Group wants tougher water law
http://www.mlive.com/news/chronicle/...910.xml&coll=8
01/11/08 By Jeff Alexander
jalexander@muskegonchronicle.com
Michigan's 2006 water withdrawal law needs to be strengthened to better protect groundwater and give local units of government a say in where corporations pump large quantities of water, environmentalists said Thursday.
Two dozen members of the Great Lakes, Great Michigan Campaign came to Muskegon to show support for a series of Democrat-sponsored bills that would tighten water withdrawal regulations. They criticized a package of Republican-sponsored bills as too lenient.
After holding a press conference in Hackley Park, the group delivered 600 petition signatures to the nearby office of state Sen. Gerald Van Woerkom, R-Norton Shores. Van Woerkom is on a Senate committee considering changes to the existing water withdrawal law.
Environmentalists want the state to require permits for groundwater withdrawals over 100,000 gallons annually. They also want to ensure that the public and local units of government have a hand in determining whether water bottlers or other corporations receive permits to pump surface waters or groundwater.
"As it stands now, local units of government basically have no input," said Jim Cordray, a Blue Lake Township planning commissioner. "When Nestle put in test wells last year in our township, the township board didn't hear about it for several months."
Nestle Waters North America, which bottles Ice Mountain water in Stanwood, sampled spring water last June at the Owasippe Scout Reservation without informing local officials.
The 2006 state law required companies to obtain a state permit only if pumping more than 250,000 gallons of water out of the ground annually. The law does not require public notices or hearings on large water withdrawals.
Competing legislation backed by Senate Republicans would establish a scientific assessment tool as the primary method for determining whether a new water withdrawal would harm a stream or underground aquifer.
Critics said the assessment tool focuses on how water withdrawals affect fish populations while ignoring other signs of ecological health.
Van Woerkom said the assessment tool is based on "very conservative" scientific judgments, which err on the side of protecting streams. "I think they've done a very good job with the assessment tool," he said.
Cyndi Roper, policy director of Clean Water Action's Michigan office, said the Senate legislation would allow corporations to reduce water flow by 22 percent in parts of the Pere Marquette, AuSable and Boardman rivers. It would allow stream flow to be reduced as much as 46 percent in parts of the Betsie River.
Environmentalists also want groundwater specifically protected under Michigan's public trust doctrine, a legal principle that ensures state control of natural resources. Michigan's 1963 constitution afforded public trust doctrine protection to lakes and streams, but lawmakers at the time didn't know that groundwater and surface water are connected.
Van Woerkom said some companies fear extending the public trust doctrine to groundwater could give the state ownership of the water and prevent some individuals and companies from using water beneath their land.
"We're trying to find an appropriate compromise so we can protect the water of Michigan without preventing our residents and companies from having appropriate uses of that water," Van Woerkom said.
Donald Roy, a Ferris State University professor who opposed Nestle's water bottling operation, said the oversight has made Michigan's abundant groundwater fair game for water bottlers.
"The opposite of public trust protection is privatization," Roy said. "If we don't protect our water, it won't be there when we need it for sustainable business operations."
Linear Mode
