MICHIGAN CITIZENS FOR WATER CONSERVATION
P.O. Box 1 Mecosta, MI 49332
Phone: 231-972-8856
Contact:
Terry Swier, President Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation
Phone & Fax: 231-972-8856
Jim Olson, Attorney for Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation
Phone 231 499 8831 (cell phone) from 1 pm to 4 pm, then 231-946 0044 until 6 pm. Wednesday 231-882-7789.
Judge's Ruling on Water Rights Case
Big Rapids, MI, November 25 - Mecosta County Circuit Court Judge Lawrence Root released his sixty-seven page opinion today in a lawsuit brought by Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation and plaintiffs R.J. and Barbara Doyle and Jeff and Shelly Sapp vs. Nestle Waters North America, Inc, formerly the Perrier Group.
The suit brought by Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation and its plaintiffs in September 2001 challenged Nestle's claim that it can take 400 gallons per minute, or 210 millions gallons a year, of spring water that feeds a stream that is a tributary to the Little Muskegon River that flows to Lake Michigan, for it's own usage.
Judge Root's ruling sets a precedent and clarifies many critical facets of Michigan water law, including important protections for the State's lakes, streams, and wetlands, which form an essential role in Michigan's natural resources, recreation, tourism, and economy. The ruling confined itself to the specific relationship between the pumping and diversion of water from the shallow unconfined aquifer that is part of nearby wetlands, two lakes, and the Dead Stream, a stream that Judge Root said "is not dead" but "a complex and beautiful ecosystem." Judge Root ruled that riparian rights in our state's lakes and streams are superior to an extraction and diversion of groundwater that feeds them, like Nestle's out of watershed sale of bottled water. "I hereby hold that riparian interests are superior to conflicting groundwater interests, and that the latter must yield to the former." (Opinion, p. 47). Any diversion of water that diminishes the riparian waters system is unlawful. The Judge's painstakingly detailed findings concluded that Nestle's water operation unlawfully diminishes the lakes, streams, and wetlands at issue in the lawsuit. He also found that the diminishment of these waters resources violated Michigan environmental laws.
While he did not expressly rule on broader issues concerning the Great Lakes, the opinion acknowledged the importance of Michigan's water resources and that bottled water derived from shallow aquifers that is diverted from lakes and streams is suspect, noting that "if water is the product," distinguishing this from other Michigan industries, such as farming or other beverages like beer or carbonated drinks, "I believe the state has a rational basis on which to limit its removal as water from the state and/or Great Lakes basin." (Opinion, p. 61).
In reaching his opinion, the Judge carefully noted the competing forces in this lengthy and intense dispute, but also was careful to dispel any notion that he was persuaded by those forces. Rather the Court chose to reach his findings on the evidence over nineteen days of trial and the applicable Michigan law concerning groundwater and riparian rights and the Michigan Environmental Protection Act, a citizen suit law that prohibits the likely impairment of Michigan's water and other natural resources.
Based on his opinion, Judge Root issued an order that calls for the "termination of all water withdrawals by the Defendants from the well field at the Sanctuary Springs" within 21 days. The ruling does not affect Defendant's bottling operations related to the 175 gallon per minute groundwater well located at its plant eleven miles away from the Sanctuary site.
Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation and its plaintiffs, who have legal riparian or public trust interests in the waters of the state, are "grateful for the Court's thorough attention and opinion, and for the vindication of their riparian and public interest in such a precious commonly held resource like our State's magnificent waters," Terry Swier, President of the Citizen's Group said. "The Court's opinion is a major step toward the protection of Michigan's waters from unlawful or unreasonable use, diversion, and appropriation for shipping and selling it beyond our watersheds and communities," said James Olson, from the Traverse City firm Olson, Bzdok & Howard, one of Plaintiff's lawyers in the suit. Other lawyers representing the Plaintiffs are Jim Samuels, Big Rapids, and Chris Shafer, a professor at Cooley Law School in Lansing.
Judge Root's ruling can be viewed in its entirety at
www.envlaw.com.Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation held a press conference at the law office of Jim Samuels at 305 S. Warren, Big Rapids, MI, November 25th after the Judge's ruling.
######