It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Forestry & Nestle Stealing YOUR Water California.

page: 1
11

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 09:58 AM
link   
A few of you might remember my thread awhile ago showing a vid that has Nestlé CEO (Bilderberger) Peter Brabeck claiming that water is not a basic human right and that Organic food isn't all its cracked up to be. That water is in fact a food that needs to have a value attached to it by companies such as his.

www.activistpost.com...
In the subtitled video below, from several years back, Brabeck discusses his views on water, as well as some interesting comments concerning his view of Nature — that it is “pitiless” — and, of course, the obligatory statement that organic food is bad and GM is great. In fact, according to Brabeck, you are essentially an extremist to hold views opposite to his own.

His statements are important to review as we continue to see the world around us become reshaped into a more mechanized environment in order to stave off that pitiless Nature to which he refers. The conclusion to this segment is perhaps the most revealing about Brabeck’s worldview, as he highlights a clip of one of his factory operations.

Evidently, the savior-like role of the Nestlé Group in ensuring the health of the global population should be graciously welcomed. Are you convinced?


It looks like California believes in this as well. Not the citizens of course but rather any and all who could profit from it from Govt. on down.

Let's face it head on. California is in trouble. We all know this. It's drying up, farms are shutting down, towns are going dry and it's only getting worse. But there are those that believe that what little there is remaining should be sold to a foreign interest, bottled and sold back to the very citizens it was stolen from.

Some may ask why I claim it's being stolen. Let's look at it this way:

1. In 2013, the company drew 27 million gallons of water from 12 springs in Strawberry Canyon for the brand — apparently by employing rather impressive legerdemain — considering the permit to do so expired in 1988. But, as Nestle will tell you, that really isn’t cause for concern since it swears it is a good steward of the land and, after all, that expired permit’s Here annual fee has been diligently and faithfully paid in full.

And that isn’t the only water it collects. Another 51 million gallons of groundwater were drawn from the area by Nestle that same year.

2. Deer Canyon. Last year, Nestle drew 76 million gallons from the springs in that location, which is a sizable increase over 2013’s 56 million-gallon draw — and under circumstances just as questionable as water collection at Arrowhead.

3. In 2014, Nestle used roughly 705 million gallons of water in its operations in California, according to natural resource manager Larry Lawrence. That’s 2,164 acre-feet of water — enough to “irrigate 700 acres of farmland” or “fill 1,068 Olympic-sized swimming pools,” as Ian James pointed out in The Desert Sun.

Now why would I call this theft you are still asking? Because Nestle pays just $524 for these water rights and the most popular size of a bottle of Arrowhead 100% Mountain Spring Water (1 liter) retails for 89¢ — putting the potential profit for Nestle in the tens of billions.

$524? How can you possibly be a good steward of the land paying back that much?

How is this allowed? How is a mult billion dollar corporation granted the right to steal water from US public lands and give back $524 dollars which apparently it isn't even honoring even that?

www.desertsun.com...
The U.S. Forest Service has long been allowing Nestle to pipe water out of the national forest from a collection of wells using a permit that lists an expiration date of 1988. The company has been paying the San Bernardino National Forest an annual permit fee of $524, and the water has continued to flow, even as the drought has prompted questions about the potential impacts on a stream and wildlife in the national forest.

Documents
Audit Presentation

Continued next post:




posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 09:59 AM
link   
So how does the forest service get pulled into this? Quite simply by this string:

The documents — including letters, emails, an audit presentation, and notes of meetings — reveal that officials failed to follow through on plans for a permit review that would have involved assessing the environmental impacts of drawing water from the national forest. During one meeting, some in the agency questioned the legal basis for the company’s use of water from the forest.

But the Forest Service ultimately authorized Nestle to keep using its wells and water lines, and also permitted the company to rebuild flood-damaged pipelines — even as the permit issue was left unresolved.

Here's the kicker:
Gene Zimmerman, the forest supervisor who was in charge at the time, retired in 2005.

He now does paid consulting work for Nestle.

Zimmerman has said he doesn’t see any conflict in working for Nestle in his retirement. And he has cited some of the same reasons the Forest Service has given for not reviewing the permit. And that would be one instance of someone getting paid.

Not too difficult to see that outcome.

So where does this leave us?

1. No permits
2. Decades of water theft
3. California turning to desert
4. People asking where all the water went.
5. All to a foreign Mega Corp.
6. No money coming back to Cali.
7. People being sold the exact water that was stolen from them.

And to add just a little more.


Nestle runs five bottling plants in California out of a total of 111 bottled water plants that are licensed by the state’s Department of Public Health. Nestle says its business in California uses about 700 million gallons of water a year, some of that drawn from springs. There’s only one place where the company holds a permit to pipe water across a national forest: in the rocky canyon along Strawberry Creek, north of San Bernardino.

The Forest Services explanation as to how they let these permits go unattended thereby allowing water theft is: "Officials cited priorities such as dealing with wildfires and assessing permits for railroad lines, power lines, wind power projects, expansion of an oil pipeline, and water tunnels for the Metropolitan Water District, among other things."

Ok I get it, no time to go after these thieves. Budget cuts, staffing cuts etc. But they do have just enough money, time and man power to go after us:

The agency, however, has reassessed some other water permits in the national forest. In the mid-2000s, for instance, the Forest Service went through the permits of hundreds of cabins and reexamined their use of water from creeks. In Barton Flats, dozens of cabin owners were told they could no longer draw water from a creek and instead would have to use wells or install tanks and truck in water. Cabin owners spent thousands of dollars putting in tanks.

There is so much more I could put in here but you get the picture. Use this link to find more in-depth info on these crooks who are stealing your water. Yes, stealing. There is no other word for it.
Source

BTW, it's not just Cali. but all over the World.

Canadians are not exempt from the corruption and theft either:

The price of a litre of bottled water in B.C. is often higher than a litre of gasoline. However, the price paid by the world’s largest bottled water company for taking 265 million litres of fresh water every year from a well in the Fraser Valley — not a cent. Because of B.C.’s lack of groundwater regulation, Nestlé Waters Canada — a division of the multi-billion-dollar Switzerland-based Nestlé Group, the world’s largest food company — is not required to measure, report, or pay a penny for the millions of litres of water it draws from Hope and then sells across Western Canada. According to the provincial Ministry of Environment, “B.C. is the only jurisdiction in Canada that doesn’t regulate groundwater use.”

Source
Cali. is hurting worse than Canada tho. The water is almost gone but what remains is being sold to the actual owners.

Peace





edit on 22-8-2015 by jude11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 10:21 AM
link   
hmm - so the total water abstraction by nestle [ california ] would "irrigate 852 acres "

thats going to make a huge difference to the fate of 25 MILLION acres of californian agricultural land

context is everything i am not making any other claim - but screaming at nestle california is not going to fix californias water problem is it ?



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
hmm - so the total water abstraction by nestle [ california ] would "irrigate 852 acres "

thats going to make a huge difference to the fate of 25 MILLION acres of californian agricultural land

context is everything i am not making any other claim - but screaming at nestle california is not going to fix californias water problem is it ?


Before you lose it over a number, take a look further at the time line. Decades.

Those numbers are one year. There are also 11 locations and I pointed out a couple but you never got that far I'm guessing.

And you never addressed the issue of no permits either. Did you even read further than a few lines?

Jude



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: jude11

A great example of how materialism leeds to greed and entitlement.

I think Gaddfi was the only one who had it right when it came to natural resources. I know this is about oil, but the same philosophy could be used with water. Where we employ Nestle to bottle water and cover their expenses for doing so but the rest of the money belongs to the state.

Imagine if all the profits from selling CA water went to California. I bet we would have a few desalination plants by now and no water shortages.



February 16, 2009, Gaddafi took a step further and called on Libyans to back his proposal to dismantle the government and to distribute the oil wealth directly to the 5 million inhabitants of the country.

However, his plan to deliver oil revenues directly to the Libyan people met opposition by senior officials who could lose their jobs due to a parallel plan by Gaddafi to rid the state of corruption.

Some officials, including Prime Minister Al-Baghdadi, Ali Al-Mahmoudi and Farhat Omar Bin Guida, of the Central Bank, told Gaddafi that the measure could harm the country's economy in the long term due to "capital flight."

"Do not be afraid to directly redistribute the oil money and create fairer governance structures that respond to people's interests," Gaddafi said in a Popular Committee.

The Popular Committees are the backbone of Libya. Through them citizens are represented at the district level.

"The Administration has failed and the state's economy has failed. Enough is enough. The solution is for the Libyan people to directly receive oil revenues and decide what to do with them," Gaddafi said in a speech broadcast on state television. To this end, the Libyan leader urged a radical reform of government bureaucracy....

Given the rejection of the Committee, Gaddafi affirmed before a public meeting: "My dream during all these years was to give the power and wealth directly to the people."

english.pravda.ru...


The only problem I see with nationalizing resources on the state or federal level is globalization. This could be fixed by modifying trade agreements and tariffs on competing imports. Or simply by requiring our trade partners to enact an equal minimum wage to ours.


edit on 22-8-2015 by Isurrender73 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 11:19 AM
link   
That's the problem with America. Corporations can do what ever they want while the little peons can do nothing.

Why shouldn't corporations pay the same price for services as the average person?

We really have to reign in these corporations.



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 11:36 AM
link   
a reply to: jude11

i have not lost anything - read my post - i did a calc for the total for nestles california operations - as detailed in your op .

the permit is irrelevant - as is the timescale - as your op talks about / year abstraction and per year irrigation needs

like i said - read my post - it does address the issue



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   
Don't forget Walmart...last I read (can't find the article atm) they bottle the *majority* of their water they sell all over the US in northern CA....



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   
a reply to: jude11

Well done Jude, I know ultimately you and I disagree horribly
on some topics. But where we do agree in a number of different
venues, the intensity is unmatched.



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 06:58 PM
link   
S and F, and I'll be posting your links to Facebook as well.



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: jude11

Well done Jude, I know ultimately you and I disagree horribly
on some topics. But where we do agree in a number of different
venues, the intensity is unmatched.


Couldn't agree more.


Jude



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Look2theSacredHeart
S and F, and I'll be posting your links to Facebook as well.


Thank you.

All the more awareness.

Jude



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: jude11

i have not lost anything - read my post - i did a calc for the total for nestles california operations - as detailed in your op .

the permit is irrelevant - as is the timescale - as your op talks about / year abstraction and per year irrigation needs

like i said - read my post - it does address the issue


Are you intentionally ignoring:

1. The OP title is not mine. I do agree tho.

2. The issue of Nestle carrying on illegal business?

2. The paltry sum of a license?

4. The small property owners getting fined.

5. Forestry allowing theft of public water?

6. Nestle claiming water is not a right?

7. The former person in charge of permits in Forestry is now employed by Nestle?

Just want to go back and forth on numbers? I couldn't care if the amount was 10% of the claim. Most likely it's 10x more than we know. The issue is the same...Theft, corruption, public property sold to corporate interests...foreign ones.

And so much more.

But go ahead and compare acres. The fact that Nestle does it all over the World should keep you busy crunching those numbers.

Jude



posted on Aug, 22 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   
oh man. peter brabeck was it....good lord.......fat bazzterd he he
I can discern spirits you know, why do I flinch at the sight of peter's face??

.
edit on 22-8-2015 by GBP/JPY because: our new King.....He comes right after a nicely done fake one



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 10:12 AM
link   
a reply to: jude11

Thank you for making this thread. Excellent job.

And who would have known about this situation, if it hadn't been for citizen action, "CrunchNestleAlliance"?

Yes, this one situation is but a snapshot of a bigger picture. Nestle is a corporation. Corporations advertise. Good advertising makes us buy things we don't want/need, by creating the want/need. There may even be a specific need in a specific instance, but good advertising carries that specific into a generality. Such it is with plastic bottled water.

Theft of water in 2015, and in a drought! Guilty of manslaughter in the 1970s. I remember the 1970s Nestle boycott, when they advertised their infant formula worldwide, with dangerous results. The Scandalous History Of Infant Formula

And now also adultery, with Gene Zimmerman in bed with Nestle. A new generation of citizens had better become more active against sociopaths like Nestle and those they corrupt. If not, you'll have to live with the consequences. And you can't live without water. And the best way to get water is not from a plastic bottle.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 10:45 AM
link   
We need to revoke all their permits.
No foreign corporation should be allowed to gain from California water and then sell it back to the residents.

Private wells should be allowed to those residents who want them. (contamination can and should be tracked - don't drill next to and old Boeing site or anything like that)



new topics

top topics



 
11

log in

join