Circulating now among the Great Lakes states and provinces is draft two of an agreement that was roundly attacked last year. Promised by mostly-departed governors and premiers in 2001, the agreement supposedly strengthens defenses against water overuse and export. It may be made available for public comment by the end of this month.
The new draft contains some improvements over the previous draft and over current Great Lakes water management. It also contains at least one significant and gaping loophole.
Page 11, paragraph 1:
"A proposal to Withdraw Water and remove it from the Basin in any container greater than 5.7 gallons (20 liters) shall be considered to be a proposal for a Diversion. A proposal to Withdraw Water and to package it within the Basin (emphasis added) for human consumption in containers 5.7 gallons (20 liters) or less shall be considered to be a proposal for a Consumptive Use."
Why does that matter? Because new diversions are largely banned under the draft agreement.
But new consumptive uses are not banned; and are not necessarily even subject to state regulation, depending on their volume.
This is a loophole carved out by bottled water company lobbyists. Note the clever wording, "packaged within the Basin." Not "consumed within the Basin." In other words water leaving the Basin in large containers is a no-no, but in small containers is encouraged, as long as the latter are packaged within the Basin.
The issue of private water ownership of public waters -- which Nestle and others are trying to establish -- is apparently not even dealt with in this agreement. That is a fatal flaw.
The agreement terms the Great Lakes a "shared public treasure." Merriam-Webster defines "treasure" as follows:
(1) wealth (as money, jewels, or precious metals) stored up or hoarded
A "public trust resource" is a far more appropriate term, and far more in keeping with the majesty of the Lakes.
Copy of the agreement should be posted within 24 hours.