Ventura investigated the siphoning of Lake Superior for China and for Nestle's international bottled water industry.
Around 1999-2007, water levels began decreasing so dramatically that it was referred to as the Incredibly Shrinking Lake Superior. There has been such an impact on shipping because of it that freighters have had to lower the amount of ore that can be hauled and the Army Corp of Engineers were asked to dredge harbors. Global Warming was promoted as the cause but that was a lie and melting glaciers would increase the water levels of the Great Lakes, not decrease them.
2003 was declared by the UN to be the International Year of Freshwater -- the year we occupied Iraq, land of the Tigris and Euphrates freshwater systems. Tajikistan pushed for that initiative at the UN -- also the International Decade for Action “Water for life” 2005-2015, and the President of Tajikistan has proposed 2012 as an International year of water diplomacy.
This is an excerpt from the so-called "University for Peace", The Peace and Conflict Review, Volume 5, Issue 1 - ISSN: 1659-3995 on Current Trends in Water Management in Central Asia that shows the direction they're heading:
"The mere fact that water originates in a country does not give it the full right to become the sole owner of the water. The upstream countries have to realize that it is universally acknowledged that the absolute sovereignty of upstream countries over available water resources is inadmissible under international law. In this respect, the Preamble of the Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes (UNECE 1992) states that transboundary waters shall be used through the elaboration of agreements between countries bordering the same waters."
In Ventura's investigation, a native American appealed to him for help on the Great Lakes water issue and this is an excerpt from an article that goes into more detail and background (such as NAFTA) on that:
If water is the oil of the 21st century, then Michigan, smack dab in the middle of the Great Lakes, is Saudi Arabia. And after banging their straws at the Big Dipper for years, Nestle Corporation has finally succeeded in plunging into the liquid gold.
On February 28th Michigan Governor Granholm signed a bill that will, for the first time, permit a multinational corporation to scoop up given amounts of the Great Lakes and sell bottled water across the world. For the first time in history the concept of the Great Lakes as a commons for all to enjoy has been breached. And NAFTA, as we'll see, might insure a run on the Great Lakes.
The new Michigan law allows Nestle Corporation to continue its five-year takings of up to 250,000 gallons per day and sell them at a markup well over 240 times its production cost. Nestle's profit from drawing this water could be from $500,000 to $1.8 million per day. A key proviso is that the bottles can be no larger than 5.7 gallons apiece.
Nestle had been ferociously fighting in court to prevent Granholm from exercising her veto power against diversion, but with her acquiescence to the 250,000 limit, Nestle dropped its suit.
The irony is that most mainstream environmentalists compromised with Nestle and the Governor. James Clift the policy director of the Michigan Environmental Council (MEC), a coalition of about 70 environmental organizations, called the new law, "a huge step forward for Michigan." Not so says Dave Dempsey, the former Policy Director of MEC. "I think Nestle is dancing in the streets." Dempsey is author of "On the Brink, The Great Lakes in the 21st Century."
NAFTA's Trojan Horse
Few Midwesterners are aware that the ubiquitous Nestle bottled water filling their shopping carts is really the peoples' water. How could they know? Nestle calls the water "Ice Mountain," and they adorn their plastic containers with a majestic snowy Mountain, even though there are no such places in Michigan, let alone Mecosta County where it draws the water from four wells 60 miles North of Grand Rapids.
Truth in advertising might require Nestle to label the bottles, "Your Great Lakes for Sale Plundered at a 24,000% mark up."
Under NAFTA's Chapter 11 corporations are protected from differential treatment meaning that Pepsi could line up next. Once one corporation gets its foot in the door to extract a resource there are no restrictions on others to do the same. If barriers were put up against Pepsi, for example, they could sue Michigan government for a potential loss of profits.
For years there has been talk about ocean tankers loading up the Great Lakes water for the Far East, or a pipeline diverting the bounty to the dry Southwest which has already mined the Colorado River. Michigan environmentalists succeeded in stopping those types of water diversion - for the moment at least - but they failed to stop this Trojan horse of privatization on the Great Lakes. Nestle came to Michigan after former Republican Governor Engler enticed with a sweetheart $10 million deal to create jobs after Wisconsin's citizens and tribes kicked them out.
Largest gathering of Great Lakes Tribes since 1764
First Nations people are at the forefront in mounting challenges to Nestle and the nation state sovereigns along several fronts. [cont.]
In February 11, 1999, the Parliament of Canada unanimously enacted a moratorium on all potential bulk exports of Canadian freshwater. 1 Bulk water exports are defined as the siphoning of freshwater from lakes or other areas for shipment through pipelines, diversions, or by sea on supertankers. The controversy over Canadian freshwater began with the signing of the initial Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement in 1988. There is strong environmentalist and nationalist opposition in Canada to the United States', or other countries for that matter, buying Canadian water in mass.
The arid southwest United States and California have so far expressed the most interest in dealing with their water shortages through imports from their neighbor to the north. Other countries around the globe, from China in East Asia to the United Arab Emirates in the Middle East, have also expressed a desire for access to large quantities of Canadian freshwater. The water shortages currently faced, and, those of the future as well, by the nations of the world means that bulk water exports will become a massive industry in the twenty-first century. Also, Canada will need a coherent national water policy to prevent mass exportation to the extent that they can no longer meet their own needs.
Environmental concerns are another factor in Canada's decision to place a moratorium on bulk water exports. Environmentalists are concerned that large exports of freshwater will upset the delicate ecosystems of Canada. [end excerpt]
Related documents are referenced on that page, such as "Canada's Position Regarding an Emerging International Fresh Water Market", "Selling Great Lakes Water to a Thirsty World", "The Commoditization of Water", and "'Bottling Up' Our Natural Resources".
Someone named Andrew Nikiforuk wrongly declares "climate change" as the cause of the Great Lakes water levels decreasing, in this 2007 Global Research article. It mentions the SPP/"Super NAFTA", Canada's oil extraction from tar sands industry as a possible cause, etc.:
Under the North American Free Trade Agreement, Canada lost control over its energy resources. Now, with “NAFTA-plus”, it could also lose control over its freshwater resources, say experts.
Canada’s water is on the trade negotiating table despite widespread public opposition and assurances by Canadian political leaders, said Adèle Hurley, director of the University of Toronto’s Programme on Water Issues at the Munk Centre for International Studies.
A new report released Sep. 11 by the programme reveals that water transfers from Canada to the United States are emerging as an issue under the auspices of the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP). The SPP — sometimes called “NAFTA-plus” — is a forum set up in 2005 in Cancún, by the three partners, Canada, United States and Mexico.
Economic integration as envisioned by the powerful but little-known SPP is slowly changing the lives of Canadians, says Andrew Nikiforuk, author of the report “On the Table: Water Energy and North American Integration”.
The SPP is comprised of business leaders and government officials who work behind the scenes and are already responsible for changes to border security, easing of pesticide rules, harmonisation of pipeline regulations and plans to prepare for a potential avian flu outbreak, Nikiforuk writes.
“The SPP is run by corporate leaders; governments are irrelevant,” said Ralph Pentland, a water expert and acting chairman of the Canadian Water Issues Council.
Pentland envisions a future where, in response to ongoing drought problems in the United States, the SPP will make arrangements to dole out millions of dollars of public funds for private companies to build pipelines to transfer water from Canada.
“The SPP is like putting the monkeys in charge of the peanuts,” he told Tierramérica.
Massive water diversions from Canada do not make economic or environmental sense, according to water experts. Far better and cheaper is to improve water efficiency and eliminate waste. The United States and Canada lead the world in water consumption and are extraordinarily wasteful, Pentland says.
Moreover, most of Canada’s water is in the far north, not near its border with the United States. And even the transboundary Great Lakes are at their lowest levels in 100 years due to climate change, notes Nikiforuk.
William Nitze, prominent member of the SPP and chairman of GridPoint Inc., a company that makes energy management systems, is not in favor of bulk water exports.
“Water management has been poor in all three countries,” Nitze said. Canada, for example, favors guidelines over mandatory rules for keeping pollutants out of water. And Mexico needs to double its investment in its water infrastructure, he noted.
Nikiforuk agrees that Canada has mismanaged its water resources. He points out that Canada already ships enormous volumes of water to the United States, in the form its main exports: grain, cattle, hogs, aluminum, automobiles and oil. Each of these requires many tons of water to produce, but the latter is perhaps the most controversial.
Most of Canada’s oil comes from the tar sands, a 125-billion-dollar capital project in the boreal forest of northern Alberta province. One million barrels of oil flow south each day to the U.S. making Canada its largest supplier.
However, it takes three barrels of freshwater to produce one barrel of oil from the tar sands, says Nikiforuk.
The project already consumes 359 million cubic metres of water, enough for a city of two million people in Canada. Ninety percent of the water becomes contaminated and has to be stored in vast tailings impoundments. More than 10 of these exist, covering an area of 50 square km.
Members of the SPP North American Energy Working Group met in Houston, in the southern U.S. state of Texas, in 2006, where they talked about the “pipeline challenge”, a proposed a five-fold increase in production at the tar sands, said Nikiforuk.
“No mention was made of water at the meeting, but there isn’t nearly enough water in the region for this kind of expansion,” he said.
Under NAFTA rules, Canada cannot reduce its energy exports to the United States, according to Gordon Laxer, director of the Parkland Institute, a research network at the University of Alberta. “The U.S. is the most energy wasteful nation on Earth. And Canada is sacrificing its environment to feed America’s addiction to oil,” Laxer said in an interview.
“Respected energy analyst Matthew Simmons told me Canada should stop furthering the U.S. addiction to liquid fuels and make it illegal to use fresh water in tar sands,” said Nikiforuk.
There is ample evidence that environmental standards and stewardship in Canada and Mexico have plummeted since NAFTA went into effect in 1994, and “accelerated trade under the SPP means accelerated environmental abuse,” he said.
Related comment and article reference at Post #6, 4um The Military-Industrial Complex, Plus Congress: Rumsfeld closed lots of bases jiffy quick, many on our coastlines and waterways. Odd move, considering the next resource wars are projected to be over water. The terrorist theme is a marketing device to promote wars for oil and empire because not many people are willing to go to war for those objectives. Water wars can be marketed with sheer survival as the recruitment motivator. Canada has long been a good and friendly neighbor. And it has lots of water resources that some might covet.
Nov 02 10:08 at whatreallyhappened.com:
Climate Change Hysteria Falters. Water Is The New Target
Water is the latest target. More and more stories about running out of water appear. Most are linked to the false claim by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that droughts will increase in severity with global warming. It’s illogical because higher temperatures mean increased evaporation and more moisture in the air to create precipitation, but that doesn’t stop them.