Level 3 Watering Restrictions for Greater Vancouver

[spit.fire]

Originally Posted by sumpfinfishe

Also the Nestle corporation comes into our province and milks springs and natural wells of hundreds of thousands of gallons of water a year for pennies a gallon and then sell it back to British Columbians for almost 98% profit, not to mention they also close off access to the once public springs so we can no longer obtain the once free water.

This is false. As much as I'd like to jump on the "f-Nestle" bandwagon, we have been misled. The province does not SELL the water. In other words, Nestle is not BUYING the water. They are, in layman's terms, renting the rights to use the water. This is very specific wording as it implies that the government can, at any time and for any reason, say "hey, you can't use the water anymore; don't matter if you paid for it." This applies for ALL the industries that use water in BC, not just Nestle.

Additionally, all this petitioning and outrage to pressure the government to charge more forces it out of this position and encourages water rights sales as a commodity. Do we really want this?

Besides, if you really wanted to stick it to the man, it's as simple as not buying bottled water (WHICH IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN GASOLINE FFS!!!!).

Oh, here's a quick source regarding the actual impact of this "awful operation":

http://achemistinlangley.blogspot.ca...water.html?m=1

This one is a bit more political, but may be interesting to some of you:

http://vancouverisawesome.com/2015/0...-use-petition/

I could go on at length about this and might if it comes down to it


*EDIT: Oops, this is Albert on Tyler's computer, lol...

[sumpfinfishe]

OK so nestle doesn't buy the water, they rent the property to gain access to the water source. Either way, they pay a minimal fee, less than what the average lower mainland resident pays in taxes a year to access and use hundreds of thousands of gallons of water and in return after filtering, treating, bottling, and marketing for each bottle of water they sell the profit is 98%.

In my first reply I didn't post my vent about nestle to have a debate on nestle and there business practices, it was merely another example of how we are being told we need to restrict our water usage while giant corporations can use as much water as they want whenever they want.

[albert_dao]

That's a straw man. If nestle Nestle was drawing water from the same treatment plants, they would have the same restrictions imposed upon them. But seriously, we're being asked to leave our lawns and not fill swimming pools. Is this totally unreasonable? Seems like a step in the right direction.

[sumpfinfishe]

Well at least were not being asked to rip up our lawns and replace them with gravel or rock gardens yet. In California you can get a rebate from the government to do this, which in turn covers the cost of hiring a company to rip up your lawn, certify the action and put down a dry substrate