Nestlé Water Bottling Plant Proposal

Proposed “exchange” of publicly-owned Oxbow Springs water may harm Gorge resources, deserves full public-interest review

Nestlé Water Bottling Plant Proposal
Friends does not support the Nestlé proposal to bottle water from Oxbow Springs. (Photo of Oxbow Springs by Kathleen Marie for the Portland Mercury)

Status Update: Early 2016

Friends of the Columbia Gorge applauds Oregon Gov. Kate Brown’s  November 2015 decision to request that Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) withdraw its “cross-transfer” water rights proposal and instead go through the appropriate water rights exchange process and the required public interest test.
 
Meanwhile, Hood River County officials have approved for the May 2016 primary election a ballot initiative filed by local Hood River activists prompted by the Nestlé plan. The initiative seeks to ban commercial bottled water operations in the county, which would stop Nestlé from bottling and selling water from Oxbow Springs.
 

Overview

For several years the transnational food and beverage company Nestlé has been working to develop a water bottling plant in Cascade Locks, Oregon. However, in order to market its product as genuine spring water, Nestlé needs water from Oxbow Springs that currently feeds Herman Creek. The catch has been that the ODFW owns the right to use water from Oxbow Springs and currently uses that water to operate the Oxbow fish hatchery, which produces spring chinook salmon, Coho salmon, Sockeye salmon and winter steelhead.
 
The City of Cascade Locks, which supports the project on economic grounds, has tried to acquire ODFW’s water right so that the City could sell Oxbow Spring water to Nestlé. Cascade Locks and ODFW originally proposed to exchange ODFW’s rights to Oxbow Springs for a City-owned groundwater right. Under state law, the exchange of water must be approved by the Oregon Water Resources Department, which must determine whether the exchange is in the public interest.
 
Cascade Locks and ODFW previously applied for a water rights exchange, but in the face of substantial public opposition changed course and submitted two separate applications to transfer their respective water rights. The proposed “cross-transfer” would have avoided the public interest test required for a water rights exchange. Friends opposed the cross-transfer applications and encouraged ODFW and Cascade Locks to apply for an exchange to ensure review of whether the proposal is in the public interest.