Letter: New industry yes, Crystal Geyser no

Orland needs new industries, but not a water bottling plant. Many of our region's citizens believe that water should be kept right here — at least until we obtain better data about how much water is in our aquifer and how aquifers interact.

Water is our public trust, and its availability is in question: for example, climate change is expected to reduce the Sierras' snowcap severely. We also have to keep guard over other private and state interests that want northern California's water.

Crystal Geyser, an international company, meets its bottom line by selling water all over the world. Bottling companies market water as it if it were pure, when it is often far worse than tap water. Orland would be involved in international deception, while profits go to a foreign company.

Crystal Geyser sued Calistoga when a city fuel tank contaminated a Crystal Geyser well. Yet Orland has a plume, listed for 20 years as a toxic Super Fund site. Two county officials declined an Orland planner's request to certify that a bottling plant would not disturb the plume.

Crystal Geyser and Nestle have been shut out Oxford, Wisconsin and McCloud.

Moreover, the trucks used, but not owned by Crystal Geyser, produce CO2 emissions. We should demand that Orland require an Environmental Impact Report to fully account for: PM 2.5 diesel emissions; climate change and local water needs; effects on aquifers, wells, and a toxic plume; noise from chillers and trucks; and truckers' impacts on roads and traffic.

Grace Marvin

Conservation Chair

Sierra Club-Yahi Group