26
NATIONAL OFFICE
1616 P St. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
tel: (202) 683-2500 • fax: (202) 683-2501
foodandwaterwatch.org
consume is safe, accessible and sustainably
produced. So that we can all enjoy and trust
in what we eat and drink, we help people take
charge of where their food comes from; keep
freely to our homes; protect the environmental
quality of oceans; work to ensure that the
government does its job protecting citizens
and educate about the importance of keeping
the global commons — our shared resources —
under public control. We envision a world where
healthy and wholesome food and clean water
to meet their basic needs — a world in which
governments are accountable to their citizens
and manage essential resources sustainably.
FOOD & WATER WATCH
A Message From Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director ........................ 2
Board of Directors and Directors .............................................................. 3
Organizing: The Key to Protecting Our Food and Water ....................... 3
Programmatic Activities and Campaigns
Food Program .......................................................................................... 5
Water Program ...................................................................................... 11
Common Resources Program ................................................................ 14
Food & Water Justice .............................................................................. 16
Global Advocacy and Movement Building ............................................ 17
Food & Water Europe ............................................................................ 19
Financials .....................................................................................................22
table of contents
2
In 2013, we reached a milestone with over half a million people having signed up to take action with Food & Water Watch. There is a rising consciousness that things won’t change unless we have the people power to make it happen. Food & Water Watch is only as strong as our membership, and we’re on target to reach a million members by 2015.
It’s citizens like our members, engaged in changing policy in their communities and beyond, who are helping us win victories for our food and water every day. And I had the pleasure to meet many of these members while I was touring for my book, Foodopoly: The Battle for the Future of Food and Farming in America. I was on the road over three-quarters of this year talking about Foodopoly, and I was always met with so much hospitality in the bookstores and cafés and other places I spoke.
It was especially palpable in the small towns I visited. In Athens, Ohio, I went to a local bakery to
she’d been instructed that if I came in, I was to be
went, I felt as if I could move right in and be part of a wonderful community of activists and caring people.
In towns big or small, I also met many people who had never heard of Food & Water Watch, but who’d heard about Foodopoly and wanted to learn more about changing the food system. I was thrilled to meet so many people who were interested in our work and wanted to be involved.
And we need all the help we can get. We need
in fossil fuel use from fracked gas to stopping secret trade deals. We need massive numbers of people who want clean, safe and wholesome food
the labeling of genetically engineered food the
big agribusinesses and the oil and gas industry. We need massive numbers of people to stand for local control of their water supplies as big multinational corporations like Nestlé and Veolia seek to control our diminishing supplies of clean water. And we need massive numbers of people to lobby the Environmental Protection Agency and our food safety agencies to make sure that they are
It is these massive numbers of people that are the foundation for all of our work here in Washington,
lobbyists, researchers, communications and
the trains running, but our members are the fuel for the movement. We’re on track to essentially double our supporters over the next two years, and the victories you are about to read about are just the tip of the iceberg.
We are making true change — and we welcome you to be a part of that change.
Over Half a Million Strong in 2013A Message From Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director
Wenonah HauterExecutive DirectorFood & Water Watch
3
Organizing: The Key to Protecting Our Food and WaterOne of the things that sets Food & Water Watch apart is our commitment to organizing — to working in communities and with community-based organizations to build the real power necessary to make meaningful changes in people’s lives. The
planet — from global warming, water pollution, and corporate control of our democracy, to monopoly control of our food system — stem from a power imbalance between people and large corporate interests. As organizers, we work to rectify that imbalance.
Building on the Midwest Academy organizing model
lives. We give our supporters, members, activists and allies a sense of their own power, and ultimately change the relations of power for the better.
By any measure — victories on policy issues, growth in the number of supporters and activists, development and expansion of coalition relationships, and the training and experience of our
Even in challenging political and economic times,
with our policy and communications specialists in Washington, D.C. and with allied organizations across the country — was able to achieve some
In addition to working on state and local initiatives,
pressure on key federal decision makers, organize national sign-on letters and build a national program in a way that would not otherwise be possible.
FOOD & WATER WATCHBOARD OF DIRECTORS
Maude Barlow CHAIR
Rudolf Amenga-Etego FINANCE COMMITTEE
Elizabeth Peredo Beltrán FINANCE COMMITTEE
Wenonah Hauter EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Dennis Keeney GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE
Kelsie Sue Kerr SECRETARY
Mary Ricci TREASURER
Lisa Schubert GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE
Wenonah Hauter EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Sarah Alexander DEPUTY ORGANIZING DIRECTOR
Lane Brooks CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER
Scott Edwards FOOD & WATER JUSTICE PROJECT CO-DIRECTOR
Mitch Jones COMMON RESOURCES PROGRAM DIRECTOR
Doug Lakey DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
Patty Lovera ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
AND FOOD PROGRAM DIRECTOR
Michele Merkel FOOD & WATER JUSTICE PROJECT CO-DIRECTOR
Darcey O’Callaghan INTERNATIONAL DIRECTOR
Darcey Rakestraw COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR
Mark Schlosberg ORGANIZING DIRECTOR
Emily Wurth WATER PROGRAM DIRECTOR
DIRECTORS
4
Among the policy successes:• We passed legislation to require the labeling of genetically engineered foods in Connecticut and
Maine — bills that were ultimately signed into law. These bills were the first in the country to require such labeling, and although they both contain trigger clauses that delay their implementation until similar legislation is passed in other states, we also launched labeling campaigns in a wide range of states including New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Florida and Pennsylvania aimed at making labeling a reality in the years to come.
• We took a lead role at the state level working with state-based allies in beating back legislation that would have protected factory farms. In New Mexico, we stopped a bill that would have made it nearly impossible for rural residents and communities to protect themselves from factory farm pollution and threats to their heath and quality of life. In Missouri, we stopped legislation that would have taken away local control regarding factory farms. And we helped defeat ag gag bills in Illinois, Indiana and Nebraska — legislation that would have criminalized whistleblowing activities that take place on factory farms.
• We continued to beat back efforts to privatize water systems, scoring victories in Allentown, Pennsylvania; St. Louis, Missouri; and Fort Worth, Texas.
• We continued to hold the line against fracking in New York, ramping up pressure on Governor Cuomo and, with our New Yorkers Against Fracking coalition partners, making this one of the most significant issues in New York State.
• We made major gains at the local level in the fight against fracking by coordinating with local groups and citizens to pass ballot measures stopping fracking in the Colorado cities of Broomfield, Fort Collins, Boulder and Lafayette (where oil and gas companies spent a combined $900,000 to try to defeat the bills). We supported successful local efforts to pass a citywide ordinance in Dallas, Texas; we passed a ban on fracking waste in Baltimore, Maryland; and we passed a ban on fracking in Erie County, New York. We also helped pass other measures against fracking in Ohio, California, New Mexico, Illinois, Michigan, New York, New Jersey, North Carolina and Florida. And, through the Global Frackdown, we built a strong and growing movement to ban fracking across the country and around the world.
• We continued to train a future generation of organizers and activists through our Take Back the Tap program. We were active on over 40 campuses, training campus coordinators who lead campaigns across the country to stop bottled water sales on campus and make tap water more accessible. Among the highlights were successfully working to stop the sale of bottled water on campus at Plymouth University in New Hampshire; Lane Benton Community College in Eugene, Oregon; and Western Washington University and Evergreen State University in Washington. Campus coordinators also made tap water more accessible on several campuses through the installation of water filling stations.
These victories would not have happened without the work of our engaged membership and strong coalition partners. One important measure of our power as an organization has been the growth of our activist list to over half a million members.
growing reach. Our members take action by sending messages to decision makers online,
and last year our supporters sent over 1.7 million
communities: making phone calls, organizing others to make phone calls to decision makers, organizing
makers, organizing rallies and giving community presentations. Some of our members become involved at even higher levels, coordinating local
5
groups of Food & Water Watch supporters as we seek to build power in key communities.
We do this through coordination between messages sent to our online supporters, personal interaction with our community-based organizers, and national
to expand this program in 2013.
In addition to working to develop Food & Water Watch volunteers and activists, our organizing team devotes considerable time to building up and supporting community- based organizations and coalitions. To make real change in these challenging times, we need to marshal the collective resources of various organizations and interests that are working toward the same goals that we are. We will never be able to take on the big oil and gas companies or the big food monopolies or the fundamental problems in our democratic system alone — we will need strong
Most of the victories listed above were not achieved solely by Food & Water Watch, but by working with other organizations and building strong coalitions — groups of groups — that play a critical role in our
trainings for community-based organizations,
and local allies, and providing the infrastructure and initiative for coalition development.
Food & Water Watch has played a critical role in launching and supporting the leading anti-fracking coalitions New Yorkers Against Fracking, Californians Against Fracking, Marylanders Against Fracking, and Protect Our Colorado. We work with strong networks of organizations in other states across the country, including Oregon, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina and Illinois, among others. It’s through these networks that we are able to achieve together more than any one organization can achieve individually.
Programmatic Activities and CampaignsFOOD PROGRAMFood & Water Watch’s Food Program combines policy research, strategic communications, lobbying and grassroots organizing to advocate for policies that will result in sustainable and secure food systems that provide healthy food for consumers and an economically viable living for family farmers and rural communities.
Factory Farms In 2013, after years of pressure from Food & Water Watch and other public health advocates,
withdrew approvals for the use of most types of arsenic in chicken feed. This issue is a great example of how our strategy of combining strong
6
research, policy and regulatory expertise and litigation with grassroots organizing works over time to achieve the changes we need. The FDA’s move on arsenic in chicken feed followed our
the Maryland legislature in 2012, and key research by our coalition partners in the public health community documenting the threat that it posed to public health.
In addition to working to demand regulation of the meat industry and factory farms at the federal level, we worked at the state level across the country. In Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, New Mexico, Indiana, Missouri and elsewhere, we worked to block bad bills in state legislatures that would make it harder for neighbors of factory farms to take legal action when they were harmed by these facilities, or that would make it illegal to even take a picture of a factory farm.
Saving AntibioticsIn September, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) provided data on antibiotic-resistant infections and reported that over 2 million Americans experience an antibiotic-resistant infection each year, and at least 23,000 people die from them. This provided a great platform for discussing our national campaign to ban the abuse of antibiotics on factory farms, which use an estimated 80 percent of the antibiotics sold in the United States.
In 2013, we launched campaigns in Iowa, Colorado
on key Congressional committees to ask them to become leaders on the issue of ending the overuse of antibiotics by factory farms.
At the end of the year, the FDA released voluntary guidelines for drug companies and livestock producers. The FDA’s new guidance requests that pharmaceutical companies change the labels on medications used in feed to state legal use of the
medicine. But the FDA’s new strategy is inadequate because it does not cover all of the ways that antibiotics are misused and create resistance.
Because we still need a ban on the nontherapeutic use of medically important antibiotics by factory farms, our work to build pressure on Congress to pass legislation is as important as ever.
Agriculture and Food Policy in the Farm BillThroughout 2013, we worked to block damaging industry-driven proposals in the Farm Bill, including attempts to cut food stamps, weaken contract fairness provisions for farmers and ranchers, gut country of origin labeling requirements, and derail a new food safety inspection program for imported
research for organic agriculture and beginning
7
Country of Origin LabelingIn May, we successfully pressured the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to strengthen the rules for country of origin labels for meat. This was in response to a challenge at the World Trade Organization (WTO), where Canada and Mexico challenged the U.S. Country of Origin Labeling rule (COOL) as a “barrier to trade.” We worked hard with our farm group allies to make sure that the meat and grocery industries didn’t convince the USDA to use this as an opening to get rid of COOL entirely. In May, we were rewarded when the USDA released an updated COOL regulation that addressed the WTO concerns by making the labels more accurate for consumers.
But the meat industry didn’t stop there. After the new rules were issued, it sued the federal government, claiming that the new regulations violated their First Amendment rights. We contributed as an intervenor in the case, explaining the critical information that accurate COOL labels provide to consumers. By the end of 2013, the meat industry’s legal challenge continued to
swim upstream, as they appealed decisions made by lower courts that maintained this important labeling program.
Food SafetyFor two years, we’ve led the charge to stop the “Filthy Chicken Rule.” This proposal from the USDA would allow poultry companies to inspect their own product, while running lines at up to 175 birds per minute. We have mobilized media attention, Congressional scrutiny and public comments to oppose this change that would take USDA
police themselves, all while putting worker safety and animal welfare at risk. This year, we worked closely with several worker justice and occupational safety groups to expose the risk that this change would pose to workers in chicken plants.
In addition to meat and poultry inspection, we focused on the food safety rules for other foods. In 2013, after years of debate and an intense
controversial industry-sponsored Leafy Greens
Breaking Up the FoodopolyIn December, we released a report and online tool that vividly illustrate the impact that increasing consolidation of our food supply into fewer hands has on consumers. The report, Grocery Goliaths, includes our analysis of which companies control the market for 100 food products, and reveals that consumers don’t really have as many choices at the grocery store as they think. Along with the report, we launched an updated Foodopoly website that included infographics illustrating the level of control in different sections of the store and an online quiz to test consumers’ knowledge about who makes the brands they buy.
8
Marketing Agreement, which would have created a food safety regime controlled by big produce growers that would have been unworkable for small farmers.
In July, the FDA took some long-overdue action on an issue that we have pressured them on for several years: inadequate standards for arsenic in apple juice. We’d lobbied the FDA for years to set stricter standards for arsenic levels in apple juice,
Increasingly, food safety challenges are coming from foods that are imported. In 2013, we worked to make sure that the USDA and the FDA acknowledge the special risks that can be presented from imported food. For example, we discovered repeated fecal contamination problems in products imported from Australia and New Zealand and exposed these problems to the press. Australia recently privatized its meat inspection program, and we continue to monitor problems in countries using such programs to illustrate that turning over meat inspection to the companies to police themselves
does not work, and that we should not follow in their footsteps here in the United States.
In the fall, the USDA announced that it was giving the green light to China to export processed poultry to the United States. This report cleared the way for China to process poultry that is sent to Chinese facilities from “approved” sources such as the United States, Canada or Chile. We have managed to block this proposal for several years, and the announcement that we could soon be importing processed poultry products from China — products that wouldn’t have to be labeled with a country of origin — sparked widespread media coverage that was overwhelmingly negative. We will continue to generate public opposition to this idea, to try to discourage these imports.
After months of pressure from Food & Water Watch, in October 2013 the FDA released a long-overdue update about the pet deaths and illnesses that have been linked to chicken jerky treats produced
which has been linked to over 3,000 reported illnesses and over 500 deaths in dogs.
Genetically Engineered FoodIn 2013, we released several new reports
genetically engineered foods (GMOs) and why they are not worth the risk to public health and the environment. Superweeds: How Biotech Companies Bolster the Pesticide Industry explains the connection between the rapid proliferation of GMO crops
resistant “superweeds” that have led to the steadily increasing use of more dangerous herbicides.
Monsanto. The report shows that the chemical
also political campaigns, regulatory processes and the structure of agriculture systems all over the
9
world. A third report outlines the extent to which the U.S. government promotes biotech crops in its foreign policy. We also released a popular factsheet that lists all of the seed companies, including some producers of vegetable seed, that are now controlled by Monsanto.
In 2013, we also opposed the USDA’s push for approval of new GMO crops. We worked to provide critical comments and public opposition to 2,4-D-tolerant corn and soy and dicamba-tolerant soy and cotton, as well as the reduced-bruising potato and a non-browning apple.
We also helped successfully pressure Congress to remove the “Monsanto Protection Act” rider from the House version of the appropriations bill. This rider ended up in the previous year’s budget for the USDA and removes judicial oversight of the agency’s environmental review process for genetically
And 2013 was yet another year in which we held
food animal, the transgenic salmon, which has been under consideration by the FDA since 2010. We submitted nearly 200,000 public comments to the FDA in April, urging them to reject this controversial, unnecessary new GMO animal.
Protecting the Integrity of the Organic StandardsIn April, after we worked with allies to generate public pressure on the National Organic Standards Board, it voted not to continue to allow the use of the antibiotic tetracycline on organic apple and pear trees.
TriclosanIn December, as a result of pressure from Food & Water Watch and our allies, the FDA released a proposed rule requiring companies that manufacture the antibacterial additive triclosan
Labeling GMO FoodThe grassroots movement to demand labeling of GMO foods grew in 2013, and Food & Water Watch was involved all over the country to help push this issue forward. We worked hard in Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Florida, Illinois and California to build strong coalitions to push for labeling. In 2013, both Connecticut and Maine passed the first-ever statewide legislation that would require foods with GM products to be labeled. But these bills included “trigger” clauses that delay them from going into effect until surrounding states also require labeling. This increases the pressure on other Northeastern states to pass labeling as well, and we will be involved in the fight to achieve this.
In Washington State, we worked on the ground to help the effort to pass a ballot initiative requiring labeling of GMOs. Unfortunately, the largest corporate agribusiness interests were able to buy the election, and won by the slimmest of margins: just three percentage points. The opposition spent a record amount of money, and there was a very low voter turnout. Despite this loss, we have significantly increased activism on this issue and made GMOs a topic of conversation among constituencies not usually exposed to the issue — assets that can be built upon as we move forward.
10
soap and water. While this was a long-overdue development, the proposed rule will not take
corporations that manufacture this unnecessary additive to soaps and other antibacterial products, the FDA should make companies prove that triclosan and similar products are safe before they go on the market.
Legal Advocacy to Regulate Factory Farm PollutionOur legal arm, Food & Water Justice, has focused much of its attention in this past year on industrial agriculture and, in particular, factory farms. In 2013,
industry attempts to further insulate itself from any reasonable form of regulation or transparency.
After the EPA withdrew a rule that would amass baseline data on factory farm pollution in 2012, we were forced to develop legal action to require the agency to reinstate the rule. Food & Water
organizations that similarly wanted to challenge
the materials that the agency relied on to pull the rule, through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. These documents were shared with many of the environmental organizations that were then considering whether to join a legal action against the EPA.
After industry’s predictable response to the
operation (CAFO) data, the EPA asked all environmental groups to return the data so that it could redact information like the names and addresses of CAFO operators. All groups agreed to do so except Food & Water Watch, which refused on the grounds that business names and addresses of industrial facilities like CAFOs are not subject to any privacy protection exemptions from FOIA.
of a complaint against the EPA for abandoning its 2011 308 CAFO information-gathering rule. During the remainder of 2013, we fought to ensure that the administrative record that the EPA relied on to promulgate the rule includes all the documents that should be before the court, and we intervened in the Farm Bureau’s case to make sure that this information on industrial polluters was kept public.
CAFO litigation in 2013 also saw a major, but hopefully temporary, setback in the scope of Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction over these factory farm facilities. Food & Water Watch was one of several organizations to intervene in a West Virginia case to try to protect the EPA’s ability to require CWA permits for CAFO production areas. Despite intense
the district court judge ruled in favor of industry and made CAFOs virtually immune from CWA protections. We spent the remainder of 2013 preparing for the appeal of this lower court ruling and to be in court in 2014 to have it overturned.
11
WATER PROGRAMFood & Water Watch’s Water Program works to protect our essential water resources so that
water. The program works to reduce the sale and consumption of bottled water through our campaign called “Take Back the Tap,” as bottled water is far more expensive than tap water and creates mountains of plastic waste. We work with community organizations across the country to prevent the privatization of public water and sewer utilities. We also work to safeguard our precious water resources from contamination and misuse by oil and gas industry fracking.
Take Back the Tap One of the most important ways that we tackle bottled water is through the Take Back the Tap campus campaign, which trains students in organizing, outreach and education on bottled water. We have worked with an average of 50 campuses each semester, training student leaders in how to organize campaigns to reduce the use of bottled water and to promote tap water on campus. In some locations, student groups have been successful in banning the sale of bottled water on campus, while in other locations, students work
stations, to increase access to reusable water on campus and to pass resolutions to prevent student fees from being used for the provision of bottled water.
a-palooza” campus contest using the Tap Buddy mobile app that we developed in 2012. The contest encouraged college students to compete to get the most students to pledge to choose tap water over bottled water on campus. The competition collected over 4,000 student pledges, representing nearly 900,000 water bottles that will not enter the waste stream. Dartmouth College won the competition
Poultry Fair Share ActOur big push during the second half of 2013 was to draft and build support for legislative efforts to make poultry integrators in Maryland at least partly accountable for the pollution from their chickens. To do this, we launched the Poultry Fair Share Campaign to educate the public and decision makers on this issue and to generate support for efforts to force the industry integrators to take on, for the first time, the financial burdens of waste disposal from their chicken-growing enterprises.
As part of this campaign, we drafted legislation, the Poultry Fair Share Act (PFSA), which requires poultry companies to pay a $.05 per bird fee for any chicken placed on a contract farm in the state. This would add a new revenue stream to the Bay Restoration Fund, an existing fund that covers the costs of Chesapeake Bay clean-up measures. While everyone in the state, from households to municipalities, pays into the fund though annual fees and taxes, the chicken companies do not contribute to the fund, even though they are one of the biggest sources of pollution. The new revenue stream, roughly $15 million, generated by the PFSA would pay for cover crops, a practice that prevents the run-off of farm pollutants into our waterways.
12
campaigns across the country, we pulled together an online map of municipalities or campuses that had successful bottled water campaigns. This map is a useful tool for our student leaders to be able to show the widespread support for similar initiatives across the country, and to advocate for change on their campus.
Campaign to Ban FrackingFood & Water Watch is leading a national campaign to stop hydraulic fracturing (also known as “fracking”). This practice involves drilling through hard rock formations like shale to obtain previously inaccessible supplies of oil and natural gas, then injecting millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and chemicals to break apart the rock and release the oil and gas.
Fracking comes with serious threats to the environment, public health, agriculture and the economy. These threats are not just localized to the immediate vicinity of areas being fracked, since
reach far beyond the immediate drilling site as toxic waters leach into groundwater systems and methane gas and industrial processes pollute the air. A growing body of evidence shows that fracking cannot be done safely and must be banned.
In 2013, in addition to our national campaign, we worked on expanding state campaigns in New York, New Jersey, Colorado and California.
NATIONAL CAMPAIGN
In 2013, we worked in collaboration with our allies in Americans Against Fracking on a highly successful call to President Obama and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to ban drilling and fracking on federal lands. The industry pays very little for these oil and gas leases in some of the most sensitive ecosystems in the country. The campaign received widespread support from hundreds of organizations, and we were able to generate more than 650,000 comments to the BLM calling for a ban on fracking on public lands. Food & Water Watch alone submitted just under 100,000 comments from our online supporters to the BLM. Together with other organizations that called for stronger regulations for fracking on federal lands, we delivered more than 1 million comments, the greatest show of opposition to fracking to date.
Our national work also focused on holding the EPA accountable on fracking. In June 2013, the agency dropped a critical investigation into drinking water contamination and fracking in Pavillion, Wyoming, under pressure from the industry. We then worked with allies in Americans Against Fracking and the
13
Stop the Frack Attack Network to deliver more than 250,000 petitions at an event in front of the White House with community members from Pavillion and
In September, we released a major data-driven analysis in a report entitled The Social Costs of Fracking: A Pennsylvania Case Study. The report
accidents, social disorder arrests and sexually transmitted infections worsened in rural counties with fracked natural gas wells, and the trends were especially pronounced in the rural counties in Pennsylvania with the highest density of fracked wells.
Food & Water Watch has helped to pass numerous local bans and moratoriums on fracking across the country. These include
New York; Dallas, Texas (de facto ban); Santa
Cruz, California; and Middlesex County, New Jersey. We developed a map to track all of the measures against fracking.
STATE CAMPAIGNS
New York
date we have kept the dangerous and destructive method of fracking from threatening New York’s food and water supplies. As a result of the pressure from the coalition we helped form, New Yorkers Against Fracking, the Cuomo administration announced that it would not be able to complete the proposed fracking regulations by the deadline at the end of February 2013. Further, in March the New York State Assembly passed a two-year moratorium on fracking in the state. Passage of this legislation shows the power of the grassroots movement against fracking.
ColoradoIn Colorado, we worked with four communities that successfully passed ballot measures against fracking in November 2013. We worked with local
groups in the city of Lafayette to ban fracking. The oil and gas industry spent nearly $900,000 to defeat the measures, outspending the community 30-to-1. We helped to train the local leaders, mobilize our members, draft talking points, raise money and provide legal assistance.
These democratic bans were subjected to a furious
including massive public relations campaigns
bans. Our legal arm, Food & Water Justice, was
Colorado — litigation that continued throughout
drafting of a Constitutional Amendment to provide unchallengeable local control of gas and oil operations by the state’s towns and cities so that
The Social Costs of
A PENNSYLVANIA CASE STUDY
14
other communities do not have to face courtroom battles to protect their citizens and homes from the negative impacts of irresponsible fracking. In
have the wording changed. As a result, we withdrew the bill and will seek to reintroduce it in the coming
CaliforniaAs oil companies gear up to frack for oil in a huge area of California, we helped form the new coalition Californians Against Fracking to pressure Governor Jerry Brown to ban fracking in the state. The coalition has more than 150 member organizations working to hold Governor Brown accountable. Hundreds of activists delivered petitions signed by more than 100,000 people calling for a ban.
Maintaining Public Control of Water ResourcesWe work closely with communities across the country to maintain public control of water and sewer systems using a combination of research,
media outreach and organizing. Research shows that private water systems charge higher rates and deliver lower-quality service to residents. In 2013,
privatize water systems in Allentown, Pennsylvania; Fort Worth, Texas; St. Louis, Missouri; and Bethel, Connecticut.
We also helped to block a proposed long-term contract between Fryeburg Water Company and Nestlé Waters/Poland Springs that would have threatened community groundwater resources in Maine. Nestlé and the Fryeburg Water Co. wanted to enter into a 25 to 45 year contract that would compromise Maine’s water resources for future
public at large and that it will somehow generate substantial revenue.
COMMON RESOURCES PROGRAMFood & Water Watch’s Common Resources Program works to promote environmental policies that protect our most essential resources while seeking real reductions to harmful pollution — not accounting gimmicks designed to give the appearance of reductions. It also works to prevent bad trade deals that would undermine our federal, state and local public and environmental health laws. Given the threats posed by two trade deals under negotiation, the Common Resources Program focused its work in 2013 on stopping these deals.
Free Trade Fast TrackThe year 2013 saw a growing push to pass “Fast Track” trade-promotion authority in Congress. Fast Track would allow the president to negotiate trade deals without consulting Congress and to bring completed deals to Congress for a yes or no vote, prohibiting it from amending the deals. Two trade deals are currently being negotiated that could
advocate on all the issues that we work on, from food safety to fracking.
15
negotiated by 12 countries including the United States, Canada, Mexico, Chile, Peru, Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Japan and Brunei. It will limit food GMO labeling and allow the import of goods that do not meet U.S. safety standards. We know that farmed seafood in South Asia is raised with chemicals and antibiotics not allowed in the United States, and already these products are shipped here. Around 90 percent of the seafood sold in the United States is imported,
comes from countries in the TPP.
This situation will only be worse under this deal, which would lower food safety standards. It will also
prohibiting public institutions — such as schools, hospitals and nursing homes — from establishing “Buy Local” rules for purchasing foods. The TPP will also include a provision that will allow foreign corporations to sue state and local governments in international trade tribunals if they believe that state and local laws and regulations violate their trade rights under the agreement. Once adopted, the TPP would allow any country in the world to join, making it a global trade agreement.
The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is being negotiated between the United States
Partnership, the TTIP would weaken food safety standards, not only in the United States but also in the EU. The EU has targeted several important U.S. food safety measures for weakening under the negotiations. For instance, the EU is seeking to overturn the U.S. ban on the import of cattle and cattle products from the EU due to concerns about Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, commonly known as mad cow disease. Additionally, the TTIP could facilitate the privatization of water and wastewater treatment systems. Trade liberalization threatens the ability of local communities to control their water utilities, demand local control of water
water companies and restore public control of water services.
The key to stopping these deals is to defeat the
end, Food & Water Watch has been active both in Congress and across the country educating our supporters and members of Congress about the dangers posed by these trade deals. On the research side, we published four new fact sheets on these trade deals to educate our supporters as well as Congress.
Additionally, Food & Water Watch was active in Washington, D.C. educating members of Congress about the trade deals and the need to defeat Fast
on the impacts of the TPP and the potential risks that it poses to our nation’s seafood industry and seafood safety. Throughout the summer and fall, we met with both Republican and Democratic
Alan Nunnelee (R-MS), Rep. Rick Crawford (R-AR), Rep. John Delaney (D-MD) and Rep. Tim Walz (D-MN). In addition, we generated over 60,000 emails from constituents to their members of Congress asking them to oppose Fast Track. And thanks to
16
Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D-NM) signed a letter to President Obama opposing fast tracking the TPP.
FOOD & WATER JUSTICE Legal Advocacy to Stop Pollution TradingFood & Water Watch’s legal team, Food & Water
trading, a fundamental shift away from the successful Clean Water Act (CWA) source-by-source approach to water quality protection that can only bring negative impacts to our communities and
challenging trading provisions.
concept of pollution trading, no matter how it is
Chesapeake Bay’s latest cleanup plan that allowed
narrower “as applied” legal challenges against
evade their permit limits by purchasing credits from
Our West Virginia case involved a wastewater
discharge pollutants into the Bay watershed even though the receiving stream was already impaired, a practice that should be disallowed under the CWA. The permit required the facility to purchase nutrient credits from other polluters outside the local waterway once it was ready to discharge. After a hearing before the state administrative board, the permit was remanded back to the issuing agency, and, as 2013 came to a close, a new permit had not yet been reissued.
letter against NRG Energy for violations of its CWA
plants. We brought this case because NRG was proposing to purchase nutrient credits from agricultural operations to allow for these permit violations. Prompted by our notice letter, the
against NRG, and we have intervened in the case to advocate against trading for pollutant credits. We have been involved in all settlement discussions and are committed to preventing trading from being part of any remedy for NRG’s violations.
While 2013 did not see the legality of water pollution
to monitor proposed trading schemes and bring cases until eventually judges will be forced to rule on whether the CWA, as currently written, allows for point sources of pollution to buy their way out of permit compliance.
In 2013, we were also very engaged in educating legislators about the dangers of water pollution
members of Congress, such as Senator Ben Cardin.
17
GLOBAL ADVOCACY AND MOVEMENT BUILDINGAs multinational oil and gas companies continued to expand fracking and drilling operations across the globe, they were met in nearly every location by strong opposition. Food & Water Watch supported frontline communities by sharing the research and strategies gained through years of experience in the United States.
From Poland to Tunisia, and Mexico to Argentina, organizers have built local and regional coalitions that are making progress in the global march against fracking.
The year 2013 was also marked by great strides in our United Nations advocacy to promote participatory democracy in natural resource policy, as well as by the publication of Biotech Ambassadors: How the U.S. State Department Promotes the Seed Industry’s Global Agenda.
Global FrackingIn the past several years, fracking has spread like
in nearly every location where shale oil and gas reserves are assessed. Many of the companies doing the fracking (and the data and arguments used for its promotion around the world) were originally developed for use in U.S. communities. Food & Water Watch has played an important role in sharing our campaigning expertise with communities around the world that are facing the introduction of fracking.
This year, the Mexican Alliance Against Fracking (Alianza Mexicana Contra el Fracking) formed to counter the government’s push for oil and gas extraction. They began by conducting a series of webinars and public events to raise awareness, including co-hosting a forum in Congress about the impacts of extracting shale gas. The Alliance has quickly become the primary voice against fracking
Water Pollution Trading SchemesFood & Water Justice has been actively researching ongoing water pollution trading schemes in the country to identify opportunities to challenge the legality of trading. Specifically, in 2013 we filed state-level freedom of information (FOIA) requests in both Pennsylvania and Ohio, two states where trading is taking a firm hold. While our Pennsylvania request was partially denied and is currently under appeal, we are in the process of analyzing trading documents from the state that were produced where the credit “aggregator” Red Barn is engaged in a nutrient trading scheme. Under this scheme, Red Barn not only creates the waste management plans that generate the credits, but also creates the certification of the plan for the state Department of Environment and is in charge of verifying that nutrient reductions have indeed taken place, all the while profiting from the sale of these credits to polluters.
We are also analyzing documents from the Ohio River Basin, where the power plant industry, in collaboration with the USDA and the EPA, is promoting another multi-state trading effort. So far, documents reveal that the Alpine Cheese Factory, which is held out by proponents of trading as the poster child of success, has been in constant violation of its permit limits, even with the benefit of trading. Our goal, with both the Red Barn and Alpine Cheese examples, is to create a report in the coming year to be used in Maryland and elsewhere that looks critically at water pollution trading as it is implemented on the ground and to uncover all the inherent failures of this harmful practice.
18
in Mexican media, while slowly building a following on social media.
opportunity to engage with global communities where shale reserves are being explored or where
time events in Mexico, Bolivia, Indonesia, India, Senegal and Egypt.
As in previous years, people marched against fracking in Argentina, where communities have already passed several local bans but where
actions were held in Tunisia, Egypt and Senegal, and hundreds rallied in South Africa against plans by Shell to frack in the Karoo. In India, where the government is moving toward fracking, there was a
related strategy session held in New Delhi. Likewise, in Indonesia, water justice activists reacted to recent fracking proposals by hosting a discussion about fracking, and in Australia, activists rallied in Perth and Geelong.
United Nations AdvocacyFracking is not a theme that has received much attention at the United Nations, but the multi-year process of developing Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), as well as the Secretary General’s Sustainable Energy for All platform, have created timely opportunities for introducing the topic.
In November, Food & Water Watch collaborated with partners to organize “Sustainable Energy for All: Can a just solution include hydraulic fracturing?” This event, held in conjunction with the Fifth Session of the UN Open Working Group on the
event held within the UN focused exclusively on fracking. Our goal was to introduce the topic of fracking in the context of the Secretary General’s Sustainable Energy for All plan and to show how the practice would, in fact, slow the move toward sustainable energy production in developing countries.
Food & Water Watch also contributed to the SDG process by acting as an expert speaker on the topic of water and sanitation. We are increasingly seeing the over-withdrawal of aquifers inaccurately framed as an “urban vs. rural” issue. Our goal is to reframe this issue so that those who live within the watershed are empowered to collectively determine prioritization of use with a long-range view toward protecting both recharge rates and the human right to water, followed by water for the production of local agriculture.
GMO AdvocacyAfter a year of extensive research and the creation of a massive database, we published a report in the United States and Europe that uncovers the systematic promotion of biotech agriculture by the U.S. State Department in developing countries.
19
Previous researchers have used WikiLeaks to uncover anecdotal examples of U.S. embassies pushing biotech seeds, but our database was the
database — over 900 cables. The report received Reuters, The Guardian, Mother
Jones, , Le Monde, Russia Today, Jamaican radio and many blogs. It was also tweeted by WikiLeaks to hundreds of thousands of Twitter followers. Colleagues in the global South, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa and in Latin America, made great use of the data that we provided in their own national struggles to implement appropriate regulation of genetic engineering.
FOOD & WATER EUROPE
program, Food & Water Europe, advocates for clean water and safe food in the European Union.
FoodThe Europe team worked on a variety of food projects throughout 2013:
• to introduce them to the dangers of
press the U.S. FDA not to approve the animal for food.
• urging them to vote
against the GM maize crop Pioneer1507 in order to prevent it from becoming the second GM crop grown in the EU (that crop was not voted through, and we await the Commission’s response).
• directly and via online activism, on their abandonment of non-GM animal feed requirements in meat, milk, dairy and egg contracts and to label non-GM-fed products to ensure true customer choice.
•
both to inform MSPs of current developments and to continue to drive a wedge between the anti-GM Scottish Government and the vocally pro-GM Whitehall authorities (who consistently cast pro-GM votes at the EU level that undermine us in key areas).
•
mosquitoes by a U.K. company.
• for the EU in the
ongoing TTIP/TAFTA talks, and we’ll hold EU
Global Solidarity In addition to advancing our global work to fight fracking, promote the human right to water at the United Nations, and uncover State Department efforts to promote U.S. seed companies, 2013 saw the continuation of our ongoing solidarity support for local campaigns against water privatization, extractivism and corporate influence over natural resource policy. For example, Food & Water Watch:
• Partnered with CISPES (Committee In Solidarity with the People of El Salvador) to block a proposed law in El Salvador that would promote public-private partnerships in water and infrastructure.
• Joined an amicus brief for a lawsuit to stop the Mirador open-pit mine in Ecuador that would contaminate water and displace local communities.
• Helped draft and circulate an international solidarity letter to stop a large, proposed hydropower dam in San Jose del Tambo, Ecuador.
• Supported a campaign against the privatization of four hydropower plants in Albania. The sale, proposed to solve budgetary shortfalls, was backed by the International Finance Corporation. Our research showing that privatization is a false solution to municipal constraints was translated into Albanian for use in a national campaign to block the privatization.
20
authorities to account for their many statements in this area.
•
consultations in the U.K., EU and United States. We submitted comments to the FDA on 2,4-D-tolerant corn and soy and on GM salmon; to the European Commission on sustainability of the food system; and to the U.K. Government on
• of electronic activists and our social
media presence in many areas, and published EU versions of Food & Water Watch reports and papers. We continued to use blogs and social media to press the U.K. Government and other key players, like the National Farming Union, on their pro-GM positions and the lack of public support for them. We look forward to continuing to build our political punch,
nature and collaborating with networks dealing with international trade, food sovereignty and a variety of related issues.
FrackingFood & Water Europe has played a prominent role in coordinating the growing European anti-fracking movement by cooperating closely with other environmental groups in Brussels and at the national and regional levels. Throughout 2013, we
in the EU’s Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, which would require a mandatory risk assessment, baseline data collection and consultation of local communities prior to any drilling or fracking for unconventional fossil fuels such as shale gas, coalbed methane or tight gas; we managed to convince a comfortable majority in the European Parliament to support such an amendment. In subsequent negotiations about the text between the Parliament and the Member States, our amendment was unfortunately rejected, as Member States like Poland and the U.K. were able to block this proposal.
In 2013, we also stayed in frequent contact with the departments of the European Commission dealing with environmental policy and climate change. Apart from frequently updating them about
and public health impacts of fracking, we also pushed our demand for strong rules that would increase the transparency, accountability and data-gathering of fracking activities in Europe. In January 2014, the European Commission introduced a set of recommendations that included our policy recommendations. Unfortunately, again under pressure from Member States, the Commission failed to introduce binding new EU-wide legislation to force Member States to strictly monitor this industry.
Food & Water Europe also organized an event in the European Parliament — attended by 100-plus people — to question not only the environmental, but also the economic sustainability of the fracking industry in the United States as well as the limited
21
contribution of shale gas to the EU’s energy mix. By tackling the ongoing hype about shale gas in terms of jobs, energy security and foreign investment, Food & Water Europe consistently advocated for a European climate and energy policy based on
and social media, we remain in frequent contact with groups across Europe.
WaterThe year 2013 has been one of great achievements for the water justice movement in Europe, where Food & Water Europe plays an important role.
Led by trade unions and joined by nongovernmental and grassroots organizations, the movement was
Citizens’ Initiative (ECI). The ECI is a tool introduced recently to help citizens play a more active role in European political processes. It can serve to put an issue on the European agenda by collecting 1 million
States. The ECI demanding that European legislation recognize the Human Right to Water was able to deliver nearly 2 million signatures.
Food & Water Europe worked hard for this ECI as a demand for Europe to commit to the human right to water and sanitation. It is a clear signal from citizens asking the European Commission to change its mindset from a market-based approach with a focus on competition to a rights-based approach with a focus on participatory public service. It asks for the aim to achieve universal and global access to water and sanitation and to safeguard our water resources for future generations.
As a result of the massive mobilization around the Right to Water Initiative, water was excluded from a new piece of European legislation, the Concessions Directive, whose primary goal is to favor the insertion of private corporations into public services.
Food & Water Europe has closely followed the situation in countries under the pressure of the austerity agenda. As a result of the policies imposed by the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank (which together form the Troika), countries like Greece have been pushed to privatize their water companies as a way to reduce their debts. Food & Water Europe, together with allies, has mobilized to denounce and try to block those privatizations.
22
We depend entirely on generous individuals and visionary private foundations for the funds we need to do the research, litigation, lobbying and grassroots organizing to challenge corporate control of our food and water and to demand that government do its job to protect people and our most essential resources. We would like to recognize and thank the following for their support:
Food & Water Watch individual membersFood & Water Partners monthly giversFood & Water Leaders Circle membersAnonymous funders and supporters
EXPENSES
PROGRAM
Food $4,420,891
Water $1,339,991
Common Resources $4,425,692
TOTAL PROGRAM $10,186,574
MANAGEMENT $1,819,793
FUND RAISING $1,460,893
TOTAL EXPENSES
INCOMEGrants and Contributions $13,102,108
Interest Income ($37,954)
Program Fees $3,700
Other $842
TOTAL INCOME
ENDING NET ASSETSas of December 31, 2013
FINANCIALS
11th Hour Project
Bellwether Foundation
Cloud Mountain Foundation
Columbia Foundation
Energy Foundation
Ettinger Foundation
Franklin Conklin Foundation
Jessie Smith Noyes Foundation, Inc.
Longmont Community Foundation
McKnight Foundation
New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
New World Foundation
Park Foundation
Scheidel Foundation
Stephen and Tabitha King Foundation
The Boulder County Community Foundation
Tides Foundation
Town Creek Foundation
foodandwaterwatch.org
