Great Lakes water,” her directive said, “the Michigan legislature

has failed to seriously debate and act on this issue. Based upon this

and the recommendations of the Department of Environmental

Quality, I have determined that the imposition of a moratorium on

the permitting or approval of new or increased bottled water plants,

processors, or operations is the appropriate course of action for state

government.”

2

Nestlé responded to the moratorium by suing the governor in

federal court. While Governor Granholm didn’t invoke WRDA

once in her directive—concentrating her authority on state statutes

instead—Nestlé focused on WRDA heavily in its legal challenge.

Of the twenty-two pages in the suit, ten were devoted to an attack

on WRDA. Not surprisingly, among Nestlé’s chief criticisms were

the allegations that WRDA was arbitrary and that it violated

Nestlé’s right to due process. The suit immediately attracted the at-

tention of water managers and environmentalists around the Basin,

who wondered whether it was the long-anticipated beginning of

WRDA’s end. The concern, of course, was that if a federal judge

agreed with Nestlé and found WRDA to be unconstitutional, the

Great Lakes would become vulnerable to unregulated diversions.

The lawsuit created an odd dynamic in the Great Lakes region.

While the governors were pursuing a compact to replace WRDA,

Nestlé was pursuing a lawsuit to have WRDA thrown out. The

question everyone wanted to know? Who would get there first? “If

[the Compact] doesn’t pass,” said Andy Buchsbaum in late 2005,

“then the backstop against diversions is essentially WRDA, and our

protection against diversions is only as strong as WRDA is

legally—and WRDA’s being challenged now.” Business leaders who

sympathize with Nestlé’s position worry that if WRDA falls before

the Compact is enacted, regulatory chaos will ensue in the Great

Lake Basin, creating an insecure climate for regional industry and

capital investment. “[If] WRDA is determined to be unconstitu-

tional, we’ll be naked and the resource is there for the taking,” says

George Kuper at the Council of Great Lakes Industries. “That, to

me, would be terrible.”

Those concerns have been appeased however—at least for the

W h o Wi l l Wi n t h e Wa r ?

267