In a significant move that could conclude a long-standing dispute over commercial water extraction from public lands, the U.S. Forest Service has mandated that BlueTriton Brands, the company behind Arrowhead bottled water, cease operations. The order demands the removal of a pipeline and associated infrastructure used to gather and transport water from springs within the San Bernardino National Forest.
The Forest Service officially notified BlueTriton Brands of its decision via a letter last month, stating the denial of the company’s application for a new permit to continue its water extraction activities.
District Ranger Michael Nobles articulated in the July 26th letter that BlueTriton Brands “must cease operations” within the San Bernardino National Forest. Furthermore, the company is required to submit a comprehensive plan detailing the removal of all pipelines and equipment from the federal land.
BlueTriton Brands has since initiated a legal challenge against this denial in court, signaling the ongoing nature of the battle.
Environmental advocates have lauded the Forest Service’s decision as a major victory.
“It’s a huge victory after 10 years,” stated Amanda Frye, a prominent activist who has been at the forefront of the campaign against water extraction from the forest. “I’m hoping that we can restore Strawberry Creek, have its springs flowing again, and get the habitat back.”
Frye and other opponents contend that BlueTriton’s water extraction has drastically diminished creek flow, leading to substantial environmental degradation in the area.
The Forest Service’s announcement followed closely on the heels of a lawsuit filed by a local environmental organization, Save Our Forest Assn. The lawsuit alleged that the agency was unlawfully permitting BlueTriton to operate under an expired permit.
However, BlueTriton Brands maintains that its water usage is not environmentally detrimental and argues for the continued operation of its water pipeline within the national forest.
In an email statement, the company asserted that BlueTriton Brands and its predecessors “have continuously operated under a series of special-use permits for nearly a century.”
“This denial has no legal merit, is unsupported by the facts, and negatively impacts the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians,” the company added, highlighting that the tribe utilizes a portion of the water transported through the pipeline, particularly for firefighting purposes.
The San Manuel Band of Mission Indians has not issued a public statement on the matter, referring inquiries regarding the lawsuit to BlueTriton Brands.
If the Forest Service’s decision is upheld, it would effectively cut off BlueTriton Brands from the very source that lends its name to its flagship product, Arrowhead 100% Mountain Spring Water.
The springs situated in the mountains north of San Bernardino, historically a water source for generations of bottled water production, derive their name from a naturally occurring arrowhead-shaped rock formation on the mountainside.
California state officials have documented that the initial water diversion infrastructure in the Strawberry Creek watershed was established in 1929. Over subsequent years, the system expanded with the drilling of additional boreholes into the mountainside to increase water extraction capacity.
Located near the company’s water pipeline, at the base of the mountain, is the long-shuttered Arrowhead Springs hotel property, acquired by the San Manuel tribe in 2016. BlueTriton has stated that a decades-old agreement dictates that a portion of the water flowing through the 4.5-mile pipeline is allocated to the Arrowhead Springs property. Another portion is delivered to a roadside tank and then transported via trucks to a bottling plant.
The Forest Service has been collecting a permit fee of $2,500 annually from BlueTriton, but notably, has not charged for the actual water extracted.
Public controversy surrounding the water extraction issue intensified following a 2015 report by the Desert Sun, revealing that the Forest Service was permitting Nestle (now BlueTriton) to siphon water under a permit that had officially expired in 1988.
Subsequently, the Forest Service initiated a review of the permit, and in 2018, granted a new permit, valid for up to five years. The revelations regarding Nestle’s water extraction activities sparked widespread public opposition and triggered multiple complaints to California regulators concerning the company’s water rights claims. This led to a comprehensive investigation by state water regulators.
BlueTriton Brands assumed control of the bottled water operation in 2021 when Nestle’s North American bottled water division was acquired by private equity firms. Recently, BlueTriton and Primo Water Corp. announced merger plans to create a new, larger beverage company.
Last year, state officials concluded that BlueTriton had been illegally diverting a significant amount of water without valid water rights, concurring with concerns raised by Amanda Frye and others who had challenged the company’s claims. The State Water Resources Control Board subsequently ordered BlueTriton to cease its “unauthorized diversions” of water. BlueTriton, however, initiated legal action to contest this decision, citing procedural irregularities.
In the recent Forest Service letter, District Ranger Nobles explained that BlueTriton was repeatedly asked to provide “additional information necessary to assure compliance with BlueTriton’s existing permit,” but these requests were “consistently left unanswered.”
Nobles further stated that regulations allow him to consider whether the water usage surpasses the “needs of forest resources.”
He also highlighted a discrepancy between BlueTriton’s permit application, which stated the water was for bottled water production, and the company’s reports, which indicated that 94% to 98% of the monthly diverted water was delivered to the non-operational hotel property for “undisclosed purposes.” Nobles noted that “for months BlueTriton has indicated it has bottled none of the water taken,” while simultaneously increasing extraction volumes.
“This increase represents significantly more water than has ever been delivered previously,” Nobles wrote. “The hotel and conference facility on the property is not operating, and there is no explanation of where the millions of gallons of water per month are going.”
Nobles declared the Forest Service’s decision as final, with no option for appeal.
The order mandated BlueTriton to immediately “stop use of the BlueTriton pipeline” within seven days by severing or blocking the pipe at each tunnel or borehole across twelve sites. The company is also required to remove locks from its equipment and submit a plan for complete infrastructure removal within three months.
Forest Service officials have not yet responded to requests for comments regarding the decision.
A BlueTriton spokesperson stated that the Forest Service has granted a “temporary 30-day stay for the sole purpose of supplying the needs of the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, including for fire prevention.”
“We will continue to operate in compliance with all state and federal laws while we explore legal and regulatory options,” the spokesperson added.
In its lawsuit, BlueTriton argues that the Forest Service’s decision violates federal law and is “arbitrary and capricious.”
BlueTriton asserts that studies conducted by its scientific consultants have demonstrated that water extraction “has not negatively affected the Strawberry Canyon environment.”
Records indicate that approximately 319 acre-feet, equivalent to 104 million gallons, of water flowed through BlueTriton’s pipelines in 2023.
Despite the ongoing water extraction, Strawberry Creek, located in the canyon below the springs, has continued to flow in recent years. However, Amanda Frye has observed during her hikes along the creek that its western fork, situated downstream from the boreholes, is significantly reduced to a mere trickle, forming intermittent puddles among the vegetation.
“Our goal was to get that water back in the creek and protect the forest,” Frye stated. “The proof will be when the pipes and all that infrastructure is taken out and it’s restored. But I think we’re nearing the end.”
