ANNUAL REPORT 20102005-2010: FIVE YEARS OF DEFENDING OUR NATURAL RESOURCES

works to ensure the food, water and fish we

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

clean, affordable, public tap water flowing

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

all people have access to enough affordable,

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

F O O D & W AT E R W AT C H A N N U A L R E P O R T 2 0 1 0

A Message from Wenonah Hauter, Executive Director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Board of Directors and Directors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Programmatic Activities and Campaigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Food Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Water Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Fish Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Financials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

TA B L E O F C O N T E N T S

In just five short years,

Food & Water Watch has

achieved significant wins in

the protection of our food

and water resources, and we

couldn’t have done it without

the generous support of our donors and members.

Since we don’t take money from the usual sus-

pects — corporations and government — we rely

on foundations, individual donors and our growing

membership to remain independent. This indepen-

dence, as well as our focus on grassroots organiz-

ing backed by fact-based research, is what sets

Food & Water Watch apart among the countless

organizations and lobbyists operating in Washing-

ton, D.C. to influence food and water policy. We

seek to shift the balance of power back to consum-

ers and communities and away from corporations

and cronyism.

In our fifth year, we saw our staff continue to

grow, to 50 people. We opened new offices in

Iowa, Chicago and Michigan, bringing the total

number of Food & Water Watch offices to 12. We

also continue to work with our partner organiza-

tion Food & Water Europe, based in Brussels, to

pressure European leaders and to share U.S. expe-

riences with European consumers.

We’ve had a number of key successes in 2010:

We released our updated online factory farm

map, which the New York Times called “truly

eye-opening.”

We released our report on sustainable seafood

labeling, critiquing private sustainability labels

and calling for the federal government to intro-

duce and oversee sustainability standards.

We helped local groups in Hawai’i organize

into a coalition for sustainable aquaculture and

had two bills introduced to challenge factory

fish farming in the state. 

We defeated efforts to privatize waste and/

or drinking water systems around the country

in places like Trenton, New Jersey, where our

opponents spent over $1 million to support

privatization.

We worked with students at over 50 campuses

across the country to raise awareness about

bottled water. Highlights included a ban on

the sale and purchase of all disposable bottled

water on campus at the University of Oregon,

and a resolution by the Rutgers University stu-

dent government to Take Back the Tap, with

the administration agreeing to install bottle

filling stations.

We doubled the number of Food & Water

Watch activists online.

We succeeded in the first step in ensuring that

nanotechnology is not allowed in organic food

production.

With the support of our donors, members and volunteers around the country, our work con-tinues to gain momentum. We look forward to growing the movement to protect our food and water. Won’t you join us?

Sincerely,

Dear Friends,

A M E S S A G E F R O M W E N O N A H H A U T E R , E X E C U T I V E D I R E C T O R

Wenonah Hauter

Executive Director

4Food & Water Watch www.foodandwaterwatch.org

2010 Annual Report

Food & Water Watch works on issues across

three programmatic platforms: Food, Water and Fish.

These programs are responsible for staying on top of the

latest research in their issue areas and working with the

organizing department to create campaigns backed by

fact-based research materials — campaigns that win.

Food ProgramOur Food Program works to improve food safety and

food labeling so that consumers know what they’re buy-

ing. The program also promotes sustainable agriculture

and opposes factory farming. Our organizers engage the

public on these food policy issues all across the country.

Below are a few of the Food Program’s victories in the

fight for safer, healthier food in 2010:

Improving Food Safety

Food & Water Watch played a key role in the debate

surrounding the Food Safety and Modernization Act

passed in 2010. We were the first, and ultimately the

only, consumer group to advocate for a provision that

exempts small processors and farmers from the food

safety plan and produce safety requirements, and we

were a resource for both small-farm groups and Senate

staff trying to make the bill better. We continued to pro-

vide accurate information to reporters and other orga-

nizations about what was, and was not, in the bill — an

important role given the huge amount of false informa-

tion that has circulated on the Internet.

We presented on this topic at several conferences and

even at a training event for organic inspectors. The bill

also provides mandatory recall authority to the U.S.

Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as well as en-

hanced authority for the agency to access company

records if it suspects that a firm is putting adulterated

food into commerce — two provisions that we fought for.

An Interactive Factory Farm Map

In 2010, we released our updated online factory farm

map at www.factoryfarmmap.org. The interactive

map illustrates something that people in rural America

FOOD & WATER WATCH

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Maude Barlow CHAIR

Wenonah Hauter

Rudolf Amenga-Etego

Dennis Keeney

Kelsie Sue Kerr

Elizabeth Peredo Beltrán

Mary Ricci

Sue Rome

DIRECTORS

Wenonah Hauter EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Lane Brooks CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER

Patty Lovera ASSISTANT DIRECTOR

Marianne Cufone FISH PROGRAM

Emily Wurth WATER PROGRAM

Mark Schlosberg ORGANIZING DIRECTOR

Darcey O’Callaghan INTERNATIONAL POLICY DIRECTOR

Darcey Rakestraw COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR

P R O G R A M M A T I C A C T I V I T I E S A N D C A M P A I G N S

5Food & Water Watch www.foodandwaterwatch.org

2010 Annual Report

have known for a long time: family farms are being

replaced by factory farms, and these facilities are over-

whelming some regions of the country. By concentrating

large numbers of animals into one factory farm, and by

concentrating factory farms into one part of the country,

we also concentrate the effects of their waste on the en-

vironment. The current U.S. food system sends products

from unsustainable, potentially unsafe facilities far and

wide before a problem is even detected, putting consum-

ers all over the country at risk.

We designed the updated Factory Farm Map to provide

more opportunities for users to get involved in our issues

and to take action. Our updated website also includes

more data, which allows us to better illustrate trends re-

garding where factory farms are located. Along with the

new map, we released a comprehensive report, Factory

Farm Nation: How America Turned Its Livestock Farms

into Factories, that explains consolidation into factory

farms; the environmental, public health and community

impacts created by these facilities; and the bad govern-

ment policies that have fueled the farms’ growth. Events

in Iowa City and Chicago helped bring the issue to the

attention of local media and policymakers.

The report and the map help relate the policies that

Congress deliberates in the national Farm Bill to some-

thing that more and more consumers are familiar with:

the negative impacts of factory farms.

Nanotechnology

In the battle against the spread of nanotechnology in the

food system, one front has been an effort to make sure

that this controversial new technology is not allowed in

organic food production. This issue has been before the

National Organic Standards Board for several years, and

we successfully pressured the Board to call on the U.S.

Department of Agriculture to issue guidance stating that

nanomaterials are not permitted in organic production.

We were successful in getting the Board to use a good

definition of nanomaterials, classifying them as synthet-

ic and therefore prohibited in organic production, which

was contentious in some previous drafts.

Water ProgramOur Water Program works with grassroots organizations

to prevent the privatization of public water resources,

which occurs both through the purchase of local utilities

and through the bottling and selling of a community’s

water. The program also works to reduce the sale and

consumption of bottled water, which is far more expen-

sive than tap water and creates mountains of garbage.

Our campaign against bottled water is called “Take Back

the Tap.”

Below are some of the Water Program’s successes in

2010:

Raising Awareness Around Bottle Water

We learned in 2010 that Secretary of State Hillary

Clinton had named Coca-Cola, Pepsi and Fiji Water as

finalists for an environmental excellence award. Because

companies that pack water into plastic bottles and ship

them around the world shouldn’t be recognized for

environmental excellence, we alerted our activists and

generated over 11,800 comments asking Ms. Clinton not

to reward bad behavior. Hearing from activists had an

impact, as she did not end up giving any of the water

corporations the award.

We continue to work to decrease the use of bottled wa-

ter across the country. Sales of bottled water have been

declining in recent years as cash-strapped consumers

have realized that it’s not a necessary purchase.

6Food & Water Watch www.foodandwaterwatch.org

2010 Annual Report

Victory Over Privatization in Trenton

We won a hotly contested referendum to stop the priva-

tization of two-thirds of Trenton, New Jersey’s Water

Works by a margin of almost 4 to 1 (79% vs. 21% of the

vote). This victory is even more significant because the

company New Jersey American Water spent over $1

million on its effort to privatize the water system. With

the help of nearly 100 volunteers, who knocked on doors

and made thousands of phone calls to raise awareness

of the issue, our campaign showed that the power of the

people can overcome wealthy special interests by using

a traditional grassroots campaign strategy.

To ensure that New Jersey American Water has heard

the message against privatization sent by the residents

of Trenton, we are now working with residents to urge

the city council to pass a resolution asserting the impor-

tance of maintaining public control and ownership of

water and urging increased federal investment in public

drinking water systems.

Reducing Bottled Water on College Campuses

Food & Water Watch recruits student activists at col-

leges and universities across the country to be campus

coordinators. They work primarily on reducing the

consumption of bottled water and increasing the avail-

ability of tap water at their schools. Exposing the myth

of bottled water engages young people at a very person-

al level and opens the door to an interest in a broader

range of water issues. The initiative also exposes young

people to the skills needed to take action and advocate

for change in their communities — skills that are essen-

tial for an active citizenry.

The coordinators participated in national student confer-

ence call trainings with Food & Water Watch organizers

to discuss strategy and develop the knowledge base for

campus organizing about water issues. They also par-

ticipated in coordinated national events around World

Water Day, Earth Day and a National Day of Action for

Water in October to coincide with the global Blue Oc-

tober initiative. Some of the campuses we worked with

included Rutgers University, University of New Mexico,

Portland State University and University of Oregon,

Eugene.

Advocating for Improvements in Drinking Water and Sewage Infrastructure

In 2010, our Renew America’s Water campaign advo-

cated for increased funding for water and sewer in-

frastructure. Water systems in the United States are

severely underfunded, resulting in water main breaks,

sewer overflows and water contamination. Lawmak-

ers are looking to cut federal support for clean and

safe water even further. By the end of the year, Food &

Water Watch organizers had signed on 71 organizations

across the country to support Renew. We also developed

several materials to use for outreach for the campaign,

including one that detailed the need for investment in

water infrastructure in public schools across the country.

This publication underlined the importance of having all

schools provide safe public drinking water for students,

particularly given the increased presence of bottled wa-

ter in schools.

A Rising Threat: Hydraulic Fracturing

In 2010, Food & Water Watch began focusing on a new

threat to clean water: hydraulic fracturing, or “frack-

ing,” a process of extracting natural gas from the earth

by injecting a mix of toxic chemicals into the ground to

break up rock, potentially contaminating groundwater.

7Food & Water Watch www.foodandwaterwatch.org

2010 Annual Report

We released a report entitled Not So Fast, Natural Gas:

Why Accelerating Risky Drilling Threatens America’s

Water, which outlines the threats to our nation’s water

from the rapid proliferation of fracking in states across

the country.

We also organized around federal and state legislation

regarding this risky practice. The Fracturing Responsibil-

ity and Awareness of Chemicals Act of 2009, or FRAC

Act, would lift the exemption from regulation that was

granted to hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking

Water Act in 2005. It would also require oil and gas min-

ing companies to disclose the chemicals used in fracking

operations.

In addition, we delivered comments and letters to mem-

bers of the New York state legislature encouraging them

to pass New York Senate Bill 8129-B and similar legisla-

tion in the General Assembly that would require more

investigation into the impacts of natural gas drilling in

New York before going forward. As part of the lobby day

activities, we delivered copies of our report and gener-

ated phone calls to legislators. We engaged in similar ac-

tivities around the issue with the Delaware River Basin

Commission and in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Fish ProgramOur Fish Program works to promote safe seafood for

consumers while helping to protect the environment and

support coastal communities. Seafood consumers tell us

regularly that they are paying more attention to the fish

they eat, the value they get from that fish and what it

does for them and the world around them.

Here are a few highlights of the Fish Program’s work in

2010:

Opposing Factory Farming at Sea

We continued to draw national attention to the dirty and

dangerous practice of industrial factory fish farming,

also known as open ocean aquaculture. Just as multina-

tional corporations have forever changed the way food

is grown on land to the detriment of public health, the

environment, local communities and food quality itself,

they are poised to do the same at sea. The factory farm

model for aquaculture is rapidly replacing traditional

methods of fishing that have been used to catch fresh,

wild seafood for millennia, and will not increase the

seafood supply in the United States.

In Hawai’i, we worked with local groups in a coalition

known as Pono (native for “sustainable and culturally

appropriate”) Aquaculture Coalition and worked to get

two bills introduced, with several co-sponsors, to chal-

lenge factory fish farming in the state. We also launched

our report The Empty Promise of Ocean Aquaculture in

Hawai’i, which featured new information about the

negative impacts of industrial fish farming in Hawai’ian

waters, including troubling facts about the company

Kona Blue, which claims that ocean factory farming is

sustainable. Late in the year, Senator Pohai Ryan (D–

HI-25) confirmed that she would introduce state-level

legislation that requires all ocean aquaculture facility

applicants to complete an Environmental Impact State-

ment as part of the permitting process. This will provide

the public with more formal opportunities to review

and push back on proposals that are detrimental to the

marine environment.

At the national level, we began work on a set of prin-

ciples for the Alliance for Sustainable Aquaculture and

drafted guidelines to define how “recirculating aqua-

8Food & Water Watch www.foodandwaterwatch.org

2010 Annual Report

culture systems” should be permitted, monitored and

regulated. We also worked with Senator David Vitter

(R-LA) to introduce the Research in Aquaculture Oppor-

tunity and Responsibility Act of 2010, which calls for a

moratorium on ocean aquaculture and supports funding

for research and development of land-based recirculat-

ing aquaculture systems instead.

Genetically Engineered (GE) Salmon

In 2010, we successfully delayed the expected FDA ap-

proval of genetically engineered (GE) salmon, a tech-

nology that is problematic on several levels. First, the

FDA sought to push through the approval of the new

technology as an animal drug, not as the food product

for humans that it was intended to be. Furthermore,

the agency was relying mostly on company-provided

data regarding the safety of the fish, which proved to

be questionable: the FDA called the company’s claim

that GE eggs would be sterile “potentially misleading”

— in fact, up to 5 percent of the fish may be fertile. We

worked with allied groups to promote understanding of

the known (and unknown) risks to human health and

the environment that this product posed, getting media

coverage from hundreds of U.S. media organizations that

quoted Food & Water Watch experts and research.

We also publicized our analysis that the biotech industry

has lobbied Washington to the tune of half a billion dol-

lars in the past decade, which has also been widely cited

in the media coverage regarding the issue.

Fair Access to Fish

After many months of public engagement and lobby-

ing, we successfully pushed for congressional hearings

on catch shares. These programs divvy up our nation’s

fishery resources for exclusive use by the biggest and

fastest fishing operations and then allow corporations

and banks to buy and sell these “shares” for profit.

Catch shares turn the opportunity to go fishing into a

commodity, requiring fishermen to buy shares before

being able to go fishing. As has happened with family

farms on land, the added costs push smaller-scale fisher-

men out of business and consolidate the industry, paving

the way for industrial fishing methods that can destroy

sensitive ocean habitats.

In New England, we challenged the implementation

of a catch share program without a referendum, as is

required by law, and in the Gulf of Mexico, we submitted

a brief challenging the catch share program for grou-

per. We challenged both the program’s insufficient ref-

erendum and its failure to develop an adequate environ-

mental impact statement and assess the socioeconomic

impact of the program.

Seafood Labeling

In 2010, we released our comprehensive seafood label-

ing report, De-Coding Seafood Eco-Labels: Why We Need

Public Standards, which reviews the various seafood

certification programs, including the well-known Marine

Stewardship Council and Friend of the Sea labels. These

programs are often relied on as a means for consum-

ers to identify seafood items that are considered more

sustainable than others — but are they really?

Our research showed that most of the certification pro-

grams are more marketing tools than good guidance for

consumers. These labels are often created by the very

companies that stand to benefit from seafood sales, and

their “sustainable” standards likely do not mean what

consumers expect. A number of fisheries that have been

certified by eco-labels are very questionable in terms of

sustainability, and assorted groups and prominent scien-

tists have opposed various certifications. In light of this,

we have called for the federal government to introduce

and oversee sustainability standards for seafood.

9Food & Water Watch www.foodandwaterwatch.org

2010 Annual Report

In order to maintain our independence, Food & Water Watch

does not accept corporate or government contributions.

We are grateful to our 12,000 members in 2010 who provided

generous support, without which our success would not be possible.

They include the following foundations:

Apono Hawai’i

Boston Foundation

Goldman Fund

Johnson Ohana Charitable Foundation

A component fund of the Maine Community Foundation

Merrill Family Charitable Foundation

Park Foundation

Renaissance Charitable Foundation

Rose Foundation

Weeden Foundation

EXPENSES

Program

Food $3,505,367

Water $2,149,339

Fish $1,348,926

Total Program $7,003,632 80.4%

Management $1,154,205 13.2%

Fund Raising $553,296 6.4%

TOTAL EXPENSE $8,711,133

INCOMEGrants and Contributions $9,452,533

Interest Income $8,304

Program Fees $1,500

Other $48,402

TOTAL INCOME $9,510,739

ENDING NET ASSETS as of December 31, 2010 $3,553,154

F I N A N C I A L S

National Office1616 P St. NW, Suite 300Washington, DC 20036

tel: (202) 683-2500fax: (202) 683-2501

www.foodandwaterwatch.org