Report: Bottle ban ended after talks with Coke

Asso­ci­ated Press

WASHINGTON — Offi­cials at the Grand Canyon abruptly aban­doned plans to ban the sale of plas­tic water bot­tles at the Ari­zona national park after con­ver­sa­tions with Coca-Cola offi­cials, The New York Times reported Thurs­day.

Stephen P. Mar­tin, who crafted the plan, told the news­pa­per that the effort was scrapped after Coca-Cola offi­cials raised con­cerns about the plan through the National Park Foun­da­tion. He was told the effort was being tabled about two weeks before its sched­uled Jan. 1 start.

Coca-Cola, which dis­trib­utes water under the Dasani brand, has donated more than $13 mil­lion to the parks.

David Barna, a National Park Ser­vice spokesman, said National Parks Ser­vice Direc­tor Jon Jarvis made the “deci­sion to put it on hold until we can get more information.

“Reduc­ing and elim­i­nat­ing dis­pos­able plas­tic bot­tles is one ele­ment of our green plan,” Barna said. “This is a process, and we are at the begin­ning of it.”

Neil J. Mul­hol­land, pres­i­dent of the parks foun­da­tion, said a Coca-Cola rep­re­sen­ta­tive con­tacted him late in the process to ask for details of the bot­tle ban and how it would work.

“There was not an overt state­ment made to me that they objected to the ban,” Mul­hol­land said. “There was never any­thing inferred by Coke that if this ban hap­pens, we’re los­ing their support.”

Susan Stri­b­ling, a spokes­woman for Coca-Cola Refresh­ments USA, said the com­pany would pre­fer to help address prob­lems with lit­tered plas­tic bot­tles by mak­ing more recy­cling pro­grams available.

“Ban­ning any­thing is never the right answer,” she said. “If you do that, you don’t nec­es­sar­ily address the prob­lem.” She also char­ac­ter­ized the bot­tle ban as lim­it­ing per­sonal choice. “You’re not allow­ing peo­ple to decide what they want to eat and drink and con­sume,” she said.

Mar­tin, a 35-year vet­eran of the park ser­vice who rose to the No. 2 post in 2003, said he was dis­heart­ened by the deci­sion to halt the ban.

“That was upset­ting news because of what I felt were eth­i­cal issues sur­round­ing the idea of being influ­enced unduly by busi­ness,” Mar­tin said. “It was even more of a con­cern because we had worked with all the peo­ple who would be truly affected in their sales and bot­tom line, and they accepted it.”

Posted by AP News on Nov 10 2011. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS Feed. Comments can be made below.