When I was invited to give this speech, I was asked if I could give a simple short talk that was “direct, naked, taut, honest, passionate, lean, shivering, startling, and graceful.” No pressure there.

Let’s begin with the startling part. Class of 2009: you are going to have to figure out what it means to be a human being on earth at a time when every living system is declining, and the rate of decline is accelerating. Kind of a mind-boggling situation… but not one peer-reviewed paper published in the last thirty years can refute that statement. Basically, civilization needs a new operating system, you are the programmers, and we need it within a few decades.

This planet came with a set of instructions, but we seem to have misplaced them. Important rules like don’t poison the water, soil, or air, don’t let the earth get overcrowded, and don’t touch the thermostat have been broken. Buckminster Fuller said that spaceship earth was so ingeniously designed that no one has a clue that we are on one, flying through the universe at a million miles per hour, with no need for seatbelts, lots of room in coach, and really good food–but all that is changing.

There is invisible writing on the back of the diploma you will receive, and in case you didn’t bring lemon juice to decode it, I can tell you what it says: You are Brilliant, and the Earth is Hiring. The earth couldn’t afford to send recruiters or limos to your school. It sent you rain, sunsets, ripe cherries, night blooming jasmine, and that unbelievably cute person you are dating. Take the hint. And here’s the deal: Forget that this task of planet-saving is not possible in the time required. Don’t be put off by people who know what is not possible. Do what needs to be done, and check to see if it was impossible only after you are done.

When asked if I am pessimistic or optimistic about the future, my answer is always the same: If you look at the science about what is happening on earth and aren’t pessimistic, you don’t understand the data. But if you meet the people who are working to restore this earth and the lives of the poor, and you aren’t optimistic, you haven’t got a pulse. What I see everywhere in the world are ordinary people willing to confront despair, power, and incalculable odds in order to restore some semblance of grace, justice, and beauty to this world. The poet Adrienne Rich wrote, “So much has been destroyed I have cast my lot with those who, age after age, perversely, with no extraordinary power, reconstitute the world.” There could be no better description. Humanity is coalescing. It is reconstituting the world, and the action is taking place in schoolrooms, farms, jungles, villages, campuses, companies, refuge camps, deserts, fisheries, and slums.

You join a multitude of caring people. No one knows how many groups and organizations are working on the most salient issues of our day: climate change, poverty, deforestation, peace, water, hunger, conservation, human rights, and more. This is the largest movement the world has ever seen. Rather than control, it seeks connection. Rather than dominance, it strives to disperse concentrations of power. Like Mercy Corps, it works behind the scenes and gets the job done. Large as it is, no one knows the true size of this movement. It provides hope, support, and meaning to billions of people in the world. Its clout resides in idea, not in force. It is made up of teachers, children, peasants, businesspeople, rappers, organic farmers, nuns, artists, government workers, fisherfolk, engineers, students, incorrigible writers, weeping Muslims, concerned mothers, poets, doctors without borders, grieving Christians, street musicians, the President of the United States of America, and as the writer David James Duncan would say, the Creator, the One who loves us all in such a huge way.

There is a rabbinical teaching that says if the world is ending and the Messiah arrives, first plant a tree, and then see if the story is true. Inspiration is not garnered from the litanies of what may befall us; it resides in humanity’s willingness to restore, redress, reform, rebuild, recover, reimagine, and reconsider. “One day you finally knew what you had to do, and began, though the voices around you kept shouting their bad advice,” is Mary Oliver’s description of moving away from the profane toward a deep sense of connectedness to the living world.

Millions of people are working on behalf of strangers, even if the evening news is usually about the death of strangers. This kindness of strangers has religious, even mythic origins, and very specific eighteenth-century roots. Abolitionists were the first people to create a national and global movement to defend the rights of those they did not know. Until that time, no group had filed a grievance except on behalf of itself. The founders of this movement were largely unknown — Granville Sharp, Thomas Clarkson, Josiah Wedgwood — and their goal was ridiculous on the face of it: at that time three out of four people in the world were enslaved. Enslaving each other was what human beings had done for ages. And the abolitionist movement was greeted with incredulity. Conservative spokesmen ridiculed the abolitionists as liberals, progressives, do-gooders, meddlers, and activists. They were told they would ruin the economy and drive England into poverty. But for the first time in history a group of people organized themselves to help people they would never know, from whom they would never receive direct or indirect benefit. And today tens of millions of people do this every day. It is called the world of non-profits, civil society, schools, social entrepreneurship, non-governmental organizations, and companies who place social and environmental justice at the top of their strategic goals. The scope and scale of this effort is unparalleled in history.

The living world is not “out there” somewhere, but in your heart. What do we know about life? In the words of biologist Janine Benyus, life creates the conditions that are conducive to life. I can think of no better motto for a future economy. We have tens of thousands of abandoned homes without people and tens of thousands of abandoned people without homes. We have failed bankers advising failed regulators on how to save failed assets. We are the only species on the planet without full employment. Brilliant. We have an economy that tells us that it is cheaper to destroy earth in real time rather than renew, restore, and sustain it. You can print money to bail out a bank but you can’t print life to bail out a planet. At present we are stealing the future, selling it in the present, and calling it gross domestic product. We can just as easily have an economy that is based on healing the future instead of stealing it. We can either create assets for the future or take the assets of the future. One is called restoration and the other exploitation. And whenever we exploit the earth we exploit people and cause untold suffering. Working for the earth is not a way to get rich, it is a way to be rich.

The first living cell came into being nearly 40 million centuries ago, and its direct descendants are in all of our bloodstreams. Literally you are breathing molecules this very second that were inhaled by Moses, Mother Teresa, and Bono. We are vastly interconnected. Our fates are inseparable. We are here because the dream of every cell is to become two cells. And dreams come true. In each of you are one quadrillion cells, 90 percent of which are not human cells. Your body is a community, and without those other microorganisms you would perish in hours. Each human cell has 400 billion molecules conducting millions of processes between trillions of atoms. The total cellular activity in one human body is staggering: one septillion actions at any one moment, a one with twenty-four zeros after it. In a millisecond, our body has undergone ten times more processes than there are stars in the universe, which is exactly what Charles Darwin foretold when he said science would discover that each living creature was a “little universe, formed of a host of self-propagating organisms, inconceivably minute and as numerous as the stars of heaven.”

So I have two questions for you all: First, can you feel your body? Stop for a moment. Feel your body. One septillion activities going on simultaneously, and your body does this so well you are free to ignore it, and wonder instead when this speech will end. You can feel it. It is called life. This is who you are. Second question: who is in charge of your body? Who is managing those molecules? Hopefully not a political party. Life is creating the conditions that are conducive to life inside you, just as in all of nature. Our innate nature is to create the conditions that are conducive to life. What I want you to imagine is that collectively humanity is evincing a deep innate wisdom in coming together to heal the wounds and insults of the past.

Ralph Waldo Emerson once asked what we would do if the stars only came out once every thousand years. No one would sleep that night, of course. The world would create new religions overnight. We would be ecstatic, delirious, made rapturous by the glory of God. Instead, the stars come out every night and we watch television.

This extraordinary time when we are globally aware of each other and the multiple dangers that threaten civilization has never happened, not in a thousand years, not in ten thousand years. Each of us is as complex and beautiful as all the stars in the universe. We have done great things and we have gone way off course in terms of honoring creation. You are graduating to the most amazing, stupefying challenge ever bequeathed to any generation. The generations before you failed. They didn’t stay up all night. They got distracted and lost sight of the fact that life is a miracle every moment of your existence. Nature beckons you to be on her side. You couldn’t ask for a better boss. The most unrealistic person in the world is the cynic, not the dreamer. Hope only makes sense when it doesn’t make sense to be hopeful. This is your century. Take it and run as if your life depends on it.

Paul Hawken is an entrepreneur, environmental activist, and author of many books, most recently Blessed Unrest: How the Largest Movement in the World Came into Being and Why No One Saw It Coming.

During the BOCC special hearing Aug. 19 Commissioner Frank Holman argued the board should admit both Nestle’s memo as well as comments to draft conditions offered by Chaffee Citizens for Sustainability. Commissioners Tim Glenn and Dennis Giese persuaded Holman that re-opening the record, even if only to allow the written comments by Nestle and CCFS, would unnecessarily prolong a public review process that already included thousands of pages of documents, hundreds of letters from the public and hundreds of hours of oral testimony.

While Nestle and CCFS last-minute efforts to influence the county commissioners is a moot point because they were not heard by the commissioners prior to their decision to approve the project, the points shed light on which issues both sides still contested.

Perhaps most significantly, a review of Nestle’s eight-page memo appears to show Nestle directly contradicting earlier testimony by its own legal team aimed at discrediting and downplaying testimony by Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District General Manager Terry Scanga,

Earlier in the public review process, Scanga provided written and oral testimony warning Commissioners that Nestle project depletions could cause an increase in exchanges by Aurora on the Arkansas that could have a “deleterious effect” on the basin. Aurora has signed a 10-year lease with Nestle to provide augmentation water for the project.

In direct counterpoint to Scanga, Nestle water counsel Steve Sims told Commissioners that while he appreciates Scanga for “always looking out for the Upper Ark,” he also said it was “very very doubtful” that the Nestle-Aurora lease would change any legal dynamic on the river.

At the time, Sims said the 200-acre-feet per year Nestle-Aurora lease is a fraction of Aurora’s 52.000-acre-foot portfolio on the Upper Arkansas Basin.

Commenting on the drought scenario Scanga painted for the county, Sims flatly assured the Commissioners “it’s just not going to happen,” especially in light of Aurora’s Prairie Waters project that Sims said will double or triple Aurora’s water portfolio, buffering it against enacting the type of drought triggers Scanga envisioned.

Now three months later, Nestle appears to refute its own earlier testimony. It recaps Scanga’s argument that Aurora will need Nestle lease water to serve its customers in the future and they should not be allowed to replace that water with new Arkansas exchanges. Nestle now agrees that this is a “legitimate concern” that will be mitigated by draft county condition 32a requiring Nestle to suspend pumping project wells if Aurora exercises its right to exchange any Category 2 leased water.

Citing a closer examination of the Aurora-UAWCD-Southeast Water Conservancy District intergovernmental agreement, Nestle now argues that condition 32a is too broad and “will have the unintended result in some circumstances of causing Nestle to curtail pumping, without preventing Category 2 exchanges.” In the memo, Nestle provides an example of just such a scenario as it asks Commissioners to amend condition 32a so that under certain Category 2 exchange circumstances, Nestle would not have to suspend pumping in Chaffee County.

Also of note in the latest memo to the county, Nestle continues to take issue with recommendations provided to the county from environmental consultants, Colorado Natural Heritage Program. Nestle argues that since it agreed not to pump water from its Bighorn Springs parcel, the extent of wetlands monitoring conceptualized and suggested by CNHP at Bighorn Springs is no longer necessary. Despite acknowledging the county’s uncertainty as to whether Ruby Mountain Springs pumping will impact Bighorn Springs wetlands, Nestle nevertheless suggests “deleting any reference to the CNHP report in county 1041 permit condition titled “wetlands and groundwater monitoring and mitigation plan.”

Also of note in Nestle’s recent memo is its attempt to dodge circumstances that could trigger a re-opening of the 1041 permit process.

In its draft conditions of approval, the county outlines triggers that would determine the difference between minor changes to the Nestle plan that would require an administrative technical revision and those that would mandate a re-opening and re-examination of Nestle’s 1041 permit.

Nestle hoped to persuade commissioners to agree that any change in the augmentation water source or augmentation water release point would constitute a minor technical revisions, rather than re-opening the 1041 permit process as recommended by county water counsel Jim Culichia.

As drafted, the county will require that all augmentation water to offset Nestle depletions must be physically delivered to the Arkansas River above the project area and that release points in Lake County meet this requirement. The condition also states that augmentation water cannot be delivered either by exchange from downstream water rights to the point of depletion, or by Aurora into storage of downstream native water rights.

In another attempt to skirt re-opening the 1041 permit process, Nestle asked Commissioners to consider a minor technical revision any material changes to its description of the 15-acre “Hagan exception.”

An earlier lack of a precise location of the 15-acre exception, slated for future residential development by the Hagan family who is selling the Ruby Mountain Springs property to Nestle, was a factor in the county’s concern for 10 of the 26 1041 requirements county staff believed Nestle had not satisfied.

Nestle asked that it not be required to provide limited parking and overland fishing access to the Arkansas River through its property.  This particular point proved to be a battleground last week as Commissioner Glenn argued in favor while Commissioner Holman was staunchly opposed. In the end the two agreed to a compromise proposed by Commissioner Dennis Giese that would cede the decision to the local Division of Wildlife.

Finally, Nestle wrote to express its hope the county would ease restrictions on summer holiday weekend truck traffic arguing that it should not be required to address a part of its project that it feels it proved, through the Wilkinson traffic study, would not have a significant net adverse impact on the community.

The top two concerns aired by CCFS in an emailed memo to the County concerned the deletion in the final draft of 1041 conditions of any reference to the permanent conservation easement Nestle had verbally promised in the closing hours of public testimony after Commissioners had already closed the hearing to written testimony.

Glenn checked with county legal counsel several before commissioners voted on the Nestle project to be sure Nestle would be held to its promise. Staff assured Glenn that reference to the conservation easement would be in the “whereas” portion of the permit resolution.

CCFS also aired concerns that the county altered a condition CCFS had expressly requested remain unchanged. On first draft condition 39 prohibited Nestle from purchasing, leasing or acquiring, directly or indirectly, other water rights or dry-up irrigated lands in Chaffee County in order to provide water to the aquifer Nestle plans to tap. Now, the condition adds that Nestle does not need the consent of the county to enter into agreements with up-gradient irrigators for the continuance and preservation of historical irrigation practices, the return flows from which provide a source of water to the aquifer.  CCFS is concerned the new sentence is too vague and that Nestle’s arrangements with irrigators should be more closely defined and monitored.

County Planning Director Don Reimer explained that in the county comprehensive plan and again through the recently concluded Planning Roundtable process, the county has heard repeatedly from the public about the necessity and desirability of continuing productive agriculture in the valley for the benefits it provides to viewsheds, water and air quality, and wildlife.

In the end, Commissioners voted unanimously to direct county staff to draft a resolution granting conditional approval to the Nestle project.  Fort-four conditions totaling 11 pages will be incorporated into the resolution. Commissioners have until Oct. 18 to review and vote on the final resolution.

Nestle will extract 65 million gallons of water annually from springs on what was once ranchland at the mouth of Brown’s Canyon. The springwater will be piped underground four miles north to Johnson Village where it will be loaded on trucks for transfer some 120 miles east to Denver. Once there, the water will be bottled for distribution and sale as Nestle’s Arrowhead brand of bottled water.

Members of both sides of the debate were reserved in their reaction to the decision granting Nestle Waters North America conditional approval to extract 65 million gallons of springwater annually from an aquifer at the mouth of the renowned Brown’s Canyon stretch of the Arkansas River. The water will be piped four miles to a truck loading station where it will then be transported two hours to Denver for bottling then sold to consumers as Nestle’s Arrowhead brand of bottled water.

The approval includes 40 conditions, totaling 11 pages and addressing what the commissioners considered some of the most controversial aspects of the proposal, namely water and economics.

However, it was a seemingly minor issue that proved to be the day’s most contentious. Citing private property rights and potential adverse impact to wildlife, Commission Chair Frank Holman adamantly objected to requiring Nestle to provide overland fishing access to the Arkansas River. Commissioner Tim Glenn was just as adamant that the easement was “not overly burdensome” to Nestle and provided very desirable public shoreline fishing access in a county where recreation is such an important part of the economy. Commissioner Dennis Giese was on the fence. In the end, the commissioners agreed to let the local Division of Wildlife determine if and where overland fishing access would be appropriate on the Nestle property.

Nestle had hoped to have the overland fishing access condition deleted from the final list of conditions writing in a memo to county staff that to do so would “unacceptably increase risk to security and spring water quality” and created an “unwarranted and significant business risk” to the company.

Chaffee Citizens for Sustainability Chair John Graham said he was surprised by the amount of time the commissioners spent on the fishing easement issue and said it was evidence that the commissioners were “not seeing the forest through the trees.”

During and after the hearing, Glenn was adamant on two points: Nestle’s promise of a permanent conservation easement and that any adverse economic impacts “directly attributable to Nestle” would be paid for out of a dedicated Cost Reimbursement Fund administered by the county and funded by Nestle.

Even after the hearing, Glenn was adamant on the topic of the conservation easement “(Nestle) represented that whey would put a permanent conservation easement on the property whether they get a tax benefit in doing so or not.” Glenn pointed out there are numerous state and federal tax credits and incentives to do so.

While still expressing concerns over whether the benefits of Nestle’s application outweighed the loss of the resource, in the end, Glenn conceded that “perhaps” the standards are met with the conditions imposed which include the Cost Reimbursement Fund, conditions calling for Nestle to show proof of good faith efforts to provide as many construction jobs and at least 50 percent of truck driving jobs to locals, as well as conditions limiting truck traffic so as to not adversely impact tourist visits to the area especially during busy summer holiday weekends.

In statements preceding approval of the project, Giese said his big concern about the project was about impacts to water rights and supply as outlined by the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District, as well as groundwater and wetlands concerns aired by consultants and citizens. County Planning Director Don Reimer pointed out that 14 conditions proposed by county water counsel Jim Culichia were specifically designed to address Giese and the public’s concerns about such potential impacts.

Holman concluded that the county had imposed some “strict conditions” that addressed those areas of the application that were “nonconforming.” He said that if he thought there would have been any loss of water in the valley due to the Nestle project he would not have supported the project. The county mandated conditions of approval are very specific with respect to Nestle’s plan to offset its water harvest with a 10-year lease of a similar quantity of water from Aurora, as well as very detailed specifics about Nestle’s pumping operation, monitoring and reporting.

Shortly before the vote, Holman looked directly at Nestle representatives and said that the county will “rely on the permittee to follow the conditions and we believe you will.” He said the county would also rely on the citizens to help monitor the project and thought that, overall, the project would be a benefit to the county.

Nestle’s Bruce Lauerman said he appreciated the good deliberations by the county and assured the Citizen Nestle would comply with the conditions. “We look forward to being a benefit to the economy, the culture and heritage of the area, providing a level of stewardship to water resources that doesn’t currently exist at that location, and providing funding for the environment and education.” Lauerman said he believes the people of Chaffee County will “come to recognize that Nestle is a great project and a great benefit to Chaffee County” then repeated the oft-heard Nestle refrain, “We’ll be a good neighbor.”

Not everyone at today’s hearing shared Lauerman’s optimism.

“I don’t believe the commissioners are representing the best interests of Chaffee County,” said longtime resident and staunch Nestle opponent Jim Ruggles. “My main concern is that (Nestle) will dry out the aquifer and that the county will wind up in litigation sooner or later with Nestle. I believe the commissioners fairly ignored their own consultants and favored Nestle’s presentation of the facts.”

While clearly disappointed by the decision for a project he described as “ludicrous,” John Graham, chair of Chaffee Citizens for Sustainability, took some comfort in the belief that his group was responsible for some positives such as removing the Bighorn Springs parcel, which was rife with myriad concerns about wetlands impacts, from the project, as well as the creation of the Cost Reimbursement Fund.

Graham said CCFS will be interested to see whether there will be an upswell of anger or alarm from citizens over the commissioners’ approval of Nestle and that the board would definitely weigh community response as it decides its next course of action.

Sam Schabacker of the national non-profit Food and Water Watch said Colorado’s battle with Nestle is being closely watched around the country and is considered pivotal to the nationwide fight against the privatization of water. “This is the first battleground in the Rocky Mountain West – the arid West – and CCFS has shown great leadership in this national struggle.” Schabacker said the intelligence and dedication CCFS has shown through the application review process puts the organization in a good position to recalibrate and take the fight to the next level, joining the ranks of citizens in Maine, California, Michigan and Flagstaff, AZ.