Make Iowa Great Again - Yes We Can!

The year is 1986 and farmers of Iowa face a dual agricultural crisis. On one hand, a farm recession gripped the Midwest in the mid-1980s causing farmland values to drop drastically and debt loads to increase exponentially. On the other hand, unsafe levels of agricultural chemicals have been found in the groundwater across the state. Citizens of Iowa are facing an identity crisis: what happens when the industrial agricultural system fails both economically and ecologically? 

The Des Moines Register begins to address the issue running a series of articles called “Iowa’s Water: Not a Drop to Drink?” The articles decry a situation in which “slowly but surely, the waters beneath Iowa’s rich earth are becoming a cauldron of farm chemicals and crop nutrients that are of increasing concern to health and environmental officials.” 

A further USDA survey finds that 80% of the state’s population, 95% of the rural population, and 75% of the poultry and livestock relies upon groundwater for drinking water. 

However, a bipartisan group of six legislators in the Iowa Statehouse see this moment of upheaval as an opportunity to find an innovative solution to Iowa’s groundwater crisis. The “key six” group comprises of representatives Paul Johnson (D), David Osterberg (D), Sue Mullens (R), Ralph Rosenberg (D), Jack Hatch (D), and House Speaker Don Avenson (D). But rather than proposing top-down legislation that imposed onerous regulations on Iowans, the “key six” looks for a more holistic solution that focuses on finding better ways to farm and address ground-water contamination at all of its sources. 

The act established two new research centers; the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture at Iowa State University and the Center for Health Effects of Environmental Contamination at the University of Iowa. 

The act also addressed education. Water quality was included in the curriculum of public schools and local agencies cooperated with the DNR in spreading information on water quality. 

Regulations in the act included: (1) tougher regulation of landfills, (2) regulation requiring the plugging of abandoned wells, (3) permits for the drilling of new wells, (4) adoption of groundwater protection strategies by all counties, (5) the requirement of a permit for dumping on any land, and (6) regulation of minimum standards for all underground storage tanks. 

The passage of the act was a resounding win for water quality and the people of Iowa. 

The “key-six” legislators faced significant pushback from the well-funded agrochemical lobby during their attempts to pass the bill. The chemical lobby did not want the use of fertilizers and pesticides to be scrutinized by the Iowa public. The National Agricultural Chemicals Association decried the bill as “absolutist” and worried that it could set a national trend in groundwater legislation. As a result, they hired out-of-state lobbyists and consultants from nationwide trade groups to intimidate lawmakers into opposing the bill.  

But the Iowa citizens were behind their legislators and strongly supported the legislation. As Rep. Osterberg later commented, groundwater purity "is a mom and apple pie issue, right up there with the American flag." In fact, over 85% of the state felt that it was a serious issue. To combat the chemical lobby, the “key six” worked with a broad coalition of organizations ranging from environmental groups like the Sierra Club to traditional agriculture groups such as the Iowa Farm Bureau. With this broad base of support, the bill passed the legislature and was signed into law. As Rep. Hatch later asserted, it was a contest between "what's good for people versus what's good for business ... they [the chemical lobby] chose what's good for business and they lost." 

The establishment of the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture was revolutionary because it allowed the state to address groundwater issues from a holistic viewpoint and created a blueprint to study all environmental issues from an interconnected perspective. Rep. Johnson wrote,  

The name alone, the Leopold Center, paying homage to the conservationist Aldo Leopold, spoke to the desire of legislators to frame the groundwater issue as an issue of responsibility to the health of people and the land. In the following years, the Leopold Center became a powerful voice for sustainable agriculture and helped secure millions of dollars of funding for  research  that would not have been funded otherwise. The Center brought diverse groups of practitioners together to find solutions to complex issues. For example, a group convened to research swine confinement and developed a “hoop house” system that improved the negative environmental and health impacts of raising hogs in more traditional hog confinement systems. As a report noted, “Each animal gets more space, the initial cost per pig is lower, the hoop is naturally ventilated, the floor is bedded with cornstalks, straw, and other materials, and waste is solid instead of liquid that is stored in large lagoons.”

And for over 30 years, the 1987 Act and the Leopold Center were a resounding success in addressing the groundwater and agricultural crises. According to Ferd Hoefner, senior strategic advisor at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.“It was one of the very first sustainable agriculture centers at a land grant university and was certainly a trendsetter. Now there are dozens.” 

Unfortunately, in 2017 the Legislature decided to  discontinue  the Leopold Center. As founder Paul Johnson wrote, “Iowa Legislature has decided to abolish the Leopold Center, saying, "mission accomplished” and we can no longer afford a couple million dollars of research each year to keep our agriculture and land healthy. This action is a horrible mistake.”  

Governor Branstad stopped short of allowing the Center (and the Act) to be completely gutted, but failed to allocate any funding leaving the Center to continue to exist only in name. Once again, Iowa stands at a similar crossroads to 1986: will Iowa allow marginal returns and industrial agriculture to poison our common wealth or can we find a solution that allows for clean water and productive farming? 

Further Reading

•  Leopold Center Avoids Shut-Down, but its Future Remains Uncertain 
•  Dear Iowa Lawmakers: Leopold Center Deserves Recognition and Respect 
•  Editorial: Leopold Center gutting unfair to farmers