Opportunity vs. futility
Positive action vs. intransigence
Two recent environmental events could not have been more different.
On February 24, we – along with 380+ others - attended the Iowa Prairie Network Winter Seminar at Ames High School. Enthusiasts from Iowa and even other states came to learn about anything and everything prairie - from thistle identification to invasive species to climate change.
The day-long gathering sparked spirited exchanges of ideas on prescribed burning, attracting pollinators, and techniques for re-establishing our tallgrass prairie ecosystem. Many participants left inspired - with plans to plant and manage more plots of prairie, and to work even harder to preserve the few tiny remnants of native prairie that remain in Iowa.
A couple of days later, I visited Iowa’s Golden Dome, the State Capitol in Des Moines, for the Environmental Advocacy Day. About a dozen environmental groups, such as the Iowa Environmental Council, Trees Forever, the Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation, 1000 Friends of Iowa, the Iowa Bicycle Coalition, and more, staffed exhibits in the rotunda, hoping to communicate with lawmakers and visitors.
Sadly, we were mostly talking to ourselves. A few legislators – to their credit - wandered past and chatted, as did some members of the public. But the atmosphere was decidedly calm, or should I say uninspiring.
Why? Should we chalk it up to Mondays being a slow day at the Capitol? Or, could it be that we environmentalists have grown weary of the Iowa Legislature and Governor ignoring or killing any proposals that might benefit our natural resources?
Examples:
Consider HF 2029, which would have required farmers to maintain buffer strips of permanent vegetation at least 30 feet wide along Iowa stream corridors. Common sense? No, dead on arrival! That’s despite the fact that streamside crops get destroyed by floods every couple of years anyway. And maybe that buffer is good insurance to keep from driving your half-million-dollar combine into the drink when you’re working late to finish harvesting the corn that the deer and beavers and raccoons didn’t eat. Coincidentally, those buffers – already used by some conscientious farmers - could go a long way to cleaning up our polluted waters by slowing the erosion of topsoil and the runoff of farm chemicals.
Provide full funding for the Resources Enhancement And Protection (REAP) program, which allots money to the state, counties, and cities for conservation education, open spaces, soil and water conservation, roadside management, and historical resources? First authorized at $30 million annually in 1989, the program never has reached the current (revised downward!) $20 million cap. Even that amount might interfere with Republicans’ plans to keep slashing the state budget and eliminate the income tax.
Tighten rules for animal feeding operations (AFOs) and how their manure is handled? No way! Some lawmakers prefer a bill that would allow AFOs to spread their sewage on the land before getting hoped-for approval of loosely enforced nutrient management plans (NMP).
Allow the Iowa DNR and county conservation boards to acquire a bit more public land for outdoor recreation and wildlife? Horrors! It’s not like a couple of thousand acres a year might catapult Iowa out of their near-the-bottom ranking among states for the percentage of public land! What if a young person wants to begin farming on that rough, timbered, or creek-bottom tract that has been offered for sale? Why should he or she have to compete with the state or county? (Oops! Forget the competition! A neighbor just paid more than market price to grab the parcel to expand his 3,000-acre spread.)
Now comes the annual attempt to eliminate the tax exemption for Iowa forestland, which has been in effect since 1906. The public benefits of maintaining woodlands for erosion control, wildlife, esthetics, carbon capture, and tourism far outweigh the taxes that could be collected on these lands – most of which are best suited for growing trees instead of corn.
I sometimes wonder whether the current legislative controversies over abortion, the national anthem, school choice, Area Education Agencies, tax cuts, and gender identity are intentional distractions. If Iowans are exhausted from the passionate debates over social issues, legislators may hope we won’t notice if a late-night bill passes to reduce money for land protection.
Our lawmakers say they’re hearing from constituents, and claim they vote accordingly. But here’s a not-so-modest suggestion: Maybe they also should try Listening to the Land.
I’m privileged to be a member of the Iowa Writers’ Collaborative of about 50 journalists who share their work and thoughts about issues affecting all Iowans. Most posts are free - but you can support these journalistic efforts by becoming a paid subscriber. Here is a list of collaborative members. Please sample their work and consider subscribing to your favorites.
As someone who helped organize those lobby days, it can be disheartening. But the value of showing up cannot be underestimated. I remember during the years when D's held the trifecta under Culver, the 'right to life' groups still held their lobby days. They were seen. Regarding your mention of "intentional distractions"-- Does not have to be distractions as long as 'we' do not fight among ourselves. Not every Iowan prioritizes outdoors and nature; they might prioritize libraries and public education. The advocacy does not have to conflict--there are opportunities to work together. All one has to do is see how well the book banners and anti choice groups work together.
Thanks for the update Larry. Disheartening, but it was nice to know so many groups are fighting back. Sorry I missed it...Thanks for your efforts for educating generations of Iowans about the outdoors.