Resources amendment a boost to quality of life

By Rich Patterson

---

Only two hours after boarding a bus at New York City's bustling Port Authority, I entered a 600-acre wild wonderland called Jonathan's Woods. Named for an American Indian who once lived there, a simple trail took me up a glacier-carved rock ledge where the Empire State Building was visible 30 miles to the east. The trail then headed downward into a lush woodland of beech and tulip trees.

Because New Jersey is the nation's most densely populated state, land costs are enormous. Yet, a collaboration of residents, non-profit groups and government agencies were recently able to buy Jonathan's Woods for eternal protection.

Today it's a place to test muscles, spot warblers, hunt deer or simply enjoy peaceful quiet within a couple of miles of massive highways. The Woods' springs and streams flow clean water that ends up in the taps of New Jersey residents. Thousands of people who will never visit the woods benefit from its clean water.

The land's purchase was possible because New Jersey state, county and some municipal governments have funds to buy and manage land for watershed protection, recreation and conservation. As parcels of Jonathan's Woods came on the market, fund money was tapped to buy them from willing sellers.

New Jersey isn't alone. All of Iowa's neighboring states have funds dedicated to conservation. In 1976, Missouri's voters approved a 1/8-cent sales tax for conservation.

“Not only has the Show-Me State's

nominal sales tax for conservation made a world of difference to the environment, wildlife and outdoor recreation, it more than pays for itself in increased tourism, jobs and economic stimulus through forestry and outdoor-related businesses. The investment in conservation doesn't cost. It pays,” avid Missouri outdoorsman Jim Low said.

Last June, I saw an 18-inch wild brown trout living in a healthy stream. Watershed restoration had been conducted by Trout Unlimited, a private conservation group. It received money for the project from Minnesota's relatively new Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment. It came from a 3/8-cent sales tax that generates about

$220 million each year for clean water, natural areas, parks, art education and history.

Iowa has a fund called Resource Enhancement and Protection. However, it requires an annual appropriation from the Legislature. Funding is tiny and variable. Typically, it's about $10 million. That's not much to spread across Iowa.

Our state ranks 47th in the nation in conservation funding. Iowans have an opportunity to improve that Nov. 2 when they vote on a state constitutional amendment called Iowa's Water and Land Legacy.

It would provide a sliver of one cent from the next sales tax increase passed by the Legislature. It's not a proposal to raise the tax.

Following Iowa's devastating floods, there is widespread agreement that restoring wetlands and other watershed stewardship practices will reduce future flooding, but there's hardly any money to do this critical work. That would eventually change with the new amendment. It will, for example, help fund farmers to restore and retain wetlands on their land.

The impact of the fund will go beyond high water. Conservation spending is directly tied to clean water and air, interesting parks and outstanding outdoor recreation that increase our quality of life and encourage visitors to come to our state.

Come Election Day, I'll eagerly cast my vote for the amendment.

Rich Patterson is director of Indian Creek Nature Center in Cedar Rapids. Comments: rpatterson@indiancreeknature

center.org