Judge rejects Iowa landowner’s challenge of federal wetlands protections

A northeast Iowa farmland owner does not have legal standing to sue the federal government for its "Swampbuster" wetland protections, but even if he did, the challenge would likely fail, a federal judge decided Thursday.

Jim Conlan, a retired Chicago attorney, filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture last year over its wetland designation for nine acres of his recently purchased farmland in Delaware County, about 35 miles northeast of Cedar Rapids.

That designation meant Conlan could not clear and till that piece of land — part of a 72-acre plot — or he would risk losing federal farm benefits, such as subsidized crop insurance.

Conlan's attorneys had argued that requiring landowners to set aside potentially valuable cropland to be eligible for the benefits amounted to an unconstitutional taking of that land, in part because they said farmers depend on the benefits to financially survive.

Conlan — who owns more than 1,000 acres of farmland and rents it to tenants — had corresponded with the USDA about wetlands before and after he bought the Delaware County land and intended to ask the department to reevaluate the designation for the nine acres.

Recommended Reading

One Iowa landowner fights to farm a wetland. Others could face consequences

But due to an apparent misunderstanding, the department examined another part of the Delaware farmland that had not previously been evaluated for wetland status. And then it also sent Conlan the determination for the nine acres, which had been made in 2010.

Conlan thought the department had rejected his reevaluation request and filed a lawsuit in April 2024.

The court ruling on Thursday was the result of requests for a judge to decide the lawsuit before it went to trial — what is known as summary judgment. That can happen when the pertinent facts of a case are undisputed.

Conlan wanted the judge to rule that Swampbuster — which has withstood court challenges for 40 years — is unconstitutional on several grounds. The USDA and several environmental groups who intervened in the lawsuit proceedings sought dismissal.

Because of the miscommunications between Conlan and the USDA, Chief Judge C.J. Williams, of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa, dismissed the lawsuit out of hand.

Conlan "simply never requested review of the 2010 wetlands determination," Williams decided. That meant the lawsuit was challenging a USDA decision that had not yet occurred.

Williams could have ended his ruling there, but he went further.

The judge disassembled Conlan's arguments about Swampbuster and said "the conditions Swampbuster places upon benefits likely do not amount to a taking" of property.

Williams reasoned that Conlan could do anything to that wetland but grow crops on it and maintain federal farm benefits. Compliance is optional.

"This court's thorough decision upholds the practical conservation measures that have been the standard for decades," said Michael Schmidt, an attorney for the Iowa Environmental Council, which intervened in the lawsuit. "Commonsense measures like Swampbuster support Iowa farmers and everyone downstream from them."

Conlan and his attorneys could not immediately be reached to comment for this article, but they have said they plan to take their arguments about Swampbuster to the U.S. Supreme Court.

It's unclear if that will happen with an appeal of the Thursday ruling or whether Conlan might start the process again by seeking a redetermination for his nine acres.

Comments: (319) 368-8541; jared.strong@thegazette.com