Farm Bureau: ‘We’re all on same team’ for conservation

Most Iowa environmentalists say they have no hard feelings toward the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, the chief opponent of a successful Nov. 2 ballot measure that establishes a trust fund for conservation projects.

“Nothing against those guys,” said Pheasants Forever official Matt O'Connor, who co-chaired the effort to pass the Iowa Water and Land Legacy amendment.

“They stated their opinion, and the people did not agree. We are going to need the Farm Bureau to be on our side. They will be part of the solution,” said O'Connor, of Hopkinton, state habitat director of Pheasants Forever.

“We are all on the same team,” said Laurie Johns, public relations director for the Iowa Farm Bureau.

Johns said Farm Bureau leaders and members “felt it was important to clarify for voters that any environmental gains realized through the adoption of the amendment to the state constitution would come at the expense of a tax increase.”

The Farm Bureau, which advocates more state funding for conserving soil and improving water quality, also opposed the constitutional amendment because it would lock in spending priorities - in effect, reducing the discretion of elected officials to make budget decisions.

Marian Gelb, executive director of the Iowa Environmental Council, said she sees a “disconnect” in the Farm Bureau's opposition and the measure's 63 percent approval margin.

It seems clear, she said, that Farm Bureau does not speak for most Iowans, and “I am not sure its position is representative of its members.”

The trust fund, if and when it becomes operative, would allocate almost a third of the $150 million a year it is expected to generate to the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship to support voluntary conservation programs that are underfunded and oversubscribed, Gelb said.

“Here was a chance to help secure additional funding for Farm Bureau priorities,” she said.

Chris Petersen of rural Clear Lake, president of the Iowa Farmers Union, which backed passage of the amendment, said he worried that the Farm Bureau's radio and television advertisements would help defeat the amendment.

The margin of victory, he said, “tells me that the broad spectrum of Iowans, including farmers, want increased state allocations to improve water quality, conserve soil, improve recreational opportunities and protect natural resources.”

Petersen said most of the Iowa Farmers Union's more than 1,400 members supported passage of the amendment. Many Farm Bureau members apparently were “not in lock step” with the organization, either, he said.

Petersen acknowledges that many Iowa farmers are under the influence of large agribusiness concerns that too often put profits ahead of protecting the environment.

“Say what you want, though, the vast majority of Iowa farmers want to do the right thing for the environment,” he said.

Another Iowa Farmers Union board member, Mary Krier of rural Ollie in Keokuk County, said the Farm Bureau's opposition to the measure defied understanding.

“It made no sense for an Iowa farm organization to be against a measure that would improve hunting, fishing and parks in their own state and help farmers themselves conserve their valuable topsoil,” she said.

In an election characterized by the ascendancy of conservative politics, nearly two-thirds of Iowa voters supporting the Water and Land Legacy amendment “really was a mandate for increased state funding for conservation in Iowa,” said Sean McMahon of Des Moines, director of the Nature Conservancy's Iowa office. He also served as chairman of the coalition formed to support passage of the amendment.

The measure will amend the Iowa Constitution and set aside three-eighths of a cent from the next increase to the state's sales tax for the Natural Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund, which will fund projects for clean water, soil protection, flood control, wildlife habitat and outdoor recreation. The account is expected to receive $150 million a year, should lawmakers approve a future tax increase.

That won't happen in this session of the Legislature, say governor-elect Terry Branstad and Rep. Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha, the next speaker of the Iowa House.

“I am not surprised that it passed, but I did not think it was an endorsement that Iowans want us to go out and raise the sales tax,” Paulsen said, adding that the possibility of raising the sales tax will not even come up for discussion in the next session.

A spokesman for Branstad, whose margin of victory was about 10 percentage points less than the amendment's, said the transition team is considering conservation funding along with other budget line items as it prepares budget recommendations.

The Iowa Environmental Council's Gelb said she does not consider the vote a mandate to raise taxes.

“I think we have to step back and look at the bigger picture of the state's economy, but at some point I think it will happen,” she said.

One of the messages her organization intends to reinforce with state legislators, she said, is “63 percent of Iowans care strongly about the environment. You need to care, too.”

The Nature Conservancy's McMahon said it will be up to the Legislature and governor to judge when the state's economy can afford a sales tax increase. In the meantime, he said, “we would like to see the Legislature approve increased funding for conservation efforts.”

Pheasant Forever's O'Connor and Petersen, of the Iowa Farmers Union, say they will focus on educating and reminding legislators of the importance of protecting the environment.