Move the dial on watershed practices

By The Gazette Editorial Board

---

Since the devastation of 2008, there's been considerable talk about how to better manage the watersheds that drain into the state's increasingly flood-prone rivers. Concrete, broad-based action, sadly, has been in much shorter supply.

There are some promising signs - more so among individual landowners than in most urban settings. More farmers, even before 2008, have incorporated minimum- or no-tillage practices that reduce runoff and erosion and improve water quality. Some have installed buffers, wetlands, terraces, waterways and other conservation measures that are even more effective.

Certainly, much more needs to be done. But a new state program looks like a step in the right direction. It allows, for the first time, local governments to join in creating watershed management authorities.

Six such agencies recently gained approval for funding that the federal government appropriated for flood recovery after the 2008 disaster. State lawmakers designated a share for watershed improvements and gave local government entities the power to create the agencies. Three of them are in our area: Indian Creek in Linn County, the Cedar River above Waterloo and the Turkey River in northeast Iowa. Though only six applicants received initial funding, others can continue organizing their agencies anyway and apply again for assistance if and when more is available. So far, the amount of grants made totals $158,010.

Sen. Rob Hogg, D-Cedar Rapids, has been the state's political leader in pursuing better watershed management practices and supporting resources. He was a sponsor of the legislation allowing the watershed authorities.

Under this law, local government entities can give the authorities whatever power they decide to delegate, short of eminent domain. However, it's not likely a city or county will cede its land-use authority.

Instead, Hogg told us, “I think the best opportunity” for these agencies is to develop goals and plans, pool local resources and then present proposals that could attract additional support from the state and federal governments. “If we want to be competitive for federal dollars that are being reduced, we need to come together with plans that will be attractive.”

Hogg said he believes more farmers want to improve their land management practices and the new agencies could help them, especially as other sources that help fund conservation measures shrink or remain stagnant. For example, Iowa's 100 soil and water conservation districts administer state and federal cost-share programs for farmers and other land owners to implement conservation practices. But funding isn't adequate to meet demand. Landowners applying for the cost-share money wait up to four years to get it.

A related issue the watershed agencies could address is the trend toward more distant land ownership. More than 53 percent of farmland in Iowa is rented by operators. Which means that owners and the tenants must agree on what, if any, long-term conservation measures to implement and who pays for what.

Expanding the watershed authority project also depends in part on additional funding. That's where the state must step up.

Hogg last year was sponsor of more ambitious legislation, asking for $600 million over 10 years toward flood prevention projects and leveraging more federal dollars. It didn't draw enough support from legislators or the governor as budget arguments dragged on through June.

Hoggs argues that investments in mitigation projects lead to future savings - pay now or pay more later when the next big flood arrives. You'd think selling that idea would be easier after the 2008 event and more frequent flooding incidents since then. Not so far.

The watershed authority program carries no guarantee of success. It will test the resolve and level of voluntary cooperation among rural and urban interests. And the funding commitment so far is modest at best.

But it's an opportunity to at least move the dial on watershed management at the grass-roots level. If these new agencies produce tangible results, if they earn favor with state and federal policymakers and regulators, this initiative is more likely to bring widespread benefits: less flood damage, reduced erosion and better water quality. All Iowans should value such outcomes, for themselves and generations to come.

n Comments: thegazette.com/category/opinion/editorial or editorial@sourcemedia.net