Bill brings soil health focus to watershed management work, but some say effort is flawed
A bill that would change state laws that enable local governments and groups in Iowa to work together to reduce flood risks and improve water quality has run into questions about whether it would be too limiting.
The bill is meant to streamline and update existing laws governing watershed management authorities, Haley Hook, the Iowa Department of Agriculture’s legislative liaison, said in a House agriculture subcommittee meeting Thursday. Among the changes: the groups' named would become watershed management partnerships.
Several people said they like that House Study Bill 674 incorporates soil health into the mission of Iowa’s watershed management authorities, often referred to as WMAs. Good soil health helps improve water quality and reduce flooding by retaining water that runs off Iowa farm fields.
But some people said the legislation is too restrictive and doesn’t fully address shortfalls in the existing laws.
“Why does the department want to prohibit watershed partnerships from assessing and educating about water quality?” asked Rep. Chad Ingels, R- Randalia, pointing out that the bill that retains language about assessing and educating residents about flood risks but not water quality.
Susan Kozak, an Iowa Department of Agriculture soil conservation and water quality division director, said officials were unsure citizen-led water management groups had the expertise to assess water quality.
But Ingels, a northeast Iowa farmer and former watershed management coordinator, said the local groups he's worked with often have reached out to colleges, agriculture groups like the Iowa Soybean Association, and other experts to assess water quality, and can be used as “educational tools to engage farmers.”
“They could see the data for themselves,” Ingels said. “They knew how it was collected. I think that's a valuable tool for watershed partnerships.”
Hook said it was something that the Iowa departments of agriculture and natural resources could address.
More: The Iowa Legislature is back. So how does it work? Here's your 2024 session cheat sheet
Bill 'needs a lot of work'
Rep. Chuck Isenhart, D-Dubuque, said he’s concerned the bill would limit money the watershed authorities may receive, including through nonprofit groups or federal programs, to reduce runoff of fertilizer and other nutrients from rural and urban areas.
While Iowa struggles with runoff from farms and cities that contributes to the Gulf of Mexico dead zone, a large area each summer at the mouth of the Mississippi River that's unable to support aquatic life, the state also battles other contaminants like PFAS, a group of chemicals that have been tied to cancer, liver damage and other health problems.
Rep. David Sieck, R-Glenwood, said the bill needs to better incorporate the work at other agencies like Iowa Department of Homeland Security and the Iowa Flood Center at the University of Iowa.
“This bill needs a lot of work,” said Rep. Norlin Mommsen, R-DeWitt. But the subcommittee chairman added that he thought its goals are worthwhile.
Isenhart said he thought incorporating soil health goals and other changes could be better addressed in other legislation.
“I think many pieces of this bill are problematic,” he said.
Donnelle Eller covers agriculture, the environment and energy for the Register. Reach her at deller@registermedia.com or 515-284-8457.
This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: Iowa subcommittee moves along bill making watershed management changes
