The injustice of inaction on conservation funding

Once upon a time on a November day in 2010, there was an election in Iowa where the people overwhelmingly amended their state constitution to establish the Iowa Natural Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund. The fund was to be used to improve water quality, conserve soil and restore natural areas, including fish and wildlife habitat.

This tale of voters choosing to give something back to a once diverse landscape has turned into an injustice for the people of Iowa because the mandate was never funded.

That mandate was overwhelmingly passed by Iowa voters 62.6 percent to 37.4 percent, nearly 9 percent more than Gov. Terry Branstad received in the last election.

The conservation measure was supported by more than 130 organizations representing 300,000 anglers, hunters, farmers, paddlers, boat owners and clean water advocates. The only opposition came from Farm Bureau's now hypocritical campaign, using membership funds to run negative ads against it. Farm Bureau opposed it because they said it could lead to higher taxes, which they neglected to remember in their recent lobby blitz of the 45 percent gas tax increase. The ironic part is a large portion of the Natural Resource Trust Fund will go toward soil and water conservation, which can only help the touted 'voluntary nutrient reduction strategy” become more than rhetoric.

As the natural resource fund sits conveniently hidden away, the gas tax sailed to the pump in a matter of days. The fund was supposed to receive three-eigths of a cent of Iowa's next sales tax increase, generating $150 million annually. In comparison, the 10-cent-per-gallon gas tax will generate over $215 million annually for what was billed as 'critical for road and bridge improvements.” If bridge and road repairs are 'critical,” then our degraded land and water would be categorized as 'desperately critical.”

Does it take near extinction of the Monarch butterfly or a lawsuit by Des Moines waterworks to recognize the need to fund a mandate preapproved by Iowa voters?

In our short history of altering a once diverse Iowa landscape, we have invested little in the health of the land, water or the native species we share the land with. Every possession we have comes from the land, yet we give little back in return. Our current investment in the land or natural resource education is nearly dead last compared to the rest of the nation. Why wouldn't we want to invest in outdoor recreation to promote tourism, lure new businesses and keep our brightest and active young adults in Iowa?

In contrast, consider how more than $37 million collected annually from mandated commodity 'checkoffs” are spent to promote agricultural land-use agendas. An undisclosed amount (kept secret by commodity officials) is spent on propaganda to protect corporate profits or to divert public awareness away from environmental degradation related to intensive agricultural. Listen to a broadcast of an Iowa or Iowa State game and you will hear 'Iowa Corn” or 'Farm Strong” over and over. Even high school sports can't escape the propaganda, with the 'Iowa Farm Bureau Girls State Basketball Championships” in Des Moines last week. On this high dollar propaganda stage, conservation has no voice.

The people of Iowa have already stepped up to give something back to the land, water and future of our state's conservation legacy. Until legislators fulfill the already mandated Natural Resource Trust Fund, the scales of injustice will remain hopelessly out of balance. A bipartisan bill has been introduced in the Iowa Senate to finally fulfill this obligation. What are we waiting for?

' Jon Stravers is a researcher with the Driftless Area Bird Conservation in McGregor. Comments: hawk@acegroup.cc