“Recently, the Des Moines Water Works announced it would pursue a lawsuit against three northwestern Iowa drainage districts because of record high levels of nitrates in the water flowing from those districts, leaving the job of removing the nitrates to Des Moines Water Works. Do you think the Des Moines Water Works is right or wrong to pursue this lawsuit?”

This is the question that was asked by the Des Moines Register for an Iowa Poll featured in last Friday’s paper.  63% of the respondents were in favor of the Des Moines Water Works intended action.  23% were opposed.  14% were unsure.  Donnelle Eller, whom covers both the agricultural and environmental beats at the Register, wrote the story.

On the same day the story ran, I was taking part in a group that brought together everyday people telling the story of agriculture and rural Iowa so they might share how they do it and what they have learned with each other.  Donnelle had been asked to speak to us.  My impression of her was that of a ‘straight shooter’ and someone striving towards unbiased reporting.  She had a good sense of humor, spoke directly, and was very approachable.  This was all well because a few of us thought the question above was off the mark, and we didn’t miss the opportunity to say so.

“I think it is pretty fair and straight forward.  What do you take exception to about it?” asked Donnelle.

“Why did you need the first sentence before you asked the question?” asked someone.

“It’s accurate isn’t it?”

“Actually, I think the Iowa Department of Natural Resources and the U.S. Geologic Survey say it’s been trending lower over the last eight to fifteen years.  I think Des Moines Water Works own data supports this claim.  What would have happened to the poll results had you mentioned that trend?”

Someone else added, “I’ve never read an article in the Des Moines Register which actually examines the trend of nitrates in the Raccoon River.  Did I miss it?  I read Bill Stowe saying it keeps trending higher and higher, and that there is no evidence we are having an impact.  At least two other government agencies and a former governor, the current U.S Secretary of Agriculture, say otherwise.  Which is it?”

“That’s on the top of our list to cover next.”  I think it was supposed to be reassuring.  The fact that it had went unexamined this far wasn’t, however.  “I think Bill Stowe would say that he’s not in the business of dealing in trends, though,” she added.  For not dealing in them, he certainly seems to be selling the hell out of a particular one.

It is frustrating for me.  As an assistant Soil and Water Conservation Commissioner in Madison County, I get to see first hand the waiting list of farmers wanting cost share assistance for large scale conservation projects.  This assistance isn’t just in terms of dollars, but also design and engineering.  As a commissioner and a contractor, I got to witness a staff laying these projects out as fast as they can, but hardly keeping up with contractors also facing the same workload.  As a farmer I know firsthand how these new practices will compliment existing ones already in place and are part of a long term plan for the future.

In terms of the trends involved, one can do a Bing image search of “nitrate levels in the Raccoon River.”  The two graphs below will pop up.  One can see how both trends can be argued at the same time.  What do they look like to you?  Does it impact how you would answer the poll?

I would like to be able to tell you how all the stakeholders involved collaboratively view the below, but unfortunately I can’t.  One of them has not been in a collaborative relationship with the rest for some time.  For my part, as a farmer, contractor, and assistant commissioner, you get up every morning, try to do the best you can, and try to figure out how it is you can do better.  In this effort I get assistance from all groups but one.  It is harder because of their absence and will likely be harder if attorneys get involved.