Moreover, in the long run, Hamilton suggested, it “isn’t necessarily important” whether DMWW wins or loses the suit because it “already has changed the discussion around water quality and agriculture.”

An eye-popping Feb. 7 report titled “Fooling Ourselves” only adds to that evolving discussion.

Researched and written by Environmental Working Group, a Washington, D.C.-based environmental nonprofit most U.S. farmers love to hate, the report found while USDA “has spent $3 billion in Iowa alone” since 2005 “on programs to help farmers farm in more environmentally friendly ways,” there’s little to none “conservation” benefit to show for all the dough.

In fact, EWG claims, “We are fooling ourselves by clinging to the hope that voluntary conservation measures will clean up Iowa’s water.”

In his FERN interview, lawyer Hamilton agreed. “There’s no question that Iowa has a water-quality issue, and that it’s getting worse.”

The dirtier water, however, is an indication of a dirtier secret we in agriculture would like to keep: Yesterday’s rules cover an agriculture that no longer exists in either Iowa or the rest of the country. The rules covered traditional agriculture; today’s agriculture is industrial.

Therein lies the rub; more nonfarmers than farmers — water customers in Des Moines and Akron, federal judges, members of Congress, your state legislators — are working to bring the old rules up to the public’s new needs.

Alan Guebert’s column is published weekly in the U.S. and Canada. Past columns, news and events are posted at www.farmandfoodfile.com. Contact Guebert at agcomm@farmandfoodfile.com.

Love 0 Funny 0 Wow 0 Sad 0 Angry 0