Cityview:  An Earth Day Portrait

---

While the timeliness of this post might not be very good, I found a very good article discussing Iowa's environmental record on a number of topics.  This comes from the Des Moines independent weekly "Cityview", which I found while leaving the grocery store this past weekend.

The Cityview authors found Iowa's environmental record to be a rather mixed bag, leaning toward "poor".  There are some good things that we do in Iowa (bottle returns, recycling, wind power) and some things we do very horribly (water quality, land use, conservation spending).

Since the article will soon vanish (no archives), here are a few snippets I found worthwhile:

Even in the areas in which Iowa is clearly excelling - recycling and renewable energy, for instance - it's generally no thanks to the state's policymakers. While other states, even in the agriculture-saturated Midwest, are making strides in reigning in environmental threats, Iowa lets animal producers run hog wild, condones regulators that blatantly flaunt federal clean water rules, robs environmental funding sources with impunity and apathetically allows the very concept of natural habitat to teeter on the brink of extinction. So, by all means, strike up the jam band. But, when it comes to the decline of Iowa's natural resources, it's time to face the music.
...

"The market is ready, but the utilities are hesitant," Kenyon-Brown says. "So, because we are a state that regulates its utilities, it's up to legislators to decide how much renewable energy is produced. And they have not stepped up."
...

They literally watched as the s__t ran out of the building, down the slope and right into the tile intake.

When Environmental Protection Agency inspectors visited with members of Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement last month, Kari Carney escorted the federal regulators on a tour of some local factory farms. She showed them firsthand the streams of manure that had been flowing so consistently out of one site that they had created obvious grooves in the landscape. They watched as animal waste drained out of another cracked lagoon and streamed into the ditch on the side of the road. They saw sites that, despite blindingly obvious evidence and repeated complaints, had received no attention from the Department of Natural Resources.

In Iowa, many environmentalists have come to find that, while hog producers get the royal treatment, local citizens and the environment are treated like swine. The hog invasion has been on the march since landmark legislation in 1995 opened the flood gates, Carney says, and, thanks to the continuing trend of favorable laws, Iowa has become the No.1 hog producing state in the nation.
...

It's time to stop gulping back the truth: Iowa's water is foul. And it's not a matter of a handful of renegade corporations surreptitiously discharging chemicals or urban areas overburdening their watershed - although both of those do occur in Iowa. It's the kind of systemic breakdown in which an Ames trailer park discharges sewage into College Creek, visible feces float right through the middle of the ISU campus and, the DNR is up s__t creek without a regulatory paddle because the stream didn't have any defined protection standards. What's wrong with the state's water isn't an easily pinpointed disease cured with one heavy dose of financial medication; it's a chronic condition that requires a regulatory lifestyle change.

...

But even more galling is that Iowa continues to miss the boat on the most basic provisions of water quality protection. Argue all you want about how George W. Bush has attempted to undermine the Clean Water Act; Iowans would be thrilled if the state would follow that federal act in the first place. According to the CWA, every body of water must be protected for aquatic life and recreational uses. But, of nearly 72,000 miles of rivers and streams, Iowa protects only 3 percent of those miles for swimming and 17 percent for aquatic life. States are also required to keep waters from further degradation by showing economic or social need for any increases in pollution. But DNR doesn't do that environmentalists say. The CWA mandates that states set aside their highest quality waters and restrict any additional pollution, no exceptions. But Iowa hasn't bestowed that designation on a single drop of water. In fact, Iowa is so far off base when it comes to the CWA, the EPA has been sending notices of violation for the past seven years and, if the agency doesn't get with the national program in the very near future, environmental groups say they will take the state to court to get the feds to take over the job local regulators are not doing.
...

Flashback to 1937 when the national parks system was just getting off the ground, and Iowa was leading the pack in setting aside land for conservation, Edwards says. But return to reality, he continues, and Iowa has plummeted to nearly dead last in the amount of land under public protection. In fact, even if you combine all the state, county and federal lands, you come up with barely 600,000 acres or a measely 1.7 percent of Iowa's total land area.

"That's smaller than Polk County," Edwards says gravely

Beyond Earth Day:  It's Time for Iowa to Face the Music

---

Cityview - Des Moines

By Carolyn Szczepanski

When the first Earth Day erupted, rivers were burning and citizens were suffocating in a country infected with oppressive pollution. On April 22, 1970, a massive protest descended on the nation's capitol, with 20 million Americans around the country demanding the government do something to turn back the tide of rampant environmental destruction. A grassroots uprising years in the making, the inaugural Earth Day was heralded as a pivotal advance for the fledgling environmental movement and a key factor in motivating apathetic politicians to finally enact fundamental environmental protections, including the Clean Air and Clean Water acts.

But, like a fiery teen whose convictions have been compromised by middle age, Earth Day has gone soft. Now, the impassioned protests have been replaced by sugar-coated, tie dye carnivals sponsored by the latest company seeking to boost sales by green washing its corporate image. The urgent fervor has dissolved into G-rated gatherings, marked, not by collective demands for action, but hollow slogans and absentminded petition signing. Like Valentine's Day, the previously political event has been corrupted by consumerism and cliches, and, just as cupid has become a bearer of empty sentiment, in many ways Earth Day undermines the urgency of serious environmental problems by making everyone feel they're saving the environment if they simply recycle their pop bottles.

So, in the face of the shiny-happy holiday, consider this your reality check. In an effort to rescue a moment of reflection from the 35th anniversary of the memorable protest, we set out to determine just how complicit Iowans are in the global assault on Mother Earth, asking the academics, activists and agency officials leading their respective fields "where do we stand?" And, although the issues are complex,  it is abundantly clear that the state of Iowa could stand to take far better care of its often-abused or entirely neglected natural resources.

Even in the areas in which Iowa is clearly excelling - recycling and renewable energy, for instance - it's generally no thanks to the state's policymakers. While other states, even in the agriculture-saturated Midwest, are making strides in reigning in environmental threats, Iowa lets animal producers run hog wild, condones regulators that blatantly flaunt federal clean water rules, robs environmental funding sources with impunity and apathetically allows the very concept of natural habitat to teeter on the brink of extinction. So, by all means, strike up the jam band. But, when it comes to the decline of Iowa's natural resources, it's time to face the music.

(click here to read the entire article)

---

  Rapid Response needs letter-writers, researchers, readers, and media watchers.  Join the Rapid Response-Iowa team.  Help us take back the media!

---

Iowa Department of Agriculture Bans Sale of Homeopathic Remedies for Livestock

---

And to think that the University of Iowa used to have a thriving School of Homeopathy until the AMA killed it off!


This came in today from Wisconsin:

We had a . . . meeting today in Madison, WI, and one of our committee members gave me a copy of a newsletter called Cow Tales published by Crystal Creek, a supplier of biologically safe livestock products.

A front page article reads:

"The Iowa Department of Agriculture has banned the sale of homeopathy and like products in the state of Iowa. It is illegal to use homeopathy on livestock, companion animals and pets in Iowa. This action took place over a year ago and they are enforcing this position. Consequently, Crystal Creek (the company that publishes the newsletter) cannot ship homeopathy or our Micro-Nutrients into Iowa. Producers can physically leave the state, purchase the homeopathy, and bring it back into the state, but then are not allowed to use homeopathy on their livestock or pets.

It remains to be seen if other states will follow Iowa's lead on this interpretation of FDA regulations. According to the FDA, homeopathy is an over-the-counter drug for human use only. The FDA also recognizes the need for Agricultural Departments at the state level to exercise discretion as to what needs critical enforcement. Regulatory agencies in other states have not focused on enforcing strict interpretation of the FDA concerning the use of homeopathy. On the other hand, Iowa has chosen to stictly enforce FDA regulations on homeopathy."

---

What I'd like to know is why the Iowa Department of Agriculture thinks it is better to contaminate the food chain with antibiotics than it is to treat and heal livestock in a manner that creates no side effects in the animals and passes on no harmful residue to humans?  --Linda

Random Views From A Community Activist

---

by John Drury

I thought I would take the opportunity to comment on a few things that have been happening in politics …

Truth Bill Dead
Republican leadership in the Iowa House has given up on a truth in campaigning bill when it comes to political campaign ads. This bill would have fined candidates for lying about their opponents in campaign ads.

Luckily, this bill went nowhere. However, there was at least one interesting quote that came out of the limited discussion this idea received.

House Majority Leader Chuck Gipp, R-Decorah, said, “The problem you have is you always have constitutional rights and freedom of speech issues …” Yes, Representative Gipp, that pesky Constitution gets in the way again.

I believe in truthful campaign ads as much as the next guy but if an incumbent claims he or she is pro-education, and their opponent finds an instance or two where the incumbent voted against additional funding for education, should this issue come before a judge? And I always thought it was the Republicans who complain about lawyers and their frivolous lawsuits.

Representative Ed Fallon Announces for Governor
While I appreciate Representative Fallon’s commitment to a clean campaign void of any special interest money, I honestly think he’s shooting himself in the foot. He mentioned in his announcement speech that he saw election reform as his number one goal. That’s admirable, but to be honest, I’m not sure that it is the people of Iowa’s number one concern.

The people of Iowa want economic growth and I don’t think that necessarily means more casinos. They want this growth in all parts of Iowa and they want this growth to be something that they can celebrate. Economic growth based on celebrating our small communities and returning a quality of life to Iowa that has long been forgotten. Hell, I don’t know, maybe that’s just what I want.
 
At this point in the game, my only advice to Representative Fallon would be to reconsider his self-imposed limits on accepting PAC money. I think that change can come about but I think the system has a much better chance of being changed from within. So I would encourage him to raise as much money as he can, forget the limits, get elected, and then go to work. Oh, and he’ll need a good reason for supporting Nader in 2000, he will get asked that a lot.

Seed Bill Signed, Sealed and Delivered to Corporate Ag
In yet another example of an attack on Iowa’s Home Rule, the Iowa House and Senate have both passed legislation that will pre-empt local governments from controlling the types of agricultural seeds that are planted in their counties and municipalities. Unfortunately, Governor Vilsack has signed this piece of legislation. Why?

House Talks Tough on Sex Offenders
The Iowa House talked tough last week on sex offenders, passing legislation for tougher penalties, new money for increased prison terms, and increased monitoring of released sex offenders. All of this sounds great, and all of it will cost additional money. Unfortunately, money wasn’t appropriated. According to House Democratic leader Pat Murphy, the legislation requires the Attorney General’s office and the Department of Public Safety to find $3.6 million dollars in their existing budgets to pay for these new laws. My guess is that these departments aren’t delighted to have to find this extra money in their already strapped budgets. State troopers are at a 40-year low and we’ve laid off prison guards while increasing prison populations. In the Iowa House, talk is cheap, literally.

Social Security and Iowa’s Tom Latham
In a piece of propaganda, I mean, literature distributed by Tom Latham’s office on Social Security, Representative Latham says he “will continue to fight for reforms that protect the current benefits and needs of current retirees and those nearing retirement. This includes absolutely opposing any plan to privatize Social Security.”

But in a town hall meeting just a few weeks ago here in north Iowa, Representative Latham was asked directly, “Do you support private accounts as part of Social Security?” He said that he does support private accounts and went on to use the standard the sky is falling scare tactic. The questioner then asked why his literature said one thing and he said another. Representative Latham explained that when he says he opposes any plan to privatize Social Security, he means getting rid of it all together and privatizing the whole thing, but that he is not opposed to privatizing parts of it.

My suggestion to avoid such confusion about what the guy says in the future is to do what my wife did to that last slick mailer he produced. Mark it, “RETURN TO SENDER” and put it in the corner mailbox. It may not do any good, but it might make you feel better.

Bankruptcy Bill
It’s gone through the U.S. Senate and it’s likely to sail through the House tomorrow. Our federal government is about to make it harder for people to file for bankruptcy protection. The bill does a host of other favors for the already booming credit card industry and sticks it to the little guy plain and simple.

Is it just me or does anyone else find it ironic that our federal government runs trillion dollar deficits and at the same time seems to be teaching financial discipline to the masses. God Bless America.

Attend a Public Forum in Iowa on a Harmful Pesticide

---

Defenders of Wildlife

Defenders of Wildlife is urging you to attend a public forum on atrazine - one of the most widely used corn herbicides in the United States. Atrazine is known to be harmful to both people and wildlife yet more than 60 million pounds are used annually in the U.S. In Iowa, more than 7 millions pounds are applied each year. Despite its link to prostate cancer in humans and an array of harmful impacts to wildlife, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently okayed its continued use.

The forum, entitled "Atrazine and Impacts on Human Health and Wildlife," will take place on SUNDAY, APRIL 24th from 3:00 to 5:00 PM and will present the latest science and policy issues around atrazine to the public.

The forum will be held at the University Life Centers located at 135 Iowa Memorial Union at the University of Iowa in Iowa City.

A one-hour presentation by Professor Tyrone B. Hayes, University of California, Berkeley, will be followed by one-hour open discussion ("town hall meeting"). The industry and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will also be invited to express their points of view, concerning the policy and continued use of atrazine, economic issues, environmental and public health and conservation concerns.

For more information please contact, Erin Conner or Tyrone Hayes.

---

   Click here to receive action alerts from Rapid Response - Iowa

---

 Chemical Trespass: Pesticides in Our Bodies and Corporate Accountability

---

Pesticide Action Network North America

Many U.S. residents carry toxic pesticides in their bodies above government assessed “acceptable” levels. Chemical Trespass: Pesticides in Our Bodies and Corporate Accountability, makes public for the first time an analysis of pesticide-related data collected by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a study of levels of chemicals in 9,282 people nationwide (2,644 of whom were tested for pesticides).

Many of the pesticides found in the test subjects have been linked to serious short- and long-term health effects including infertility, birth defects and childhood and adult cancers.

Chemical Trespass finds that children, women and Mexican Americans shoulder the heaviest “pesticide body burden.” For example, children — the population most vulnerable to pesticides — are exposed to the highest levels of nerve-damaging organophosphorous (OP) pesticides. The CDC data show that the average 6 to 11 year-old sampled is exposed to the OP pesticide chlorpyrifos (commonly known by the product name Dursban) at four times the level U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers “acceptable” for a long-term exposure. The report introduces the Pesticide Trespass Index (PTI), a new tool for quantifying responsibility of individual pesticide manufacturers for their “pesticide trespass.” 

Using the PTI, the report estimates that Dow Chemical is responsible for at least 80% of the chlorpyrifos breakdown products found in the bodies of those in the U.S. 

Chemical Trespass calls for immediate action by government officials and the pesticide industry to reduce reliance on toxic pesticide and better protect the public from pesticide exposures.

Download PDF documents:

Executive Summary

Full Report

How Rural Voters Helped Their Abusers Further Humiliate Them

---

Agribusiness Examiner

by John Hansen, President, Nebraska Farmers Union

As a recent New YorkTimes article on ag subsidies clearly shows, family farm agriculture is now reaping the public perception and political backlash that the American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Corn Growers Association, National Soybean Growers, National Association of Wheat Growers, and the U.S. based grain traders set us up for and created in 1996.

They transformed traditional farm programs from price supporting programs that forced the grain traders to pay up for grain commodities, which caused the cost of farm programs to be relatively low, and the majority of farm income to be realized through the cash market into income transfer programs that look, feel, and taste like welfare programs to most observers.

The fact that the actual structure is a "make up allowance" of sorts for lost market place value lost is seldom if ever recognized. The common perception becomes the reality, which is the current structure of farm programs is politically indefensible and fiscally vulnerable, just as Farmers Union said it was in the 1996 Farm Bill battle.

When we compare the 1996 value of the national production of six crops: Corn, Wheat, Soybeans, Grain Sorghum, Rice, and Cotton for the years 1997 through 2003, farmers were paid an average of $14.6 billion less for their crops. That amounts to $102.45 billion less money the raw material processors paid farmers for their crops during the 1997-2003 period.

So, who are the primary beneficiaries of the "farm subsidies"? Not the family farmers who lost more market place value than they got in income transfers - and produced most of their crops most years at below the USDA's Economic Research Service estimated cost of production. Not the consumers who did not pay proportionally less for the processed food products they bought. [It was] the food processors and food retailers.

They continue to steal raw material food production from farmers and ranchers for below full cost of production, with the help of our national farm and trade policy, which continues to be driven and supported by the food industry conglomerates with the political support of the very organizations that are supposed to be representing America's family farmers and ranchers.

What is worse, the very same set of big agribusiness players and their political supporters are now positioned to use the growing federal deficit and the direction of WTO negotiations to further carry out their self serving economic agenda to reduce and eliminate domestic income supports which are now called "subsidies". The new Congress leadership and the White House both support this agenda.

American farmers and ranchers are being fed to the U.S. based international corporate sharks by their own public officials, commodity organizations, and the American Farm Bureau Federation. Our traditional system of independent, farmer- and rancher-owned food and fiber production is being destroyed and dismantled in favor of the industrialized, top down corporate-owned and -controlled version of the failed former Soviet model.

In the last election, rural voters, just as the low self esteem victims of prolonged domestic abuse often do, once again helped their own abusers further beat and humiliate them.

(Source)