Iowa Soybean Review, October 2015

Iowa Soybean Association, 1255 SW Prairie Trail Parkway, Ankeny, Iowa 50023

NON-PROFIT ORG. U.S. POSTAGE PAID DES MOINES, IA PERMIT NO. 1333

EXAMINING WATER QUALITY EFFORTS IN IOWA AND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY October 2015

SOYBEANreview

®

IOWA

SPECIAL ISSUE: FREEDOM TO OPERATE

Make soybean cyst nematodes useful.

Turn them into fertilizer.

While other seed treatments claim to be effective against soybean cyst nematodes (SCN), Clariva® Complete Beans seed treatment, a combination of separate products, is the only broad-spectrum seed treatment proven to kill them all season long. As it acts to destroy SCN, it also reduces damage from sudden death syndrome (SDS).

All this lethal power comes from a tough nematicide paired with the unbeaten insect and disease protection of CruiserMaxx® Beans with Vibrance® seed treatment, a combination of separately registered products. So contact your Syngenta representative or visit ClarivaCompleteBeans.com. And take back your fields.

© 2015 Syngenta. Important: Always read and follow label instructions. Some crop protection products may not be registered for sale or use in all states or counties. Please check with your local extension service to ensure registration status. Clariva Complete Beans is an on-seed application of Clariva pn and CruiserMaxx Vibrance. CruiserMaxx Beans with Vibrance is an on-seed application of CruiserMaxx Vibrance and Apron XL. Clariva®, CruiserMaxx®, Vibrance®, the Alliance Frame, the Purpose Icon and the Syngenta logo are trademarks of a Syngenta Group Company.

MW 17175010-P1-V1 06/15

Iowa Soybean Association

For expanded stories, photos and exclusive videos examining water quality efforts in Iowa and the Chesapeake Bay, visit:

www.iasoybeans.com/ContrastingCurrents

October 2015 | Vol. 28, No. 1

16 Reflections of

22 Maintaining Your

to operate.

Farmers now have more choices than ever when it comes to their operations.

Europe Protecting freedom

18 Results Define

Early Success for Iowa Food & Family Project The year was 2010,

many issues affected the competitiveness of Iowa farmers.

Voice Choice in Farming

25 Contrasting

Currents Examining water

quality efforts in Iowa and the Chesapeake Bay.

About the Cover: ​A storm lights up the sky over Kent Narrows, Md. on the Chesapeake Bay. The bay is often referenced by Iowans as an example of how to deal with water pollution, both good and bad. Our state is battling its own water quality issues, exacerbated by an unprecedented lawsuit filed by the Des Moines Water Works against three northwest Iowa counties. Unlike Iowa, lawmakers in the Chesapeake Bay have instituted numerous mandates on agriculture to force farmers to act. The Iowa Soybean Association wanted to investigate the regulatory system and report our findings.

Congratulations to Nancy and Rich Degner for their recent retirements as executive directors of the Iowa Beef Industry Council and Iowa Pork Producers Association, respectively. Nancy and Rich have not only been great friends, they have been mentors to numerous people working for agriculture organizations around the country. They have made major contributions to their livestock organizations and will be missed by all. Best wishes in their retirement years!

Iowa Soybean Association

EXECUTIVE review Kirk Leeds Chief Executive Officer Iowa Soybean Association kleeds@iasoybeans.com Twitter@kirkleeds

Lessons Learned and Lessons Yet to be Learned For more than two decades, the Iowa Soybean Review has been providing important information to Iowa’s soybean farmers. Over the years, we have covered issues that have ranged from emerging international markets, new uses for soybeans, never ending lists of new soybean diseases, launch of biotech soybeans, election of volunteer soybean leaders and a host of policy issues and other “current events.”

More recently, we have dedicated time and attention to Iowa Soybean Association's (ISA) ongoing work to improve water quality across the state. The work behind these recent stories is based on more than 15 years of lessons we have learned by actively seeking answers to the challenge of improving water as it leaves Iowa’s farms. Our approach is driven by our desire to use real data and to be willing to “go where the data takes us.” While on this journey, we have learned much, but perhaps more importantly, we have learned how little we really understand.

I thought of this reality as I reviewed the numerous stories in this issue focused on the lessons learned by ISA

President Wayne Fredericks, Osage | D2 President Elect Rolland Schnell, Newton | D5 Treasurer Jeff Jorgenson, Sidney | D7 Secretary Bill Shipley, Nodaway | D7 Executive Committee Lindsay Greiner, Keota | At Large

Directors Mark Vosika, Pocahontas | D1 Chuck White, Spencer | D1 April Hemmes, Hampton | D2 Scott McGregor, Nashua | D3 Suzanne Shirbroun, Farmersburg | D3 Sheila Hebenstreit, Jefferson | D4 Randy Souder, Rockwell City | D4 Morey Hill, Madrid | D5 Ed Ulch, Solon | D6 Robb Ewoldt, Blue Grass | D6 Cliff Mulder, Pella | D8 Pat Swanson, Ottumwa | D9 Mark Jackson, Rose Hill | D9 Stephanie Essick, Dickens | At Large Tom Oswald, Cleghorn | At Large Tim Bardole, Rippey | At Large

staff members as they visited the Chesapeake Bay area.

Their mission was to see what Iowa farmers could learn from folks who have been working to improve water in this high profile body of water on the East Coast of the United States for many years. As in Iowa, there are strong disagreements on whether or not a regulatory or a voluntary approach will result in greater improvements, how long this will take and whether actual progress is being made.

I urge you to spend some extra time with this issue and share it with your friends and neighbors. ISA is fully committed to helping farmers voluntarily adopt practices that help manage nutrients better as outlined in the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy. We believe that a voluntary approach, focused on working with individual farmers and landowners, using real data, with a willingness to accept the reality of the lessons learned, while readily embracing the idea that we have much more to learn is the only way we will be successful.

Join us on the journey.

American Soybean Association Directors Ray Gaesser, Corning Wayne Fredericks, Osage Dennis Bogaards, Pella Mark Jackson, Rose Hill John Heisdorffer, Keota United Soybean Board Directors Laura Foell, Schaller Delbert Christensen, Audubon Larry Marek, Riverside Tom Oswald, Cleghorn

For advertising information in the Iowa Soybean Review, please contact Larson Enterprises, (515)440-2810 or larson6@mchsi.com.

Comments and statewide news articles should be sent to the above address. Advertising space reservations must be made by the first day of the month preceding publication. In consideration of the acceptance of the advertisement, the agency and the advertiser must, in respect of the contents of the advertisement, indemnify and save the publisher harmless against any expense arising from claims or actions against the publisher because of the publication of the content of the advertisement.

PAGE 18

Farmers adopt technology

4 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

YOUTUBE Staff Credits LOGO SPECS Editor | Ann Clinton Communications Director | Aaron Putze, APR Creative Manager | AshtononJacobson light backgrounds Photographer | Joe Murphy Staff Writer | Carrie Laughlin standard Staff Writer | gradient Matthew Wilde main red bottom 1815C Tate PMSWriter 1795C | PMS Staff Dorothy Staff Writer | Allison Arp Staff Writer | Michelle Jones Staff Writer | Easton Kuboushek white Sales Directorblack | David Larson no gradients BLACK WHITE The Iowa Soybean Review is published eight times a year by:

PRINT C0 M96 Y90 K2

C13 M96 Y81 K54

C0 M0 Y0 K0

C100 M100 Y100 K100

Iowa Soybean Association 1255 SW Prairie Trail Parkway, Ankeny, Iowa 50023 watermark Phone: (515) 251-8640 Web address: www.soybeanreview.com E-mail: aclinton@iasoybeans.com

stacked logoalso (for sharing only) Iowa Soybean Association can be found on these sites:

If You Don’t Sell Yourself, Who Will?

By Lindsey Foss

Shannon Latham wears several hats: Vice President of Latham Hi-Tech Seeds; owner of Enchanted Acres pumpkin patch; wife; mother of two and blogger. While she wears each with pride, at the end of the day, one hat she never takes off is “agvocate.” We sat down to get Latham’s take on the obstacles facing Iowa farmers and how she works to share her story, one consumer at a time.

On the uphill battle to maintain freedom to operate

Regulations, and furthermore the unintended consequences of those regulations, are always a looming threat. There’s no denying that farmers face complex issues that require long-term solutions. In the meantime, we must share practices currently in place to address consumers’ concerns. We can’t afford to be the silent majority. The best way to gain trust is for people to get to know you. Then when consumers have questions, they know a farmer whom they trust for an honest answer.

On the source of food and farming confusion

I consider myself fortunate to have never doubted the safety of my food or question where it came from. I grew up on “fresh” and “local” foods and I’m raising my kids the same way. When I see children who don’t live on farms and whose families don’t even have a swing set — let alone a backyard — I try to think about food issues from their perspective. They’re consistently fed information from several different directions, making it hard to sort fact from fiction.

On advocating for agriculture

Just as agriculture has changed over time, so have communication methods. When someone has an experience — good or bad — it only takes a picture, text or tweet before it’s shared with friends and followers. That can be scary, even intimidating! We must acknowledge this is the era of communications we live in and make the most of it. I try to look at interaction with consumers as an educational opportunity. To me, the possibility that our freedom to operate could be jeopardized is far scarier than backlash on social media.

Tips for connecting with consumers

1. Ask several questions. It’s far too easy to assume that just because someone has a question, he or she has an opposition. Before jumping to quick judgment, listen and try to create understanding.

2. Monitor your voice, tone and inflection when responding both in-person and online. Having a passion for what we do may come off as defensive to non-farming audiences.

3. You don’t have to go at it alone. I’m involved with organizations like CommonGround and the Iowa Food & Family Project because I see the strength in teaming up with our commodity organizations and others to share consistent, united messages.

6 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

Bring it

SM

with

LATHAM

Latham® brand IRONCLAD™ soybeans include exceptional genetics and industry-leading protective traits. Each IRONCLAD brand must be SCN resistant, and have been specially developed to combat Iron Deficiency Chlorosis and withstand high pH and high-salt soils.

They also have strong defensive ratings against White Mold, SDS, Phytophthora Root Rot, and Brown Stem Rot. Family-owned Latham Hi-Tech Seeds selects products bred to perform best in your local conditions. Our team approach to product selection, combined with our hands-on production process, leads to high quality seed in the bag and higher yields in the field.

IF YOU HAVE A NEED, WE HAVE THE SEED. Latham has been bringing home unmatched protection and unparalleled yield for nearly 70 years. To find out which products are best suited for your conditions, contact us at:

1-877-465-2842

lathamseeds.com 1.877.GO.LATHAM

CORN. SOYBEANS. ALFALFA. BRING IT HOMESM WITH LATHAM! ®Registered marks of Latham Hi-Tech Seeds

Panama Canal Expansion Could Boost U.S. Soy’s Competitive Advantage

By ???????

A looming deadline is fast approaching for U.S. soy’s competitive advantage. By the end of December, construction on the Panama Canal expansion will be completed. The eventual opening of this expansion will give exporters the opportunity to more efficiently move products, such as U.S. soybeans, to end users in China and other countries.

U.S. soy already has an advantage of being the more reliable and often more affordable supplier of soybeans when compared with South American soybeans, so this engineering marvel should only improve these efficiencies. To take advantage of the deeper canal, U.S. ports will need to maintain depth of 45 to 50 feet. These depths allow Panamax vessels, which can carry up to 2 millions bushels, to be loaded to maximum capacity. This is 500,000 additional bushels per load over current ships.

“Most soybean exports that use the canal move through the ports around New Orleans,” says Woody Green, soybean farmer from South Carolina. “The projected depth through this area is 45 feet, which leaves room for vessels to be loaded. It’s important to maintain this depth.”

With the Water Resources Reform and Development Act now in place to provide increased funding for port and inland waterway maintenance, the U.S. agriculture sector is hopeful that major agricultural ports will be ready for the opening of the canal expansion.

Linking Iowa soybean producers to global markets

AGP’s Export Terminal Port of Grays Harbor Aberdeen, WA 8 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

Photo by Marc Sterling

stineseed.com

with stine, i have options.

Offering elite genetics and a wide range of technologies that can boost performance, STINE haS whaT I waNT aNd whaT my farm NEEdS. ®

I choose dedIcatIon. I choose servIce. I choose what I can count on.

I choose Stine because…

Stine haS yield.

S T IN E S E E D C O MPA N Y

|

A D E L, IO WA

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 9

SOY TALK Selecting soybean varieties for 2016 When selecting seed for 2016, you can do much of the work by paying attention during harvest.

To help you manage your soybean acres, Josh Enderson, Mycogen Seeds commercial agronomist for central Iowa, recommends focusing on these five important factors:

Iowa Soybean Association Board of Directors Elects 2016 Officers

1. Consider performance across maturity groups. Compare local and statewide yield performance of varieties from different companies, sourcing university Extension data where available.

2. Understand soil types. Analyze your soil textures during harvest this year, and work with your Mycogen Relative agronomist to determine Variety Maturity what adjustments you 5N207R2 2.0 might need to make.

3. Diversify your maturities. This will help minimize weather-related risks and maximize your harvest window.

5B264R2

2.6

5N293R2

2.9

5N354R2

3.5

5N374R2

3.7

New Mycogen® brand soybean varieties

4. Select appropriate row width. To reduce weed pressures, favor a more upright plant in narrow rows and a bushier plant in wider rows.

5. Address disease and insect pressures. As witnessed this year, untreatable plant disease pressures can hurt yield.

Focus on varieties with high ratings for disease tolerance against pressures such as sudden death syndrome, white mold and frogeye leaf spot.

“At Mycogen Seeds, our access to soybean germplasm allows us to develop top-performing and diverse soybean products that growers need for successful yield,” Enderson says.

Enderson urges farmers to work with their local Mycogen Seeds commercial agronomist to build a customized cropping plan that puts the right varieties on their acres next year. For more information, visit Mycogen.com/Agronomy.

Brought to you by:

® Mycogen and the Mycogen Seeds Logo are trademarks of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow. ©2015 Mycogen Seeds. Mycogen Seeds is an affiliate of Dow AgroSciences LLC.

A farmer from Osage took the gavel as president of the Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) while six farmers were elected to leadership positions at the association’s board of directors meeting held recently.

Wayne Fredericks of Osage took his seat as president. Farmers elected were: ROLLAND SCHNELL | Newton | president-elect JEFF JORGENSON | Sidney | treasurer BILL SHIPLEY | Nodaway | secretary LINDSAY GREINER | Keota | executive committee

ISA directors also elected Fredericks and Dean Coleman, Humboldt, to represent Iowa on the American Soybean Association board of directors.

“Iowa soybean farmers look to these leaders to manage their investments, whether it be in research to find solutions to the latest production issues or in market development to find new uses or customers for our production,” says Fredericks. “These leaders also engage in the policy making process to protect our freedom to operate. At the state, national and international levels, these leaders will work on behalf of Iowa soybean farmers to enhance their competitiveness and bring value to their farm operations.”

YOU WERE MEANT FOR THIS. When all the planting, feeding and protecting grow into more than just your yield.

More than a job well done — it’s a realization. That this is what you were meant to do. We’re with you. It’s what Mycogen Seeds is all about. A shared passion for the life of your land. For the life that you love.

Visit

to maximize the potential of your corn and soybeans.

®

Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) or an affiliated company of Dow ©2013 Mycogen Seeds. Mycogen Seeds is an affiliate of Dow AgroSciences LLC. S38-705-003 (09/13) BR 010-13551-B MYCOCORN3055

Investing Checkoff Dollars

NO OTHER LENDER DELIVERS MORE FOR YOUR MONEY – OR GIVES MORE BACK. FARM CREDIT SERVICES OF AMERICA OPERATING LOANS OFFER CASH-BACK DIVIDENDS. A Farm Credit Services of America operating loan offers more than attractive rates and terms — you get access to valuable financial and management information, services and tools. Plus cash-back dividends that can return even more. Discover the difference of a lender that works for you.

Call 800-884-FARM.

Larry Bortz Soybean & Swine Producer Rudd, IA fcsamerica.com/bortz

1 2 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

Investing Checkoff Dollars

ISA Policy Director Carol Balvanz

Definitions Matter

By Carol Balvanz, Policy Director

In late August, a major set of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules called the “Clean Water Rule” went into effect despite agriculture’s protests. This rule changed the definition of Waters of the United States that are under EPA jurisdiction. It still includes all the navigable rivers it once did. But it also branches out to possible adjacent waters which can reach up to 4,000 feet from the original navigable water, including wet areas as well as flowing water. We question how EPA will use this new rule to actually improve water quality. Will they enforce water monitoring on all tile lines? Will they set drinking water standards on all of those “adjacent” waters? Or will they simply demand permits from farmers for the number of acres farmed and payment to match?

For most of us, freedom to farm really means maintaining our financial viability to farm. Managing cash flow and expenses are vital. But this new EPA rule will add to the total cost of farming. Historically, farm activities and tile drainage have been defined as non-point source runoff and exempt from the Clean Water Act. Why? One reason is that determining which water came from which farmland is very difficult. Another is that farmers have no ability to pass on the costs of environmental improvements. We are price takers — not price setters.

Enter lawsuit strategy. Environmental groups have been very successful in whittling away certain farming exemptions through changing or ignoring the definitions and exemptions that apply to farming. The Des Moines Water Works (DMWW) claims that field runoff and tile drainage should be defined as “point sources” and therefore regulated by the Clean Water Act (That, despite the fact that even the new “Clean Water Rule” specifically exempts agricultural storm-water discharges and tile drainage). If DMWW wins the lawsuit, all drainage from farm fields could be defined as point source discharges.

Definitions also matter to the Washington dairy farmers

1 4 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

who have followed state nutrient management plans for years but have now been dragged into court because environmental groups want to define manure from cattle as industrial waste and subject to the Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). If manure is defined as industrial waste, it will cost dairy farmers much more in permit and removal fees. Sympathetic judges and poorly written laws are allowing environmental activists to gain control over the nation’s agricultural production.

Court cases generally take months or years to reach a courtroom. For this reason, Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) has decided to use this coming year to work even harder on the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy (INRS). We’re continuing to push for our $3 million tax credit for strategically located environmental practices such as bioreactors, saturated buffers and wetlands.

We’ve envisioned a partnership with Iowa Community Colleges to provide training and internships for water quality monitoring. And we support the 3/8 cents sales tax increase that can provide major funding for the INRS. These are incremental steps but demonstrate our commitment to clean water.

Radical environmental groups have long led campaigns to “save” the environment from farmers and ag businesses.

They send out pleas for contributions to “save our water,” often including misinformation about agriculture. We don’t have their millions. They’re hoping we will just cave in and agree that farm field runoff should be defined as point source runoff rather than engage in an expensive fight. Can we afford to do that?

Like the dairy farmers in Washington, we have historical definitions on our side. We have made huge improvements in water quality over the past thirty years.

It now becomes even more important that we stand on our accomplishments, point to our plans and remember that definitions matter.

E C N A M OR F R E P D N E E P L O P T O E P R E I T TOP

G N I N N I W A NATION I B M O CFOR YOUR ACRES Steph Kasper Pioneer Sales Professional

LOCAL TEAM OF PROS

Ryan Wangen Grower

Tim Hasler DuPont Pioneer Account Manager

RELIABLE LEADING AGRONOMY PIONEER PREMIUM SEED TREATMENT PERFORMANCE RESEARCH

Pioneer.com/Soybeans Components under the Pioneer Premium Seed Treatment offering for soybeans are applied at a DuPont Pioneer production facility or by an independent sales professional of Pioneer. Not all sales professionals offer treatment services, and costs and other charges may vary. See your Pioneer sales professional for details.

Seed treatment offering is exclusive to DuPont Pioneer and its affiliates.

PIONEER® brand products are provided subject to the terms and conditions of purchase which are part of the labeling and purchase documents. , , Trademarks and service marks of DuPont, Pioneer or their respective owners. © 2015 PHII. DUPPSY15027_100115_ISR

® TM SM

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 1 5

Investing Checkoff Dollars

REFLECTIONS OF EUROPE: PROTECTING FREEDOM TO OPERATE

By Dorothy Tate

Large government subsides.

Failing economic equations. Immense consumer and public influence and a trend toward “nonscientific reasoning.”

European Union (EU) farmers face these challenges every day.

During a learning mission to four EU countries in July, seven members of the Iowa Soybean Association board found out exactly how damaging these issues and policies could be to farmers’ freedom to operate if left unaddressed.

“U.S. agriculture takes pride in our efficiencies and our ability to provide safe, nutritious food to a hungry world, and to do so using the latest technology,” says Kirk Leeds, ISA CEO. “European agriculture is focused on protecting what they have and maintaining the public’s support for agriculture as if it were a social cause.”

This divide and the economic, social and environmental conditions that comprise it came up consistently during the 15-day mission. Results of the issues and regulations severely limit the freedom EU farmers have to operate.

Who’s running the show?

Consumer and community preference reigns supreme in the EU. One example was the switching of crops in Germany — the largest agricultural producer in the EU — from corn to more aesthetically pleasing crops, such as rapeseed, canola and sorghum, per public mandate.

The term “agricultural schizophrenia,” coined by the Bavarian Farmers Association, described another instance where public demanded the use of certain practices and even crops, but didn’t want to pay for them.

The pressure is particularly tough in livestock production where the public demands better animal welfare, but still wants to purchase cheap meat products.

“So many policies and public thinking do not match up or appear to belong in the same country,” says Wayne Fredericks, ISA president and farmer from Osage. “The government pays very large subsidies to the farms and thus controls for the most part what the farmers are able to do.”

1 6 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

Who’s funding the show?

Part of the problem comes from the trade regulation system that the member states of EU operate within. Farming practices fall under this umbrella and in some cases the government ends up providing 40 percent to 50 percent of a farmer’s income.

The German government subsidizes many practices that incentivize farmers to move in the direction envisioned by policy makers. For example, one farmer installed a methane digester on his farm to produce electricity. He could have purchased electricity for 12 cents/ KW, yet it cost him 18 cents/KW to make energy. However, the government guaranteed him 28 cents/KW for 20 years, so he made energy.

Another example is expensive capital and machinery costs incurred on many farms, despite a small number of animals or acres. For example, a modern dairy facility costs upwards of $500,000 to milk less than 30 cows or a $200,000 building for 28,000 to 40,000 hens. Fredericks does not see how a similar setup would be economically

Investing Checkoff Dollars

If you recognize that the three pillars of sustainability are social, economic and environment, then you understand the importance of each for a balanced outcome.

— MARK JACKSON, Rose Hill

viable in the U.S. considering the current capital investment.

“What has happened is the subsidies and programs are built around maintaining the small size of the farms, yet providing a comfortable living for the farmers,” Fredericks continues. “All we visited with were very happy with the current situation.”

Who’s got freedom?

The resignation of surrendering freedom to operate permeated conversations and presented a concerning lack of attention to longterm effects.

“The sustainability conversation was fragmented and occurred often throughout our tour,” says Mark Jackson of Rose Hill. “If you recognize that the three pillars of sustainability are social, economic and environment, then you understand the importance of each for a balanced outcome. However, most sustainability conversations were singular in nature driven by nonscientific reasoning with little

consideration of the consequences.”

Some ISA leaders still held out a glimmer of hope, noting that a representative from the Foreign Agriculture Service in Germany indicated a crisis such as higher priced food and/or economic downturn could spur demand for GMO acceptance in Europe and change the export equation for the U.S. “I believe it is important to continue a dialog with the EU and the farmers,” says Lindsay Greiner, farmer from Keota and ISA board member.

“They are a large market for U.S. soybean farmers and one that needs to be protected, if not expanded. Without the acceptance of GMO's, expansion will be slow. I believe that it will take a reduction of government subsidies, a widespread economic crisis and a cultural shift for acceptance of GMO's to become a reality.”

In the meantime, U.S. farmers will continue to view the big picture from all angles — economic, social and environmental — and consider these lessons learned from the EU in order to protect their freedom to operate.

FREEDOM TO OPER ATE TIPS • Consumer and community preference reigns supreme in the EU, as they do in the United States.

• In many EU countries, government subsidies are at such a high level that the government can control what farmers are able to do.

• Resignation of surrendering freedom to operate permeated conversations and presented a concerning lack of attention to long-term effects.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 1 7

Investing Checkoff Dollars

RESULTS DEFINE EARLY SUCCESS FOR

IOWA FOOD & FAMILY PROJECT

By Carrie Laughlin

In 2010 many issues impacting the competitiveness of Iowa farmers were trending. Near the top of the list was how farmers could engage more effectively with consumers to enhance their confidence in modern agriculture.

While activities had been launched for the purpose of making farming more real and relevant to urban Iowans, their success was muted.

Sponsors were often limited to farm and commodity organizations and audiences largely consisted of farmers.

The ability to measure real success was difficult, if not impossible.

It was time for a new approach.

Ideas take root

Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) Communications Director Aaron Putze recalls the year as if it occurred last week.

Hired by the ISA in October 2010 as director of external relations, one of

Putze’s primary duties was to develop and implement a consumer-focused initiative that would be collaborative, sustainable and, most importantly, “move the needle” in how Iowans perceived modern agriculture.

His approach to accomplishing the task began with a 35,000-foot view of the landscape … literally.

The catalyst for what would eventually become the Iowa Food & Family Project, says Putze, was an idea he scribbled on the back of a United Airlines napkin while returning from a conference held in Washington, D.C., focusing on consumer understanding of agriculture.

“Most of the time at the meeting was devoted to the perceived ‘ruralurban divide’ and the activist groups responsible,” he said. “I was frustrated that so much time and attention was once again given to the problem.

It was time for solutions. So, I put

pen to napkin on the return flight home and roughed out a plan that I was confident would increase the confidence food-minded Iowans have in today’s agriculture.”

In January 2011, the ISA board approved Putze’s concept and the Iowa Food & Family Project was born.

Three months later, it was publicly launched.

Joining in the announcement were Gov. Terry Branstad, Lt. Gov. Kim Reynolds, Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey and Jim Hallihan, thenexecutive director of the Iowa Sports Foundation. Along with the Iowa Sports Foundation, representatives from the seven founding partners — ISA, Midwest Dairy Association, Hv-Vee, Iowa Turkey Federation, Iowa Beef Industry Council, Iowa Egg Council and the Iowa Food Bank Association — were also present.

A key first step was announcing

“Expedition Yetter” participants

enjoy a white tablecloth dinner.

1 8 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Iowa FFP showcased “What Farmers Grow Makes Iowa Go” at the Iowa State Fair, which included a 50-ton sand sculpture, ag trivia and the opportunity to talk to Iowa’s farmers.

Iowa FFP’s presenting sponsorship of the Iowa Games and Live Healthy Iowa. Both programs are administered by the Iowa Sports Foundation.

“The affiliation immediately created an audience comprised of thousands of Iowans interested in health, wellness and nutrition,” Putze says. “We were able to connect with people who were sincerely interested in all kinds of foodrelated topics, including farming.”

No time wasted

The Iowa FFP quickly kicked off its first activity in August of 2011 and wasted no time going big — as in the Big Apple itself. The ‘Be Our Guest, Be a Farmer’ contest lit up a Times Square Jumbotron, offering one lucky family the chance to win a visit to Iowa to meet many of the people responsible for feeding the world.

The Conturso family from New Jersey won the contest and, therein, a whirlwind trip to Iowa; complete with farm tours, dinner with Ag Sec. Northey, visits to REG in Newton, Living History Farms, and the Iowa State Fair.

And that was just the start. The ‘Together We Can!’ exhibit at the 2011 and 2012 Iowa State Fairs featuring farm-related themes built from canned and packaged food generated farmer-

consumer engagement and provided much-needed resources for Iowa food banks.

Several months later, a ‘Special Delivery. Homes. Help. Hope. For Haiti’ partnership provided more than $400,000 for the purchase of Sukupdesigned Safe T Homes™ and soybased Meals from the Heartland for the small country still reeling from an earthquake.

The roots of the Iowa FFP were firmly planted and its message continued to grow.

Activities such as ‘You on the farm’ and ‘Talkin’ farming at the Shed’ welcomed Iowans curious about food to connect with farmers and have honest conversations about agriculture.

Within two years of its launch, Iowa FFP’s social media presence had grown to several thousand followers and an online newsletter titled “Fresh Pickings” was launched.

Timely talk

“Consumers often have questions on the same topics that make the five-o'clock news including water quality, food labeling, animal care and sustainability,” says Lindsey Foss, Iowa FFP coordinator. “That's why it's important to continue to create events that provide Iowans with the (Continued on page 20)

2011 JA N UA RY 201 1 Creation of Iowa Food & Family Project.

A P R I L 201 1 Public launch.

AUG UST 201 1 Welcomes Canstruction® to the Iowa State Fair constructed entirely from nearly 15,000 canned and packaged food items.

D EC E MBE R 201 1 Coordinates “Homes. Help. Hope.

For Haiti” campaign.

2012 MAY 201 2 Launches “You on the Farm.”

J UN E 201 2 Advisory Council convened to assist in the growth and success of Iowa Food & Family Project.

More than 30 representatives of the Iowa Sports Foundation board and staff tour the Paul and Nathan Hill turkey farm near Ellsworth.

We were able to connect with people who were sincerely interested in all kinds of food-related topics, including farming.

— AARON PUTZE, ISA Communications Director

J ULY 201 2 Inaugural “Fields of Champions” Cookout held in Ames in conjunction with Summer Iowa Games opening ceremonies.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 1 9

Investing Checkoff Dollars

(Continued from page 19) opportunity to visit with farmers.

People curious about their food can get their questions answered, straight from the source.”

A highly successful program launched in 2013 invited Iowans to join popular food blogger Kristin Porter of Iowa Girl Eats to ‘Join My Journey,’ which took Porter across the state to learn about agriculture. Porter blogged about her experiences and the knowledge she gained as someone extremely curious about the food she purchased.

She was joined by Cristen Clark in 2015 for ‘Join Our Journey.’ Clark, a sixth-generation farmer from Runnells, teamed up with Hy-Vee and Porter for the Iowa Food and Family Cookbook, Recipe Refresh and Make it & Take It events, along with a presence at the Des Moines Farmers’ Market.

“Iowa FFP has been a real success

story for Iowa agriculture,” says ISA President Wayne Fredericks of Osage. “Together with many partners, Iowa FFP has been able to engage consumers and tell the story of modern day farming. Through our interactions we have been successful in raising awareness and acceptance of agriculture. We give the consumer the opportunity to visit, interact and ask questions of real farmers.”

ISA CEO Kirk Leeds says the Iowa FFP continues to exceed expectations.

“When the farmer directors of the ISA decided to launch Iowa FFP, they did so because they were concerned many consumers had questions about today's agriculture and our food system," Leeds says. "The best way to address these concerns was to engage in a dialogue. And that’s what Iowa FFP has allowed us to do — have honest, open and transparent conversations."

Iowa FFP hosted “Expedition Yetter” on Aug. 29, 2015.

Forty-one attendees joined an all-day farm journey that showcased grain and livestock farmers.

Kristin Porter, far right, and Cristen Clark, second from left, join the winners of “Recipe Refresh,” a partnership with Hy-Vee where dieticians, farmers and bloggers shop for ingredients to prepare their favorite recipes in-store.

THE INSIDE SCOOP KRISTIN PORTER of West Des Moines knows food. The Iowa Girl Eats blogger has been cooking up recipes daily for more than five years. In 2013, she teamed up with the Iowa FFP to learn more about agriculture.

How has your involvement with Iowa FFP impacted your perception of farmers?

Meeting farmers and their families has easily been the highlight of my experience. Listening to stories of their decades — even century — old farms and how the work is in their blood is indescribable. The

way farmers go to great lengths to protect our fertile farmland so it can continue to lead the U.S., and world, in production of goods such as corn, soy and eggs for generations to come is honorable, and the fact that farmers feed their families the food they raise speaks for itself.

Why is it important farmers answer the questions foodminded Iowans have about how their food is produced?

Before teaming up with the Iowa FFP, my agricultural exposure was limited to seasonal visits to the farmers’ market. I didn’t realize I can have access to farmers and can rely on them to answer my food questions.

Many Iowans are in the same boat, which is why I also love sharing agriculture tidbits I’ve learned. I like

2 0 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

to think everything I’ve shared will have a domino effect leading to bigger and better conversations between farmers and consumers.

What is one take-away from your time with Iowa FFP that you’d share with other non-ag folks about food and farming?

I’ve learned so much from the Iowa FFP and most importantly, walked away satisfied knowing farmers are doing everything they can to raise safe and healthy products. I have yet to meet a farmer who doesn’t feed what they raise to their family, nor take immense pride in utilizing new technologies to ensure Iowa’s farmland will remain healthy and fertile for many generations to come.

Investing Checkoff Dollars

2013

Kristin Porter of Iowa Girls Eats and Cristen Clark of Food & Swine sign complimentary copies of the Iowa Food & Family Cookbook at Hy-Vee.

JA N UA RY 201 3 Iowa FFP and Subway announce partnership.

MAY 201 3 Highly successful “Join My Journey” campaign launches, hosted by Kristin Porter.

AUG UST 201 3 “Get Connected to Farming” exhibit at the Iowa State Fair.

D EC E MBE R 201 3 Advisory team grows from 14 to 21 partners

2014 MA R C H 201 4 Host Grist.org Food Editor Nathanael Johnson for lecture attended by nearly 175 people.

MAY 201 4 Porter continues her journey into all things food and farming.

CRISTEN CLARK is a farmer, competitive baker and author behind Food & Swine.

This year, she joined Kristen Porter of Iowa Girl Eats in engaging food-minded Iowans about raising wholesome, sustainable food.

What is the value of the Iowa Food & Family Project as a farmer? How do activities like Iowa FFP provide a voice for farmers like you?

The Iowa FFP is the only initiative of its kind when it comes to agricultural advocacy. Joining the efforts of each of the commodities grown in Iowa makes our voice stronger and helps show the lives of families on modern day farms collectively. The activities of Iowa FFP are invaluable ways to connect

with the consumer, and the variety of activities are outstanding. Iowa FFP puts the name and face to modern day Iowa agriculture, and to me, that's vital.

What has been the most rewarding experience so far as part of the Iowa FFP?

Working with Iowa FFP has been one of the most fun experiences I've ever had, and to call it work would be a shame. It’s easy to discuss with others what you are passionate about, and for me, it’s agriculture and growing up on a family farm. Making a connection is the most important thing for me; I love to learn a bit about everyone who will take an Iowa FFP cookbook home with them.

What is one key take-away you want consumers to know about Iowa farmers?

“Iowa Food & Family” Cookbook (1st edition) published.

AUG UST 201 4 50-ton sand sculpture welcomes fairgoers at the Iowa State Fair.

2015 A P R I L 201 5 “Iowa Food & Family” Cookbook (2nd edition) published.

MAY 201 5 “Make it and Take it” and “Recipe Refresh” piloted with Hy-Vee. S UMM E R 201 5 Des Moines and Beaverdale Farmers Markets offer summer venue to talk about Iowa FFP. J ULY 201 5

Iowa farm families are passionately committed to innovating, preserving resources and growing safe, nutritious food that not only feeds many families, but our own families as well.

Harvested 24,000 ears of sweet corn in less than three hours for distribution to families in need.

AUG UST 201 5 “Expedition Yetter” launches.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 2 1

Investing Checkoff Dollars

MAINTAINING YOUR VOICE Choice IN

FARMING

By Allison Arp

Seed treatment or in-season application? Aerial applicator or drill?

And possibly the most passionately debated farming choice, red or green?

Farmers now have more choices than ever when it comes to their operations, but the option for Iowa farmers to make those choices could be threatened.

Regulation is standard in some parts of the country, but here in Iowa, farmers are allowed to make their own data-based choices on what is best for their land and crops. Even though farmers make what they believe is the best choice for their land, sometimes those decisions are called into question. That’s when the data behind the decision becomes incredibly important. Fifteen years ago, the Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) formed the Environmental Programs and Services

(EPS) and On-Farm Network® teams.

Since then, both groups have collected data to help farmers make the tough choices.

The EPS team works throughout the year to collect water samples from all across the state in order to better understand resource issues, determine the progress of conservation practices and how practices can be improved.

From April to July of 2015, more than 2,800 water samples were collected and tested in ISA’s certified water lab.

“We collect samples for two main reasons,” explains Todd Sutphin, ISA EPS operations manager. “To give farmers a starting point or baseline and to track improvements once practices have been implemented.

Providing them with better information leads to better decision making.”

Sutphin says oftentimes farmers

2 2 | O C T O B E R 2 0 11 55 || SSO OY YB BE EA AN NR RE EV VIIEEW. W.C CO OM M

hear about the ongoing statewide water quality discussion but don’t know their local conditions or what is coming out of their tile line. Some think they’re doing everything right, but after testing they find out there is room for improvement. Testing offers a baseline number that can be compared to future samples after conservation practices have been implemented at the farm or watershed scale.

Another hot topic this growing season has been seed treatments.

While the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released a report stating that “these seed treatments provide little or no overall benefits to soybean production in most situations,” the On-Farm Network encourages farmers to test products on their own operations.

“Collecting and aggregating local

Investing Checkoff Dollars

data on topics relevant to farmers is more important than ever,” says Pat Reeg, ISA On-Farm Network director. “Testing the products on their farms allows producers to better understand the situations in which products such as seed treatments can benefit their crop.”

The On-Farm Network is currently studying three different seed treatments.

One is designed to control sudden death syndrome (SDS) and soybean cyst nematode (SCN), another is meant to control SCN severity and the third is a fungicide intended to control diseases like phytophthora and pythium root rot.

Next year, the team plans to test the SDS/SCN control product and is adding neonicotinoid seed treatments to its trial regimen. The trials conducted on neonicotinoid seed treatments will provide farmers with the necessary data to prove why having the choice to use these treatments is important for the success of the soybean industry.

Reeg said the On-Farm Network’s research may look at factors the EPA did not consider when conducting their analysis including early- or late-planted soybeans, situations in which soybean seeding rates are lowered and fields that have been planted into soybeans following a cover crop.

“The On-Farm Network analyzes many specific on-farm trials and takes into account production practices, environmental conditions, insect pressure and other factors to determine if and

when a seed treatment is beneficial to soybean production,” says Ed Anderson, Ph.D., ISA senior director of supply and production systems. “In order to be productive and profitable in environmentally sustainable ways, farmers need a variety of reliable tools.

If a neonicotinoid seed treatment passes through the regulatory process, and is determined to be an effective tool, it should be maintained as one of a diverse set of products and practices farmers can use.”

Water quality and the use of seed treatments aren’t the only issues for farmers in regards to regulation.

Everything from manure management to the use of pesticides has been involved in the conversation.

So how can farmers maintain their right to choose what works on their operations? Progressive thinking and research.

“You can sit back and let others tell you what to do on your farm or you can use the tools available today to determine for yourself the best choices,” Reeg says. “The On-Farm Network was established by innovative farmers who wanted scientifically sound tools and results to allow them to make datadriven decisions.”

Farmers looking to collect data to assist their decision-making are encouraged to visit isafarmnet.com to learn more about options available to them.

You can sit back and let others tell you what to do on your farm or you can use the tools available today to determine for yourself the best choices.

— PAT REEG, ISA On-Farm Network director O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 2 3

JANUARY

THE NINTH ANNUAL

29 KEYNOTE SPEAKERS

S H ER ATO N H OT EL | W ES T D ES M O I N ES

ABOUT THE EXPO As the Land Investment Expo, presented by Peoples Company, launches into its ninth year it does so being recognized as the nation’s premier farmland event. Attendees to the Ninth Annual Land Investment Expo will again be challenged with a wide range of thoughts, cutting-edge ideas and contrarian thinking. Expo attendees gain broader perspectives, learn new information and are challenged to “connect-the-dots” in their own way that advances their particular business interests.

This is the format that attendees have come to expect and that keeps them coming back year after year.

Scheduled for January 29, 2016, the more than 650 attendees, speakers, sponsors and media will converge on the West Des Moines Sheraton for an exciting day of learning, discussing, debating and networking. Each year farmers, business owners, academics, REITs, land developers, hedge funds, pension funds, endowments, family offices, bankers, policy experts, real estate professionals and others from around the Midwest and across the country gather to learn from, and interact with, each other.

Mary Matalin & James Carville Renowned Political Insider Odd-Couple

SCHEDULED SPEAKERS Dr. Mark Dotzour Chief Economist and Director of Research, Real Estate Center at Texas A&M University

With the Ninth Annual Land Investment Expo taking place just three days prior to the media circus referred to as the Iowa Presidential Caucuses, the Expo will undoubtedly catch the attention of national media and political pundits. With as many reporters looking for a story, as there are voters in Iowa, it’s always a spectacle.

Dennis Gartman Editor/Publisher, The Gartman Letter

The agenda for the Ninth Annual Land Investment Expo features an exciting array of expert speakers, 10 educational breakout sessions and 20 relevant trade show exhibitors. Conference goers will again face the challenge of choosing just two of the 10 breakout sessions covering a range of highly relevant topics and emerging trends important to the farmland asset class.

Benjamin J. Zaitz Managing Director, B. Zaitz & Sons

Save the date for January 29, and register now to gain a global perspective while taking in a groundlevel view at this robust, one-of-a-kind, ag conference in Iowa, the heart of American agriculture.

Please call Mollie Reilly (515-457-2127) at the West Des Moines Sheraton to make your reservations early. The hotel has limited space due to the Iowa Caucuses.

www.LandInvestmentExpo.com

Robert D. Saik, P. Ag., C.A.C. CEO, Agri-Trend Group of Companies

Bruce J. Sherrick, Ph.D. Professor & Director, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

PRESENTED BY

Investing Checkoff Dollars

EXAMINING WATER QUALITY EFFORTS IN IOWA AND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY

Stories by Matthew Wilde // Photos by Joe Murphy

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 2 5

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Chesapeake Bay Watershed:

8.5 Million acres of farmland

18 Million

AT

LA

NT

IC

OC

EA

NV

people

C H E SA P E A K E B AY WAT E R S H E D C H E SA P E A K E B AY

AUTHOR'S NOTE There were no gotcha moments.

No concrete proof that regulation is the best way to curb nonpoint source water pollution. Nor was there ironclad evidence that voluntary conservation efforts are the only way to do it.

Member Communications Manager Joe Murphy and I traveled to the Chesapeake Bay in late June to investigate water quality improvement efforts in the nation’s largest estuary (a mixture of fresh and salt water), the impact on agriculture and to compare and contrast that with ongoing work in Iowa.

We had no agenda. The only directives: Have an open mind and report the truth.

Six East Coast states and the District of Columbia have been trying for decades to solve the problem. Lawmakers instituted numerous mandates on agriculture 2 6 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

to force farmers to do their part.

The Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) wanted to find out what a regulatory system looks like and if it works. Then relay that information to members and all citizens.

The Chesapeake Bay is often brought up by Iowans as an example of how to deal with water pollution, both good and bad. Our state is battling its own water quality issues, exacerbated by the Des Moines Water Works unprecedented lawsuit against three northwest Iowa counties.

The utility alleges the counties allow nitrates from drainage districts under their control to pollute the Raccoon River, a primary source water, which are a health hazard and financial burden to rate payers.

Water Works officials, led by General Manager and CEO Bill Stowe, and some activist groups believe regulation and permits are the only way to solve the problem. They hope

the lawsuit brings that about, along with financial restitution.

ISA and other farm groups believe the two-year-old Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy, which mostly relies on voluntary conservation practices by farmers and landowners to improve water quality, is the best solution. Fortunately, so do the majority of Iowa legislators.

Here’s the BIG question: What is the best way to solve or at least mitigate water pollution?

Joe and I talked to more than a dozen farmers, government officials and environmental experts in the bay watershed and in Iowa to compare and contrast the regulatory and voluntary efforts to clean up the bay and its tributaries to Iowa’s voluntary strategy.

We thought we would find disgruntled bay area farmers who would say regulation is worse than sudden death syndrome in

Investing Checkoff Dollars

PRODUCES ABOUT 500 MILLION POUNDS of seafood per year

A B O U T 2 0 0 M I L E S LO N G A N D 4 TO 3 0 M I L E S W I D E , with an average depth

OF ABOUT 21 FEET

S U P P O R TS M O R E T H A N 2 ,70 0 S P E C I E S O F P L A N TS A N D A N I M A L S , 348 species of finfish and 173 species of shellfish

a soybean field. Or politicians and environmental experts who would exclusively sing the praises of regulation. Neither occurred, though farmers say regulations can be burdensome and costly.

What we learned is there’s no easy answers or quick fixes, and what might work in the bay area may not work in Iowa due to the vast differences in population, tax base, land use and scope and scale of agriculture. Regardless if the system is regulatory or voluntary, it often takes decades to improve water quality.

There are similarities and stark differences between issues in Iowa and the Chesapeake Bay. As Iowa ramps up water quality efforts, residents (especially farmers) can learn from brethren in the East who are decades into their fight with decades still to go.

Enjoy the journey.

THE BAY I

n some ways, the similarities are scary.

Water pollution has plagued the Chesapeake Bay for decades.

One of the planet’s first marine “dead zones,” an area where levels of dissolved oxygen are too low to sustain aquatic life, was discovered there in the 1970s.

The health of many Iowa rivers and streams have deteriorated over time as well. Iowa and other Midwestern states are considered major contributors to the hypoxia zone in the Gulf of Mexico.

Nitrate, phosphorous and sediment loading are the primary culprits. A myriad of reasons exist including land use changes, nutrient runoff from farm fields, urbanization and volatile weather.

John Lawrence, associate dean of Iowa State University’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and director of the Iowa Nutrient Research Center, says water quality problems in Iowa and the bay didn’t occur overnight and will take time to solve. Differences in population, funding, scope and scale of agriculture and hydrology mean different solutions will be needed.

“People should be prepared for a long process,” Lawrence says.

“There is no simple answer. The best solution in one part of the state won’t work in another, or across the country.”

Bay 101 The bay’s massive watershed encompasses parts of six states — Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania and New York — and the District of Columbia.

About 150 waterways drain into the bay including the Susquehanna River, which provides nearly 50 percent of its fresh water.

“The Chesapeake Bay is the heart and soul of the state of

JOHN LAWRENCE Associate dean of Iowa State University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and director of the Iowa Nutrient Research Center

People should be prepared for a long process. There is no simple answer. The best solution in one part of the state won’t work in another, or across the country.

Maryland (and the entire region),” says Maryland Secretary of the Environment Ben Grumbles.

Deteriorating bay health threatened the livelihood of fishermen, the ecosystem and recreational opportunities. Blue crab and oyster numbers dropped to alarming levels.

The 2009 Fisheries Economics of the U.S. Report by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration indicates that the commercial seafood industry in Maryland and Virginia contributed $3.39 billion in sales, $890 million in income, and almost 34,000 jobs to the local economy. Tourism generates hundreds of millions of dollars more.

“The bay is engrained in the culture, history and economy,” Grumbles adds. “We understand the value of the bay and clean water.”

According to the Chesapeake Bay Program, a regional partnership that leads and directs bay restoration and protection based in Annapolis, Md., it’s the first estuary in the nation to be targeted for restoration as an integrated watershed and ecosystem.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 2 7

Investing Checkoff Dollars

The first of several Chesapeake Bay agreements was signed in 1983 by states closest to the bay to reduce nutrient loads by 40 percent by the year 2000. Later agreements included the rest of the states in the watershed, each becoming more structured.

Early agreements imposed tougher requirements on point source contributors, like sewage treatment plants. But voluntary conservation measures and nutrient management were used to curb nonpoint source pollution.

Iowa is working to solve its nonpoint source water pollution issues largely through voluntary efforts. Steps outlined in the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy — a science-based initiative to reduce nitrate and phosphorous loads in Iowa waterways by 45 percent — farmers can take include installing bioreactors, planting cover crops, using nitrogen inhibitors, conservation tillage, wetland restoration and many others.

Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey is confident the strategy will work despite some already calling it a failure.

“We’re on the right track to get more practices on the ground that will improve water quality,” he says.

Game changer A pfiesteria outbreak in the late 1990s essentially ended an all-voluntary effort to reduce nonpoint source pollution in the bay, producers and environmental officials say. The organism associated with algae blooms

secreted fish-killing toxins and caused rashes on humans.

“That was a game changer,” says Royden Powell III, Maryland Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, Office of Resource Conservation.

The pfiesteria outbreak was initially blamed on the poultry industry for spreading too much phosphorous-laden manure on the land. It was never determined to be true, says Lynne Hoot, executive director of the Maryland Association of Soil Conservation Districts.

“We lost our votes on human health,” she adds.

Des Moines Water Works officials are using a similar tactic to evoke change in Iowa, saying high nitrate levels are a public health threat.

Maryland lawmakers in 1998 decided to require all farmers with a gross income of at least $2,500 to file nutrient plans, which dictates how much fertilizer can be used and when. Other regulations followed.

Other bay states followed Maryland’s lead to varying degrees imposing nutrient and conservation regulations on agriculture. Water quality in the bay did improve, but not fast or good enough.

“After nearly 20 years of partnerships … people were getting impatient not seeing the results we needed,” says Jon Capacasa, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 3 Water Protection Division director. “Part of the 2000 bay agreement was to set a deadline of 2010 to get the bay off the impaired waters list. If not, employ other tools.”

Urban and rural runoff are

ABOUT EQUALLY AT FAULT IN THE CHESAPEAKE BAY, research shows.

THE 64,000-SQUARE-MILE WATERSHED, which is about 10,000 square miles larger than Iowa, only has 8.5 MILLION acres of farmland.

Since 1950, records show

THE POPULATION IN THE WATERSHED HAS DOUBLED to nearly 18 MILLION.

Maryland Secretary of the Environment

BEN GRUMBLES Maryland Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, Office of Resource Conservation

ROYDEN POWELL III

Iowa:

30.7 Million acres of farmland

Bill Beam farm, Elverson, Pa.

3.1 Million people

Acres of farmland far outnumber people. The vast majority of the nutrient loading is attributed to agriculture.

2 8 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

Investing Checkoff Dollars

A marina on the Chesapeake Bay.

THE PROJECT of choice: A diet.

Taren’the tool People in the Chesapeake Bay eating less blue crabs, oysters or other specialties of the region.

Instead, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) put the bay on a “pollution diet.”

It became clear to state and environmental officials that the bay could not be removed from the federal government’s impaired waters list by 2010 despite extensive restoration efforts since the early ‘80s.

At the request of the seven watershed jurisdictions, the EPA established a total maximum daily load (TMDL), or pollution diet, in December of that year.

According to the Chesapeake Bay Program, the historic plan instituted “rigorous accountability measures to initiate sweeping actions to restore clean water” in the bay and the region’s streams, creeks and rivers.

It’s a key component to President Barack Obama’s Executive Order to restore and protect the estuary.

Specifically, the bay’s TMDL (a

combination of 92 smaller TMDLs for individual tidal segments) set watershed limits of 185.9 million pounds of nitrogen, 12.5 million pounds of phosphorous and 6.45 billion pounds of sediment per year — a reduction of 25 percent, 24 percent and 20 percent, respectively.

It’s the maximum amount of pollution the bay can receive to still meet water quality standards so it’s swimmable and fishable.

Jon Capacasa, EPA Region 3 Water Protection Division director, says the TMDL is not a regulation, but a target.

“The beauty of the TMDL is … we didn’t develop plans in a vacuum,” he says. “We allowed each state the latitude to develop their own implementation strategies.

“We’re here to call balls and strikes,” Capacasa continues. “You develop a strategy to meet the target and we’re going to hold you accountable to that.”

The TMDL is designed to ensure that all pollution control measures

needed to fully restore the bay and its tidal rivers are in place by 2025, with practices in place by 2017 to meet 60 percent of the overall nitrogen, phosphorous and sediment reductions. The EPA will assess progress at the 2017 milestone and adjust course if needed.

Each watershed jurisdiction developed their own Watershed Implementation Plans, affectionately called WIPs. They detail how and when pollution allocations will be met.

“It’s great for the states. It really helps people visualize how they will get there,” says Kelly Shenk, EPA Region 3 agricultural advisor.

The TMDL includes targeted “backstop allocations” for a few areas where WIPs aren’t met.

Noncompliance could mean EPA withholds funds, delays permits to restrict development, takes over permitting programs and increases oversight.

Several farm and other organizations challenged the validity

Several farm and other organizations KELLY SHENK EPA Region 3 agricultural advisor

challenged the validity of the bay TMDL in court, saying the EPA exceeded its authority by including deadlines and pollutant allocations.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 2 9

Investing Checkoff Dollars

of the bay TMDL in court, saying the EPA exceeded its authority by including deadlines and pollutant allocations.

In July, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of EPA. The court said it would be unfair if the entire burden of cleaning up the bay fell on pointsource polluters.

Iowa concerns Some environmentalists have suggested Iowa and other Midwest states regulate farmers like in the Chesapeake Bay watershed to solve the gulf’s hypoxia problem.

The recent court case reaffirming the legality of the TMDL has increased concerns from the farm community that may happen.

Capacasa says there’s no plans for the Chesapeake Bay TMDL model to be applied elsewhere, which could bring about more regulations.

“This is working for us in the bay region because it evolved out of earlier agreements, and the states asked us to take a role. I wouldn’t prejudge we will do it anywhere else,” he says.

Sen. Charles Grassley of New Hartford isn’t so sure. He says EPA overreached with its initial Waters of the United States rule that wasn’t favorable to agriculture

and the agency doesn’t have an appreciation for the family farm.

“I think you can see that (TMDL) coming to the Midwest, particularly in regards to the (Des Moines Water Works) lawsuit.

You need to be very concerned,” Iowa’s senior senator says.

Capacasa counters that the EPA is an active supporter of nutrient reduction since water pollution is a national challenge. He lauded the work of the Mississippi River Gulf of Mexico Watershed Nutrient Task Force, charged with reducing and controlling hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico.

“We’re just interested in results,” Shenk adds.

Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey, co-chair of the gulf hypoxia task force, says the voluntary approach of the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy has been praised by EPA Director Gina McCarthy and it's being used as a model by other Midwest states.

He says a regulatory scheme that would accompany a TMDL would be a pretty “heavy lift” in Iowa and other states due to the size and scope of agriculture and funding availability.

“Even some of the successes people think they’ve had in the Chesapeake Bay with regulations wouldn’t scale very well to the Iowa landscape.” Northey says.

I think you can see that (TMDL) coming to the Midwest, particularly in regards to the (Des Moines Water Works) lawsuit. You need to An Amish farmer works a field in Pennsylvania.

be very concerned.

— SEN. CHARLES GRASSLEY, New Hartford

3 0 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

BILL BEAM Chairman of the United Soybean Board's Freedom to Operate Committee and chairman of the Pennsylvania Soybean Checkoff Board

THE STATES A

combination of regulations and voluntary conservation practices and programs are on the plate of Chesapeake Bay states on a “pollution diet.”

Some require mandatory nutrient management plans. Iowa does too for large confined animal feeding operations (CAFOS), but Maryland, Delaware and Virginia make it so almost every farm needs one and they’re much more prescriptive.

In Pennsylvania, nutrient management plans are mandated for CAFOs and confined animal operations. Manure management plans are needed for smaller livestock operations (80 to 90 percent of animal operations in the Pennsylvania portion of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed) or for farmers that buy and use manure for fertilizer. Cover crops are required for CAFOs if manure is applied in the fall, spring or winter. The seeding rate is a mandatory 120 pounds per acre regardless if lesser amounts are just as effective.

“It can be a bit cumbersome, but not overly burdensome,” says Bill Beam, who farms near Elverson, Pa. Soil and manure tests are often mandated. Restrictions on where, when and how much nutrients can be applied are common. However, some rules don’t factor in weather, yield variability and genetic improvements, which can cost farmers bushels and money and put them at a competitive disadvantage.

Some states heavily subsidize voluntary conservation practices like cover crops and manure storage structures.

“In the Chesapeake Bay region, although we have an accountability framework called the TMDL (total maximum daily load), the guts of the

Investing Checkoff Dollars

A bridge crossing the Chesapeake Bay.

Iowa Legislature this year approved $9.6 million

LYNNE HOOT

Executive director of the Maryland Association of Soil Conservation Districts

strategies are a combination of regulatory and nonregulatory tools,” says Jon Capacasa, EPA Region 3 Water Protection Division director.

Here’s two state examples:

Maryland The state provides the greatest amount of funding to implement voluntary conservation practices and has the most aggressive agricultural regulations to meet TMDL goals, bay area officials concede.

“Maryland is an environmental leader protecting the bay,” says Ben Grumbles, Maryland Secretary of the Environment.

Almost all farms in the state are required to have a nutrient management plan (eight horses qualifies). Preparers must be state certified.

An annual two-page report is submitted to the Department of Agriculture in March summarizing plan implementation the previous year. For example, a soybean and corn farmer must: • Provide total acres.

• Submit yields.

• Record the amount of nitrogen, potassium and phosphorous from commercial or organic sources applied to each crop on each field, and prove it with receipts, if applicable.

• Follow recommended fertilizer application rates based on University of Maryland recommendations, historic yields and need.

• Conduct a soil analysis at least every three years.

“If farmers use fertilizer outside of university guidelines, they are outside of compliance,” says Lynne Hoot, executive director of the Maryland Association of Soil Conservation Districts.

The fine for a first offense is $250 if

for water quality initiatives.

corrective measures aren’t taken. If a farmer refuses to comply, such as having a plan written (it can be done for free) or send in a report, fines can escalate.

Ten percent of the plans are audited every year. Farmers can adjust nutrient amounts by up to 10 percent and still be in compliance if noted in the plan.

A certified consultant can make greater revisions that fall within requirements of the law.

Maryland, like Iowa, has a long list of voluntary best management practices (BMPs) to improve water quality such as animal waste storage, conservation tillage, grass buffers, etc.

Lawmakers appropriate about $20 million a year to make sure the vast majority of row crop acres are planted in cover crops, an estimated 750,000 acres this fall. The average benefit is $50 per acre.

Without that type of monetary support, Hoot and other state officials are skeptical if Maryland could meet its goals.

“The cover crop program, for pounds of nutrients saved, is the most cost effective program we have,” Hoot says.

In comparison, the Iowa Legislature this year approved $9.6 million for water quality initiatives. A portion will provide $25 in cost share for new cover crop users per acre and $15 for past users, up to 160 acres. An estimated 400,000 to 500,000 acres of cover crops (roughly 2 percent of Iowa’s row crop acres) were planted last year in Iowa, according to Iowa Secretary of Agriculture Bill Northey.

Delaware Delaware Secretary of Agriculture Ed Kee says the state’s Nutrient Management Commission, made up of

farmers, environmental groups, state agencies and public health officials, crafted regulations to benefit the environment and agriculture.

Examples include: • A nutrient management plan is required for any farm of 10 acres or more. Elements include crop mix, yield goals, irrigation or no irrigation, type of fertilizer, tillage, etc.

• Nutrients are applied in accordance with university recommendations, yield goals, historic production and current soil fertility.

• Nutrients can’t be applied from Dec. 7-Feb. 15.

• Phytase is required in all poultry feed to reduce phosphorous content in manure.

• Manure must be analyzed for nutrient content.

• Plan writers must be certified.

“Our philosophy is regulation through education,” Kee says. “We do have regulations, but the reason they have worked is it’s primarily a farmer commission and other farmers have faith in it and the goals.”

Two thousand of Delaware’s 2,500 farms file nutrient management plans.

The state has less than 400,000 acres of soybeans and corn, but 216 million broilers.

Finding a home for 300,000350,000 tons of poultry litter a year is challenging, Kee says. To keep too much manure from being applied, which can cause excess phosphorous to get in the water, Delaware pays farmers 19 cents per ton per mile to transport litter to where it can be used safely.

“It’s all part of the story in improving water quality in the Chesapeake Bay,” Kee says.

The state also offers some cost share of BMPs, but not to the extent of Maryland.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 3 1

Investing Checkoff Dollars

RICHARD WILKINS Greenwood, Del., farmer and first vice president of the American Soybean Association

THE PEOPLE T

o some Chesapeake Bay farmers, regulations are no big deal.

Others say they’re a financial burden, but not to the point they’ve put people out of business. Some producers claim they provide little or no agronomic or environmental advantage.

Farmers rattle off benefits and pitfalls of rules meant to restore a local and national treasure, which many agree is slowly occurring.

“Certainly the bay is a treasure,” says Richard Wilkins of Greenwood, Del., first vice president of the American Soybean Association (ASA). “For those of us who live (and farm) here, we recognize that.”

Wilkins planted his first soybean crop during the Nixon Administration. He raises 1,800 acres of soybeans, corn, wheat, vegetables, forage and some cattle on the DelMarVa Peninsula.

He knows farming and ag policy inside and out. While regulations are undesirable and costly, Wilkins says they’re manageable and part of doing business.

“All the things we are doing under our (required) nutrient management plan are all sound agronomic practices I would be doing anyway. I just have to pay extra for it,” he says.

Eight dollars per acre to be exact.

That’s the cost of a certified

consultant to take and analyze soil samples and write and submit an annual nutrient management plan to the state.

Wilkins says he was already doing many of the agronomic practices required in his plan to ensure every acre got just the amount of fertilizer needed for optimum, not maximum, yields. Now, he has to pay for what he was already doing.

“There’s no extra economic benefit,” he adds.

The plan and information, after cost share help, costs about $8,000.

“When corn is $3.50, and margins are squeezed, that could be the difference between profitability and curtailing family living expenses,” says Wilkins, who will assume ASA’s helm in December.

Since Wilkins buys and applies about 2,000 tons of poultry litter a year — the peninsula is home to hundreds of millions of broilers — to displace most commercial fertilizer, he must follow storage, testing and application rules.

Making sure excess nutrients, like phosphorous, aren’t applied is a good thing, Wilkins says.

“A blessing is now farmers are more proactive and adaptive of technologies that improve nutrient use,” he adds.

However, Wilkins says

3 2 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

basing nutrient application rates on past yields and Extension recommendations, which he already followed, can be troublesome.

“During drought years, when yields are low, nutrients are based on that, which can leave bushels on the table during good weather years,” he says.

Bill Beam and Tim Kurtz — Pennsylvania Beam is a third-generation farmer from Elverson, Pa., located in the southeast corner of the state near the top of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. He farms 3,900 acres of soybeans, corn, wheat and hay, along with a few cattle.

As chairman of the United Soybean Board’s Freedom to Operate Committee and chairman of the Pennsylvania Soybean Checkoff Board, Beam keeps a watchful eye on regulatory efforts at home and across the country.

Pennsylvania has far fewer rules than other states in the watershed, especially for row crops, he says. But rules have become stricter in recent years and he expects that will continue.

“What I deal with is very minor compared to my livestock friends,” he continues.

Kurtz, Beam’s neighbor, recently built a new robotic dairy operation for 230 Holsteins. To modernize

Investing Checkoff Dollars

JOE LAYTON Former ASA director from Vienna, Md.

HANS SCHMIDT Farmer and president of the Maryland Soybean Board from Sudlersville, Md.

TIM KURTZ Farmer from Elverson, Pa.

and expand, Kurtz says he had to jump through numerous zoning and engineering hoops, comply with costly manure storage and handling rules and manage storm water runoff.

“It’s probably a limiting factor as far as livestock expansion in Pennsylvania,” Kurtz says.

Since Beam and Kurtz use manure for fertilizer, they have to hire a consultant to write a nutrient or manure management plan, which includes fall soil tests. Beam says it costs $8 per acre.

“I see it as good, sound business and doing the right thing by utilizing BMPs (best management practices),” Beam says. “Pennsylvania, in my opinion, hasn’t got to the point where it has financially hurt farmers.”

Joe Layton and Hans Schmidt — Maryland Farming within what are arguably the most stringent guidelines in the country is both good and bad, Layton and Schmidt say. Both farm on the DelMarVa Peninsula.

The farmers agree regulations, for the most part, benefit water quality and help some producers be more efficient. But there are drawbacks.

Layton, a former ASA director, farms 1,250 acres of row crops, wheat and grapes near Vienna. He’s certified to write his own nutrient management

plan. Most of the requirements he was already doing.

He pulls a thick three-ring binder from a shelf. It’s filled with field maps showing soil tests, yield goals, acres, the amount of nitrogen and phosphorous allowed and applied and fertilizer receipts to prove it.

“The nutrient management plans didn’t bother me but it did some people,” Layton says. “I find it advantageous because I can see right away what can be changed or improved.”

But requirements have a price.

Layton has a three-year crop rotation.

Sometimes he’s required to use 15-yearold corn yields when setting nutrient rates.

“I lost 15 bushels on my average (during the past decade),” he says due to dry years and genetic improvements.

“When we had so much opportunity in agriculture, I did not do too well.”

Another requirement he and Schmidt have heartburn over is incorporating manure within 48 hours.

Schmidt, President of the Maryland Soybean Board, farms about 2,000 acres of row crops, vegetables, grapes and hay near Sudlersville. He spreads about 2 tons of chicken litter per acre, which is far cheaper than commercial fertilizer and better for the environment.

“We would prefer to be totally no-till.

It’s better for soil health,” Schmidt says.

“When you incorporate, you disturb the top soil and it’s much more vulnerable to erosion from major rain events.”

When corn is $3.50, and margins are squeezed, that could be the difference between profitability and curtailing family living expenses.

Wilkins describes the cost of a mandatory nutrient management plan.

Hans Schmidt and other farmers use GreenSeeker in the Chesapeake Bay to apply just the right amount of nitrogen to corn. Sensors on the application bar take real-time readings of plants to do so.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 3 3

Investing Checkoff Dollars

South River Federation workers conduct a stream assessment in Annapolis, Md.

THE PROGRESS R

estoring the health of the Chesapeake Bay may prove to be a century-long process, regardless of agricultural regulations in place.

Environmental and state officials tasked with improving water quality in the bay say it may be another 30 years or more before goals are met even after decades of work. Experts concede farmers for the most part are holding up their end, but reductions in nonpoint source pollution are often being offset by urban sectors.

The five-year anniversary of the bay total maximum daily load (TMDL), which forced states to ratchet up efforts and tighten rules to meet pollution targets, is in December.

Is it working?

Some believe it is, albeit very slowly.

Others aren’t so sure.

“We’re making progress in reducing nitrogen (and other pollutants) but not as much as we would like,” says Nick DiPasquale, director of the Chesapeake Bay Program. In late June, he provided a progress report to about 200 bay watershed stakeholders in Annapolis, Md. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official said cleanup efforts essentially started in the mid-‘80s. Results have been up and down since then, as some three-year water quality reporting periods are better than others due to a variety of reasons such as the weather, population and land use changes.

A straight line analysis shows a positive trend in the percentage of water quality standards met from 1985-2013, according to the program.

Standards regressed slightly, though, during the latest assessment.

“We’re on our way to meeting standards. By 2025, will we meet (them)? No, it will take time,” DiPasquale says. “It could be decades later before we have total compliance to the water quality standards. It does take a while for point sources and even longer for nonpoint sources.”

Other indicators of bay health are mixed.

Three major rivers in the watershed showed long-term reductions in nutrient and sediment concentrations, data shows. Yet the size and severity of the bay’s dead zone hasn’t changed.

The number of spawning-age female blue crabs fell by 53 percent in 2014 to an estimated 68.5 million, but juvenile striped bass numbers are up.

We’re on our way to meeting standards. By NICK DIPASQUALE Director of the Chesapeake Bay Program 3 4 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

2025, will we meet (them)? No, it will take time.

It could be decades later before we have total compliance to the water quality standards.

Investing Checkoff Dollars

According to data, 28.38 PERCENT of the water quality standards for dissolved oxygen, water clarity/underwater grasses and chlorophyll a in the bay and its tidal rivers were met in 1985-1987. The high point was 1999-2001 at 40.68 PERCENT.

Water Quality Standards Attainment (%) 1985-2012 Water Quality Standards Attainment (%) 1985-2012

An inlet in the Chesapeake Bay.

80 60 40 20

Farmers stepping up Environmental experts are optimistic the bay will recover despite sporadic success.

Officials say there is a lag time for best management practices to work and it takes cooperation among all stakeholders and states. DiPasquale and others contend Pennsylvania needs to do more to stop pollutants from entering the bay or face consequences, like funding being withheld.

“Farmers and partners in Maryland are absolutely improving water quality,” says Ben Grumbles, the state’s secretary of the environment. “The rub is if you look at the bay as a receiving ground for six states, the challenges for 17 million people and how to keep making progress if upstream polluters and lifestyle choices are increasingly putting the bay at risk.”

Delaware Secretary of Agriculture Ed Kee says farmers in his state are doing their part. After 15 years of voluntary and regulatory efforts, nutrient loading in the state’s waterways has dropped by 40 percent.

“Even the most ardent environmentalist recognizes agriculture has taken huge steps and will continue to do so,” he adds. “The fact is, 100 acres of farmland is better than 100 acres of homes or shopping centers.”

2011-13

2009-11

2007-09

2005-07

2003-05

2001-03

1999-01

1997-99

1995-97

1993-95

1991-93

1989-91

1987-89

1985-87

0

Progress is being made to curb water pollution in Iowa, Agriculture Secretary Bill Northey contends. Even though the latest Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy Progress Report doesn’t say how much of the 45 percent reduction of nitrates and phosphorous has been achieved — it eventually will, Northey says — it does show engagement.

There are 16 targeted Water Quality Initiative demonstration projects in the state, cover crop use is up and more bioreactors, wetlands and other practices are going in. Urban and rural partnerships are being formed.

The latest Iowa Farm and Rural Life Poll indicates the majority of farmers are aware and support the strategy.

And an Iowa Soybean Association (ISA)-AgriPulse survey conducted in August of 153 Iowa soybean farmers found that while a majority of respondents plan to reduce rent, seed, fertilizer and equipment expenses in 2016, many also plan to invest more resources in conservation practices.

“I’m pleased with awareness and the ownership of agriculture — not just ag organizations like ISA but individual farmers,” says John Lawrence, associate dean of ISU’s College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and director of the Iowa Nutrient Research Center. “Before you can see a change in the land, you need a change in the human.”

3-Yr Period 1985-87

AreaWeighted 28.38

1986-88

28.62

1987-89

25.20

1988-90

23.22

1989-91

23.21

1990-92

23.94

1991-93

29.02

1992-94

31.77

1993-95

30.76

1994-96

32.69

1995-97

36.49

1996-98

33.86

1997-99

36.78

1998-00

35.04

1999-01

40.68

2000-02

40.06

2001-03

35.29

2002-04

35.75

2003-05

30.51

2004-06

30.16

2005-07

31.61

2006-08

34.73

2007-09

30.92

2008-10

40.01

2009-11

29.80

2010-12

31.15

2011-13

28.93

Since the TMDL was instituted, water quality achievement standards in the bay were 40.1 percent in 2008-10, 29.8 percent in 2009-2011, 31.15 percent in 2010-2012 and 28.93 percent in 2011-2013.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 3 5

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Iowa connection Northey says bay cleanup efforts and results prove what he and other Iowa farm and environmental leaders have been saying all along: Curbing water pollution, especially from nonpoint sources, takes time and cooperation.

The Spirit Lake farmer says expecting regulations to cure everything is naive. It doesn’t work that way, he says. A concerted effort to get conservation practices on the ground will do more to move the needle than a lawsuit, he says.

“We have to change people’s minds, create investment and change what is being done in the field. And that will change the water,” Northey says.

Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy opponents say it’s a failure after two years. Yet, after nearly five years with the TMDL in place, the bay isn’t clean or close to it.

“Maybe regulations don’t work,” Northey quipps. “It’s important to share that. There are people who think regulations are a magic potion that fixes everything overnight.

“We’re dealing with a very complex biological system: hydrology, drainage, weather, soil, crops. All the different pieces may not even allow us to get to the numbers we want,” he adds.

Like the Chesapeake Bay, pollutants in Iowa waterways such as nitrates have worsened during

the last century. Overall water quality ebbs and flows, mostly with the weather. However, there are indications efforts are working.

Depending on the time period, peer reviewed ISA research shows average nitrate concentrations in the Raccoon River haven’t increased as critics of the strategy claim. At Sac City, data indicates average nitrate concentrations in the Raccoon have significantly trended lower from 1998-2012 (about 15 milligrams per liter to about 9 mg/l). From 19982014, the trend is lower as well but not statistically significant.

Weather-driven nitrate spikes in the Raccoon have occurred the past two years forcing Des Moines Water Works to run its denitrification facility, and will likely occur in the future. But it sat idle from 2007-2012.

Due to Iowa’s organically-rich soil — every acre contains 10,000 pounds of nitrogen, on average, according to ISU — Northey says water works will still need a denitrification facility even if the strategy’s goals are met since it uses river water.

Roger Wolf, director of ISA’s Environmental Programs and Services, says Iowa needs to be “all in” to curb water pollution. Building trust that voluntary practices are working will take time like in the Chesapeake.

“To improve water quality, it will require public support,” Wolf says.

We’re dealing with a very complex biological system: hydrology, drainage, weather, soil, crops. All the different pieces may not even allow us to get to the numbers we want.

BILL NORTHEY Iowa Secretary of Agriculture

Wheat harvest in Maryland.

A Maryland farmer plants soybeans in a recently harvested wheat field.

3 6 | O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S O Y B E A N R E V I E W. C O M

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Skunk River in central Iowa.

THE FUTURE E

arning the public’s trust that voluntary conservation efforts to improve water quality in Iowa is the best solution won’t be easy. But the Iowa Soybean Association (ISA) and its members are up to the challenge.

Roger Wolf, ISA’s director of Environmental Programs and Services, and other environmental experts say farmers and landowners have to increase the pace and scale of practice implementation and monitoring to avoid Chesapeake Bay-like regulations. That will take funding, and lots of it.

To fully implement the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy, Iowa State University officials estimate it will cost $4 billion upfront to build and maintain enough practices like wetlands and bioreactors to meet its goals. Or, $1.2 billion initially and $1.2 billion annually for structures and cover crops to do the job.

It's not unthinkable given the

value of farmland and annual ag sales statewide — estimated at nearly $250 billion and $30 billion, respectively. Realistically, Wolf says the chances the Iowa Legislature authorizing that kind of expenditure or even half that for cost share is slim to none given Iowa’s tax base.

“Some want to regulate our way to success rather than invest our way to success,” Wolf says. “Given what we’ve learned from the history of the bay and Iowa’s unique situation, the latter is better.”

Iowa Rep. Lee Hein, a Republican from Monticello and a farmer, supported an ISA-backed bill last year to provide targeted income tax credits for conservation work. He’s optimistic it will pass during the upcoming session.

Raising taxes is tough in Iowa, he says. He doesn’t think conservation funding will increase anytime soon.

Hein believes the majority of the

legislature believes in the strategy as he does and want to give it time to work. But some lawmakers want regulation.

“As an ag man that understands the issue, I think things are working quite well,” Hein says. “(But) one thing I’ve learned in the legislature is no matter if you think an issue is a no-brainer, there’s somebody 180 degrees from your thinking. This issue is a perfect example.”

What is the best approach?

Michelle Perez of the World Resources Institute in Washington, D.C., a nonprofit global research organization that turns big ideas into action, says it remains to be seen whether a voluntary or a regulatory approach or a combination of the two offers the best options to solve water quality problems.

Some want to regulate our way to success rather than invest our way to success. Given what we’ve learned from the history of the bay and Iowa’s unique situation, the latter is better.

ROGER WOLF Director of ISA's Environmental Programs and Services

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 3 7

Investing Checkoff Dollars

MICHELLE PEREZ World Resources Institute in Washington D.C.

Nobody wants ‘aggressive regulations’ that don’t work. A nutrient plan as a regulatory tool has a lot of challenges.

An expert in environmental policy, her current focus is U.S. water quality, particularly the Mississippi River basin.

“I try to find ways to improve existing voluntary programs and concentrate funds using a targeted approach to improve water quality,” Perez says. “It’s a win-win. Farmers achieve good conservation on their fields, which often helps save them money and reduce risk while they’re participating in a larger stream cleanup effort with their farmer neighbors.”

Perez’s 2010 doctoral dissertation basically asked the question: “What happens when you try to regulate

farmers?” It focused on evaluating the effectiveness of nutrient management plan regulations in Maryland, Delaware and Virginia.

She says regulatory policy discussions clouded conversations concerning sound science and a good targeted policy approach. Some policymakers used rhetoric offensive to the farming community and pointed fingers. The media largely used inflammatory language that painted all farmers as bad actors. And most farmers defended themselves by saying they were judicious with fertilizer even though poultry manure application rates at the time often resulted in four times more than needed to grow corn.

In the smaller Chesapeake Bay states with lots of resources, she says regulations like nutrient plans are difficult to enforce. In Iowa, with 20 times more row crop acres than Maryland and a much smaller tax base, the challenges are much greater.

Even if Iowa had the political appetite to implement some sort of regulatory goal, Perez says there has to be buy-in to the policy from the farming community, sufficient boots on the ground to provide technical assistance, cost-share funding and a regulation that is easy to detect compliance with and enforce to make it work.

“Folks shouldn’t be calling for regulations … if they can’t address these basic questions that increase the likelihood a regulatory approach will

be effective. Nobody wants ‘aggressive regulations’ that don’t work,” Perez says. “A nutrient plan as a regulatory tool has a lot of challenges.”

In regards to Iowa, Perez thinks the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy is not yet translating the big plan into workable, implementable actions on the ground that people can track and measure progress in a timely fashion.

The strategy kind of resembles early Chesapeake Bay agreements, she says.

“What Iowa doesn’t want to do is take 30 years to get really good planning and monitoring efforts in place,” Perez adds. “It needs to leapfrog the failed policy approaches of the bay area and instead take the good elements and lessons learned and implement them, setting timelines for how to measure progress being made to achieve the Iowa ag goal of a 41 percent reduction in nitrogen and a 29 percent reduction in phosphorous.”

If states are going to tackle water quality problems either with a voluntary, a regulatory or a combined approach, Perez offered a few recommendations: • LISTEN to the problems some

farmers say they may be having with specific best management practices (BMP), take them seriously and work together to address them.

• EMPHASIZE BMPs that will not

only help the environment but improve production and save money.

A bioreactor was installed in July near Eddyville. One of many edge-of-field best management practices Iowa farmers use to reduce nitrate loading in waterways.

3 8 | O C T O B E R 2 0 11 5 5 || SSO OY YB BE EA AN NR RE EV VIIE EW. W.C CO OM M

Investing Checkoff Dollars

Prioritize cost-share funds for BMPs that only have environmental benefits and little to no in-field economic benefits.

• WORK in targeted watersheds to

achieve measurable improvements in priority streams, rivers and lakes. Concentrate resources in places with the greatest need, like the Raccoon River or other places with significant drinking water, recreational or wildlife value.

Still, there are no guarantees.

“Simply having a big 45 percent reduction goal for hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico may not result in cleaner streams. People have to come to grips with that,” Perez says. “The only way you accomplish measurable cleaner streams is through targeted watershed projects (which Iowa is doing).”

The “R” word Ray Gaesser of Corning believes in the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy. As past president of the ISA and American Soybean Association, he has traveled to the bay area many times and talked to regulators, politicians and fellow farmers about the dreaded “R” word.

“The fear is regulations will be made by people who don’t understand agriculture, which are too constrictive, curtail production and

revenues and are not sustainable,” Gaesser says. “As my friends in the Chesapeake have learned, government doesn’t always know what’s best.”

Many farmers and regulators in the bay hope Iowa’s strategy works.

But without specific timetables, milestones and accountability, they’re skeptical it will.

Even Delaware Secretary of Agriculture Ed Kee, who says it’s ridiculous that some are already defining Iowa’s nutrient strategy as a failure, thinks some sort of regulation is inevitable.

“I don’t think any state with water quality issues that’s related to agriculture can duck some level of regulation,” Kee says. “The trick is for ag to lead and convey to other communities what’s acceptable and rely on science to know what will work to make an impact.

“Develop programs that are educational and incentive based,” he adds. “I think it’s going to be a longer road without the stick and the carrot.”

Gaesser agrees, saying Iowa farmers need to do more to improve water quality and prepare themselves for the inevitable.

“Regulations probably are coming,” he says. “It’s a matter of time. As farmers we need to be proactive and find practical ways to improve water quality and soil health.”

I don’t think any state with water quality issues that’s related to agriculture can duck some level of regulation.

ED KEE Delaware Secretary of Agriculture

For expanded stories, photos and exclusive videos examining water quality efforts in Iowa and the Chesapeake Bay, visit:

www.iasoybeans.com/ ContrastingCurrents

RAY GAESSER

Regulations probably

ASA chairman and past ISA Farmer from Corning, Iowa

are coming. It’s a matter of time. As farmers we need to be proactive and find practical ways to improve water quality and soil health.

O C T O B E R 2 0 1 5 | S OY B E A N R E V I E W. C O M | 3 9

LibertyLink® varieties provide growers high-yielding options with greater weed control for high yields you will see at harvest.

The high yield that LibertyLink varieties deliver is protected and assured by the Liberty® weed management system. Liberty kills tough weeds that erode high yield, providing clean fields to ensure varieties reach their full yield potential.

Let NuTech Seed Be Your CHOICE for LibertyLink® Soybeans!

WITH LIBERTY®

WITHOUT LIBERTY®

© 8/2015 NuTech Seed, LLC. LibertyLink®, Liberty® and the Water Droplet logo are registered trademarks of Bayer.

800.942.6748

www.yieldleader.com