5/18/17

Bill Stowe, Director of the Des Moines Water Works stated, “We do not feed the world.” Many in Iowa would take issue with Stowe’s contention.  Iowa is the “Corn State,” but the type of corn that is grown is not directly edible by humans. The majority of the corn produced is converted into ethanol, which is then used as gasoline for cars and other modes of transportation. Another significant percentage of the corn crop is used as feed for farm animals such as chickens, cattle, and pigs. However contrarian the nature of Stowe’s quote, farm animals are considered food for humans. So, the corn that is grown in Iowa is indirectly consumed by humans. In my opinion, Iowa does feed the world, just not in the same sense that Bill Stowe was implying. Iowa’s corn is not sent to grocery stores and placed with sweet corn to be sold for eating, which was Stowe’s train of thought. However, if Iowa halted on the amount of corn that they currently produce, the United States, as well as other countries such as China would have a dramatic decrease in food that was available to humans.

A lot of pressure has been placed on Des Moines Water Works lately because of a history of disagreements between the utility and the Water Drainage Districts in three Northwestern Counties whose waters drain into the Raccoon River, one of two rivers that provide drinking water to the Des Moines region.  On one side of the argument, farmers believe that proper methods and procedures are being employed to manage the nutrients they are applying to their farm land; no further regulations are necessary.  From the Water Works’ point of view, farmers are polluting Des Moines’s water source with nitrates, creating hazardous water that is dangerous for consumption. I personally have difficulty in trying to decide which argument is the more compelling one. I believe that farmers should be able to choose how they manage their agriculture, but I also want a safer environment that involves fewer nitrates polluting waterways as well as the Gulf of Mexico. Somehow, a common ground must be met for any progress to be made in water quality.

To promote this common ground, this could mean establishing regulations on the amount of fertilizers farmers spray onto their crops. It could also provide farmers with a reimbursement if they do not produce the same quantity of yield after lowering the amount of fertilizer they use. However, the main problem I see is the fact that neither side is willing to adapt to changes. Kevin Butt, a professor at Ellsworth Community College, explained to us that the amount of fertilizer he sprays onto his crops is not one of the main factors in the pollution of water. At the same time, those working at Water Works believe that the majority of nitrates in Des Moines water is the direct result of fertilizer runoff from agriculture. Both sides feel very strongly towards their opinions, making this common ground establishment extremely difficult. As our adventure in Iowa continues, I hope to discover ways that farmers and political figures can work together to create means of protecting our environment as well as its people.