In early September, Matt Bormann attended a field day and visited with three other farmers about practices such as cover crops and reduced tillage.
“None of them had done anything like that, and they were really curious,” said Bormann, who farms near Algona, Iowa, and is a member of the conservation farmer trio “The Lobe Rangers.” “They were like, ‘We think we’re going to be regulated in the next 10 years, and we need to get ahead of the curve.’”
More regulation?
Nutrient regulation already occurs, as livestock producers of certain sizes must have manure management plans.
Yet concern exists that more regulation may loom as a way to improve Iowa’s water quality.
Goals in the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy should remain voluntary, given the uniqueness of the land and differences among farms and soils, said Kirk Leeds, CEO of the Iowa Soybean Association.
“Here's the challenge that I ask to anybody who wants to bring a regulation: Tell me a regulation that we can afford to do that doesn't bankrupt Iowa agriculture and farmers that's actually going to improve water quality,” Leeds said. “It’s one thing to regulate something. It's another thing to actually have regulations that are not only doable, but actually improve water quality. Our organization is not interested in regulations that check a box and give social license, but that do not solve the problem.”
So, what will move the needle?
Farmers such as “The Lobe Rangers,” and farmers and conservation agronomists with whom Leeds works at the ISA, he said.
“We need people teaching farmers how to do it,” Leeds said. “We're doing what I think is the necessary research to show farmers that if you're patient, willing to try things and even make some mistakes, that long term, the quality of the soil will be better, soil health will be better, and [soil] organic matter will be better. And in the process, farmers will see better water quality.”
Incentives and disincentives
Rather than regulations, The Lobe Rangers support a series of incentives and disincentives to drive change, starting with crop insurance. The federal government pays about 60% of premiums on average, and farmers pay about 40%, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
One proposal from The Lobe Rangers is akin to conservation compliance in the 1985 Farm Bill, when farmers needed to adopt conservation practices to farm highly erodible land.
“There are virtually zero contingencies tied to crop insurance,” said Zack Smith, a Lobe Ranger who farms near Lake Mills, Iowa. “If we started saying, ‘Farmer, if you want to earn the subsidy, then you should do things that don't increase costs or negative outcomes for the rest of society who help fund your crop insurance premium.’ If there was a real cost to noncompliance, that would change behavior.”