When it's done correctly, zoning solves problems. But if we screw it up, we could bring a whole host of new problems upon ourselves — like costly lawsuits that Iowa's counties simply cannot afford.

Before we get into the nuts and bolts of how agricultural zoning should be implemented in Iowa, we need to talk more about why it's needed. More Inside.

We need to recognize that local control of agricultural zoning, while a step forward, is not going to solve all of Iowa's problems.

Consider California, the top producer of agricultural products in the United States. That state has county-level control of agricultural zoning, and it continues to lead the nation in many aspects of agriculture. But California still has problems.

Despite California's county-by-county local control of agricultural zoning, significant problems exist in its ag economy. According to a report from the International Society for Ecology and Culture, California agriculture is dominated by large corporate agribusinesses. To quote a portion of the report, "in California today, large agribusinesses dominate every sector of the food economy…Today, just 1 percent of California producers supplies 38 percent of the state's total agricultural production; just three companies control 57 percent of the huge food retail market in California."

Clearly, it won't solve everything. Nonetheless, Iowa needs to institute agricultural zoning.

As we move forward, we need to focus on the purpose of zoning. We need agricultural land-use planning at the county level in Iowa to determine precisely which areas of each county should be set aside and separated from full-scale, modern livestock production. There is a right place and a wrong place for livestock in every county in Iowa, as long as we have strong, statewide environmental protection standards.

That's how industrial development has been done in Iowa for decades, and it works. The line between agriculture and industry has become increasingly gray in recent years, and we ought to start treating them in a similar fashion.

If state legislators move forward with this as their guiding principle — that the main purpose of zoning is to keep incompatible land uses separated — I think Iowans will be happy with the results.

Iowa legislators need to have a public debate on how land-use planning can help farmers operate more harmoniously with their neighbors. We need to hear more discussion about how zoning can help save Iowa's valuable farmland from urban sprawl. And let's all think about Iowa's crucial role in the production of renewable fuels and what that industry might bring to rural Iowa in the coming years.

We also need to hear more debate about how county-level agricultural zoning fits into efforts to protect the environment. This is where there seems to be the most significant disagreement.

One point to consider: Watersheds don't begin and end along county lines, so why would we want different sets of regulations covering various parts of a watershed? I believe that after a rigorous public debate on this subject, most thoughtful people will come to the conclusion that environmental regulations should be statewide and they should be administered at the state level. And they need to be strengthened.

Undoubtedly, county agricultural zoning would play an important role in protecting our environment, but only if it fits into and enhances the larger set of statewide natural resource regulations. Zoning should be used to keep large-scale livestock operations from being built in environmentally sensitive areas — but conversely, zoning should be used to determine areas that are well-suited to raising livestock.

So how should legislators begin the process of instituting county-level zoning for agriculture?

First, they might want to take a look at this:
Click diagram to enlarge. Source: County Zoning Officials of Iowa.

We have already discussed the need for statewide uniformity if we add agriculture to our county zoning regulations. This map shows us one of the first major stumbling blocks on the road to uniformity in agricultural zoning. We see that there are quite a few counties in Iowa that haven't yet implemented any form of zoning whatsoever in their unincorporated areas. That needs to change before we can move forward.

Every county in Iowa should be required to prepare a comprehensive land-use plan and create a planning and zoning commission. That's a tall order, but it is necessary.

The first step in tackling any issue of this magnitude should be the creation of a state commission to oversee the process. Let's call it the Iowa Rural Land Use Planning Board, or maybe somebody can come up with something a little more catchy.

Whatever it's called, all interested parties should be invited to the table. Members appointed to the board should include the secretary of agriculture, the director of the Department of Natural Resources, the director of the Department of Economic Development and a representative from the Iowa State Association of Counties. Others who should have a seat at the table include academics from state universities, representatives of environmental advocacy groups like the Sierra Club and Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, as well as agricultural organizations such as the Iowa Farmers Union and the Farm Bureau. Let's face it, we're not going to get anything done unless folks put their differences aside and work together.

First, this board would be charged with the task of reviewing and approving the comprehensive land-use plan of every county in Iowa.

The board would then need to conduct feasibility studies to determine what all of this is going to cost Iowa taxpayers, one of the subjects we will discuss in the final part of this series (Click here).

Water quality in Iowa

Water quality problems have been a serious concern in recent years in Iowa, and farmers are often blamed for the problems. Northey discussed some of the work his department is doing to improve water quality in Iowa.

"At this department, about half of the 400 people that work here work at improving soil conservation and water quality," said Northey. "We've got projects where we're looking at trying to take nitrogen out of the water that's coming down to our streams. We've got tons of soil conservation efforts, both traditional efforts from terraces and grass waterways and filter strips, to newer kinds of no-till and other kinds of things that are done through the department."

Successful efforts to improve soil conservation practices on Iowa farms involves a collaborative effort between different local, state and federal agencies as well as private individuals. "There's a real partnership between the state and the local folks, as well as those federal folks that are out there in the (USDA) offices," said Northey.

He meets at least every two weeks with Rich Leopold, director of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources. "We had a meeting this morning, and we talked about several different projects that are going on. We talked about livestock siting regulations. There are some regulations on feedyards that we talked about, and we talked about a federal grant that we would be asking for together. So it's the combination of trying to make sure government does the best job it can with the programs we have, and looking ahead and trying to develop some of that new technology," said Northey.

Challenges of cellulosic ethanol production

Northey said that there is significant research occurring right now in the state on cellulosic ethanol production and the impact it may have on the environment. "One of the things that folks talk about is turning cellulose into ethanol. If we're going to use corn stalks, corn cobs, it makes great sense. We can use them, but how do we take them off of the ground without causing erosion? So, part of the effort has to be in figuring out how much we can take off the ground."

A lot of that depends on soil types and slope in the field, he said. "Maybe we can go out there and harvest various amounts over various parts of that field. What those numbers are, we are still learning how to do that. Soil conservation started 80 years ago after the dust bowl times of the '30s; we're still learning a lot about it and how we can do a better job."

Livestock confinements

One of the most-contentious issues around livestock production in Iowa involves large livestock-confinement operations. Northey said that a lot of improvements have been made in recent years to reduce the amount of environmental impact created by such operations.

"I think we need to kind of split it up into the separate issues," he said. "Different species out there cause different concerns. Certainly some of the attention right now is around hog facilities, and it's really more around air quality concerns. It's about odor rather than water quality concerns. If you talk to the DNR folks, they've mapped out how many areas cause real water quality concerns. Not very frequently is it a hog confinement, in fact. Not very frequently is it a large cattle or large dairy facility causing these problems. But often it may be one of the older cattle facilities, maybe built on the side of a hill, which is very traditional–the way 90 percent of the cattle were raised 40 years ago. We're trying to figure out how those facilities can continue to run but not cause water quality problems. But with these new facilities, we're not seeing much risk to water quality."

Still, air quality is a different matter. "We need to be able to do a better job on the odor research that's out there. That's not generally as big of a problem with dairy and cattle feeding. That's more of a hog issue, and sometimes poultry as well, but we need to be able to find out if we're doing everything we can, if we have the latest technology here in Iowa. It's never going to be easy. You know, we have industrial processes in some of our cities that smell also. We can't snap our fingers and solve these problems. But we sure shouldn't hide our head under a bushel basket. We should go after some of these new technologies and make sure we're doing all we can."

Local control of livestock confinement siting

Many environmental activist groups have pushed for years for local zoning control of agricultural land. Northey is not in favor of such a change to Iowa law.

"I think we really need statewide regulations. If they're right to have, then we need to have those regulations all around the state," said Northey. "If (regulations) are health-based, then there's no reason one area should have them and another area shouldn't. Certainly, there are some areas where we've got folks raising livestock that aren't doing the best that they can. But most of the folks are doing a really good job, and when you take the big hammer of local control, you end up hitting an awful lot of people that are doing a good job and driving an industry away. What we need to do is we need to fine-tune it and find some way of getting that little handful of folks that aren't doing a good job without destroying the industry in the process. It's not easy, it's not quick. It's not as quick as just running everybody out."

You've undoubtedly heard those two words a lot lately in Iowa. You've seen them displayed on bumpers stickers and painted on protest banners.

Local control — yep, here in Iowa, we've been hearing about local control for years. Lots of people throw the phrase around. Local control is good. We need it. If we had it, everything would be just fine and dandy.

But just ask 10 average Iowans what "local control" means and you're likely to get 10 very different responses. Then ask 10 Iowa legislators, and be prepared for some really creative answers.

Let's not mince words. What we're really talking about is giving county governments in Iowa more of a say in where large livestock confinement operations should and shouldn't be built.

Iowa politicians have struggled for years to find a workable way to do this without derailing our agricultural economy. Their overly cautious approach is not entirely unfounded. According to the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, Iowa's cash receipts from farm commodities total nearly $16 billion a year. Iowa is the national leader in the production of pork, soybeans, corn and eggs. Iowa is ranked second in the nation in the production of red meat.

And Iowa is poised to host significant growth in beef cattle production. This is because of the abundance of dried distiller grains, a nutritious byproduct of ethanol production that is fed to cattle.

Without question, we cannot afford to choke the economic engine of agriculture in Iowa. To do so would spell economic disaster.

Nonetheless, we have a serious problem that must be addressed. Modern livestock production is simply unwelcome in some parts of the state. And with the expected growth in beef-feeding operations, something must be done as soon as possible to protect both the livestock industry and Iowa's rural residents.

There is already a legal process that has been proven over a century to resolve just these kinds of problems. Time and time again, this process has been used to direct the orderly development of land in America, protect property values and keep incompatible land uses separated.

It's called zoning. It's worked really well since the first urban planning laws were enacted in New York more than 100 years ago. For communities and rural areas in Iowa, zoning — or the more palatable term "land-use planning" — has served us well for many years in our efforts to keep industrial developers from stepping on the toes of residential and commercial property owners. And vice versa.

Right now, more than 80 of Iowa's 99 counties already have some sort of zoning law regulating their unincorporated areas. But there's a hitch. Because of a few short sentences in the Iowa Code, Chapter 335.2, agricultural land in unincorporated Iowa is exempt from virtually all county zoning regulations. And that's why you can build a large-scale livestock feeding operation without a whole lot of local government control over where you decide to build it. Or you can move to rural Iowa and build a luxury home, call it a "farmhouse" and proceed to complain about your neighbors for farming.

For years, agricultural lobbying groups have fought against zoning for agriculture. The Coalition to Support Iowa's Farmers, a collaboration between the Farm Bureau and five Iowa farm commodity groups, calls such efforts "misguided." They say that in Nebraska, new regulations including county zoning authority have "decimated dairy, cattle and hog numbers." They say Nebraska's hog numbers have dropped by 36 percent as a result of such new regulations.

They also point to a situation in Minnesota. The coalition says an advisory group was created to study the downward spiral in livestock numbers shortly after a cheese plant closed because of insufficient local milk supplies. "Nearly $100 million in regional economic activity vanished along with 100 skilled jobs. The advisory group said a significant impediment to new livestock farms was the lack of regulatory uniformity, adding that the uncertainty has 'a chilling effect on growth of other livestock sectors.'" Farmers were simply unwilling to invest.

They make a good point. A patchwork of more confusing regulations is not what we need. If you really think about it, thick volumes of regulations can only really be surmounted by companies that can afford to hire lawyers and engineers. That does not help the family farmer who only wants to modernize to remain competitive at producing livestock.

It's not going to be easy, but it's time for Iowa legislators to step up and prepare a workable bill to give Iowans local control. What we need is a strict, uniform set of guidelines, set at the state level, that can be administered by county zoning boards.

In the next article in this series, we will examine some steps that the state should take to give county governments more control of agricultural zoning.  Click here for Part 2.