Erin Jordan’s article in The Gazette Feb. 20 described the public hearing on the new DNR Chapter 65 regulations for animal feeding operations. The regulations are being revised as dictated by Gov. Kim Reynolds’ Executive Order 10. These regulations have long been confusing, inadequate, and open to manipulation by livestock producers and the DNR. Now, as Erin’s article explains, even when the DNR tried to revise the rules to provide more protection for Iowa’s waters in areas of karst terrain, the governor’s “Administrative Rules Coordinator” blocked the proposed rule because it would not reduce the “regulatory burden” on livestock producers.
The purpose of regulatory rules should not be to reduce the regulatory burden, but to ensure protection of people and the environment. Erin’s article noted that livestock producers and the Farm Bureau complained that increased protection in areas of karst would have “unintended consequences,” without explaining what those consequences might be. In fact, the consequences of inadequate protection in areas of karst would be the pollution of rivers and streams and groundwater.
The proposed Chapter 65 rules flout the legislative requirement that manure storage structures be covered to minimize odor. So the rules state that a manure pit under a confinement building is covered by a slatted floor over the pit, even though the odor comes up through the slats and is blown out of the building by big fans.
The rules also allow what is effectively a confinement operation to be considered as an open feedlot, with less rigorous rules. The legislature defined an open feedlot as an operation that is unroofed or partially roofed. The intent was that the cattle would be in a fenced in open area with a structure where they could seek shelter in inclement weather. The rules allow an operation where the buildings are at least 10% unroofed to be an open feedlot. Buildings are constructed so the feedbunks are unroofed, constituting 10% of the building area. But the cattle never leave the building.
The Chapter 65 rules also allow construction of a livestock operation in a flood plain in some instances. This also puts Iowa’s water at risk.
There is more, but you get the point. The governor’s executive order makes the rule-making process a sham. If the governor can stop a rule on a whim even before it is presented to the public, why even have public comment? And if the governor’s intent is to reduce regulatory burdens, the rules will not adequately protect the public. This is just another example of the governor’s dictatorial control, aided and abetted by the Iowa Legislature.
Is this really what Iowans voted for? If so, why? If not, we need to make our voices heard in November.
Wally Taylor of Marion is a member of the executive council for the Sierra Club Iowa Chapter.
Opinion content represents the viewpoint of the author or The Gazette editorial board. You can join the conversation by submitting a letter to the editor or guest column or by suggesting a topic for an editorial to editorial@thegazette.com
GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings