The following editorial appeared in The Des Moines Register Saturday. This is
the Register's own opinion, not a letter or opinion by someone outside the
Register staff.
If you want to write a letter to the editor, be sure to include your complete
name,  address, and daytime telephone number, and send it to:

Letters,
The Des Moines Register
Box 957
Des Moines, Iowa 50304

or by e- mail:  [log in to unmask]

or fax: 515-286-2511


Here are some of my opinions about this editorial:

To me the editorial's statement that it would be "a cynical acceptance of
politics-as-usual," for Vilsack to replace Wilson, is an insult to the very
idea of democracy. Why do we bother to have elections if, after 30 years of
rule by the same party, the election of a new governor from the opposition
party means we will still have the same people running major agencies that,
like the DNR, that have made bad policy that concerned citizens have, up until
now, been unable to change?

The editorial is also an insult to the intelligence of people who care about
the environment. Larry Wilson has not stood tall for protecting the
environment, as the editorial states. Wilson has allowed commercial logging in
state parks and on other state lands, which has severely damaged forest
ecosystems. Wilson has supported the building of artificial lakes on Iowa's
public lands, such as the dam and lake at Brushy Creek that destroyed one of
the finest natural areas in Iowa. Wilson's DNR continues to support the
building of more of these destructive lake projects. Wilson has not publicly
challenged Gov. Terry Branstad to demand that Branstad budget enough money to
meet the DNR's environmental protection responsibilities.

To say, as the Register editorial does, that it is the legislature, not
Wilson, that is responsible for all the environmental destruction caused by
the DNR is absurd.Why do we pay to have a DNR director if he or she is not
accountable for the actions of the agency?

Tom Mathews

And here is the editorial itself:

Des Moines Register Editorial, November 14, 1998, page 10A:

Change at the DNR?
Everybody has a bone to pick, but dumping Wilson might be a mistake.

        The shift in Iowa from a Republican to a Democratic governor is assumed by
many to presage a shake-up in some state agencies, particularly the Iowa
Department of Natural Resources. Everybody has a bone to pick with the
DNR—hunters and hunter-hating landowners, environmentalists and polluters,
horseback riders and hikers, those who favor park expansion and those who
worship private land ownership. More people claim to know how DNR director
Larry Wilson should do his job than claim to know how Hayden Fry should do
his.
        Before the election, Governor-elect Tom Vilsack declined to speculate on
possible changes in major state agencies, and he hasn't broken silence since.
But "everybody" is sure his election means Wilson—Iowa's political lightening
rod—is out. They're kicking around names of political successors.
        "Everybody" could be wrong. Dumping Wilson could be a mistake.
        In the area of environmental protection, the DNR has fallen short of what
Iowans have a right to expect. It has not been on top of hog-confinement
operations as it should; it has slapped hands when it should have kicked butt.
It has done an inadequate job of monitoring water quality, its methods drawing
blunt criticism and stern warnings from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. (Seriously flawed . . . not in compliance with the federal Clean Water
Act," the EPA told DNR.)
        If the DNR were directly responsible, Wilson and a half dozen top
administrators should get the ax. But the blame lies elsewhere—with a
Legislature that has refused to finance the sort of environmental monitoring
that the health of Iowa requires (the DNR can't afford to hire enough
inspectors) and with a governor who has refused to give sufficient priority to
a strong environmental effort.
        The competence and dedication of the DNR's personnel are unquestioned. But
Wilson and his staff can't do the job right without ideological support from
higher echelons.
        Firing Wilson could be seen as the symbolic gesture signaling a cynical
acceptance of politics-as-usual.
        A better signal would be to split the DNR into two departments, one dealing
with environmental enforcement and one with parks and wildlife. The
environmental mission has become far too divergent from that of the rest of
the DNR and far too important not to merit departmental status. Then let
Wilson function under a more environment-friendly state leadership. There are
reasons to stand tall that go beyond serving as a lightning rod.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To get off the IOWA-TOPICS list, send email to [log in to unmask]
Make the message text (not the Subject): SIGNOFF IOWA-TOPICS