Hello
HSB 267 is 23 pages long, single spaced. The bill makes changes to 37
separate sections of the Iowa Code disbursed in the following chapters:
331 355 362 427 441 459 455B 456B 462A
With legislation of this sort, the devil is always in the details,
especially when the bill is well intentioned. It is impossible to protect
the implementation of the bill without carefully scrutinizing the effect of
every change to every existing Iowa Code section referenced in the
bill. Forces opposed to the bill will attempt to insert particular
language, seemingly innocuous, at key places in the bill. They have lots
of paid staff who are very good at this.
For example, the bill provides a special separation distance of 5280 feet
to "high quality" water resources in the state that are not tourism
destinations, and 10560 to "high quality" water resources that are tourism
destinations. Sounds good and quite encompassing, but there are two
problems. First, only tourism destinations specifically "designated" by
DNR qualify. Since there are no rules in place for DNR to use, these will
have to be developed from scratch (against great opposition) before any
"high quality" water resource will receive the two-mile protection.
Which brings up the even greater problem. The "high quality" designation
as assigned in our water quality standards includes only 50 stream or river
segments totalling only 342 miles (Iowa has about 25,000 miles of perennial
rivers and streams). Of the 50 streams, 47 are B(CW).... trout
streams!!!... which this bill exempts from the protection!!! Only three
short segments of the Turkey River would receive the one mile or two mile
protection afforded by this section of the bill.
In addition to the 50 streams, there are 7 lakes designated as "high
quality", covering 10,249 acres. Of these seven, five of them are the Iowa
Great Lakes. The other two are very small spring fed impoundments, one in
Jackson and one in Winneshiek. And by the way, there are no DNR procedures
in place to allow additional water resources to be designated as "high
quality".
So this section of the bill accomplishes little except to perhaps
neutralize the local control voices in Dickenson county by giving extra
separation distance protection to the Great Lakes. Period.
Every section of the bill needs to be scrutinized in this fashion, along
with every change negotiated along the way. It is always about how the
language translates to actual implementation.
Steve Veysey, Conservation Co-chair
Iowa Chapter of the Sierra Club
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]
Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
|
