Water planning law and government.

Water planning efforts typically identify problems and needs. But simply calling attention to issues is usually not enough to spur action; the end result of many well-intentioned planning efforts is a report that ends up gathering dust on a shelf. Vague recommendations like “Water conservation measures should be implemented” usually accomplish little by themselves as they don’t assign responsibility to anyone. Success is more likely when an implementation strategy — who can and should do what — is developed as part of the planning process. The more detailed and specific the implementation strategy, the greater the chance that something will actually be done. The question then becomes who has the legal authority or responsibility to do what? Are new laws and programs needed or can existing ones be used to implement the recommendations? ... This document is divided into four main parts. The first, “Carrots and Sticks” looks at two basic approaches — regulatory and non-regulatory — that can be, and are, used to carry out water policy. Both have advantages and disadvantages that need to be considered. The second, “The powers of federal, state and local governments…,” looks at the constitutional powers the federal government and state and local governments have to carry out water policy. An initial look at the U. S. Constitution might suggest the federal government’s regulatory authority over water is limited but, in fact, its powers are very substantial. States have considerable authority to do a number of things but have to be mindful of any federal efforts that might conflict with those state efforts. And local governments can only do those things the state constitution or state legislature says they can do and must conform to any requirements or limitations on those powers that are contained in the enabling acts. Parts three and four examine in more detail the main programs and agencies at the federal level as well as Iowa’s state and local levels and the roles they play in national and state water policy.

Designation of Co-benefits and Its Implication for Policy: Water Quality versus Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils, March 2005

Designation of Co-benefits and Its Implication for Policy: Water Quality versus Carbon Sequestration in Agricultural Soils, The

Ambient Water Monitoring Strategy for Iowa: 2016-2021, November 30, 2016

The Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Ambient Water Monitoring Program provides consistent, unbiased information about the condition of Iowa’s water resources to support decisions affecting the development, management and protection of these resources. To strengthen its services, the program worked with a variety of stakeholders and other DNR programs to develop a five-year strategy for Iowa’s ambient water monitoring efforts. The strategy identifies opportunities to improve the program’s effectiveness in several categories: monitoring objectives, sampling design, data management, products and services, and program evaluation and coordination. Iowa DNR managers and technical staff will use the new strategy to guide decisions affecting the ambient monitoring program over the next five years. The strategy should also serve as a robust informational resource for stakeholders, policy makers, legislators and the public.