(Radio Iowa) – Iowa State University researchers are part of an effort led by Purdue University to diversify the cornbelt. I-S-U sociology professor J. Arbuckle says farmers once planted many different crops on their land. “The long rotations with lots of different crops, spread risk, all around the farm, but they also took care of, you know ecological processes, agro ecological processes that took care of a lot of the, you know, the pest cycles and the weed cycles and that sort of thing,” he says.  The crops became less diversified with the advent of chemicals to deal with the pests and weeds, and the use of mechanized farm machines. Arbuckle says farmers started specializing in soybeans and corn.

“We’re seeing a lot of problems stemming from that specialized system, right? So we’ve got a lot of tillage going on that results in reduction of soil health and soil erosion. We also have herbicide resistant weeds, we’ve got pesticide resistant insects,” Arbuckle says. There’s also a boom and bust pattern for the price of those commodities. He says this project is looking at ways to add some diversity back into the system. “To number one, provide more market opportunities for farmers, more ways to have more resilient cropping systems that use more agroecological processes to deal with those pest and weed cycles,” Arbuckle says. “But also to deal with some of the more extreme weather that we’re having.”

They hope to find some of the answers with the ten million dollar U-S-D-A grant. “This is a five-year project. So we don’t have any illusions that we’re going to change the system in five years,” he says. “So really, what we’re doing is looking at different options and pathways and potential creative visions for ways that we might open doors for diversification.”

The team includes more than 30 investigators who are working with farmers and other agricultural stakeholders in Iowa, Indiana, and Illinois to envision and evaluate more diverse agricultural systems for the Midwest.

(Radio Iowa) – A state senator who’s proposed five different bills in response to proposed carbon pipelines says the current regulatory process is unfair to landowners. Senator Jeff Taylor says the bill most likely to pass would require that developers get voluntary access to 90 percent of the land along the pipeline route before state regulators could grant permission to seize the rest through eminent domain.

“The Iowa Farm Bureau has endorsed the 90% bill,” Taylor says. “It’s probably seen as more of a reasonable compromise by Republicans who are leery of interfering for various reasons into the existing process.” Taylor is a Republican from Sioux Center — in Sioux County — where the proposed Summit pipeline would pass through. Taylor says since Summit is owned by major G-O-P donor Bruce Rastetter and former Governor Terry Branstad has been an advisor to the project, it’s been political uncomfortable to raise concerns.

“These pipelines, carbon capture, helping the ethanol industry, it’s a priority for a lot of my Republican colleagues,” Taylor says. “I’m not against the pipelines per se, but it matters how we do things and I think we’re going about this the wrong way.” Taylor says there’s no guarantee the legislature will take any action on the issue. “I think some of my colleagues would just like us to sit back and let the process take its natural course, but that’s what I object to,” Taylor says, “because I don’t think the natural course is constitutional or fair to the landowners who are affected.”

Dan Tronchetti lives near Paton in Greene County. The Summit pipeline would pass through one of his fields and be within 12-hundred feet west of his front door. He’s frequently at the Iowa Capitol, outlining his objections to having his land seized for the project. “I’ve been forced to come out of my comfort zone and become a political activist,” he says. Tronchetti says the contract Summit presented him suggests he could be sued if his combine or farm equipment damages the pipeline buried four feet below ground.

“Bottom line is that I don’t feel like I have liability protection,” he says, “and that if the pipeline company says that I caused an issue that I could end up losing the farm either by a court judgment or to pay attorney fees to defend myself.” Tronchetti says if the pipeline passes through his farm, he may make the 75 foot wide strip of land on top of the underground pipeline a no-go zone rather than plant corn or soybeans on it.