Field Notes & Dispatches

Introduction

The state of Iowa occupies a unique position in the American public policy landscape, serving as a critical nexus where intensive agricultural production, environmental stewardship, and public health outcomes continuously intersect. As one of the most extensively cultivated regions globally, the state relies heavily on the extraction and management of its natural resources to drive its economy. However, the legacy and continuation of specific land-use practices have generated profound secondary effects on environmental quality and public health. Currently, Iowa is navigating a complex matrix of systemic challenges: it holds the second-highest cancer incidence rate in the nation and is the only state where this rate is actively rising^[1]. Concurrently, the state faces persistent and record-breaking nitrate contamination in its waterways^[3] and is addressing an expanding crisis of rural maternal care deserts^[5].

The state government, currently operating under a Republican administrative trifecta—controlling the governorship, the House, and the Senate—has historically favored voluntary conservation frameworks, corporate development incentives, and decentralized health administration^[7]. However, emerging ecological and epidemiological data are increasingly placing pressure on these established paradigms. This comprehensive analysis evaluates the current status of environmental, scientific, and health policies in Iowa, exploring the underlying scientific mechanisms driving these issues. Furthermore, it examines how the impending 2026 elections might alter the legislative and administrative trajectory of the state, particularly regarding regulatory oversight, infrastructure development, and public health investments.

Agronomic Science and Hydrological Modification

The Mechanics of Tile Drainage and Hydrological Modeling

To understand Iowa's environmental policy, one must first understand its heavily modified hydrology. Between seven and ten million acres of Iowa farmland are underlain by subsurface tile drainage systems^[8]. Historically installed in the nineteenth century to lower the water table in naturally wet, hydric prairie soils, these networks of perforated pipes lie three to four feet below the surface. They intercept downward-percolating water and discharge it into surface ditches and streams, effectively converting wetlands into highly productive cultivable land^[8].

While tile drainage is essential for maintaining crop yields and allowing for early spring planting, it fundamentally alters the watershed's hydrologic response and biogeochemical cycling. Field-scale deterministic models, such as DRAINMOD and the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT), demonstrate that while tile drainage can reduce peak surface runoff and sheet erosion during moderate precipitation events, it significantly increases groundwater flux and the export of highly soluble nutrients^[10]. Because nitrate does not readily bind to soil particles, the rapid routing of water through the soil profile bypasses natural denitrification zones—such as anaerobic wetland soils where bacteria convert nitrate to harmless nitrogen gas—delivering high concentrations of nitrate directly to river networks^[8]. Recent enhanced SWAT modeling applied to tile-drained corn-soybean systems highlights the difficulty of simulating event-scale nitrous oxide fluxes, but confirms that artificial drainage is the primary vector for nitrogen loss in the Midwest^[13].

Mitigating Carbon and Nutrient Loss: Tillage and Cover Crops

In response to soil degradation and nutrient export, agronomists and soil scientists at Iowa State University Extension have heavily researched and promoted conservation tillage and cover cropping. Intensive conventional tillage accelerates the oxidation of soil organic matter, releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and destroying the physical soil structure, which in turn reduces water holding capacity and increases erosion^[14].

Integrating cover crops, such as cereal rye, between cash crop seasons provides a scientifically validated dual benefit. First, cover crops scavenge residual soil nitrate during the fall and winter when the ground would otherwise be bare. Longitudinal field data and SWAT modeling indicate that cover crops can reduce nitrate leaching by approximately forty-one to fifty percent^[13]. Second, recent ecological analyses reveal that cover crops reduce soil carbon loss from erosion by an average of sixty-eight percent—a metric often overlooked when calculating the carbon sequestration potential of agricultural lands^[17].

To quantify these benefits, researchers have developed Carbon Intensity (CI) tools. These calculators evaluate factors such as tillage practices, cover crop acreage, crop rotation, and nitrogen use efficiency to generate a carbon intensity score for crops and animal feed^[18]. Practices that increase soil organic carbon, such as no-till farming and continuous cover, reduce the overall CI score, potentially allowing producers to access premium low-carbon fuel markets^[18]. Furthermore, precision agronomy tools like the Corn Nitrogen Rate Calculator determine the Maximum Return To Nitrogen (MRTN). Instead of applying flat rates of synthetic fertilizer based solely on yield goals, the MRTN uses localized yield response curves and fluctuating commodity prices to identify the most economically profitable nitrogen rate, thereby minimizing excess application that would otherwise be lost to the watershed^[19].

Water Quality Policy and Economic Externalities

The Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy (INRS)

The primary policy framework addressing nonpoint source pollution is the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy (INRS). Established in response to the 2008 Gulf Hypoxia Action Plan, the INRS is a science- and technology-based initiative aiming to achieve a forty-five percent reduction in nitrogen and phosphorus loads leaving the state^[20]. The INRS operates on a strictly voluntary basis for nonpoint sources (farms), avoiding enforceable federal or state mandates in favor of incentivized conservation practices^[20].

Progress under the INRS is tracked annually. Recent reports indicate gradual adoption of conservation practices; for example, Iowa farmers planted more than 3.87 million acres of cover crops in 2024, a significant increase from pre-strategy levels, backed by over 420 million dollars in private and public sector funding^[22]. However, conservation advocates and downstream stakeholders frequently argue that voluntary measures have not achieved reductions at the pace or scale required by the scientific consensus, particularly as extreme weather events exacerbate runoff^[8].

Municipal Burdens and Public Health Economics

The externalities of nutrient loading are most acutely felt by downstream municipalities. Central Iowa Water Works (formerly Des Moines Water Works), which serves over 600,000 residents, operates one of the world's largest nitrate removal facilities to maintain compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Maximum Contaminant Level of 10 milligrams per liter^[24]. The facility utilizes an ion exchange process—passing water through massive vessels filled with a specialized resin that captures nitrate ions before the resin is regenerated with a brine solution^[26].

The financial burden of this treatment is substantial. Operating the facility at full capacity costs approximately sixteen thousand dollars per day^[24]. In 2025 alone, the facility required 2.2 million dollars in capital and operational expenses^[27]. To address long-term capacity, the utility is currently planning a 344 million dollar expansion over the next decade^[28].

Despite these costs, empirical studies suggest the public health interventions are economically justified. An epidemiological analysis of birth outcomes in Des Moines revealed that operating the nitrate removal facility during a mother's first trimester was associated with a 0.4 percentage-point increase in the probability of a normal birth weight and a 1.6 percentage-point increase in the probability of a normal term birth^[25]. The post-hoc analysis determined that the intervention is highly cost-effective, generating 3.50 dollars in public health benefits for every 1.00 dollar invested in water treatment^[25].

The Vulnerability of Private Wells

While urban centers can invest in advanced filtration, rural populations face unregulated risks. An estimated 230,000 to 290,000 Iowans rely on private wells for their drinking water^[30]. Because the state only requires testing when a well is initially dug or repaired, the day-to-day water quality of private wells is unregulated, placing the onus entirely on the homeowner^[30].

Data aggregated by the Environmental Working Group and the Iowa Environmental Council highlights systemic contamination. Between 2002 and 2017, out of approximately 55,000 tested wells, more than 12,300 had nitrate averages at or above 5 milligrams per liter, and over 6,600 tested at or above the 10 milligrams per liter legal limit for public systems^[31]. Furthermore, spatial and demographic analyses reveal significant disparities; communities with higher poverty rates, older adults, and populations of color face statistically higher rates of prolonged exposure to elevated nitrates^[32].

Data compiled from Iowa HHS and EWG well testing analyses^[30].

The Legislative Battle over Environmental Monitoring

The tension between agricultural productivity and environmental transparency culminated in a highly publicized legislative battle over the Iowa Water Quality Information System (IWQIS). Managed by the University of Iowa's IIHR—Hydroscience and Engineering, the IWQIS is a state-of-the-art network of continuous water quality sensors providing real-time data on nitrate levels, stream flow, and dissolved oxygen at fifteen-minute intervals^[33].

In 2023, the state legislature removed five hundred thousand dollars in funding for the network, reallocating the funds to support voluntary conservation programs^[35]. During the 2025 legislative session, attempts to restore funding were derailed by a late-night budget amendment (S-5254) that bypassed the negotiated House amendment (H-8404). This maneuver redirected the 300,000 dollars intended for the IIHR sensors to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to support its ambient monitoring program, which relies on much less frequent grab-sample testing^[37].

Public health advocates argue that replacing continuous, real-time sensors with infrequent manual sampling cripples the ability of municipal water managers to predict nitrate spikes and adjust treatment protocols^[37]. To prevent the network from going dark, independent entities such as the Walton Family Foundation, alongside localized emergency funding from Polk, Johnson, and Linn counties, stepped in to temporarily finance the sensors through 2026 and 2027^[36]. This defunding reflects a broader political hesitation to generate high-resolution environmental data that could potentially be utilized to mandate regulations.

Agricultural Operations and Infrastructure Regulations

CAFOs, Manure Management, and the Master Matrix

Iowa's status as a national leader in livestock production necessitates strict protocols for the disposal of animal waste from Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs). The state utilizes a "Master Matrix" system, which county boards of supervisors can adopt annually to evaluate construction permits for large confinement feeding operations^[40]. By adopting a construction evaluation resolution, counties can compel applicants to meet stricter environmental criteria to gain approval; however, the ultimate permitting authority remains with the DNR, which is not legally bound to follow the county's recommendation, a structure that often frustrates local governance^[40].

A critical regulatory component is the Manure Management Plan (MMP). Producers with a capacity exceeding five hundred animal units must submit an MMP to the DNR to ensure manure is applied at appropriate agronomic rates^[43]. These plans must incorporate the Iowa Phosphorus Index (P-Index), which was recently updated by the Natural Resources Conservation Service in 2024^[44]. The P-Index calculates the risk of phosphorus delivery to surface waters based on soil test levels, erosion potential, and distance to waterways^[45]. Furthermore, state law mandates that liquid manure from confinements cannot be applied on snow-covered or frozen ground between late December and April except in defined emergencies, and even then, application is restricted to fields with a P-Index rating of two or less, and surface drain tile intakes must be blocked^[46].

Carbon Pipelines and Infrastructure Zoning

A dominant infrastructural and environmental policy issue currently gripping the state is the proposed construction of high-pressure hazardous liquid pipelines intended to transport captured carbon dioxide from ethanol plants to underground sequestration sites in the Dakotas. Summit Carbon Solutions, the primary developer, recently received a permit from the Iowa Utilities Commission (IUC) after a lengthy regulatory review^[47]. The IUC determined that the pipeline would promote the "public convenience and necessity" by allowing Iowa's ethanol industry to compete in emerging low-carbon fuel markets and capitalize on federal tax credits^[48].

This approval granted the company the right of eminent domain to seize land from uncooperative property owners, igniting a fierce bipartisan backlash among rural landowners, environmentalists, and property rights advocates^[48]. In response, the Iowa House of Representatives passed legislation (HF 2104) in early 2026 that would entirely prohibit the use of eminent domain to acquire right-of-way for carbon oxide pipelines^[49]. The Senate, adopting a different approach, advanced a bill aimed at restricting the use of eminent domain by imposing stringent insurance requirements, demanding that pipelines qualify as common carriers, and limiting permits to twenty-five years^[51]. The legislative gridlock over property rights versus corporate agricultural development highlights a major fracture within the state's conservative base.

Simultaneously, environmentalists and lawmakers have pushed for moratoriums and stricter regulations on the development of new data centers. Driven by concerns over massive water and electricity consumption, proposed policies seek to require water-use permits and ban non-disclosure agreements that obscure the environmental impact of these facilities from local communities^[52].

Epidemiology and Public Health Policy

The Iowa Cancer Crisis and the Agricultural Health Study

Public health monitoring has identified a severe and escalating cancer crisis in the state. According to fifty years of tracking by the Iowa Cancer Registry, Iowa currently holds the second-highest age-adjusted rate of newly diagnosed cancers in the United States and is the only state where the incidence rate is actively rising^[1]. To better target public health interventions, the Registry developed the Cancer Analytics & Maps for Small Areas (CAMSA) tool, which uses statistical modeling to provide interactive, age-adjusted incidence rates at the Zip Code Tabulation Area level^[2].

The 2026 Cancer in Iowa report provides deeply nuanced epidemiological data, specifically focusing on the agricultural sector through the Agricultural Health Study (AHS)—one of the world's longest-running active studies of agricultural exposures^[55]. The data presents a complex paradox regarding rural health.

Data summarized from the 2026 Cancer in Iowa Report and the Agricultural Health Study^[55].

The lower overall cancer incidence among farmers is largely attributed to the "healthy worker effect"—the tendency for actively employed individuals to have fewer chronic illnesses—coupled with significantly lower rates of tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption compared to the general public^[55]. (High alcohol consumption has been independently identified as a major driver of the state's overall cancer rates^[53]). However, the elevated rates of prostate and lip cancer in farmers, and melanoma and thyroid cancer in spouses, point to specific environmental and occupational exposures, including prolonged ultraviolet radiation and interactions with specific agricultural chemicals^[55].

The report also highlights alarming statistics across age demographics. Between 2018 and 2022, Iowa saw 497 new childhood cancers (predominantly leukemia and brain cancer), 245 adolescent cancers, and 4,006 cancers in young adults (ages 20-39), where melanoma, breast, thyroid, and testis cancers were most prevalent^[56].

Environmental Carcinogens: Radon and Nitrates

The state's cancer crisis is inextricably linked to its physical environment. Radon, a naturally occurring radioactive byproduct of uranium decay, is the second-leading cause of lung cancer overall and the leading cause among non-smokers^[57]. The geology of Iowa, specifically the uranium-rich glacial till of the Des Moines Lobe, combined with the state's highly insulated, basement-heavy residential architecture, traps the gas indoors^[59]. Consequently, 71.6 percent of homes in Iowa test at or above the EPA's action level of 4 picocuries per liter (pCi/L), making Iowa the only state where every single county is classified as EPA Zone 1 (highest risk)^[59]. The average indoor radon concentration in Iowa is 8.5 pCi/L, vastly exceeding the national average of 1.3 pCi/L^[58]. In a proactive policy shift, the state building code has been updated to require that all new single- and two-family residential construction commenced after July 2026 include a passive radon mitigation system^[61].

Furthermore, there is growing scientific consensus linking Iowa's elevated cancer rates to nitrates in drinking water. While the EPA's Maximum Contaminant Level for nitrate is set at 10 milligrams per liter, modern epidemiological studies demonstrate that long-term ingestion of water with nitrate concentrations as low as 5 milligrams per liter is associated with increased risks of colorectal, ovarian, thyroid, and bladder cancers^[62]. Nitrates are endogenously reduced to nitrites in the human body, leading to the formation of N-nitroso compounds, which are highly carcinogenic^[62]. The stalled reassessment of these standards by federal regulators has left state agencies scrambling to fund cancer prevention initiatives, largely utilizing federal Preventive Health and Health Services (PHHS) Block Grants to support regional cancer control networks^[65].

Maternal Health and Care Deserts

Maternal health policy is undergoing rapid restructuring due to a combination of rural hospital closures, workforce shortages, and changing legislative priorities. Currently, 33.3 percent of Iowa counties are defined as complete "maternal care deserts," lacking any birthing facilities or obstetric clinicians^[5]. Broadening the scope, 57 percent of the state's counties do not have an active obstetric facility, forcing 14 percent of women to travel more than thirty minutes to give birth^[6].

The Iowa Maternal Mortality Review Committee (MMRC) recently published data indicating that nearly all pregnancy-related deaths (occurring during pregnancy or up to a year postpartum) between 2019 and 2021 were preventable^[69]. The leading causes of maternal death included cardiovascular conditions, hemorrhage, and systemic infections^[69]. These outcomes disproportionately affect minority populations; for example, the infant mortality rate for Black infants in Iowa (11.0 per 1,000 live births) is nearly three times the rate for White infants (4.0 per 1,000 live births)^[70].

To combat this, the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is utilizing federal grants from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to establish "Hub and Spoke" networks of care^[72]. This model seeks to connect highly specialized urban medical centers (the hubs) with rural clinics and critical access hospitals (the spokes) to provide advanced technical assistance, telehealth support, and coordinated maternal and mental health care, thereby keeping patients in their local communities whenever appropriate^[72].

Concurrently, the state legislature has initiated a major funding shift. The "More Options for Maternal Support" (MOMS) program, originally designed to fund non-medical pregnancy resource centers, has been statutorily terminated, effective on or before August 31, 2026^[74]. The legislation mandates that any remaining unobligated funds from the MOMS program, along with a newly appropriated one million dollars, be transferred directly to the state's Medicaid program specifically to increase the reimbursement rates for labor and delivery services^[74]. This policy pivot represents a structural acknowledgment that supporting the financial viability of rural clinical delivery services is paramount to reversing the expansion of maternal care deserts.

Electoral Implications and Future Trajectories

As Iowa proceeds through the 2026 legislative session and approaches the midterm elections, the intersection of agriculture, environmental regulation, and public health serves as a primary axis of political contention. The current administrative paradigm heavily favors voluntary compliance and the economic expansion of the agricultural sector. However, the cascading secondary effects—polluted municipal water systems, rising cancer rates, and the infringement on private property rights via pipeline eminent domain—have created localized vulnerabilities for incumbent policymakers.

1. The Transparency and Monitoring Debate: The defunding of the IIHR IWQIS sensor network has become a highly visible electoral issue. Pro-environment candidates and local water defense coalitions are leveraging the loss of real-time nitrate data as evidence of administrative opacity^[33]. The 2026 elections could dictate whether the state reinstates funding for independent, high-frequency academic monitoring, or if it continues to consolidate environmental data collection within the state-run DNR's lower-frequency ambient monitoring programs^[35].
2. Property Rights vs. Climate Infrastructure: The Summit Carbon Solutions pipeline has scrambled traditional partisan lines. Conservative rural landowners, traditionally opposed to government regulation, are demanding strict legislative intervention to prevent private corporations from using eminent domain^[49]. If the legislature fails to finalize robust protections before the election, it could result in primary challenges or depressed rural turnout for incumbents perceived as overly allied with the corporate ethanol lobby.
3. Public Health Accountability: Advocacy groups, such as the Iowa Environmental Council and the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, are increasingly connecting the dots between the state's agricultural practices and its cancer crisis^[76]. Recent polling indicates that water quality is a top-five issue for 60 percent of likely Iowa voters across the political spectrum^[76]. Furthermore, large corporate and industrial farming operations received a 76 percent unfavorable rating in recent surveys, while independent farms received a 90 percent favorability rating, suggesting that voters are highly attuned to scale and environmental impact^[78]. Electoral pressure may force a gradual shift in the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy, moving it from a purely voluntary framework to one that incorporates targeted, enforceable standards in highly vulnerable watersheds.

The physical infrastructure of the state—from the subsurface tile drains that optimize yields but flush nitrates^[8], to the geological formations that trap radon in homes^[59]—creates unique public health vulnerabilities. While the state has implemented promising clinical interventions, such as the Hub and Spoke model for maternal and cancer care^[72], the upstream environmental determinants of health remain largely managed through voluntary compliance. As the 2026 elections approach, the electorate's growing awareness of the direct links between landscape management, water quality, and chronic disease will likely force a fundamental reevaluation of how the state balances agricultural prosperity with the preservation of public health.

Works Cited

1. The latest annual report from the Iowa Cancer Registry shows the, https://www.facebook.com/21WFMJ/posts/the-latest-annual-report-from-the-iowa-cancer-registry-shows-the-state-has-the-s/1474120004762254/
2. University of Iowa researchers create tools for cancer tracking in, https://www.iowapublicradio.org/health/2026-02-19/university-of-iowa-researchers-create-tools-for-cancer-tracking
3. Nitrate levels in Iowa water remained high through fall, data show, https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/nitrate-levels-iowa-water-remained-high-through-fall-data-show
4. Streams Critical to Des Moines' Drinking Water No Longer Protected, https://www.nwf.org/Home/Latest-News/Press-Releases/2026/6-29-26-Des-Moines-Drinking-Water
5. Editorial | Iowa needs to address the cause of maternal care deserts, https://dailyiowan.com/2025/04/08/iowa-needs-to-address-the-cause-of-maternal-care-deserts/
6. Improving access to maternity care in Iowa's health care deserts, https://www.ama-assn.org/public-health/population-health/improving-access-maternity-care-iowa-s-health-care-deserts
7. 2026 Iowa legislative session - Ballotpedia, https://ballotpedia.org/2026_Iowa_legislative_session
8. Iowa Water Quality and Agriculture: Runoff, Tile Drainage, and, https://iowaagricultureauthority.com/iowa-water-quality-and-agriculture/
9. Measuring Tile Drainage in Iowa - Iowa Environmental Council, https://www.iaenvironment.org/blog/iowa-environmental-voice/measuring-tile-drainage-in-iowa
10. Hydrologic Impacts of Tile Drainage in Iowa - ResearchGate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/275833603_Hydrologic_Impacts_of_Tile_Drainage_in_Iowa_From_Field_to_Catchment_Scale
11. simulation of daily flow pathways, tile-drain nitrate concentrations, https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/bitstreams/c4845c57-16d3-4271-a782-574466babaa8/download
12. Hydrogeologic controls on nitrate transport in a small agricultural, https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/70031704
13. Modeling nitrogen fluxes in a tile-drained cropping system in the, https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/entities/publication/ecec7836-315a-4de0-8340-ba7631485758
14. Do I need to till my soil? - Integrated Crop Management, https://crops.extension.iastate.edu/encyclopedia/do-i-need-till-my-soil
15. Frequent tillage and its impact on soil quality, https://crops.extension.iastate.edu/encyclopedia/frequent-tillage-and-its-impact-soil-quality
16. How Do Long-Term Cover Crops Impact Yield and Soil Health?, https://www.iasoybeans.com/newsroom/article/isr-august-2025-long-term-impacts-of-cover-crops
17. Cover crops provide an often-overlooked reduction in soil carbon, https://www.news.iastate.edu/news/cover-crops-provide-often-overlooked-reduction-soil-carbon-erosion-study-finds
18. Crop and Feed Carbon Intensity Tool (CaFCIT) - Iowa State Extension, https://www.extension.iastate.edu/ageng/crop-and-feed-carbon-intensity-tool
19. Iowa State University Corn Nitrogen Rate Calculator, https://bmpcosttools.nrem.iastate.edu/resource/iowa-state-university-corn-nitrogen-rate-calculator-finding-maximum-return-n-and-most
20. Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy: Goals and Farm Practices, https://iowaagricultureauthority.com/iowa-nutrient-reduction-strategy/
21. Prepared by - Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy, https://www.nutrientstrategy.iastate.edu/sites/default/files/documents/2025%20INRS%20Complete%20Feb%202025.pdf
22. Farmers expanding cover crop, no-till acres across the state, https://www.iowafarmbureau.com/Article/Farmers-expanding-cover-crop-notill-acres-across-the-state
23. Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy Annual Report Now Available, https://iowaagriculture.gov/news/iowa-nutrient-reduction-strategy-annual-report-now-available
24. With Fertilizer Pollution on the Rise, Iowa Will Invest
    https://sentientmedia.org/fertilizer-pollution-on-the-rise-iowa-will-invest-in-water-treatment/
25. Evidence from the World's Largest Nitrate Removal Facility - medRxiv, https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.05.06.25327112v1
26. operation of Nitrate Removal Facility - Des Moines Water Works, IA, https://www.dmww.com/news_detail_T37_R328.php
27. What is the Nitrate Removal Facility? | CIWW, https://ciww.gov/what-is-the-nitrate-removal-facility/
28. A lawn watering ban in the Des Moines area brings treatment, https://www.iowapublicradio.org/ipr-news/2025-06-20/des-moines-lawn-watering-ban-central-iowa
29. Des Moines Water Works, https://cms9files.revize.com/desmoineswater/061323%202024-2028%20Five-Year%20CIP%20Materials.pdf
30. It's better to know – Making sure your private well water is safe | Iowa, https://canceriowa.org/its-better-to-know-making-sure-your-private-well-water-is-safe/
31. Iowa's Private Wells Contaminated by Nitrate and Bacteria, https://www.iaenvironment.org/webres/File/EWG_IowaWells-Report_C01.pdf
32. Disparities in potential nitrate exposures within Iowa public water, https://pubs.rsc.org/ew/article/11/4/959/850182/Disparities-in-potential-nitrate-exposures-within
33. IIHR currently operates a network of 60 water quality sensors that, https://www.facebook.com/IIHR.UIowa/posts/iihr-currently-operates-a-network-of-60-water-quality-sensors-that-provide-real-/1291012056151125/
34. about iwqis - Iowa Water Quality Information System | IWQIS, https://iwqis.iowawis.org/about.html
35. Iowa House approves budget that could cut Iowa's water sensors, https://investigatemidwest.org/2023/05/03/iowa-house-approves-budget-that-could-cut-iowas-water-sensors/
36. Iowa Counties Keep Water Quality Monitoring Afloat After State, https://insideclimatenews.org/news/24102025/iowa-polk-county-water-quality-monitoring-agricultural-pollution/
37. These two water monitoring programs are not the same, https://www.bleedingheartland.com/2026/04/24/these-two-water-monitoring-programs-are-not-the-same/
38. Legislators Fail Iowans On Water Sensor Funding - Blog For Iowa, https://blogforiowa.com/2026/05/21/legislators-fail-iowans-on-water-sensor-funding/
39. Longtime water program leader monitors Iowa nitrate levels as, https://dailyiowan.com/2026/04/19/longtime-water-program-leader-monitors-iowa-nitrate-levels-as-funding-tightens/
40. Master Matrix - Iowa State Association of Counties, https://www.iowacounties.org/member-resources/legal-resources/master-matrix/
41. Johnson County adopts construction evaluation resolution related to, https://www.johnsoncountyiowa.gov/news/board-supervisors/2026-01-02/johnson-county-adopts-construction-evaluation-resolution-related
42. Iowa CAFOs: Regulations, Permits, and Compliance Requirements, https://iowaagricultureauthority.com/iowa-concentrated-animal-feeding-operations/
43. Manure Management Plans (MMPs) - Iowa DNR, https://www.iowadnr.gov/environmental-protection/animal-feeding-operations/afo-confinements/manure-management-plans
44. Iowa Phosphorus (P) Index Calculator update - Iowa DNR, https://www.iowadnr.gov/news-release/2025-02-13/iowa-phosphorus-p-index-calculator-update
45. IAC Ch 65, p.1 567—65.17 (459459B) Manure management plan, https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/iac/rule/08-11-2010.567.65.17.pdf
46. 459.313A Application of manure on land — snow covered ground, https://www.legis.iowa.gov/docs/code/2025/459.313A.pdf
47. Summit Carbon Solutions and SCS Carbon Transport: Applications, https://iuc.iowa.gov/hazardous-liquid-pipeline-requests
48. Iowa Utilities Commission Grants Summit's Petition for a Carbon, https://www.calt.iastate.edu/post/iowa-utilities-commission-grants-summits-petition-carbon-pipeline-permit
49. Iowa House passes bill to restrict use of eminent domain for, https://littlevillagemag.com/iowa-house-passes-bill-to-restrict-use-of-eminent-domain-for-summits-co2-pipeline/
50. Iowa House passes bill banning eminent domain for carbon pipelines, https://www.iowapublicradio.org/state-government-news/2026-01-22/iowa-house-passes-bill-banning-eminent-domain-for-carbon-pipelines
51. Iowa Senate passes bill limiting eminent domain for carbon capture, https://www.iowapublicradio.org/state-government-news/2025-05-13/iowa-senate-passes-eminent-domain-bill-carbon-capture-pipelines
52. Environmentalists push lawmakers to forge ahead on moratorium, https://www.newsfromthestates.com/article/environmentalists-push-lawmakers-forge-ahead-moratorium-and-regulations-data-centers
53. Latest News - Iowa Cancer Registry, https://shri.public-health.uiowa.edu/latest-news/
54. Interactive Iowa Data Tools - Iowa Cancer Registry, https://shri.public-health.uiowa.edu/cancer-data/interactive-iowa-data-tools/
55. 2026 Cancer in Iowa report highlights cancer incidence among, https://shri.public-health.uiowa.edu/2026/03/13/2026-cancer-in-iowa-report/
56. CANCER IN IOWA, https://shri.public-health.uiowa.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/2026-Cancer-in-Iowa.pdf
57. Radon in Iowa: The Hidden Carcinogen We Can No Longer Ignore, https://www.iaenvironment.org/blog/iowa-environmental-voice/radon-in-iowa-the-hidden-carcinogen-we-can-no-longer-ignore
58. As Iowa continues to see high cancer rates, radon professionals are, https://www.facebook.com/IowasNewsNow/posts/as-iowa-continues-to-see-high-cancer-rates-radon-professionals-are-encouraging-h/1548242117315602/
59. Radon In Iowa (LBP) – Health, Work and the Environment Spring 2026, https://pressbooks.uiowa.edu/hwe-cph-3400-0a03-sp26/chapter/radon-poisoning-in-iowa/
60. Radon in Iowa - Iowa Cancer Consortium, https://canceriowa.org/radon/
61. Radon Resources - Iowa Department of Health and Human Services, https://hhs.iowa.gov/health-prevention/providers-professionals/radiological-health/radon/radon-resources
62. Municipal Drinking Water Nitrate Level and Cancer Risk in Older, https://www.wassermanufaktur.com/media/pdf/03/0c/ed/Nitrate-and-Cancer-University-of-Iowa.pdf
63. Drinking water of almost 1 in 5 Americans contains nitrates linked to, https://www.ewg.org/research/drinking-water-almost-1-5-americans-contains-nitrates-linked-cancer-and-birth-defects
64. Municipal drinking water nitrate level and cancer risk in older women, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11338313/
65. EPA stalls long-planned nitrate cancer review as pollution crisis grows, https://www.circleofblue.org/2026/agriculture/epa-stalls-long-planned-nitrate-cancer-review-as-pollution-crisis-grows/
66. Iowa FFY 2025 PHHS Block Grant Executive Summary, https://hhs.iowa.gov/media/16688/download?inline
67. Iowa FFY 2026 PHHS Block Grant Executive Summary, https://hhs.iowa.gov/media/18895/download?inline
68. Iowa's rural areas lack obstetric facilities, affecting maternal healthcare, https://www.facebook.com/KentuckyReligiousCoalitionforReproductiveChoice/posts/more-than-half-of-iowas-counties-57-did-not-have-an-obstetric-facility-in-2025-a/1462000312624715/
69. State report finds majority of maternal deaths were preventable, https://www.iowapublicradio.org/health/2025-04-11/state-report-finds-majority-maternal-pregnancy-deaths-preventable
70. Infant mortality rates by race/ethnicity: Iowa, 2021-2023 Average, https://www.marchofdimes.org/peristats/data?reg=99&top=6&stop=92&lev=1&slev=4&obj=1&sreg=19
71. 2025 March Of Dimes Report Card For Iowa | PeriStats, https://www.marchofdimes.org/peristats/reports/iowa/report-card
72. Iowa Department of Health and Human Services - Iowa.gov, https://hhs.iowa.gov/media/19012/download?inline
73. FY26 RFP COMPADM26001 for Combat Cancer ... - IowaGrants, https://www.iowagrants.gov/viewStorefrontOpportunity.do?OIDString=1763756798533|Opportunity
74. IA SF2381 - BillTrack50, https://www.billtrack50.com/billdetail/1974908
75. Iowa Department of Health and Human Services More Options for, https://grantedai.com/grants/iowa-department-of-health-and-human-services-more-options-for-maternal-s-iowa-department-of-health-and-human-serv-52235efd
76. Water quality and cancer are top of mind for many Iowa voters. This, https://www.iowapublicradio.org/environment/2026-09-11/protect-water-quality-cancer-iowa
77. 2026 Iowa Legislative Priorities, https://www.fightcancer.org/2026-iowa-legislative-priorities
78. Iowa Environmental Council launches Protect Water Prevent Cancer, https://www.businessrecord.com/iowa-environmental-council-launches-protect-water-prevent-cancer-campaign/
79. Combat Cancer TA, https://iphprp.org/services/combatcancer/