March Madness

And...why Mike Naig and Republicans hate water monitoring

When viewed over long time periods (decadal, for example), average nitrate concentrations in Iowa streams tend to follow an “S” curve with the calendar. The example below is the Raccoon River at Des Moines, from 1974 to 2025.

Concentrations tend to peak in May and June, and then bottom out in August and September, then increase again until January, and then decline again until about April 1st.

March typically is the fourth-lowest month for nitrate concentrations.

But…March of 2026 has been an extraordinary month for stream nitrate all over Iowa. These are some peak concentrations from around the state this month:

All the data above is from the water quality sensor network, except for the Raccoon at Des Moines which is from the Des Moines Water Works website.

Unless this is the first thing you’ve read after emerging from a 3-year coma, it’s likely you’ve heard or read about the sensor saga since the legislature interrupted its funding stream in 2023. This happened mere days after I gave my notice to the University of Iowa of my intention to retire. Part of my job was to manage the sensor network.

Since that time, UI has kept the network running at a diminished capacity through other funding streams. Those will end on June 30. Some of Iowa’s counties and the Izaak Walton League have been trying to pick up the slack, but these type of efforts tend not to be sustainable for the long haul.

It’s important to recognize that the network was not funded through an allocation from the legislature; rather, that money came from the Groundwater Tax, also known as the Groundwater Protection Fund and other sorts of insider lingo. Some of that funding is from a tax on nitrogen fertilizer, so some refer to the tax as the ‘fertilizer tax’, but that’s only part the money stream.

In 2023, the legislature simply reassigned that portion of the money going to UI (around $500,000 per year), sending it instead to Mike Naig and the Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship.

Todd Dorman reported yesterday in the Cedar Rapids Gazette that the Groundwater Protection Fund currently holds $23.5 million dollars, enough to fund the sensor network for roughly 50 years.

Several Republicans have stated that the Iowa DNR Ambient Water Monitoring Program adequately characterizes water quality in Iowa, and for that reason the sensor network is not needed. The DNR monitoring does indeed generate a valuable data set and the program needs to be continued and bolstered.

Comparing the sensors to the DNR program, however, is like comparing apples and planting an apple tree. DNR data are not daylighted for public consumption for sometimes months after samples are collected, analyzed in a laboratory, and data posted onto the DNR web portal, which is nightmarish for lay people to navigate.

Plain and simple, Naig and Republicans in the legislature want to prevent the public from seeing how bad your water quality is NOW, because saying the water was bad two months ago tends to not be news. Water quality data in general also tells a story different from what they want told about their pet policy, the Iowa Nutrient Reduction Strategy, now in its 14th year.

So instead of talking about ACTUAL water quality, they want to tell you how much of your money they’ve spent on bandaid and diaper conservation. Honest question: When did Iowa Republicans decide it was ok to spend public money with no accountability and no measurable outcomes? Back in the day, didn’t Rs used to mock Ds for these exact reasons when it came to their support of various social programs?

Naig says we’re spending $100M per year on water quality, matched with $500M per year in federal funding. Do you see $600 million per year improvements in your water quality? I sure don’t.

---

Let’s look at Iowa’s most important drinking water supply river, the Raccoon at Des Moines. The analysis that follows uses 1974-2026 data generated primarily at Des Moines Water Works (DMWW), with data drawn from other credible sources (Iowa DNR, USGS, Des Moines River Water Quality Network (DMRQN) to fill gaps in the DMWW data, which mostly occur in the months around the 1993 flood when the treatment plant was inundated.

The average March Nitrate-N concentration from 1974-2025 was 6.0 mg/L. In four out of those 52 years, the average exceeded 10 mg/L: 1991 (12.5 mg/L), 1992 (11.33), 1999 (10.2), and 2016 (10.8).

This year, up until today (March 30th), the average for the month is 13.0 mg/L. (I’m using data from the nitrate sensor at Van Meter for the last couple of days.)

The highest value ever measured at Des Moines during the month of March was 13.3 mg/L in 1992. The Raccoon River at Des Moines has exceeded that value on 16 days in 2026, with a new maximum established on March 11 of 16.5 mg/L. Since January 1, the Raccoon has been below the EPA maximum for drinking water (10 mg/L) on only 15 days.

It’s been above 10 mg/L on 74 days (!) and above 16 mg/L on ten days (!!).

Raccoon River Nitrate, 2026. Allowable drinking water maximum is 10 mg/L.

The denialists will surely say but/but/but what about the weather, since nitrate concentrations tend to be higher during wet weather. Ok, let’s take a look at that.

Statewide, long-term average precipitation from January through March is 4.12”. This year: 3.46”. March long-term average precipitation: 2.05”. This year: 2.18”. Sorry guys.

Having studied this stuff for 25 years, I can tell you these nitrate numbers are off the charts bonkers for a river the size of the Raccoon and one that serves as a drinking water supply for 600,000 people. Having worked in the water supply industry, it’s my firm belief that this situation would never be tolerated by people in any other metropolitan area in the U.S.

This is what $600 million per year of spending by the state and federal government has given us. Between brag sessions held to crow about his check-writing abilities, which are prodigious indeed, do you think Naig mentions the trends toward higher nitrogen fertilizer application rates, and the trends back to fall application, which result in greater losses? Or the 10s of thousands of miles of new drainage tile that are installed every year in Iowa, which increase nitrate loss? Or that Iowa State is now recommending higher nitrogen application rates to corn in many parts of Iowa?

I’ve heard no such talk.

Iowans have been misled by people in authority about our water quality for decades. Sometimes lied to in brazen ways. And sometimes obstructed from knowing the truth, which is happening right now with the water quality sensors and the legislature.

There’s an agribusiness empire here in Iowa terrified that regulation of the pollution will reduce sales of their stuff (i.e. inputs) to the Iowa farmer. This is the same stuff the price of which Iowa farmers are screaming about right now. In many cases, this is also the same stuff that pollutes your air and water—fertilizer nitrogen and pesticides, to name two. Naig claims to care, but the truth is, agribusiness is the world he came from and job 1 for him is to protect this racket at all costs—with your tax dollars, $600 million of them every year.

But Naig would burn his own clothes before he’d bring accountability to that six hundred mil with actual water quality data. Without it, what’s required from him is blowing smoke up the backsides of 3 million Iowans when it comes to water quality, and I’ll concede he’s not bad at it. He sure gets lots of practice and plenty of help in that endeavor.

But folks, maybe, just maybe, the times, they are a changing, and I think even the Agribusiness Titans may suspect this. As rural Iowa struggles, as our children and grandchildren flee to distant cities and states, and as the rest of us wonder if we’re going to die of old age before some pollution-caused cancer gets us first, I think people are seeing the light. As Mr. Dylan said in 1964, the order is rapidly fadin'. Let’s hope so.