April, 13 2011, 05:37pm EDT

Soil Erosion in Corn Belt Is Much Worse Than Official Estimates
Fencerow-to-fencerow cultivation erases gains in soil conservation
AMES, Iowa
Data based on tracking erosion after every storm over a period of years shows that Iowa farms are losing precious topsoil up to 12 times faster than government estimates, a disturbing discovery detailed in a new report by the Environmental Working Group. The report, titled Losing Ground, is based on research by scientists at Iowa State University whose methods provide an unprecedented degree of precision in monitoring soil erosion.
Moreover, aerial surveys by EWG and interviews with experts across the Corn Belt indicate that soil erosion and polluted runoff are likely far worse than even the disturbing ISU numbers suggest. The aerial photography showed that many Corn Belt fields are scarred by gullies that funnel soil and toxic farm chemicals into streams damage that is not accounted for in official or even ISU's estimates of soil erosion and runoff.
"What is happening on Iowa farm fields is shocking but goes largely unnoticed," said Craig Cox, who manages EWG's agriculture programs from its Ames, Iowa office. Cox is the lead author of Losing Ground.
"We've grown complacent thinking we have the soil erosion problem under control, but instead it looks as if we are losing ground in our decades-old fight against this most fundamental and damaging problem in agriculture," Cox said.
Go here for the full Losing Ground Report
Go here for a short video produced by Atlas Films showing EWG's aerial footage.
Go here for an analysis on the policy and political implications of Losing Ground
In April 2010, the US Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service estimated that the rate of soil erosion on agricultural land averaged only 5.2 tons per acre per year in Iowa and 3.9 tons per acre per year across the Corn Belt. On the surface, these data are reassuring, because they suggest erosion is less than the so-called "sustainable rate." But the more precise look provided through the ISU project's data shows that these statewide or regional estimates are masking the serious damage that occurs when larger storms hit.
"When a storm hits vulnerable or poorly protected soil, fields lose more soil in a single day than is supposed to sustainable for the whole year, or even decades," said Cox. "If we had the same kind of information for other intensive corn-growing states, the picture would be the same or worse. Alarm bells should be going off across the Corn Belt."
Farmers are planting fencerow-to-fencerow in response to high crop prices that are likely here to stay. Misguided mandates for corn ethanol production add fuel to the fire, and flawed government farm and insurance subsidies clear the way for all-out production with little regard for what happens to the soil, water and wildlife habitat.
Chronically underfunded and voluntary agricultural conservation programs cannot compete with the pressure these forces are putting on America's soil and water. Between 1997 and 2009, the government paid Corn Belt farmers $51.2 billion in subsidies to spur production, but just $7.0 billion to implement conservation practices. The $18.9 billion spent to subsidize expansion of the corn ethanol industry rubs salt in the wound.
USDA should resume full and aggressive enforcement of provisions in the 1985 farm bill that require farmers who accept subsidies to apply soil conservation measures on the most vulnerable cropland. Official reports and anecdotal evidence indicate that enforcement has waned, putting at risk the gains made in soil conservation between 1985 and 1995.
In addition, EWG believes Congress must act to strengthen the conservation compliance provisions when it reauthorizes the farm bill in 2012. Specifically, Congress should:
- Require all producers participating in existing or new crop and revenue insurance programs to meet conservation compliance standards.
- Reopen and revise all the legacy soil conservation compliance plans approved and applied before July 3, 1996, requiring that they reduce erosion to a truly "sustainable" level and prevent ephemeral gully erosion on highly erodible cropland.
- Require vegetative buffer zones at least 35 feet wide between row crops and all lakes, rivers and smaller streams.
- Adequately fund USDA's technical staff so it can plan and implement the required conservation practices and conduct annual inspections.
"This isn't rocket science," said Cox. "Simple, common-sense conservation practices that some farmers have used for years can bring soil erosion under control and protect our streams, lakes and rivers. It seems only fair to ask landowners to take these simple steps in return for the generous public support they receive each year."
Go here for the full Losing Ground Report
Go here for a short video produced by Atlas Films showing EWG's aerial footage.
Go here for an analysis on the policy and political implications of Losing Ground
The Environmental Working Group is a community 30 million strong, working to protect our environmental health by changing industry standards.
(202) 667-6982LATEST NEWS
Environmental and Indigenous Groups Mobilize to Stop 'Alligator Alcatraz'
"This scheme is not only cruel, it threatens the Everglades ecosystem that state and federal taxpayers have spent billions to protect," said Eve Samples, executive director of Friends of the Everglades.
Jun 30, 2025
As Florida's Republican government moves to construct a sprawling new immigration detention center in the heart of the Everglades, nicknamed "Alligator Alcatraz," environmental groups and a wide range of other activists have begun to mobilize against it.
Florida's Republican attorney general, James Uthmeier, announced last week that construction of the jail, at the site of a disused airbase in the Big Cypress National Preserve, had begun. According to Fox 4 Now, an affiliate in Southwest Florida, construction has moved at "a blistering pace," with the site expected to be done by next week.
Three environmental advocacy groups have launched a lawsuit to try to halt the construction of the facility. And on Saturday, hundreds of protesters flocked to the remote site to voice their opposition.
Opponents have called out the cruelty of the plan, which comes as part of U.S. President Donald Trump's crusade to deport thousands of immigrants per day. They also called out the site's potential to inflict severe harm to local wildlife in one of America's most unique ecosystems.
Florida's government has said the site will have no environmental impact. Last week, Uthmeier described the area as a barren swampland. He said the site "presents an efficient, low-cost opportunity to build a temporary detention facility because you don't need to invest that much in the perimeter. People get out, there's not much waiting for 'em other than alligators and pythons," he said in the video. "Nowhere to go, nowhere to hide."
But local indigenous leaders have said that's not true. Saturday's protest was led by Native American groups, who say that the site will destroy their sacred homelands. According to The Associated Press, Big Cypress is home to 15 traditional Miccosukee and Seminole villages, as well as ceremonial and burial grounds and other gathering sites.
"Rather than Miccosukee homelands being an uninhabited wasteland for alligators and pythons, as some have suggested, the Big Cypress is the Tribe's traditional homelands. The landscape has protected the Miccosukee and Seminole people for generations," Miccosukee Chairman Talbert Cypress wrote in a statement on social media last week.
Environmental groups, meanwhile, have disputed the state's claims that the site will have no environmental impact. On Friday, the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Everglades, and Earthjustice sued the Department of Homeland Security in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. They argued that the site was being constructed without any of the environmental reviews required by the National Environmental Policy Act.
"The site is more than 96% wetlands, surrounded by Big Cypress National Preserve, and is habitat for the endangered Florida panther and other iconic species. This scheme is not only cruel, it threatens the Everglades ecosystem that state and federal taxpayers have spent billions to protect," said Eve Samples, executive director of Friends of the Everglades.
Governor Ron DeSantis used emergency powers to fast track the proposal, which the Center for Biological Diversity says has left no room for public input or environmental review required by federal law.
"This reckless attack on the Everglades—the lifeblood of Florida—risks polluting sensitive waters and turning more endangered Florida panthers into roadkill. It makes no sense to build what’s essentially a new development in the Everglades for any reason, but this reason is particularly despicable," said Elise Bennett, Florida and Caribbean director and attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity.
Reuters has reported that the planned jail could hold up to 5,000 detained migrants at a time and could cost $450 million per year to maintain. It comes as President Trump has sought to increase deportations to a quota of 3,000 per day. The majority of those who have been arrested by federal immigration authorities have no criminal records.
"This massive detention center," Bennett said, "will blight one of the most iconic ecosystems in the world."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Kristi Noem Took Personal Cut of Political Donations While Governor of South Dakota: Report
"No wonder Pam Bondi gutted the public integrity section of DOJ. To protect utterly corrupt monsters like Kristi Noem."
Jun 30, 2025
The investigative outlet ProPublica revealed Monday that Kristi Noem secretly took a personal cut of funds she raised for a nonprofit that boosted her political career—and then did not disclose the income when President Donald Trump selected her to serve as head of the Department of Homeland Security.
ProPublica reported that in 2023, while Noem was governor of South Dakota, the nonprofit group American Resolve Policy Fund "routed funds to a personal company of Noem's that had recently been established in Delaware." The company is called Ashwood Strategies, and it was registered in June 2023.
"The payment totaled $80,000 that year, a significant boost to her roughly $130,000 government salary," according to the outlet. "Since the nonprofit is a so-called dark money group—one that's not required to disclose the names of its donors—the original source of the money remains unknown."
Experts told ProPublica that the arrangement and Noem's failure to disclose the income were unusual at best and possibly unlawful.
"If donors to these nonprofits are not just holding the keys to an elected official's political future but also literally providing them with their income, that's new and disturbing," Daniel Weiner, a former Federal Election Commission attorney who now works at the Brennan Center for Justice, told ProPublica.
Noem's lawyers denied that she violated the law but did not reply to ProPublica's questions about whether the Office of Government Ethics was aware of the $80,000 payment.
Unlike many Trump administration officials, Noem is not a billionaire. But "while she is among the least wealthy members of Trump's Cabinet, her personal spending habits have attracted notice," ProPublica observed, noting that she was "photographed wearing a gold Rolex Cosmograph Daytona watch that costs nearly $50,000 as she toured the Salvadoran prison where her agency is sending immigrants."
"In April, after her purse was stolen at a Washington, D.C. restaurant, it emerged she was carrying $3,000 in cash, which an official said was for 'dinner, activities, and Easter gifts,'" the outlet continued. "She was criticized for using taxpayer money as governor to pay for expenses related to trips to Paris, to Canada for bear hunting, and to Houston to have dental work done. At the time, Noem denied misusing public funds."
Political scientist Norman Ornstein wrote Monday that it was "no wonder [Attorney General] Pam Bondi gutted the public integrity section of DOJ."
"To protect utterly corrupt monsters like Kristi Noem," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Caving to Trump, Canada Drops Tax on US Tech Firms
One journalist accused Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney of chickening out.
Jun 30, 2025
Acquiescing to pressure from the Trump administration, the Canadian government announced on Sunday that the country will rescind the digital services tax, a levy that would have seen large American tech firms pay billions of dollars to Canada over the next few years.
The Sunday announcement from the Canadian government cited "anticipation of a mutually beneficial comprehensive trade arrangement" as the reason for the rescission.
"Today's announcement will support a resumption of negotiations toward the July 21, 2025, timeline set out at this month's G7 Leaders' Summit in Kananaskis," said Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney in the statement.
The digital services tax impacts companies that make over $20 million in revenue from Canadian users and customers through digital services like online advertising and shopping. Companies like Uber and Google would have paid a 3% levy on the money they made from Canadian sources, according to CBC News.
The reversal comes after U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday blasted the digital services tax, calling it a "direct and blatant attack on our country" on Truth Social.
Trump said he was suspending trade talks between the two countries because of the tax. "Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately. We will let Canada know the Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period," Trump wrote. The United States is Canada's largest trading partner.
Payments from tech firms subject to the digital services tax were due starting on Monday, though the tax has been in effect since last year.
"The June 30, 2025 collection will be halted," and Canada's Minister of Finance "will soon bring forward legislation to rescind the Digital Services Tax Act," according to the Sunday statement.
"If Mark Carney folds in response to this pressure from Trump on the digital services tax, he proves he can be pushed around," said Canadian journalist Paris Marx on Bluesky, speaking prior to the announcement of the rescission. "The tax must be enforced," he added.
"Carney chickens out too," wrote the author Doug Henwood on Twitter on Monday.
In an opinion piece originally published in Canadian Dimension before the announcement on Sunday, Jared Walker, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Canadians for Tax Fairness, wrote that all the money generated for the tax could mean "more federal money for housing, transit, and healthcare transfers—all from some of the largest and most under-taxed companies in the world."
Walker also wrote that the digital service tax could serve as a counterweight to the so-called "revenge tax" provision in Trump's sprawling domestic tax and spending bill.
Section 899, called "Enforcement of Remedies Against Unfair Foreign Taxes," would "increase withholding taxes for non-resident individuals and companies from countries that the U.S. believes have imposed discriminatory or unfair taxes," according to CBC. The digital services tax is one of the taxes the Trump administration believes is discriminatory.
"If 'elbows up' is going to be more than just a slogan, Canada can't cave to pressure when Donald Trump throws his weight around," wrote Walker, invoking the Canadian rallying cry in the face of American antagonism when it comes to trade.
"But this slogan also means the Carney government has to make sure it is working on behalf of everyday Canadians—not just the ultra-rich and big corporations that are only 'Canadian' when it's convenient," Walker wrote.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular