Water Quality Impacts

Females and Males

Female respondents in the general public consistently rate the primary factors, except for hardness, higher than males do, in similar ratios to the respondents engaged in farming vs. those not engaged in farming.

Among students, three of the top four factors are nearly the same across genders. Females selected hardness at a significantly higher rate, but that could be related to sensitivity to hair washing and effectiveness of hair products—which can be greatly diminished when using hard water. However, for nearly all factors, female students were more likely to select known or suspected than their male counterparts.

Who should be most responsible for protecting water quality in your community?

Who is responsible for restoring and protecting water quality in the state—and how do we achieve that?
It depends on who you ask.

General public respondents who farm tend to lean on individuals to protect water quality:

Well, it’d be nice if it was grassroots. Farmers feeling compelled or feeling responsible themselves.
Male Farmer

Those who aren’t engaged in farming—as well as students who are—put higher responsibility on government:

Government has to be supportive. And they’re the ones that are subsidizing a lot of these problems. They’re encouraging higher production…really pushing really high numbers and intensive farming.
Female Urban

Both urban and farmer participants pointed toward crop insurance and government programs as contributing to poor water quality:

If the crop insurance wasn’t the way it was, [that land] wouldn’t be farmed. It’d be put back into pasture.
Male Farmer

Water Quality Matters to Us All

Iowans are well-known for coming together to help when tragedy strikes, from floods to derechos. The time is now for all Iowans to make clean water a priority:

Do you know of or suspect that any of the following conditions are affecting water quality in your area?

Respondents were presented nine conditions—high bacteria counts, fertilizer/nitrate, heavy metals, hardness, pesticides, livestock waste, pet waste, septic systems, and pharmaceuticals/personal care products—and asked for each to indicate if they know or suspect it of affecting water quality, if it is not a problem, or if they don’t know.

Survey respondents identified the primary conditions impacting water quality as:

  • Hardness

  • Fertilizer/nitrate

  • Livestock waste

  • Pesticides

  • High bacteria counts

Farmers and Non-Farmers

The largest variation in responses between those engaged in farming and those not engaged in farming was revealed in this question. The majority of general public respondents not engaged in farming (75 percent) view fertilizer/nitrate as the main impact in their area, followed by hardness at 71 percent.

The majority of general public farming respondents (76 percent) identify hardness as the major issue, with only 55 percent identifying fertilizer/nitrate as a factor. Similar to other trends between the 2012 Iowa Learning Farms Community Assessments and this one, more farmers (59 percent) 10 years ago felt fertilizers/nitrate were affecting water quality. They understand that there are excess nutrients in the water, but it is less clear they have the will or understanding of how to change this.

With greater media coverage of bacteria levels in lakes and recreation areas over the past decade, there is significantly increased awareness of high bacteria counts as a known or suspected issue compared to what was noted in the 2007 Water Issues in Iowa report, with only 28 percent knowing or suspecting it was a problem at that time. Concerns over bacteria in Iowa’s waterways also came out strongly in the urban listening sessions.

Among farming students, fertilizer/nitrate is the top factor, at 61 percent, followed closely by hardness at 60 percent. Both of these percentages are higher than those for students not engaged in farming, as are the responses for pesticides and livestock waste.