Exhibit C: Detailed Background, Work Group Recommendations

Impact to Iowans: Costs for monitoring and planning. Water quality improvements.
Potential improvements in wildlife habitat. Potential for increased cyanobacteria blooms
due to the introduction of high nutrient water in the wetland, increased wetland water
storage capacity.
Agencies Affected: Individual drainage districts and county governments, IDALS‐DSC, IDNR,
NRCS, FSA, U.S. Fish and Wildlife service, EPA
Interest Groups that Support or Oppose: Iowa Drainage District Association and Iowa Land
Improvement Association support. Other state and federal agencies are working with IDALS
to develop pilot projects to refine this concept.
Funding Considerations: Could be funding‐neutral for the public once any research and
evaluation is complete if existing wetland restoration programs are redirected for this
purpose. If done as part of drainage infrastructure replacement, costs would be borne by
drainage district landowners to cover required mitigation.
Recommendation #9: Develop, implement, monitor and document a watershed project that has as
a primary goal high infiltration of rainfall under non‐saturated soil moisture conditions in both rural
and urban areas.
Required Action Not Including Legislation: None.
Legislation Required: None.
Impact to Iowans: Primary impacts are rural and on cropland.
This could demonstrate reduced negative impacts from high‐frequency rainfall events and
benefits to soil quality.
Agencies Affected: DNR, IDALS, NRCS. Most crop producers not already using
comprehensive conservation systems will need significant technical assistance to comply
with this requirement.
Interest Groups that Support or Oppose: Not aware of any.
Funding Considerations: Funding needs are not the biggest barrier for this action.
Practices to achieve this requirement would be low cost UNLESS land use changes are
needed.
Recommendation #10: Conduct a cooperative pilot project for the evaluation of strategies for
reducing severe scour erosion and sand deposition by floodwaters under various soils/geology
conditions. Strategies would include but are not limited to levee and road modifications,
reforestation and grassland seeding. This project should be part of an overall watershed plan at the
HUC 8 scale or larger.
Required Action Not Including Legislation: Flood Risk Management Team (FRMT) to
facilitate coordination of work by USACE, NRCS and FSA. NRCS through the Wetlands
Reserve Program and FSA through the Conservation Reserve Program (as well as the
enhancement programs allowed for both programs.)
Legislation Required: None.
Impact to Iowans: Could provide information on strategies that could be used state‐wide.
69