[Note: This is the fourth in a series of Research Notes by Platte’s summer intern, focusing on county zoning and agriculture issues]
Thirteen years before Nebraska developed its Livestock Siting Assessment Matrix, its neighbor, Iowa, implemented a similar tool. In 2002, the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) introduced a scoring system, known as the Master Matrix, to evaluate construction permit applications for certain livestock operations. Like Nebraska’s later matrix, Iowa’s system calls for producers to attain a minimum number of points before their operations can receive construction approval. Available in PDF format, the Master Matrix requires applicants to achieve at least 50% of the total possible score (a minimum of 440 points), as well as at least 25% of the available points in each of the three categories: air quality, water quality, and community impact. Additionally, the matrix assesses proposed site locations and management practices to identify potential adverse effects on the environment and surrounding communities.
As in Nebraska’s permit process, Iowa producers must complete the matrix and submit it with other required documents, such as a construction design statement, a Professional Engineer certification form, and a manure management plan. Once submitted, a county official reviews the materials and completes the matrix independently. Regardless of whether the county assigns a passing or failing score, it must submit a recommendation to the DNR. If the application violates state regulations, the DNR will issue a preliminary denial. However, if the project meets legal requirements but receives a failing matrix score from the county, the DNR will conduct its own scoring of the matrix. If the DNR’s assessment results in a passing score, the application is approved.
Although Iowa’s Master Matrix process is nearly identical to Nebraska’s Livestock Siting Assessment Matrix in structure, the key distinction lies in the tool’s adoption and implementation. As of February 2025, 85 of Iowa’s 99 counties have adopted the Master Matrix, in contrast to Nebraska’s inconsistent and limited use of its tool. This discrepancy can be attributed to how the tools are promoted and maintained at the state level. Nebraska’s approach, releasing the matrix and leaving adoption entirely optional, has led to widespread unfamiliarity and underuse. In contrast, Iowa has instituted an annual enrollment process that keeps counties engaged and informed.
Each December, the DNR notifies all Iowa counties about the opportunity to enroll in the Master Matrix for the following year. To participate, counties must pass a construction evaluation resolution annually between January 1 and January 11, formally declaring their intent to use the matrix. This opt-in model ensures local control while promoting consistent use across the state. Moreover, the DNR’s routine outreach has helped sustain awareness and proper use of the tool year after year, making the Iowan Master Matrix a resounding success.
Sources:
