Iowans want clean water, but that has not motivated Iowa policymakers to tackle water pollution.

Rather, the driving fear is stronger regulation by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) because of the “dead zone.” That 5,000-square-mile area in the Gulf of Mexico has become toxic to life because of nitrogen and phosphorus, mostly from farm runoff. Iowa and Illinois are the top culprits.

The state’s “nutrient reduction strategy” is a narrow approach designed not to clean up Iowa’s water in our lifetimes, but to forestall specific federal limits on polluted water. The plan is focused on how to manage fertilizer. That piece is good as far as it goes, but does not go far enough. Iowa needs a broader strategy.

The Gulf of Mexico is not the only water body with a “dead zone.” For example, Maryland depends on  the Chesapeake Bay as a $1 trillion economic driver, including tourism, recreation, seafood and other industries. Maryland has been fouling its own nest for decades.

Imagine the Gulf of Mexico in Iowa. No doubt dealing with our 489 impaired lakes and streams suffering death by a thousand drips would become more urgent, undeserving of the 80 percent budget cut inflicted by Governor Branstad this year.

As both perpetrators and victims, Maryland citizens made clean water a top public priority. In leaner economic times, a 2012 poll showed that 91 percent of Maryland residents said cleaner water was important and nearly two-thirds supported increasing a statewide household tax to do it. Eighty percent wanted the state to be active in managing growth.

I spent a day on a recent trip to Maryland learning about the Chesapeake Bay. Governor Martin O’Malley put his staff at my disposal after I met him on his summer visit to Iowa. What lessons can be learned from the Chesapeake initiative that might be helpful to us?

Here is what I learned from the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, the EPA’s Chesapeake Bay program and the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science:

* Maryland’s challenges are similar to ours. With 17.5 million people and 77,000 farms, the largest estuary in North America has 3,600 species of fish, plants and wildlife. Poor water quality and declining fish and wildlife are caused by excessive nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment from farm runoff, impervious surfaces in urban areas and loss of natural habitat due to deforestation sea-level rise.

* Maryland is working with five other states — Virginia, Delaware, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and New York — along with the District of Columbia, 1,800 local governments and the EPA. They have established a “pollution diet” for the Chesapeake, limiting how many “calories” each state can feed the ecosystem from all sources.

* The themes of their partnership, consolidated over the last five years: clear goals, deadlines, measurement, transparency, accountability, science-based best-management practices and dedicated funding;

* $191 million in direct investment comes from Maryland’s Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays Trust Fund for non-point source pollution reduction, with $109 million in leveraged funds between 2009 and 2014;

* 890 projects to-date have removed 2.2 million pounds of nitrogen, 243,522 pounds of phosphorus and 17,527 tons of solids; restored 1,180 acres of forest and 312 acres of wetlands; engaged 32,190 students; and employed 885 people in direct and indirect jobs.

* $700,000 is dedicated to strategic monitoring and implementation tracking;

* Comprehensive data is collected and reported on nutrient management plans, adoption of best practices and use of public subsidies by agricultural producers;

* A university report card provides a timely and geographically-detailed assessment of the health status of the watershed, using mutually-agreed indicators;

* Better handling of storm water is a major part of the strategy . My visit included a tour of a project on Saltworks Creek. The stream is being restored and rehydrated to reduce the export of sediment and pollutants to the Severn River.

Iowa and neighboring states can’t simply copy and paste the Chesapeake model onto the upper Mississippi. But we can adopt or adapt the pieces that help us do more, do it better and do it faster than we are now, with everyone doing their part and no one getting a free pass.

My hosts in Maryland are willing to come to Iowa to tell their story. I will be working with my colleagues in the Iowa Legislature and on the Watershed Planning Advisory Council to take them up on their offer.

State Rep. Chuck Isenhart (D-Dubuque) is ranking member on the House Environmental Protection Committee and liaison to the state Watershed Planning Advisory Council.