Livestock Production: The Farm, The Environment, The Community

IOWA STATE UNIVERSITYUniversity Extension

Livestock Production:The Farm,

The Environment,The Community

March 28, 2005

Livestock Production:The Farm,

The Environment,The Community

Dr. Steve Hoff, Colin Johnson

March 28, 2006


Why are we concerned?

Community acceptance may be one of the driving factors in survival of your operation.

March 28, 2005


Why is the public concerned?An operations effect on:

March 28, 2005

water qualityair qualityproperty valuesroads & bridgesother farms


Types of operations

Regulations center on protection of natural resources

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) responsible at Federal level National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

(NPDES) Regulates discharge of pollutants from point sources

into waters of the United States


Types of operations

Define operations based on size Animal Feeding Operation or AFO AFOs are agricultural operations where animals are

kept and raised in confined situations. AFOs generally congregate animals, feed, manure, dead animals, and production operations on a small land area. Feed is brought to the animals rather than the animals grazing or otherwise seeking feed in pastures. Animal waste and wastewater can enter water bodies from spills or breaks of waste storage structures (due to accidents or excessive rain), and non-agricultural application of manure to crop land.


Types of operations

Define operations based on size Animal Feeding Operation or AFO An AFO is a lot or facility (other than an aquatic animal

production facility) where the following conditions are met:

Animals have been, are, or will be stabled or confined and fed or maintained for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period, and

Crops, vegetation, forage growth, or post-harvest residues are not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the lot or facility.

Source: US EPA


Types of operations

Define operations based on size Animal Feeding Operation or AFO AFOs that meet the regulatory definition of a CAFO may

be regulated under the NPDES permitting program. Previous EPA regulations based the definition of CAFOs

on the number of "animal units" confined. EPA no longer uses the term "animal unit," but instead

refers to the actual number of animals at the operation to define a CAFO.

Source: US EPA


Types of operations

Source: US EPA

Size Thresholds (number of animals)

Animal Sector Large CAFO Medium CAFO Small CAFO

Cattle or cow/calf pairs 1,000 or more 300-999 less than 300

Mature dairy cattle 700 or more 200-699 less than 200

Veal calves 1,000 or more 300-999 less than 300

Swine (weighing over 55 lbs 2,500 or more 750-2,499 less than 750

Swine (weighing less than 55 lbs 10,000 or more 3,000-9,999 less than 3,000

Horses 500 or more 150-499 less than 150

Sheep or lambs 10,000 or more 3,000-9,999 less than 3,000

Turkeys 55,000 or more 16,500-54,999 less than 16,500

Laying hens or broilers 30, 000 or more 9,000-29,999 less than 9,000

Chickens other than laying hens (other than a liquid manure handling system

125,000 or more 37,500-124,999 less than 37,500

Laying hens (other than a liquid manure handling systems 82,000 or more 25,000-81,999 less than 25,000

Ducks (other than a liquid manure handling systems) 30,000 or more 10,000-29,999 less than 10,000

Ducks (liquid manure handling systems) 5,000 or more 1,500-4,999 less than 1,500


Iowa requirements are based on operation size 1200 hd (480 animal units)

Storm water discharge permit if > 1 acre disturbed during construction

Tile around footings (with a shut off) or certify (prof. engineer) ground water table is below the structure

No alluvial (flood plain) or karst (bedrock) areas Upgrade concrete standards if on karst

Source: US EPA



No manure management plan is needed No construction permits are required Master matrix is not used No lawful separation required from residences or public

use areas Separations

200 ft. from shallow well 100 ft. from deep well 1000 ft. from major water source (navigable) 500 ft. from water sources (a bed with water flow and defined

banks) (excludes farm ponds) 2500 ft. State or Federal wetlands

Source: US EPA



Manure management plan required ($250) Manure storage indemnity fee $96 No construction permit No master matrix required Construction design statement (CDS) submitted at least

30 days before construction or Prof. Engineer Design Certification (generally provided by the builder)

Source: US EPA



Separations 1250 ft. from residences, businesses, churches, and schools 1875 ft. public use areas (parks, cemeteries, etc.) 200 ft. from shallow well 100 ft. from a deep well 1000 ft. from major water sources (navigable) 500 ft. from water sources (a bed with water flow and defined

banks) (excludes farm ponds) 2500 ft. State or Federal wetlands 100 ft. road right of way

** Are minimums producer can increase in they think it is warrented

Source: US EPA



Storm water discharge permit if > 1 acre disturbed during construction

Tile around footings (with a shut off) or certify (prof. engineer) ground water table is below the structure

No alluvial (flood plain) or karst (bedrock) areas Upgrade concrete standards if on karst

Water use permit - $25 Annual compliance fee - $144.00 ($0.15 x 960 AU) due

with annual update of MMP

Source: US EPA


Iowa requirements are based on operation size Master matrix – what is it?

A master matrix is a scoring system that was designed to evaluate the siting and manure management practices of proposed permitted operations based on environmental risks and community impacts.

The matrix was required by Iowa law, Senate File 2293, enacted by the 79th General Assembly in spring 2002.

Source: US EPA


Iowa requirements are based on operation size It was developed by a 10-member technical advisory

committee that was designated in the legislation.

Based on committee consensus on 44 factors addressing air quality, water quality, and community impacts.

After public input and revisions to the proposed matrix, the Environmental Protection Commission set passing scores on the matrix at 440 points of the total available.

Producers must pass 25 percent of the available points in each of the subcategories of air quality, water quality, and community impact.

Source: US EPA


Site considerations Like prime property value it is driven by –

LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION

Identify best location for a new livestock operation 1st step in growing a farming operation responsibly

90% of Iowa’s land is devoted to food production Many areas that are suitable for livestock facilities Does not mean there are no poor locations


Site considerations Size of barn and manure-holding structure

Available land for nutrient utilization

Distance to surface water or wells

Avoid karst (rock) terrain or alluvial (flood) soils

Determine distance to neighbors

Prevailing summer winds typically from south and west

Proximity of roads, bridges, lakes, streams, wetlands, and other public-use areas

Opportunities for future growth at a site


How have we gotten to this point ? Over time farms and specifically livestock facilities must be

modified, expanded and / or replaced.

Reasons for farm expansion Increased costs of living, increased demand for livestock products Including another generation into the business



Environmental Concerns


Public concerns

Center around three main areas Soil

Accumulation of minerals in the soil Runoff of minerals from land where nutrients were applied

Water Surface Ground water

Air Nuisance Health


Challenges

Producers must meet the demands Many technologies are available to address these

concerns. Expensive in a time of declining margins


Pig Densities Livestock production

is becoming concentrated in many geographical parts of the world. Pork production is no

exception


Pig Densities in Selected Countries(Adapted from Saskatchewan Agriculture Food and Rural Revitalization, Statistics Canada.)

Country or Region Pig Inventory Pigs Per Acre (Hectare)

Pigs Per Sq. Mile

United States

Iowa 15,000,000 0.56 (1.38) 357.9

North Carolina 9,600,000 1.71 (4.23) 1,095.2

Minnesota 6,100,000 0.28 (0.70) 181.7

Illinois 3,950,000 0.16 (0.40) 104.6

Indiana 3,100,000 0.23 (0.57) 148.4




Pigs Per Sq. Mile

Europe

Germany 25,958,000 0.89 (2.20) 569.1

Spain 23,858,000 0.74 (1.83) 474.6

France 15,290,000 0.34 (0.83) 214.7

Netherlands 13,000,000 5.81 (14.36) 3,720.6

Denmark 12,990,000 2.29 (5.67) 1,467.9

Belgium 6,851,000 3.29 (8.14) 2,107.4

United Kingdom 5,588,000 0.40 (0.99) 256.1




Pigs Per Sq. Mile

Asia

Japan 9,612,000 0.88 (2.16) 560.1

China 464,695,000 1.31 (3.24) 838.0

Canada

Quebec 4,280,000 0.93 (2.31) 597.7

Ontario 3,700,000 0.41 (1.01) 261.0

Manitoba 2,750,000 0.22 (0.55) 143.3

Alberta 2,100,000 0.08 (0.19) 49.6

Saskatchewan 1,211,000 0.03 (0.07) 16.9


Why are we concerned? The issue to locate a new livestock facility

generates debate in Iowa and other states?

Why do you suppose it causes more debate in some countries and less in others?


How can we overcome concerns?

March 28, 2005


How can we overcome concerns?

Management and facility approaches

Proper siting

Environmental measures

Knowing our neighbors


What are emission sources?What are emission sources?

2. Storage1. Housing

3. Land Application

Dr. Hongwei Xin


What are emissions? Common Pollutants

Odor Dust (PM) Ammonia (NH3) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S)

Control Points Prevent generation Capture or destroy before release Disperse or disguise to reduce impact

Dr. Robert Burns


Building Emissions

Constant Sources

Buildings typically release odors & gases continuously and at relatively stable rates.

Emission rate depends on: animal & housing system ventilation system and rate manure collection system and frequency of removal

Dr. Robert Burns


Possible Approaches

Filtration

Barriers

Vegetation / landscaping

Diet Manipulation

Oil sprinkling

Solids separation

Dr. Robert Burns


Possible Approaches

Covers

Composting

Additives

Injection

Application timing

Aeration

Anaerobic Digestion

Dr. Robert Burns


What affects odor/gas release & dispersion ?

3. Source intensity

2. Area

1. Wind speed

1. Temperature2. Wind speed3. Topography

Dr. Hongwei Xin


Weather/Terrain Impact Odor Plumes

5+ odor units

2-4 odor units

1 odor unit

Clear summer DAY, Open flat terrain

10 mph

N

Clear summer NIGHT, Open flat terrain

10 mph

N

Clear summer NIGHT, Trees down-wind of odor source

10 mph

N

Clear Summer DAY, Open flat terrain

2 mph

N

Dr. Hongwei Xin


Siting of new facilities

We must be wise about how we site facilities.


Community Assessment

How far do odors travel? When is the potentialgreatest for odor nuisance?

How can this information be used to makesiting recommendations?

How can we modify odor transport?


Community Assessment Model or CAM Program developed here at Iowa State Univ.

Ag & Biosystems Engineering - Dr. Steve Hoff Community based odor assessment model to help

identify most favorable site livestock facility New facility – swine, poultry, dairy, beef feedlot, etc. Expand an existing facility

Program supported by the Coalition to Support Iowa’s Farmers

= location, location, location


Community Assessment Model or CAM Based on numerous factors

Weather conditions Wind patterns Type and size of facility Terrain Other swine or livestock facilities in the area Neighbor sensitivity


Community Assessment Model or CAM Predicts the new or expanding livestock impact

on area neighbors Amount of time they will be exposed to different odor

levels Impact that implementing odor mitigation methods might

have Accounts for other existing sources of odor within a

community


Community Assessment Model or CAM Need site specific information

Proposed new facility or existing modification Specific weather data Current model only useful for Swine not other kinds of

livestock Been used to evaluate over 60 locations in Iowa


Community Assessment Model or CAM Remaining questions

Can the model work for poultry, dairy, and beef ?

Can the model be evaluated on how well did it performed when it was utilized in making a siting decision?

Can the number of available odor mitigation strategies be expanded?

How does terrain impact wind patters?


Reducing odor from swine facilities Building factors

When building a new facility consider a waste handling system that allows routine removal of material

Every 7 days or less Remodeling facilities

Smooth surfaces (floors, walls and ceilings) aid cleaning Slatted floors stay drier than slotted floors Pulling ventilation from under the floor promotes drier floors

Use good judgment Agitate and empty pits when favorable wind conditions prevail –

blowing away from neighbors Avoid making a mess on the roads Work with your neighbors

From Purdue University Extension


Reducing odor from swine facilities Building factors

Clean the buildings after each group of pigs or “turn” Keep 2” of water on the floor of open or under-floor

manure collection gutters and pits



Reducing odor from swine facilities Animal factors

Keep animals clean and dry Scrape manure buildup when it occurs on floors Maintain animal health – avoid scours Provide optimal conditions – warm, dry and draft-free

Provide recommended space allowance Overstocking

Cases where intentional overstocking occurs Understocking



Reducing odor from swine facilities Animal factors

Provide proper ventilation Air flow rates Air distribution

Waterer maintance Repair leaky waters – keeps floors dry Maintain waterers at correct height

Avoids wasting – Diluting manure Use flow-through pen design to keep floors dry



Reducing odor from swine facilities Dietary methods for reducing swine odor

Use feeding methods where more precision can be used to meet animal dietary requirements

Split sex feeding Phase feeding

Consider pelleting diet Improves digestibility

Smaller particle size

Heat during the pelleting process

Use wet feeding systems (3:1 water to feed ratio) Reduces feed spillage / waste Reduces water wasting Challenges – freezing, spoilage, etc.



Reducing odor from swine facilities Dietary methods for reducing swine odor

Add oils and fats to feed Reduce barn dust

Enzymes ?



Reducing odor from swine facilities Carcass disposal

Remove mortalities from site to rendering facility within 24 hrs.

If removal is not feasible Incinerate

Cost? Compost

Takes management Bury

Check state regulations

Properly site and manage the burial pits

Any method must not be disturbed by pets or wild animals Neighbor relations Health



Reducing odor from swine facilities Carcass disposal

Remove mortalities from site to rendering facility within 24 hrs.

If removal is not feasible Incinerate

Cost? Compost

Takes management Bury

Check state regulations

Properly site and manage the burial pits

Any method must not be disturbed by pets or wild animals Neighbor relations Health



Reducing odor from swine facilities Manure storage (high-load systems)

Tanks and basins Agitate and pump when favorable weather conditions exist

Brisk wind blowing away from neighbors Avoid humid still day or times of the day

Aerate slurry using pump exhaust below the surface of the manure pit or lagoon




Use permeable cover or biocover (example: straw) on storage

Bottom load the manure Covers limit solar heating and wind induced volatilization Provide aerobic zone within the cover material and have a high

surface area for filteringAerobic degradation of odors

Other slurry gasses Allow natural crust to form

Works better with diets high in fiber (barley based, high ddgs, etc.)

Can reduce odors by as much as 50%




Use permeable cover or biocoverChallenges

Biocovers may only last 2 – 3 months

Chopper pump may be needed during pumping

Cost can range between $0.25 to $0.40 per pig marketed annually




Table 1. Odor reduction by cover method on a open basin or lagoon type of manure storage system.

Cover Type ThicknessOdor

Reduction Cost

Chopped straw 8-12 in. 50-80% $0.01 – $0.02 ft.2

Chopped corn stalks

8 in. ~25-50% $0.01ft.2

Impermeable floating plastic cover

NA >99% $0.35 to $45



Reducing odor from swine facilities Anaerobic lagoons (low-load systems)

Avoid over loading lagoon with manure Want that pink color on the lagoon surface Do not exceed the design loading rate

Always important but especially in spring and fall

Use solid separators to reduce solids from liquids Avoid shock loading lagoon

Add small amounts frequently (less than every 7 days) Do not add large quantaties all at once Never add mortalities, carcass parts, or human waste to lagoons Do not dispose of needles in the pit or lagoon




Add dilution water to avoid odors during times when the lagoon is warming up

Bacterial turn over and activity increase in spring and fall Agitate and pump lagoons when weather conditions permit

Wind blowing away from neighbors Lagoon should contain ample water before adding manure

Fill a treatment lagoon to design volume before adding any waste Start a lagoon in late spring by following normal dilution procedures




Add waste at several points around the lagoon Remove sludge on a regular basis

Every 3-4 years from the second stage of a two-stage lagoon system Every 5-7 years from a single stage lagoon system

Minimize the used of feed additives that can reduce normal bacterial decomposition

Antibiotics Heavy metals (think trace minerals iron, copper, manganese zinc, &

others)




Consider permeable biocovers for relatively small lagoons Do not work as well on large lagoons.

Use surface aeration to increase aerobic digestion When proper loading cannot be achieved Aeration is expensive

Aeration required to control odor is much less than the energy required to treat the manure to reduce organic matter

Costs = $1.50 to $3.00 per pig marketed for the fixed costs (pump and equipment to aerate. Plus an additional $0.75 to $1.50 in variable costs (energy to drive the pump)

Research indicates this is effective at reducing odor from lagoons

» As much as 80% reduction from a lagoon loaded at ½ rate



Reducing odor from swine facilities Land application

Do not spray irrigate concentrated liquid slurry from manure tanks and basins

Inject manure Controls odor much better Less volatilization of nutrients Cost is $0.40 to $0.50 per pig marketed or $0.003 per gallon of

slurry based on equipment costs Injection save fertilizer value that more than covers the cost

difference between spray and injection slurry application methods Many business have developed that do this

Have the large machinery, pumps and hoses to perform this




Avoid agitating and surface spreading of manure on still days or when wind is blowing towards your neighbors

Avoid weekends, holidays or known social events are occurring

Surface apply manure when good drying conditions are present

Early morning Low humidity High wind Clear, sunny weather On tillable soil




Use reduced application rates to promote faster drying and reduced odor release

Incorporate surface-applied manure as soon as possible following application preferably as it is applied

If irrigating Use low trajectory and low pressure systems. Install drop nozzles on an existing system to minimize odors

Size the manure storage system large enough so that the number of applications can be reduced to as few as possible

1-3 times per year



Reducing odor from swine facilities Out door lots

Minimize the use of outdoor lots Odors emitted are directly proportional to the lot’s surface area

where manure is deposited Slope dirt lots at 4 – 6 % to the south or southeast to

enhance drying and drainage Capture contaminated runoff and apply to crop land Divert clean roof rain water and external rain water away from lots

to keep them drier



Reducing odor from swine facilities Out door lots

Remove solid manure often to reduce surface area odor emissions

Land apply Place in a long term storage area (to compost) Divert clean water and other lot runoff away from solid manure

storage to promote drying



Siting DecisionsFactors to Consider

Historical Weather Patterns% time in various directions and the

relation to neighbors

Current SourcesWhat sources currently exist and how do these

relate to the proposed source and existing neighbors?

Distances are not Equal in all DirectionsIn Iowa, predominant summer winds from S, SSE.

A facility to the south of a neighbor at a given distance has a greaterodor impact as one to the north at the same distance.

Dr. Steve Hoff


Central Iowa Weather Conditions

Central Iowa Weather Conditions:

WS Levels Direction From: Percent Time

< 5 mph SE 7

5-7 mph SSE 11

7-11 mph S 13

11-13 mph SSW 7

> 13 mph SW 7

Dr. Steve Hoff


Odor TransportEffect of Distance and Size

Exposure Angles

1,320 ft

11 Deg

2,640 ft

5.5 Deg

1,320 ft

22 Deg

Dr. Steve Hoff


1,320 ft

10.8 Deg

1,320 ft

18.5 Deg

Odor TransportDistance, Orientation, and Multiple Sources

Dr. Steve Hoff


Distance, Orientation, and Local Weather

Summer, Central Iowa

10.8 Deg

18.5 Deg

7 Percent Time

5 Percent Time

2

5 % from...10 % from...

Dr. Steve Hoff


Community-Based Odor Assessment ModelDeveloped, Calibrated, Being Requested in Practice

10.8 Deg

18.5 Deg

7 Percent Time

5 Percent Time

Considers:Location of neighborsLocation of odor sourcesLocal historical weather patternsDistances and orientationNumber/maturity of animalsSeasonal ventilation rates

Determines:Percent time exposure to various odor levelsImpact on neighborsImpact of odor reduction methodsImpact of additional sources to a community

Dr. Steve Hoff


Odor TransportWind Origination and Percent Time: Central Iowa

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

0.0

22.5

45.0

67.5

90.0

112.

5

135.

0

157.

5

180.

0

202.

5

225.

0

247.

5

270.

0

292.

5

315.

0

337.

5

Wind From..(0=N, 180=S)

Pe

rce

nt

Tim

e

March

July

October

Dr. Steve Hoff


Odor TransportTotal Hours of Wind Origination: Central Iowa

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

0.0

22.5

45.0

67.5

90.0

112.

5

135.

0

157.

5

180.

0

202.

5

225.

0

247.

5

270.

0

292.

5

315.

0

337.

5

Wind From..(0=N, 180=S)

To

tal H

ou

rs (

Ma

rch

to

Oc

tob

er)

Dr. Steve Hoff


Odor TransportSource Relative to Receptor Rankings

1 (2)

14 (14)

7 (9)

6 (4)

5 (6)

4 (5)

3 (3)

2 (1)

13 (8)

12 (11)

11 (7)

10 (13)

9 (12)

8 (10)

16 (15) 15 (16)

Central Iowa March-to-OctoberPlacement Rankings Based on

Hours of Time

Receptor Ranking for the16 Compass Locations Considered

source

receptor locations and rank

Example: 10 (13)

ASHRAE Data NRCS Data

Dr. Steve Hoff


Decision Criteria Used

Siting with CAM is as follows:

● Limit proposed source load for neighbors to 1% 2:1 odors (58 hrs)and ½% 7:1 odors (29 hrs).

● Limit proposed + existing source load for neighborsto 2% 2:1 odors (115 hrs) and 1% 7:1 odors (58 hrs).

● Siting choice judged against all four criteria.

Hour amounts based on March-thru-October hours

Dr. Steve Hoff


Odor Levels

+ =

2:1 OdorsIt takes 2 Parts Fresh Air Mixed with 1 Part

Odorous Air to Make the Odor Nearly Undetectable

+ =

7:1 OdorsIt takes 7 Parts Fresh Air Mixed with 1 Part

Odorous Air to Make the Odor Nearly Undetectable

Dr. Steve Hoff


Know Your Exposure Risks

Environmental self audits are available www.lpdes.org

Utilize Best Management Practices

Consider the approaches


Closing Remarks

Know your neighbors and consider their concerns

Distance is not the same in all directions

Consider all siting options, including: facility size, location, orientation, ventilation and manure storage design as well as manure

application

Utilize your resources …





Closing RemarksIowa State University- Air Quality CommitteeJay HarmonSteve HoffHongwei XinJaciek KozielRobert BurnsJoe ColletiJohn TyndallWendy PowersKen Stalder

Iowa Manure Management Action GroupAngie Rieck-Hinz

Iowa Pork Industry Center (800)808-7675


Thank You for YourAttention

Documents

Livestock Production: The Farm, The Environment, The Community