Colorado is the second highest producer of high solids cattle waste (HSCW) in the United States. Despite the available resources, Colorado currently has only one operational anaerobic digester treating manure (AgSTAR EPA 2011), which is located at a hog farm in Lamar. Arid climate and limited water resources in Colorado render the implementation of high water demanding conventional AD processes. Studies to date have proposed high solids AD systems capable of digesting organic solid waste (OSW) not more than 40% total solids (TS). Lab tests have shown that HSCW produced in Greeley (Colorado) has an average of 89.4% TS. Multi-stage leach bed reactor (MSLBR) system proposed in the current study is capable of handling HSCW of up to 90% TS.
What Did We Do?
Hydrolysis is carried out in a trickle flow leach bed reactor (TFLBR) and methanogenesis can be carried out in a high rate anaerobic digester (HRAD) like an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor or a fixed film reactor. The objective of this research is to evaluate and optimize the performance of the TFLBR. The system was operated as a batch process and the organic leaching potential of a single pass TFLBR configuration was evaluated. The organic leaching potential was measured in terms of chemical oxygen demand (COD).
Three series’ of reactor experiments were carried out in total. Each subsequent experiment was based on the results on the previously conducted experiment. First set of reactor experiments included three TFLBRs (triplicate) loaded with HSCW. The difficulty encountered during the operation of this experiment was that the flow rate of water through the TFLBR slowed down over time and eventually dropped to zero within the first 24 hrs. This caused water build-up on top of the manure bed, resulting in the failure of hydrolysis. Second set of reactor experiments included six TFLBRs (two sets of triplicates). One set of triplicate was loaded with HSCW and the other set of triplicate was loaded with HSCW bulked with straw (5% by mass) to improve the porosity through the reactor. A layer of fine sand was added on top of the manure bed to facilitate water dispersion through the reactor.
The third set of reactor experiments included the comparison between nutrient dosed and non-nutrient dosed reactors (each carried out in triplicates). The idea behind dosing nutrients to an operational TFLBR was to check if the reactors were nutrient limited during the digestion process. Composite sampling technique was adopted so as to capture the exact leaching potential from each of the reactors.
What Have We Learned?
The first set of reactor experiments helped in identifying the clogging issues in operational TFLBRs handling HSCW. The second set of reactor experiments validated the use of fine sand as a better alternative to improve hydraulic flow when compared to the use of bulking agents. The third set of reactor experiments indicated that the addition of nutrient solution to a single-pass TFLBR operation is essential in improving the overall system yield. Leachate collection by composited sampling method instead of the instantaneous sample method improved the system efficiency by approximately 50%. The average TS reductions in the non-nutrient dosed and nutrient dosed TFLBRs were 23.18% and 22.67% respectively. The non-nutrient dosed TFLBRs underwent approximately 66.32% of COD reduction and the nutrient dosed TFLBRs underwent approximately 73.51% of COD reduction due to COD leaching during hydrolysis, over the period of six weeks. Biochemical methane potential (BCMP) test results indicate high biogas yields from the weekly composited leachate from the reactor experiments proving successful system operation. Approximately 0.43 L CH4/g COD is produced from the leachate collected from the non-nutrient dosed TFLBRs and 0.57 L CH4/g COD is produced from the leachate collected from the nutrient dosed TFLBRs.
Future Plans
The proposed MSLBR system recommends TFLBRs operating under leachate recirculation. The addition of nutrient solution in a leachate recirculated TFLBR would not be unnecessary since the nutrients in the system would be conserved. The success of hydraulic conductivity and leaching quality in a leachate recirculated TFLBR is unknown. More research is required to completely understand the operation and success of the MSLBR system treating HSCW. Pilot scale reactor experiments should be conducted to monitor the operation of the TFLBRs under leachate recirculation.
Authors
Asma Hanif, Graduate Student in Civil & Environmental Engineering, Colorado State University, asmahanif1988@gmail.com
Dr. Sybil Sharvelle, Assistant Professor in Civil & Environmental Engineering, Colorado State University, Sybil.Sharvelle@colostate.edu
The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.
Many of today’s high school students have little insight into the basic day-to-day operational decisions and challenges faced by Agricultural producers. Therefore, there is a need for the development of ag-centric and dynamic educational material. Furthermore; there is an even greater need to provide high-school instructors with innovative classroom materials and instructional tools that are conducive to the structured conveyance of ag principles. Targeting the need for these innovative ag educational materials within Arkansas classrooms, this project presents an dynamic lab activity with emphasis on introductory level subject matter about Arkansas swine production systems and the related greenhouse gas emissions. Due to the particular nature of the subject matter, the activity materials were crafted into two complementary products for practicality. The first product is a compilation of swine production reference materials including: terminology and layman definitions of Arkansas swine management strategies and the basic dynamics of greenhouse gasses (CO2, N2O, CH4) as they relate to swine production. The second product is a scenario based critical thinking exercise, implemented from a manipulative decision-tree platform.
Purpose
Educate students within the state of Arkansas about the various management systems intrinsic to swine production operations within their state.
Provide students insight into the management obstacles that Arkansas swine producers are challenged with through balancing Carbon footprints, economic resources, natural resources, and legal compliance with production profitability and productivity
What Did We Do?
This project presents an dynamic lab activity with emphasis on introductory level subject matter about Arkansas swine production systems and the related greenhouse gas emissions. The activity materials were crafted into two complementary products for practicality. The first product is a compilation of swine production reference materials including: terminology and layman definitions of Arkansas swine management strategies and the basic dynamics of common greenhouse gasses (CO2, N2O, CH4) as they relate to this activities scope of swine production. The reference material serves as both an introduction to basic ideas and practices native to swine production and GHGs, and as a guide which aids the students in completion of the second product (lab activity).
The second product is a scenario based critical thinking exercise, implemented from a manipulative decision-tree platform. Flashcards are used to represent three specific swine management systems using a three tier hierarchy. This hierarchy is distinguished by the allocation of Categories, Components, and Options. The “Categories” are the designated ranking class and will represent three major swine production management systems: Housing Management, Waste Management, and Feed Management. The “Components’ are the first sub-order class, and are used to represent various functions/considerations that comprise each “Category” of production system. The “Options” class holds the lowest position within the hierarchy and represents the different configurations/settings for the individual “Components”. For the context of this exercise the students will act as consultants hired by a producer to design the three management systems (via the flashcards) to “best match” the producer’s desired specifications, as defined within by a supplied catalog of unique scenarios.
Graphical reference to the hierarchical structure of the manipulatives used within this project’s lab activity.
Future Plans
Implementation of this project’s developed lab-activity within Arkansas’ high school classrooms via the Arkansas Farm Bureau supported (Ag-In-the-Classroom) program.
Authors
Szymanski “Rick” Fields II, Program Associate, Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture Extension rfields@uaex.edu
Karl VanDevender, Professor-Engineer, Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture Extension
This is a NIFA funded project (Proposal # 2010-04269; Title of Proposal “Integrated Resource Management Tool to Mitigate the Carbon Footprint of Swine Produced in the U.S”)
Special thanks to Donna VanDevender (High School Science Teacher-Bauxite Arkansas) for her insight into the development of the materials and for providing the opportunity to conduct trial runs of the lab-activity.
The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.
Why Be Concerned With Manure Management for Small Farms?
Increased local or regional food marketing opportunities have allowed commercial success in livestock and poultry operations with relatively small herds and flocks. The Census of Agriculture recently reports an increase in the number of small farms, as a proportion of all farms, across much of the U.S. Small animal feeding operations, less than 300 animal units, are a productive component of the animal ag sector. Finally, there continues to an interest in the development of hobby farm and equine related properties. All of these scenarios result in the necessity to manage manure resources, often on small acres, and often in close proximity to a neighbor. Knowledge about, access to, and acquisition of, appropriate manure handling equipment is a requirement to proper manure and nutrient management on all of these types of commercial or hobby farms and ranches.
What Did We Do?
This overview seeks to provide examples of power equipment and manure handling tools appropriate to smaller operations. An emphasis is placed on solid manure handling, small acreage land application, and light duty compost production equipment. Examples of equipment choices and options are based on Internet and literature reviews, as well as personal field experiences.
What Have We Learned?
A balance between size/power, cost, and versatility must be considered when purchasing or leasing equipment for small livestock and poultry operations. Smaller operations often deal only in solid manure. This can simplify equipment choices to small tractors and skidsteer loaders, which can perform a variety of manure management and compost related tasks. Tractor size will limit traditional manure spreader options. However, several manufacturers are now offering light weight, ground drive spreaders, towable by small tractors or even ATVs.
Authors
Thomas M. Bass, Livestock Environment Associate Specialist, Montana State University tmbass@montana.edu
Acknowledgements
Mike Westendorf, Rutgers University and Jean Bonhotal, Cornell University
The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.
Why Are We Concerned About Drug Residues in Animal Mortality Compost?
With disease issues, the decline of the rendering industry, a ban on use of downer cows for food, and rules to halt horse slaughter, environmentally safe and sound practices for disposal of horses and other livestock mortalities are limited. Improper disposal of carcasses containing veterinary drugs has resulted in the death of domestic animals and wildlife. Composting of carcasses has been performed successfully to reduce pathogens, nutrient release, and biosecurity risks. However, there is concern that drugs used in the livestock industry, as feed additives and veterinary therapies do not degrade readily and will persist in compost or leachate, threatening environmental exposure to wildlife, domestic animals and humans.
Two classes of drugs commonly used in the livestock and horse industries include barbiturates for euthanasia and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) for relief of pain and inflammation. Sodium pentobarbital (a barbiturate) and phenylbutazone (an NSAID) concentrations in liver, compost, effluent and leachate were analyzed in two separate horse carcass compost piles in two separate years. Horse liver samples were also buried in 3 feet of loose soil in the first year and drug concentrations were assessed over time.
What did we do?
Year 1- On 9/22/09 a 6 x 6 m piece of 10 mil plastic sheeting was laid on bare soil with a 2% slope, at the edge of Cornell University’s compost site in Ithaca, NY. Water was poured on the plastic to check the direction of flow. A hole was dug at the low end of the pad, under the plastic, large enough to fit a 76 l galvanized garbage can. A stainless steel canner was placed in the garbage can to collect effluent. A hole was cut in the plastic over the canner for collection. A 0.6 m high base (3.7 x 3.7 m) of coarse carbon material (woodchips) was laid on the plastic. A 27 year old Appaloosa mare, weighing approximately 455 kg that had been dosed with 1 gram phenylbutazone at midnight on 9/22/09 and again at 8:00 am was led onto the base and euthanized for severe lameness by a qualified veterinarian with 120 ml Fatal Plus® solution (active ingredient 390 mg/ml Pentobarbital Sodium). After the horse had been euthanized and the veterinarian ensured there were no signs of life, the carcass was maneuvered onto the wood chips with the head on the upward slope of the pad. The liver was removed from the horse and cut into 48 pieces, each weighing approximately 100 grams, and nylon mesh bags were then placed in whiffle balls. A 2 m length of nylon twine was attached to each ball. Twenty-three balls were inserted in the horse’s gut cavity and 22 balls were placed in a 1 m hole in the ground (burial hole) which was dug approximately 1.5 m from the pad. Pieces of the intestine and some blood were also placed in the hole to help mimic the presence of a carcass. The remaining 3 nylon mesh bags with liver were packaged for delivery to Cornell University’s Animal Health Diagnostic Center (AHDC) to determine initial NSAID and barbiturates concentrations. Two Hobo U12 data loggers with 4 temperature probes each were set up to record hourly temperatures. Five of the probes were placed in the compost pile: under the horse’s chest, in the horse’s hind gut, in the horse’s chest cavity, under the horse’s spine and under the horse’s right hind quarter. Two of the probes were placed in the burial hole and one probe was left out to record ambient temperature. The hole was covered with loose soil. The horse was covered with woodchips so that the pile was approximately 1.8 m high. The plastic liner was tightened by rolling it over and under wooden fence posts.
Year 2- In year 1, the collection of “leachate” included precipitation that diluted the leachate. In year 2, to target only the liquids that leached out of the horse and through the pile, two 3 m long troughs with a 1% slope were built out of 15 and 10 cm diameter PVC pipe attached to 5 x 15 cm untreated lumber. The troughs were placed on the pad from the centerline to the edge of the pile end-to-end with slopes going toward the outside of the pile. Leachate drained via gravity into 2-liter polyethylene bottles attached to the troughs. The exposed ends of the troughs were covered with 1 m length of aluminum flashing to keep rainwater out of the collection bottles.
On 8/10/10 the leachate collection troughs were laid on bare soil with a 2% slope at the edge of Cornell University’s compost site in Ithaca, NY. A 0.6 m high base (3.7 x 3.7 m) of coarse carbon material (woodchips) was laid on top of the troughs. A 22 year old horse weighing approximately 590 kg, that had been dosed with 1 gram phenylbutazone at midnight on 08/10/10 and again at 7:30 am, was led onto the base and euthanized by a qualified veterinarian with 300 mg xylazine as a sedative, then with 120 ml Fatal Plus® solution (active ingredient 390 mg/ml Pentobarbital Sodium). After the horse had been euthanized and the veterinarian ensured there were no signs of life, the carcass was maneuvered on the wood chips with the head on the upward slope of the pad. The veterinarian took 4 tubes of blood from a vein in the nose and a vein in the front leg of the horse in heparinized Vacutainer® tubes for initial concentrations of pentobarbital and phenylbutazone. Twenty-six whiffle balls that had been pre-filled with wood chips (the base material of the compost pile) were placed such that they would be under the horse and liquids coming from the horse would be absorbed by the chips inside the balls, as well as in the surrounding base material, while the excess would drain down the leachate collection troughs and be captured in the 2 liter bottles at the end of the troughs (Figure 1). One Hobo U12 data logger with 4 temperature probes was set up to record hourly temperatures. The probes were placed under the horse’s neck and rump, on top of the horse’s abdomen, and one was left out to record ambient temperature. The horse was covered with woodchips so that the pile was approximately 1.8 m high. Additional woodchips were added to the pile on August 13 and the pile was covered with a breathable polyester compost cover to collect only what was leaching from the animal.
Figure 1 Cross-section of horse compost pile showing placement of leachate collection troughs and woodchip-filled whiffle balls.
On 8/10/10 a 0.6 m high base (3.5 x 3.5 m) of coarse carbon material was laid near the horse compost pile. A 455 kg 3 year, 7 month old, 2nd lactation Holstein cow was euthanized, due to a lung abscess, in the same manner as the horse (300 mg xylazine, followed by 120 ml Fatal Plus®). Four tubes of blood were withdrawn from her milk vein as described for the horse. One Hobo U12 data logger with 4 temperature probes was set up to record hourly temperatures. The probes were placed under the cow’s udder and rear leg, on top of the cow’s back, and one was left out to record ambient temperature. The cow was then covered with woodchips so that the pile was approximately 1.8 m high. Additional woodchips were added to the pile the following day before the pile was covered with a compost cover.
What did we learn?
In year one, phenylbutazone concentrations in the liver of the horse were undetectable (< 10 ppb) by 20 days of composting or burial in loose soil and were undetectable in effluent from the pile at the time of first sampling on day 6. Pentobarbital concentrations were undetectable (< 10 ppb) in liver samples retrieved from both the compost pile and loose soil by day 83. Rate of decay was faster in the soil, exponentially decreasing by 18% per day, with a half-life of 3 days, than in the compost pile where there was a 2% decrease per day and a half-life of 31 days, but occurred at the same rate of 1% and a half-life between 55 and 67 mesophilic degree days when calculated on the number of mesophilic degree days to which it was exposed. This suggests that breakdown of pentobarbital is not initiated by the heat of composting, but by the biological degradation that occurs in both soil and compost at mesophilic temperatures. Pentobarbital in the effluent decreased by 20% per day with a half-life of 3.1 days but was still detectable (0.1 ppm) at 223 days of composting.
In year 2, phenylbutazone was not detected in any of the samples analyzed (compost and leachate) other than blood taken from the jugular vein of the horse immediately after euthanasia. Pentobarbital concentrations in the compost were still detectable after 224 days of composting, but had decreased from 79.2 (initial) to 5.8 ppm. Pentobarbital in leachate was 2.2 ppm at day 56 of composting, after which no additional fluids leached into the leachate collection containers. Rate of decay in the leachate was 35.2% per day with a half-life of 1.6 days. When managed properly, composting will deter domestic and wild animals from scavenging on treated carcasses while they contain the highest drug concentrations providing an effective means of disposal of euthanized and/or NSAID treated livestock. The resulting compost contains either no or very low concentrations of both NSAIDs and barbiturates rendering it safe for use in agriculture.
Barbiturate poisoning in domestic and wild animals has occurred from ingestion of tissue from animals euthanized with pentobarbital. Many of the reported cases have occurred from direct feeding on improperly disposed livestock in which little or no degradation or biotransformation of pentobarbital has occurred. During the time period in which carcasses would be desirable to domestic and wild animals as a food source, composting creates sufficient heat to deter them from digging in to the pile. In addition, when covered properly, the smell of decomposition is minimized, also reducing attraction. The diverse community of microorganisms in the compost pile aids in the degradation and biotransformation of pentobarbital, especially after the thermophilic phase of composting is over. Properly implemented composting, as a means of disposal of euthanized or NSAID treated livestock, will deter domestic and wild animals from scavenging for carcasses when they contain the highest drug concentrations. The resulting compost contains either no or very low concentrations of either NSAIDs or barbiturates, rendering the compost safe for use in agriculture.
Future Plans
Education and implementation work continues in this area nationally and internationally. A 5th International Symposium on Depopulation and Disposal of Livestock is in the planning stages. A study on the Fate of anthelmintics (drugs that expel parasitic worms from the body) in livestock manure has just been completed.
Authors
Jean Bonhotal, Mary Schwarz, Cornell University, Cornell Waste Management Institute, Ithaca, NY
Karyn Bischoff, Joseph G Ebel, Jr. Cornell University, College of Veterinary Medicine, Ithaca, NY
The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.
Fencing along stream banks, lakes, and wetlands (riparian areas) is important in order to limit the access horses have to the waterways. When horses area allowed free access to riparian zones, they can deposit manure on the bank or directly in the water. Horse manure may cause elevated levels of nutrients and/or microbes in water. This will be of particular concern in water bodies that are classified as impaired.
Buffer Zone
The area between the horses and the water is called a buffer zone because it buffers the water from the effects of animals. The purpose is to collect any sediment from the pastures before it runs off into the waterway. The distance that should separate the animals from the water depends on several factors including, soil type, slope steepness, and condition of the pasture.
What Type of Fencing Should Be Used?
There are many types of fencing that can be used. Your choice will depend on the potential safety concerns for animals and people, cost of the materials, equipment needed to install the fencing and the maintenance requirements.
The Natural Resource Conservation Service has guidelines that can be used for determining how and where stream bank fences should be implemented. The NRCS Field Office Technical Guide provides technical information on stream bank fencing.
A 1,000 pound horse will defecate approximately four to thirteen times each day and produce approximately nine tons of manure per year. The 1,000 pound horse will produce, on the average, 37 pounds of feces and 2.4 gallons of urine daily, which totals about 50 pounds of raw waste per day in feces and urine combined. A horse kept in a stall may require fifteen to twenty pounds of bedding per day. Bedding products include: wood by-product (shavings, chips, or pellets), straw, hay, or paper. Bedding must be provided in stalls with cement floors, kept reasonably clean, and changed periodically. Manure plus bedding will have a volume of between two and three cubic feet per day.
Soiled bedding can equal almost twice the volume of the manure, but will vary based on management practices. A stalled horse will require the removal of 60 to 70 pounds of waste per day. This results in between 12 and 13 tons of waste per stall per year with 9 tons being manure, 3.5 tons urine, and the remainder bedding. The density of horse manure is about 63 lb/cubic foot. Annual stall waste from one horse will fill a 12 foot x 12 foot stall about 6 feet deep. This leads to a steady stream of manure to handle.
Daily manure and waste production from a typical 1,000 lb. horse
Manure Daily
37 lbs feces
2.4 gallons urine
51 lbs manure
Stall Waste Daily
15-20 lbs bedding (1.6 cubic ft)
51 lbs manure (0.8 cubic ft)
60-70 lbs stall waste/day (2.4 cubic ft)
(Table adapted from Pennsylvania State University, 2000, Horse Stable Manure Management)
Choosing a Bedding Material
Although straw, wood shavings, and bulk and pelleted sawdust are the most popular bedding materials, other sources may also be used. Pine shavings or sawdust will result in less disposable material than straw, and cannot be disposed of with mushroom producers. Disposal with the mushroom industry is an option in some parts of the country if horse are bedded with straw. Wood shavings, sawdust, and straw are relatively absorbent. Many horse owners, particularly owners of racing or performance horses, prefer shavings over straw because they are less dusty and may result in less respiratory irritation. Shavings produced from black cherry and black walnut should not be used. Even very small amounts of black walnut in bedding products can cause laminitis and founder in horses.
Bedding should be absorbent, dust-free, easy to handle, comfortable to the horses, readily available, easily disposed of, unpalatable (i.e. the horse will not want to ingest it), and affordable. The more absorbent a bedding is, the less matieral will need to be used. All beddings should be stored in well-ventilated areas to remain as dry as possible prior to use. For more information, see the following factsheet: Horse Manure Bedding Use.
When managed properly, nutrients from manure should be seen as part of a larger cycle occurring on the farm. Nutrients enter the farm as feed or fertilizer, are excreted as manure, and are subsequently spread on the soil, taken up by plants, or transported off the farm as waste. Related: Horse Manure Composting: Facilities and Methods
The soil can store nutrients, provided the amount of manure applied to the soil is not excessive. When land has excess manure, more nutrients than crops can take up, these nutrients will build up in the soil and pose a hazard to ground or surface water. Excess nutrients can be carried by water through runoff or leaching to surface or ground water.
To minimize environmental risk, all horse farms should develop management plans that provide for proper storage, use, and disposal of horse manure.
What Is Nutrient Management?
The purpose of nutrient management is to implement practices that permit the efficient use of manure for crop production while preventing environmental damage that may be caused by nutrients. Nutrient management planning is a site specific exercise and, if the recommendations are followed, nutrient losses should be minimal. In general nutrient management considers how many nutrients are accumulating on a farm, their potential impacts on the environment, and how to best utilize them. Usually considered in nutrient management planning are:
goals of the farm as well as any constraints,
available farm resources (land, equipment, financial resources),
potential critical areas on the farm (sensitive water bodies, neighbors concerns, erosion, manure storage etc),
and nutrient balance (shown in the figure below).
Importance of Nutrient Balance
Farm nutrient inputs consist of feed and fertilizer, but also animals, legume nitrogen, and bedding. Farms may export nutrients through outputs such as grain, animals, milk, meat, eggs, manure, and hay. Some nutrients are recycled on the farm, from feed to livestock to soil to plant and back to feed again. The optimal situation is for the farm to remain in balance between inputs and outputs without losses either as runoff to surface water or as leachate to groundwater. For more information, see Whole Farm Nutrient Balance.
Additional Articles On Horse Manure Management
The challenges of managing manure nutrients are different on a horse farms than on many larger farms. Horse farms often have fewer animals and sometimes several animal species on the same farm, but may have limited acreage for spreading manure. Some horse farms also face a challenge because they do not export nutrients from their system the way that many other farms do–by marketing outputs such as milk or selling animals that are produced.
The following articles are available on this website and include links to additional resources for each topic.
You may also want to see Nutrient Planning on Small Farms. It provides information about how to feed animals and manage their diets; calculate how much manure is produced. There is also information on basic soil science and soil fertility; and nutrient (manure) management – manure use on and off the farm and nutrient management planning.
Author: Michael Westendorf, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
A sacrifice or exercise area is your animal’s outdoor living space ( see Exercise Areas) . It is called a sacrifice area because you are giving up land that could be used as a pasture in order to protect the remaining pasture area, which is saved for rotational grazing, hay production, forage stockpiling, etc. Related: Horse Manure Management Overview
Sacrifice Areas Protect Pastures
A sacrifice area can be used to secure animals while stalls are cleaned in the barn or routine maintenance (dragging, clipping, etc.) is completed. The use of a sacrifice area could result in increased pasture productivity because it gives you a place to keep the horses when you need to keep them off the pasture. For example pastures cannot survive continuous grazing and trampling during non-growing seasons, winter and droughts. Other situations where they are useful are; when the ground is muddy, when there is frost on the grass, and anytime the grass needs rest like after grazing.
Locating a Sacrifice Area
Sacrifice areas should be located as far away from wetlands, surface water, and wells as possible. They should not be located in drainage flows, such as ditches, and preferably on a level area at the top of a hill. Sacrifice areas should be surrounded by a thick stand of grasses that can filter sediment and nutrients washed from the sacrifice area. A common way to do this would be to have the sacrifice area surrounded by pastures that may be used for rotational grazing. Manure should be collected from a sacrifice area for disposal. The sacrifice area should be located close enough to the manure storage area to improve the ease of collection.
Since these areas may not be vegetated, they are likely to become muddy in wet or inclement weather. Wood chips, sand, and/or gravel, or even concrete may be used to provide an improved foundation and keep the area small. Feeding, watering, and shelter areas that are in the sacrifice area should have appropriate foundations surrounding them to prevent erosion from hoof traffic.
cc2.5 MIke Westendorf, Rutgers
Sizing a Sacrifice Area
They should be only as big as absolutely necessary if vegetation cannot be maintained in the sacrifice area. Because of substantial wear and tear, these areas will be sparsely vegetated; grass cover may be nonexistent. Sacrifice areas should be large enough to provide exercise for the animals using the area. Horse Facilities Handbook, by Midwest Plan Services recommends that pens be at least 1,000 square feet per horse. Don’t forget that appropriate fencing, some sort of shelter from the elements and water are necessary for horses as well.
There are two strategies to sizing and maintaining sacrifice areas: either keep the area just large enough for the needs of the animals and accept the fact that the lot surface will be bare, or use a large sacrifice area that is large enough to maintain a vegetative cover. The latter is preferred for environmental reasons.
Regulatory Implications of Continuous Use of the Sacrifice Area
Confining animals for more than 45 days in the sacrifice lot can define the area as an animal feeding operation. If that area has a connection with surface water, such as a stream or ditch running through it, or if it discharges to a water body and is deemed to be a significant risk to surface water by the state regulatory authority, the operation may be required to control the runoff from the exercise lot and obtain permit coverage. Therefore, it is strongly urged that producers manage their exercise lots and sacrifice areas as seasonal or temporary use, primarily keep animals on pastures, and not locate them in environmentally sensitive locations so as not to impact surface waters.
Why Is Barnyard Management Important for Horse Manure?
Horse paddocks (and pastures) may contain large quantities of mud due to excessive traffic. Mud is more than a “mess” or “nuisance.” Winter and spring rains can cause mud and manure to runoff into nearby waterways. Nutrients and sediment in runoff are considered non-point source pollution, which can degrade water quality. A small amount of non-point source pollution from a single property may not seriously impair water quality, however, small amounts of nutrients and pollutants multiplied by many properties can result in significant water quality problems.
Environmental Impacts of Barnyard Runoff
Nitrogen, phosphorus, organic matter, and bacteria in runoff can pollute surface waters and decrease oxygen availability. Phosphorus and nitrogen reaching waterways can promote excessive algae growth. When the algae decays, oxygen is depleted which can kill fish and other aquatic life (aquatic bacteria remove oxygen from the water when decomposing the organic matter in manure). Property owners can reduce the impact of horse facilities on local waterways and groundwater by adopting management practices that minimize the potential for non-point source water pollution.
The capability to store manure reduces or eliminates the need to spread manure on a daily basis. The primary reason to store manure is to allow for land applicaitons that are compatible with the climate and cropping systems on the land receiving the manure. Saturated, wet, frozen, or snow-covered soil conditions are not suitable for land application of manure. The nutrients in horse manure are best utilized by the crop when spread before or during the growing season of the crop.
Many horse farms do not have extensive fields on which to spread manure. Manure storage facilities also allow the farm owner to store the manure until it can be removed and used by other farmers or landscapers.
Where Should You Locate a Manure Storage Structure?
Manure associated with horse production includes stall litter (feces, urine, bedding) and manure collected from exercise lots. Manure storage areas may simply be well-drained areas where the material is stacked or stockpiled for subsequent spreading operations. Manure should be stored in areas accessible to trucks, tractors, and other manure removal equipment.
Manure storage areas should not be located near waterways or wetlands. Rainfall or floodwater could carry manure into these water bodies. A well-drained manure storage area will prevent the pooling of polluted runoff that could serve as a breeding area for mosquitoes and flies. Manure should not be stored in paddocks or exercise lots, since lots can become infected with parasites. The presence of trees around the facility will help to dissipate odors and keep storage out of sight.
If no well-drained, level areas exist for manure storage, or if run-off presents a water quality issue, permanent manure storage facilities may be required as described in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide. Permanent manure storage facilities should have an impervious bottom, and may have solid walls to confine the solids and a “push” wall for stacking and loading of the solids. Contaminated runoff or leachate from manure storage facilities must be managed as described in the NRCS Field Office Technical Guide.
Composting Horse Manure
Composting is a recommended management practice for horse manure management and, when done properly, will result in the destruction of internal parasites and weed seeds. The composted product can then be spread on pastures. Composting is a managed process, resulting in accelerated decomposition of organic materials. Microorganisms, including bacteria, actinomycetes, and fungi break down the organic materials at elevated temperatures.
Composting requires proper levels of moisture and oxygen, and the appropriate feedstock mixture to ensure proper microbial activity. Turning the composting material, aeration, ensures that all parts of the manure pile reach elevated temperatures for certain time periods. Compost will be less odorous than fresh horse manure and may have value as a soil amendment or fertilizer. For more information, see Composting Livestock or Poultry Manure.
Minimum distances between manure storage/composting areas and other activities
Sensitive Area
Minimum Separation Distance (Feet)
Property line
50-100
Residence or place of business
200-500
Private well or other potable water source
100-200
Wetlands or surface (streams, pond, lakes)
100-200
Subsurface drainage pipe
25
Water table (seasonal high)
2-5
Bedrock
2-5
(Adapted from On-Farm Composting Handbook, NRAES 54, 1992)
Please check on local standards as local manure storage areas and facilities should be sited based on existing regulatory standards.
Sizing of Manure Storage Facilities
The size of the manure storage area is dictated by manure removal practices and number of horses specific to that farm. If the manure is spread on crops on the farm, the storage area should be large enough to hold manure when fields are inaccessible. If manure is removed for off-farm use, the size of the manure storage area will be determined by the storage space requirements between removal periods. The NRCS Field Office Technical Guide should be consulted for more specific information about sizing storage facilities.
Management of Stored Manure
When properly managed, flies, odors, dust, and particulate matter can be controlled. Manure should be kept as dry as possible, since wet manure provides a breeding ground for flies and will lead to the presence of fly maggots. A roofed storage area may be advisable to keep manure as dry as possible when stored for long periods of time. It is possible to reduce fly larvae using predatory wasps and other parasites for control. It is important to avoid overusing pesticides to control flies.
Author: Michael Westendorf, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Manage Cookie Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
Waste to Worth home | More proceedings….
