The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20012545.tiff AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 4311 Hwy 66, Suite 4, Longmont, CO 80504 TATEYAMA DAIRY 39713 Weld County Rd 43 Ault, Colorado 80610 Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan Prepared by: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 4311 Hwy 66, Suite 4 Longmont, CO 80504 May 31, 2001 2001-2545 Your `Pro Ag" Environmental Professionals AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 CONTACTS AND AUTHORIZED PERSONS 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 3 SITE DESCRIPTION 4 FACILITY 4 MAPS 4 STORMWATER AND PROCESS WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT 4 SURFACE RUNOFF 4 PROCESS WASTEWATER 5 FLOODPLAINS 5 LAND APPLICATION OF STORMWATER/PROCESS WASTEWATER 5 AVERAGE YEARS' STORMWATER/ PROCESS WASTEWATER APPLICATION 6 Sustainability 7 SOLID MANURE MANAGEMENT 7 LAND APPLICATION OF SOLID MANURE 8 NUTRIENT UTILIZATION 8 SOIL TESTING 9 IRRIGATION WATER TESTING 9 MANURE, COMPOST AND STORMWATER TESTING 9 AGRONOMIC CALCULATIONS 9 RECORD KEEPING 10 LIMITATIONS 10 Appendix A 11 Appendix B 12 Appendix C 13 Appendix D 14 Appendix E 15 Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 2 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Introduction This Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) has been developed and implemented to comply with requirements, conditions and limitations of the Colorado "Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation" 4.8.0 (5 CCR 1002-19). This CNMP outlines current site conditions, structures and areas requiring management of solid manure, stormwater run-off and process wastewater. This CNMP will be kept on-site and amended prior to any change in design, construction, operation or maintenance which significantly increases the potential for discharge of solid manure, stormwater run-off and process wastewater to waters of the State. This CNMP shall be amended if it is ineffective in controlling discharges from the facility. Below is the date of the last CNMP amendment: Amendment 1: Amendment 2: Amendment 3: Amendment 4: Tateyama Dairy will keep records relating to the CNMP onsite for a minimum of three years. Contacts and Authorized Persons Mr. Robert H. Tateyama 39713 Weld County Rd 43 Ault, CO 80610 (970) 834-2237 The individual(s) at this facility who is (are) responsible for developing and implementation, maintenance and revision of this CNMP are listed below: Robert Tateyama Owner (Name) (Title) (Name) (Title) Legal Description The legal description of Tateyama Dairy is: Part of the EA of Section 16, Township 7 North, Range 65 West, Weld County, Colorado. Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 3 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Site Description Facility Tateyama Dairy is an existing dairy facility located on the south side of Highway 14 and just west of Weld County Road 43. Dairy construction is industry-typical steel and wood posts, pipe and cable fence, concrete feed aprons and feed bunks, feed alleys and cow movement alleys, feed storage areas and associated storage structures and maintenance facilities, waste management and control structures. Tateyama Dairy is proposing to add some capacity. The ultimate maximum capacity at Tateyama Dairy will be 2,675 head including approximately 1,160 milking and the balance made up of dry cows and young stock. Cattle numbers fluctuate throughout the year as calves are born, and cattle are bought and sold. However, the average number of cattle at the facility is expected not to exceed 2,675 head. Farm ground surrounds the facility. Maps The maps described below are included in Appendix A. Topographic Map The Topographical Location Map shows the location of Tateyama Dairy, surrounding sites, topography and major drainages. Site Layout— Current Conditions The Site Layout—Current Conditions Map details the configuration of the existing dairy. Site Layout—Proposed Conditions The Site Layout—Proposed Conditions Map details the changes proposed for the dairy. Soils Map The USDA Soil Survey map details the area's soil types. Also included are detailed soil descriptions. Stormwater and Process Wastewater Management Surface Runoff Tateyama Dairy currently controls stormwater with a series of retention ponds located south of the dairy (see Site Layout in Appendix A). Tateyama Dairy will construct two new retention ponds for the additional corrals built. Tateyama Dairy will monitor the site and maintain appropriate diversion structures to ensure runoff enters the stormwater collection system. The 25-year, 24-hour storm event for the area east of Ault, Colorado is 3.0 inches. Using the appropriate SCS runoff curve numbers the amount of runoff generated during a 25-year event over the current 9.0 acres is 1.5 acre-feet. For the 16.12 acres of new dairy area, the amount of runoff during a 25-year event is 2.7 acre-feet. The amount falling directly on the retention ponds is 0.93 acre-feet. The existing retention structures south of the existing dairy contain approximately 5.3 acre-feet. The new stormwater structures south of the new construction will contain approximately 3.9 acre-feet. Calculations for the 25-year storm and pond capacities are in Appendix B. The new stormwater ponds will be constructed to control seepage as per the state requirement at the time of construction. Upon completion of the new stormwater retention ponds, the liners will be inspected and certified by a licensed professional engineer. Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 4 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Tateyama Dairy will maintain the lagoon system to contain a 25-year, 24-hour storm event. Should stormwater runoff elevate the lagoons beyond 50% of the designed 25-year, 24-hour containment level, the system will be dewatered within 15 days to achieve the required retention capacity as outlined in the Colorado Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation. Pumping to surrounding farm ground dewaters the lagoons. Tateyama Dairy has available approximately 550 acres of flood-irrigated farm ground for land application of stormwater. The primary land application area is located adjacent to the dairy south. Process Wastewater Tateyama Dairy generates process wastewater within the milking parlor. It is estimated that Tateyama Dairy will generate a maximum of 10,000 gallons of process wastewater per day at maximum capacity. A table summarizes the process wastewater in Appendix B. Dairy parlor floors and walls, milking equipment, pipelines, and tanks are washed with fresh water. Wastewater flows via a pipe system to the south into the process wastewater lagoon system. The existing process wastewater lagoons south of the dairy have been in operation since the late 1970s or early 1980s. Floodplains AgPro Environmental Services, LLC, has reviewed the Weld County FEMA maps and determined that a portion of Tateyama Dairy is and will be in the floodplain. Tateyama Dairy is currently investigating the accuracy of the FEMA maps as it pertains to the eastern border of the floodplain. The Site Layout Map shows the new stormwater ponds within the floodplain. It is Tateyama's contention that the floodplain does extend that far east, therefore the ponds are situated in the proposed location. Tateyama will investigate through FEMA to get floodplain elevations and determine whether the floodplain is actually where it is mapped and make appropriate adjustments to the stormwater ponds location or elevation or both. Land Application of Stormwater/Process Wastewater Stormwater/process wastewater is pumped, or gravity fed, from the retention ponds onto farm ground in accordance with the Colorado CAFO regulations, "tier two" land application requirements. Tateyama Dairy has, on site, adequate pumping equipment to dewater the lagoons. The primary application area for stormwater/process wastewater is irrigated land south of the dairy consisting of approximately 100 acres. Tateyama Dairy has another 450 acres available if needed. Table 1 below shows the land necessary to utilize nutrients from a 25-year, 24-hour storm. The nitrogen content and losses are based on Colorado State Cooperative Extension Bulletin No. 568A, Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization. The calculation in Table 1 indicates that Tateyama Dairy requires approximately 27 acres of corn to utilize the nitrogen contained in runoff generated from a 25-year, 24-hour storm. Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 5 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Table 1 -Land Requirements Tor 25-year Storm 25-year,24-hour storm volume( 5.2 A.F.),gallons 1,681,162 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 6,725 'Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 3,362 'NHS-N= 2 lbs/1.000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 3,362 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 2,606 22.5% Flood-Irrigation loss' Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 1,412 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr.,lbs. 4,018 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content, ppm 2.0 Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 5.5 Corn Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain,Bu/acre;silage,tons/acre) 175 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.,soil N,&Irr.Water NO3,(lb./acre) 168 149 Bulletin#538 Acres req.if effluent applied via flood irrigation 24 27 1.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization During process wastewater application, Tateyama Dairy monitors the process so that runoff of process wastewater does not occur. Tateyama Dairy will utilize tail water structures during application of process wastewater via flood irrigation. Tateyama Dairy does not apply process wastewater on frozen ground or during rainfall events. Average Years' Stormwater / Process Wastewater Application Two five-year wastewater generation estimates are outlined in Appendix B. The tables estimate the average annual amount of wastewater to be land applied. The tables estimate land application amounts by maintaining enough capacity to contain a 25-year, 24-hour storm. The tables combine the volume of normal precipitation, runoff and process wastewater and account for the following: • Average monthly precipitation values from local weather data • Average monthly lake-evaporation data from local weather data • Process wastewater generation rate of 10,000 GPD • Evaporation area equal to the surface area of the settling ponds when full, the primary ponds when one-half full or near empty • Existing dairy drainage area of 9 acres and new dairy area of 16.1 acres • Runoff percentage from NRCS National Engineering Handbook • Trial-and-error pumping amounts to maintain capacity for a 25-year, 24-hour storm The calculation tables show that annual land application of approximately 8.85 acre-feet of process wastewater will maintain capacity for a 25-year, 24-hour storm. Table 2 below shows the land necessary to utilize the nutrients from 8.85 acre-feet of stormwater/process wastewater in accordance with tier two of the state CAFO regulations. The nitrogen content and losses are based on Colorado State Cooperative Extension Bulletin No. 568A, Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization. The calculation in Table 2 indicates that Tateyama Dairy requires approximately 46 acres of corn to utilize the nitrogen contained in 8.85 acre-feet of stormwater/process wastewater. Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 6 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Table 2-Average Years' Land Application Requirements Maximum pumping requirement( 8.85 A.F.),gallons 2,883,585 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 11,534 'Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 5,767 "NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 5,767 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 4,470 22.5% Flood-Irrigation loss' Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 2,422 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N" Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr.,lbs. 6,892 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content,ppm 2.0 Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 5.5 Corn Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre;silage,tons/acre) 175 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.wl listed O.M.,soil N,&Irr.Water NO3,(lb./acre) 168 149 Bulletin#538 Acres req.if effluent applied via flood irrigation 41 46 1.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Sustainability Note that the above calculations show organic nitrogen mineralization and residual accumulation when stormwater/process wastewater occurs on the same fields every year. The calculations utilize an equilibrium mineralization rate for organic nitrogen of 42 percent. This represents the cumulative organic nitrogen released over three years. The above two tables indicate that Tateyama Dairy has enough available land (550 acres) to assimilate nutrients produced in stormwater/process wastewater year after year. Solid Manure Management Tateyama Dairy manages solid manure through routine pen cleaning and maintenance. Pen density is managed to optimize the surface area and keep cows clean while maintaining solid, dry footing for livestock. Tateyama Dairy cleans pens at least annually. Tateyama Dairy utilizes a portion (approximately 50%) of the solid manure produced annually on its own land; the remainder is given away to area farmers for use on their land. Tateyama Dairy land applies solid manure on the property it controls utilizing "tier two" criteria in the state CAFO regulations. Manure, compost and soil testing is covered later in this CNMP. Tateyama Dairy has approximately 550 irrigated-acres of controlled land available for land application of solid manure. Table 3 below calculates the amount of manure produced and the associated nutrients on an "as excreted basis". In addition, `as-hauled' weight is calculated accounting for predictable moisture losses. The calculations are based on NRCS Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, for various size dairy cattle and an average capacity of 1,160 lactating cows. Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 7 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Table 3- Manure Production NRCS Ag Waste Management Field Handbook Moisture Manure Manure TS VS Nitrogen Prosphorus Potassium Number of Wt/hd, (lbs./day/ (ft'/day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs_/day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs_/day/ Animal Type Hd lbs. Total Wt..lbs. (%) 1000#) 1000# 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) Milk Cows 1,160 1,400 1,624,000 87.5 80.0 1.30 10.00 8.50 0.45 0.07 0.26 Dry Cows 150 1,200 180,000 88.4 82.Q 1.30 9.50 8.10 0.36 0.05 0.23 Springers 550 750 412,500 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0,31 0.04 0.24 Heifers 715 500 357,500 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Calves 100 200 20,000 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Totals 2,675 2,594,000 Total Daily Production 211.830 3,372 25,171 21,400 1,041 154 653 Total Annual Production 77,317,950 1,230,853 9,187,269 7.811,110 379,783 56,312 238,433 Tons produced w/moisture content of 88% 38,659 Tons to apply w/moisture content of 46% 8,591 Land Application of Solid Manure Table 4 below is generated to estimate the land required to assimilate the nitrogen from approximately 50% of the manure produced annually at Tateyama Dairy. Table 4 also assumes that no solid manure is lost during rain events into the stormwater retention ponds or in the milk parlor during milking. Therefore, Tables 2 and 4 are not cumulative. The table utilizes values from CSU's Bulletin Nos. 538, Fertilizing Corn and 568A, Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization. Table 4 shows that Tateyama Dairy requires approximately 405 acres of corn to assimilate the nitrogen from 50% of the manure produced annually. Table 4-Land Requirements for Solid Manure Nitrogen produced annually, 50% used,rest given away,lbs. 189,891 Nitrogen loss during storage&handling,lbs. 94,946 50% "lost as ammonia in open lot Total Nitrogen in manure before application,lbs. 94,946 Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in manure,lbs. 36,554 *N14-N= 39%of total N in solid manure Organic-Nitrogen contained in manure,lbs. 58,392 'Organic-N= 62%of total N in solid manure NH4-N available after spreading(no incorporation),lbs. 28,329 'NH4-N loss= 23%within 4 days of application Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 32,115 55% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N• Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr.,lbs. 60,445 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Irrigation Water NO,content,ppm 2.0 Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 5.5 Corn Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain,Bu/acre;silage,tons/acre) 175 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.&residual soil N,lb./acre 168 149 Bulletin#538 Acres req.if effluent applied via flood irrigation 359 405 1.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed 'Taken from Table 4 of CSU's Bulletin No,568,9 Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Nutrient Utilization Nitrogen is the element that most often limits plant growth. Nitrogen is naturally abundant. However, it is the nutrient most frequently limiting crop production because the plant available forms of nitrogen in the soil are constantly undergoing transformation. Crops remove more nitrogen than any other nutrient from the soil. The limitation is not related to the total amount of nitrogen available but the form the crop can use. Most nitrogen in plants is in the organic form and is incorporated into amino acids. By weight, nitrogen makes up from 1 to 4 percent of harvested plant material. Essentially all of the nitrogen absorbed from the soil by plant roots is in the inorganic form of either nitrate or ammonium. Generally, young plants absorb more ammonium than nitrate; as the Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 8 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 plant ages the reverse is true. Under favorable conditions for plant growth, soil microorganisms generally convert ammonium to nitrate, so nitrates generally are more abundant when growing conditions are most favorable. Manure and process wastewater is most typically applied for fertilizers and soil amendments to produce crops. Generally, manure and process wastewater is applied to crops that are most responsive to nitrogen inputs. The primary objective of applying agricultural by-products to land is to recycle part of the plant nutrients contained in the by-product material into harvestable plant forage or dry matter. Another major objective in returning wastes to the land is enhancing the receiving soil's organic matter content. As soils are cultivated, the organic matter in the soil decreases. Throughout several years of continuous cultivation in which crop residue returns are low, organic matter content in most soil decreases dramatically. This greatly decreases the soil's ability to hold essential plant nutrients. Land application of Tateyama Dairy's stormwater/process wastewater and solid manure to recycle valuable nutrients is a practical, commonly accepted best management practice given that fertilization rates are applicable and that deep soil leaching does not occur. Reference material from Colorado State University is included in Appendix C of this CNMP for use by the operator in making sound decisions pertaining to the land application of process wastewater and/or solid manure. Soil Testing The purpose of soil sampling is to ensure that the quantity of nutrients later applied to the soil will not lead to undesirable nutrient levels in the soil. Knowledge of nitrogen and other nutrients present in the soil, combined with specific crops and realistic yield goals, are key for calculating appropriate manure and/or stormwater application rates. Tateyama Dairy will test soil on land application areas annually using protocol in Appendix D. Irrigation Water Testing Tateyama Dairy will test irrigation water once per year using the protocol in Appendix D. Manure, Compost and Stormwater Testing Manure, compost and stormwater testing are essential components of a complete nutrient balance. The amount of nutrients in solid and liquid waste determines the amount that can be land applied agronomically. Tateyama Dairy will test stormwater/process wastewater and solid manure at least once per year following the protocol in Appendix D. Agronomic Calculations Agronomic rate is the rate at which plants will utilize nutrients while limiting the amount of nutrients that are lost via percolation through the soil or runoff. Tateyama Dairy will perform agronomic calculations for every field upon which wastewater or solid manure is applied. Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 9 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Agronomic calculations take into account: • The crop to be grown • A realistic yield goal • Total nitrogen required to meet the yield goal • Residual soil nitrate • Soil organic matter • Nitrogen content in irrigation water • Nitrogen credit from previous legume crop;and • Plant available nitrogen(PAN) in the wastewater Forms for performing agronomic calculation are in Appendix E. One agronomic calculation sheet is used for each field on which wastewater or solid manure is applied. In addition, reference materials from Colorado State Cooperative Extension is located in Appendix C, which includes nitrogen requirement information for corn, wheat and other crops commonly grown in Colorado. Record Keeping Tateyama Dairy will keep records per Table 5 (forms are in Appendix E): Table 5- Record Keeping Forms ITEM FORM USED FREQUENCY OF RECORDING Rainfall Precipitation Log Each event, or more frequently during intense or long-lasting storms Manure Removal Manure/Compost Daily during removal Removal Log Solid Manure Solid Manure Several times per day during solid manure application Application Application Log Land Application Process Wastewater Several times per day during application of stormwater of Stormwater Application Log Pond Inspection Retention Basin Monthly Inspection Form Soil, wastewater, irrigation water and solid manure testing results will be retained for a minimum of three years. These records associated with manure and nutrient management at Tateyama Dairy will be kept with this CNMP. Limitations AgPro Environmental Services, LLC, has no control over the services or information furnished by others. This Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan was prepared and developed in accordance with generally accepted environmental consulting practices. This plan was prepared for the exclusive use of Tateyama Dairy and specific application to the subject property. The opinions provided herein are made based on AgPro Environmental Services, experience and qualifications, and represent AgPro Environmental Services' best judgment as experienced and qualified professionals familiar with the agriculture industry. AgPro Environmental Services, LLC, makes no warranty, expressed or implied. Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 10 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Appendix A • Topographic Location Map • Site Layout—Current Conditions • Site Layout—Proposed Conditions • Soils Map and Detailed Descriptions Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 11 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Appendix B • 25-year, 24-hour storm and retention basins capacity calculation • Average Years' Process Wastewater/Stormwater Accumulation Table (Main Dairy) • Average Years' Stormwater Accumulations Table (New Portion) • Process Wastewater Generation Table Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 12 • Tateyama Dairy 25-year,24-hour Storm Event, 10-year, 10-day Storm Event and Pond Capacity Calculations 25-year,24-hour event 10-year, 10-day event Earthen Concrete Earthen Concrete Earthen Concrete Earthen Concrete Areas for Areas for Total for Areas for Areas for Total for Areas for Areas for Total for Areas for Areas for Total for Existing Existing Existing Proposed Proposed Proposed Grand Existing Existing Existing Proposed Proposed Proposed Grand Dairy Dairy Dairy Area Area Area Total Dairy Dairy Dairy Area Area Area Total Applicable Storm Event for Location,inches 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 SCS Runoff Curve Number (90 for unsurfaced lots) 90 97 90 97 90 97 90 97 (97 for surfaced lots) S(potential max retention after runoff begins),inches 1.11 0.309 1.11 0.309 1.11 0.309 1.11 0.309 Surface Area of ominage Basins,acres 8.50 0.50 9.00 15.31 0.81 16.12 25.1 8.50 0.50 9.00 15.31 0.81 16.12 25.1 (Separate different drainage areas) (Include pens.alleys,mill areas,working areas,etc.) Inches of Runoff using SCS Runoff Curve Factor 1.98 2.66 1.98 2.66 3.20 3.95 3.20 3.95 Minimum Retention Capacity Required, Acre-Ft. 1.4 0.1 1.5 2.5 0.2 2.7 4.2 2.3 0.2 2.4 4.1 0.3 4.4 6.8 Cubic-Ft 61,220 4,825 66,045 110,268 7,816 118,085 184,130 98,878 7,169 106,047 178,096 11,614 189,710 295,757 Surface Area of Retention Structures,Acres 2.01 1.72 3.7 2.01 1.72 3.7 Additional Volume Required.Acre-Ft. 0.50 0.43 0.93 0.72 0.62 1.34 Additional Volume Required,ffs 21,875 18,750 40,625 31,353 26,875 58,228 Total Retention Structure Volume Required,Acre-Ft 2.02 3.14 5.16 3.15 4.97 8.13 Total Retention Structure Volume Required,tt 87,920 136,835 224,754 137,400 216,585 353,985 Total Retention Structure Volume Available,Acre-Ft 5.33 3.86 9.19 5.33 3.86 9.19 Lagoon Capacities Existing 1st-Stage Pond Existing 2nd-Stage Pond Existing Small Holding Pond Existing Large Holding Pond Proposed Settling Pond Proposed Primary Pond Vol.For Vol.For Vol.For Vol. For Vol.For Vol. For Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Depth,ft depth,ft2 ft3 depth,ft° ft3 depth,ft2 ft3 depth,ft' ft3 depth,ft2 ft3 depth,ft2 ft3 0 27,352 26,930 36 4,781 6,900 41,400 1 28,896 28,124 28,456 27,693 104 70 5,934 5,358 9,126 8,013 44,226 42,813 2 30,472 29,684 30,014 29,235 208 156 7,119 6,527 11,424 10,275 47,124 45,675 3 32,080 31,276 31,605 30,810 348 278 8,337 7,728 13,794 12,609 50,094 48,609 4 33,720 32,900 33,227 32,416 523 436 9,586 8,962 16,236 15,015 53,136 51,615 5 35,392 34,556 34,881 34,054 734 629 10,868 10,227 18,750 17,493 56,250 54,693 6 980 857 12,181 11,525 7 1,262 1,121 13,527 12,854 8 1,579 1,421 14,904 14,216 9 1,932 1,756 10 2,321 2,127 11 12 Total Volume,ft 156,540 154,208 8,849 77,395 63,405 243,405 Total Volume,Acre-Ft. 3.59 3.54 0.20 1.78 1.46 5.59 Vol.wl 2'frbrd,ft' 89,084 87,738 4,967 50,325 30,897 137,097 Vol.wl 2'frbrd,Acre-Ft. 2.05 2.01 0.11 1.16 0.71 3.15 Tateyama Dairy Process Wastewater/Stormwater Accumulation Table-Main Dairy Init.Volume Process Water Generated,GPD= 10,000 Pond Surface Area,ft2= 87,498 Evaporation Area,ft2= 69,184 0.5 Precip.* Percent Runoff Area Total Runoff Lake Evap. Evap.Area Total Evap. Process-H2O Net Change Amt.Pumped Vol.In Lagoon Annual Pumped Month (inches) Runoff (Acres) (Acre-Ft.) (inches)*** (Acres) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) Jan 0.37 5.0% 0.5 0.06 0.40 1.59 0.05 0.95 0.96 1.46 Feb 0.49 5.0% 0.5 0.08 1.20 1.59 0.16 0.86 0.78 2.24 Mar 1.16 5.0% 0.5 0.20 2.40 1.59 0.32 0.95 0.83 3.08 Apr 2.00 7.0% 0.5 0.34 3.60 1.59 0.48 0.92 0.78 0.55 3.31 May 2.82 17.0% 0.5 0.49 5.00 1.59 0.66 0.95 0.78 0.80 3.29 Jun 1,84 15.0% 0.5 0.32 6.20 1.59 0.82 0.92 0.42 0.40 3.31 5.70 Jul 1.61 14.0% 0.5 0.28 6.40 1.59 0.85 0.95 0.38 0.40 3.29 Aug 1.40 12.0% 0.5 0.24 5.20 1.59 0.69 0.95 0.50 0.50 3.30 Sep 1.30 13.0% 0.5 0.22 4.40 1.59 0.58 0.92 0.56 0.55 3.31 Oct 1.11 10.0% 0.5 0.19 3.00 1.59 0.40 0.95 0.74 0.75 3.31 Nov 0.60 5.0% 0.5 0.10 1.60 1.59 0.21 0.92 0.81 0.80 3.32 Dec 0.47 5.0% 0.5 0.08 0.60 1.59 0.08 0.95 0.95 0.95 3.32 Jan 0.37 5.0% 0.5 0.06 0.40 1.59 0.05 0.95 0.96 0.95 3.33 Feb 0.49 5.0% 0.5 0.08 1.20 1.59 0.16 0.86 0.78 0.80 3.31 Mar 1.16 5.0% 0.5 0.20 2.40 1.59 0.32 0.95 0.83 0.85 3.29 Apr 2.00 7.0% 0.5 0.34 3.60 1.59 0.48 0.92 0.78 0.80 3.28 May 2.82 17.0% 0.5 0.49 5.00 1.59 0.66 0.95 0.78 0.75 3.31 Jun 1.84 15.0% 0.5 0.32 6.20 1.59 0.82 0.92 0.42 0.40 3.33 8.55 Jul 1.61 14.0% 0.5 0.28 6.40 1.59 0.85 0.95 0.38 0.40 3.31 Aug 1.40 12.0% 0.5 0.24 5.20 1.59 0.69 0.95 0.50 0.50 3.32 Sep 1.30 13.0% 0.5 0.22 4.40 1.59 0.58 0.92 0.56 0.55 3.33 Oct 1.11 10.0% 0.5 0.19 3.00 1.59 0.40 0.95 0.74 0.75 3.33 Nov 0.60 5.0% 0.5 0.10 1.60 1.59 0.21 0.92 0.81 0.85 3.29 Dec 0.47 5.0% 0.5 0.08 0.60 1.59 0.08 0.95 0.95 0.95 3.29 Jan 0.37 5.0% 0.5 0.06 0.40 1.59 0.05 0.95 0.96 0.95 3.30 Feb 0.49 5.0% 0.5 0.08 1.20 1.59 0.16 0.86 0.78 0.80 3.28 _ Mar 1.16 5.0% 0.5 0.20 2.40 1.59 0.32 0.95 0.83 0.80 3.31 Apr 2.00 7.0% 0.5 0.34 3.60 1.59 0.48 0.92 0.78 0.80 3.30 May 2.82 17.0% 0.5 0.49 5.00 1.59 0.66 0.95 0.78 0.75 3.33 Jun 1.84 15.0% 0.5 0.32 6.20 1.59 0.82 0.92 0.42 0.45 3.30 8.50 Jul 1.61 14.0% 0.5 0.28 6.40 1.59 0.85 0.95 0.38 0.40 3.28 Aug 1.40 12.0% 0.5 0.24 5.20 1.59 0.69 0.95 0.50 0.50 3.29 Sep 1.30 13.0% 0.5 0.22 4.40 1.59 0.58 0.92 0.56 0.55 3.30 Oct 1.11 10.0% 0.5 0.19 3.00 1.59 0.40 0.95 0.74 0.75 3.30 Nov 0.60 5.0% 0.5 0.10 1.60 1.59 0.21 0.92 0.81 0.80 3.31 Dec 0.47 5.0% 0.5 0.08 0.60 1.59 0.08 0.95 0.95 0.95 3.31 Jan 0.37 5.0% 0.5 0.06 0.40 1.59 0.05 0.95 0.96 0.95 3.32 Feb 0.49 5.0% 0.5 0.08 1.20 1.59 0.16 0.86 0.78 0.80 3.30 Mar 1.16 5.0% 0.5 0.20 2.40 1.59 0.32 0.95 0.83 0.85 3.28 Apr 2.00 7.0% 0.5 0.34 3.60 1.59 0.48 0.92 0.78 0.75 3.32 May 2.82 17.0% 0.5 0.49 5.00 1.59 0.66 0.95 0.78 0.80 3.30 Jun 1.84 15.0% 0.5 0.32 6.20 1.59 0.82 0.92 0.42 0.40 3.32 8.50 Jul 1.61 14.0% 0.5 0.28 6.40 1.59 0.85 0.95 0.38 0.40 3.30 Aug 1.40 12.0% 0.5 0.24 5.20 1.59 0.69 0.95 0.50 0.50 3.31 Sep 1.30 13.0% 0.5 0.22 4.40 1.59 0.58 0.92 0.56 0.55 3.32 Oct 1.11 10.0% 0.5 0.19 3.00 1.59 0.40 0.95 0.74 0.75 3.31 Nov 0.60 5.0% 0.5 0.10 1.60 1.59 0.21 0.92 0.81 0.80 3.32 Dec 0.47 5.0% 0.5 0.08 0.60 1.59 0.08 0.95 0.95 0.95 3.33 Jan 0.37 5.0% 0.5 0.06 0.40 1.59 0.05 0.95 0.96 1.00 3.29 Feb 0.49 5.0% 0.5 0.08 1.20 1.59 0.16 0.86 0.78 0.75 3.32 Mar 1.16 5.0% 0.5 0.20 2.40 1.59 0.32 0.95 0.83 0.85 3.30 Apr 2.00 7.0% 0.5 0.34 3.60 1.59 0.48 0.92 0.78 0.80 3.29 May 2.82 17.0% 0.5 0.49 5.00 1.59 0.66 0.95 0.78 0.75 3.32 Jun 1.84 15.0% 0.5 0.32 6.20 1.59 0.82 0.92 0.42 0.45 3.29 8.55 Jul 1.61 14.0% 0.5 0.28 6.40 1.59 0.85 0.95 0.38 0.40 3.27 _ Aug 1.40 12.0% 0.5 0.24 5.20 1.59 0.69 0.95 0.50 0.50 3.28 Sep 1.30 13.0% 0.5 0,22 4.40 1.59 0.58 0.92 0.56 0.55 3.29 Oct 1.11 10.0% 0.5 0.19 3.00 1.59 0.40 0.95 0,74 0.75 3.28 Nov 0.60 5.0% 0.5 0.10 1.60 1.59 0.21 0.92 0.81 0.80 3.29 Dec 0.47 5.0% 0.5 0.08 0.60 1.59 0.08 0.95 0.95 0.95 3.30 Maximum Volume Pumped= 8.55 Average Monthly Change= 0.71 Maximum Volume in Pond= 3.33 *Precipitation for Ft.Collins,CO,NOAA **SCS,National Engineering Handbook ***Evaporation for Ft.Collins,CO,NOAA Tateyama Dairy Stormwater Accumulation Table-New Portion Init.Volume Process Water Generated,GPD= - Pond Surface Area,re= 75,000 Evaporation Area.112= 55,194 0.4 Precip.' Percent Runoff Area Total Runoff Lake Evap. Evap.Area Total Evap. Process-H2O Net Change Amt.Pumped Vol.In Lagoon Annual Pumped Month (Inches) Runoff (Acres) (Acre-Ft.) (Inches)"` (Acres) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) Jan 0.37 5.0% 16.12 0.08 0.40 1.27 0.04 - 0.04 0.44 Feb 0.49 5.0% 16.12 0.10 1.20 1.27 0.13 - (0.02) 0.41 Mar 1.16 5.0% 16.12 0.24 2.40 1.27 0.25 - (0.01) 0.40 Apr 2.00 7.0% 16.12 0.48 3.60 1.27 0.38 - 0.09 0.50 May 2.82 17,0% 16.12 1,05 5.00 1.27 0.53 - 0.52 0.30 0.72 Jun 1.84 15.0% 16.12 0.63 6.20 1.27 0.65 - (0.02) 0.70 0.30 Jul 1.61 14.0% 16.12 0.53 6.40 1.27 0.68 - (0.14) 0.56 Aug 1.40 12.0% 16.12 0.43 5.20 1.27 0.55 - (0.12) 0.43 Sep 1.30 13.0% 16.12 0.41 4.40 1.27 0.46 - (0.05) 0.38 Oct 1.11 10.0% 16.12 0.31 3.00 1,27 0.32 - (0.01) 0.37 Nov 0.60 5.0% 16.12 0.13 1.60 1.27 0.17 - (0.04) 0.33 Dec 0.47 5.0% 16.12 0.10 0.60 1.27 0.06 - 0.04 0.37 Jan 0.37 5.0% 16.12 0.08 0.40 1.27 0.04 - 0.04 0.40 Feb 0.49 5.0% 16.12 0.10 1.20 1.27 0.13 - (0.02) 0.38 Mar 1.16 5.0% 16.12 0.24 2.40 1.27 0.25 - (0.01) 0.37 Apr 2.00 7.0% 16.12 0.48 3.60 1.27 0.38 - 0.09 0.47 May 2.82 17.0% 16.12 1.05 5.00 1.27 0.53 - 0.52 0.30 0.69 Jun 1.84 15.0% 16.12 0.63 6.20 1.27 0.65 - (0.02) 0.67 0.30 Jul 1.61 14.0% 16.12 0.53 6.40 1.27 0.68 - (0.14) 0.52 Aug 1.40 12.0% 16.12 0.43 5.20 1.27 0.55 - (0.12) 0.40 Sep 1.30 13.0% 16.12 0.41 4.40 1.27 0.46 - (0.05) 0.35 Oct 1.11 10.0% 16.12 0.31 3.00 1.27 0.32 - (0.01) 0.34 Nov 0.60 5.0% 16.12 0.13 1.60 1.27 0.17 - (0.04) 0.30 Dec 0.47 5.0% 16.12 0.10 0.60 1.27 0.06 - 0.04 0.34 Jan 0.37 5.0% 16.12 0.08 0.40 1.27 0.04 - 0.04 0.37 Feb 0.49 5.0% 16.12 0.10 1.20 1.27 0.13 - (0.02) 0.35 Mar 1,16 5.0% 16.12 0.24 2.40 1.27 0.25 - (0.01) 0.34 Apr 2.00 7.0% 16.12 0.48 3.60 1.27 0.38 - 0.09 0.43 May 2.82 17.0% 16.12 1.05 5.00 1.27 0.53 - 0.52 0.25 0.70 Jun 1.84 15.0% 16.12 0.63 6.20 1.27 0.65 - (0.02) 0.68 0.25 Jul 1.61 14.0% 16.12 0.53 6.40 1.27 0.68 - (0.14) 0.54 Aug 1.40 12.0% 16.12 0.43 5.20 1.27 0.55 - (0.12) 0.42 Sep 1.30 13.0% 16.12 0.41 4.40 1.27 0.46 - (0.05) 0.37 Oct 1.11 10.0% 16.12 0.31 3.00 1.27 0.32 - (0.01) 0.36 Nov 0.60 5.0% 16.12 0.13 1.60 1.27 0.17 - (0.04) 0.32 Dec 0.47 5.0% 16.12 0.10 0.60 1.27 0.06 - 0.04 0.35 Jan 0.37 5.0% 16.12 0.08 0.40 1.27 0.04 - 0.04 0.39 Feb 0.49 5.0% 16.12 0.10 1.20 1.27 0.13 - (0.02) 0.37 Mar 1.16 5.0% 16.12 0.24 2.40 1.27 0.25 - (0.01) 0.36 Apr 2.00 7.0% 16.12 0.48 3.60 1.27 0.38 - 0.09 0.45 May 2.82 17.0% 16.12 1.05 5.00 1.27 0.53 - 0.52 0.25 0.72 Jun 1.84 15.0% 16.12 0.63 6.20 1.27 0.65 - (0.02) 0.70 0.25 Jul 1.61 14.0% 16.12 0.53 6.40 1.27 0.68 - (0.14) 0.56 Aug 1.40 12.0% 16.12 0.43 5.20 1.27 0.55 - (0.12) 0.44 Sep 1.30 13.0% 16.12 0.41 4.40 1.27 0.46 - (0.05) 0.39 Oct 1.11 10.0% 16.12 0.31 3.00 1.27 0.32 - (0.01) 0.38 Nov 0.60 5.0% 16.12 0.13 1.60 1.27 0.17 - (0.04) 0.34 Dec 0.47 5.0% 16.12 0.10 0.60 1.27 0.06 - 0.04 0.37 Jan 0.37 5.0% 16.12 0.08 0.40 1.27 0.04 - 0.04 0.41 Feb 0.49 5.0% 16.12 0.10 1.20 1.27 0.13 - (0.02) 0.38 Mar 1.16 5.0% 16.12 0.24 2.40 1.27 0.25 - (0.01) 0.37 Apr 2.00 7.0% 16.12 0.48 3.60 1.27 0.38 - 0.09 0.47 May 2.82 17.0% 16.12 1.05 5.00 1.27 0.53 - 0.52 0.30 0.69 Jun 1.84 15.0% 16.12 0.63 6.20 1.27 0.65 - (0.02) 0.67 0.30 Jul 1.61 14.0% 16.12 0.53 6.40 1.27 0.68 - (0.14) 0.53 Aug 1.40 12.0% 16.12 0.43 5.20 1.27 0.55 - (0.12) 0.41 Sep 1.30 13.0% 16.12 0.41 4.40 1.27 0.46 - (0.05) 0.36 Oct 1.11 10.0% 16.12 0.31 3.00 1.27 0.32 - (0.01) 0.35 Nov 0.60 5.0% 16.12 0.13 1.60 1.27 0.17 - (0.04) 0.30 Dec 0.47 5.0% 16.12 0.10 0.60 1.27 0.06 - 0.04 0.34 Maximum Volume Pumped= 0.3 Average Monthly Change= 0.02 Maximum Volume in Pond= 0.72 'Precipitation for Ft.Collins,CO,NOAA **SCS,National Engineering Handbook "'Evaporation for Ft.Collins,CO,NOAA Tateyama Dairy Process Wastewater Production No. of Water Gallons/ Washes Volume Type of Use Wash per Day (GPD) Bulk Tank (Automatic Wash) 200 1 200 Pipeline in Parlor 200 3 600 Miscellaneous Equipment 100 3 300 Parlor Floor Flush 1,000 3 3,000 Milk Floor 300 3 900 Holding Pen Wash 1,200 3 3,600 Total Daily Flow(GPD) 8,600 Design Factor 1.2 Design Flow(GPD) 10,000 Annual Flow(Acre-Feet) 11.20 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Appendix C • Colorado State University References Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 13 t^ ys. M .1- 't h £w "�'6;tat xa 3; ti I i E. 3 s ftykC. ...:..;4; X,' ,4 fE y v tr. )k 4 +F r; r y f 4 ax r "r r✓! ,a .n '� w a r ! t ¢,9a 3'r1. 40 "'A4tr'1`vx�r9y 9 Nt n i S r,,l"'S l v Yank N ',r'ai"+.itil-j i1 t i. el '+etai i," � ISyt °ti; ' 1'G 1/4 r'-'-'4-? {r h u�7'd . 1-1 f ;::: r i € d q:il vr'tFA4 { rK.iS a J gLLL tiY 4 `e }F9*'.a J(ZCL;M•tVI-6 a t�,4'47.te.� t'LL7)'e7'O < .ty I..S 4 ryf t a+ f rr'tkM1': " ' rd' {t riy,S tl� 'f W rik.k4� 'y', 4 4 Y ,q M li lti °k c d r"i r>,c 7 t 1� ( A-L�41 1.i' 114 5� ,�'� F J ys+ `'lt }ar+�.'. i .I��.r '#�:.Nr x+�s��gg T&�4'�h ,63.E�� vzY ''cY�rq*`'�fp r � t .�t Ilx 3- -i r } 4•h F ''x �f+-iwS FE-, +'d �'. J4 F Arh,ti' sA9 t,,A e y�', v r' " L a..•t `hti* r+,at ` j i t.•n i 'rli S'Jr (4J..aid'" 'r w*',? '. 1 "1s* p x>{'erI fltioa yxfw. a.5-,0,--- 4141'4'1'r •'iv yLy"� �` �•[�Zrr�`� .y{tn� -a at I +e' T e ..+r .'"s'y tt �kF{L,' 'lz tyL f� '�' �`. .yes-. f ..4:4,44114 `Y As; l "4l:l it M C47Y' �'1 l .n p 'C "C4..V- -�.,F F. ). :A � fiH }'' }� "!'� e b ', s: m . ..„t PR tar '"a krz r x5 rJw4' x p '.4TFS'"'nn;r`�nh.r. ,�, 'dry+''i r,e s�cii, 4 r t- ay # ;t01-44;.44. tr„'LgL y 6 4u rY .. h k ,1 ,, �i,"''T ,+-Xt .sr?',V`a u '" n rj�'y to r s q" s K 4'ds. z S -, r ratw'Rdr n:a�t ,.N A r es�pi'r,�yC .x. ,�'t 4''°{,i1 +�'�,�f,� r r >�r: H �e'r 4'"n I '.�.r':law 1m ! A r w. t'�t ( SFXx."kq`a r. Y °,4 1ji+ ,. sG4.0, },'^.r<""f 4*,' 43t*, 'Shit , r*,f'i ele4,yc,\4 g4 ). 01,'` .'� Le Fl: I-t"4 4e� 7' > ta'.? r 4 k'r 1^k"m",y T4v _"'t" 2^i 2y}'s A1 ':{iw l'i""`j' Par�40,'gs [5 I l' - ,, 'x `,4 .'4 ,,i,,, .4't;" Ni;;,;4 x o-f, .L 1 t ti4. r ,.,,,.,1/2„.„, ,x J y�r rvrY+t .ur! { t, r ...a •,„. „'Sx'4;. IT .7•'., C"tj4 L 'I.n f { �1' j $' I } rM ,< 4-00,,,,,L, ,,,, "K51',i gS .r: ' `��8--rtif..t i �rt • ," ( r.l X, -o Mr's 4 r..11 t A.0 �t k„ t °! �. 4.,' �g' dL - r .4, .--,9;744: M u-kn,f y.- . tkz Pr Sic r,'2 Jd`} .v rt, .�f t , 7 ♦ 1 ", yL' .^il � 7� `>�.qx•z i� r ! 9. tKvv�7 r v�r r x�L5 1� 'W'�-E x▪,�i L#�' 2"'ai'"F^tt I�t r atgr i i'cr cu a' t-t.' . u4 {w of R rw *•S r + ",�p,77+�rt2 �{ v 3 h+f s t.n. , ww r s t W I..yij . „,-., i-:•i ;4.5 xr}E• tL jt'Y t.'.aa:-k�yisV *^k_lYnrt'' `J^Nt?��"{^' r<t^?5K,'aS4p-;,,?4 ;. �Pd 4;;+^:: i 5 r ., q� t} r'ti., rr,�l4, jq � ��e I �ry 1 r, `F. t } T� ) x ?Y P ry ri l v�: n } i 1. r" S �p rJ i a {` S..'F'Y+,p2 nr �.+1V a r ♦ Q .-.,ar t{ N"rjd aR:7, ''t atr'"h-+14.17'x4 Cl.H" r. •I,)e Y rfti4 ti sr �a niF :4 RV I t d s f ti 'p ` .. r i { kr '�'�.` T.w + x �, ! . ,„" ' •..t�a , ,� ., i „•,,,„..,..,, ,i,...4.„,•„,,,:,..,„:„.4..„,„.„.„),,..,„„:„.,,,,,,,-,,,,,,.. f. 4...i ,% r ,�,'„y-°'.„.„ o#R„„ ;.,,, t �sO " s -- •'4,d� d*}y r. .a 6 r rk,. ri v t1,t ra.ti t 'i _. r41. ' °1^t <2 1,4 it �{„(,v�E�As 14- yabnj-A 'tit p, i r :3▪ Ys4`. th' Yaxtt rt4.i ', nL. 'ralr 1 i iii' '4Y-4,:'': +s �j pA ?•t -"+t."^ 4 k °"w, soi j' '^,t ' >11�P x'Nr`+`+, d'M.7z r `3; v . .;i. tq7 iM1q ar`�ai W q Ka ..0, J a tx `We' k�x t '.,s ly �ymyiµ,, !.:4gi ft`�Iw,i'*LY,r';;• l; M yed9 AL0V }nyA ! '4 si Yd rdw l:.01 .' 9 il45aa e7r} fsYwe y��I Prdl lv `l"n c >nflykca. K 'Y•• �{U } �} a'If � � af' \ � �y�lµ4d �h�J rr� 5ar5 r'�I� L�tk .rt di < . y m a, t�;. 4.F 'et: . ,1` 4 ky , p . '4„,,,-,,. r" t 44, , wt4,.v'y y n' 7y. Ac v'/r.iJ�F': + r eit41 a 7A8` tr, • d. ‘LC s.4�'"�� q i a w' A' "F` 11•',,` t 4 a�i,34 d9;(e wA r v"w' ` r P STYE .wa[ A'1F., e1, 'y..�K;. l„ ya 4!4 n S.M.`n ? at x x 'IL'i ^ ffi � ;„-,.,;(4„....,,,1--Q-0-,;•, � �,�111 irp "'r'J`�' . $ .S '{' ' 1 LLr « i i' .k t , j 7h 'T xo- � wf• g i ,0H V ` t ,:43-- r . 4iP'zork `fitly 4�N7tne,,,t`'oi.fi'+[ ''i'Fk<� I F ..��y, IP:4. 41 a... _uuYYz�' '. {{�4f q n �'1 y,.,e>'gy� , sm'c$r M"' rJ- +`, �/� f 1 ,n IP1;iF u 1 •,/:?.R tv t •' YyFi e;:iP - �i ,> GieIL4' V 44144404'14,.."*.--MS:t.Cr. L Rgd�f yn ski l �Y f t;�' f � � �� 4 + U$444.4%,, £4 i 4 jr `ifraa k1a''�. 'L k •a, t kit,5..rv- -.'' k f �� tH 7s "4 � • " �. C 'i J tY .$,,,? ei ° �i "' L 4r '04: 5 i;^ l dt,^y�, uja",)5 " ,�rrp w, L A ..a {1 ' 3� rx , ' tlya �5 `;, .; ,A .1.,,,,.„.9.! • • R{f "Yf y 0 '�'R t"` i' „ Cr h Sp �S } > +N !.-01n""4y S_yp. k,,,„0:,,,,--,,,..- ta x ' 4rk riy ,k i + k,�k r < fd� rj r=r ti, � ,. e-d.7'GL ..I'-� t t7«',•iN J{T �:d7,„'„,* t„ t��'Sf° i 'g!'i�'.2y k rr 44 1.-;:!'.11"4)(4,1, 3n i'�' 04 i 'pks 'k'uy v*,rr'N a.' 'all,. t a • Y9" r ro fi�Y • °erg a„<i h`�*S ` cRw^ rx t r �� i rA "w'7f ru lyr + F r. rl/k ih r 4AW � � � � 0...... I "� i .�.kr.�r G.�3'rl 5� *Jilt' � �awfw'I a �t,' Y�T*` fzi` { (. �,n. �. r q t 1 . 4 12.. 'Nvti�Ly�, •• a alP.�,,�i(ii , Qlf 1N 4 th .� s.�r d„ ^ kr `a^Y ly+f, frw r ! n t n>: "r jilt, a'k'1 €� r }9b.^f-t7' �*�EY4� a�Y µ, '"tl "!. 1 ^iy . 3 u;�ytn�` � r "fin 7 7�.. I at�r:s, ` t� t Ll+++! n'd4 it r }}}m Cr ;it'll re i.4.-�• � q`. }4p d.al4 r7 P 1 ,4 ,w tot4 g4. i�F4i H+t aK sr � ytktt+' . P, � y�." �"''6, vYo�i ,��F�s,�rfsu: 'ti'1F � wrr � isr.nJ:, t ?`I � ,,-.,..'"4-•'-'1?S' 4i ��4 id dr �1#Yat4,tr71RG"� ,.m F nYd, t 94 v d w In we f `^ r e Ia 31 F r n tl ap.. ��F✓e v t . �a ,� � ��: Li 3 �� •+d1. � p. F2^+5"" #.& P 4 ;4"14.: �A�t�"ze�+gt Aria " ,• ,„,, .3 t sn tv, rtz4� .x.'W,N n4 kit 1L °f s fjt�� n,.:. far =crwrlfdix w r n .✓ ',oil: )., 't 7 c 33� ryh �q 4 a � •-t e f R r sr ap .to.,,, ot�* aJ�rl� {�v a R 1 M1'k 'f' f 5rYt'. F�j�rt+. Si a i'e', 4.414, . f,. l- +' Wn Fe, t e F (+*y M1 1 Y• t—' 4 '4 „y dCt.'\' h 45 7':� rA r' 1;T:t, /1i.f { * %f • i4. •r -4 y ;net ,- i "ti +C 1 4 .. r ..ypy�{.,,.'Y dwS a0.,,..nwifl �I a p, r � .. q `t f( s . 'LC µ ; Jvfk 4x7m ia'''. n A f •W'�'',,F''�r!„ , 4 4w q. q', T U.`� d y J y r�'` 4 M '", R W '.. C44A. 5kA w' l ,EaV3°' 'y !„,s9--.T:04,- df` 'n..I t t,i. '�" F r r5,TY4 ' eLW ,t, £.^� .1 i k d 41 c431.pl 91 10;. - , ""r �7 4 � lyly^sL y m kr y112' c9:..r,A 2s t ' ,l 4443;b1- 43-44O45't z s , r i ` ', Y itil Y ..e zt x> ,^rt ,,;,.'w""Lyf i b rt.!_ ,� .r4vey;gs,.e�s f+�d x i5J%. „...3,.,,,,,,,,,,,, e a,"'n"" �F ti .-ft'"-s' '-t7��1j3'� x1 vs1 ' ,w ,:-, a r •7W#.r l°R � 3^Fr T�fi 'v ;4n r s r: -41.,„:,,,,42,,,s0 i�tf7 e21 .� Are" Y r`4 . gVlrw � �G� ^ r 11.}1"4 r'W r y ax 4 '4�. yptri fl w.''..mq' t N+'r_% w "wer A}a+ „ 2 it ry, YF' - u �e� 44s"},ry ,+.`q.S u 4 i 4 1 s• :< L I"r't �i:57}� .43.ah L'f , i . 5�q Irr'. V v,11 Ii", ,.tr, i "'fit., m''v, l.r�(+ t } �,�`�� y '�4 - �� , No- yh�,^i� ✓P' A-C•�.'reer.,- " 0. r „11O4, �rY r l y'� I -,,eyrp'r 4;ro a -k'rf4 _]J.r 7 r'"`�^ '-9 r^"rJ T'drf Nc_. 'ter i "^ .:e- ..yrc'� tsie I. -71:42,47,1P.". �a,�� .? �t �7. xL i'vv ..i». $[yam eµ Y µ " rL. 'tl`y('�j wya zi e, . 'C ''-�rdJjs �7'.e,r e.,. 1 .}4'. p' rfx `{i ✓1 .•Iy i,.Y 'Rti' +SY>i1r ' i *M +4 ^ir " n , 21 i♦ 1',�4� 1�j..ase..��' l4S''ivy4 '{��ryt �{y� Y4'.l'Fw ..i.�rrx,.. +d-4.;1�` Q r •A°' :.� hr� S a� k 5 r rc �. i„.,—aer- n,a . Ott .., CIgc7r�a 'a ..ge9S"a_f�c: t 41(lr r i 3,v -Pew-. r�r,.,�• • ' en(yWKHxg�Hi"Xfi{. �-s^ ^+ _ x in_... •.�M` + is 41444O'4 a-'1 v .,. .... S",N�"3atYJ r+{J" t ssim'otr,, ".^ 2L� X ' K J 1 ''';',Jr.„ �-00 ,.s.. sr.�' x,1r. ^fir R'4 iY ^t• v '" '`Y�k' c�".•.0 r r ,�Cy.`ii` .rte : ', irr"11hA '#7.4tor r ''' ' rllr )r `w, —'as3 '+.. z „ ...':A-O-O' ' -27/. r r. •" .., ._'"r$!'«$ st�..l ..l: al s'. w i4 In S .�,.. 'F R'F c "" �'�"r^ c rR "?j3 +. '�+ tw vi A« Sr r ! r M1 M • �.�,Fa x . s ,c I rd4 .p w r ti aY. x x ,+ it �y. o f 01 II; a s 4J } +Fr y( �,'y � � " }sfrk �r� !fli!a c 'F k �:G t� y3/4a,„,,...� ,- ">tS. v a;,}7 °X F,wn "sti 1 [ • - f Wtir»` s %yt •• ay T .) .3� r ,�•9 .f." q . s`'r aw.5 „„E„,,..,..;„-.. vd .k�.t } sg�w r d'v,e ry`�ih. 4 Kkr4 iH"^ ,an�+°-, ^3»'' + �'S�' t'Ty rPtrte,S., % "f `'Jl 'f 1-V. :404 JV•t�¢e^. F•u" , �i�+'"pV: 3 t .sa �-4,,,, x"�^Y9t"'4Y rte. c,4• „/ t C a e.�''. e J j F ° r u r i'.141-1.1, ""M' '. 4,,,‘“.. .; t bq ` f 11 u•••••,• ��tt-F yy��.r , i. 4 T ( ).�4 �Jc' v5 r,'tai• 'lSF` 16 tt 11 f tj�r K • IBS. w R L�4. {�pp4 n:l..,:—�,,y� k y ,P-v{-ri"fok, 4'i .ry* ,L calrhf 5 tiY �t r" Mf r .. , '. ,`^ "T ) ( .y i`Y , �'T�S 4 51.4i1f1}I1WtlIC.mU+.Yf-VYLYIIJ1w'ir[W 6L.� kJ .�u1Y3"YL,r...Wt� Wi,�.w.1 n.1_/Ar77 �n:e:t a�',�. r , \ ( Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization } Bulletin 5S8A Colorado Yate U x Cooperative Extensiot eky!. Best Management Practices for 'C Manure Utilization s t�- Livestock manure and effluents are rich in plant available nutrients which can be valuable assets to crop producers. However, they also can be a source of both ground and surface water contamination if handled improperly. Livestock manure contains significant quantities of N, P, and K, and smaller amounts of nutrients such as Ca, Mg, Mn, Zn, Cu, and S. Manure that is properly applied to cropland increases soil fertility, improves soil physical properties, and saves fertilizer costs. Liquid effluents are composed primarily of water and have less This publication is intended to impact on soil physical properties, but they also contain nutrients and other provide general recommendations constituents that must be managed properly. and BMPs to assist in the sound The primary constituents of animal waste that may cause water quality management of animal waste as problems include pathogenic organisms, nitrate, ammonia, phosphorous, salts, a nutrient source for crops. These heavy metals, and organic solids. Nitrate (N03) is the most common ground BMPs are necessarily general, as water pollutant from fields that receive excessive rates of manure. Ground water they cover operations utilizing monitoring has shown that NO3 contamination can be a problem in the vicinity manure from a vanety of feeding of confined livestock feeding operations. Runoff from feedlots or manured fields operations. This document is not can also degrade the quality of surface water. In Colorado, state law prohibits any direct discharge of manure or animal ntended to establish guidance to wastewater to either surface or ground water. Concentrated swine operations are meet any specific regulatory ,ubjected to air and water quality provisions that among other things, require program in Colorado governing an approved nutrient management plan as a component of the operating permit. the application of animal waste These nutrient management plans are used to document that confined feeding and is not a substitute for com- operations apply wastes at agronomic rates and in a manner which does not pliance with local, state or adversely impact air or water quality. The Colorado Confined Animal Feeding federal regulations. Table values Operations Control Regulation mandates that producers who confine and feed an for manure characterization given average of 1000 or more "animal units" for at least 45 days per year ensure that in the document are for planning no water quality impacts occur by collecting and properly disposing of animal purposes in lieu of documented manures, as well as stormwater runoff. Smaller feeding operations that directly site-specific values. discharge into state waters or are located in hydrologically sensitive areas may also fall under this regulation. Animal. feeding operations are directed to employ Best Management Practices (BMPs) to protect state waters. Nutrient Management Planning Sound management practices are essential to maximize the agronomic and economic benefits of manure while reducing the risk of adverse environmental consequences. Livestock producers do not intentionally put water quality at risk. The problems that occur are usually a result of inattention due to the need to focus limited management time on herd health and production. Virtually every regulatory and voluntary manure management approach now calls for producers to develop a Nutrient Management Plan. This plan documents approximately how much manure is produced and how it will be managed. At the core of these ins is the concept that manure will be applied at "agronomic rates" to crop ands. 1 `qua The agronomic rate is a nutrient application rate F Table 1 .Animal"unit equivalency factors for Colorado based upon a field-specific estimate of crop needs and an accounting of all N and P available to that crop prior �$L�vestock Type 3 � �Anrmal Umt�,;��,�...,CAFO�� x xs : — ' Equivalency - T eshold to manure (and/or fertilizer) application. Implicit ""` Factor • Kumberrapirr. y within the agronomic rate concept is an application Slaughter and Feed Cattle -1 Pte ---1,b00" _ rate that does not lead to unacceptable nutrient losses. iFPt{Orsesw s.o 1.0 1 00 The agronomic rate is not something that can be �g r+Ts�,��,�ksi�3l,� x 0y '"mod g $hFaturekaatry CattE'e 4 { a „ �rxg7,5 directly obtained from a textbook or tables. Rather, it Peiswrney&. 5blbsr `x., 4�-„�Z� • e5t0k must be evaluated for each farm and field. Knowledge Sheepl,(y x15`ickii �4r r r cr tsAt 52,, mq lx� c a+o . 4M0 2 500 of manure or effluent nutrient content and residual soil ��,f+p�' y�y 4 45 � X `,50r0ich r nutrients is critical to determining how much can be Chickens �brotlerfgr layer) 0 02,' 'tra10070001 safely applied so that the agronomic rate is not ex- 4� tkY -{k X11 w5"S r` t�.'p i aq,cw!i%��fYY3 .. r�,, . a , sv6ti,,tt,� n, ceeded. While producers were encouraged in the past to ^i,For y0,Dg stock less thae�5o/q of,adult weight-cedue th aC v i factorsb onehatf i. °*abst�tm} v4'-' ` ��' fertilize for maximum crop yields, they now must also i e tS. ;;17', :hillR C i.a s- x l�r mod vu N �4�' ��..+..._��:;� ` consider the environmental risk of nutrient losses in determining how much manure to apply. By knowing the relationship between manure nutrient content, residual soil nutrients, and crop needs, wise decisions can be made such as where to spread manure, how much to spread, and on which nutrient to base the application rate. Long-range planning is fundamental to optimizing manure benefits while minimizing environmental concerns. The basic elements of a nutrient manage- ment plan are: 1. Estimates of manure and waste water production on the farm 2. Farm maps which identify manure stockpiles and lagoons, potential applica- tion sites and sensitive resource areas 3. Cropping information and rotation sequence 4. Soil, plant, water, and manure analyses 5. Realistic crop yield expectations 6. Determination of crop nutrient needs 7. Determination of available nutrient credits 8. Recommended manure rates, timing, and application methods 9. Plans for operation and maintenance of manure storage and utilization. Documentation of any manure to be sold, given away, or used for purposes other than as a soil amendment. If animal feed rations are modified to reduce nutrient content or volume of the waste as part of the management strategy, this also should be documented as part of the waste management plan. Advances have been made in recent years in feed formulation for reducing N and P excretion without reducing rate of gain. The "ideal protein concept" is a feeding method for monogastrics in which crude protein levels are reduced and amino acids are supplemented in order to reduce N excretion. For reduction of phosphorus excretion, adding phytase to the diet has been shown to increase P availability to hogs and chickens. Most of the research on nutritional approaches to reducing manure nutrient excretion has been done on monogastrics, but research is in progress on cattle feeding methods for this purpose. 2 Nutrient management plans are no longer just a good idea: they are essential for documenting proper stewardship and regulatory compliance. This • publication is designed to help producers develop their own nutrient manage- ment plans in a relatively simple format. However, technical assistance is also available to producers from their local Certified Crop Adviser (CCA), Cooperative Extension agent or USDA NRCS conservationist. Manure Handling and Storage Livestock feedlots, manure stockpiles, runoff storage ponds, and treatment lagoons represent potential point sources of ground water contamination. Research has shown that active feedlots develop a compacted manure/soil layer, which acts as a seal to prevent leaching. When cleaning pens, it is very impor- tant to avoid disturbing this seal. Workers need to be trained to correctly use manure loading machinery to maintain a manure pack on the surface. In addition to maintaining the integrity of the "hard pan" under feedlot pens, it is critical to create and maintain a smooth pen surface that facilitates proper drainage and runoff collection. Pens should be designed with a 3 percent to 5 percent slope for optimum drainage. Low spots and rough surfaces should be filled and smoothed during pen cleaning. Abandoned feedlots have a large potential to cause NOa leaching as the surface seal cracks and deteriorates. For this reason, pens need to be thoroughly cleaned and scraped down to bare earth prior to abandonment. Revegetation of the old pens is also important to help absorb excess soil nutrients and prevent erosion. Manure stockpiles should be located a safe distance away (at least 150 ft.) from any water supply and above the 100-year flood plain unless flood proofing measures are provided. Grass filter strips or sediment basins can be used to reduce solids and nutrients in runoff. For land with a slope of greater than 1 percent, plant a strip of a dense, sod-forming grass such as smooth brome or pubescent wheatgrass at least 20 to 50 feet wide around the downhill side of any feedlot or manure stockpile to filter potential contaminants in runoff water. More precise filter strip seeding recommendations may be obtained from the local USDA-NRCS office. liquid Effluent and Runoff Collection and Storage Storm water and wastewater runoff from feedlots can quid waste holding structure contain high concentrations of nutrients, salts, pathogens, and oxygen-demanding organic matter. Preventing storm water from passing across the feedlot surface by installing terraces or diver- sion channels above the feedlot is a BMP that can significantly reduce the volume of wastewater. Decreasing the active lot area can also help reduce the contaminants moved by storm water. e-""'^.';`1..'a�` ae u.tiNr�.�. i;C�ya y1�=✓'�" r'" �YvA-' �Mw. The criteria for waste water treatment lagoons and holding ponds is stricter than for runoff containment ponds. Runoff _* —nntainment ponds are necessary for large feeding operations to -_r d s . 4- .ld excess wastewater until it can be landapplied or evaporated. � -� + � '. , • These should be constructed on fine-textured soils (such as silty • clays, clay loams, or clay) with a lining of soil compacted to a ,a, y =_ 3 — — minimum thickness of 12 inches with an additional 18-30 inches of soil cover above the compacted soil. On coarse textured or sandy soils it may be necessary to import bentonite clay or use synthetic liners or concrete. Seepage is required to be less than 0.25 inch/day if the pond contains runoff only. However, if the pond stores process wastewater, the seepage requirement is 0.03 inch/day. New holding facilities must be designed to contain the runoff from a 25-year, 24- hour storm event and should be located above the 100-year flood plain and at least 150 feet down gradient from any well. Do not site storage ponds or treatment lagoons in areas with a high water table (within 10 ft. of the bottom of the pond). The local. USDA-NRCS office can provide help with pond or lagoon design. Manure Treatment There are numerous options for treating or processing manure such as composting, solid separation, aeration, anaerobic digestion, and constructed wetlands. A growing number of producers have become interested in manure treatment systems as a way to reduce volume and odor and enhance the value and acceptance of manure. Careful evaluation of the economic """"' ] feasibility of a manure treatment system and discussion with a professional engineer is recommended before implementing a new 717.77, ? i 'r1. treatment system. • Composting is a biological process in which microorganisms convert organic materials, such as manure, into a soil-like mate- 'r ;� rial. During composting, some N is lost from the manure as NH, gas. Most of the remaining N is tied up within stable organic r �.. z tegka t compounds which will become slowly available to plants after soil tee "Y application. Composted manure has less odor and is easier to haul f and store than raw manure because the volume and weight can be, reduced by as much as 50 percent. Solid separation is a viable treatment for wastewater from Cleaning pens milking parlors or hog operations. Settling basins or vibrating screens are used to remove solids from the wastewater resulting in reduced odor and less lagoon loading. This treatment requires an investment in equipment and maintenance, but improves the ease of handling the wastewater. Aeration of wastewater storage ponds increases the oxygen level in waste- water and reduces odors. Aeration can be achieved through mechanical means or through gas exchange with the air in large, shallow ponds. The disadvantages of aeration include high energy costs for mechanical aeration and additional maintenance expense. Anaerobic digestion is another treatment option in which manure is digested to produce energy for farm use or possibly for sale to a local power company. This treatment can require a large start-up investment and high maintenance, but significantly reduces manure odors because the treatment vessel is enclosed to capture gases. Maintenance costs can be offset by the use of the energy produced by the combustion of the gases. Constructed wetlands can be a useful manure treatment option because of high nutrient use of wetland plants and the denitrification process which transforms nitrate into gaseous nitrogen forms. The disadvantages include 4 construction costs, the need for solid separation prior to wetland treatment, and the need to manage the wastewater discharged from the wetland. Developing a Nutrient Management Plan {NMPJ Worksheets to help develop a nutrient management plan can be found near the end of this publication. They are provided as a starting place to help producers establish sound manure management. Developing a plan is just the beginning. Implementation of the plan and follow up are required to best manage your operation. NMP Section 1. Nutrient and land Inventory Producers should start by calculating an estimate of total annual manure production at their operation so ,�t„ems „-- d i „ that they can determine how muchety £ l;, � � � r3 r 6� 4 ~ t Table 2• S:174 manure prodcictionrb livestock ca culated,orva wet weig t cropland is needed for tong term ' - ,.,. : .,_,"4 , , , 't4&a h ,. basis at the time of tan'd appGcatiomt g„„ ti r i } application. There are several ways r•: • ,_ . fir to develop this information; one j • "`° '' idu n v k in, "k " ^ 4 ,°"r5+'x t ," Animal Ty• pe + v Manure Producfion 7 a t ,Manure Moisture ' a a s ffr * r " , , , • r w,:n method is described in the steps + id w C." e't a ry� 1s• , ` k. , 1-', ,t w ,l � `' ' +�r '�'` )� R �}, t�`'a'°�J '�@' s.h }+tr 1`�"`�re-r»3r ��.ysR"�yT�`A'k��Co ntent'ra, "�+�+7 below. Another method is to , , ,• ,Tf „ s.,�, 1i r, , - 4,N,V,,. ,„;,�o ,,,,� l�, , y actually weighthemanureremoved •ram d: y2(lb/dayi,�10.91491Flbs,�o!'arvarna:V,� (. att1meof ' -'' rmgj during en cleaning. If our land .Dairy < e ,n�,w 1't ',14.l4aVd' „ ,'" . ,3 9 P g Y �` M a�4 � t3*r Y t ?> � y^n ' s7 , lrY,'c 4s COW y4Tye/Ji:,::: I,St `, Fi�s:i 5>L } } GP �, 2- ' base is inadequate to safely utilize ��f�r�I,7�><r*.�xk rt,'�` r�„ �,�y,r6r , t ��_� �,� ��» the total adequate produced, ; Dry COW . xn, 't�, ,�+. i I+x�, r + i {p�� ", iyr ";;;;;4:166;74,‘"1,,�* , i a { Helfer ?6,iitlk 11107 'Y�.bnil {;, r r �n7.• 16 9 w 't arrangements should be made to �1�yi„k� wx� �% �r�t �-�„�*>f� r � ps��. � y +„ Beef r wi '"i X'Y>' r „P9"'+�ii' � m�a, „, r. apply the manure off-site. �, EwS� x , { r * v� Feeder'yearl ng"(750 1100 fb 1°ASItr Steps for determining nUtrlent + r /47 d; °+mot tir.il t . i`, 04,s nventory from manure production High forage dieJ.t, ry i : ,110 1,A +qu ,om� ir,'t hf krfi �1 x 7 p�s , .n »' y High energy diet , 3 Mr�� 8 :4 Ott 4 z M 32'g h,-,, ' include: �{ x, g , r fa in1. Determine the average weight 450 75014 , ^ > }'x'°Llg; ,"x'` �r I ,,w 2' s �,R,� 1 : i t MM r i [ IP"'� I.rt icA g H�M1l ,f,YhS'F P ffi i ,• c0 W t na ix 7"k,, c e :e r 10 74y '^,.711^,.. 45 j 'L'32, ,p'1,r}x'`R "C4,i and number of livestock kept s-, `" g ,. ,lf). e i „^ max, x* ,, a t 4,F x, + i ,T, Vedl w�_7 + r + +d" 2'B ��r+ r 0�q � �Y �q,��. annually at the facility. Swine „M xip.tp.. :41, « r>r ' r {a,, Ittal > ir. :-;t, 2. Determine annual manure a}; d-r -za �' !. ''+'r.�.( 3 a Y: r Nursing/nursery pig'(0 401b4: , 8` l?r * ,et a t^5i �� t production on a per animal , , ds basis. (Tables 2 and 3 give ; , _),Grower (4Q,220,1b ) + ,' i �'"� 12.9 .� mgrs„ '' ik3`X` 1 1 4.!',' ^Re la cement ill �c „ +'. i! - M1 p dpi"; estimates on an AU basis.) y p 9 r:lI '� ry .Py: .. w 51,.* i,,,a"t,:i Saw (gestating) '� 'n 5 L`" x 3. Multiply average annual manure 51 .Sow (lactating) ,r x, �x ,r12 2fr�i.vX 51 t „ production times average r k Boar ne i'. M a,�re 39 'u a r ,eH-' 41 4 s y rc number of animals to get total 9 '-�- "'� w + q ,i� a r, 't,4w`v +rat < eat,+h S11iy�z s manure production. Poultry, , M .-*4 }"+$j} t, n+ ' ' ' t' kt1W� „+'"'w_w'N•� Layer f $h M;l, r , ar lw '} c,4,�' ' ZS' "v, + r�4. eS F,:c. ,+a :kr-".µ' 4. Use manure analysis or Table 4 Y " x } 4 . `ti40 r s " to estimate nutrient content of Pullet y +19 0 k� l „„ " 40 - :.:vm ▪ , _ 333 .^--euz .+yt`�i'r0' .,• �'�'` ...itf', iairj manure. Broiler E^. m, 5. Multiply total manure production Turkey ' 18.2 �40y P Y p Horse 14.1 72� c by nutrient content per unit of manure to determine annual Sheep 14.5 31 nutrient production. -,:These valuesare adapted from the USDA,Agncu[turat:Waste:ManagementFieLdr Handbook or '"'� :represent data from Colorado sampling. Manure production and'moisture willvary with.animal::_, age, feed ration, breed and handling. :::::,: t.,,,,::::_, _ ,-. 5 ., „"..� � a `; +,v,d 1,h " ---- x§551 ,"^,vw{?', Total all manure nutrients from the various sources Table 3. Liquid swine manure production o t a wet +� weft basis { �, �+ ri on your farm to get an estimate of farm total nutrient 9 ." ' err' , production (Worksheet 1 is provided at the end of this S�nneType ,tw Manure "721,-‘ =.1, document as a template for these records). This figure `x3 6r " ^ • 7r; will be compared to estimated crop utilization figures S,i1q (gal/day/1000 bs ofamma� P 9 Nursing/nursery`pig (0;40'lbs I2 8 tl i �+ on Worksheet 3. Grower (40-220 lbs) 7 5 f, w a Estimating the volume of liquid swine manure w=j"'r � i at produced Large confined feeding facilities is con- Replacement gilt 9 ak Sow (gestating)- u 1,,,' ',w„ "`r�`ra.' J' 3 3 � founded by the addition of fresh water to the system for •Sow'(Lactat(Lactating); �a j2 flushing waste from the animal housing units. Docu- Soar„r " ,r'2 S Y T' mented, operation-specific numbers or Table 3 can be used to estimate the volume of swine manure produc- 'These:numbers du,not waterorstorm water thatmay i;l tion on a liquid basis. To estimate total liquid waste be added to holding facrht,es ' '� ' water available for land application, add the volume of fresh water used for flushing purposes to the calculated manure volume. This should give you total wastewater volume (excluding runoff) before any evaporation or digestion occurs. Evapora- tion figures for Colorado are available from local USDA-NRCS offices. Calculation 1. Estimation of total annual nutrient production from a solid manure handling system. Example la: Beef Feedlot Manure Example Feedlot has 2500 head on average year-round: The cattle come irrweighing 500 lbs. each and Leave weighing 1200 lbs. each: They are fed a grain diet.- Step 1: -Calculate average animal weight (500 + 1200)/2 = 850 lbs./head Step 2: Obtain table value for manure production (Table 2) „" '8.7 lb/day/1000 lbs. of animal (feeder, high energy diet) Step 3: Calculate total annual manure production for operation Multiply table value by average animal weight divided by 1000. 8.7 lb/day/1000 lbs. of animal x lbs 7.4 lbs. manure/day/animal , Multiply by the number of days on feed/year'. 7.4 lbs. manure/day x 365 days/year = 2,700 lbs. manure/year/animal Multiply by the number of head fed/year. 2,700 lbs. manure/year x 2500 head = 6,750,000 lbs. manure/year. Convert lbs. to tons by dividing by 2000. 6,750,000 lbs. manure /year= 3375 tons manure /year 2000lbbs./ton .. Step 4: Obtain manure analysis (Table 4):._ 23 lb. N /ton - 24 lb. P20. /ton Step 5: Calculate total annual nutrient production: " 23 lb. N /ton x 3375 tons/yr.= 77,625 lb. N/yr. 24 lb. P205 /ton x 3375 tons/yr. = 81,000 lb. P205/yr s Calculation lb. Estimation of nutrient production from a liquid manure handling system. Example 16: Swine Liquid Waste Example feeding operation has 5000 head on average year-round. The pigs come in weighing 50 lbs, each and leave weighing 250 lbs. each. They are fed a grain diet. Step 1: Calculate average animal weight (50 + 250)/2 = 150 lbs./head Step 2: Obtain table value for liquid waste production (Table 3) 7.5 gal/day/1000 lbs. of animal Step 3: Calculate total annual manure production for the operation Multiply table value by average animal weight divided by 1000. 7.5 gal/day/1000 tbs. of animal x 150 lbs. = 1.125 gal manure/day/animal Multiply by the number of days on feed/year. 1.125 gal manure/day x 365 days/year = 410 gal manure/year/animal Multiply by the number of head fed/year. 410 gal manure/year x 5000 pigs = 2,050,000 gal manure/year. Convert to 1000 gal by dividing by 1000 2,050,000 gal manure/year= 2,050 thousand gal manure/year 1000 gal Step 4: Obtain liquid manure analysis (Table 4): 36 lb. N/1000 gal 27 lb. P205/1000 gal Step 5: Calculate total. annual nutrient production: 36 lb. N /1000 gal x 2,050 thousand gal/year = 73,800 lb. N/yr. 27 lb. P205/1000 gal x 2,050 thousand gal/year = 55,350 lb. P205/yr Step 6: Adjust for N loss as ammonia from system (Table 5) 73,800 lb. N/yr. x 50% volatilization = 36,900 Lb. N/yr. Determining Land Needs for Long Term Manure Utilization One of the first steps in developing a tong term nutrient management plan is to determine if adequate land is available for utilization of the manure and effluent produced. If the land base is determined to be inadequate, arrange- ments must be made to reduce manure production or find alternatives to over- application. To estimate the minimum land base required, you need to know the annual manure production of your facility and have a manure sample analyzed for total N, P, and K. Then calculate the best estimate of annual nutrient removal on a per acre basis. For this calculation, use conservative estimates of annual crop nutrient removal and assume that all N and P in the manure is crop available unless you are using liquid effluents with known N volatilization rates. Total manure production divided by acceptable application rates (tons or gallons per acre) will give an estimate of the land base needed for safe manure utiliza- on (Calculation 2). This is not the same calculation as is used for determining -ne agronomic rate of application for a specific field for a specific year. 7 it , r . `,,,s ., k t s rw'ti*' -��te .�s.,a Total N in manure is used to Table 4 Approximate nutnent composition of;vanous types of ammaL a calculate an estimate of safe long manure at time of land application* " ° ,r � " p i t a term solid manure application citim % a+ r "t+i: rate because all of the applied N Type of manure Moisture TatatNy NH N P 0 „ �. t i� xw>7 %"r "`i 4a,� /s � 'T'a � "a 9 that is not lost to teaching or Content `+` 'C volatilization will eventually [b/ton c - k 'F Siva Fa +F9'�f1tS''"' ,�,.M"W r,�.t•.+'bb-r' F+k £',i .. become available t0 the crop. '14Solid handling systems zs df y , r� � $ Swi'ne r ''r ` '` � r1 , 6 � b Liquid wastes such as swine a r m t n"ri v=,r+ effluent can have a large loss Beef 32 + 23, t .t' < 24 p1 hiX ',, rys a.y " z component due to ammonia Dairy Cattle 46�a 13wi ° �5�, 16z ti ' gg P Sheep " �, 31 wd.t`h'24r#�,5 raFaa26s " 3&z volatilization. Long term planning Chickens Without Etter 55 33" a ` ' 26 * 48n i34 for effluent applications should + ak"` include conservative volatilization With htteo �' "' ZS fy 56 36 ` 45 Turkeys Without litter °% 78 27,;, 17 20 , 17 estimates to allow for uncertainty 71 20' " v �' 13▪ 16 X13 1 and lower than expected crop With litter. Horses Without bedding Z2 19c 4 Ar. ,y• 14j d '36 s nutrient uptake (See Table 5). Rio Phosphorus Based Manure Planning lb/I 000 gal While manure applications in Liquid Handling Systems° ; Ls`ct:L , '• !' r t r'i, ' w rd Swine Li uid it 96 € ' Colorado are most often based on q P fi NW"' n 6"▪ r`2 ~`te4, ','` Single stage anaerobic 99 "" 7 crop N needs, in certain situa- Two-stage anaerobic , 99 4,y `+: a 3 2 7W A lions it is more appropriate to 99 4 2 9 l+ 5 r v base manure rates on crop P Beef Lagoon` Dairy Cattle Liquid pit 92 °`c 24='` 12�'� t I8 requirement and manure P con- t:y + Zg 5 t 2� , �i tent. Phosphorus is known to Lagoonc 99 a 4 5, 7 4 r ,r 10 Poultry Liquid pit 87 80 F 64 36:)' 96 u cause surface water degradation, i11 even at very low concentrations. • Ammonia fraction can vary significantly across time:and-systems Numbers gfv ri are for `+° " When P from runoff enters lakes planning purposes only; manure analysis is needed to accurately determine ammonia ,,,,1 h and streams, it accelerates the fraction. ° Application conversion factor: lb/1,000 gal x 27.15 = lb./acre inch. wi.. , growth of algae and other aquatic • Includes runoff water. weeds. As these plants flourish, • These values are derived from the USDA Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, 1992 M oxygen and light become limiting and are modified with data collected from Colorado feeding operations when possible r Nutrient composition of manure wilt vary with a e breedfifeed rations, and manure handlin to the survival of more desirable p e species and the natural food chain is disrupted. Excessive manure applications to cropland have been shown to result in P movement to water and subsequent degradation. Manure management plans should consider P loading when runoff from a field is likely to enter sensitive water bodies. In addition, if the soil test shows that extractable P is in the "high" or "very high" range and P movement is likely, manure should be applied at rates based on crop P removal. For planning purposes, all of the P in the manure should be considered crop available in these cases. The consequence of P based management for a producer is that more land is required to safely utilize the manure. Site Assessment The final aspect of the land and resource inventory is an assessment of the manure storage and utilization sites. Site maps of the farm and feeding opera- tion are an important part of any nutrient management plan. Obtain aerial maps 8 'rom your local NRCS office or develop your own maps if necessary. Identify manure storage facilities, fields receiving manure, and any wells, surface water or shallow ground water. These maps can help you identify sensitive resource areas such as surface water bodies that might receive runoff from your farm. Appropriate BMPs such as buffer areas, set backs, reduced application rates, or application timing limitations may be identified as a part of these maps. To determine the pollution potential at your site, the following questions need to be considered: Manure and wastewater storage site evaluation 1. Is the soil texture coarse (sandy with low amounts of y clay)? 7' 3 W„�&4."'^r" 'kw-�,iy!aka�u�'+�d..V.°„yA r rHc r 2. Is the depth to ground water less than 50 feet in the Table-5 Approximafe nitrogen tost;asammonia ; vicinity of manure storage? during handling and storage e8yr a 3. Have recent well water analyses indicated that Local System Estimated NH N Lossy° a ground water N03-N levels are increasing. 4. Is the horizontal distance of the feedlot to surface water 11e� $6.Liti tt liniro bodies (creeks, ponds, drainage ditches, etc.) or wellheads ?�� p tf', ,:,,,,i � s1 less than 150 feet? rtiZir Daily scrape anldhauLt' - , I5 35,-. �g,j,' ;r 0,, a 5. Does runoff from the feedlot surface Leave your property? Manure packs flam kr2Q 40t h r�;v1 6. Does seepage from runoff storageponds exceed .25 in Open lot S m;q;4 ,t z 4Q,6puv' i 9 / .44g } day? ' °M�W 7. Does seepage from lagoons exceed .03 in/day? Lagoon vy 70 ,0 {, � ¢5,, Is manure stored within the 100 year flood plain? Anaerobic pitt• vri 15,30 f}hF 9. Do runoff storage ponds lack the capacity to handle runoff Above-ground'storage 1. 10 30 volumes from a 25 year, 24-hour storm? 56urcee MWP518 Livestock Waste FaalitreS,Handboo ,.t_..47,1 " Manure utilization site evaluation -^•' kr;e: S i•"'�"' ^"'^ 1. Do you lack sufficient Land to use all of the nutrients in manure produced on your farm? T 2. Do any fields receiving manure have greater than a 1°/a Calculation 2 Determining land base for, slope and little surface residue? term manure disposal based on crop N needs.* *u 3. Do any fields have a history of more than 5 consecutive years of manure application? Example: Feedlot applies manure to corn har 4. Is excess water from irrigation or precipitation available vested for grain: Average yield is 175 bu/acre/'' ,..;,t for runoff or leaching? Usingestimated N removal from Table 6 and 5. Is manure applied at rates greater than the agronomic Calculation ladata :_ rate? -1) Crop nutrient remova[(from Tab(e�6) , 6. Is there surface water or a well immediately downhill from 175 bu corn/acre x 56 lb./bu = 9,800 Lb any field which receives manure? - grain/acre on harvest dried basis. 7. Has it been more than one year since you soil sampled to , '9,800 lb. grain/acre x 1.6% N in dry harvested determine nutrient levels in fields where manure will be • grain = 158 l6: N'removed/acre` applied? 2) Land needs ('from Calculation Ia)c If the answer to any one of these questions is yes, or if 77,625 lb.'N from manure production/ 158 you are unsure about the answer, manure storage or applica- N removed/acre = 491 acre minimum Land tion at your site may degrade water quality. The local USDA- base ;CS office can help you answer questions you are unsure * This calculation does not determine the agronomic rate of about. Your nutrient management plan should address any application because it assumes no volatilization,leaching -' problem areas identified in the questions above. Manure rates or other N tosses or credits. may need to be adjusted downward and all appropriate BMPs 9 HH iH "lab e 6?,Nutrient content of the harvested pa'ctof'sele"cted eolorada crops .� employed where water resources z ,� 1., _. • .,,:., are at risk. Additionally, it may be 7 Crop '�' '.7.4'17' Dry w1 keight , Typical yie[d* ,ir N'"� " '7� ° .,p ,w p'' � ` "t', ) helpful tos periodically test wells t r , ; , aA 4 >H ; ', .} "a content in "`,"cantentin ti near livestock operations and y ��„"4;;�` a fi t a r� ,.. e '� 4rii cN-x�"fir " ' n "� ''oi t harvested 7,,,,:**;harvested, rE manured fields for N0 and �r ' '; rr material l ,`, material " +�' bacterial contamination to ,� / 7 .. r u, n F r,+ n]f t +4': ttF ww ,, lb/bu umt/A r" a r 4% • `' j determine if management prac- Rr.,.; ' ce ,,,a* - :vu '" ,w* t�5r+' '<(harvest d wetrht bastsl,i°* T 9,, K I, FfFt,^;' .k rk' ry.' 9 rr" ,,,� bats are sufficiently protecting Grain..tops ,'y �,ra 1� 47F yt"ih�,ua,;$r�ry r{ tcs`1v: °�Tr 7A,.°��kaYi}�p,i i water uality. k rS } .�41: r it w e t S' P.pv M °9 r q `y' Barley , r �,,t 71t�vo r48 , n' o- k.F 8t bLictI actb},TPiVrfi$r �"AY 4li r4 ' rL •+i i�44�,�_t r 2 tOn5:St dwT9 ,}�'�tQ'Aji y i1 �,,y.��>s a 11 w RIP Section Z.Hates_ fo_r Determination ,r. d k' r sv : Corn 56 •" 165 bu ww V > 16 '$,;y,to 2s ,r ,. of Agronomic is Rates for Crap iii ,r, P e {r*"43' r7•ti , • Production s .� srk , 3 5 tons stover „;i1A 1 ; r T.4.ii40.2O':A ,{aiX '�tw Oats <r 32 ° �' t 60 bu. `,r r 2 0 l0 34. " .441 Determine agronomic rate of t A r Al- 0.16 as ,] manure or effluent application for ' , " ! 1 S,tOns strata ,• �Q 6 '-�� a ♦rr^w BR'S Rye 56' 30 bui ," r(� 2 1 'tic , 0 26,E?P'�,y each field by assessing crop r,, , r, iy 4bay Ikf` +rip. yur �.,`aM i , ; 1. .y�rr: 1 5L.tons straw z% 20 S ?� "' 0 12 ,y ' �,') nutrient needs, available nutrient Sorghum (dryland] ° 56; 60 bu.� , +`1 T ,�A't' '1 036" f" credits, and nutrients in the , e x ,d'r7gn. a E Ft 3 tons stover '' ri 1 t� r a 0-•02 `` �5r� manure. Worksheet 2 at the end Wheat (dryland) 60 `i' 0 62` � Z 1 y �, ", ,;,� 1'h.,, � of this document is provided as a rl w , z• a.�o'n ! r 1 S;; d ,, 1 5 tons straw `a 0 7 ; 7,',� i,,,,o..0.1"Ht;;;;;;; ` template for this po tion of your Oil crops r Ear , h , L nutrient management plan. Fill rs .Canola 50 r l 35��u' q h3 6 'rr k�b�0 79 rti,r �3 d out one copy of Worksheet 2 for r 3 tons'straw rW 4 5„ ,{36 ; 44 43�.r' +' each f eld. An explanation of each Soybeans 60 35 bu ? hA 6 3 �0 64 section is prov ded below. 1' M " 2 tonsstover ,':::,.4.5 t•�"� f0 22dt 'a �+ ""�� field Information w Sunflower (dryland) 25 1,100 lb 3 6 +' ` *1 7' a+ " M f y 4_t r,E,. Each f eld has specific 2 tons stover ' 1 5 �r, x" 0 8 a Ca F l nut ent requirements that will Forage crops _ t vat from ear to year. Begin our Alfalfa 4 tons � • 2.3 r 0 ZZ �, r determination of gronomic rates Big bluestem 3 tons 1 0 0,85 e�+r "'` by f Ming out 1 copy of Worksheet Birdsfoot trefoil 3 tons 2 5 r ,,' 0 22 " °`i4 ' 2 for each field that receives Bromegrass 3,tons ; x 1 4 ,t w µ0 21a °n manure. Note the soil texture or Alfalfa-grass 4 tans 1 5 0.27 :A t'1 soil name of each field. Sandy Little bluestem 3 tons' ' IL I—. i` 0`85 3 44y (MI soils may require special consider- 0rchardgrass 4 tons 1.5 a 0.20 ""� ation to avoid nutrient leaching. Red clover 3 tons 2.0 "7 ur-'0.22' .�T -� Clay soils may be more prone to 4 tons 1.4 Reed canarygrass 0.18 runoff. These considerations are Ryegrass 4 tons 1 7 0 27 important in a sound nut ent r Switchgrass71::-.''''''''''''3't ons 1 2r1 -4"1"`"1",307:1'0.--- "= fi r 4 M e:� management plan. Previous crop Tall fescue 4 tons l '' 2 0 '''!'4'N'''-'''''S'0 2Q s, grown is important because you Timothy 3 tons '( 1 2 0.22 .,' may need to add more nut ents Wheatgrass•(dryland) to help with residue breakdown or ;-;Adapted from the USDA Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook. - less nutrients due to N-fixation, •gTt* Typical,yields are for.irngated production.unless noted gihecwue -,,,a depending on the rotation Nutrient contents•are on a harvest dried basis and do not need to be, fretted moisture "-' sequence. Manure applications -content except for silage and haylage - � from the previous year can also __ ill iy upply significant amounts of nutnents in the current year due Table 6. Nutrient content of the harvested part of selected Colorado crops. (continued) }„ < to the mineralization process. To „ ,nk complete your records, attach the Crop Dry matter .Typical yield*.„-f most recent soil and manure yc ` content in y .1 analysis reports to the field "harvested har ested ;•;v information sheet. material material " }, Sail, Manure, Water and Plant Sampling °� AJ tons/acre ' , and Analysis , ' (h . uarvest.dry weight halts)*i �3h A current soil test is needed • Silage craps - (1 ER. . nq , brr, kk t{ t y e, y4teft,f for each field receiving manure or Alfalfa haytage , 50 10 wet/5 dry 2 St r ; 0-33 effluent to determine residual soil Corn silage 35 ^ 20-•wet/7 dry -'4. .„.". 1.1, �r+= 5 • NO , extractable P and soil Forage sorghum X30 20 wet/6 dry Oat ha la e 40 ', 10wet/4d 16, ` 028 r,M organic matter content. Soil y 9 ry f sampling for agronomic rate Sorghum-sudan 50 10 wet/5 dry 1.4 • ` 0.16 ; determination should occur once Sugar crops ! �� Sugar beets. + 20 0 2 t 0 03 r Ati%,�t a year. More frequent sampling „�� may be needed to track N utiliza- Turf grass ll tion and movement in the soil Bluegrass 2 2 9 •43 Bentgrass 2 V4 3.1 profile. Shallow soil samples (1 Vegetable crops foot or less) are needed to ,r --,valuate crop P, K and other . Bell peppers 9 utrient needs. Deeper rootzone Beans, dry soil samples (generally 4 to 6 ft. Cabbage ,20 0.3 0 04 deep) should be collected after Carrots13' 0.2 crop harvest and prior to any Celery 27 0 2 0 09 1 manure or effluent application to Cucumbers 10 0 2 A OT i evaluate residual soil NO3. Soil Lettuce (heads) 14_ 0 2 0 08 sampling below the active Onions 18 , 0.3 0 06 Peas 2 3.7 —0.40 ,.. .- 4" ;J •J rootzone (>6 ft. for most annual - Potatoes 14 0.3 0 06 crops, >10 ft, for hay crops) may Snap beans 3 0.9 0.26 be needed occasionally to docu- ment that nutrients are not Sweet corn 6 0.9 0.24 leaving the crop rootzone. Toget Adapted from the USDA Agricultural Waste Management Field"Handbook. ,..7 a good, representative soil " Typical yields are for irrigated production unless noted otherwise. -" • Sample, it is recommended that a •* Nutrient contents are on a harvest.dried basis and do not need to be corrected for moisture content except for silage and naylage. - - _ minimum of 1 soil core per 10 acres or at least 10 cores on fields 40 acres or smaller be collected to form the composite sample for each depth increment. Samples should be thoroughly mixed and either air-dried or delivered to the lab immediately. In situations where effluent or manure is applied in the fall after crop harvest, NH, in the animal waste may not be converted to NO, prior to spring =nil sampling. Additionally, fields with long manure histories may also have a jnificant amount of NH4 in the rootzone due to increased mineralization rates. NH, is available to crops and should be credited as part of the N budget in these particular situations. 11 • Manure is an extremely variable Table 7a. Suggested nitrogen application rates•for irrigated corn:*t` -, : „ � ,� material whether in solid or liquid form. grair)'(175 bu/A) based;on soil.NO -N.and organic matter content A representative manure sample is Soil NO3 N (ppm)* "" ' ' h.' SoilOrgantcMatter(0f) r ,k;,t "M n critical for a reliable analysis. A mini- ,r ,,rr ' , _: r t "' ' ,. ".� mum of six sub-samples should be 0 IO r 11i 2O , ti , + >2ayii ry, sr :' ., " !; Fert[tzer rate(lb N/'A) taken and mixed together for analysis. 0 6 '*210 :185 s v 3pM 165-s-, ly When sampling a solid manure stock- 1 y - , r N v 1 d°. N s T x�rt 2 °L, `w L i -; f5 c yr pile, remove the crust, and use a bucket 7 22` 160 , , , x , r , 135 ran, a ,$. ` -„r�• i ` tsw e7-4j auger or a sharpshooter (a narrow 13 24 110 4^ .$f* k ra* AF shovel) to core into the pile as deeply 19 24 , 60 35 r w 15 , {A , �»rt�;:., ' *''x , , 1' ; r°.. as possible. Walk around the pile, and >24" 10 '0 ' .(.r 0 .' 5 take samples from all sides. Deliver the `Average concentration of NO-N:'(ppm)-in•0th.? ftsail layer`,-•r sample to the lab immediately or if Add or subtract 1 lb. N/A for every busheL above or below 175 bu/A. immediate delivery is not possible, ,.•This table uses the•formula rt` i ; ' • `i', freeze the sample in a freezer-type N rate- 35 + [1.2 x yield goal(bu/A)] [8 x ppntsoil N0-N] [0.1A/4s"yield goal x_ wr 0/00.M.] a , heavy-duty plastic bag. Manure samples ,.,,._. ' , ,...,.;, .,. t. ,.:J; ;. 0� « ..._4„,.i..�„ a should be analyzed by a reputable laboratory for moisture content, total .n rr, r N, NH4 and total P at the minimum. Table.7b. Suggested nitrogen application rates forlr igated corri i4'a4t; ;1 Metals, micronutrients and E.C. are also silage (30 tons/A), based on soil NO3-N and organic Matter content: - recommended analytes. Soil NO -N. (ppm)* ' Solt Organic Matter ( o) ., When sampling a liquid manure or a ,^ wastewater, there are several ways of m0 ':1:03:'..,;;;•,,,,,F:23,0 11 - Z &; ; >2 0 sampling. You can sample from the Fertilizer rate (lb N/A) " ,r 4� ;l lagoon directly with a water grab 0 - 6 ' 225 200 185 ` sampler (be sure to walk or boat around 7 - 12 170 145 r., 125 the lagoon and get a minimum of six 13 - 18 125 100 ,2 >r75 :f4,.;,--'7,:l samples) or you can sample from a 19 - 24 75 - . .50 30 - H valve inserted in the irrigation line or >24• 25 0 0 yu`,'. 't from cups placed in the field where the Average concentration of.N0J-N (ppm) in.,0 to 2 ft sail layer. effluent is irrigated onto the land. Store Add or subtract 6 lb.'N/A for every ton above.or below 30 ton/A. the sample in a plastic jar in a cooler or :This table uses the formula: ,i-;•:412-1'.••• - freezer and deliver to the lab immedi- N rate = 35 + [7.5 x yield goal (tons/A)] - [8 x ppm soil NOr N] [0.85 x yield goal atel . Irrigation water should be ana- ' lyzed for NO3 credit, especially when shallow ground water is pumped for irrigation. These lab reports, along with a current manure analysis, should be attached to your nutrient management plan. When plant tissue tests are used to determine in-season fertilizer needs, they should also accompany the plan. See Colorado State University Cooperative Extension Fact Sheet 0.520 for informa- tion on analytical laboratories. Crop Nutrient Need Plant nutrient need depends upon the crop, growing conditions, and actual yield. The crop rotation will determine nutrient needs and nutrient carryover from the previous crop. In some cases, such as a three year stand of alfalfa, nutrient applications are based on more than one year of production. Table 6 12 indicates approximate N and P content of dry harvested crops. This information _an be used to estimate actual crop nutrient removal. Due to inherent ineffi- ciencies in plant uptake, fertilization rates often include an additional amount to compensate for these tosses. Tables 7 and 8 contain current Colorado State University fertilization suggestions for selected Colorado crops; information on other crops can be obtained from your local Cooperative Extension office. Realistic Yield Expectations The expected crop yield is the basis for determining how much N and P fertilizer will be needed. Generally, the higher the yield expectation the higher the nutrient requirement. Over-estimating potential crop yield will result in over application of fertilizer or manure. For this reason, producers are encouraged to base yield expectations on a docu- mented 5 year field average plus an additional 5 percent for above T `L 'C G73'/:1 if "1F`7""``7,Cib' 's i mi''U(nt tOnlia's'y{;r` '` ' t ' -1' s ;Table 7c Suggested nitrogen application rates'for irrigated sorghum average growing conditions. Each grain (80 bu/A), based orr soil nitrate and organic matter contents. field should have a yield history and yp y b 'SWa, x tiw'H Yp it� I +h H ,HAY' .ttye ` expectation. Soil NO -N (ppm)t< 9 So7l0rganic Matter% y4rIi1=• Determining Total Nutrient Needs _ MT'?1 ?a f( Crop nutrient needs are deter 'Fe{rtilizer rat�e (clb� �A) mined using your yield expectations 0 75 Y ��r45w14 5 and table values for fertilizer rates or 4 6 50 ) 1 ) +? 15 s, 3 },• "O,4r ' . op nutrient removal values. Most 7 9 ik 25,„f F. `.;�IS'O' ti ' st0 } Jil Laboratories will also give ,a>9c . w D L'rr , rkti�1ary „ j ;74;.@Q�si tWist 2.1 "'" fertilizer recommendations with soil rr J* f9^ Average concentration of NO N (ppm) in 0 to 2 ft soo il(ayes �n,�,a iiA�' i, ix test results. Be sure you understand _ Add or subtract 125thr N/A for every 10 bushels abovve o[below 80 bu/Ac the labs fertilizer recommendation This table uses the formula ^` % 'k �,f 1 a ; philosophy to be sure it is compat- N rate - [1.25 x yield goal (bu/Ajl [8 x ppm soil N0 Nlrt{0 30 xa/Yd M..}' , ible with the production and envi- ronmental goals of your operation. In some cases, fertilizer appll "';?a a'rn y'';�F� .IXT ws40 rvT,. r i.><a+i +•**. cation rates will need to be adjusted Table 7d. Suggested nitrogen application rates forirngated sorghum^. 7. above or below the standard table silage (30 tons/A)`, based on soil nitrate aidloFganic matter content, values. Examples of these situations 2. of Soil NO -N (ppm)* ; SOrlOrgam<Matter % i would be 1) where high amounts far,: 0 1 Orr "•:;471,;•;l l 2•O, c',7',..:61•••1,7,•••3••?;2 i crop residue remain, increasing N '' -' fefibzerrate '(tb `NSA) ` '^'� `T*A need by up to 30 lb./acre, 2) where a 0 - 6 180r� 4r � starter fertilizer is needed due to 7 12 190 � 60F" e14 fig> cool soils, 3) where alfalfa is to be a � �'J , 13 18'. " 150 ''tT20 ':A^^" •200' .` maintained for more than 3 years, „• 'k`,. c M _>? ° 19 - 24 :110 ;vl �80 "0-4.4i. i" and 4) when manure has been 25 - 30' 70"ii ^a � 40 applied in the previous year. Other • ^w' ,? 20 i,� .'G1z situations may exist that justify � 0IY s 0 tr-i' x"r' 36 0 t,-0 0 er manure rate adjustments. If so, ncument these adjustments on your * Average concentration of NO -N (ppm) in 0 to 2 ft soil layer Add or subtract 9 W. N/A for every ton above or below 30 ton/A. orient management plan. This table usesthe formula: t N rate =[9 x yield goat (tons/A)] [8 x ppm,soil JNOI Nl [30 x yield goatx y:: ;1 13 I'J I 3rd �,r; t; Available H and P in Manure ,��Fable-,e Suggested mtrogen application The total amount of N in manure is not plant available in the , T .. r ratesforirdgated grasses.(4 tons/acre) first year after application due to the slow release of N bed up in based o'rL soil nitrate contents `fs� ;, organic forms. Organic N becomes available to plants when sol wry ;a,t t 1 microorganisms decompose organic compounds such as proteins, WSor[ NO3 N Fertilizer Rate and the N released is converted to NH This rocess, known as 1:1.(P''' rr(PP ) F') N/A,) xl'kR4} } 5 P ',}�` ;, �> , mineralization, occurs over a period of several years after manure �( r7 X12 +,tk' a •f�° ar"r '" 160 h � y' r3 application. The amount mineralized in the first year depends N , upon manure source, soil temperature, moisture, and handling. In general, anywhere from 15 percent to 55 percent of the organic N �r19 24 , t, x 110 ,rr in manure becomes available to the crop in the first year after 85 ' `, application depending upon climate and management factors. } Nitrogen availability can be estimated as a fraction of the total N Concentration of NO3 N (ppm) in`the,tora foot of soil. content of manure or as a fraction of the organic N content, Add or subtract 40 fb. N/A For,everyton/acre above or : Organic N is usually determined by subtracting the NH4 and NO3 Use th4`tons/A F . 1 from the total N content of the manure. This approach is more Use the same N rates for Bross legume mixtures fr .es 3x ', containing less than 25% legumes `,."m 4F accurate when reliable NH4 content and NH3 volatilization numbers are available. Mineralization of N from applied manure will continue to provide nutrients to the soil system for several years after application. This ': �'` Table 8: Suggested'broadcast P applrcat�on rates�([bs..P O�acre) additional N must be accounted for in the z nutrient management plan if manure will ‘a.' CO P , , } 1 be applied again to the same field within '1,1 three years. Mineralization credit for the -IA0 6 7 '14 15 22 >22 second and third years after application lbs:P205/acre" should be based upon a fraction of this Corn, irrigated 80 40 0 0 initiat organic N content (Table 9). Alter- and dryland s t }a ye a ' natively, annual soil sampling for residual ;,.Dry Beans 80 40 0 0:; sail NO3-N, NH 4-N and organic matter can Sorghum 80 40 0 0 be used to estimate mineralization credit Potatoes. 240 180 120 r 60 ' in subsequent years. 0 Phosphorus contained in manure is ;,'Sugarbeets 100 75 y' 56 i r p Sunflowers 80 ` 40 0 0 . usually considered to be entirely plant 'Wheat w 80 40 z..' `'O 0" available in the first year after application. Alfalfa, irrigated In reality, some fraction of the P is tied-up ;new stand 200 150 „50 0 'l in forms that are not immediately available established ' 100 75 0 0 to plants. If soil test P is in the "low to °Alfalfa,rdryland , ,�, medium" range and the soil is high in lime ' new stand 60 40 ' 0 0`' content, it may be appropriate to assume established 45 30 Q 0 ' that only 80 percent of the P will be plant Grass and grass available in the first year. legume mixtures " Volatilization lasses new stand 80 40' 0 0 established 80 .40 0 0..' Su face applied manure should be incorporated as soon as possible to reduce Band application rates for row crops are half of the suggested broadcast rate. odor and minimize nutrient loss by volatil- ization and runoff. The risk of surface loss 14 - is reduced by injection rµ ;• o�k ",idyli'�"4at4W'M Table.9. Approximate percent of organic N mineralized from vanous manures, application under the 3 _ ,;!5y, '*¢a �,a soil surface, but loss still sources over three years , uy ^Nfnu Gi' ''lhn,' '�y�u Fr � " :+b 'l,.l� may occur on sloping or Manure Source, Percent of Organic N Avai(able.'w q " erosive fields. Delayed ! 4;1 � year }1a��m rn 3 yea� incorporation may be , , , acceptable on level ssr �y p Beef and dal cattle ` 0y,�4,".S i ' Ewa fields if erosion control r - '03 , ,�'`nk �°�yR.�,y, r 4 i �� "BTS'4� ,<�y�'w n.t e'Fgfry or sunlight decomposi- solid (without bedding) 30 htpq 15 �z l lion of pathogens is '"f° � i '. dx Z * €liquid (anaerobic) '25 35 'f fiz r6-1 10. ,s desired. If solid manure 1� 't , "fi� ` 's,jiu"` ,VA �' �'; Swine •is not incorporated ' t` v, K solid 45 55 3 8 wT2 7 Within 72 hours after ' 114 + H r✓S�v ,� "at r�i i+�rlt,quld (anaerooie} t 35-45 +' ,3-rust ftw?,,Iitts;? `+ 4 application, much of the ,...,e49 ‘x z � NH -N fraction may be lost to volatilization .. Horse (Table 10). The rate of solid (with bedding) 15 25 S-10 4aT2 7np volatilization increases Poultry '�', -� ! f 1.t rn'r r] "1z+±, ,,44 I f4 w of i,-=44 under warm, dry, or s solid (without litter) 30 40' . i iv:`,I015 r-'�'- 5 in'wPoGS ' windy conditions. ft�."r?c .s5- r�q•� w . Volatilization losses Adapted from USDA Ag Waste Management Field Handbook i 99Zand other sources• "a '� , #} '�' ,,'.f,•'" from liquid effluents can "x... `esult in large N losses, ,,ince much of the N in : r; s, ^o^ ,r TMtr, "* 4„ 5 :'A rs� +:� r leak a.: aj�"s.. effluents is in the NH, Table 10. Approximate percentage of ammonia lost to volatilizatwrr within four n form, which is easily days after application. converted to ammonia Application Method Type of Waste Estimated NH3 Loss `, ' gas. An accurate predic- lion or measurement of to the Atmosphere*,.ii;M u + n r +Y, Y "3 ',! ,:4,1;/±111'.1•445,(4 the amount of N volatil- %4 ized from liquid manures Broadcast without cultivation olid 15 is difficult to obtain Broadcast with immediate cultivation solid or liquidrN 1 5.; 4, `J ,n because both the Injection liquid 0 • application method and Sprinkler irrigation liquid** the ambient climate will , • Values reflect loss under each application method. . • ,g., determine the rate of •'"Losses vary widely depending upon conditions at time-of application. ' it,:•i flux. Additionally, `�Source: MWP5-18, Livestock Waste Facilities Handbook t- - r accurate measurement of NH, content of manure is confounded by a high degree of variability in NH4 concentration in the manure stockpile. The current scientific literature reports losses from sprinkler applied effluents from 10 percent to over 80 percent of the ammonia fraction. For planning purposes, 20 percent to 30 percent of the ammonia can be assumed lost to volatilization during cool season application, while 40 percent to 60 percent may be assumed lost from the soil surface during mmer applications. The amount of loss can be reduced by prompt incorpora- _in. In any case, post-season soil testing will provide feedback on how much N is in the soil system after the crop is harvested. If residual N in the rootzone 15 exceeds the subsequent crop N Calculation 3. Estimating irrigation water N credit.'' requirement, no additional effluent, manure, or commercial N Example: N credit from 17 inches of irrigation water containing 10 ppm NO -N fertilizer should be applied. 17 inches/A x (2.7 lb. N/acre foot) x (10 ppm NO3-N) = 38 lb N/A Nutrient Credits 12 inches/acre foot Residual soil NO3, irrigation water, soil organic matter, and previous legume crops all contrib- ute N to the growing crop. The N 7i17 'r-'-a-r^* r --\mss-, ; h , iJ _ tr ~� s f r t,?'. F� '" j,y?'`3 n°'1'N�^' ? rir+,r 'tz f contnbutlon from these sources Table it Nitrogen credits'Tor crop requirements• } isi1; mss' ,!sa a s au,"l must be credited in order to make N Credit ilfi ya r "" $ accurate fertilizer and manure N Source � r s e :L �� 4 1!` tf' Soil organic matter* 30 lb' N pe tofo Opt e 4 recommendations. Use soil and Residua I. soil nitrate* 3' 6 [b.N"per ppm NO N (1 ft:`sample)1 r1 water test data and the informa- Irrigation water 2 7 [b N perracrefoot x ppm NO3 N ?i°",i tion in Table 11 to estimate these Previous alfalfa crop f tia i�r Ga �tai,' �ice' _ +' y credits. In some cases, these :z80% stand,',^ } 100,140 lb: Nacre credits may entirely satisfy crop 60 - 80% stand 60-100 lb'N/acre, r ,, s, ti ,4, ,- " needs and no additional manure 30-60, lb.,N/acre `, :� .,, F' or fertilizer is required. A starter Other previous Legume crop 30 lb N/acre -�' cfc fertilizer may be all the supple- Previous Manu re or effluent" .Vanes by source rate and time (Table 9) „v mental fertilizer that is justified „ in these cases in order to en- These credits are factored in N rates given in,tables 7a •-•7e and shouldinat he used twxe` ,« hance seedling vigor if the crop is seeded in cool soils. Irrigation water containing NO3 can supply N to the crop since it is applied and taken up while the crop is actively growing. Water tests for NO3-N should be taken periodically during the irrigation season to accurately calculate this credit. Multiply p.m. NO,-N by 2.7 lb./acre foot times the amount of irrigation water consumptively used by the crop prior to the mid-reproductive stage (in acre feet) to determine lbs. N/acre applied in the irrigation water. Inexpensive quick tests are available for on-farm water testing. If a water sample is taken for laboratory analysis, it should be kept refrigerated, but not frozen, until it gets to the lab. Legume crops can be a very significant source of plant available N due to bacterial N3 fixation in root nodules. Plowing down a good stand of alfalfa may release more than 100 lbs. of N per acre in the first year after plowdown. The amount of N credit given for legumes depends upon the crop, stand, and degree of nodulation. A minimum of 30 lbs. of N/acre should be credited in the first year after any legume crop (Table 11). Total all available nutrient sources from soil testing, irrigation water, legumes and any other organic amendments to determine the total nutrient credit. Due to the difficulty of accurately assessing these credits, be sure to scout fields for nutrient sufficiency during the vegetative growth stages. Recommended Nutrient Application Rate Once you have analyzed crop needs, nutrient credits, and manure nutrient content, you can determine manure application rates. Total crop nutrient need minus total nutrient credits will equal the recommended nutrient application 16 -ate. This can be satis- ied by manure, fertilizer, Calculation 4. Determining agronomic rate of manure application or a combination of Example 4a. Beef feedlot manure broadcast applied and incorporated immediately both. Manure application rate based upon N requirement: In general, manure Step 1: Calculate available N in manure and effluent application N content of manure = 23 lb. total N/ton including 7 Lb. NH4-N/ton should be avoided on . (from Table 4) ,; _ frozen fields unless a Available. N 35% availability x (23 lb./tatak N/ton manure site specific analysis • 7 lb. NH -N/ton) + 7 lb. NH -N/ton (from Table 8) shows that runoff will = 12 lb. available N/ton manure not occur. Effluent or Step 2:Determine crop N requirement .2, y k manure should not be ex. soil contains 1.5% organic matter and 6 ppm residual soil NO2 N applied to any soil that N required for 175 bu corn crop = 185 W. N/acre (from Table 7a) , is saturated or has a Step 3:Subtract N credits from other sources. snow pack of greater ex. 25 lb. NO3-N (in 2-4 foot subsoil sample)' than one inch. Addition- 185 lb. N required - 25 lb. subsoil N ally, animal waste should • ded not be applied to soils Step 4:Calculate agronomic manure rate. that are frequently (160 lb. N/acre) / (12 lb. available N/ton manure) flooded, as defined by • ! = 13 tons manure/acre the National Cooperative Step 5: Calculate phosphorus supplied by manure (based on N rate) Soil Survey, during the 13 tons manure/acre x 24 lb. P205/ton manure _i; eriod when flooding is = 312 lb. P205/acre supplied by manure expected to occur. Manure is most Manure application rate based upon P requirement: valuable as a nutrient Step 1:Calculate available P in manure source if it is applied as Total P20, = 24 lb. P205/ton (from Table 4) close to planting as Available P20, = 80% availability x 24 lb. P205/ton manure j possible. However, = 19 lb. available P205/ton manure • manure with a high salt Step 2: Determine crop P requirement content may affect ex. NaHCO3 extractable P.= 6 ppm (low range) and soil lime content is,high germination and seedling P required for 175 bu corn crop = 80 lb. P305 (from Table 8) growth of sensitive Step 3: Determine agronomic manure rate crops, such as beans. If = (80 lb. P205/acre) / (19 lb. available P205/ton fall application is manure) necessary in order to = 4 tons manure/acre. clean out manure storage Step 4: Calculate nitrogen supplied by manure (based on P rate) areas, try to wait until 4 tons manure/acre x 23 lb.total N/ ton manure after soil temperature is = 92 lb. total N/acre supplied by manure. less than 50°F to reduce organic N and NH, conversion to NO3. If irrigation equipment is available to apply liquid manure, the best practice is to apply manure in frequent, tight applications during the growing season to match crop uptake patterns and nutrient needs. If manure is applied at the maximum rate based upon crop N needs, _dditional fertilizer N should not be applied. Maximum rate is based upon a one- time application. If yearly application of manure or effluent is made, lower rates 11 If' Calculation 4. Determining agronomic rate of manure application, continued. Example 4b. Swine effluent from a two stage anaerobic lagoon Effluent application rate based upon N requirement: Step 1: Calculate available N in effluent N content of manure = 4 lb. total N/1000 gal including 3 lb. NH4- N/1000 gal (from Table 4) Available NH4-N = 50% volatilization x 3 lb. NH4-N/1000 gal effluent (from Table 10) = 1.5 lb. available NH4-N/1000 gat effluent Available organic N = 1 lb. organic N x 40% mineralization (Table 9) = 0.4 lb. available organic N Total available N = 1.5 lb. NH4-N + 0.4 lb. organic N = 1.9 lb. available N/1000 gal effluent = 52 lb. available N/acre inch* Step 2: Determine crop N requirement ex. soil contains 1.5% organic matter and 6 ppm residual soil NO2-N N required for 175 bu corn crop = 185 lb. N/acre (from Table 7a) Step 3: Subtract N credits from other sources. ex. 25 lb. NO,-N in 2-4 foot subsoil samples 185 lb. N required - 25 lb. subsoil N • = 160 lb. N needed Step 4: Determine agronomic effluent rate. = (160 lb. N/acre)/(52 lb. available N/acre inch effluent) = 3 inches effluent/acre (to be applied in 2 or more applications) Step 5: Calculate phosphorus supplied by effluent (based on N rate) 3 acre inches effluent x 2 lb. P205/1000 gal effluent x 27.15 = 163 lb. P205/acre supplied by effluent * Multiply lb/1000 gal effluent by 27.15 to convert to lb./acre inch. Effluent application rate based upon P requirement: Step 1: Calculate available P in effluent Total P205 = 2 lb. P205/1000 gal effluent (from Table 4) Available P205 = 80% availability x 2 lb. P205/1000 gal effluent = 1.6 lb. available P205/1000 gal effluent = 43 lb. available P205/acre inch effluent* Step 2: Calculate crop P requirement ex. NaHCO3 extractable P = 6 ppm (low range) and soil lime content is high P required for 175 bu corn crop = 80 lb. P205/acre (from Table 8) Step 3: Determine agronomic effluent rate. = (80 lb. P205/acre) / (43 lb. available P205/acre inch effluent) = 2 acre inches of total effluent/acre for this crop year (To be applied in 2 or more applications) Step 4: Calculate nitrogen supplied by effluent manure (based on P rate) 2 acre inches effluent/acre x 52 lb. available N/acre inch = 104 lb.available N supplied by manure Multiply lb/1000 gal effluent by 27.15 to convert to lb./acre inch. 18 Volatilization tLivestock �tF> `k Feed - i r, v, ' r 'r'sob / A ° ‘P tt . n r r� Xi4 rvf�r. i� / 1� ' t� i Collection - r �y Potential from Lot � — i I l ] I r� �, , Runoff Apply to Land ( ' '�l;4 1 7: ,,s6, cnI aA STORAGE 1 Nutrient J ic. tiu il � .� oo�aao Use o oao°pt o °� e > D 0 , Potential o� o o o '° °°; ;�o D 0 o 0 ° ° Leaching o ° o o a o Potential ° C210 ,o O o o 0 Oo ^ �o � o c o 00Q O 0 00 O° 00 °000 , e o p.4 000 osu o°°0 oo o @®o°3c °i Leaching ° 000p2o ® 00 0 000Do/ 9,„„ PC() a oopC > s _ o od'�a�o aDaO� Oa o iccf� a Dopy X00 0°i��'06 0 0O Cie Oo a 0 Oo po Oa aQ 0 o p OD q�� O oO R � p �O �pR^0 a o G 0� � 0 no„afn 9,go o cO o OOotO 2��2e9 ovoQ O6,,,o0Oo � o`-Zi8 „ooCGROUNDWATERVoa°o o' Owe ,00© �fec._g'ro ^�© 03o , '6 , , \ op GoG pU air opOv-OOvO "\_20 a .00 0 v �O, 080\/BO OOQ: 00 '6)noo �®"Oo a�6rr©VV��6Qes-)osoo�000 ea `bO onoQanCfrOFOpaociiie0 O Q o�,p no/,,,,r n OnJ qv f1Fe c,,°4 ob° noA?7),,nPp-��`_d0O ,g,r_9 0°, are recommended and annual soil sampling is needed to track soil N and P Levels. If soil N, P or E.C. increases significantly over time, manure use should be discontinued until nutrients in the rootzone decline below crop response thresholds. NMP Section 3. Nutrient Use Summary Operation and Maintenance Farm-wide accounting of manure and fertilizer application is the final aspect of a nutrient management plan. This is important to help document a balance between manure production and utilization. Worksheet 3 is provided to help record annual application data. After tallying total nutrient application, you can evaluate nutrient sufficiency or excess on the farm by comparing these numbers to manure production on Worksheet 1. A number of other items should be assessed on an annual basis as a part of nutrient management planning. These include equipment calibration, soil sts, and monitoring water quality near the operation. Accurate record keeping is an essential component of any manure manage- ment program. Keeping accurate records allows managers to make good 19 decisions regarding manure and nutrient applications. Additionally, these records provide documentation that you are complying with state and local regulations to protect Colorado's water resources. All operators should maintain records of nutrient management plans for at least three years. Spreader Calibration The value of carefully calculating manure application rates is seriously diminished if manure spreaders are poorly calibrated. Proper calibration is essential in order to apply manure correctly. Manure spreaders discharge at widely varying rates, depending on travel speed, PTO speed, gear box settings, discharge openings, and manure moisture and consistency. Calibration requires measurement of manure applied on a given area. To check spreader calibration, you must know the field size. Secondly, count the number of loads of manure applied to the field. Weigh at least three of the loads, and calculate the average weight. Finally, multiply the number of loads by the average weight, and then divide by the field acreage. This provides you the average application rate per acre for the field. Adjust the spreader or ground speed as necessary to achieve the desired rate. Remember to recheck the calibration whenever a different manure source with a new moisture content or density is applied.. Using good equipment and the proper overlap distance will ensure better nutrient distribution and help avoid "hot spots" or areas with nutrient deficiency. (See Colorado State University Cooperative Extension fact sheet 0.561 for more information on spreader calibration.) follow Up and Monitoring Determining agronomic rates of manure or effluent application is not an exact science. Climactic, soil, and management factors influence crop nutrient uptake, mineralization rate, volatilization and overall nutrient availability. Producers must continue to monitor crop yields, as well as soils within and below the rootzone, to determine what adjustments are needed each year in the operating plan to continue protecting water quality. 2U Best Management Practises for Manure Utilization Guidance Pnncip(e: Collect, store, and apply animal manures properly to optimize efficiency while protecting water quality. To select manure BMPs that achieve water quality goaLs and the greatest net returns for your operation, consider: • most suitable practices for your site and management constraints • need to protect sensitive resources and areas General BMPs 3.1 Develop a nutrient management plan for your operation that includes: 1. Estimates of manure production on your farm 2. Farm maps which identify manure stockpiles, potential application sites and sensitive resource areas 3. Cropping information 4. Soil, plant, water, and manure analysis 5. Realistic crop yield expectations 6. Determination of crop nutrient needs 7. Determination of available nutrient credits B. Recommended manure rates, timing, and application methods 9. Operation and maintenance plans 3.2 Base manure application rates on crop phosphorus (P) needs IF soil test P is in the high or very high category, the field drains to any sensitive surface water body, AND P movement is likely. In most other cases, appli- • cation rates may be based on crop N needs. 3.3 Apply commercial N and P fertilizer to manured fields only when soil available N and P from manure application does not satisfy crop needs. 3.4 Cease effluent application if crop is destroyed during growing season. Plant winter cover crops to scavenge excess nutrients when crop uptake is lower than expected due to hail or other yield limitations. 3.5 Maintain nutrient management plans and actual manure and fertilizer management records on file a minimum of three years or the duration of your crop rotation, if longer than three years. 3.6 Scout fields for nutrient deficiencies/sufficiency throughout the season in order to identify and correct problems that may limit economic crop yields. 21 p,'l In it Manure Application BMPs 3.7 Incorporate manure as soon as possible after application to minimize volatilization losses, reduce odor, and prevent runoff. 3.8 Apply manure uniformly with properly calibrated equipment. 3.9 Time liquid manure applications to match crop nutrient uptake patterns in order to minimize the opportunity for NO, leaching on coarse textured soils. Effluent application amounts must not exceed the soil water holding capacity of the active rootzone. Several light applications of liquid manure I l during the growing season are better than a single heavy application. 3.10 Limit solid manure application on frozen or saturated ground to fields not subject to runoff. Liquid effluent should not be applied to frozen or saturated ground. 3.11 Create a buffer area around surface water and wells where no manure is applied to prevent the possibility of water contamination. 3.12 Plant permanent vegetation strips around the perimeter of surface water and erosive fields to catch and filter nutrients and sediments in surface runoff. 3.13 Apply manure on a rotational basis to fields that will be planted to high N use crops such as corn or forage. Long-term annual applications to the same field are not recommended, except at low rates. Manure Collection and Storage BMPs 3.14 Locate manure stockpiles, lagoons, and ponds a safe distance from all water supply wells. Manure stockpiles, lagoons, and runoff collection ponds should be located on areas not subject to leaching and must be above the 100 year flood plain, unless adequate flood proofing structures are pro- vided. 3.15 Inspect lagoons and liquid manure storage ponds regularly to ensure seepage does not exceed state and local restrictions. 3.16 Divert runoff from pens and manure storage sites by construction of ditches or terraces. Collect runoff water from the lot in a storage pond; minimize Solid manure application runoff volume by diverting runoff water from crossing the feedlot. 3.17 Clean corrals as frequently as possible to maintain a firm, dry corral surface with the loose manure layer less than •• one inch deep and pen moisture content between 25 percent to 35 percent. Avoid mechanical disturbance of the _ _ - o3- why r manure-soil seat when cleaning feedlots. Create a smooth ir; T � surface with a 3 percent to 5 percent slope when scraping lots. 3.18 Scrape feedlots or manure storage areas down to bare earth V ,3= � �� aroma Paz Y�r and revegetate after they are permanently abandoned. tic (7,447,:airCiare„ 22 Nutrient Management Plan Guidelines 1. Using Worksheet 1, determine the approximate nutrient inventory from manure production on your farm. If you use manure but do not produce any on your farm go to Worksheet 2. 2. Attach farm maps identifying fields receiving manure, waste storage facilities and natural resource areas of special concern, such as streams, groundwater recharge areas, wetlands, public or private drinking water wells. 3. Fill out 1 copy of Worksheet 2 per field identifying: • cropping sequence • yield expectations • crop nutrient needs • nutrient credits • planned manure and or fertilizer rates • note any special management needed to protect natural resource areas of special concern. 4, Attach soil tests, manure analysis, irrigation water tests, and plant tissue analysis used to determine proper nutrient rates. 5. Use Worksheet 3 to document whole farm nutrient use. — 6. Attach information on feed management to reduce nutrients, manure treat- ment to reduce nutrient content or volume, and land management practices used to modify manure loading rates. If other manure utilization options are used, such as composting or sale to other producers, document amount of manure diverted annually. 7. Indicate who prepared forms and date them. • 8. Nutrient management plan should be reviewed and evaluated annually. 22 I, I I: Worksheet 1. Determination of Nutrient Inventory from Manure Production Livestock Average Average Average Total Manure Analysis' Total Nutrient Type Animal Manure Number Manure Production' Weight' Production Animals Production' Total Total Per Animal' Per Year N P205 N P205 • —1000 gal— —1000 gat— --lb/1000 gal-- Or or or --tons-- --tons-- --lb/ton-- a Total Notes: Prepared by: Date: • ' Average animal weight should be based on the average over the entire year. Average production per animal should be on an as-applied basis. See Tables 2 and 3 for guidelines. ' Total manure production is determined by multiplying Average Manure Production per animal by the average number of animals per year. Manure analysis will be Lbs of nutrients (Total N and P,0,) per 1000 gal or per ton. In lieu of lab analysis, use values in Table A. Multiply total manure production by manure analysis to determine total nutrient production. Worksheet 2. lletermination of Manure Application Hates for Held: :pl.! ID) 1. Field information Crop Crop year Number of acres Soil name/texture Previous crop 2. Nutrient need N P205 lb./acre a) Expected yield b) Nutrient recommendations from soil test report _ c) Special nutrient need above test recommendations d) Total nutrient need 3. Nutrient credits N P205 lb./acre a) Residual soil credit* b) Irrigation water credit c) Organic matter credit* d) Previous legume crop e) Mineralization from previous manure applications 1) Other: g) Total nutrient credit *If not included in 2b above. 4. Recommended nutrient application rate N P205 a) Total nutrient need minus Total nutrient credit (lb./acre) b) Expected NH3-N volatilization _ c/c NH4-N available from manure lb./ton or lb/1000 gal c) Expected mineralization 0/0 Organic N available from manure lb./ton or lb/1000 gal d) Total available N lb./ton or lb/1000 gal e) Recommended manure application rate (tons/acre) or (1000 gal/acre) or (acre inch) 5. Post season follow-up Actual crop yield Total irrigation water applied (inches/acre) Supplemental fertilizers applied lbs N/a Total manure applied (tons/acre) or (1000 gal/acre) lbs P205 /A Prepared by: Date: Ii I • I ' Worksheet 3. Whole Farm Nutrient Use Summary for Crop Year: Field Size Crop Recommended Manure Total Additional { Nutrient Application Manure Fertilizer Application Rate Applied Applied Rate —tons/acre— Per Field' —acres— or —tons— —lb/acre- -1000 gal/acre— or —lb/acre— —gallons— N Pz05 • N _ P205 • Whole Farm Total Manure Applied Total manure applied is calculated by multiplying field size (acres) by manure application rate. Prepared by: Date: • Average Working Capacity & Animal Unit Worksheet Developed in Accordance with the Colorado "Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulations" (A) ( B ) ( C ) YEAR: Average Annual # Months Working Capacity Animal Species I Jan i Feb i Mar I Apr i May i June I July I Aug I Sept ! Oct i Nov I Dec Total Fed (A)divided by(B) Slaughter& Fed Cattle 0 Mature Dairy Cattle 0 Horses 0 Swine " 0 Young Stock 0 *Butcher and breeding(over 55 Ibs) "' ( C ) ( D ) ( E ) Instructions Average Average 1 Fill in "end-of-month" inventory monthly for each species Working Equivalency Working Capacity 2 Add across and total each species (A) Animal Species Capacity Factor (C) multiplied by(O) 3 Count months fed for each species for#months fed (B) Slaughter& Fed Cattle 1.0 4 Divide each species total by#months fed for Ave Working Cap ( C ) Mature Dairy Cattle 1.4 5 Multiply Ave Working Cap for species by Equivalency Factor (D) Horses 1.0 6 Total all species of Animal Units (E) Swine 0.2 Young Stock* adult* 0.5 'Young stock,less than 50%of adult weight,reduces the above equivalency factor by 1/2 Total Animal Units = AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Appendix D • Soil Testing Protocol • Process Wastewater/Stormwater Testing Protocol • Solid Manure Testing Protocol • Irrigation Water Testing Protocol Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 14 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Jun-01 Soil Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies field information sheets, soil sample containers as well as the proper instructions. In the absence of supplied sample bags, use sterile plastic bags. • A typical soil sample consists of one pound of soil. • Sample soil each spring, fields that will have manure applied that spring and/or the coming fall, and fields that had manure applied the previous year. • Sample soil before manure or fertilizer application, and before planting. • Sample each field separately. • Mark sampling points on a field map that is to scale. Use the same maps to mark where and how much manure is applied each year. • A sampling point should encompass no more than ten acres and should be evenly distributed across a field. If a field is ten acres or less, then two sampling points should be marked. • Use a coring tool to collect the samples. Collect samples from the 0-24" horizon in one- foot increments. Collect one composite sample from each 80 acres of field size. Each composite sample should include 8-12 different sampling points across the 80-acre parcel. Take the 8-12 sub-samples in an "X" or"Z" pattern. Mark the sampling points on the field map along with the sampling date and the name of the sampler. • Place sub-samples in clean buckets. When all sub-samples have been collected, mix well. Take care to keep each horizon separate and clean the buckets well between composite sampling events. • Place the composite soil samples in the containers provided by the lab. Mark each sample with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain-of- custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep the soil samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. • Have the laboratory evaluate the soil samples for the following parameters at a minimum: Nitrate-N Organic Matter pH Phosphorus (P) Potassium (K) AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Jun-01 Process Wastewater / Stormwater Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic sample containers. • A typical process wastewater/stormwater sample consists of 250 ml to one liter. • Test process wastewater/ stormwater at least once per year or every time wastewater is land applied. • Take at least three sub-samples. Mix them together and submit one composite sample to the lab. • Sample wastewater from each pond or basin that will be utilized for land application. Take the sub-samples from different sides of the retention basin. Take each sub-sample from at least 12 inches, and preferably 18 inches, below the surface. • Place the composited wastewater samples in the containers provided by the lab. • Fill the bottles completely, with no air space (if air space is allowed, then some of the ammonium will volatilize and the test will not be accurate). • Mark each composite sample with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain-of-custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep the samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. Make sure the samples will arrive at the lab in a cool state within 48 hours of sampling. • If the samples will not arrive at the lab within 48 hours, then freeze them and ship them so they arrive at the lab in the frozen condition. • Have the laboratory evaluate the process wastewater samples for the following parameters at a minimum: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) Ammonia-N pH Total Solids Phosphorus (P) Potassium (K) AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Jun-01 Solid Manure Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic bags as sample containers. • A typical solid manure sample consists of one to five pounds. • Test solid manure at least once per year. • Sample solid manure in a manner, which will give the most representative sample possible. Accomplish this by randomly sampling several stockpiles of manure throughout the feedlot/dairy. Take at least four sub-samples and mix them together in a large plastic bucket to make one composite sample. • Do not collect excessive amounts of dirt; manure that is wet, or other foreign material. • Place the composite manure samples in the sterile plastic bags provided by the lab. Fill the bags full and seal well, with as little air space as possible (if air space is allowed, then some of the ammonium will volatilize and the test will not be accurate). • Mark samples with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain- of-custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep the samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. Make sure the samples will arrive at the lab in a cool state within 48 hours of sampling. • If the samples will not arrive at the lab within 48 hours, then freeze them and ship them so they arrive at the lab in the frozen condition. • Have the laboratory evaluate solid manure samples for the following parameters at a minimum: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) Ammonia-N pH Total Solids Phosphorus (P) Potassium (K) During solid manure application, weigh several truckloads per day to determine an average weight per load. AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Jun-01 Irrigation Water Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic bottles as sample containers. • A typical water sample consists of 100 ml to one liter. • Test irrigation water at least once per year. • Test irrigation water at the peak of the irrigation season. • If using ditch water, take the sample after the ditch has been running for several days. Take the sample at a relatively clear spot in the ditch about mid-depth. • If utilizing well water, take the sample after the well has been running for several days. Take the sample from a spigot near the well. Allow the water to run from the spigot at least five minutes before sampling. • Fill the sample bottle to the indicated line and cap it. • Mark samples with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain- of-custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep water samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. Make sure the samples will arrive at the lab in a cool state within 48 hours of sampling. • Have the laboratory evaluate irrigation water samples for the following parameters at a minimum: pH Nitrate-N AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 05.31.2001 Appendix E • Rainfall Log • Agronomic Determination Sheet (Process Wastewater) • Agronomic Determination Sheet (Solid Manure) • Process Wastewater Application Log • Solid Manure Application Log • Manure and/or Compost Removal Log • Pond/Lagoon Inspection Form Tateyama Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 15 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 2001 PRECIPITATION LOG (Record precipitation after each event&frequently during events if rainfall is intense or for long duration.) Facility Name: Year: Rain Gauge Location: Date Time Time Elapsed Beg. Reading End Reading Total Rainfall Comments: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 2001 Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet - Process Wastewater Application Reference material needed:Soil test data,process wastewater test data and CSUBulletin No,5684 1. Field Information: Crop Crop year Number of Acres Soil name/texture Previous crop 2. Nitrogen Need: N (lb./acre) a) Expected yield(avg. of last 5 yrs.+5%) (bu/acre,ton/acre,etc.) b)Nitrogen recommendations from Tables 7a-7e in CSU Bulletin No.568A (or use one of the following formulas for corn or corn silage) Corn:N-rate =35+[1.2 x yield goal(bu/acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NO3-N]-[0.14 x yield goal x%O.M]. Corn Silage:N-rate =35+[7.5 x yield goal(tons/acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NO3-N]-[0.85 x yield goal x%OM] c) Special nitrogen need above recommendations d) Total nitrogen need 3. Nitrogen Credits: N (lb./acre) a) Residual soil nitrate credit* (3.6 lb. N per ppm NO3-N (1 ft. sample)) b) Irrigation water credit(2.7 lb. N pr acre-foot x ppm NO3-N) c) Organic matter credit* (30 lbs. N per%O.M.) d) Previous legume crop (see Table 11 in CSU Bulletin No. 568A) e) Other: f) Total nitrogen credit *If not included in 2b above. Do not use N credits twice, i.e. from Tables 7a-7e and here. 4. Recommended Nitrogen Application Rate: Nitrogen a) Total nitrogen need minus Total nitrogen credit(lb./acre) b) Expected Ammonium-N volatilization c) NI-I,-N available from process water lb./1000 gal d) Expected mineralization rate for Organic-N e) Organic-N available from process water lb./1000 gal 0 Total available N ([c x (1-b]] + [d x e/) lb./1000 gal g) Recommended manure application rate (a =fi 1000 gal/acre 5. Post-Growing Season Follow-Up Actual crop yield (bu/acre,ton/acre,etc.)Total irrigation water applied inches/acre or Acre-feet/acre Supplemental fertilizers applied: lbs. N/acre Total process water applied 1000 gaUacre Prepared by: Date: AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 2001 Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet - Solid Manure Application Reference material needed:Soil test data,manure test data and CSU Bulletin No.568A 1. Field Information: Crop Crop year Number of Acres Soil name/texture Previous crop 2. Nitrogen Need: N (lb./acre) a) Expected yield(avg. of last 5 yrs.+5%) (bu/acre,ton/acre,etc.) b)Nitrogen recommendations from Tables 7a-7e in CSU Bulletin No.568A (or use one of the following formulas for corn or corn silage) Corn:N-rate -35 +[1.2 x yield goal(bu/acre)J—[8 x ppm soil NO3-N]—[0.14 x yield goal x%O.M/. Corn Silage:N-rate =35 + [7.5 x yield goal(tons/acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NOrN]-[0.85 x yield goal x%.OM] c) Special nitrogen need above recommendations d) Total nitrogen need 3. Nitrogen Credits: N (lb./acre) a) Residual soil nitrate credit* (3.6 lb. N per ppm NO3-N (1 ft. sample)) b) Irrigation water credit(2.7 lb. N pr acre-foot x ppm NO3-N) c) Organic matter credit* (30 lbs. N per%O.M.) d) Previous legume crop (see Table 11 in CSU Bulletin No. 568A) e) Other: • f) Total nitrogen credit *If not included in 26 above. Do not use N credits twice, i.e. from Tables 7a-7e and here. 4. Recommended Nitrogen Application Rate: Nitrogen a) Total nitrogen need minus Total nitrogen credit(lb./acre) b) Expected Ammonium-N volatilization c) NHa-N available from solid manure lb./ton d) Expected mineralization rate for Organic-N e) Organic-N available from solid manure lb./ton f)Total available N ([c x (1-b)] + [d x el) lb./ton g) Recommended manure application rate (a -J) ton/acre 5. Post-Growing Season Follow-Up Actual crop yield (bu/acre,ton/acre,etc.)Total irrigation water applied inches/acre or Acre-feet/acre Supplemental fertilizers applied: lbs. N/acre Total solid manure applied tons/acre Prepared by: Date: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 2001 PROCESS WASTEWATER APPLICATION LOG (Record manure application data several times per day when applying process wastewater.) Facility Name: Year: Field I.D.: Crop: Water Changed GPM reached Initials of Date Time Time Meter Gallons being Pressure end of water Person Elapsed Reading Pumped pumped @ Pump rows? setting? Pumping (Y/N) Calculation: (1) Total Gallons Pumped: (2) Total Acres in Field: (3) Gallons per Acre Pumped: [Line 1 =Line 2] (4) Plant Available Nitrogen in Effluent: lb./1000 gal [Line 4ffrom Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet-Process Wastewater Application] (5) Plant Available Nitrogen Applied: lb./Acre[(Line 4 *Line 3) =1000] AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 2001 • SOLID MANURE APPLICATION LOG (Record manure application data every day when applying solid manure.) Facility Name: Year: Field I.D.: Crop: #Of loads Average tare-weight Total pounds Total tons Tons per Initials of Date hauled of loads hauled(lbs.) hauled hauled acre applied Person Applying Calculation: (1) Total Tons Applied: (2) Total Acres in Field: (3) Tons per Acre Applied: [Line I =Line 2] (4) Plant Available Nitrogen in Solid Manure: lb./ton[Line 4ffrom Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet-Solid Manure Application] (5) Plant Available Nitrogen Applied: lb./Acre[Line 4 *Line 3] AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 2001 MANURE and/or COMPOST REMOVAL LOG (to track manure and/or compost removed from facility by others) Facility Name: Year: #Of loads Average tare-weight Total weight Total weight Person Date hauled of loads hauled (lbs.) hauled (lbs.) hauled (tons) hauling Comments: AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 2001 Pond/Lagoon Inspection Form (Inspect ponds/lagoons monthly.) Facility Name: Pond Name: Person Performing Inspection: Date: Item Yes/No Follow-Up Date Follow-Up Initials Needed? Y/N Completed 2 feet freeboard existing? 25-year/24-hour capacity available? Visible bank erosion? Visible seepage on sides or base? Rodent burrows or holes? Trees, stumps or roots on dike? Inlet clear and erosion free? Sludge/Solids accumulation present? Other: Other: Other: Comments: Hello