The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20010223 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 6508 WCR 5, Erie, CO 80516 KERBS DAIRY 33440 Weld County Rd 55 Gill, Colorado 80644 Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan Prepared by: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 6508 Weld County Rd 5 Erie, CO 80516 October 13, 2000 2001-0223 Your "Pro Ag" Environmental Professionals AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 10.13.2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 CONTACTS AND AUTHORIZED PERSONS 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 3 SITE DESCRIPTION 4 FACILITY 4 SOILS 4 MAPS 4 STORMWATER AND PROCESS WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT 5 SURFACE RUNOFF 5 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 NUTRIENT UTILIZATION 8 SOIL TESTING 8 IRRIGATION WATER TESTING 8 MANURE, COMPOST AND STORMWATER TESTING 8 AGRONOMIC CALCULATIONS 9 RECORD KEEPING 9 INSPECTIONS 9 LIMITATIONS 9 Appendix A 10 Appendix B 11 Appendix C 12 Appendix D 13 Appendix E 14 Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 2 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 10.13.2000 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: Kerbs Dairy will keep records relating to the CNMP onsite for a minimum of three years. Contacts and Authorized Persons Ms. Lisa Kerbs 33440 Weld County Rd 55 Gill, CO 80644 (970) 667-2697 The individual(s) at this facility who is (are) responsible for developing and implementation, maintenance and revision of this CNMP are listed below: Lisa Kerbs Operator (Name) (Title) (Name) (Title) Legal Description The legal description of Kerbs Dairy is: Most of the SW'/ of Section 15, Township 6 North, Range 64 West, Weld County, Colorado. Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 3 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 10.13.2000 Site Description Facility Kerbs Dairy is an existing facility located on Weld County Road 55, north and east of the intersection of WCR 55, and HWY 392. Dairy construction is industry-typical steel posts, pipe and cable fence, shade structures, 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. Kerbs Dairy is proposing to expand the capacity and milk approximately 1,800 head. Dry cows, springer heifers, replacements and calves will add another 3,200 head. 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 to be approximately 5,000 head. Farm ground borders the facility on four sides. Soils Soils at Kerbs Dairy consist of primarily Nelson fine sandy loam, Otero sandy loam and Thedalund loam. Soils map and detailed descriptions are in Appendix A. The Nelson fine sandy loam is a moderately deep, well-drained soil that formed in residuum from soft sandstone. Typically,the surface layer is light brownish gray fine sandy loam about 9 inches thick. The underlying material is light olive brown fine sandy loam. Soft sandstone is at a depth of about 30 inches. Permeability is moderately rapid. Available water capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Surface runoff is slow to medium and the erosion hazard is low. The Otero sandy loam is a deep well drained soil that was formed in mixed outwash and eolian deposits. Typically,the surface layer is brown sandy loam about 12 inches thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 inches is pale brown calcareous fine sandy loam. Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Surface runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is low. The Thedalund loam is a moderately deep,well-drained soil that formed in residuum from shale. Typically the surface layer is brown loam about 8 inches thick. The underlying material is pale brown and very pale brown loam. Shale is at a depth of about 28 inches. Permeability and available water capacity are moderate. The effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Surface runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is low. Maps The maps described below are included in Appendix A. Topographic Map The Topographical Location Map shows the location of Kerbs Dairy, surrounding sites, topography and major drainages. Site Layout The Site Map details the configuration of the expanded dairy. Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 4 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 10.13.2000 Stormwater and Process Wastewater Management Surface Runoff Kerbs Dairy will control stormwater with several sediment ponds and two main retention ponds located on the west side of the dairy. (See Site Layout in Appendix A) Ponds 1 thru 3 and the Main Pond are existing ponds. The other ponds are to be completed as the dairy expands. Kerbs Dairy will construct stormwater diversion berms and grade the site to ensure runoff enters the stormwater collection system. The retention ponds will be designed and constructed to meet the 1/32 inch-per-day maximum seepage requirement in Section 4.8.4 of the Colorado Confined Animal Feeding Operation Control regulation. Upon completion of the wastewater retention ponds, the liners will be inspected and certified by a licensed professional engineer. Documentation of adequate lining will be submitted to the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment. The 25-year, 24-hour storm event for the area near Gill, Colorado is 3.0 inches. Using the SCS runoff curve number for unsurfaced lots (90), the amount of runoff generated during a 25-year event is 1.98 inches. For the 60 acres draining toward the lagoon system, this results in approximately 9.9 acre-feet of runoff generated at Kerbs Dairy during a 25-year event. The amount falling directly on the lagoons is 2.2 acre-feet. The proposed retention structures will contain approximately 60.2 acre-feet. This amount of storage gives Kerbs Dairy approximately 6 months of process wastewater accumulation and storage. Calculations for the 25-year storm and pond capacities are in Appendix B. Kerbs 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 some of the surrounding farm ground will dewater the ponds. Kerbs Dairy will have available approximately 48 acres of sprinkler-irrigated farm ground for land application of stormwater. The land is immediately adjacent to the ponds and therefore is easily accessible. Process Wastewater Kerbs Dairy generates process wastewater within the milking parlor. It is estimated that Kerbs Dairy will generate approximately 15,000 gallons of process wastewater per day. 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 through a pipeline into Ponds 1 thru 3. Wastewater flows from Ponds 1 thru 3 south into the existing Main Pond. Floodplains AgPro Environmental Services, LLC, has reviewed the Weld County FEMA maps and determined that Kerbs Dairy is not within the mapped 100-year floodplain. Land Application of Stormwater/Process Wastewater Stormwater/process wastewater is pumped from the retention ponds onto farm ground in accordance with the Colorado CAFO regulations, "tier two" land application requirements. The application area for stormwater/process wastewater is irrigated land adjacent to the dairy consisting of approximately 48 acres. Table 1 below shows the land necessary to utilize Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 5 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 10.13.2000 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 Kerbs Dairy requires approximately 45 acres of corn to utilize the nitrogen contained in runoff generated from a 25-year, 24-hour storm. Table 1 -Land Requirements for 25-year Storm 25-year,24-hour storm volume( 12.1 A.F.),gallons 3,927,989 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 15,712 'Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 7,856 `NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 7,856 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 4,321 45% Sprinkler Irrigation loss* Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 3,300 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN) 1st yr.,lbs. 7,620 Soil Organic Matter,°/0 1.0 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.8 residual soil N, lb./acre 177 157 Bulletin#538 Acres req.if effluent applied via sprinkler irrigation 43 48 *Taken from CSU's Bulletin No.568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization During process wastewater application, Kerbs Dairy monitors the process so that runoff of process wastewater does not occur. Kerbs Dairy does not apply process wastewater on frozen ground or during rainfall events. Average Years' Stormwater / Process Wastewater Application A five-year average stormwater/process wastewater generation table is located in Appendix B. The table estimates the average annual amount of wastewater to be land applied to maintain the retention structures' volume at a level that will still maintain volume for a 25-year, 24-hour storm. The table combines the volume of normal precipitation runoff with process wastewater. The table accounts for the following: • Average monthly precipitation values from local weather data • Average monthly lake-evaporation data from local weather data • Evaporation area equal to the surface area of the settling containment structures when full and the primary containment structures when '/z full • Dairy drainage area of 60 acres • Runoff percentage from NRCS National Engineering Handbook • Process wastewater generation rate of 15,000 GPD • Trial-and-error pumping amounts to keep the retention basins' volume at a manageable level The calculation table shows that annual land application of approximately 12 acre-feet of stormwater/process wastewater will maintain a manageable level in the retention structures. Table 2 below shows the land necessary to utilize the nutrients from 12 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 Kerbs Dairy requires approximately 45 acres of corn to utilize the nitrogen contained in 12 acre-feet of stormwater/process wastewater. Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 6 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 10.13.2000 Table 2-Average Years' Land Application Requirements Maximum pumping requirement( 12.0 A.F.),gallons 3,909,946 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 15,640 "Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 7,820 "NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 7,820 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 4,301 45% Sprinkler Irrigation loss" Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 3,284 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N" Nitrogen available to plants(PAN) 1st yr.,lbs. 7,585 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 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 177 157 Bulletin#538 Acres req.if effluent applied via sprinkler irrigation 43 48 "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 Kerbs Dairy has enough available land (48 acres) to assimilate nutrients produced in stormwater/process wastewater year after year. Solid Manure Management Kerbs 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. Kerbs Dairy cleans pens at least annually. Manure is stockpiled and removed by local farmers who take it to utilize the nutrient value for their fields. Kerbs Dairy does not utilize solid manure on its own land. Should Kerbs Dairy choose to land apply solid manure on its own property; they will do so in a manner following "tier two" criteria in the state CAFO regulations. Manure, compost and soil testing is covered later in this CNMP. Kerbs Dairy has approximately 48 irrigated-acres of their own land available for land application of 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 1,800 lactating cows. Table 3-Manure Production NRCS Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook Moisture Manure Manure TS VS Nitrogen Prosphorus Potassium Number of (lbs./clay/ (fts/day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs./day 1 (lbs./day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs./day/ Animal Type Hd Wt./hd.lbs. Total WI..lbs. (%) 1000#) 1000# 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) Milk Cows 1,800 1,400 2,520,000 87.5 80.0 1.30 10.00 8.50 0.45 0.07 0.26 Dry Cows 220 1,200 264,000 88.4 82.0 1.30 9.50 8.10 0.36 0.05 0.23 Heifers 745 1,000 745,000 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Heifers 745 500 372,500 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Calves 745 250 186,250 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0,04 0.24 _. Calves 745 150 111,750 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Totals 5,000 4,199,500 Total Daily Production 343,586 5,459 40,646 34,557 1,668 246 1,056 Total Annual Production 125,401,408 1,992,663 14,835,670 12,613,245 608,763 89,870 385,309 Tons produced w/moisture content of 88% 62,701 Tons to apply wl moisture content of 46% 13,933 Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 7 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 10.13.2000 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 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 Kerbs Dairy stormwater/process wastewater 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 stormwater. 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. Kerbs Dairy will test soil on land application areas annually using protocol in Appendix D. Irrigation Water Testing Kerbs 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. Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 8 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 10.13.2000 Kerbs Dairy will test stormwater/process wastewater at least once per year following the protocol in appendix D. If solid manure or compost is applied to land owned or managed by Kerbs Dairy, these materials will also be tested annually. 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. Kerbs Dairy will perform agronomic calculations for every field upon which wastewater is applied. 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 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 Records of each wastewater application event will be kept on the Process Wastewater Application Log and if necessary on the Solid Manure Application Log. These forms are included in Appendix E. Soil, wastewater, irrigation water and/or manure testing results will be retained for a minimum of three years. These records associated with manure and nutrient management at Kerbs Dairy will be kept with this CNMP. In addition, authorized person(s) will track precipitation at Kerbs Dairy. After each event, precipitation will be recorded in the Rainfall Log(this form is provided in Appendix E). The Rainfall Log will be kept in this CNMP. Inspections Authorized persons will inspect the site, retention ponds and manure handling equipment quarterly for potential problems that may result in manure or wastewater entering waters of the State. These inspections will be recorded on the Pond/Lagoon Inspection Form (this form is provided in Appendix E). Appropriate corrective actions will be taken and properly documented on the forms. These quarterly reports will be inserted into 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 Kerbs 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. Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 9 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 10.13.2000 Appendix A • USDA, Weld County Soils Map & Descriptions • Topographic Location Map • Site Layout Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 10 outs sheet 40 47 47 77 N 137 38 4 51 3 73 `4 48 $ 48 �. 51 52 0 77 1 ` 48 76 47 47 64. 38 51 {* 1... I Q 68 52 * *64..� `"R 65 77 I( (- 51 p 64 53 52 47 51 y .. } 47 *' s§in. & 51 w24 -r, # 4 16 17 w 64 ; 15. t , `14 76 51 .Ey thiN 51 65 65 E 63 ,R i 4 :'SF .1.§69. 64 64 37 �- k .d 38 51 ', 1! t w 51~ 64 37 7x' 51 76 l 51 52 ® P t /' 20 4( �� _ . lily 51 44.#122 1 C. 65ikr w 493/4„ 51 64 41 64 51 ,4. ' /47 64 w w it 37 .o'. _,y.. 51 ri I52 xw:• ' a is , w 51 4k t @ ` r. an ` + 51 3 � �'5•' .i < 52 144 } a 51 62 32 t 58 32 51 51 65 k 24 74 47 4 \ 51 / / �. \n 26 SOIL SURVEY shale is about 18 inches. Permeability is moderate. Availa- plication of barnyard manure and commercial fertilizer. ble water capacity is low. The effective rooting depth is Keeping tillage to a minimum and utilizing crop residue 10 to 20 inches. Surface runoff is medium to rapid, and are important. the erosion hazard is moderate. In nonirrigated areas this soil is suited to winter wheat, This unit is used as rangeland and wildlife habitat. The barley, and sorghum. Most of the acreage is planted to potential native vegetation is dominated by alkali sacaton, winter wheat and is summer fallowed in alternate years western wheatgrass, and blue grama. Buffalograss, to allow moisture accumulation. Generally precipitation is sideoats grama, needleandthread, little bluestem, sedge, too low for beneficial use of fertilizer. winterfat, and fourwing saltbush are also present. Poten- Stubble mulch farming, striperopping, and minimum til- tial production ranges from 800 pounds per acre in lage are needed to control soil blowing and water erosion. favorable years to 500 pounds in unfavorable years. As The potential native vegetation on this range site is range condition deteriorates, the mid grasses decrease dominated by sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, and blue and forage production drops. Undesirable weeds and an- grama. Needleandthread, switchgrass, sideoats grama, nuals invade the site as range condition becomes poorer. and western wheatgrass are also prominent. Potential Management of vegetation on this unit should be based production ranges from 2,200 pounds per acre in favora- on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- ble years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As range tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, Western wheatgrass, blue grama, alkali sacaton, sideoats and switchgrass decrease and blue grama, sand dropseed, grama, little bluestem, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested and sand sage increase. Annual weeds and grasses invade wheatgrass are suitable for seeding. The grass selected the site as range condition becomes poorer. should meet the seasonal requirements of livestock. It can Management of vegetation on this soil should be based be seeded into a clean, firm sorghum stubble, or it can be on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- drilled into a firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. spring has proven most successful. Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats Rangeland wildlife, such as antelope, cottontail, and grama, blue grama, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested coyote, are best suited to this unit. Because forage wheatgrass are suitable for seeding. The grass selected production is typically low, grazing management is needed should meet the seasonal requirements of livestock. It can if livestock and wildlife share the range. Livestock water- be seeded into a clean, firm sorghum stubble, or it can be ing facilities also are utilized by various wildlife species. drilled into a firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in The nearby cropland makes areas of this unit valuable as spring has proven most successful. escape cover for openland wildlife, especially pheasants. Windbreak and environmental plantings are generally Capability subclass VIe irrigated, VIe nonirrigated; Shaly not suited to this soil. Onsite investigation is needed to Plains range site. determine if plantings are feasible. 37—Nelson fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes. Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. The This is a moderately deep, well drained soil on plains at cropland areas provide favorable habitat for ring-necked elevations of 4,800 to 5,050 feet. It formed in residuum pheasant and mourning dove. Many nongame species can from soft sandstone. Included in mapping are small areas be developed by establishing areas for nesting and escape of soils that have sandstone at a depth of more than 40 cover. For pheasants, undisturbed nesting cover is essen- inches. tial and should be included in plans for habitat develop- Typically the surface layer is light brownish gray fine ment, especially in areas of intensive agriculture. Range- sandy loam about 9 inches thick. The underlying material land wildlife, for example, the pronghorn antelope, can be is light olive brown fine sandy loam. Soft sandstone is at attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, a depth of about 30 inches. managing livestock grazing, and reseeding where needed. Permeability is moderately rapid. Available water The underlying sandstone is the most limiting feature capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 20 to of this soil. Neither septic tank absorption fields nor 40 inches. Surface runoff is slow to medium, and the ero- sewage lagoons operate properly. Site preparation for sion hazard is low. dwellings is more costly. Environmental and beautifica- This soil is suited to most of the irrigated crops com- tion plantings of trees and shrubs may be difficult to monly grown in the area, but it is somewhat restricted establish. This soil, however, does have good potential for because it is only moderately deep. A suitable cropping such recreational development as camp and picnic areas system is corn, corn for silage, barley, 3 to 4 years of al- and playgrounds. Capability subclass Ills irrigated, IVe falfa, and wheat. This soil is also well suited to irrigated nonirrigated; Sandy Plains range site. pasture. 38—Nelson fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes. Row crops can be irrigated by furrows or sprinklers. This is a moderately deep, well drained soil on plains at Flooding from contour ditches and sprinkling are suitable elevations of 4,800 to 5,050 feet. It formed in residuum _. in irrigating close grown crops and pasture. Small heads derived from soft sandstone. Included in mapping are of water and short runs help to reduce erosion. Produc- small areas of soils that have sandstone at a depth of tion can be maintained with frequent irrigations and ap- more than 40 inches. 34 SOIL SURVEY or drilled into a firm, clean sorghum stubble. Seeding tivating only in the tree row and by leaving a strip of early in spring has proven most successful. Brush vegetation between the rows. Supplemental irrigation management can also help to improve deteriorated range. may be needed at the time of planting and during dry Windbreaks and environmental plantings are fairly well periods. Trees that are best suited and have good survival suited to this soil. Blowing sand and low available water are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern redeedar, ponderosa capacity are the principal hazards in establishing trees pine, Siberian elm, Russian-olive, and hackberry. The and shrubs. This soil is so loose that trees should be shrubs best suited are skunkbush sumac, lilac, and Siberi- planted in shallow furrows, and vegetation is needed an peashrub. between the rows. Supplemental irrigation may be needed Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. to insure survival. Trees that are best suited and have Ring-necked pheasant, mourning dove, and many non- good survival are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern game species can be attracted by establishing areas for redcedar, ponderosa pine, and Siberian elm. The shrubs nesting and escape cover. For pheasants, undisturbed best suited are skunkbush sumac, lilac, and Siberian nesting cover is essential and should be included in plans peashrub. for habitat development, especially in areas of intensive Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. The agriculture. cropland areas provide favorable habitat for ring-necked Rapid expansion of Greeley and the surrounding area pheasant and mourning dove. Many nongame species can has resulted in urbanization of much of this Otero soil. be attracted by establishing areas for nesting and escape This soil has excellent potential for urban and recrea- cover. For pheasants, undisturbed nesting cover is essen- tional development. The only limiting feature is the tial and should be included in plans for habitat develop- moderately rapid permeability in the substratum, which ment, especially in areas of intensive agriculture. Range- causes a hazard of ground water contamination from land wildlife, for example, the pronghorn antelope, can be sewage lagoons. Lawns, shrubs, and trees grow well. attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, Capability subclass Its irrigated. managing livestock grazing, and reseeding where needed. 51—Otero sandy loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes. This is a Few areas of this soil are in major growth and ur- deep, well drained soil on plains at elevations of 4,700 to banized centers. The chief limiting feature is the rapid 5,250 feet. It formed in mixed outwash and eolian permeability in the substratum, which causes a hazard of deposits. Included in mapping are small areas of soils that ground water contamination from seepage. Potential for have loam and clay loam underlying material. recreation is poor because of the sandy surface layer. Typically the surface layer is brown sandy loam about Capability subclass IVe irrigated, VIe nonirrigated; Deep 12 inches thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 Sand range site. inches is pale brown calcareous fine sandy loam. 50—Otero sandy loam, 0 to 1 percent slopes. This is a Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is deep, well drained soil on smooth plains at elevations of moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or 4,700 to 5,250 feet. It formed in mixed outwash and eolian more. Surface runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is deposits. Included in mapping are small areas of soils that low. have loam and clay loam underlying material. This soil is used almost entirely for irrigated crops. It Typically the surface layer is brown sandy loam about is suited to all crops commonly grown in the area. Land 12 inches thick. The underlying material to a depth of 60 leveling, ditch lining, and installing pipelines may be inches is pale brown calcareous fine sandy loam. needed for proper water application. Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is All methods of irrigation are suitable, but furrow ir- moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or rigation is the most common. Barnyard manure and com- more. Surface runoff is slow, and the erosion hazard is mercial fertilizer are needed for top yields. low. In nonirrigated areas this soil is suited to winter wheat, This soil is used almost entirely for irrigated crops. It barley, and sorghum. Most of the acreage is planted to is suited to all crops commonly grown in the area, includ- winter wheat. The predicted average yield is 28 bushels ing corn, sugar beets, beans, alfalfa, small grain, potatoes, per acre. The soil is summer fallowed in alternate years and onions. An example of a suitable cropping system is 3 to allow moisture accumulation. Generally precipitaiton is to 4 years of alfalfa followed by corn, corn for silage, too low for beneficial use of fertilizer. sugar beets, small grain, or beans. Generally, such charac- Stubble mulch fanning, striperopping, and minimum til- teristics as a high clay content or a rapidly permeable lage are needed to control water erosion. Terracing also substratum slightly restrict some crops. may be needed to control water erosion. All methods of irrigation are suitable, but furrow ir- The potential native vegetation on this range site is rigation is the most common. Proper irrigation water dominated by sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, and blue management is essential. Barnyard manure and commer- grama. Needleandthread, switchgrass, sideoits grama, cial fertilizer are needed for top yields. and western wheatgrass are also prominent. Potential Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally production ranges from 2,200 pounds per acre in favora- suited to this soil. Soil blowing, the principal hazard in ble years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As range — establishing trees and shrubs, can be controlled by cul- condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PAR. 35 and switchgrass decrease and blue grama, sand dropseed, should be grown at least 50 percent of the time. Contour and sand sage increase. Annual weeds and grasses invade ditches and corrugations can be used in irrigating close the site as range condition becomes poorer. grown crops and pasture. Furrows, contour furrows, and Management of vegetation on this soil should be based cross slope furrows are suitable for row crops. Sprinkler on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- irrigation is also desirable. Keeping tillage to a minimum tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. and utilizing crop residue help to control erosion. Main- Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats taining fertility is important. Crops respond to applica- grama, blue grama, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested tions of phosphorus and nitrogen. wheatgrass are suitable for seeding. The grass selected The potential native vegetation on this site is should meet the seasonal requirements of livestock. It can dominated by sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, and blue be seeded into a clean, firm stubble, or it can be drilled grama. Needleandthread, switchgrass, sideoats grama, into a firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in spring has and western wheatgrass are also prominent. Potential proven most successful. production ranges from 2,200 pounds per acre in favora- Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally ble years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As range suited to this soil. Soil blowing, the principal hazard in condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, establishing trees and shrubs, can be controlled by cul- and switchgrass decrease, and blue grama, sand dropseed, tivating only in the tree row and by leaving a strip of and sand sage increase. Annual weeds and grasses invade vegetation between the rows. Supplemental irrigation the site as range condition becomes poorer. may be needed at the time of planting and during dry Management of vegetation on this soil should be based periods. Trees that are best suited and have good survival on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern redcedar, ponderosa tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. pine, Siberian elm, Russian-olive, and hackberry. The Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats shrubs best suited are skunkbush sumac, lilac, and Siberi- grama, blue grama, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested an peashrub. wheatgrass are suitable for seeding. The grass selected Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. should meet the seasonal requirements of livestock. It can Ring-necked pheasant, mourning dove, and many non- be seeded into a clean, firm sorghum stubble, or it can be game species can be attracted by establishing areas for drilled into a firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in nesting and escape cover. For pheasants, undisturbed spring has proven most successful. nesting cover is essential and should be included in plans Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally - for habitat development, especially in areas of intensive suited to this soil. Soil blowing, the principal hazard in agriculture. establishing trees and shrubs, can be controlled by cul- Rapid expansion of Greeley and the surrounding area tivating only in the tree row and by leaving a strip of has resulted in urbanization of much of this Otero soil. vegetation between the rows. Supplemental irrigation This soil has excellent potential for urban and recrea- may be needed at the time of planting and during dry tional development. The only limiting feature is the periods. Trees that are best suited and have good survival moderately rapid permeability in the substratum, which are Rocky Mountain juniper, eastern redcedar, ponderosa causes a hazard of ground water contamination from pine, Siberian elm, Russian-olive, and hackberry. The sewage lagoons. Lawns, shrubs, and trees grow well. shrubs best suited are skunkbush sumac, lilac, and Siberi- Capability subclass IIIe irrigated, IVe nonirrigated; an peashrub. Sandy Plains range site. Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. 52—Otero sandy loam, 3 to 5 percent slopes. This is a Ring-necked pheasant, mourning dove, and many non- deep, well drained soil on plains at elevations of 4,700 to game species can be attracted by establishing areas for 5,250 feet. It formed in mixed outwash and eolian nesting and escape cover. For pheasants, undisturbed deposits. Included in mapping are small areas of soils that nesting cover is essential and should be included in plans have loam and clay loam underlying material. Also in- for habitat development, especially in areas of intensive eluded are small areas of soils that have sandstone and agriculture. shale within a depth of 60 inches. Rapid expansion of Greeley and the surrounding area Typically the surface layer of this Otero soil is brown has resulted in urbanization of much of this Otero soil. sandy loam about 10 inches thick. The underlying material The soil has excellent potential for urban and recreational to a depth of 60 inches is pale brown calcareous fine development. The only limiting feature is the moderately sandy loam. rapid permeability in the substratum, which causes a Permeability is rapid. Available water capacity is hazard of ground water contamination from sewage moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or lagoons. Lawns, shrubs, and trees grow well. Capability more. Surface runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is subclass IIIe irrigated, VIe nonirrigated; Sandy Plains low, range site. This soil is used almost entirely for irrigated crops. It 53—Otero sandy loam, 5 to 9 percent slopes. This is a is suited to the crops commonly grown in the area. deep, well drained soil on plains at elevations of 4,700 to Perennial grasses and alfalfa or close growing crops 5,250 feet. It formed in mixed outwash and eolian WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, SOUTHERN PART 41 The potential native vegetation on this range site is This soil is suited to limited cropping. Intensive — dominated by sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, and blue cropping is hazardous because of erosion. The cropping grama. Needleandthread, switchgrass, sideoats grama, system should be limited to such close grown crops as al- and western wheatgrass are also prominent. Potential falfa, wheat, and barley. The soil is also suited to ir- production ranges from 2,200 pounds per acre in favora- rigated pasture. A suitable cropping system is 3 to 4 ble years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As range years of alfalfa followed by 2 years of corn and small condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, grain and alfalfa seeded with a nurse crop. and switchgrass decrease and blue grama, sand dropseed, Closely spaced contour ditches or sprinklers can be and sand sage increase. Annual weeds and grasses invade used in irrigating close grown crops. Contour furrows or the site as range condition becomes poorer. sprinklers should be used for new crops. Applications of Management of vegetation on this soil should be based nitrogen and phosphorus help in maintaining good produc- on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- tion. tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. The potential native vegetation on this range site is Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats dominated by sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, and blue grama, blue grama, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested grama. Needleandthread, switchgrass, sideoats grama, wheatgrass are suitable for seeding. The grass selected and western wheatgrass are also prominent. Potential should meet the seasonal requirements of livestock. It can production ranges from 2,200 pounds per acre in favora- be seeded into a clean, firm sorghum stubble or it can be ble years to 1,800 pounds in unfavorable years. As range drilled into a firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in condition deteriorates, the sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, spring has proven most successful. and switchgrass decrease and blue grama, sand dropseed, Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally and sand sage increase. Annual weeds and grasses invade not suited to this soil. Onsite investigation is needed to the site as range condition becomes poorer. determine if plantings are feasible. Management of vegetation on this soil should be based Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. The on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- cropland areas provide favorable habitat for ring-necked tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. pheasant and mourning dove. Many nongame species can Sand bluestem, sand reedgrass, switchgrass, sideoats be attracted by establishing areas for nesting and escape grama, blue grama, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested cover. For pheasants, undisturbed nesting cover is essen- wheatgrass are suitable for seeding. The grass selected tial and should be included in plans for habitat develop- should meet the seasonal requirements of livestock. It can ment, especially in areas of intensive agriculture. Range- be seeded into a clean, firm sorghum stubble, or it can be land wildlife, for example, the pronghorn antelope, can be drilled into a firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, spring has proven most successful. managing livestock grazing, and reseeding where needed. Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally The underlying sandstone is the most limiting feature not suited to this soil. Onsite investigation is needed to of this soil. Neither septic tank absorption fields nor determine if plantings are feasible. sewage lagoons function properly. Site preparation for Wildlife is an important secondary use of this soil. The dwellings is costly. Enviornmental and beautification cropland areas provide favorable habitat for ring-necked plantings of trees and shrubs can be difficult to establish. pheasant and mourning dove. Many nongame species can Potential is good, however, for such recreational develop- be attracted by establishing areas for nesting and escape ment as camp and picnic areas and playgrounds. Capabili- cover. For pheasants, undisturbed nesting cover is essen- ty subclass IVe irrigated, IVe nonirrigated; Sandy Plains tial and should be included in plans for habitat develop- range site. ment, especially, in areas of intensive agriculture. Range- 63—Terry fine sandy loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes. This land wildlife, for example, the pronghorn antelope, can be is a moderately deep, well drained soil on plains at eleva- attracted by developing livestock watering facilities, tions of 4,500 to 5,000 feet. It formed in residuum from managing livestock grazing, and reseeding where needed. sandstone. Included in mapping are small areas of soils The underlying sandstone is the most limiting feature that have sandstone deeper than 40 inches. Also included of this soil. Neither septic tank absorption fields nor are small areas of soils that have a sandy clay loam and sewage lagoons function properly. Site preparation for clay loam subsoil. dwellings is costly. Environmental and beautification Typically the surface layer of this Terry soil is pale plantings of trees and shrubs can be difficult to establish. brown fine sandy loam about 6 inches thick. The subsoil is Potential is good, however, for such recreational develop- pale brown fine sandy loam about 18 inches thick. The ment as camp and picnic areas. Capability subclass IVe ir- substratum is fine sandy loam. Sandstone is at a depth of rigated, VIe nonirrigated; Sandy Plains range site. about 32 inches. 64—Thedalund loam, 1 to 3 percent slopes. This is a Permeability is moderately rapid. Available water moderately deep, well drained soil on plains at elevations capacity is moderate. The effective rooting depth is 20 to of 4,900 to 5,250 feet. It formed in residuum from shale. 40 inches. Surface runoff is medium to rapid, and the ero- Included in mapping are small areas of soils that have sion hazard is moderate. shale and sandstone deeper than 40 inches. 42 SOIL SURVEY Typically the surface layer is brown loam about 8 The underlying shale is the most limiting feature of _. inches thick. The underlying material is pale brown and this soil. Neither septic tank absorption fields nor sewage very pale brown loam. Shale is at a depth of about 28 lagoons function properly. In places the underlying shale inches. has high shrink-swell potential. Environmental and beau- Permeability and available water capacity are tification plantings of trees and shrubs can be difficult to moderate. The effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. establish. Capability subclass IVs irrigated; IVe nonir- Surface runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is low. rigated; Loamy Plains range site. This soil is suited to limited cropping. A suitable 65—Thedalund loam, 3 to 9 percent slopes. This is a cropping system is 3 to 4 years of alfalfa followed by 2 moderately deep, well drained soil on plains at elevations years of corn and small grain and alfalfa seeded with a of 4,900 to 5,250 feet. It formed in residuum from shale. nurse crop. Incorporating plant residue and manure im- Included in mapping are small areas of soils that have proves tilth and provides organic matter and plant shale and sandstone deeper than 40 inches. Some small nutrients. outcrops of shale and sandstone are also included. Most irrigation methods are suitable, but the length of Typically the surface layer of this Thedalund soil is runs should be short to prevent overirrigation. Light, brown loam about 8 inches thick. The underlying material frequent irrigations are best. Sprinkler irrigation is is pale brown and very pale brown loam. Shale is at a desirable. Commercial fertilizers increase yields and add depth of about 25 inches. to the value of the forage produced. Permeability and available water capacity are In nonirrigated areas this soil is suited to winter wheat, moderate. The effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Surface runoff is medium to rapid, and the erosion hazard barley, and sorghum. Most of the acreage is planted to winter wheat. The predicted average yield is 25 bushels is moderate. per acre. The soil is summer fallowed in alternate years This soil is suited to limited cropping. Intensive to allow moisture accumulation. Generally precipitation is cropping is hazardous because of erosion. The cropping too low for beneficial use of fertilizer. system should be limited to such close grown crops as al- Stubble mulch farming, striperopping, and minimum til- falfa, wheat, and barley. The soil is also suited to ir- lage are needed to control soil blowing and water erosion. rigated pasture. A suitable cropping system is 3 to 4 Terracing also may be needed to control water erosion. Years of alfalfa followed by 2 years of corn and small The potential native vegetation is dominated by blue grain and alfalfa seeded with a nurse crop. grams. Several mid grasses, such as western wheatgrass Closely spaced contour ditches or sprinklers can be and needleandthread, are also present. Potential produc- used in irrigating close grown crops. Contour furrows or tion ranges from 1,600 pounds per acre in favorable years sprinklers should be used for new crops. Application of to 1,000 pounds in unfavorable years. As range condition commercial fertilizer helps in maintaining good produc- deteriorates, the mid grasses decrease; blue grama, buf- tion. falograss, snakeweed, The potential native vegetation is dominated by blue gr yucca, and fringed sage increase; grama. Several mid grasses, such as western wheatgrass and forage production drops. Undesirable weeds and an- and needleandthread, are also present. Potential produc- nuals invade the site as range condition becomes poorer. tion ranges from 1,600 pounds per acre in favorable years Management of vegetation on this soil should be based to 1,000 pounds in unfavorable years. As range condition on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- deteriorates, the mid grasses decrease; blue grama, buf- tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. falograss, snakeweed, yucca, and fringed sage increase; Sideoats grama, little bluestem, western wheatgrass, blue and forage production drops. Undesirable weeds and an- grama, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested wheatgrass are nuals invade the site as range condition becomes poorer. suitable for seeding. The grass selected should meet the Management of vegetation on this soil should be based seasonal requirements of livestock. It can be seeded into on taking half and leaving half of the total annual produc- a clean, firm sorghum stubble, or it can be drilled into a tion. Seeding is desirable if the range is in poor condition. firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in spring has Sideoats grama, little bluestem, western wheatgrass, blue proven most successful. grama, pubescent wheatgrass, and crested wheatgrass are Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally suitable for seeding. The grass selected should meet the not suited to this soil. Onsite investigation is needed to seasonal requirements of livestock. It can be seeded into determine if plantings are feasible. a clean, firm sorghum stubble, or it can be drilled into a Rangeland wildlife, such as antelope, cottontail, and firm prepared seedbed. Seeding early in spring has coyote, are best suited to this soil. Because forage produc- proven most successful. tion is typically low, grazing management is needed if Windbreaks and environmental plantings are generally livestock and wildlife share the range. Livestock watering not suited to this soil. Onsite investigation is needed to facilities also are utilized by various wildlife species. The determine if plantings are feasible. cropland areas provide favorable habitat for pheasant and Rangeland wildlife, such as antelope, cottontail, and mourning dove. Many nongame species can be attracted coyote, are best suited to this soil. Because forage produc- iy establishing areas for nesting and escape cover. tion is typically low, grazing management is needed if AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 10.13.2000 Appendix B • 25-year, 24-hour storm and retention basins capacity calculation • Average Years' Stormwater/Process Wastewater Generation • Process Wastewater Generation Table Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 11 Kerbs Dairy 25-year, 24-hour Storm Event and Pond Capacity Calculations 25-year,24-hour event Proposed w/ Current Expansion Applicable Storm Event for Location,inches 3.00 3.00 SCS Runoff Curve Number 90 90 (90 for unsurfaced lots) (97 for surfaced lots) Surface Area of Drainage Basins,acres 12 60 (Separate different drainage areas) (Include pens, alleys,mill areas,working areas, etc.) Inches of Runoff using SCS Runoff Curve Factor 1.98 1.98 Minimum Retention Capacity Required, Acre-Ft. 2.0 9.9 Cubic-Ft. 86,249 431,244 Surface Area of Retention Structures,Acres 2.4 8.6 Additional Volume Required,Acre-Ft. 0.6 2.2 Additional Volume Required,ft3 26,169 93,888 Total Retention Structure Volume Required, Acre-Ft. 2.6 12.1 Total Retention Structure Volume Required,ft3 112,418 525,132 Total Retention Structure Volume Available,Acre-Ft. 12.1 60.2 Lagoon Capacities Main Pond Pond#1 Pond#2 Pond#3 New Pond-Settling New Pond Storm Pond Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Area @ depth, Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment Depth,ft ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 ft3 depth,ft2 ft3 depth,ft2 ft3 depth,ft2 ,ft3 depth,ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 ,ft3 0 26,144 2,068 1,760 963 5,424 119,810 17,805 1 30,536 28,340 2,800 2,434 2,408 2,084 1,624 1,294 8,243 6,834 125,415 122,613 19,468 18,637 2 35,000 32,768 3,600 3,200 3,124 2,766 2,423 2,024 11,128 9,686 131,149 128,282 21,184 20,326 3 39,536 37,268 4,466 4,033 3,906 3,515 3,352 2,888 14,078 12,603 137,011 134,080 22,964 22,074 4 44,144 41,840 5,397 4,932 4,753 4,330 4,483 3,918 17,094 15,586 143,001 140,006 24,801 23,883 5 48,823 46,484 6,393 5,895 5,665 5,209 5,769 5,126 20,174 18,634 149,120 146,061 26,694 25,748 6 53,568 51,196 7,494 6,944 6,642 6,154 7,133 6,451 23,320 21,747 155,366 152,243 28,643 27,669 7 58,378 55,973 26,531 24,926 161,740 158,553 30,650 29,647 8 63,254 60,816 29,806 28,169 168,227 164,984 32,712 31,681 9 68,194 65,724 174,775 171,501 10 73,200 70,697 181,379 178,077 11 78,270 75,735 188,039 184,709 12 83,406 80,838 194,756 191,398 13 201,530 198,143 14 208,360 204,945 Total Volume,ft3 647,678 27,437 24,057 21,699 138,183 2,275,593 199,663 Total Volume,Acre-Ft. 14.87 0.63 0.55 0.50 3.17 52.24 4.58 Vol.w/2'freeboard,ft3 491,105 14,599 12,695 10,122 85,089 1,872,505 138,335 Vol.wl 2'freeboard,Acre-Ft. 11.27 0.34 0.29 , 0.23 1.95 42.99 3.18 Kerbs Dairy Stormwater/Process Wastewater Accumulation Table(w/Additional Lagoon) Init.Volume Process Water Generated,GPD= 15,000 Pond Surface Area,ft2= 375,553 Evaporation Area,ft'= 265,106 35 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 0.49 5.0% 60 0.47 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.22 36.22 Feb 0.37 5.0% 60 0.36 1.58 6.09 0.80 1.29 0.85 37.06 Mar 1.13 5.0% 60 1.09 2.48 6.09 1.26 1.43 1.26 38.33 Apr 1.80 7.0% 60 1.92 4.05 6.09 2.05 1.38 1.25 39.58 May 2.47 17.0% 60 3.87 5.40 6.09 2.74 1.43 2.56 42.14 Jun 1.83 15.0% 60 2.69 6.53 6.09 3.31 1.38 0.76 42.90 2.20 Jul 1.48 14.0% 60 2.10 6.75 6.09 3.42 1.43 0.10 43.00 Aug 1.15 12.0% 60 1.52 6.08 6.09 3.08 1.43 (0.14) 42.86 Sep 1.16 12.0% 60 1.53 4.50 6.09 2.28 1.38 0.63 43.49 Oct 1.00 10.0% 60 1.22 3.15 6.09 1.60 1.43 1.05 2.2 42.34 Nov 0.82 5.0% 60 0.79 1.80 6.09 0.91 1.38 1.26 43.60 Dec 0.45 5.0% 60 0.44 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.18 44.78 Jan 0.49 5.0% 60 0.47 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.22 45.99 Feb 0.37 5.0% 60 0.36 1.58 6.09 0.80 1.29 0.85 46.84 Mar 1.13 5.0% 60 1.09 2.48 6.09 1.26 1.43 1.26 48.10 Apr 1.80 7.0% 60 1.92 4.05 6,09 2.05 1.38 1.25 4.6 44.75 May 2.47 17.0% 60 3.87 5.40 6.09 2,74 1.43 2.56 47,32 Jun 1.83 15.0% 60 2.69 6.53 6.09 3.31 1.38 0.76 48.07 12.00 Jul 1.48 14.0% 60 2.10 6.75 6.09 3.42 1.43 0.10 6.5 41.68 Aug 1.15 12.0% 60 1.52 6.08 6.09 3.08 1.43 (0.14) 41.53 Sep 1.16 12.0% 60 1.53 4.50 6.09 2.28 1.38 0.63 42.16 Oct 1.00 10.0% 60 1.22 3.15 6.09 1.60 1.43 1.05 0.9 42.31 Nov 0.82 5.0% 60 0.79 1.80 6.09 0.91 1.38 1.26 43.57 Dec 0.45 5.0% 60 0.44 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.18 44.75 Jan 0.49 5.0% 60 0.47 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.22 45.97 Feb 0,37 5,0% 60 0.36 1.58 6.09 0.80 1.29 0.85 46.81 Mar 1.13 5.0% 60 1.09 2.48 6.09 1.26 1.43 1.26 48.08 Apr 1.80 7.0% 60 1.92 4.05 6.09 2.05 1.38 1.25 4.6 44.73 May 2,47 17.0% 60 3.87 5.40 6.09 2.74 1.43 2.56 47.29 Jun 1.83 15.0% 60 2.69 6.53 6.09 3.31 1.38 0.76 48.05 12.00 Jul 1.48 14.0% 60 2.10 6.75 6.09 3.42 1.43 0.10 6.5 41.65 Aug 1.15 12.0% 60 1.52 6.08 6,09 3.08 1.43 (0.14) 41.51 Sep 1.16 12.0% 60 1.53 4.50 6.09 2.28 1.38 0.63 42.14 Oct 1.00 10.0% 60 1.22 3.15 6.09 1.60 1.43 1.05 0.9 42.29 Nov 0.82 5.0% 60 0.79 1.80 6.09 0.91 1.38 1.26 43.55 Dec 0.45 5.0% 60 0.44 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.18 44.73 Jan 0.49 5.0% 60 0.47 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.22 45.94 Feb 0.37 5.0% 60 0.36 1.58 6,09 0.80 1.29 0.85 46.79 Mar 1.13 5.0% 60 1.09 2.48 6.09 1.26 1.43 1.26 48.05 Apr 1.80 7.0% 60 1.92 4.05 6.09 2.05 1.38 1.25 4.6 44.70 May 2.47 17.0% 60 3.87 5.40 6.09 2.74 1.43 2.56 47.27 Jun 1.83 15.0% 60 2.69 6.53 6.09 3.31 1.38 0,76 48.02 12.00 Jul 1.48 14.0% 60 2.10 6.75 6.09 3.42 1,43 0.10 6.5 41.63 Aug 1.15 12.0% 60 1.52 6.08 6.09 3.08 1.43 (0.14) 41.49 Sep 1.16 12.0% 60 1.53 4.50 6.09 2.28 1.38 0.63 42.11 Oct 1.00 10.0% 60 1.22 3.15 6.09 1.60 1.43 1.05 0.9 42.26 Nov 0.82 5.0% 60 0.79 1.80 6.09 0.91 1.38 1.26 43.53 Dec 0.45 5.0% 60 0.44 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.18 44.70 Jan 0.49 5.0% 60 0,47 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.22 45.92 Feb 0.37 5.0% 60 0.36 1.58 6.09 0.80 1.29 0.85 4677 Mar 1.13 5.0% 60 1.09 2.48 6.09 1.26 1.43 1.26 48.03 Apr 1.80 7.0% 60 1.92 4.05 6.09 2.05 1.38 1.25 4.6 44.68 May 2.47 17.0% 60 3.87 5.40 6.09 2.74 1.43 2.56 47.24 Jun 1.83 15.0% 60 2.69 6.53 6.09 3.31 1.38 0.76 48.00 12.00 Jul 1.48 14.0% 60 2.10 6.75 6.09 3.42 1.43 0.10 6.5 41.60 _ Aug 1.15 12.0% 60 1.52 6.08 6.09 3.08 1.43 (0.14) 41.46 Sep 1.16 12.0% 60 1.53 4.50 6.09 2.28 1.38 0.63 42.09 Oct 1.00 10.0% 60 1.22 3.15 6.09 1.60 1.43 1.05 0.9 42.24 Nov 0.82 5.0% 60 0.79 1.80 6.09 0.91 1.38 1.26 43.50 Dec 0.45 5.0% 60 0.44 1.35 6.09 0.68 1.43 1.18 44.68 Maximum Volume Pumped= 12 Average Volume in Pond= 44.05 Maximum Volume in Pond= 48.10 'Precipitation for Greeley.CO,NOAA '5CS,National Engineering Handbook *"Evaporation for Greeley,CO,NOAA Kerbs 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 250 3 750 Miscellaneous Equipment 100 3 300 Parlor Floor Flush 1000 6 6000 Milk Floor 200 3 600 Holding Pen Wash 1000 3 3000 Total Daily Flow(GPD) 10,850 Design Factor 1.4 Design Flow(GPD) 15,000 Annual Flow(Acre-Feet) 16.80 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 10.13.2000 Appendix C • Colorado State University References Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 12 Best Management Practices For Manure Utilization Bulletin 568A MV° Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization 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 variety 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 intended to establish guidance to wastewater to either surface or ground water. Concentrated swine operations are meet any specific regulatory subjected 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 corn- 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 plans is the concept that manure will be applied at "agronomic rates" to crop lands. 1 The agronomic rate is a nutrient application rate Wiable 1 ' a jquiva ``t• ` .""¢ based upon a field-specific estimate of crop needs and rainwirx a an accounting of all N and P available to that crop prior Kit st .'; «gin 'f f y� �" .•-,` to manure (and/or fertilizer) application. Implicit Factor, within the agronomic rate concept is an application Slaughter and Feed Cattle,: we = s n-At rate that does not lead to unacceptable nutrient losses. tp x ;,c rt The agronomic rate is not something that can be directly obtained from a textbook or tables. Rather, it must be evaluated for each farm and field. Knowledge of manure or effluent nutrient content and residual soil nutrients is critical to determining how much can be safely applied so that the agronomic rate is not ex- ceeded. While producers were encouraged in the past to fertilize for maximum crop yields, now they must also 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 NO3 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 Liquid 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. The criteria for waste water treatment lagoons and holding ponds is stricter than for runoff containment ponds. Runoff containment ponds are necessary for large feeding operations to hold excess wastewater until it can be land applied or evaporated. r�r a These should be constructed on fine-textured soils (such as silty clays, clay loans, or clay) with a lining of soil compacted to 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 treatment system. #7,7- \\� e ! Composting is a biological process in which microorganisms� t ` convert organic materials, such as manure, into a soil-like mate- .,. I s AA rial. During composting, some N is lost from the manure as NH3 gas. Most of the remaining N is tied up within stable organic compounds which will become slowly available to plants after soil •: application. Composted manure has less odor and is easier to haul 1_ and store than raw manure because the volume and weight can be reduced by as much as 50 percent. - a" 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 [NMP] 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 that they can determine how much cropland is needed for long term + ;` �'" � � � tee ° " application. There are several ways ,, .� , , 4° l to develop this information, one is f � f ,f method is described in the steps j.:; :xf below. Another method is to 3 F st-r.„ actually weigh the manure removed t w during pen cleaning. If your landttn' " - - ' base is inadequate to safely utilize #`, x'�`g'� >` j' the total nutrients produced, ,9x "-t ` i* Y ", s '....-4..!:4-.=.....:: p ky zv b ,-[ Ali ' "Af.1-4).;:k:','?!.,Ii; *. ti, _ arrangements should be made to Y: apply the manure off-site. Steps for determining nutrient t inventory from manure production #' ‘;,,,,,,,;:f14, � F` "_a i+ include: � b� � 1. Determine the average weight and number of livestock kept , annually at the facility. Az - 2. Determine annual manure �� production on a per animal a , v� .z 12.9 basis. (Tables 2 and 3 give ').r y,.,;4, .a. Lw." estimates on an AU basis.) � 6� s • 51 3. Multiply average annual manure s-I:r@ � , „ , . N f .,c ,per - s, t1-3 ?r }f+s.' r, a - '� production times average �: y Ts ; number of animals to get total Boar " M �t.' j-ril :r:e manure production. Layer ' # ` .' ' " "F t mer , ,.'� ` .. as 7 ,i 4. Use manure analysis or Table 4 Pullet to to estimate nutrient content of "'' � � "T� x r Broiler x 5. Mulmatiply total manure production Turkey 18.2 r .y re. by nutrient content per unit of Horse 14.1 '^P2 manure to determine annual Sheep 14.5 31 nutrient production. ; tf} a aluesare.adaptedafmmlhe USDA Ajricuttural-Waste Manageme!)b eld lamlbook or 'z represent data-from o°lorado samp1ii 4 M'Aaours�mi ar�T°moistu t#�animal, age, feed ration,breedratid handling °` '7:0....:C' 5 l` a k a �"-" "1r � ' M4i " 4 Total all manure nutrients from the various sources Ee Table 3. l¢3lqurdrswine mane re p ,r, $ on your farm to get an estimate of farm total nutrient -iwergh "' ' ' A'�� fi -; production (Worksheet 1 is provided at the end of this s n'` T _ � I1`W� —...r..;,....:-,:,a. document as a template for these records). This figure ..r' , � : f . yb ci `i xi!! 91.,`,7143.' $ 4 F' t f, will be compared to estimated crop utilization figures .` ;^a .:.',.'-`.:11-1.- y :_ ql. !. on Worksheet 3. } ga ' '' Estimating the volume of liquid swine manure ,Sri ' ;:�� Ce _ , produced at large confined feeding facilities is con- M t. w 1 ' . , ' r _r:= /3 w' founded by the addition of fresh water to the system for ,, g1 . ₹ k r-tr a flushing waste from the animal housing units. Docu- v c°-r gr, s`s, s ' mented, operation-specific numbers or Table 3 can be s g -� / '� D— Min` , ' used to estimate the volume of swine manure produc- `'umbers : r, .rstorm water# _tz n+ t tion on a liquid basis. To estimate total liquid waste e -.s `a . i f„� ;.� , � , ,_ i 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 10:Beef Feedlot Manure Example Feedlot has.2500 head on:average year-round. The cattle come in weighing 500 lbs.each and leave weighing 1200 lbs each._7beyaresfed;agtain diet Step 1: Calculate average animal weight (500+1200)$21=850 lbsj'head° T . Step 2: Obtain table value for manure production (Table.2) 8,7lbJday/i000lbs'Manimal,lfee4citt:iigh(energyd , Step 3: Calculate total_annual manure prod,:-.-? for operation, Multiply table value by average animal fveight divided by 1000. 8.7 lb/day/1100 lbs:of animal x 850 lbs.=7.4 lbs.manure/day/animal Multiply by the number of days=onfeed/year. 7.4 lbs. manure/day x 365 days/year=2,700 lbs. manure/year/animal Multiply by the--number4 head fed/year 2,700 lbs. manure/ye'arx 250(1 head=5,750 000-1bs. manure/year. Convert lbs. to tons by dividing*210., 6,750,000 lbs. manure/year 3375 tons manure/year 2000lbs./ton:' , Step 4: Obtain manure analysis (Table 4): 23 lb. N/ton 24 lb. P205/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.=181,000 Lb. P2O5/yr 6 Calculation lb. Estimation of nutrient production from a liquid manure handling system. Example lb: 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 tbs. 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 lbs. 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 long 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- tion (Calculation 2). This is not the same calculation as is used for determining the agronomic rate of application for a specific field for a specific year. Total N in manure is used to ode 4 tJ -a ' 9,1 �,� d a rt „ calculate an estimate of safe long m ur = r --;';--74.7.•,!-- ! � � t .-. . x > �s ..4_�:• • _.:: . .-.. . • - '°k term solid manure application A tpp l , a rate because all of the applied N A that is not lost to leaching or tit � 51Jt1;;;;, , g +ey 5`t volatilization will eventually become available to the crop. 5 Liquid wastes such as swine j• g effluent can have a large loss • component due to ammonia volatilization. Long term planning ', e • f effluent applications should . gyp„ . include conservative volatilization ry estimates to allow for uncertainty and lower than expected crop a r sir - • " • • • nutrient uptake (See Table 5). � 141 Phosphorus Based Manure Planning � ,rr ,,, s While manure applications in tittL 11�, • j., z - ,�;�� Colorado are most often based on 000 crop N needs, in certain situa- e' a N7E,k . q a { tons it is more appropriate to a .r, a an0'rr 3.. r.. r • base manure rates on crop P ,, a requirement and manure Pcon- Darry C .+ � s tent. Phosphorus is known to �4 Poultry ""6" ��r' ) �.. ,*+�°"""-� cause surface water degradation, even at very low concentrations. f 5tr#vF r�c . "7!! ✓ • Ammonia fraction . . � �, ="'enrs � -'- h '<- When P from runoff enters lakes planning purposes only; m ��. i . . "'."to accurately dete` . • . ' < .. and streams, it accelerates the `fraction. " Application conversion factor: lb/1,000 gala 27.15=Lb./acre inch. -r"ir-r 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— oxygen and light become limiting and arelgodlfied witieds, k0uub 99.444 t R of en�ossibte ^` neat c0m o - to the survival of more desirable nw - . 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 from 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 clay)? 2. Is the depth to ground water less than 50 feet in the Ta ` ) t vicinity of manure storage? f, _;l3 3. Have recent well water analyses indicated that local Yom. tr ground water NO3-N levels are increasing? ' s.4° 4. Is the horizontal distance of the feedlot to surface water x bodies (creeks, ponds, drainage ditches, etc.) or wellheads less than 150 feet? 5. Does runoff from the feedlot surface leave your property? 6. Does seepage from runoff storage ponds exceed .25 in/ *' day? trh rr ; 7. Does seepage from lagoons exceed .03 in/day? �4-,-. ': "" 8. Is manure stored within the 100 year flood plain? �" 9. Do runoff storage ponds lack the capacity to handle runoff r- . 1 a-gro volumes from a 25 year, 24-hour storm? Manure utilization site evaluation ` - 1. Do you lack sufficient land to use all of the nutrients in manure produced on your farm? 2. Do any fields receiving manure have greater than a 1% Calculation 2.Determining land'base'for tong- slope and little surface residue? term manure disposal based on crop N needs.* 3. Do any fields have a history of more than 5 consecutive years of manure application? Example: Feedlot appliesmanureto tom har 4. Is excess water from irrigation or precipitation available vested for grain. Average yield is 175 bu/acre. for runoff or leaching? Using estimated N removal from Table 6 and 5. Is manure applied at rates greater than the agronomic Calculation.la data: -- rate? 1) Crop nutrient removal(from Table 6):, 6. Is there surface water or a well immediately downhill from 175 bu corn/acre x 56 tb./bu=9,800 lb. any field which receives manure? grain/acre'bn harvest dried basi5,t 7. Has it been more than one year since you soil sampled to 9,800 lb.grain/acre x 1.6%Win dry harvested determine nutrient levels in fields where manure will be grain= 158 lb.N removed/acre applied? 2) Land needs (from Calculation la): If the answer to any one of these questions is yes, or if 77,625 tb. N from manure production /158 lb. 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 NRCS 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 losses or credits. may need to be adjusted downward and all appropriate BMPs 9 y} { ;+ e ` qLib g r.' employed where water resources A..14.1.-44‘' L11-:' ,, E N , „x.dl":1.±7.7;."1;1);41". g , ,,Ez , r are at risk. Additionally, it may be Cry £y' "*�-+r, vi ,h, } ; helpful to periodically test wells .t k��n: Jr near livestock operations and F • ,j r � z . : `r;. .- _ , ;§ manured fields inati and o w'4 bacterial contamination to determine if management prat- � • - - tices are sufficiently protecting ;; ¢. „ water quality. r fi a ; NMP Section 2. Determination ; _� 4 � ' of Agronomic Rates for Crop Production Determine agronomic rate of manure or effluent application for each field by assessing crop " nutrient needs, available nutrient at, credits, and nutrients in the t,4_" manure. Worksheet 2 at the end f ` , , , of this document is provided as a 4 ' template for this portion of your 5:1c � ' �' �' - . ' , nutrient management plan. Fill K 1 ₹ out one copy of Worksheet 2 for „ each field. An explanation of each r section is provided below. ' _ ° w Field Information J, k 4 @ .� F, t€ lb, I . Each field has specific t•m t" .k;r nutrient requirements that will t .a1,r ii vary from year to year. Begin your • ' , determination of agronomic rates rg ' ' >� by filling out 1 copy of Worksheet Br . . r rvr�"'�^" 2 for each field that receives Bromeg . S,s: • a ,y•••. _ '• manure. Note the soil texture or Alfalfa-grass 11�� -.A � � - x},"�i q � ::=" ta� � c ., , � x. soil name of each field. Sandy Little'bluestem and ▪ soils may require special consider- orchardgrass �'"5 1.5 " . ation to avoid nutrient leaching. Red clover 3tons 2.0 I. Clay soiiik ils may be more prone to F, Reed canarygrass 4 tons 1.4 0.18 runoff. These considerations are Ryegrass 4 tons 1.7 0.27 • important in a sound nutrient ;zs t3 Fell - � � ,� � Q, � � x� �, 4 , management plan. Previous crop 11adg= t .x` 'r^-, ,..c e%, l�-c ^�'3r= : 3. em ."-:: 4ra €s o ;ea.. n C a:. f _ ..4..,,-,:" ,,y� 7 . c3� � grown is important because you Timoth zn u x may need to add more nutrients Wheatgra . .I f , „ .., , ,, - to help with residue breakdown or t . ..,d from the USDA Agriculture a;. Management Field Handbook. less nutrients due to N-fixation, a ,: depending on the rotation 4 x'f 5 . 1 ";'" `# z s ., - ,, s' sequence. Manure applications f ,' ' ` ? C a T °` f'' °'` from the previous year can also a '� ,z4`.2-3-,.'',*', y ,�p t s e 10 supply significant amounts of 4 i, " 4 1 3 nutrients in the current year due li' )- 4" 'err? tOr' 4 p k:crO��cO ,, t • 'Y to the mineralization process. To r , � zr� m� `�' � �, ,�s yX�{ '-'ill `fr�t� ;$.t ,' complete your records, attach the l.. , ° ; `"' k +� ,::: ::e3:7,....1:4: ': r; Crop ,tfr 6 « r most recent soil and manure +,' .; " xt analysis reports to the field , +n r � S y ,f 3'' s E + c •4:; X aK' e, 4E' Y _ lr '° '"`*f,.rka S", information sheet. s °-° .e�' -� «tr .• v zl e > ,.c, '`.' Soil, Manure,Water and Plant Sampling t f8• ; p e,l i 3 A x �� .�`g n '� ."'+ii`Aa'h f r3 � ��. �.F c3�3 � ;� ':� �e'" and Analysis j / s .L . .� �. < k b � . t� A current soil test is " " ' t r for each field receiving manure needed e. z ' y ` s . pep *.i ',� , .'7 � '�' effluent to determine residual soil t .,f h ! , ,, �s d ,,•$� ys f x ,, , t a i NO3, extractable P and soil `•f t telit T 1 ; y-"sf :•, `l, f "- + ' - „.4, " l kc d Y t organic matter content. Soil >� '� 4 a% s �' �.. xr +a+ fir w` F s x1' qr • + a� ' sampling for agronomic rate s l �,2 ' # •• e •. f • r st = determination should occur once r.! '�°��;:�;� s a: � ` , 'r , <�, � „ 3.; , ��z�� . a year. More frequent sampling >� M xz �, �r * , .:. may be needed to track N utiliza- ri`" -�` ' . ...±.447,14',,11$4.1f14,'•,0744 "l"4 "`� "` lion and movement in the soil F rQ' ,440,0-y. profile. Shallow soil samples (1 F h F 1 --,2•:- r2 t ; f� 4:.,:;,....),,,e_ e Y , foot or less) are needed to liell 1 W'y� t. -� a: ' ` evaluate crop P, K and other max , s �� i nutrient needs. Deeper rootzone .w , � .t,,..:1. ,,,,.; soil samples (generally 4 to 6 ft. '::' "`t� `� 3rS 'h 0 a i. deep) should be collected after .h sta , Cele ^� k rx s ' r A,. crop harvest and prior to any , !+'₹,, : ;� ,r r�� rr b �^� �� .r- Cel :::z --C.4:11:::72� .,,3. r manure or effluent application to , `< n x� 4 t Lettuce ( ''. s.� -r. � .i. 'at t � t' ..1 evaluate residual soil NO3. Soil �= x "' Onions " er - "f .- , k. k ,� sampling below the active '' °7 - a' °f' "' rootzone (>6 ft. for most annual Peas 3J Potatoes 14 0.3 ` r ?� crops, >10 ft. for hay crops) may -q be needed occasionally to docu- ment Snap beans 3 0.9 0.26 that nutrients are not Sweet corn 6 0.9 0.24 leaving the crop rootzone. To get Adapted kt9i tike USDA dcuttora( Al n n # a good, representative soil ' Typx'alyieldsareforirrgated product ' " l' F� 5 Nutnent contend ne ona harvestdnned bask°do not need�p araisture sample, it is recommended that a . I nc content except h.2 arkdfi + ! , . minimum of 1 soil core per 10 « ` " ' '" �y' ` 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 NO34 pr or to spring soil sampling. Additionally fields with long manure histories may also have a significant amount of NH4 in the rootzone due to increased mineralization rates. NH4 is available to crops and should be credited as part of the N budget in these particular situations. 11 Manure is an extremely variable lisa , t ;rl` • _ material whether in solid or liquid form. It 1 - , A representative manure sample is � . ` ..1 1111 for a reliable analysis. A mini- ` ' mum of six sub-samples should be taken and mixed together for analysis. When sampling a solid manure stock- pile, remove the crust, and use a bucket strti . auger or a sharpshooter (a narrow .irtc ' 4=k ry shovel) to core into the pile as deeply —.•_ • as possible. Walk around the pile, and ;�-3 a take samples from all sides. Deliver the . ;-'9,-";;;•:..7sample to the lab immediately or if / /A#or ew• ^_ "' immediate delivery is not possible, lirj freeze the sample in a freezer-type � heavy-duty plastic bag. Manure samples - should be analyzed by a reputable laboratory for moisture content, total N, NH4 and total P at the minimum. 89 „• t -. all,, , Metals, micronutrients and E.C. are also aiF ion .= 1 recommendedanalytes. When sampling a liquid manure or . . wastewater, there are several ways of - sampling. You can sample from the lagoon directly with a water grab sampler (be sure to walk or boat around the lagoon and get a minimum of six '" -' x•-'1- samples) or you can sample from a „ valve inserted in the irrigation line or a, t from cups placed in the field where the ' :1'r . " effluent is irrigated onto the land. Store r 'Iy- 1� • t r , I"Al . , :_ ` * A .rev " € _�; the sample in a plastic jar in a cooler or `,- - ' — freezer and deliver to the Lab immedi- , .. f m1" N - a y tel . 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 can 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 losses. 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 5 rs, > - , r' iY r � �I �s�,}.`) t FS f eS 2 average growing conditions. Each A i w , y Jo lrY+� field should have a yield history and expectation. Determining Total Nutrient Needs t � Crop nutrient needs are deter- ' A � mined using your yield expectations k a and table values for fertilizer rates or r Arc a� ` crop nutrient removal values. Most • soil laboratories will also give fertilizer recommendations with soil Gam'`— - A 4 9 test results. Be sure you understand N/ or ewBobuJA ; r the lab's fertilizer recommendation N ra ., A ar philosophy to be sure it is compat- �, A �� , ible with the production and envi- ronmental goals of your operation. In some cases, fertilizer as li- r a t �T * ` b cation rates will need to be adjusted �� •_ ' k � �`- 3o- ,rt . . b , r�- <' ,� , 4.. above or below the standard table 'i values. Examples of these situations „z would be 1) where high amounts of • l N,� k � crop residue remain, increasing N •i ' 'Aft; �- need by up to 30 lb./acre, 2) where a " .��a • starter fertilizer is needed due to cool soils, 3) where alfalfa is to be a xe , c-y ' maintained for more than 3 years, f p.zeit - A�Er „cr ` �,i and 4) when manure has been `k iaszt it o a €EfP- 1- ' x a applied in the previous year. Other 30 a +. thy?- situations may exist that justify - -0 ' k 0„,-/. �` p manure rate adjustments. If so, document these adjustments on your jOe co eptA_lion of NO,o;pgr 01hrbtoP'ftsoil layer nutrient management plan. AddbrsubbictOptN/Aforevery.ton orceorbelgv313c+n/A Thisfi9ble userthe formulas, -' _.; ^ N rate a[9 x yield goat(tons/A)j -[8 x ppm soil 003;14] [30 x yield goal x%O.M.] 13 , x Available N and P in Manure �c • t ' ` a The total amount of N in manure is not plant available in the � '� � ',� ' first year after application due to the slow release of N tied up in ' ;1:11,4-7:, ' '� , ' organic forms. Organic N becomes available to plants when soil --1 ".ya �, ; �, „ . u r'; microorganisms decompose organic compounds such as proteins, f f .' �-,' -` *`, t ,.+' and the N released is converted to NH4. This process, known as mineralization, occurs over a period of several years after manure application. The amount mineralized in the first year depends upon manure source, soil temperature, moisture, and handling. In general, anywhere from 15 percent to 55 percent of the organic N a ' p, in manure becomes available to the crop in the first year after :'85 .- e application depending upon climate and management factors. 1` Nitrogen availability can be estimated as a fraction of the total N .� . '--,4,H21,.:.4 .;;;;;'''' content of manure or as a fraction of the organic N content. -. .r: ' n , "'. Organic N is usually determined by subtracting the NH4 and NO3 ,tia 4°1- from the total N content of the manure. This approach is more "'" „ ' accurate when reliable NH content and NH, 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 .7ab $.s" ,,,, ppyy, i, 'i 41,,t, additional N must be accounted for in the � nutrient management plan if 0manure will 5, ' be applied again to the same field within f ;; three years. Mineralization credit for the 4" second and third years after application should be based upon a fraction of this 7, initial organic N content (Table 9). Alter- „'' natively, annual soil sampling for residual -,,,..,4j - soil NO3-N, NH4-N and organic matter can •I be used to estimate mineralization credit in subsequent years. .. 3 6 Phosphorus contained in manure is "` "tF9 i 1.-4- ,i ""x ' y+' ,'* .• '-,:nr - i- usually considered to be entirely plant =4`, available in the first year after application. .' r.p ,-. l? ,„ In reality, some fraction of the P is tied-up ' ''.1...,m,' <;'t; ' ,, 15r ; . ,f+ 'ice` in forms that are not immediately available " ir r s to plants. If soil test P is in the "low to . medium" range and the soil is high in lime `4'4x311,4 4 egg'-.. i re $ 'I 0 ) content, it may be appropriate to assume � iot3F v;'+ ' r I that only 80 percent of the P wilt be plant s .",n, , :4.: ' ;,. ` . s^ available in the first year. tegu ".••'..-.7+11':- `•' `a - „§ .. r u „ °� ,t Volatilization losses new Stan, 4:(1:::::1:::t'' ". _' 7 ',: f"- ;MR:‘-':•;;-1'•- '"4:4'.4‘t.4,,-141.1e.,. ;, .��,a ,�- - a,� .� � 1 Surface applied manure should be establisher' ,_ 0 incorporated as soon as possible to reduce "Band application rates for row crops are half of the suggested broa rite odor and minimize nutrient loss by volatil- ization and runoff. The risk of surface loss 14 s reduced by injection "" 1 } 8b , � `ti"aI TC " . »'3' e � 4 :,.:.re; application under the 4, _ soil surface, but loss still sou oVnr * f 3 may occur on sloping or erosive fields. Delayed � - 4, a y U! FF j incorporation may be acceptable on level 4 .x4 ,. fields if erosion control . ; or sunlight decomposi- t k �-4 ,, , , , :• . tion of pathogens is 04 desired. If solid manure $�""A ; is not incorporated ' t f .11;4;,' "e �.� ° within 72 hours after 4;;;Y:',5- application, much of the 't""` ¢ p,^" yi5, • y NH,-N fraction may be , t `�� lost to volatilization >" �r (Table 10). The rate of .rr. �.. volatilization increases poultry under warm, dry, or windy conditions. ;,,,� Volatilization losses Adapted from USDA Ag Was - •, • - • from liquid effluents can -esult in large N losses, since much of the N in a.. effluents is in the NH4 .AP'a:#. 1 Y .- °`t" form, which is easily S r a'; ti' ' U+V k v converted to ammonia gas. An accurate predic- � ,W tion or measurement of i t "c+ the amount of N volatil- t ized from liquid manuresffii �i�F Cferw Wax e3 r ��4r r � C �. is difficult to obtain ''1r, ' 7'T C ,: 14._',----;...'"' - - 4„ �i • ,� . because both the _ ' application method and �� 9 F. Sc7, T.at "e' t+gra+#pi+y kq+.s,`.47:7 the ambient climate will :�;"� , . �f:l�'�' � � 4.• p;.« -r ,r `� < F�xs�4.�s.�"'�' determine the rate of Ral .r 'rt,,, 4 g upon 1 t :,4..e,� / s, flux. Additionally, Sour2 t: `: accurate measurement of NH4 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 summer applications. The amount of toss can be reduced by prompt incorpora- tion. 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 Example: 'N creditfrom 173ndhesofirrigation watercontaining-10-ppm'2403-N- effluent, manure, or commercial N t•y�:: qY fertilizer should be applied. 17 inches/A x (2.7 tb. N/acre'foot) I (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 G ar:-.(r, contribution from these sources i �a ro, �1lttb + 1 i• .,:1 .1 ct •-.«- r .,. .. -t � must be credited in order to make accurate fertilizer and manure . a.,•'}�,u ■._ I recommendations. Use soil and . , , _ ., ,• water test data and the informa- ti, bon in Table 11 to estimate these € credits. In some cases, these credits may entirely satisfy crop - .k - • ac :. - needs and no additional manure 3r_, r , �,..,, or fertilizer is required. A starter , 'C -- fertilizer may be all the supple- eree '/' . Z S � "" sjj-j, y . r ` • 7""' time s.• . mental fertilizer that is justified 1i • -, .., in these cases in order to en- ., •.q >, �'.f.. , , f Z fIV ig - hance seething 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. NO3-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 N2 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 18 rate. This can be satis fled by manure, fertilizer, Calculation 4. Determining agronomic rate of manure application. ','7,1.,:::,,t,;;:-,T,:-.,ti.;v.. or a combination of Example 4a. Beef feedlot manure broadcast applied'and incorplitated"immediately'r.. , both. Manure application rate based upon N requirements° , . h `.SSA .tt� s' In general, manure , ,' any ;a Step 1: Calculate available N in manure , � and effluent application N content of manure = 23 lb.total N/ton inct ?- 1� is should be avoided on �p ) ` frozen fields unless a Available N • =35°/c availability x(23 NT Rt4 a site specific analysis m s , )`' 7 lb. NHS-N/tonj +3 ib, N bli'.c8 shows that runoff will = 12 lb.available N/ton ma ; ,,` not occur. Effluent or 1` em Step 2: Determine crop N requirement g z .., , manure should not be ex. soil contains 1.5°/o organic matter and 6 ppm res is NOz2-�N: . applied to any soil that N required for 175 bu corn crop= 185 lb N/acrg(from Table"la) is saturated or has a =t �' Step 3s Subtract N credits from other source, . � t a_ , mot' " snow pack of greater �x .. ` ex. 25 lb. NO3-N('1n 2-4-foot subsoYsample) ,��# ?fig � �.�` than one inch. Addition- 185 lb. N required-25;lb. subsoil N �.. , e a� v��' ., ally, animal waste should • = 160,1b,,N needed rk�e,- +' ' ,, #` not be applied to soils Step 4:Calculate agronomic manure rate. ` 4."$ ` £ . that are frequently = (160 lb. N/acre) /(12 lb.available 4 riure) flooded, as defined by = 13 tons manure/acre k: .,.. ` r y the National Cooperative Step 5:Calculate phosphorus supplied by manure (based an Naote) Soil Survey, during the 13 tons manure/acre x 24 lb. P205/ton manure 1cit i period when flooding is = 312 lb. P205/acre supplieifby maoui `°x d expected to occur. Manure is most Manure application rate based upon P.requireme „r A .tt valuable as a nutrient Step 1:Calculate available P in manure ,. rt, z`e source if it is applied as Total P2135 =24lb.-P205/ton'(from`lab i) close to planting as Available P205 =80%availability x 24 l$1;,P fi5/ton mono'. , possible. However, = 19 lb. available"P205/ton'anure m manure with a high salt Step 2: Determine crop P requirement ,' ckz ,_a content may affect ex. NaHCO3 extractable P s 6 ppm (low range) and'soit lime content is'high' germination and seedling P required for 175 bu corn crop=80.16. P205 (from Table 8) growth of sensitive Step 3: Determine agronomic manure rate • crops, such as beans. If = (80 lb. P205/acre) / (19 lb. available f'205/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 NH4 conversion to NO3. If irrigation equipment is available to apply liquid manure, the best practice is to apply manure in frequent, light 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, additional 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 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. NH4N/1000 gal effluent (from Table 10) = 1.5 lb. available NH4-N/1000 gal 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. NO3-N in 2-4 foot subsoil samples 185 lb. N required - 25 ib. 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 gat 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 gat 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 t Livestock Feed ii___ • • y Potential Collection I ' ll Runoff from Lot Apply to Land STORAGE . Nutrient �° ° ° ° Use o o 0 OO go O o o x .n > o o © Potential o o ° ®o © o 0 0 0 0°O Leaching o °o 0 0O ° ° O ) Potential po II ,to�® ova0G�°((7] „too ° Oa,., ® °®ec o ap ® o�o ° °.°' °. Qi '`b`et.8)(GROUNDWATER ?:a®.' o o.e� o _ ;� v® 4a®D o$©opop® I° �Ymo aVG pryvtic, ,,° n 1°` Y.0, ) oO�. A1• �V„,, coo�� . .�' O , J 0O i:1 �/ i rl`fie�a,o(. @ G �O\`�4'V i .m/ Q _° ®o®-:orb ,' /% .&ti.._l: 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 tests, 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. 20 Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Guidance Principle: 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 8. 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 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 property calibrated equipment. 3.9 Time liquid manure applications to match crop nutrient uptake patterns in order to minimize the opportunity for NO3 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 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 fitter 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 manure-soil seal when cleaning feedlots. Create a smooth surface with a 3 percent to 5 percent slope when scraping lots. 3.18 Scrape feedlots or manure storage areas down to bare earth and revegetate after they are permanently abandoned. sr f 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. 5. 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. 23 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 10.13.2000 Appendix D • Soil Testing Protocol • Process Wastewater/Stormwater besting Protocol • Solid Manure Testing Protocol • Irrigation Water Testing Protocol Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 13 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Oct-00 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. "fake 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. • I lave the laboratory evaluate the soil samples for the following parameters at a minimum: Nitrate-N Organic Matter pI I Phosphorus (P) Potassium (K) AgPro Environmental Services. LEG Oct-00 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 nil 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. 'fake the sub-samples from different sides of the retention basin. 'fake 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 Oct-00 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 Oct-00 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 10.13.2000 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 Kerbs Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 14 AgYro Environmental Services, LLC Oct-00 PRECIPITATION LOG (Record precipitation of er 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 Oct-00 Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet - Process Wastewater Application Reference material needed:Soil lest data,process wastewater 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 4 11.2 x yield goal(bu itcre)1 18 x ppm soil,RO3-NI-[0 14 x yield goal x%Qn1l. Corn Silage: N-rate-35 -[7.5 x yield goal(Ions'acre)1 -[8 x ppm soil NO3-NJ-[0.85 x yield goal x 9)O Alf 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)NH4-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 f) Total available N ([c x (1-b)] -f [d x eJ) Ib./1000 gal g) Recommended manure application rate (a tO 1000 gal/acre 5. Post-Growing Season Follow-Up Actual crop yield _(bu/acrc,ton/acre.etc.)Total irrigation water applied inches/acre or Acre-feet/acre Supplemental fertilizers applied: lbs. N/acre Total process water applied 1000 gal/acre Prepared by: Date: _ AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Oct-00 Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet - Solid Manure Application Reference material needed:Soil test data, manure lest data and(511 Bulletin No.568,1 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 +11.2 x yield goal(bO/acre)/—[8 x ppm soil NO3-181 [0.1 f x yield goal x%O.d9J. Corn Silage: N-rate =35 +17.5 x yield goal(tons/acre)]—[8.e ppm soil NO3-NJ [0.85x yield goal x%O..M./ c) Special nitrogen need above recommendations d) Total nitrogen need 3. Nitrogen Credits: N (Ib./acre) a) Residual soil nitrate credit* (3.6 lb. N per ppm NO3-N (l ft. sample)) b) Irrigation water credit(2.7 lb. N pr acre-foot x ppm NO,-N) c) Organic matter credit* (30 lbs. N per% O.M.) d) Previous legume crop (see Table I 1 in CSU Bulletin No. 568A) e) Other: t) 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(Ib./acre) b) Expected Ammonium-N volatilization c)NH4-N available from solid manure - lb./ton d) Expected mineralization rate for Organic-N e) Organic-N available from solid manure lb./ton 0 Total available N ([c x {I-b)J + 1-(1)c 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 Oct-00 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 Time Meter Gallons Pressure water Date Time Elapsed Reading Pumped being @ Pump end Person setting? pumped rows? (Y/N) Pumping (Y/N) Calculation: (1) Total Gallons Pumped: (2) Total Acres in Field: (3) Gallons per Acre Pumped: [Line I r Line 2] (4) Plant Available Nitrogen in Effluent: lb./1000 gal [Line 4f from Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet-Process Wastewater Application] (5) Plant Available Nitrogen Applied: lb./Acre [(Line 4 *Line 3) =1000] AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Oct-00 SOLID MANURE APPLICATION LOG (Record manure application data every day when applying solid manure.) Facility Name: Year: Field I.D.: Crop: Initials of #Of loads Average tare-weight Total pounds Total tons Tons per Date Person hauled of loads hauled(lbs.) hauled hauled acre applied Applying r Calculation: (l) Total Tons Applied: (2) Total Acres in Field: (3) Tons per Acre Applied: [Line ! =Line 2] (4) Plant Available Nitrogen in Solid Manure: lb./ton[Line 41from Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet—Solid Manure Application] (5) Plant Available Nitrogen Applied: lb./Acre [Line 4 *Line 3] AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Oct-00 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 Oct-00 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 sewage 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: Kerbs Dairy 25-year, 24-hour Storm Event and Pond Capacity Calculations 25-year,24-hour event Proposed w/ Current Expansion Applicable Storm Event for Location,inches 3.00 3.00 SCS Runoff Curve Number 90 90 (90 for unsurfaced lots) (97 for outfaced lots) Surface Area of Drainage Basins,acres 12 65 (Separate different drainage areas) (Include pens, alleys, mill areas, working areas, etc.) Inches of Runoff using SCS Runoff Curve Factor 1.98 1.98 Minimum Retention Capacity Required,Acre-Ft. 2.0 10.7 Cubic-Ft. 86,249 467,181 Surface Area of Retention Structures, Acres 2.4 11.2 Additional Volume Required,Acre-Ft. 0.6 2.8 Additional Volume Required,ft3 26,169 122,071 Total Retention Structure Volume Required, Acre-Ft. 2.6 13.5 Total Retention Structure Volume Required,ft3 112,418 589,252 Total Retention Structure Volume Available,Acre-Ft. 12.1 63.7 Lagoon Capacities Main Pond Pond#1 Pond#2 Pond#3 New Pond-Settling New Pond Evap Pond Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Vol. For Area @ depth, Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment Area @ Increment, Area @ Increment Depth, ft ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 , ft3 depth, ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 , ft3_ 0 26,144 2,068 1,760 963 5,424 94,944 114,736 _1 30,536 28,340 2,800 2,434 2,408 2,084 1,624 1,294 8,243 _ 6,834 101.616 98,280 120,977 117,857 2 35,000 32,768 3,600 3,200 3,124 2,766 2.423 2,024 11,128 9,686 108,416 105,016 127,338 _ 124,158 3 39,536 37,268 4,466 4,033 3,906 3,515 3,352 2,888 _ 14,078 _ 12,603 115,344 111,880 133,820 130,579 4 44,144 41,840 5,397 4,932 4,753 4,330 4,483 3,918 17,094 15,586 122,400 118,872 140,424 137,122 - 5 48,823 46,484 6,393 5,895 5,665 _ 5,209 5,769 5,126 20,174 18,634 129,584 _ 125,992 147,149 _ 143,787 6 53,568 51,196 7,494 6,944 6,642 6,154 7,133 6,451 _ 23.320 21,747 136,896 133,240 153,995 150,572 7 58,378 55,973 26,531 _ 24,926 144,335 140,616 _ 8 63,254 60,816 - 29,806 _ 28,169 151,896 148,116 9 68,194 65,724 _ 159,578 155,737 _ 10 73,200 70,697 167,382 163,480 11 78,270 75,735 _ _ 175,306 171,344 12 83,406 80,838 _ 183,352 179,329 13 191,519 187,436 _ 14 199,806 195,663 Total Volume,ft' 647,678 27,437 24,057 21,699 138,183 2,034,999 804,074 Total Volume,Acre-Ft. 14.87 0.63 0.55 0.50 3.17 46.72 18.46 Vol.WI 2 freeboard,ft3 491,105 14,599 12,695 10,122 85,089 1,651,901 509,715 Vol.wl 2 freeboard,Acre-Ft. 11.27 0.34 0.29 0.23 1.95 37.92 11.70 Kerbs Dairy Stormwater/Process Wastewater Accumulation Table(Current Lagoons) init.Volume Process Water Generated,GPD= 12.500 Pond Surface Area,ft2= 104,675 Evaporation Area,ft°= 63,456 0 Precip.* Percent Runoff Area Total Runoff Lake Evap. Evap.Area Total Evap. Process-H20 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 0.49 5.0% 28 0.16 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.18 118 Feb 0.37 5.0% 28 0.12 1.58 1.46 0.19 1.07 1.00 2.18 Mar ' 1.13 5.0% 28 a36 2.48 1.46 0.30 1.19 1.25 3.43 Apr 1.80 7.0% 28 0.65 4.05 1.46 0.49 1.15 1.31 4.74 May 2.47 17.0% 28 1.47 5.40 1.46 0.66 1.19 2.01 6.75 Jun 1.83 15.0% 28 1.01 6.53 1.46 0.79 1.15 1.37 0.6 7.51 7.60 Jul 1.48 14.0% 28 0.78 6.75 1.46 0.82 1.19 1.15 1.2 7.46 Aug 1.15 12.0% 28 0.55 6.08 1.46 0.74 1.19 1.00 1 7.47 Sep 1.16 12.0% 28 0.56 4.50 1.46 0.55 1.15 1.16 1.2 7.43 Oct 1.00 10.0% 28 0.43 3.15 1.46 0.38 1.19 1.24 1.2 7.47 Nov 0.82 5.0% 28 0.26 1.80 1.46 0.22 1.15 1.19 1.2 7.46 Dec 0.45 5.0% 28 a14 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.17 1.2 7.43 Jan 0.49 5.0% 28 0.16 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.18 1.2 7.41 Feb 0.37 5.0% 28 0.12 1.58 1.46 0.19 1.07 1.00 0.9 7.51 Mar 1.13 5.0% 28 0.36 2.48 1.46 0.30 1.19 1.25 1.3 7.46 Apr 1.80 7.0% 28 0.65 4.05 1.46 0.49 1.15 1.31 1.3 7.47 May 2.47 17.0% 28 1.47 5.40 1.46 0.66 1.19 2.01 2.0 7.48 Jun 1.83 15.0% 28 1.01 6.53 1.46 0.79 1.15 1.37 1.4 7.44 15.00 Jul 1.48 14.0% 28 0.78 6.75 1.46 0.82 1.19 1.15 1.1 7.49 Aug 1.15 12.0% 28 0.55 6.08 146 0.74 1.19 1.00 1.0 7.50 Sep 1.16 12.0% 28 0.56 4.50 1.46 0.55 1.15 1.16 1.2 7.46 Oct 1.00 10.0% 28 0.43 3.15 1.46 0.38 1.19 1.24 1.2 7.50 Nov 0.82 5.0% 28 0.26 1.80 1.46 0.22 1.15 1.19 1.2 7.49 Dec 0.45 5.0% 28 0.14 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.17 1.2 7.46 Jan 0.49 5.0% 28 0.16 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.18 1.2 7.44 Feb 0.37 5.0% 28 0.12 1.58 1.46 0.19 1.07 1.00 1.0 7.44 Mar 1.13 5.0% 28 0.36 2.48 1.46 0.30 1.19 1.25 1.2 7.49 Apr 1.80 7.0% 28 0.65 4.05 1.46 0.49 1.15 1.31 1.3 7.50 May 2.47 17.0% 28 1.47 5.40 1.46 0.66 1.19 2.01 2.0 7.51 Jun 1.83 15.0% 28 1.01 6.53 1.46 0.79 1.15 1.37 1.4 7.47 15.00 Jul 1.48 14.0% 28 0.78 6.75 1.46 0.82 1.19 1.15 1.2 7.42 Aug 1.15 12.0% 28 0.55 6.08 1.46 0.74 1.19 1.00 1.0 7.43 Sep 1.16 12.0% 28 0.56 4.50 1.46 0.55 1.15 1.16 1.1 7.49 Oct 1.00 10.0% 28 0.43 3.15 1.46 0.38 119 1.24 1.3 7.43 Nov 0.82 5.0% 28 0.26 1.80 1.46 0.22 115 1.19 1.2 7.42 Dec 0.45 5.0% 28 0.14 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.17 1.1 7.49 Jan 0.49 5.0% 28 0.16 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.18 1.2 7.47 Feb 0.37 5.0% 28 0.12 1.58 1.46 0.19 1.07 1.00 1.0 7,47 Mar 1.13 5.0% 28 0.36 2.48 1.46 0.30 1.19 1.25 1.3 7.41 Apr 1.80 7.0% 28 a65 4.05 1.46 0.49 1.15 1.31 1.3 7.43 May 2.47 17.0% 28 1.47 5.40 1.46 0.66 1.19 2.01 2.0 7.44 Jun 1.83 15.0% 28 1.01 6.53 1.46 0.79 1.15 1.37 1.3 7.50 15.10 Jul 1.48 14.0% 28 0.78 6.75 1.46 0.82 1.19 1.15 1.2 7.45 Aug 1.15 12.0% 28 a55 6.08 1.46 0.74 1.19 1.00 1.0 7.45 Sep 1.16 12.0% 28 0.56 4.50 1.46 0.55 1.15 1.16 1.2 7.42 Oct 1.00 10.0% 28 0.43 3.15 1.46 a38 1.19 1.24 1.2 7.46 Nov 0.82 5.0% 28 0.26 1.80 1.46 0.22 1.15 1.19 1.2 7.45 Dec 0.45 5.0% 28 a14 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.17 1.2 7.42 Jan 0.49 5.0% 28 0.16 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.18 1.1 7.50 Feb 0.37 5.0% 28 a12 1.58 1.46 0.19 1.07 1.00 1.0 7.50 Mar 1.13 5.0% 28 0.36 2.48 1.46 0.30 1.19 1.25 1.3 7.44 Apr 1.80 7.0% 28 a65 4.05 1.46 0.49 1.15 1.31 1.3 7.46 May 2.47 17.0% 28 1.47 5.40 1.46 0.66 1.19 2.01 2.0 7.47 Jun 1.83 15.0% 28 1.01 6.53 1.46 0.79 1.15 1.37 1.4 7.43 15.00 Jul 1.48 14.0% 28 0.78 6.75 1.46 0.82 1.19 1.15 1.1 7.48 Aug 1.15 12.0% 28 a55 6.08 1.46 0.74 1.19 1.00 1.0 T48 Sep 1.16 12.0% 28 0.56 4.50 1.46 0.55 1.15 1.16 1.2 7.45 Oct 1.00 10.0% 28 0.43 3.15 1.46 a38 1.19 1.24 1.2 7.49 Nov 0.82 5.0% 28 0.26 1.80 1.46 0.22 1.15 1.19 1.2 7.48 Dec 0.45 5.0% 28 0.14 1.35 1.46 0.16 1.19 1.17 1.2 7.45 Maximum Volume Pumped= 15.1 Average Volume in Pond= 7,14 Maximum Volume in Pond= 7.51 "Precipitation for Greeley,CO,NOAA "SCS,National Engineering Handbook "*Evaporation for Greeley,CO, NOAA Kerbs Dairy Stormwater/Process Wastewater Accumulation Table(w/Additional Lagoon) Init.Volume Process Water Generated,GPD= 20,000 Pond Surface Area,H2= 488,282 Evaporation Area,fd= 362,785 35 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 0.49 5.0% 65 0.59 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.56 36.56 Feb 0.37 5.0% 65 0.45 1.58 8.33 1.10 1.72 1.07 37.62 Mar 1.13 5.0% 65 1.36 2.48 8.33 1.72 1.90 1.54 39.17 Apr 1.80 7.0% 65 2.36 4.05 8.33 2.81 1.84 1.39 40.56 May 2.47 17.0% 65 4.58 5.40 8.33 3.75 1.90 2.74 43.30 Jun 1.83 15.0% 65 3.20 6.53 8.33 4.53 1.84 0.51 43.80 Jul 1.48 14.0% 65 2.50 6.75 8.33 4.68 1.90 (0.28) 43.53 Aug 1.15 12.0% 65 1.82 6.08 8.33 4.22 1.90 (0.50) 43.03 Sep 1.16 12.0% 65 1.84 4.50 8.33 3.12 1,84 0.56 43.59 Oct 1.00 10.0% 65 1.48 3.15 8.33 2.19 1.90 1.19 44,78 Nov 0.82 5.0% 65 0.99 1.80 8.33 1.25 1.84 1.58 46.36 Dec 0.45 5.0% 65 0.54 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.51 47.87 Jan 0.49 5.0% 65 0.59 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.56 49.43 Feb 0.37 5.0% 65 0.45 1.58 8.33 1.10 1.72 1.07 0.3 50.19 Mar 1.13 5.0% 65 1.36 2.48 8.33 1.72 1.90 1.54 1.6 50.14 Apr 1.80 7.0% 65 2.36 4.05 8.33 2.81 1.84 1.39 1.4 50.13 May 2.47 17.0% 65 4.58 5.40 8.33 3.75 1.90 2.74 2.7 50.17 Jun 1.83 15.0% 65 3.20 6.53 8.33 4.53 1.84 0.51 0.5 50.17 10.60 Jul 1.48 14.0% 65 2.50 6.75 8.33 4.68 1.90 (0.28) 49.90 Aug 1.15 12.0% 65 1.82 6.08 8.33 4.22 1.90 (0.50) 49.40 Sep 1.16 12.0% 65 1.84 4.50 8.33 3.12 1.84 0.56 49,96 Oct 1.00 10.0% 65 1.48 3.15 8.33 2.19 1.90 1.19 1.0 50.15 Nov 0.82 5.0% 65 0.99 1.80 8.33 1.25 1.84 1.58 1.6 50.13 Dec 0.45 5.0% 65 0.54 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.51 1.5 50.14 Jan 0.49 5.0% 65 0.59 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.56 1.5 50.19 Feb 0.37 5.0% 65 0.45 1.58 8.33 1.10 1.72 1.07 1.1 50.16 Mar 1.13 5.0% 65 1.36 2.48 8.33 1.72 1.90 1.54 1.5 50.21 Apr 1.80 7.0% 65 2.36 4.05 8.33 2.81 1.84 1.39 1.4 50.20 May 2.47 17.0% 65 4.58 5.40 8.33 3.75 1.90 2.74 2.8 50.14 Jun 1.83 15.0% 65 3.20 6.53 8.33 4.53 1.84 0.51 0.5 50.14 12.80 Jul 1.48 14.0% 65 2.50 6.75 8.33 4.68 1.90 (0.28) 49.87 Aug 1.15 12.0% 65 1.82 6.08 8.33 4.22 1.90 (0.50) 49.37 Sep 1.16 12.0% 65 1.84 4.50 8.33 3.12 1.84 0.56 49.93 Oct 1.00 10.0% 65 1.48 3.15 8.33 2.19 1.90 1.19 1.0 50.12 Nov 0.82 5.0% 65 0.99 1.80 8.33 1.25 1.84 1.58 1.5 50.20 Dec 0.45 5.0% 65 0.54 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.51 1.5 50.21 Jan 0.49 5.0% 65 0.59 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.56 1.6 50.16 Feb 0.37 5.0% 65 0.45 1.58 8.33 1.10 1.72 1.07 1.1 50.13 Mar 1.13 5.0% 65 1.36 2.48 8.33 1.72 1.90 1.54 1.5 50.17 Apr 1.80 7.0% 65 2.36 4.05 8.33 2.81 1.84 1.39 1.4 50.17 May 2.47 17,0% 65 4.58 5.40 8.33 3.75 1.90 2.74 2.7 50.21 Jun 1.83 15.0% 65 3.20 6.53 8.33 4.53 1.84 0.51 0.5 50.21 12.90 Jul 1.48 14.0% 65 2.50 6.75 8.33 4.68 1.90 (0.28) 49.93 Aug 1.15 12.0% 65 1.82 6.08 8.33 4.22 1.90 (0.50) 49.44 Sep 1.16 12.0% 65 1.84 4.50 8.33 3.12 1.84 0.56 50.00 Oct 1.00 10.0% 65 1.48 3.15 8.33 2.19 1.90 1.19 1.0 50.19 Nov 0.82 5.0% 65 0.99 1.80 8.33 1.25 1.84 1.58 1.6 50.17 Dec 0.45 5.0% 65 0.54 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.51 1.5 50.18 Jan 0.49 5.0% 65 0.59 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.56 1.6 50.13 Feb 0.37 5.0% 65 0.45 1.58 8.33 1.10 1.72 1.07 1.0 50.20 Mar 1.13 5.0% 65 1.36 2.48 8.33 1.72 1.90 1.54 1.6 50.14 Apr 1.80 7.0% 65 2.36 4.05 8.33 2.81 1.84 1.39 1.4 50.14 May 2.47 17.0% 65 4.58 5.40 8.33 3.75 1.90 2.74 2.7 50.18 Jun 1.83 15.0% 65 3.20 6.53 8.33 4.53 1.84 0.51 0.5 50.18 12.90 Jul 1.48 14.0% 65 2.50 6.75 8.33 4.68 1.90 (0.28) 49.90 Aug 1.15 12.0% 65 1.82 6.08 8.33 4.22 1.90 (0.50) 49.41 Sep 1.16 12.0% 65 1.84 4.50 8.33 3.12 1.84 0.56 49.96 Oct 1.00 10.0% 65 1.48 3.15 8.33 2.19 1.90 1.19 1.0 50.16 Nov 0.82 5.0% 65 0.99 1.80 8.33 1.25 1.84 1.58 1.6 50.14 Dec 0.45 5.0% 65 0.54 1.35 8.33 0.94 1.90 1.51 1.5 50.15 Maximum Volume Pumped= 12.9 Average Volume in Pond= 48.54 Maximum Volume in Pond= 50/1 *Precipitation for Greeley,CO,NOAA "SCS,National Engineering Handbook r"Evaporation for Greeley,CO,NOAA Kerbs Dairy Land Application Requirements for Average Years' Process Wastewater(Current Lagoons) Maximum pumping requirement( 15.1 A.F.), gallons 4,920,015 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 19,680 *Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 9,840 "NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 9,840 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation, lbs. 5,412 45% Sprinkler Irrigation loss* Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year, lbs. 4,133 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N" Nitrogen available to plants (PAN) 1st yr., lbs. 9,545 Soil Organic Matter, % 1.0 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 177 157 Bulletin#538 Acres req. if effluent applied via flood irrigation 54 61 *Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Land Application Requirements for 25-year, 24-hour Storm 25-year, 24-hour storm volume( 13.5 A.F.), gallons 4,407,601 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 17,630 *Total-N= 4 lbs/1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 8,815 "NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 8,815 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation, lbs. 4,848 45% Sprinkler Irrigation loss* Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year, lbs. 3,702 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N" Nitrogen available to plants (PAN) 1st yr., lbs. 8,551 Soil Organic Matter, % 1.0 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 177 157 Bulletin#538 Acres req. if effluent applied via flood irrigation 48 54 *Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Land Application Requirements for Average Years' Process Wastewater (w/Additional Lagoon) Maximum pumping requirement ( 12.9 A.F.), gallons 4,203,192 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 16,813 *Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 8,406 "NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 8,406 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation, lbs. 4,624 45% Sprinkler Irrigation loss* Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year, lbs. 3,531 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N* Nitrogen available to plants(PAN) 1st yr., lbs. 8,154 Soil Organic Matter, % 1.0 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 177 157 Bulletin#538 Acres req. if effluent applied via flood irrigation 46 52 *Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Kerbs 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 250 3 750 Miscellaneous Equipment 100 3 300 Parlor Floor Flush 1500 6 9000 Milk Floor 100 3 300 Holding Pen Wash 1000 3 3000 Total Daily Flow(GPD) 13,550 Design Factor 1.5 Design Flow(GPD) 20,000 Annual Flow(Acre-Feet) 22.40 Kerbs Dairy Manure Production and Associated Nutrients NRCS Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook Moisture Manure Manure TS VS Nitrogen Prosphorus Potassium Number of (lbs./day/ (ft3/day/ (lbs. I day/ (lbs. /day I (lbs./day I (lbs. /day! (lbs. /day/ Animal Type Hd Wt/hd,lbs. Total Wt.,lbs. (%) 1000#) 1000# 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) 1000#) Milk Cows 2,500 1,400 3,500,000 87.5 80.0 1.30 10.00 8.50 0.45 0.07 0.26 Dry Cows 300 1,200 360,000 88.4 82.0 1.30 9.50 8.10 0.36 0.05 0.23 Heifers 550 1,000 550,000 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Heifers 550 500 275,000 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Calves 550 250 137,500 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Calves 550 150 82,500 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Totals 5,000 4,905,000 Total Daily Production 398,345 I 6,377 47,971 40,786 2,029 305 1,244 Total Annual Production, 145,395,925 2,327,423 17,509,525 14,886,762 740,421 111,252 453,914 Tons produced w/moisture content of 88% 72,698 Tons to apply w/moisture content of 46% 16,155 Hello