The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20011936.tiff 4311 Hwy 66, Suite 4, Longmont, CO 80504 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC COCKROFT DAIRY 27906 Weld County Rd 388 Kersey, Colorado 80644 Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan Prepared by: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 4311 Hwy 66, Suite 4 Longmont, CO 80504 March 15, 2001 2001-1936 EXHIBIT Your "Pro Ag" Environmental Professionals I / 3 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 03.15.2001 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 CONTACTS AND AUTHORIZED PERSONS 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 3 SITE DESCRIPTION 4 FACILITY 4 MAPS 4 STORMWATER AND PROCESS WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT 4 SURFACE RUNOFF 4 PROCESS WASTEWATER 5 FLOODPLAINS 5 LAND APPLICATION OF STORMWATER/PROCESS WASTEWATER 5 AVERAGE YEARS' STORMWATER/ PROCESS WASTEWATER APPLICATION 6 Sustainability 7 SOLID MANURE MANAGEMENT 7 LAND APPLICATION OF SOLID MANURE 8 NUTRIENT UTILIZATION 8 SOIL TESTING 9 IRRIGATION WATER TESTING 9 MANURE, COMPOST AND STORM WATER TESTING 9 AGRONOMIC CALCULATIONS 9 RECORD KEEPING 10 INSPECTIONS 10 LIMITATIONS 10 Appendix A 11 Appendix B 12 Appendix C 13 Appendix D 14 Appendix E 15 Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 2 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Introduction This Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) has been developed and implemented to comply with requirements, conditions and limitations of the Colorado "Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation" 4.8.0 (5 CCR 1002-19). This CNMP outlines current site conditions, structures and areas requiring management of solid manure, stormwater run-off and process wastewater. This CNMP will be kept on-site and amended prior to any change in design, construction, operation or maintenance which significantly increases the potential for discharge of solid manure, stormwater run-off and process wastewater to waters of the State. This CNMP shall be amended if it is ineffective in controlling discharges from the facility. Below is the date of the last CNMP amendment: Amendment I: Amendment 2: Amendment 3: Amendment 4: Cockroft Dairy will keep records relating to the CNMP onsite for a minimum of three years. Contacts and Authorized Persons Mr. Loren Cockroft or Mr. Scott Cockroft 27906 Weld County Rd 388 27906 Weld County Rd 388 Kersey, CO 80644 Kersey, CO 80644 (970) 353-3299 (970) 353-3299 The individual(s) at this facility who is (are) responsible for developing and implementation, maintenance and revision of this CNMP are listed below: Loren Cockroft Owner (Name) (Title) Scott Cockroft Owner (Name) (Title) Legal Description The legal description of Cockroft Dairy is: Part of the NE'/4 of Section 15, and part of the SEA of Section 10, Township 5 North. Range 64 West, Weld County, Colorado. Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 3 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15. 001 Site Description Facility Cockroft Dairy is an existing dairy facility located north of the South Platte River and on both sides of Weld County Road 388, with most of the operation on the south side. Dairy construction is industry-typical steel and wood posts, pipe and cable fence, concrete feed aprons and feed bunks, feed alleys and cow movement alleys, feed storage areas and associated storage structures and maintenance facilities, waste management and control structures. Cockroft Dairy is updating the waste management system and proposing to add some capacity. The ultimate maximum capacity at Cockroft Dairy will be 1,350 head including approximately 900 milking and the balance made up of dry cows and young stock. Cattle numbers fluctuate throughout the year as calves are born, and cattle are bought and sold. However, the average number of cattle at the facility is expected to be approximately 1,350 head. Farm ground surrounds the facility. Maps The maps described below are included in Appendix A. Topographic Map The Topographical Location Map shows the location of Cockroft Dairy, surrounding sites, topography and major drainages. Site Layout— Current Conditions The Site Layout—Current Conditions Map details the configuration of the existing dairy. Site Layout—Proposed Conditions The Site Layout— Proposed Conditions Map details the changes proposed for the dairy. Soils Map The USDA Soil Survey map details the area's soil types. Also included are detailed soil descriptions. Stormwater and Process Wastewater Management Surface Runoff Cockroft Dairy controls stormwater with a retention pond located on the south side of the dairy (see Site Layout in Appendix A). Cockroft Dairy will monitor the site and maintain appropriate diversion structures to ensure runoff enters the stormwater collection system. Cockroft Dairy is adding storage volume north of the dairy at the top of the primary land application field. The dairy will pump wastewater to the additional storage structures. Cockroft Dairy is also constructing a small stormwater pond on the north side of Rd 388 to contain runoff from the feed storage area and calf huts. The 25-year, 24-hour storm event for the area north of Kersey, 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 12 acres of dairy area, this results in approximately 2.0 acre- feet of runoff generated at Cockroft Dairy during a 25-year event. The amount falling directly on the retention ponds is 0.52 acre-feet. The existing retention structure south of the milk parlor contains approximately 1.8 acre-feet when accounting for the required two feet of freeboard. The existing structure will contain approximately 3.2 acre-feet if filled to the top-of-berm. The new process wastewater structures 'h mile north of the dairy will contain approximately 3.2 acre- Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 4 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 03.15.2001 feet when accounting for two feet of freeboard. The new stormwater pond will contain approximately 0.51 acre-feet when accounting for two feet of freeboard. Calculations for the 25- year storm and pond capacities are in Appendix B. Cockroft is installing a pumping system in the current containment pond south of the milk parlor that will automatically pump to the new structures 1/2 mile north of the dairy. The pump will be designed to have an adequate pumping capacity so that it will keep the existing structure pumped down to a liquid level of 1.5 feet. Cockroft Dairy will maintain the lagoon system to contain a 25-year, 24-hour storm event. Should stormwater runoff elevate the lagoons beyond 50% of the designed 25-year, 24-hour containment level, the system will be dewatered within 15 days to achieve the required retention capacity as outlined in the Colorado Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation. Pumping to surrounding farm ground dewaters the lagoons. Cockroft Dairy has available approximately 200 acres of flood-irrigated farm ground for land application of stormwater. The land application areas are located adjacent to the dairy north and northeast. Process Wastewater Cockroft Dairy generates process wastewater within the milking parlor. It is estimated that Cockroft Dairy generates a maximum of 7,000 gallons of process wastewater per day at maximum capacity. A table summarizes the process wastewater in Appendix B. Dairy parlor floors and walls, milking equipment,pipelines, and tanks are washed with fresh water. Wastewater flows via a pipe system to the south into a concrete weeping dam system and then into the main lagoon. Cockroft Dairy plans to install a pump in the lagoon and pump wastewater to the newly constructed storage structures '/ mile north of the dairy. The new storage structures will be a two-stage system with the first stage being solids settling and the second stage maximizing evaporation and minimizing the amount to be land applied. A pond capacity table is located in Appendix B. The proposed process wastewater lagoons to the north 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. Floodplains AgPro Environmental Services, LLC, has reviewed the Weld County FEMA maps and determined that the extreme south portion of Cockroft Dairy is in the floodplain. Cockroft Dairy proposes to raise the existing flood-control berm to a height that will alleviate flood danger. See the Site Layout —Proposed Conditions map for information on the proposed final height of the flood-control berm. Land Application of Stormwater/Process Wastewater Stormwater/process wastewater is pumped, or gravity fed, from the retention ponds onto farm ground in accordance with the Colorado CAFO regulations, "tier two" land application requirements. Cockroft Dairy has, on site, adequate pumping equipment to dewater the lagoons. The primary application area for stormwater/process wastewater is irrigated land north of the dairy consisting of approximately 65 acres. Cockroft Dairy has another 135 acres available if needed. Table I below shows the land necessary to utilize nutrients from a 25-year, 24-hour storm. The nitrogen content and losses are based on Colorado State Cooperative Extension Bulletin No. 568A, Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization. The calculation in Table Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 5 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 1 indicates that Cockroft Dairy requires approximately 13 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( 2.5 A.F.),gallons 814,782 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 3,259 'Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 1,630 'NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid, lbs. 1,630 Organic-N= 2 lbs/1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation, lbs. 1,263 22.5% Flood-Irrigation loss' Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year, lbs. 684 42% Equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr. after yr.,lbs. 1,947 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content,ppm 2.0 Residual NO3 in soil, ppm 5.5 Corn Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre, silage,tons/acre) 175 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.,soil N, 8 Irr.Water NO3, (lb./acre) 168 149 Bulletin#538 Acres req. if effluent applied via flood irrigation 12 13 1.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization During process wastewater application, Cockroft Dairy monitors the process so that runoff of process wastewater does not occur. Cockroft Dairy will utilize tail water structures during application of process wastewater via flood irrigation. Cockroft Dairy does not apply process wastewater on frozen ground or during rainfall events. Average Years' Stormwater / Process Wastewater Application Two five-year wastewater generation estimates are outlined in Appendix B. The tables estimate the average annual amount of wastewater to be land applied. The tables estimate land application amounts by maintaining enough capacity to contain a 25-year, 24-hour storm. The tables combine the volume of normal precipitation, runoff and process wastewater and account for the following: • Average monthly precipitation values from local weather data • Average monthly lake-evaporation data from local weather data • Process wastewater generation rate of 7,000 GPD • Evaporation area equal to the surface area of the primary south pond with 1-/ foot of water, the new solids settling basin when full, the new secondary structure one-half full, and the new stormwater pond with one-half foot of water • Dairy drainage area of 10 acres south of Rd 388 and 2 acres north of Rd 388 • Runoff percentage from NRCS National Engineering Handbook • Trial-and-error pumping amounts to maintain capacity for a 25-year, 24-hour storm The calculation tables show that annual land application of approximately 7.06 acre-feet of process wastewater will maintain capacity for a 25-year, 24-hour storm. Table 2 below shows the land necessary to utilize the nutrients from 7.06 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 Cockroft Dairy requires approximately 37 acres of corn to utilize the nitrogen contained in 7.06 acre-feet of stormwater/process wastewater. Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 6 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Table 2 - Average Years' Land Application Requirements Maximum pumping requirement( 7.06 A.F.),gallons 2,300,351 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 9,201 'Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 4,601 -NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 4,601 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 3,566 22.5% Flood-Irrigation loss' Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 1,932 42% Equilibnum mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr_ lbs. 5,498 Soil Organic Matter, °/ 1.0 Irrigation Water NO3 content, ppm 2.0 Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 5.5 Corn Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre; silage,tons/acre) 175 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.,soil N.&Irr.Water NO3, (lb./acre) 168 149 Bulletin#538 Acres req.if effluent applied via flood irrigation 33 37 1.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed 'Taken from CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Sustainability Note that the above calculations show organic nitrogen mineralization and residual accumulation when stormwater/process wastewater occurs on the same fields every year. The calculations utilize an equilibrium mineralization rate for organic nitrogen of 42 percent. This represents the cumulative organic nitrogen released over three years. The above two tables indicate that Cockroft Dairy has enough available land (200 acres) to assimilate nutrients produced in stormwater/process wastewater year after year. Solid Manure Management Cockroft 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. Cockroft Dairy cleans pens at least annually. Manure is removed and utilized by Cockroft Dairy on its own land or land that they farm. Cockroft Dairy land applies solid manure on the property it controls utilizing "tier two" criteria in the state CAFO regulations. Manure, compost and soil testing is covered later in this CNMP. Cockroft Dairy has approximately 200 irrigated-acres of its own land- as well as 1,000 acres of additional land that they farm available for land application of solid manure. Table 3 below calculates the amount of manure produced and the associated nutrients on an "as excreted basis". In addition, 'as-hauled' weight is calculated accounting for predictable moisture losses. The calculations are based on NRCS Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, for various size dairy cattle and an average capacity of 900 lactating cows. Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 7 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Table 3 - Manure Production NRCS Ag Waste Management Field Handbook Moisture Manure Manure TS VS Nitrogen Prosphorus Potassium Number of Wi/hd, (lbs./day/ (fl°/day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs.I day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs./day/ (lbs./day/ Animal Type HO Ibs. Total Wt..lbs. (%) 1000#) 10004 10004) 1000#) 10004) 1000#) 1000#) Milk Cows 900 1,400 1,260,000 87.5 80.0 1.30 10.00 8.50 0.45 0.07 0.26 Dry Cows 95 1,200 114,000 88.4 82.0 1.30 9.50 8.10 . 0.36 0 O5 0.23 Springers 95 900 85,500 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Heifers 95 500 47,500 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Calves 85 250 21,250 89.3 85.0 ' 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Calves 80 150 12.000 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Totals 1.350 1.540.250 Total Daily Production 124.279 2,002 15,203 12,925 660 101 394 Total Annual Production 45.361,926 730,849 5.548,922 4,717,684 240.746 36.701 143,708 Tons produced w/moisture content of 88°/n 22,681 Tons to apply w/moisture content of 46% 5,040 Land Application of Solid Manure Table 4 below is generated to estimate the land required to assimilate the nitrogen from the manure produced annually at Cockroft Dairy. Table 4 also assumes that no solid manure is lost during rain events into the stormwater retention ponds or in the milk parlor during milking. Therefore, Tables 2 and 4 are not additive. The table utilizes values from CSU's Bulletin Nos. 538, Fertilizing Corn and 568A, Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization. Table 4 shows that Cockroft Dairy requires approximately 500 acres of corn to assimilate the nitrogen from the manure produced annually. Table 4 - Land Requirements for Solid Manure Nitrogen produced annually, 100% used.rest given away,lbs. 240,746 Nitrogen loss during storage 8 handling,Ibs. 120,373 50% 'lost as ammonia in open lot Total Nitrogen in manure before application,lbs. 120.373 Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in manure.lbs. 46.344 *NH,-N= 39% of total N in solid manure Organic-Nitrogen contained in manure,lbs. 74,029 'Organic-N= 62% of total N in solid manure NH4-N available after spreading(no incorporation),lbs. 35,916 'NH,--N loss= 23% within 4 days of application Organic-Nitrogen available 3rd year,lbs. 40.716 55% Equilibnum mineralization rate for organic-N' Nitrogen available to plants(PAN)yr.after yr.,lbs. 76,632 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Inigation Water NO3 content,ppm 2.0 Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 5.5 Corn Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre;silage,tons/acre) 175 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.8 residual soil N,lb./acre 168 149 Bulletin#538 Acres req.if effluent applied via flood irrigation 455 514 1.5 A.F./Acre Irrigation water assumed 'Taken from Table 4 of CSU's Bulletin Na. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization Nutrient Utilization Nitrogen is the element that most often limits plant growth. Nitrogen is naturally abundant. However, it is the nutrient most frequently limiting crop production because the plant available forms of nitrogen in the soil are constantly undergoing transformation. Crops remove more nitrogen than any other nutrient from the soil. The limitation is not related to the total amount of nitrogen available but the form the crop can use. Most nitrogen in plants is in the organic form and is incorporated into amino acids. By weight, nitrogen makes up from I 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 Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 8 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 plant ages the reverse is true. Under favorable conditions for plant growth, soil microorganisms generally convert ammonium to nitrate, so nitrates generally are more abundant when growing conditions are most favorable. Manure and process wastewater is most typically applied for fertilizers and soil amendments to produce crops. Generally, manure and process wastewater is applied to crops that are most responsive to nitrogen inputs. The primary objective of applying agricultural by-products to land is to recycle part of the plant nutrients contained in the by-product material into harvestable plant forage or dry matter. Another major objective in returning wastes to the land is enhancing the receiving soil's organic matter content. As soils are cultivated, the organic matter in the soil decreases. Throughout several years of continuous cultivation in which crop residue returns are low, organic matter content in most soil decreases dramatically. This greatly decreases the soil's ability to hold essential plant nutrients. Land application of Cockroft Dairy's stormwater/process wastewater and solid manure to recycle valuable nutrients is a practical, commonly accepted best management practice given that fertilization rates are applicable and that deep soil leaching does not occur. Reference material from Colorado State University is included in Appendix C of this CNMP for use by the operator in making sound decisions pertaining to the land application of process wastewater and/or solid manure. Soil Testing The purpose of soil sampling is to ensure that the quantity of nutrients later applied to the soil will not lead to undesirable nutrient levels in the soil. Knowledge of nitrogen and other nutrients present in the soil, combined with specific crops and realistic yield goals, are key for calculating appropriate manure and/or stormwater application rates. Cockroft Dairy will test soil on land application areas annually using protocol in Appendix D. Irrigation Water Testing Cockroft 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. Cockroft Dairy will test stormwater/process wastewater and solid manure at least once per year following the protocol in Appendix D. Agronomic Calculations Agronomic rate is the rate at which plants will utilize nutrients while limiting the amount of nutrients that are lost via percolation through the soil or runoff. Cockroft Dairy will perform agronomic calculations for every field upon which wastewater or solid manure is applied. Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 9 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Agronomic calculations take into account: • The crop to be grown • A realistic yield goal • Total nitrogen required to meet the yield goal • Residual soil nitrate • Soil organic matter • Nitrogen content in irrigation water • Nitrogen credit from previous legume crop; and • Plant available nitrogen(PAN) in the wastewater Forms for performing agronomic calculation are in Appendix E. One agronomic calculation sheet is used for each field on which wastewater or solid manure is applied. In addition, reference materials from Colorado State Cooperative Extension is located in Appendix C, which includes nitrogen requirement information for corn, wheat and other crops commonly grown in Colorado. Record Keeping Records of each wastewater application event will be kept on the Process Wastewater Application Log and on the Solid Manure Application Log. These forms are included in Appendix E. Soil, wastewater, irrigation water and solid manure testing results will be retained for a minimum of three years. These records associated with manure and nutrient management at Cockroft Dairy will be kept with this CNMP. In addition, authorized person(s) will track precipitation at Cockroft 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 Cockroft 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. Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 10 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Appendix A • Topographic Location Map • Site Layout— Current Conditions • Site Layout—Proposed Conditions • Soils Map and Detailed Descriptions Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 11 i I , •▪ 4627 U j7 " i'` $46'3 .4627 • 0.-r. • �. 4::4625 • 3' •. • ' 4 a 1.0 u ;•• ••— \' ,1 II • u 1•( t 1,,...\] .... p6o°—\ n u• <,,T4''4.44 ' ' !\ .....1• 0510- I`• 1 V II 0/,‘,0_ N )O �� f • gyi . I i ° ii46lS 1 fOR•.. ' 4603 .�° .j 46!8 .��— +++ 6jtt-?e/' 71 �r.,., •# Q :,s :/ '`' i+ `,+sue`.O , , a' `-I. \--,• r"\.1. ..,-- ------.° 4588 1rA` ' n .� » 9 \ 4610 ^� .... 4603 c • 4598 1�,� \ `2\ -� 1 , 3TH- i 'l'■f'S • • 4551 �� \_" F.RK 2 \I b0� N1� ' I `'�- i s OQlcv � '• \ .0 '�. a \ Go � �.`_ ----�� asai.•.\ . sea ;;• Cockroft P mary ° .. �\��r n '.. Land App rea ` °�I ..:,-;,;•-••• O �_ ••\ . ""\lt \-\<\\11 4,, ' 1 • u 4S90 4590 c..>, 46 `` <\ _ Cockroft SecondaryM zrf Rr• Land App.Area "nr"\ ,. %.Ni,6 • tuft'a I .ems ' \ 1 .... rte • • ill�' `a' ` • ° L` i ..° ' • `", ! �Q _, 4570 e 4:41i Gravel P y•. • - 9t�'1144 �. _ {wsesasasrrs.° _..... ._.._ ':1 . i ° • •I IPI I T 1 r••' •i;ele 114 ••'•,� —.._.�.-•,,...i.,0,*•frr --;-4574 „yes ` . 11 i 1. UNION 22 ..__-•`'. `� _ • - amass-r�r•a �.y'�•, 214171-- °21 - panish•µ'y;7' .e — -- - _ _ sM' ,..._ "7``"_-•-'1"--<;2. 3=•.. • • �'i . Village'"•".1. 1 • ,J. 1 4597.'�'-' A, ` ' ,p i • ° : ,14603 `e 5. • • \ -u.._;600 , �J 1,/ o..00 ao II C 10' E Name: KERSEY Location. 040° 24' 15.4" N 104° 32' 15.7" W Date: 3/16/2001 Caption: COCKROFT DAIRY Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet Topographic Location Map Copyright(C)1997,Maptech,Inc. , , COCKROEt DAIRY CURRENT CONDITIONS s_ // �I. N90'oT00"f 75A09' Y (/ .. .„,c,,,, a ...7. 1�� P 1 I p ! 1 ('.4'1 +K - � IA� .. © I'I x p il°1 , my;te rtim ma 0 100 200 SCALE. I" = 200' It 7 ,I j l CONTOUR INI[RVk I I • I;) I yH l .«' Il WSW 8000-CONIPIX HMI Z L- -5>" COCKPOrT DAPY PROPOSED CONDITIONS k",,pm r _ &m.M W wf:Sqe [epii 0! �� Im:r— \ la-N-&mr IRO 4 40 - - � , - - ; Lich III _�I �� &Neu'Paint 1.050001 �//4/�// -,•r, „. 1,15bAnne ed Ms,i i4.1 u.1� I i No,0 /, fC(0 STORAGC d GU MII IR(A V ///�= II1 N. InsToral-Berm Ss • _.\ t .. .� ma n (IkoN^n•!fah'051 Al \t N \ \ 1 R � • \ Ci(1 , x I eX xr 1,, ��^`^. �,a .. it -M a -% �. } -�55 QV CAI Anr17 , pt Imoo osm55.5.4 an _ l / '11 F 0 100 200 SCALE: 1" = 200' / 'ileac COME NMSI IO H CONTOUR INTERVAL I ' [FNuO MI AI[ROLM G 451I 1577IRgYL MIWL ' GM CI 6P' /,MING riptd,oftiRot BERN / N Be 1‘50.1515.150.57,01,f4.a:a.✓.577' 4� AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Appendix B • 25-year, 24-hour storm and retention basins capacity calculation • Average Years' Process Wastewater/Stormwater Accumulation Table • Average Years' Stormwater Accumulations Table (North of Rd 388) • Process Wastewater Generation Table Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 12 Cockroft Dairy 25-year, 24-hour Storm Event and Pond Capacity Calculations 25-year, 24-hour event Feed Storage Main Dairy &Calf Huts(N. Area of Rd 388) Total Applicable Storm Event for Location, inches 3.00 3.00 3.00 SCS Runoff Curve Number 90 90 90 (90 for unsurfaced lots) (97 for surfaced lots) Surface Area of Drainage Basins, acres 10 2 12 (Separate different drainage areas) (Include pens, alleys, mill areas, working areas, etc.) Inches of Runoff using SCS Runoff Curve Factor 1.98 1.98 1.98 Minimum Retention Capacity Required, Acre-Ft. 1.7 0.3 2.0 Cubic-FL 71,874 14,375 86,249 Surface Area of Retention Structures, Acres 1.8 0.3 2.1 Additional Volume Required,Acre-Ft. 0.46 0.07 0.52 Additional Volume Required, ft3 19,828 2,851 22,679 Total Retention Structure Volume Required,Acre-Ft. 2.1 0.40 2.5 Total Retention Structure Volume Required, ft3 91,702 17,226 108,928 Total Retention Structure Volume Available, Acre-Ft. 4.9 0.51 5.5 Lagoon Capacities • Existing Primary Pond Proposed Setting Process Pond Proposed Main Process Pond Proposed Stormwater Pond Vol. For Vol. For Area @ depth, Increment, Area @ Increment, Area @ Vol. For Area @ Vol. For Depth, ft ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 ft3 depth, ft2 Increment, ft3 depth, ft2 Increment, ft3 0 22,287 624 12,096 6,591 0.5 23,338 11,406 896 380 13,600 6,424 7,449 3,510 1 24,405 11,936 1,200 524 15,136 7,184 8,359 3,952 1.5 25,487 12,473 1,536 684 16,704 7,960 9,322 4,420 2 26,584 13,018 1,904 860 18,304 8,752 10,337 4,915 2.5 27,696 13,570 2,304 1,052 19,936 9,560 11,404 5,435 3 28,823 14,130 2,736 1,260 21,600 10,384 12,525 5,982 3.5 29,966 14,697 3,200 1,484 23,296 11,224 13,697 6,556 4 31,124 15,273 3,692 1,723 25,024 12,080 14,922 7,155 4.5 32,297 15,855 4,210 1,976 26,784 12,952 16,200 7,781 5 33,485 16,446 4,753 2,241 28,576 13,840 5.5 5,321 2,519 30,400 14,744 6 5,914 2,809 32,252 15,663 6.5 34,130 16,596 7 36,033 17,541 7.5 37,961 18,499 8 39,914 19,469 Total Volume,ft3 138,803 17,511 _ 202,871 49,705 Total Volume,Acre-Ft 3.19 0.40 4.66 1.14 Vol.w/2'freeboard,ft3 76,533 7,967 130,767 22,232 Vol.w/2'freeboard,Acre-Ft. 1.76 0.18 3.00 0.51 Cockroft Dairy Process Wastewater/Stormwater Accumulation Table Init.Volume Process Water Generated,GPO= 7,000 Pond Surface Area.tt°= 79,313 Evaporation Area.ft2= 50,779 0.5 Predp.' 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% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.63 1.13 Feb 0.37 5.0% 10 0.07 1.58 1.17 0.15 0.60 0.52 1.65 Mar 1.13 5.0% 10 0.22 2.48 1.17 0.24 0.67 0.64 2.29 Apr 1.80 7.0% 10 0.38 4.05 1.17 0.39 0.64 0.63 0.1 2.82 May 2.47 17.0% 10 0.72 5.40 1.17 0.52 0.67 0.87 0.9 2.79 Jun 1.83 15.0% 10 0.51 6.53 1.17 0.63 0.64 0.52 0.5 2.80 5.80 Jul 1.48 14.0% 10 0.40 6.75 1.17 0.66 0.67 0.41 0.4 2.81 Aug 1.15 12.0% 10 0.29 6.08 1.17 0.59 0.67 0.36 0.4 2.78 Sep 1.16 12.0% 10 0.29 4.50 1.17 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.5 2.78 Oct 1.00 10.0% 10 0.24 3.15 1.17 0.31 0.67 0.60 3.0 0.37 Nov 0.82 5.0% 10 0.16 1.80 1.17 0.17 0.64 0.63 1.00 Dec 0.45 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.62 1.62 Jan 0.49 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.63 2.25 Feb 0.37 5.0% 10 0.07 1.58 1.17 0.15 0.60 0.52 2.77 Mar 1.13 5.0% 10 0.22 2.48 1.17 0.24 0.67 0.64 0.6 2.81 Apr 1.80 7.0% 10 0.38 4.05 1.17 0.39 0.64 0.63 0.7 2.74 May 2.47 17.0% 10 0.72 5.40 1.17 0.52 0.67 0.87 0.8 2.81 Jun 1.83 15.0% 10 0.51 6.53 1.17 0.63 0.64 0.52 0.5 2.83 6.90 Jul 1.48 14.0% 10 0.40 6.75 1.17 0.66 0.67 0.41 0.5 2.73 Aug 1.15 12.0% 10 0.29 6.08 1.17 0.59 0.67 0.36 0.3 2.80 Sep 1.16 12.0% 10 0.29' 4.50 1.17 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.5 2.80 Oct 1.00 10.0% 10 0.24 3.15 1.17 0.31 0.67 0.60 3.0 0.39 Nov 0,82 5.0% 10 0.16 1.80 1.17 0.17 0.64 0.63 1,02 Dec 0.45 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.62 1.64 Jan 0.49 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.63 2.27 Feb 0.37 5.0% 10 0.07 1.58 1.17 0.15 0.60 0.52 • 2.79 Mar 1.13 5.0% 10 0.22 2.48 1.17 0.24 0.67 0.64 0.7 2.74 Apr 1.80 7.0% 10 0.38 4.05 1.17 0.39 0.64 0.63 0.6 2.77 May 2.47 17.0% 10 0.72 5.40 1,17 0.52 0.67 0.87 0.8 2.83 Jun 1.83 15.0% 10 0.51 6.53 1.17 0.63 0.64 0.52 0.6 2.75 6.90 Jul 1.48 14,0% 10 0.40 6.75 1.17 0.66 0.67 0.41 0.4 2.76 • Aug 1.15 12.0% 10 0.29 6.08 1.17 0.59 0.67 0.36 0.3 2.82 Sep 1.16 12.0% 10 0.29 4.50 1.17 0.44 0.64 0.50 ' 0.5 2.82 Oct 1.00 10.0% 10 0.24 3.15 1.17 0.31 0.67 0.60 3.0 0.41 Nov 0.82 5.0% 10 0.16 1.80 1.17 0.17 0.64 0.63 1.04 Dec 0.45 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.62 1.67 Jan 0.49 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.63 2.29 Feb 0.37 5.0% 10 0.07 1.58 1.17 0.15 0.60 0.52 2.81 Mar 1.13 5.0% 10 0.22 2.48 1.17 0.24 0.67 0,64 0.7 2.76 Apr 1.80 7.0% 10 0.38 4.05 1.17 0.39 0.64 0.63 0.6 2.79 May 2.47 17.0% 10 0.72 5.40 1.17 0.52 0.67 0.87 0.9 2.75 Jun 1.83 15.0% 10 0.51 6.53 1.17 0.63 0.64 0.52 0.5 2.77 7.00 Jul 1.48 14.0% 10 0.40 6.75 1.17 0.66 0.67 0.41 0.4 2.78 Aug 1.15 12.0% 10 0.29 6.08 1,17 0.59 0.67 0.36 0.4 2.74 Sep 1.16 12.0% 10 0.29 4.50 1.17 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.5 2.74 Oct 1.00 10.0% 10 0.24 3.15 1.17 0.31 0.67 0.60 3.0 0.34 Nov 0.82 5.0% 10 0.16 1.80 1.17 0.17 0.64 0.63 0.96 Dec 0.45 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.62 1.59 Jan 0.49 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.63 2.22 Feb 0.37 5.0% 10 0.07 1.58 1.17 0.15 0.60 0.52 2.74 Mar 1.13 5.0% 10 0.22 2.48 1.17 0.24 0.67 0.64 0.6 2.78 Apr 1.80 7.0% 10 0.38 4.05 1.17 0.39 0.64 0.63 0.6 2.81 May 2.47 17.0% 10 0.72 5.40 1.17 0.52 0.67 0.87 0.9 2.77 Jun 1.83 15.0% 10 0.51 6.53 1.17 0.63 0.64 0.52 0.5 2.79 6.90 Jul 1.48 14.0% 10 0.40 6.75 1,17 0.66 0.67 0.41 0.4 2.80 - Aug 1.15 12.0% 10 0.29 6.08 1.17 0.59 0.67 0.36 0.4 2.76 Sep 1.16 12.0% 10 0.29 4.50 1.17 0.44 0.64 0.50 0.5 2.76 Oct 1,00 10.0% 10 0.24 3.15 1.17 0.31 0.67 0.60 3.0 0.36 Nov 0.82 5.0% 10 0.16 1.80 1.17 0.17 0.64 0.63 0.99 Dec 0.45 5.0% 10 0.09 1.35 1.17 0.13 0.67 0.62 1.61 Maximum Volume Pumped= 7 Average Monthly Change= 0.58 Maximum Volume in Pond= 2.83 'Precipitation for Greeley,CO.NOAA "SCS,National Engineering Handbook "'Evaporation for Greeley.CO.NOAA Cockroft Dairy Stormwater Accumulation Table-North of Rd 388 Init.Volume Process Water Generated,GPD= - Pond Surface Area,ft2= 16,200 Evaporation Area,ft2= 7,449 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% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - 0.00 0.00 Feb 0.37 5.0% 2 0.01 1.58 0.17 0.02 - (0.01) - Mar 1.13 5.0% 2 0.04 2.48 0.17 0.04 - 0.01 0.01 Apr 1.80 7.0% 2 0.08 4.05 0.17 0.06 - 0.02 0.03 May 2.47 17.0% 2 0.15 5.40 0.17 0.08 - 0.07 0.10 Jun 1.83 15.0% 2 0.10 6.53 0.17 0.09 - 0.01 0.11 - Jul 1.48 14.0% 2 0.08 6.75 0.17 0.10 - (0.02) 0.09 Aug 1.15 12.0% 2 0.06 6.08 0.17 0.09 - (0.03) 0.06 Sep 1.16 12.0% 2 0.06 4.50 0.17 0.06 - (0.00) 0.06 Oct 1.00 10.0% 2 0.05 3.15 0.17 0.04 - 0.00 0.06 Nov 0.82 5.0% 2 0.03 1.80 0.17 0.03 - 0.01 0.07 Dec 0.45 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - (0.00) 0.07 Jan 0.49 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - 0.00 0.07 Feb 0.37 5.0% 2 0.01 1.58 0.17 0.02 - (0.01) 0.06 Mar 1.13 5.0% 2 0.04 2.48 0.17 0.04 - 0.01 0.07 Apr 1.80 7.0% 2 0.08 4.05 0.17 0.06 - 0.02 0.09 May 2.47 17.0% 2 0.15 5.40 0.17 0.08 - 0.07 0.05 0.11 Jun 1.83 15.0% 2 0.10 6.53 0.17 0.09 - 0.01 0.12 0.05 Jul 1.48 14.0% 2 0.08 6.75 0.17 0.10 - (0.02) 0.10 Aug 1.15 12.0% 2 0.06 6.08 0.17 0.09 - (0.03) 0.07 Sep 1.16 12.0% 2 0.06 4.50 0.17 0.06 - (0.00) 0.07 Oct 1.00 10.0% 2 0.05 3.15 0.17 0.04 - 0.00 0.07 Nov 0.82 5.0% 2 0.03 1.80 0.17 0.03 - 0.01 0.08 Dec 0.45 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - (0.00) 0.07 Jan 0.49 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - 0.00 0.07 Feb 0.37 5.0% 2 0.01 1.58 0.17 0.02 - (0.01) 0.07 Mar 1.13 5.0% 2 0.04 2.48 0.17 0.04 - 0.01 0.08 Apr 1.80 7.0% 2 0.08 4.05 0.17 0.06 - 0.02 0.09 May 2.47 17.0% 2 0.15 5.40 0.17 0.08 - 0.07 0.05 0.11 Jun 1.83 15.0% 2 0.10 6.53 0.17 0.09 - 0.01 0.12 0.05 Jul 1.48 14.0% 2 0.08 6.75 0.17 0.10 - (0.02) 0.11 Aug 1.15 12.0% 2 0.06 6.08 0.17 0.09 - (0.03) 0.08 Sep 1.16 12.0% 2 0.06 4.50 0.17 0.06 - (0.00)i 0.07 Oct 1.00 10.0% 2 0.05 3.15 0.17 0.04 - 0.00 0.08 Nov 0.82 5.0% 2 0.03 1.80 0.17 0.03 - 0.01 0.08 Dec 0.45 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - (0.00) 0.08 Jan 0.49 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - 0.00 0.08 Feb 0.37 5.0% 2 0.01 1.58 0.17 0.02 - (0.01) 0.07 Mar 1.13 5.0% 2 0.04 2.48 0.17 0.04 - 0.01 0.08 Apr 1.80 7.0% 2 0.08 4.05 '0.17 0.06 - 0.02 0.10 May 2.47 17.0% 2 0.15 5.40 0.17 0.08 - 0.07 0.06 0.11 Jun 1.83 15.0% 2 0.10 6.53 0.17 0.09 - 0.01 0.12 0.06 Jul 1.48 14.0% 2 0.08 6.75 0.17 0.10 - (0.02) 0.11 Aug 1.15 12.0% 2 0.06 6.08 0.17 0.09 - (0.03) 0.08 Sep 1.16 12.0% 2 0.06 4.50 0.17 0.06 - (0.00) 0.07 Oct 1.00 10.0% 2 0.05 3.15 0.17 0.04 - 0.00 0.08 Nov 0.82 5.0% 2 0.03 1.80 0.17 0.03 . 0.01 0.08 Dec 0.45 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - (0.00) 0.08 Jan 0.49 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - 0.00 0.08 Feb 0.37 5.0% 2 0.01 1.58 0.17 0.02 - (0.01) 0.07 Mar 1.13 5.0% 2 0.04 2.48 0.17 0.04 - 0.01 0.08 Apr 1.80 7.0% 2 0.08 4.05 0.17 0.06 - 0.02 0.10 May 2.47 17.0% 2 0.15 5.40 0.17 0.08 - 0.07 0.06 0.11 Jun 1.83 15.0% 2 0.10 6.53 0.17 0.09 - 0.01 0.12 0.06 Jul 1.48 14.0% 2 0.08 6.75 0.17 0.10 - (0.02) 0.10 _ Aug 1.15 12.0% 2 0.06 6.08 0.17 0.09 - (0.03) 0.08 Sep 1.16 12.0% 2 0.06 4.50 0.17 0.06 - (0.00) 0.07 Oct 1.00 10.0% 2 0.05 3.15 0.17 0.04 - 0.00 0.07 Nov 0.82 5.0% 2 0.03 1.80 0.17 0.03 - 0.01 0.08 Dec 0.45 5.0% 2 0.02 1.35 0.17 0.02 - (0.00) 0.08 Maximum Volume Pumped= 0.06 Average Monthly Change= 0.00 Maximum Volume in Pond= 0.12 -Preupitation for Greeley,CO,NOAA "SCS.National Engineenng Handbook -"Evaporation for Greeley,CO,NOAA Cockroft Dairy Process Wastewater Production No. of Water Gallons/ Washes Volume Type of Use Wash per Day (GPD) Bulk Tank (Automatic Wash) 200 1 200 Pipeline in Parlor 200 3 600 Miscellaneous Equipment 100 3 300 Parlor Floor Flush 600 3 1800 Milk Floor 300 3 900 Holding Pen Wash 650 3 1950 Total Daily Flow(GPD) 5,750 Design Factor 1.2 Design Flow(GPO) 7,000 Annual Flow(Acre-Feet) 7.84 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Appendix C • Colorado State University References Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 13 Best Management Practices For Manure Utilization Bulletin 588A Co gio c nhersiry Extension -, 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 (NO3) 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. intended to establish guidance to In Colorado, state law prohibits any direct discharge of manure or animal meet any specific regulatory wastewater to either surface or ground water. Concentrated swine operations are 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 r �„s The agronomic rate is a nutrient application rate -fable 1tA wmt equiva en.�� .•'a. . based upon a field-specific estimate of crop needs and st • an accounting of all N and P available to that crop prior f r— reshoJ4,, . - to manure (and/or fertilizer) application. Implicit Factorrtg-e. N within the agronomic rate concept is an application Slaughter and Feed Cattle ,x 3 rate that does not lead to unacceptable nutrient losses. 1.0 ' 1,lassAll 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. White 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 fitter 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- a,- 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. These should be constructed on fine-textured soils (such as silty n— \` ..P.= clays, clay barns, or clay) with a lining of soil compacted to a , rs . ... , 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. l Composting is a biological process in which microorganisms l "" 9` •, h I convert organic materials, such as manure, into a soil-like mate- 1 _ 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 II _�_' and store than raw manure because the volume and weight can be reduced by as much as 50 percent. Solid separation is a viable treatment for wastewater from Cleaning pens milking parlors or hog operations. Settling basins or vibrating screens are used to remove solids from the wastewater resulting in reduced odor and less lagoon loading. This treatment requires an investment in equipment and maintenance, but improves the ease of handling the wastewater. Aeration of wastewater storage ponds increases the oxygen level in waste- water and reduces odors. Aeration can be achieved through mechanical means or through gas exchange with the air in large, shallow ponds. The disadvantages of aeration include high energy costs for mechanical aeration and additional maintenance expense. Anaerobic digestion is another treatment option in which manure is digested to produce energy for farm use or possibly for sale to a local power company. This treatment can require a large start-up investment and high maintenance, but significantly reduces manure odors because the treatment vessel is enclosed to capture gases. Maintenance costs can be offset by the use of the energy produced by the combustion of the gases. Constructed wetlands can be a useful manure treatment option because of high nutrient use of wetland plants and the denitrification process which transforms nitrate into gaseous nitrogen forms. The disadvantages include 4 — construction costs, the need for solid separation prior to wetland treatment, and the need to manage the wastewater discharged from the wetland. Developing a Nutrient Management Plan INMP] Worksheets to help develop a nutrient management plan can be found near the end of this publication. They are provided as a starting place tob 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 ,,,,i41,„:1,,,,, p �y Ta�2 d , ' it-4e- t& .L' `4l"Y'4�St-j4„7 3° 1t• js jf cropland is needed for long term ss at L4-,1,11$1,11,1:"c'1 t.„�` 1,7;Jr��s application. There are several ways a� . ..-''`s' ; &- i . - F E,.• to develop this information; one i' � 7. y, `�"'M ,'f c method is described in the steps r.,..4`.. ` below. Another method is to ^ f iL y c actually weigh the manure removed rif S. • . .,,,17:::::."::,..:.t: ,, during pen cleaning. If your land L base is inadequate to safely utilize i4' t + z s _ the total nutrients produced, ;;Y$ 4 , . p arrangements should be made to r< apply the manure off-site. q t r,,, � •; 1, Steps for determining nutnent inventory from manure production include: '- ., " L,,, , 1. Determine the average weight and number of livestock kept t. ' : + " annually at the facility. Attra 2. Determine annual manure ..�- . e t Y s : illit .11a- . - production on a per animal a.r s e, •+ t "_: 12 97. basis. (Tables 2 and 3 give 3t . =n. 6 ' • o i� ss , ,tis t r ,., estimates on an AU basis.) t' � F # tti ` , - , -', ' ;.11:et,.:: 5a 3. Multiply average annual manure xe,�a �5W � -r �. �� pp .e v U [ t� s t «. ..... Boar O;g yo 4f.Le z ys a'.+sr T' '. > ' *s as. production times average Boar 1 w � x number of animals toget total j ; '` Pon a: y"..S. �a, .il r St< r is gT e r t P F ic �t j. iY x-w 4c-s-a + r r-7 . " y- s s ti- manure production. Layery .....„,:t1.0.1...-, r y1 z -1':;.;e " ...�`*' s 4. Use manure analysis or Table 4 - a .r;xw y Pullet r ` ; ° to estimate nutrient content of k'- w n .. Broiler 18.2 tea, 5. Multiply total manure production y ` manure. Turkey Horse 14.1 by nutrient content per unit of Sheep 14.5 31 manure to determine annual nutrient production. r; se vatuesere adapud•fmm a Di(Y1gr+cultiirai]iaste+janigemepttelli landbook or prep sent aW from'`oWoradorsamp ameptoduc�ion it t#+arrimal age, feed ration breed-and handling x .t s --�` , s- R`-'-€ E __ . " ; .ux _:. .....�._ . . 3•,, ,. mac._. 5 i * ; kiyx : •-(0-4-A'S' Total all manure nutrients from the various sources "7ab�e;3. d swine mapy t on your farm to get an estimate of farm total nutrient 4 4 .1 � A•r,jvll4 �� • � µ production (Worksheet 1 is provided at the end of this�e.. � document as a template for these records). This figure't* 4 "'r}tea'-3 ry ax n14 ; 1' will be compared to estimated crop utilization figures P.171 ' r .�� F on Worksheet 3. 1- - .1 r""' q Estimating the volume of liquid swine manure �six produced at large confined feeding facilities is con- c aF.3 r founded by the addition of fresh water to the system for flushing waste from the animal housing units. Docu- * 2 i mented, operation-specific numbers or Table 3 can be used to estimate the volume of swine manure produo- -e:74—. � q Liquid u� .;�, „��,, ,� � rstorm seater . tion on a liquid basis. To estimate total li waste 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 is Beef Feedlot Manure, Example feedlot has 2500 head on.average year round The cattle come in weighing 500 lbs. each and leave =A weighing 1E04;1bs ea44 11.%X,.af 14.0Fin #g. = - • 4•'&0--(=, Step i y Calculate average animal we ght , 4 a (500+1200)x$=850 lbs /heaYrn 4 Ste 012::. Obtain table r.value for manuNre production (fable 2)F ` �3fu VSloe es A 3 anu Y r R y x 4a, 71b/day 100O'lbs of amm 1 feedet 1.911 energy diet 's >� _ -~• iasa5' -fib^• + , t r4vz- sr Step3y Calculate totalTannual manureproau tion for operation Multi•ply table uotue by average amnia werght.dmded by iDDO 8.7 lb/day/1000 lbs of ammalx 85b lbs ;7 4 lbs manure/day/animal Multiply by the:number of days.on feed/year.F y • 7.4 lbs, manure/day x 365tday-sfyear 2 700 ibs manure/year/animal ▪ Multiply by the number.pf head fed/year 2 700 lbs manure,,/year x 2500 head-5•750 000.1bs :manure/year Convert lbs. to tonbys dividing ky2l D 6.750.0001bs. manure /years 337 tons manure jyearj. ` " 20001bs jton <` s" � ,tom -ry, , Step 4: Obtain manure analysis'(Table 4): 23 lb. N /ton 24-lb. P205 /ton Step 5: Calculate total annual nutrient production: 23 W:-N /ton x 3375 tons/yr. = 77,625 lb. N/yr. 24 lb.'P205/ton x 3375 tons/yr.-81,000 lb. p205/yr 6 Calculation lb. Estimation of nutrient production from a liquid manure handling system. Example 16:Swine Liquid Waste Example feeding operation has 5000 head on average year-round. The pigs come in weighing 50 lbs. each and leave weighing 250 Lbs. each. They are fed a grain diet. Step 1: Calculate average animal weight (50 +250)/2 = 150 lbs./head Step 2: Obtain table value for liquid waste production (Table 3) 7.5 gal/day/1000 lbs. of animal Step 3: Calculate total annual manure production for the operation Multiply table value by average animal weight divided by 1000. 7.5 gal/day/1000 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 gat x 2,050 thousand gal/year - 55,350 lb. P205/yr Step 6: Adjust for N loss as ammonia from system (Table 5) 73,800 lb. N/yr. x 50% volatilization = 36,900 lb. N/yr. Determining Land Needs for Long Term Manure Utilization One of the first steps in developing a tong term nutrient management plan is to determine if adequate Land is available for utilization of the manure and effluent produced. If the land base is determined to be inadequate, arrange- ments must be made to reduce manure production or find alternatives to over- application. To estimate the minimum Land base required, you need to know the annual manure production of your facility and have a manure sample analyzed for total N, P, and K. Then calculate the best estimate of annual nutrient removal on a per acre basis. For this calculation, use conservative estimates of annual crop nutrient removal and assume that all N and P in the manure is crop available unless you are using liquid effluents with known N volatilization rates. Total manure production divided by acceptable application rates (tons or gallons per acre) will give an estimate of the Land base needed for safe manure utiliza- - 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. 1 Total N in manure is used to ,. r'" A Il. ) ter.'-i ,,,a , %l' try - + . calculate an estimate of safe long tI term solid manure application , ' rate because all of the applied N : :. that is not lost to leaching or volatilization will eventually become available to the crop. -,T4-:,24.' • r r •- Liquid wastes such as swine effluent can have a large loss component due to ammonia volatilization. Long term planning for effluent applications should include conservative volatilization l4 r estimates to allow for uncertainty '''cc : : and lower than expected crop a si, nutrient uptake (See Table 5)- +,';x'46,_+' -",..,,-:E„.-•-. .!-;_ f ?:.. --:•27%,i,:C- , Ip ,_ . Phosphorus Based Manure Planning While manure applications in 96' 1.4.-,-,"`ice Colorado are most often based on a ' crop N needs, in certain situa- .00 tions it is more appropriate to . . V n Lb/M base manure rates on crop P •Dairy . .:rte s ,, _ v ,:" requirement and manure P con- : ,: tent. Phosphorus is known to Poultry' .it.'711,,,t4---.. •rro - cause surface water degradation, L t, __ r,. even at very tow concentrations. • Ammonia fraction -, ,, ;,1, ..s„ '- •` � - a -#- When P from runoff enters lakes planning purposes only m_ ! . . oaccurately dete th"• : and streams, it accelerates the _• growth of algae and other aquatic Application conversion factor.��b0n galr`x27 15—lb./acre inch:-- � .,,, �nr IncLud'es runoff water. . weeds. As these plants flourish, ••Thesevalues are-derived from the USDA Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, 1992 oxygen and light become limiting —and, rp n0-davit 1-•i° s '' to the survival of more desirable eUl2bin ° # - :, 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)? z� 2. Is the depth to ground water less than 50 feet in the E'x e ' vicinity of manure storage? F, ¢f t } 3. Have recent well water analyses indicated that local ground water NO3-N levels are increasing? 4. Is the horizontal distance of the feedlot to surface water 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? _ ' 7. Does seepage from lagoons exceed .03 in/day? 8. Is manure stored within the 100 year flood plain? • v 9. Do runoff storage ponds lack the capacity to handle runoff : ' a e-gro ;_• r volumes from a 25 year, 24-hour storm? - ;< T t. 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: Determrmngtand`base'for bng- ue. slope and little surface residue?' term manure disposal baseOni p N needs.'Y- 3. Do any fields have a- history of more than 5 consecutive '' z years of manure application? Example Feedlot app-be5anunrmrr1har- :' 4. Is excess water from irrigation or precipitation available vested for-grain Averaggyietkfi5i 'itbtfacre for runoff or leaching? Using estimated N removatfromTabie4and 5. Is manure applied at rates greater than the agronomic CalculatidnetacdtttaRrr " rate? 1) Crop.nutrient-removatxfromaableA , F,giy; 6. Is there surface water or a well immediately downhill from 175 bu cornJacre x 56 tb/ba ;9,80D 88 any field which receives manure? grain/acre'on harvest dried tiasr ••' 7. Has it been more than one year since you soil sampled to 9 800 lli.=gram/acre x 1 6%'t'ffl`;try harvested determine nutrient levels in fields where manure will be grain 158 iii. N removed/acre applied? 2)-Land needs (from Calculation,l4) If the answer to any one of these questions is yes, or if 77,525 lb. 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 theagronomic rate of about. Your nutrient management plan should address any application because it assumes no volatilizationr'leaching problem areas identified in the questions above. Manure rates or other N tosses or credits. may need to be adjusted downward and all appropriate BMPs 9 employed where water resources ..� Mx' TIQY+ c+ r 1 ' ' - - are at risk. Additionally, it may be 732- helpful to periodically test wells near livestock operations and ^. manured fields for NO3 and .- `•i'i bacterial contamination to determine if management prac- tices are sufficiently protecting - water quality. ' -a NMP Section 2. Determination of Agronomic Rates for Crap Production Determine agronomic rate of manure or effluent application for each field by assessing crop nutrient needs, available nutrient credits, and nutrients in the manure. Worksheet 2 at the end '" of this document is provided as a template for this portion of your }a� a nutrient management plan. Fill 3 . out one copy of Worksheet 2 for each field. An explanation of each awe, section is provided below. .4-44 q e � a '` Field letormatitte Each field has specific `„ 1- a.. O. Mans A R 7 nutrient requirements that will " .gy. y � vary from year to year. Begin your ,s determination of agronomic rates by filling out 1 copy of Worksheet 9r W 2 for each field that receives Bromeg l manure. Note the soil texture or Alfalfa grass '+" • s , ,;? I-T j: '$r_ soil name of each field. Sandy Little-bluestem •• md•"" _ soils may require special consider- G,Drchardgrass e s„yr 1'5- - ation to avoid nutrient leaching. Red lei 31,;%$—' wax, 2.0- - Clay soils may be more prone to ;`"tl [anarygrass_ .-_.. 4 tons 1 4 D•18" runoff. These considerations are Ryegrass.- Iry 4 tons important in a sound nutrient management plan. Previous crop 1 �r-�ra►*�fi Y „ u ` ,,. grown is important because you Timoth '�.` '' may need to add more nutrients Wheatg -. to help with residue breakdown or less nutrients due to N-fixation, from the USDA Agricultura: , Management Feld Handbook. depending on the rotation w' ;•.; t s td : sequence. Manure applications from the previous year can also 10 supply significant amounts of i4 Tab 4..a.,-"f“. " `"r�" -i / •V 1 ,- ' z x-�r'`....,:') nutrients in the current year due F . 4 ,� µ u to the mineralization process. To cro (c° r9i ,y complete your records, attach the ��, .2- q , - A,, ,r p�er� k � .a, 1 + most recent soil and manure �' x izliq , ,`��t c"-' s '. t--.! . - ',s. Y reports d 1, y-4u� ti ?ygff C- .{,x`Cs . ` �r rw ' , 3.,,,,-.„..r: � analysis to the field e x � �" ,�� Flt �"� `�4 �� v ••1 �.,. ,.• 1 �."_ ::::,,,:"z '+wY ! z as to v ��t information sheet. i f $ (-411, � r # k > s ;1,2 M J ~, } ...4,-,..A.-.:::4. ., Soil, Manure,Water and Plant Sampling ; y. ' and Analysis ,N"_'=` ' t rict.`r'F ' yy(y (�.� n - Y Y 1: Z A current soil test is needed S '6. ihf + y 1,r t 7 t..- �- -1-...4,i'1/4114.' for each field receiving manure or ,₹t,, , ,-," F P3F •₹� effluent to determine residual soil �' „ m , , , f 5 NO3, extractable P and soil 4 4" rA :" ' ^4°' 7,, r'Ct'`organic matter content. Soil :'^` " 'E Y' � '-;•4',- ' sampling for agronomic rate .' ' ` 4° .- ti x+ ` ' determination should occur once iv i.;bs t ,; '..% ' ^ y: a year. More frequent sampling ,,,.�-` ( -e , 'z ' ` ' ; may be needed to track N utiliza- ` l M N. i Cdr r Fa i - q tion and movement in the soil r , - ° ..., profile. Shallow soil samples (1r • µ x ( �k foot or less) are needed to �,.:e •F) ',44 i -;#1414;3': u evaluate crop P, K and other �pr : ,5-4,.....;-1-; ,,,;•,•,..:4,,-.• 9 . +?g r nutrient needs. Deeper rootzone " �° soil samples (generally 4 to 6 ft. £ -,2., +,- deep) should be collected after 4z �ps`s crop harvest and prior to any Cele _,,rf r . ,1 -.s f Cu ,'.` r—' "`;yip: ;,j .;. 2- * 7 ;'.,,-.f manure or effluent application to = . evaluate residual soil NO . Soil Lettuce ( • • sampling below the active Onions ? �' -1•2 ‘4,:•„:,,,,,-,:iitr"r" . : 1 - rootzone (>6 ft. for most annual Peas . __ — s Potatoes- 14 0.3 �' crops, >10 ft. for hay crops) may ` e be needed occasionally to docu- Snap beans 3 0.9 0.26 ment that nutrients are not Sweet corn 6 0.9 0.24 leaving the crop rootzone. To get paap�; p the"tisp�j"�cuttufa4 (�e er. _inie „in a good, representative soil ''3ylliicyjeLdsare irra rb Ness" � .. Nutnenpcontents . 4n arvestdne� an -do .. - ,pioutUre_ sample, it is recommended that a contents ce F ial • 14,..-. minimum of 1 soil core per 10 -.e a f_ 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, NH4 in the animal waste may not be converted to NO3 prior 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 •` ' ` f3 r ' " TT 1 material whether in solid or liquid form. 117. A representative manure sample is 'irl _ 9.IL critical 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 ,.,..“-'-^7,c_. :_ auger or a sharpshooter (a narrow :. shovel) to core into the pile as deeply �,, rz.: ' y , as possible. Walk around the pile, and _' x, ' a -e � take samples from all sides. Deliver the xa �y c e sample to the lab immediately or if immediate delivery is not possible, freeze the sample in a freezer-type ss«.. heavy-duty plastic bag. Manure samples should be analyzed by a reputable laboratory for moisture content, total N, NH, and total P at the minimum. in . 9 '1 kw-J ?3l 7 =s Metals, micronutrients and E.C. are also oti n :Y recommended analytes. When sampling a Liquid manure or 'a n wastewater, there are several ways of sampling. You can sample from the �.._ lagoon directly with a water grab 4 sampler (be sure to walk or boat around the lagoon and get a minimum of six xc e r. Ica," ms's samples) or you can sample from a valve inserted in the irrigation Line or ' -„r-- from cups placed in the field where the Jr- •-; ", « 'f effluent is irrigated onto the land. Store A •rev -= __mac ' the sample in a plastic jar in a cooler or `` " m - 4 s�iur«. - freezer and deliver to the lab immedi- N i ,Sr. ` i .� a� ! t:Ka�si ately. 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 4 ti-R ir-' "-f:it,:'....-,::,i2.-‘:1t r '.l� 1 ''� i .. _ f average growing conditions. Each ryh ,, r field should have a yield history and a Z'4 04 _ ar jet expectation. t , 'F �/ 1 {E Determining Total Nutrient Needs -,v. zg Crop nutrient needs are deter- T' mined using your yield expectations , and table values for fertilizer rates or `'. c. ,4{7 + , K„ crop nutrient removal values. Most °' y L soil laboratories will also give a .elf" fertilizer recommendations with soil , s ``rJ..!„-,St, `k .., 1Li".cy; test results. Be sure you understand , r•, . N/ •r I,4,'7•;=-�, sobs ; the lab's fertilizer recommendation ,w N ra : 'kr.`-'t tr¢1 " , s t ', s ,41 a. philosophy to be sure it is compat- ible with the production and envi- ronmental goals of your operation. In some cases, fertilizer appli- „,„ ,W '= •' c ,#., .- w< 't `� .S, z ,s 7 , �' , a t K' ter: �� )rr�a . 2 „- lay cation rates will need to be adjusted z x above or below the standard table *~•F ;II' b "t" t is'; "� 70" `I tli values. Examples of these situations ,-1 N, w * :rte .D+ ‘4.1c".-±'=. ;'17"s' ".r ` would be 1) where high amounts of "" cb �' 4 crop residue remain, increasing N iy'1^' l'',_:, ' "s ` o45t"v r '� ' t"•2'' --.......:1.: b" ". .,o E e 7"n need by up to 30 lb./acre, 2) where a r ,: ,i:,;;;."..,1,-,_.......',•,,,.',.=,,,7,- ;.,, ) �p + 4'k C.. a a v'-sp t �. m' "---,-.‘42:4,.., , J+ starter fertilizer is needed due to i t r. "s ��r,,}i "'{r s,x,7 . c ;• ;g-7 - * 5xr ' cool soils, 3) where alfalfa is to be :7-4f-ti. : maintained for more than 3 years, ;.-=;,..,4"1-1:-",.......r }'.ce ', `, ;;_: , 1r ,.. tn, t and 4) when manure has been ��`� � � *-7-11r: ... L d . i , -z;~ 40 applied in the previous year. Other t -,`-��, >'�„; 1:-4. - 30 ,�SIS: � situations may exist that justify [ . e ig, manure rate adjustments. If so, , co *PA `Iron of NO oil layer ?f document these adjustments on your 9c a• �A.140 • 4 a nutrient management plan. Adc1 iii1;64 ' s #or" p to rn/A : �: This•table ulisgt mpl'li₹., r... s'«` :.�"t v : ," ''x N rate-F_[9 x yield goall4tons/A)] {8.x ppmsint, +NJZ[30 x yield yoat'x.. FI:] 13 Available N and Pin Manure Iy \ 1- ' r`— ' 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 i ' F-79 organic forms. Organic N becomes available to plants when soil microorganisms decompose organic compounds such as proteins, ''-‘114.1;11' . and the N released is converted to NH,. 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 a7 : general, anywhere from 15 percent to 55 percent of the organic N R''" 4 in manure becomes available to the crop in the first year after *'-"--8s a* application depending upon climate and management factors. -r4 s '' AO'°. Nitrogen availability can be estimated as a fraction of the total N ` ` ' WA content of manure or as a fraction of the organic N content. r - ' Organic N is usually determined by subtracting the NH, and NO3 (00t, • ' from the total N content of the manure. This approach is more - accurate when reliable NH, content and NH3 volatilization numbers are available. Mineralization of N from applied manure will continue to provide nutrients to the soil system for several years after application. This ablQ.s,w4rir cen...1•'1`it„ it "`z . r() - • °r '' additional N must be accounted for in the nutrient management plan if manure will 0 be applied again to the same field within three years. Mineralization credit for the second and third years after application should be based upon a fraction of this initial organic N content (Table 9). Alter- natively, annual soil sampling for residual soil NO3-N, NH,-N and organic matter can be used to estimate mineralization credit , in subsequent years. Phosphorus contained in manure is x usually considered to be entirely plant m+ i. P available in the first year after application. A - In reality, some fraction of the P is tied-up : .�--a_.: in forms that are not immediately available " r - •I ,ce a3 ` pi., to plants. If soil test P is in the "low to • e" r '{ medium" range and the soil is high in lime c } content, it may be appropriate to assume s that only 80 percent of the P will be plant available in the first year. Leg - ' n Volatilizatiea louts new stan� r` Surface applied manure should be establishe. 'e -` .,D k,....7::- ..k incorporated as soon as possible to reduce 'Band application rates for row crops are half of the suggested broa '+?+1` odor and minimize nutrient loss by volatil ization and runoff. The risk of surface loss 14 is reduced by injection application under the ab :''':17::2— 4" 1!,j•-;r1,-• ' ; -ou ov= x soil surface, but loss stilt ,T may occur on sloping or `.i erosive fields. Delayed ; incorporation may be acceptable on level aye fields if erosion control or sunlight decomposi- i. ( �n tion of pathogens is i I ar desired. If solid manure y'a mss-' .era is not incorporated within 72 hours after _. application, much of the Arg Mrtk NH4-N fraction may be _ `. lost to volatilization w` ` (Table 10). The rate of ► rr volatilization increases Poultry, under warm, dry, or `.. .. windy conditions. ' Volatilization tosses Adapted from USDA Ag Wa - E. ` • - ` , .4.4- ,,,,A.:.. ... from Liquid effluents can result in large N losses, since much of the N in i' effluents is in the NH4 ;ta form, which is easily KL.,), w} ' a x converted to ammonia � s_ " N. gas. An accurate predic- - - { 3r_:. ` tion or measurement of Sy ":`+ the amount of N volatile ized from liquid manures iv-O;44i- '`' • - ; Y r ,w is difficult to obtain _ -t2 ,. because both the •,;(.l.,---; " '• application method and w suo k „ , t the ambient climate will - ,war a r 74.1... 1.151°. ,,,,,i» F FF� ;x determine the rate of k.,..:,_, , 41"" r . "g-upon ,v.W 4 flux. Additionally, Ili.Sou r4. 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 loss 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 fi ti3 exceeds the subsequent crop N Cattiitatio Estimating` in atioowatet�`cn:�f %.,,f � requirement, no additional nabs#. a ry"t`y.,a, 3vK ^-2t'i.8.aph,-i+R-z,,,*, ;n F;w .. m ttrediti' o P41 1M `low et", effluent, manure, or commercial N • M .. jsa"^�z fertilizer should be applied. G I C'17 jnc ,4 max'` 2 l ib NJacr ₹ea c '"(1{t p i 38 lb N/A Nutrient Credits fi� 1,F! f ,'A1444 :Y.. GP °4 9 l'a " ' „w: t.ZhF •"s-N4.411"-^1,:,-� Residual soil N03, irrigation 4=a i ",, s .t_ water, soil organic matter, and previous legume crops all contrib- ute N to the growing crop. The N 3 � r,r contribution from these sources iGlIll . , tP 'Y! r2 1, 1 s must be credited in order to make g E , _. accurate fertilizer and manure recommendations. Use soil and water test data and the informa- tion in Table 11 to estimate these 4. a credits. In some cases, these �, credits may entirely satisfy crop s- * needs and no additional manure ,.... . . 3o e , -- `� ' c or fertilizer is required. A starter i s ,4"" -; d} fertilizer may be all the supple- ��j'�}� y 57` mental fertilizer that is justified . f' x,'' ri in these cases in order to en- * ., - hance seedling vigor if the crop is `"'"° seeded in cool soils. Irrigation water containing NO3 can supply N to the crop since it is applied and taken up while the crop is actively growing. Water tests for N03-N should be taken periodically during the irrigation season to accurately calculate this credit. Multiply p.m. N03-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 NZ fixation in root nodules. Plowing down a good stand of alfalfa may release more than 100 tbs. of N per acre in the first year after plowdown. The amount of N credit given for Legumes depends upon the crop, stand, and degree of nodulation. A minimum of 30 lbs. of N/acre should be credited in the first year after any legume crop (Table 11). Total all available nutrient sources from soil testing, irrigation water, legumes and any other organic amendments to determine the total nutrient credit. Due to the difficulty of accurately assessing these credits, be sure to scout fields for nutrient sufficiency during the vegetative growth stages. Recommended Nutrient Application Rate Once you have analyzed crop needs, nutrient credits, and manure nutrient content, you can determine manure application rates. Total crop nutrient need minus total nutrient credits will equal the recommended nutrient application 16 rate. This can be satis- a,-�"a '�" ' " = "F, ` '° ai�X ,yF Y^ x a: 1 na fled by manure, fertilizer, Calculation 4 Deternrrmng agronomic rate of manures u , , rte , r or a combination of nure , Eat ti e xEat 1 i - ,9a eu a 4a Beef feedlot manure broadcast ' , d, d. „i � , E C' both. Manure appircatron rate based upon N reguireme rtr-ki f z pv Ingeneral, manure < G Step 1 Calculate available N rn•manure , s ' ` m� -•r ��iiist ` and effluent application ° ,�r N wrrtentAfmaure m 231b'#otal „fir °fi + i c 5 should be avoided on t = -` ;.,,,t <,{r m-TAbte` AE a ark frozen fields unless a � i rfliTt Available N s ='r* t 35°l�ava?-,,, e la . : site specific analysis + r $ a - a s 4"' s ) A- y L shows that runoff will3 i �s ,ip n 5 avails e�� not occur. Effluent or •;= �" - 'dv '� : up . �1, '' ?'f�La �' Step 2 Determnie crop 11 regmremeriiSli'tvr, r ' x z' manure should not be is ` =�Yi - applied to any soil that ?x soil contains 1.5%organic matter!,, ,ppiq t;�f` cl T -N requwed for`1755 bu corn crop s18S 16 `N + �F, x is saturated or has a +' k _;_'x7 t4,: ++ _. " r 'r f r Step 3,Su-; '''`N aedr1rfrom othersour ri '-': ` i . snow pack of greater - r _� h ex"' `251b N0li irF` -4,f utisli �b samp t »ice 1 < .. than one inch. Addition x 3.- EFL k �, f �F a 185 lb N recurred:f 25-b sut solL Alikt-i ry _ ally, animal waste should rs . I '; T, ,p <°,- .`; 'ti'e C_•- s :- a V< ., —,36tT�lb:ai,needed �:, ,F . .4;ht s y t not be applied to soils ' = PP ` i 7 .. r Step 4 Calculate agronommc manure;:rate.�� ." ; �` � �.- 's"'r7, that are frequently / "" �"a�. flooded, as defined by a a 1601b ac i. i ;., is i h �w� 'X' `'{,� �t ;,13 tops manure/a® Per } =y„e s , v' the National Cooperative l ""_"ph i , -r 4 ;^ ,� u Step 5 Calculate phosphorus supplied by manure x►n "�, t s Soil Survey, during the 33 tons manure/acre x 24 lb P 0,/tonrmanu u k :t . r r r period when flooding a -,,,, ,,,..i.:::4:445,,,,; }� r _ ' ` k.w'a.+ ' '" , ` `'. 312 lb P fl5/atre S , e+ Y--, expected to occur. as " z ' !' ''" , = " Manure is most °ik` :. -: 44A1 Manure appbcatron atbupo4t�,�requrreme�nfi�� f valuable as a nutrient Step 1:Calculate avartabCe' pan manure �rix ;�x�:'� ?t4 r x a#(.> r y a . rt'-1 x. - r/ a =ftl 1 Lfi$L y, 167 �.gy+p,f•> source if it is applied as Tots-1 e L 2436.=PAT ton' from �y # close to planting as Available P$D$x •=80% availabibty x a= x possible. However, r = 19th available AT' «" ;> - s, manure with a high salt Step 2 Determine trop P requirement" ` x . )t.,'Y i' <s'/+' M''m''`' `- � . content may affect • ex - NaNC03 extracta'blip =b ppm (low range) anus i ,,,, � �t; germination and seedling , j P.required for 175 bu corn crop 8016 P?°• (frog(Tabf 7 '� growth of sensitive Step 3:Determine agronomic.manu•re rate _. < 2 ''', crops, such as beans. If (80 ib Pz05/acre) 1-1c;;%;:',1;.;. (19 Ib available PztT5�torr;, fall application is manure r r-^ • tc • necessaryin order to ,7 1 y • Z;,,.;. — 4 tons manure a- x's, . ' -Z bra clean out manure storage Step 4: Calculate nitrogensupplied'by manure (based on P rate)IMP t areas, try to wait until 4 tons manure/acre x 23 lb.total Ni ton manrlriG, r ; #.: after soil temperature is • a 92 ib.total N acre sic red b manure f PPS. y . 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 s made, lower rates 11 Calculation 4. Determining a 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 NH„-N =50% volatilization x 3 lb. NH,-N/1000 gal effluent (from Table 10) -1.5lb:available NH4-N/1000 gat effluent Available organic N = 1 lb. organic N x 40% mineralization (Table 9) =0.41b. 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 lb.subsoil N. - 160 lb.N needed Step 4: Determine agronomic effluent rate. — (160 lb. N/acre)/(52 lb.available N/acre inch effluent) —'3 inches effluent/acre (to be applied in 2 or more applications) Step 5: Calculate phosphorus supplied by effluent(based on N rate) 3 acre inches effluent x 2 lb'P205/1000 gal effluent x 27.15 - 163 lb. P20/acre supplied by effluent Multiply lb/1000 gal effluent by 27.15 to convert to lb./ace inch. Effluent application rate based upon P requirement Step 1: Calculate available P in effluent Total P205 —2"lb. P205/1000 gal effluent(from Table 4) Available P205 -80% availability x 2 lb. P205/1000 gal effluent — 1.6 lb. available P205/1000 gal effluent 43 lb. available P205/acre inch effluent* Step 2: Calculate crop P requirement - - ex. NaHCO3 extractable P - 6 ppm (low range) and soil lime content is high P required for 175 bu corn crop-80 lb. P205/acre (from Table 8) Step 3: Determine agronomic effluent-rate. (80 lb. P205/acre) /(43 lb. available P205/acre inch effluent) - 2 acre inches of total effluent/acre for this crop year (To be applied in 2 or more applications) Step 4: Calculate nitrogen supplied by effluent manure (based on P rate) 2 acre inches effluent/acre x 52 lb. available N/acre inch = 104 lb.available N supplied by manure •Multiply l6/1000 gal effluent by 27.15 to convert to lb./acre inch. Volatilization t Livestock Feed II__ a • Collection Potential from Lot - ' I ' l I I Runoff Apply to Land /1"-7a e , J/ o ;� 'er ° STORAGE l ° ° Nutrient . � ° ° ° ° ° ° Use ° ° O 4 o O 0 0 O O v 'i1" ' 0 © D 0 Potential p ° .' I g 0 D 0 ° © ° ° Leaching o a o o ° o O a Potential , p cr? 4° ' ., �te) ^ „ o�od.e : :Leaching , 'otna . ,. CFA oo o o•' r..,. oia , oo v> %r o� , y o yp✓' , .i 0 > am\fr , too a � • �,�0 . N/ o. "OQ° ®o°°o po I," > a≥e ,v °" 0. CGROUNDWATER'b A?€ , o 1 e '9 • '0 G \'a / ' ! 1 me '.� I o u i@o >?'�•KY"1 rt ✓ ® ° n-> r - ! �( - o T o ! W 'tea � �a`d• o /� •�,Iy(��® �. ti,��1 ©• ` 4 � °m •.( o w'► °I� � 1° O 4ry t M� �.. _Gl T� I,(irr SO li `2 •mm�C e1.O ( C °� d/ �tv 1 �,�� ` `�rl p� 0 °rr °ot� n�• cl a 0 o..s Yti ;e na+ /r� v.. °iia "a< a.Blr/1\ .a . < /aw..�. ;Oj.• / - Of 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 ant 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 Manftorlo' 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 property 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 tosses, reduce odor, and prevent runoff. 3.8 Apply manure uniformly with properly calibrated equipment. 3.9 Time liquid manure applications to match crop nutrient uptake patterns in order to minimize the opportunity for 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 welts where no manure is applied to prevent the possibility of water contamination. 3.12 Plant permanent vegetation strips around the perimeter of surface water and erosive fields to catch and filter nutrients and sediments in surface runoff. 3.13 Apply manure on a rotational basis to fields that will be planted to high N use crops such as corn or forage. Long-term annual applications to the same field are not recommended, except at low rates. Manure Collection and Storage BMPs 3.14 Locate manure stockpiles, lagoons, and ponds a safe distance from all water supply wells. Manure stockpiles, lagoons, and runoff collection ponds should be located on areas not subject to leaching and must be above the 100 year flood plain, unless adequate flood proofing structures are pro- vided. 3.15 Inspect lagoons and liquid manure storage ponds regularly to ensure seepage does not exceed state and local restrictions. 3.16 Divert runoff from pens and manure storage sites by construction of ditches or terraces. Collect runoff water from the lot in a storage pond; minimize Solid manure application runoff volume by diverting runoff water from crossing the feedlot. 3.17 Clean corrals as frequently as possible to maintain a firm, dry corral surface with the loose manure layer less than one inch deep and pen moisture content between 25 percent to 35 percent. Avoid mechanical disturbance of the a:••••;.:1211-&-711- _;. -m 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. 22 Nutrient Management Plan Guidelines 1. Using Worksheet 1, determine the approximate nutrient inventory from manure production on your farm. If you use manure but do not produce any on your farm go to Worksheet 2. 2. Attach farm maps identifying fields receiving manure, waste storage facilities and natural resource areas of special concern, such as streams, groundwater recharge areas, wetlands, public or private drinking water wells. 3. Fill out 1 copy of Worksheet 2 per field identifying: • cropping sequence • yield expectations • crop nutrient needs • nutrient credits • planned manure and or fertilizer rates • note any special management needed to protect natural resource areas of special concern. 4. Attach soil tests, manure analysis, irrigation water tests, and plant tissue analysis used to determine proper nutrient rates. 5. Use Worksheet 3 to document whole farm nutrient use. 6. Attach information on feed management to reduce nutrients, manure treat- ment to reduce nutrient content or volume, and land management practices used to modify manure loading rates. If other manure utilization options are used, such as composting or sale to other producers, document amount of manure diverted annually. 7. Indicate who prepared forms and date them. 8. Nutrient management plan should be reviewed and evaluated annually. 23 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Appendix D • Soil Testing Protocol • Process Wastewater/Stormwater Testing Protocol • Solid Manure Testing Protocol • Irrigation Water Testing Protocol Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 14 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Feb-01 Soil Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies field information sheets, soil sample containers as well as the proper instructions. In the absence of supplied sample bags, use sterile plastic bags. • A typical soil sample consists of one pound of soil. • Sample soil each spring, fields that will have manure applied that spring and/or the coming fall, and fields that had manure applied the previous year. • Sample soil before manure or fertilizer application, and before planting. • Sample each field separately. • Mark sampling points on a field map that is to scale. Use the same maps to mark where and how much manure is applied each year. • A sampling point should encompass no more than ten acres and should be evenly distributed across a field. If a field is ten acres or less, then two sampling points should be marked. • Use a coring tool to collect the samples. Collect samples from the 0-24" horizon in one- foot increments. Collect one composite sample from each 80 acres of field size. Each composite sample should include 8-12 different sampling points across the 80-acre parcel. Take the 8-12 sub-samples in an "X" or "Z" pattern. Mark the sampling points on the field map along with the sampling date and the name of the sampler. • Place sub-samples in clean buckets. When all sub-samples have been collected, mix well. Take care to keep each horizon separate and clean the buckets well between composite sampling events. • Place the composite soil samples in the containers provided by the lab. Mark each sample with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain-of- custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep the soil samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. • Have the laboratory evaluate the soil samples for the following parameters at a minimum: Nitrate-N Organic Matter pH Phosphorus (P) Potassium (K) AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Feb-01 Process Wastewater / Stormwater Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic sample containers. • A typical process wastewater/ stormwater sample consists of 250 ml to one liter. • Test process wastewater / stormwater at least once per year or every time wastewater is land applied. • Take at least three sub-samples. Mix them together and submit one composite sample to the lab. • Sample wastewater from each pond or basin that will be utilized for land application. Take the sub-samples from different sides of the retention basin. Take each sub-sample from at least 12 inches, and preferably 18 inches, below the surface. • Place the composited wastewater samples in the containers provided by the lab. • Fill the bottles completely, with no air space (if air space is allowed, then some of the ammonium will volatilize and the test will not be accurate). • Mark each composite sample with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain-of-custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep the samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. Make sure the samples will arrive at the lab in a cool state within 48 hours of sampling. • If the samples will not arrive at the lab within 48 hours, then freeze them and ship them so they arrive at the lab in the frozen condition. • Have the laboratory evaluate the process wastewater samples for the following parameters at a minimum: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) Ammonia-N pH Total Solids Phosphorus (P) Potassium (K) AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Feb-01 Solid Manure Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic bags as sample containers. • A typical solid manure sample consists of one to five pounds. • Test solid manure at least once per year. • Sample solid manure in a manner, which will give the most representative sample possible. Accomplish this by randomly sampling several stockpiles of manure throughout the feedlot/dairy. Take at least four sub-samples and mix them together in a large plastic bucket to make one composite sample. • Do not collect excessive amounts of dirt; manure that is wet, or other foreign material. • Place the composite manure samples in the sterile plastic bags provided by the lab. Fill the bags full and seal well, with as little air space as possible (if air space is allowed, then some of the ammonium will volatilize and the test will not be accurate). • Mark samples with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain- of-custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep the samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. Make sure the samples will arrive at the lab in a cool state within 48 hours of sampling. • If the samples will not arrive at the lab within 48 hours, then freeze them and ship them so they arrive at the lab in the frozen condition. • Have the laboratory evaluate solid manure samples for the following parameters at a minimum: Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) Ammonia-N pH Total Solids Phosphorus (P) Potassium (K) During solid manure application, weigh several truckloads per day to determine an average weight per load. AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Feb-01 Irrigation Water Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic bottles as sample containers. • A typical water sample consists of 100 ml to one liter. • Test irrigation water at least once per year. • Test irrigation water at the peak of the irrigation season. • If using ditch water, take the sample after the ditch has been running for several days. Take the sample at a relatively clear spot in the ditch about mid-depth. • If utilizing well water, take the sample after the well has been running for several days. Take the sample from a spigot near the well. Allow the water to run from the spigot at least five minutes before sampling. • Fill the sample bottle to the indicated line and cap it. • Mark samples with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain- of-custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep water samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. Make sure the samples will arrive at the lab in a cool state within 48 hours of sampling. • Have the laboratory evaluate irrigation water samples for the following parameters at a minimum: pH Nitrate-N AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 03.15.2001 Appendix E • Rainfall Log • Agronomic Determination Sheet (Process Wastewater) • Agronomic Determination Sheet (Solid Manure) • Process Wastewater Application Log • Solid Manure Application Log • Manure and/or Compost Removal Log • Pond/Lagoon Inspection Form Cockroft Dairy Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 15 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Feb-01 PRECIPITATION LOG (Record precipitation after each event&frequently during events if rainfall is intense or for long duration.) Facility Name: Year: Rain Gauge Location: Date Time Time Elapsed I Beg. Reading End Reading 1 Total Rainfall • • • l! Comments: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Feb-01 Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet - Process wastewater Application Reference material needed:Soil test 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-role =35 +[1.2 x yield goal(bu acre))—[8 x ppm soil NO,-NJ—[0.14 x yield goals%O.Al]. Corn Silage: N-rate = 35 + [7.5 x yield goal(tons;acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NO3-!'J--[0.85 x yield goals%O.Nil 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/o 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)NH;-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 (I-b)] + [dx e]) lb./1000 gal g) Recommended manure application rate (a - 1000 gal/acre 5. Post-Growing Season Follow-Up Actual crop yield (bu/acre, ton/acre, etc.)Total irrigation water applied inches/acre or Acre-feet/acre Supplemental fertilizers applied: lbs. N/acre Total process water applied 1000 gal/acre Prepared by: Date: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Feb-01 Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet - Solid Manure Application Reference material needed:Sod test data, manure test data and CSU Bulletin No. 5684 1. Field Information: Crop Crop year Number of Acres Soil name/texture Previous crop 2. Nitrogen Need: N (]b./acre) a) Expected yield (avg.of last 5 yrs. +5%) (bu/acre,ton/acre.etc.) b)Nitrogen recommendations from Tables 7a-7e in CSU Bulletin No.568A (or use one of the following formulas for corn or corn silage) Corn:N-rate =35+ [1.2 x yield goal(bulacre)J—[8 x ppm soil NO3-NJ-[0.14 x yield goal x Corn Silage:N-rate =35 +[7.5 x yield goal(tons/acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NO3-N]-[0.85 x yield goal x c) Special nitrogen need above recommendations d) Total nitrogen need 3. Nitrogen Credits: N (]b./acre) a) Residual soil nitrate credit* (3.6 lb. N per ppm NO3-N (I 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 I 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 solid manure lb./ton d) Expected mineralization rate for Organic-N e) Organic-N available from solid manure lb./ton f)Total available N ([c x {1-b)J + [d x eJ) 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 Feb-0I 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 Time Meter Gallons GPM Pressure reached water Initials of Date Time Elapsed Reading Pumped being @ Pump end of settino9 Person pumped rows? (YIN) Pumping (Y/N) Calculation: (1) Total Gallons Pumped: (2) Total Acres in Field: (3) Gallons per Acre Pumped: [Line I ÷Line 2] (4) Plant Available Nitrogen in Effluent: lb./1000 gal [Line 4ffrom Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet-Process Wastewater Application] (5) Plant Available Nitrogen Applied: lb./Acre [(Line 4 *Line 3) _ 1000] AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Feb-01 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 l acre applied Applying • l � 'I - F i • 1 Calculation: (1) Total Tons Applied: (2) Total Acres in Field: (3) Tons per Acre Applied: • [Line I ÷Line 2] (4) Plant Available Nitrogen in Solid Manure: lb./ton [Line 4ffrom Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet—Solid Manure Application] (5) Plant Available Nitrogen Applied: lb./Acre [Line 4 *Line 3] AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Feb-01 MANURE and/or COMPOST REMOVAL LOG (to track manure and/or compost removed from facility by others) Facility Name: Year: Date # Of loads Average tare-weight Total weight r Total weight Person hauled of loads hauled (lbs.) hauled (lbs.) hauled (tons) hauling I Comments: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Feb-01 Pond/Lagoon Inspection Form (Inspect ponds/lagoons monthly.) Facility Name: Pond Name: Person Performing Inspection: Date: r Item Yes /No Follow-Up Date Follow-Up Initials Needed? Y/N Completed 2 feet freeboard existing? 25-year/24-hour capacity available? Visible bank erosion? Visible seepage on sides or base? Rodent burrows or holes? Trees, stumps or roots on dike? Inlet clear and erosion free? Sludge/Solids accumulation present? Other: Other: Other: Comments: Hello