The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20002761.tiff AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 6508 WCR 5, Erie, CO 80516 r DYELANDS DAIRY, LLC 7007 Weld County Rd 84 Fort Collins, Colorado 80524 Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan ti ,fr. Prepared by: AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 6508 Weld County Rd 5 Erie, CO 80516 August 15, 2000 > 2000-2761 Your "Pro Ag" Environmental Professionals AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 TABLE OF CONTENTS f,,s' INTRODUCTION 3 CONTACTS AND AUTHORIZED PERSONS 3 LEGAL DESCRIPTION 3 SITE DESCRIPTION 4 FACILITY 4 SOILS 4 MAPS 4 Figure 1 —Topographic Map 5 Figure 2 — Site Layout 6 STORMWATER AND PROCESS WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT 7 SURFACE RUNOFF 7 PROCESS WASTEWATER 7 FLOODPLAINS 7 LAND APPLICATION OF STORMWATER/PROCESS WASTEWATER 7 AVERAGE YEARS' STORMWATER/PROCESS WASTEWATER APPLICATION 8 Sustainability 9 pr"\ SOLID MANURE MANAGEMENT 9 NUTRIENT UTILIZATION 10 SOIL TESTING 11 IRRIGATION WATER TESTING 11 MANURE, COMPOST AND STORMWATER TESTING 11 AGRONOMIC CALCULATIONS 11 RECORD KEEPING 11 INSPECTIONS 12 LIMITATIONS 12 Appendix A 13 Appendix B 14 Appendix C 15 Appendix D 16 Appendix E 17 r Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 2 r^, AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 Introduction This Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan (CNMP) has been developed and implemented to comply with requirements, conditions and limitations of the Colorado "Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation" 4.8.0 (5 CCR 1002-19). This CNMP outlines current site conditions, structures and areas requiring management of solid manure, stormwater run-off and process wastewater. This CNMP will be kept on-site and amended prior to any change in design, construction, operation or maintenance which significantly increases the potential for discharge of solid manure, stormwater run-off and process wastewater to waters of the State. This CNMP shall be amended if it is ineffective in controlling discharges from the facility. Below is the date of the last CNMP amendment: Amendment 1: Amendment 2: Amendment 3: Amendment 4: Dyelands Dairy will keep records relating to the CNMP onsite for a minimum of three years. Contacts and Authorized Persons Mr. Terence Dye 7007 Weld County Rd 84 Fort Collins, CO 80524 (970) 484-9294 The individual(s) at this facility who is (are) responsible for developing and implementation, maintenance and revision of this CNMP are listed below: Terence Dye Owner (Name) (Title) (Name) (Title) Legal Description The legal description of Dyelands Dairy, LLC is: That part of the W1/2 and the SEY of Section 5, Township 7 North, Range 67 West, that lies west of Cactus Hill Ditch, Weld County, Colorado. Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 3 t", ess AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 Site Description Facility Dyelands Dairy is a new facility located on Weld County Road 84, north and east of the intersection of WCR 84, and WCR 15. Dairy construction is industry-typical steel posts,pipe and cable fence, shade structures, concrete feed aprons and feed bunks, feed alleys and cow movement alleys, feed storage areas and associated storage structures and maintenance facilities, waste management and control structures. Dyelands Dairy is proposing to milk approximately 1,740 head. Dry cows, springer heifers, replacements and calves will add another 2,260 head. Cattle numbers fluctuate throughout the year as calves are born, and cattle are bought and sold. However, the average number of cattle at the facility is expected to be approximately 4,000 head. Farm ground borders the facility on four sides. Soils Soils at Dyel.ands Dairy consist of primarily Ascalon loam, Kim loam, Olney fine sandy loam and Thedalund loam. Soils map and detailed descriptions are in Appendix A. The Ascalon loam is a deep, well-drained soil that formed in alluvium deposited by the major rivers in the area. Typically, the surface layer is brown loam about 10 inches thick. The subsoil is brown and yellowish brown sandy clay loam about 15 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches is calcareous sandy loam. Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Surface runoff is medium and the erosion hazard is low. rib." The Kim loam is a deep well drained soil that was formed in mixed eolian deposit and parent P sediment from a wide variety of bedrock. Typically,the surface layer is brown and pale brown loam about 12 inches thick. The upper 28 inches of the underlying material is pale brown loam. The lower part to a depth of 60 inches is pale brown fine sandy loam. Permeability is moderate. Available water capacity is high. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Surface runoff is medium and the erosion hazard is low. The Olney fine sandy loam is a deep, well-drained soil that formed in mixed outwash deposits. Typically the surface layer is grayish brown fine sandy loam about 10 inches thick. The subsoil is yellowish brown and very pale brown sandy clay loam about 14 inches thick. The substratum to a depth of 60 inches is very pale brown, calcareous fine sandy loam. Permeability and available water capacity are moderate. The effective rooting depth is 60 inches or more. Surface runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is low. The Thedalund loam is a moderately deep, well-drained soil that formed in residuum from shale. Typically the surface layer is brown loam about 8 inches thick. The underlying material is pale brown and very pale brown loam. Shale is at a depth of about 25 inches. Permeability and available water capacity are moderate. The effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Surface runoff is medium to rapid, and the erosion hazard is moderate. Maps The maps described below are included in the following pages. Topographic Map The Topographical Location Map shows the location of Dyelands Dairy, surrounding sites, topography and major drainages. Site Layout The Site Map details the configuration of the proposed dairy. Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 4 AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 08.15.2000 Stormwater and Process Wastewater Management fTh Surface Runoff Dyelands Dairy will control stormwater with one sediment pond and two retention ponds located on the west side of the dairy. (See Figure 2) Dyelands Dairy will construct stormwater diversion berms and grade the site to ensure runoff enters the stormwater collection system. The retention ponds will be designed and constructed to meet the 1/32 inch-per-day maximum seepage requirement in Section 4.8.4 of the Colorado Confined Animal Feeding Operation Control regulation. Upon completion of the wastewater retention ponds, the liners will be inspected and certified by a licensed professional engineer. Documentation of adequate lining will be submitted to the Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment. The 25-year„ 24-hour storm event for the area east of Fort Collins, Colorado is 3.4 inches. Using the SCS runoff curve number for unsurfaced lots (90), the amount of runoff generated during a 25-year event is 2.36 inches. For the 78 acres draining toward the lagoon system, this results in approximately 15.3 acre-feet of runoff generated at Dyelands Dairy during a 25-year event. The amount falling directly on the lagoons is 3.8 acre-feet. The proposed retention structures will contain approximately 78.3 acre-feet. This amount of storage gives Dyelands Dairy approximately 11 months of process wastewater accumulation and storage. Calculations for the 25-year storm and pond capacities are in Appendix B. Dyelands Dairy will maintain the lagoon system to contain a 25-year, 24-hour storm event. Should storrnwater runoff elevate the lagoons beyond 50% of the designed 25-year, 24-hour containment level, the system will be dewatered within 15 days to achieve the required retention capacity as outlined in the Colorado Confined Animal Feeding Operations Control Regulation. Pumping to some of the surrounding farm ground will dewater the north lagoon. Dyelands Dairy will have available approximately 110 acres of flood-irrigated farm ground for land application of stormwater. Seventy-eight of those acres is immediately north of the north lagoon. Crop rotation is corn, wheat and alfalfa. Process Wastewater Dyelands Dairy generates process wastewater within the milking parlor. It is estimated that Dyelands Dairy will generate approximately 12,500 gallons of process wastewater per day. A table summarizes the process wastewater in Appendix B. Dairy parlor floors and walls, milking equipment, pipelines, and tanks are washed with fresh water. Wastewater flows through a pipeline into the settling basin. Wastewater flows from the settling basin west to the primary pond. Floodplains AgPro Environmental Services, LLC, has reviewed the Weld County FEMA maps and determined that Dyelands Dairy is not within the mapped 100-year floodplain. Land Application of Stormwater/Process Wastewater Stormwater/process wastewater is pumped from the retention ponds onto farm ground in accordance with the Colorado CAFO regulations, "tier two" land application requirements. The application area for stormwater/process wastewater is irrigated land surrounding the dairy consisting of approximately 110 acres. Table 1 below shows the land necessary to utilize nutrients from a 25-year, 24-hour storm. The nitrogen content and losses are based on Colorado Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 7 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 State Cooperative Extension Bulletin No. 568A, Best Management Practices for Manure (NI Utilization. The calculation in Table 1 indicates that Dyelands Dairy requires approximately 90 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 Maximum pumping requirement( 19.1 A.F.),gallons 6,224,767 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 24,8'99 `Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 12,450 'NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organid-Nitrogen;contained in liquid,lbs. 12,450 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 9,337 25% Flood Irrigation loss Organic-Nitrogen available 1st year, lbs. 5,229 42% equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N Nitrogen available to:plants(PAN)1st yr.,lbs. 14,566 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Residual NO3 in soil,ppm 5.5 Com Corn Silage Expected Yield (grain., Bu/acre:silage,tons/acre) 175 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O.M.&residual'.soil N, lb./acre 177 157 Bulletin#538 Acres req,if effluent;applied via flood irrigation 83 93 'Taken from Table 4 of CSU's Bulletin No. 568A Best Management Practices for Manure Utilization During process wastewater application, Dyelands Dairy monitors the process so that runoff of process wastewater does not occur. Tail water collection structures exist on site and will be utilized during process wastewater application. Dyelands Dairy does not apply process wastewater on frozen ground or during rainfall events. Average Years' Stormwater / Process Wastewater Application te.y Ten year average stormwater/process wastewater generation estimates are outlined in Appendix B. The table estimates the average annual amount of wastewater to be land applied to maintain the retention structures' volume at a level that will still maintain volume for a 25-year, 24-hour storm. The table combines the volume of normal precipitation runoff with process wastewater. The table accounts for the following: • Average monthly precipitation values from local weather data • Average monthly lake-evaporation data from local weather data • Evaporation area equal to the surface area of the primary containment structures when full and the secondary pond when '/2 full • Dairy drainage area of 78 acres • Runoff percentage from NRCS National Engineering Handbook • Process wastewater generation rate of 12,500 GPD • Trial-and-error pumping amounts to keep the retention basins' volume at a manageable level The calculation table shows that annual land application of approximately 2.0 acre-feet of stormwater/process wastewater will maintain a manageable level in the retention structures. Table 2 below shows the land necessary to utilize the nutrients from 2.0 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 ("N! that Dyelands Dairy requires approximately 10 acres of corn to utilize the nitrogen contained in 2.0 acre-feet of stormwater/process wastewater. Dyelands Dairy. LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 8 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 Table 2-Average Years' Land Application Requirements Maximum pumping requirement( 2.0 A.F.),gallons 651,658 Total Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 2,607 'Total-N= 4 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 1,303 *NH3-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Organic-Nitrogen contained in liquid,lbs. 1,303 Organic-N= 2 lbs./1,000 gal Ammonium-Nitrogen available after irrigation,lbs. 977 25% Flood Irrigation loss Orgainic-Nitrogen available 1st year, lbs. 547 42% equilibrium mineralization rate for organic-N Nitrogen available to plants(PAN) 1st yr., lbs. 1,525 Soil Organic Matter,% 1.0 Residual NO,in soil, ppm 5.5 Corn Corn Silage Expected Yield(grain, Bu/acre;silage,tons/acre) 175 25 Based on CSU Extension N req.w/listed O:M.&residual soil N,lb./acre 177 157 Bulletin#538 Acres req. if effluent applied via flood irrigation 9 10 • 'Taken from Table 4 of 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 Dyelands Dairy has enough available land (110 acres) to assimilate nutrients produced in stormwater/process wastewater year after year. Solid Manure Management Dyelands 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. Dyelands Dairy cleans pens at least annually. Manure is composted and removed. The dairy also gives manure to local farmers who take it to utilize the nutrient value for their fields. Dyelands Dairy does not utilize solid manure on its own land. Should Dyelands Dairy choose to land apply solid manure on its own property; they will do so in a manner following "tier two" criteria in the state CAFO regulations. Manure, compost and soil testing is covered later in this CNMP. Dyelands Dairy has approximately 110 irrigated-acres of their own land available for land application of manure. .Table 3 below calculates the amount of manure produced and the associated nutrients on an "as excreted basis". In addition, compost weight is calculated accounting for predictable moisture - losses. The calculations are based on NRCS Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, for various size dairy cattle and an average capacity of 1,740 lactating cows. Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 9 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 f#Th Table 3- Manure Production NRCS Agricuttural Waste Management Field Handbook Moisture Manure Manure TS VS Nitrogen Phos K Animal Type Number of HO Wt./hd,lbs. Total Wt.,lbs, (%) (Ibs.I d/ (8f/d/1000# (111303641d: /d/ (Iba./d)/ (Iba./d)/ (Ibs,/d)/ 1000#) 1000#) 1000# 1000#) Milk Cows 1,740 1,400 2,436,000 87.5 80.0 1.30 10.00 8.50 0.45 0.07 0.26 Dry Cows 300 1,200 36,0;000 88.4 82.0 1.30 9.50 8.10 0.366 0.05 0.23 Springers 600 1,000 600;000 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Heifers 800 500 400;000 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Calves 500 200 100;000 89.3 85.0 1.30 9.14 7.77 0.31 0.04 0.24 Totals 3,940 3,1896,000 Total Daily Production 317.900 5,065 37.834 32,169 1,567 233 980 Total Annual Production 116,033,500 1.848,652 13,809.410 11,741,685 571,882 64,870 357.758 Tons produced w/moisture content of(as excreeted) 88% 58,017 Tons produced(as hauled)w/moisture content of 46% 12,893 Tons Compost Produced w/moisture content of 40% 11,603 Nutrient Utilization Nitrogen is the element that most often limits plant growth. Nitrogen is naturally abundant. However, it is the nutrient most frequently limiting crop production because the plant available forms of nitrogen in the soil are constantly undergoing transformation. Crops remove more nitrogen than any other nutrient from the soil. The limitation is not related to the total amount of nitrogen available but the form the crop can use. Most nitrogen in plants is in the organic form and is incorporated into amino acids. By weight, nitrogen makes up from 1 to 4 percent of harvested plant material. Essentially all of the nitrogen absorbed from the soil by plant roots is in the inorganic form of either nitrate or ammonium. Generally, young plants absorb more ammonium than nitrate; as the plant ages the reverse is true. Under favorable conditions for plant growth, soil microorganisms generally convert ammonium to nitrate, so nitrates generally are more abundant when growing conditions are most favorable. Manure and process wastewater is most typically applied for fertilizers and soil amendments to produce crops. Generally, manure and process wastewater is applied to crops that are most responsive to nitrogen inputs. The primary objective of applying agricultural by-products to land is to recycle part of the plant nutrients contained in the by-product material into harvestable plant forage or dry matter. Another major objective in returning wastes to the land is enhancing the receiving soil's organic matter content. As soils are cultivated, the organic matter in the soil decreases. Throughout several years of continuous cultivation in which crop residue returns are low, organic matter content in most soil decreases dramatically. This greatly decreases the soil's ability to hold essential plant nutrients. Land application of Dyelands Dairy stormwater/process wastewater to recycle valuable nutrients is a practical, commonly accepted best management practice given that fertilization rates are applicable and that deep soil leaching does not occur. Reference material from Colorado State University is included in Appendix C of this CNMP for use by the operator in making sound decisions pertaining to the land application of stormwater. Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 10 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 Soil Testing ra"\ 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. Dyelands Dairy will test soil on land application areas annually using protocol in Appendix D. Irrigation Water Testing Dyelands 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. Dyelands Dairy will test stormwater/process wastewater at least once per year following the protocol in appendix D. If solid manure or compost is applied to land owned or managed by Dyelands Dairy, these materials will also be tested annually. Agronomic Calculations Agronomic rate is the rate at which plants will utilize nutrients while limiting the amount of nutrients that are lost via percolation through the soil or runoff Dyelands Dairy will perform agronomic calculations for every field upon which wastewater is applied. Agronomic calculations take into account: • The crop to be grown • A realistic yield goal • Total nitrogen required to meet the yield goal • Residual soil nitrate • Soil organic matter • Nitrogen content in irrigation water • Nitrogen credit from previous legume crop; and • Plant available nitrogen(PAN) in the wastewater Forms for performing agronomic calculation are in Appendix E. One agronomic calculation sheet is used for each field on which wastewater is applied. In addition, reference materials from Colorado State Cooperative Extension is located in Appendix C, which includes nitrogen requirement information for corn, wheat and other crops commonly grown in Colorado. Record Keeping Records of each wastewater application event will be kept on the Process Wastewater Application Log and if necessary on the Solid Manure Application Log. These forms are included in Appendix E. Soil, wastewater, irrigation water and/or manure testing results will be retained for a minimum of three years. These records associated with manure and nutrient management at Dyelands Dairy will be kept with this CNMP. In addition, authorized person(s) will track precipitation at Dyelands Dairy. After each event, precipitation will be recorded in the Rainfall Log (this form is provided in Appendix E). The Rainfall Log will he kept in this CNMP. Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 11 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 + Inspections rr l 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 Dyelands Dairy, LLC 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. r r, Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 12 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 Appendix B • 25-year, 24-hour storm and retention basins capacity calculation • Average Years' Stormwater/Process Wastewater Generation • Process Wastewater Generation Table r r Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 14 r ''1 Dyecrest Dairy 25-year,24-hour Storm Event /+,, and Pond Capacity Calculations 25-year,24-hour event Main Dairy Compost Initial Pens Area Area Total Applicable Storm Event for Location,Inches 3.4 3.4'0 3.40 3.40 SCS Runoff Curve Number 90. 90 90 90 (90 for unsurfaced lots) (97 for surfaced lots) Surface Area of Drainage Basins,acres 29 64.5 13.5 78 (Separate different drainage areas) (Include pens,alleys,mill areas,working areas,etc.) Inches of Runoff using SCS Runoff Curve Factor 2.36 2.36 2.36 2.36 Minimum Retention Capacity Required, Acre-Ft 5.7 12.7 2.7 15.3 Cubic-Ft. 248,437 552,559 115,652 668,210 Surface Area of Retention Structures,Acres 1.3 13.3 13.3 Additional Volume Required,Acre-Ft. 0.4 3.8 3.8 Additional Volume Required,ft' 15,867 163,978 163,978 Total Retention Structure Volume Required,Acre-Ft. 6.1 16.4 19.1 Total Retention Structure.Volume Required,ft' 264,304 716,536 832,188 Total Retention Structure Volume Available,Acre-Ft. 6.2 78.3 78.3 Lagoon Settling Primary Secondary Capacities Pond Pond Pond Total Length(Top-of-Berm)(feet) 700 700 596 Width(Top-of-Berm)(feet) 80 250 596 Liquid Depth(feet) 8 14 4 Slope(ft.horizontal/1 ft.vertical) 3 4 4 Freeboard(feet) 1 2 2 fl Liner Thickness(feet) 1 1 1 Totals (Cubic-Feet) 269,536 1,579,611 1,272,725 3,121,872 (Acre-Feet) 6,19 36.3 29.22 - - 71.7 Surface Area @ Top-of-Berm,ft° 56,000 175,000 355,216 - - 586,216 Surface Area @ Liquid Level,ft2 51,356 160,056 336,400 - - 547,812 Surface Area @ 1/2-full Depth,ft2 33,500 111,784 318,096 - - 463,380 • Lagoon Capacities Primary Pond Secondary Pond Surface Surface Area @ Incremental Area @ Incremental Depth(ft) depth(ft) Volume(ft') depth(ft2) Volume(ft3) 0 71,030 288,354 1 76,825 73,928 297.158 292,756 2 82.,745 79,785 306,094 301,626 3 88,805 85,775, 615,162 460,628 4 94,995 91,900 324,362 469,762 5 101,315 98,155 333,695 329,029 6 107,770 104,543 343,160 338,428 7 114,355 111,063 8 121,070 117,713 9 127,925 124,498 10 134,905 131,415 11 142,020 138,463 12 149,270 145,645 13 156,650 152,960 • 14 164.165 160,408 ' 15 171,810 167,988 16 179,585 175,698 Total Volume,to 1,959,933 2,192,228 to,"1 Total Volume,A.F. 45.0 50.3 Vol.wl 2'Freeboard,re 1,616,248 1,524,772 Vol wt T Freeboard.A.F. 37.1 35.0 Dyecrest Dairy F Y Stormwater& Process W153tewater Accuniulation Calculation(Average Years) Ink.Volume Process Water Generated,GPD= 12,500 Pond Surface Area,R'= 578,745 Evaporation Area,fl'= 521,615 50 Precip.* Percent Runoff Area Total Runoff Lake Evap. Evap.Area Total Evep, Process-H20 Net Change Amt.Pumped Vol.In Lagoon Annual Pumped _ Month (inches) Runoff (Acres) (Acre-FL) (inches)"' . (Acres) _ (Acre-Ft.)_ (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) I_ (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 51.32 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 51.90 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 52.35 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3.59 1.15 0.68 53.04 May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 55.48 at Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 54.27 - m Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 - 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 52.22 } Aug 1.40 12.0% 78 2.64 5.20 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 50.86 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 50.16 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2.99 1.19 0.15 50.30 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 50.72 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 51.98 Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 53.30 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 53.88 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 54.33 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3.59 1.15 0.68 55.02 N May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 57.46 at Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 56.25 - ia Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 54.20 Aug 1.40 12.0% 78 2.64 5.20 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 52.84 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 52.14 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2.99 1.19 0.15 52.28 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 52.70 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 53.96 Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 55.28 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 55.86 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 56.31 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3.59 1.15 0.68 57.00 May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 0.3 59.14 4t Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 57.93 0.30 Y Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 55.88 Aug 1.40 12.0% 78 2.64 5.20 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 54.52 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 53.82 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2.99 1.19 0.15 53.96 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 54.38 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 55.64 Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 56.96 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 57.54 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 57.99 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3.59 1.15 0.68 58.68 May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 2 59.12 a Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 57.91 2.00 w Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 55.86 > Aug 1.40 12.0% 78 2.64 5.20 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 54.50 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 53.80 Oct 1.11 10.0% - 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2.99 1.19 0.15 53.94 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 54.36 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 55.62 Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 56.94 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 57.52 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 57.97 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3.59 1.15 0.68 58.66 May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 1.9 59.20 u Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 57.99 1.90 a`) Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 55.94 leas} Aug 1.40 12.0% 78 2.64 5.20 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 54.58 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 53.88 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2.99 1.19 0.15 54.02 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 54.44 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 1127 0.60 1.19 1.26 55.70 r n Dyecrest Dairy �y Stormwater 8 Process Wastewater Accumulation Calculation.(Average Years)_ Init.Volume f Process Water Generated,GPD= 12,500 Pond Surface Area,ftz 578,745 Evaporation Area,ft1= 521,615 50 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-Fl.) (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft.) _ (Acre-Ft.) _ (Acre-Ft.) (Acre-Ft,) Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 5722 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 57.60 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 58.05 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3.59 1.15 0.68 58.74 co May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 2 59.18 4it t Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 57.97 2.00 Y Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 55.92 Aug 1.40 12.0% 78 2.64 5.20 • 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 54.56 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 53.86 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2.99 1.19 0.15 54.00 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 54.42 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 55.68 Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 57.00 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 57.58 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 58.03 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3.59 1.15 0.68 58.72 May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 2 59.16 # Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 57.95 2.00 ial Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 55.90 Aug 1.40 12,0% 78 2.64 5.20 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 54.54 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 53.84 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2,99 1.19 0.15 5398 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 54.40 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 55.66 Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 56.98 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 57.56 Mar 1.16 5,0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 58.01 r‘ Apr 2,00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3,59 1.15 0.68 58.70 May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4,99 1.19 2.44 2 59.14 co a Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 57.93 2.00 m Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 55.88 Aug 1.40 12.0% 78 2.64 5.20 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 54.52 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 53.82 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 229 1.19 0.15 53.96 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1,60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 54.38 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 55.64 Jan 0.37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 56,96 Feb 0.49 5,0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0.58 57.54 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 57.99 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11,97 3.59 1.15 0.68 58.68 m May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 2 59.12 't Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3,83 6.20 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 57.91 2.00 ai Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11.97 6.39 1.19 (2.05) 55.86 Aug' 1.40 12,0% 78 2,64 5.20 11.97 5,19 1.19 (1.36) 54.50 Sep 1.30 13.0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 53.80 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2.99 1.19 0.15 53.94 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 54.36 Dec 0.47 5,0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 55.62 Jan 0,37 5.0% 78 0.53 0.40 11.97 0.40 1.19 1.32 56.94 Feb 0.49 5.0% 78 0.70 1.20 11.97 1.20 1.07 0,58 57.52 Mar 1.16 5.0% 78 1.66 2.40 11.97 2.39 1.19 0.46 57.97 Apr 2.00 7.0% 78 3.12 3.60 11.97 3.59 1.15 0.68 58.66 o May 2.82 17.0% 78 6.24 5.00 11.97 4.99 1.19 2.44 1.9 59.20 u Jun 1.84 15.0% 78 3.83 6.20, 11.97 6.19 1.15 (1.20) 57.99 1.90 w Jul 1.61 13.0% 78 3.14 6.40 11,97 6,39 1.19 (2.05) 55.94 > Aug 1,40 12.0% 78 2.64 5.20 11.97 5.19 1.19 (1.36) 54.58 (/'a. Sep 1.30 13,0% 78 2.54 4.40 11.97 4.39 1.15 (0.70) 53.88 Oct 1.11 10.0% 78 1.95 3.00 11.97 2.99 1.19 0.15 54.02 Nov 0.60 5.0% 78 0.86 1.60 11.97 1.60 1.15 0.41 54.44 Dec 0.47 5.0% 78 0.67 0.60 11.97 0.60 1.19 1.26 55.70 Maximum Volume Pumped= 2 Average Volume in Pond= 55.66 Maximum Volume in Pond= 59.20 'Precipitation for Ft.Collins,CO,NOAA "SCS,National Engineering Handbook ***Evaporation for Fort Collins,CO, NOAA Dyecrest Dairy Process Wastewater Production No. of Water Gallons/ Washes Volume Type of Use Wash per Day (GPD) Bulk Tank(Automatic Wash) 100 1 100 Pipeline in Parlor 150 3 450 Miscellaneous Equipment 50' 3 150 Parlor Floor Flush (every 2 hrs) 600 10 6000 Milk Floor 100 3 300 Holding Pen 1000 3 3000 Total Daily Flow(GPD) 10,000 Design Factor 1.25 Design Flow(GPD) 12,500 Annual Flow(Acre-Feet) 14.00 r f AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 rTh Appendix C • Colorado State University References r� • r Dye lands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 15 els r its ANN i i ti ,0) Eir Hoorn On Bulletin UN r do Unn Extension r'1 e'y o est a�ge F rac+t+is f�or manure' liHil tike Livestock manure and effluents are rich in plant available nutrients which can be valuable assets to crop producers. However, they also can be a source of both ground and surface water contamination if handled improperly. Livestock manure contains significant quantities of N, P, and K, and smaller amounts of nutrients such as Ca, Mg, Mn, Zn, Cu, and S. Manure that is properly applied to cropland increases soil fertility, improves soil physical properties, and saves fertilizer costs. Liquid effluents are composed primarily of water and have less This publication is intended to impact on soil physical properties, but they also contain nutrients and other provide general recommendations constituents that must be managed properly. and BMPs to assist in the sound The primary constituents of animal waste that may cause water quality management of animal waste as problems include pathogenic organisms, nitrate, ammonia, phosphorous, salts, a nutrient source for crops. These heavy metals, and organic solids. Nitrate (N03) is the most common ground water pollutant from fields that receive excessive rates of manure. Ground water BMPs are necessarily general, as monitoring has shown that N03 contamination can be a problem in the vicinity they cover operations utilizing of confined livestock feeding operations. Runoff from feedlots or manured fields manure from a variety of feeding can also degrade the quality of surface water. operations. This document is not In Colorado, state Law prohibits any direct discharge of manure or animal intended to establish guidance to wastewater to either surface or ground water. Concentrated swine operations are meet any specific regulatory subjected to air and water quality provisions that among other things, require program in Colorado governing r 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 rlands. 1 Table 1. Animal unit equivalency factors for Colorado. The agronomic rate is a nutrient application rate �~ based upon a field-specific estimate of crop needs and Livestock Type Animal Unit CAFO an accounting of all N and P available to that crop prior Equivalency Threshold to manure (and/or fertilizer) application. Implicit Factor Number • within the agronomic rate concept is an application Slaughter and Feed Cattle 1.0 1,000 rate that does not lead to unacceptable nutrient tosses. Horses 1.0 1,000 . _ , The agronomic rate is not something that can be Mature Dairy Catt[e'r .. 1.4 750 - directly obtained from a textbook or tables. Rather, it Swine (>55 lbs ) 0.2 5 OOQ , must be evaluated for each farm and field. Knowledge Sheep ' - ^� ' 0 2 5 000 ; of manure or effluent nutrient content and residual soil Turkeys 0 02 50000 nutrients is critical to determining how much can be Chickens (br tte or yer) ,0 O1 190,004t t • safely applied so that the agronomic rate is not ex- For young slot ceeded. While producers were encouraged in the past to ess;tlian,50%of adult weight,re e the abo 9 factors by one half l fertilize for maximum crop yields, now they must also ki-c- 1,� ' 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 !rs 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 rm, on cattle feeding methods for this purpose. 2 rest <"1 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 teaching 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 e.-"N erosion. Manure stockpiles should be located a safe distance away (at least 150 ft.) from any water supply and above the 100-year flood plain unless flood proofing measures are provided. Grass filter strips or sediment basins can be used to reduce solids and nutrients in runoff. For land with a slope of greater than 1 percent, plant a strip of a dense, sod-forming grass such as smooth brome or pubescent wheatgrass at least 20 to 50 feet wide around the downhill side of any feedlot or manure stockpile to filter potential contaminants in runoff water. More precise filter strip seeding recommendations may be obtained from the local USDA-NRCS office. Liquid Effluent and Runoff Collection and Storage Storm water and wastewater runoff from feedlots can Liquid waste holding structure contain high concentrations of nutrients, salts, pathogens, and oxygen-demanding organic matter. Preventing storm water from ti-- --- ® ;. passing across the feedlot surface by installing terraces or diver " w� , sion channels above the feedlot is a BMP that can significantly _ reduce the volume of wastewater. Decreasing the active tot area can also help reduce the contaminants moved by storm water. !r 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 tot f hold excess wastewater until it can be land applied or evaporated _ These should be constructed on fine-textured soils (such as silty k , . clays, clay loans, or clay) with a lining of soil compacted to a 3 r minimum thickness of 12 inches with an additional 18-30 inches of soil cover e'' above the compacted soil. On coarse textured or sandy soils it may be necessar. to import bentonite clay or use synthetic liners or concrete. Seepage is requirec 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. Composting is a biological process in which microorganisms convert organic materials, such as manure, into a soil-Like mate- a V ' eF . r aL DuriS,cng composting, some N is lost from the manure as NH r .. 4--:,-I--- gas. Most of the remaining N is tied up within stable organic .11:11r.-:-i. a , z compounds which will become slowly available to plants after soil r'5' °" " -I. . "° "? application. Composted manure has less odor and is easier to haul E I. � and store than raw manure because the volume and weight can be a y- , ;. 4 ,. _� t-- 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. re-? 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 em P^1 �"'ynure nutrients from tt construction costs, the need for solid separation prior to wetland treatment, and the need to manage the wastewater discharged from the wetland. get an estimate of farn 'lorksheet 1 is provided at Developing a Nutrient Management Plan (AMP] 3 template for these recon Worksheets to help develop a nutrient management plan can be found near ,red to estimated crop utiti the end of this publication. They are provided as a starting place to help 3. producers establish sound manure management. Developing a plan is just the ig the volume of liquid swi beginning. Implementation of the plan and follow up are required to best rge confined feeding facilii manage your operation. addition of fresh water to from the animal housing u NMP Section 1. Nutrient and land Inventory :ion-specific numbers or Tat Producers should start by calculating an estimate of total annual manure e the volume of swine man production at their operation so • basis. To estimate total liq that they can determine how much Table 2. Solid manure production by livestock cal for lane application, add tf cropland is needed for long term basis at the time of land application. ' for flushing purposes to ti application. There are several ways This should give you total 1 to develop this information; one Animal Type Manure Production iporation or digestion method is described in the steps m local USDA-NRCS offices occur below. Another method is to (lb./day/1000 tbs. of animal) actually weigh the manure removed Dairy during pen cleaning. If your land Lactating Cow 18.5 lanure handling base is inadequate to safely utilize Dry Cow 17.6 system. the total nutrients produced, Heifer 16.9 ^+, - arrangements should be made to Beef elyinng 500 lbs. each and to apply the manure off-site. Feeder, yearling (750-1100 lb.) • • Steps for determining nutrient High forage diet 10.1 inventory from manure production High energy diet 8.7 include: 450-750 lb. 11.2 1. Determine the average weight Cow 10.7 and number of livestock kept Veal 2.8 annually at the facility. Swine 2. Determine annual manure Nursing/nursery pig (0-40 lbs.) 21.6 nimal production on a per animal Grower (40-220 lbs.) 12.9 basis. (Tables 2 and 3 give Replacement gilt 6.7 mat estimates on an AU basis.) . Sow (gestating) 5.1 3. Multiply average annual manure Sow (lactating) 12.2 production times average Boar - 3.9 number of animals to get total poultry manure production. .. Layer Y,. . 25.2 '.: 4. Use manure analysis or Table 4 Pullet 19.0 to estimate nutrient content of . Broiler 33.3 manure. Turkey 18.2 5. Multiply total manure production Horse 14.1 by nutrient content per unit of Sheep 14.5 manure to determine annual 1 nutrient production. These values are adapted from the USDA Agricultural Waste Ma represent data from Colorado sampling. Manure production and age, feed ration, breed and handling. 5 Total all manure nutrie m. Table 3. Liquid swine manure production on a wet � on your farm to get an estin weight basis.* production (Worksheet 1 is r :g 50 tbs. each and leave document as a template for Swine Type Manure Production(gat/day/1000 lbs. of animal) will be compared to estimat Nursing/nursery pig (0-40 lbs.) 12.8 on Worksheet 3. Grower (40-220 lbs.) 7.5 Estimating the volume Replacement gilt 4.0 produced at large confined r Sow (gestating) 3.3 founded by the addition of f Sow (lactating) 7.2 flushing waste from the anir Boar 2.5 mented, operation-specific r used to estimate the volume These numbers do not include wash water or storm water that may tion on a liquid basis. To esi be added to holding facilities. water available for Lana app fresh water used for ftushinc manure volume. This should volume (excluding runoff) before any evaporation or tion figures for Colorado are available from local USC Calculation 1. Estimation of total annual nutrient production from a solid manure han Example la: Beef Feedlot Manure Example Feedlot has 2500 head on average year-round. The cattle come in weighing 5C weighing 1200 lbs. each. They are fed a grain diet. Step 1: Calculate average animal weight (500 + 1200)/2 = 850 lbs./head Step 2: Obtain table value for manure production (Table 2) 8.7 lb/day/10001bs. of animal (feeder, high energy diet) Step 3: Calculate total annual manure production for operation Multiply table value by average animal weight divided by 1000. 8.7 lb/day/1000 lbs. of animal x 850 lbs. = 7.4 lbs. manure/day/animal Multiply by the number of days on feed/year. 7.4 lbs. manure/day x 365 days/year a 2,700 lbs. manure/year/animal Multiply by the number of head fed/year. 2,700 lbs. manure/year x 2500 head = 6,750,000 lbs. manure/year. Convert lbs. to tons by dividing by 2000. 6,750,000 Lbs. manure /year = 3375 tons manure /year 2000 lbs./ton Step 4: Obtain manure analysis (Table 4): 23 lb. N /ton 24 lb. P205 /ton Step 5: Calculate total annual nutrient production: 23 lb. N /ton x 3375 tons/yr. = 77,625 lb. N/yr. 24 lb. P205 /ton x 3375 tons/yr. - 81,000 Lb. P205/yr 6 i`1 ,'1 pure is used to ear^'Of safe long Calculation lb. Estimation of nutrient production from a liquid manure handling systen a'._,Icatlon the applied N Example 1b: Swine Liquid Waste .eaching or Example feeding operation has 5000 head on average year-round. The pigs come in weighini eventually weighing 250 Lbs. each. They are fed a grain diet. :o the crop. Step 1: Calculate average animal weight as swine (50 + 250)/2 = 150 lbs./head large loss Step 2: Obtain table value for liquid waste production (Table 3) ammonia 7.5 gal./day/1000 lbs. of animal g term planning Ste Calculate total annual manure production for the operation itions should p 3: Multiply table value by average animal weight divided by 1000. Le volatilization 7.5 gal/day/1000 Lbs. of animal x 150 lbs. = 1..125 gal manure/day/animal for uncertainty Multiply by the number of days on feed/year.ear a410 gal manure/year/animal Tab Jetted crop • i' ;,'S33' 1.125 gal manure/day x 365 days/y _e Table 5). "+ /1Tri Multiply by the number of head fed/year. Pl410 gal manure/year x 5000 pigs = 2,050,000 gal manure/year. inure li ca tiogns in Convert to 1000 gal by dividing by 1000 ; appliatio � 0 v 050 00 gal manure year = 2,050 thousand gal manure/year often based on oropriat to 1000 gal grain situa- ,to I Step 4: Obtain liquid manure analysis (Table 4): o36 lb. N/1000 gal an crop cnure P con- 27 lb. P205/1000 gal ^ Calculate total annual nutrient production:vn:r:r degradation,to Step 5:dation, 36 lb. N /1000 gal x 2,050 thousand gal/year- 73,800 lb. N/yr. 27 Lb. P205/1000 gal x 2,050 thousand gal/years 55,350 lb. P205/yr fncenta es. Step 6: Adjust for N loss as ammonia from system (Table 5) f enters l lakes :elevates the 73,800 lb. N/yr. x 50% volatilization = 36,900 lb. N/yr. id other aquatic .ants flourish, lecome limiting rare desirable Determining Land Needs for long term Manure Utilization aural food One of the first steps in developing a long term nutrient management plan . Excessive is to determine if adequate land is available for utilization of the manure and movement to ,,--i‘.3.--n3,... effluent produced. If the Land base is determined to be inadequate, arrange- ments must be made to reduce manure production or find alternatives neev to on over- runoffw the from a application. To estimate the minimum land base required, you soil test shows annual manure production of your facility and have a manure sample analyzed ivement is for total N, P, and K. Then calculate the best estimate of annual nutrient I. For:l. For planning removal on a per acre basis. For this calculation, use conservative estimates of Bailable in annual crop nutrient removal and assume that all N and P in the manure is crop ucer is that 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- ;rent of the tion (Calculation 2). This is not the same calculation as is used for determining -et._.ng opera- the agronomic rate of application for a specific field for a specific year. rain aerial maps (Th '1 Total N in manure is use Table 4. Approximate nutrient composition of various types of animal calculate an estimate of safe term solid manure apolicatior manure at time of land application.* rate because all of the applie Type of manure Moisture Total N NHS N' Pz0s K20 that is not Lost to leaching o Content volatilization will eventually ova lb./ton become available to the crop Solid handling systems 8 Liquid wastes such as swine 82 10 6 9 effluent can have a targe los: Swine 32 23 7 24 41 Beef 16 34 component due to ammonia Sheep 31 29 46 13 5 volatilization. Long term pla Dairy Cattle 5 26 38 34 for effluent applications shop 55 33 26 48 for effluent conservative vola ho: Chickens Without elitter 25 56 36 45 34 With litter estimates to allow for uncer: 78 27 17 20 17 20 13 16 13 and lower than expected cro Turkeys Without litter With litter nutrient uptake (See Table 5 Horses Without bedding 22 19 4 14 36 Phosphorus eased Mau're Ptann ----Lb/1,000 gal While manure applicar Liquid Handling Systems'Swine Liquid pit 96 36 26 27 22 Colorado are most often bas 7 crop N needs, in certain sib Single-stage anaerobic 99 4 3 2 7 tions it is more appropriate a7 Two stage anaerobic 99 6 base manure rates on crop Beef Lagoon' 99 4 2 9 requirement and manure P , Dairy Cattle Liquid pit 92 24 12 18 29 10 Lagoon' 99 4 2 4 tent. Phosphorus is known 96 cause surface water degrad Poultry Liquid pit 87 80 64 36 even at very low concentra s Ammenu `r: can vary significantly across time and systems. Numbers given are for When from it ac enter s pl.a-- .:-rposes only; manure analysis is needed to accurately determine ammonia and streams, growth of algae and other ucation conversion factor: lb/1,000 gal x 27.15 - lb./acre inch. weeds. As algae nd of f er Intrudes runoff water. oxygen and Light become t *These values are derived from the USDA Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, 1992 and are modified with data collected from Colorado feeding d feed rations, and manure e. to the survival of more des handlin9. species and the natural foc Nutrient composition of manure will vary with age, chain is disrupted. Excessi manure applications to cropland have been shown to result in P moveme water and subsequent degradation. Manure management plans should consider P loading when runoff f field is likely to enter sensitive water bodies. In addition, if the soil tes- that extractable P is in the "high" or "very high" range and P movement likely, manure should be applied at rates based on crop P removal. For p purposes, all of the Pin the manure should be considered crop available these cases. The consequence of P based management for a producer is more land is required to safely utilize the manure. Site Assessment / 's The final aspect of the Land and resource inventory is an assessme manure storage and utilization sites. Site maps of the farm and feeding tion are an important part of any nutrient management plan. Obtain ae 8 h "1 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 8MPs 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 wastevvater storage site evaluation 1. Is the soil texture coarse (sandy with low amounts of clay)? 2. Is the depth to ground water less than 50 feet in the Table 5. Approximate nitrogen lost as ammonia vicinity of manure storage? during handling and storage. 3. Have recent well water analyses indicated that local ground water NO3-N levels are increasing? System Estimated NHS N Loss 4. Is the horizontal distance of the feedlot to surface water ----%---- bodies (creeks, oonds, drainage ditches, etc.) or wellheads Solid ess than 150 feet? Daily scrape and haul 15-35 5. Does runoff from the feedlot surface leave your property? Manure pack 20-40 6. Does seepage from runoff storage ponds exceed .25 in/ Open lot 40-60 day? Liquid 7. Does seepage from lagoons exceed .03 in/day? Lagoon 70-80 8. Is manure stored within the 100 year flood plain? Anaerobic pit 15-30 te...., 9. Do runoff storage ponds lack the capacity to handle runoff Above-ground storage - 10-30 volumes from a 25 year, 24-hour storm? Source: MWPS-18, Livestock Waste Facilities Handbook Ka: Manure utilization sire evaluation 1. Do you lack sufficient land to use all of the nutrients in manure produceo on your farm? 2. Do any fields receiving manure have greater than a 1% Calculation 2. Determining land base for long- slope and little surface residue? term manure disposal based on crop N needs.* 3. Do any fields have a history of more than 5 consecutive years of manure application? Example: Feedlot applies manure to corn har- 4. Is excess water from irrigation or precipitation available vested for grain. Average yield is 175 bu/acre. for runoff or leaching? Using estimated N removal from Table 6 and 5. Is manure applied at rates greater than the agronomic Calculation la data: rate? 1) Crop nutrient removal (from Table 6): 6. Is there surface water or a well immediately downhill from 175 bu corn/acre x 56 lb./bu - 9,800 lb. any field which receives manure? grain/acre on harvest dried basis. 7. Has it been more than one year since you soil sampled to 9,800 lb. grain/acre x 1.6% N in dry harvested determine nutrient levels in fields where manure will be grain = 158 lb. N removed/acre applied? 2) Land needs (from Calculation la): If the answer to any one of these questions is yes, or if 77,625 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 the agronomic rate of about. Your nutrient management plan should address any application because it assumes no volatilization, leaching problem areas identified in the questions above. Manure rates or other N tosses or credits. may need to be adjusted downward and all appropriate BMPs 9 r '"1 employed where water resources Table 6. Nutrient content of the harvested part of selected Colorado crops. are at risk. Additionally, it may be Crop Dry weight Typical yield* N P helpful to periodically test wells content in content in near livestock operations and harvested harvested manured fields for N03 and material material bacterial contamination to tb./bu unit/A % determine if management prac- (harvest dry weight basis)** tices are sufficiently protecting Grain crops water quality. Barley 48 80 bu. 1.8 0.34 2 tons straw 0.8 0.11 NMP Section 2. Determination Corn 56 165 bu. 1.6 0.28 of Agronomic Rates tar Crop 3.5 tons stover 1.1 0.20 Production Oats 32 60 bu. 2.0 0.34 Determine agronomic rate of 1.5 tons straw 0.6 0.16 manure or effluent application for Rye 56 30 bu. 2.1 0.26 each field by assessing crop 1.5 tons straw 0.5 0.12 nutrient needs, available nutrient Sorghum (dryland) 56 60 bu. 1.7 0.36 credits, and nutrients in the 3 tons stover 1.1 0.15 manure. Worksheet 2 at the end Wheat (dryland) 60 40 bu. 2.1 0.62 of this document is provided as a 1.5 tons straw 0.7 0.07 template for this portion of your Oil crops nutrient management plan. Fill Canola 50 35 bu. 3.6 0.79 out one copy of Worksheet 2 for 3 tons straw 4.5 0.43 each field. An explanation of each feTh Soybeans 60 35 bu. 6.3 0.64 section is provided below. 2 tons stover 1.5 0.22 field Information Sunflower (drylancl) 25 1,100 lb. 3.6 1.71 Each field has specific 2 tons stover 1.5 0.18 nutrient requirements that will Forage crops vary from year to year. Begin your Alfalfa 4 tons 2.3 0.22 determination of agronomic rates Big bluestem 3 tons 1.0 0.85 by filling out 1 copy of Worksheet Birdsfoot trefoil 3 tons 2.5 0.22 2 for each field that receives Bromegrass 3 tons 1.9 0.21 manure. Note the soil texture or Alfalfa-grass 4 tons 1.5 0.27 soil name of each field. Sandy Little bluestem 3 tons 1.1 0.85 soils may require special consider- Orchardgrass 4 tons 1.5 0.20 ation to avoid nutrient leaching. Red clover 3 tons 2.0 0.22 Clay soils may be more prone to Reed canarygrass 4 tons 1.4 0.18 runoff. These considerations are Ryegrass 4 tons 1.7 0.27 important in a sound nutrient Switchgrass 3 tons 1.2 0.10 management plan. Previous crop Tall fescue 4 tons 2.0 0.20 grown is important because you Timothy 3 tops 1.2 0.22 may need to add more nutrients Wheatgrass (dryland) 1 ton 1.4 0.27 to help with residue breakdown or _ • Adapted from the USDA Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook. less nutrients due to N-fixation, ' Typical yields are for irrigated production unless noted otherwise. - . depending on the rotation t m%\ "Nutrient contents are on a harvest dnedhasis and do not need to be corrected.for moisture content except for silage and haylage . `-'^ ur- sequence. Manure applications lb. Px23—W. P,0, - �, .. ., from the previous year can aLso 10 supply significant amounts of nutrients in the current year due Table 6. Nutrient content of the harvested part of selected Colorado res, to the mineralization process. To crops. (continued) complete your records, attach the Crop Dry matter Typical yield* N P most recent soil and manure content in content in analysis reports to the field harvested harvested information sheet. material material Soil,Manure,Water and Plant Sampling °i° tons/acre °i° and Analysis (harvest dry weight basis)" A current soil test is needed Silage crops for each field receiving manure or Alfalfa haylage 50 10 wet/5 dry 2.8 0.33 effluent to determine residual soil Corn silage 35 20 wet/7 dry 1.1 0.25 NO3, extractable P and soil Forage sorghum 30 20 wet/6 dry 1.4 0.19 organic matter content. Soil Oat haylage 40 10 wet/4 dry 1.6 0.28 sampling for agronomic rate Sorghum-sudan 50 10 wet/5 dry 1.4 0.16 determination should occur once Sugar crops a year. More frequent sampling Sugar beets 20 0.2 0.03 may be needed to track N utiliza- Turf grass tion and movement in the soil Bluegrass 2 2.9 0.43 profile. Shallow soil samples (1 Bentgrass 2 3.1 0.41 foot or less) are needed to Vegetable crops evaluate crop P, K and other Bell peppers 9 0.4 0.12 • nutrient needs. Deeper rootzone Beans, dry 1 3.1 0.45 rsoil samples (generally 4 to 6 ft. Cabbage 20 0.3 0.04 deep) should be collected after Carrots 13 0.2 0.04 crop harvest and prior to any Celery 27 0.2 0.09 manure or effluent application to Cucumbers 10 0.2 0.07 evaluate residual soil NO3. Soil Lettuce (heads) 14 0.2 0.08 sampling below the active Onions 18 0.3 0.06 rootzone (>6 ft. for most annual Peas 2 3.7 0.40 crops, >10 ft. for hay crops) may Potatoes 14 0.3 0.06 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 Adapted from the USDA Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook: a good, representative soil ' Typical yields are for irrigated production unless noted otherwise. sample, it is recommended that a *' Nutrient contents are on a harvest dried basis and do not need to be corrected for moisture content except for silage and haylage. minimum of 1 soil core per 10 -- acres or at least 10 cores on fields 40 acres or smaller be collected to form the composite sample for each depth increment. Samples should be thoroughly mixed and either air-dried or delivered to the lab immediately. In situations where effluent or manure is applied in the fall after crop harvest, 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. r NH4 is available to crops and should be credited as part of the N budget in these particular situations. 11 Table 7a. Suggested nitrogen application rates for irrigated corn Manureis an extremely variable rte' grain (175 bu/A), based on soil N03-N and organic matter content. material whether in solid or liquid form. A representative manure sample is Soil N03-N (ppm)* Soil Organic Matter (%) critical for a reliable analysis. A mini- 0 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 >2.0 mum of six sub-samples should be ----Fertilizer rate (lb. N/A)--- taken and mixed together for analysis. 0 - 6 210 185 165 When sampling a solid manure stock- 7 - 12 160 135 115 pile, remove the crust, and use a bucket 13 - 18 110 85 65 auger or a sharpshooter (a narrow 19 - 24 60 35 15 shovel) to core into the pile as deeply >24 10 0 0 as possible. Walk around the pile, and take samples from all sides. Deliver the 'Average concentration of NO3-N (ppm) in 0 to 2 ft soil layer. sample to the lab immediately or if Add or subtract 1 lb. N/A for every bushel above or below 175 bu/A. immediate delivery is not possible, This table uses the formula: N rate- 35+ [1.2 x yield goal(bu/A)] - [8 x ppm soil NO3-N] - [0.14 x yield goal x freeze the sample in a freezer-type %o.M.]. 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. Table 7b. Suggested nitrogen application rates for irrigated corn Metals, micronutrients and E.C. are also silage (30 tons/A), based on soil N03-N and organic matter content. recommended analytes. When sampling a liquid manure or Soil NO3-N (ppm)* Soil Organic Matter (%) wastewater, there are several ways of rTh 0 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 >2.0 sampling. You can sample from the --Fertilizer rate (lb. N/A)-- lagoon directly with a water grab 0 - 6 225 200 185 sampler (be sure to walk or boat around 7 - 12 170 145 125 the lagoon and get a minimum of six 13 - 18 125 100 75 samples) or you can sample from a 19 - 24 75 50 30 valve inserted in the irrigation line or >24 25 0 0 from cups placed in the field where the *Average concentration of N03-N (ppm) in 0 to 2 ft soil layer. effluent is irrigated onto the land. Store Add or subtract 6 lb. N/A for every ton above nr below 30 ton/A. the sample in a plastic jar in a cooler or This table uses the formula: freezer and deliver to the tab immedi- N rate-35+ [7.5 x yield goal(tons/A)] - [8 x ppm soil NO3-N] - [0.85 x yield goat x ately. a O.M. Irrigation water should be ana- lyzed for NO: 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 r 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 eiTh can oe 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 Table 7c. Suggested nitrogen application rates for irrigated sorghum average growing conditions. Each grain (80 bu/A), based on soil nitrate and organic matter content field should have a yield history and expectation. Soil NO3-N (ppm)* Soil Organic Matter % Determining Total Nutrient Needs 1 - 1.0 1.1 - 2.0 >2.0 Crop nutrient needs are deter- ---Fertilizer rate (Lb. N/A)--- 25 mined using your yield expectations 0 - 3 75 45 and table values for fertilizer rates or 4 - 6 50 15 0 , . crop nutrient removal values. Most 7 9 25 0 0 .r :.. soil laboratories wilt also give '9zk , Via.' 0. 0• 0 fertilizer recommendations with soil *Average concentration of NO,-N (ppm) in 0 to 2 ft soil layer. •.. test results. Be sure you understand Add or subtract 12;5 Lb. N/A for every 10 bushels above or below 80 bu/A. the tab's fertilizer recommendation This table'uses the formula: . ,=:7' ,. _ philosophy to be sure it is compat- N rate-[1.25 x yield goat(bu/A)] - [8 x ppm soil NO,-N] - [0.30 x%0.M.]. ible with the production and envi- ronmental goals of your operation. In some cases, fertilizer appli- - -•"`^ . . .. - cation rates will need to be adjusted Table 7d. Suggested nitrogen application rates for irrigated sorghum above or below the standard table silage (30 tons/A), based on soil nitrate and organic matter content. values. Examples of these situations Soil NO N (pp i t. would be 1) where high amounts of 3 Soil Organuc Matter% Fa:, 0 1.0 y :.. 1.1 2.0 crop residue remain, increasing N fertilizer rate (lb N/A) r need by up to 30 lb./acre„ 2) where a 0 starter fertilizer is needed due to r £ cool soils, 3 where alfalfa is to be 7 ,> 190= "c,- 10 140.4. 13 -:: 15() : 120 . 10 maintained for more than 3 years, 19 - 2 h. e c' and 4) when manure has been r 110 c 80 60y applied in the previous year. Other 31 -3 25 0� -c , 30 .. 40 « 0 r N situations may exist that justify .. ° >36 0 0 0 manure rate adjustments. If so, document these adjustments on your *Average concentration of NO3-N (ppm) in 0 to 2 ft soil layer.It _ nutrient management plan. Add or subtract 9 lb. N/A for every ton above or below 30 ton/A. This table uses the formula: ' N rate- [9 x yield goat(tons/A)] - [8 x ppm soil NO,-N] - [30 x yield goal x%0.M.] 13 Available N and Pin Manure Table 7e. Suggested nitrogen application The total amount of N in manure is not plant available in the rates for irrigated grasses (4 tons/acre), first year after application due to the slow release of N tied :o in based on soil nitrate content. organic forms. Organic N becomes available to plants when soil microorganisms decompose organic compounds such as proteins, Soil NO3 N* Fertilizer Rate (ppm) (lb. N/A) and the N released is converted to NH . This process, known as 0 - 6 185 mineralization, occurs over a period of several years after manure 7 - 12 160 application. The amount mineralized in the first year depents 13 - 18 135 upon manure source, soil temperature, moisture, and handling. In 19 - 24 110 general, anywhere from 15 percent to 55 percent of the organic N 25 - 30 85 in manure becomes available to the crop in the first year after >30 0 application depending upon climate and management factors. Nitrogen availability can be estimated as a fraction of the total N ' Concentration of N0,-N (ppm) in the top foot of soil. content of manure or as a fraction of the organic N content. Add or subtract 40 lb. N/A for every ton/acre above or Organic N is usually determined by subtracting the NH; and NO. below 4 tons/A. from the total N content of the manure. This approach is more Use the same N rates for grass-legume mixtures PP containing less than 25% Legumes. accurate when reliable NH4 content and NH, volatilization numbers are available. Mineralization of N from applied manure will continue to • provide nutrients to the soil system for several years after application. This Table 8. Suggested broadcast P application rates (lbs. P20s/acre).* additional N must be accounted for in the nutrient management plan if manure will r NaHCO3 P be applied again to the same field within -------(ppm) three years. Mineralization credit for the 0 - ti 7 - 14 15 - 22 >22 second and third years after application -------lbs. P205/acre should be based upon a fraction of this Corn, irrigated 80 40 0 0 initial organic N content (Table 9). Alter- and dryland natively, annual soil sampling for residual Dry Beans 80 40 0 0 soil NO3-N, NH4-N and organic matter can Sorghum 80 40 0 0 be used to estimate mineralization credit Potatoes 240 180 120 60 in subsequent years. Sugarbeets 100 75 50 0 Phosphorus contained in manure is Sunflowers,: 80 40 0 0 usually considered to be entirely plant Wheat 80 40 0 0 available in the first year after application. Alfalfa, irrigated • In reality, some fraction of the P is tied-up new stand 200 150 50 0 in forms that are not immediately available established` 100 75 0 0 to plants. If soil test P is in the "low to Alfalfa, dryland.- medium" range and the soil is high in lime new stand_.. 60 40 0 0 content, it may be appropriate to assume established 45 30 0 0 that only 80 percent of the P will be plant Grass and grass..°.;:: available in the first year. legume mixtures l_ Volatilization Losses new stand 80 40 0 0 Surface applied manure should be established 80 40 0 0 incorporated as soon as possible to reduce * Band application rates for row crops are half of the suggested broadcast rate. odor and minimize nutrient loss by volatil- ization and runoff. The risk of surface loss 14 is reduced by injection application under the Table 9. Approximate percent of organic N mineralized from various manure rigs, soil surface, but loss stilt sources over three years. may occur on sloping or Manure Source Percent of Organic N Available erosive fields. Delayed incorporation may be In year 2nd year 3° year acceptable on levet Beef and dairy cattle fields if erosion control or sunlight decomposi- solid (without bedding) 30-40 ' 10-15 5-10 tion of pathogens is liquid (anaerobic) 25-35 5-10 2-7 desired. If solid manure Swine is not incorporated - solid 45-55 3-8 2-7 within 72 hours after liquid (anaerobic) 35-45 4-9 , 2-7 application, much of the Sheep 40 "S O. 5 NH -N fraction may be solid 20-30 - 10-15 ,- 5-10 lost to volatilization Horse (Table 10). The rate of solid (with bedding) 15-25 5-10 2-7 volatilization increases Poultry under warm, dry, or solid (without litter) 30-40 10-15 5-10 windy conditions. ._ Volatilization Losses Adapted from USDA Ag Waste Management Feld Handbook, 1992 and other sources." from liquid effluents can �--- - result in large N losses, ers since much of the N in effluents is in the NH, Table 10. Approximate percentage of ammonia lost to volatilization within four form, which is easily days after application, ' y converted to ammonia - gas. An accurate predic- Application Method Type of Waste Estimated NH Lou tion or measurement oft the Atmosphere* the amount of N volatil- % -- zed from liquid manures Broadcast without cultivation solid , 15 30 s difficult to obtain Broadcast with immediate cultivation solid or liquid 1 5 because both the Injection liquid c e.,;:. 0 2 - application method and Sprinkler irrigation** liquid 25 65 =� the ambient climate will * Values reflect Loss under each application method. ."-` "- determine the rate of ** Losses vary widely depending upon conditions at time of application. r flux. Additionally, Source: MWPS-18, Livestock Waste Facilities Handbook or4 ',, _ accurate measurement of """`' " c- f NH4 content of manure is confounded by a high degree of variability in NH, 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, white 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- r 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 Calculation 3. Estimating irrigation water N credit. exceeds the suosequent crop N requirement, no additional Example: N credit from 17 inches of irrigation water containing 10 ppm NO3-N effluent, manure, or commercial IV fertilizer should be applied. 17 inches /A x (2.7 lb. N/acre foot) x (10 ppm NO3-N) = 38 lb. N/A Nutrient Credits 12 inches/acre foot Residual soil NO,, irrigation water, soil organic matter, and previous legume crops all contrib- ute N to the growing crop. The N Table 11. Nitrogen credits for crop requirements. contribution from these sources must be credited in order to make N Source N Credit accurate fertilizer and manure Soil organic matter* 30 lb. N per % OM recommendations. Use soil and Residual soil nitrate* 3.6 lb. N per ppm NO3-N (1 ft. sample) water test data and the informa- Irrigation water 2.7 lb. N per acre foot x ppm NO3-N tion in Table 11 to estimate these Previous alfalfa crop credits. In some cases, these >80°6 stand 100-140 lb. N/acre credits may entirely satisfy crop 60 - 80% stand 60-100 lb. N/acre needs and no additional manure <60% stand 30-60 lb. N/acre or fertilizer is required. A starter Other previous legume crop 30 lb. N/acre fertilizer may be all the supple- Previous manure or effluent Varies by source, rate and time (Table 9) mental fertilizer that is justified in these cases in order to en- *These credits are factored in N rates given in tables 7a - 7e and should not be used twice. hance seedling vigor if the crop is seeded in cool soils. Irrigation water containing NO3 can supply N to the crop since it is applied and taken up while the crop is actively growing. Water tests for NO3-N should be taken periodically during the irrigation season to accurately calculate this credit. Multiply p.m. NO3-N by 2.7 lb./acre foot times the amount of irrigation water consumptively used by the crop prior to the mid-reproductive stage (in acre feet) to determine lbs. N/acre applied in the irrigation water. Inexpensive quick tests are available for on-farm water testing. If a water sample is taken for laboratory analysis, it should be kept refrigerated, but not frozen, until it gets to the lab. Legume crops can be a very significant source of plant available N due to bacterial N2 fixation in root nodules. Plowing down a good stand of alfalfa may release more than 100 lbs. of N per acre in the first year after plowdown. The amount of N credit given for legumes depends upon the crop, stand, and degree of nodulation. A minimum of 30 lbs. of N/acre should be credited in the first year after any legume crop (Table 11). Total all available nutrient sources from soil testing, irrigation water, legumes and any other organic amendments to determine the total nutrient credit. Due to the difficulty of accurately assessing these credits, be sure to scout fields for nutrient sufficiency during the vegetative growth stages. Recommended Nutrient Application Rate Once you have analyzed crop needs, nutrient credits, and manure nutrient content, you can determine manure application rates. Total crop nutrient need minus total nutrient credits will equal the recommended nutrient application 16 r^ ^^� rate. This can be satis- fled by manure, fertilizer, Calculation 4. Determining agronomic rate of manure application. teThor a combination of Example 4a. Beef feedlot manure broadcast aooilied and incorporated immediately both. Manure application rate based upon N requirement In general, manure Step 1: Calculate available N in manure and effluent application N content of manure = 23 lb. total N/ton including 7 lb. NH4 N/ton should be avoided on (from Table 4) frozen fields unless a Available N = 35% availability x (23 lb./total N/ton manure - site specific analysis 7 lb. NI- N/ton) + 7 lb. NH<N/ton (from Table 8) shows that runoff will = 12 lb. available N/ton manure not occur. Effluent or Step 2: Determine crop N requirement manure should not be ex. soil contains 1.50/0 organic matter and 6 ppm residual soil NO2-N applied to any soil that N required for 175 bu corn crop = 185 lb. N/acre (from Table 7a) is saturated or has a Step 3: Subtract N credits from other sources. snow pack of greater ex. 25 lb. NO3-N (in 2-4 foot subsoil sample) than one inch. Addition- 185 lb. N required - 25 lb. subsoil N ally, animal waste should = 160 lb. N needed not be applied to soils Step 4: Calculate agronomic manure rate. that are frequently = (160 lb. N/acre) / (12 lb. available N/ton manure) flooded, as defined by = 13 tons manure/acre the National Cooperative Step 5: Calculate phosphorus supplied by manure (based on N rate) Soil Survey, during the 13 tons manure/acre x 24 lb. P205/ton manure period when flooding is = 312 lb. P205/acre supplied by manure r• expected to occur. Manure is most Manure application rate based upon P requirement: valuable as a nutrient Step 1: Calculate available P in manure source if it is applied as Total P205 = 24 lb. P205/ton (from Table 4) close to planting as Available P205 = 80% availability x 24 lb. P205/ton manure possible. However, = 19 lb. available P205/ton manure manure with a high salt Step 2: Determine crop P requirement content may affect ex. NaHCO3 extractable P = 6 ppm (low range) and soil lime content is high germination and seedling P required for 175 bu corn crop = 80 lb. P205 (from Table 8) growth of sensitive Step 3: Determine agronomic manure rate crops, such as beans. If = (80 lb. P205/acre) / (19 Lb. available P205/ton fall application is manure) necessary in order to = 4 tons manure/acre clean out manure storage Step 4: Calculate nitrogen supplied by manure (based on P rate) areas, try to wait until 4 tons manure/acre x 23 lb.total N/ ton manure after soil temperature is = 92 lb. total N/acre supplied by manure. less than 50°F to reduce organic N and NH, conversion to NO3. If irrigation equipment is available to apply liquid manure, the best practice is to apply manure in frequent, light applications during the growing season to match crop uptake patterns and nutrient needs. If manure is applied at the maximum rate based upon crop N needs, ( " additional fertilizer N should not be applied. Maximum rate is based upon a one- time application. If yearly application of manure or effluent is made, lower rates 11 ed.„1 Calculation 4. Determining agronomic rate of manure application, continued. Example 4b. Swine effluent from a two stage anaerobic lagoon Effluent application rate based upon N requirement: Step 1: Calculate available N in effluent N content of manure - 4 tb. total N/1000 gal including 3 lb. NH4 N/1000 gal (from Table 4) Available NHS N s 50% volatilization x 3 lb. NH,-N/1000 gal effluent (from Table 10) = 1.5 lb. available NH4-N/1000 gal effluent Available organic N = 1 lb. organic N x 40% mineralization (Table 9) = 0.4 lb. available organic N Total available N = 1.5 lb. NH<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) r - 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 F. - 163 lb: P205/acre supplied by effluent .. •Multiply Ili/1000 gal effluent by 27.15 to convert to lb./acre inch. Effluent application rate based upon P requirement Step 1: Calculate available Pin effluent Total P'205 ::. = 2 lb. P205/1000 gal effluent (from Table 4) `Available P205 = 80% availability x 2 lb. P20/1000 gal effluent el,h a 1.6 lb. available P2011000 gal effluent :�� - 43 lb. available P20Jacre inch effluent'..: 6Step 2 Calculate crop P requirement __ '; L l. ex. NaliCO3 extractable P - 6 ppm (low range) and soil lime content is high - _-. -- a, P rerquired�for 175 bu corn crop a 80 lb. P05/acre (from Table OW , ?. Step 3 Determine agronomic effluent rate: t,t. g • F.': = (80 lb. P205/acre) L(43 lb available P205acre inch effluent) �i- t. • = 2 acre inches of total effluent/acre for this crop year r -. xf' r. ."^ X (To be applied in 2 or:more applications) xT} ^'°'r - ,- , v Step 4 Calculate nitrogen supplied by effluent manure (based on P rate) 2 acre inches effluent/acre x 52 lb. available N/acre inch .:4';"1/4*(4??S - - 104 lb.available N supplied by Manure,;24..i," 1. F . •Multiply lb/1000 gal effluent by 27.15 to convert to lb./acre inch . , ,... 18 i^ r 's r Volatilization T Livestock Feed - '�....: � /� �j f t,„ ^�dG Jf�� G`ili lt,Ge� afiiil�� jObi 4[I d�, G J1 U Collection - I �\ ° % }�o P � from Lot' -IP I ►' ,d°i%10 �e'�i� ;�ti << I� itenti� � � Apply to Land ��;I",�.t R,�,�� 1� F •^ ��s��'�Ur �° o; STORAGE ° Nutrient i "` � '� p.fi° o Use ° /' ! • , .e ,.�, > o 0 o n o ° o o ° 0 Ya �a ° a Potential 0 0 o ° ; e o ° o °°o Leaching ° ° 0 ° I r ° ° ° O o o °C5 •Do c o o ° p o 0 00 °° °Q� Potential';e;.;o 3� Ili °• D . I e ,ttO�° o�P®I CSO r Leaching- a° )�� i {i ® r °O� Di ® j e ® ° 6 1,,; © ,., ell 4 {yo O a o © @ 010 D -I O i. �.-• So 'j©� • wso„ p CGRO'U�NMDWATER ,, by oo,® k 9 ` e®bw$ �®off i �', °0 ® y O4 e o0p Ike m ‘,"'Or., > • aP �' it r 0 �. s� i® vla s°i® a b. en>u' I '�� ri Q doc, °ra �� r�° O' , -i 1„),;uO' (. Yom,.a, oi0° Q 0 �� U ili 9F �ap m v °O to oaam�©e®Doom ;�' o%poop� t�/��.. •® o�o�t'�a0o ;" cz, ot.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. NIP Section 3. Nutrient Use Summary Operation and Maintenance Farm-wide accounting of manure and fertilizer application is the final aspect of a nutrient management plan. This is important to help document a balance between manure production and utilization. Worksheet 3 is provided to help record annual application data. After tallying total nutrient application, you can evaluate nutrient sufficiency or excess on the farm by comparing these numbers to manure production on Worksheet 1. A number of other items should be assessed on an annual basis as a part of nutrient management planning. These include equipment calibration, soil tests, and monitoring water quality near the operation. r Accurate record keeping is an essential component of any manure manage- ment program. Keeping accurate records allows managers to make good 13 ("IN "1 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 Ip and Monttorieg 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 welt as soils within and below the rootzone, to determine what adjustments are needed each year in the operating plan to continue protecting water quality. r 20 r\ r Best .fan. gemenftPractices I a r ICImal a �U� n tip e Guidance Principle: Collect, store, and apply animal manures properly to optimize efficiency while protecting water quality. To select manure BMPs that achieve water quality goals and the greatest net returns for your operation, consider: • most suitable practices for your site and management constraints • need to protect sensitive resources and areas General BMPs . 3.1 Develop a nutrient management plan for your operation that includes: 1. Estimates of manure production on your farm 2. Farm maps which identify manure stockpiles, potential application sites and sensitive resource areas 3. Cropping information 4. Soil, plant, water, and manure analysis 5. Realistic crop yield expectations 6. Determination of crop nutrient needs 7. Determination of available nutrient credits 8. Recommended manure rates, timing, and application methods 9. Operation and maintenance plans 3.2 Base manure application rates on crop phosphorus (P) needs IF soil test P is in the high or very high category, the field drains to any sensitive surface water body, AND P movement is likely. In most other cases, appli- cation rates may be based on crop N needs. 3.3 Apply commercial N and P fertilizer to manured fields only when soil available N and P from manure application does not satisfy crop needs. 3.4 Cease effluent application if crop is destroyed during growing season. Plant winter cover crops to scavenge excess nutrients when crop uptake is lower than expected due to hail or other yield limitations. 3.5 Maintain nutrient management plans and actual manure and fertilizer management records on file a minimum of three years or the duration of your crop rotation, if longer than three years. 3.6 Scout fields for nutrient deficiencies/sufficiency throughout the season in order to identify and correct problems that may limit economic crop yields. r 21 rs eTh Manure Appli�cation'BMPs 3.7 Incorporate manure as soon as possible after application to minimize volatilization losses, reduce odor, and prevent runoff. 3.8 Apply manure uniformly with properly calibrated equipment. 3.9 Time Liquid manure applications to match crop nutrient uptake patterns in order to minimize the opportunity for NO3 Leaching on coarse textured soils. Effluent application amounts must not exceed the soil water holding capacity of the active rootzone. Several light applications of liquid manure during the growing season are better than a single heavy application. 3.10 Limit solid manure application on frozen or saturated ground to fields not. subject to runoff. Liquid effluent should not be applied to frozen or saturated ground. 3.11 Create a buffer area around surface water and wells where no manure is applied to prevent the possibility of water contamination. 3.12 Plant permanent vegetation strips around the perimeter of surface water and erosive fields to catch and 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. f"", Manure Collection and Storage BMPs 3.14 Locate manure stockpiles, lagoons, and ponds a safe distance from all water supply wells. Manure stockpiles, lagoons, and runoff collection ponds should be located on areas not subject to leaching and must be above the 100 year flood plain, unless adequate flood proofing structures are pro- vided. 3.15 Inspect lagoons and liquid manure storage ponds regularly to ensure seepage does not exceed state and local restrictions. 3.16 Divert runoff from pens and manure storage sites by construction of ditches or terraces. Collect runoff water from the lot in a storage pond; minimize Solid manure application runoff volume by diverting runoff water from crossing the feedlot. 3.17 Clean corrals as frequently as possible to maintain a firm, dry corral surface with the loose manure layer less than one inch deep and pen moisture content between 25 percent to 35 percent. Avoid mechanical disturbance of the manure-soil seal when cleaning feedlots. Create a smooth mss, 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 r'N, AgPro Environmental Services, LLC 08.15.2000 r~` Appendix D • Soil Testing Protocol • Process Wastewater/Stormwater Testing Protocol • Solid Manure Testing Protocol • Irrigation Water Testing Protocol r� Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 16 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Aug-00 Soil Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies field information sheets, soil sample containers as well as the proper instructions. In the absence of supplied sample bags, use sterile plastic bags. • A typical soil sample consists of one pound of soil. • Sample soil each spring, fields that will have manure applied that spring and/or the coming fall., and fields that had manure applied the previous year. • Sample soil before manure or fertilizer application, and before planting. • Sample each field separately. • Mark sampling points on a field map that is to scale. Use the same maps to mark where and how much manure is applied each year. • A sampling point should encompass no more than ten acres and should be evenly distributed across a field. If a field is ten acres or less, then two sampling points should be marked. • Use a coring tool to collect the samples. Collect samples from the 0-24" horizon in one- foot increments. Collect one composite sample from each 80 acres of field size. Each composite sample should include 8-12 different sampling points across the 80-acre parcel. 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) r AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Aug-00 Process Wastewater / Stormwater Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook,NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic sample containers. • A typical process wastewater/ stormwater sample consists of 250 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. P'" • 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) r^ AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Aug-00 Solid Manure Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook,NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic bags as sample containers. • A typical solid manure sample consists of one to five pounds. • Test solid manure at least once per year. • Sample solid manure in a manner, which will give the most representative sample possible. Accomplish this by randomly sampling several stockpiles of manure throughout the feedlot/dairy. Take at least four sub-samples and mix them together in a large plastic bucket to make one composite sample. • Do not collect excessive amounts of dirt; manure that is wet, or other foreign material. • Place the composite manure samples in the sterile plastic bags provided by the lab. Fill the bags full and seal well, with as little air space as possible (if air space is allowed, then some of the ammonium will volatilize and the test will not be accurate). • Mark samples with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain- of-custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep the samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by f"'+, 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. r1 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Aug-00 Irrigation Water Testing Protocol • Use a qualified laboratory. (Olsen's Agricultural Laboratory, Inc., McCook, NE) • Utilize the same lab annually. • The lab typically supplies plastic bottles as sample containers. • A typical water sample consists of 100 ml to one liter. • Test irrigation water at least once per year. • Test irrigation water at the peak of the irrigation season. • If using ditch water, take the sample after the ditch has been running for several days. Take the sample at a relatively clear spot in the ditch about mid-depth. • If utilizing well water, take the sample after the well has been running for several days. Take the sample from a spigot near the well. Allow the water to run from the spigot at least five minutes before sampling. • Fill the sample bottle to the indicated line and cap it. • Mark samples with the date, sample identification and samplers name. Complete a chain- of-custody form and send it with the samples. • Keep water samples cool by packing in ice, and send to the lab as soon as possible and by the fastest method available. Make sure the samples will arrive at the lab in a cool state r within.48 hours of sampling. • Have the laboratory evaluate irrigation water samples for the following parameters at a minimum: pH Nitrate-N r AgPro Environmental Services,LLC 08.15.2000 r 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 ris • Pond/Lagoon Inspection Form r Dyelands Dairy, LLC Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plan 17 AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Aug-00 PRECIPITATION LOG (Record precipitation after each event&frequent duringduring events if rainfall is intense or for long duration.) Facility Name: _ Year: Rain Gauge Location: Date Time • Time Ela.sed Be:. Readin: End Readin: Total Rainfall Comments: _ AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Aug-00 (" 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-rate =35 +[1.2 x yield goal(ha/acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NO3-N]—[0.14 x yield goal x%O.M]. Corn Silage:N-rate=35+[7.5 x yield goal(tons/acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NOrN]—[0.85 x yield goal s%O.M.] c) Special nitrogen need above recommendations d) Total nitrogen need 3. Nitrogen Credits: N (lb./acre) a) Residual soil nitrate credit* (3.6 lb.N per ppm NO3-N(1 ft. sample)) b) Irrigation water credit(2.7 lb. N pr acre-foot x ppm NO3-N) c)Organic matter credit* (30 lbs.N per% O.M.) d) Previous legume crop(see Table 11 in CSU Bulletin No. 568A) e)Other:_ f) Total nitrogen credit *if not included in 2b above. Do not use N credits twice, i.e. from Tables 7a-7e and here. 4. Recommended Nitrogen Application Rate: Nitrogen a) Total nitrogen need minus Total nitrogen credit(lb./acre) b) Expected Ammonium-N volatilization c)NI-14-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 11-b)J + [d x el) lb./1000 gal g) Recommended manure application rate(a -f) 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: P"s% AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Aug-00 • Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet - Solid Manure Application _ s Sference material needed:Soil test data,manure test data and CSU Bulletin No.568A 1. Field Information: Crop Crop year Number of Acres Soil name/texture Previous crop 2. Nitrogen Need: • N (lb./acre) a) Expected yield(avg.of last 5 yrs.+5%) (bu/acre,ton/acre,etc.) b)Nitrogen recommendations from Tables 7a-7e in CSU Bulletin No.568A (or use one of the following formulas for corn or corn silage) Corn:N-rate=35+ [1.2 x yield goal(bu/acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NO,-N]—[0.14 x yield goal x%O.M]. Corn Silage:N-rate =35 +[7.5 x yield goal(tons/acre)]—[8 x ppm soil NOj-N]—[0.85 x yield goal x%O.M.] c) Special nitrogen need above recommendations d) Total nitrogen need 3. Nitrogen Credits: N (lb./acre) a) Residual soil nitrate credit* (3.6 lb. N per ppm NO3-N(1 ft. sample)) b) Irrigation water credit(2.7 lb. N pr acre-foot x ppm NO3-N) c)Organic matter credit* (30 lbs.N per% O.M.) d) Previous legume crop(see Table 11 in CSU Bulletin No. 568A) e) Other: f) Total nitrogen credit *If not included in 2b above. Do not use N credits twice, i.e. from Tables 7a-7e and here. 4. Recommended Nitrogen Application Rate: Nitrogen a) Total nitrogen need minus Total nitrogen credit(lb./acre) b) Expected Ammonium-N volatilization c)NI-14-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 el) lb./ton g) Recommended manure application rate (a #f) 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 Aug-00 PROCESS WASTEWATER APPLICATION LOG (Record manure application data several times per day when applying process wastewater.) Facility Name: Year: Field I.D.: _ Crop: Water Changed GPM reached Initials of Time Meter Gallons Pressure water Date Time Elapsed Reading Pumped being @ pump end of setting? Person pumped rows? (Y�) Pumping (YIN) Calculation: (1) Total Gallons Pumped: (2) Total Acres in Field: (3) Gallons per Acre Pumped: [Line 1 =Line 2] (4) Plant Available Nitrogen in Effluent: lb./1000 gal [Line 4ffrom Agronomic Rate Determination Sheet Process Wastewater Application] (5) Plant Available Nitrogen Applied: lb./Acre [(Line 4 *Line 3) =1000] AgPro Environmental Services, LLC Aug-00 SOLID MANURE APPLICATION LOG (Record manure application data every day when applying solid manure.) Facility Name: Year: Field I.D.: Crop: #Of loads Average tare-weight Total pounds Total tons Tons per Initials of Date hauled of loads hauled(lbs.) hauled hauled acre appliedA in Person 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 Aug-00 t'"` 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 Total weight Person hauled of loads hauled (lbs.) hauled (lbs.) hauled (tons) hauling Comments: _ l- AgPro Environmental Services,LLC Aug-00 ("4'. Pond/Lagoon Inspection Form (Inspect ponds/lagoons monthly.) Facility Name: Pond Name: Person Performing Inspection: Date: Item Yes /No Follow-Up Date Follow-Up Initials Needed? Y/N Completed 2 feet freeboard existing? 25-year/24-hour capacity available? Visible bank erosion? Visible seepage on sides or base? Rodent burrows or holes? Trees, stumps or roots on dike? ( Inlet clear and erosion free? Sludge/Solids accumulation present? Other: Other: Other: Comments: Hello