Manure management—how manure is captured, stored, treated, and used—has important implications for farm productivity and the environment. When applied according to the agronomic needs of crops, manure can improve productivity by reducing the need for commercial fertilizer. Farmers who install an anaerobic digester on their livestock operations can use manure to produce a biogas that can be burned to generate electricity. Digesters can also reduce greenhouse gas emissions from manure storage and handling. Manure management can affect water quality. The over-application of manure nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorous) to cropland can increase the risk that these nutrients flow into surface water. Agriculture is a major source of the nutrient pollution causing hypoxic "dead" zones in many areas of the country, including the Chesapeake Bay, Gulf of Mexico and the Great Lakes. ERS research examines how agricultural and environmental policies combined with market forces and the changing structure of animal agriculture influence manure management decisions, farm income and environmental outcomes.
If you want to learn more, please visit our website.
Improving manure management. Developing new uses and markets for manure may result in both economic and environmental benefits. The ERS report, Increasing the Value of Animal Manure for Farmers (AP-109, March ), uses data from the USDA Agricultural Resource Management Survey (ARMS) to describe current manure production, handling, storage, and use. An extensive review of manure-related research describes existing and emerging technologies that have the potential to increase the value of manure or reduce manure management costs.
Options to reduce agricultural pollutants in the Chesapeake Bay. In , a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) was established for the Chesapeake Bay, setting limits on emissions of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment necessary to reverse declines in the Bay’s quality. Agriculture is the largest source of nutrients and sediment in the watershed. The cost of achieving water quality goals depends heavily on which policies are selected and how they are implemented. The ERS report, An Economic Assessment of Policy Options To Reduce Agricultural Pollutants in the Chesapeake Bay (ERR-166, June ), assesses several policy instruments for achieving the TMDL goals to identify which policy design features lead to a more cost-effective solution.
Greenhouse gas emissions and the adoption of digesters on livestock operations. Methane digesters—biogas recovery systems that use methane from manure to generate electricity—have not been widely adopted in the United States because costs have exceeded benefits to operators. Burning methane in a digester reduces greenhouse gas emissions from manure management. ERS research, Climate Change Policy and the Adoption of Methane Digesters on Livestock Operations (ERR-111, February ), considers how a policy or program that pays producers for these emission reductions—through a carbon offset market or directly with payments—could increase the number of livestock producers who would profit from adopting a methane digester.
Rick Koelsch - Professor of Biological Systems Engineering, Daniel Andersen - Iowa State University, Erin Cortus - University of Minnesota, Leslie Johnson - Animal Manure Management Project Coordinator, Amy M. Schmidt - Livestock Bioenvironmental Engineer, Melissa Wilson - University of Minnesota
Animal manures can be a “valuable asset” or a “pain in the assets”. The right amounts in the right location can be very beneficial to Nebraska’s crop, soil, and water resources. Too much manure or manure in the wrong place is an environmental concern. Our ability to place manure where its benefits are maximized and to manage manure so that its challenges are minimal is important to agriculture’s sustainability.
During the winter of , 957 farmers and their advisors shared their perspective on the benefits and barriers to manure use. This article focuses on their perceptions of manure’s benefits and a later article will target their thoughts on the barriers. Understanding farmers’ and advisors’ experiences and knowledge of benefits and barriers is critical to using manure as a valuable asset! We invite you to learn more about:
Recycling of nutrients is critical to an environmentally sound agricultural “circular economy”. Animal agriculture must recycle the nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) in manures, typically as a soil fertility amendment, to be environmentally sustainable. With feed supplies commonly originating from cropland not managed by animal feeding operations, recycling should involve manures being transferred to crop farms, possibly with little or no history of manure use. Agriculture’s “circular economy” is an essential foundation for a sustainable future.
Sifeng supply professional and honest service.
A faculty team from University of Nebraska, University of Minnesota, and Iowa State University is addressing the need to expand the acres receiving animal manures. The project team with the guidance of a stakeholder advisory group of farmers and advisors, implemented a survey of perceptions of animal manure’s benefits and challenges. American Society of Agronomy’s (ASA) International Certified Crop Adviser (ICCA) Program, Manure Manager magazine, and others promoted this survey among farmers and their advisors. The current survey, requiring less than 10 minutes to complete, remains open for additional response at http://go.unl.edu/manure
Responses have been received from 957 individuals from the U.S. and Canada (Figure 2). Our survey responses represent those individuals who have a history of manure use. For example, 73% of farmers responding use manure annually. Our results provide insight to manure’s benefits and challenges from frequent users.
Five characteristics identified as “Potential Benefits” by our project’s stakeholder advisory group were evaluated for survey participants’ perceptions and understanding (Figure 3a/b).
The agronomic and yield benefits of animal manures are commonly valued as beneficial. Ninety nine percent of farmers and advisors labeled manure as beneficial or slightly beneficial to meet crop fertility needs. Manure was seen as beneficial or slightly beneficial for improving crop yields by 92% of responses. Most of those responding believed they were either Very or Moderately Knowledgeable of these topics.
Farmers and their advisors share a strong recognition of the value of manure to soil physical and biological properties. Most believed they were moderately knowledgeable on manure’s value to soil health. The survey and other experiences suggest that some additional work is needed to help farmers connect manure to the soils that will benefit the most from the organic matter in manure.
Farmers and their advisors have a mixed opinion of manure’s benefits to environmental quality (described primarily as water quality). Roughly equal responses described manure as either “beneficial” (37% of responses) and “harmful” (32% of responses) to water quality. A history of over applying manure and managing it as a waste product, is likely responsible for negative impressions of manure and water quality. Possibly, less well understood are the water quality benefits that accompany agronomic manure application rates, current practice for many animal feeding operations. If manure is applied at agronomic rates, farmers need to be sharing the water quality benefits resulting from substituting manure for fertilizer with our rural neighbors and policy makers.
Next month, we will look at the barriers to expanded manure use.
The authors wish to thank the Manure Manager magazine, ASA ICCA program, The Fertilizer Institute, and our many partners in Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska for promoting this survey.
Contact us to discuss your requirements of Manure Handling System. Our experienced sales team can help you identify the options that best suit your needs.