Journal of Nutrient Management - Q2 - May 2024

j.dewitt@bauer-at.com

t.poteat@bauer-at.com

j.moeggenberg@bauer-at.com

r.francis@bauer-at.com

r.hultgren@bauer-at.com

Managing Editor

Abby Bauer

Art Director

Todd Garrett

Editorial Coordinator

Jennifer Yurs

Director of Marketing

John Mansavage

Advertising Sales

Beth Gierke bgierke@nutrientmgmt.com

Advertising Coordinator Patti Kressin pkressin@hoards.com

Online Media Manager Patti Hurtgen phurtgen@hoards.com

Digital Marketing Manager Sam Rasmussen samr@hoards.com

Publisher W.D. Hoard & Sons Co. Brian V. Knox, President

CONTACT INFORMATION

Editorial Office PO Box 801 28 Milwaukee Ave. West Fort Atkinson, WI 53538

Website: www.jofnm.com Email: info@jofnm.com Phone: 920-563-5551

Journal of Nutrient Management (ISSN# 26902516) is published four times annually in February, May, August, and November by W.D. Hoard & Sons Company, 28 Milwaukee Ave. West, Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin 53538 Tel: (920) 563-5551. Email: info@ jofnm.com Website: www.jofnm.com. Postmaster: Send address corrections to: Journal of Nutrient Management, PO Box 801, Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin 53538-0801. Tel: (920) 563-5551. Email: info@jofnm. com. Subscription Rates: Free and controlled circulation to qualified subscribers. For Subscriber Services contact: Journal of Nutrient Management, PO Box 801, Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin 53538, call (920) 563-5551, Email: info@jofnm.com.

Copyright © 2024 W.D. Hoard & Sons Company. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Content may not be reproduced or used for any commercial activity without express written consent from W. D. Hoard & Sons Company

Abby Bauer Managing Editor

Stuck on farming

few weeks ago, I received a phone call from a reader you might put into the “unhappy customer” category. An article he read in one of our other publications spurred him to dial our office number and air his frustration about content that focused on carbon credits, climate change, greenhouse gases, and the like.

Loud and clear, he left me with this parting thought: “Stick to farming.”

I am sure there are others out there who feel similarly, and I certainly took those comments to heart. Our three magazines are produced, first and foremost, with farmers in mind. For more than 135 years, we have aimed to share practices that work on farms and are backed by research. It is a guiding principle of our editorial team, and I want to be sure we live up to that.

Still, there is growing awareness and pressure to be more environmentally mindful. This is not just on the farm; we see it in our everyday lives. Drive less. Recycle more. Stop wasting food. Don’t use plastic straws. Things we have done for years are coming into question.

I believe most farmers would prefer to focus on farming — working with animals, crops, or equipment — over other parts of running a business, such as monitoring financials, managing employees, or planning for the future. Dealing with environmental regulations and growing requirements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions would also fall into this category.

But like it or not, much focus in this charge to save the planet is stuck on farming. A spotlight has been shined on agriculture as one of the industries that releases greenhouse gases, and that means we as livestock producers — and agriculture as a whole — are on the clock to make changes that benefit the environment. Having this finger pointed at us is frustrating, but fortunately, we have opportunities to make a difference.

Improvements have already been made and documented. In a report released by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), titled Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2022, it was stated that American agricul-

ture reduced emissions by almost 2% from 2021 to 2022. That was the largest reduction of any economic sector and the lowest level of greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture since 2012. These changes don’t happen overnight, and they don’t happen on their own. It takes action all along the food chain, from consumers and retailers to processors and farmers. And if we don’t want people too far up the chain making the decisions that impact us at the farm level, we need to be part of the solution. You can read how one farmer got involved with improving water quality in California’s Central Valley on page 12. Around the globe, many eyes are focused on farming, questioning the water we use, the methane our cattle release, where our manure goes, and so on. While we may prefer to just stick to farming, that isn’t in the best interest of our businesses or the world around us.

If I toss an aluminum can in the garbage instead of the recycling bin, I am not singlehandedly ruining the planet. Similarly, one farm isn’t causing tremendous damage because of the emissions it releases. But collectively, our actions make a difference, for better or for worse. With so many critics stuck on farming as a contributor to global warming or climate change or whatever you want to call it, we really can’t separate farming from its impact on the environment. Farming and sustainability have always gone hand in hand, but now more than ever, it behooves us to be part of the conversations to tackle these environmental concerns rather than be forced to react to them someday not too far down the road.

Until next time, Abby

Let us know your thoughts. Write Managing Editor Abby Bauer, 28 Milwaukee Ave. West, P.O. Box 801, Fort Atkinson, WI 53538; call: 920-563-5551; or email: abauer@jofnm.com.

POLICY WATCH

UNITED STATES

The American Feed Industry Association (AFIA) challenged reports alleging that the highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) virus was spread to dairy cattle through the consumption of chicken litter. In a statement, the AFIA emphasized that USDA and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have not found a link between chicken litter and HPAI in dairy cattle. At this time, wild migratory birds are the believed culprit.

Dried poultry litter is an approved feed ingredient and protein source for cattle, but it is not widely used in dairy cattle diets. The FDA stated that chicken litter does not pose an animal or human threat and therefore does not warrant usage restrictions.

OREGON

Oregon’s Department of Agriculture withdrew its decision requiring small dairy farms to apply for concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) permits. Last year, the state reinterpreted its definition of a CAFO to include any livestock or poultry operation that housed animals indoors, discharged into waterways, or relied on wet systems for waste treatment. This meant that small farms, even those with just a few cows, would need to comply. The agency’s decision to reverse the decision followed a lawsuit filed by four small-scale dairy producers in the state.

UNITED STATES

The Enteric Methane Innovation Tools for Lower Emissions and Sustainable Stock (EMIT LESS) Act was introduced with bipartisan support by Michael Bennet (DCO), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Mike Crapo (R-ID), and Jerry Moran (R-KS). The bill would provide support for research and directs USDA to expand domestic capacity to develop and expand the adoption of enteric methane solutions. It would also make enteric methane reduction products and practices eligible for cost-share under several USDA conservation programs.

THE INNOVATIVE BIOSELECT FOR EFFICIENT MANURE SEPARATION.

OHIO

The Ohio Department of Agriculture expanded its H2Ohio incentive program for agricultural producers. The program provides funding to farmers to help offset costs associated with implementing best management practices that improve water quality in the state.

H2Ohio is a comprehensive, datadriven approach to improving water quality over the long term. The program was launched in 2019 in the Western Lake Erie Basin, where producers enrolled 1.4 million acres and reduced phosphorus runoff by an estimated 317,000 pounds. In 2024, farmers outside of this area are able to join the program, with an enrollment cap of 500,000 new acres statewide. Expansion of the program is supported by $270 million in funding from the Ohio General Assembly in the current operating budget.

FEATURES:

+ Low Life-Cycle Costs

+ Turnkey from a Single Source: Separator Pump(s)

Control Unit Stationary or Mobile Skids

+ Large Capacities

+ Patented Profile Auger with Counter Bearing for No Auger Screen Contact

+ Continuously Variable Dry Matter Content

844-647-7867 | www.boerger.com

Putting methane from manure into perspective

There are many variables that affect greenhouse gas emissions, but we know some solutions have clear and compelling benefits.

by Lauren Ray

The two lesser-known greenhouse gases, methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2 O), dominate in agriculture as opposed to carbon dioxide (CO2). Yet, there is three times more carbon dioxide emitted globally each year than methane and nitrous oxide combined. With carbon dioxide being a “stock” greenhouse gas (GHG), its accumulation lasts hundreds if not thousands of years and must be curbed by stopping the use of fossil fuel carbon.

Recently, though, there has been more and more buzz about methane, a “flow” gas lasting about 12 years in the atmosphere with a warming potential several times that of carbon dioxide (on a molecule basis). Since dairy production

accounts for nearly 25% of U.S. enteric methane emissions (beef production makes up the majority of the rest) and over 50% of estimated manure management methane emissions, there is a special focus on how to reduce methane from dairy.

One of the most impactful ways this has already been achieved is through production efficiency. Greenhouse gas emissions per unit of energy-corrected milk (ECM) dropped 19% between 2007 and 2017 in the U.S. Although the improved efficiency trend has remained steady over an even longer period than that, the total gross methane emissions associated with dairy production have been rising. In fact, estimated methane from dairy

manure management has doubled since 1990 in the U.S.

Despite this growth, methane from dairy manure still makes up less than 1% of total U.S. GHG emissions and less than 2% of my home state of New York’s GHG (even under their GWP-20 year accounting that puts CH4 at 84 times the global warming potential of CO 2). Still, there are proven technologies available now that can do something about it — and in some cases not only mitigate methane but also displace use of fossil fuels to serve society’s energy needs. If anything, this is an opportunity to be part of the solution that can mean a more sustainable product for the consumer, an improved bottom line, and other

co-benefits for the farm and community they are integrated within.

Manure in storage

Methane from “manure management” is confusing. The substantial source is from lengthy anaerobic storage of manure as a liquid or slurry. This is true among all climates, yet the magnitude of the methane emission is drastically different based on the regional climate where it is located.

Further, in the warmer regions of the U.S. below the 40th parallel, dairy manure is commonly stored in anaerobic lagoons, which are designed to promote the degradation of excreted manure volatile solids, the process that produces methane. In the Northeast and most of the Upper Midwest regions, manure is not managed using anaerobic lagoons but is instead often managed using some form of longterm storage.

The storage of manure enables farms to achieve the “4Rs” with manure application: right source, right rate, right time, and right place. This is imperative for water quality protection and of particular importance in wetter climates with a multitude of lakes and aquifers, such as New York, Vermont, and Wisconsin.

The ambient temperature, manure temperature within storage, and length

of storage period play significant roles in the true methane conversion factor (MCF) of volatile solids from dairy cow excreted manure. Another layer of complication in quantifying methane from the open storage of manure is what happens before the manure enters the storage or lagoon:

• Is it mixed with organic bedding?

• Is it mixed with inorganic bedding?

• Was it scraped from the barn?

• Was it flushed from the barn?

• Were there solids removed?

• Was it digested in an anaerobic digester vessel?

• Was it digested in combination with food waste?

• Was there food waste added directly to the manure storage?

• Was there an additive product used to help promote solids break down?

• Was the storage drained completely the last time stored manure was field-applied?

Hard to put a number on

There is substantial research in multiple climates that indicates these various practices impact the behavior and quantity of both methane and nitrous oxide emissions from the storage of manure. Yet, exact emission quantities and the reliable equations that can predict them still largely elude us.

The way to think about it is that each of the situations posed above are still largely being treated in the same way when it comes to estimating methane from long-term storage of liquid or slurry manure. Further, an anaerobic digester system processing excreted dairy manure can either be an actively heated and mixed vessel with scraped manure from the barn or a passive covered anaerobic lagoon with flushed and separated liquid manure in a warmer climate. Add to that the confusion of a covered anaerobic lagoon in California being the same as a covered manure storage in New York!

When carbon markets and the credits available from them are using protocols that offer a “one system fits all” approach, the actual impact of these practices for a specific farm or even for a specific region is often inaccurate. The photos illustrate this discrepancy in the amount of methane captured from manure carbon using various system types.

Even worse, GHG inventorying at the state and federal level has not aligned with carbon market accounting, resulting in situations where both a dairy farm’s baseline GHG from manure storage without their upstream treatments being taken into account is then added

to a blanket assumption of methane loss (as gas leakage) from the anaerobic digester to renewable natural gas (RNG) system recovering carbon from that farm’s manure. This is “double counting” in a way where no one wins and everyone is confused.

Seek out co-benefits

This may sound grim and not worth dealing with on your livestock operation. Fortunately, there are some consultants and also technology providers who can help you navigate the carbon market scene, which is ever-changing as climate policy and individual company or industry goals evolve. From my discussions with farmers, they know that their focus should remain on how they can become more circular, efficient, and economically viable, now and into the future.

When you think about some key practices that also happen to reduce manure GHG on dairy farms, they have some clear and compelling co-benefits. For example, keeping soils healthy by cover cropping, double cropping, and practicing no-till allows for appropriate manure application for nutrient uptake throughout more of the year, particularly in the summer when methane from the storage of manure can be five to 10 times higher than in the winter in cooler climates.

Another example is implementing manure solids separation to both reduce volume in liquid storage and either provide manure solids bedding, saving tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars on imported bedding costs each year, or solids that can be composted for soil amendments. Depending on the

This covered anaerobic lagoon (located in California) captures approximately 17,000 cf of methane per cow per year.

separator and manure collection used, the excreted manure volatile solids heading to long-term liquid storage can be cut in half, which is substantially less ability for conversion to methane. A final example is to consider whether anaerobic digestion of your dairy’s manure makes economic and practical sense for you, which doesn’t mean you need to own and operate it. A benefit of anaerobic digester systems includes substantial energy production (as either renewable electricity or renewable pipeline gas) that can be utilized at your farm and/or within your community to help offset use of fossil fuels and provide another revenue source for the farm.

Reduced odor, pathogens, and solids with preserved nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in the digested manure effluent allows for flexibility with storage and easier application (often via drag hose) during the warmer months. There is even the option to maximize value by co-digesting food waste with the manure to cut landfill methane, manure methane, and fossil fuel usage all at the same time. What is more circular and impactful to greenhouse gas reduction than that? 

The author is an agricultural sustainability and energy engineer with Cornell CALS PRO-DAIRY.

A covered manure storage (located in New York) captures 3,500 cf of methane per cow per year.

JUNE

JUNE 5-6 • DES MOINES, IA

Sustainability offers farmers more of a say

Supply chain transparency is an increasing expectation in the sustainability conversation, but so are producers’ perspectives.

by Kathryn E. Childs

Consumer choices are unpredictable and complex. They are often made based on emotional subjectivity rather than scientific information, which is why, as agricultural producers, it can be daunting to approach the topic of sustainability.

Americans’ growing concern with where their food comes from is a good thing — it promotes healthy habits and usually means more attention paid to farmers’ livelihoods. The more consumers care about what they’re eating, the more credit is given where it’s due. However, this also means there are growing expectations not only for supply and production transparency, but also for the way in which those supplies are acquired and/or compensated for (for example, conducting audits to ensure a company’s labor force is lawfully regulated).

Put another way, there is now a critical eye directed at agriculture’s sustainability efforts. What a wonderful challenge to rise to, given that this industry has already been addressing sustainability for years, but what multifarious questions and complexities the fixation brings along with it.

“We don’t wonder where our electricity came from when we flip a switch in our living room, but we very well might wonder where a carton of eggs came from at the grocery store,” said Kimberly Stackhouse-Lawson of Colorado State University on the GPS Dairy Cast podcast.

While only generally true, this analogy speaks to the broader question at work; that is, the question of why food is such a

unique resource (and why agriculture is so scrutinized for the production of food).

It’s

complicated

Food is distinct in the nature of its tie to our emotional responses and to memory. We might shop for specific ingredients because our grandmother used them in her signature lasagna or reach for comfort food to unwind after a mentally taxing day. These kinds of choices don’t exist in the electricity, gas, or water world, where an energy source is only as desirable as its use, such as lights, heat, and plumbing. Agriculture operates under the same umbrella as other industrial ventures, but it has a distinct set of additional expectations.

Therefore, sustainability solutions within this field are not cut and dry. Companies and corporations are expected to thoroughly address all three “pillars” of sustainability in their reporting. Those three pillars are social, economic, and environmental, with social and economic being the most overlooked in a “sustainable” framework. With pressure from the government and the public to reduce ag’s contribution to greenhouse gases (most notably, via efforts to mitigate methane emissions), it can seem like all that’s talked about in today’s discourse is climate. However, businesses that show a well-rounded approach in all three pillars are more likely to receive outside

Greater transparency in food production is coming, but we can help shape the future.

investments from ESG investors (a type of investing concerned with a company’s environmental, social, and corporate governance values) than those who focus on environmental sustainability alone. Still, what does well-rounded, sustainable agriculture actually look like, and to what extent are farmers expected to invest in changes?

“Radical transparency is coming,” Stackhouse-Lawson said. “It will not just be a part of the future; it will be an expectation.” Reporting requirements have evolved from including what a company can control within its own walls (its scope of operations) to including details of every step along the supply chain (data traceability from supplier, to producer, to distribution, to retail).

To rise to these burgeoning expectations, farms will need to meet or, at the very least, support all three sustainability pillars, which requires extensive data collection and new technologies

CAPACITY

— both of which can be expensive. Stackhouse-Lawson emphasized the importance of being open with policymakers and food retailers about what the challenges are when navigating this as a supplier or producer.

“Let them know what you need to know about expectations and solutions before you invest in making changes,” she said. “Come to the table with a specific ask.” This will make it easier on those applying pressure and on those whose operations are directly affected.

Action and reaction

Producers are more a part of the dialogue than ever. Who better to say how systems research and nutrient productivity are best approached than those who are on the farm doing the work? There’s always been incentive to be more efficient and produce less waste — it’s an inherent part of farming — but now there is the added incentive of being able to shape

the narrative about sustainable agriculture from the top down. If anything, this opportunity to be at the table, to let farmer expertise have a say at every level where changes are being introduced, is motivation itself to conduct efficiency reports. Innovation is not the enemy, but the foundation, of land positivism. Producers are far from powerless; they are a key component to the conversation.

“We have already reduced the footprint of milk. Even if greenhouse gases have gone up, we’re producing more milk, so that footprint is going down from a resource-use-efficiency perspective,”

Stackhouse-Lawson said. “We can keep doing what we’re doing and still look for what there is yet to discover.” 

The author is a freelance writer based in Rockford, Ill.

On the leading edge

A growing list of environmental regulations can be frustrating, but this California dairyman has used this as motivation to improve his farm, surrounding communities, and the greater agricultural industry.

by Abby Bauer, Managing Editor

Simple, yet effective. That is how Justin Gioletti describes the current manure handling system on his family’s farm.

Cows are housed in freestall barns at Robert Gioletti and Sons Dairy near Turlock, Calif. The alleys are cleaned using a flush system, which is typical for many dairies in California. The flush water gravity flows to and from the two flush lagoons.

The water and manure are pumped to the earthen settling ponds, where the solids are separated. Some of these solids are dried, stacked, and tarped during the summer months for use as bedding in the freestalls year-round. The rest of the solids are applied as a nutrient source on their 2,200 acres of corn, alfalfa, and oats. The Giolettis also grow a few hundred acres of almonds. The remaining liquid from the settling ponds is applied to the fields using flood irrigation.

Gioletti, who owns the dairy with his brother, Devin, and father, Robert, said this manure system has worked well for them over the years. Still, the fourth-generation farmer said they are not afraid to make changes that improve the dairy in the long run. This is why they were one of the first participants in the state’s Alternative Manure Management Program (AMMP), which provides financial assistance for the implementation of manure management practices in California that will result in reduced greenhouse gas emissions.

Seize the opportunity

With that AMMP funding, the Giolettis invested in a manure vac -

uum truck and a 4-acre concrete pad in 2017. Since then, manure has been vacuumed from the freestall barn alleys twice a week. The collected manure is spread out on the concrete pad to dry, which takes about a week when weather conditions are right. These dried solids make a fertilizer source that is easier to haul and is applied to fields that can’t be irrigated with the flush water. This saves the farm some money on commercial fertilizer purchases, he noted.

Gioletti said they saw this addition to their manure system as a way to reduce methane emissions, but it also diverts some solids — and nitrogen — out of the flush lagoon.

“It’s a hybrid approach that takes

some pressure off our current system, but it is still very simple,” he said. “It really is an efficient way to dry that manure, keep it out of the lagoons, and get it to sites further away that can benefit from that nitrogen.”

Since implementing the vacuum truck, they have also noticed improved animal hygiene. The vacuum truck does a better job cleaning the alleys than the flush system can. “The flush system doesn’t get 100% of the manure, so we would scrape once or twice a week anyway,” Gioletti explained. “This complements the flushing system well.” The vacuum also picks up small rocks, helping minimize lameness caused by injury.

“It does a really nice job of keeping things clean,” he reiterated. They would vacuum manure more often, he said, but space on the drying pad is a limiting factor.

Manure is produced by the farm’s herd of 3,800 milking Holsteins. Most of the herd is milked three times a day in a rotary parlor on the main farm; late lactation cows are milked 2x on a second neighboring dairy that was purchased in 2019. By seizing the opportunity to buy this farm site that was adjacent to their land, the Giolettis were able to pursue their herd growth goals. All calves are housed at the main farm, while heifers are kept on open lots just up the road.

Gioletti said they manage their crops “from seed to feed,” doing their own planting, chopping, and baling. They apply their own liquid manure but do hire out the application of the manure solids.

The vacuum truck empties manure into windrows on a concrete pad where will be dried and then stacked.

The progression of dairy

The relatively simple manure handling system is about to become more robust, though, as big changes are on the way for the farm. That’s because the Giolettis recently signed papers with a company to put in a methane digester.

Gioletti said this project is “exciting and terrifying.” There are some financial incentives that will come from the generation of energy, but he also feels the switch to mechanical separation because of the anerobic digester will make a fluffier bedding material than they currently have, which will benefit the cows.

While he’s not implying that all dairies will need to install a digester in the future, he feels that is the direction the industry is going, and when they had the opportunity to partner with a company to make this happen, they decided to take the leap.

“It’s part of the progression of the industry,” he said. “We need to keep going forward.”

Where they farm may play a part in this forward-thinking philosophy. Farmers in California are some of the most regulated in the country, which Gioletti admits is a challenge. At this same time, he also sees that as an opportunity.

“The opportunity that comes from being the most regulated is that we are going to be the innovators,” he shared. By adapting new technologies and potentially developing new products, Gioletti said, “Hopefully, we can generate some different revenue to offset costs to adapt to some regulations.”

Broader benefits

Beyond his commitment to their family farm and its future, Gioletti also believes in being involved in programs that benefit the dairy community and beyond.

That’s a big reason he helped found and serves as chairman of the Central Valley Dairy Representative Monitoring Program (CVDRMP), a region-wide groundwater monitoring program that replaces individual groundwater monitoring on dairies. Established more than a decade ago, this program helps dairies across the area comply with the dairy general order requirements involving water testing, which saves them money

but also provides the industry data needed to make improvements in sustainable farming practices.

The goals of the CVDRMP are to examine groundwater conditions and how they relate to historical operations, identify past practices that contribute to current groundwater quality condi-

tions, generate results that are applicable beyond areas of monitored dairies, and ultimately identify practices that protect groundwater. There are 1,100 members of the farmer-led CVDRMP with data being collected at 42 dairies from 443 monitoring wells.

“The main goal of that [the CVDRMP]

Digester Tanks

was to start something that provided a robust monitoring network at a fraction of the cost. Ultimately, we achieved that goal,” Gioletti noted during a panel discussion at the California Dairy Sustainability Summit this spring. He said that this network saves California dairy producers $6 million annually.

“The financial incentives are there to be involved with projects like this, but they also make a lot of common sense,” he explained. This alternative monitoring program replaced individual monitoring required by every dairyman in the state.

nitrate and salt compliance testing, making it a “one stop shop” for the dairy and livestock farmers who pay dues to participate in the program.

Gioletti also currently serves as the chairman of the Valley Water Collaborative. This nonprofit organization formed in 2020 is one of five associations created to address nitrate contamination concerns in private wells used for drinking water. The Valley Water Collaborative offers testing and provides water treatment systems or bottled water delivered monthly for households with wells that exceed the nitrate standard for drinking water.

The Valley Water Cooperative is supported by water quality permit holders in the Modesto and Turlock groundwater basins, including dairy farms, other livestock and crop operations, food processors, wineries, publicly-owned wastewater treatment facilities, and more. Gioletti feels compelled to represent dairy in a group like this that has members from many industries.

“Dairy needs to be at the table,” he emphasized. “We need to have dairymen there with all the other dischargers to help set fees and policies. It is very important to do that kind of stuff.”

He noted that the agriculture industry in California has been active in improving the environmental impact of farming, but that doesn’t happen

have to be leaders in reducing dairy’s environmental impact.

Gioletti has been a true leader in water quality efforts in California. His actions benefit the general public, agriculture as a whole, and his fellow dairy farmers who are working in a profession that can be challenging, but it is also one he is very passionate about.

“It’s a struggle, and it’s tough, but it has been good to our family,” he said.

Gioletti follows in the footsteps of both sets of his great-grandparents, who immigrated to the United States to farm. With dairy on both sides of his pedigree, and his wife’s as well, Gioletti said, “We are dairy through and through.” Since he was a young

pass the business on to his children and

The Gioletti family milks about 3,800 cows and raises young stock at their Robert Gioletti and Sons Dairy near Turlock, Calif.

Twice a week, a vacuum truck is used to pick up manure from the freestall barns. This addition to the Giolettis’ manure system helps keep cows and alleyways cleaner.

KEEP THE LAGOON IN WORKING ORDER

n important part of manure management is a place for storage; manure needs somewhere to go while it awaits its final destination. In a recent Idaho Dairy Focus newsletter by the Idaho Dairymen’s Association, authors Tanya Hibler and Megan Satterwhite shared that spring is the right time to plan for lagoon maintenance.

With some parts of the country experiencing warmer and wetter winters, lagoons may be filling up more quickly than they were originally designed to. In addition, solids take up valuable storage space. The pair wrote that now is a perfect time to start planning when these solids can be removed. They also recommended checking

the edges of the lagoon. If the lagoon’s boundaries are not clearly marked, the soft spring ground makes this the ideal time to pound in some posts and add signs with bright colors to label the edges, Hibler and Satterwhite noted. “Driving around a full lagoon can be quite treacherous if the edges aren’t properly marked,” they wrote.

Removing weeds on the lagoon banks also improves visibility and safety. “Spraying weeds as they come up this spring and implementing a year-round weed control program will have lasting impacts,” they advised. The roots from weeds can degrade the lagoon banks, creating pathways for liquids to flow. Weeds become a habitat for rodents that can cause damage as well. Weed removal also makes the area look neater, which boosts the farm’s overall appearance.

Even though lagoons are often not in a prominent location on the farm, that doesn’t mean they should be ignored. Proper maintenance now will have lasting impacts the rest of the year, the authors concluded. 

Death, taxes, and nutrient planning

Nutrient planning is a must, but whether it is done independently or with the help of a professional is an important business decision to make.

by Scott Fleming

Ben Franklin knew all about the certainties of life — the first two being death and taxes. Tax season has come and gone, and some find themselves happy to have the deadline passed, while others are filing for an extension or were sweating heavily on April 15 wishing they had made the decision to hire out the filing rather than attempting it themselves.

While a tax discussion this is not, some growers might find the nutrient management plan writing decision to be equally as certain and as cringe-worthy. Similar to taxation, heavy variability across regulations, states, and statutes within nutrient management planning can overwhelm and even frighten.

After a quick survey of nutrient management plan rules throughout the United States, it’s suffice to say most states require a nutrient management plan (NMP) or manure management plan (MMP) if manure is being applied. While some states require a plan after a certain threshold is met, other states require a plan if any manure is spread.

Differences in size

Operation size is often synonymous with the complexity of a plan. For instance, a 6,000-cow dairy is going to require a detailed planning process that covers nearly 10,000 acres. The creation of such a plan is generally best suited for a professional. That line of

thinking may lead some to believe an NMP for 100 milking goats is simple, but that’s not always the case. Sometimes learning the process and taking the time to write the plan is just not worth the hassle.

Oftentimes, the intermediate-sized plan is best written internally. These farms may have the time to dedicate to the process and can easily gather an immense amount of data to help streamline their processes.

Software tools to use

Just as animal types and numbers vary, so does a grower’s capacity and capability to take on advanced record-keeping and data tracking. Most nutrient management work is completed electronically. In my home state of Wisconsin, the state’s department of agriculture provides free access to its own nutrient management software. In 45 other states, the Manure Management Planner software by Purdue University and the National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) is accepted for the

creation of a nutrient management plan. Learn more about these tools on page 22.

Each of these programs is very simple to use by a qualified nutrient management planner, but they’re not for everyone. This is especially true when it comes to the program setup. Knowing how to calculate and check slopes, determine the appropriate distance to water, and enter and verify all the other fine details of adding fields to the software can be cumbersome and time-consuming.

The ability to operate the nutrient management software does not guarantee that the nutrient management plan will be accepted. After all, we are dealing with the government. Taking a quick cyber survey, most states have some sort of farmer-written nutrient management plan provision. Generally, these require farmers to attend one or more training sessions on how to properly use the software. These plans will generally satisfy state or county-level requirements.

Consider what you know

With larger farms, the rules tend to be stricter and also more variable from state to state. It is more likely that a certified planner is required to take the reins to meet local and state laws. It will also be no surprise that when

writing a plan for the federal government, an entirely separate certification is required. These plans can only be written by a Technical Service Provider (TSP). And the chances that a grower would want to submit themselves to the requirements of becoming a TSP to complete their own nutrient management plan is a bit of a long shot.

Along with being a certified planner, knowledge of the constantly changing regulations associated with nutrient management plans is necessary. Some adjustments are technical, such as changes to buffer widths near wells or depth to bedrock separation distance requirements. Some of these changes are purely logistical changes — requiring the submission of an additional report or changes to the NMP checklist.

Most certified planners are in tune with these regulation updates through their association with professional groups and networking, agency email updates, and regular training. These updates are usually open to growers as well, but knowing where and when to get the information is often harder than obtaining the information.

Who you know also helps

What goes hand in hand with being an industry professional are professional relationships. Networking opportunities abound in the professional space. Working in an office setting allows for interface between planners on a daily basis. These professional connections extend far beyond the walls of the office.

Relationships often exist throughout the state or even nationwide. Most professional planners are also involved in peer groups, trade advocacy groups, and professional organizations. The greatest value in these relationships is having someone to hear ideas or provide helpful advice based on past experience.

Connections also exist between planners and plan regulators. These government regulators exist from the local to the federal level. Having a strong working relationship creates mutual understanding between a planner and the regulator.

A great example from my personal bank is plan deliverables. What deliverables are submitted to each county to satisfy their requirements varies greatly from county to county. The manner in which these deliverables are submitted varies just as much as what is required to be submitted. Without strong working relationships, it would be difficult for an individual writing their own plan to know what to send or where to send it.

Find the right fit

This may all sound like a complicated sales tactic to drive growers straight to a professional plan writer. However, I will be the first to share that a farm-written plan can be a fantastic tool for a grower to fine-tune their operation. This calibration is far more than knowing where and how much manure to apply.

Completing their own NMP can help farmers know when

and where they may be shorting or oversupplying nutrients. Doing your plan can help you identify manure restrictions or prohibitions. And most of all, writing your own plan can give you ownership of the planning process.

When writing your own plan, you can dial in your commercial and manure applications with pinpoint precision rather than just running a blanket approach on all acres. You will also know exactly where and when some of the planning guidelines were or were not followed.

Much like your taxes, when the severity of regulations outweighs the benefits of internal completion, it’s time to consider a professional to help you complete the process. I will always encourage growers to write their own nutrient management plan, but when the task becomes too much, knowing that there is a professional there to back you up can help you sleep better at night. 

The author is a nutrient management specialist and sampling director at Rock River Laboratory in Watertown, Wis.

PIPE BRIDGE

Foldable and transportable, the Pipe Bridge allows the connecting of liquid manure hoses over a roadway.

DRAGLINING SIMPLIFIED.

Easily clears 3 full-size trucks!

25’ top pipe length

CLIMATE CHANGE RAISES THE STAKES

In the face of warmer temperatures and more extreme weather events, farmers must build up the resiliency of their soils.

by Sheryl Schwert

Climate change creates a multitude of issues for farmers, and it has two main components:

1. Increasing precipitation

2. Increasing temperature Impacts vary by location and season. Changes, especially at the beginning of the growing season, present unique challenges to farmers and surface water quality.

Managing soil loss due to the spring thaw and rain is not new for farmers, but climate change will exacerbate issues created by the combination of cold winters and high amounts of precipitation experienced in parts of the country. This article will discuss the impacts of climate change in spring, the consequences of climate change with a focus on phosphorus, and practices to improve farm resilience in the face of rapidly changing weather in spring.

What is the new normal?

Using Wisconsin as an example, from 1979 to 2021, the state has seen a 2.6-inch uptick in the average March, April, and May precipitation (Figure 1). Spring is predicted to have the greatest increase in precipitation in this century (Figure 2). Extreme precipitation events (2 inches or more) are also on the rise. Spring is becoming wetter with rain falling in more extreme events. Winter is warming the most of any season. This has an effect on spring through the change in snowmelt, by either reducing the total snowmelt or changing the timing of it. Winter

thawing and subsequent refreezing is happening more often. In spring itself, average daily temperatures are projected to rise by 4°F to 5°F by mid-century.

Overall, springs are becoming warmer. This could mean longer growing seasons, but temperatures are more unpredictable, making planting annual crops riskier. Springs are also getting much wetter. The precipitation is more likely to come in the form of extreme

events and be more erratic.

Less snow is falling in winter, reducing snowmelt volume in spring. The snowmelt is a source of soil moisture that is less likely to cause soil loss than intense storms. It is possible that spring droughts could be worsened by the absence of snowmelt.

Runoff and phosphorus loss

Fields that are bare or just planted are vulnerable to sediment and nutri-

Snowmelt is a source of soil moisture but too much at one time elevates the risk of runoff.

ent loss because those fields do not have the same capacity for infiltration that a mid-season crop field does. Consider a storm event of more than 5 inches of precipitation recorded by Discovery Farms in the month of May, which produced 1.2 inches of runoff, compared to a similar storm in August, which produced no runoff at all. Snowmelt and precipitation in March, April, and May saturate the soil, leaving it unable to hold more precipitation and causing runoff (Figure 3).

The majority of phosphorus in surface runoff from Wisconsin agricultural fields is lost from March to June. Particulate phosphorus is lost during the time of greatest soil loss in May and June because it is bound to soil particles.

Discovery Farms data consistently show large soil loss events in May

and June due to heavy spring rains and soil disturbance. While 7,500 pounds of soil per acre was lost on a Rock County site, it carried with it 6.8 pounds per acre of particulate phosphorus. Practices to reduce soil loss will be best suited to also reduce particulate phosphorus loss.

Dissolved phosphorus is lost during the time of greatest total runoff, which is March. Runoff in March contains more dissolved phosphorus because it includes pore water, which has pulled phosphorus from the top inches of soil, snowmelt or rain on frozen ground that cannot infiltrate into the soil, or manure and fertilizer that has been surface applied on frozen ground. As winters warm and spring precipitation picks up, the peak runoff timing may change, along with the timing of dissolved phosphorus losses.

Addressing the loss of dissolved and particulate phosphorus requires accounting for both meltwater and heavy spring rains, both of which will become more inconsistent in the future due to climate change.

Aim for resiliency

The key to building resilience is to utilize practices that improve infiltration and slow down runoff. Incorporating one or more of these techniques enhances overall resilience to unpredictable temperature and precipitation variances in spring and throughout the year.

Cover crops that survive and continue to grow through the winter address the challenge of increasingly wet springs by establishing biomass to improve soil health and water infiltration. Belowground biomass and abo-

Figure 1. Historical change in March, April, and May precipitation (%) from 1950 to 2018 % change (from 1950 to 2018)

• Indicates significant trend

Source: Center for Climatic Research, Nelson Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison

veground cover can reduce runoff, soil loss, and phosphorus loss.

Improve nutrient application and manure management practices so rates and timing line up with crop needs to ensure fewer nutrients are left at risk for runoff.

Reduce soil disturbance and maintain crop residue to improve water infiltration. More water is drawn into the soil, lowering runoff during extreme rain events and before crop canopy is established. This also bumps up the amount of water the soil can hold before it is saturated, which helps sustain soil moisture during dry periods.

Consider planting flood-prone areas to permanent cover. You will gain a filter strip, a riparian buffer, and benefit pollinators all in one. Extreme storms make planting in wet areas more risky, leading to yield reductions and planting or harvesting delays that can impact profitability. This practice relieves that risk, improves resilience for the rest of the field(s), and can provide forage quality.

Explore agroforestry practices such as windbreaks and hedgerows, alley cropping, and silvopasture systems. These can slow down and filter runoff,

2. Expected precipitation change by 2050

for

Wisconsin Discovery Farms (2003-2022)

129 site-years of data 17 farms, 24 fields

keeping more nutrients and soil in place. Spring is already a time of tremendous seasonal change. The shifting climate will push those changes to their extremes. Farm resilience to those extremes means planning for a broad range of events, from droughts to floods and early thaws to late freezes.

The pathway to resilience must also be broad and layered. 

The author is a water quality outreach specialist with the University of Wisconsin-Madison Division of Extension.

Figure 3. Average total monthly surface runoff

Figure

Source: Center

Climatic Research, Nelson Institute, University of Wisconsin-Madison NOAA

MANURE MINUTE

BIOSECURITY SHOULD INCLUDE MANURE

The mystery illness affecting dairy cattle in the Texas Panhandle this spring was later identified as a strain of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). Just a week earlier, HPAI had been confirmed in a goat kid in Minnesota on a farm where the disease had been detected in poultry. This was the first time HPAI was found in livestock in the United States.

By early May, the number of farms with infected cattle ticked upward, and the virus had been confirmed on dairy farms in nine states. The main symptoms in infected animals include reduced feed intake, a drop in milk production, and milk that is abnormal in appearance. Fortunately, the virus is not fatal for dairy cattle like it often is in chickens and turkeys. According to USDA, since the outbreak of HPAI began in poultry in February 2022, cases have been found in 1,133 flocks from 48 states, affecting almost 91 million birds.

We know that infected dairy cattle shed HPAI in their milk. It has not yet been proven that the virus is secreted though saliva, respiratory droplets, or manure, but it is possible. Farms have been asked to bump up their biosecurity measures to prevent further spread of the virus, and manure management should be part of that plan.

In a Michigan State University Extension article, Charles Gould offered advice for manure application in the face of the HPAI situation. Manure biosecurity, he wrote, should start before application. Note the location of adjacent livestock farms, especially poultry operations. Contact those neighboring farms prior to application and let them know your dedicated routes of travel when moving manure. If spreading manure from infected animals, Gould said to avoid roadways commonly used by other livestock farms and apply the manure to fields away from main roadways and other farms.

The extension educator encouraged the use of dedicated equipment, applicator clothing, and footwear when transferring and applying manure. He said to create designated pathways on the premise, for both walking and driving, that limit crossover between people entering animal housing and those responsible for manure handling.

“Institute proper cleaning and disinfection protocols for manure application equipment. This means removing organic material before applying an appropriate sanitizer or disinfectant,” Gould said. Clean and then disinfect any manure equipment inside and out when moving between manure sources, different livestock sites, or fields.

As is always good practice, Gould said to keep complete records of agitation, removal, and application dates and locations. If you work with a custom applicator, communicate with them to ensure proper biosecurity measures are being followed to help protect animals from HPAI and other viruses.

It is also a good time to review protocols that help keep humans safe. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention considers the current HPAI risk to the general public to be low, but the first human case of HPAI contracted from dairy cattle was identified in early April.

John Shutske, a professor and agricultural safety and health specialist with the University of Wisconsin-Madison, shared five practices that reduce pathogen exposure in a video series for farm workers. His first piece of advice was for people to wash their hands and forearms regularly, especially after working with animals or manure and before touching food. People should avoid touching their face when working, Shutske recommended next. This includes the mouth, nose, and eyes. Keep scratches or wounds clean and covered because bacteria can enter through any break in the skin. Another helpful practice is to store food in a clean location and only eat in designated areas. Avoid eating when working with animals and do not eat where animals are kept, he said. Shutske also recommended wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) when appropriate. This includes gloves, boot covers, coveralls, face masks, and eye protection. Lastly, Shutske said to have dedicated work clothing and boots that stay on the farm and are washed daily. “Work clothes and boots should not be worn in personal vehicles or at home,” he advised. 

ON THE MOVE

TOOLS OF THE TRADE

There are models and tools available to improve manure management.

by Sydney (Endres) Flick

Programs and tools can help gather the information needed to put together the best manure management plan for your farm. A Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Community (LPELC) webinar focused on a few tools used by farms across the country. The webinar showcased three options: the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Manure Management Planner available in 49 states, the SnapPlus program used in Wisconsin, and the Nebraska Ag Site Planner available in Nebraska.

An option from NRCS

The NRCS Manure Management Planner is currently used in 38 states. The program inputs data through a series of tabs, starting with general farm information and fields. Then, any nearby water sources or artificial drainage sources are input, followed by soil tests.

The program asks for crop specifics — what crops will be planted in what years and what fields will be planted. This is followed by manure specifics, such as the type of storage system, the number and species of animals on the farm, and so forth.

The program also has an area to input manure analysis information. If manure sample results are available, that data can be entered; otherwise, the program uses book values for the type of manure.

Finally, the program asks what kind of equipment will be used to apply the manure and what other fertilizer will used on the fields. Once all these data points are entered, the program will show a projected phosphorus and potassium analysis for specific fields. The data can also be exported into a

document as a comprehensive nutrient management plan.

SnapPlus in Wisconsin

SnapPlus is specific to Wisconsin and is run through the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection. Around 90% of nutrient management plans in Wisconsin are written using SnapPlus. This program inputs similar data as the NRCS program. Fields are mapped out and users can upload soil tests into the system as well. The program will show restrictive layers to verify any potential contamination spots.

In the last step of the program, a user will add in nutrient sources, and it will calculate manure production each year. This section has an option to enter in current commercial fertilizer costs to be able to see the value of the manure.

SnapPlus has an app for manure application called Smart that takes data from SnapPlus and creates a GPS map that manure applicators can use to watch restrictions and map application. The Smart app serves as a good recordkeeping system for applying manure as well.

Nebraska’s Ag Site Planner

The Nebraska Ag Site Planner is available to users looking to expand or begin a livestock production site in Nebraska. The planner has three tools available within it: the Risk Management Tool, the Regulatory Guidance Tool, and a tool that asks critical questions.

The Risk Management Tool starts by mapping a site boundary through a Google Maps interface. Once that boundary is created, the tool pulls the legal land description of the site, local regulations and ordinances, proximity to sensitive areas such as parks, schools, and other

permitted operations, hydrologic information, and climate data.

The Regulatory Guidance Tool asks a series of questions about the livestock, including what species and how many animals will be in the system. It then will calculate what class of feeding operation it will be and has links to permits for those classes. This tool also provides the county administrator information to check on any extra regulations specific to the area.

The final step is a series of critical questions. The first questions evaluate components of the potential production site, including water quality, neighbors, business, and local infrastructure. Then it asks questions about starting an operation, including communications with the county, community, local regulators, and anyone who may have a say in the agriculture site. The last series of questions covers engagement with the community.

The final addition to this planner includes an odor footprint tool. This tool uses weather data to see who might be affected by odors from the agricultural site. The Nebraska Ag Site Planner has users in the beef, swine, and poultry industries.

This is simply a brief overview of these three tools. For more information, please visit their websites:

Manure Management Planner — purduemmp.myfarms.com

SnapPlus — snapplus.wisc.edu

Nebraska Ag Site Planner — agsiteplanner.unl.edu. ■

MANURE MINUTE

HEAVY RAINS CREATE PATHWAYS

FOR NITROGEN LOSS

s discussed in the article “Climate change raises the stakes” starting on page 18, extreme weather events are happening more frequently. In situations of excessive rainfall, nitrogen losses can be exacerbated through three routes: runoff, leaching, and denitrification.

In a recent C.O.R.N. Newsletter published by The Ohio State University, authors Manbir Rakkar, Alexander Lindsey, Greg LaBarge, and Stephany Karhoff discussed these pathways of nitrogen loss. For runoff, fields with no residue or cover are more susceptible. If not incorporated, fertilizer applied to these fields before a heavy rainfall is likely to experience some degree of runoff.

Nitrogen can also be lost though leaching. The amount of loss depends on the amount of rain as well as the fertilizer used and the growth stage of the crop, the authors noted. Fertilizers that contain nitrogen in the nitrate form (such as UAN) are at greater risk for leaching. Similar to runoff, bare fields have more leaching potential. If a growing crop is on the field, nitrate leaching is less likely because of greater nitrogen uptake, they explained.

In saturated soils, nitrogen can be lost through denitrification, which is the conversion of nitrate into a gas form.

“The amount of nitrogen loss depends on how long soil stays saturated and soil temperatures during water logging, with warmer temperatures accelerating the denitrification losses,” the experts shared. Potential denitrification losses under various conditions are shown in the table.

“If any of the above nitrogen loss mechanisms occur in

your field, especially after a nitrogen fertilizer application was made, it is important to supplement nitrogen to the growing or upcoming crop to avoid yield losses,” the authors wrote.

To decide if additional nitrogen is needed, losses must be quantified. One strategy to estimate nitrogen losses is based on fertilizer type, timing of application, crop growth stage, and soil water content. A formula to calculate this can be found at bit.ly/cornnloss. Alternatively, a presidedress nitrogen test (PSNT) can be used to determine the nitrogen status of the soil.

Plants can also show signs of nitrogen deficiency. An inverted yellow “V” pattern on leaves or yellowing lower leaves may indicate nitrogen deficiency in a crop. If the symptoms remain after soils are no longer cool and waterlogged, it may be worth considering an application of side-

Lagoon Management and Cleaning

• 3,000 gpm

• AGI pump rentals

• Digital flow

• Meters

• Dragline systems

• Trucking

• Tanking

• Manure brokering

LAGOONSIDE REFLECTIONS

Our service to the soil

We should do all we can to maximize soil health, and manure and biologicals play an important role in accomplishing this.

by Megan Dresbach

Biologicals. Are you familiar with this term? North Carolina State Extension defines biologicals as agronomic inputs derived from microbes, plants, or other living organisms.

Biologicals is one of the new buzzwords in agriculture that raises many questions. What are they? What do they do? Why should individuals in the manure industry be aware of them? Isn’t manure the original biological? This idea has been met with curiosity and speculation, as does any new technology when it is produced for the masses.

The manure industry mainly focuses on the nitrogen and phosphorus levels in manure. Yet, we know manure has many other benefits, including microorganisms and micronutrients.

Numerous studies have been done to determine the value of those additional benefits. To date, the conclusion is daunting, if not downright impossible, to quantify the value of these organisms in manure. These are such important components, but with so many possible interactions, the value is acknowledged without a specific economic value. I do not think they are talked about enough.

The economic side

Let’s begin the conversation in a logical place: economics. According to Vantage Market Research, the agricultural biological sector was valued at $12.3 billion in 2022, with a projected compound annual growth rate of 13.4% until 2030. These figures should be eye opening, especially since I believe manure has a place at the “biological table.”

The biological market has numerous products, each focused on a very specific

piece of plant or soil health. Want some microbes that help break down plant residue faster? It’s there. How about plant stress? That’s available, too.

Need to utilize nitrogen during a more optimal period in the growing season? There are several of those products. There are even biologicals on the market that are specified to enhance the benefits of manure after they break down solids in the pit and reduce

Essentially, all life depends upon the soil . . . There can be no life without soil and no soil without life; they have evolved together.

Charles E. Kellogg, USDA Yearbook of Agriculture, 1938

crusting. With the value of biologicals growing and the ability of manure to contribute to the growing value, I contend that conversation should be focused on how manure application saves producers money.

In the bigger picture of crop production, the relationship of plant health and soil is essential. The balance of the plant and soil relationship is the basis for any manure application. Manure application should also be seen as a biological amendment. The contribution to plant growth while enhancing soil health is the primary consideration. The economic value to accomplish this goal should not be ignored. Concurrent to the economic value of manure as a

biological is to reduce the need for other applications and amendments.

Stewards of the soil

We, as professionals in the manure industry, should do everything we can to maximize soil health. Manure and biologicals are a large component of this goal. There is still a lot to be learned about the broad spectrum of biologicals on the market.

Not all acres have access to manure. The farms that have access should be using manure and conducting research to see if more biologicals fit their operations. Farms with acres that don’t have access should be using biologicals, and probably a mix of them. Regardless of access, the goal is to improve soil health for long-term sustainability.

I haven’t even begun to talk about how biologicals and manure fit into the conversations revolving around Carbon Intensity Scores. The bottom line is that what we do in the manure industry is a small part of the larger web we call agriculture. I hope I sparked some questions for you to ponder. The manure industry needs to recognize its potential to positively impact soil health, among other benefits. We must commit to continuous learning, asking questions, and conducting our own field experiments to find feasible options. This commitment will move us forward. I know I have to keep learning every day, all for the improvement of my operation . . . What about you? ■

The author is the vice president of W.D. Farms LLC in Circleville, Ohio, and blogs as the Ohio Manure Gal.

World Pork Expo

June 5 and 6, 2024

Des Moines, Iowa

Details: worldpork.org

American Dairy Science Association Annual Meeting

June 16 to 19, 2024

West Palm Beach, Fla.

Details: adsa.org

National Pork Industry Conference

July 7 to 10, 2024 Wisconsin Dells, Wis.

Details: porkconference.com

North American Manure Expo

July 17 and 18, 2024 Auburn, N.Y.

Details: manureexpo.ca

PLACES TO BE

American Society of Animal Science Annual Meeting

July 21 to 25, 2024

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Details: asas.org

Empire Farm Days

August 1 to 3, 2024 Pompey, N.Y.

Details: empirefarmdays.com

Wisconsin Farm Technology Days

August 13 to 15, 2024 Cadott, Wis.

Details: wifarmtechdays.org

Farm Progress Show

August 27 to 29, 2024 Boone, Iowa

Details: farmprogressshow.com

SUPPLIER FORUM

LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING COMMUNITY

Connecting agri-professionals advancing environmental stewardship in animal agriculture.

The Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Community (LPELC) is a network made up of professionals from across the U.S. (and Canada) with an interest and expertise in some aspect of animal agriculture and environmental stewardship. (A nice way of saying we talk about manure….a lot.)

U.S. Poultry and Egg Association’s Environmental Seminar

September 19 and 20, 2024

Destin, Fla.

Details: uspoultry.org/programs/ education/seminar

World Beef Expo

September 19 to 22, 2024 West Allis, Wis.

Details: worldbeefexpo.com

World Dairy Expo

October 1 to 4, 2024 Madison, Wis.

Details: worlddairyexpo.com

If you would like us to include your event on our list, please send details to info@jofnm.com.

AGRICULTURAL CONCRETE

JP Tank

317 Kohlman Rd. Fond du Lac, WI 54937 920-948-2286

jptankconcrete@gmail.com jptank.com

Pipping Concrete N6106 County Rd. C Rosendale, WI 54974 920-948-9661 dennis@pippingconcrete.com pippingconcrete.com

ANAEROBIC DIGESTER SERVICES

Agricultural Digesters LLC 88 Holland Ln. #302 Williston, VT 05495 802-876-7877

info@AgriculturalDigesters.com AgriculturalDigesters.com

APPAREL

Udder Tech Inc. 2520 151st Ct. W Rosemount, MN 55068 952-461-2894

dana@uddertechinc.com uddertechinc.com

BEDDING SEPARATION

McLanahan

200 Wall Street Hollidaysburg, PA 16648

814-695-9807 sales@mclanahan.com mclanahan.com/solutions/dairy

COATINGS

Industrial Solutions USA 5115 S. Rolling Green Ave. Ste. 211 Sioux Falls, SD 57108 605-254-6059 isusananoclear.com

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

Future Enviroassets LLC Cincinnati, OH 45215 513-349-3844 LF@futureenviroassets.com futureenviroassets.com

Hall Associates 23 Evergreen Dr. Georgetown, DE 19947-9484 302-855-0723 hallassociates@mediacombb.net

Tomorrow Water 1225 N. Patt St. Anaheim, CA 92801 714-578-0676

PROFESSIONAL DIRECTORY

info@bkt21.com tomorrowwater.com

Trident Processes Inc. 10800 Lyndale Ave. S. Bloomington, MN 55420 1-800-799-3740

frank.engel@tridentprocesses.com tridentprocesses.com

FEED ADDITIVES

AB Vista 151 Peters Rd, Ste 2001 Plantation, FL 33324 816-225-0874

Bruce.Hageman@ABVista.com ABVista.com

Natural Biologics P.O. Box 221 Newfield, NY 14867 844-628-2465

celrod@naturalbiologics.com naturalbiologics.com

MANURE SEPARATION

Boerger LLC 2860 Water Tower Place Chanhassen, MN 55317 844-647-7867 boerger.com

AL-INS Enterprises, LLC 695 Sullivan Drive Fond du Lac, WI 54935 920-238-5460 aaron.kuhls@al-ins.com www.al-ins.com

MANURE STORAGE

Pit-King®/Agri-King® Inc. 18246 Waller Rd. Fulton, IL 61252 1-800-435-9560 agriking.com/pit-king

MANURE TREATMENT

Ag Odor Control, LLC 609 8th St. Fort Madison, IA 52627 319-470-5727

WayneMarple@gmail.com www.agodorcontrol.com

WASTE HANDLING EQUIPMENT

Cornell Pump Co. 16261 SE 130th Ave. Clackamas, OR 97015 503-653-0330 cornellpump.com

Doda USA

255 16th St. S. St. James, MN 56081 507-375-5577 dodausa.com

Fort Equipment 3216 Wabash Rd Fort Recovery, OH 45846 567-644-5927 fortequip.com

GEA Farm Technologies, Inc. 1385 N. Weber Road Romeoville, IL 60446 + 1-800-563-4685 contact.geadairyfarming.na@gea.com

Pacific Pumping 8941 Jasmine Lane Lynden, WA 360-815-2171 pacific_pumping@yahoo.com

R Braun Inc. 209 N. 4th Ave. St. Nazianz, WI 54232 920-773-2143 RBrauninc.com

WASTE HANDLING SPREADERS

Kuhn North America P.O. Box 167 Brodhead, WI 53520 Kuhn-usa.com

New Leader 1330 76th Ave. SW Cedar Rapids, IA 52404 1-800-363-1771 newleader.com

Oxbo International 100 Bean St. Clear Lake, WI 54005 1-800-628-6196 oxbo.com

WATER TECHNOLOGY

Bauer North America Inc. 107 Eastwood Rd. Michigan City, IN 46360 1-800-922-8375 bnasales@bauer-at.com bauer-at.com

Press Technology & Mfg. Inc. 1401 Fotler Street Springfield, OH 45504 937-327-0755 dberner@presstechnology.com

 Don’t see your company listed? Send your company information to marketing@jofnm.com with Professional Directory in the subject line.

TAKE CONTROL OF SAND

KEEP SAND WHERE YOU NEED IT, NOT WHERE YOU DON’T

Sand bedding provides a healthy, comfortable environment for dairy cows. But sand is abrasive, and when mixed with manure, it can become difficult to agitate and pump, expensive to land apply and it is not always the optimal addition to fields.

Choose a manure partner who can help you overcome these challenges and help your herd prosper. Plus, you can REDUCE BEDDING COSTS BY UP TO 95% with efficient sand separation and recovery.

ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS

Without separation beforehand, sand-laden manure is incompatible with anaerobic digester systems.

With sand separation, you can:

 Achieve greater than 90% sand recovery

 Capture an additional 5% of fines

Success begins with capitalizing on physics, gravity and engineering know-how.

MOVING AND SEPARATING

Sand is tough on equipment, but McLanahan equipment is tougher.

 Engineered to outperform standard-duty equipment

 Simplifies manure transport and handling

 Produces clean, recycled sand suitable for reuse within days

 Reduces costly storage cleanouts

Heavy-duty engineered equipment for on-farm conditions for extended life and fewer parts runs.

COW COMFORT

Sand bedding is the gold standard for dairy cows because it’s a forgiving, drier, comfortable deep bed.

Sand bedding:

 Increases cow lying time

 Decreases lameness

 Boosts milk production

Researchers suggest bedding with sand containing less than 3% organic matter and more than 95% dry matter.1

FIELD EFFECTS

Over time, applying sand-laden manure can change the nutrient composition of soils.2

 As sand is added to manure, the percentage of N, P, K and sulfur is diminished3

 Without sand separation, dairies may add up to 2/3 of a truckload of sand per acre per year

The effects are slow, but cumulative. Research shows adding large amounts of sand to soil can change its texture to include 20% more sand over two decades.3