Journal of Nutrient Management - Qtr 4 – 2022

Journal of Nutr ient Management

6

Bouncing between frozen and thawed

10 Manure irrigation deserves a retrial

18 Sampling for success

EAST Jim Dewitt 1-630-750-3482

j.dewitt@bauer-at.com

MIDWEST Trey Poteat 1-219-561-3837

t.poteat@bauer-at.com

WEST Jeff Moeggenberg 1-630-334-1913

j.moeggenberg@bauer-at.com

SALES DIRECTOR Ray Francis 1-219-229-2066

r.francis@bauer-at.com

PARTS/OPERATIONS Rob Hultgren 1-800-922-8375

r.hultgren@bauer-at.com

ON THE COVER

On this dairy farm in northeastern Wisconsin, manure was applied with a dragline to a harvested winter rye field last spring. In addition to milking 1,500 cows and cropping 4,500 acres, the family also manages a farm store, runs a forage bagger, and operates a custom manure hauling and irrigation business.

Journal of Nutrient Management

Managing Editor

Abby Bauer

Art Director

Todd Garrett

Editorial Coordinator

Jennifer Yurs

Director of Marketing

John Mansavage

Advertising Sales

Kim Zilverberg kzilverberg@hoards.com

Advertising Coordinator

Patti Kressin pkressin@hoards.com

Online Media Manager

Patti Hurtgen phurtgen@hoards.com

Digital Marketing Manager

Michaela King mking@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 © 2022 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

Photo by Mike Rankin, Hay&ForageGrower Managing Editor.

Abby Bauer Managing Editor

SMALL BUT MIGHTY

There are certain jobs young children tend to gravitate toward when asked the question, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” Doctor, teacher, and fireman are common responses. Some aim more for celebrity status, with aspirations to become a movie star, singer, or professional athlete. For kids growing up around agriculture, farmer or veterinarian usually top the list.

As high school graduation nears, young people tend to narrow down their career aspirations to something a tad less glamorous than becoming the next Taylor Swift or Tom Brady. When I think of my fellow dairy science classmates, most were headed down a path toward genetics, nutrition, or communications.

Few young people set their eager eyes on a career in manure handling or nutrient management, but I would argue that more probably should. It truly is an area of agriculture that is filled with potential, and it affects farms — and communities — of all sizes across the country and around the world.

This very specific area of farm management has broad implications. Of course, there is the direct storage, handling, and application of manure, but it is so much more than that. There are people studying crops and soils to determine how farms can best utilize these nutrients. Others are engineering new solutions for handling manure and updating old equipment to meet the needs of today’s farmers. People are inventing completely new ways to work with manure, and then individuals at universities are studying these new technologies. Companies are manufacturing products that reduce the volume and odor. Positions connected to the manure space tie into environmental issues and sustainability. Or, if one wants to pursue a career in regulation or law, manure certainly involves that.

This past year saw the return of more in-person events, some that had been sidelined for a while due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Meetings like the Waste to Worth conference and the Texas Animal Manure Management Issues conference were a gathering of the minds for people who work with manure and nutrients. It was energiz-

ing for me to see these academic experts come together, a small fraternity of sorts, bonded by the work they do to study this valuable by-product and help farmers make the most of it.

Some manure specialists have desks in an agricultural engineering department, while others are linked to their soils or agronomy colleagues. Some are more focused on studying the nutrients found in manure; others evaluate technology that can be used to help process it.

Like many areas of agricultural research, there are bright young minds getting into the field, but they don’t seem to outnumber the seasoned veterans who already spent a career dedicated to this area of study and will be heading to retirement sooner rather than later. New talent waiting in the wings will help keep these important positions filled in the future.

A similar assessment could be made about the area of nutrient management in general. From manure haulers to laboratory techs to manure equipment salespeople, there are many services needed by farmers, and it will require the next generation of the workforce to embrace this line of work. Those interested in this field may be small in number, but their impact is mighty.

If you know a young person trying to find their path in the agriculture world, encourage them to give manure and nutrient management a look. I can’t promise they’ll come home with clean clothes every day but there is tremendous opportunity to help farmers and be involved with exciting changes in the future. Who knows what we’ll be able to do with manure next, but what we know right now is that proper manure management is important to everyone.

Until next time, Abby

CALIFORNIA

The California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) awarded $37.65 million in grant funding to 41 methane reduction projects across the state. In total, these projects are estimated to cut annual greenhouse gas emissions in The Golden State by 233,393 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.

These projects are part of the Alternative Manure Management Program aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions from manure produced by dairy and livestock farms. Including this latest round of grants, 273 projects have received funding since 2015, and these projects reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 2,555,727 metric tons per year, which the CDFA says is equivalent to removing more than 550,600 cars from the road.

WISCONSIN

The 2023 budget for Dane County, Wisconsin, includes $3 million to study the feasibility of opening a commercial grade, community scale manure processing plant and funding to acquire a site for this potential development.

In a press release, Dane County Executive Joe Parisi said that the county had done a lot over the past decade to address the root cause of excessive algae growth in the Yahara Chain of Lakes, but a grander scale solution is needed to reach the county’s phosphorus runoff reduction goals. Dane County — home to Madison, the state’s capital — is still a major player in dairy and other agricultural commodities. This new manure processing plant, in combination with two existing digesters in the county, would treat approximately 400 million gallons of manure each year from about 40,000 cows.

DELAWARE

An emergency order approved by members of the Delaware Nutrient Management Commission will allow for a 180-day extension of properly staged poultry litter in state fields. The order took effect on November 1.

This follows last spring’s order by the Delaware Department of Agriculture to restrict the movement and application of poultry litter in two counties to control the spread of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). The ability to stage litter in preparation for spring application will help farmers who faced storage limitations while still reducing litter movement when HPAI risk is anticipated to be greatest.

UNITED STATES

Included in the Inflation Reduction Act is $40 billion over the next 10 years directed toward existing voluntary programs promoting climate-smart agriculture, rural energy efficiency and reliability, forest conservation, and more. Around half of those dollars will support Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) programs. The remaining funds will support programs that improve land health, water quality, and the economic stability and climate resilience of farming operations.

For agriculture, funds will be used to streamline nutrient management planning, provide technical assistance for conservation programs, and support a program to quantify carbon sequestration and carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions. More specifically, $8.45 billion will be allocated to the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP); $4.95 billion for the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP); $3.25 billion for the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP); and $1.4 billion for the Agricultural Conservation Easement

Program (ACEP). The Rural Energy for American Program (REAP) will also receive funds to support the generation, storage, and use of renewable energy.

As part of the nutrient management initiative, the USDA will conduct an outreach campaign to highlight the ways nutrient management can contribute to a farm’s bottom line. An estimated 89 million acres of cropland across the country exceed the nitrogen loss threshold, and implementation of nutrient management plans for these acres would result in more efficient use of resources and could save farmers $2.6 billion, along with reducing nutrients that end up in ground and surface waters.

The Biden-Harris Administration made $500 million in grants available through the Fertilizer Production Expansion Program to increase American-made fertilizers. The goal is to spur competition and combat record-high prices. According to the USDA, the grants will be used to support independent, innovative, and sustainable American fertilizer production. The funds will also expand the manufacturing of fertilizer and nutrient alternatives.

THE NETHERLANDS

The Dutch agriculture minister resigned unexpectedly following a turbulent summer of protests by farmers in opposition to a court ruling that required farms to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions. The Dutch government allocated an extra $24.2 billion to work toward this goal, but a mid-September deadline to present a plan for the transition away from intensive farming practices was not met by the agriculture minister.

Henk Staghouwer announced his decision in September after holding the position for only nine months, telling reporters that he wasn’t the right person for the job. The position will temporarily be filled by the former agricultural minister, Carola Schouten.

BOUNCING BETWEEN FROZEN AND THAWED

by Aaron Wunderlin and Laura Paletta

Over the years, the University of Wisconsin Division of Extension Discovery Farms Program has shared lessons learned from nutrient applications on frozen soil. The main takeaway is that applying nutrients, such as manure, to frozen ground shortly before runoff occurs leads to greater losses.

Frozen soils are more prone to runoff from rain and/or snowmelt events because it is much harder for water to infiltrate into the soil and percolate below the frost layer. Understanding how soils freeze and thaw provides insight on the development of soil conditions that are more susceptible to runoff and is important to consider when making decisions about nutrient applications.

The dynamics of how soils freeze and thaw throughout winter can strongly influence surface water runoff potential during snowmelt and early spring rains. The combination of physical and climatic variables in a local region can result in varying freeze dates, frost depths, and thaw dates.

The freeze-thaw cycle

The freeze-thaw cycle in a soil can vary based on several factors including:

• Soil type

• Soil structure

• Landscape position

• Temperature patterns

• Soil moisture content

• G eographic location

• Ground cover

• Timing/depth of snowpack

• Rain/snowmelt on frozen soil

• Frost depth Discovery Farms collects soil temperature data at multiple depths throughout the year at each of the monitoring project areas to assess the soil conditions as it relates to runoff. For our purposes, “frozen soil conditions” are defined as a soil temperature below 32°F at any depth monitored. Depending on factors listed above, our data reveal that soil conditions can either fluctuate between frozen and nonfrozen throughout winter or freeze and stay frozen until spring.

As observed in Table 1 and 2, soil does not freeze and thaw at the same time each year, nor is the length of

There is a connection between the freeze-thaw cycle and runoff risks.

time when soil is frozen the same. Within and between years, the factors listed above can influence timing at any given location.

As hard as concrete

The amount and type of frost present in the soil is one of the primary factors that influence the amount of surface runoff generated by snowmelt or winter rain events in any given year. These conditions in the soil vary widely across the state and even in your local area. A challenge that develops with surface thawing while frost remains deeper in the soil profile is water can still infiltrate to fill pore space above the frost layer and then refreeze when temperatures drop again.

“Concrete frost” is commonly used to describe the condition when most of the pore space at or near the surface of the soil is occupied by frozen water (Figure 1). This condition is often formed in mid to late winter when snowmelt or rain infiltrate soil that is still frozen at some depth below. This cold water percolates down to where the frost still exists in the soil profile and then freezes.

In some situations, the upper profile of the soil becomes saturated with water to the soil surface before freezing. Concrete frost takes longer to thaw than regular frost in the soil; therefore,

once it forms, it is typically present for the rest of winter until the entire frost is pushed out of the soil and water can percolate through.

The development of concrete frost has been verified in data collected by both Discovery Farms and others where melting occurs at the surface but the frost is not fully removed from the soil. In this situation, melt or rain water percolates to the frost layer then refreezes (Figure 2). These studies have also shown that during concrete frost conditions, little to no infiltration occurs in the soil as pore spaces are full of ice.

The in-field study conducted by Melanie Stock and collaborators at the University of Wisconsin also found that frozen soils create significantly greater amounts of runoff than unfrozen soils. This study applied liquid manure at different timings throughout the winter and saw higher runoff and nutrient losses in January compared to December. They attribute this to the presence of a thick layer of concrete frost (20.1 inches deep) that developed in January (Figure 2).

Stock also found that another important factor to consider when applying manure on snow is the effect of albedo, which is the reflection and absorption of

continued on following page >>>

Figure 1. Concrete frost development in soils after thaw/refreeze events where the frost is not completely removed from the soil.

*Original core farms: Winter 2003-2004 through 2010-2011

**Current farms: Winter 2015-2016 through 2020-2021

Table 1: Average freeze and thaw dates at monitoring locations in Wisconsin and average duration of frozen soil conditions

sunlight. Manure is dark in color, which raises sunlight absorption. This speeds up snowmelt and can cause rapid runoff. In a case where snow starts to melt but concrete frost is still present, the newly melted snow cannot infiltrate the soil and becomes surface runoff.

Avoid risky areas

Nutrients applied to soils during concrete frost conditions have a very high likelihood of loss via surface runoff. Avoid nutrient applications during concrete frost conditions to prevent nutrient loss, which degrades water quality. This is not always possible, so be sure to place your nutrient applications in areas of the least amount of risk.

During concrete frost conditions, utilize internally drained land (closed depressions) or low-sloped (flat) land, areas that are far from surface water features, and target those fields that have vegetative cover throughout the winter. Utilize your local conservation resources to assist you with your decision making when spreading manure this winter. ■

Figure 2. Snowpack and frost depth throughout two winter seasons in south central Wisconsin (Stock et al., 2019).

Wunderlin is with the University of WisconsinMadison Division of Extension’s Discovery Farms program. Paletta is an outreach specialist with the University of Wisconsin’s Agriculture Water Quality Program.

2: Observed freeze and thaw dates

MANURE VALUES CHANGE OVER TIME

Laboratory analysis is the best way to evaluate the nutrient content of manure on a specific farm. When sampling is not or cannot be done, farmers rely on “book values” to develop nutrient management plans, design manure storages, and create best management practices for land application. Book values show a range of nutrient values that can be expected from typical manure storages, but many of these averages are decades old and may not reflect current production practices. Factors such as animal diets, genetics, housing, and manure handling and storage all impact the nutrient content of the manure.

Researchers from the University of Minnesota set out to evaluate the

change in manure from when the Midwest Plan Service last published its Manure Characteristics booklet in 2004. They partnered with three laboratories in the Midwest that shared data from the last 10 years. Nutrient averages for beef, dairy, poultry, and swine manure were evaluated.

For the liquid dairy samples, there was a decreasing trend over time for nitrogen and phosphorus and an increasing trend for ammoniumnitrogen. In liquid beef manure, there was a rising trend for more nitrogen, ammonium-nitrogen, and phosphorus. The liquid poultry manure had an increasing trend for ammoniumnitrogen and potassium with reducing levels of phosphorus. Without knowing

more details about the liquid swine manure samples, including age of the animals and the type of manure storage system, the researchers were unable to determine nutrient changes.

For solid manure from swine, dairy, and beef operations, they found an upward trend for total nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium. The solid poultry manure had a rising trend for total nitrogen and potassium.

The team recognized that knowing more details about the samples would be beneficial, since animal age, nutrition, housing, and manure storage can impact nutrient levels. The project’s next step is to formulate a manure nutrient database, called Manure DB, to help keep book values up to date. ■

scales

Proven, twin-auger design eliminates material bridging Fully enclosed, heavy-duty oil bath drive for low maintenance and long life

Manure irrigation deserves a retrial

by John P. Chastain

Large-bore traveling gun and center pivot irrigation systems have been used to apply treated lagoon water, liquid animal manure, and untreated slurry from swine and dairy farms in many parts of the United States. The primary advantages of using irrigation equipment to spread manure on cropland are the lower costs for energy and labor and the higher speed of application as compared to using a tractor-drawn spreader. The primary disadvantages are related to greater odor release and the possibility of spraying manure on roads or another person’s property.

The loss of nitrogen

The amount of nitrogen lost to the air as ammonia from application of manure is important for two reasons. From the farmer’s point of view, the loss of nitrogen as ammonia gas represents fertilizer that could have contributed to the production of a crop.

From an environmental point of view, ammonia lost from a field to the atmosphere is a source of air pollution that can combine with sulfates and nitrates to form extremely fine particulate matter that can have harmful effects on human health. This particulate matter can also contribute to water pollution when deposited into surface water by rainfall.

A previous study and several extension publications state that irrigation of animal manure raises ammonia-N

For many years it has been assumed that more ammonia nitrogen was lost if irrigation was used to land apply liquid manure as compared to application with a spreader. Some governmental agencies have outlawed irrigation as an option even if manure treatment methods have been used to reduce the nitrogen content and odor.

loss by 10% to 25%. It was thought that using irrigation to apply liquid manure resulted in higher ammonia loss as compared to application to a field with a spreader. This additional ammonia loss was assumed to occur as the manure traveled through the air from the end of the irrigation nozzle and before it struck the ground.

Consequently, some government agencies have discouraged irrigation as a means to fertilize cropland with manure or have prohibited it completely due to concerns over an increase in ammonia emissions. Such regulations have a significant negative impact on dairy and swine producers who have invested in high levels of manure treatment that result in large volumes of dilute, liquid

manure with low concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorous, solids, and minimal odor potential. Pumping diluted liquid manure through pipes to irrigation equipment is typically the most costeffective means to use the water and nutrients to grow crops.

A closer look

A meta-analysis of 55 data sets from three independent sources was performed to quantify the ammonia-N lost during the interval of time from when the liquid manure exited the irrigation equipment and when a sample was collected on the ground. The study included data for irrigation of untreated liquid and slurry manure, surface water from treatment lagoons, and very dilute effluent from an oxidation ditch that was used to provide advanced treatment for cattle manure. The data set also included three types of irrigation equipment: a traveling big gun, large-bore solid set sprinklers, and center-pivot irrigation.

The data included measurements of the total solids content (TS, %), the total nitrogen content (TKN), and the total ammoniacal nitrogen content (TAN). The total ammoniacal nitrogen is the sum of the ammonium nitrogen, which is a good source of fertilizer, and the ammonia nitrogen, which is the part that can be lost to the air as a gas. Fortunately, most liquid animal manure has a pH near 8, and only 8%

Irrigation of liquid animal manure has a reputation for elevating ammonia loss, but research has proven otherwise.

TOTAL AMMONIACAL NITROGEN IN IRRIGATED AND GROUND COLLECTED SAMPLES

TAN g = 0.9999 TANI

R 2 = 0.9844 n

55

Figure 1. The concentration of the total ammoniacal nitrogen (TAN = ammonium-N + ammonia-N) was not changed as the manure traveled through the air. This was indicated by a regression line slope that was not significantly different from 1.0. The data included in the analysis was slurry manure, treatment lagoon water, and highly treated liquid manure. Manure that received the highest amount of treatment had the lowest concentrations of TAN.

to 10% of the TAN is ammonia nitrogen. In each of the studies, samples were collected from the manure that was irrigated onto a field, and samples were collected in containers placed in the field to catch the manure on the ground. The differences in these concentrations were analyzed to determine if the TS, TKN, or TAN had changed significantly as the result of irrigation alone.

The first step was to determine if any water evaporated during irrigation by analysis of the TS data. Well-known data, used in irrigation design, indicates that evaporation loss during irrigation ranges from 1% to 3.5%. It was determined that evaporation losses for all 55 data sets was small and averaged 2.4%, which agreed with expectations for irrigation.

Consider the impacts

The same type of analysis was done for the total nitrogen data. Total nitrogen includes the organic nitrogen and TAN.

The results indicated that irrigation did not significantly alter the concentration of TKN. On the average, the TKN content of the ground-collected samples was slightly higher than the irrigated samples, which was obviously impossible.

The plot of the TAN concentrations collected on the ground and the TAN contained in the irrigated water is shown in Figure 1. The results showed that irrigation of manure did not result in a change in the concentration of TAN. On the average, the TAN concentrations in the irrigated and ground-collected manure differed by only 0.01%. Therefore, no ammonia nitrogen was lost from the manure during irrigation.

The results of this study do not imply that ammonia volatilization after manure strikes the ground is to be ignored. The suitability of irrigation as a liquid manure application method should be evaluated based on the level of treatment and the potential impact of

odors on neighbors. Also, the irrigation system should be designed and operated so as to prevent overspray onto roads, property owned by neighbors, and any type of surface water. In addition, irrigation of liquid manure must be delayed if runoff begins.

Application methods that reduce ammonia loss and odor, such as band application, direct injection, or similar nitrogen conserving methods, are recommended if untreated slurry manure or lagoon sludge is to be used as a natural fertilizer substitute. 

Reference: Chastain, J.P. 2019. Ammonia Volatilization Losses during Irrigation of Liquid Animal Manure. Sustainability 11(21), 6168; https://doi. org/10.3390/su11216168.

The author is a professor and extension agricultural engineer at Clemson University.

Inspired to farm closer to nature

At Roche Grain Farms, adjustments made to current farming practices lead to a more regenerative future.

by Abby Bauer, Managing Editor

Farming is nothing new for the Roche family, who has been raising livestock and growing crops at their farm in southeastern Wisconsin for 170 years. What has changed in recent years, though, is the family’s focus on regenerative agriculture. Over time, their goals for farming have become more centered on working in harmony with nature — rather than against it — to improve the soil on their fields.

Three of the six Roche brothers — Kevin, David, and Dennis — followed in the footsteps of their father and uncle when they took over the family business. Today, the farm is owned as an equal partnership between the trio and their wives, Tracy, Amy, and Jacki. Their father is still involved with the farm, and at the age of 85, one of his main jobs is installing drain tile in their fields.

All three brothers attended the University of Wisconsin-River Falls. Kevin returned home first after graduation to start his farming career with his father. David worked in landscaping for a few years, but when the opportunity arose to buy into the farm, he returned as well. Dennis served in the Navy before attending college, then came back to the family business.

The former dairy farm transitioned to beef cattle production decades ago, and in 1972, feedlot facilities were built on the farm. Today, the Roches finish about 1,200 head of Holstein steers, dairy and beef crossbreds, and beef steers annually. Cattle arrive at the farm in groups of 110 head between 400 and 700 pounds and are finished in about 300 days. The steers are sold to a few different buyers depending on market preferences. David said they are always running projections and locking in prices to ensure the cattle business is making money.

The cattle are fed homegrown forages along with corn fines from the co-op and distillers grains. Five different rations are utilized depending on age of the cattle and their stage of growth. When the cattle arrive at the farm, they are vaccinated, implanted, and treated if needed. The best treatment they have

found, though, is to keep the steers clean and well bedded, which helps ward off many issues.

Keeping fields under cover

The grain side of the operation includes 3,700 acres located within a 5-mile radius of the farm that are used to grow corn, soybeans, and wheat for cash cropping. They also grow corn for silage and rye that is harvested in the form of ryelage as a forage source for their cattle.

The introduction of rye as a cover crop is just one example of the steps the trio has taken to improve the health of their soils. A mix of cereal rye, vetch, and winter peas is planted following corn silage, grain corn, and soybean harvest. The rye is typically what survives through the winter and some of the

acres are harvested in the spring.

David said the best part of ryelage is that they can feed less corn to the cattle. The forage also provides different nutrients in the ration, and he said the cattle seem to prefer it over corn silage. Overall, they can include less energy in the ration, and as another bonus, they are getting two crops off the same field.

After wheat harvest, fields are planted with a cover crop mix of seven to eight species, including more legumes that provide additional nitrogen. “When it comes to cover crop seeds, diversity is key,” Kevin said. “Cost is a factor too; as with everything else, these costs continue to rise.” Some of their rye is harvested as grain and is

Dennis, David, and Kevin Roche own and operate Roche Grain Farms near Columbus in southeastern Wisconsin.

All photos: Abby Bauer

“Diversity is key” when it comes to cover crop mixes, according

to Kevin Roche of Roche Grain Farms.

used for seed.

A valuable source of information on cover crops and other soil-friendly practices has come from a farmer-led organization called the Dodge County Farmers for Healthy Soil and Water. Kevin was involved with the group initially, and David currently serves on the board of directors. “It has been really helpful working with this group,” David said.

It was a presentation at one of these meetings that really spurred their interest in soil health. Ray Archuleta, known as “The Soil Guy,” is a nationally known expert who talks about soil health and cover crops based on his experience of working over three decades for the National Resources Conservation Service. Archuleta’s comments motivated them to make changes to their more conventional farming practices.

The Roches were also inspired by Rick Clark, a crop and cattle farmer in Indiana who is on the forefront of regenerative farming. “He is ahead of where we are, and we are trying to emulate him,” David said.

Organic farming is appealing to the Roches, but the transition is not practical for them right now. The same is true for cattle grazing. However, they are trying to use as many organic practices as possible and are really focusing on regenerative agriculture.

The brothers have transitioned toward cover crops on 100% of their fields because they realize the benefits. Kevin said that cover crops have improved soil health. “The crops are more uniform from end-to-end now,” he said. They can also plant into wetter fields in the spring, even in their claytype soils, if the fields had a cover.

David noted that their soil is now home to plenty of worms, which he explained is a good indicator of soil health. He added that cover crops have also helped reduce erosion.

Corn and soybeans are planted into cover crops that can be up to knee high. For corn, they have found it works best to kill off the cover crop three days after planting. For soybeans, it is done one to two weeks after planting.

Since they have been using no till and cover crops, they have noticed other changes in their fields, too. For one, “The weed pressure is different,” said Kevin.

The brothers said they are managing around a different set of weeds now.

The brothers noted that cover crops are only part of the equation, though. Pairing cover crops with no-till is important as to not destroy the biological activity in the soil.

Kevin said a lot of what they learned has been by trial and error, and David jumped in to say they have had plenty of failures, too. It’s all part of the learning process.

“No-till takes more management,” Kevin noted. “Tillage can cover up the symptoms for unhealthy soil. It’s like aspirin for a headache.”

A ready nutrient source

The Roches have been cutting down on potash and phosphorus applications the last few years. That’s because past soil tests revealed that a lot of those nutrients were tied up in the soil, but with more biological activity underground, the nutrients are more available.

Some of the nutrients applied to the fields come in the form of manure from their beef cattle. Their housing systems provide both solid and liquid manure for application.

The young steers are housed in bedded-pack barns. A layer of wood chips is covered by cornstalks. Sheets of gypsum drywall are laid on top of the pack to reduce the smell and, because it ties

up the ammonia, they feel the drywall keeps the steers healthier. The gypsum also contains ammonium and sulfur, which eventually provides nutrients to the land, the brothers noted.

The solid manure is hauled out of the barns and is put into windrows to be composted. The rows are turned more often in the beginning of the summer but less often as time goes on. They have found that they dry out too much if turned too often, which slows down the composting, so they have gone from turning them once a week to turning them every three weeks to conserve the moisture. They noted that the quality of the compost product at the end depends on the effort that is put into managing the windrows.

Kevin said in the fall, they apply 2.5 to 3 tons of compost per acre, which is a valuable soil amendment, but he emphasized that there’s more to improving soil health than just adding compost. “It’s a combination of compost, no-till, and cover crops,” he said. “You have to stop digging up the worms’ home.”

The older cattle are housed in a barn with rubber-covered slatted floors. When first considering the purchase of mats to cover the slats, the Roches ran a trial where half the pens had rubbercovered slats and half did not. The steers in the pens with the mats were lying down more and gained 0.25 pound

Corn and soybeans are harvested and stored on the farm. The Roches’ bins have capacity for 450,000 bushels.

more per day, they observed, so they soon added mats to the whole barn.

Manure is stored underground in an 8-foot deep pit, and a biological control product is added to the manure to help break it down. The liquid manure is hauled out and applied in spring, summer, and fall, before corn planting, after wheat, and after fall harvest. David said liquid manure is always

applied to cover crops or ground that is soon to be planted. “We want a crop to be there to take in those nutrients right away,” he explained.

Manure is tested prior to application, and soils are tested every three to four years, as scheduled in their nutrient management plan. “Manure is a great fertilizer,” the brothers agreed, and they try to get the most out of it by spreading it out over all their acres, ensuring that every field gets an application of manure every two or three years.

Growing crops and children

The farm is operated with family labor, plus two full-time employees that assist with all aspects of the farm. “We all work well together,” David noted. While corn chopping is done by a custom harvester, they do their own combining and storage. On the original dairy farm site is now a machine shed. On another farm sit several grain bins with 450,000 bushels of storage. What

is not used to feed their cattle is sold to local co-ops for grain or for ethanol. The addition of a new grain dryer this past summer will allow harvest to be completed more quickly, they noted.

The brothers’ favorite aspects of farming are seeing plants grow and recognizing the benefits of different practices. Kevin said he also appreciates the opportunity to work with his sons and daughters on the farm, and David agreed. “It’s a great way to raise a family,” he said

It is clear that at the core of their farming practices is family, which remains very important to all of them. Between the three brothers, they have 17 children. While none of their offspring are working on the farm full time yet, there is plenty of potential for the farm to carry on for another generation. With regenerative agricultural practices in place, the Roches hope the land will be in even better condition when that time comes. 

4103 LNMS

5105 LNMS

4103 LNMS DRAGHOSE SYSTEM

5105 DNMS

Equipped with All-Wheel Drive & choice of 3 or 5 wheels, we can help you spread your valuable nutrients in even the toughest conditions.

Steers are raised on bedded packs and then moved into a barn with a rubbercovered slatted floor.

MOVING DOWN THE MANURE PIPELINE

A less common but effective way to move manure from Point A to Point B is an underground pipeline.

by Abby Bauer, Managing Editor

When a window of opportunity opens to empty out a farm’s manure storage, the yard is suddenly filled with a buzz of activity. Soon, filled tankers will head down the country roads to move manure out to the fields.

To alleviate road traffic, the expense of hauling, and compaction in the fields, dragline application has grown in popularity. These durable hoses are spread across fields, delivering nutrients to the soil in fields that are within a reasonable distance to the farm.

Another similar but more permanent option is the use of underground pipes to haul manure out to a field, where it can then be applied. During a Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Community webinar, Glen Arnold, an associate professor and field specialist for Ohio State University Extension, talked about using pipelines to transport manure.

“Livestock farms continue to grow,” Arnold said. “When more animals are in one spot, you end up with more manure.” For this reason, farms may find value in a more permanent way to move nutrients.

Find the right location

When considering where to install pipelines, Arnold said to locate them where they would provide the most benefit. This could be a hard-to-access field, one that might not be far from

the farm but requires several miles of transport down the road to reach it. A pipeline could also be beneficial for moving manure to a satellite pond or a manure processor.

The pipe needs to have both the size (diameter) and strength (pounds per square inch) to handle the volume and pressure needed to move manure through it. Additionally, Arnold said to anticipate the farm’s future needs and design the system with enough capacity

so that it can keep up with the manure pumpers and remains useful for years to come.

“If you are going to take the time and investment to put in a subsurface manure pipe in, build for the future of your farm,” he advised.

He said the volume that moves through larger pipes is substantial. While an 8-inch pipe can handle 1,600 gallons per minute, a 10-inch one can move 3,000 gallons per minute. A

A permanent underground pipeline can help farms reduce traffic on roadways and transport manure to hard-to-reach fields.

Glen Arnold

12-inch pipe has the capacity for 4,700 gallons per minute, and a 14-inch pipe could handle 6,000 gallons per minute. Pipelines should be placed below the frost line, Arnold said, so a backhoe or trencher will be needed for installation. Any fixed pipes need to be blown out after each use to keep sand from settling in there, he added.

A real-world example

For David Cunningham, the farm manager for Bridgewater Dairy in northwestern Ohio, his experience with underground manure pipelines has been positive. Their 5,000-cow dairy has close to 6,000 acres of cropland where they apply manure using variable rate technology. A stretch of pipeline is used to carry some manure away from the farm, and Cunningham predicts they will add a longer, larger pipeline in the future.

Prior to joining the Bridgewater Dairy team, Cunningham worked as a crop manager at an Iowa livestock farm that ran 10,000 acres. That operation installed about 9 miles of pipeline to transport manure, a move that benefited the farm in several ways.

“The cost savings were huge, that is what motivated the farm,” Cunningham explained. “Being able to get the trucks off the roadways is huge. We eliminated the truck traffic through the tourist towns that surrounded the farm and also eliminated a lot of the smell,” he added.

To install this length of pipeline, they had to bore under highways, railroads, and state and county roads. “You will encounter a lot of governing agencies in this adventure. Be prepared to deal with all of them,” Cunningham advised. He noted that they had an engineering firm design the projects to help meet the specifications for every group. “It’s very important to follow the rules,” he noted.

When they installed the pipeline, Cunningham said they were hoping to pay it off in two or three years. With hauling costs cut dramatically, the investment was paid off in just 1.5 years. “That was a pretty big deal for us,” he noted.

Relationships are important when moving manure, and Cunningham said they try to stay on a first name basis with folks, from neighbors to town commissioners. “Go above and beyond what is necessary to communicate with these folks, so when you do have an issue or a need, you know these people and they know how important it is to you to do the right thing. Have those lines of communication open,” he said.

The pros and cons

Positives for livestock producers using underground manure pipelines include less potential mess around the farm, which makes neighbors happier. Arnold said it also leads to less road travel and potential road damage, which local townships appreciate. Still further, there is reduced liability with fewer trucks on the road.

A pipeline also offers benefits for applicators. It makes set up faster, as less hose must be unrolled. They are also running fewer tankers on the road, which may save on driver and truck costs. Again, reduced liability is a benefit, along with less labor needs.

One concern about this system is the fact that farms may outgrow it and try to push more volume than it is designed to handle. Another con would be a farm losing access to ground where the pipe was placed. In that vein, farms must get permission to cross ditches and streams to put the pipeline in, which may be a challenge in some locations.

And of course, installation comes with a cost. While variable, Arnold shared one estimate of $158,400 per mile for a 10-inch pipe, if not crossing any roads or streams. Arnold said farms may consider more in-season manure application, such as sidedressing corn or application between cuttings, to help make this investment pay.

“There are a lot of pros and cons to a fixed manure transport system,” Arnold said. “But we know that costs to transport manure will likely increase, and liability costs will continue to rise.”

He continued, “As livestock farms grow in size, they will have to travel greater distances for feed sources. That means our need to travel greater distances with manure will also grow.”

If considering a permanent manure pipeline, Arnold said to plan the system for the farm’s future the best you can. Also be sure to include the buried line in your emergency spill plan. ■

Sampling for success

Timing

by Scott Fleming

Pulling a quality soil sample is rule number one of soil analysis. The most accurate laboratory in the world cannot accurately evaluate anything without a quality, representative sample. Planning and timing rules call for soil sampling every four years, but many other considerations exist that affect this ideal sample.

Nutrient management planning is a prevalent director of soil sampling schemes and plays into every sampling strategy. Crop rotation and input prices tend to direct both the sampling plan and even the decision to sample in many cases. What likely seems to be an uncomplicated subject can quickly become overwhelming, but learning more about key factors affecting soil sampling and analysis can help prepare operators to make the best decision for future fertility success.

Representative samples

Between almost two decades of soil sampling experience and directing a sampling crew for most of that time, I’ve had the opportunity to glean the good and the bad across all types of soil sampling. One of the most common things we hear is, “The soil is always there; why can’t you sample it now?” While it is always possible to put soil in a sample bag, it is not always possible to pull a high-quality, representative soil sample. Most often, such snipes are made when it comes to sampling following primary tillage. The soil is indeed present, but tillage has destroyed the soil’s structure. It’s no longer a homogeneous, stable substance. Instead, it has

a series of peaks and valleys that are full of air. The easiest means to introduce error into a soil sample is through inconsistent sampling depth. And as you’ve probably gathered through this story, it is nearly impossible to have a consistent sample depth in an environment like that after tillage.

The second most common reason a field must be bypassed for sampling is because of manure application. The reasons for this are more apparent than those surrounding tillage. Manure is applied as a fertility source; therefore, application of manure could substantially change the soil analysis value.

The manure application method also plays a significant role in the decision to sample. While not ideal, soil sampling may still be an option following a light application of poultry litter. However, soil sampling is generally out of the equation following a dragline application of liquid dairy manure. Not only is there a large amount of fertility that may contribute to inconsistencies, but the application method of injected manure also includes tillage.

Is it fall, y’all?

Pulling soil samples following harvest in the fall has long been considered the

and frequency can be the difference between collecting a high-quality, representative sample or just putting soil in a bag.

While it is recommended to take soil samples every four years, more frequent sampling allows for better management decisions.

only “acceptable” timing. While this timing may appear to be the standard for soil sampling, it is certainly not the only window of time to pull a soil sample.

My colleagues and I have evaluated data and written a hearty handful of articles on this subject. A quick internet search will yield more than one article on this heavily debated topic. Research has shown that seasonal variation between spring soil sampling and fall soil sampling does not exist at a level that will warrant significant management decision changes.

Identifying a soil sampling program that will fit into your operation is far more valuable than always pulling samples in the fall. This may include sampling in July following wheat harvest or after third crop alfalfa to spread out the fall harvest rush. This may even include sampling corn after planting to develop and incorporate timely lime recommendations prior to reseeding. My overarching response to the common question of timing is, “It is more important to pull a good soil sample than to insist it must be pulled in the fall.”

A small price to pay

The majority of fertility management decisions are based on soil test results. But on the balance sheet, soil sampling is a fairly small number compared to most crop inputs. Few other, if any, inputs cost less than a bushel of corn per year. Who wouldn’t give up a bushel of corn to ensure they are making the right soil fertility management decisions?

The price aspect of sampling could also be viewed from the savings side. Think back to the old 1980’s soil sampling literature with the tagline, “Soil sampling doesn’t cost, it pays!” While much has changed since then, they weren’t wrong. One ton of potash will likely run around $900 this fall.

In most areas, a 2.5-acre grid soil sampling package that includes variable rate technology (VRT) recommendations is under $10 per acre. Soil sampling will pay for itself if just 25 pounds of fertilizer savings is identified over the life of the soil sample — which

in many cases is four years! My bets are placed.

Aim for more often

Conventional wisdom says the minimum soil sampling requirements are one sample per five acres every four years. There is nothing on a farm or ranch that is ever done at the minimum level. No cattleman does just enough to get by. No producer plants a crop and walks away. Yet, many of my encounters in the field are with operators who are trying to do less than the bare minimum when it comes to soil sampling. The margins are too tight and the decisions are far too important to employ such a delinquent strategy. My argument typically revolves around the ideal that temporal and spatial frequency should be increased well beyond the minimums required in a nutrient management plan. The benefits of additional sampling are nearly endless. More data for management decisions, greater flexibility, and a better program fit are just a few advantages. But by far, the greatest may be improved compliance.

With increased spatial frequency of soil sampling, the chances of not having

enough samples for nutrient management plan compliance are eliminated. By pulling soil samples more frequently, there is no fear of having another strike against you during a compliance review if the sampler doesn’t stay ahead of the plow or the manure applicator is there earlier than expected. You simply regroup and ensure you get the samples pulled next year — with less stress for all parties involved.

In the end, confidence plays a key role in the strategy built around soil sampling and analysis for nutrient management. The scheme, frequency, and timing comes down to how much information the end user needs in order to make decisions for regulatory, financial, and management success. In times like these, when nutrient applications are highly regulated and input and commodity prices will make or break a farm business, the more you know can offer confidence in decisions for years to come. 

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

KUHN INTERCEPTOR 8055 OFFERS A HIGH-SPEED CONSERVATION TILLAGE OPTION

Kuhn North America is pleased to introduce the Interceptor 8055 highspeed conservation tillage tool for sizing, distributing, and incorporating residue into a full cut width of worked soil. Residue is mixed throughout the soil profile, aiding breakdown and preventing a “mat” of residue from being formed either on or below the soil surface. The Interceptor 8055 can be used to control green growth, particularly in the presence of herbicide-resistant weeds.

An innovative stability control system helps reduce the “hopping” that often characterizes high-speed, full-width tillage tools. Individually mounted Excalibur CT blades operate on a shallow compound angle to reduce smearing and compaction by limiting weight on the backside of the blade. Nine-inch blade spacing provides a full-width cut-out, and the two parallel rows are arranged in a tandem layout to prevent “dog-tracking” or windrowing of residue. The distance between the rows of blades allows soil and residue to land, reducing the risk of plugging in wet conditions. Behind the front row of blades, a

heavy-duty tine harrow controls soil and residue flow to help prevent buildup and improves residue distribution across the field. Depth is controlled from the tires in the center of the machine and is adjusted from a single point. At the rear of the machine, the Star Wheel treaders and 24/7 reel attachment provide excellent leveling and clod sizing. Maintenance-free features are incorporated throughout the Interceptor 8055, reducing daily maintenance and increasing machine uptime.

The Interceptor 8055 is available in 30-foot (29-foot RTK), 36-foot (35-foot RTK), and 40-foot (39-foot 6-inch RTK) working widths and is designed to be used at field speeds of 8 to 10 mph. For more information, visit www.kuhn-usa.

GEA SLOPESCREEN WITH OPTICLEAN TECHNOLOGY ADAPTS TO NEEDS OF THE FUTURE

CASE IH AND RAVEN INDUSTRIES DEBUT FIRST AUTONOMOUS SPREADER

Case IH and Raven Industries introduce the agriculture industry’s first autonomous spreader: the Case IH Trident 5550 applicator with Raven Autonomy. It combines proven driverless technology with an agronomically designed spreading platform. The technology stack is powered by guidance and steering, propulsion control, perception, and path planning software developed by Raven.

From a mobile device, operators can plan and complete an entire field operation based on mapped field boundaries. The Raven Autonomy perception system, through a series of advanced cameras and radar system, is constantly sensing a 360-degree environment around the machine for obstacles and motion initiation while operating. With artificial intelligence,

the perception controller processes the continuous stream of images. By operating at a constant speed, the autonomous applicator provides ultimate spreading consistency and allows for repeatable performance with sub-inch accuracy.

The Case IH Trident 5550 applicator with Raven Autonomy will be operating with limited availability in 2023. For more information, visit https://info. caseih.com/CIHAutonomy.html and www.ravenind.com.

The newly redesigned SlopeScreen separator from GEA Farm Technologies delivers enhanced functionality and performance. With the new stainless steel construction featuring a unique wedge wire screen, the GEA SlopeScreen has a modular design that can grow based on customer needs. The separation surface can be adapted to different flow rates and animal numbers and ranges from 32 to 96 square feet. It can be configured in a single stage (screen only) or a two-stage separator with the addition of a roller screen and press for more water capture and drier solids.

GEA SlopeScreen separator benefits include greater throughput, adaptability, reliability, accuracy, efficiency, and longevity. The labor required for frequent washing can also be eliminated by automating it with the OptiClean system. OptiClean uses pressurized water to remove fiber and includes an integrated chemical system to remove minerals and soil. It can be added to new or existing SlopeScreen separators and is programmable for sitespecific conditions.

For more information about the GEA SlopeScreen and OptiClean, visit www.gea.com.

PROFESSIONAL DIRECTORY

ANAEROBIC DIGESTER SERVICES

Agricultural Digesters LLC

88 Holland Ln. #302 Williston, VT 05495

802-876-7877

info@AgriculturalDigesters.com www.AgriculturalDigesters.com

Future Enviroassets LLC

513-349-3844

LF@futureenviroassets.com www.futureenviroassets.com

ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS

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

info@bkt21.com

tomorrowwater.com

Trident Processes Inc.

1-800-799-3740

frank.engel@tridentprocesses.com www.tridentprocesses.com

COATINGS

Industrial Solutions

5115 S. Rolling Green Ave. Ste. 211 Sioux Falls, SD 57108 605-254-6059

www.isusananoclear.com

DEWATERING EQUIPMENT

Bauer North America Inc.

107 Eastwood Rd. Michigan City, IN 46360 800-922-8375

bnasales@bauer-at.com

www.bauer-at.com

Press Technology & Mfg. Inc.

1401 Fotler Street Springfield, OH 45504 937-327-0755

dberner@presstechnology.com

WASTE HANDLING EQUIPMENT

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

PLACES TO BE

2022 Sustainable Agriculture Summit

November 16 and 17, 2022 Glendale, Ariz.

Details: sustainableagsummit.org

Iowa State University Integrated Crop Management Conference

November 30 and December 1, 2022 Ames, Iowa

Details: aep.iastate.edu/icm

Wisconsin Agribusiness Classic

January 11 to 12, 2023 Madison, Wis.

Details: wiagribusiness.org

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

www.RBrauninc.com

Doda USA

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

WASTE HANDLING NUTRIENT SPREADERS

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

Oxbo International 800-628-6196 oxbo.com

WATER TECHNOLOGY

Bauer North America Inc. 107 Eastwood Rd. Michigan City, IN 46360 800-922-8375

bnasales@bauer-at.com www.bauer-at.com

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

COMPOST 2023

January 24 to 27, 2023

Ontario, Calif.

Details: compostconference.com

National Cattlemen’s Beef Association Trade Show and Convention

February 1 to 3, 2023

New Orleans, La.

Details: ncba.org/events

World Ag Expo

February 14 to 16, 2023

Tulare, Calif.

Details: worldagexpo.com

Midwest Forage Association/ Wisconsin Custom Operators Symposium

February 20 to 22, 2023 Wisconsin Dells, Wis.

Details: midwestforage.org

Minnesota Pork Conference

February 21 and 22, 2023 Mankato, Minn.

Details: mnporkcongress.com

Midwest Manure Summit

February 28, 2023

Green Bay, Wis.

Details: dairy.extension.wisc.edu/events/ midwest-manure-summit

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

THE SALTY SIDE OF MANURE

by Thomas Menke

I’ve written numerous articles and made many presentations extolling the virtues of manure. Yes, we know it has some unpleasant characteristics and can be dangerous when not respected, but when well-managed, the benefits far outweigh these drawbacks.

Treatment of liquid manure to concentrate nutrients is gaining traction around the world. This is due to industrial processes becoming more economical in light of typical land application of raw manure becoming more expensive and more restrictive. The energy costs of hauling “water” creates economic questions, and as a result, treatment options become more attractive. The goal is to improve the ratio nutrient value per mile of travel. A side benefit can be a manure product with less odor, which makes everybody happy.

Looks can be deceiving

Separation is easier for some nutrients than others. Case in point would be a settling basin prior to primary liquid manure storage where up to 80% of the phosphorus can be removed by sinking to the bottom using only gravity and time. Meanwhile, a screen separator can remove a fair amount of organic solids but doesn’t remove a high portion of chemical constituents from manure.

Those types of techniques can leave low solids “tea water,” as many call it, which can be deceiving. This brackish water is where the more soluble elements reside. Anyone who has pulled a manure sample off the top of an unagitated storage pond or pit will attest that potassium levels are nearly as high here as they are in the agitated samples. This is true of ammonia as well.

Soluble nutrients are difficult to capture. Ammonia can be aerated out of the manure water because it is volatile or may be converted to nitrate. Getting soluble elements out of manure water at the ionic level is very expensive. As long as we know what’s left behind in the water, we can manage its application accordingly.

Test for sodium levels

There are some insidious soluble cations in that water, with the main culprit being sodium. Salt is an essential

if you are not testing for sodium, you need to be. It is well demonstrated through research that sodium competes with potassium for uptake by plant roots.

Too much is toxic

Sodium is toxic to plants in high amounts. Soil test sodium levels comparing inside water irrigation areas versus outside of them can be dramatic — I’ve observed tenfold differences in my experiences. I’m sure there is variable tolerance of crops to high

part of animal nutrition and finds its way into the manure. While animals need sodium, soil does not. Western farmers located where rainfall is limited know about sodic soils and excessive salts. I’m not talking about those situations, although sodium in manure water will only exacerbate those issues. I am seeing more and more soil sodium issues in the Midwest where rainfall is plentiful. These issues include higher incidence of corn smut, deterioration of soil structure, and overall yield reductions.

High volumes of treated manure water can be applied because nitrogen and phosphorus are no longer limiting. Potassium can be first-limiting in those situations. Most of our clay soils in the Midwest have a fairly high total exchange capacity and can tolerate high potassium within reason. Still,

sodium (not merely salts), and my crop and soil science colleagues would know more about this. But what I do know is that there is sound correlation between high sodium levels building in manure water-irrigated soils that appears to be negatively impacting crop growth. Apparently, a soluble calcium source, such as gypsum, can counteract and reverse sodium buildup, but the amount will depend on the specific soil characteristics and its degree of sodium burden.

Don’t guess what is happening in your fields. Test your soils, review the results, and be observant. ■

The author is the president of Menke Consulting LLC, an agronomic and environmental consulting firm in Greenville, Ohio.

Salt is an essential part of animal nutrition and finds its way into the manure. While animals need sodium, soil does not.

LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY ENVIRONMENTAL LEARNING COMMUNITY

Connecting agri-professionals advancing environmental stewardship in animal agriculture

Livestock and Poultry Environmental Learning Community (LPELC) is a network made up of professionals from across the U.S. (and Canada) who share their knowledge and expertise in aspects of animal agriculture and environmental stewardship. (A nice way of saying we talk about manure….a lot.)

Webiars

LPELC.org is a clearinghouse of manure and environmental management basics, gathered from experts around the country. Sign up for announcements at: lpelc.org/sign-up

LPELC offers a free monthly webinar on a variety of issues related to animal manure management.

Our biennial conference focuses on manure and livestock environmental issues. Learn more at WastetoWorth.org

Topics include:

• Air quality

• Beginning farmer

• Climate change

• Environmental planning

• Feed management

• Manure nutrients

• Manure storage

• Manure treatment

• Pathogens

• Regulations

• Small farms

• Economics of manure

• Mortality management

NOVEMBER 16-17

GLEN GLENDALE, AZ

JOIN U.S. FOOD AND AGRICULTURE to explore how bold collaborations and actionable strategies can scale and strengthen our collective capacity to drive change and build a more sustainable future.

Hosted by:

Register at: