270 likes | 491 Views
Understanding Manure Management Behavior on Wisconsin Dairy Farms. Lessons from Recent On-Farm Research Douglas Jackson-Smith (Utah State University) J. Mark Powell, Dan McCrory, & Heather Saam (Univ of WI-Madison). Overview. Present initial results of recent on-farm research
E N D
Understanding Manure Management Behavior on Wisconsin Dairy Farms Lessons from Recent On-Farm Research Douglas Jackson-Smith(Utah State University) J. Mark Powell, Dan McCrory, & Heather Saam(Univ of WI-Madison)
Overview • Present initial results of recent on-farm research • Focus: the ‘logic’ of manure mgt • Why do farmers spread manure (or not) on particular kinds of fields? • What obstacles prevent farmers from incorporating manure? • How do farmers view manure as a potential source of crop nutrients? • Emphasis on small- and medium-sized integrated crop-dairy farms in Wisconsin
Starting Points • Small- and Mid-sized livestock operations are important contributors to nutrient-water quality problems – and are not going away • These operations do not always respond well to traditional approaches • Many technical or mgt solutions are inappropriate to their situation • To broaden research and policy agenda, we need to better understand these operations • Important to find ‘representative’ farms
Constraints to Proper Manure Management (Nowak et al 1998) • Institutional factors (research, extension) • Engineering factors (box spreaders) • Private Sector factors (motivation of input suppliers, risk avoidance) • Economic factors (economies of scale, risk, labor constraints) • Social-psychological factors (invisibility of impacts, safety & weather concerns, low status of manure handling, vocabulary) • Environmental factors (land constraints, confinement systems, topography)
Background to OFG study • Integrated Research Into Nutrient Cycling on Wisconsin Dairy Farms • Included Studies of Feeding/Diet, Manure Handling/Storage, Field Application • On-farm component Attempt to model nutrient cycling on “TYPICAL FARMS” • Fall 2002 in-depth interviews used here • Modeling farms = ongoing • Follow-up interviews planned • USDA NRI (Ag Systems) & IFAFS funding
Study of 54 Dairy Farms “On Farmers’ Ground” • Within each region • 18 farms selected • 6 farms in each randomly selected from each animal density category NE region SC region SW region
Profile of Respondents • Typical of Wisconsin dairy farms • Mean herd size = 88 (median = 66) • Most 50-99 cows (10% had 200+ cows) • 80% stanchion barns (20% parlor/freestall) • 65 lbs milk shipped / cow / day • Mean cropland = 275 acres (median 198) • Median 3.4 acres cropland / cow • Avg age = 48 • 77% rely mainly on farm income for hh
Manure Management Behavior • Roughly half have some manure storage • Mostly concrete lagoons • Average ~ 280 days storage • Most haul manure to fields daily • Few incorporate manure after spreading • Few have written nutrient mgt plans • Storage affects manure mgt behavior • Though not as much as we might expect
Understanding Manure Spreading Behavior • Previous work found ‘manure gap’ • Farmers only utilizing 23-44% of cropland • Why? • Hypotheses • Absence of storage • Labor or machinery shortage • Weather or soil conditions • Distance of fields • Land tenure
Results • Structured Question: • How important are the following factors in your decision to spread on a particular field? • Open-ended Question • What kinds of fields do you seek to spread manure? • Asked separately by season (fall, winter, spring, summer)
Incorporating Manure • 50% overall do not incorporate at all • 25% of farms incorporate < 1/4th • 10% incorporate 25-50% of manure • Why? (hypotheses) • Management system (daily haul, no-till) • Labor & equipment constraints • Seasonality & weather • Lack of concern/motivation
Perceptions about Manure as Fertilizer Source • Open-ended questions • What is the biggest advantage of manure in comparison to commercial fertilizers? • What is the biggest disadvantage of manure compared to commercial fertilizer?
Lessons and Conclusions • Small and mid-sized farms face many constraints to use of recommended manure management systems • No storage • Inability to incorporate • Inability to get to many fields on timely basis • These factors are not just ‘poor motivation’ or a lack of information
Implications • Blanket policies to NM regulation might disproportionately impact small- and mid-sized operations • Unrealistic Nutrient Mgt Plans might be hard to follow (if enforced) • Alternatively, policies and technical solutions limited to the largest operations might fail to provide opportunities for improved outcomes
More Implications • Develop technical solutions and mgt systems that work within these constraints • Education/Info is not enough • May not be ‘optimal’ (from NM perspective), but can improve performance
Suggestions for Future Research • Assume integrated crop/livestock systems • Assume many will not have long-term storage • More information about timing and placement of manure (vis-à-vis cropping patterns and landscape features) • Low-tech/cost options for manure handling and storage (in barn, farmstead, spreading)