1 / 27

Understanding Manure Management Behavior on Wisconsin Dairy Farms

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

aram
Download Presentation

Understanding Manure Management Behavior on Wisconsin Dairy Farms

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 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)

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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)

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. 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)

  11. 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

  12. 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?

  13. 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

  14. 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

  15. 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

  16. 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)

  17. QUESTIONS & COMMENTS?

More Related