Poultry Results: Funded by USDA IFAFS Program

1. Poultry Results: Funded by USDA IFAFS Program

2. The Poultry Industry • Differences • Most Vertically Integrated • Least regulated • More small, part time operations % Full time farmers GA-68% VA-71% PA-88% 25% have college degrees, 42% stopped at high school National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

3. Farmer Pre Survey • We must change producer behavior • Keep written records • 23% on Crops • 31% on Livestock • 36% on Financial Information • 38% on Environmental Issues • 50% do not keep any • 74% are concerned or very concerned about the impacts of manure on water quality but only 43% of their nieghbors are. • 48% Worked on nutrient management plan within 2yrs National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

4. PENNSYLVANIA’S ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMSPOULTRY PILOT PROGRAM

5. Pennsylvania The poultry industry in Pennsylvania accounts for almost $700 million in annual income at the farm level, making it the second largest agricultural industry in the state (behind the dairy industry). The following table shows the relative size of the different segments of the poultry industry in Pennsylvania. Size of the poultry industry in Pennsylvania, 2001* *Source: Pennsylvania Agricultural Statistics Service, 2001-02 Statistical Summary. **All, excluding broilers.Includes 23.7 million laying hens, 5.6 million pullets not of laying age, and 78,000 other chickens. Average egg production of Pennsylvania flocks was 271 per hen/year. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

6. Pennsylvania’s Plan • Objective: Adapt and field test an EMS evaluation tool for poultry. • With the assistance of a diverse and expert planning team, Pennsylvania tailored the national version of the environmental assessment tool to meet the needs of its poultry industry. • We thenidentified ten cooperating producers from each of the broiler, turkey, and layer industries to test the ability of the assessment tools to serve different poultry enterprises. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

7. PennAg Industries Association Pennsylvania Farm Bureau Pennsylvania Conservation District Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania Farm*A*Syst PennAg Poultry Council Wenger’s Feed Mill, Inc. Pilgrim’s Pride Flintrock Farms PA Planning Team National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

8. The Assessment Tool • There are eleven evaluation areas on the farm. • The responses to the questions in each section are ranked from 1 to 4, 1 being low risk and 4 being a potential high risk. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

9. Site Appearance Drinking Water Supply Septic System Design and Operation Runoff Issues Pest, Odor and Dust Management Mortality Management Farm Nutrient Balance Manure Exporting Land Application Biosecurity and Pathogen Management Emergency Action Planning Evaluation Areas National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

10. Assessment Goals • The Pennsylvania Poultry assessment tool was developed to: • perform on-site evaluations of poultry farms for potential water quality, odor and other environmental impacts, and to • identify specific actions to reduce those potential impacts. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

11. The Assessment Process • Before and after the assessment the producers were asked to fill out confidential evaluation surveys. • These on-site visits were followed by a written evaluation pointing out low risk areas and opportunities for improvement. • To be sensitive to the time constraints felt by poultry producers, and to keep information accessible, we kept the site visit to about 2 hours and produced the assessment results on a single page. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

12. Site Appearance Broiler 1.46 Layer 1.35 Turkey 1.29 Drinking Water Supply Broiler 1.67 Layer 1.64 Turkey 1.50 Septic System Design & Operation Broiler 1.53 Layer 1.61 Turkey 1.35 Runoff Issues Broiler 1.78 Layer 1.50 Turkey 1.61 Pest, Odor & Dust Management Broiler 2.36 Layer 2.13 Turkey 2.19 Mortality Management Broiler 1.27 Layer 1.58 Turkey 1.58 Assessment Feedback National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

13. Farm Nutrient Balance Broiler 1.96 Layer 2.35 Turkey 2.29 Manure Exporting Broiler 2.50 Layer 2.20 Turkey 2.50 Land Application Broiler 1.77 Layer 1.65 Turkey 1.53 Biosecurity & Pathogen Management Broiler 1.55 Layer 1.62 Turkey 1.19 Emergency Action Planning Broiler 1.88 Layer 2.10 Turkey 2.14 Assessment Feedback National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

14. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

15. Stronger Areas Site Appearance Drinking Water Supply Septic System Design & Operation Runoff Issues Mortality Management Biosecurity & Pathogen Management Land Application Weaker Areas Manure Exporting Farm Nutrient Balance Pest, Odor & Dust Management Emergency Action Planning Results National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

16. Lessons Learned • Survey responses from producers in Pennsylvania indicate that this tool was helpful and beneficial to their poultry operations. • The producers enjoyed the personal contact of a farm-visit, and in evaluations more than 83% of producers said they preferred the 3rd party assessment to a self-assessment. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

17. More Lessons Learned • Producers were very comfortable with the one-on-one atmosphere, and many said that they probably would not have taken the time out on their own to perform a self-assessment. • One third of the producers indicated that they are interested in moving beyond the assessment to pursue an EMS. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

18. More Lessons Learned • Length of the assessment does matter. • Producers have very little extra time on their hands with all the responsibilities involved with running a poultry operation. • Having an assessment tool that was concise and to the point was a definite advantage. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

19. More Lessons Learned • Producers were pleased that they could have a thorough environmental assessment that could be completed in a timely manner. • We also found that many producers plan to make changes to their operations based on the information they received from their assessment and evaluation, which is a very positive result. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

20. More Lessons Learned • It is vital for the questions to be very specific and pertain to each individual producer’s operation. • In testing our assessment tool on three different poultry commodity groups, we found that we could have designed a tool specific to each group individually: broilers, turkeys and layers. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

21. Producer Quotes • When asked what they like best some answer were as follows: • “It helped us to understand some of the weaknesses of our operation and how to practically correct them.” • “Personal Contact.” • “Having an outside opinion on how we perform our operation.” National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

22. Future • The future of this assessment tool in Pennsylvania is bright. • The Pennsylvania Ag Conservation Certification of Excellence (PEACCE) program is considering its adoption. • It is the first of its kind developed specifically for the PA poultry industry. • It will be published as a Penn State Extension document. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

23. Conclusion • All in all, our pilot test was a success. • The results show that it can be a useful and beneficial tool for Pennsylvania poultry producers across the state and commodity groups. • The future of the assessment tool is bright. • It will possibly be used in collaboration with an already established state-wide certification program. • It will be widely distributed as a Penn State Extension document. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

24. Virginia Poultry EMS Pilot Project Project Investigators: Lori Marsh & Matt Habersack

25. Virginia Specifics • 265.5 Million broilers/year • 20 Million turkeys/year • Poultry Waste Management Program (1999) • Concentrated in Chesapeake Bay Watershed National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

26. Advisory Committee Recommendations/Comments • Minimize Length • Self-assessment format • Question/answer format in the assessment tools is excellent, forces farmers to answer truthfully and shows how to improve performance at the same time. • Representative sample of VA growers: • 15 - Shenandoah Valley • 10 - Southside • 5 - Eastern Shore National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

27. EMS Materials • VA Guidebook (16 pages) • Template forms and samples • Prioritize Issues • Formulate an Environmental Policy Statement • Identify Assessment Tools • Set Objectives • Develop Farm Action Plans • Designed to facilitate record keeping for the EMS and VPA permit National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

28. EMS Materials • VA Assessment Tools • Regulations • Site Management • Nutrient Management • Odor & Air Quality • Manure Storage • Mortality • Biosecurity • Pest Management • BMP’s • Exporting Manure National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

29. Workshops • Participant Identification • Project staff and Integrator support • Format • 4-hour workshop to finish one complete set of template forms • Attendance • Shenandoah Valley: 25 farms (Perdue, Georges, Pilgrims, Tyson, and Cargill represented) • Southside: 11 farms (7 Perdue and 4 Tyson) • Eastern Shore: 7 farms (6 Perdue and 1 Tyson) National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

30. Support • Electronic Documents (Website: http://poultryEMS.ag.vt.edu) • Telephone follow-ups • Mailings National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

31. Results Survey Comments • “Anything of this nature that causes us to take a proactive position on environmental concerns is good”  • “We all need to do our share with our environment.” • All respondents strongly agreed or agreed that the information presented was useful to their operation. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

32. Results • 21% response rate for second surveys • Excessive time requirements for record keeping and paperwork • Repetitive National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

33. Lessons Learned • Company farms need corporate guidance • Integrators are interested in non-regulated states • Chesapeake Bay Foundation National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

34. Lessons Learned • Better incentives needed • Integrator support is critical • Environmental leaders are more accepting of the process • Single person operations skeptical of the benefits National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

35. Georgia ApproachUniversity of Georgia, College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Cooperative Extension Service • Partners include GPF, U.S. P & E, Gold Kist, GDA, & UGA, AWT & Env. Mgmt. Services • Focus on EMS for dry litter operations • If feasible, we hope agricultural EMS’s in GA will: • improve management • enhance stewardship • defend the industry • enhance marketability • provide regulatory relief or other related incentives National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

36. Georgia Approach cont… • Flexibility with assessment • Farm*A*Syst • OFAER • local Extension help • on-farm brainstorming • Three Experiment Groups: • Project staff-lead • Self-lead w/ support materials and resources • Consultant lead National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

37. Experiment Groups • Project staff-lead (Extension Specialists) • Worked closely with an Extension based project representative to develop an EMS using poultry specific guidebook • Self-lead w/ support materials and resources • Received directions, guidebooks assessments and other tools • Worked more independently than other groups • Could call for help or request help from outside the project (local Extension, OFAER, NRCS, SWCD) National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

38. Experiment Groups cont… • Consultant lead –Agri-Waste Technology Inc. and Env. Mgmt. Services • Worked with consultants to adapt EMS model to on farm • Douglas (South Georgia) complex only Suzanne W. Sessoms Environmental Mgmt. Services 618 Aquarius Dr. Wilmington, NC 28411-9404 Ph. (910) 520-3641 Fax (910) 686-1525 emsnc@yahoo.com National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

39. Project Time Table • 2000-2002: • National project organization and groundwork • Spring/Summer 2003: • Begin piloting and survey 1 • Complete pilot tests and survey 2 • Late Fall 2003/Winter 2004: • Summarize GA experience • Conduct GA Forum on L&P EMS (Oct. 28) • Conduct follow-up evaluations (limited number) National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

40. Summary • 28 farms were identified by integrators or volunteered through article published by UGA Poultry Science • 23 Agreed to participate • 17 Stayed with the project • Reasons for leaving project: • sold farm, • higher priority issues, • unknown National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

41. Summary • Policy Statements developed were well thought out and personal; farmers liked this exercise! • Assessments were well received and led to action plan development • Roadblocks were: • Record keeping oriented • Lack of clear benefit • Farm size/time req. • “follow through” past plan developmentnot measured National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

42. Summary:Initial Comments on groups • Extension Led (n=10): good cooperation, excellent interactions, results seem to be satisfactory • 10 hrs plus assessment • Self Led (n=5): moderate to poor success, draft materials often cumbersome and difficult to follow, difficult to maintain enthusiasm • Unknown time input • Consultant Led (n=2): excellent products, professional experience and attention to farmer • Two or three full day meetings, $2K to $12K National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

43. Summary • Issues addressed in EMSs developed by participants: • Nutrient Management • Regulatory Compliance and Adherence to Permit Conditions • Petroleum Storage and Handling • Dust and Odor Movement • Pest Management and Pesticide Use • Emergency Planning • Noise National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

44. Stakeholder Summary • GA Stakeholder Roundtable 10/28/2003 • 36 attendees • Groups represented: farmers, integrators, SWCC, ag insurers, consultants, Extension, EPA and commodity groups • Summary of our experiences, discussion of future and applications • Integrator interest is high, producer reaction is mixed. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

45. Summary • Products developed: • GA EMS Guidebook and Worksheet Packet • GA Poultry Farm Environmental Assessment Modules • Final Georgia Report: producer and roundtable surveys • Consultant EMS’s and reports • Graduate Thesis National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

46. Our New Delivery Strategy • GA P2 Partners Program • GA DNR-P2AD • Incentive based awards from industry; EMS based • Developing ag version, looking for benefits that are appropriate • Ties-in to experiences and outcomes of this project National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

47. Summary of Conclusions • Self led approach unlikely to work, we will need coaches willing to spend time with farmers. • Consultant based approach will be expensive. We will need subsidize cost or improve benefits. Consultant products are good and ag background is not essential. • Poultry EMS’s will probably be integrator driven or supported • Integrator more likely to see market benefit • Integrator can take advantage of scale • Must still be producer acceptance • Clear benefits need to be developed. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

48. Summary of Conclusions • Self assessments are useful but not the tool of choice. • Regulatory assessment tools needed. • Assessments identified improvements and plans that were not expected by producers. • EMS’s will not be for everyone, larger operations may benefit more, based on improved management. National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania

49. Questions? National EMS Forum: Poultry Results from Georgia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania