nutrient management planning

23
Nutrient Management Planning Alan Sutton Department of Animal Sciences

Upload: brynne-hebert

Post on 30-Dec-2015

62 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Nutrient Management Planning. Alan Sutton Department of Animal Sciences. 1998 EPA Section 303(d) List Top 15 Causes of Water Quality Impairment. Nutrient Management: What is it?. Managing the amount, source, placement, form and timing of application of nutrients and soil amendments - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Nutrient Management Planning

Alan SuttonDepartment of Animal Sciences

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Ammonia

Fish Contamination

Turbidity

Noxious Plants

Pesticides

Flow Alterations

Temperature

Suspended Solids

pH

Habitat

Metals

Dissolved Oxygen

Pathogens

Nutrients

Sediments

Percent of Waters Listed

1998 EPA Section 303(d) ListTop 15 Causes of Water Quality Impairment

Nutrient Management:What is it?

• Managing the amount, source, placement, form and timing of application of nutrients and soil amendments– Budget and supply nutrients for crop production

– Properly utilize commercial fertilizers, animal manures and other materials as crop nutrient resources and soil amendments

– Minimize nutrient losses from fields to protect surface and ground water resources

Nutrient Management Plan Components (CNMPs)

• Site, field and soil maps– Identify sensitive areas

• Crop rotation• Crop nutrient budget

– Realistic yield goals• Records are best

– Appropriate fertilizer recommendations

• Land grant universities

• Quantification of all nutrient resources– Commercial fertilizers– Manures

• Planned nutrient applications– Time, rate and method

• Implementation, operation and regular maintenance plan

• Regular reviews

Problem Areas

• Over application of manure

• Excessive nutrients in rations

• Variable nutrient contents of manure

• Insufficient storage capacity

• Applications -- not uniform

• Applications -- Do you know how much is applied?

• Conflicting regulations

Problem Areas

• Different soil testing methods

• Use of the Phosphorus Index

• Use of other soils evaluation procedures

• Nutrient availability (mineralization) rates

• Pathogen concerns???

““Whole Farm” NutrientWhole Farm” NutrientBalances forBalances for

Livestock and Poultry OperationsLivestock and Poultry Operations

Whole Farm Nutrient Balance on Livestock and Poultry Operations

Balance the input nutrients from feed, fertilizer, recycled manure and other sources with animal and plant nutrient needs for efficient crop, meat, egg and milk production

Whole Farm Nutrient Balance

FarmBoundary

Nutrient Imbalance(inputs - managed outputs)

Inputs

Feed

Animals

IrrigationWater

Fertilizer

Legume N

ManagedOutputs

- Meat

- Crops

-Manure

Gas Emissions

Crops Manure

Correcting Whole Farm Nutrient Balance

• Reduce feed nutrient imports

• Reduce fertilizer imports

• Export manure from farm

• Treat manure to reduce nutrients

Nutrient ratios in manure generally do not meet crop nutrient requirements.

Approximate ratios of N, P2O5, and K2O needed for corn and present in manure.

N P2O5 K2O Corn grain 3.0 1.0 1.0 Corn silage 2.0 1.0 2.0 Hog manure 1.0 1.0 1.0

Poultry manure 1.5 1.5 1.0

Impact of Diet on Land Application Requirements

• Example Pork Operation– 4,000 head grow-finisher– 2.6 turns per year– 120 day feeding period– Requirement based diet (based on ASABE

384.2; NRC, 1998)• Average CP = 15.8%• Average P = 0.437%• Average feed intake = 2.35 kg/d (5.18 lb/d)• Average daily gain = 0.84 kg/d (1.85 lb/d)

Impact of Diet on Land Application Requirements

• Scenarios– Compare diets with combinations of different

crude protein levels (15.77%; 13.1%; 11.6%) and total P levels (.437%; .369%; .30%)

– Assumed a 30% N loss during storage in a slurry system

– Assumed that the availability of N in the slurry at 80% for the crop at the time of application

Impact of Diet on Land Application Requirements

• Reducing the crude protein of the diet:

– 15.8% to 13.1% reduced N excretion 25%

– 15.8% to 11.6% reduced N excretion 40%

(assume use of synthetic amino acids)

• Reducing the total P of the diet:

– 0.437% to 0.369% reduced P excretion 25%

– 0.437% to 0.30% reduced P excretion 50%

(assume use of phytase and low phytate corn)

• Increasing total P 20% over requirement increases P excretion 24.4%

Impact of Diet on Land Application Requirements (as applied)

Diet Avail. Nutr. Applied Ratio

CP, % P, % N, lb/yr P2O5, lb/yr N:P2O5

15.8 0.437 60,780 37,922 1.6:1(1.2:1)

15.8 0.369 60,780 28,359 2.1:1(1.6:1)

15.8 0.300 60,780 18,654 3.3:1(2.2:1)

13.1 0.437 45,314 37,922 1.2:1(0.9:1)

13.1 0.369 45,314 28,359 1.6:1(1.2:1)

13.1 0.300 45,314 18,654 2.4:1(1.7:1)

11.6 0.437 36,326 37,922 0.96:1(0.7:1)

11.6 0.369 36,326 28,359 1.3:1(0.97:1)

11.6 0.300 36,326 18,654 2.0:1(1.3:1)Assume 30% storage N loss and 80% total available N at application (commercial diet with 20% above NRC requirement for P)

Nitrogen and Phosphorus requirements by crops

Crop Yield potential,

bu/ac

N,

lb/ac

P2O5,

lb/ac

Ratio

N:P2O5

Corn 176 183 65 2.8:1

Corn 143 139 53 2.6:1

Corn 115 101 43 2.3:1

Soybean 57 (220) 46 (4.8:1)

Soybean 46 (180) 37 (4.9:1)

Soybean 37 (140) 30 (4.6:1)

Nitrogen and Phosphorus requirements of Corn-Soybean

2-year rotation

Yield potential

N,

lb/ac

P2O5,

lb/ac

Ratio

N:P2O5

High 183 111 1.6:1

Medium 139 90 1.5:1

Low 101 73 1.4:1

Land Application Area Required (high yield)

Diet Application Acres

CP, % P, % N-basis P-basis Corn-Soybean

15.8 0.437 332 583 341

15.8 0.369 332 436 255

15.8 0.300 332 302 168

13.1 0.437 248 583 341

13.1 0.369 248 436 255

13.1 0.300 248 302 168

11.6 0.437 198 583 341

11.6 0.369 198 436 255

11.6 0.300 198 302 168

Assume 30% storage N loss and 80% total available N at application (NRC requirements)

Land Application Area Required (high yield)

Diet Application Acres

CP, % P, % N-basis P-basis Corn-Soybean

15.8 0.546 332 771 451

15.8 0.461 332 578 339

15.8 0.375 332 417 244

13.1 0.546 248 771 451

13.1 0.461 248 578 339

13.1 0.375 248 417 244

11.6 0.546 198 771 451

11.6 0.461 198 578 339

11.6 0.375 198 417 244

Assume 30% storage N loss and 80% total available N at application (commercial diet with 20% above NRC requirement)

EPA CAFO Rule Revision• Duty to apply for those who discharge or

intend to discharge• NMP open for public comment and included in

the permit• New large swine, poultry and veal have a zero

discharge requirement• Production area runoff must be stored unless

prove reduction in pollutants• Best Current Technology for pathogen control

(fecal coliforms)

Software Websites

• Spatial Nutrient Management Planner

• http://www.cares.missouri.edu/snmp

• Manure Management Planner

• http://www.agry.purdue.edu/mmp