Liquid Swine Manure Nutrients

Swine manure pits in Iowa were sampled as part of an extension program to encourage producer sampling. Solids concentrations, and nutrient data were collected for finishing and non-finishing operations, for indoor concrete, outdoor concrete, and earthen pits, and for wet/dry finishing systems with deep pits. Nutrient summaries are presented

Pork Producer Efforts to Improve Neighbor Relations

As part of a pork producer odor survey conducted in 2002, respondents were asked to provide information on things they were doing to improve neighbor relations. The open-ended question provided a wide range of responses. It was evident that many producers are working with neighbors to better inform them about their pork production operation and when they may be doing activities such as applying manure, etc. Primary items producers are doing to improve neighbor relations are communication, treating them with respect, and considering weather before applying manure. This would include wind direction, air temperature, etc. Another grouping of items included manure application timing, providing pork/gifts, keeping facilities and landscaping looking nice, and facility location or siting. Producers do things to improve neighbor relations. About 30 percent indicated they check the weather before deciding to apply manure; and/or they communicate with the neighbors informing them when manure will be applied. Another one-in-six respondents indicated they use landscaping around the facility to improve its appearance

The Iowa Pork Production Industry—Descriptive Characteristics

The Iowa pork production industry has experienced a reduced number of producers and increased size of operation over time. Results of a survey conducted in 2002 showed that about one-in-four producers (23 percent) marketed from 5,000 to 9,999 market hogs annually. About one-in-three (31 percent) marketed from 2,000 to 4,999 pigs annually. The predominant operation type was a farrow-to-finish producer (40 percent of producers). Confinement production with mechanical ventilation was the primary type of farrowing and nursery production system used. There was a wide range of types of finishing facilities in use. Open lots with shelters or pastures represented the largest number of breeding/gestation facilities. The nearest neighbor for most producers was from one-eighth to one-half mile from the production facility. One-third had the nearest neighbor one-eighth to one-fourth mile from the facility. Slightly more than one-third had the nearest neighbor one-fourth to one-half mile from the facility. Most producers had only one hog production site. A few producers (10) had ten or more production sites. Only about six percent of the producers were under 30 years old. One-in-eight producers were 60 years old or older. About the same number had 40 or more years experience as a pork producer. Most had from 20 to 35 years of production experience

Air/Odor Control Technology Used By Iowa Pork Producers

An issue that has received attention in the livestock industry is that of air quality/odor. An Iowa pork producer survey showed that about two-thirds of the respondents felt air quality/odor was an issue that needed evaluation. This report is aimed at developing a baseline of air quality/odor control measures currently in use by Iowa pork producers. Information is obtained on use of selected odor control technologies and user level of satisfaction. Two survey methods were utilized; a mail survey and a telephone survey. The telephone survey followed the mail survey and was used to test the representativeness of the mail survey respondents and obtain information on why selected odor control technologies were not used. Level of use and level of satisfaction with selected odor control methods varied. A deep pit was used by 77 percent of the respondents. About seven-in-ten injected manure. About half of the respondents immediately incorporated manure. One-half composted pig mortalities. About four-in-ten had a windbreak, used manure additives, and/or had a bedded system somewhere in the production system. Level of satisfaction was high for windbreaks, bedded systems, bio-covers, deep pits, composting pigs/manure, and incorporating manure. Satisfaction was low for bio-filters, ozone, manure storage plastic covers, and manure additives. Reasons why odor control technologies were not used varied. A dominant reason was that the technology was not applicable to the production facility. For example, a biocover, plastic cover, etc. would not be applicable for a deep pit manure storage system. Another response for nonadoption of some technologies was that odors are managed sufficiently already. This was related to the response for building odors. About one-third of the respondents indicated they did not use selected building odor control technologies because they were too expensive and/or they were not familiar with the technology. Responses for not using modified diets and/or manure additives included too expensive, not effective for odor control, and not familiar with the technology. This survey shows that swine producers are using a wide variety of techniques to minimize off-site odor and air quality effects. The most common type of manure storage used is deep pits (68 percent of producers) followed by solid manure systems (20 percent). While a large number of technologies are available, none provides a perfect solution to air quality

Safe Farm: Manure storage poses invisible risks

Gases and odors may be a nuisance for many livestock producers, but they also can be a life- threatening danger when confined to buildings or manure pits.https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/extension_ag_pubs/1052/thumbnail.jp