The Use of Vegetative Environmental Buffers for Livestock and Poultry Odor Management

An odor mitigation technology that is drawing a lot of attention in Iowa and in other livestock producing states is the strategic use of shelterbelts – purposefully planted trees and shrubs usually arranged in linear patterns; a technical term for shelterbelts being used for odor mitigation is Vegetative Environmental Buffers or VEBs (Malone et al., 2006). Research evidence suggests that VEBs strategically located near and around livestock facilities can play an important incremental role in bio-physically and socio-psychologically mitigating odor in an economically feasible way (Tyndall and Colletti, 2007)

A biophysical and socio-economic examination of the use of shelterbelts for swine odor mitigation

The use of shelterbelts (trees and shrubs) arranged in strategic designs near and within swine facilities potentially can play a significant incremental role in bio-physically mitigating odor in a socio-economically responsible way thereby reducing social conflict from odor nuisance. Shelterbelts of modest heights (i.e. 20--30 ft) may be ideal for plume interception, disruption, and dilution. Based on available evidence, there are five primary ways that shelterbelts can mitigate livestock odors: (1) Physical interception and capture of odor laden dust by trees/shrubs; (2) Dilution of gas concentrations of odor into the lower atmosphere; (3) Ground deposition of odor laden dust due to reduced wind speeds; (4) Providing a biological sink for the chemical constituents of odor after interception; and (5) Enhancing the aesthetics of pork production sites and rural landscapes.;Calculated costs for shelterbelt establishment and maintenance over a twenty-year period for four model pork-finishing farms when considering a seedling price scenario (0.50 tree/shrub) are below producer willingness to pay (WTP) for odor mitigation detailed by the USDA. Some high priced scenarios (≈9.59 tree/shrub) exceeded the WTP for producers of certain sizes. Yet, when cost-share programs (e.g. EQIP and CRP) are factored in, the total amortized costs are lowered below all WTP thresholds. Some of the results show positive cost margins (as much as 0.33--0.59 per pig produced of extra costs to spare) to suggest room for shelterbelts to be part of a suite of odor management technology .;A series of focus groups examined the notion that environmental quality may be marketed by way of producing and labeling as such, environmentally friendly pork. The analysis also examines pork producer and consumer interest in the use of shelterbelts as an environmental quality enhancing technology. Pork producers and consumers alike expressed skepticism about the marketability of odor reduction , suggesting such attributes may better be bundled with other credence type attributes (i.e. animal welfare, locally grown). If consumer\u27s pay for environmental protection by way of a premium for pork products produced with more pollution control then the traceability to the producer must be transparent. Producers must benefit directly from such premiums

Windbreaks: A Fresh Tool to Mitigate Odors from Livestock Production Facilities

Windbreaks (shelterbelts, vegetative environmental buffers) placed around livestock production facilities as Working Trees can help mitigate the movement of odors and dust generated by these operations. Four primary factors are thought to contribute to these odor issues: Urban expansion has placed many more people into closer contact with agricultural operations. Large scale livestock confinement production has led to increased concentrations of manure. Heavy concentrations of odor emissions travel across highly modified landscapes relatively devoid of natural barriers. Market economics and regulatory policies create limited producer incentives to control activities beyond minimum regulatory requirements

Air Quality and Shelterbelts: Odor Mitigation and Livestock Production a Literature Review

This literature review is focused on the potential for innovative use of trees and other vegetation to reduce the odor associated with livestock production. The goal is to examine available evidence to assess if trees and shelterbelts may: 1) be able to help control odor through physical and biological means, and 2) be an economically feasible technology for livestock producers as well as surrounding communities

Comparing Apples to Apples: An Iowa Perspective on Apples and Local Food Systems

This paper looks at Iowa\u27s once thriving apple industry from a food system perspective

Financial Perspectives on the Use of Vegetative Environmental Buffers for Swine Odor Management

This multi-scale financial analysis begins at the farm level using discounted cash-flow methods to examine the costs of establishing and managing Vegetative Environmental Buffer (VEB) systems for swine odor mitigation in Iowa. Using a random sample of existing hog confinements throughout Iowa (n=60), site specific VEB systems were designed for each production site. Assuming each VEB was designed as a retrofit system, the full costs of establishing and managing VEBs were calculated for each facility. The effects of the cost share program, Environmental Quality Incentive Program (EQIP), were then examined. On average for the state of Iowa, excluding all potential land rent costs, the present value of VEB costs comes to just under $4,200 over a 20-year period. This cost assumes that the VEB was planted with relatively low-cost seedling stock. If the operator chose to plant a VEB with older, larger (but more expensive) planting stock in an effort to “buy time”, the present value cost more than doubles to almost$9,100 over a 20-year period. Across Iowa, upfront costs (costs associated with tree stock, site preparation and VEB establishment) ranges from 37% to 45% of total costs; the remainder costs are in the form of long-term maintenance of these tree systems. Across all of Iowa, the total costs per pig produced (over 20 years) comes to $0.04 per pig for the lower cost seedling options and$0.08/pig for the higher cost plant stock options. The cost share program, EQIP, can reduce total costs between 18% and 54% (low cost option and high cost option, respectively). The overall effects of EQIP are more pronounced when upfront costs are higher. For analytical purposes the effects of land rent (@ $177 per acre; 2008 state average) was factored in. On average, factoring in annual land rent for the area under trees on each site, total 20-year costs increase by 60% for the low cost position and by 23% for the high cost position

Agricultural Water Quality BMPs: A Standardized Approach to Financial Analysis

Addressing water quality issues continues to emerge as a challenge to be faced by agricultural interests across the Cornbelt. Agricultural Extension has a role to play in assisting farmers in complying with water quality regulations and adoption of Best Management Practices (BMP) to address water quality impacts. Despite the clear importance of financial information in BMP decision-making, often, published cost assessments are rare and lack transparency. This article provides a framework for Extension personnel who provide water quality BMP cost assessments while also highlighting financial information necessary for creating Extension publications that have transparent and dynamic financial assessments

Changes in deep soil organic carbon and soil properties beneath tree windbreak plantings in the U.S. Great Plains

Agroforestry systems such as tree windbreaks became a common practice in the U.S. Great Plains following a large tree planting program during the Dust Bowl of the 1930s. Tree windbreaks combine the potential to increase biomass and soil carbon (C) storage while maintaining agricultural production. However, our understanding of the effect of trees on soil organic carbon (SOC) is largely limited to the upper 30 cm of the soil. This study was conducted in the Great Plains to examine the impact of tree plantings ranging in age from 15 to ~ 115-years on SOC storage and relevant soil properties. We quantified SOC stocks to 1.25 m depth within eight tree plantings and in the adjacent farmed fields within the same soil map unit. Soil samples were also analyzed for inorganic carbon, total nitrogen, pH (in water and KCl), bulk density, and water stable aggregates. Averaged across sites, SOC stocks in the 1.25 m were 16% higher beneath trees than the adjacent farmed fields. Differences ranged from + 10.54 to a – 5.05 kg m−2 depending on the site, climate, and tree species and age. The subsurface soils (30-125 cm) beneath trees stored 7% more SOC stocks than the surface 30 cm (9.54 vs. 8.84 kg m−2), respectively. This finding demonstrates the importance of quantifying C stored at deeper depths under tree-based systems when tree SOC sequestration is being assessed. Overall, our results indicate the potential of trees to store C in soils and at deeper depths

Building social networks to capture synergies in wood-based energy production and invasive pest mitigation

This project makes a variety of policy recommendations for cities and the private sector to help deal with the consequences of emerald ash borer infestations

A Combat with an Infective Atmosphere

n/