Duration: 10/01/2007 to 09/30/2012

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

Statement of Issues and Justification

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

Environmental and water quality issues have received a lot of press coverage in recent years as contamination of ground and surface water sources have been brought to the attention of the US public. The importance of these issues will continue to escalate as the supply of potable water diminishes in the U.S. and our nation looks more critically at its natural resource base. Water quality is a health issue in many parts of the US and world, and in addition to being important for human health, water quality can affect poultry health and performance.

The goal of this project is to study the environmental issues affecting poultry production and this is the only regional project dedicated to this topic. For this reason, the objectives are broader than would be preferred under other circumstances. The poultry industry depends on our capacity to address current, relevant issues in a timely and comprehensive manner. Food safety, performance, health, and profitability of poultry and poultry products also will be examined.


JUSTIFICATION:

Importance in agriculture, rural life and consumer concerns

Agriculture continues to be the dominant industry in rural communities; however, it is becoming more evident that stewardship of our natural resource base is not only the responsibility of farmers, but of all citizens. Consequently, society is demanding that agriculture implement environmentally sound sustainable systems of production that have low chemical usage, reduced movement of sediment and nutrients from the land, and have minimal or no off-site impacts. Components of these production systems must include a reduction of waterborne pollutants, high-quality, healthy food products, and profitability for companies. Reduction or elimination of pollutants released into the environment will insure a safe and healthy drinking water supply for humans and animals.

In 1990 and 1991, states throughout the U.S. assessed the surface water quality of this nation's rivers, streams, lakes and estuaries. According to EPA sources, agricultural non-point source pollution affected 72 percent of the river and stream miles, 56 percent of lake acres, and 43 percent of estuary acreage. The nation's groundwater quality also was assessed and found generally good; however, local areas have experienced significant contamination with agriculture implicated as one of the main sources of groundwater pollution. One-third of agricultural pollution originates from non-point sources, with causes including the mishandling of animal waste such as manure and dead birds.

Public concern over animal waste pollution of our nation's water resources has resulted in the initiation of several pieces of federal legislation. Agriculture is greatly affected by these federal laws such as the Coastal Zone Management Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Safe Drinking Water Act. Best management practices (BMP's)must be economically achievable and represent the best means possible to reduce discharge of non-point source pollutants. Manure, waste water, and runoff water utilized on agricultural land must be applied in accordance with an applicable nutrient management plan. The Reauthorization Amendment is the foundation for controlling and preventing non-point source pollution. The reauthorization also encompasses the Clean Water Act which includes surface and groundwater protection from point and non-point pollutant sources. Agriculture, and the poultry industry, specifically, has been impacted significantly.

Maintaining profitability while protecting the environment has become a critical issue for the poultry producer. On many farms, traditional agricultural practices related to traditional crop and livestock production cannot provide adequate protection of the environment while sustaining agricultural profitability. To achieve this balance, agriculture must implement cost effective practices that invoke innovative approaches to marketing, production, management, and utilization. Such approaches include reducing total input costs, direct marketing, forward contracting, increasing efficiency through newly developed technologies, and identifying new uses for traditional agricultural products. All of this must be accomplished in harmony with the country's rich natural resource base.

Extent of the problem

Poultry production in the U.S. is a 28-billion-dollar-a-year industry that has grown dramatically since the 1950's. Unfortunately, severe environmental problems such as odor, flies, dust and declining water quality have concomitantly increased. The poultry industry currently is faced with major water quality and non-point source pollution issues, such as mortality management; manure/litter management; and air quality. These issues must be addressed, and mitigated, if the industry is to remain robust and sustainable.

Non-point source pollution from animal waste runoff can reduce surface and groundwater quality by introducing excessive levels of nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus, organic matter, and pathogens into the environment. In 114 watersheds studied throughout the U.S., excessive levels of nitrogen and phosphorus were derived primarily from excessive or irresponsible animal manure applications. Detailed guidelines on manure-nutrient management programs must be developed and implemented by the poultry industry in order to avoid water pollution or to improve water quality. Besides nutrient management programs, mortality from poultry production units must be handled in ways that are environmentally sound, economical, and easily implemented by the industry.

One of the real challenges facing todays poultry producer, is managing and handling poultry by-products in ways that minimize environmental impacts, especially upon water resources. Animal wastes contain materials which cause direct and indirect health problems in other animals and people. Health problems from water sports or drinking water always relate to the concentration of contaminants in the water. With more and larger poultry operations confined to smaller areas of land, the likelihood of water contamination increases. That is the single most important reason for concern of both ground and surface waters in areas where there are high numbers of animals producing large amounts of manure and associated by-products.

Water is vital to the poultry industry. High quality water is necessary for poultry production and processing. Poultry farms may use water from municipal sources (potable for humans), wells, streams, ponds, lakes, rainfall catchments, or springs. Because of its very nature of potential hydrogen bonding, water is an excellent solvent for many inorganic and organic substances. Water also is an ideal medium for the proliferation and distribution of microorganisms, including pathogens. Surface and ground water quality depends upon many factors, including cations, anions, heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, run-off of excessive organic or inorganic fertilizers, and microorganisms.

Drinking water quality is a concern to poultry producers due to its great variability and potential for contamination. The former is characterized by acidity, alkalinity, odor, color, turbidity, salinity, electrical conductivity, pH, biochemical oxygen demand, hardness, presence of anions, cations, herbicides, pesticides, and bacteria. Water inclusions contribute to the diet of chickens, having either nutritional, anti-nutritional, toxic, or infectious properties. High quality drinking water may be defined as water that contains inclusions which promote vitality and lack inclusions causing morbidity and mortality. As the proportion of non-potable water increases and the technology for measurement of inclusions improves, we are increasingly aware of water inclusions and their impact on poultry health and nutrition, and it is important that we precisely define high-quality drinking water.

Needs and advantages of a cooperative approach

It is important for the American poultry industry to comply with environmental policies and regulations and to exceed future expectations through the development and adoption of environmentally safe management practices. The development of these systems requires a multi-disciplinary approach that can only be accomplished through cooperation of various experiment stations to account for variations in climatic and environmental conditions across the U.S. Also, these issues must be examined regionally because of the enormous variation in climate, forage and crop biology, soil types, and management systems employed. No single institution or investigator is likely to develop a single, broad-based program to ensure the environmentally safe disposal of farm-generated poultry by-products or to ensure the safety of ground and surface waters under all climatic conditions and production scenarios. Field testing and producer education programs must be addressed in different regions of the country to ensure that results of research trials and field tests are relevant to the target audience. The need to refine information to fit local conditions mandates the need to develop an information base that involves researchers from diverse geographical regions and to include experts in nutrition, physiology, waste management, agronomy, horticulture, agricultural engineering, waste water management, and food safety.

Expected benefits

Establishing an interdisciplinary team will allow greater flexibility and innovation to solve non-point source problems in the poultry industry nationwide. Despite shrinking personnel and financial resources, work continues to progress in this area. However, reduced resource availability demands greater flexibility in defining objectives, and time constraints force personnel to focus on certain areas within the broader array of possibilities. By sharing innovative program approaches, concepts and characteristics, time, money, and energy in solving related problems can be saved. Moreover, existing programs that may need a new direction or approach can consider what works in a particular region or production situation and potentially modify their practices to enhance the efficiency of an operation without negatively affecting, or even improving its environmental impact.

Development of methods to ensure environmentally safe disposal of poultry by-products and to ensure quality of ground and surface waters requires a thorough understanding of scientific principles and their application to real-world situations. A more complete knowledge in these areas will allow for development of sustainable agricultural systems that utilize science-based technologies to reduce environmental problems and will result in more appropriate management-based systems. Application and integration of these systems will result in improvements in efficiency of poultry production by reducing costs, lessening potential for contamination of ground and surface waters, utilizing by-products in a more economical manner, and reducing the amount of non-point source pollutants being released into the environment.

Extension publications, videos/DVDs, articles in trade magazines, as well as refereed journal articles will report results from the cooperative project while also serving to educate producers and other poultry industry personnel on manure/nutrient management and dead bird disposal. Through educational materials, understanding of this subject will be enhanced. Oral presentations at a wide variety of venues - grower meetings, regional meetings, scientific meetings and conferences, extension workshops, and associated professional meetings, both domestic and international, will be used to disseminate the research findings generated by regional project participants.

Coordination of the educational plan will be through the elected Chair of the committee. Richard Reynnells, the USDA/CSREES/PAS liaison, will be actively involved in assisting in national coordination and distribution of information. Coordination of an educational action plan will be discussed as part of annual meetings and quarterly conference calls. Personnel will have responsibilities related to their contributions on individual efforts, as well as team projects.

How this project varies from past efforts

This is a renewal and continuation of the former W195 project group. The core group of this project originally initiated WCC-59 (early 1980s), which subsequently became the W195 project group in 2000. Thus, there has been a long-term interest in poultry environmental and water quality issues by a group of highly committed poultry scientists. The project varies from work accomplished by WCC-59 in that additional research emphasis is being placed upon the effects of non-point nutrient pollution associated with poultry production and processing.

This committee has taken the responsibility for conducting the bi-annual National Poultry Waste Management Symposium (since 1988) that has been held throughout the country in order to educate poultry technical personnel, the commercial industry, and governmental officials, about poultry waste management and environmental issues. Environmental issues, water quality, air quality, and food safety are critical public issues, and this is the only regional project that studies these issues specifically for the poultry production arena.

Related, Current and Previous Work

Review of Related or Previous Work

Vegetative Buffers:

Theoretically, the potential of vegetative buffers (VEBs) to mitigate poultry (and livestock) odor arises from the tree/shrub impacts on the central characteristics and physical behavior of livestock odor (Jacobson et al., 2001; Guo et al., 2001; Smith, 1993; Hammond et al., 1981; Takle, 1983; Zhou et al., 2002. These characteristics are):
" The animal odor source is at or very near ground level;
" There is limited odor plume rise, due to common weather conditions (i.e. temperature inversions) and limited mechanical turbulence;
" An odor plume has spatial and temporal variability;
" There is often a close proximity of people to odor sources;
" The majority of odors generated in animal facilities that are intense and detectable at appreciable distances travel as aerosols (particulates);
" Many of the volatile organic compound constituents of odor are nitrogen based which have a known lipophilic affinity to plant cuticles;
" There seems to be a socio-psychological component to the perception of odor being a nuisance.

Hammond et al. (1981) noted that the odors generated in animal facilities such as animal houses, feedlots and storage lagoons, which are intense and detectable at appreciable distances downwind, are all particulate aerosols. Sources of dust in poultry production houses includes feather fragments, fecal material, skin debris, feed particles, mold spores, bacteria, fungus fragments and litter fragments (MAF, 1999). The majority of the odorous compounds are easily absorbed onto, concentrated and carried by particulates (Laird, 1997, SOTF, 1995). Removing these dust particles may cause animal houses, lagoons, and feedlots to become almost odorless (Thernilius, 1997; Laird, 1997, SOTF, 1995; Hammond and Smith, 1981; Hammond et al., 1979; Hoff et al, 1997a, 1997b).


Hartung (1989) concluded that animal building air filtration would reduce odor emission from animal houses up to 65%. Beckett et al. (2000a, 2000b, 2000c) suggest that woody vegetation can and does filter airstreams of particulates to limited detriment of the plants As air moves across vegetative surfaces, leaves and other aerial plant surfaces remove some of the dust, gas, and microbial burden normally carried by the wind. Freer-Smith et al. (1997) indicate that trees and other woody vegetation are among the most efficient natural filtering structures in a landscape due in part to the very large total surface area of leafy plants, often exceeding the surface area of the soil containing those plants by as much as 200-fold (Schultze, 1982).


Additionally, the leaves of tree species are highly lipophilic and they are excellent accumulators of lipophilic foreign materials, such as nitrogen-based substances (Reischl et al., 1989; Reischl et al., 1987). As measured in field experiments, nitrogen based chemicals and compounds have shown high affinities for leaf cuticles and other plant surfaces (Asman et al., 1997). This affinity of nitrogen-based chemicals to leaf cuticles is enhanced with increased relative humidity and decreased vapor pressures (Asman et al., 1997). Both typically occur within the leeward (quiet) zone of VEBs. Depending on the porosity of the VEB, relative humidity is typically 2 to 4 percent higher in sheltered areas than in open areas (Brandle and Finch, 1991). Asman et al. (1997) suggested that reductions in NHx might be achieved indirectly by modifying local scale atmospheric transport and because a relatively large percentage of ammonia emissions are dry deposited close to the source, benefits might be achieved by planting a tree system around known sources of N to increase dry deposition and reduce deposition to more critical areas.


VEBs also create zones of ground level mechanical turbulence, which can effectively lift air into the lower atmosphere creating zones of dilution (Lammers et al., 2001; Lammers, 2002; Wang and Takle, 1995). This dilution effect is caused by the odor plume mixing with the air layers at greater elevation and a greater localized residence time for odorous particulates within the turbulent zones leading to slower release of odorous particulates and gases into the airstreams that continue downwind. Also the concentration of the plume that does continue downwind is reduced and more uniform in terms of concentration. Due to the physiology of human olfactory systems, annoyance from livestock odor is particularly related to the variation of odorous particulates carried within a plume. The degree of uniformity of odor concentration caused by the VEB likely can help reduce the offensive character of an odor event (Lammers, 2002).


The air turbulence and wind speed reduction creates situations where wind borne particles can be deposited at much shorter downwind distances than would occur without the shelterbelt. This zone allows for dry deposition of atmospheric nitrogen compounds including ammonia. Ucar and Hall (1998) suggest that even a simple vegetative barrier such as a single row of trees may reduce potential chemical drift significantly due to reduced wind speed. Ucar and Hall (2001) later conclude that chemical (i.e. pesticides) drift reduction offered by vegetative barriers (trees) arises from the reduction of within-crop wind speed, which is responsible for the aerial movement of pesticide aerosols, and the interception of fugitive pesticide aerosols within the barrier.
Depending on the design and tree/shrub species used, VEBs should be temporally effective and provide long term, year round plume interception, with increasing effectiveness over time. More is also known about how landscape aesthetics affect people's perceptions of livestock odor, suggesting that landscape elements such as VEBs can lead to improvements and perhaps more positive interpretations of livestock production and the farm systems themselves (Mikesell et al., 2001; Kreis, 1978). Selective tree plantings around livestock houses may foster good neighbor relations. Planting trees creates a positive image for the poultry industry, and helps the farm take on a landscaped appearance, which adds to property values. As the trees mature, the houses are obstructed from view. Neighbors do not see routine activities such as feed delivery, live-haul crews and litter cleanouts. One of the biggest advantages of this visual screen of poultry farms is the 'out-of-sight-out-of-mind' concept.


There is anecdotal evidence that VEBs are quite adaptable to local landscape conditions, variability of livestock production sites and regions  every farm that uses VEBs has its very own unique system tailored to each farm situation, yet the mitigation concepts are universal. VEBs are a technology that can be considered production technology and size neutral in that poultry producers of all kinds and sizes can plant designed VEB systems to mitigate odor problems. Because of the similarities of odor formation, sourcing, and movement, VEBs should be useful to mitigate odors from all poultry production  egg laying, pullet, broiler, growers, turkeys, as well as other livestock types particularly swine (Tyndall and Colletti, 2000). Further, as our longer-term examinations hope to demonstrate VEBs are expected to increase in efficacy over time as opposed to other odor mitigating technologies that typically depreciate over time. As with other tree-based technologies used in agriculture, VEB effectiveness comes from providing ecological infrastructure within an otherwise ecologically simplified system (Schultze et al, 2000). As the trees grow larger and more morphologically complex, their ability to mitigate odors should increase. Most other odor mitigation technology is very often source specific and not adaptable throughout the farm. VEBs can be used throughout the entire farm and agricultural landscapes.


Bedding Sources:

The poultry industry uses diverse types of bedding materials, including pine shavings, sawdust, peanut hulls, rice hulls, sawdust and hardwood shavings (Bilgili et al., 1999). The type utilized is largely dependent upon local availability of the material and location of the farm. In the Southeastern United States, pine shavings and peanut hulls are the preferred bedding material. Unfortunately, the availability of pine shavings has steadily decreased due to competition from the composite board industry, horticulture, and use as an energy source (Carpenter, 1992). One possible alternative to pine shavings is mortar sand, which has been used outside the United States with no detrimental effect on the birds performance or survivability (Bilgili et al., 1999; Ranade and Rajmane, 1990). Work performed at Auburn University, in recent years (Bilgili et al., 1999a; Bilgili et al., 1999b; Macklin et al., 2005), confirmed the utility of sand as a bedding material.


In-House Litter Composting:

Composting of poultry litter is a common practice after litter has been removed from a broiler chicken house. When composting is performed properly, the biodegradable waste is transformed into a stable, relatively odorless compost product. This product is devoid of harmful bacteria and can be safely used to augment nutrients in the soil. Additionally, it is known that composting is an efficient method for the destruction of pathogenic microorganisms (Dumontet et al., 1999). Research that has been performed at Auburn University has shown the utility of using in-house composting as an effective measure to control poultry diseases (Macklin et al., 2006; Giambrone et al., 2007.


Litter Treatments:

Poultry facilities contribute ammonia emissions to the atmosphere and reduction in ammonia volatilization from poultry facilities is possible utilizing correct management techniques. It is known that high ammonia levels make birds more susceptible to respiratory diseases and methods to reduce pathogenic microbes and ammonia levels include changes in management practices and the utilization of litter treatments, which work, but are not without problems (Blake et al., 2007c; Blake et al., 2007d). The treatments should effectively reduce ammonia emissions from poultry facilities, which will have a direct effect on improving litter management, nutrient enrichment, and reducing ammonia volatilization from poultry. Recent research has focused on a series of litter treatment trials to evaluate five litter treatments at three application levels (50, 100, or 150#/1,000 ft2) to prolong litter usage and to reduce ammonia volatilization and pathogenic microorganisms associated with this material (Blake et al., 2007a; Blake et al., 2007b).


Project Accomplishments to Date:

Accomplishments from station-based members of W-195 include, but are not limited to, the following:

Vegetative Filters:

Continuing research projects in Delaware and Pennsylvania have been implemented and have evaluated the potential of planting trees around poultry houses to serve as vegetative filters to capture emissions. These trials have lead to a number of published abstracts to date characterizing the reduction in pollutants afforded by this technique. The potential impact that trees around houses have on poultry production and the microclimate is being studied. This research has lead to popular press publications in Alabama as well as Delaware and Pennsylvania.


Feeding Strategies to Reduce Nutrient Output of Poultry Production:

Researchers in Alabama, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Texas have been and continue to evaluate dietary methods of reducing nitrogen, phosphorus, or other mineral excretion by poultry. These dietary methods include the use of phytase, low phytate soybean meal, degermed-dehulled corn, reduced phosphorus supplementation, alternative phosphorus supplements, and reduced nitrogen content of the diet.


Composting Litter, Composting Mortalities, Alternative Litter Sources:

In Alabama, Delaware, and Louisiana, researchers have been and continue to evaluate methods of composting litter for safe re-use, methods of composting poultry mortalities, litter treatment use, and alternative sources of litter. These researchers have evaluated methods of composting poultry litter in windrows within poultry houses (in both commercial and research poultry houses). Additionally, these researchers have evaluated in-vessel poultry mortality composting, as well as incineration of poultry mortalities. A method of windrowing and composting poultry litter and mortalities, as a result of an infectious disease outbreak, also has been developed and evaluated. Researchers from Alabama have collaborated extensively with the Louisiana State University in conducting research trials regarding in-house litter composting to reduce disease occurance.

The use of sand as an alternative bedding source has been evaluated by researchers in Alabama and Delaware. Sand was found to be a viable option for bedding in poultry houses. Research trials completed simultaneously at both locations have lead to a number of referred publications, abstracts and a plethora of popular press articles.


Litter Production, Quantification, Sampling, and Nutrient Content:

Characterization of broiler litter production and nutrient mass balance has been and continues to be conducted under current commercial-style management houses in Texas and Kentucky. To date, the accurate quantification of litter accumulated throughout the production process and the concentration and fate of nitrogen have been studied. Accurate estimates of litter production have been developed (Georgia, Kentucky, Texas).


Drinking Water Quality:

A drinking water database has been and continues to be created by researchers in Arkansas and Maryland. The evaluation of drinking water for poultry producers both at the source and at the end of lines in production facilities has helped poultry companies identify operations that need better sanitation programs. Also, researchers have evaluated various statistical methods relating drinking water quality to growth performance. Information regarding thresholds of water inclusions likely to impact broiler growth performance has been evaluated. (Alabama, Arkansas, Maryland)


Outreach:

Many publications, educational presentations, newsletters, and videos have been developed, presented, and disseminated by researchers in this project.

A total of 156 citations have been developed by the members of the W195 project since its beginning in 2000. These citations are in the form of extension publications, extension bulletins, papers in meeting proceedings, popular press articles, or refereed publications. The citations from each experiment station are as follows:
Alabama 77
Arkansas 4
Delaware 42
Kentucky 2
Louisiana 2
Michigan 9
North Carolina 4
Pennsylvania 8
Texas 8


Symposia:

Participants in W195 Water Quality issues in Poultry Production and Processing have organized the bi-annual National Poultry Waste Management Symposium. During the current project, symposia have been held during 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2006. The purpose of the symposia is to communicate the latest technology and information regarding poultry waste management. Proceedings, of greater than 300 pages each, have been published for each symposium. Each symposium is a two-day meeting, with approximately 150 to 250 people in attendance. The attendees are poultry industry, government, allied poultry industry, and university personnel.

The committee also organized the national symposium, Alliance for Environmental Stewardship: A Comprehensive Approach in September of 1999. This symposium had a 65 page pre-symposium proceedings, and a 300 page post-symposium proceedings.

In cooperation with the 9-state national program Partnership for Livestock Environmental Management Assessment Systems, Pennsylvania personnel from Penn State University and the Penn Ag Industries-Poultry Council developed and pilot tested an environmental management system (EMS) assessment tool for poultry farms. During 2003, 30 cooperator poultry producers including 10 producing broilers, 10 producing turkeys and 10 with hens producing eggs pilot tested the assessment tool. The assessment tool ranks areas of concern for environmental stewardship and sets priorities for continuous improvement.

An interagency waste management team was formed in Alabama to develop educational materials and programs to support the agricultural sector in their efforts to comply with Alabamas AFO/CAFO regulations. Through various training programs, poultry growers in Alabama are now prepared to deal with current AFO/CAFO regulations. The team provides environmental education.

In Louisiana, the Master Farmer Program (Master Poultry Grower) has been developed and implemented. The Master Farmer program is an effort to help agricultural producers address environmental stewardship through voluntary, effective and economically achievable Best Management Practices (BMPs). Phase I of this educational program was offered to poultry growers in 2003. This phase focuses on environmental issues specific to production agriculture and poultry-specific BMPs and their implementation. Some of the topics addressed are: national water quality standards and the clean water act, Louisiana water quality standards, TMDLs, non-point source management strategies, BMPs, soil and water management, nutrient management, and NRCS CORE 4 conservation practices.

Objectives

1. Evaluate nutritional and management strategies to minimize the impact of poultry production on air and water quality
   
2. Develop and disseminate science based information through outreach activities
   

Methods

Objective 1: Evaluate nutritional and management strategies to minimize the impact of poultry production on air and water quality. Air and water quality are integral to proper manure management both during and after production. Given the current Environmental Protection Agency's initiatives, it is important that air and water quality be addressed in a dual manner because contaminants impact the environment. To reduce ammonia emissions and nutrient excretion, studies will be conducted in which broilers are fed diets with reduced protein and amino acid levels with or without the supplementation of commercial enzyme supplements (Pennsylvania, Kentucky, Minnesota, Texas). Additional studies with broilers and turkeys will utilize dietary supplements and/or manure/litter amendments designed to reduce ammonia emissions and impact phosphorus solubility(Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Georgia, Mississippi). To decrease trace mineral excretion in broilers and layers, experiments will be conducted to examine the effect of dietary organic sources of zinc, manganese, and copper compared to the common inorganic sources of these minerals (Kentucky, Alabama). The response criteria evaluated in these experiments will include: growth performance, litter nitrogen concentration, litter phosphorus concentration, litter ammonia production, litter trace mineral and nutrient concentration, ammonia emissions. Researchers in Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Louisiana and Pennsylvania are working in collaboration on management strategies including the use of vegetative buffers (Delaware and Pennsylvania), alternative litter sources and amendment sources (Alabama, Delaware, Louisiana, Georgia), and proper methods of disposal for daily and catastrophic mortalities (Delaware, Pennsylvania and Alabama). As an alternative management procedure, experiments and demonstrations will be conducted to validate the impact of planting trees as vegetative environmental buffers to capture ammonia and particulate matter for the prevention of dry and wet deposition of potential pollutants to land, surface water and the atmosphere. Some baseline data have been collected for soils and water wells. The long-term implications of vegetative environmental buffers will be monitored on pullet, layer, turkey, and broiler farms. A USDA NRI grant entitled, "Vegetative Environmental Buffers to Mitigate Odor and Aerosol Pollutants Emitted from Poultry Production Sites" has been secured to study poultry house emissions in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Iowa. In addition, research and demonstrations to evaluate the effectiveness of a grass buffer/filter strip as a vegetative buffer to minimize the runoff, to waterways, of nutrients from land applied litter will be conducted. Various depths of a grass filter strip will be evaluated to determine the optimum depth. Runoff following a rainfall will be collected and analyzed for nutrients, pathogens, and heavy metals (Delaware, Pennsylvania). In some broiler producing areas of the United States, there is a shortage of litter sources as well as restrictions on land application of the litter. Thus, experiments will be conducted to evaluate litter amendments or the combination of mechanical, biological, and chemical treatments to recondition and revitalize used litter between flocks. Ammonia production, litter quality, litter nutrient content, and growth performance are the response criteria that will be evaluated. Furthermore, alternative litter sources will be evaluated to determine their effect on broiler growth performance and bedding performance. These trials will be conducted with broilers and turkeys (Alabama, Georgia, Louisisana). Also, the effects of litter treatments on litter nitrogen, bacteria levels and ammonia production over time will be evaluated. Litter and air quality samples will be analyzed on days 7, 14, 21, 28, 35, 42, and 49 of each trial. Ammonia measurements will be taken using a closed container of specified dimension that is inverted over the litter bed. The ammonia will be determined using a Drager CMS Analyzer equipped with a remote air sampling pump. Trials with new bedding and reused bedding will be conducted (Alabama). New technologies for clean burning litter systems will be evaluated for broiler and turkey litter. In this research, the heat generated will be evaluated as a source of heat for brooding and the ash produced will be evaluated as a dietary phosphorus supplement for poultry and as a crop fertilizer (Georgia, Minnesota). The nutrient bioavailability of the ash will be determined. Emerging technologies for composting daily and catastrophic mortalities will be evaluated. Research will be conducted to design and evaluate a rotary composting system to minimize material handling and labor/time required to compost mortalities on broiler farms. Furthermore, euthanasia and composting methods for catastrophic poultry losses will be evaluated. Several gases as well as a portable animal euthanasia device (AED-HKI Wageningen) will be assessed during emergency situations. These will be evaluated for ease of use, risk associated, and convenience for layer, turkey, and broiler farms. In these emergency situations, the catastrophic losses may be disposed of by in-house composting of the flock (the in-house composting method has been evaluated previously) (Delaware). Objective 2: Develop and disseminate science based information through outreach activities. The science based information obtained from the research conducted in objective 1 will be disseminated through meetings, workshops, and seminars conducted by individual states, regions within the poultry producing areas of the United States, and national programs. Participants in the project will disseminate information through presentations at the National Training Programs on Euthanasia and Disposal Procedures for Catastrophic Poultry Disease Events, the National Poultry Waste Management Symposium, the Poultry Science Association Annual Meetings, and the International Poultry Scientific Forum. All project members are working together to disseminate the information (Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas). Extension publications, videos, Experiment Station publications, popular articles in trade magazines, and refereed journal articles which discuss results from the project will be used to educate producers and managers of poultry companies on manure/nutrient management, waste water management and dead bird disposal. Through educational materials, producers and managers will further understand and appreciate the impact of various management schemes on water quality and poultry performance. Oral presentations of the results will be presented at grower meetings, regional meetings, scientific meetings, international meetings, conferences, extension workshops, and the annual meetings of the Poultry Science Association, the Southern Poultry Science Association, the World's Poultry Science meeting, and Southeastern Poultry Association. Coordination of the educational plan will be through the Chair of the committee. Richard Reynnells, USDA/CSREES/PAS liaison will be actively involved in assisting in national coordination and distribution of information. Coordination of an educational action plan will be discussed as part of meetings and conference calls. Personnel will have responsibilities related to their contributions on individual projects and team efforts.

Measurement of Progress and Results

Outputs

• Nutritional strategies to improve environmental, water, and air quality will be developed and/or evaluated.
• Production management strategies and emerging technologies to improve environmental, water, and air quality will be developed and/or evaluated.
• Science based information on environmental issues affecting poultry production will be developed and disseminated.

Outcomes or Projected Impacts

• Methods of proper management and recycling of poultry production wastes to improve water quality will be developed and/or evaluated.
• Water quality factors that affect poultry performance will be determined and/or evaluated.
• The fulfillment of the objectives will increase the poultry industry's knowledge and understanding of the relationship between water quality and poultry production. Also, the fulfillment will provide the opportunity to apply innovative methods that will ensure the environmentally safe disposal of poultry wastes, as well as ensure quality of ground and surface waters.
• A more complete knowledge in these areas will allow for the development of sustainable agricultural systems that utilize science-based technologies to reduce environmental problems which will enhance management-based systems for the poultry industry.
• Research accomplishments of this interdisciplinary team will allow recommendations that will contribute to the most efficient and economical methods for water quality management in poultry production systems.
• Information gained from this project will be disseminated by committee members to poultry industry and producer groups around the country. Members of this research project are located in concentrated poultry producing areas and are actively involved in outreach or continuing education programs. Potential also exists to place this information on a variety of internet sites, which would provide interested individuals or groups with state of the art information. All forms of technology transfer are expected to be used to effectively reach target audiences.

Milestones

(0):re are no time-linked accomplishments that must be made before any of the objectives can be initiated.

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Outreach Plan

Extension publications, videos, Experiment Station publications, popular articles in trade magazines, and refereed journal articles which discuss results from the project will be used to educate producers and managers of poultry companies on manure/nutrient management, waste water management and dead bird disposal. Through educational materials, producers and managers will further understand and appreciate the impact of various management schemes on water quality and poultry performance.

Oral presentations of the results will be presented at grower meetings, regional meetings, scientific meetings, international meetings, conferences, extension workshops, and the annual meetings of the Poultry Science Association, the Southern Poultry Science Association, the World's Poultry Science meeting, and Southeastern Poultry Association.

Coordination of the educational plan will be through the Chair of the committee. Richard Reynnells, USDA/CSREES/PAS liaison will be actively involved in assisting in national coordination and distribution of information. Coordination of an educational action plan will be discussed as part of meetings and conference calls. Personnel will have responsibilities related to their contributions on individual projects and team efforts.

Organization/Governance

Regional Technical Committee: The Technical Committee shall consist of the Administrative Advisor (non-voting), CSRS representative (non-voting), a technical representative from each participating SAES appointed by the director, and a technical representative of each cooperating USDA research laboratory named by the appropriate administrator. The responsibility of the Technical Committee shall be to coordinate research activities of the participants and to carry out such other functions as outlined in the Manual for Cooperative Regional Research SEA-CR/OD-1082.

Officers: These shall consist of a Chair, a Secretary, and a Member-at-Large. The Secretary will assume the office of the Chair and the Member-at-Large will assume the office of secretary. The officers are elected on a yearly basis.

Executive Committee: This subcommittee, consisting of the Chair, Secretary, Member-at-Large, and the Administrative Advisor will act as directed by, and for, the Technical Committee between meetings.

The time and place of the annual meetings will be decided by vote of the members after consultation with the Administrative Advisor or by the Executive Committee when so directed.

Coordination of the educational plan will be through the Chair of the committee. Richard Reynnells, USDA/CSREES liaison will be actively involved in assisting in national coordination and distribution of information. Coordination of an educational action plan will be discussed as part of meetings and conference calls. Personnel will have responsibilities related to their contributions on individual projects and team efforts.

Literature Cited

AFTA. 2000 The Association For Temperate Agroforestry. Research and Technology Transfer Needs for the Next Millennium. The Association For Temperate Agroforestry. Columbia, Missouri, Fall 2000

Arritt, R.W., J. M. Riese, M. E. Westgate, E. S. Takle, and M.J. Falk, 2002: Application of a Lagrangian model for pollen dispersion. 15th Symposium on Boundary Layers and Turbulence. Amer. Meteor. Soc. Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Asman, W. A. H., M. A. Sutton, and J. K. Schjorring. 1997. Ammonia: emission, atmospheric transport and deposition. New-phytol. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. May 1998. v. 139 (1) p. 27-48.

Beckett K. P., P.H. Freer- Smith, and G. Taylor. 2000a. The capture of particulate pollution by trees at five contrasting UK urban sites. Arboriculture Journal, 24, 1-21.

Beckett K. P., P.H. Freer- Smith, and G. Taylor. 2000b. Particulate pollution capture by urban trees: effect of species and wind speed. Global Change Biology, 6, 995-1003.

Beckett K. P., P.H. Freer- Smith, and G. Taylor. 2000c. Effective tree species for local air quality management. Journal of Arboriculture, 26 (1), 12-19.

Bilgili, S.F., G.I. Montenegro, J.B. Hess, and M.K. Eckman. 1999a. Sand as litter for rearing broiler chickens. J. Appl. Poul. Res. 8:345-351.

Bilgili, S.F., G.I. Montenegro, J.B. Hess, and M.K. Eckman. 1999b. Live performance, carcass quality, and deboning yields of broilers reared on sand as a litter source. J. Appl. Poul. Res. 9:352-361.

Blake, J.P., J.B. Hess, and K.S. Macklin, 2007a. Evaluation of poultry litter treatment (PLT) at three application rates for broiler chickens.
Proceedings of the Southern Poultry Science Society, Atlanta, GA. January 22-23.

Blake, J.P., J.B. Hess, and K.S. Macklin, 2007b. Evaluation of aluminum sulfate at three application rates for broiler chickens. Southern Poultry Science Society, Atlanta, GA. January 22-23.

Blake, J.P., J.B. Hess, and K.S. Macklin, 2007c. Evaluation of Poultry Guard at three application rates for broiler chickens. Poultry Science 86 (Suppl. 1):591-592.

Blake, J.P., J.B. Hess, and K.S. Macklin, 2007d. Efficacy of hydrated lime as a litter amendment for broiler chickens. Poultry Science 86 (Suppl. 1):591.

Borman v. Board of Supervisors, No. 192/96-2276 (Iowa, September 23, 1998).

Bottcher, R.W., R.D. Munilla, K.Keener, and R.S. Gates. 2001. Dispersion of livestock building ventilation using windbreaks and ducts. Presentation at the 2001 ASAE Annual International Meeting, Sponsored by ASAE Sacramento Convention Center, Sacramento, California, USA July 30-August 1, 2001.

Brandle, J.R. and S. Finch. 1991. How windbreaks work. University of Nebraska Extension EC 91-1763-B.

British Columbia, Ministry of Agriculture and Food. 1999. Management of Dust in Broiler Operations. Poultry Fact Sheet. BC Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Abbotsford Agriculture Centre, 1767 Angus Campbell Road, Abbotsford, BC. V3G 2M3. December 1999.

Carpenter, G.H. 1992. Current litter practices and future needs. Pages 268-273 in: Proc. Natl. Poultry Waste Management Symposium. J.P. Blake, J.O. Donald and P.H. Patterson, eds. Birmingham, AL.

Chapin, A., C. Boulind, A. Moore. 1998. Controlling odor and gaseous emission problems from industrial Swine facilities. Yale Environmental Protection Clinic Handbook.

Delind, L. B. 1998. Parma: A Story of Hog Hotels and Local Resistance. Pages 23 - 28. In: Thu and Durrenberger, eds. Pigs, Profits, and Rural Communities. State University of New York Press. p208.

Des Moines Register. 2002. Only a Partial Victory. The Register's Editorials. Richard Doak (Editorials Editor). Des Moines Register, Friday, October 11, 2002, Page 12A.

Dumontet, S., H. Dinel and S.B. Baloda, 1999. Pathogen reduction in sewage sludge by composting and other biological treatments: A review. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 16:409-430.

Freer-Smith, P.H., S. Holloway, and A. Goodman. 1997. The uptake of particulates by an urban woodland: Site description and particulate composition. Environmental Pollution, Vol. 95, No. 1, 27-35.

Giambrone, J.J., S. Fagbohun and K.S. Macklin. 2007. Management methods to reduce infectious laryngotracheitis virus. Proceedings of the 56th Western Poultry Disease Conference. 26-29 March, Las Vegas, Nevada, pp. 85.

Guo, H., L.D. Jacobson, D.R. Schmidt, K.A. Janni. 2001. Simulation of odor dispersions as impacted by weather conditions. Pp. 687-695 In: Livestock Environment VI: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium (21-23 May, 2001, Louisville, Ky., USA), Eds. Stowell, R.R., R. Bucklin, and R. W. Bottcher. ASAE Publication Number 701P0201.

Hamilton, N.D. 1992. A Livestock Producer's Legal Guide to Nuisance, Land Use Control, and Environmental Law. (Des Moines: Drake University Agricultural Law Center).

Hammond, E. G. and R. J. Smith. 1981. Survey of some molecularly dispersed odorous constituents in Swine house air. Iowa State Journal of Research 55(4):393-399.

Hammond, E. G., C. Fedler, and G. Junk. 1979. Identification of dust-borne odors in swine confinement facilities. Transactions of the ASAE 22(5):1186-1189, 1192

Hammond, E. G., C. Fedler, and R.J. Smith. 1981. Analysis of particle bourne swine house odors. Agriculture and Environment. (6) 395-401.

Hartung, J. 1986. Dust in livestock buildings as a carrier of odours. pp.321-332. In: Odour Prevention and Control of Organic Sludge and Livestock farming. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, New York.

Heisler, G. M., and D.R. Dewalle. 1988. Effects of windbreak structure on windflow. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment,22/23 (1988) 41-69.

Hoff, S.J., Harmon, J.D., Xin, H, and L. Dong. 1996. Treating Ventilation Exhaust Air for Odor Control, Department of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, Iowa State University. Iowa State University Swine Research Report ASL-R1393.

Hoff, S.J., L. Dong, X. Li, D.S. Bundy, J.D. Harmon, H. Xin. 1997a. Odor Removal Using Biomass Filters. In Proceedings; Livestock Environment V-Fifth International Symposium, pp 101-108. May 29-31, 1997. Bloomington, MN. American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, MI. 49085.

Hoff, S.J., D.S. Bundy, X. Li. 1997b. Dust Effects on Odor and Odor Compounds. In Proceedings; Ammonia and Odour Emissions from Animal Production Facilities, pp 101-110. October 6-10, 1997. Vinkeloord, The Netherlands. NVTL, Rosmalen, The Netherlands.

Hoff, S.J. and D.S. Bundy. 2003. Automated downwind sampling for analyzing gas dispersion from livestock systems. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Gaseous and Odour Emissions from Animal Production Facilities. Horsens, Denmark. June 1-4, 2003. pp 401-409.

Inside Agroforestry. 2002. Colletti, J. and J. Tyndall. Shelterbelts: an answer to growing odor concerns? Inside Agroforestry. USDA National Agroforestry Center. Spring 2002.Jackson, L 1998. Large Scale Swine Production and Water Quality. Pages 103 - 121. In: Thu and Durrenberger, eds. Pigs, Profits, and Rural Communities. State University of New York Press. p208.

Jacobson, L. D., H. Guo, D.R. Schmidt, R.E. Nicolai. 2001. Influence of weather conditions on field evaluation of odor dispersions from animal production sites. Pp. 679-686 In: Livestock Environment VI: Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium (21-23 May, 2001, Louisville, Ky., USA), Eds. Stowell, R.R., R. Bucklin, and R. W. Bottcher. ASAE Publication Number 701P0201.

Jacobson, L., D. Schmidt, R. Nicolai, and J. Bicudo. 1998. Odor control for animal agriculture. BAEU-17. University of Minnesota Extension Service, Department of Biosystems and Agricultural engineering. http://www.bae.umn.edu/extens/aeu/baue17.html (Last accessed December 1999)

Kliebenstein, J.B. 1998. Economic and associated social and environmental issues with large-scale livestock production systems. Concept Paper for the World Bank Workshop on Sustainable Intensification of Agricultural Systems: Linking Policy, Institutions and Technology. July 5-10, 1998. Iowa State University, Ames, Ia.

Kreis, R.D. 1978. Limiting the environmental impact of animal production odors. Environmental International. Vol. 1, 247-275.

Laird, D.J. 1997. Wind tunnel testing of shelterbelt effects on dust emissions from swine production facilities. Thesis (M.S.)--Iowa State University.

Lammers, P.S. 2002. Personal Communication. Department of Agricultural Engineering, University of Bonn, Nussallee 5, 53115 Bonn, Germany. E-mail: lammers@uni-bonn.de.

Lammers, P.S., O. Wallenfang, and P. Boeker. 2001. Computer modelling for assessing means to reduce odour emissions. Presented at 2001 ASAE Annual International Meeting, Sponsored by the ASAE, Sacramento, California, USA, July 30-August 1, 2001. Paper Number:01-4042.

Lorimor, J 1998. Iowa Odor Control Demonstration Project: Landscaping. Cooperative Extension Service. Iowa State University Extension. Pm-1754h.

Malone, G.W. 2002. An on-farm demonstration of planting trees around poultry houses. Poultry Science. 81: 126 (Suppl. 1).

Malone, G.W. and D. Abbott-Donnelly. 2001a. The benefits of planting trees around poultry farms. University of Delaware, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Extension Bulletin #159, December 2001.

Malone, G.W. and D. Abbott-Donnelly. 2001b. Environmental and production benefits of trees for poultry farms. University of Delaware Cooperative Extension Bulletin #158.

Malone, G.W. and G. Van Wicklen. 2002. Trees as a Vegetative Filter. Poultry Digest Online. Volume 3, Number 1.

Macklin, K.S., J.B. Hess, S.F. Bilgili, and R.A. Norton. 2005. Bacterial levels of pine shavings and sand used as poultry litter. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 14: 238-245.

Macklin, K.S., J.B. Hess, S.F. Bilgili and R.A. Norton. 2006. The use of in-house composting to reduce bacterial numbers between growouts. Journal of Applied Poultry Research, 15: 531-537.

McNaughton, K. G. 1988. Effects of windbreaks on turbulent transport and microclimate. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, 22/23:17-40.

McNider, R. T., 1981: Investigation of the impact of topographic circulations on the transport and dispersion of air pollutants. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Virginia, Charlottesville.

Midwest Plan Service. 2002. Outdoor Air Quality. Manure Management Systems Series. MWPS - 18, Section 3.

Mikesell, R.E., K.B. Kephart, L.J. Ressler, and F.K. Willits. 2001. Comparison of neighbor and non-neighbor perceptions of large-scale animal agriculture. International Symposium on Animal Production & Environmental Issues. Oct. 3-5, 2001. Research Triangle Park, NC.

National Pork Producers Council (NPPC). 1995. An Executive Summary: A Review of Literature on Nature and Control of Odors from Pork Production Facilities. A report prepared by J.R. Miner, Bioresource Engineering Dept. Oregon State University for the subcommittee of the National Pork Producers Council.

Odor Control Task Force (OCTF). 1998. Board of Governors of the University of North Carolina. Control of odor emissions form animal Operations. http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/waste_mgt/control.htm (3/31/99).

Patterson, P. H. and E. S. Lorenz. 1997. Nutrients in manure from commercial white Leghorn pullets. J. Appl. Poultry Res. 6:247-252.

Patterson, P. H. and E. S. Lorenz. 1996. Manure nutrient production from commercial White Leghorn hens. J. Appl. Poultry Res. 5:260-268.

Patterson, P. H., E. S. Lorenz, W. D. Weaver, Jr. and J. H. Schwartz. 1998. Litter nutrients from commercial broiler chickens. J. Appl. Poultry Res. 7:247-252.

Ranade, A.S. and B.V. Rajmane. 1990. Comparative study of different litter materials for poultry. Poultry Adviser 23:21-26.

Reischl, A., M. Reissinger, and O. Hutzinger. 1987. Occurrence and distribution of atmospheric organic micropollutants in conifer needles. Chemosphere, Vol.16, Nos.10-12:2647-2652.

Reischl, A., M. Reissinger, H. Thoma, and O. Hutzinger. 1989. Accumulation of organic air constituents by plant surfaces. Chemosphere, Vol.18, Nos.1-6:561-568.

Schulze, E.D. 1982. In: O.L. Lange, C.B. Osmund, H. Ziegler (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology. Vol. 12 B. Springer-Verlag, Berlin. pp. 615-676.

Smith, R. J. 1993. Dispersion of odours from ground level agricultural sources. Journal of Agricultural. Engineering. Res. 54:187-200.

Swine Odor Task Force (SOTF). 1995. Options for Managing Odor. North Carolina University, http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/whpaper/SwineOdor.html.

Takle, E.S. 1983. Climatology of superadiabatic conditions for a rural area. Journal of Climate and Applied Meteorology. 22:1129-1132.

Takle, E.S., R.H. Shaw, and H.C. Vaughan. 1976. Low-level stability and pollutant trapping potential for a rural area. Journal of Applied Meteorology. 15:36-42.

Thernelius, S.M. 1997. Wind tunnel testing of odor transportation from swine production facilities. Thesis (M.S.)--Iowa State University, 1997.

Tyndall, J and Colletti, J. 2000. Air Quality and Shelterbelts: Odor Mitigation and Livestock Production A Literature Review. Final Report. United State Department of Agriculture, National Agroforestry Center Lincoln, Nebraska. Project Number: 4124-4521-48-3209.

Ucar, T. and F. Hall. 1998. Windbreak technology for agrochemical drift mitigation. Progress Report 1 for the Laboratory for Pest Control Application Technology and the USDA-NRCS.

Ucar, T. and F.R. Hall. 2001. Windbreaks as a pesticide drift mitigation strategy: a review. Pest Management Science 57:663-675.

Wang, H., and E. S. Takle, 1995. Numerical simulations of shelterbelt effects on wind direction. Journal of Applied Meteorology. 34, 2206-2219.

Wang, H., E. S. Takle, and J. Shen, 2001: Shelterbelts and Windbreaks: Mathematical Modeling and Computer Simulation of Turbulent Flows. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 33, 549-586. (Invited review paper)

Wood, S.L., D.R. Schmidt, K.A. Janni, L.D. Jacobson, C.J. Clanton, and S. Weisberg. 2001. Odor and air emissions from animal production systems. Presented at: 2001 ASAE Annual International Meeting. Sacramento, California, USA. July 30- August, 2001. Paper Number: 01-4043.

Zhou, X.H., J.R. Brandle, E.S. Takle, and C.W. Mize. 2002. Estimation of the three-dimensional aerodynamic structure of a green ash shelterbelt. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology. 111 pp 93-108.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

AL, AR, GA, IN, KY, LA, MD, MN, MS, OH, PA, TX, WA

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions