Grassland Soil and Water Research Laboratory, Temple, Texas Site Logo
ARS Home About Us Helptop nav spacerContact Us En Espanoltop nav spacer
Printable VersionPrintable Version     E-mail this pageE-mail this page
Agricultural Research Service United States Department of Agriculture
Search
  Advanced Search
Programs and Projects
ALMANAC Simulation Model
ALMANAC Applications
Rangeland Research
Poultry Litter Application
Wheat Study 2003
Corn Fertility Study
Impact of Biological Control Agents on Musk Thistle Populations
MANAGE Nutrient Loss Database
Hydrologic Data Collection and Water Quality Sampling
Reprints Relevant to ALMANAC
ALMANAC - Forestry Simulation
ALMANAC - Switchgrass Field Research Simulation
ALMANAC -Biofuel grass nutrient cycling
ALMANAC - Rangeland CEAP
Publications on Riesel Data and History
Hydrologic Data
Models
Atmospheric CO2 Research Group
 

Research Project: DEVELOPMENT OF MODELS AND CONSERVATION PRACTICES FOR WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND RESOURCE ASSESSMENTS

Location: Grassland Soil and Water Research Laboratory, Temple, Texas

Title: On-farm agro-economic effects of fertilizing cropland with poultry litter

Authors
item Harmel, Daren
item Harmel, Bob - MIDWESTERN STATE UNIV
item Patterson, Mike - MIDWESTERN STATE UNIV

Submitted to: Journal of Applied Poultry Research
Publication Type: Peer Reviewed Journal
Publication Acceptance Date: September 9, 2008
Publication Date: N/A

Interpretive Summary: As animal feeding operations increase in size, public and regulatory pressure is being exerted on the animal industry to develop and implement appropriate uses for the wastes produced. One option is applying the litter and manure waste as fertilizer for cultivated crop production. However, this practice must be shown to be cost-effective to be widely accepted by local farmers and must be environmentally sound to be supported by regulators. In the present study, the on-farm economic impacts of traditional (commercial) fertilizer practices were compared for several alternatives using both litter and commercial nitrogen fertilizer. For six years (2002-2007), land management, crop yield, crop price, and fertilizer cost data were collected from six field sites in central Texas and utilized for economic analysis. Varying litter and commercial fertilizer combinations resulted in minimal differences in corn and wheat yields; however, total fertilizer costs increased significantly as litter rate increased in spite of dramatic increases in commercial fertilizer cost. The highest average annual returns were determined for the 1 and 2 tons per acre litter treatments. At litter rates greater than 3 tons per acre, returns were reduced as fertilizer costs increased with no compensating higher yields to provide offsetting revenues. This economically optimal litter range of 1-2 tons per acre is also environmentally optimal according to nutrient runoff and soil nutrient data collected onsite. It is hoped that this surprising coincidence will facilitate the increased use of litter as a cost-effective, environmentally friendly fertilizer alternative for cultivated crop production and thus benefit both the grain farmers and poultry producers in the region.

Technical Abstract: As animal feeding operations increase in size, public and regulatory pressure is being exerted on the animal industry to develop and implement appropriate by-product utilization practices. One such practice is offsite application of litter and manure as fertilizer for cultivated crop production. However, this practice must be shown to be cost-effective to be widely accepted by local farmers and must be environmentally sound to be supported by regulators. In the present study, the on-farm economic impacts of the traditional commercial (inorganic) fertilizer practice were compared for several hybrid litter and commercial N fertilization alternatives. For six years (2002-2007), land management, crop yield, crop price, and fertilizer cost data were collected from six field sites in central Texas and utilized for economic analysis. Varying litter and inorganic fertilizer combinations resulted in minimal differences in corn and wheat yields; however, total fertilizer costs increased significantly as litter rate increased in spite of dramatic increases in commercial fertilizer cost. The highest average annual economic throughput values were determined for the 1 and 2 ton/ac litter treatments. At litter rates greater than 3 ton/ac, diminishing returns were observed as fertilizer costs increased with no compensating higher yields to provide offsetting revenues. This economically optimal litter range of 1-2 ton/ac is also environmentally optimal according to nutrient runoff and soil nutrient data collected onsite. It is hoped that this surprising coincidence will facilitate the increased use of litter as a cost-effective, environmentally friendly fertilizer alternative for cultivated crop production and thus benefit both the grain farmers and poultry producers in the region.

   

 
Project Team
Arnold, Jeffrey
Rossi, Colleen
Kiniry, James
Harmel, Daren
 
Publications
   Publications
 
Related National Programs
  Soil Resource Management (202)
  Water Availability and Water Management (211)
 
Related Projects
   HYDROLOGICAL AND WATER QUALITY SYSTEM
   THE IMPACT OF PROPER ORGANIC FERTILIZER MANAGEMENT IN PRODUCTION AGRICULTURE
   PLAN FOR TOMORROW: POULTRY LITTER APPLICATION ON NEW SITES
   HYDROLOGIC AND WATER QUALITY SYSTEM DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
   EFFECTS OF CONSERVATION PRACTICES ON SOIL AND WATER RESOURCES IN THE LEON RIVER WATERSHED (PHASE II)
   HYDROLOGIC MODELING OF THE INDUS RIVER BASIN IN PAKISTAN
   SYNTHESIS OF FINDINGS FROM THE CEAP WATERSHED ASSESSMENT STUDY
   FATE AND TRANSPORT OF E. COLI IN RURAL TEXAS LANDSCAPES AND STREAMS
   MODELING THE IMPACTS OF LAND-APPLIED MUNICIPAL BIOSOLIDS ON ECOSYSTEM SERVICES ACROSS URBAN, AGRICULTURAL, AND WILDLIFE INTERFACES
   DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING OF A BMP EVALUATION TOOL FOR TEXAS
 
 
Last Modified: 11/09/2008
ARS Home | USDA.gov | Site Map | Policies and Links 
FOIA | Accessibility Statement | Privacy Policy | Nondiscrimination Statement | Information Quality | USA.gov | White House