I

ncreasingly farmers across the United

States are feeling pressure to minimize
the impact of their farm management prac-
tices on the environment. Implementation
of nutrient management planning, cost-shar-
ing for manure storage facilities, applica-
tion for permits, and changing environmen-
tal legislation are frequent topics of conver-
sation among dairymen and their advisors.
The challenge
facing the in-
dustry is to
identify tech-
niques to reduce
the environ-
mental impact
of farming op-
erations while
mai ntai ni ng
their economic
viability. This
article is the
first in a series
covering the relationship between animal ag-
riculture and the environment.
Environmental concerns associated with
animal agriculture include nutrient pollution
of ground water (drinking water) and sur-
face water (lakes, ponds, streams); patho-
gen contamination of water resources; and
air quality issues (odors, ammonia emis-
sion). Before we can develop and implement
techniques to minimize the impact of farms
on the environment, we must understand
these specific issues.
Water Quality
Changes in the structure of the agricul-
ture industry in the past fifty years have in-
creased the impact of farms on water qual-
ity. Increased specialization and concentra-
tion of crop and livestock production has
led to the net export of nutrients from major
crop producing areas (i.e., the corn and
wheat belt), and net importation of these nu-
trients to areas with a high concentration of
livestock operations. These areas include the
DelMarVa peninsula with its concentrated
poultry industry, North Carolina with its hog
industry, and New England, Lancaster
County PA, the Chino Valley in California,
and the Lake Okeechobee area in Florida
all with a high concentration of dairies.
Todays more intensive and specialized
farming operations have largely separated
production of manure nutrients from pro-
duction of crops. Livestock are not very ef-
ficient in the utilization of dietary nutrients
for meat and milk. While some of the nutri-
ents imported
onto the farm
in grains and
mi n e r a l
supplements
are exported
in meat and
milk, most of
the nitrogen
and phospho-
rus consumed
by the animal
is excreted in
manure, and
remains on
the farm.
Over time,
this causes the
buildup of
these nutri-
ents on the
farm, and increased risk of nutrient leach-
ing and runoff.
Because of this importation and concen-
tration of nutrients, areas of increasingly in-
tensive animal agriculture have been asso-
ciated with problems with water quality. Nu-
trients that leach or runoff the farmmay con-
taminate water resources. While animal ag-
riculture has played a role in contamination
of ground and surface water, it is obviously
not the only culprit. Other sources of nutri-
ent contamination include atmospheric ni-
trogen, fertilizer used in commercial and
suburban settings, and human sewage.
Excess nitrogen in bodies of surface wa-
ter (lakes, ponds, streams) can lead to
eutrophication, or excessive growth of nox-
ious aquatic weeds. Degradation of this over-
growth of algae and water plants uses up
the oxygen in the water, and the depleted
oxygen levels lead to fish kills. Addition-
ally, ammonia can be directly toxic to fish.
Surface runoff and acid rain are the most
common routes of nitrogen contamination
of surface water.
Excess phosphorus in water, like excess
nitrogen, causes algae populations to grow
rapidly, or to bloom. Again, the degrada-
tion of these plants decreases dissolved oxy-
gen in water and decreases the population
of fish, clams, crabs, oysters, and other ani-
mal life. An algae bloom may be caused by
application of phosphorus to land in excess
of crop requirements followed by runoff of
that excess phosphorus.
Unlike nitrogen, phosphorus in soil is
relatively stable, and doesnt leach to
groundwater. Instead, it accumulates. His-
torically, phosphorus runoff has been pri-
marily associated with soil erosion. With
excessive application of phosphorus to soils
over a period of years, however, it is becom-
ing apparent that saturation of soils can lead
to phosphorus runoff even when erosion is
controlled. Increased soil test phosphorus
has been linked to the greater soluble phos-
phorus in runoff. No till practices, although
they reduce soil erosion, may actually make
runoff of soluble phosphorus worse, as phos-
phorus is kept near surface. Still controver-
sial, and the subject of much research, is
the soil phosphorus level at which soluble
phosphorus becomes a problem, and the in-
teraction of soil type with phosphorus solu-
bility.
In addition to nutrient pollution, micro-
bial pathogens found in animal waste may
contaminate water supplies when cows have
access to streams and ponds. The pathogens
that cause salmonellosis, dysentery, hepati-
tis, shigellosis, and giardiasis may be present
in water. Even if they do not cause disease,
the presence of these pathogens, as well as
fecal coliforms (including E. coli) and fecal
streptococci, may indicate other contamina-
tion of drinking water.
Environmental Issues Facing Dairy Farmers
Katharine Knowlton, Ph.D.
Research Scientist, Virginia Tech
Department of Dairy Science
Katharine Knowlton
One of the effects of the diminishing distance between rural areas and
cities like Richmond, Va., is greater concern for water and air quality. Photo
courtesy of Agricultural Research Service, USDA.
I N D U S T R Y I S S U E S
(continued to page XX)
Contamination of ground water with ni-
trates, while less visible than surface water
contamination, is also of concern. When
nitrogen in manure or commercial fertilizer
is applied to land in excess of crop require-
ments, nitrate leaching occurs. This nitrate
in ground water may then
enter wells and contami-
nate the drinking water
supply.
Nitrate in drinking wa-
ter is converted to nitrite
in the human digestive
tract. Nitrite can replace
oxygen in hemoglobin
creating a compound
called methemoglobin,
which is much less effi-
cient at carrying oxygen
than is hemoglobin. With
increased levels of meth-
emoglobin, oxygen levels
in the blood decrease. In-
fants are more susceptible
to this than adult humans.
Because of this health
concern, a legal limit for
nitrates in well water of 10
ppm was established in the U.S. in 1985.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) conducted a survey of drinking wa-
ter in 1990 and found that nitrate-N con-
centration was highest in rural wells, with
2.4% of those wells above the legal limit.
Increased nitrate-N in wells was correlated
with increased sales of nitrogen fertilizer and
increased market value of crops and live-
stock on nearby farms.
Air Quality
Air quality issues associated with animal
agriculture include the emission of ammo-
nia, methane, and odorous compounds. Dra-
matic increases in air concentration of am-
monia in areas of intensive agriculture have
been reported, and animal agriculture ac-
counts for 50% to 85% of total ammonia
volatilization. Ammonia has direct, toxic
effects on vegetation, and when returned to
soil and water by rainfall, disrupts ecosys-
tems and leads to algae blooms.
Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas and
a significant contributor to global warming.
Greenhouse gases are those that absorb in-
fra red radiation, trapping heat derived from
solar radiation and setting the conditions and
limits for life on earth. Atmospheric meth-
ane contribution has doubled since 1800,
and is increasing by about 1% per year. Ag-
riculture is the source of an estimated 32%
of total methane emissions on a worldwide
basis. Ruminant animals are the principal
source of methane from agriculture, respon-
sible for an estimated 48% of total agricul-
tural emissions worldwide. Other sources
include rice paddies (36% of total agricul-
tural methane), emission from animal ma-
nure (15%) and
crop residue burn-
ing (1%). Combin-
ing animal and ma-
nure sources indi-
cates that animal
agriculture is re-
sponsible for 64%
of total agricultural
emissions and about
20% of total emis-
sions on a world-
wide basis.
While not
strictly an environ-
mental concern,
odor emission from
farms may be the
most common com-
plaint producers
hear. Odors used to
be considered sim-
ply part of farming, but with increasing in-
tensity in animal agriculture and increasing
population of formerly rural areas, odor is
becoming a serious point of contention be-
tween farmers and their neighbors. Odor po-
tential is increasingly limiting the location
of new animal production facilities, and the
National Pork Producers Council has iden-
tified odors as their single biggest environ-
mental challenge.
Eliminating odors from animal agricul-
ture is essentially impossible. Instead, the
relevant questions become how much odor
is too much, and how can we maintain odor
below that threshold? Odors are volatile
compounds generated during anaerobic de-
composition of organic matter. A total of 168
odorous compounds have been identified in
livestock waste or in air around livestock
houses. Odorous compounds generally con-
tain either nitrogen (i.e., ammonia) or sul-
fur (i.e., hydrogen sulfide, the odor of rot-
ten eggs).
These compounds are carried by vapor
and airborne dust. The generation of odors
varies with type of animal, ration fed, ma-
nure moisture, and type and duration of
manure storage. Odor problems can be re-
duced by preventing generation of these
compounds, diluting them, or treating air or
manure to reduce their offensiveness. But
the factor with the greatest impact on odor
problems is neighbor relations.
The perception of odor as a nuisance is
driven at least as much by public relations
and good will as by actual presence and in-
tensity of odorous compounds. Perception
of odor is individual, and is influenced by
personal preference, experience, and asso-
ciations. An individuals tolerance for odor
is much lower if that odor is associated with
something unpleasant or out of their con-
trol. Conversely, individuals are more toler-
ant of odor if they feel they have some con-
trol over it, if the context is appropriate, if
they understand its source, or if they ben-
efit from the source.
Summary
This article is not intended to carry a
message of doom and gloom. While there
are legitimate environmental concerns as-
sociated with animal agriculture, manage-
ment techniques are available to protect air
and water quality while maintaining the eco-
nomic viability of farming operations. Fu-
ture articles will focus on these.
Common sense conservation is the theme of the National Conservation Buffer
Initiative, a program that aims to install two million miles of buffers by the year 2000.
Conservation buffers, strips of land in
permanent vegetation, have
the capacity to remove:
up to 50% or more of
nutrients and pesticides;
up to 60% or more of
certain pathogens; and
up to 75% or more of
sediment.
Conservation buffers also
reduce odor and noise.
More than 600,000 miles of buffers,
with a total of 2 million
miles are expected to be
installed by 2002 through
the initiative.
You can find more
information on buffers
from the National Re-
sources Conservation Ser-
vice, log onto the website
at www.nrcs.usda.gov.
I N D U S T R Y I S S U E S
(continued from page XX)
Contamination of drinking water sup-
plies may occur when excessive nitrates
leach into the ground water from crop land
or pastures. ARS/USDA photo.