The Rural Voice, 2006-04, Page 38Under
control
Environmental
Farm Plan funding
is giving an
incentive to look at
safe manure storage
options
By Keith Roulston
Between new nutrient
management regulations and
Environmental Farm Plan
funding provisions that make up to
$30,000 available for new and
expanded manure storage options,
storage construction is going to be a
big focus in the next few years.
There has already been a lot of
money spent on manure storage
solutions, says Jaqui Forbes, nutrient
management advisor with
OMAFRA's Clinton office.
Prior to the deadline for larger
livestock operations with 300 animal
units or more to file their nutrient
management strategies and plans, a
total of 610 farms took advantage of
the Nutrient Management Financial
Assistance Program.
Of these, Forbes says, 27 per cent
of the successful grant applications
were for manure storage, but these
accounted for 74 per cent of the
funding. (By comparison, 31 per cent
of the grants went to projects to
design a nutrient management plan
but this took only four per cent of the
funding.
The bulk of the money from the
successful applications went to three -
wall containment structures for dry
manure and to run-off containment,
Forbes explained.
New regulations require that
effective this past January 1, any
farm will have to have a nutrient
34 THE RURAL VOICE
Covered storage of solid manure is becoming a popular option to control run-
off problems.
management strategy in place before
It can receive a building permit
(many won't require a full-fledged
NM plan). It means many more
farmers will be looking at their
manure storage requirements.
especially since a grant of up to
$30,000 for manure storage is
available under the EFP.
The whole business of manure
storage has become increasingly
complicated in relation to both the
possibilities for manure storage and
the requirements. Once upon a time
there was the manure pile out back.
Now there's not only the choice of
whether you want to use liquid or
solid manure but how you want to
store the manure while meeting
increasingly stringent environmental
icgu.ilations.
Sometimes personal preference
plays a role in the choice of manure
storage options. For most pork
farmers these days the natural choice
is liquid manure and the choice is
between under -barn storage and an
exterior tank. But when Blyth -area
farmer John Nesbit wanted to build a
600 -pig finishing barn in 2004, he
chose a solid -floor, bedded manure
option. A 5,000 square foot, cement -
floored indoor storage area was built
into one end of the barn, enough
room to store eight months of
manure.
"I feel we have better manure
because there is nothing leaching out
of it," he said of the covered storage.
Ray Robertson. EFP Co-ordinator
for Grey County. says there certainly
has been interest in manure storage
funding portions of the EFP, though
some farmers are holding off to see if
these funds will be topped up with
additional money when
implementation plans for the Source
Water Protection Act are announced.
In his area, where beef is the most
prominent type of livestock
operation, the greatest call for EFP
funding has been for covered manure
storages, Robertson says.
Covered manure storages offer
other advantages. The shed can be
used to store machinery or feed at
times of the year when not required
for manure storage.
Aroofed building also offers
flexibility if the farming
operation changes in future.
A cement liquid manure tank is only
good for that purpose. The covered
storage can be converted to other
uses.
No matter what type of storage
option you choose, the requirement
now is to provide 240 days of storage
capacity, if you fall under NMP
requirements. There are a few
exceptions such as a beef operation
where cattle are inside for less than
240 days. If, for instance, cattle are
indoors from November I to May 1.