Wood Chip Pad Winter Feeding Area as a New

Livestock Manure Management System

2015 Waste to Worth Conference

Seattle, Washington

April 2, 2015

Tom Basden (WVU Extension)

Joshua Faulkner (UVM Extension)

David DeVallance (WVU Wood Science)

Introduction

Soil and water effects from feeding cattle

on pastures during the winter dormant

period.

Wood Chip Heavy Use Area, design,

costs and monitoring.

Evaluating Optimal Biomass Media:

Species, thermally modified chips, and

mixtures.

Mid-Atlantic Cattle Production

PA, MD, VA, WV, and DE. The five state

have aproximatly 1.1 million beef brood

cows and if you include dairy that number

is 1.6 million cows.

Beef pasture management scheme of

summer grazing and importation of hay

into the pasture for winter feeding is

common in eastern USA.

What is a Wintering Site?

An area where cattle are fed during the

winter months, sites include

A feeding area; stored hay and

concentrates

A sheltered area; windbreaks, calf hutches

A water source; winterized pasture

systems

Typical Winter Feeding Site in

WV

Long Term Pasture Studies in Coshocton,

Ohio Experimental Watershed Owens, Edwards and Van Keuren

Compared 3 management systems on a micro

watershed: 1. from 1974 to 1986 continuous

pasture winter feeding of hay, 2. 1987 to 1989

grazing only during summer and 3. 1990 to 1994,

hay harvest only, no cattle in the pasture

60 % of sediment losses occurred during dormant

period (Feeding Periods)

Months of Greatest Losses during March – June,

April had almost 40% of annual losses

Soils saturated, surface thawed and churned from

cattle

Runoff reduced as cattle were removed from the pasture during the winter period

Fig. 2 Yearly percentage cover for the continuous winter feeding area (WS 129).

Lloyd B. Owens , Martin J. Shipitalo

Runoff quality evaluations of continuous and rotational over-wintering systems for beef cows

Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Volume 129, Issue 4, 2009, 482 - 490

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2008.11.003

Woodchip Heavy-Use Area

Separation Geotextile

Advantages

• Local materials (where available)

• Environmental…

• Cost…

• Improved animal performance and welfare

(French et al., 2004)

Woodchip

Pad

Slat barn w/

outdoor

access

Straw

bedding

Slat barn

Feed intake

(lb DM/day)23.99 23.32 21.58 20.9

Live weight

gain (lb/day)3.06 2.93 2.43 2.23

Carcass gain

(lb/day)1.70 1.68 1.41 1.41

Woodchip Winter Feeding Pad: Subgrade

Woodchip Winter Feeding Pad: Drainage

Woodchip Winter Feeding Pad: Outlet

Woodchip Winter Feeding Pad: Doser

Woodchip Winter Feeding Pad: Distribution

Woodchip Winter Feeding Pad: In Operation

Anecdotal observations…

Cost and Size Comparison

• Does not include liquid handling system or on-farm labor

Recommended Stocking Density (ft^2/cow)

*Off-pad feeding

Woodchip

(WV)

Woodchip

(UK)

Roofed

feeding barn

(NRCS-WV)

Concrete

Barnyard

Gravel

Barnyard

163 171 983 463 209

Woodchip* Concrete/Gravel Earthen

110 60-75 500-800

Construction Costs ($/cow)

Monitoring Study in Ohio Co. WV

• May 20, 2011 – April 17, 2013

• On-site temperature and precipitation

• Pressure transducer mounted in effluent

collection tank for continuous flow monitoring

• WQ sampling

• 12 storm events

• TKN

• NO3-N

• PO4-P

• TP

Monitoring Results: Nutrients

Total Loads in Effluent

TKN: 16,874 g

NO3-N: <9 g

PO4-P: 630 g

TP: 892 g

N Mean Min Max Std. Dev.

TKN (mg/L) 15 117.1 62.6 153.5 25.2

NO3-N (mg/L) 16 <0.065 <0.065 0.6 -

PO4-P (mg/L) 16 4.4 1.9 8.2 2.0

Total P (mg/L) 16 6.2 2.6 12.9 3.0

“90-95% N and P bound in manure held

in woodchips” (French and Hickey, 2003)

Monitoring Results: Hydrology

• Runoff Response:

• Comparison to other surfaces:

*(NRCS, 2006)

24%

Monitoring Period Runoff as % of Rainfall

Winter periods 37%

Non-winter periods 17%

Entire monitoring period 24%

Monitoring Results: Hydrology

Woodchip substrate absorbent while allowing for evaporation

1” storm

Nutrient Cycling

• Field application of soiled woodchips

• Un-composted vs. composted vs. synthetic N

• Grass yield equal from

• Soiled woodchip applied @ 143 lb N/ac

• Composted woodchip at same rate

• Synthetic N @ 54 lb/ac

• Size of woodchip

• 5-10 cm – no degradation

(Photo: AHDB, 2011)

Nutrient Cycling

(AHDB, 2011)

18 t/ac 11 t/ac 4.5 t/ac

Disadvantages

Annual requirement for bedding material (similar

to bedded housing)

Solid waste (spent woodchips) management

requirements

Effluent management

Prolonged freezing?

Sourcing woodchips?

(Photo: AHDB, 2011)

Chip characteristics matter….

Our most recent project is investigating how wood chip

types influences chip pad runoff water quality and quantity

Suitability of Wood and Thermally Modified Wood Chips

• White Oak

• Mixed Hardwoods

• Mixtures

– White Oak +

Torrefied Wood

– White Oak +

Torrefied Wood +

Biochar

Lab Column Studies

Field Studies

• Biochar Applications

– For combustion

– As an absorbent

– Soil amendment

– Catalyst development

Slow pyrolysis (carbonization) of wood is used to produce

solid charcoal or char (i.e., biochar)

Wood Thermal Treatment: Pyrolysis

Thermal decomposition of

biomass in the absence of

atmospheric oxygen

Laboratory column studies: 3 rain events & a 48 hr. hold

Suitability of Wood and Thermally Modified Wood Chips

In the 3 rain events, the biomass filters performed better

than the gravel controls

Suitability of Wood and Thermally Modified Wood Chips

Suitability of Wood and Thermally Modified Wood Chips

In the 48 hour hold, thermal modification did not appear to

improve TN or P reduction

Field Site: Construction

The field site consists of three separated pads with mixed

hardwoods in pad 1 and white oak in pad 2 and 3

1

1

3

2

2

Mixed HW

White Oak

Field Site: Construction & Sampling Boxes

Twelve inches of gravel was covered by twelve inches of

wood chips and three sampling boxes were installed

Mixed HW

White Oak

Gravel

Field Site: Flow Monitoring: Tipping Buckets

Jess Cummins

What Next for Wood Chip Heavy Use Areas

• Request interim Practice Standard from WV NRCS

• Will allow additional pads to be established and evaluated

• Continue evaluations of wood chip treatments in

sampling boxes and WO and MH Paddocks on WVU

Dairy facility

• Evaluation of forestry equipment to produce large

size uniform wood chips, fist size is optimum for the

lower chip layer.

Acknowledgements

• Farmer-Cooperator, Paul Seidewitz

• John Miller, WVU Extension

(Retired)

• West Virginia Conservation Agency

• WVU Animal Science Farm

• WVU Faculty Senate Grant

Program

• Jess Cummins, Dr. John Zondlo,

Dan Hovanec, Toby Grapner, WVU

Joshua Faulkner

Joshua.Faulkner@uvm.edu

Tom Basden

Tom.Basden@mail.wvu.edu

David DeVallance

David.DeVallance@mail.wvu.edu