加利福尼亚州奶牛场房屋和粪便管理实践调查。

Survey of dairy housing and manure management practices in California.

机构信息

Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis, CA 95616-8521, USA.

出版信息

J Dairy Sci. 2011 Sep;94(9):4744-50. doi: 10.3168/jds.2010-3761.

DOI:10.3168/jds.2010-3761

Abstract

In 2007, a descriptive survey was mailed to all dairies in Glenn (G) and Tulare (T) Counties to identify current and future opportunities of manure management practices on California dairies. The purpose was to provide baseline information for development of outreach curriculum and a decision support tool to quantify potential benefits of various N management options on dairy farms. Such baseline information is valuable to staff regulating dairy facilities (e.g., San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District and Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board), dairy trade association representatives, and technology vendors. Response rates for each county were similar at 29.7% (n=19; G) and 26.7% (n=88; T). Mean milking herd size averaged 570 (range 50 to 3,000) cows in G and 1,800 (range 196 to 9,286) cows in T. Survey data are reported by location due to differences between counties in herd size, housing facilities, and climate. Freestalls are common housing facilities (63.2%, G; 38.6%, T) and separated solids and corral scrapings are commonly used as bedding in freestalls (81.8% G and 79.4% T). The most common methods of manure collection were flushing and scraping (18.8%, G; 44.7%, T), only flushing (43.8%, G; 34.1%, T), or only scraping daily or less frequently than daily (37.5%, G; 20.0%, T). Most dairy farms in G (63.2%) and T (70.5%) used some method of separating solids from liquids. However, mechanical separation systems alone were used by 5.3% G and 11.4% T of dairy farms. Storage or treatment ponds were found on 95.9% of dairies. Respondents identified existing manure management practices and did not indicate any new technologies were in use or being considered for manure management. Survey results were used to describe the 2 predominant manure management pathways of manure collection, storage, treatment, and utilization. Survey results will be used to develop and disseminate targeted information on manure treatment technologies, and on-farm evaluation of implemented technologies related to anaerobic digesters, solid liquid separation, and pond additives.

摘要

2007 年，我们向加利福尼亚州格伦（G）县和图莱里（T）县的所有奶牛场邮寄了一份描述性调查，以确定加利福尼亚州奶牛场目前和未来的粪肥管理实践机会。目的是为制定推广课程和决策支持工具提供基础信息，以量化奶牛场各种 N 管理选择的潜在效益。此类基础信息对监管奶牛场设施的工作人员（例如，圣华金谷统一空气污染控制区和中央山谷区域水质控制委员会）、奶牛贸易协会代表和技术供应商非常有价值。两个县的回复率相似，分别为 29.7%（n=19；G）和 26.7%（n=88；T）。G 县的平均奶牛存栏量为 570 头（范围 50 至 3000 头），T 县的平均奶牛存栏量为 1800 头（范围 196 至 9286 头）。由于各县的畜群规模、住房设施和气候不同，调查数据按地点报告。牛舍是常见的住房设施（63.2%，G；38.6%，T），分离的固体和畜栏刮屑通常用作牛舍的垫料（81.8%，G 和 79.4%，T）。粪肥收集最常见的方法是冲洗和刮粪（18.8%，G；44.7%，T），仅冲洗（43.8%，G；34.1%，T），或仅每天或每天以下刮粪（37.5%，G；20.0%，T）。G 县（63.2%）和 T 县（70.5%）的大多数奶牛场都使用了某种固液分离方法。然而，仅有 5.3%的 G 县和 11.4%的 T 县的奶牛场使用了机械分离系统。95.9%的奶牛场都有储存或处理池塘。受访者确定了现有的粪肥管理实践，并没有表示正在使用或正在考虑任何新技术进行粪肥管理。调查结果用于描述粪肥收集、储存、处理和利用的两种主要粪肥管理途径。调查结果将用于开发和传播有关粪肥处理技术的针对性信息，以及关于厌氧消化器、固液分离和池塘添加剂的农场实施技术的评估。