1. Beef Cattle Feedyards Brent W. Auvermann Amarillo, TX September 19, 2005

2. Industry Description Major cattle-feeding states: TX, KS, NE, IA, OK, CO, ID, WA, AZ, CA Major cattle-feeding states: TX, KS, NE, IA, OK, CO, ID, WA, AZ, CA ~ 25 million hd/yr produced on feed ~ 25 million hd/yr produced on feed 30% produced within ~150 mi of Amarillo, TX 30% produced within ~150 mi of Amarillo, TX Increasingly dominated by multi-feedyard corporations (5-10 feedyards, 350-600,000 hd) Increasingly dominated by multi-feedyard corporations (5-10 feedyards, 350-600,000 hd) Deaf Smith Co. (TX) > 1,000,000 hd Deaf Smith Co. (TX) > 1,000,000 hd Alberta is Canada’s #1 cattle-feeding province Alberta is Canada’s #1 cattle-feeding province

3. Feedyard Description Average one-time capacity increasing & varies geographically (~40,000 in southern High Plains) Average one-time capacity increasing & varies geographically (~40,000 in southern High Plains) One-time capacity x 2.2 = annual throughput One-time capacity x 2.2 = annual throughput 365/2.2 = 165 days per feeding period, or “turn” – depends on beginning liveweight 365/2.2 = 165 days per feeding period, or “turn” – depends on beginning liveweight Feed-to-gain ratio = 6 (approx.) Feed-to-gain ratio = 6 (approx.) Beginning liveweight 350-750 lb. Beginning liveweight 350-750 lb. Market weight 1,100-1,300 lb. Market weight 1,100-1,300 lb.

4. Feedyard Description Average daily gain (ADG) ~ 3-4 lb/hd/d Average daily gain (ADG) ~ 3-4 lb/hd/d Daily intake averages 20-25 lb/d dry matter (DM) Daily intake averages 20-25 lb/d dry matter (DM) Average water use varies seasonally; 8-15 gal/hd/d Average water use varies seasonally; 8-15 gal/hd/d Feed digestibility >80% Feed digestibility >80% Each animal may receive up to 3 or 4 different rations through feeding period Each animal may receive up to 3 or 4 different rations through feeding period – Starter (high roughage) – Step-up or transitional – Finishing (high energy; may exceed 90% digestibility) Manure production ~ 0.75-1 dry ton/hd (cap)/yr Manure production ~ 0.75-1 dry ton/hd (cap)/yr Corn, sorghum, distillers’ grains, potatoes, other Corn, sorghum, distillers’ grains, potatoes, other

5. General Layout Stocking density = 1/cattle spacing Stocking density = 1/cattle spacing Typical cattle spacing 150-200 ft 2 /hd Typical cattle spacing 150-200 ft 2 /hd Total corral area ~3.5-4.5 ac/1,000 hd capacity Total corral area ~3.5-4.5 ac/1,000 hd capacity 45,000-hd yard covers 200 ac including ancillary areas (feed mill, manure handling, holding ponds etc. 45,000-hd yard covers 200 ac including ancillary areas (feed mill, manure handling, holding ponds etc. Typical SCS Runoff Curve Number 90-95 Typical SCS Runoff Curve Number 90-95

6. Manure and Wastewater Handling Predominant form: solid manure Predominant form: solid manure – Corral scraping >1/yr – May be composted (low N), stockpiled, mounded or directly land-applied (higher N) – N:P 2 O 5 ratio around 1-1.5 – Cereal crops require N:P 2 O 5 ratio of 2.5-3.5 – Over-apply P or under-apply N

7. Manure and Wastewater Handling Liquids Liquids – Usually little to no process-generated wastewater – Rainfall runoff – full containment (25-yr/24-h) CN ~ 90-95 CN ~ 90-95 Management objective: rapid drainage Management objective: rapid drainage Improves manure quality, reduces odor/dust potential Improves manure quality, reduces odor/dust potential May be enhanced by mounding May be enhanced by mounding Old vs. new construction practices Old vs. new construction practices – Overflow waterers (winter only)

8. Runoff Holding Ponds Designed to meet EPA no-discharge standard Designed to meet EPA no-discharge standard “No hydrologic connection” to ground water typically ensured by clay (in situ or imported) or geotextile liner “No hydrologic connection” to ground water typically ensured by clay (in situ or imported) or geotextile liner Clay liners >18” with K sat 18” with K sat <10 -7 cm/sec Management objective: EMPTY Management objective: EMPTY – Irrigation-based systems – Evaporative systems

9. Threats to Water Quality Surface water Surface water – Excess nutrients from land application – Solid manure is P-rich – Historical NMPs (where used) based on N req. – Tailwater from wastewater irrigation – Holding pond overflows – Soil erosion, rainfall runoff

10. Threats to Water Quality Ground water Ground water – Excess nutrients from land application – Inorganic N is highly soluble; organic P also – Shallow water tables (e. g., S. Platte River, CO) – Unprotected wellheads, old well casings – Poor liner construction or installation – Sweeten et al. (early 1990s) found little to no WQ impact from feedyard holding ponds in Texas Panhandle

11. National Trends Steady growth and expansion, but not many new feedyards Steady growth and expansion, but not many new feedyards Net flow of P from mines in FL to Corn Belt to cattle-feeding states (B. Stewart, WTAMU) Net flow of P from mines in FL to Corn Belt to cattle-feeding states (B. Stewart, WTAMU) Declining water tables in High Plains will reduce irrigated acreage, crop yield and sustainable fertilization rates Declining water tables in High Plains will reduce irrigated acreage, crop yield and sustainable fertilization rates Above-average growth in semi-arid West Above-average growth in semi-arid West Accelerated P-based nutrient planning Accelerated P-based nutrient planning

12. Other Trends Koelsch et al. (2002) found that the ratio of nutrient inputs to “managed outputs” (meat, crops, marketed manure) frequently exceeds 1.0 and may approach 6-10 in extreme cases Koelsch et al. (2002) found that the ratio of nutrient inputs to “managed outputs” (meat, crops, marketed manure) frequently exceeds 1.0 and may approach 6-10 in extreme cases Confirms Smolen et al. (late 1990s) finding of significant nutrient concentration in OK cattle-feeding counties Confirms Smolen et al. (late 1990s) finding of significant nutrient concentration in OK cattle-feeding counties Dead animal disposal a growing concern Dead animal disposal a growing concern – Rendering a vanishing prospect for many remote producers – Burial’s time is short – Incineration is energy intensive – “Out of sight, out of mind” – Biosecurity – Water and air quality

13. Other Trends Energy production from manure and manure products is returning Energy production from manure and manure products is returning – $60/bbl crude – Shifts WQ burden incrementally to power plants (ash; dry and wet deposition of stack emissions) Airborne NH 3 dissolves readily in downwind surface water; emissions to be regulated eventually due to secondary PM 2.5 production, CERCLA/EPCRA implementation Airborne NH 3 dissolves readily in downwind surface water; emissions to be regulated eventually due to secondary PM 2.5 production, CERCLA/EPCRA implementation Secondary PM 2.5 formation is a sink for acidic (SO x, NO x ) and alkaline (NH 3 ) gases Secondary PM 2.5 formation is a sink for acidic (SO x, NO x ) and alkaline (NH 3 ) gases Fugitive dust showing up as a source of soil nutrient enrichment downwind of cattle feedyards Fugitive dust showing up as a source of soil nutrient enrichment downwind of cattle feedyards