WEST VIRGINIA POULTRY PRODUCTION SURVEY pdf

WEST VIRGINIA
POULTRY PRODUCTION SURVEY
A Report on Implementation of Water
Quality Improvement Practices in
the Five Eastern Panhandle Poultry
Producing Counties.
Requested By
The West Virginia Poultry Water Quality Advisory Committee
Prepared by:
Thomas Basden, Extension Specialist
West Virginia University Extension Service
Andrew Walker, Non-Point Source Specialist
West Virginia Soil Conservation Agency
Potomac Inter-Agency Water Quality Office
129 North Main St. Moorefield, WV 26836
Telephone: (304) 538-7581, Fax: 538-7676
and
Casey Ritz, Ph.D., Poultry Program Coordinator
West Virginia University Extension Service
WVU Eastern District Office
40 State St. Keyser WV 26726
Telephone: (304) 788-3118, Fax: 788-2543
ABSTRACT
Rapid expansion of the West Virginia poultry industry has
prompted questions concerning the effect of this expansion upon
water quality. This survey was conducted during October and
November of 1994 to determine the level of Best Management Practice
(BMP) implementation in order that educational and technical
programming could be targeted toward specific BMPs needing greater
attention. Using a set of 52 questions, poultry producers
demonstrated their management of poultry litter and mortality and

how they were making agronomic decisions on their farms. Improved
methods of poultry litter storage, application, and distribution
are occurring. Poultry mortality management has made a dramatic
shift to composting as a low-cost solution. Agronomic management
is an area that needs targeted programming to demonstrate to
producers how they can maximize poultry litter as a fertilizer.
Overall, the producers are showing a commitment to voluntary land
stewardship that will ensure continued, environmentally sound
growth of the poultry industry in the Potomac Valley.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Purpose Of Study
Methods And Materials
Results And Discussion
Section I. Type of Production and Geographic Location
Section II. Size and Type of Farm Operations
Section III. On-farm Litter Utilization
Section IV. Litter Distribution to and Utilization by
Non-poultry Producers
Section V. Litter Storage and Land Application
Section VI. Agronomic Management
Section VII. Manure and Litter Analysis
Section VIII. Crop and Forage Management
Section XI. Mortality Management
Section X. State and County Regulations
Conclusions
References
Appendix A Questionnaire Form
Appendix B Tables of Results
Appendix C Follow Up Survey, Sept. 1995

Appendix D Watershed Map
Perdue Farms, Inc.; Rocco Farms, Inc.; Wampler-Longacre
1
Foods, Inc.
4
INTRODUCTION
The five West Virginia counties, Grant, Hampshire, Hardy,
Mineral, and Pendleton historically have had poultry production as
a part of their agricultural makeup. During the last five years
this industry has undergone considerable expansion within the
Potomac River Watershed, becoming the primary agricultural
enterprise in the State.
The rapid expansion of the poultry industry combined with West
Virginia's established beef cattle industry has generated questions
about the effects of the large number of animals on water quality
in this watershed. State and Federal Agricultural Agencies
including Natural Recourse Conservation Agency, Consolidated Farm
Service, State Soil Conservation Agency, West Virginia University,
WVU Extension Service and the West Virginia Department of
Agriculture have joined together to address these concerns through
educational and technical programs. This collaboration has evolved
into the Potomac Headwaters Project.
To determine the best utilization of agency personnel, a needs
assessment is underway. A component of that assessment was the
completion of a survey of poultry producers to determine specific
sizes of operations, management of litter, types of equipment
utilized, and specific agronomic decisions. The poultry
integrators agreed to distribute and collect the survey from each
1
of their producers. This was done during the fall of 1994.

Because of the industry cooperation, 53% (199 respondents) of the
surveys sent out were returned by producers. A 53% return is
commonly an acceptable number for this type of study. Therefore,
the conclusions should allow agricultural producers, the poultry
industry, and State and Federal Agencies to use this study as a
planning tool to ensure the continued growth of all agricultural
activity while maintaining and improving water quality in the five
county area.
PURPOSE OF STUDY
The purposes of this study were threefold. First, to
determine the degree of implementation of water quality improvement
practices by the poultry producers in the Potomac River Watershed.
Second, utilize the responses to this questionnaire to target
technical and educational programming on specific management
practices. Finally, to demonstrate the successes which are already
occurring through voluntary adoption by producers.
Grant, Hampshire, Hardy, Mineral, Pendleton
2
5
METHODS AND MATERIALS
A 52 question survey was initiated during the summer of 1994
in the Potomac Inter-Agency Water Quality Office (See Appendix A
for questionnaire form). The document was reviewed by district
conservationists, county agents, university specialists, and
poultry integrators. During October and November the questionnaire
was distributed to 375 poultry producers in the five county
2
poultry producing area, collected by the integrators upon
completion, and returned to the Water Quality Office. A database
was prepared and all returned surveys were entered into it.

CMR Research Associates were contracted to statistically
analyze the results. Included in this report are frequency
distributions for each questionnaire item. Included in Appendix B
are 65 tables presenting the responses to the 52 questions within
the survey.
The results are presented in bar graph format to clarify and
condense the number of tables presented by CMR Research Associates.
A 90% confidence interval was used for all questions. The number
of responses to individual questions vary because of non-response
error. On the bottom left side of each bar graph is a percentage
response from total number of poultry producers in the Potomac
Watershed and the actual number of responses.
A short follow up survey is contained in Appendix C. This was
conducted in September 1995 with 90% of producers responding to the
questionnaire.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Section I. Type of Production and Geographic Location
Q1. What type birds do you raise?
All producers that returned surveys responded to this
question. The breakdown of bird types shows that in the sample
approximately 48% of producers raise broilers, 27% raise layers,
11% raise pullets and 15% produce turkeys (Figure 1).
Q2. How many tons of litter do you produce annually?
Figure 2 shows that 10% of poultry farmers produce 0-100 tons
per year, 53% or the majority produce 101-400 tons, 13% produce
401-600, 13% produce 601-800 tons, and 10% produce over 800 tons of
litter per year.
Section I. Figures 1-4, Type of Production
and Geographic Location
6

7
8
Q3. How many houses do you operate?
Figure 3 shows a distribution of the number of houses per
operation. The average number of houses per producer is 3 [90%
CI{± 0.21}].
Q4. In what watershed is your operation located?
Figure 4 shows that the largest concentration of producers
(34%) is located in the largest watershed, the South Branch (see
Appendix D). The second largest concentration (13%) is in a much
smaller watershed, the Lost River area.
The significance of the distribution by bird type is the large
number of broiler producers that have 6 to 7 flocks per year and a
corresponding accumulation of litter to store or apply at each
cleanout. The other bird types have one or two cleanouts per year
with reduced accumulation of litter.
The 53% of producers that accumulate 101-400 tons/year of
litter have a manageable amount that can be stored in a shed or
under a tarp without difficulty. The 27% of producers accumulating
401-800 tons/year have a greater challenge storing, applying and/or
selling this quantity of litter.
Seventy-seven percent of producers have from 1 to 3 houses.
Operations of this size should allow a producer flexibility in
litter utilization through storage, application and/or selling of
the product. Producers with 6 or more houses account for 9% of
total producers. These operations should have large treatable
acreage available, large storage facilities and/or written plans to
facilitate distribution of the litter to other agricultural
producers.
Lost River watershed has limited treatable acreage for the

large animal numbers located in the valley, making redistribution
of litter to other areas a high priority (Appendix D). The Water
Quality Incentive Program (WQIP) funded by USDA in 1994 has been
implemented and is designed to encourage improved management of
livestock manure and poultry litter within the Lost River
watershed. In Grant County, the Mill Creek watershed also has a
large number of producers in relation to the treatable acreage.
Section II. Size and Type of Farm Operations
Q5. How many acres do you normally operate?
Figure 5 shows the distribution of farm sizes. The largest
group consists of farms which operate less than 50 acres at 28%,
followed by 51-100 acres at 13%, 101-250 acres at 22%, 251-500
acres at 21% and over 500 acres at 16%.
Q6. Is your farm mainly grassland/hay, row crops, timber or other?
Figure 6 shows that 84% of the farm land is grassland/hay.
Section II. Figures 5-7, Size and Type of Farm Operation
9
10
11
This constitutes the largest potentially treatable land area for
litter application on farms in the sample group.
Q7. What percent of your farm is grassland/hay?
A mean of 61% [90% CI{± 3.0}] was reported. Most producers
have a large portion of their operation in pasture and/or hay.
Q8. What percent of your farm is row crops?
The mean percentage reported was 9 [90% CI{± 2.0}]. The
distribution in Figure 7 shows a large number of respondents (57%)
having no row crop production at all.
Q9. What percent of your farm is timber?
The mean percentage reported was 31 [90% CI{± 3.4}].

Based on Q7-Q9, the average poultry farm in this survey
consists of 60% grassland/hay, 10% row crops and 30% timber.
The 28% of producers with less than 50 acres have the greatest
challenge in not over applying litter on their limited acreage and
to find markets for the litter that is surplus to their operation.
These producers (n=46) sold a mean percentage of 81% [90% CI{±
7.4}] of their litter. Producers with greater than 50 acres
(n=125) sold a mean percentage of 33% [90% CI{± 4.7}] of their
litter. From this analysis, the producers with less than 50 acres
are clearly marketing their litter that they cannot utilize on the
farm. The producers with greater than 50 acres are also
redistributing a third of their litter off the farm. This
redistribution is an important best management practice that
producers are implementing.
The 57% of producers without row crops reinforce the need to
have educational and technical programs that ensure proper
application rates on pasture and hay land. With only 10% of farm
land in row crops, the nutrient loading of crop land needs to be
monitored closely to reduce excess nutrient application (Wagger and
Mengel, 1988; Wood, 1992).
Section III. On-farm Litter Utilization
Q10. Do you use all, some or none of the litter you produce?
Figure 8 shows that 33% of producers use all of their litter,
52% use some and 15% use none of it.
Q11. Question (Q11) was asked of those respondents who chose
"some" as an answer to question 10. What percent of the litter do
you use?
The mean percentage was 59 [90% CI{± 4.7}]. Figure 9 shows
that 44% of the producers use 76-100% of their litter.
Section III. Figures 8-11, On-farm Litter Utilization

12
13
14
Q12. What percent of the litter you use is for fertilizer?
The mean percentage was 91 [90% CI{± 2.2}].
Q13. What percent of the litter you use is for feed?
The mean percentage reported was 8 [90% CI{± 1.8}]. To
estimate the amount of litter generated per producer per year that
is utilized as a livestock feed, we used the following formula:
(average number of houses per producer X average litter produced
per house {151 tons} X 7.9%). Using this formula we estimate 32
tons of litter per producer per year is utilized as livestock feed.
Q14. What percent of the litter for fertilizer is used on
grassland?
The mean percentage was 82 [90% CI{± 3.3}]. The distribution
of responses is shown in Figure 10.
Q15. What percent of your litter is used for row crops?
A mean percentage of 16 [90% CI{± 3.1}] was reported. Figure
11 shows the distribution of the litter use on row crops with 61.3%
of producers utilizing 0% or not having any row crops. These
results concur with question 7 and 8 that asked about land use.
By far the largest percentage of litter is utilized as
fertilizer. Pasture and hay land have nutrient loading capacities
capable of receiving the greatest part of the litter produced
because they constitute the largest acreage.
Broiler litter as a cattle feed supplement needs to be
promoted. Broiler producers that sell their litter to cattlemen
for feed supplement could benefit from having their litter analyzed
for feed value, and using the results as a marketing tool. A
program of litter sampling could be established by using

integrators to provide sample kits to producers who are nearing the
clean out period within their houses. Integrators could then pick
up the kits and take them to a central location.
Section IV. Litter Distribution to and Utilization by Non-poultry
Producers.
Q16. Do you sell or give away all, some, or none of your litter
you produce?
The results are similar to those of question 10, in that 27%
[90% CI{± 5.2}] of producers sell none or keep all, 57% [90% CI{±
5.8}] of producers use some or sell some, and 16% [90% CI[± 4.3}]
of producers sell all or use none of their litter.
Q17. What percent of your litter do you sell or give away?
15
The mean percentage was 46 {90% CI{± 4.8}]. Asking a question
about the amount of litter utilized by the producer (question
10,11) and then asking the producer what percentage of the litter
is sold or given away (question 16,17) are two ways to ask the same
question. The results are the same for both series of questions
and adds more validity to the results. See Appendix B for question
17 distribution of responses.
Q18. What percent of the litter you sell is used for fertilizer?
The mean percent was 73 {90% CI{± 5.2}]. Figure 12 shows the
distribution of producers with 60% selling 76-100% of their litter
as fertilizer, 19% selling 26-50% as fertilizer and 9% selling 0%
as fertilizer.
Q19. What percent of the litter you sell is used for feed?
A mean percent of 21 [90% CI{± 8.1}] was reported. Figure 13
demonstrates the distribution of responses with 60% of producers
not selling any (0%) of their litter as feed, 21% selling 26-50%
for feed and 10% selling 76-100 as feed. This breakdown

corresponds with the mean and distribution of responses in question
18.
Q20. Does the litter you sell stay in or go outside your
watershed?
Of the responses, 36% of producers [90% CI{± 6.9}] sell their
litter to people outside of their watershed and 64% [90% CI{±6.9}]
of producers sell within their watershed. Litter leaving the
watershed improves its distribution, however, care must be taken
that other watersheds are not impacted by improper storage and/or
application practices.
Q21. What percent of the litter you sell stays in your watershed?
Figure 14 shows the distribution for this question with 19%
moving all their litter out of the watershed, 17% moving up to half
of it, and 55% retaining the litter in their watershed.
Q22. Does any of the litter you sell go outside of the Potomac
Valley?
Thirty seven percent of producers answered this question.
Twenty five percent [90% CI{± 6}] of respondents answered yes to
this question and 75% [90% CI{± 6}] answered no.
Q23. What percent of the litter you sell goes outside of the
Potomac Valley?
Figure 15 shows the distribution for this question with 63% of
producers having no litter going out of the valley, 13% sending
half of their litter out and 16% sending between 75 and 100% of
their sold litter out of the valley.
Section IV. Figures 12-15, Litter Distribution to
and Utilization by Non-poultry Producers
16
17
18

Producers are currently marketing 46% of the litter that is
produced on their operation. Seventy three percent of the litter
is utilized by the buyers as fertilizer and 21% of the litter is
used as a feed supplement.
The distribution of litter outside of the producers' watershed
accounts for 34% of the marketed litter. This distribution pattern
may be attributed to readily available treatable land within the
watershed and/or low market price for litter that prohibits long
distance hauling (Bosch and Napit, 1992).
Twenty five percent of producers sell litter that goes
outside of the Potomac Valley. This distribution pattern may be
affected by the same reasons mentioned above and also producers
outside of the Potomac Valley may not understand the effectiveness
of litter as a fertilizer and feed supplement.
Section V. Litter Storage and Land Application
Q24. What type of storage do you use for your litter accumulation?
The listed storage methods in the survey are: shed, under a
tarp, in an open pile, or in some other way. Figure 16 shows that
37% of producers store litter in a shed, 12% utilize a tarp to
cover litter, 30% store in an open pile, and 24% some other way.
Other ways may include immediate land application or the selling of
litter.
Q25. If you have a shed, is it your own design or another design?
Seventeen percent of producers responded to this question. Of
those that responded, 48% [90% CI{± 10.6}] used their own design
and 52% [90% CI{± 10.6}] used another design.
Covering litter with a tarp during winter or for short periods
in the crop field must become an integral part of a litter
utilization plan for all poultry producers and users. Uncovered
litter, even for short periods of time, has the potential of

becoming a source of nonpoint pollutants (Ritter, et al., 1994).
The people that designed their own sheds presumably did not
have Government Cost Share monies available while the group that
used another design had Cost Share monies available that required
a specific design. The response shows that a percentage of
producers are willing to build storage structures without the
benefit of cost share money.
Section VI. Agronomic Management
Q26. When do you usually spread your litter?
Section V. Figure
16,
Litter Storage and Land Application
Section VI. Figures 17-19, Agronomic Management
19
20
21
Some of the returned surveys had more than one response to
this question. The multiple responses show that 79% of producers
apply during the spring, 27% during the summer, 71% in the fall and
26% in the winter (Figure 17).
Q27. Do you incorporate all, some or none of your litter?
Thirty percent of producers responded to this question.
Eleven percent [90% CI{± 4.9}] of producers incorporate all of
their litter, 38% [90% CI{± 7.4}] incorporate some litter and 51%
[90% CI{± 7.7}] incorporate none. This was a poorly worded
question and should have been broken into several yes/no questions.
Because of the way questions 27 and 28 were asked, few conclusions
can be reached.
Q29. What type of litter spreader do you use?
Forty three percent of producers responded to this question.

Figure 18 shows that 65% [90% CI{± 6.1}] producers use a box-type
spreader, 39% [90% CI{± 6.3}] use a fan-type spreader and 2% [90%
CI{± 2}] use some other type of spreader to apply poultry litter.
Q30. Is your litter spreader calibrated?
Figure 18 shows that nearly 60% of respondents have calibrated
their spreader equipment to determine the amount of litter applied
per acre.
Q31. Do you soil test all, some or none of your fields at least
every three years?
Figure 19 shows that 32% [90% CI{± 6}] test all, 33% [90% CI{±
6}] test some and 34% [90% CI{± 6.1}] test none of their fields
during a three year period.
Q32. If you soil test some of your fields, what percent of your
fields do you test at least every three years?
Figure 19 shows the percent distribution for question 32 with
a mean of 49.6% [90% CI{± 6.3}] of fields being tested.
Most litter applications occur during the spring and fall of
the year from survey results. Winter applications have the greatest
potential to impact the environment because nothing is growing
during this time of the year (Young and Mutchler, 1976).
Litter application is predominantly a spring and fall
activity. The timing of these applications fit with best
management practices that include applying litter before planting
corn in the spring and fall applications of litter on pasture and
hay ground. Fall applications promote winter root reserves and
encourage rapid growth in the spring (Rayburn, et al., 1979; Wolf,
1993). Winter applications, if they must occur, need to be
22
incorporated into the plow layer as the litter is spread. This
helps to reduce nutrient loss (Breeuwsma, et al., 1995).

The box-type spreaders are designed to apply semi-solid
livestock manures and tend to over-apply poultry litter. The fan-
type spreaders apply litter more evenly than the box spreaders and
allow for reduced loading rates on pasture land. The 65% of
producers who use box spreaders could improve litter utilization
with reduction kits that reduce application rates. The 40% of
producers who have not calibrated their spreaders need to do so
because calibration is one component of a nutrient management plan.
In addition, nutrient management plans require a soil sample
from every field at least once every three years.
Section VII. Manure and Litter Analysis
Q33. Do you have your litter tested for fertilizer values?
Figure 20 shows that 33% [90% CI{± 5.7}] of producers test
litter for its fertilizer value and 67 [90% CI{± 5.7}] do not.
Q34. Do you have your litter tested for feed values?
Figure 20 shows that 16% [90% CI{± 4.5}] of producers test
litter for its feed value and 84% [90% CI{± 4.5}] do not.
Q35. Do you produce other livestock manures?
Figure 21 shows that 45% [90% CI{± 5.9}] of producers are
diversified operations with poultry and livestock enterprises while
54% [90% CI{± 5.9}] solely produce poultry.
Q36. Do you have your other manures tested?
A response of 2% [90% CI± 1.6}] of producers test their manure
for its fertilizer value.
Q37. If a manure testing service was available would you use it?
Forty six percent of producers responded to this question.
Seventy nine percent [90% CI{± 5.1}] would use a testing service
and 21% [90% CI{± 5.1}] would not.
To improve utilization of litter and as a component of a
nutrient management plan all producers should test litter 3 times

over the period of a year or two and then once every other year or
when a production input such as feed or bedding changes (Sims, et
al., 1989). Even producers that sell all their litter would
benefit from litter analysis because they could quantify the
nutrient value of the litter that they were selling.
With 45% of producers having both livestock and poultry
components to their farming operation, testing of all types of
manures is needed to quantify the total nutrients produced on each
farm. Accurate nutrient management plans can then be constructed.
Section VII. Figures 20-21, Manure and Litter Analysis
23
Section VIII. Figures 22-23, Crop and Forage Management
24
25
A fact sheet describing why, when, and how to take a good
litter/manure sample and where to send it is needed for all people
involved in animal agriculture within the state.
The 20% that would not use a manure/litter analysis service
may not understand the benefit of analysis or they have already
been involved with a testing program.
Section VIII. Crop and Forage Management
Q38. Do you use additional commercial fertilizer, and
Q39. If so, what percent of your needs is commercial?
Figure 22 shows that 65% [90% CI{± 5.8}] of producers use no
additional fertilizer. In the percent distribution breakdown, 26%
[90% CI{± 6.1}] of producers that use additional fertilizer only
need it for 1-25% of their total needs.
Q40. Do you have a nutrient management plan?
Forty four percent of producers responded to this question
with 34% [90% CI{± 6}] reporting that they did have a plan and 66%

[90% CI{± 6}] responded that they did not have a nutrient
management plan.
Q41. Do you use cover crops on all, some, or none of your crop
fields?
Figure 23 shows that 44% of that group not having a cover crop
program on their crop fields, 21% having covers on all the fields
and 34% having covers on some of their fields.
Q42. If so what percent?
The percent distribution in figure 23 shows that 57% of
producers establish some degree of cover crop on their fields.
Q43. What type of cover crop do you use?
The available responses were small grain, vetch, or other.
Seventeen percent of producers responded to this question, with 77%
[90% CI{± 8.7}] of them stating that small grain is the cover crop
they use, 6.3% [90% CI{± 5}] use vetch and 17% [90% CI{± 7.7}] use
another type of cover crop.
Q44. Do you use the nitrogen quick test on your corn fields?
Thirty one percent of producers responded to this question,
with 16% [90% CI{± 5.5}] of producers using the quick test and 84%
[90% CI{± 5.5}] not using this new tool.
The majority of producers (65%) rely solely on litter for
their nutrient needs. This shows that applications of litter are