Covering slurry stores

[Ffermer Bach]

We need some water in the store in order to pump it so putting a cover on it is pointless. We’ve spent a fair bit on reducing dirty water from yards and then end up putting it back in.

only 30 cows so not a great deal of slurry, but, to get it liquid enough to pump I need to take the gutters off the shed and allow the rainwater off the cubicle shed roof to dilute the slurry, otherwise it is too thick, and we have 64" of rain here (but there is no dirty water produced, all separated).

 

[frederick]

Not strictly true, had some work done through catchment sensitive farming in the spring and their figures suggested it will take 56 years to pay for a cover purely based on savings made from not spreading rain water. 28 with the grant. 50 inch rainfall area. Even at the tender age of 33 I find items with a 28 year payback difficult to justify.

When environmental permitting turns up in 2025 for dairy farms as planned by the ea your cover investment may not be based on payback but if you dont have it you wont have a license to produce milk.
Only trouble is we still dont know what cover means.

 

[Farmer Keith]

When environmental permitting turns up in 2025 for dairy farms as planned by the ea your cover investment may not be based on payback but if you dont have it you wont have a license to produce milk.
Only trouble is we still dont know what cover means.

Time will tell, there’s still plenty of dairy farms without storage though, never mind a covered store, I put my tower up roof ready last year so it shouldn’t be a major issue either way.

 

[Jaffa Cakes]

What is environmental permitting going to look like?

 

[Farmer Keith]

Similar to what the pig and poultry guys do apparently. Whatever that is, the natural England advisor up here thought it would be big herds only though

 

[Tarw Coch]

Similar to what the pig and poultry guys do apparently. Whatever that is, the natural England advisor up here thought it would be big herds only though

And what’s a big herd?
It could put a cap on herd size and prompt others to cut numbers.
If the number is too small it could lead to quite a few quitting.
I won’t be investing, either carry on as now if I’m small enough, cutting back a bit if necessary or if the small number doesn’t look viable getting out.

 

[Farmer Keith]

And what’s a big herd?
It could put a cap on herd size and prompt others to cut numbers.
If the number is too small it could lead to quite a few quitting.
I won’t be investing, either carry on as now if I’m small enough, cutting back a bit if necessary or if the small number doesn’t look viable getting out.

yeah, he wouldn’t be drawn on that, is 250 a big herd or do you need 600 cows? I’m just waiting for now.

I’m not sure what the repercussions of effectively shutting down the smallest 25% of producers would be. They’re undoubtably the guys with the smallest environmental footprint per cow on average and you’d certainly make the big herds bigger with such a move. Let alone the effect on all of our suppliers. My guess would be it’s highly unlikely at 150 cow guy is going to need a £20k permit but who knows what the “brains” are thinking!

 

[lazy farmer]

Number 3) seems to point to a basic design fault at the back of the cow

But (according to Google) ammonia isn't actually a pollutant. It as, as farmers know, a stimulant to plant growth. But it can be a factor in water and air pollution when it combines with pollutants to enable the spread of those pollutants.

So like farting, cows have peed and crapped for ever, but suddenly they are a "cause" of pollution. Another case of farming being used to distract from the real causes of pollution (industrialisation, transport and population growth)

That’s right farmers have keep cows in sheds and on concrete for thousands of yrs!!!! Agriculture is part of the industrialisation you speak of . Large or small In affect this is fact so we have to play our,part.

 

[Jdunn55]

Could an alternative solution be to not have slurry but have dung instead?
Just thinking out loud to see what other peoples opinions are - especially for smaller farmers (it might be too big an operation for those with bigger herds?)
But say, cubicle housed still (or loose housed but not my choice due to mastitis) bedded with straw not sand/shavings etc
As much water separated as possible into a dirty water store.
And then put into a covered dung store with a gentle slope leading to drain for liquid to work it's way down to?

Could then let you spread with a dung spreader avoiding the splash plate regulations and you can spread anytime of the year for those in an nvz. But would it work and could you get it thick enough??

 

[Tarw Coch]

Could an alternative solution be to not have slurry but have dung instead?
Just thinking out loud to see what other peoples opinions are - especially for smaller farmers (it might be too big an operation for those with bigger herds?)
But say, cubicle housed still (or loose housed but not my choice due to mastitis) bedded with straw not sand/shavings etc
As much water separated as possible into a dirty water store.
And then put into a covered dung store with a gentle slope leading to drain for liquid to work it's way down to?

Could then let you spread with a dung spreader avoiding the splash plate regulations and you can spread anytime of the year for those in an nvz. But would it work and could you get it thick enough??

Without the addition of quite a bit of straw you won’t have a thick enough, stackable product. Not sure exactly what water you anticipate separating out but there’s a good chance the EA wouldn’t class it as dirty water once it had been in contact with muck, any liquid draining off your stack certainly wouldn’t.

 

[Jdunn55]

Without the addition of quite a bit of straw you won’t have a thick enough, stackable product. Not sure exactly what water you anticipate separating out but there’s a good chance the EA wouldn’t class it as dirty water once it had been in contact with muck, any liquid draining off your stack certainly wouldn’t.

I'm just thinking that slurry can become very thick without water in it hence why people have to stir it and add dirty water in the first place so by keeping water out its fairly thick plus with the addition of straw (not sure on amounts) you could make it stackable??
In terms of separating any remaining water was thinking you could have a much smaller slurry store that then wouldn't need stirring as it's pretty much water that's happened to touch some slurry? Meaning covering is possible and if it's only small wont cost a fortune??

Like I say only thinking aloud

 

[sjt01]

Separate the dung and urine

Hanskamp

hanskamp.nl

 

[nonemouse]

And what’s a big herd?
It could put a cap on herd size and prompt others to cut numbers.
If the number is too small it could lead to quite a few quitting.
I won’t be investing, either carry on as now if I’m small enough, cutting back a bit if necessary or if the small number doesn’t look viable getting out.

The CSF guy for this area, last year, said current thinking at the time, was permits for ALL dairy farmers regardless of size.
As I’m the wrong side of 50 with nobody to follow on, dairy farming here might on its way out.
It’s rather ironic that with 65/70 cows plus young stock (strawbedded) on 300 acre mixed farm, whilst my neighbour on 60 acres with 16000 layers 2000 fattening pigs (on slats) 200 fat bulls may still avoid permits

 

[Tarw Coch]

The CSF guy for this area, last year, said current thinking at the time, was permits for ALL dairy farmers regardless of size.
As I’m the wrong side of 50 with nobody to follow on, dairy farming here might on its way out.
It’s rather ironic that with 65/70 cows plus young stock (strawbedded) on 300 acre mixed farm, whilst my neighbour on 60 acres with 16000 layers 2000 fattening pigs (on slats) 200 fat bulls may still avoid permits

As allways, the devil will be in the details but if imposed across all dairy farmers there’s a strong possibility that many at the smaller end of the industry will drop out especially if there’s a flat rate registration fee and no doubt levels of paperwork needed for compliance will be fairly similar for a large herd as a small one.
The unintended consequences could well be more large scale herds with ever more tractors running the roads with silage and slurry.

 

[Jdunn55]

As allways, the devil will be in the details but if imposed across all dairy farmers there’s a strong possibility that many at the smaller end of the industry will drop out especially if there’s a flat rate registration fee and no doubt levels of paperwork needed for compliance will be fairly similar for a large herd as a small one.
The unintended consequences could well be more large scale herds with ever more tractors running the roads with silage and slurry.

But isnt that what the government wants?? Large companies with multiple managers and directors.

May well end up they see it as killing two birds with one stone?

 

[Tarw Coch]

But isnt that what the government wants?? Large companies with multiple managers and directors.

May well end up they see it as killing two birds with one stone?

I don’t know, maybe.

But I’d guess it’s not what a large number of consumers would want , cows walking out to grass between milking when ground/weather conditions allow on smaller farms supporting families or large agri buisnesses with cows kept indoors year round employing migrant workers.

That said, I only see things going one way, it’s only the pace that will change.

 

[stirrer]

if the hoops sit on the floor I would say-
1 they would be a liability for the liner
2 the crust, when stirred (certainly if using a Mixit!) would either push them all over the place
or stop/hinder the arrival of surrouinding crust.
I always imagined, the liners would be partially removed at critical access points and pulled back when stirred? Hmmm.
The best solution must be total removal onto a roller and then pulled back when the required stirred slurry has been removed.
unstirred crust is at least 50% as good as a liner at gas retention.