- Email: [email protected]
Nuisance and Odor Issues in Broiler Production: A Case Study
2004 Poultry Science Association, Inc.
Nuisance and Odor Issues in Broiler Production: A Case Study J. B. Carey1 Department of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-2472
SUMMARY Recent expansion of the broiler industry in Texas resulted in an opportunity to experience and mitigate a number of nuisance and odor issues related to broiler production. For the sake of this discussion, the participants in these issues are divided into 3 groups: the poultry industry; the nonpoultry citizenry; and government, regulatory, and educational agencies. Establishment of a broiler complex in an area with little exposure to commercial poultry production resulted in a concerned nonpoultry citizenry. This was often exacerbated by misinformation, external influences, and poor communications, resulting in a less-than-optimum level of trust between the nonpoultry citizenry and the poultry industry. Early in the process, the poultry industry attempted to provide information and open communication with the nonpoultry citizenry; however, establishment of bias within the nonpoultry citizenry eroded trust and cooperation to the point that effective communication was difficult. Throughout this period, government, regulatory, and educational agencies were involved in investigations of complaints, facilitation of communication, and development of policy. Over a 2-yr period these activities resulted in a special legislative appropriation to investigate odor and nuisance issues related to broiler production. This investigation and other agency activities resulted in the development of regulatory policy that required all broiler producers to develop comprehensive nutrient management plans. Although these plans are primarily concerned with water quality and environmental issues, the nonpoultry citizenry was willing to accept this step as a means to assure that poultry facilities would be operated in compliance with best management practices. As a result, the poultry industry now had specific policy and guidelines for dealing with environmental issues, and the nonpoultry citizenry had assurance that the broiler operations would be held to a standard of operation. At this time, the level of communication and trust between all parties is greatly improved. Key words: broiler, guidelines, nuisance, odor, regulation 2004 J. Appl. Poult. Res. 13:146–148
INTRODUCTION In 1999, a new broiler complex was established in the Brazos Valley region of Texas. No commercial poultry firms had been contracting in this area for over 25 yr; thus, local agricultural producers and local communities were not readily familiar with contract broiler production. 1
Naturally, an endeavor of this magnitude attracted wide attention among the citizenry.
ADDRESSING ODOR ISSUES IN BROILER PRODUCTION Informational Efforts Many informational meetings were held to inform potential producers of the economics of
To whom correspondence should be addressed: [email protected].
Downloaded from http://japr.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Birmingham on June 4, 2015
Primary Audience: Extensionists, Industry Personnel, Regulatory Agencies
CAREY: NATIONAL EXTENSION WORKSHOP
147
TABLE 1. Topic areas for project investigating odor issues related to broiler production
contract broiler production. Additional contacts were made by the broiler company with community leaders throughout the area in order to familiarize them with various aspects of broiler production and processing. As the development of the complex proceeded, some individuals expressed concern over the nuisance and odor issues related to broiler production. With limited success, attempts were made to address these concerns. Early in the process, the poultry industry attempted to provide information and open communication with the nonpoultry citizenry; however, establishment of bias within the nonpoultry citizenry eroded trust and cooperation to the point that effective communication was difficult. Due to the intensity of emotions associated with these issues, groups of deeply interested individuals developed. Establishment of Interested Parties For the sake of this discussion, the participants in these issues are divided into 3 groups: the poultry industry; the nonpoultry citizenry; and government, regulatory, and educational agencies. As the issues concerning broiler production intensified, an increasing number of complaints to regulatory agencies and local law enforcement ensued (Figure 1). Establishment of a broiler complex in an area with little recent exposure to commercial poultry production resulted in a concerned nonpoultry citizenry. This was often exacerbated by misinformation, external influences, and poor communications resulting in a less-than-optimum level of trust between the nonpoultry citizenry and the poultry industry. Adding to this were the actions of naive
poultry producers that in certain instances failed to realize the potential for negative impressions and impacts upon the community as a result of their practices. Throughout this period, government, regulatory, and educational agencies were involved in investigations of complaints, facilitation of communication, and development of policy. These activities resulted in a special legislative appropriation to investigate odor and nuisance issues related to broiler production.
Downloaded from http://japr.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Birmingham on June 4, 2015
FIGURE 1. Number of odor complaints to Waco, Texas, regional office of the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission January 1994 to April 2002.
I. House/site factors a. Topography b. Distance to occupied dwellings/public areas c. Land usage in immediate area d. Prevailing wind characteristics e. Density of poultry operations f. Vegetative barriers II. Land application of litter a. Litter moisture b. Loading, transportation of litter c. Wind speed/direction d. Application site factors (similar to house/site factors) e. Setback and buffer strips f. Weather considerations III. In-house activities a. Moving birds b. Catching birds c. Transportation of birds d. Cake-out (partial litter removal) e. Litter clean out IV. Processing of litter a. Composting b. Packaging c. Storage facilities V. Mortality a. Site selection b. Methodology c. Residue disposition VI. Flock/house management factors a. Season/weather conditions b. Ventilation (natural) c. Ventilation (tunnel) d. Litter management e. Flock husbandry f. Feed factors g. Equipment (water, feed) h. Heating systems i. Cooling systems VII. Remedial activities a. Scrubbers b. Filters c. Masking agents d. Litter amendments e. Alternative management systems
JAPR: Workshop
148 Legislative Actions This appropriation supported an investigation into current scientific literature and sciencebased recommendations regarding nuisance and odor issues related to broiler production. The topic areas of the project are outlined in Table 1. Extension and Academia Involvement
CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS 1. Honest, respectful, and open communication is essential. 2. Early access to information helps avoid problems later. 3. Third-party involvement could help.
REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. Final Report. 2000. Study of odors and arsenic emissions from poultry growing operations (Contract 582-0-81252). Information Resources Division, MC 197, Attn. Production Control and
Reporting Services, TNRCC, PO Box 13087, Austin, TX 7871133087.
Downloaded from http://japr.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Birmingham on June 4, 2015
A team of extension specialists and researchers from the Departments of Poultry Science and Agricultural and Biological Engineering conducted the study. This investigation began in January 2000, was conducted in less than 10 mo, and included a review of over 190 peerreviewed research articles related to the topic areas. Some topic areas were combined with others in the final report due to lack of pertinent research. Additional data were collected for the project concerning litter moisture, pH, ammonium nitrogen as well as ammonia, and air particulate size and quantity emitted from selected broiler houses in the area. The project also ad-
dressed arsenic issues related to broiler production and included a separate review of the impacts of broiler production dust and odor impacts on human health. The final report was 124 pages [1]. This project and other agency activities resulted in the development of regulatory policy that required all broiler producers to develop comprehensive nutrient management plans. Although these plans are primarily concerned with water quality and environmental issues, the nonpoultry citizenry was willing to accept this step as a means to assure that poultry facilities would be operated in compliance with best management practices. The result was that the poultry industry now had specific policy and guidelines for dealing with environmental issues, and the nonpoultry citizenry had assurance that the broiler operations would be held to a standard of operation. At this time, the level of communication and trust between all parties is greatly improved. As shown in Figure 1, the number of complaints has been reduced drastically.
Nuisance and Odor Issues in Broiler Production: A Case Study J. B. Carey1 Department of Poultry Science, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-2472
SUMMARY Recent expansion of the broiler industry in Texas resulted in an opportunity to experience and mitigate a number of nuisance and odor issues related to broiler production. For the sake of this discussion, the participants in these issues are divided into 3 groups: the poultry industry; the nonpoultry citizenry; and government, regulatory, and educational agencies. Establishment of a broiler complex in an area with little exposure to commercial poultry production resulted in a concerned nonpoultry citizenry. This was often exacerbated by misinformation, external influences, and poor communications, resulting in a less-than-optimum level of trust between the nonpoultry citizenry and the poultry industry. Early in the process, the poultry industry attempted to provide information and open communication with the nonpoultry citizenry; however, establishment of bias within the nonpoultry citizenry eroded trust and cooperation to the point that effective communication was difficult. Throughout this period, government, regulatory, and educational agencies were involved in investigations of complaints, facilitation of communication, and development of policy. Over a 2-yr period these activities resulted in a special legislative appropriation to investigate odor and nuisance issues related to broiler production. This investigation and other agency activities resulted in the development of regulatory policy that required all broiler producers to develop comprehensive nutrient management plans. Although these plans are primarily concerned with water quality and environmental issues, the nonpoultry citizenry was willing to accept this step as a means to assure that poultry facilities would be operated in compliance with best management practices. As a result, the poultry industry now had specific policy and guidelines for dealing with environmental issues, and the nonpoultry citizenry had assurance that the broiler operations would be held to a standard of operation. At this time, the level of communication and trust between all parties is greatly improved. Key words: broiler, guidelines, nuisance, odor, regulation 2004 J. Appl. Poult. Res. 13:146–148
INTRODUCTION In 1999, a new broiler complex was established in the Brazos Valley region of Texas. No commercial poultry firms had been contracting in this area for over 25 yr; thus, local agricultural producers and local communities were not readily familiar with contract broiler production. 1
Naturally, an endeavor of this magnitude attracted wide attention among the citizenry.
ADDRESSING ODOR ISSUES IN BROILER PRODUCTION Informational Efforts Many informational meetings were held to inform potential producers of the economics of
To whom correspondence should be addressed: [email protected].
Downloaded from http://japr.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Birmingham on June 4, 2015
Primary Audience: Extensionists, Industry Personnel, Regulatory Agencies
CAREY: NATIONAL EXTENSION WORKSHOP
147
TABLE 1. Topic areas for project investigating odor issues related to broiler production
contract broiler production. Additional contacts were made by the broiler company with community leaders throughout the area in order to familiarize them with various aspects of broiler production and processing. As the development of the complex proceeded, some individuals expressed concern over the nuisance and odor issues related to broiler production. With limited success, attempts were made to address these concerns. Early in the process, the poultry industry attempted to provide information and open communication with the nonpoultry citizenry; however, establishment of bias within the nonpoultry citizenry eroded trust and cooperation to the point that effective communication was difficult. Due to the intensity of emotions associated with these issues, groups of deeply interested individuals developed. Establishment of Interested Parties For the sake of this discussion, the participants in these issues are divided into 3 groups: the poultry industry; the nonpoultry citizenry; and government, regulatory, and educational agencies. As the issues concerning broiler production intensified, an increasing number of complaints to regulatory agencies and local law enforcement ensued (Figure 1). Establishment of a broiler complex in an area with little recent exposure to commercial poultry production resulted in a concerned nonpoultry citizenry. This was often exacerbated by misinformation, external influences, and poor communications resulting in a less-than-optimum level of trust between the nonpoultry citizenry and the poultry industry. Adding to this were the actions of naive
poultry producers that in certain instances failed to realize the potential for negative impressions and impacts upon the community as a result of their practices. Throughout this period, government, regulatory, and educational agencies were involved in investigations of complaints, facilitation of communication, and development of policy. These activities resulted in a special legislative appropriation to investigate odor and nuisance issues related to broiler production.
Downloaded from http://japr.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Birmingham on June 4, 2015
FIGURE 1. Number of odor complaints to Waco, Texas, regional office of the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission January 1994 to April 2002.
I. House/site factors a. Topography b. Distance to occupied dwellings/public areas c. Land usage in immediate area d. Prevailing wind characteristics e. Density of poultry operations f. Vegetative barriers II. Land application of litter a. Litter moisture b. Loading, transportation of litter c. Wind speed/direction d. Application site factors (similar to house/site factors) e. Setback and buffer strips f. Weather considerations III. In-house activities a. Moving birds b. Catching birds c. Transportation of birds d. Cake-out (partial litter removal) e. Litter clean out IV. Processing of litter a. Composting b. Packaging c. Storage facilities V. Mortality a. Site selection b. Methodology c. Residue disposition VI. Flock/house management factors a. Season/weather conditions b. Ventilation (natural) c. Ventilation (tunnel) d. Litter management e. Flock husbandry f. Feed factors g. Equipment (water, feed) h. Heating systems i. Cooling systems VII. Remedial activities a. Scrubbers b. Filters c. Masking agents d. Litter amendments e. Alternative management systems
JAPR: Workshop
148 Legislative Actions This appropriation supported an investigation into current scientific literature and sciencebased recommendations regarding nuisance and odor issues related to broiler production. The topic areas of the project are outlined in Table 1. Extension and Academia Involvement
CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS 1. Honest, respectful, and open communication is essential. 2. Early access to information helps avoid problems later. 3. Third-party involvement could help.
REFERENCES AND NOTES 1. Final Report. 2000. Study of odors and arsenic emissions from poultry growing operations (Contract 582-0-81252). Information Resources Division, MC 197, Attn. Production Control and
Reporting Services, TNRCC, PO Box 13087, Austin, TX 7871133087.
Downloaded from http://japr.oxfordjournals.org/ at University of Birmingham on June 4, 2015
A team of extension specialists and researchers from the Departments of Poultry Science and Agricultural and Biological Engineering conducted the study. This investigation began in January 2000, was conducted in less than 10 mo, and included a review of over 190 peerreviewed research articles related to the topic areas. Some topic areas were combined with others in the final report due to lack of pertinent research. Additional data were collected for the project concerning litter moisture, pH, ammonium nitrogen as well as ammonia, and air particulate size and quantity emitted from selected broiler houses in the area. The project also ad-
dressed arsenic issues related to broiler production and included a separate review of the impacts of broiler production dust and odor impacts on human health. The final report was 124 pages [1]. This project and other agency activities resulted in the development of regulatory policy that required all broiler producers to develop comprehensive nutrient management plans. Although these plans are primarily concerned with water quality and environmental issues, the nonpoultry citizenry was willing to accept this step as a means to assure that poultry facilities would be operated in compliance with best management practices. The result was that the poultry industry now had specific policy and guidelines for dealing with environmental issues, and the nonpoultry citizenry had assurance that the broiler operations would be held to a standard of operation. At this time, the level of communication and trust between all parties is greatly improved. As shown in Figure 1, the number of complaints has been reduced drastically.