Environmental Resource Management

Sixth Circuit Reverses Ruling, Allowing Farmers to Defend Interests in Clean Water Act Case

Tue, 17 Mar 2026 15:06:30 GMT

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed a lower court ruling and agreed National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), the Ohio Pork Council, and several other agricultural associations are allowed to intervene as full parties in a case challenging Ohio’s regulation of nutrients in the Maumee River Watershed and western Lake Erie basin.

“This decision matters because it ensures agriculture can stand up and tell its own story,” says Cheryl Day, executive vice president of the Ohio Pork Council. “Our producers who raise livestock and grow crops are in the best position to defend agriculture and explain how these policies affect real farms — not federal regulators or government lawyers who don’t have any connection to agriculture.”

The Case Background

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency developed and the U.S. EPA approved a total maximum daily load (TMDL) – the amount of pollutants, including otherwise unregulated farm and agricultural storm water runoff, that can be in a water body and still meet federal water quality standards – for the river in northwest Ohio, NPPC shares in Capital Update.

The Environmental Law & Policy Center, among others, sued EPA in U.S. District Court in 2023, arguing that its approval of the Ohio EPA’s Maumee River TMDL “was arbitrary and capricious and the TMDL is not stringent enough.”

Even though the District Court allowed environmental activists, including Food & Water Watch and the Waterkeeper Alliance, to intervene in the case, the U.S. Department of Justice opposed the agricultural organizations’ request to enter the case, arguing that it would represent EPA and farm group interests.

The Right to Intervene

In granting NPPC and the other agriculture organizations the right to intervene, the Sixth Circuit unanimously found that while the EPA’s argument that “approval of the Maumee TMDL is consistent with its regulations interpreting and implementing the CWA” – a position supported by the farm groups – the agricultural associations have a different view of the regulations from EPA. NPPC explains the groups further argue that some of the regulatory requirements are inconsistent with or otherwise not required by the CWA and not applicable to farmers.

“With the case back at the U.S. District Court, the farm organizations will be able to argue that while EPA’s reasons for approving the Maumee River TMDL were adequate to support its decision, the legal threshold for such approval is lower than the environmental groups and even EPA contend,” NPPC says.

Although NPPC and the agricultural associations could have filed friend-of-the-court briefs in the case, being intervenors allows them to raise and prosecute their own arguments, argue at trial, weigh in on possible settlements, and appeal an adverse outcome.

“Overall, NPPC will have a much stronger platform for defending agriculture from baseless attacks by activist groups, both in this case and in future challenges,” the organization says.

A Journey in Motion: Why Stewardship Never Reaches a Destination at Trails End Farm

Mon, 23 Feb 2026 13:43:54 GMT

At Trails End Farm, environmental stewardship is a way of thinking, one shaped by generations, sharpened by experience, and guided by a willingness to make thoughtful investments to help pigs, people, and the planet. For Dale Stevermer, Minnesota Pork’s Environmental Steward of the Year, the recognition reflects a journey still in motion rather than a destination reached.

Built from Bare Ground

Trails End Farm began with Stevermer’s grandparents, who started the site from bare ground. Breeding pigs were central to those early years, with his grandfather raising purebred Chester Whites throughout his entire career.

“Pigs were always here on the farm,” Stevermer says. “My dad continued that.”

They transitioned to commercial production, and in 1975 the farm built its first barn. Within a decade, all pigs were moved indoors, earlier than some operations, but a move Stevermer says was necessary and ultimately beneficial. He and his father both grew up on the farm, absorbing not just the daily work but the mindset that progress requires adaptation.

After graduating from Iowa State University, where he studied animal science, Stevermer spent several years in agricultural lending. The experience proved invaluable, as he always knew pigs were going to be an integral part of the farm.

When Stevermer returned, he took over the pigs as his father prepared to step back. Together, they formed a corporation to manage farm operations and guide financial decisions. Advice from veterinarians and feed representatives helped inform changes along the way.

(Minnesota Pork Board)

Dale and his wife, Lori, have three children. Brett is a mechanical engineer, and his wife, Tressa, is a pharmacist. Brett and Tressa have a one-year-old son, Killian. Adam serves as a 4-H program coordinator in Mower County. Beth recently began her legal career in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Lori is the Customer Success Manager for Alltech’s U.S. Pork Business and will be finishing her role as immediate past president of the National Pork Producers Council in March.

A Commitment Passed Down

For Stevermer, this award means so much, especially from the generational aspect as the farm was built by his grandparents with vision and insight into how they can do more with what they have.

“It is fulfilling to receive recognition from fellow producers to receive this award, especially in regard to the time I have committed and resources I directed toward sustainability and environmental stewardship,” Stevermer says.

Stevermer focused on not being afraid to make investments to make not only the farmers’ lives easier but the pigs’ life better as well.

“Dale has always been one to do the right thing, that is simply who he is,” says Brandon Schafer, a fellow Minnesota pig farmer. “His passive wisdom and steady leadership made him a mentor to me in my early years, personally and professionally, and you never have to question whether he has the industry’s best interest at heart. On the environmental side, he does what is right for the pigs and planet, not for the credit, but because he believes in being a good steward.”

Stewardship in Practice

“I had a hand in planning and budgeting for the gestation barn,” Stevermer says. “When we moved the sows, manure handling became a twice a year opportunity to fertilize the soil instead of dealing with it every other day or week.”

If soil conditions allow, manure is injected to reduce disturbance. In the early 1990s, manure management limited progress on the crop side.

“How do you do the least amount of soil disturbance but still get manure on the ground?” Stevermer recalls.

It took decades for technology to catch up, but low-disturbance openers eventually provided the solution.

Manure is typically applied twice a year, depending on weather conditions. This year, a third of Stevermer’s acres will be planted to oats, shifting rotations from a 50/50 corn-soybean split to a more diverse rotation that may also include sweet corn.

Two-thirds of his acres will have a cover crop. Corn going to soybeans will typically feature cereal rye, while oats going to corn will receive a more complex, multi-species mix designed to alleviate compaction, diversify root structures, and improve nutrient cycling.

“Cover crops are designed to alleviate compaction, diversify root structures, and improve nutrient cycling,” Stevermer says. “I’m trying to accomplish multiple strategies at once.”

Letting the Soil Do the Work

Stevermer’s transition to reduced tillage began in 2014 with a single cover crop. By 2017, cover crops were on nearly every acre, and that spring he made the decision to eliminate tillage altogether. With minor repair exceptions, the farm has been no-till ever since.

“I don’t have residue buildup,” Stevermer says. “After rain events, I can walk into the field and not pick up mud on my shoes. It’s more like walking on a lawn.”

Some soil types responded within three years and others took six. Crop type and soil conditions played a role, but the results are clear. Stevermer now relies less on commercial fertilizer, confident that soil biology is making nutrients more bioavailable. From this point forward, 100 percent of his corn acres will receive manure.

The difference is especially noticeable during extreme weather. In the spring of 2025, while hauling manure, Stevermer witnessed one of the hardest rain and wind events he could remember. Yet soil movement was minimal.

Water quality improvements have come through the installation of rock inlets, replacing surface intakes. Over the past six years, Stevermer has steadily converted inlets, improving infiltration and reducing erosion. With no-till practices, the inlets last longer and function more effectively.

“We won’t be the first ones out in the field by calendar,” he says, “but we can be the first ones out after a rain event.”

Innovation in Every Corner

Solar energy represents another piece of the stewardship puzzle. Installed in the summer of 2022, the six panel system produces roughly as much electricity as the site consumes annually.

“I see it as a hedge against energy inflation,” Stevermer says.

(Minnesota Pork Board
)

Excess production is compensated for, and the addition of an electric pickup, his favorite vehicle to date, has shifted the energy balance slightly. Under the panels, a pollinator habitat was established in 2023, complementing an existing monarch habitat installed in 2018.

Inside the barns, stewardship continues through technology. After transitioning from farrow-to-finish to finishing in 2016, significant changes were required. Central controllers and airflow were adjusted, feeders were updated to wet/dry instead of just dry, and one barn moved from partial to fully slatted floors.

Temperature monitoring systems, water meters, bin-level sensors, and BarnTalk technology now provide real-time insights. Stevermer records water usage daily, watching for trends that may signal health challenges before they arise.

“I’m starting to trust that I can pick up a health problem before it happens,” Stevermer says.

These tools also support the On-Farm Sustainability Report, which Stevermer has completed annually since 2020. Seeing his reports year over year has reinforced that the decisions made on the farm today have lasting impacts on both productivity and sustainability.

“Dale’s commitment to continuous improvement is evident in every decision made at Trails End Farm,” says Todd Selvik, president of the Minnesota Pork Board of Directors. “His dedication to caring for pigs, people, and the planet truly sets him apart in our industry.”

Stewardship Beyond the Farm

Education and advocacy are equally important components of stewardship. Stevermer is open about his practices and welcomes conversation, whether with neighbors, fellow farmers, or consumers at the Minnesota State Fair.

“Going to the state fair allows farmers to engage with consumers, some that may have preconceived notions with what we are doing,” Stevermer says. “Consumers are surprised that we are able to use manure as a fertilizer and produce the crop for the next group of pigs instead of discarding it as waste.”

Stevermer shared that one of his favorite topics to discuss especially with consumers is the nutrient cycle, the “why” behind many farmers’ decisions.

“It takes nutrients to grow corn, we grow corn to feed our pigs, we use manure to grow the next crop, and raise an awesome protein to eat,” Stevermer says.

At the national level, Stevermer served on the National Pork Board (NPB) from 2021 to 2024 and participated in the USDA Advancing Markets for Producers grant working group. His role helped ensure producer perspectives shaped the program.

“What are things unique to pig farms that USDA has not thought about yet?” he asks. “Those were the conversations I was part of.”

That work led to an invitation to represent American pig farmers at the 2023 G7 Agriculture Ministers Meeting in Japan, where he presented on the climate-smart grant and the On-Farm Sustainability Report.

After the presentation, NPB was asked to assist in the creation of a video that could be used by USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service and U.S. Meat Export Federation (USMEF) as visual tools for building pork markets in other countries. The Stevermers were featured in the video filmed at Trails End Farm.

“I’m deeply grateful for Dale’s steadfast leadership in advancing our industry’s sustainability efforts through the We Care® platform,” says National Pork Board Chief Sustainability Officer, Jamie Burr. “His guidance was key in shaping the On-Farm Sustainability Report and the USDA Advancing Markets for Producers grant. Dale’s impact on our sustainability journey is lasting, and we are stronger because of his leadership.”

Looking Forward

Stevermer views stewardship as an investment in the future, whether or not the next generation ultimately chooses to farm. The agronomic improvements made today, he believes, will leave the land better prepared for whatever comes next.

(Minnesota Pork Board
)

“The things I’ve done agronomically have improved this soil,” Stevermer says. “If the next generation wants to build on it, they’ll be able to reap the benefits.”

Stevermer’s advice to others is simple: “Do or do not. There is no try.”

He encourages others to commit fully to the process, make informed decisions, seek out trusted advisors, and approach challenges as opportunities to learn and improve rather than setbacks to avoid. Progress, in his view, comes from action, reflection, and a willingness to adapt.

At Trails End Farm, stewardship remains exactly what it has always been: a commitment to doing what is right, one decision at a time. It is an approach Dale Stevermer exemplifies as Minnesota Pork’s Environmental Steward of the Year.

“This is not the end, the journey is not done,” Stevermer says. “Without the vision and insight to do more with what we have, this farm wouldn’t exist.”

Protect Your Freedom to Operate: Waters Advocacy Coalition Supports New WOTUS Rule

Wed, 21 Jan 2026 16:45:25 GMT

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), as part of the Waters Advocacy Coalition (WAC), submitted comments to the U.S. EPA, voicing its support for the agency’s proposal to define what constitutes Waters of the United States (WOTUS).

“The proposed EPA regulation is a revision in the decades-long fight over defining WOTUS, which sets forth the jurisdiction of federal regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act,” NPPC explains. “These proposed revisions come following the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Sackett v. EPA, which brought significant legal clarity to what is and isn’t WOTUS.”

WAC says the new rule “better aligns the regulatory definition of WOTUS with the CWA (Clean Water Act) and Supreme Court precedent - in particular, by defining critical terms such as ‘relatively permanent’ and ‘continuous surface connection.’”

In May 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court limited EPA’s authority over waterways, holding that CWA waters “refers only to geographical features that are described in ordinary parlance as streams, oceans, rivers and lakes and to adjacent wetlands that are indistinguishable from those bodies of water due to a continuous surface connection.”

“Despite that decision, the Biden administration wrote a WOTUS rule that had jurisdictional categories, including drains, ditches, stock ponds and low spots on farmlands, outside the high court’s definition, and included language that made the regulation overly broad,” the Waters Advocacy Coalition (WAC) said in comments submitted on that rule.

Pork Industry Applauds Definition

NPPC applauds the WOTUS rule for spelling out the limits of federal jurisdiction over waterways and wetlands under the CWA.

“For pork producers, an expansive definition of WOTUS that included farm fields and ditches would have led to significant increases in regulatory and activist pressure and taken away the freedom of farmers to operate,” NPPC says.

In the submitted comments, WAC says these new definitions provide much-needed clarity and transparency.

“They better preserve the states’ primary role in regulating water resources and land use within their boundaries, while still maintaining important protections for aquatic resources consistent with the law,” WAC says.

Uncertainty Imposes Substantial Cost, Delays Development

In its comments on the updated definition of WOTUS, WAC adds: “The Proposed Rule will provide regulatory certainty that WAC members desperately need and hopefully break the cycle of regulatory revisions with each change in administration. For decades, shifting WOTUS definitions have created a moving target for jurisdictional determinations, forcing landowners and operators to repeatedly modify plans, conduct redundant delineations and litigate disputed determinations. This uncertainty imposes substantial costs, delays development and discourages infrastructure investment.”

WAC points out that clear, stable, consistent jurisdictional rules allow for more efficient planning for projects and more effective environmental protection. At the same time, predictability benefits both the regulated community and the environment by “reducing unnecessary conflicts and enabling resources to be focused on genuine environmental protection.”

In the comments, WAC offered several recommendations to provide additional clarity, to further align the proposed definition with the CWA and Supreme Court precedent and aid implementation of the rule. Read the full comments here .

When You Know Better, You Do Better: A Pig Farmer’s Approach to Sustainability

Tue, 13 Jan 2026 14:25:15 GMT

If you want your freedom to operate, you must be willing to do the hard things every day to make that happen, says seventh-generation pig farmer Maddie Hokanson.

“We need to have hard conversations and be willing to set aside our own really strong opinions,” Hokanson says. “We’re passionate in agriculture. We’re passionate in the pork industry. That is wonderful, but we can’t let that be our blind spot that stops us from getting where we want to be in the long run.”

That’s why Hokanson joined National Pork Board chief sustainability officer Jamie Burr to have some of those hard conversations at the Conference of Parties (COP) in Brazil. Each year, about 200 countries convene at COP to develop global climate policy. https://unfccc.int/cop30

Some of the attendees are anti-ag, others are anti-meat, and this year, one was a U.S. pig farmer. For all their differences, the perspectives gathered at this event provide a window into what the world thinks, Burr says.

Time to Play Offense

Burr and Hokanson set out for Brazil with a goal to play offense and not defense.

“There’s never been a baseball team win the World Series by playing defense alone,” Burr says. “It’s so important we stand in that batter’s box and play offense. I know that’s very nerve-wracking to have all eyes on you. But to win the game, we’re going to have to be in that position. We’re going to have to continue to share our story and we need to do it with our own data.”

Hokanson says the opportunity to tell her story and have conversations with people opposed to animal agriculture is why she said yes.

(National Pork Board and the Pork Checkoff)

“We all want to have a sustainable, healthy world to live in together,” she says. “Eighty percent of the things we talked about at COP are things we all agree on. It’s all those extra pieces on the periphery that seem to be what get focused on instead of the things we agree on.”

Whether farmers are there or not, conversations take place at COP about livestock production practices and things we do on our farms, Hokanson explains.

“If we’re not willing to be there and share our story, then we’re being left out of the equation,” she says. “As new practices and new commitments are put into place by other countries, I believe COP allows us to change the narrative from livestock agriculture being part of the problem to livestock agriculture being part of the solution.”

Show Me the Data

The on-farm sustainability reports are a great way to show that, she says. One of the key messages she shared is what she calls the three-legged stool of sustainability: environmental, economic and social sustainability.

“On our farm, we have generations before us that continued to look for improvement and ways to do better,” Hokanson says. “That’s something we must continue to do. We don’t want to be the generation that screws it up. We want to make sure it continues for another seven generations. However, that can only happen if we are environmentally, economically and socially sustainable.”

Hokanson has always thought of sustainability as stewardship.

“I see them very much as the same word,” she says. “We’re stewards of our land. We want to do more with less. That means taking good care of our land, environment and water because we live there, too. We drink the same water, breathe the same air, and live on the same land as our neighbors. It’s important that we take good care of it. That has been the posture and the position of our farm for 140 years.”

International sustainability conversations directly influence U.S. farmers’ freedom to operate—and what the pork industry is bringing to the table.

(National Pork Board and the Pork Checkoff)

When You Know Better, You Do Better

She found some historic paperwork from her farm in the 1940s, after the Dust Bowl during the Great Depression. These papers showed how several farmers, including her great-great-grandfather, met and asked a hard question of themselves: What do we need to change to make sure that we don’t have another Dust Bowl?

“They decided they needed to make some changes, and not because a regulation was coming down on them,” Hokanson says. “They saw change was needed, so they improved. That doesn’t mean that what they did before was wrong. They did the best they could with the information they had. Then, when they knew better, they did better.”

She says that’s what agriculture is all about.

“When you know better, you do better,” Hokanson says. “But you’re always doing the best that you can for your animals, for your land and for your people. At the end of the day, when you put all those things together, continuous improvement is the name of the game. That’s the only way for a farm to transition from one generation to the next in a long-term capacity.”

What Made the Trip to Brazil a Win

Hokanson was a coveted panelist, but she says it was the side conversations that stood out to her.

“The conversations before and after panels, where some people disagreed with our beliefs, truly made it worthwhile to travel all the way down to Brazil,” she says.

(The Meat Institute)

During one panel focused on minimizing animal protein and shifting to a more plant-based diet, Hokanson was intrigued about how often they brought up the need to “involve farmers in these conversations.”

“The ironic thing was that there wasn’t a single farmer on that panel or another farmer in the room,” she says. “Toward the end of the panel, the moderator said, ‘It’s great to see so many friends in the room, and I see we’ve got a couple of people from the animal protein sector, too. So, if you have opinions on this, we’d be happy to hear them.’”

Hokanson stood up and took the opportunity to share her opinion. She thanked the panel for saying farmers should be involved in these conversations and pointed out that she would be happy to do something like that in the future.

“I told them, ‘If you want to have a farmer be part of the conversation, then make sure you really make an effort to do so,’” she adds. “Then I followed it up with a question about differences in topography and geography. On our farm we raise pigs and cattle, and cattle work really well in areas where crops can’t be grown. Then, one of the panelists who wants to minimize animal production, said, ‘Well, I will say there’s plenty of ground in the world that isn’t well-suited for crop production, and that probably is meant to be livestock focused.’ For him to say that – in a crowd of people who are meat minimizers – was a big win.”

There is no question there are a lot of individuals who make local, state, national and global policy who have never had their boots on a farm, Burr adds.

“It’s so important for us to be open enough to have those conversations with them and invite them to our farm to form their own opinion,” he says. “There’s a lot that goes on inside of those four walls, and those four walls, they don’t raise pork – people do. The more that we can connect with those individuals to understand their perspective and then share ours, the more middle ground we will find.”

Sign up for the Pork Cares Impact Report program here.

Listen to Maddie share more of her story on The PORK Podcast.

Sustainable Strategies for Row Crop and Livestock Operations to Maximize Manure Value

Mon, 01 Dec 2025 14:46:26 GMT

By Ryan Matzke, business development manager for The Maschhoffs

In today’s agricultural environment, farmers are constantly searching for ways to improve efficiency, reduce input costs, and strengthen long-term soil health. One of the most overlooked opportunities lies beneath our feet: manure.

When managed effectively, swine manure is not just a byproduct but also a valuable resource that can transform the economics and sustainability of an operation.

From Waste to Resource

Hog manure is a cost-effective, environmentally friendly, and nutrient-rich resource that can enhance soil fertility, improve crop yields and reduce fertilizer costs. Unlike commercial fertilizer, it also brings added benefits such as organic matter that improves soil structure, water-holding capacity, and microbial activity. This closed-loop approach — where animal agriculture directly supports crop agriculture — offers a pathway to reduce reliance on synthetic fertilizers while building healthier soils over time.

Managing Manure for Maximum Return

To unlock its full potential, manure must be managed with precision. Proper management and application are essential to maximize its benefits and minimize potential environmental impacts. Key considerations include:

• Application timing — Applying manure close to crop uptake ensures nutrients are available when plants need them most, minimizing nutrient loss.

• Application method — Incorporating manure into the soil through injection reduces odor and volatilization, while improving nutrient retention.

• Rate calibration — Balancing manure application rates with soil tests and crop nutrient needs helps avoid over-application and runoff risk.

• Record-keeping and compliance — Tracking manure use not only aids in nutrient management planning but also ensures regulatory compliance and sustainability certification opportunities.

Sustainability and Cost Savings

The economic value of manure is clear: Farmers can significantly reduce fertilizer input costs while maintaining — or even improving — yield potential.

From a sustainability perspective, manure recycling reduces dependency on fossil-fuel-based fertilizers, cuts greenhouse gas emissions and enhances soil resilience against erosion and extreme weather events. It’s a win-win for both farm profitability and environmental stewardship.

Practical Tips from the Field

Producers who have integrated swine manure into their crop rotations often highlight several lessons learned:

• Develop strong working relationships with agronomists and nutrient management planners.

• Invest in technology such as dragline systems or GPS-guided application to improve efficiency.

• Consider crop rotation impacts; corn-on-corn rotations often capture the most value from manure nutrients.

• View manure not as a challenge to manage, but as an asset to leverage for long-term farm success.

The Bigger Picture

Manure management is more than nutrient recycling; it’s a strategy that supports farm resiliency, profitability and sustainability. By seeing manure as part of a holistic nutrient management plan, farmers can close the loop between livestock and row crops, leaving healthier soils and stronger operations for the next generation.

20 Strategies to Reduce the Nitrogen Footprint of Pork Production

Tue, 25 Nov 2025 20:06:50 GMT

By Eduardo Beltranena and Mahmoud Sharara, North Carolina State University

Over three decades, the swine industry has substantially reduced phosphorus (P) excretion (30–60%). Nitrogen (N) is the current challenge in progress. Protein rich in N is the second most expensive dietary nutrient and a major contributor to ammonia (NH₃) and nitrous oxide (N₂O) emissions. Some strategies are already being implemented but need expansion.

Feeding Strategies

1. Feed lower crude protein diets.
Balancing for amino acids (AA) reduces dietary protein cutting urinary N, the primary source of barn NH₃ volatilization.

2. Include crystalline AA.
Adding crystalline AA instead of protein meals lowers dietary protein while meeting growth needs, reducing deamination losses.

3. Formulate on digestible AA.
Formulating diets on standardized ileal digestibility improves AA utilization and lowers urinary N by 10–20%.

4. Shift N from urine to feces.
Adding soluble fiber (e.g., wheat bran, DDGS) feeds hindgut microbes that convert urea into microbial protein, reducing urinary N by 10–30%.

5. Feed slower-digestible proteins.
Protein in canola meal or pulses is digested more slowly, promoting microbial use and lowering urinary N by 5–15%.

6. Synchronize protein and starch digestion.
Matching protein and starch digestion rates improves nutrient utilization enhancing N retention.

7. Add proteases, prebiotics and resistant starch.
These enhance diet digestibility by young pigs and microbial N capture, cutting urinary N by 5–15%.

8. Match AA supply to growth.
Changing diets as often as barn feed bins fill, reduces protein oversupply and improves N utilization by 3–7%.

9. Adopt precision feeding.
Forthcoming automated feeders blend high and low diets to match the growth curve of individual pigs within pen reducing N excretion.

10. Promote gut health.
Minimizing weaning stress and enteric diseases promote gut stability and reduce N losses.

Manure Strategies

1. Separate feces from urine.
Barn V-belt separators sieve feces from urine preventing barn urea breakdown and NH₃ release.

2. Solid–liquid sludge separation.
Outdoor centrifuges, presses and settling basins reduce N losses when in-barn segregation isn’t feasible.

3. Add acids to manure.
Acidifying manure pits keeps N as ammonium (NH4), reducing barn NH₃ release that affect both workers and pigs.

4. Install manure tank or lagoon covers.
Covers limit gas exchange and allow methane capture or flaring.

5. Time manure applications.
Apply manure as close to crop peak N demand to improve nutrient uptake.

6. Improve crop manure placement.
Place manure on the most ideal spot for the crop to maximize plant nutrient uptake.

7. Incorporate manure promptly.
Inject or incorporate promptly manure spread on top to minimize surface losses and runoff.

8. Weather at time of application.
Avoid hot, windy or rainy days to prevent N volatilization and runoff.

9. Calibrate application equipment.
Proper nozzle selection and calibration ensure uniform N delivery and over application.

10. Analyze soil and manure.
Soil and manure testing and in-line sensors enable variable-rate application.

Together, improved feeding, manure handling and precision applications can substantially reduce ammonia and greenhouse gas emissions, lower nutrient losses and enhance manure’s value as a fertilizer shrinking the pork industry nitrogen footprint.

Breaking News: EPA Backs Existing Wastewater Regulations, Prevents Catastrophe for Processors and Producers

Sat, 30 Aug 2025 20:37:08 GMT

The longstanding Meat and Poultry (MPP) Effluent Guidelines and Standards will stand, announced Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin on Aug. 30. He says the proposed changes to the regulation are unnecessary.

EPA determined existing federal wastewater regulations under the Clean Water Act are effective and the burdens proposed changes would inflict on meat and poultry processors are unwarranted.

“The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) applauds the Trump administration and EPA Administrator Zeldin for taking a common sense approach on the Meat & Poultry Processing Rule,” says Duane Stateler, NPPC president and pork producer from McComb, Ohio. “As proposed by the previous administration, this rule—which provides no environmental benefits—would have been devastating to small- and medium-sized meat processors across the country and the livestock farmers who rely on them as markets for their animals.”

EPA’s action will save not only the nearly 100 local meat processors that EPA itself identified would have to close down but also the thousands of family farmers who rely on them to stay in livestock production, Stateler points out.

“It will help ensure affordable, nutritious American-grown pork can continue to be served on dinner tables across the country,” Stateler says.

Moving Forward
The decision closes the book on a nearly two-year comment and consideration process in which NPPC and other stakeholders have worked with EPA to better inform the agency’s decision and preempt unnecessary harm.

“Under the prior proposal, if it were finalized, major pork processors would have faced significant costs to install new waste water management systems,” explains Michael Formica, NPPC chief legal strategist. “During that period of construction, some plants would likely have needed to temporarily shut down. Others might have had to cut back on how many shifts they run.”

EPA’s internal analysis showed that dozens of facilities, likely small and medium-sized, would be forced to shut down because they would be unable to afford the cost of the technology required to comply, Formica says. Overall, the industry would have realized additional costs estimated at greater than $1 billion a year.

“Producers who rely on those processors would have then been without a market for their livestock,” Formica adds.

Unnecessary Expansions
The Meat and Poultry Products Effluent Guidelines and Standards was enacted in 1974 by the EPA and amended in 2004 to cover wastewater directly discharged by processing facilities. NPPC says the proposed amendment would have established more stringent technological requirements for controlling discharges from processors and significantly increased the scope of plants that were covered by the rules.

While the agricultural industry and the meat and poultry processing sectors support clean water efforts, EPA found these expansions were unnecessary.

NPPC says it appreciates EPA taking no action on the proposal, which would have disrupted packing capacity and livestock markets, in turn inflicting additional financial harm on producers and leading to further industry concentration and the loss of independent farmers.

The Meat Institute says the proposed rule would have also harmed the relationship between meat and poultry processing (MPP) facilities and publicly-owned treatment works (POTWs).

“Indirect discharging MPP facilities often make significant financial investments in maintaining and upgrading the POTW or shouldering major surcharges for the POTW’s continued operation and maintenance, which reduce public treatment costs for residential ratepayers and improve the quality of local and downstream waters,” the Meat Institute wrote in a statement.

Equipment Malfunction Causes Manure Spill in Ohio, Sparks Vital Lessons for Farmers

Tue, 19 Aug 2025 20:06:09 GMT

A farming equipment malfunction is the cause of a manure spill that turned a creek red in Wyandot County, Ohio, reports the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA).

According to Glen Arnold, field specialist and manure nutrient management systems professor at Ohio State University Extension, a part broke on the irrigation system that allowed the manure to flow into nearby Carey Creek, also known as Poverty Run. An alarm system should have indicated a problem did not work properly. Ohio EPA reports that the red color stemmed from a discharge of liquid manure that was pulled from an anaerobic manure lagoon on a nearby hog farm.

“As soon as it was discovered, the farmers shut the manure source off and took steps to pump the manure-contaminated water back out of the creek,” Arnold explains. “This time of the year in Ohio, we are at a minimum flow time. We haven’t had much rain, so the creeks wouldn’t have much water to carry manure downstream.”

An example of equipment being positioned to remove manure from a ditch.

(Glen Arnold)

This means the manure-contaminated water wouldn’t travel very far, he says.

Carey Creek is not a drinking water source, Ohio EPA reports. It flows into Tymochtee Creek then the Sandusky River.

Fortunately, no impacts to wildlife have been reported, Ohio EPA says. Cleanup is underway by a contractor hired by the farm. The farm is working closely with Ohio EPA, Ohio Department of Agriculture, Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Wildlife, and the Local Soil and Water District. Ohio EPA will continue to oversee cleanup until the issue is resolved.

Why Did the Water Turn Red?
Reports said the creek turned a light red to a pink color. Although this may seem odd to most people, for those who understand anerobic lagoons, this is anything but weird.

“That would be pretty standard for a manure lagoon,” Arnold says. “In lagoon situations, you’re hoping the bacteria will break down the solids that are in that manure pond or lagoon. You don’t generally pump it all the way out, you basically pump liquids off the top on a regular basis. Because of the bacteria that are working together to make that lagoon work as it should, the liquids generally have a red tint.”

For the most part, liquids are being pumped off the top of the manure pond or lagoon, he explains.

“It’s low-nutrient water – most of the high nutrients are down in the bottom,” Arnold says. “In that situation, that red tint that was in the manure pond then gets transferred into the creek. It’s not more toxic or more dangerous in any way, but that was the color of the original liquid manure.”

Ohio EPA reports this red tinted color is caused by purple sulfur bacteria commonly found in anaerobic manure lagoons. This color means the lagoon is working properly.

How Should You Handle a Manure Spill?
If a spill occurs, Arnold says the first thing producers should do is contact the local authorities. In Ohio, it’s generally the Soil and Water Conservation Service District, but some larger permitted farms can call the Ohio Department of Agriculture directly.

“Malfunctions happen,” Arnold points out. “Anytime a problem like this occurs, quick action is the best way to go. Get the situation mitigated as quickly as possible. Get the source stopped, get the creek or river dammed up, contain the spill, and then we can pump it back out.”

A manure tanker sucking up liquid manure from a emergency sump hole dug in a corn field.

(Glen Arnold)

He says it’s important to remember that you can’t rely 100% on technology at all times.

“You have to put eyes on the manure application process,” Arnold says. “You have to put eyes on the field tile. You’ve got to put eyes on surface ditches and be sure they’re not allowing the manure to escape from a field. It’s important producers give thought to their first line of defense and second line of defense to prevent these things from happening.”

After everything has been done to pump the water out, Arnold says the next step is to mitigate or improve the quality of the water through aerification.

“Aerification is where we shoot the water up in the air to let ammonia get out of the water, and to add oxygen to the water,” he says. “We can put bubblers in the water to bubble air into it to improve the water quality or add some additional water from a source like a fire truck or water tanker to get fresh water into the creek or ditch.”

He says this is important because manure contains ammonia, and ammonia will bind with the oxygen in the water, making it unavailable for fish, crawdads and other aquatic life.

“It’s always difficult once a manure spill has occurred to think clearly and follow a plan,” he says. “I would encourage producers to think through the steps they would take if a spill occurred. Who would you need to contact? Do you have their cell phones handy? What equipment would you need to get your hands on?”

Respect Authorities When a Manure Spill Occurs
It probably goes without saying, but it’s important to cooperate with the authorities when a spill occurs, Arnold adds.

“The agency people have a job to do,” he says. “I know how it feels – you are partly embarrassed because you’re the center of attention, and farmers rarely want to be the center of attention. You’re partly mad at the equipment that broke, or the unexpected clay tile that allowed the manure off the field that you didn’t know about in advance, or the fact that the neighbors are going to be watching you now.”

Manure being sucked from a ditch after a spill.

(Glen Arnold)

If you’ve got a solid track record and are upfront about what happened, the authorities will generally work with you to resolve it, Arnold says.

“But if someone shows a bad attitude or has a history of repeated manure escapes or spills, that’s a very different situation. The best thing you can do is demonstrate that you’re taking responsibility and making every effort to do the right thing.”

Tips for Smooth Manure Application
The old adage that ‘an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure’ is true, especially when it comes to manure management.

“We don’t want to make mistakes when handling manure,” he says.

Although manure is an organic product that breaks down rapidly and does not last long in the environment, having a manure spill is disruptive, troublesome and costly.

Remember to look closely at fields this time of year before you apply manure, Arnold says.

A temporary dam built in a corn field to stop swine from manure escaping after an equipment pumping failure.

(Glen Arnold)

“Because of our clay content in our soil, we’re going to have a lot of cracks,” he says. “We use tillage to disrupt those preferential flows, the worm holes, the cracks in the soil, crawdad holes, and those types of things.”

He also urges producers to understand the tile structure in the field where manure is being applied. Check the weather forecast before applying manure, and of course, apply manure at the proper rate.

“Farmers live as close to their hog buildings as anyone in the community,” Arnold says. “The same groundwater and surface water that their families drink is the water we all depend on. Pork producers want to do right because they hope their children and grandchildren will remain on the land and be part of the farm’s future. Protecting water is not only about farming responsibly — it’s about safeguarding our own families and neighbors.”

Cheryl Day, Ohio Pork Council executive vice president, says producers are already doing a responsible job managing nutrients, but no one can afford complacency.

“Every decision we make on manure handling and application matters,” Day says. “One mistake can set back the progress our industry has made and risk both water quality and community trust. Stewardship isn’t optional — it’s our responsibility, and it must remain our highest priority.”

No one plans for a spill, but planning for the unexpected makes all the difference. Farmers who know their tile maps, watch the forecast, and have response plans ready are protecting more than their farms — they’re protecting their communities.

District Court Upholds Air Reporting Exemptions

Mon, 11 Aug 2025 19:09:43 GMT

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) secured a significant victory in its long-running efforts to stop activists from forcing farmers to report routine emissions to state and local emergency response authorities. Ruling for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the NPPC coalition of farm and livestock intervenors, the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the challenge of activists to an earlier EPA rulemaking that exempted livestock farms from having to treat routine air emissions as emergency releases and report them to local first responders.

Why it Matters
NPPC and other livestock groups have been fighting activists over this issue since January 2009 when the Bush administration required livestock farms to file reports to emergency authorities over the routine emissions from livestock farms. The debate over these emissions dates back far earlier – to the late 1990s – when activist groups such as the Waterkeeper Alliance made them a centerpiece of its campaign against the U.S. pork industry.

Since the federal government lacked any science that would justify enforcement against livestock farms, the Clinton administration proposed an agreement to better understand air emissions. That resulted in the Air Consent Agreements that the industry signed with EPA and the start of the National Air Emissions Monitoring Study to help policymakers better understand what types of emissions came from livestock farms. Those efforts continue to this day, with comments on EPA’s latest air emission models due to the agency later this month.

In 2017, the Federal Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ultimately found that reporting of routine farm emissions was required to be made to the U.S. Coast Guard under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA, or the Superfund law). Congress quickly passed the FARM Act with a strong bipartisan majority, which exempted livestock farms from CERCLA reporting. In implementing the statute, EPA exempted reporting to state and local first responders under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), reasoning that reporting is only required under EPCRA when it is also required under CERCLA.

Activists, led by then-Humane Society of the United States and Food and Water Watch, filed suit, claiming EPA failed to follow EPCRA’s requirements and comply with the National Environmental Policy Act – and that Environmental Justice concerns demanded that farmers be obligated to report the information.

The District Court disagreed – agreeing with NPPC and EPA that since Congress passed the Farm Act, no reporting was necessary, making this a huge win for U.S. pork producers.

How 10 Leaky Waterers Could Cost $900 Per Year In Your Swine Barn

Mon, 12 May 2025 18:25:41 GMT

It starts out as one slow drip. Then, second by second, minute by minute, hour by hour, the drips get bigger and faster. It may not seem like a major problem to worry about in your barn, but one expert says that leak can add up to over $900 in extra costs to the producer in time.

“When we talk about manure management, it really starts inside of the barns,” says Marguerite Tan, director of environmental programs for the National Pork Board.

As an engineer, Tan is always interested in holistic systems. Unfortunately, Tan says as humans, we like to segment stuff into little silos far too often.

“We look at this little manure pit over here when it comes to the topic of manure management,” she says. “In reality, we need to look at what’s going on inside of the barn for our manure management help.”

What One Leak Can Do
Did you know that if a single faucet nipple or water watering cup leaks one drip per second, that will add about 3,000 gallons to the farm’s annual manure storage?

(Marguerite Tan, National Pork Board)

“Most of the time that water is not just evaporating into the air, it’s going into the pit underneath those pigs, in manure storage, or into our lagoons,” she says. “If we have 10 watering devices that are dripping, that adds 30,000 gallons of water into our manure storage. That doesn’t sound like a huge amount when we’re talking about hundreds of thousands of gallons of manure we’re managing, but when we have to pump that additional 30,000 gallons of water, that’s that adds up to over $900 more or more of annual manure hauling costs.”

Not to mention, this also decreases manure storage by 30,000 gallons, which represents several weeks of actual manure accumulation from those animals.

“It turns into a lot over time and over that year,” Tan says.

But that’s not all it does. Extra water in the manure pit decreases manure nutrient value. This can be very problematic, she points out.

“When we’re talking to producers, I often hear, ‘I wish I had more nutrient value in my manure. That would really help me out,’” Tan says. “I remind them it starts inside the barns. We can make that manure more nutrient-dense, but we need to look at those in-barn practices, like leaky waterers or excess wash water.”

No one wants to buy commercial fertilizer when they have hog manure at their disposal. But if additional water is going into manure storage, it really decreases the manure nutrient value.

“So, how much is that drip actually costing us?” she asks. “Not only is it impacting our manure nutrient values in that pit, but it also costs us additional water, it costs additional money to pump it out of the pit and we end up with less storage in those pits.”

Why You Should Meter Your Water
How do you know if you are using excessive wash water? Tan says this is a great question producers should ask.

“We don’t really know what excessive is until we start measuring our water consumption inside of those barns,” she says. “Maybe we need to start looking at using soaker timers or adjusting our soaker timers. Maybe we should focus on dry cleanup. Ultimately those are some of the things that using a water meter and tracking our water usage can help you determine.”

There are other benefits to water metering, Tan points out.

“It’s actually a lead indicator of pig health,” she says. “It’s pretty amazing what we can do when we just dig into water metering and study our water usage trends. At the end of the day, what we’re doing in the barn, and the measurements that we are taking in the barn, are very important.”

This is just one example of how preventative maintenance in the barn can make a big difference, Tan says.

“If we could get more preventative maintenance done inside of the barns, our producers would be saving a quite a bit of money just with a few simple measures,” she says.

Check out the National Pork Board’s barn maintenance checklists.

Your next read: A Pinch of This, A Dash of That: It’s Time to Update Pork’s Recipe for Sustainability

A Pinch of This, A Dash of That: It’s Time to Update Pork's Recipe for Sustainability

Tue, 06 May 2025 21:35:46 GMT

Gone are the days where a pinch of salt and a dash of pepper will do. Recipes referencing the measurements of our grandparents are no longer accurate enough in today’s environment, explains Marguerite Tan, director of environmental programs at the National Pork Board. To stay feasible and relevant, measurements must be more accountable.

Just as a “little of this and a little of that” isn’t good enough for recipes today, nor is it enough for pork producers to simply fall back on anecdotal claims about how they are producing pigs more efficiently and sustainably, Tan says.

“Consumers and the supply chain want real numbers as proof of what we are doing in animal agriculture,” Tan says. “Now we are finding ourselves in this transition period where we’re changing over to more precise measurements and data to give consumers and the supply chain what they want. This is about measuring our progress and tracking what we are actually doing.”

Protecting Producers’ Freedom to Operate
Producers have always been fantastic at doing more with less, she says. Not only do they continually seek innovative ways to save time and money, but they value using research-backed data to make needed change.

“The challenge is we can’t manage what we don’t measure,” Tan points out. “Accurate measurements provide us tools to manage our facilities, save us money, be more efficient and help us identify those opportunities for improvement.”

When it comes to raising pork more sustainably and efficiently, one of the biggest questions that needs to be answered is fairly simple: Is the improvement worth the investment of that producer’s time, labor and money to implement?

“Sometimes we might look at some of these improvements at the farm level and decide it’s really not worth it. It’s not going to gain me anything to save $0.03 per month,” Tan says. “But other improvements may cause us to say, ‘Yeah, it’s absolutely worth the time, energy and money to implement that improvement.’”

Taking measurements and looking at the resulting trend lines can help producers find ways to raise pork more efficiently. Tan adds mitigating environmental impacts is a crucial element in protecting pork producers’ freedom to operate.

Start the Process Now
Documentation can be very simple, she says. Hopefully, it will include information that producers already measure and track. The information is aggregated into Pork Cares Farm Impact Reports, funded by Checkoff dollars. These reports provide a snapshot of on-farm sustainability practices presented in a concise professional report. Learn more about the reports here .

“The state and national reports, built from blinded and aggregated data from real producers on their individual farms, is a great vehicle to share accurate data measurements with customers as proof of what we’re doing inside of the farms,” Tan says. “The reports highlight the commitment producers have to the environment and sustainability. If we don’t provide that accurate, blinded and aggregated data from real farms, data will come from other sources to be used instead.”

And Tan says there’s a good chance that this data will not be accurate or reflect the continuous improvement pig farmers have worked so hard to gain over the past 30 to 50 years.

“It’s really important producers are able to measure that data and track that data, not only for the management of their facilities and continuous improvement of their facilities, but also for the swine industry, so we can continue to operate,” Tan says.

Where Do You Start?
How can producers start moving the needle to make progress in their operation? Tan says it starts by thinking about preventative maintenance in barns.

1. Accurate records
“When was the last time you had a tetanus shot?” she asks. “Likely you won’t remember unless you’ve had a recent visit to the emergency room, and they gave you a tetanus shot because you were told you needed one or you happened to write it down. Preventative maintenance items in our barns are very similar to preventative medicine in humans, like that tetanus shot.”

Maintaining a schedule with records of what was done when and making sure the schedule is maintained is a key place to start.

2. Fan maintenance
Another example of preventative practices is fan maintenance. Poor or inadequate fan maintenance can decrease overall airflow by those fans, as well as the efficiency of the motors.

“It can decrease efficiency by more than 40%, which significantly increases our energy costs with our fan motors,” Tan says. “We need to make sure we are cleaning the dust off of them, we’re adjusting our pulleys, we’re checking those motor temperatures so they’re actually running efficiently and correcting those items as we have problems.”

3. Electricity
A big part of this preventative maintenance is measuring electric use. This will indicate if something is going on, not necessarily with the fans, but within the barn.

“Maybe there’s a newer technology that’s more efficient with this electric use?” she says. “But, if we’re not measuring or tracking that electricity, we might not notice that opportunity.”

4. Propane and natural gas
If propane use seems high for a particular month, it might be as simple as what’s happening in the barn. Maybe you have smaller pigs in the barn that don’t generate as much natural heat. Maybe it’s just colder outside. However, it also might mean there is a gas leak somewhere, or something odd is going on with the barn ventilation,” Tan says.

Check to see if you have an inlet stuck open, or if you have holey curtains that need replaced.

“I know none of this stuff is easy,” she says. “It takes a lot of time and energy to implement for us to be able to actually measure and keep track of all of these different records.”

Producers can’t control the cost of energy, but Tan advises them to look at things they can do to help control how much they are spending on energy or how much energy they are actually using. Performing preventative maintenance and identifying energy-saving opportunities can make a big difference to a producer’s bottom line.

Your next read: FDA Grants PIC Approval for PRRS-Resistant Pig Gene-Editing Technology

Avoid Confusion: Clear the Air on CAFOs

Mon, 05 May 2025 20:23:38 GMT

Concentrated animal feeding operations have continued to sustain meat and dairy industries since their implementation many decades ago by providing a steady flow of livestock for food chains for home and consumers abroad.

Contrary to popular belief, Kansas State University extension livestock specialist Joel DeRouchey says CAFOs present a more efficient opportunity to raise livestock with less stress on the environment.

“While CAFOs can get a bad rap due to their ability to house many animals in one location, they face some of the most stringent regulations for environmental protection, which is good for surrounding land and water quality,” he points out on Agriculture Today with the K-State Radio Network .

After considering what’s regulated, how CAFOs handle manure, how it’s applied and the regulations and inspections involved from both the state and potentially the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), DeRouchey says these operations are in business for a reason.

“They’re doing a very good stewardship for both for the land and water quality,” he adds.

Feedlot

(Shelby Chesnut)

But Josh McCann, associate professor of animal science at the University of Illinois, says it’s understandable people may have questions about CAFOs.

“I think it’s easy to get nervous or ask questions about things that we’re not exposed to, that we aren’t very familiar with,” McCann says.

CAFOs are highly professional environments led by teams of experts who help those animals remain healthy, grow in a productive way and provide an extremely affordable protein for Americans and people around the world, he adds.

“We have some of the very best nutritionists, the very best veterinarians, the very best management experts working at these facilities to help those animals actually grow and prosper,” McCann says. “I don’t think people truly appreciate the amount of effort, investment of time and people and science that goes into this.”

Is Your Operation a CAFO?
CAFOs include cattle and small ruminant feedlots, confined large indoor and outdoor swine and poultry operations and dairy facilities that meet the criteria as a CAFO. Once a CAFO is designated for a site, it has both state and federal requirements under which it must operate.

The challenge is every state is different when it comes to its respective state regulations, he says.

“Permitting of different livestock species could be different within a state and certainly is across states,” DeRouchey says. “But the bigger pictures items are the same.”

To be a CAFO, EPA explains that farms must first be an Animal Feeding Operation (AFO). If a farm does not meet the definition of an AFO, the EPA rules do not apply to it.

The AFO definition has two parts: Part 1 - A lot or facility where animals have been, are, or will be confined and fed or maintained for a total of 45 days or more in any 12-month period. Part 2 - Where vegetation (crops, forage, post-harvest residues) is not sustained in the normal growing season over any portion of the lot or facility.

“There are many factors to consider when determining if your farm is a CAFO. Bottom line: Manage your farm in a way that ensures no discharges to WOTUS,” the Illinois Pork Producers Association says on its website .

For example, in Kansas, any facility with an animal unit capacity of 300 or greater must register with the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE). Additionally – regardless of size – any facility that presents a significant water pollution potential must obtain a permit as determined by KDHE.

“Feedlot cattle over 700 pounds would be considered a single animal unit, 700 lb. and less is a half and cattle such as a lactating dairy cow would be considered 1.4,” DeRouchey says. “These figures relate to their feed intakes and the amount of manure produced per body weight.”

Another factor to consider when determining the size of your CAFO is if a farmer has multiple sites where animals are confined, they must determine if those sites are separate AFOs or should be combined. In Illinois, under the IL EPA Livestock Rules, two or more AFOs under common ownership would be a single AFO if the AFOs are adjacent to each other or the AFOs utilize a common area or system for handling or disposing of manure.

“Most situations in which pigs are raised will likely be defined as an AFO,” IPPA says. “If your farm is an AFO, then you must determine if you are a small, medium or large CAFO, which factors in the number of animals that are confined on the farm and whether pollutants are being discharged into Waters of the U.S (WOTUS).”

When determining if the operation has any discharges, a farmer must look at the entire production area including manure storage, feed storage and dead animal composting to determine if there is a discharge.

“CAFOs are strictly permitted to have full containment of all rainwater and runoff that reaches a pen surface, and the same goes for cleaning pen surfaces,” DeRouchey explains. “Manure must be stored in a contained area until it’s moved out to fields for spreading.”

Compliance is Key
Many regulations like these are in place to help keep the environment, water and land safe for multiple generations, McCann says.

Dairy

(Jim Dickrell)

To ensure compliance with these regulations, CAFOs undergo periodic on-site state inspections and a permit renewal where producers update their paperwork and nutrient management plan with any changes to the operation. An essential part of that process is developing a new nutrient management plan that says what’s going to occur with the application of manure to the agronomic crop ground surrounding the facility, DeRouchey says.

“With soil tests and manure samples taken, new projections are completed to ensure that the manure produced on those operations fits all the acreage,” DeRouchey says.

The challenge is those nutrient management plans are pretty region-specific, McCann says.

“Rainfall here in central Illinois is extremely different from rainfall in western Kansas,” he adds. “The appropriate ways you need to manage the nutrients in your animal waste is accordingly also very different. I think that’s one of the reasons why we have a lot of state-by-state regulation within this area.”

Compliance starts before the CAFO is constructed. Assessments, based on the species housed in the CAFO, look at criteria like geography. For example, in feedlots, rainwater drainage containment, manure storage areas, and agronomic manure application plans rank as some of the most crucial considerations.

Be a Good Neighbor
The one thing that’s not regulated directly is odors, DeRouchey says. Owners routinely clean pen surfaces as well on the outdoor facilities because the top layer of manure can turn into dust if it’s there too long, and that can carry odor from the CAFO to surrounding areas.

“We know that large or small operations have odor from livestock,” he adds. “And that doesn’t matter if you only have a couple animals or a lot of animals. What owners often do is look at, where can they potentially put up windbreaks? Where is the prevailing wind coming off of those facilities? How does that impact the surrounding area? How do they minimize potential dust? Because odor really travels a lot on dust.”

Being a good steward and making sure we’re minimizing any potential impact that our livestock farms would have on the surrounding area involves being aware of how it affects our neighbors, DeRouchey says.

“USDA scientists have confirmed that U.S. pork producers’ rigorous biosecurity efforts to keep pigs healthy are working,” says NPPC President Lori Stevermer.

(National Pork Board and the Pork Checkoff)

Eldon McAfee , attorney with Brick Gentry P.C. in West Des Moines, Iowa, says operational environmental management extends to neighbor awareness, communication and good relations.

“Don’t ignore neighbors who aren’t happy with your operation. Keep those lines of communication open,” McAfee says. “For example, when you apply manure, try to let everyone know. Attend educational seminars and obtain certifications to show you are being a good neighbor. Make sure employees are up to date on best practices when it comes to being a good neighbor, too.”

Can We Feed the World Without CAFOs?
CAFOs exist for a reason, McCann says. Some of those reasons are economic-related, and some of those are people-related.

“I would make the case that there are not enough people who want to work in the livestock industry and meet our animal protein needs without CAFOs now,” he says. “It’s pretty hard to imagine feeding a world that really craves lean, healthy, wholesome protein from livestock today without CAFOs. That’s difficult to do in my mind.”

Your Next Read: Don’t Let Your Guard Down: How to Avoid an Ag Nuisance Lawsuit

Ninth Circuit Rejects Petition to Tighten EPA Rules on CAFOs

Fri, 25 Apr 2025 19:07:53 GMT

A federal appeals court denied a petition from environmental groups led by Food and Water Watch and the Center for Biological Diversity that sought stricter regulations on concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). This ends a year-long legal effort to overhaul federal oversight of large livestock farms.

The environmental groups argued that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to narrow exemptions and require more CAFOs to obtain permits even without direct discharges.

The Ninth Circuit upheld EPA’s 2021 rejection of a 2017 petition that called for new permitting requirements and reinterpretation of exemptions for agricultural stormwater discharges, Meatingplace reports.

The court ruled the EPA’s decision was not “arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to law.”

The court noted the EPA acknowledged the environmental concerns raised and has committed to further studying CAFO-related water pollution and updating effluent guidelines, rather than launching an immediate rulemaking process.

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) backed the EPA in court, saying that current rules are effective and that many CAFOs already meet zero-discharge standards or face stricter state-level regulations.

Your Next Read: 5 Ways to Protect Your Farm from Animal Activists

How One Minnesota Pork Producer Capitalizes on the Conservation Circle

Tue, 22 Apr 2025 20:20:00 GMT

Ask Minnesota pork producer Dave Mensink what shapes his conservation practices take at the farm gate and he’s got a quick answer.

Circle.

Mensink Farms in Preston, Minn., is one big circle of production, with pork square in the center.

On their crop land, he and wife, Tracie, grow corn and mill it on site to feed the pigs that go out the door each year. Then they use the manure to fertilize the corn.

It’s pretty simple, really.

“Corn feeds the pigs, pigs make manure and manure grows the corn,” Mensink says. “We feed as much corn as we can because the more we raise, the less we have to buy.”

Circularity like this is not an uncommon practice in the area because it provides a number of benefits for growers such as Mensink, namely capturing opportunity for efficiency and profitability by reducing commercial inputs.

On Mensink Farms, corn is milled on-site to provide feed for the pigs they produce annually. This circularity brings advantages for profitability, efficiency and environmental stewardship.

(Photo courtesy of Minnesota Pork Producers Association)

“The ability to leverage circularity helps farmers, especially those in the upper-Midwest, remain competitive from an environmental and economical perspective,” says Lauren Servick, director, public policy strategy and sustainability, Minnesota Pork Producers Association . “This helps capture the value at each part of the farming enterprise, and for farmers like Dave, using manure to grow the corn that then goes back into the pig as feed gives them a competitive advantage.

“From an ecosystem perspective, pig farming where the feed is grown helps keep the nutrient input cycle local.”

Protecting What’s Below from Above
But, because Mensink Farms abuts the Forestville State Park and sits atop a unique ecological bedrock known as karst, every bend and turn of his farm’s circle is knitted with conservation.

“In this region we’ve got to do what we do in an environmentally-responsible manner,” he says.

On Mensink Farms, that looks like making accommodations for a soil type that is both highly filterable and highly erodible at the same time. These accommodations form another circle for Mensink – one that means he is protecting what is underneath the ground through conservation practices above ground.

Because of that unique soil type, Mensink must use caution when applying manure to the land surface because excess nitrogen can leach into both surface and ground water.

Working with local University of Minnesota officials has yielded Mensink a manure management plan that is keeping his water wells at acceptable nitrogen levels.

“We test all our manure before we apply it so we have an idea of how much we should put on,” he says. “And then we implement our soil tests and report our yields back. We follow our manure management plan.”

For growers like Mensink, there are many resources to help get started and even hone an existing manure management plan. Local and regional USDA-NRCS experts provide technical and sometimes even financial support in manure management. According to USDA-NRCS team lead conservationist Jessica Bronson, NRCS can walk beside growers in ways that support stewardship through manure management.

“Producers can obtain assistance from NRCS to plan manure applications and as a part of a complete soil and manure testing to better understand their nutrient production,” Bronson says.

This allows farmers to determine where and when nutrients should be applied for maximum benefit to crops, he adds.

“Storage can be a key component of manure/nutrient management, so NRCS assists producers in understanding their storage needs, obtaining additional storage, upgrading old or failing storages and supporting practices that address odor, transfer or treatment,” Bronson says. “At application, NRCS guides producers in understanding setbacks and regulations and adopting new practices such as incorporation or implementing transfer infrastructure.”

That stringent manure management on Mensink Farms means that he and his wife can feel good about what is underground as well, for one specific reason.

“We have six wells we’ve tested of our own, and they’re all below nitrate risk levels,” he says. “We want to keep it that way because we have grandkids who drink that water.”

Mensink is also protecting his soils by managing what is planted on top of them, namely by installing buffer zones around karst-driven sinkholes that also create habitat for pollinators.

Assistance through USDA-NRCS, in part, made those projects possible.

Mensink Farms has planted more than four acres of buffers to create a pollinator habitat, which creates an environment for biodiversity while also protecting fragile karst soils

(Photo courtesy of Minnesota Pork Producers Association )

“We have 4.5 acres of pollinators that we did through the Conservation Stewardship Program ,” he says. “We still have them in there even though we’re not getting paid because they are much less we have to mow and it looks good along the site.”

This year, Mensink is experimenting with cover crops by aerial-applying winter rye, tillage radish and camelina to keep his more highly-erodible land in place.

Full Circle
For the past several years, Mensink has been working with Minnesota Pork Producers Association and National Pork Board to record and report the impact that conservation has on his farm. This record-keeping serves dual purposes: not only is Mensink able to use that data to make better operational decisions that serve both the environment and the bottom-line, but industry officials say it adds up to building trust within the value chain.

“On-farm assessments look at the practices the Mensink family is using on their farm and quantify that data to help them understand the environmental impact in the areas of carbon sequestration, water use, greenhouse gas emissions and soil erosion reductions,” Servick says. “By using primary data and participating over four years, Dave and his family are able to evaluate the changes they’ve been making on their farm over time which is aggregated into a state and national report that can be used extensively with the supply chain partners and the public.”

This work serves as the foundation of the National Pork Board’s Pork Cares Farm Impact Reports, which the organization uses to advocate for the future of the industry.

“National and state organizations can use the easy-to-understand, blinded and aggregated Pork Cares Farm Impact Reports to talk with decision-makers and value chain partners about farmers’ commitment to pigs, people and the planet,” says Eugenia Hartsook, National Pork Board director, grant administration. “These conversations, backed by the on-farm data and ethical principles, are the building blocks to help protect farmers’ freedom to operate.”

While Mensink values his work with the pork industry, for him, the impact that his conservation practices have on the future of his farm is more immediate. Even though he and his wife are the first-generation of Mensinks to farm this land, he’s hoping they are far from the last.

“We are in the process of farm transition to our son Alex and his wife Katie,” he says. “Every year, he takes on a little more and I take on a little less.”

America’s Conservation Ag Movement is a public/private collaborative that meets growers across the country where they are on their conservation journey and empowers their next step with technical assistance from USDA-NRCS and innovation solutions and resources from agriculture’s leading providers. Learn more at www.americasconservationagmovement.com .

Your Next Read:

How One Oklahoma Farmer Used Conservation to Stop Fighting Mother Nature

Making the Most of Land Stewardship Incentives

One Montana Farmer’s Conservation Solution: Get Back to His Prairie Roots

Feral Swine Law Setback: What's at Stake for Ohio

Fri, 18 Apr 2025 14:25:21 GMT

Every year, feral swine cost Ohio $2.5 million in losses due to the spread of deadly animal diseases and damage to land and crops. Just as 44 other states have some type of ban on importation of feral swine, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine signed H.B. 503, known as the Feral Swine Bill , into law last December to curb the problem.

The law was to go into effect in late March, but a county judge recently granted an injunction putting it on hold.

“The court has disregarded the entire purpose of the law and has wildly expanded what it’s designed to do — which is to protect all pork producers from diseases carried by feral swine such as African swine fever,” says Cheryl Day, Ohio Pork Council executive vice president. “This is certainly not something we foresaw, but we are confident that it will be resolved swiftly to ensure the full protection of our state’s farmers and landowners who are at much higher risk otherwise.”

The judge in the case, brought by a feral swine hunting preserve owner, has urged the state of Ohio to seek a “legislative clarification” to the definition of feral swine, which is currently being pursued, the Ohio Pork Council said in a statement.

With unanimous bipartisan support in the General Assembly and numerous supporters, including the Ohio Farm Bureau, Ohio Dairy Producers Association, Ohio Cattleman’s Association, Ohio Soybean Association, Ohio Sheep Improvement Association, Ohio Poultry Association, Ohio Corn & Wheat Growers Association, and the Ohio Forestry Association, the law set out to protect the state from the harm wild pigs cause.

“It’s a bit disturbing that the court did not understand what’s at stake when we have over 3,500 family-based pig farms in Ohio that depend on keeping their animals safe from unnecessary health risks that could devastate them and our state economy,” Day says.

The Stakes are High
As a family pig farmer in Ohio, Nathan Schroeder, president of the Ohio Pork Council from Leipsic, Ohio, says it’s extremely disappointing that the court did not understand what’s at stake.

“Our nation’s poultry farmers have seen how devastating diseases like avian influenza can be and a foreign animal disease brought in by feral swine would be much worse for us, which is why this law must be allowed to go into effect,” Schroeder urges.

Ohio alone could lose an estimated 28,000 jobs and experience losses of up to $115 million per year if African swine fever, a deadly foreign animal disease that impacts both wild and domestic pigs, were brought in, experts say.

“We’ve all seen the devastation that diseases such as avian influenza can have, and we know foreign animal disease losses would be dramatically worse, which is another reason why this law must be reinstated,” Day points out.

Ohio Pork Council is not letting this one slide.

“We’ll be working hard to support the reinstatement of the law so that our industry gets the protection it deserves,” Day says.

Your Next Read: Pigs Don’t Fly: Feral Hog Spread Is A Man-Made Mess

It's Complex: What is African Swine Fever's Toll on the Environment?

Mon, 07 Apr 2025 14:28:03 GMT

A significant knowledge gap exists around the environmental impacts of African swine fever (ASF), particularly in terms of carcass disposal and the pollution risks associated with it, says Mikayla Schlosser, a student at University of Minnesota’s Veterinary School.

Her study sought deeper understanding of the environmental impacts of ASF, particularly in response to practices such as mass depopulations and carcass disposal in the Philippines.

“ASF has significantly affected swine populations and economies globally since its emergence, but there is limited research on its environmental effects,” Schlosser says.

To fill this gap, Schlosser and colleagues with the Center for Animal Health and Food Safety at the University of Minnesota conducted a scoping review of existing literature on the environmental impacts of ASF, finding minimal literature relevant. Then, they conducted an exploratory, qualitative systems mapping exercise with 18 private and public veterinarians in the Philippines who have experience with ASF response efforts.

She says the exercise explored the environmental impacts of ASF during the pre-outbreak, immediate response, and endemic/long-term management phases.

“The research identified stakeholders involved in decision-making related to ASF’s environmental impacts and highlighted concerns such as the potential contamination of water from carcass burial, gaps in surveillance, and threats to native swine species,” Schlosser says. “The findings will inform future research and policy development in the U.S. to mitigate the potential environmental and economic damage of potential ASF outbreaks.”

The scoping literature review revealed minimal relevant research, underscoring the urgent need for further studies to better understand how ASF affects environmental health, she points out. Additionally, the systems mapping exercise highlighted the complexity of ASF’s environmental impact, involving multiple stakeholders and concerns such as water contamination and threats to native species.

“This emphasizes the importance of learning from other countries’ experiences to develop more comprehensive and effective mitigation strategies prior to ASF entrance to the U.S.,” she says. “Findings can also help U.S. producers by providing insights into the environmental risks associated with ASF outbreaks and response practices.”

Schlosser says by understanding the potential pollution risks from practices like carcass burial and identifying key stakeholders involved in decision-making, producers can better prepare for and respond to ASF outbreaks in a way that minimizes environmental harm.

“The findings can also inform policy development and guide producers in implementing strategies that protect both their operations and the broader environment,” she adds. “The lessons learned from countries like the Philippines can help producers in the U.S. anticipate challenges and prevent environmental and economic damage before ASF reaches their regions.”

Schlosser was one of 15 students who competed in the Veterinary Student Poster Competition at the AASV annual meeting. Read more here.

NPPC Asks USDA to Reconsider Climate-Smart Agriculture Rule

Mon, 24 Mar 2025 15:48:14 GMT

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) asked USDA to reconsider a proposed regulation on “climate-smart agriculture” (CSA) crops used as biofuel feedstocks because it fails to consider manure’s role in providing a renewable source of crop nutrient and reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs), the organization said in Capital Update on Monday. Current scientific literature shows that replacing some amount of commercial fertilizers with manure maintains annual crop yields, increases soil organic carbon storage, reduces GHG emissions, and reduces crops’ carbon footprint.

On Jan. 17, the last business day of the Biden Administration, USDA published an interim rule to establish guidelines for quantifying, reporting and verifying GHG emissions related to the production of biofuel feedstock crops. NPPC pointed out that the rule covers CSA practices that could reduce GHG emissions or sequester carbon, including reduced till and no-till, cover crops, and nutrient management, such as the use of nitrification inhibitors.

“Despite numerous comments to the agency urging it to recognize the important role in crop production manure plays as ‘not only the original sustainable and organic renewable resource but also as a superior soil conditioner,’ USDA’s Office of Energy and Environmental Policy decided to not recognize the use of manure nutrients as a climate smart practice under the regulation,” NPPC said.

NPPC wants USDA to reconsider the rulemaking and the process for developing CSA technical guidelines.

“NPPC greatly anticipated the release of the interim rule to fully understand how the hog and other livestock farmers would play a role in the production of CSA crops used as biofuel feedstocks,” NPPC wrote in its comments. “Needless to say, pig farmers are extremely disappointed to find absolutely no mention or role for hog or other livestock farmers in the interim rule.”

The organization also noted that agronomically sound use of manure rather than commercial nitrogen fertilizer to produce crops reduces the net carbon intensity (CI) score of the feedstock being produced.

“This practice must be included in the list of practices for which … Cl scores are calculated,” NPPC stated, pointing out that manure use has other environmental benefits, including improved soil health, better nutrient cycling, and support for a more circular economy, where “wastes” are put to productive and efficient uses.

Your next read: Is the Swine Industry Ready for H5N1? Texas Veterinarian Says “No”

Don’t Leave Anything on the Table

Wed, 08 Jan 2025 15:37:24 GMT

One thing my dad taught me at an early age was that if I didn’t keep myself busy, he would. When you live on a farm, there is always something to do. There’s always an animal that could use attention, a barn that needs cleaning or a skill that needs practicing.

It can be an exhausting life, but it’s rewarding. It’s rewarding to know that you’ve put the time in and gave it your all. It’s rewarding to know that your work makes a difference and has an impact somehow.

And while my dad was right – that there is always something to do – I’ve also learned that there is always something to do. No matter how hard I work, there will still be work to do tomorrow.

You Can’t Pour Out of an Empty Cup
So, it’s important to also find time to rest. Taking some time off over the holidays is exactly what my soul needed. It’s easy for me to go hard and forget to rest. Then, I wonder why it’s so hard to pour myself into everyone and everything else.

Rest reminds us that we’re human and we can’t control it all. It helps us take a step back and regain perspective. It allows us see more clearly when we’ve taken a bit of a break from the grind.

Time for a Reboot
A recent conversation with my husband has been on my mind a lot lately. He said, “If you aren’t putting in full effort and trying to be the absolute best version of you that you can be, you’re leaving something on the table.”

I’m not a resolutions girl. I’m more of a “use the new year as a time to reboot” kind of girl. For me, the new year is a time to ask important questions.

• What are the things I care about most?
• Does my schedule reflect my priorities?
• Am I investing my time in stuff that matters?
• How am I living up to my full potential?
• What am I leaving on the table?

The U.S. pork industry has been wrestling with big questions, too. As a new year unfolds, I think it’s a good time to ask yourself a few reboot questions. We have limited days to make a difference in this life and fulfill our purpose. Are you on track to make your time count?

We Need You
If you haven’t been a part of the pork industry before, it’s hard to explain why it’s unique. But if you know, you know. My good friend Jan Archer recently retired from a 50-year career working in the pork industry. To say she’s seen it from all angles falls short.

“I’ve had an amazing career in this industry,” Archer says. “I’ve been able to feed my family and send my children to college. I’ve met the most amazing people on the planet -- the most honorable, the most hardworking, the most invested in other people. And that’s because I work in the pork industry.”

Archer says it’s critical that we let people know these stories of rewarding pork industry careers and lifetimes spent doing things that matter.

“We’ve got to let people know we’re here and we are a great career option,” she urges. “It doesn’t matter what you do or what your skill set is. If you are really good at social media, we’ve got a job for you. If you have a flip phone and never want to look at a computer, we have a job for you. If you love animals, we have a job for you. If you don’t really love animals, but love people, we have a job for you. There’s a place for everybody.”

Archer believes the industry’s cohesiveness and dependency on each other is part of why it’s special.

“The guy that’s got 150 pigs and is selling pork out his back door for a lot of money, we need him,” she says. “Those kids with show pigs that are chasing the banners, learning how to be FFA speakers, discovering how to have independent thought, learning how to get up every day and do the work, we really need them. There is a place for everybody.”

Sometimes I question if my role matters. Am I helping? Do I make a difference? The reality is we may never know in this lifetime. But if we prioritize and invest time pursuing a life that matters, using our gifts to the best of our ability, we will find incredible satisfaction living a life that doesn’t leave anything on the table.

Your Next Read: How My Insecurities Made Me More Grateful

Pork Plays Its Part in Global Sustainability Efforts

Thu, 26 Dec 2024 16:00:00 GMT

Have you heard about SDGs? If you have been listening to any sustainability discussions recently, you might have heard this acronym. SDGs refer to the Sustainable Development Goals, a major building block of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

According to the United Nations, these goals are part of a “shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future.” In total there are 17 goals, including zero hunger, sustainable cities and communities, climate action, partnership on goals, and many others. U.S. animal agriculture, including the pork community, is actively contributing toward progress on 15 of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals.

The U.S. animal agriculture community has a proven track record of continuously improving animal care, environmental impact, and food security and has committed to even greater achievements. Real progress toward healthy people and a healthy planet depends on recognizing and advancing those contributions.

Here are a few examples of how U.S. animal ag is supporting UN Sustainable Development Goals:

Goal 7: Affordable and Clean Energy. The U.S. animal agriculture community is on a mission to reduce waste, and that includes recycling waste from the farm and converting it into renewable energy. Smithfield has set a goal to implement biogas systems on 90% of company and contract finishing farms in North Carolina and on 90% of company finishing farms in Missouri by 2030.

Goal 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities. Farmers, ranchers and those involved in agriculture are often well-connected and involved in their local communities and recognize the need to invest in them.

As an example, Christensen Farms donated $300,900 in 2023 to local communities, including $14,200 to local emergency services and $22,000 to military veterans.

Goal 13: Climate Action. Many farms in the U.S. have been passed down over multiple generations. This is not possible without the everyday commitment to care for the land and preserve it for the next generation. American farmers and ranchers have been innovating for decades to reduce their environmental impact.

In the pork community, on-farm conservation practices have reduced CO2 emissions by the equivalent of taking 22,410 cars off the road. Although incredible progress toward climate change efforts has already been made, the U.S. animal ag community remains committed to furthering that progress.

Though the ag community continues to innovate and improve, we can expect to see continued attacks on animal ag’s environmental impact from those that just blatantly oppose animal agriculture. Let’s be prepared to set the record straight.

Your Next Read: A Winning Mentality Motivates This Illinois Livestock Industry Teacher, Coach and Mentor

How Solar Energy is Helping Power Indiana Pork Production

Mon, 25 Nov 2024 21:20:48 GMT

An Indiana company has installed more than one megawatt of onsite solar capacity across Indiana pork farms in the past 12 months.

“We are helping commercial operations utilize available solar incentives, while contributing to a cleaner, more sustainable pork production chain,” says Jeremy Lipinski, managing partner of Emergent Solar Energy. He adds that this achievement underscores a growing commitment to sustainability and cost savings within Indiana’s agricultural sector.

A provider of commercial solar solutions based in the Purdue Research Park of West Lafayette, Ind., Emergent Solar Energy can offer economically compelling on-farm solar solutions to Indiana’s agriculture sector through USDA Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) support.

“Each of the projects was made possible through partial financing from the USDA REAP grants, making renewable energy more accessible and affordable for Indiana’s pork producers,” Lipinksi says. “By utilizing the available grant program, farms can generate clean energy on-site. This lowers their dependence on traditional energy sources, reduces their carbon footprints and insulates their operation against energy inflation costs.”

The USDA’s REAP grant program is an valuable tool for rural businesses looking to adopt renewable energy technologies. By covering up to 50% of total project costs, REAP grants reduce financial barriers by empowering farms to invest in sustainable energy solutions.

“USDA’s Rural Energy for America Program is crucial to the success of rural farms and small businesses across Indiana,” USDA Deputy State Director Curtis Johnson says in a release. “This program allows Hoosiers to adopt renewable technologies, cutting operational costs and strengthening our rural economy for future generations.”

The grants have enabled Emergent Solar Energy to place in service a range of solar projects that cater to diverse pork production operations, from feed mills to sow facilities and hog finishing barns, Lipinski says.

“These projects are helping Indiana’s pork producers cut energy costs by an average of 90% while collectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 1,148 metric tons of carbon dioxide each year,” he adds.

The company has a strong record of partnering with agricultural clients to develop custom solar solutions tailored to the unique needs of farms.

“By collaborating with local farmers and leveraging USDA support, we’re committed to driving renewable energy adoption in Indiana’s agricultural sector,” Lipinski says. “We believe Indiana farmers can lead the way in sustainable agriculture, with solar energy playing a critical role in that future.”

Emergent Solar Energy’s projects over the past 12 months include:
• A 364-kilowatt peak solar project at Laidig Custom Services in St. Joseph County, Ind.
“High utility expenses and concerns of future inflation of electricity cost encouraged us to look into solar power,” says Tim Laidig, independent grower, in a release. “With the USDA REAP grant and tax credits, it made sense to invest in a solar array for our farm. We have reduced our electric expenditures by 50%.”

Arrowhead Pork

(Emergent Solar Energy)

• A 130-kilowatt peak solar project at Arrowhead Pork in White County, Ind.
“Once I saw the project return numbers after the application of the solar tax credits and the USDA REAP grant award, the decision to invest in solar for my dual quad was an easy one,” says Cody Snyder, contract grower, in a release.

The Golden Pig Wyrick Project

(Emergent Solar Energy)

• A 110-kilowatt peak solar project at Golden Pig Farm in Clinton County, Ind.
“The USDA REAP grant offered us the most cost-effective path for installing the solar project on our farm,” say owners Tim and Beth Wyrick, in a release. “We reduced our energy costs by well over 90% at our hog site. The REAP grant program gives farmers a competitive advantage.”

Learn more.

Your Next Read: 5 Things to Consider Before You Add Solar Modules to Your Farm

Pork Representatives Picked for USDA Air Quality Task Force

Mon, 25 Nov 2024 19:49:27 GMT

Two pork industry technical representative were appointed to USDA’s Task Force on Agricultural Air Quality Research, which examines the connection between agricultural production and air quality and advises the Secretary of Agriculture on scientifically sound, cost-effective, federally supported agricultural solutions that can help improve air quality.

Robert Burns, a professor of agriculture at the University of Tennessee with extensive experience working on behalf of pork producers and other livestock farmers, and Arizona producer Marguerite Tan, who serves on the staff at the National Pork Board, were selected to serve up to two years on the 27-member task force.

The focus areas of the task force include:
• Providing recommendations for research related to agricultural air quality issues.

• Ensuring that USDA practices, programs, and research for air quality and climate change promote environmental justice goals and improve the environment for all.

• Addressing reactive nitrogen emissions, including ammonia from agricultural sources.

• Discussing agricultural greenhouse gas and carbon sequestration topics, including climate-smart agriculture and forestry options and sustainable solutions.?

• Providing guidance and recommendations on the impact on agriculture of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency rules and research, including the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and emissions estimating methodologies for livestock and poultry farms.

• Discussing state and local air quality regulations related to agriculture and the potential impact on agricultural operations in those areas.?

Why It Matters
Created by the 1996 Farm Bill, the Task Force on Agricultural Air Quality Research works to address agricultural air quality issues. It also helps better coordinate activities and resources among USDA agencies and other federal partners, including EPA.

Your Next Read: Ohio Pig Farmer Finds Strength Through Life’s Challenges

Fighting Back: The Ongoing Battle Against the Activist Playbook

Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:49:41 GMT

The activist playbook is predictable: file a frivolous lawsuit, challenge an effective agricultural rule or regulation, flood the case with money and cast farmers as villains. This strategy, designed to stifle American ag, threatens not only farmers but also our entire food supply. It’s up to those of us in the industry to push back. Producers know what’s best for their animals, their farms and the communities they serve.

Recently, pork producers won a crucial battle when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit rejected an activist lawsuit that could have upended livestock regulations nationwide. The lawsuit, led by extremists at Food & Water Watch, the Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, and the North Carolina Environmental Justice Network, sought to force the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to require all concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) to obtain federal Clean Water Act (CWA) permits or prove they weren’t discharging pollutants into waterways. If successful, this case would have imposed crippling fines, permitting and regulatory chaos, as activists across the country would have the right to comment on every farm’s business plan and open up the industry to attacks from nationwide class action law firms.

Thankfully, the 9th Circuit saw through the activists’ demands. The court ruled that EPA’s decision to gather more data, from all sides, before making any major regulatory changes was both reasonable and aligned with the CWA. This decision reinforces the need for informed, evidence-based rulemaking rather than reactionary litigation.

In its ruling, the 9th Circuit said EPA denying the activists’ demands was not arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise not in accordance with the law. The court found the agency “deemed it prudent to first seek information about how best to tackle” challenges associated with raising livestock “before directing resources toward a new rulemaking. Those justifications are reasonable and hardly at odds with the CWA’s requirements.”

Unwavering Commitment
The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) led a coalition ensuring agriculture’s voice was heard before the court and defending EPA’s decision, as well as the long-established regulations that have supported modern livestock and poultry farming.

Activists ignore the tremendous progress made in environmental sustainability over the past several decades. Pork producers have long been leaders in maximizing the efficient use of manure and improving on-farm performance and sustainability. We are feeding more people, and more efficiently, than ever. And we’ve addressed environmental challenges, including through adoption of the 2003 CAFO Rule which set a zero-discharge standard, which the industry meets, for livestock and poultry operations.

The activist playbook might be repetitive, but so is our commitment to defending the future of American agriculture.

Your Next Read: Don’t Back Down From the Hard Stuff in the Pork Industry

Trump Return Likely to Slow, Not Stop, U.S. Clean-energy Boom

Wed, 06 Nov 2024 21:40:48 GMT

Donald Trump’s return to the White House will refocus the nation’s energy policy onto maximizing oil and gas production and away from fighting climate change, but the Republican win in Tuesday’s presidential election is unlikely to dramatically slow the U.S. renewable energy boom.

Investor fears of a reversal under Trump sent clean-energy stocks down sharply on Wednesday. The MAC Global Solar Energy index was down 10% in midday trade, while shares of top renewable project developer and owner NextEra Energy slid 6.2%.

A Biden-era law providing a decade of lucrative subsidies for new solar, wind and other clean-energy projects would be near-impossible to repeal, however, thanks to support from Republican states, while other levers available to the next president would only have marginal impact, analysts say.

“I don’t think a Trump president can slow the transition,” said Ed Hirs, energy fellow at the University of Houston. “This is well under way.”

Renewable energy sources such as solar and wind are the fastest-growing segments on the power grid, according to the Department of Energy, driven by federal tax credits, state renewable-energy mandates, and technology advancements that have lowered their costs.

President Joe Biden in 2022 signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act guaranteeing billions of dollars of solar and wind subsidies for another decade as part of his broader effort to decarbonize the power sector by 2035 to fight climate change.

Before the election, Trump slammed the IRA as being too expensive and promised to rescind all unspent funds allocated by the law - a threat that, if accomplished, could pour cold water over the U.S. clean energy boom. But dismantling the IRA would require lawmakers, including those whose states have benefited from IRA-related investments such as solar-panel factories, wind farms and other projects, to vote to repeal it.

“The jobs and the economic benefits have been so heavy in red states, it’s hard to see an administration come in that says, ‘we don’t like this,’” said Carl Fleming, a partner at law firm McDermott Will & Emery, who advised the Biden White House on renewable energy policy.

Many of Trump’s allies also benefit from the IRA through their investments in clean-energy technologies, Reuters has previously reported.

Fleming said Trump could, however, slow things down around the margins by hindering federal agencies that deliver IRA grants and loans, or by reducing federal leasing for things such as offshore wind.

“You could see a new administration come in and they can very quickly begin to cut budgets or restrict budgets or restrict the freedom of agencies to do certain things that are tied to funding,” he said. “But I think that’s a smaller subset of the larger renewables market that’s really relying on those, so I don’t think it would have a shocking effect.”

The Biden administration has rushed to ensure it spends the majority of available grant funding under the IRA before a new president arrives, Reuters has previously reported.

One way Trump could slow the transition is through executive action by changing public lands leasing, analysts said. The Biden administration had sought to expand lease auctions for offshore wind in federal waters, along with solar and wind on land.

“I think you would see more preference given to fossil-fuel extraction on public lands and waters,” said Tony Dutzik, associate director and senior policy analyst at Frontier Group, a non-profit sustainability think-tank.

That could have an outsized impact on the offshore-wind industry, which aims to site projects in federal waters. Most onshore solar and wind projects are located on private property, as is the vast majority of oil and gas drilling. Trump has said he intends to end the offshore-wind industry “on day one,” arguing it is too expensive and poses a threat to whales and seabirds, a dramatic policy reversal after his first administration supported offshore-wind development.

Bernstein Research said Trump is likely to enact a moratorium on new offshore-wind lease sales. Meanwhile, U.S. fossil-fuel production is likely to look much the same under Trump, experts said. The U.S. has already become the world’s largest oil and gas producer, under the watch of Biden, thanks to a drilling boom in fields such as the Permian Basin under Texas and New Mexico.

The production boom started under former President Barack Obama and has continued through the Trump and Biden presidencies. Even so, Trump’s campaign has sought to claim credit, saying his efforts to slash regulatory red tape during his 2017-2021 term paved the way, and arguing he could further expand U.S. fossil-fuel production in a second term by rolling back Biden’s climate initiatives.

“Presidents can make a lot of noise about plans for U.S. oil and gas, but ultimately it’s individuals and companies responding to prices of a global commodity that make the decisions on when to drill,” said Jesse Jones, head of North American upstream at Energy Aspects.

Dan Eberhart, Trump donor and CEO of oilfield-services company Canary, LLC, said he supports Trump’s encouragement of increased oil-and-gas drilling, saying it could further lower energy prices for businesses and consumers.

He added he would also welcome a move by Trump to once again withdraw the United States from international climate cooperation, like he did in his first term, arguing other big greenhouse-gas emitters were not doing enough.

“The Paris accord was aspirational and meaningless if China and India don’t participate,” he said, referring to a landmark U.N. deal in 2015 to limit global warming.

USDA Expands Climate-Smart Grant to Pork Producers in 12 States

Thu, 31 Oct 2024 17:30:56 GMT

The National Pork Board (NPB) recently announced the expansion of the Advancing U.S. Pork Sustainability and Market Value grant program to support pork producers. The grant, which is part of USDA’s Partnership for Climate Smart Commodities program, is now extended to farmers in the following states: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

This industry program offers cost-share opportunities to benefit pork producers, according to its website. This expansion opens new opportunities for producers to receive financial and technical support for adopting climate-smart practices, says NPB.

Eligible producers in all 12 states can now access support for implementing the following practices:

• Cover Crops: Improve soil health, reduce erosion, and increase carbon sequestration by planting cover crops during non-growing seasons.

• Livestock Integration: Combine livestock management with cover cropping to enhance nutrient recycling and soil fertility.

• Conservation Tillage: Reduce soil disturbance with reduced tillage or no-till practices, which help preserve soil structure and moisture.

• Manure Management: Efficiently use manure in nutrient application plans – applying manure to nourish crops and improve soil quality.

• Edge-of-Field and Perennial Grass Buffers: Establish buffers that help reduce sediment and nutrient loss, protecting local waterways.

• Energy-Efficient Practices: Transition to energy-efficient options like LED lighting and heat mats to reduce overall energy use.

A Great Fit for the Pork Industry
NPB says this grant program is a natural fit for the pork industry because it aligns with the We Care commitment established by pig farmers 16 years ago. The We Care initiative includes six ethical principles and sustainability goals that guide the pork industry and promote responsibility across every aspect of production.

By participating in this grant program, pork producers can show their dedication to We Care while adopting practices that improve production methods.

Support for Producers in Navigating Grant Options
With multiple climate-smart grants available across these states, understanding the various options can be complex. To help navigate this process, NPB’s trusted grant partner Eocene Environmental Group will help producers understand which practices they can earn financial incentives for, helping them choose the right grant opportunities and match them with expert guidance on adopting new practices. Climate-smart commodities projects are available in each state through the USDA’s public dashboard .

How It Works: A Simple 5-Step Process
Get started by requesting a Pork Cares Farm Impact Report.

1. Sign Up for a Pork Cares Farm Impact Report: Eligible producers begin by requesting a custom report.

2. Complete the Report with Eocene: An Eocene technician will help producers in collecting necessary on-farm data to begin the report.

3. Create a Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) Implementation Plan: With support from Eocene, producers decide on a plan tailored to their farm’s needs and goals for adopting climate-smart practices.

4. Receive Technical Assistance: Partners like Eocene, Ducks Unlimited and Millborn Seeds will provide hands-on support for implementing CSA practices, while financial training is available through the Farm Credit Council.

5. Track Progress: Eocene gathers data on the impact of CSA practices through confidential, secure Pork Cares Farm Impact Reports, ensuring continuous improvement and transparency.

Why Participate in Climate-Smart Programs?
Participating in climate-smart grant programs like this one helps producers maintain their freedom to operate by attracting valuable supply chain partners. The financial backing of $20 million in federal funding for the Advancing U.S. Pork Sustainability and Market Value grant, matched with $10 million from our grant partner Nestle and $5 million in Pork Checkoff funds, provides a total of $35 million to support producers.

Investments like this enhance the long-term viability of U.S. pork production and ensures that producers remain competitive in a market that increasingly values environmentally conscious practices.

Get Started Today
Producers interested in applying for the grant and integrating climate-smart practices into their operations should begin by requesting a Pork Cares Farm Impact Report.

With the USDA’s support and the expertise of our partners, this program is poised to make a significant impact on the sustainability of U.S. pork production, helping farmers adapt to new challenges while maintaining a focus on environmental stewardship, market growth, and the We Care principles that define the pork industry.

Producers are encouraged to reach out to NPB if they have any questions about the process. Call 1-800-456-7675 and ask for a representative from the sustainability team.

Your Next Read: Pork and Soy Team Up for a Sustainable Future

The Future of the Food Supply Chain Depends On Your Choices Today

Thu, 24 Oct 2024 22:20:44 GMT

The future of food depends on sustainable farming — and pork and soybean producers are leading the charge to protect both the planet and the supply chain.

When the word “sustainability” comes to mind, many think of practices that maintain resources and ensure the future of production agriculture. Today, the sustainability stakes are higher than ever.

Lucas Lentsch, CEO of the United Soybean Board, says sustainability is more than just a buzzword.

“It’s something farmers believe in. It’s about ensuring multiple generations can continue farming while maintaining public trust,” he explains.

This commitment is woven into farming operations in numerous ways, including nutrient management, crop rotation and resource stewardship. But why does this matter? The food system is interconnected, and the choices made on farms today will determine the health of the land and the security of the food supply.

The sustainability stakes are higher than ever.

(National Pork Board and the Pork Checkoff)

In 2018, the pork and soybean commodity organizations recognized their interdependence. Corn and soy provide feed for pigs, and in turn, pigs help maintain soil health through the nutrients their manure provides.

“ 60% of the cost and impact of sustainability in pork production comes from the feed the hogs consume ,” says Bill Even, CEO of the National Pork Board.

The relationship between these sectors is symbiotic, where the nutrient cycle directly affects the efficiency and sustainability of both crop and livestock production.

“You take livestock nutrients, put them on the land to grow corn and soybeans, which becomes feed for the pigs, and out pops a ham,” Even explains.

This cycle, while often overlooked by the broader public, is a key reason why on-farm sustainability matters so much. It’s not just about individual farm practices — it’s about sustaining an entire food system that millions rely on daily. Farmers have always focused on sustainability, even if it went by other names such as conservation or stewardship.

“It’s doing the right thing when nobody’s looking because you know it’s the right thing to do,” Lentsch says.

As consumer demands for sustainability have grown, particularly in the food supply chain, farmers are stepping up to meet those expectations. Restaurants and retailers now seek sustainably produced pork and soybeans, pushing producers to share their progress transparently.

A farmer spreads feed on a mat for a new group of pigs.

(National Pork Board and the Pork Checkoff)

“They know as a brand they have to do their part,” Lentsch says. “It’s all integrated from the farm gate through to the consumer’s grocery experience.”

To back up these claims, the National Pork Board has developed the Pork Cares Farm Impact Report , a third-party verified, personalized report that is also aggregated for state and national pork associations. This transparency is essential for maintaining consumer trust and showing that pork producers are aligned with larger environmental goals.

While the cost of implementing sustainability practices can be a concern for farmers, Even points out these practices can actually boost a farm’s credibility and market competitiveness. Programs such as USDA’s “ Farmers for Soil Health ” initiative are helping to make sustainability more accessible. The program is an initiative backed by National Pork Board, United Soybean Board and National Corn Growers Association through the USDA Partnership for Climate-Smart Commodities. It aims to double the number of corn and soybean acres using cover crops by 2030, which will significantly improve soil health and farm resilience in the long run.

Both the National Pork Board and United Soybean Board are farmer-led organizations, ensuring that decisions about sustainability are made by those who understand the industry’s challenges firsthand. These efforts aren’t just about environmental responsibility — they’re about ensuring the future of farming in an increasingly competitive and resource-constrained world.

“Would you miss us if we were gone?” Lentsch asks. “The entire food chain would miss what farmers do, whether it’s raising pork, poultry or the commodities that feed them. It’s all part of an integrated society.”

His point is clear: Sustainability isn’t just important for farmers — it’s critical for the future of the entire food supply chain, and ultimately, for all consumers.

Your Next Read: Don’t Back Down From the Hard Stuff in the Pork Industry

What Impact Does Pork Farming Have on the Environment?

Thu, 24 Oct 2024 14:29:49 GMT

Agricultural producers face many pressures and challenges. With a growing population that will demand more food, and a strained climate that requires attention and adjustment of practices, it is difficult to know right from wrong and fact from fiction.

“The pork industry has taken this topic by the horns,” says Frank Mitloehner, CLEAR Center Director. “They’ve been ahead of the curve on what needs to be done. Their focus on sustainability was not just on animal welfare or animal housing, but issues like environmental sustainability. They looked at sustainability and identified it as containing many things, which became the We Care Principles. This work was all done in the early 2000s, laying a strong foundation.”

The National Pork Board’s (NPB) We Care® Ethical Principles offer a roadmap for the industry. These principles acknowledge pork producers’ responsibility to build and maintain the trust of customers through ethical practices and high-quality products. This includes safeguarding natural resources in all pork production practices.

Agriculture products, such as pork, provide affordable, nutrient-rich and sustainable food options for consumers. Pork is one of the most economical meat options and is one of the most consumed meat products on the market. Producers, researchers and industry professionals are working together to create efficiencies and minimize emissions to continue providing safe, healthy and responsibly produced food for generations to come.

What are greenhouse gases?
To understand pork production’s impact on the environment begins with an understanding of greenhouse gases — the chemicals causing environmental warming and changes, according to the Unites States Environmental Protection Agency.

Greenhouse gases trap heat in the atmosphere. The sun radiates solar beams to the surface of the earth. In an emissions-free world, these gases are reflected back into space. Greenhouse gases create a blanket that hovers in the atmosphere. The thicker this layer becomes, the more heat is retained in the atmosphere, contributing to climate change. The most well-known of these gases are carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide.

Methane is a greenhouse gas that is more than 28 times as potent and heat-wrapping than carbon dioxide per molecule. It is produced in agriculture from animal waste, fossil fuel production, biomass burning and natural sources such as wetlands. Methane is notably short-lived compared to carbon dioxide; methane stays in the atmosphere for about 10 years, compared to carbon dioxide’s 1,000. Mitloehner emphasizes that because of its lifespan, reducing methane emissions in livestock operations is paramount to reducing overall greenhouse gas emissions.

“If we can reduce methane enough, we can reduce warming,” says Mitloehner. “This is why there is so much attention on animal agriculture, because it has an opportunity to be a climate solution. And while swine production is small part of livestock emissions, we’ve seen the sector strive to make improvements where possible.”

Total emissions from the agriculture sector
According to the EPA , the agriculture sector — which includes crop and livestock production —accounts for 11% of the total direct greenhouse gas emissions. Agriculture soil management, cattle enteric emissions and manure management make up the industry’s footprint. Soil management accounts for just over half of the greenhouse gases in industry.

Livestock emissions differ between ruminant and monogastric animals. Ruminants are animals with multiple-chambered stomachs, such as cattle, goats and sheep. Swine and poultry are monogastric animals and have one, simple stomach. The difference in these animals’ physiological makeups has varying effects on the industry’s footprint. As ruminants digest food, they are prone to enteric emissions, meaning they belch methane.

Mitloehner sees the swine industry as the envy of many around the world — swine are naturally less problematic than other livestock because they do not produce enteric emissions.

How are greenhouse gases emitted in pork production?
Carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide are all produced in the swine life cycle. Fossil fuels and livestock production emit carbon differently. Animals produce carbon through a biogenic carbon cycle. This means that atmospheric carbon dioxide, produced during photosynthesis, is taken out of the air and absorbed into plants and the soil. As animals eat and process plants in their feed or organically, they emit carbon back into the cycle through manure or belches. When there is a surplus of carbon in the cycle, it is emitted into the atmosphere instead of being pulled back into the cycle.

Alternatively, fossil fuels access carbon from animals and plants that have died, decayed and fossilized underground. Carbon is pulled from underground and burned for fuel. As carbon burns, it’s added directly into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide.

Pigs consume and excrete compounds through manure. In pig feed, carbon is primarily found in carbohydrates, while nitrogen is found in proteins, often sourced from grains and other feed ingredients. When animals digest the feed, they convert these compounds to animal proteins digestible by humans.

Land application of manure helps continue the nitrogen cycle and the carbon cycle, both of which circulate elements in the natural forms they are found.

Improved manure management cannot be undervalued
As carbon in manure is broken down, it becomes methane. Manure that is uncovered, for example in lagoons or open pits, leeks methane into the atmosphere. Conversely, covered manure storage systems, such as anaerobic digesters, trap methane and process it into an energy source.

Mitloehner says there are many valid ways to manage manure on swine farms, but believes in anaerobic digesters’ potential to reduce emissions through manure storage and processing.

“Anaerobic digesters are good options to manage manure because they optimize the production of methane,” Mitloehner says . “The methane doesn’t go into the air; it’s trapped and processed. It’s used to power vehicles or converted to power homes. If you want to reduce methane, you need to reduce volatile solids. Digesters are the best way to do that.”

Traditionally, manure is stored in open lagoons or uncovered pits. Capping manure in digesters traps the methane gas and converts it to a usable source of power. Because manure is a volatile solid, meaning it is converted to carbon dioxide and methane, separating and processing manure is crucial. Additionally, the organic materials that are left after digesting are land-applied as fertilizer with a much lower odor than untreated manure while emitting fewer greenhouse gases.

Mitloehner brings attention to the “Pathways towards lower emissions report,” published in 2023, and centers the conversation on reducing emissions on the report’s researched predictions. The biggest opportunity to reduce the environmental impacts in pork production lies in improved manure management, although manure management is the least-effective total emission reduction strategy in livestock overall, according to the report. Notably, the report also highlights that decreasing the volume of meat consumed in human diets is one of the least effective in combatting greenhouse gas emissions.

Looking to the future
Progress has been made across the industry’s environmental footprint. According to We Care’s 2021 Sustainability Report, producers have reduced their environmental impact in the past 50 years by using 75.9% less land, 25.1% less water and 7% less energy. Overall, the carbon emissions per pound of pork are 7.7% lower than they were 50 years ago.

There is more work to be done, and scientists around the world are working and connecting tirelessly to address these issues. Mitloehner is confident the industry will continue to develop to address these issues to meet the challenge of creating more food while being stewards of the environment.

“Over the last few decades, we’ve learned to breed more efficient animals that are directly related to the environmental footprint of livestock,” Mitloehner says. “We’ve seen great progress in breeding efficiencies in dairy cows to reduce methane, now we have to figure out breeding parameters for pigs. I believe research will lead to efficiencies to predict potential methane emission in pigs.”

The CLEAR Center receives support from the Pork Checkoff, through the National Pork Board.

Your Next Read: Supreme Court Hears NPPC’s Arguments in Clean Water Act Case

Study Combines Woodchips and Biochar to Clean Water of Pharmaceuticals, Nutrients

Tue, 22 Oct 2024 21:59:14 GMT

What happens to ibuprofen after it eases your throbbing headache? Like many pharmaceuticals, it can remain in an active form when our bodies flush it out. That’s a problem, because although wastewater treatment plants are good at reducing nutrient pollutants in water, they aren’t designed to remove pharmaceuticals and personal care products. So antibiotics, hormones, and other drugs are sent back into streams and onto crop fields.

In a new University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign study, researchers show how a simple system using woodchips and a bit of glorified sawdust can dramatically reduce nitrogen, phosphorus, and multiple common drugs in wastewater.

“Even at low concentrations, pharmaceuticals and personal care products (PPCPs) can degrade water quality, disrupt ecosystems, promote antibiotic resistance, and lead to bioaccumulation in wildlife. While nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus cause visible problems like harmful algal blooms, PPCPs pose potential risks, particularly through long-term exposure in vulnerable populations. Both issues highlight the need for better wastewater management,” said study author Hongxu Zhou, who completed this study as a doctoral student in the Department of Agricultural and Bioengineering (ABE), part of the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences and The Grainger College of Engineering at U. of I.

Zhou and his collaborators knew woodchip bioreactors — woodchip-filled tanks or trenches through which water flows — efficiently remove excess nitrogen in water. This is thanks to microbes living in and on the woodchips; they “eat” nitrate, turning it into harmless nitrogen gas. The team developed a novel designer biochar — in this case, sawdust pretreated with lime sludge and then slow-burned into a charcoal-like material — could bind phosphorus and certain PPCPs. The large surface area and composition of the designer biochar cause chemical compounds to stick and not let go.

With these principles in mind, the researchers tried a “treatment-train” approach in the lab to see how well the two treatments worked together. They collected water from a local creek and loaded it with nitrogen, phosphorus, ibuprofen, naproxen, the diabetes drug sitagliptin, and a derivative of estrogen. This water entered small woodchip bioreactors, then flowed “downstream” through tubes filled with biochar. On the other end of the system, which they called B2 (bioreactor-biochar), the researchers measured the remaining compounds in the water.

“On average, the B2 system removed 77% of the nitrate, 99% of the phosphorus, and about 70% of the ibuprofen, 74% of the naproxen, 91% of the sitagliptin, and 97% of the estrone,” said study co-author Wei Zheng, principal research scientist at the Illinois Sustainable Technology Center (ISTC), part of the Prairie Research Institute at U. of I. “The biochar acted like activated carbon to efficiently remove pharmaceutical residues from the contaminated water.”

The results varied a bit when the research team changed the speed at which the water moved through the system, with slower speeds leading to greater nitrogen removal. They also tested the role of biochar format — granules or pellets — finding the granules picked up more pharmaceuticals and phosphorus.

Because microbes are responsible for the nitrogen removal in woodchip bioreactors, the researchers wondered whether the pharmaceuticals could impact the microbial community. They found changes in the abundance of certain bacterial groups, but the main function of the microbial community was unaffected.

“For me, the most exciting aspect of our findings is the confirmation that the woodchip bioreactor’s nitrate efficiency remains unaffected by PPCPs, despite the changes in microbial composition,” Zhou said. “This suggests that the bioreactor system is robust enough to maintain its performance under challenging conditions, which has significant implications for its application in real-world scenarios.”

Although the study was conducted on the lab bench, the researchers modeled the B2 system’s efficacy at larger scales, showing strong potential for industrial applications.

“We believe that through regular maintenance and optimizing system design, many of the challenges associated with scaling can be addressed. For example, clogging in continuous flow-through systems can reduce overall performance and longevity; therefore, periodic replacement of biochar is needed,” said co-author Rabin Bhattarai, associate professor in ABE.

“These design and operational considerations are critical to ensuring both performance and service life in relevant applications, ultimately enhancing the effectiveness of B2 systems in addressing environmental challenges,” he added.

The study, “Simultaneous removal of nutrients and pharmaceuticals and personal care products using two-stage woodchip bioreactor-biochar treatment systems,” is published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials [DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.135882]. The research was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (grant no. 2020–67019-31023) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (grant no. 84008801).

Zhou is now a postdoctoral research associate in ISTC. Zheng is also an adjunct faculty in ABE.

Your Next Read: Purposeful Purchases: How to Decide Which Technology to Invest in Next