Follow Our Blog: The Confluence
When liquid manure sits in storage lagoons on dairies or other livestock operations for too long, methane can form and contribute to climate change. To address concerns about methane emissions, the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) developed the Alternative Manure Management Program (AMMP), which supports farmers in reducing their methane emissions with both financial and technical assistance.
The objective of CDFA's AMMP is to encourage dairy and livestock producers to adopt climate smart practices to reduce methane emissions in animal agriculture systems. The program incentivizes the development of manure management practices that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as protect water and air quality.
These practices fall under four main categories: pasture-based management, solid separation, conversion from flush to scrape, and alternative manure treatments and storage. For example, running manure through a solids separator helps to reduce potential surface and groundwater pollution as there is less nitrogen and other elements in the separated liquids. In the most recent round of grants from the program, livestock and dairy operations could apply for up to $750,000 to implement these kinds of methane reduction practices.
In addition, producers can receive technical assistance from the University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources (UC ANR) Climate-Smart Agriculture educators. This team was established with the support of UC ANR, the Strategic Growth Council, and CDFA, and has educators based in ten counties around the state. The effort is led by Doug Parker, director of the California Institute for Water Resources, in collaboration with several UC ANR county based Advisors.
The Climate-Smart Agriculture educator team has been working on a case study project highlighting the work of two dairies that received a CDFA AMMP grant for solid separation practices.
Zuppan Dairy, a family-owned farm, milks around 600 cows in Glenn County. With the help of the CDFA AMMP grant, they were able to purchase and install a manure solids separator, handling equipment, a pump for the pond, a concrete slab, and an agitator. The project was completed within a year and has now been operating for almost two years. By implementing these climate-smart manure management practices, Zuppan's greenhouse gas reduction is equivalent to removing 176 cars from the road per year. Not only are there environmental benefits, but Zuppan Dairy is also seeing a yearly average savings of $29,000 - $37,000 due to fertilizer savings, reductions in manure hauling with the excavator, and diesel fuel reductions.
Renati Dairy, is a third and fourth-generation run farm that was established in 1958 and milks 750 cows in Sonoma County. They installed a pump, agitator, mechanical scraper, and concrete trough to connect manure to an existing manure solids separator. Renati Dairy's greenhouse gas reduction for this project is equivalent to removing 111 cars from the road each year. In addition, a dairy of this scale can expect to see yearly savings of approximately $93,000.
Along with annual cost savings for each of the dairies, both are seeing additional related benefits including lower levels of solids in manure ponds and a reduction in labor costs. Reduced solids in the collection ponds means the farmer does not have to worry about a crust forming that could create methane gas, and can also more evenly distribute the water onto their various fields for irrigation.
Taken as a whole, the CDFA AMMP program has led to a reduction of 1.1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents over five years, the equivalent of 243,310 cars being taken off the road.
For more information, please visit the UC ANR Climate-Smart Agriculture web pages to read the full stories and economic analyses for these dairies.
By John Karlik, UC Cooperative Extension, Environmental Horticulture/Environmental Science Advisor, Kern County
In a previous article, I noted another dry year is underway. Excessive landscape irrigation is wasteful and can lead to turf and landscape diseases. However, rarely is it necessary to do a landscape makeover to save water, nor will modifications necessarily result in water savings.
The key to saving water outdoors is irrigation scheduling. Modifications to a landscape are of no benefit for water conservation unless the irrigation amount is reduced. Although water conservation is a large topic, here are a few tips and ideas for saving water in landscapes and other outdoor plantings:
Check the irrigation system
Periodically run the irrigation system during the day to check for leaks, missing heads, broken risers, and sprinkler coverage. Repair as necessary.
Determine how much to water
Water needs of plants in home gardens, landscapes, and orchards change by a factor of 10 from winter to summer in much of California, though the exact factor is location specific. Therefore, irrigation schedules should be changed at least four times per year: spring, summer, fall, and winter. In winter, you may be able to turn the system off completely.
Irrigation amounts are usually expressed as depth of applied water. For example, during winter in the southern San Joaquin Valley, about 0.02 inches per day are needed, while in summer the value rises to about 0.25 inches per day. These values do not mean water needs to be applied every day. Weather conditions will affect water needs of plants.
You can measure how much water your sprinklers deliver by placing cans or coffee mugs in the landscape and running sprinklers for a set amount of time. You can also estimate total landscape water use from your water bill by considering water use during winter months as the baseline indoor value, and water in addition as used outdoors. That assumes sprinklers are shut off during winter.
Finally, irrigate and monitor. In other words, check soil moisture between irrigations with a shovel, soil probe, or screwdriver, and adjust the irrigation schedule accordingly.
Determine how often to water
Irrigation scheduling is a combination of frequency (how often) and duration (run-time). As a rule-of-thumb, plan to fill the soil volume containing plant roots and then irrigate again when about half the available water has been used. Therefore, set run-times for each irrigation zone and then add or subtract days depending on season of the year.
Determine when to water
Early morning is best since wind speeds and temperature are low, and less evaporation and wind-loss occur.
What about mulches?
Mulches, such as wood chips or shredded leaves, help save water by reducing evaporation from soil.
What about turfgrass?
Turfgrass is water-thrifty if irrigated carefully. However, turf is often over-irrigated, so reducing the area of turf may lead to water savings. Experimental data show warm-season grasses, such as bermudagrass and the UC release ‘El Toro' zoysia, offer water savings over cool season turfs, such as tall fescue or bluegrass. Buffalograss is even more drought tolerant, but not often planted in California.
What about “drought-tolerant plants?”
Research-based water-use data do not exist for most plants used in landscapes. We often infer drought tolerance from seeing where a plant grows in nature. However, many California natives and plants adapted to Mediterranean climates may not perform well under irrigated conditions. These plants may be susceptible to root rot, for example, if irrigated. Drought-tolerant plants do not of themselves save water. Saving water is instead accomplished by changing irrigation schedules to reduce applied water.
By John Karlik, UC Cooperative Extension, Environmental Horticulture/Environmental Science Advisor, Kern County
As California enters another dry summer, the supply and use of water are once again becoming topics of immediate concern. Statewide, agriculture dominates use of developed water — meaning water which is moved through pipes at some point. In urban areas, about half of developed water is used outdoors, and of that fraction about half is used for landscape irrigation.
That half is an important fraction in Los Angeles and other urban areas. Across the state, homeowners may be interested in saving money on water bills, improving plant health, limiting weeds, and being ecologically responsible while still having an attractive, low-maintenance landscape.
There are several approaches to landscape management that can save water. Some are relatively simple, such as adjusting irrigation schedules. Others require more cost and time, such as replacing some plant materials with others or modifying an irrigation system.
In the 1990s, there were many meetings and attention given to the concept of xeriscape, which is a water-conserving landscape. Seven principles of xeriscape were enunciated, among them plant selection, use of mulches, and so forth. Often, when someone asks about reducing landscape irrigation, the first thought or question is about replacing plants with others thought to require less water.
The key to water savings, however, is irrigation scheduling, which is a combination of frequency and duration. That means how often the system is run and how much water is applied each time. In fact, all possible landscape modifications are directed toward being able to make changes in how much water is applied, because without reducing applied water by changing irrigation settings no water will be saved.
Around 1990, I did a case study in my own home landscape in Bakersfield, California, which is a warm-summer area, to measure how various changes in the landscape affected water use. I tracked water use through monthly water bills, and knew how much water the previous owner had used on a month-by-month basis.
When I moved in to the house, I immediately began a four-phase plan to change the landscape and evaluate corresponding water use. Goals were to conserve water, minimize maintenance, lessen the need for herbicides and insecticides, and evaluate less common plants thought to be water conserving. The house had a water meter, and I recorded the monthly values.
The first phase focused on assessing the property. The landscape had 4,880 square feet of well-maintained hybrid bermudagrass with additional areas of border plantings of annual flowers and shrubs.
Phase two involved changing irrigation scheduling with no other landscape modifications. I began by conducting a water audit by placing small containers around the yard during a watering cycle and measuring the amount of water in the containers. I used these data to determine precipitation rate; that is, how much water sprinklers delivered per given time period. Then, I checked UC data for historic reference evapotranspiration (ETo), which is the amount of water an unstressed area of cool season turfgrass uses. I adjusted the irrigation schedule accordingly.
This change – the water audit plus changing sprinkler timer settings based on ETo – was the least expensive alteration. Yet it ultimately proved to be the most effective in reducing water use, resulting in a 33% savings in outdoor water use compared to the baseline year.
In phase three, turf was replaced and the total turf area reduced. Bermudagrass was sod cut and removed and replaced with ‘El Toro' zoysia, a UC release. The main reason for turf replacement was not water conservation, at which bermudagrass excels, but rather to reduce maintenance and to observe ‘El Toro' in a residential setting, since at the time it was quite new.
The bermudagrass on the south side of the driveway was replaced with plants thought to be water conserving from an Arizona nursery. In the side yard along the street, bermudagrass between a fence and sidewalk was replaced with landscape roses watered by drip irrigation. The new turf area was 3,260 square feet, 67% of the original turf area. Water saved following these modifications was small, only 4% less than in year two.
Overall, through these modifications, water use in the landscape was reduced to 55% of its initial value. As noted, the greatest savings occurred by simply adjusting clock settings to better correspond to plant water needs. Other benefits were reduction in maintenance time and improved ease of care of the landscape.
“California's historic drought presents an opportunity to apply insight from on-the-ground managers to develop future adaptation and mitigation strategies for management and policy decision-making. Ranchers are among the first to experience the social, economic, and environmental impacts of drought, so they are essential in co-developing management and policy guidance for building rangeland resilience to drought,” says Grace Woodmansee, UC ANR Livestock and Natural Resources Advisor in Siskiyou County.
Woodmansee is relatively new to her position, having started in January of 2021, but she is not new to UC ANR. She grew up in Chico, California, raised market lambs through 4-H, and eventually earned an undergraduate degree from Chico State. As an undergraduate, she interned with UC Cooperative Extension and was drawn to how connected county advisors were to their communities.
She continued to pursue this work through graduate school. “My interest in rangeland management and Cooperative Extension expanded while serving as a research assistant in the UC Rangelands lab at UC Davis, where I completed my Master of Science in Agronomy in November 2020,” Woodmansee explains.
While conducting graduate research, Woodmansee worked with UC ANR's Dan Macon, Tracy Schohr, and Leslie Roche to analyze data from interviews of rangeland livestock producers collected near the end of California's last historic drought in 2016. The team asked 48 rangeland livestock producers about what proactive strategies they used to prepare for drought and what reactive actions they took to respond to drought. The managers then ranked the effectiveness each practice.
Through the interviews, Woodmansee and her colleagues explored whether multi-species grazing was effective as a proactive drought management strategy. Multi-species grazing means that a mix of livestock, such as sheep and cattle, who like to eat different plants, graze the land. This may allow ranchers to stretch the available forage during a drought year. The interviews revealed that multi-species ranchers managed drought in a greater variety of ways. Indeed, multi-species grazing seems to allow for greater flexibility in coping with drought.
“Surprisingly, some of the least-used management strategies were ranked as most effective by ranchers. For example, we found that multi-species grazing was the least-used proactive drought management practice, but was the highest ranked proactive practice based on perceived effectiveness by ranchers,” Woodmansee observed. As extreme, multi-year droughts become more common, strategies that were ranked as highly effective by ranchers may be the best hope for mitigating future drought impacts.
These results led Woodmansee and her colleagues to conclude that prioritizing management flexibility is the most effective way for ranchers and land managers to manage drought. “A diversity of both proactive and reactive drought management strategies will continue to be a critical component of building ranch resilience, particularly during multi-year droughts,” says Woodmansee.
As for the future, Woodmansee is excited to be a part of the Siskiyou County community and to work with ranchers and land managers to identify research priorities and projects that will not only address livestock production but also contribute to solutions for natural resource management challenges. She hopes to continue working on drought-related research, contribute to increasing wildfire preparedness, and support disaster planning for commercial livestock operators.
“It can be overwhelming to think about the effects of complex natural disasters occurring simultaneously, such as drought and wildfire, and how to support land managers as they manage through these challenges,” Woodmansee reflects, noting that Siskiyou County has been under extreme drought conditions for over a year and the impacts on forage production, irrigation water availability, and fire danger this spring are apparent to her. “But I am excited to be working with motivated and innovative folks, including ranchers, extension colleagues, agency personnel, and community members, to solve water-related challenges.”
The podcast Water Talk launched its second season on Friday, April 2. This season focuses in part on drought, a water issue at the top of many minds during this relatively dry rainy season.
"In California, drought is not 'if,' it's 'when,' said Water Talk co-host Faith Kearns, academic coordinator with the California Institute for Water Resources in the preview episode.
"The second season includes a diverse group of guests from every corner of the state, border to border," said co-host Samuel Sandoval, a UC Cooperative Extension specialist in the UC Davis Department of Land, Air, and Water Resources.
The weekly podcast will feature discussions of agriculture, water policy, environmental and social justice, land and wildlife management, water for cities, Indigenous perspectives on water, climate change, and other issues related to California water.
"We thought a lot about the geography of the state, the identities of the people whom we were speaking with, the experts we were talking with, and the topics," said co-host Mallika Nocco, a UC Cooperative Extension specialist in the UC Davis Department of Land, Air, and Water Resources.
Some aspects of the podcast were modified in the second season. Instead of recording during a live event, as was done in the first season, each episode was recorded with only the co-hosts. In addition, two production assistants, Claire Bjork and Victoria Roberts, supported the development of each episode through a UC ANR Renewable Resources Extension Act grant.