Fert$mart Soil and Fertiliser Management Planfertsmart.dairyingfortomorrow.com.au/.../PM.16.001-F.-Smart-Soil...1.… · Desired soil fertility levels based on DPI guidelines (refer

F. Smart

Kyabram

November 2012

Prepared for the Fert$mart project

Fert$mart

Soil and Fertiliser Management Plan Making fertiliser profitable

Photos Lynne Strong

2

Fert$mart planning

This Soil and Fertiliser Management Plan has been prepared to meet the requirements of Dairy

Australia’s Fert$mart program which is funded by Dairy Australia and the Australian Government’s

Caring for Our Country Program.

The aim of the Fert$mart Soil and Fertiliser Management Plan (Fert$mart Plan) is to assist dairy

farmers reach higher levels of profitability and sustainability by providing recommendations to

improve nutrient use efficiency and soil health, and to reduce soil and nutrient losses. Fert$mart

aligns with the International Plant Nutrition Institute’s 4R’s principles of applying the right source of

nutrient, at the right rate, at the right time, and in right place.

This Fert$mart plan has been prepared by a Fertcare C accredited agronomist in Victoria, based on

the farm information provided, observations & farm advisor feedback during the on-farm visits in

September & October 2012. As well as reviewing the Fert$mart plan annually (as per planning cycle)

it is also important to review the ramifications in context of overall on-farm profitability with your

advisor.

Contents Fert$mart planning ................................................................................................................................. 2

Fertiliser Program 2012/2013 ................................................................................................................. 3

Key Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 4

Farm Details ............................................................................................................................................ 5

FMZ 1 – Permanent Pastures .................................................................................................................. 6




FMZ 5 – Permanent Pastures ................................................................................................................ 10

FMZ 5 – Annual Pastures ...................................................................................................................... 11

Farm Gate Nutrient Budget .................................................................................................................. 12

APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................................... 13

Farm Map - FMZs .................................................................................................................................. 13

DPIV Soil Test Guidelines ...................................................................................................................... 14

DairySAT Fertiliser BMP ........................................................................................................................ 14

DairySAT Soils BMP ............................................................................................................................... 15

Soil/Plant tissue tests ............................................................................................................................ 16

Using Dairy Effluent as a Fertiliser (DPIV Fact Sheets)……………………………………………………………………… 21

Additional technical information is available on-line:

www.dairyaustralia.com.au Environment / Soils, Nutrients & Effluent

www.dpi.vic.gov.au Agriculture / Dairy / Managing Waste

www.dpi.vic.gov.au Agriculture / Dairy / Fertilising dairy pastures

www.dpi.vic.gov.au Agriculture / Dairy / Pasture Consumption Calculator

3

Fertiliser Program 2012/2013

Fertiliser products top-dressed unless otherwise indicated using DairySAT BMP (best management practices)

included in the appendix (pages 14-15). Products noted based on past use so discuss all aspects fully with

your Fertcare C accredited advisor.

Fertiliser kg/ha 2012 / 2013

FMZ Area N P K S Fertiliser Program

1 No 14-16 7.4 193 13 0 16 Spring 2 x 70 kg/ha Urea NPKS 46:0:0:0

(Perm't)

Summer Nil

Autumn 1 x 150 kg/ha Single Super NPKS 0:9:0:11

Autumn 2 x 70 kg/ha Urea NPKS 46:0:0:0

Winter 2 x 70 kg/ha Urea NPKS 46:0:0:0


(Perm't)

Summer Nil

Autumn Gypsum required. Refer FMZ 2 notes

Autumn 1 x 150 kg/ha Single Super NPKS 0:9:0:11




(Perm't)

Summer Nil




4 No 28-31 10.1 129 0 0 0 Spring Irrigated with effluent pond liquid *

(Perm't)

Summer Irrigated with effluent pond liquid *




(Perm't)

Summer Slurry likely to be applied


Autumn 1 x 300 kg/ha Super Potash 5:1 NPKS 0:7:8:9




(Annual)

Summer Nil

Autumn Agricultural lime required. Refer FMZ 6 notes.

Autumn 1 x 500 kg/ha Super Potash 5:1 NPKS 0:7:8:9



Milking area 83.6

Bull & Calves 6.6

Other areas 14.8

Total 105.0

* Effluent pond liquid usually applied on FMZ 4 but slurry will be pumped out onto FMZ 6 in summer 2013.

4

Key Recommendations

• Baseline topsoil phosphorus (P), potassium (K) and sulphur (S) levels are all generally

high across the milking area which is not unexpected after the drought and high inputs

of supplementary feed.

• The Fert$mart plan has identified nitrogen (N) use as a key consideration within the

fertiliser program moving forward. As discussed record the number of grazings and

silage yields (x paddock) annually to confirm intensity of use across the milking area.

It is important to benchmark your nitrogen use, supplementary feed use & production

per ha data to provide a guide to any change in the N program.

Your key criteria for 2011/12 is compared with the top 25% farms in Northern Victoria

taken from the 2011/12 DPI Dairyfarm Monitor Project (total of 24 farms).

Note the milking area used with the DPI Dairyfarm Monitor project includes permanent

& annual pastures on an equal basis.

Supplementary Stocking Supplementary Production Actual N

feed t DM/cow rate/ha feed DM/t/ha kg MS /ha use/ha

F Smart 4.30 t DM/cow x 3.3 SR = 14.3 t DM/ha 1555 Kg MS/ha 95 kg N/ha

Top 25% 3.20 t DM/cow x 2.2 SR = 7.00 t DM/ha 1256 Kg MS/ha 120 kg N/ha

• The effluent pond will be emptied onto the annual pasture (FMZ 6) over summer. In

2013/14 ensure the effluent pond liquid is shandied and applied over paddocks No

28-31 (10.1ha).

• The farmgate nutrient balance indicates current positive balance based on 2011/12

for potassium (K) and slight negative for phosphorus (P) with nil inputs. It is

recognised the distribution is not consistent across the property. Potassium is

adequately supplied but farm milking area maintenance P requirements are approx.

20 kg/ha.

• Pasture herbage testing identified copper levels are borderline and should be

monitored again in spring 2013 to confirm trends. Ameliorant use (gypsum and / or

agricultural lime) will help build soil calcium reserves over time while gypsum will

help leach sodium.

• Review the Fert$mart plan again in mid-2013 with your Fertcare C accredited

advisor.

• Adopt bi-annual soil monitoring program (given your high fertility status) except for

FMZ 4 & 6 which should be tested annually.

5

Farm Details

Fert Smart purchased the Back Road, Kyabram property back in 2001 and supply Beaut Milk.

The irrigated dairy farm property has total farm area of 105 ha with 15.4 ha of other use

area. The milking area is 83 ha milking area (51.6 ha permanent & 32 ha annual) and 6.6 ha

calf / bull paddocks.

Herd size was 270 cows in 2011/12 and will be increased to 290 cows for 2012/13. Herd has

60/40 split between spring & autumn calving. Herd is cross bred with average cow size 500

kg

Calves are reared at home but all young stock (100 head) are agisted off the home property.

During the drought pastures were dried off and high rates of supplementary feed bought

onto the property. All pastures have been renovated since the drought.

Nitrogen only was used last season (average of 95 kg N/ha across the milking area). Fertiliser

expenditure was $17,653 in 2010/11.

The milking area has been split into 6 farm management zones (FMZ) as outlined.

FMZ AREA

1 7.4 Permanent pasture No 14 - 16





6 32.0 Annual pasture No 37 - 43

83.4 ha

The property has a turkey nest effluent dam (1.0 Ml), turkey nest recycle dam

(4 Ml) and a new recycle sump on the annual paddocks (3.0 Ml). Recently completed

irrigation works have added a sump and meant all water now remains on the property.

The Accounting for Nutrients Project identified that dairy cows spent a small proportion of

their time in the dairy (2%) and yards (9%). This was followed by time spent on feedpads

(11%) and holding areas (26%) but the most significant was in the paddock (but heavily

weighted towards paddocks close to the dairy).

The intention is to pump out the effluent pond over summer 2012/13 onto the annual

pastures of FMZ 6 (which have low fertility base).

‘Using dairy effluent as a fertiliser’ notes are attached for future use (Appendices, page 27).

6

2012 / 2013 Fertiliser program: Permanent Pastures

FMZ 1 – Permanent Pastures

Area 7.4 ha Comprising farm map paddocks No 14-15-16

Background: Old permanent pasture paddocks close to dairy. Ryegrass & clover paddocks

are rotationally grazed (usually 12-14 x grazings).

Soil structure: Friable brown clay loam soils that are not saline or sodic.

However soil tests indicate the calcium:magnesium ratio is low and gypsum is

the preferred remedial ameliorant.

Soil health: Organic carbon levels are high (4.5%) and satisfactory. Pastures have good

root depth and there was no indication of pest or disease issues.

However the pasture rootmats are quite thick and specific grazing

management is required.

Past history: No historical soil data provided (due to the drought).

Past inputs: High rates of N (estimate of 5-6 x 80 kg/ha Urea) applied over 2011/12. Nil

phosphorus applied for at least 5 years

Desired soil fertility levels based on DPI guidelines (refer appendix)

Olsen P > 25.0 mg/kg Maintenance P required for 2012/13

Colwell K > 220.0 mg/kg Nil maintenance K requirement for 2012/13

KCL 40 S > 10.5 mg/kg Nil maintenance S requirement for 2012/13

• Fertiliser inputs (particularly N) are based on high intensity of grazing use and

maintenance P is being applied given nil P inputs in recent times.

• Soil tests have not identified any trace nutrient concerns.

Timing Rate Product

Spring Early 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Spring Late 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Summer Nil

Autumn Early 150 kg/ha Single Super (NPKS 0:9:0:11)

Autumn Early 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Autumn Late 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Winter Early 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0) or equivalent Easy N

Winter Late 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0) or equivalent Easy N

Managing risk:

• Apply 2.5 t/ha gypsum prior to oversowing any of the paddocks in autumn 2014 using

good quality (graded) product which will help pasture establishment and improve

ground cover.

• During winter foliar N (Easy N) may be a cost effective option

• All irrigation water applied to this section is recycled.

7



Area 4.6 ha Comprising farm map paddocks No 17 - 18

Background: Lasered 12 months ago and now resown to ryegrass & clover. The paddocks

are rotationally grazed (usually 12 x grazings) and had millet direct drilled last

summer


However soil tests indicate the calcium:magnesium ratio is low and sodium

levels are only just within desired levels. Gypsum is the preferred remedial

ameliorant.

Soil health: Organic carbon levels are high (4.0%) and satisfactory. Pastures currently

have good root depth and there was no indication of pest or disease issues.

New pastures often struggle through the peak summer months and the N

program has been adjusted to help thicken up the pasture prior to the hot

weather.


Past inputs: Regular N applications over 2011/12.




KCL 40 S > 10.5 mg/kg Maintenance S required for 2012/13

• Fertiliser inputs (particularly N) are based on high intensity of grazing use and

maintenance P is being applied given nil P inputs in recent times.


Timing Rate Product



Summer Nil

Autumn Early 150 kg/ha Single Super (NPKS 0:9:0:11)



Winter 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Managing risk:

• Gypsum is required (2.5 t/ha) when these paddocks are grazed out & direct drilled in

autumn 2013 (using a graded product).


8



Area 16.0 ha Comprising farm map paddocks No 21-22-23-24-25-26-27

Background: Permanent ryegrass & clover paddocks that are rotationally grazed.

Soil structure: Sticky clay based soils that are poorly structured. Soil tests confirm the

topsoils are sodic and have calcium:magnesium ratio < 1:1 which is a major

concern. Pasture tests also indicate low herbage Ca levels. Gypsum is the

preferred remedial ameliorant.

Soil health: Organic carbon levels are high (5.80 %) and satisfactory. Pasture testing

indicated high molybdenum levels so monitor livestock for any signs of low

copper availability. Pasture chloride & sodium levels are elevated and calcium

levels are low which is not unexpected.


Past inputs: Regular applications of 80 kg/ha Urea applied over 2011/12.


Olsen P > 25.0 mg/kg Nil maintenance P requirement for 2012/13



• High P levels on this section

• Follow up livestock implications with the pasture herbage data.

Timing Rate Product



Spring Late High rates of gypsum required with full renovation

and summer crop as outlined

Summer Nil

Autumn Gypsum required if oversowing as outlined




Managing risk:

• Maintaining pasture density over the summer months is the challenge on these poorly

structured soils. High rates of gypsum (5.0 tonne/ha) have been recommended when it

can be incorporated as part of full renovation. With topdressing apply 2.5 t/ha gypsum

prior to over-sowing any of the paddocks in autumn 2013 using good quality (graded)

product.

• Recently No 27 paddock has been sprayed out and had gypsum applied and resown to

permanent pasture with poor establishment. Assess the situation with your advisor and be

prepared to sow summer crop (millet) if necessary.

9



Area 10.0 ha Comprising farm map paddocks No 28-29-30-31

Background: Effluent pond liquid is shandied with irrigation supply and gravity fed

primarily to No 31 paddock. Permanent ryegrass & clover paddocks are

rotationally grazed.


However soil tests indicate the calcium:magnesium ratio is low. Gypsum is the


Soil health: Organic carbon levels are moderately high (3.8%) and satisfactory. Pastures

have good root depth and there was no indication of pest or disease issues.

Past history: No historical soil data provided.

Past inputs: Strategic N use over 2011/12.


Olsen P > 25.0 mg/kg Nil maintenance P requirement for 2012/13



• High soil PKS fertility and higher pH as expected as effluent pond liquid is currently

gravity fed (& shandied) to irrigate this section.


Timing Rate Product

Spring Nil Low rates of effluent applied

Summer Nil Low rates of effluent applied



Winter Early 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Winter Late 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Managing risk:

• The effluent pond will be pumped out over summer onto the annual pastures (FMZ 6)

as the soil fertility base is significantly lower than the rest of the property. Expect low

rates of effluent to be applied on this section.

• Apply 2.5 t/ha gypsum if any of the paddocks are direct drilled in autumn 2014 to

improve pasture density (using good quality graded product).


10



Area 13.4 ha Comprising farm map paddocks No 33-34-35-36

Background: Lasered 12 months ago and resown to ryegrass & clover paddocks that are

rotationally grazed (usually 12 x grazings).

Soil structure: Brown clay loam soils that are not saline. However soil tests indicate the

calcium:magnesium ratio is low and sodium levels are elevated. Gypsum is the


Soil health: Organic carbon levels are moderately high (3.90 %) but will benefit from

regular oversowing in the future. Pastures have good root depth and there was

no indication of pest or disease issues. New pastures often struggle through the

peak summer months and the N program has been adjusted accordingly.

Pasture testing indicated moderate molybdenum and borderline copper levels.

Pasture chloride & sodium levels are elevated while calcium levels are low

which is not unexpected.

Past history: No historical soil data provided.

Past inputs: Regular Urea inputs applied over 2011/12.



Colwell K > 220.0 mg/kg Maintenance K required for 2012/13


• Maintenance P is being applied given nil P inputs in recent times.


Timing Rate Product

Spring 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Summer Nil

Autumn Gypsum required when oversowing as outlined

Autumn Early 300 kg/ha Super Potash 5:1 (NPKS 0:7:8:9)




Managing risk:

• Gypsum is required (2.5 t/ha) when these paddocks are grazed out & direct drilled in

autumn 2013 (using a graded product).

All irrigation water applied to this section is recycled.

11

2012 / 2013 Fertiliser program: Annual Pastures

FMZ 5 – Annual Pastures

Area 32.0 ha comprising farm map paddocks No 37-38-39-40-41-42-43

Background: Annual ryegrass / shaftal pasture paddocks that were flooded in early 2012.

Only grazed 3 times this season and will be dried off early.

Soil structure: Brown clay loam soils that are not saline but soil tests indicate the

calcium:magnesium ratio is low and sodium levels are just within desired

levels. Agricultural lime is the preferred ameliorant to supply calcium (and lift

pH levels).

Soil health: Organic carbon levels are only moderate (2.60 %) but the existing pastures

looked healthy. Annual pastures had root disease problems last season which

have been addressed. Pasture testing indicated low molybdenum but liming

will improve availability. Herbage calcium & copper levels are marginal so

monitor trends again next spring. Herbage sodium levels are elevated which is

not unexpected.

Past inputs: No historical soil data provided and nil fertiliser inputs last season with Super

Potash (NPKS 0:7:13:8) applied the previous season.


Olsen P > 22.0 mg/kg Capital P required for 2012/13

Colwell K > 250.0 mg/kg Maintenance K required for 2012/13

KCL 40 S > 10.5 mg/kg Maintenance S required for 2012/13

• Annual pastures down the back of the property have low P levels as expected.


Timing Rate Product

Spring 70 kg/ha Urea (NPKS 46:0:0:0)

Summer Nil

Summer Manure slurry will be pumped across paddocks and

lightly incorporated.

Autumn 2.50 t/ha Apply agricultural straight calcium carbonate lime

well before sowing using> 80 ENV

(effective neutralising value) product.

Autumn 500 kg/ha Super Potash 5:1 (NPKS 0:7:8:9) preferably prior

to sowing or after establishment



Managing risk:

• Potassium inputs are not likely to be required in 2013/14 after the slurry application

but check soil fertility levels again in mid-2013.

• Record the actual volume of manure slurry applied over summer.


12

Farm Gate Nutrient Budget

13

APPENDICES

Farm Map - FMZs

14

DPIV Soil Test Guidelines

15

FERTILISER

Below Standard Practice Acceptable Practice Above Acceptable Practice

Do not understand why you would need

information on soil fertility.

Understand why soil sampling is being undertaken

and follow a planned approach.

No information on soil fertility or data > 3yrs old. Fertiliser decisions are based on soil sampling

from the past three years and soil fertility trends.

Fertiliser decisions are based on soil sampling

every one to two years, and soil fertility trends.

Plant sampling (tissue testing) and soil sampling

used to fine-tune nutrient requirements.

Unsure what to consider when soil sampling. Soil samples are taken from three or four

representative areas of the farm.

Separate soil samples are taken from all Farm

Management Zones, or paddocks.

Unaware of correct soil sampling techniques. Correct soil sampling techniques have been

checked and are used.

Soil test sites are located using GPS and mapped

for future reference.

Do not use a soil testing laboratory that is

National Association of Testing Authorities

(NATA) accredited or Australian Soil and Plant

Analysis Council (ASAPC) certified for the

analysis required.

Use a soil testing laboratory that is National

Association of Testing Authorities (NATA)

accredited or Australian Soil and Plant Analysis

Council (ASPAC) certified for the analysis required.

Do not use a soil test results as part of nutrient

management decisions.

Soil test results and soil nutrient target levels are

used as part of making nutrient management

decisions.

So

il

Co

nst

rain

ts Soil constraints and other limiting factors are not

considered before applying fertilisers.

Soil constraints and other limiting factors are

considered before determining nutrient

requirements.

Nu

trie

nt

Bu

dg

et

Do not use a nutrient budget (a calculation of what

comes onto the farm and what leaves it).

Use a nutrient budget that is calculated over the

whole farm, i.e. a farmgate nutrient budget.

Calculate nutrient budgets for different Farm

Management Zones.

Use the same rate of fertiliser on all paddocks

without considering nutrient requirements.

Target your nutrient rates/types for different areas

of the farm based on soil test results.

Target your nutrient rates/types for different areas

of the farm based on your soil test results, nutrient

budgets, and areas where there is a high risk of

nutrient loss through run-off and drainage.

Do not consider effluent as a fertiliser. Effluent is used as a fertiliser with rates

determined by soil nutrient requirements and soil

test results.

Effluent is used as a fertiliser with rates

determined by soil nutrient requirements, soil test

results, effluent nutrient value, and the financial

value to the farm.

Nutrient application rates are not determined by a

trained farmer or adviser.

Nutrient application rates are determined by a

farmer or advisor with training in the

interpretation of soil test results and calculating

nutrient application rates according to the 4Rs

principles.

Nutrient application rates are determined by a

Fertcare accredited advisor, or farmer with

accredited training in soil test interpretation.

Do not calibrate the fertiliser spreader or use an

Accuspread-accredited spreader.

Calibrate the fertiliser spreader or use an

Accuspread-accredited spreader.

Proximity to waterways or drainage lines is not

considered.

A buffer distance is maintained between areas

where fertiliser/effluent is applied and waterways

or drainage lines.

Do not know if there are farm areas with a high risk

of nutrient loss through runoff and leaching.

Farm areas with a high risk of nutrient loss through

runoff and leaching have been identified and

fertiliser is not applied in these areas. These areas

may include wet spots, steep areas etc.

Fertiliser is applied to nutrient built-up areas, such

as stock camps, gateways, troughs, etc.

Fertiliser is not applied to nutrient build up areas.

Fertiliser is applied without considering soil

moisture levels, weather forecasts or irrigation

schedules.

Fertiliser is applied at times when the risk of run-

off/leaching is low. The risk may be determined

by considering soil moisture, weather forecasts

and irrigation schedules.

No records of soil fertility or fertiliser management

are kept.

Soil fertility records and fertiliser management

are kept for each paddock or Farm Management

Zone and are used for making fertiliser decisions.

No documented farm nutrient management plan A farm nutrient management plan is documented

and used to guide fertiliser applications.

The farm nutrient management plan is

documented and reviewed every 1-2 years.

Nu

trie

nt

ap

plic

ati

on

ra

tes

& s

pre

ad

ing

So

il S

am

plin

g &

An

aly

sis

Av

oid

ing

Nu

trie

nt

Loss

es

Pla

nn

ing

& R

eco

rd

ke

ep

ing

DairySAT Fertiliser BMP

16

SOILSBelow Standard Practice Acceptable Practice Above Acceptable Practice

Do not know if there is any erosion occurring on-

farm.

Understand the different types of erosion

occurring and their causes.

Visible erosion exists on-farm and there is no

management plan to address it.

A management plan is in place to minimise

erosion on-farm.

There is ongoing monitoring and review of the

management plans to minimise erosion.

There appears to be increasing erosion damage. Management practices have been implemented

to minimise erosion problems.

Management practices including engineering

solutions, where appropriate, are in place to

minimise erosion.

No maintenance of watercourses, drains, tracks

and eaves after flooding.

Water courses, drains, tracks and eaves are

maintained to prevent flood damage. Damage is

repaired as soon as possible after flooding.

Do not know if there are soil structure problems

across the farm.

Understand the different soil structure problems

that can occur, their causes and the extent of

their occurrence.

Pugging or compaction exists on-farm and there

are no management plans.

A management plan with a series of actions is

in place to address pugging and compaction on-

farm.

There is ongoing monitoring and review of the

management plans addressing pugging and

compaction.

There appears to be increasing pugging or

compaction.

Management practices have been implemented

to minimise pugging and compaction problems,

such as using sacrifice paddocks for feeding out

and managing stock movement in winter.

Management practices (including a feedpad) to

minimise compaction or pugging problems are

implemented and reviewed.

There appears to be increasing compaction and

surface sealing on cropping land.


to minimise compaction and surface sealing on

cropping land, such as reduced tillage.


to minimise compaction and surface sealing on

cropping land, such as reduced tillage and

controlled traffic farming.

Unsure if farm soils are saline or sodic, or if

farm water is saline.

Understand the causes of soil salinity and

sodicity, and how to identify and manage soils

and water with potential problems.

Sodic and saline areas on the farm have been

identified and recorded using soil test results

and visual observation. Water salinity is tested

and recorded annually.

Salinity problems exists on-farm and there is no

monitoring or management plans.


in place to address saline areas (e.g. drainage,

salt tolerant perennial pastures or trees).

There is ongoing monitoring and review of

management plans to minimise the impacts of

salinity. Management plans comply with

Regional NRM strategies.

Unaware of increased risk of irrigation on

salinity.

Understand how irrigation can increase soil

salinity levels, what to look out for and how to

manage salinity risks.

Whole-farm salinity mapping is conducted every

three years and salinity levels of irrigation water

are tested annually.

Soil salinity levels and the affected areas are

increasing due to irrigation.

Current irrigation practices aim to minimise salt

accumulation.

Irrigation rates, timing and frequency are

managed to minimise overwatering and

waterlogging.

Soil structural problems exist and there are no

management plans for sodic soils.


in place to address structural problems

associated with sodic soils (e.g. application of

gypsum or organic matter, and reduced tillage).

There is ongoing monitoring and review of

management practices to minimise the impacts

of sodic soils.

Unsure if farm soils are acidic, or becoming more

acidic.

Understand the causes of acidification, the effect

acid soils have on production, and how to monitor

and manage soil acidity before it becomes a

production problem.

Unsure if acidity problem is surface, subsurface or

both.

Soil pH levels are tested and recorded for each

Farm Management Zone every two to three years,

and pH trends are monitored for change.

Soil acidity is affecting production and there are no

management plans in place.

Management practices are in place to address

existing or increasing acidity problems (e.g. lime

application).

Management practices are in place to prevent

soil acidification and are reviewed very two to

three years.

So

il S

tru

ctu

re (

refe

rs t

o p

ug

gin

g &

com

pa

ctio

n)

Aci

dit

yE

rosi

on

(ty

pe

s: s

he

et,

tu

nn

el,

gu

lly,

rill

an

d w

ind

)S

alin

ity

/So

dic

ity

DairySAT Soils BMP

Soil/Plant tissue tests

16

Effluent

Fert$mart

F. Smart Kyabram

Requires Attention Nutrient Excess

17

Requires Attention Nutrient Excess

18

Requires Attention

19

Requires Attention

20

Requires Attention

13/03/2013 Using dairy effluent as a fertiliser - Department of Primary Industries

www.dpi.vic.gov.au/agriculture/dairy/pastures-management/fertilising-dairy-pastures/chapter-13 1/9

Using Dairy Effluent as a FertiliserIt is easy to overlook the nutrients being accumulated around the farm as a result of typical farm activities. These include

nutrients deposited in pastures, laneways and animal loafing areas; nutrients added to pastures when fodder is fed out;

and the nutrient-rich effluent associated with dairy sheds and feedpads.

Dairy effluent is a natural fertiliser and soil conditioner and, if managed effectively, can enhance pasture growth and

improve soil structure.

It is estimated that, during one lactation, a 100-cow herd deposits on the dairy yard:

50 kg of phosphorus (equivalent to about 568 kg of single superphosphate).

250 kg of nitrogen (equivalent to about 540 kg of urea)

270 kg potassium (equivalent to 540 kg of muriate of potash).

Effluent can be utilised safely and effectively if it is applied in accordance with environmental, pasture growth and soil

fertility requirements.

What will you find out in this section?

At the completion of this section, you should:

Understand the legal requirements related to dairy effluent management.

Understand the different sources of dairy effluent on the farm.

Have knowledge of the nutrient levels in dairy effluent.

Know how to sample effluent.

Have knowledge of the methods of applying effluent to pastures and crops.

Understand the rate of effluent to apply to crops and pastures.

Have knowledge of where and when dairy effluent can be best used on the farm.

Be able to minimise risks to animal health from dairy effluent.

13.1 Legal requirements of dairy shed effluent management

Dairy effluent must be managed in such a way that it remains on the farm and does not contaminate ground or surface

waters. This is a legislative requirement under the state environment protection policies (SEPPs) on ground water and

water and is enforceable by the Environment Protection Authority (EPA).

The spreading or spraying of dairy effluent back on pastures and crops is a best-management practice. It makes good

use of the nutrients, organic matter and water collected in the effluent system, thus enhancing farm production and

lowering the risk of polluting streams or ground water.

13.2 What is in dairy effluent?

The dairy shed effluent stream largely consists of the manure and urine in wash down water. However, it also includes



detergents, gravel from the cows’ hooves, suspended soil particles, cow hair, milk, string, paper and other debris that

can collect around the dairy.

Some of the nutrients from the manure and urine will be in a form that is not immediately available for pasture plants.

However, research indicates 50% to 80% of the nitrogen content, about 50% of the phosphorous and almost all of the

potassium content will be in the available form.

13.2.1 Nutrient sources within an effluent system

Dairy shed

Dairy shed effluent contains a small but useable quantity of nutrients. Approximately 8% to 10% of the daily dung and

urine is dropped in the yards, depending on distance walked, time spent in the yards, and stress experienced during

milking. Table 13.1 shows the quantities of nutrients excreted per dairy cow per lactation in the shed and yards.

Table 13.1 Quantity of nutrients excreted in manure per dairy cow per lactation in the sheds and yards

Table 13.1 Quantity of nutrients excreted in manure per dairy cow per lactation in the sheds and yards

SourceNutrient Excreted in Manure per Cow per Lactation (kg)

Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium

Thompson (1989) 3.2 0.5 2.0

Average (various authors) 2.5 0.5 2.7

Range (various authors) 1.6 to 3.2 0.3 to 0.7 1.3 to 5.4

Source: Thompson (1989)

Dairy sump/trafficable solids trap

The sump or trap is the primary collection point for effluent and urine washed from the yard and shed areas, and

therefore it contains a rich source of nutrients. In summer, many farmers will apply effluents to pastures directly from the

sump to utilise nitrogen before losses occur through volatilisation and settling within the ponds.

Effluent ponds

The levels of nutrients in effluent ponds are significantly less than the levels in the fresh manure and urine. This is

because the wash down water dilutes the manure and urine, most of the solids settle out (sink to the bottom of the pond),

and some of the nutrients volatilise and are lost to the atmosphere.

However, understanding the nutrient value within the effluent ponds and being able to practically use these nutrients is

essential given storage ponds are designed to store effluent for only 4 to 6 months of the year. In addition, the anaerobic

(first) pond in a two-pond system needs to be almost completely emptied every 4 to 7 years to reduce the accumulation of

solids and salts, which eventually may impact on the pond’s functioning.

A large number of dairy effluent ponds have been sampled in Victoria to get an idea of the nutrient content in the effluent

(Tables 13.2 to 13.4). The amount of nutrients is expressed in kilograms per megalitre (kg/ML) of effluent. (A megalitre is

one million litres.)

Table 13.2 Nutrient, electrical conductivity and sodium levels from dairy effluent ponds in south-west Victoria

(storage or second ponds only)

LevelN

(kg/ML)

P

(kg/ML)

K

(kg/ML)

S

(kg/ML)pH (water)

Electrical

Conductivity

(mS/cm)

Sodium

Adsorption Ratio

Average 192 47 358 23 7.4 4800 4.6

Range 48 to 568 12 to 150 90 to 900 6 to 70 6.2 to 8.7 1000 to 10000 1.1 to 9.1

Source: John Kane, formerly DPI Warrnambool (pers. com.).

Table 13.3 Nutrient, electrical conductivity and sodium levels from dairy effluent ponds in south-east (Gippsland)

Victoria (all ponds)

LevelN

(kg/ML)

P

(kg/ML)

K

(kg/ML)

S

(kg/ML)pH (water)

Electrical

ConductivitySodium

Adsorption Ratio



(mS/cm)

Average 505 178 524 132* 7.5 3826 2.4

Range 43 to 2100 13 to 1400 67 to 3900 1 to 1300 6.8 to 8.2 1500 to 9300 0.7 to 9.1

Source: B. Bradshaw, DPI Ellinbank (pers. com.). *High levels due to large amounts of S in bore water being used.

Table 13.4 Nutrient, electrical conductivity and sodium levels from dairy effluent ponds in northern Victoria (single

ponds)

LevelN

(kg/ML)

P

(kg/ML)

K

(kg/ML)

S

(kg/ML)pH (water)

Electrical

Conductivity

(mS/cm)

Sodium

Adsorption Ratio

Average 277 57 309 23 7.5 1200 to 3900 4.1

Range 184 to 596 20 to 106 146 to 476 12 to 43 6.5 to 8.4 3050 1.0 to 9.0

Source: Scott McDonald, DPI Kyabram (pers. com.).

As expected, results varied widely. This variation is due to such factors as the age of effluent in ponds, whether the

sample was taken from the first or second pond in a two-pond system, and the level of dilution caused by varying

amounts of wash down water. To get a true picture of the nutrients in your effluent pond, you need to conduct regular

sampling, especially before desludging older stagnant ponds.

Feedpads and animal loafing areas

As dairy farms become more intensive in terms of stocking rate and production per cow, feedpads and animal loafing

areas are becoming increasingly common.

The intensive feeding and stocking of animals on an area for any length of time has a tendency to create nutrient hot

spots. The amount of nutrients being generated on the area and how those nutrients are managed and applied back to

pasture and crop systems are very important.

An adult cow (500 to 650 kg) is capable of producing 7% to 8% of her body weight in manure each day which equates to

40 to 60 kg of manure. Table 13.5 shows the nutrients in that manure and urine.

Table 13.5 Production of nutrients from a dairy cow

Nutrient

Kg/cow/day (500-kg cow) Kg/cow/day (600-kg cow)

Nitrogen (N) 0.225 0.270

Phosphorus (P) 0.047 0.056

Potassium (K) 0.145 0.174

Source: Goulburn Broken Feedpad Guidelines (2002).

The longer cows spend on holding yards and feedpad areas, the greater the amount of manure and nutrients deposited.

Management and redistribution of these nutrients back to pastures or crops are essential.

View guidelines on putting in feedpads

13.2.2 Nutrient movement within the pond system

Understanding the fate of nutrients and where they are accumulating is the key to effective nutrient management, as it

allows you to fine tune fertiliser decisions and manage farm hot spots.

Figure 13.1 shows the fate of nutrients in an anaerobic pond.

http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/agriculture/dairy/managing-wet-soils/feedpads-stand-off-areas



Figure 13.1 The fate of nutrients in an aneorobic pond

Table 13.6 shows the range in nutrient concentrations (kg per megalitre) at depth in the first (anaerobic) pond at

DemoDAIRY (south-west Victoria) prior to (P) and after (A) agitation.

Table 13.6 Nutrient concentrations at depth (kg/ML) in a pond prior to and after agitation (first pond)

Pond Depth

(m)

Nitrogen

(P/A)*

Phosphorus

(P/A)

Potassium

(P/A)

Sulphur

(P/A)

0 260/370 39/57 510/500 26/62

1 270/700 40/120 510/560 27/200

2 1300/750 210/120 670/550 410/210

3 1700/970 230/150 660/610 470/300

4.5 (bottom) 1400/1500 190/230 620/720 370/530

Source: Nutrient sampling conducted by John Kane (DPI Warrnambool) and Worldwide Organics Pty Ltd at the Terang

Demo Dairy (2003).

*P = prior to agitation; A = after agitation.

The nutrient concentrations in the first pond increased with depth for N, P and S but did not for K. Agitating (stirring) the

pond did have an effect on mixing nutrients throughout the pond. Basing your application rate on the nutrient

concentration at the top of the pond could mean that you will be out by a factor of over threefold if you use effluent from the

bottom. You may be applying excessive amounts of nutrients to some areas and be at risk of burning crops and

seedlings. Therefore, when emptying a first pond that has been collecting nutrients for a number of years, it is

recommended that this effluent be applied to an established pasture or to paddocks prior to cultivation (in other words,

apply it before sowing a new crop or pasture).

There was no nutrient gradient at depth with the second (storage) pond at DemoDAIRY, which means that taking a

sample at any level in a second pond will give an accurate result.

13.2.3 Salts

The relatively high levels of electrical conductivity (a measure of total salts) shown in Tables 13.2, 13.3 and 13.4 are

possibly due to potassium, rather than to sodium. Potassium is less likely than sodium to cause a salinity problem in

pastures. However, if your wash down water itself has a high level of electrical conductivity (for example, some bore

water), then a high level of electrical conductivity in the effluent may mean a high level of sodium.

If the effluent contains a high proportion of sodium compared to calcium and magnesium (a relationship called the

sodium adsorption ratio, or SAR), continued application of effluent on the same area may eventually increase the

proportion of sodium cations adsorbed by the clay particles. If the ratio is above 6 (generally speaking), it is of concern

and can increase dispersion of some soils and consequently affect soil structure. In other words, applying effluent with a

sodium adsorption ratio above 6 has the opposite effect to applying gypsum.

The average SAR for the sampled dairy effluent ponds ranged from 2.6 to 4.6 (see Tables 13.2 to 13.4), which is below

the level of concern of about 6. However, some ponds had SAR levels above 6 (see the ranges for SAR in Tables 13.2 to

13.4). Such effluent should not be applied to pastures in excessive amounts; or alternatively, it should be well-diluted

before application.



13.3 Sampling and testing of effluent ponds

Sampling the storage pond prior to the first application of effluent is recommended, followed by monitoring of the area to

which the effluent was applied using soil tests. It is also recommended to sample the first (anaerobic) pond before

emptying (in other words, every 4 to 7 years), although nutrients at depth will vary.

13.3.1 Procedure for sampling

Sample source

As with soil testing, the key to effluent sampling is to take a sample that will represent the effluent being applied to the

pasture or crop. In many cases, it would be more appropriate to collect samples from the final pond, the gate valves or

even from the pump.

Direct application systems are best sampled at the sump or pump.

Farmers who use flood irrigation would sample at the gate valve, as this is the easiest place to test (allow the pump or

gate valve to flow for at least 10 minutes before sample collection).

If you intend to desludge the pond, take samples from the sludge layer of the pond. As indicated in Table 13.6, the levels

of nutrients at the bottom of the pond will be higher than the liquid fraction at the top of the first pond. If you are pumping

off the liquid fraction of the first pond, take samples from that part of the pond. It would be best to take a sample when the

first pond is being stirred. It is, however, unlikely that the pond will be stirred by a contractor, sampled and then stirred

again and applied after the results of the test have arrived. If you are pumping from a second or storage pond, the nutrient

gradient is relatively constant, so sampling depth is not critical.

Equipment required for sampling

You will need the following equipment for sampling:

A pole with a clamp at one end to hold a sample bottle.

A plastic bucket.

Three or four 1-litre, water-washed sample bottles.

Insulated carrier boxes.

Crushed ice.

Procedure

Collect 250- to 500-mL samples from various sites around the final pond or from the pump or pipe outlet, using the

sample bottle clamped to the pole until 3 to 4 litres have been collected. Collection from ponds should take place close to

the surface but should exclude any crust material.

As each sample is collected, place it in the plastic bucket. Hands and foreign objects should not contact sampled effluent

or the inside of the bucket.

Each 1-litre, water-washed sample bottle should be filled to the brim with thoroughly mixed effluent from the bucket,

unless the sample will be frozen prior to sending it to the laboratory, in which case, leave enough space below the top of

the bottle to allow for expansion.

If samples are refrigerated, ensure they reach the laboratory within 2 days of sampling. If samples are frozen, 7 days is

acceptable. To prevent unnecessary waiting and sample spoiling, the laboratory should be notified that the samples are

being sent.

Note: Effluent ponds can be very deep, with steep internal walls. It may even be difficult to locate the edge of the pond due

to plant growth. Any work, including effluent sampling, done in the vicinity of the pond should be conducted with extreme

caution.

13.3.2 Testing laboratories

Laboratories in Victoria that do effluent analyses include:



Water Ecoscience Pty Ltd, 68 Ricketts Road, Mount Waverley 3149; telephone 9550 1000; fax 9543 7372.

SGS Environmental Services (Scientific & Environmental Services),

PO Box 1956 (Hazelwood Road), Traralgon 3844; telephone 5172 1555; fax 5174 9320.

Deakin University Water Quality Laboratory, Deakin University,

PO Box 423 Warrnambool 3280, telephone 55633481; fax 5633462.

Ellinbank Water Laboratory, Department of Primary Industries,

RMB 2460 Hazeldean Road, Ellinbank 3821; telephone 5624 2222; fax 5624 2200.

Tests that should be considered include:

pH (water).

Electrical conductivity (in other words, salinity).

Calcium as Ca.

Sodium as Na.

Potassium as K.

Nitrogen as total N.

Phosphorus as total P.

This group of tests provides a good assessment of the useful nutrients for pastures and also identifies potentially

detrimental constituents, such as sodium and other salts.

13.4 Methods of applying dairy shed effluent to pastures and crops

Eventually, all dairy effluent systems will need to have the ability to apply effluent to land. A well-designed dairy effluent

collection and storage system is essential for the effective use of dairy effluent on farm. An effective effluent system also

enhances the control and distribution of valuable nutrients back to sections of the farm that require them.

13.4.1 Options for applying effluent

The two main options for managing dairy effluent, whether from a dairy shed or a feedpad facility, are:

Direct application: This option collects effluent at a single collection point, and then transports it via pipes or channels to

a suitable area on the farm. Effluent can be applied to pastures and crops using a number of options, such as direct

discharge, flood irrigation channels, fixed sprays, travelling irrigators and slurry tankers.

As this option relies on daily application, effluent needs to be managed so that it is retained on the property and so that

plants and soil absorb the nutrients. Farms with well-drained soil types that suit direct application also pump from

sumps year round.

Storage prior to application: This option allows effluent to be collected from more than one collection point and directed

to an effluent storage pond. It provides much more control over runoff, and effluent applications can be timed to meet

plant nutrient and water requirements and to fit labour availability, rather than having to apply effluent on a daily basis,

even when it is raining.

On irrigation farms, the effluent pond should be located near a main farm channel to maximise the irrigated area onto

which the effluent can be spread. If farm channels are used as part of the distribution system with either option, only

discharge dairy effluent into a farm channel in which water is flowing. This will avoid a build up of waste material and

weed growth, which would interfere with the operation of the channel.

Note: Salinity and nutrient toxicity problems can result where effluent is spread over an area of pasture that is too small.

13.4.2 Options for applying effluent pond sludge

Numerous types of machinery are available specifically for handling solids from the pond sludge and applying them to

pastures, including slurry tankers, belt spreaders, muck runners, loaders, scrapers and laser buckets.

This is an opportunity to specifically target paddocks that are lacking in nutrients or have poor topsoils.

A common practise in the Northern Irrigation and Macalister regions is to apply solids to newly lasered bays to help

establish topsoil structure with effluent high in organic matter.



In dryland farming, it is recommended that sludge be applied to paddocks that are going to be cultivated for cropping.

13.4.3 Underlying principles of application

Irrespective of which system is used, a number of key principles need to be followed to return effluent and its nutrients

back to pastures or crops effectively. These principles are:

Ensure effluent and its nutrients are distributed over a large area. The effluent should be tested to work out the

required application rate.

Irrigate paddocks where there is no likelihood of runoff from the property.

Conduct regular soil testing of the areas to which effluent is being applied to monitor nutrient levels.

Rotate applications around three or four areas so that you avoid nutrient overloading.

Be conscious of animal health issues when applying effluent to paddocks that will be grazed.

Maintain machinery and equipment.

Have contingency plans for breakdowns.

13.5 How much effluent should I apply to pastures or crops?

The average results from Tables 13.2 to 13.4 give us an indication of how much effluent can be applied to improve

pasture and crop growth.

Many waste ponds have a capacity of 1000 cubic metres of water, which is the same as 1 megalitre (ML). Using figures

from south-west Victoria (Table 13.2), the average nutrient contents per ML of effluent were:

192 kg nitrogen.

47 kg phosphorus.

358 kg potassium.

Using these figures, 192 kg N/ha, 47 kg P/ha and 358 kg K/ha would be applied for every megalitre of effluent applied per

hectare. You can see this is a high rate of applied nutrients.

One ML of effluent applied to 1 ha is the same as 100 mm of rainfall or irrigation per ha. So this rate also applies a lot of

water.

Using these figures, applying the effluent at a rate of 1 ML per 4 ha (25 mm or 0.25 ML/ha) will put on around 48 kg N/ha,

12 kg P/ha and 90 kg K/ha.

This is close to the maximum nitrogen to apply in a single dressing, a fair level of phosphorus (equivalent to about 140 kg

of single superphosphate/ha) and quite a high level of potassium. Preferably, the annual potassium application rate

should be less than 120 kg K/ha. High rates of K may cause an imbalance of calcium and magnesium in pastures (see

‘Exchangeable potassium’ in Section 8.1.8), which can lead to milk fever and grass tetany, especially around calving.

Therefore, using these figures, a single application of dairy effluent at a rate of about 25 mm or 0.25 ML/ha will not apply

excess nutrients. This application rate should also reduce the risk of effluent runoff and of nitrates leaching to ground

water. At this application rate, one to three applications can be made per year, preferably at times when the pasture is

actively growing and able to use the nutrients and water. Nutrient levels in dairy shed effluent vary greatly, and it is best to

test the effluent you will be using on your farm.

Following from the above, every megalitre should irrigate about 4 ha per irrigation. If the crop or pasture is to be

irrigated more than once in a year, then the following points need to be considered:

Normal fertiliser applications should be altered (in the case of potassium, eliminated) on the paddocks to which

effluent is applied.

Timing of applications.

Withholding periods.

Grazing management of effluent-treated areas.

Remember that the figures used above are based on the average nutrient content of pond effluent for one region. The

http://www.dpi.vic.gov.au/agriculture/dairy/pastures-management/fertilising-dairy-pastures/chapter-13#_Table_13.2_Nutrient,



nutrient content of individual effluent pond varies widely. Thus, the amount of effluent to be applied will also vary widely. If

you want to use effluent on your pastures or crops, it is strongly suggested that you have the effluent tested so you can

work out the actual nutrient application rates for your farm. Monitor the results by regular soil testing of the areas to which

effluent has been applied. The money you spend on testing may well be saved in reduced fertiliser applications or by

avoiding a problem with nitrates leaching to ground water, high potassium levels, salinity or high sodium levels.

13.6 Where should dairy effluent be applied?

Applying effluent to the same area each year can lead to overloading with some nutrients, such as K. Care also needs to

be taken with salts that may be contained in the effluent. So, unless you regularly test your effluent and test the soil where

it is applied, it is recommended that you rotate your applications around three or four areas so that you avoid nutrient

overloading. In the example of 1 ML applied to 4 hectares, you could have three or four 4-hectare areas on which the

effluent is applied one to three times per year.

Generally, areas of application may include pastures with nutrient deficiencies, newly lasered irrigation bays, pastures

linked to on-farm drainage (such as irrigation reuse dams) or paddocks further away from the dairy. Application of effluent

to calf-rearing paddocks or paddocks used to calve down the herd should be avoided (see Section 13.8 for animal health

implications). Results from research trials in south-west Victoria are showing encouraging results from application of

effluent to fodder crops (turnips and millet) and silage regrowth. See the articles ‘Using dairy effluent to boost turnip

yields can pay’ and ‘Effluent Returns Dollars – 3 Years Of Trials Show’ in Appendix E for further information on effluent

rates and crop responses. A full-scale effluent trial is also under way to further explore the economics of effluent

application to crops.

13.7 When is the best time to apply effluent?

Effluent from your storage pond (or your second pond, if you have a two-pond system) should be applied in the drier

months of summer and autumn. Applying effluent during the wetter months increases the risk of runoff to streams or

leaching to ground water when soils are saturated.

Apply effluent when pasture or crops are actively growing so that they can use the nutrients. With pastures, applications

are timed to follow a grazing event to ensure pastures are palatable in the next rotation. To avoid problems with nitrate

levels, especially with a slurry application, stock should be kept off the area for a minimum of 3 weeks.

An important point to remember when managing effluent is that storage ponds must be emptied prior to the

recommended storage period to ensure ponds have adequate holding capacity for effluent water generated over that

period. In southern Victoria, the end of spring (say, December) and then soon after the autumn break are ideal times for

applying effluent. Quite often, a single irrigation onto a fodder crop at this time of the year will significantly improve yields.

In irrigation areas, the water from the effluent system should be used regularly through the irrigation season and timed to

coincide with the last irrigation.

13.8 Animal health considerations when using dairy effluent or sludge as

fertiliser

Bacteria that cause diseases, such as Johne’s disease, salmonellosis, leptospirosis, mastitis and enzootic bovine

leucosis, can be found in manure, urine and milk. Worm eggs, coccidial eggs, clostridium organisms and tetanus

spores are also passed in manure. However, in most cases, the period of time before application to pasture and the

dilution effect of the washdown water tend to reduce the risk to stock that graze paddocks that have been treated with

waste water.

To further reduce the risk to animal health, the following precautions should be taken:

Do not allow young stock (less than 12 months old) to graze or have access to treated areas.

Do not allow drains from treated areas to flow into areas where young stock are being kept. (This will help to

reduce the risk of infection with Johne’s disease.)

During summer, do not graze areas to which effluent has been applied for at least 2 weeks. If you can safely apply

effluent in the winter, do not graze treated areas for at least 3 weeks.



Do graze areas just prior to effluent application to allow increased sunlight penetration to kill organisms and to

extend the period before the area is ready to be regrazed.

Do spread effluent during the warmer, drier months to reduce survival chances of disease organisms.

Contact your veterinarian if you have concerns about any specific animal health problems associated with applying dairy

shed wastes to pastures or crops.

13.9 Summary

Dairy shed effluent must not leave the farm via waterways or ground water.

Approximately 8% to 10% of the daily dung and urine is deposited in the dairy yard and laneways.

Dairy shed effluent from a 100-cow herd over one lactation contains approximately 50 kg P, 250 kg N, and 270 kg

K.

Nutrient levels in dairy shed effluent vary greatly, and it is best to test the effluent you will be using on your farm.

Apply effluent in summer and autumn when crops and pastures are actively growing and ground water is not close

to the ground surface.

Follow sensible management strategies to minimise animal health issues.

The Department of Primary Industries provides advice on how to manage dairy effluent and also provides effluent

and feedpad system designs. Refer to Section 13.4.3 for contact details.

Documents

Fert$mart Soil and Fertiliser Management Planfertsmart.dairyingfortomorrow.com.au/.../PM.16.001-F.-Smart-Soil...1.… · Desired soil fertility levels based on DPI guidelines (refer