ILO at CRESSY

On 4 September 1996 the local residents met in the community hall for the first (and only) information session about the new Intensive Livestock Operation to be located in our community. The meeting was arranged by request from the local ratepayers association. There were representatives from the Ministry of Environment, the local Council (none re-elected) and the Owner.

The meeting started out with the residents voicing concerns over the operation. The following major problems were envisaged.

Residents Position

  1. Odours of pig manure - excessive.
  2. Potential dangers to quality of ground water.
  3. Fear of expansion of this farm or potential new farms locating in the area before any associated problems are resolved.
  4. Request limiting development of similar operations in the township.

M.O.E. Position

  1. Ministry has guidelines used/developed for the placement of the sewage tank, these guidelines have been used here to locate the tank.
  2. Ministry does not have the staff to monitor operations, so that is left to the farmer.
  3. Ministry has not monitored the ground water of agricultural activities in the past, and does not require monitoring of ground water at farm sites.
  4. Shore wells take in lake water and should be treated before consumption.

Council's Position

  1. Council responded with a statement that this was just another "farming operation".
  2. The site chosen had a historical use as a specialized farm. It had been used as a chicken farm but had fallen into disuse for many years.

Owner's Position

  1. The Owner stated that he had owned 3 pig farms in Hay Bay for 3 years and that he had no complaints from the neighbours. But the sewage storage tanks are located below the barns at those farms, not open facilities as in the Cressy Farm.
  2. The Owner claimed that he saves the local farmers $40,000 to $50,000 per year in fertilizer charges, by spreading the manure on their farm lands.
  3. He had a problem acknowledging that there will be an odour from the tank. He did not believe that the odour from the tank would travel one mile or more.

The Farm

  1. The farm has 250 acres (230 acres tillable) and another 150 acres rented (of which 120 acres are tillable). Total tillable acreage 350 acres.
  2. Ministry stated that the owner should have more land - require about 200 acres more workable farm land, so that the manure would be spread over 600 acres, and that he should have a nutrient management plan with local farmers.
  3. Barns to be sized for 3,000 pigs.
  4. Nutrient Management strategy. The manure is analyzed, and the soil is analyzed using GPS location of sample sites. Government laboratories to do the soil analysis.
  5. Amount of nitrogen added to the soil is no greater with natural fertilizer, than the amount applied to the soil with the application of chemical fertilizers. Nitrate/nitrogen soil tests are used to monitor the levels at test point.
  6. The ministry recommended that the farmer sow corn, wheat or oats to take up the nitrogen. Soy beans do not absorb enough nitrogen

Manure Tank

  1. The manure tank is located 1,000 feet from the pig barns, and approximately 1500 feet from either road.
  2. It is 120 feet in diameter and approximately 15 ft deep. There is NO cover on the tank.
  3. Tank Capacity is 1,000,000 gallons of liquid or approximately 6 months storage. This is works out to an average of 2 gallons of water mixed with faeces and urine per day for each of the allowed 3,000 pigs in the barns.
  4. The sewage is pumped into it from the bottom.
  5. The Ministry stated that agricultural code of practice is being met by the sewage tank.

Odours

  1. Distance is the usual measure for dealing with odours.
  2. Eliminating odours completely is not required, but reducing the number of "odour days" per year is the best thing.

Steps to Reduce Odours from the Tank

The following were discussed as possible solutions to odours from the tank.

  1. Owners are feeding enzymes to the pigs to reduce odours.
  2. Straw on top of the tank/tank. This option was rejected by owner - the straw wets and falls to the bottom of the tank and creates worse odours.
  3. Put a fence around the tank, plant trees around it so that the odour has to rise further. Owner agreed to plant trees to screen the tank (M.O.E. suggested the use of poplars rather than pines because of their growth rate).
  4. Owner claimed that aeration is not an economically viable system for reducing odours in the manure.
  5. Covering the tank was rejected outright by the owner, the M.O.E. and Council.

Spreading Manure

  1. Manure will be injected into the soil instead of spreading it on top of the soil. This will reduce the problem of liquid manure running into a water course.
  2. Spreading on frozen ground. There is not a high potential for contamination of ground water, but runoff could be a problem.

Owners Commitment

  1. Owners will work with the ratepayers group to help resolve the problems.
  2. They will plant trees to screen the tank.
  3. They will try using straw on top of the tank, and look into the possibility of using oils.