Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Besi Ahırı Projelerinin Gübre İşletim Planlamasıyla Birlikte Ele Alınması: Çanakkale/Ayvacık Uygulama Örneği

Year 2022, , 48 - 59, 22.01.2022
https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.991651

Abstract

Hayvancılık işletmelerinde hayvan barınakları hayvan refahı, verimlilik ve işgücünün etkin kullanımı dikkate alınmadan inşa edilmektedir. Tasarım ilkeleri izlenerek bu sorunlar ortadan kaldırılabilir. Ancak ülkemizdeki küçük aile işletmeleri dikkate alındığında büyükbaş hayvan ahırlarında oldukça büyük tasarım hatalarının olduğu görülmektedir. Hayvancılık işletmelerinde dikkate alınmayan bir diğer konu ise üretim sırasında ortaya çıkacak hayvansal atıkların toplanması, iletilmesi, depolanması ve bertarafı ile ilgili süreçlerdir. Bu durum yönetimi zorlaştırır, bazı çevre sorunlarına neden olur ve çok değerli bir bitki besin kaynağı olan gübre israfına neden olur. Bu çalışmada, yukarıda belirtilen tasarım kriterleri ve olası gübre yönetim seçenekleri dikkate alınarak küçük ölçekli (50 baş sığır) bir işletme tasarlanmıştır. Yıllık 575 t gübre üretim kapasitesi hesaplanmıştır. Ancak toprak analizi sonuçlarına ve çeşitli tesislere göre bu işlemde yıllık 76 ila 902 ton gübre uygulanması gerekecektir. Bu, gübre yönetim planlarına dayalı olarak ayrıntılı bir bitki üretim planının yapılması gerektiğini göstermektedir. Alternatif plantasyonlar için gübre atılması gereken arazi ihtiyacı 13 – 91 da arasında değişmektedir. Gübre uygulamasına uygun arazi bu işletme için yaklaşık 20 dekardır. Bu nedenle, gübreyi yönetmek için başka araziler de gerekmektedir. Çalışmanın sonuçları, yıllık üretilen gübrenin ticari değerinin yaklaşık 874 $ olduğunu göstermiştir. Bu değer aynı zamanda toprak/gübre besin içeriğine ve plan ihtiyaçlarına dayalı gübre yönetiminin önemini de göstermektedir.

References

  • Absmanner, E., Rouha-Mülleder, C., Scharl, T., Leisch, F., Troxler J. 2009. Effects of different housing systems on the behaviour of beef bulls—An on-farm assessment on Austrian farms. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118,12–19.
  • Anonymous 2007. Principles to be followed in the construction of joint production units in cooperative projects. Ministery of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Ankara, Turkey
  • Anonim 2018. Ayvacık Belediyesi. 7 Aralık 2018. http://www.canakkaleayvacik.bel.tr//Syf/Cografi-Konumu.html
  • Brady, N.C. 1991. The nature and properties of Soil. (10. Ed.)MacMillan Publishing Co. Inc. Newyork. ISBN: 0-02-313361-9. Christopherson, R.J. 1985. Management and housing of animals in cold environments. In: Yousef, M.K. (Ed.), Stress Physiology in Livestock. Ungulates, vol. II. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, USA, pp. 175–194.
  • Dagnew, M., T. Crowe, Schoenau, J. 2000. Near-infrared sensing of hog manure nutrients. 2000. ASAENorth Central Region Intersectional Meeting. Paper No. RRV00-206.
  • Graf, B. 1984. Inwieweit genügen Laufstallsysteme den artspezifischen Ansprüchen von Mastrindern Überprü fung anhand von Merkmalen des Ausruhverhaltens. In: Aktuelle Arbeiten zur artgema¨ßen Tierhaltung 1983, vol. 299, KTBL-Schrift. pp. 9–13.
  • Han, Y., Bakır G., 2010. Özel besi işletmelerinin barınak yapısı ve etkileyen faktörler. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 41(1), 45-51.
  • Hillel, D. 1980. Application of soil physics. Academic Press, New York.
  • Kessel, J.S., Thompson, R.B., Reeves III, J.B. 1999. Rapid on-farm analysis of manure nutrients using quick tests. J. Prod. Agric., 12(2),215-224.
  • Kızıl, U., Lindley, J.A. 2001. Comparison of different techniques in the determination of animal manure characteristics. ASAE/CSAE North Central Sections Conference Brookings, South Dakota. Paper No. SD 01-106
  • Koch, L., Irps, H. 1985. Zum einfluss von bodenbeschaffenheit und klima bei der haltung von jungrindern. Landtechnik, 40,408–411.
  • Kutlu, H., Gül, A., Görgülü, M. 2003. Türkiye hayvancılığının sorunları ve çözüm yolları. Damızlık hayvan-kaliteli yem. Yem Magazin Derg, 34(1),40-46.
  • Lowe, D.E., Steen, R.W.J., Beattie, V.E. 2001. Preferences of housed finishing beef cattle for different floor types. Anim. Welf., 10,395–404.
  • Mallory, E.B., Griffin, T.S., Porter, G.A. 2010. Seasonal nitrogen availability from current and past applications of manure. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst., 88,351–360.
  • Manninen, M., Sankari, S., Jauhiainen, L., Kivinen, T., Soveri, T. 2007. Insulated, uninsulated and outdoor housing for replacement beef heifers on restricted grass silage-based diet in a cold environment. Livestock Science., 107,113–125.
  • Mossberg, I., Lindell, L., Johnsson, S., Törnquist, M., Engstrand, U. 1992. Two housing systems for intensively reared bulls slaughtered in two weight ranges. Acta Agric. Scand., A Anim. Sci., 42,167–176.
  • Mutaf, S., Aklan, S., Şeber, N., 2001. Hayvan barınaklarının projelendirme ilkeleri ve Gap yöresi için uygun barınak tipleri. TMMOB Makine Mühendisler Odası. II. GAP ve Sanayi Kongresi. 29-30 Eylül, Diyarbakır.
  • MWPS 1987. Beef housing and equipment (4th ed.). Iowa State University, USA: Midwest Plan Service.
  • MWPS 1993. Livestock waste facilities handbook. Iowa State University, USA: Midwest Plan Service.
  • Olgun, M. 2016. Agricultural buildings. Ankara University, Turkey: Faculty of Agriculture Publications No:1577.
  • Russelle, M.P., Entz, M. H., Franzluebbers, A.J. 2007. Reconsidering integrated crop–livestock systems in North America. Agron. J., 99,325–334.
  • Redbo, I., Mossberg, I., Ehrlemark, A., Ståhl-Högberg, M. 1996. Keeping growing cattle outside during winter: behaviour, production and climatic demand. Anim. Sci., 62, 35–41.
  • Sezen, Y. 1984. Gübreler ve gübreleme, Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları No:19, 39-83.
  • Schmitt, M.A. 1999. Manure management in Minnesota. University of Minnesota Extension Service. http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/cropsystems/DC3553.html
  • Schulze Westerath, H., Gygax, L., Mayer, C., Wechsler, B. 2007. Leg lesions and cleanliness of finishing bulls kept in housing systems with different lying area surfaces. The Vet. J., 174,7–85.
  • Schröder, J. 2005. Revisiting the agronomic benefits of manure: a correct assessment and exploitation of its fertilizer value spares the environment. Bioresource Technol., 96,253–261.
  • Sharpley, A.N., Chapra, S.C., Wedepohl, R., Sims, J.T., Daniel, T.C., Reddy, K.R. 1994. Managing agricultural phosphorus for protection of surface waters: issues and options. J Environ Qual., 23,437–51.

Consideration Of Beef Cattle Barn Projects With Manure Management Planning: Çanakkale/Ayvacik Case Study

Year 2022, , 48 - 59, 22.01.2022
https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.991651

Abstract

Livestock barns are built without taking into account animal welfare, productivity and effective use of labor in cattle breeding enterprises. These problems can be eliminated by following the design principles. However, considering the small family businesses in our country, it is seen that there are quite large design errors in the cattle barns. Another issue that is not taken into account in livestock enterprises is the processes related to the collection, transmission, storage and disposal of animal wastes that will arise during production. This makes management difficult, causes some environmental problems, and wastes manure, which is a very valuable plant food source. In this study, a small scale (50 head beef) operation is designed considering the above mentioned design criteria and possible manure management options. Annual manure production capacity of 575 t is calculated. However based on the soil analysis results and various plants this operation will need to apply 76 to 902 tons of manure annualy. This shows that a detailed plant production plan should be conducted based on the manure management plans. For alternative plantations land requirement to dispose of manure vary between 13 – 91 da. The land available for manure application is about 20 da for this operation. Therefore, additional land should be managed to manage manure. Results of the study showed that commercial value of manure produced annualy is about 874 $. This value aslo demonstrates the importance of manure management based on soil/manure nutrient contents and plan needs.

References

  • Absmanner, E., Rouha-Mülleder, C., Scharl, T., Leisch, F., Troxler J. 2009. Effects of different housing systems on the behaviour of beef bulls—An on-farm assessment on Austrian farms. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 118,12–19.
  • Anonymous 2007. Principles to be followed in the construction of joint production units in cooperative projects. Ministery of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Ankara, Turkey
  • Anonim 2018. Ayvacık Belediyesi. 7 Aralık 2018. http://www.canakkaleayvacik.bel.tr//Syf/Cografi-Konumu.html
  • Brady, N.C. 1991. The nature and properties of Soil. (10. Ed.)MacMillan Publishing Co. Inc. Newyork. ISBN: 0-02-313361-9. Christopherson, R.J. 1985. Management and housing of animals in cold environments. In: Yousef, M.K. (Ed.), Stress Physiology in Livestock. Ungulates, vol. II. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Florida, USA, pp. 175–194.
  • Dagnew, M., T. Crowe, Schoenau, J. 2000. Near-infrared sensing of hog manure nutrients. 2000. ASAENorth Central Region Intersectional Meeting. Paper No. RRV00-206.
  • Graf, B. 1984. Inwieweit genügen Laufstallsysteme den artspezifischen Ansprüchen von Mastrindern Überprü fung anhand von Merkmalen des Ausruhverhaltens. In: Aktuelle Arbeiten zur artgema¨ßen Tierhaltung 1983, vol. 299, KTBL-Schrift. pp. 9–13.
  • Han, Y., Bakır G., 2010. Özel besi işletmelerinin barınak yapısı ve etkileyen faktörler. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 41(1), 45-51.
  • Hillel, D. 1980. Application of soil physics. Academic Press, New York.
  • Kessel, J.S., Thompson, R.B., Reeves III, J.B. 1999. Rapid on-farm analysis of manure nutrients using quick tests. J. Prod. Agric., 12(2),215-224.
  • Kızıl, U., Lindley, J.A. 2001. Comparison of different techniques in the determination of animal manure characteristics. ASAE/CSAE North Central Sections Conference Brookings, South Dakota. Paper No. SD 01-106
  • Koch, L., Irps, H. 1985. Zum einfluss von bodenbeschaffenheit und klima bei der haltung von jungrindern. Landtechnik, 40,408–411.
  • Kutlu, H., Gül, A., Görgülü, M. 2003. Türkiye hayvancılığının sorunları ve çözüm yolları. Damızlık hayvan-kaliteli yem. Yem Magazin Derg, 34(1),40-46.
  • Lowe, D.E., Steen, R.W.J., Beattie, V.E. 2001. Preferences of housed finishing beef cattle for different floor types. Anim. Welf., 10,395–404.
  • Mallory, E.B., Griffin, T.S., Porter, G.A. 2010. Seasonal nitrogen availability from current and past applications of manure. Nutr Cycl Agroecosyst., 88,351–360.
  • Manninen, M., Sankari, S., Jauhiainen, L., Kivinen, T., Soveri, T. 2007. Insulated, uninsulated and outdoor housing for replacement beef heifers on restricted grass silage-based diet in a cold environment. Livestock Science., 107,113–125.
  • Mossberg, I., Lindell, L., Johnsson, S., Törnquist, M., Engstrand, U. 1992. Two housing systems for intensively reared bulls slaughtered in two weight ranges. Acta Agric. Scand., A Anim. Sci., 42,167–176.
  • Mutaf, S., Aklan, S., Şeber, N., 2001. Hayvan barınaklarının projelendirme ilkeleri ve Gap yöresi için uygun barınak tipleri. TMMOB Makine Mühendisler Odası. II. GAP ve Sanayi Kongresi. 29-30 Eylül, Diyarbakır.
  • MWPS 1987. Beef housing and equipment (4th ed.). Iowa State University, USA: Midwest Plan Service.
  • MWPS 1993. Livestock waste facilities handbook. Iowa State University, USA: Midwest Plan Service.
  • Olgun, M. 2016. Agricultural buildings. Ankara University, Turkey: Faculty of Agriculture Publications No:1577.
  • Russelle, M.P., Entz, M. H., Franzluebbers, A.J. 2007. Reconsidering integrated crop–livestock systems in North America. Agron. J., 99,325–334.
  • Redbo, I., Mossberg, I., Ehrlemark, A., Ståhl-Högberg, M. 1996. Keeping growing cattle outside during winter: behaviour, production and climatic demand. Anim. Sci., 62, 35–41.
  • Sezen, Y. 1984. Gübreler ve gübreleme, Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları No:19, 39-83.
  • Schmitt, M.A. 1999. Manure management in Minnesota. University of Minnesota Extension Service. http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/cropsystems/DC3553.html
  • Schulze Westerath, H., Gygax, L., Mayer, C., Wechsler, B. 2007. Leg lesions and cleanliness of finishing bulls kept in housing systems with different lying area surfaces. The Vet. J., 174,7–85.
  • Schröder, J. 2005. Revisiting the agronomic benefits of manure: a correct assessment and exploitation of its fertilizer value spares the environment. Bioresource Technol., 96,253–261.
  • Sharpley, A.N., Chapra, S.C., Wedepohl, R., Sims, J.T., Daniel, T.C., Reddy, K.R. 1994. Managing agricultural phosphorus for protection of surface waters: issues and options. J Environ Qual., 23,437–51.
There are 27 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Oğuzhan Akça This is me 0000-0002-9308-3268

Ünal Kızıl 0000-0002-8512-3899

Publication Date January 22, 2022
Submission Date September 6, 2021
Published in Issue Year 2022

Cite

APA Akça, O., & Kızıl, Ü. (2022). Consideration Of Beef Cattle Barn Projects With Manure Management Planning: Çanakkale/Ayvacik Case Study. Turkish Journal of Agricultural and Natural Sciences, 9(1), 48-59. https://doi.org/10.30910/turkjans.991651