Abstract. A survey of cattle manure management was undertaken in England and Wales, in 1997, by postal questionnaire sent out to a stratified sample (by unit size) of 1750 dairy and 1750 beef producers. The level of response obtained, with 471 dairy farmers (27%) and 515 beef farmers (29%) returning questionnaires, reflects well on the interest shown by the industry and on the survey design. The survey provided information on manure production and storage, when and how applied and nutrient value. Dairy farms are estimated to produce manures in the form of c. 65% slurry and 35% farmyard manures (FYM) and, beef units, 80%FYM and 20%slurry (based on survey response data, animal numbers and calculations of undiluted outputs of excreta). Slurry storage within both dairy and beef systems is typically up to 3–6 months capacity, although there is no storage for an estimated 16% of dairy and 25% of beef slurry. Autumn and winter spreading is common practice, with 40–50% of slurry and 50–60% of FYM applied at that time. Although some evidence suggests that farmers make little allowance for the nutrient content of manures in planning fertilizer inputs, the results of this survey suggest that many farmers do make some effort to utilize manure nutrients. However, they currently fail to be assured by the advice available to them or they lack confidence in manures as nutrient sources for a number of technical reasons. Information provided by the survey may be important to policy makers, researchers and consultants, as well as farmers.

No abstract

Set-aside was introduced in the European Community in 1988 on a voluntary basis and, under the reform of the Common Agricultural Policy in 1992, itwas a condition for the receipt of area payments for most arable farms in England. The areas of set-aside land reached around 527 000 ha in England in 1994-95, falling to 253 000 ha in 1996-97. The implications of set-aside for landscape and biodiversity are discussed, drawbig on farm questionnaire surveys, supplemented by field studies of biodiversity. The majority of farmers adopted rotational set-aside, and while crop yield and economic factors were the most important factors in selecting land to set-aside, there were few signs of substantial differences between set-aside and other areas of arable land. Most rotational set-aside was under natural regeneration, sprayed with non-selective herbicides in the spring. For the much less frequent non-rotational set-aside, there were similar areas of natural regeneration and sown grass covers. Other forms of cover, including industrial crops, were much less frequent. The farmer perception was that set-aside caused few agronomic problems. The farmers felt that set-aside did not improve the look of the landscape and felt that the benefits to wildlife were greatest from non-rotational set-aside, while field studies suggest that the benefits are typically greater for rotational set-aside, especially for farmland birds. Under Agenda 2000, it is proposed to set the set-aside rate at 0% (voluntary set-aside will still be allowed), and to rely on agri-environment schemes to generate environmental benefits from agricultural landscapes. While this may be appropriate for plants and landscape quality, it will be hard to replace the resources made available to farmland birds by the large areas of set-aside land which may be lost.

Abstract. A survey of manure management practice was undertaken in 1996, by postal questionnaire submitted to a stratified sample of egg and broiler producers in England and Wales. Out of a target of 500 laying hen and 500 broiler (chickens produced for meat) production units in the survey sample, 356 (36%) returned questionnaires. The survey provided information on amount and type of manure production, manure storage and land application strategies (timing, techniques and awareness of nutrient content). Within the survey, no attempt was made to differentiate between organic and conventional production systems. About 45% of manure production was estimated to come from layer holdings, 55% from broiler litter. It was estimated that 70% of the national manure production is litter‐based and about 30% are droppings collected without litter. Sawdust/shavings are the most popular bedding material, with an average final depth of 100 mm for broilers and 140 mm on litter‐based layer units. Commonly, storage is available within housing for at least the length of the cropping cycle (6 weeks in broiler production, or 12 months in deep pit laying houses), around 60% of poultry manure is stored for a period following removal from the house, most commonly for 3‐6 months. Overall, autumn was the peak period for manure spreading, with over 40% of laying hen manure and 50% of broiler manure applied at that time. On grassland, spreading was reasonably evenly distributed throughout the year but autumn application was favoured for arable crops, especially before the establishment of cereals and root crops, overall, almost 50% of layer and broiler manure was applied in the autumn. In the survey, up to 10% of manures were claimed to be incorporated within a day of application and about 60% within a week of application, presumably because of concern about odour nuisance. Around 25% of poultry manure was applied by contractors. A high proportion of farmers (c. 40% with layers, c. 60% with broilers) exported manures from their holdings, the proportion removed amounting to almost 90% on these farms. Although evidence elsewhere indicates that farmers make little allowance for manures in planning crop fertilizer inputs, the survey responses suggested that farmers do make an effort to allow for manures but that their confidence in the advice available to them is lacking, or they may have other technical reasons for not taking advantage of the manurial value. Information provided by the survey is of significant importance to policy makers (e.g. for the construction of environmental emissions inventories), researchers, consultants and farmers.