Protecting Washington Waters
From Manure Pollution
Photo: CARE
A strong Washington CAFO Permit is necessary
to protect salmon, shellfish beds, and drinking water for public health
Background:
Several scientific studies identify concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) as sources of
pollutants that cause and contribute to Washington’s plague of water quality problems. CAFOs are
industrial operations in which animals are not kept in grazing pastures, but packed together in barns
and feedlots, standing in their own waste the vast majority of the year. This produces large excesses
of manure in small areas, putting pathogens and other pollutants in our air, water, and soil. Improperly
managed manure is known to cause significant public health and pollution problems.
A strong waste discharge permit from the Washington Department of Ecology would improve and
protect state water quality by monitoring and preventing the discharge of pollutants from CAFOs. CAFO
pollution is a top source of nitrates in groundwater, and controlling these discharges would protect
human health and save lives.
Requiring rapid implementation of readily available technologies for eliminating CAFO pollution as part
of the permit is a necessary step toward restoring clean waters for the people and wildlife that depend
on it to survive.
20 million pounds of manure every day in WA
An adult dairy cow generates 120 pounds of
manure per day. The estimated 200,000 adult
dairy cows in Washington state produce over 20
million pounds of manure each day, collectively. A
farm with 2,500 dairy cows is estimated to create a
similar waste load as a city of 411,000 people, but
dairy waste is not sent to a sewage treatment plant
like human waste1. To store CAFO manure, millions
of gallons of liquid waste are commonly stored
in open cesspits or “lagoons,” while solid waste
is often stored in piles at the facilities. As animal
waste decomposes, it creates ammonia, nitrite,
and nitrate2. Nitrates and nitrites are hazardous
to human health, especially to infants, the most
vulnerable members of the human community2.
Microbial pathogens associated with CAFO manure
Photo: CARE
include fecal coliform, E. coli, camphylobacter,
salmonella, cryptosporidium parvum, clostridium,
and giardia. Health risks associated with these
pathogens include gastroenteritis, diarrhea,
cramps, nausea, vomiting, jaundice, headaches,
and fatigue2. Fecal coliform pollution has been
cited as a leading cause of recent shellfish bed
closures in Puget Sound.
1 EPA, Relation Between Nitrate in Water Wells & Potential Sources in the Lower Yakima Valley, EPA-910-R-13-004 (2013) at 46.
2 CARE, et al. v. Cow Palace, LLC, et al., No. 13-CV-3016-TOR (Expert Report of Robert Lawrence, Dec. 1, 2014).
Protecting Washington Waters From Manure Pollution
Dairy CAFOs are the main source of nitrogen
3% 2%
Dairy *
Other Livestock *
30%
58%
Irrigated Cropland
Septic/Biosolids
Other
* Does not account for
losses due to volatilization
and dentrification
7%
Figure 6: Nitrogen Generated by Major Sources in Yakima County
While there are other sources contributing to
the nitrate pollution problem, the Environmental
Protection Agency and Washington Department
of Ecology have found that dairy CAFOs, and
the manure that they produce, in the Lower
Yakima Valley and Sumas-Blaine Aquifer in
Whatcom County, respectively, are by far the
most significant loading sources.
Fact: All manure lagoons leak5
Even if the lagoons are built to current NRCS
standards, “NRCS guidance considers an acceptable
initial seepage rate [from manure lagoons] to be 5,000
gallons per acre per day,” and thus all lagoons leak3.
There is a vast number of studies that confirm manure
lagoons leak4. After being presented with the current
science regarding manure lagoon leakage, a federal
district court judge found “[e]ven assuming the lagoons
were constructed pursuant to NRCS standards, these
standards specifically allow for permeability and thus,
the lagoons are designed to leak5.”
Many manure lagoons are not built to NRCS
standards or status is unknown
The agriculture industry claims that all manure
lagoons are “lined” with clay that must be kept
saturated in accordance with federal NRCS
standards. However, as documented by
Washington State Department of Agriculture
inspection records, many manure lagoons are
20-40 years old and do not even comply with
current NRCS standards (which allow leakage).
Puget Sound Basin lagoons and
NRCS standards
Not Built to NRCS standards:
11.8% (49)
Unknown:
40% (164)
Built to NRCS standards:
48.3% (200)
0
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Average age of Puget Sound
Basin lagoons
70.8% (295) Unknown
6.5% (27)
30+ years
11.6% (48)
20-30 years
6.0% (25)
10-20 years
1.4% (6)
5-10 years
Puget Sound Basin lagoon liners
6
Unknown:
30.7% (127)
Clay bottom:
69.3% (287)
0
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
3NRCS Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, Chapter 10: Agricultural Waste Management System Component Design.
4Exhaustive list of citations here: http://bit.ly/21VXquN
5CARE, et al. v. Cow Palace, LLC, et al., No. 13-CV-3016-TOR (Order Re: Cross Motions for Summary Judgment) (Jan. 14, 2015) at 93.
6CARE, et al. v. George & Margaret, LLC, George DeRuyter & Son Dairy, LLC, et al., No. 2:13-cv-3017-TOR (Expert Report of David J. Erickson).
Protecting Washington Waters From Manure Pollution
Manure lagoon “seals” don’t prevent pollution
Chemistry & Conversions Under Manure Lagoons6
The agricultural industry claims a “cured manure seal” at the
bottom of a lagoon prevents leakage. The science shows
this claim is, at best, of “questionable merit7.” A variety of
common occurrences compromise the effectiveness of the
“seal,” and the “seal” may never form in the first place8.
The NRCS “no longer recommends assuming that manure
sealing will result in one order of magnitude reduction” of
seepage from a lagoon7.
Industry-favorite “study” corroborates lagoon leakage and water contamination
The agricultural industry claims a “study” of the Haak lagoon in the Lower Yakima Valley shows that manure
lagoons do not leak. However, industry has completely mischaracterized these data.
In the Cow Palace litigation, plaintiffs’ experts probed one hole 45 feet into the soil below the bottom of
the approximately one-acre Haak lagoon which had been abandoned and the manure removed over six
months prior. The data actually indicate that “preferential flow pathways” beneath lagoons transmit pollutants
from the lagoon into the groundwater and that saturated soil layers can accelerate nitrogen migration into
groundwater8.
The pollutants from the leaking lagoon do not always go straight down in a uniform manner. Instead, they
migrate only through certain areas in the soil. In the Haak boring, the data showed substantial concentrations
of nitrate (94.5 ppm) in the first foot under the lagoon, confirming that the lagoon leaked. In the second foot,
nitrate concentrations dropped because the nitrate had already moved with the preferential flow path and
gone deeper.
Nitrate is highly soluble and mobile
when it reaches soil moisture
and is flushed through the soil
quickly into the groundwater with
little attenuation or absorption.
In other words, the nitrates do
not stay in the dry soils that were
found in the borings. Since the soil
characteristics underlying lagoons
are variable, one would not expect
to find uniform levels of seepage
underlying the lagoon in a hole that
goes straight down.
“Due to its rapid movement,
preferential flow allows much faster
contaminant transport and creates
significant consequences for groundwater quality and has direct impacts on drinking water and human
health, animal waste management, nutrient and pesticide management, and watershed management9.”
7NRCS Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook, Chapter 10: Agricultural Waste Management System Component Design, Appendix 10D.
8CARE, et al. v. Cow Palace, LLC, et al., No. 13-CV-3016-TOR (Expert Report of David J. Erickson); Cornell University Department of Biological & Environmental
Engineering, Why Preferential Flow Is Important, http://soilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/Research/pfweb/educators/intro/why.htm
9Cornell University Department of Biological & Environmental Engineering, Why is Preferential Flow Important?, http://soilandwater.bee.cornell.edu/Research/
pfweb/educators/intro/why.htm
Protecting Washington Waters From Manure Pollution
Lagoons ARE a pollution problem
The agricultural industry claims that leaking manure
lagoons are a small part of the pollution problem
and should not be regulated by a discharge permit.
While lagoons are smaller than fields used for manure
application, lagoons can be a much more significant
and concentrated source of nitrogen loading.
For example, in a study conducted in California,
manure storage lagoons contributed an average of
183 kg/N/ha/yr, while cropland contributed an average
of 154 kg/N/ha/yr, leading the authors to conclude “the
most intense sources [of groundwater nitrate loading]
are corrals and lagoons located on dairies and some
WWTP/FP percolation basins10.” The study found that
nitrogen loading rates to the unsaturated zone under
manure lagoons range from 400 kg/ha/yr to 5,000
Photo: Google
kg/ha/yr—hardly an insignificant source and clearly
deserving of regulation by the Department of Ecology, the agency charged with preventing groundwater
discharges10.
In the Lower Yakima Valley, a federal district judge found “there can be no dispute that the [dairy CAFOs’]
lagoons are leaking and thus allowing nitrate to accumulate in the soil at rates possibly higher than three
million gallons per year11.”
WSDA Dairy Nutrient Management Program doesn’t effectively prevent manure overapplication
Soil sampling records show that many CAFOs are overapplying
their manure to crops despite the Dairy Nutrient Management
Program. Nutrient management plans are supposed to protect
water quality but WSDA records show that WSDA inspectors
advise dairy farmers “there is currently no state requirement to
maintain an up to date dairy plan or follow your plan12.”
A federal district judge has found that “because defendants’
Photo: CARE
manure applications were not only untethered to DNMP’s
Best Management Practices but done without regard to crop fertilization needs, presumably in an effort to
discard their excess supply, the otherwise beneficial purpose of manure as fertilizer was eliminated and the
manure discarded11.” Another federal district judge found a similar problem at a different dairy CAFO: “Faria
[Dairy]’s manure management practices are the predominant source of the nitrate contamination found in the
[groundwater] monitoring wells and correspondingly, local groundwater. These practices include consistent
over-application of manure to fields located adjacent to, and nearby, the Dairy13.”
Soil sampling and water quality monitoring data reviewed by WSDA from dairies in Whatcom County shows
that CAFOs in that area are also over-applying manure to fields in a manner that jeopardizes water quality.
Both of these dairies were routinely inspected by WSDA while the massive pollution was ongoing and nothing
was done to correct the problem.
10Viers, J.H., et al. (2012), Nitrogen Sources and Loading to Groundwater. Technical Report 2 in: Addressing Nitrate in California’s Drinking Water with a Focus
on Tulare Lake Basin and Salinas Valley Groundwater. Report for the State Water Resources Control Board Report to the Legislature. Center for Watershed
Sciences, University of California, Davis. http://groundwaternitrate.ucdavis.edu/files/139110.pdf
11CARE, et al. v. Cow Palace, LLC, et al., No. 13-CV-3016-TOR (Order Re: Cross Motions for Summary Judgment) (Jan. 14, 2015).
12 Email from WSDA Inspector to Dairy (Sept. 22, 2015).
13CARE v. Faria Dairy, 2011 WL 6934707 (E.D. Wa. Dec. 30, 2011).