The Missouri Approach to
Animal Waste Management
JAMES ODENDAHL, Industrial Waste Engineer
Missouri Clean Water Commission
ROBERT GEORGE, Extension Agricultural Engineer
University of Missouri-Columbia
Columbia, Missouri
INTRODUCTION
Since the early sixty's there has been an increasing number of complaints regarding
pollution from confined feeding operations. This is due to several reasons but the two most
important are: I) Increase in both the size and number of feedlots; and 2) Continual growth
of the urban area into the formerly rural areas.
Then the increasing public awareness and interest in the environmental problems acted
as a catalyst, causing increasing conflict between feedlot operators and their new urban
neighbors.
During the 60's Kansas and Iowa passed feedlot registration laws primarily to give the
state control over the operations and assure compliance with pollution control laws. In 1969
and 1970 recommendations began to be made to the Missouri General Assembly that
similar laws be passed. In 1971 a feedlot bill was introduced but died in committee.
With the increasing public pressure, feedlot operators began asking for assistance in
pollution abatement. Throughout the 60's the Water Pollution Board did issue a few
permits for waste treatment facilities at some feedlot operations. However, limited staff and
other pressing problems prevented any real effort by the Board to seek out potential
problems and assist in solution. The involvement was all "after the fact" or because of
complaints.
With this in mind, the Missouri Water Pollution Board staff met with some members
of the Agricultural Engineering Extension Division, University of Missouri, Columbia, and
requested their assistance in researching and developing a design for waste treatment of
animal wastes. A standing committee was formed and various ideas suggested and assigned
to individuals for future investigation and a literature review.
Many collection and treatment methods were reviewed during 1969 and 1970.
Finally, in early 1970 the group listed the basic criteria for handling animal wastes.
These are: I) System must not cause water pollution or be a local nuisance because of odors:
2) System must be feasible for agriculture and fit its specific needs; 3) System must be
flexible enough to fit individual situations; and 4) System must give the operator some
assurance that wastes are being handled in an acceptable manner.
With these firmly in mind, the committee realized that treatment of wastes and runoff
from confined feeding operations, in the sense that municipal or industrial wastes are
treated, would probably not meet criteria items 2 and 3 because of costs and operation. The
word "management" began to be heard more and more in our discussions. Before we could
proceed with design requirements and/or standards, the following ground rules were
established: 1) All wastes shall be managed so that there will be no planned discharges. No
discharge, no water pollution; 2) All systems must be designed and managed so that excess
wastes are applied to land in a controlled manner; and 3) The Water Pollution Board (now
the Missouri Clean Water Commission) issues a Letter of Approval to the owner as his
assurance that an "approved design" has been used.
617