This blog is the fourth in a four-part series that delves into the recent program evaluation of California’s Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) Programs. In this installment, we focus on the Alternative Manure Management Program (AMMP), highlighting some of the program-specific findings and recommendations.

Recap of the Evaluation Series

In the first part of this series, we explored the overall findings and recommendations of a recent independent program evaluation of California’s Climate Smart Agriculture (CSA) Programs led by Dr. Nicholas Babin of Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo. The evaluation showed that the Climate Smart Agriculture programs are effectively helping growers adopt and expand climate-smart farming practices. Producers are also gaining new skills and sharing their experiences with others. 

The second and third parts of the series focused on the evaluation results as they relate to specific climate-smart agriculture programs. Part two covered the evaluation results for the State Water Efficiency and Enhancement Program (SWEEP), while part three focused on the Healthy Soils Program (HSP).

In this fourth and final installment in the series, we summarize some of the program-specific findings and recommendations for the Alternative Manure Management Program (AMMP). 

Alternative Manure Management Program Overview

AMMP provides grants to producers to implement dairy and livestock manure management strategies that reduce methane emissions. Many dairies in California use “wet” manure management systems and storage lagoons that release large amounts of methane when organic matter decomposes in the absence of oxygen. AMMP supports producers to move towards “dry” manure management systems instead. “Dry” manure management practices eligible under AMMP include composting, dry scrape, advanced solids separation, and conversion to or expansion of pasture-based systems. Since the program’s inception in 2017, AMMP has awarded 172 California dairies a total of $113 million.

Alternative Manure Management Program Key Findings:

Motivations for Participation, Increased Profitability, and Other Reported Benefits:

According to the evaluation, the most commonly reported reason for producers participating in AMMP was the ability to upgrade manure handling and storage infrastructure (69%). Interest in upgrading manure handling and infrastructure may be tied to the knowledge that it allows for various cost and labor savings. 

For example, reported cost savings benefits included:

• Reduced lagon cleaning costs (80% of respondents)
• Reduced manure hauling costs (74% of respondents)
• Reduced bedding costs (61% of respondents)
• Reduced diesel fuel costs (52% of respondents)

Additional reported motivations for applying for the program included reducing methane emissions to mitigate climate change, addressing regulatory concerns, and improving water quality. Reported benefits, in addition to the cost savings listed above, included reduced solids in manure ponds, improved cow health, improved soil health in fields using dairy compost, reduced odor, improved water efficiency, and improved quality and yield of cash crops using dairy compost. 

Overall, the evaluation found that AMMP practices led to a 2% or more increase in farm profitability for 35% of surveyed grantees. 

High Persistence Rates Overall with A Need for More Information on Compost-Bedded Pack Barns:

The evaluation revealed that 93% of the funded AMMP practices were maintained by the surveyed producers, with a 100% persistence rate for flush-to-scrape systems, 96% persistence rate for solid separation systems, and 86% persistence rate for compost-bedded pack barns. Additionally, 91% of respondents indicated they are “somewhat likely” to reapply to the program.

Curiously, the survey revealed an apparent discrepancy related to compost-bedded pack barns which merits an additional discussion with producers. When asked “What is the likelihood that you will eventually add stalls to your compost-bedded pack barn?” (i.e. convert it to a traditional freestall barn, which would negate the GHG and environmental benefits), 21% of recipients indicated they were likely to do so and 36% of recipients indicated they were unsure. 43% of recipients indicated they were unlikely to convert the compost-bedded pack barns. 

However, as noted above, the evaluation data also indicated a high current persistence rate of 86% for compost-bedded pack barns among those surveyed. CDFA highlighted this discrepancy in their cover letter to the report and noted they are unaware of any instances of compost-bedded pack barns being abandoned or converted to freestall barns.

Similarly, CalCAN and our partners working on AMMP are unaware of producers converting compost-bedded pack barns to freestall barns and have heard mostly positive reports on the practice. As such, more investigation and discussions with producers are likely needed to understand this discrepancy and what the best course of action would be. *Note – If you or someone you know would like to share insight on this topic, please contact Colton Fagundes (colton@calclimateag.org) our Associate Policy Director who leads our dairy policy work. 

Technical Assistance (TA) Uncommon but Valued by AMMP Recipients:

Only 20% of AMMP respondents in the evaluation received technical assistance. However,  of those that did, 86% said that the TA provider was “very or extremely important” in successfully carrying out their project successfully. In contrast, 46% of SWEEP and 49% HSP respondents worked with a TA provider at some point during their project. This discrepancy may be explained by CDFA having significantly fewer agreements with TA providers for AMMP than for SWEEP and HSP. The reported satisfaction with AMMP technical assistance found in this evaluation suggests it may be worthwhile to explore ways to increase the availability of technical assistance providers for AMMP. 

Additional Healthy Soils Program Resources

If you want more information about the data collected on AMMP or the other programs evaluated, you can refer to the complete report and CDFA’s cover letter. 

If you are interested in learning more about how AMMP can benefit your farm or have insights into alternative manure management practices, feel free to contact Colton Fagundes, our Associate Policy Director, who leads our dairy policy work.

For examples of previously funded AMMP projects, check out the “Reducing emissions from dairy herds”  section of CalCAN’s Farmer Voices page.