Article

Water Management on Canadian Farms

Introduction
Protection of natural sources of water
Use of water for farming and household activities
Adoption level of beneficial management practices for water
Summary

Introduction

Water Management on Canadian Farms is the fifth article in a series of studies collectively called Farm Environmental Management in Canada. This series aims to document key results from the 2001 Farm Environmental Management Survey (FEMS).¹ It presents information about farming practices used on Canadian farms as they relate to a number of agri-environmental topics such as manure handling and storage, water management, use of chemical inputs, and sustainable land management practices. The intent of the survey was to provide a broad overview of environmental management on Canadian farms and not to investigate in detail how farmers manage their operations in an effort to protect the environment.

Agricultural activities by their very nature could have a significant impact on the environment. Tillage practices alter natural landscapes, agricultural inputs enter ecosystems and animal by-products influence the ecological balance. Farmers are at the frontlines as stewards of the environment mainly because they manage large areas of land. They are actively involved in environmental programs and are adopting farming practices that minimize pollution risks to air, water and soil, while contributing to the conservation of biodiversity. FEMS results provide insight into the adoption of environmentally sound practices and can assist governments, farmers and non-governmental organizations in the promotion and development of farm environmental initiatives.

This report is specific to water management on Canadian farms and covers practices used to protect natural sources of water, such as maintaining vegetation on areas adjacent to natural sources of water and disposing of milkhouse wash water, as well as practices for proper on-farm use of water for farming and household activities. However, practices related to water are much broader than what is included in this bulletin; other water management practices are covered in other articles in the series, including the distance between manure storage facilities and waterways.

Although the focus of the analysis is mainly at the national level, some data are also presented on a provincial basis. Additional provincial tables are found in Appendix A.

Protection of natural sources of water

Agricultural activities can have significant effects on the quality and health of natural sources of water such as streams, lakes and rivers. A number of farming practices can be adopted to reduce or eliminate risks to natural sources of water. FEMS collected data on some of these practices, more specifically it looked at the maintenance of vegetation on areas adjacent to natural sources of water, the management of grazing livestock to prevent direct access or manure runoff, the adoption of conservation measures for the protection of wetlands, and the disposal of milkhouse wash water and toxic farm wastes.
 
Vegetation in areas adjacent to natural sources of water

Over the last few decades, many farms have expanded in size, increased their level of specialization and improved their efficiency in order to ensure long-term profitability. Farmers have had to change many of their practices to reach this objective. Among them, to ensure the highest level of financial return on their land investments, there has been a trend to reduce the width of vegetated areas along waterways to cultivate the maximum acreage of land. In these cases, the extent of cultivation sometimes leaves little or no vegetation between cultivated crops and natural waterways. This practice reduces the protection of the adjacent water bodies, resulting in increased risks of erosion and of contaminated water from runoff of sediment, pesticides and nutrients.

Farmers were asked to report if the practice of leaving vegetation on areas adjacent to natural sources of water was adopted on their farms. At the national level, 76.3% of farms with areas adjacent to natural sources of water reported leaving vegetation on these areas in 2001 (Table 1). Of these farms, 95.0% left these areas permanently vegetated, 12.0% reported planting additional vegetation (e.g. perennial crops, trees and bushes) and 2.7% reported planting a winter crop.² However, these results need to be interpreted cautiously as the survey did not check if all areas adjacent to natural sources of water on an individual farm were vegetated or only a portion of them.

The percentage of farms reporting vegetation in areas adjacent to natural sources of water does not vary drastically among watersheds.³ Map 1 illustrates that, for most watersheds, between 65% and 85% of farms with such areas reported vegetation.

Management of grazing livestock

The management of grazing livestock can also affect the quality of surface water bodies. FEMS collected information on the level of adoption of two management practices for grazing livestock: preventing access of grazing livestock to surface water bodies; and feeding grazing livestock at a sufficient distance from surface water bodies during the winter months.

Allowing grazing livestock to access surface water bodies may affect the quality of the water. Grazing animals can deposit manure, increasing the loading of nutrients (mainly nitrogen and phosphorus) in water and raising the risk of pathogen contamination. They may also alter the banks, resulting in increased erosion, compaction and sedimentation.

At the national level, 56.8% of farms with grazing livestock reported that livestock were not given a direct access to surface water bodies in 2001. This percentage was consistent throughout farm revenue classes (Figure 1). The highest adoption rates for this practice were reported in the Eastern provinces, especially Ontario, and in British Columbia, as shown in Tables A.4.B to A.4.H in the Appendix.

Feeding grazing livestock in concentrated areas near surface water bodies may also negatively affect water quality, unless feeding areas are adequately managed to protect the environment. Limiting the amount of time that livestock spend close to surface water bodies is important to reduce environmental risks to water quality from nutrients and pathogens that could escape the feeding areas through runoff. Feeding at sufficient distance from surface water bodies during the winter months has proven to be an effective practice to prevent runoff.

In 2001, 90.7% of Canadian farms with grazing livestock reported not feeding animals within 100 metres of surface water bodies during winter months. This percentage was consistent throughout farm revenue classes (Figure 2).

Conservation measures for natural wetland areas

Wetlands are areas saturated with water for periods long enough to significantly alter soils and vegetation and to promote aquatic processes. The five main types of wetlands – bogs, fens, swamps, marshes and shallow water – are characterized by:

1. a seasonal or permanent covering of shallow water;
2. a water table at or near the surface for most of the growing season;
3. saturated organic soils, or peat, the productivity of which depends on the nutrient status and the pH of the site; and
4. water-loving plants, such as cattails, rushes, reeds, sedges, dogwood, willows and cedars.

Farmers with natural wetland areas on their farms could adopt measures for their conservation. Table 2 shows that fencing and rotational grazing⁴ were the most common measures reported by farmers adopting any type of conservation measures (45.5% and 41.7% of farms respectively). Alternate sources of water and water control structures or dams were also used to conserve wetland areas and were reported by 25.9% and 12.7% of farms respectively. Other types of measures were taken by 25.0% of farms.

Conservation measures adopted by farmers varied only slightly depending on whether their wetlands were seasonal, permanent or both. Farms with both types of wetlands were slightly more inclined to use several types of conservation measures. Farms with seasonal wetlands only reported a slightly greater use of rotational grazing compared to farms with permanent wetlands only.

Disposal of milkhouse wash water

Milkhouse wash water⁵ is a waste common to all dairy farm operations that can potentially contaminate soil and water. The volume of milkhouse wash water has increased over the last decades with the increased size of the dairy herd and the increased prevalence of automated technologies requiring higher volumes of water. Some methods used to dispose of milkhouse wash water are more environmentally friendly than others. The main recommended methods are the disposal of milkhouse wash water into the liquid manure storage system⁶, the use of a tank or an in-ground disposal field, a vegetative filter strip bed, constructed wetlands and the use of a flocculator.⁷

FEMS collected information on the disposal of milkhouse wash water for dairy farms storing liquid manure on the operation. Of these dairy farms, 66.1% disposed of the milkhouse wash water through their liquid manure storage system. Another 11.4% treated the wash water separately from the liquid manure storage system and 22.5% of farms did not treat their milkhouse wash water in any manner.

The disposal of milkhouse wash water into the liquid manure storage increased with farm revenue (Figure 3). The proportion of farms treating their milkhouse wash water separately from the liquid manure storage system was rather constant among farm revenue classes at about 15%.

Disposal of toxic farm wastes

Toxic farm wastes require special disposal as they can cause health risks and contaminate soil and water. Examples of toxic farm wastes include pesticide containers and products, batteries, antifreeze, veterinary products and used oil.⁸

FEMS collected information on the disposal methods used by farmers for any of their toxic farm wastes. Some typical methods to dispose safely of toxic farm wastes are to return products and containers to the supplier, to rinse and dispose of with domestic waste (e.g., pesticide containers), to use a specialized recycling program, and to use pick-up services for dangerous goods waste. Available disposal methods could vary among provinces and zones due to different types of services, regulations and programs.

Figure 4 shows that the most commonly reported disposal methods were the use of a specialized recycling program (54.2% of farms) and the return of the toxic farm waste to the supplier (40.1% of farms). About 20% of farms used a dangerous goods pick-up service to dispose of at least some of their toxic farm wastes. The disposal with domestic waste after the rinsing of the container was reported by 15.0% of farms. Other disposal methods (such as burning and using local dump sites) were used by 10.9% of farms.

Use of water for farming and household activities

Farmers use water every day for farming and household activities. FEMS collected information on the management of water used for irrigation and the frequency that farmers test their domestic water supply to ensure that the water used is of adequate quality.

Types of irrigation systems

From year to year, rainfall may be inadequate to meet the water requirements of growing crops. Irrigation can be used to supplement the amount of rain water for crops. The need for an irrigation system has to be evaluated against the risks of not receiving enough water from rainfall and the costs of irrigating to prevent such risks. Irrigation is usually used on high-value crops grown in areas that have a high probability of dry conditions during the growing season. With the higher occurrence of drought in recent years, an increasing area of field crops is being irrigated.

In 2001, 8.0% of Canadian farms reported irrigating their land. This percentage ranged from 3.0% on grain and oilseed farms to 54.6% on fruit and vegetable farms (Table 3). Regional distributions are presented in Table A.9.B and A.9.C in the Appendix.

There are many types of irrigation systems. Sprinkler and gun systems are the least water-efficient, while drip or trickle systems are the most efficient in providing water to plants. The most commonly used irrigation systems by Canadian farms in 2001 were sprinkler (49.8%) and gun (23.2%) systems. Drip or trickle systems and other systems such as flooding and subsurface irrigation represented respectively 13.1% and 13.8% of the irrigation systems used.

The choice of irrigation systems differed among farm types. Figure 5 shows that potato farms used almost exclusively gun and sprinkler systems, in similar proportions. The majority of fruit and vegetable farms irrigated their land with a gun or a sprinkler system although drip or trickle systems represented about 25% of the irrigation systems used. The sprinkler system was the most prevalent for grain and oilseed farms (59.0%), followed by guns and other less common types of irrigation systems. Drip or trickle systems were scarcely reported on these farms and, when reported, it is likely that these systems were used for other crops.

Domestic water testing

Good quality domestic water is essential to human and animal health and agricultural productivity. Over the last few years, there have been growing concerns in rural areas about the quality of domestic water. Rural residents have been encouraged to test their domestic water on a regular basis to prevent drinking contaminated water.

FEMS collected information on how often farmers tested their domestic water. In 2001, most farmers reported not testing regularly; 7.0% of farmers reported testing twice a year or more, 15.8% once a year, 13.1% every two years and 64.1% did not test on a regular basis. These percentages were rather consistent throughout the provinces. However Ontario farmers tested their domestic water more frequently; 14.5% of farmers reported testing twice a year or more, 27.5% once a year, 13.6% every two years, while 44.4% did not test on a regular basis (Figure 6). This higher level of testing in Ontario may be related, at least partly, to the waterborne disease outbreak that occurred in Walkerton in 2000.

Hog, poultry, and fruit and vegetable farms tested their domestic water more frequently than other types of farms (Figure 7). Frequency of testing was the lowest for grain and oilseed farms and beef farms.

Adoption level of beneficial management practices for water

Beneficial management practices (BMPs) for water are agricultural practices that help conserve the quantity and quality of water. This article presents information on a limited number of practices related to water management. Other practices – such as the storage, handling and application of manure, nutrients and pesticides, as well as the storage of fuel and silage and the management of drainage – can also relate to water management.

Farmers were asked if, in their opinion, BMPs for water were implemented on their farm. In 2001, 19.4% of Canadian farms reported they fully implemented BMPs for water on their farm and 11.6% reported partial implementation (Table 4). Conversely 43.9% reported to not be familiar with BMPs for water in their region, and almost one Canadian farmer out of four reported that BMPs for water were not relevant for their farm operation (23.1%). This last result is surprising as most Canadian farms use an array of practices that could have impacts on water and suggests that this group of farmers may not be able to identify which practices are considered “BMPs for water”.⁹

Summary

This analysis provides some key insights into water management practices used on Canadian farms in 2001. More specifically, this study examines practices for the protection of natural water resources and those for management of water directly used on Canadian farms.

With respect to the protection of natural water resources, FEMS collected data on the maintenance of vegetation in areas adjacent to natural sources of water, the management of grazing livestock around surface water bodies, the type of conservation measures used for natural wetlands and the disposal of milkhouse wash water and toxic farm wastes.

Results show that about 75% of farms with areas adjacent to natural sources of water left at least a portion of these areas vegetated, usually with permanent vegetation, and that this percentage was not very different among watersheds. More than half of farms with grazing livestock did not give them access to surface water bodies, and the large majority of such farms did not feed their animals within 100 metres of surface water bodies during winter months. Fencing and rotational grazing were the most commonly used practices for the conservation of natural wetlands.

Most dairy farms (66.1%) storing liquid manure disposed of their milkhouse wash water into the liquid manure storage system, 11.4% treated it separately from the liquid manure system and the last group of 22.5% of farms did not treat their milkhouse wash water in any manner. The most common methods used to dispose of toxic farm wastes are specialized recycling programs (54.2% of farms) and the return of wastes to the supplier (40.1% of farms).

With respect to the use of water for farming or household activities, FEMS collected data on the use of water for irrigation and the testing of domestic water. Eight percent of Canadian farms used irrigation to better meet the water requirement of their crops; guns and sprinklers were the most commonly used irrigation systems, even on horticultural farms. About 36% of Canadian farmers tested their domestic water at least once every two years; Ontario farmers had the most frequent water testing habits.

Farmers were also asked to which extent they implement BMPs for water on their farm. Thirty one percent of Canadian farms reported that they fully or partly implement BMPs for water on their farm, while most the remaining farms reported to not be aware of the BMPs for water in their region or that BMPs for water were not relevant for their farm operation.

1. FEMS was conducted in March 2002 by Statistics Canada for Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. The survey provides a broad coverage of farm management practices that are related to the environment in all sectors of Canadian agriculture.
2. A winter crop is seeded late in the fall so that seeds spend winter in the soil. It allows early growing in the spring.
3. A watershed consists of all the land and waterways that drain into the same body of water.
4. Rotational grazing is the practice of moving grazing cattle to different pastures or grazing paddocks throughout the growing season to allow the vegetation a period of rest and seed production.
5. Milkhouse wash water contains a considerable amount of milk solids washed from the bulk tank, pipeline milker, or other milk-handling equipment.
6. For information on liquid and solid manure storage systems, refer to the first article in this series, Manure Storage in Canada, available on Statistics Canada’s website
7. A flocculator removes organic matter and phosphorus from wastewater.
8. FEMS explicitly excluded dead animals.
9. This classification of farms is based on farmers' opinions about their practices related to water management. The survey did not provide an extensive list of BMPs for water to support farmers in responding to this question.