Farmingi Saturday, IferclT'ft, fflb? CONTROL HUMIDITY WITH WINTER VENTILATION Eileen Fabian Wheeler Assistant Professor Environmental Control Extension Specialist Agricultural & Biological Engineering The function of ventilation in cold weather is to control moisture LAND PRIDE E Quality equipment from a quality company. GROOMING MOWER 3-Spindle, 48”, 60”. 72” & 90” V* REAR BLADES 48” Through 120” ' T Km ROTARY CUTTERS 48” Through 120” V LANDSCAPE RAKES 48” Through 96” We Ship Parts levels in poultry housing. In con trast, summer and mild weather ventilation is used to maintain appropriate air temperatures for the enclosed birds. Fortunately, ammonia, odor, and pathogens are usually controlled along with humidity during winter ventilation. Where does this humidity come from? Birds exhale fairly large quantities of moisture from their respiratory tract. In addition, water ■"caa:, OVER SEEDERS & PRIMARY SEEDERS \&L NEW LANDPRIDE ALL-FLEX MOWERS 11’, 14’, 16.8’ & 21.9 Ft. Cutting Widths iKUBOT BOX SCRAPERS 42” Through 96” PULVERIZERS 48” Through 84” * ** 48” And 72” TILLERS 34” Through 76” is evaporated from manure. Waste handling practices, animal water ers, and facility cleaning each may contribute more moisture to the air. These moisture sources origi nate from normal functions within an animal environment yet the moisture level needs to be kept within a range that is healthy and comfortable for the enclosed birds. Decreased bird productivity is a well documented result of poor air quality. Air at 50 to 60 percent relative humidity is desirable in poultry housing. Below SO percent relative humidity, dry conditions will lead to a dusty environmental irrita tion of the bird’s respiratory tract Below 60 percent many patho gens have trouble surviving and less opportunity to migrate around the barn on water vapor. There fore, keeping the relative humidity in the 50 to 60 percent range pro vides protection from dusty and pathogen-laden environments. When air is allowed to teach high levels of humidity, which usually results from an under-ventilated facility, other air contaminants are also elevated. Removal of this poor quality air is essential. Since the birds are continually adding moisture to the air, mois ture should be continually removed with the ventilation sys tem. Several options exist. Rela tively small openings (relative to openings used during mild and hot weather) are provided in the sidewalls for continuous air exchange. Even on the coldest nights, these openings need to be kept open for air exchange. Gener ally, cold but dry air is much less detrimental to animal health than warmer but stale, moisture-laden, poor quality air. Continuous ventilation should be provided by a continuously run ning fan. Many broiler buildings are ventilated in winter with inter val timers which provide intermit tent ventilation multiplied by the minutes out of 10 (or 5) minutes. When these interval timers come close to providing continuous ven tilation, indoor air quality will be most uniform and desirable for the birds. The most important concept to grasp in understanding winter ven tilation strategies is that heated air holds more moisture than cooler air. This is merely an intrinsic property of air. Cold, relatively moist air from outdoors can be brought into a poultry facility and, once heated to near the desirable room temperature, will hold much more moisture than the cold air. A rule of thumb in poultry environ ments is that a 20-degree F increase in air temperature will double the air’s moisture holding capacity. This characteristic of air is used to our advantage in ventila tion system operation. The cold air that was heated now has a lower relative humidity. It can absorb moisture as it makes its way through the bam. This warm, moisture-laden air must then exit the bam by way of the ventilation fan. For young birds, beat is added to maintain comfortable and produc tive facilities. Broiler chicks are started around 90 degrees F, for example, and temperature is decreased a degree or two every few days until the birds are at 70 degrees F. Birds will eat more to keep themselves warm if tempera tures are not warm enough. Ani mals substitute feed for fuel. It hurts to pay more in fuel bills to keep birds warm but the feed bill is an even largo- penalty if warm conditions are not maintained One common but equally detrimental practice is to reduce or eliminate ventilation in order to conserve heat Studies have shown that the higher humidity, ammonia and manure gas levels that are created by inadequate ventilation rates reduce animal weight gain and feed efficiency. By maintaining proper and continuous winter ven tilation, the higher fuel bills are more than offset by a savings in improved bird productivity and health. Are heating and ventilating competing functions within a poul try environment? No. They have the same goal; providing good, productive environmental condi tions for the birds. We have chosen to raise poultry indoors for a host of reasons including the provision of a better environment for better productivi ty. We have to ventilate the build- Penn State Spring Livestock Judging Contest Draws 350 UNIVERSITY PARK (Centre Co.) The 1997 Penn Stale Spring Livestock Judging Contest was held here recently. Approximately 350 contestants, including 4-H and FFA youth from across the commonwealth and Penn State students, converged on Penn State’s Ag Arena to compete in the annual contest that marks the beginning of the summer show and livestock judging season. In addition to starting the judg ing season, the event annually leads off a busy month of activities for members of the Penn State Block and Bridle Club. After the contest, students prepared bulls for the Pennsylvania Meat Animal Evaluation Center Performance Tested Bull Sale and then con tinued preparations for their annu al Little International Livestock Exposition to be held on Saturday, April 19, also at the Ag Arena. Under the direction of Brian Kreider (senior, dairy and animal science, Lebanon) and Keith Bryan, co-adviser to the Penn State Block and Bridle Club and coach of the Penn State Livestock Judg ing Team, the contest tested the skills of youth interested in judg ing livestock. Members of the 1996 Penn State Livestock Judging Team served as officials for the contest Swine officials woe Josh Brown (senior, dairy and animal science, Kemp ton) and Annie Harris (senior, ag economics and rural sociology, Simbury, Conn.). Sheep officials were Jen Carman (senior, ag sci ence, Aaronsburg) and Stacey Sands (senior, dairy and animal science, Tunkhannock). Beef offi cials were Tadd Burch (senior, dairy and animal science. North East) and Michele Ruffing (State College). Wendy Fitzgerald (senior, dairy and animal science, Utica) coordinated the oral reasons rooms in the afternoon. Dr. Ken Kephart and Brian Egan, co advisers to the Penn State Block and Bridle Club, and Block and Bridle Club members oversaw tabulation. Coaches of 4-H teams (Chad Cash, York County; Chet Hughes, Lancaster County; and Brian McAllister, Centre County) served as officials for the collegiate pro fessional division that included students competing for a place on the 1997 Penn State Livestock Judging Team that will compete in one mote contest during spring semester and several contests dur ing fall semester. Contestants were required to place six classes, including Crossbred heifers, Angus heifers ing to remove moisture, heat, odor, and gas accumulations. We have chosen to add supplemental heat to achieve better productivity, and in the case of young birds, to main tain their health. It is still cheaper to bum fuel than it is to underventi late and risk decreased bird weight gain and feed conversion and to compromise flock health. Moisture control in winter is an important function of both natural ly and mechanically ventilated facilities. Failure to provide adequate winter air exchange will result in a warm, moist, stale, odor ous environment which is unhealthy for animals and work os. Winter ventilation must pro vide for continuous removal of moisture produced by the enclosed birds. with performance data, Dorset yearling ewes, Dorset Fall ewe lambs, Yorkshire barrows, and Duroc gilts. Although the primary purpose of the contest is to provide an opportunity for youth to enhance their ability to evaluate livestock, the contest also serves as a forum to draw young people from across the commonwealth to Penn State to view the quality livestock that are produced at the land-grant institution, and to encourage stu dents to consider Penn State in their future educational plans. More than 34 teams and 107 individuals competed in the junior advanced division which included placing the six classes of livestock and delivering three sets of oral reasons to official judges. More than 225 contestants representing 70 teams competed in the junior beginner division, which required contestants to place the six classes. Twelve contestants competed in the collegiate amateur and profes sional divisions. Results of the contest follow: Junior Beginner Division High Individuals BEEF: 1. Roy Gigee, Cowanesque FFA. 2. Autumn Kennedy, But ler Co. 4-H. 3. Melissa Mellott, McConnells burg FFA. High Teams —BEEF; 1. Adams Co. 4-H 2. Venango Co. 4-H. 3. Fayette Co. 4-H SHEEP; 1. Adam Weaver, Oxford FFA. 2 Curtis Morrar, Venango Co. 4-H. 3. DencK Code, Central Cove FFA. High Teams SHEEP: 1. Berks Co. 4-H 2. Tioga Co. 4-H. 3. Lebanon Co. 4-H. High Indidivlduals SWINE; 1. Jamd Hausman (He), Lehigh Co. 4-H. 1. Brandon Bryner (tie), Fayette Co. 4-H. 3. Andy Sey more, Adams Co. 4-H High Teams SWINE: 1. Indiana Co. 4-H. 2. Tioga Co. 4-H. 3. Clearfield FFA High Individuals OVERALL: 1. Josh Poole, Fayette Co. 4-H. 2. Adam Weaver, Oxford FFA. 3. Brett Gigee, Cowanesque FFA. High Teams OVERALL: 1. Cowan esque FFA. 2. Venango Co. 4-H. 3. Lehigh Co. 4-H. Junior Advanced Divlelon High Individuals BEEF: 1. Jessica Dye, Washington Co. 4-H. 2. Amanda Winnett, Washington Co. 4-H. 3. John Hess, Eli zabethtown FFA. High Teams BEEF: 1. Lancaster Co. 4-H. 2. Washington Co. 4-H. 3. Washington Co. 4-H. High Individuals SHEEP; 1. Eric Cow den, Washington Co. 4-H. 2. Paul Kitzmiller, York Co. 4-H. 3. Mike Burrell, York Co. 4-H High Teams —SHEEP: 1. Washington Co. 4-H. 2. Lebanon Co. 4-H. 3. Lancaster Co. 4+l. High Indidividuals —SWINE; 1. Kevin Har vadne, Susquehanna Co. 4-H. 2. Conrad Smoker, Chaster Co. 4-H. 3. Blaine Brawn, Lebanon Co. 4-H. High Teams SWINE; 1. Elizabethtown FFA. 2. Lancaster Co. 4-H. 3. Perry Co. 4-H. High Individuals ORAL REASONS; 1. Eric Cowden, Washington Co. 4-H. 2. Paul Kitzmiller, York Co. 4-H. 3. Conrad Smoker, Cheater Co. 4-H. High Teams ORAL REASONS; 1. Washington Co. 4-H. 2. Lancaster Co. 4+1.3. Lebanon Co. 4-H. High Individuals OVERALL: 1. Eric (Turn to Pago D 9)
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers