Page 63 - IJES Special Issues for AIEC2016
P. 63
International Journal of Environment and Sustainability, 2016, 5(1): 51-55 53
waste, limiting the feasibility of waste manage- to movement of estrogenic steroids into surface
ment alternatives. The presence of inorganic and ground water (Bushe´e et al., 1998; Nichols
arsenic in incinerator ash and pelletized waste et al., 1997, 1998; Peterson et al., 2001; Shore et
sold as fertilizer creates opportunities for al., 1995). E2 has been found to be mobile and
population exposures that did not previously has been detected in runoff from manured land
exist. The removal of arsenic from animal feed is (Nichols et al., 1997, 1998). Nichols et al. (1998)
a critical step toward safe poultry waste determined an average E2 concentration of
management. Arsenic in waste results from the 3500 ng/l in the runoff from a pastoral land
use of arsenicals added to poultry feed for applied with 5 mg/ha of manure (poultry litter).
growth promotion and prevention of parasitic Ground water has been reported to be conta-
infections. Elevations in soil arsenic levels have minated with E2 (Peterson et al., 2001; Shore et
been reported in fields where poultry wastes al., 1995). Shore et al. (1995) believed that a
have been applied (Gupta and Charles, 1999). constant E2 concentration of about 5 ng/l in
This form of arsenic is readily leachable and spring waters was caused by infiltration of E2
may therefore move into groundwater (Ruther- through the soil profile to the ground water.
ord et al., 2003).
Peterson et al. (2000) measured E2 concen-
Arsenic is recognized as a human carcinogen by trations ranging from 6 to 66 ng/l in mantled
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency karst aquifers in northwest Arkansas. The
(EPA), National Research Council (NRC), Inter- observed E2 concentration trends imitated the
national Agency for Research on Cancer, changes in stage over the recharge event. The
National Toxicology Program, and American contamination was associated with poultry
Conference of Industrial Hygienists, and expo- litter and cattle manure waste applied on the
sures have also been associated with increased area.
risks of heart disease, diabetes, neurologic
effects, and birth defects in humans. A compre- Conclusion
hensive re-assessment of health risks of arsenic
performed by the NRC in 2001 (NRC) formed Poultry litter applications provide nutrients for
the basis for a recent regulatory decision by the crop production and build soil organic reserves.
U.S. EPA to lower the maximum contaminant The organic matter benefits crop production via
level for drinking water by five-fold (US EPA, increases in soil water-holding capacity, water
2001). As noted by Arai et al. (2003), this action infiltration rates, cation exchange capacity,
must raise concerns about land disposal of structural stability, and soil tilt. However, the
arsenic-laden poultry wastes because of the same nutrients that make poultry manure a
likelihood of ground-water contamination. good fertilizer can, under some circumstances,
be detrimental to the quality of groundwater
Steroid Hormones and downstream surface water. Nutrient imbal-
ances in forages due to excessive poultry litter
Livestock such as sheep, cattle, pigs and poultry, applications have been observed. Poultry
as well as other animals, excrete hormone wastes are known to contain many pathogens,
steroids. In poultry waste, a concentration which could potentially contaminate both
ranging from 14 to 533 ng/g dry waste with an surface water and groundwater resources.
average of 44 ng/g for E2 (estradiol) was Therefore, it is concluded that more applied
reported by Shemesh and Shore (1994) and work and effort is needed for developing
Shore et al. (1988, 1995). innovative new practices of better utilization of
poultry waste without creating more environ-
Recent studies have shown that disposal of mental problems.
animal manure on agricultural land could lead
Science Target Inc. www.sciencetarget.com
