Manure and slurry storage
Published 13 June 2024
Applies to England
© Crown copyright 2024
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/farm-practices-survey-february-2024/manure-and-slurry-storage
The system of manure and slurry management is relevant to the control of environmental risks to water and air. Good management prevents the loss of ammonia to the air, at the same time retaining the nitrogen for use as an organic fertiliser, reducing the need for manufactured nitrogen fertiliser inputs.
Here we look at the types of stores that livestock farmers have, whether they are covered or not and whether the farmer has any plans to upgrade their current facilities.
Figure 1 Proportion of livestock holdings with solid manure storage facilities
| Response | 2024 |
|---|---|
| Stored in the open on a field site (uncovered) | 66% |
| Stored in the open on a concrete base (uncovered) | 34% |
| Stored under cover | 25% |
| Stored in the open on a concrete base (covered) | 10% |
| Stored in the open on a field site (covered) | 8% |
| Stored in another type of store | 3% |
Notes:
- In 2024 this question was redesigned, with the options updated to reflect changing policy needs and on-farm practices. Therefore, data cannot be directly compared with data collected in previous years.
In 2024, solid manure was most commonly stored in the open on a field site with no cover and 66% of farms stored solid manure this way (Figure 1), followed by stored in the open on a concrete base with no cover (34%). For slurry, the two most common storage facilities were above ground tanks with no cover, and lined or unlined earth bank lagoons with no cover, each used by 31% of farmers whilst above ground tanks with flexible cover were the least common (1%).
Figure 2 Proportion of livestock holdings with slurry storage facilities
| Response | 2024 |
|---|---|
| Above ground tanks (no cover) | 31% |
| Lined or unlined earth bank lagoons (no cover) | 31% |
| Below ground tanks not under or associated with livestock buildings (e.g. concrete store) | 18% |
| Weeping wall stores | 17% |
| Other types of store | 7% |
| Above ground tanks (floating cover) | 4% |
| Above ground tanks (rigid cover) | 4% |
| Slurry bags | 2% |
| Lined or unlined earth bank lagoons (floating cover) | 1% |
| Lined or unlined earth bank lagoons (flexible cover) | 1% |
| Above ground tanks (flexible cover) | 1% |
Notes:
- In 2024 this question was redesigned, with the options updated to reflect changing policy needs and on-farm practices. Therefore, data cannot be directly compared with data collected in previous years.
Figure 3 Proportion of holdings planning to enlarge, upgrade or reconstruct their manure and slurry storage facilities
| Year | In 0 to 6 months | In 7 to 11 months | In 1 to less than 3 years | In 3 to less than 5 years | In 5 to less than 10 years | In more than 10 years | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 9% | 14% | 43% | 17% | 14% | 4% | 100% |
| 2021 | 13% | 11% | 49% | 18% | 10% | 0% | 100% |
| 2022 | 5% | 15% | 58% | 15% | 6% | 0% | 100% |
| 2023 | 9% | 16% | 46% | 20% | 5% | 3% | 100% |
| 2024 | 7% | 9% | 51% | 23% | 6% | 4% | 100% |
Notes:
- The sum of the components may not equal 100% due to rounding.
The number of livestock farmers planning to enlarge, upgrade or reconstruct their manure or slurry storage facilities, has risen steadily in recent years and now stands at 29%. Of the holdings planning to make changes to their storage facilities, the majority (67%) are planning to make these changes within at least 3 years (Figure 3).
Figure 4 Proportion of holdings with storage facilities for slurry by number of months storage capacity
| Year | 1 to 3 months | 4 to 6 months | 7 to 12 months | Over 12 months | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 19% | 61% | 17% | 2% | 100% |
| 2021 | 15% | 61% | 22% | 2% | 100% |
| 2022 | 17% | 58% | 25% | 0% | 100% |
| 2023 | 11% | 40% | 40% | 9% | 100% |
| 2024 | 18% | 44% | 33% | 5% | 100% |
Notes:
- The sum of the components may not equal 100% due to rounding.
In 2024, 62% of farms had up to 6 months storage capacity for slurry, whilst decreases were seen in those having capacity to store slurry for longer periods (Figure 4).
Separating slurry can have several benefits. These include reducing storage space and improving the efficiency with which nitrogen is applied to land which has the potential to reduce emissions. Separating the suspended solids from slurry allows the two manure streams to be handled separately. The solid fraction can be stored on a concrete pad or in a field heap, while the liquid fraction can be stored and transported/pumped to fields for land application.
In 2024, 8% of farmers said they have a slurry separator and this proportion has remained relatively similar in recent years.