Livestock EMS Pilots: Lessons About Educational Strategies

1
Livestock EMS Pilots Lessons About Educational
Strategies

• Elizabeth Ann R. Bird, Coordinator
• Vince Padilla, Evaluation Consultant
• University of Wisconsin Madison Environmental
  Resources Center
• Farm Home Environmental Management
• With project partners across 10 states

2
Partnerships for Livestock Environmental
Management Systems - Started 2000.

• FarmASyst - Started 1990, 120,000 assessments
  conducted
• Livestock and Poultry Environmental Stewardship
  Curriculum Project - Started 1999, Training
  programs conducted

3

• Funding 2.5 million from
• USDA/CSREES Initiative for Future Agriculture and
  Food Systems
• Additional support from
• EPA Office of Non-Point Source Control
• USDA/Natural Resources Conservation Service

4
Project Goal
Develop, pilot test and evaluate LIVESTOCK
Environmental Management Systems with dairy,
poultry and beef producers (three states, each
commodity area)
5
Livestock EMS Project Partners(Mostly
Cooperative Extension)
NATIONAL LEADERSHIP TEAM
Wisconsin Richard Klemme (PI), Elizabeth Bird
(Co-PI), Gary Jackson (Co-PI), Karl Hakanson,
Mrill Ingram, Janice Kepka, Lyn Kirschner,
Vince Padilla Nebraska Richard Koelsch
(Co-PI), Jill Heemstra Georgia Mark Risse
(Co-PI) Project originators
6
(No Transcript)
7
Livestock EMS Project Partners
POULTRY TEAM Georgia (Lead Poultry State)
Lawrence (Mark) Risse, Thomas Bass,
Carrie-Lynn Presley Fowler, Casey
Ritz Pennsylvania Amanda Mende, Les Lanyon,
Paul Patterson, Amy Van Blarcom PennAg
Industries Virginia Lori Marsh, Matt Habersack

8
Livestock EMS Project Partners
DAIRY TEAM New York (Lead Dairy State) Peter
Wright, Stanley (Lee) Telega Idaho Kent
Foster, Jeanne Brittingham, Scott Koberg, Wayne
Newbill, Jim Wood ID Assn of Conservation
Districts Wisconsin Brian Holmes, Bill Bland,
Karl Hakanson, Gary Jackson, Lyn Kirschner,
Leah Nell Adams
9
Livestock EMS Project Partners
BEEF TEAM Montana (Lead Beef State) Gene
Surber, Taralyn Fisher Texas Brent Auvermann,
Shelley Howard Iowa John Lawrence, Jeffery
Lorimor, Jim Venner
10
Common Elements of State Pilot Delivery Approaches

• Build EMS understanding
• Provide for stakeholder input
• Limit EMS scope for start-up
• Focus on comprehensive assessments action
  planning and/or functional EMS not ISO 14001
  certifiable
• Integrate with existing state efforts

11
Recruitment

• Different Recruitment Strategies
• Exploit personal relationships
• Recommendations from trusted sources (e.g.,
  integrators)
• Personal recruitment of participants
• Already participating in other projects

12
Overcoming Difficulty

• Three states reported difficulty
• Strategies to overcome
• Personal appeals
• Concentrate on quality participants over quantity
  of participants
• Patience and continued education

13
Delivering EMS Information

• One-on-one meetings with producers on and off
  premises
• Mailings, newsletters, conference calls, e-mail
• Workshops
• Train-the-trainers approach
• Different groups in same state had differing
  amounts of contact with project staff

14
EMS Tools Tested by Pilot States
15
Assessment Tools Tested by Pilot States
16
Poultry Progress- Delivery Approaches

• Georgia (Mark Risse, Poultry Lead, and Tommy
  Bass)
• Testing 3 delivery approaches for full EMS
• Extension coached, with group workshops and
  regular contact (10 farms)
• Consultant on-farm (2 farms)
• Independent (5 farms, sent home with materials)

17
Georgia Participating in this project is very
useful
18
Georgia
Why? I now have a written plan of action.
19
GeorgiaLiked most about participating in this
project

• Becoming more aware of livestock environmental
  management
• Meeting with other farmers talking with them on
  their needs mine.
• The group setting and the extension specialist.
• The knowledgeable people from University of
  Georgia who visited my farm gave me new ideas.
  All I need to do to be more successful.

20
GeorgiaLiked least about participating in this
project

• Finding the time to read the material. Realizing
  that my record keeping has to improve.
• Not enough time -- needed more with project
  staff
• Nothing in particular
• The drive from my house to Athens, GA. 90 mi.
  round trip.

21
GeorgiaI was satisfied with the amount of time
project staff spent with me.
22
GeorgiaProject staff answered my questions and
provided the assistance I needed to complete the
assessment tools.
23
GeorgiaI would have preferred to receive this
information about environmental risks and
Environmental Management Systems in a different
way.
24
GeorgiaAs a result of this project
25
Georgia Participation in this process got me
interested in Agricultural Environmental
Management Systems. As a result of
participating in this project, I now understand
how an EMS applies to my operation.
26
GeorgiaAdvantages of developing an EMS for my
operation

• Helping me avoid mistakes that I should avoid.
• Safer place for employees to work and a more
  environmentally friendly place
• To identify crucial areas or impacts that result
  from my farm and trying to lessen the negativity
  of them.
• To try to meet all requirements that I need to do.

27
GeorgiaDisadvantages or difficulties of
developing an EMS

• Cost TimeLabor
• Financial burden
• Finding the time to learn a new system of
  operation.

28
GeorgiaHow to make the tools more useful?

• I recommend it, but a lot of producers might not
  be as open minded as I am.

Would you recommend developing an EMS in this way
to other producers?
29
Poultry Progress- Delivery Approaches

• Pennsylvania (PennAg Industries Amanda Mende,
  and Paul Patterson)
• Coached assessments (11 worksheets, including
  emergency planning)
• 100 incentive
• 10 layer producers 10 broiler producers 10
  turkey producers

30
Pennsylvania Participating in this project is
very useful
31
Pennsylvania
32
Pennsylvania

• Why (not)?
• I feel as if it was a measuring stick on my
  environmental risk. Didn't tell me how to
  improve anything as of yet. The person who did
  the review is drawing up a report at this time.
• The farm already had a BMP in place.
• With Project Staff help.

33
Pennsylvania Liked most about participating in
this project

• It gave me a feel whether projects I have done so
  far are beneficial. Practices/issues I have
  addressed in past 5 years.
• Made me aware of the responsibility I have to do
  a good job of managing the environment around me.
  Made me think about changes I could make.
• Made me aware that we need to incorporate manure
  as soon as possible after spreading.
• Shows how our farm operation benefits the
  environment and ways to improve.
• Not a lot of time needed to complete. Not too
  long. Simple to the point. Simple
  informative. Very easy to understand.
• Staff assistance.
• The overall look at the operation. The overall
  nature of the assessments inclusiveness.

34
Pennsylvania Liked least about participating in
this project

• A bit awkward, especially some of the lessons
  1-6 --- some of which I never did read, nor
  figured out why I needed to.
• I thought some of the pieces we did not score as
  well were not completely relevant to our
  operation.
• Nutrient/conservation/community has required
  these tools due to our operation.
• Some of it is "nit-picky."

35
Pennsylvania I was satisfied with the amount of
time project staff spent with me.
36
Pennsylvania Project staff answered my questions
and provided the assistance I needed to complete
the assessment tools.
37
Pennsylvania I would have preferred to receive
this information about environmental risks and
Environmental Management Systems in a different
way.
38
Pennsylvania As a result of this project
39
Pennsylvania Participation in this process got
me interested in Agricultural Environmental
Management Systems. As a result of
participating in this project, I now understand
how an EMS applies to my operation.
40
Pennsylvania Advantages of developing an EMS for
my operation

• Environment friendly.
• Good environmental stewardship, plus legal
  compliance.
• Good PR within the neighborhood. Please the
  community -- that is where most issues come from.
  Shows neighbors we care and are trying to do
  things right for the environment.
• Help increase safety and overall
  performance/profitability.
• Phosphorus application on land would be reduced
• To be able to prove I do all I can to be
  environmentally responsible.

41
Pennsylvania Disadvantages or difficulties of
developing an EMS

• Being less productive.
• Cost.
• Financing.
• I would need additional buyers for manure.
• There are some things we just can't change. i.e
  location.
• Weather can make problem with EMS.

42
Pennsylvania How to make the tools more useful?

• Do something to make lessons 1-6 more user
  friendly. Instructors didn't seem to completely
  understand them either.
• It would be interesting to hear how other
  producers have made improvements on their farms
• To have them be more personal to the operation
  that is begin dealt with.

43
Pennsylvania
Would you recommend these assessment tools to
other producers?
44
Poultry Progress- Delivery Approaches

• Virginia (Lori Marsh, Matt Habersack)
• Poultry integrator involvement
• Detailed self-assessments and abbreviated
  versions of other EMS components
• Began with workshop, sent 30 farmers home with
  materials, then followed up with regular contacts
  to encourage progress

45
Virginia Participating in this project is very
useful
46
Virginia
47
Virginia

• Why (not)?
• Am now better informed than before.
• I already knew of risks. This tool did not
  really help me to reduce them.
• Info ideas
• It is helpful with proper training.
• My operation is state permitted, although we were
  already using NMP, composters, odor control
  methods, etc.

48
Virginia Liked most about participating in this
project

• Help with pests, biosecurity.
• I think since we produce the food for a hungry
  nation, that these tools should always be a
  guideline for us.
• Relatively easy to follow and pertinent to my
  operation.
• With some labor a small amount of money I can
  control my odor dust problem.FOLLOW-UP
• Excellent information support available.
• Hear what others are doing what can be done.
• I was able to revisit all the aspects of being an
  environmental conscious farmer.

49
Virginia Liked least about participating in this
project

• Cumbersome - this system was probably designed
  for large industries and modified to be used on a
  poultry farm.
• I didnt think for the most part it was useful.
• In my case, it would be better if the tools would
  be for raising broilers only.
• It didn't include the entire operation.
• The assessment tools or information provided
  follows my last 15 years with issues in the
  poultry business to a T.FOLLOW-UP
• Answering these questions. Too many surveys.

50
Virginia I was satisfied with the amount of time
project staff spent with me.
51
Virginia Project staff answered my questions and
provided the assistance I needed to complete the
assessment tools.
52
Virginia I would have preferred to receive this
information about environmental risks and
Environmental Management Systems in a different
way.
53
Virginia As a result of this project
54
VirginiaParticipation in this process got me
interested in Agricultural Environmental
Management Systems.
As a result of participating in this project, I
now understand how an EMS applies to my
operation.
55
Virginia What impact did your participation with
the Partnerships for LEMS project have on your
environmental concerns?

• Good info.
• The impact on me is simply to continue to bring
  these issues to the forefront for our farms way
  of life.
• The LEMS did enlighten me to areas that I had not
  considered.
• Wildlife habitat awareness.

56
Virginia Advantages of developing an EMS for my
operation

• We have such a similar plan in place but a
  personal EMS would help think out of that box and
  perhaps keep more regulators off our backs.
• By using a checklist on a monthly or annual basis
  you could see the progress being made.
• Having a proactive position on environmental
  issues could reduce the amount of regulation in
  the future.
• I guess it would be helpful if you were very
  large, lots of employees, with many violations.
• We always have tried to be careful with soil
  erosion, spreading poultry and dairy manure and
  being very careful that we don't contaminate our
  streamsextra guidance would be a plus.

57
Virginia Disadvantages or difficulties of
developing an EMS

• Finding the time.
• I don't see any difficulties at the present.
• More work and record keeping
• This answer has been same for years. Money is
  always an issue when developing NMP and
  Environmental systems - cost share has helped in
  this area but you can't count on that for every
  project and you have to match those
• Too much paperwork.

58
Virginia How could the tools be made more useful?

• A monthly or annual checklist.
• I felt that forms 4 5 were somewhat redundant.
  The other forms were too tedious.
• If possible streamline the system somehow.
• Maybe you could have TV commercials or billboards
  supporting the importance of keeping our natural
  resources beautiful.
• The assessment tools may be more useful in a
  state that isn't under state law -- get the info
  to those areas before it happens.

59
Virginia
Would you recommend these assessment tools to
other producers?
60
Dairy Progress Delivery Approaches

• New York (Peter Wright, Dairy lead)
• Integrate assessment pilot with existing
  Agriculture Environmental Management watershed
  protection program, and Pro-Dairy systems
  management educational program.
• 5 coached EMS pilots

61
New York Participating in this project is very
useful
62
New York
63
New York

• Why (not)?
• Most risk reduction actions we are implementing
  or plan to in near future.
• Some risks are subjective and reduction is
  complex.

64
New York Liked most about participating in this
project

• I think it made you aware of some environmental
  concerns.
• FOLLOW-UP
• They didn't threaten to shoot us. Thanks.

65
New York Liked least about participating in this
project

• Too lengthy.FOLLOW-UP
• Cost. Money for milk at an all time low.

66
New York I was satisfied with the amount of time
project staff spent with me.
67
New York Project staff answered my questions and
provided the assistance I needed to complete the
assessment tools.
68
New York I would have preferred to receive this
information about environmental risks and
Environmental Management Systems in a different
way.
69
New York As a result of this project
70
New York Participation in this process got me
interested in Agricultural Environmental
Management Systems.
As a result of participating in this project, I
now understand how an EMS applies to my
operation.
71
New York What impact did your participation with
the Partnerships for LEMS project have on your
environmental concerns?

• Some impact.

72
New York Advantages of developing an EMS for my
operation

• Cleaner water
• Clear procedures (SOP) Standard Operating
  Procedures

73
New York Disadvantages or difficulties of
developing an EMS

• Cost.

74
New York Which of the following statements best
describes your awareness of the environmental
risks associated with your operation prior to,
and after, participating in this project?

• No Idea Vague Idea

75
New York How could the tools be made more
useful?

• (No comments).

76
New York
Would you recommend these assessment tools to
other producers?
77
Dairy Progress Delivery Approaches

• Wisconsin (Brian Holmes and Bill Bland)
• 30 On-line assessments
• Coaching EMS pilots on 2 research stations and 4
  farms, additional farmers observing
• Build agency and private stakeholder interest for
  long-term insurance premium reductions farmer
  organized workshop DNR collaboration

78
Wisconsin Participating in this project is very
useful
79
Wisconsin
80
Wisconsin

• Why do you know how to reduce risks?
• Clarified process.

81
Wisconsin Liked most about participating in this
project

• Being on computer.
• Quick overview of operation.
• Reinforced and was consistent with other
  standards DNS sets.

82
Wisconsin Liked least about participating in
this project

• A lot of time for the results obtained.
• Being on computer.
• More of the same.

83
Wisconsin I was satisfied with the amount of
time project staff spent with me.
84
Wisconsin Project staff answered my questions
and provided the assistance I needed to complete
the assessment tools.
85
Wisconsin I would have preferred to receive this
information about environmental risks and
Environmental Management Systems in a different
way.
86
Wisconsin As a result of this project
87
Wisconsin Participation in this process got me
interested in Agricultural Environmental
Management Systems.
As a result of participating in this project, I
now understand how an EMS applies to my
operation.
88
Wisconsin Advantages of developing an EMS for my
operation

• Don't know for sure.

89
Wisconsin Disadvantages or difficulties of
developing an EMS

• More time spent/repetitious.

90
Wisconsin How could the tools be made more
useful?

• More clearly stated questions.
• Reduce repeated questions.

91
Wisconsin
Would you recommend these assessment tools to
other producers?
92
Dairy Progress Delivery Approaches

• Idaho ( Wayne Newbill, Jeanne Brittingham, note
  presentation at this conference)
• Already has a CNMP requirement for dairy farmers
  statewide (using GIS based OnePlan NMP).
• Short-term intensive interactive introduction of
  11 farms to EMS process
• 50 incentive
• Compare to One-Plan

93
Beef Progress Delivery Approaches

• Montana
• (Gene Surber, Beef lead, with Tara Fisher)
• Rancher led, very well received
• 23 ranches pilot tested a self-assessment tool
  most requested coaching
• A few excited about a full EMS
• One has completed an EMS worksheet set and begun
  implementation 4 others in various stages of
  completion

94
Montana Participating in this project is very
useful
95
Montana
96
Montana

• Why (not)?
• Makes us all take a look at our operations, see
  our high risks as well as low risks and work
  through ways to change the problem areas.
• I will require more assistance/guidance than a
  QA format. Manual? Personnel?
• Identified problems, but its hard to figure out
  solutions.
• Options were given that will work for me.
• The program made me more aware of the risks. We
  need the "hands on" approach to solve these
  risks. Each operation is different, and will
  solve differently. I already have diversion
  dikes.
• Things were brought to our attention.

97
Montana Liked most about participating in this
project

• Easy to understand.
• Gained information knowledge.
• Getting the word out to people in the country.
• Got me thinking.
• How it made me look at our operation.
• It caused me to discuss my situation.
• It gave us many different questions to answer, to
  think about concerns on our ranches with
  different pollution aspects.
• Made me more aware of my runoff problems, in
  regards to my water wells near the house, also
  manure management.
• The assessment presented awareness w/specifics
  regarding distance from pen to well etc.

98
Montana Liked most about participating in this
project

• FOLLOW-UP
• Awareness.
• Education and the extra nudge to get it done.
• Identifying trouble areas on the rough? and
  high risk areas. Asking Gene on how to mitigate
  these risks.
• It answered questions I had and also made me
  think of other possible problems.
• Knowledge, voicing an opinion.
• Opened my eyes to what may lie ahead.
• Seeing concern of others. The education I
  acquired. Working with Gene is always a thrill.
• The no-hassle low key identify the problem and
  seek solutions to fix it approach.
• Visiting with other ranchers and discussion of
  similar problems concerns.

99
Montana Liked least about participating in this
project

• Doing it.
• Hard to understand.
• Some of the questions didn't pertain to me. Many
  didn't pertain to us. Some is not applicable.
• Maybe too many questions.
• The fact that we are not 100 compliant with
  environmental laws.
• Time to do it - naturally, but worthwhile.

100
Montana Liked least about participating in this
project

• FOLLOW-UP
• Government regulations that maybe should have
  more scientific background.
• I didn't receive as much information or technical
  advice as I would have liked.
• I don't know that I particularly had any dislikes
  other than I guess basic human nature reaction to
  being told "I need to clean up my act OR ELSE."
• I think we drove Gene crazy! Now he's leaving!
• Knowing I have to do more paperwork.
• That I missed part of the meeting.
• The realization government is someday going to
  tell us what, how, and where to run the
  agriculture sector.

101
MontanaI was satisfied with the amount of time
project staff spent with me.
102
Montana Project staff answered my questions and
provided the assistance I needed to complete the
assessment tools.
103
MontanaI would have preferred to receive this
information about environmental risks and
Environmental Management Systems in a different
way.
104
Montana As a result of this project
105
Montana Participation in this process got me
interested in Agricultural Environmental
Management Systems.
As a result of participating in this project, I
now understand how an EMS applies to my
operation.
106
Montana What impact did your participation with
the Partnerships for LEMS project have on your
environmental concerns?

• Ideas for corrections. That some corrections are
  easy and inexpensive.
• It made me much more aware where our operation is
  within the context. Also, it helped answer some
  of the problems.
• Made me more aware of the impacts possible.
• Made some plans to improve H20 quality.
• Made us more aware of problem areas.
• The concerns are still there, it is just a new
  way of working at them.

107
Montana Advantages of developing an EMS for my
operation

• Being up to speed on new proposed rules
• It help me be a better steward of the land.
• It would clean up our corrals and help the health
  of our livestock.
• Just for personal use.
• Keep up with government regulations.
• Recognizing problems prioritizing committing.
• To know where we stand.
• We like to be proactive on our ranch. If it comes
  down to having someone tell that I have to do
  something I would like to be ahead of the rest.

108
Montana Disadvantages or difficulties of
developing an EMS

• Cost.
• It takes time, and sometimes time is short on our
  place.
• None.
• Time and money it would take to divert the creek
  to a different location.

109
Montana Which of the following statements best
describes your awareness of the environmental
risks associated with your operation prior to,
and after, participating in this project?

• 44 Vague Idea Fairly Sure 44
• 44 Fairly Sure Know Exactly
• 11 Know Exactly 56

110
Montana How could the tools be made more useful?

• Categorize into different operations - some
  questions deal with feedlots only, some
  non-confinement cow/calf operations etc.
• I am not sure.
• Make some of the questions easier to understand.
• Maybe more terminology explanation.
• Put on computer program access yearly
  evaluate changes.

111
Montana
Would you recommend these assessment tools to
other producers?
112
Beef Progress Delivery Approaches

• Iowa (John Lawrence, Jim Venner)
• Built on relationships with other projects and
  with DNR
• 37 producers attended 2 workshops last spring
• On-farm follow-up
• 17 still working through EMS process

113
Iowa Liked most about participating in this
project

• FOLLOW-UP
• Awareness. Increase awareness.
• Description of the importance of EMS.
• Exposure to the alternative technology.
• Getting a plan worked out.
• Group approach to completing.
• Interaction with other producers. Meeting with
  other producers and advisors and sharing
  information
• Put some practical ideas on the table.
• Seeing how others solved their problems.
• The additional information provided.
• The end results were measurable self satisfying.

114
Iowa Liked least about participating in this
project

• FOLLOW-UP
• An EQIP program approved in Sept and plans not
  finished until April.
• It changes how we do things currently.
• Paperwork.
• The distance traveled.
• The number of meetings.
• The time it took. Time necessary to implement
• Time commitment needed to do the paperwork which
  is necessary to do things right!!
• We should have been encouraged to use "before
  after" photos. Pictures are worth a thousand
  words! Would have made the documentation easier.

115
Iowa I was satisfied with the amount of time
project staff spent with me.
116
Iowa Project staff answered my questions and
provided the assistance I needed to complete the
assessment tools.
117
Iowa I would have preferred to receive this
information about environmental risks and
Environmental Management Systems in a different
way.
118
Iowa Participation in this process got me
interested in Agricultural Environmental
Management Systems.
As a result of participating in this project, I
now understand how an EMS applies to my
operation.
119
Iowa What impact did your participation with the
Partnerships for LEMS project have on your
environmental concerns?

• Increased awareness of the different areas of
  environment. Increased concerns.
• It enforced my objectives.
• It helped refine them. Clarified the issues.
• It made me aware of ways to improve my operation,
  mainly managing an open feed lot.
• My operations participation in the EMS program
  touched on a full array of environmental
  concerns.

120
Iowa What impact did your participation with the
Partnerships for LEMS project have on your
environmental concerns?

• Refreshed my memory and alerted me to other
  concerns.
• That a lot of the open feedlot operations are
  very concerned about their environmental problems
  and are going to solve them.
• Nutrient management should help to protect water
  quality as well as improve farm profitability.
  Soil conservation efforts will not only conserve
  the resources but benefit wildlife as well.

121
Iowa Which of the following statements best
describes your awareness of the environmental
risks associated with your operation prior to,
and after, participating in this project?

• 20 Vague Idea Fairly Sure 73
• 73 Fairly Sure Know Exactly
• 7 Know Exactly 27

122
Beef Progress Delivery Approaches

• Texas (Brent Auvermann, Shelly Howard)
• Feedyard Air Quality Management Program Clear
  the Air
• Strong commodity group support
• Developing visual air quality indicators

123
All States (Early Returns)Time spent completing
assessments

• Spent 3.6 hours completing assessment tools on
  average (median time spent was 2 hours)
• Range was 0-20 hours
• 95 of respondents spent less than 7.5 hours
  completing assessment

124
All States (Early Returns)Accuracy of assessment
tools description

• Tools accurately described operation
• Assessment tools well designed
• EMS becomes part of SOPs
• Project staff did good job

• Tools did not accurately describe operation
• Assumes a certain type of operation that may not
  be realistic not applicable to type of operation

125
All States (Early Returns)Making the assessment
tools more useful

• Tailor materials to details of the operation
• Doesnt meet producers regulatory needs
• Remove repetition
• Create mechanism in tools (e.g., software) that
  allows comparing records over time
• Simplify the presentation
• Advertise to promote use
• Provide real life examples in materials and of
  successful implementations of EMS in Ag.

126
All States (Early Returns)Support needs to adopt
EMS
127
Assessments of Strategic Success

• Five states considered their strategies Somewhat
  successful, while three thought theirs to be
  Very successful, and one Extremely
  successful.
• Problems included lukewarm reception from
  producers or field agents.
• Contact with project staff had positive effect
  (or was expected to) on success of strategy.

128
Lessons Learned

• What would you do differently?
• More contact with producers.
• Direct contact with producers (skip the
  middleman).
• Start earlier to get early-adopters.
• Make instruments more user-friendly.
• More incentives for producers.

129
Lessons Learned

• What would you keep?
• One-to-one contact.
• Assessment tools/guidebook.
• Workshops.
• Mechanisms to identify willing/eager participants.

130
Pilot project lessons about tools

• Tools need to bridge the gap between ISO 14001
  and the producers world. They need to speak
  farmers language.
• Tools must recognize time limitations, especially
  of small medium sized operations.
• Most producers need an active learning style
  paperwork is quickly daunting. (Divide written
  materials into small bites.)

131
Pilot project lessons about pedagogy

• Individual, one-on-one coaching is most
  effective.
• Classes with regular follow-up contact can be
  effective as well.
• Hands-on teaching style.
• Use of computers can be strong positive strong
  negative.
• Materials need to be directly relevant.

132
Lessons about educational strategies

• Farmers most receptive to learning about a new
  approach from those they trust and respect.
• Coaches need to be perceived as highly competent,
  knowledgeable and committed (dont delegate!).
• Engaged advisory groups, trade assn and
  integrator buy-in, are important to success.
• Monetary or regulator incentives help.
• Strategy most effective where participants are
  individually motivated. Always easier with those
  most interested in change improvement.

133
ADDENDUMProducer Characteristics(early
returns)
134
Participant Characteristics

• Avg. 24 years of experience (min. 2, max. 60 95
  had between 12 and 36 years)
• 56 reported attending educational program about
  EMS before participating in project
• 49 have operation previously run by family
• 14 reported being a part-time farmer/rancher
• On avg., respondents export 30 of manure off
  farm (min. 0, max. 100 95 exported less than
  70, median 0)

135
Education (raw numbers shown)
136
Estimated acreage for crops
137
Use of decision support tools for management
decisions
138
Use of written records for operation management
139
Use of consultants services
140
Use of management plans
141
Confidence that current expertise meets
operations needs
142
Producer reported environmental
concerns(Reported as either Extremely
concerned or Concerned a lot)
143
Actions taken to reduce operations environmental
impact in last 2 years
144
Agreement with statement I seek opportunities
to adopt new agricultural innovations to improve
my operation.

• Innovations adopted
• Erosion control (soil loss)
• Manure storage
• Livestock rations
• Nutrient management
• Odor management
• Composting
• Grazing management
• Water quality
• Pollutant runoff
• Others (organic production, chemical mix station)

145
Use of outside advisors/consultants for management
146
Helpfulness of outside advisors/consultants
147
Indicators of opinions about the environment
148
Indicators of opinions about the environment
149
Current understanding of EMSs
150
Current understanding of EMSs