Organic Dairy Short Course for Ag Professionals

Organic Dairy Short Course for Ag Professionals

Summary

In 2008, our team implemented the planning we conducted in 2007, coordinating, promoting, delivering, and evaluating “Organic Dairy 101: A Workshop for Agricultural Professionals at four locations in Minnesota and three in Wisconsin, reaching a total of 174 attendees (Two additional, unplanned complementary training events reached 66 additional people in Wisconsin, delivering introductory information to veterinary students and intermediate-level information session to veterinary professionals).

End of day written assessments by participants indicated progress toward short term goals of expanding awareness and understanding about organic dairy farming requirements, practices and motivations. Follow-up surveys administered six to eight months after the trainings indicated sizeable changes in level of familiarity with organic dairy topics, awareness of organic dairy farmers in their geographical area, and confidence that organic dairy can be a viable production system. Workshop topics that interested participants the most were veterinary strategies, farmer experiences/insights, and certification requirements.

Objectives/Performance Targets

Objectives/Performance Targets

In 2008, we made progress on the following outputs and outcomes identified in our proposal:

1. Six daylong trainings; four in Minnesota and two in Wisconsin

The Minnesota team held four beginner trainings, the Wisconsin effort held three. In addition, Wisconsin held a evening mini-workshop for veterinary students at the University of Wisconsin and a more advanced two-day session focused on organic livestock health and veterinary care “Treating the Organic Dairy Cow.”

2. 180 participants who have a better understanding of the principles and opportunities in organic dairy farming, and who are more able and receptive to working with transitioning and organic producers.

The Organic Dairy 101 workshops trained 174 agriculture professionals (108 in Minnesota and 66 in Wisconsin). In addition, the intermediate Wisconsin add-on workshops reached 18 students and trained 46 veterinarians and other professionals.

3. New peer relationships among attendees, among presenters, among planners and implementers of the training program and the agencies/institutions they represent.

In Minnesota the Sustainable Farming Association worked with regional dairy development teams to arrange training logistics (locations and meals), target publicity, and identify local dairy farmer speakers, strengthening the SFA’s relationships with these regional entities. In Wisconsin,

4. Stronger relationships and more interaction between and among the SFA “alternative” MDI team and regional teams elsewhere in the state.

In Minnesota the Sustainable Farming Association worked with regional dairy development teams to arrange training logistics (locations and meals), target publicity, and identify local dairy farmer speakers, strengthening the SFA’s relationships with these regional entities.

5. Reference cards containing concise resource material indexed by topic for participants to use on the job and share with colleagues.

Attendees in Wisconsin received copies of the presenters’ talks, plus a copy of the book entitled “Organic Dairy Farming: A resource for Farmers.” In Minnesota, attendees received a summary card of recommended references (appendix 1)

6. Stronger relationships among MN and WI team members.

The planning team (Wisconsin’s team leader and Minnesota’s state-level planning team) met by phone in February to debrief the first training events and discuss adjustments (speaker preparation, pacing, order of presentations, etc.) After that call, the state teams largely worked within their own states to carry off the remainder of the trainings. Occasionally, the WI and MN planning team leaders and the PI swapped ideas and information by phone or by e-mail. The PI was substantially more involved with planning and delivery of the Minnesota sessions. She also attended the session held in Loyal, WI.

Accomplishments/Milestones

After substantial joint whole-project planning in 2006 and 2007, the Wisconsin and Minnesota workshop efforts proceeded largely independently. Each state developed and used its own standard agenda, featuring local farmer presenters and, often, different technical presenters. In total, 174 individuals received Dairy 101 training. An additional intermediate level provided training to 46 veterinarians and others in Wisconsin.

In 2008, Minnesota held four workshops in four predetermined locations of the state. The regional-level planning efforts including with local partners continued, and local planning groups largely determined the presenter lineup for their location.

Nearly every Minnesota location counted feed dealers, MN Department of Agriculture, DHIA, veterinarians, lenders, educators, NRCS and FSA staff, and dairy processors, and other affiliations among the participants. Although we had outreach assistance from the state PDP coordinator, only the Rochester event drew extension educators as participants.

Wisconsin’s original plan was to conduct two workshops at different sites in Wisconsin to provide training for veterinarians on organic dairy practices. The Wisconsin effort met and exceeded that goal. Wisconsin conducted a third “mini” workshop at the University of Wisconsin Vet School and, in response to workshop participant requests, conducted and additional “treatment-focused” workshop (which was attended by 12 of the beginning workshop participants).

Wisconsin targeted, and was successful in attracting, a large number of veterinarians to each of its sessions.

The Wisconsin and Minnesota teams collaborated to identify key evaluation questions for an end-of-day written survey, which was administered in all locations and whose results are summarized in the next section. These surveys were used to measure progress toward short-term outcomes (awareness, see above).

In November (six to nine months after the individual workshops) a free Internet-based survey tool called Survey Monkey was used to measure lasting impressions and progress toward intermediate desired outcomes. The survey consisted of 10 questions; Minnesota and Wisconsin surveys were administered and tallied separately. We sent links to the surveys in a cover e-mail to Organic Dairy 101 workshop attendees who had provided an e-mail address (attendees at the Wisconsin vet school and follow-up intermediate sessions were not surveyed). We mailed a survey with stamped return envelope to all other registrants and entered returned responses manually. A total of 37 individuals returned the “Minnesota” survey while 27 returned the “Wisconsin” summary.

Impacts and Contributions/Outcomes

Formal and informal feedback from project team members and workshop participants indicate that the workshop format and content were well received, that the information was valuable to those who attended, and that the value lasted after the end of the daylong workshop.

All survey instruments used a consistent five-point response scale with one being low and 5 being high. For some questions, we measured the magnitude of change in individual response. For others, we grouped the 4s and 5s into a “top box” score. Full evaluation results will be included in the final project report.

It is important to remember that the Minnesota and Wisconsin workshops had slightly different orientations. The Minnesota workshops aimed to provide a broad organic dairy orientation to a wide variety of agriculture professionals, whereas the Wisconsin team elected to focus on meeting the interests and needs of veterinarians. Since the audiences and approaches were different, we are reporting the attendee feedback for each state (but not each location) for reasons of differentiation, not comparison, on both the end-of-day and follow-up surveys.

End of day responses from attendees in both states indicate both workshop designs provided a large quantity of high quality information to attendees. Additional evaluation data from Wisconsin indicated that the percentage of respondents who rated their level of familiarity with organic as a 4 or a 5 soared from 15 before the workshop to 67% after the workshop. According to additional evaluation data collected at the Minnesota events, 97% of respondents said the day’s session was worth attending (score of 4 or 5) and 84% they would be likely (4 or 5) to recommend it to a colleague.

The follow-up survey conducted in November revealed more than how participants felt at the end of a training event; it provided information about what lasting changes in attitude and knowledge occurred, and how behavior may have changed.

Since one of our goals for the training was to inform attendees about resources they could turn to after the workshop finished, we asked “IF somebody approached you today with a question about organic dairy farming that you weren’t sure how to answer, what is the first place you would turn for information?

When we asked “If you wanted to get organic dairy information on a regular basis, which would be most convenient,” respondents from both states aid they preferred web sites. In Wisconsin, newsletters ranked almost as high, followed by occasional direct e-mail updates. In Minnesota, opinions were more mixed. Almost half liked the idea of an e-mail listserv they could subscribe to, followed by newsletters and direct email updates. Farm papers ranked low for both states (13.9% in Minnesota and 15.4% in Wisconsin).

To the question, “If somebody approached you today with a question about organic dairy farming that you weren’t sure how to answer, what is the first place you would turn, the Minnesotans mentioned, in order of frequency) Minnesota Department of Agriculture, organic dairy farmers, nonprofit education organizations like MOSES and Sustainable Farming Association of Minnesota, University of Minnesota and UMN Extension, the Internet, and certifiers, along with a few others.
The Wisconsin respondents mentioned (also in order of frequency) organic dairy buyers and their producer relations staff, veterinarians, farmers, books (some mentioned specific titles), conference notes, nonprofit organizations like MOSES, certifiers, and the Internet. .

Many of those who responded want still more information about organic dairy production. Minnesota respondents mentioned soil, economics, feed/rations, milk composition, reliable information resources, how to find processors and markets, health topics, udder health, inspection/certification, and the impact of organic production on the carbon footprint of organic production. Many Wisconsin respondents mentioned livestock health and veterinary care, particularly wanting information about specific treatment options and protocols. They also mentioned udder health, dairy cattle nutrition, organic breeding and reproductive management, calf rearing, the carbon footprint of organic vs. conventional, veterinarian insights and experiences, certification and enforcement, transitioning CRP ground, selecting and implementing organic crop rotations, and a compiled list of resources suitable for referral. Wisconsin already acted on some of these information needs with its follow-up workshop in December, which attracted 12 individuals who had attended the introductory course.

We designed the content of the workshop to provide specific information regarding the following short term information and attitude outcomes.

180 participants…
ST-1: …are aware of the prevalence and distribution of organic dairy farming in MN and WI
ST-2: …are aware that federal rules govern organic dairy farming.
ST-3: …are aware of health and veterinary strategies that are permitted and not permitted
ST-4: …are informed about existing health, production, and economic data about organic dairy.
ST-4: …know about 5-10 reliable sources of information that pertain to organic dairy and dairy production.
ST-5: …understand dairy producer motivations for transitioning to organic and the challenges they face.

We measured progress toward short term goals using an end of day survey instrument asking participants to self evaluate their change in knowledge and attitude using a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high ). Feedback from participants in both states indicated they gained awareness of federal rules governing dairy farming (1.57 points in Minnesota; 1.55 points in Wisconsin); increased their awareness of health and veterinary strategies that are permitted and not permitted (1.49 in Minnesota; 1.51 in Wisconsin, and have a deeper understanding of dairy farmer motivations in choosing to farm organically (1.46 in Minnesota; .86 in Wisconsin). Self-assessed pre-conference awareness was generally a little higher in Wisconsin than in Minnesota, indicating that Wisconsin participants were more familiar with organic dairy farming principles and concepts to begin with.

Intermediate term: 180 agricultural professionals will…

IT-1: …accept that organic is a viable dairy production system.
Results here were similar in both states. Of Wisconsin respondents, 44% said they would have agreed or strongly agreed (4 or 5) before the course, while 64% agreed or strongly agreed six to nine months after the course. For Minnesota respondents, 45.9% said they would have agreed or strongly agreed before the workshop, and 64.8% said they agreed or strongly agreed now (six to nine months later). While we would like to credit the workshop with this attitudinal change, it is possible that some have had subsequent reinforcing interactions with organic dairy farmers or other organic dairy professionals.

IT-2: …share knowledge and interact about organic dairy with peers and colleagues.
More than 96% of the Wisconsin respondents and 100% of Minnesota respondents said they had told colleagues or clients about attending the workshop, which we interpret as a strong measure of the workshops’ professional credibility.

IT-3: …begin to interact with and provide appropriate technical assistance or information to organic and transitioning dairy producers or refer them to appropriate sources,
Nearly 80% of Wisconsin respondents had worked with orgaic dairy farmers since the workshop. (the median number of organic dairy farmers they’d worked with was 3). For Minnesota respondents, just over 70% had worked with organic dairy farmers since the workshop (median number of farmers was 2.5)
And…

IT-4: increased interaction and collaboration among core and event team members occurs based on relationships built among project team members leads during this effort.
This project provided an impetus and a reason for PI Meg Moynihan (MN Department of Agriculture) and Wisconsin team leader Laura Paine (WI Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection) to work together. They delivered a joint presentation about state organic activities at the 2008 National Association of Agriculture Marketing Officials, where they mentioned the two-state collaboration on this short course. In addition, Minnesota and Wisconsin have begun to discuss whether there might be other areas of meaningful joint organic efforts.

Collaborators: