The Wisconsin School for Beginning Dairy Farmers Program - the First Ten Years: A Graduate Follow-up Survey and Beginning Dairy Farmer Case Studies

The Wisconsin School for Beginning Dairy Farmers Program - the First Ten Years: A Graduate Follow-up Survey and Beginning Dairy Farmer Case Studies

Summary

A 7-page survey and selective in-depth interviews of ten years (1996-2006, inclusive) of graduates from the Wisconsin School for Beginning Dairy and Livestock Farmers (WSBDF) showed that the vast majority had entered farming careers, over a third of farmer graduates owned their own farms, and satisfaction with the quality and value of the WSBDF training program was very high. Farmer graduates overcame obstacles such as little equity and difficulty finding a farm to lease or purchase in order to be successful.

Objectives/Performance Targets

The first goal of our project was to survey the approximately 200 graduates from the first ten years (1996-2006) of the University of Wisconsin School for Beginning & Livestock Dairy Farmers (WSBDF) program to learn: how many of them are farming and in what capacity and on what kinds of farms; how they got started and what obstacles they faced to successfully starting; how the WSBDF did or did not assist in their career pathway; what other resources were or were not available and helpful upon graduation.

Our second goal was to learn more about the stories of several beginning farmers and the steps they took early in their farming careers by conducting interviews and inviting graduates to speak to our current class of students. From our graduates’ perspective we sought to generate some real-life start-up budgets, find out more about their decisions along the early career pathway, as well as glean the ‘important lessons learned’ in their start-up process.

The work of this project will help us in the NCR to understand how this first-of-a-kind program has been/not been effective, and, how we can improve and promote the model for broader applicability/access across the NCR. The ultimate goal of the project is to help ensure that there is a next generation of new pasture-based farmers who are profitable, have a high quality of life, and sustain the environmental resource base. Such farmers and their families contribute as productive citizens and members of their rural communities and society as a whole.

Accomplishments/Milestones

The 1996-2006 Graduates Survey mailing and most of the data entry was completed in 2007. Through persistent follow-up we were able to obtain responses from over 2/3 of graduates during this ten year period and glean a tremendous amount of information and insight from their responses. Many graduates wrote in comments where invited, which helped to broaden our understanding of the numerical results.

Significantly, 88% of graduates are farming. Most live and farm in Wisconsin, although some are in other states or countries having either taken the course via distance education or been on a student exchange to the UW-Madison Short Course program. A few have moved out of state after attending.

About seventy percent of graduates farming are dairy farmers, while 30% raise beef, 28% cash crop and 20% raise other livestock for meat or milk. These farm enterprises are diverse by income also, with nearly half of operations generating gross farm revenues for 2006 of less than $50,000, one-third earning 50,000-250,000 annually and twenty percent of farms bringing in more than 250,000 per year. Graduates hold a variety of positions within the farming operations, from being the owner-operator, to herdsperson or paid employee to junior family member of an existing family farm business. Just over one-third of graduates currently farming owned their own farms, with more from the early years of the program having reached this point than recent graduates.

Given the strong desire to farm by those attending the WSBDF program, it is not entirely surprising that 2/3 of graduates farming were doing so full-time, without an additional paid non-farm job. However, given the high cost of purchasing cattle/livestock and land, it is often recommended to beginning farmers to build equity in livestock and savings, so holding a paid non-farm job is one strategy we observe by entrants. Many farmers (whether beginning or not) who raise meat animals (beef, sheep, goats) require additional income from other sources, and melding their desire to farm with other employment serves to keep them in farming while also providing financial resources and health care. In addition, about 1/6 of household income for graduates and their families came from a spouse, who often worked off-farm for health care coverage and cash flow purposes.

Since our program has emphasized managed grazing as a sound entry, livestock health and conservation strategy over the years, we asked graduates about their use of pasture. The vast majority, 85%, of graduates had fed pasture at some time, with 60% using managed grazing. Graziers cited animal health and longevity as well as environmental goals as strong reasons for using grazing. That managed grazing has been profitable for many of our graduates is also evidenced by the finding that of the graduates who owned their own farm by 2006, more than two-thirds were pasture-based operations. In addition, over half of graduates using managed grazing had gross farm incomes between $20,000 and $250,000 compared with one-third of graduates not using managed grazing. Those not using grazing were also more likely than graziers to be earning less than $20,000 annually from farming.

Overall, when asked about their satisfaction with their current quality of life, 84% of graduates were either ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’. The remaining responses were equally divided between ‘neither satisfied nor dissatisfied’ and ‘dissatisfied’, with only one respondent being ‘very dissatisfied.’ Graziers and those not farming were the most likely to be ‘very satisfied’ with their current quality of life. When we asked more detailed questions about life and job circumstances, we found that most graduates were meeting their goals for having a meaningful job/career, time spent outside, working with animals and having control over their job duties. These are frequently perceived benefits of farming and ‘being your own boss,’ and the gradates of the program seem to value them. Graduates were somewhat less satisfied with having enough personal/family time, health insurance coverage, paying off debt and total current income, although most still found these areas adequate.

When asked about the quality of the WSBDF program, graduates were overwhelmingly positive. No one rated the program ‘poor’ or ‘fair’ and 97% of respondents said it was ‘very good’ or ‘excellent.’ Eight different aspects of the program were evaluated and students were most satisfied with the presentations by the instructors, the availability of the instructors and farmer speakers, and the in-class discussions. While response for the other parts of the program was still largely favorable, about one-third of graduates were somewhat less satisfied with the farm financial training and financial support available to take the class. These two areas have been bolstered in recent years and are receiving continuing attention and improvement. At the recommendation of a consultant to the survey process, we posed the purely subjective question of ‘how much has the sum total of the WSBDF experience been worth to you?’ in terms of a dollar value (the actual cost of enrollment averaged about $300). Over a quarter understandably chose the option ‘can’t say,’ and similar number picked values between $5,000 and ‘over $100,000’. Nearly half of the graduates, however, picked the top choice, indicating that their participation in the WSBDF program had been ‘priceless.’

Additional results from the 1996-2006 Graduates Survey can be obtained from the project’s Final Report on the SARE website and will also be published by the UW-Madison Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems as a research brief. Please www.cias.wisc.edu for the research brief when available, as well as additional information about the WSBDF program (under Education & Training).

In-person interviews with seven graduates of the WSBDF program were conducted in 2007 and another eight graduates spoke of their start-up experience and current farming enterprises in the 2007-08 class. The interview instrument used is attached (see Appendix). Transcripts of these interviews and seminars were made in 2007 and 2008 and were included in the Final Report, along with financial reports from two beginning farmer graduates. Some of the lessons learned from these graduates during their farm start-up process are given in the next section of this annual report.

Impacts and Contributions/Outcomes

During the first ten years of the program about 200 students attended, with the results of our survey indicating that over 85% of respondents were farming (with additional graduates who had other careers in agriculture). While it is hard to put a precise value on the contributions of these new farmers to the economy and rural communities of Wisconsin and the other regions in which they live, we are clearly meeting our mission of helping to keep the next generation of dairy and livestock farmers on the land. With total farm numbers still declining, as well as challenges of high fuel, feed and land prices that are likely to continue long-term we feel that the need is still high for training and supporting new farmers in the NCR region.

Depending on the ratio of graduates who did not respond to the survey and are farming (we know several non-respondents who are farming successfully, but guess that fewer than 88% of non-respondents farm), we estimate that from 1996-2006, the program’s graduates contributed between 115 and 160 dairy and livestock farmers to the state and region. About one-third of these have started their own farm business and many graduates (whether currently farming or not) have plans to farm on their own in the future. As the WSBDF program continues to evolve and expand,–the Madison class size has increased to over 30 students per year and a new distance education program started in 2006 doubled the total enrollment in 2007-08,– its impact on the farming careers of greater numbers of graduates will continue and should be monitored and evaluated. Other institutions in Wisconsin are partnering with the WSBDF now to offer our curriculum as part of their beginning farmer training through this synchronous facilitated distance education effort and the possibility for partnering out of state is also being explored with interested parties across the NCR as well as in the northeastern United States. There is also substantial interest by other programs within the UW-Madison short course (of which the WSBDF is a part) to incorporate some of the methods we have used to reach out to students beyond the classroom and to include greater numbers of students from non-traditional backgrounds that are otherwise not seeking post-secondary education.

In terms of economic impact, we know from several sources, including the Wisconsin Milk Marketing Board, UW-Extension and the Center for Dairy Profitability, that the dairy industry in Wisconsin generates $20.6 billion a year for the state’s economy and that a 250-cow Wisconsin dairy farm will spend, on average, about $675,000 annually at primarily local businesses and retailers. Another estimate of the contribution of managed grazing dairy and beef farms (herd size average 90 head of dairy, heifers and/or beef cattle) in a major dairy county in Wisconsin, calculated that their total gross income was over $115,000 per farm or more than $12.4 million total in the county. The environmental effects of these grazing farms keeping thousands of acres of land in pasture are also substantial, but have not been assigned a dollar value. Benefits include reduction in soil erosion, cleaner water, increased wildlife habitat and lower fertilizer and pesticide use.

With WSBDF graduates participating in farms varying in size and type, from grazing sheep dairy to beef cow-calf to large confinement cow dairy farms, we cannot provide an accurate summary economic or environmental impact. If we were to apply just the income estimate above by graziers to the population of graduates we know were using grazing (just over half in 2006), we come up with over $6.6 million in gross farm income generated annually. Farming graduates also indicated that over 40 percent of their household income was from non-farm sources, so we know their families’ involvement in the rural economy via employment as well as purchases extends well beyond the farm gate.

It is with great appreciation that we acknowledge the resources this grant provided to enable us to learn from WSBDF graduates, through their participation in the mail survey, phone conversations, interviews and presentations to current students about their farming career steps, challenges and successes. In the Final Report section entitled Farmer Adoption we included eleven specific recommendations for beginning (and other) farmer success based on the experiences of those who have gone through and taught in the WSBDF program. We subscribe to the motto, “there is no failure, only feedback,” which is perhaps also reflected by the finding that of those graduates not farming in 2006, 90 percent had farmed since taking the class and 70% had intentions of farming again in the future. We learn from what works and what does not, and in that spirit we hope to continue to learn and improve the WSBDF – from our current and future students, as well as returning to and extracting more from the results of this survey and interview effort.

In conclusion, we let the graduates of the program speak to what has affected them most from the WSBDF and during their farming start-up. Their names are changed in order to maintain confidentiality, but their words and stories are uniquely their own.

Tom: “I’d probably have to say the most beneficial thing by far was the experience of [my] New Zealand [internship] and everything that went with that. There’s been a lot of things I’ve learned there that I have used, and a lot of things I learned there that I surely would not want to use. There probably is not a day that goes by that I don’t think or reference something to New Zealand and those 2 months that I spent there. Close behind the New Zealand experience was the network and the people I met and the contacts I still have today that are farming or actively farming. There are some people in [the WSBDF] class that I talk to once a week; for sure a couple times a year.”

Marty: “I see looking back on it that the most help the [WSBDF] School was the concepts and the thinking outside of the box that it provided. I don’t know what could be done to get people to start back on smaller farms, but I think that this School has started that process by teaching direct marketing/value adding concepts that are smaller instead of mega and small profit margin; small and bigger profit margins. I don’t know what that entails, more legislators becoming aware of that and jumping on it, and what the state can do to help small farmers get started.”

Kathy: “My advice to the students of the WSBDF is to be a sponge and absorb as much as you can before you start because there are so many ways to farm. I’m keeping current because like I said there are so many ways to do farming nowadays, ideas and networking with other people just goes a long way to keep you on top of the game around here…”

Fred: “When we first initially in 2002 bought the cows, the biggest obstacle that we had was finding a place that was suitable. I mean there are a lot of empty dairy barns in the country but to find one that is still workable or somewhat workable that you can work with to get going is the problem. You know how that is to find a retired couple who wants to move off the farm; I think that’s a big hurdle right now. I’ve always said it to a lot of people that the lifelong friends you make [in Short Course and WSBDF]…There are many of them that I still talk to even on a monthly basis. That there in itself is priceless I guess you could say.”

George: “I guess what I’d like to see retained [in the WSBDF] is the grass-based part of it. I knew very little about it when I got there, and now after I’ve done it on my operation for going on three and a half years now, I wouldn’t do it any other way. I firmly believe that grass-based is a very competitive way to compete in the dairy industry and it should be considered very thoroughly before disregarding it as a niche market kind of operation; I mean it’s very competitive in any kind of dairying, I believe.”

Dan: “I thought about it in class, kinda went home and thought about it, and kinda forgot about it. Then as time goes on and you are doing it on your own, you go, ‘doggone it…do you remember in [WSBDF] class when we talked about that problem?’ and then I think, ‘What the heck, I’ll run down and talk to the extension agent about it.’…if I could go back and do it all over I would have done a four year of grazing through the Wisconsin School for Beginning Dairy Farmers.”

Collaborators: