Extension Outreach Opportunities Among Segmented Dairy Producers

This paper suggests the value of a system-specific outreach education program for dairy producers that will both enhance economic survival and ability to adjust to technological change. These findings are based on a 1997 survey of Pennsylvania dairy farmers employing confinement, traditional, and intensive grazing management systems.

Three distinct production systems have emerged in the northeast: (a) confinement production, (b) intensive grazing, and (c) traditional systems that rely on both extensive grazing and supplemental confinement feeding. The first two systems are becoming highly specialized in terms of management processes. Confinement production frequently utilizes total mixed rations (TMR) which require meticulous detail for balancing a ration of processed forages and supplements. Intensive grazing requires frequent cattle rotation among a series of paddocks. Traditional dairy systems benefit from a diverse mix of extensive pasturing and in-barn feeding, but frequently forego benefits of production specialization.

A 1993 Pennsylvania survey found that 64% of a sample of traditional and intensive grazing dairy producers listed increased production efficiency and improved finances as their primary motivations for change (Hanson, Cunningham, Morehart & Parsons). The confinement production system, benefiting from increasing specialization in mechanized feed production, ration- balancing and feeding processes has steadily gained in usage since the mid-1900's (Cochrane, 1979). In order to more clearly understand their needs, a stratified random sample of Pennsylvania dairy farmers served as the basis for this 1997 study. Data were collected via a mail survey followed where necessary by a reminder post-card and a reminder survey (Dillman, 1978). Questions were asked concerning farm production practices, level of satisfaction, and farm and farmer demographical characteristics. A 66% response rate was achieved with 874 completed surveys returned. Data were compiled and statistically analyzed with SAS (SAS Institute, Inc., 1980). Stratification was based on the type of production system.

The key variable differentiating dairy systems was the grazing intensity on the farm. Confinement producers in the study are defined as those that do not graze their milking cows. Intensive grazing producers are defined as using grazing and pasture rotations of seven days or less. Traditional system producers are those who rotate pastures at intervals of eight days or longer.

Confinement systems comprised 42% of the sample (Table 1). Confinement offers advantages in terms of ease of adding more cows to the operation and use of controlled-environment feeding (which is conducive to greater milk production per cow). Those farmers with ready access to equity or borrowed capital often find the confinement production formula of more cows, more milk per cow, and more acres per farm to be highly competitive.

On the other hand, intensive grazing systems typically have less row-crop production and hence fewer total acres, which is consistent with fewer cows per farm. Similar to other studies (e.g., Jackson-Smith, Barham, Nevius & Klemme, 1996) the 1997 survey found 11% lower milk production per cow with intensive grazing systems compared to confinement feeding. Traditional systems were similar to intensive grazing in terms of milk per cow and cows per farm, but were found to have more acres and twice the number of years using their system of grazing (18 vs. 9 years, respectively). With the highest percentage having attended college, being younger, and more likely to use farm plans, the intensive grazing group may be hypothesized to be particularly open to innovative ideas and production methods arising in the future.

Intensive grazing producers were the most dissatisfied with milk and hay yields, which are critical to the survival of intensive grazing operations (Table 2). Traditional producers were more dissatisfied with 1996 corn silage yields and profit levels. The lack of specialization, via intensive grazing or confinement systems, has likely made it more difficult for traditional producers to translate production levels into a healthy level of farm profitability.

A higher percentage of traditional producers were more dissatisfied with time away from the farm and with financial progress since 1990. The survey finding that 46-49% of those farmers were dissatisfied with current stress levels indicates the presence of a high level of anxiety in Pennsylvania dairy farming at this time. Poor economic performance is correlated with personal stress.

A larger percentage of intensive grazing farmers intended to add cows, add acres, and increase use of grazing than was the case for either the confinement or traditional groups (Table 3), although increasing acreage farmed is statistically insignificant. The traditional group, however, intended to increase use of grazing substantially more than confinement producers, 11% vs. 3%, respectively. The slower and more mixed expansion of the traditional farmers can be interpreted as being consistent with their high level of dissatisfaction with 1996 profit levels and financial progress. Confinement producers with larger farm units and higher per cow production appear generally satisfied with a continuing focus on confinement technology. Similarly, 29% of the intensive grazing practitioners intend to specialize to a greater degree by increasing use of grazing. It is the traditional system practitioners that are less uniform in terms of the direction of future growth for their farms.

Important management tools now available to farmers include DHIA records, TMR feed mixing programs, computers, and farm planning techniques (Table 3). The current use level of Dairy Herd Improvement Associations (DHIA) which provide detailed milk production records on an individual cow basis, differed among the three dairy systems. While continuing to be more actively used by confinement producers during the next three years, there is little anticipated future increase in DHIA membership on the sample farms.

Current application of TMR also differed significantly, with use among confinement producers more than double that among the other groups. The substantial projected increase in usage of TMR among the traditional and intensive grazing farmers (and convergence in future rates-of-use across all systems) suggests that increasingly precise feeding technologies will complement increased future use of pasture forage. In effect, TMR is becoming viewed by graziers as an appropriate substitute for pasture forages during winter months.

Current usage of personal computers and formal farm planning differs slightly across the three dairy systems. Perhaps more importantly, the farmers in each group indicate substantial increases in future use of computers and planning techniques in their operations. This implies that educational outreach efforts focusing particularly on computer and planning applications will more likely receive a favorable response from farmers than future workshops focusing on DHIA applications to decision-making. Similarly, the findings of greater dissatisfaction with current performance, a more diffuse approach to future change, and lower indebtedness which facilitates financing innovation, present compelling reasons for outreach education efforts directed toward the traditional producers. Farms pertaining to this group are likely to undergo substantial future changes in adoption of more specialized production systems.

The results suggest that a two-fold outreach strategy consisting of (a) specialized Extension programs with topics tailored to specific dairy systems and (b) more general management programs for educational meetings that include dairy producers employing any one of the major production systems, will achieve greater success than a one-size-fits-all educational strategy. The overwhelming majority of confinement producers were not planning to intensify grazing use in their operations (other than for cow-holding and exercise lots). This group is therefore more likely to be responsive to large-herd confinement decision- making aids focusing on production and size efficiencies. On the other hand, a change-focused education program will likely have broad appeal for traditional producers who are most dissatisfied with current profitability and are most likely to shift to more specialized production in the future. In this regard, workshops that contrast the performance of intensive grazing versus confinement systems come to mind. However, workshops that enhance on-farm applications of computers to address ration balancing costs and returns, including TMR use, and formalized farm business planning will have broad appeal across all dairy groups. From an educator's perspective, it is encouraging to find increasing recognition of the critical role of computers and formal planning for improving future competitiveness.

The findings lend support for specialization in outreach education programs analogous to the increasing specialization of production systems found among the dairy farmers surveyed. Farm management extension educators are confronted with the dilemma that the dairy farmers most likely to benefit from outreach programs designed to ensure farm survival and success, the traditional producers, are among the most reluctant to attend educational meetings and workshops focusing on decision-making techniques. For example, a core base of 60% to 65% of all surveyed farmers do not intend to utilize computers or formal farm planning processes in the next three years. The survey results do not explicitly suggest that a differentiated or segmented marketing approach for Extension programs will solve the problem of low farmer participation. However, by identifying alternative education interests by producer group, study results may contribute to the design of outreach materials that are more useful in aiding extension educators address the base of critical informational needs of dairy farmers

Cochrane, W. W. (1979). The development of American agriculture: A historical analysis. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Dillman, D.A. (1978) Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: Wiley & Sons.

Hanson, G. D., Cunningham, L. C., Morehart, M. J., & Parsons, R. L..(in press) Profitability of moderate intensive grazing of dairy cows in the Northeast. Journal of Dairy Science.

Jackson-Smith, D., Barham, B., Nevius, M., & Klemme, R. (1996). Grazing in dairyland: The use and performance of management intensive rotational grazing among Wisconsin dairy farms. (Tech Rep #5). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin- Madison Ag Tech & Family Farm Institute.

SAS Institute, Inc. (1989). SAS/STAT Users Guide, Version 6, Fourth Edition, Volume 1. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.