SUMMER 1997
| Focus is produced quarterly by the Ellen Varley, editor |
Ellen Varley, ev1@umail.umd.edu phone: (301) 405-4581 |  |
Since
its creation in 1914, the Maryland Cooperative Extension Service has helped
boost the productivity and profits of farmers through innovation and education.
Although we have changed and adapted over the years to meet the needs of new,
diverse audiences in an increasingly urbanized state, we have not lost sight
of the needs of people involved in Marylandâs food and fiber system.
Extension campus- and field-based faculty are involved in a variety of innovative programs and projects designed to benefit this important audience. They are examining the effectiveness of cutting-edge technologies at increasing production and reducing costs; organizing cooperatives that give Marylandâs growing number of small and part-time farmers greater purchasing, production, and marketing clout; introducing producers to computer programs designed to facilitate planning and record-keeping; identifying and demonstrating ways of putting waste products to use; and much more.
This issue of Focus on Extension highlights some of their efforts. Although not comprehensive, I think it will give readers like you a good idea of what the Maryland Cooperative Extension Service is doing to help the Free Stateâs number-one industry remain competitive as we approach the millenium.
Thomas A. Fretz
Dean, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources
Director, Cooperative Extension Service
A team representing the public, private ... and personal ... segments of agriculture is engaged in a five-year project designed to determine whether one system of new technologies, called ãprecision agricultureä or ãprecision farming,ä can help farmers improve productivity and boost profits. This new approach to crop production involves the use of computers and satellites of global positioning system (GPS) and geographic information system (GIS) technologies to identify various soil and crop requirements, pinpoint problems, and apply appropriate soil amendments or pest-control strategies in small sections of fields.
The remarkable thing about precision farming is, well, its precision. ãIt involves use of remote sensing, geo-referencing, and aerial imaging to collect as many layers of information as possible on the variables that affect crop production,ä explains Scott Quinn, a precision farming specialist with Lebanon Agricorp. ãWith the information provided by satellites and computerized farm equipment, producers can respond to problems early or even anticipate them before they occur.ä
Given such benefits, precision agriculture appears to be a potentially valuable management tool that could save farmers money and perhaps protect the environment through the targeted application of nutrients and pesticides. Whatâs lacking so far is hard, on-farm data.
Lebanon Agricorp research specialist and field scout Jennifer Kemp uses a portable GPS-guided computer and satellite antenna to locate "trouble spots" identified by infrared aerial images of the field.
And thatâs why for the past year and a half, faculty with the Maryland Cooperative Extension Service and representatives of Lebanon Agricorp have been working with farmer Jonathan Quinn (Scottâs cousin) on a precision agriculture demonstration project on the 354-acre farm he leases near Galena, Maryland. To keep the scope of the project manageable, the team is focusing on a single 165-acre cornfield at the Wicks Farm.
Haas approached Jonathan, with whom he had previously worked. A self-described ãguinea pigä in demonstration projects involving integrated pest management (IPM) and nutrient management, the 31-year-old former DuPont Mid-Atlantic Young Farmer of the Year award winner agreed to participate. Scott; Jennifer Kemp, a Lebanon Agricorp research specialist and field scout; and John Hall, Extension agricultural educator from Kent County, rounded out the team.
What makes the project work so well, according to Haas, is the partnership of farmer, Extension, and industry. ãItâs an excellent example of the kind of cooperation that will be needed to ensure agricultureâs success in the future,ä he says. ãBy working together, we can determine whether or not new technologies do or donât work in applied situations.ä
Each participant contributes to and benefits from the project. Jonathan provides the land and receives first-hand information from cutting-edge research at little or no cost. Extension faculty share their research-based expertise on such subjects as IPM and nutrient management and secure grants to help defray costs associated with project, while increasing their practical knowledge about precision agriculture. Lebanon Agricorp provides the essential technological hardware and software and the personnel to operate the equipment. The company also has reduced its fees for scouting and monitoring. In return, Lebanon gains valuable research information.
Using GPS-guided equipment, team members took 71 soil samples in 2.5-acre grids on a 165-acre cornfield, plotting the results on a computerized map. With the same GPS-guided computer, they were able to apply the appropriate amount of lime÷ranging from nothing to 2 tons÷in each of the fieldâs 71 grid areas.
Infrared aerial images of the field show problem areas. With the GPS-guided computer and antenna in her backpack, Kemp, a former University of Maryland nutrient management consultant, locates these trouble spots from the ground. She checks them to see whatâs actually happening÷a process called ãground truthingä÷looking for loss of plant quality, signs of disease or pest damage, and the pres-ence of weeds. ãOur goal,ä she explains, ãis to identify problems in their early stages÷before theyâre obvious÷and begin treatment.ä
And finally, at harvest, they mea-sure yield. Last year, instead of the six yield recordings (one for each variety of corn) Jonathan might have collected in the past, he took 37,500 yield recordings, thanks to the computerized yield monitor on his combine that measures yields for each small section of the field. Properly calibrated, the yield monitor is usually accurate within 1 percent.
ãThe yield map produced by the monitor is like a final report card,ä says Scott. ãIt shows how we did in terms of managing the field for maximum yield and how we could do better.ä
From left to right: Farmer Jonathan Quinn, Lebanon Agricorp precision farming specialist Scott Quinn, and Extension agricultural educator John Hall check data provided by a GPS-guided computer.
Corn yields last year ranged from 70 to 215 bushels per acre. Although team members are still evaluating all the variables that could have contributed to such a wide range, Jonathan is already seeing the benefit of precision agriculture. ãI never realized how much weeds and some insects affect yield,ä he says. ãFrom what Iâve seen during this project, they can cause a loss of 25 to 30 bushels per acre.ä Jonathan also used last yearâs yield data to help him with variety selection decisions for three crops÷corn, wheat, and soybeans÷this year.
ãThe bottom line,ä he says, ãis that Iâve got a product that I have to sell, and itâs easier and more profitable to sell a quality product. From what Iâve seen so far, precision farming is a good management tool that helps me produce a better quality product.ä
Better Yield Predictions Based on Soil Types
The Maryland Cooperative Extension Service and the Maryland Department of Agriculture (MDA) launched a Nutrient Management Program in 1989 to help farmers manage nutrients from animal wastes, commercial fertilizers, and urban sludge in an environmentally safe and economically sound manner. The goal: to make certain that crops get the right amount of nutrients at the right time, reducing farmersâ costs and the amount of nutrients entering the stateâs water supply.
Preparation of nutrient management plans÷a collaborative process by farmers and Extension-trained, MDA-certified nutrient management consultants÷involves establishing appropriate yield goals. MDA regulations require that anticipated yield figures for each field be based on the average yield from the previous year. If such information is unavailable, the average yield for a neighboring field that has the same type of soil can be used. And if that information also is unavailable, the predicted crop yield for a specific soil type can be substituted.
The problem with the third option is that itâs not very accurate, says soils scientist Dr. Ray Miller. ãThere just hasnât been enough data on yield variation according to soil type,ä he explains. Complicating the issue is the fact that most fields contain not one, but several types of soil. Consequently, making predictions based on soil type has been difficult.
Until now. Geographic information systems (GIS) technology and computerized yield monitors that measure yield as a combine moves through the field are allowing researchers and farmers to gather enough data to determine if yields do actually vary by soil type and, if so, by how much. Miller is leading a project designed to accomplish just such a goal. He and graduate student Jay Radhakrishnan are currently analyzing yield monitor data gathered by several Kent County farmers as they harvested their corn. The two researchers are also comparing this information with soils data from Natural Resources Conservation Service digitized soil survey maps. Their goal is to improve the accuracy of yield predictions based on soil type so that better nutrient management plans can be developed.
If their efforts prove successful, Miller anticipates that similar work will be conducted on other crops and in other areas in Maryland and throughout the nation.
Co-op Helps Small Farms Boost the Bottom Line
As most devotees of discount warehouse-type stores will tell you, buying in bulk usually means a lower cost per unit. Unfortunately, for some 10,000 Maryland farmers, the same logic applies to agricultural supplies.
Historically, these producers, who operate small farms÷those grossing less than $50,000 a year÷have paid higher prices than their larger counterparts because they couldnât purchase the volume required for bulk discounts. But not anymore. Farmers with small operations in several counties have formed a cooperative that helps even the playing field against the ãbig boys.ä
The Maryland Small Farm Cooperative (MSFC) began as an idea in the mind of Terry Poole, an Extension agricultural educator in Frederick County. ãDue to heavy urban growth in the last two decades, Maryland has lost many of its traditional, full-time family farms,ä says Poole. ãAt the same time, the number of small and part-time farms has increased. Individually, these farms are not usually profitable due to their size. Farmers experience problems with high purchase costs, limited markets, and limited availability of work services.ä
Poole set out to rectify the situation. His goal was to bring owners and operators of small farms together so that they could take advantage of all the benefits available to large agricultural operations. In February 1996 he held a public exploratory meeting to gauge interest among farmers in Frederick and surrounding counties in establishing a cooperative. Seventy-five area farmers attended.
A representative from the Maryland Department of Agriculture explained the process of developing a cooperative. Several other agencies and organizations, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Maryland Farm Bureau, and the Maryland Council of Farm Cooperatives, offered support.
With this guidance and encouragement, a steering committee was established and met in March. Over the next several months, the committee established articles of incorporation and a set of bylaws for MSFC, developed a business plan, and created a computer-based bulletin board. Seven members later formed the first board of directors.
The MSFC gave producers their first opportunity to join the co-op in December 1996. Three months later the co-opâs 65 founding members÷from Frederick, Washington, Carroll, Montgomery, and Howard counties÷held their first meeting. They established four sections or commodity groups to better focus on the specific needs of members: livestock, field crops, fruits and vegetables, and greenhouse and ornamentals. Members, who pay a $25 annual membership fee, can belong to more than one group.
The co-op is well on its way to reducing costs, improving profitability, and boosting the purchasing and marketing power of small farms. One seed company has agreed to cut its price in half for bulk orders. Another supplier is offering a dollar a gallon break on the price of fertilizer when members collectively order 1,000 gallons. And some Washington, DC, restaurants have expressed interest in purchasing products from the co-op.
Given this early success, itâs likely, says Poole, that the co-op will grow and that farmers in other areas of Maryland will establish additional MSFC chapters. Herb Reed, an Extension agricultural educator serving Calvert, Charles, and St. Maryâs counties, is already exploring just such a possibility with Southern Maryland farmers.
Dairy Farmers Discuss Difficulties and Successes
For farmers to survive in a changing market and be successful, it is necessary for them to be flexible and adept at problem solving. They must look at their farms as businesses and develop leadership and management skills to make their farms a long-term success. The Maryland Cooperative Extension Service developed the Pro-Farm program in 1994 to help farmers foster these skills.
John Hall, agricultural educator in Kent County, worked with the Pro-Farm program and noticed that many dairy farmers had special needs that the program was not designed to meet. Hall, along with Carroll County agricultural educator Mike Bell and farm management specialist Dale Johnson, began a series of discussion groups in Kent and Carroll counties÷using Pro-Farm goals÷that are specifically tailored to meet the dairy farmersâ needs. ãThey needed a program that was flexible and presented material that was specifically relevant to them,ä says Johnson.
Farmers at these discussion groups are presented with case studies of real farms that arenât running smoothly. The farmers break into groups to identify and analyze the management problem areas and develop solutions. They look at different management components of the problem farm and decide what aspects of the system are failing. They then discuss what can be done to improve the situation. ãThis method of instruction actively involves the farmers and builds their desire to change the way they are doing things,ä explains Hall. ãThey can then take this knowledge and hands-on experience and apply it to their own operations.ä
One of the most crucial steps involved in improving management and leadership skills is writing a mission statement that helps a farmer determine future direction by identifying long-term problems. Without the focus these statements provide, farmers often find themselves spread too thin and wasting resources. The dairy farmersâ discussion groups help participants identify these problems and write targeted mission statements.
In addition to leadership and farm management, the discussion groups, which meet weekly or monthly depending on the season, have addressed such issues as personal and comprehensive insurance and retirement plans. ãWe ask participants what discussions would help them most,ä says Hall. ãThatâs why they keep coming back.ä
High Hopes for Rabbit and Goat Meat Production
Last year several factories closed in Garrett County, leaving more than 600 people unemployed and with few job options. Local residents knew that alternative projects with relatively low start-up costs were necessary to fill the void.
Jim Simms, Extension agricultural educator in Garrett County, and representatives of the Garrett County Economic Development Corporation (GCEDC) came up with the idea of establishing a cooperative of regional producers for producing, processing, and direct marketing of U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)-approved fresh rabbit and goat meat products. Production of rabbit meat had been tried in the past, but failed because too few people were involved to successfully produce and market the product. Members of the Mountain Pride Co-op believe that by pooling their resources, they can succeed where others failed.
According to Simms, interest in rabbit meat already exists. ãOne of the co-op members, Yoderâs Meat Company, has test marketed canned rabbit meat and the response has been favorable,ä he says. Still, many people are not aware that rabbit, which is a white meat that tastes like chicken and can be prepared in similar ways, has less fat and cholesterol÷and more protein÷than other meats.
A sound marketing and packaging plan is essential to the creation of a viable rabbit meat market. Using an $88,000 USDA rural economic development grant, Extension has hired a full-time marketing specialist for two years to develop just such a plan.
A unique method of packaging and presentation for goat meat is also necessary because the competition from imported goat meat is quite stiff. ãWe are trying to develop a new kind of packaging that no one has thought of before that will encourage consumers to choose Mountain Pride goat meat over the imported meat,ä explains Simms.
The co-op was formed in 1996 and has grown better than originally anticipated. Simms attributes this success to good leadership paired with strong political and community support. ãEveryone wants it to work,ä he says.
The GCEDC held a five-course rabbit benefit dinner attended by Maryland Secretary of Agriculture Riley, West Virginia Agricultural Commissioner Douglass, and other political figures. The Maryland Cooperative Extension Service is sponsoring management and accounting workshops for co-op members and West Virginia University is offering technical production management training.
Initially the co-op plans to market fresh rabbit and goat meat products within a 100-mile radius of Garrett County. Simms is confident, however, that members will be able to expand their operations to include a larger area.
The only major obstacle at this point is the expense involved in having the meat inspected by USDA. Rabbit is the only meat that is not subsidized by the government for inspection. Although the inspection cost is only 13 cents per pound, members hope to be producing and selling two million pounds of rabbit meat a year in two years, which would cost them more than $250,000 in in-spection costs. Members are working to solve this problem at the weekly meet-ings and hope to gain political support for the inspection subsidization.
Poultry Litter: Turning Waste into Gold
As poultry producers strive to raise lean, healthy, fast-growing birds, they must also address the issue of waste. Each year broilers from the Delmarva poultry in-dustry create some 800,000 tons of litter (manure and bedding material) containing an estimated 27,600 tons of nitrogen and 26,500 tons of phosphorous. If not disposed of properly, this litter can contribute to the degradation of ground water, streams and rivers, and the Chesapeake Bay.
To help prevent such degradation, faculty with the Maryland Cooperative Extension Service have worked with producers for many years to develop economically and environmentally sound ways of disposing of or utilizing this waste material. And because some farms produce more poultry litter than they can use on site, a cooperative program called the Future Harvest Poultry Project was formed to identify methods of using litter in other ways. This joint project involves the Cooperative Extension Services of the University of Maryland and Delaware State University; farmers in Maryland and Delaware; and representatives of various foundations, associations, and state agencies.
ãFavorable results have been achieved by using broiler litter in corn and wheat production,ä says Dr. Lewis Carr, Extension poultry production and processing specialist. ãProducers can save an average of $20 to $30 per acre in fertilizer costs by integrating broiler litter and commercial fertilizer into one nutrient management package.ä
The keys to success, according to Carr and his colleagues, are manure analysis, soil testing, and proper calibra-tion of equipment used to spread the manure. Maryland producers can have the nutrient content of their poultry manure analyzed free by the Soil Testing Laboratory at the University of Maryland, College Park, if their request is accompanied by a paid soil sam-ple. Nutrient management consultants employed or trained by Extension fac-ulty can use the results to guide producers in developing comprehensive nu-trient management plans for their fields.
A new demonstration project that got underway this spring involves the application of poultry litter on watermelons. This project, which is being conducted at the Salisbury Facility of the Lower Eastern Shore Research and Education Center (LESREC), involves Carr, horticulture specialist Dr. John Bouwkamp, plant biologist Dr. James Kantzes, nutrient management consultant Gregg Scott, LESREC farm manager Fred Wells, and agricultural educators Wayne Shaff (Wicomico County) and Robert Rouse (Wye Research and Education Center). The goal, says Bouwkamp, is to compare the effectiveness of various fertilizers, including raw and composted poultry litter provided by Carr, in watermelon production.
K. Marc Teffeau, regional commercial horticulture specialist at the Wye Research and Education Center, is conducting demonstration projects using composted poultry litter in the production of field grown nursery stock. In 1996 he began working with Wye Nursery in Caroline County and Quail Run Nursery in Kent County, applying composted poultry litter supplied by Pat Condon, a private compost generator in Dorchester County, and collecting anecdotal information on plant performance. This year he also has established a research plot at Chesapeake Nurseries near Salisbury, where he is comparing two different ãrecipesä of composted poul-try litter produced by Carr at the Poplar Hill Facility of the Lower Eastern Shore Research and Education Center as part of the Future Harvest project. Teffeau will observe the effect of both composts on plants over the next few years of the production cycle. He also has plans to initiate a similar project at the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Forest Serviceâs Ayton Forest Tree Nursery near Preston and to establish a riparian buffer planting project along the Marshyhope Creek near Federalsburg in cooperation with DNRs Chesapeake and Coastal Watershed Section and the town of Federalsburg.
Bouwkamp is using poultry litter compost in the College of Agriculture and Natural Resourcesâ greenhouses in College Park. For the past three years, he has been applying compost blends containing poultry litter compost produced by Condon to chrysanthemums, poinsettias, and bedding plants.
ãThere are several reasons for using poultry litter,ä Bouwkamp explains ãFirst, we can reduce a waste disposal problem on the Shore; second, we can reduce the cost of planting mixes by replacing peat moss with composted poultry litter, which is usually cheaper; and third, we can reduce the need for fertilizer considerably.ä
Bouwkamp has found that poultry litter compost works best when mixed with other composts÷yard waste com-post, for example. ãCompost blends seem to work better than any of the individual composts alone,ä he says. Such mixtures can be applied straight to some plants, such as chrysanthemums, and can be used in a 50 percent planting mixture with peat moss and perlite for use on bedding plants.
Based on research results so far, Bouwkamp, Teffeau, and Carr see a bright future for poultry litter in Marylandâs agricultural and horticultural industries. ãI believe we can turn a waste product into a valuable resource, creating economic benefits for producers and protecting the quality of the stateâs waterways,ä says Teffeau.
Computer Neophytes Can 'Try Before They Buy'
Computers can often make jobs easier, more efficient, and more profitable... even the job of farming. But for many agricultural producers, the proof, so to speak, is in the pudding, and that means determining the success of ãcomputerizedä farm management themselves.
ãThe problem,ä says Dan Donnelly, an Extension agricultural educator in St. Maryâs County, ãis that farmers who donât already own computers donât want to make a large financial investment in computer hardware without knowing if they will find the technology useful.ä
So about two years ago, a team of Southern Maryland Extension faculty, including Donnelly, Charles County agricultural educator Pam King, Calvert County agricultural educator Herb Reed, and St. Maryâs County livestock educator Janine Baratta, developed an educational program called ãLease to Learn.ä ãBasically, the program gives farm families the tools they need to evaluate and apply computer technology and to make an informed decision about the value of computers to their operations,ä explains King.
For $100 plus the cost of a financial record keeping software program called Quicken, farmers can attend the five-hour, hands-on ãQuicken for Beginnersä seminar taught by the agents and lease a computer, color monitor, and printer for six months. The Extension educators are available to provide additional support as itâs needed.
Since the introduction of ãLease to Learn,ä 19 people have leased the surplus XTs or 286s that Donnelly purchased from the University of Maryland at College Park with a grant from the Colonial Agricultural Education Foundation and other donations. Their lease fees have been used to purchase discs, cables, and other computer supplies.
Some program participants have decided after three or four months that computers arenât for them. Others have returned the leased equipment early because they purchased their own new computers. ãWeâve had a variety of res-ponses, which is okay,ä says Donnelly. ãWe want to help people make informed decisions about computers and their value to farm operations.ä
Donnellyâs current goal is to upgrade the computers so that they can handle a Windows operating environment. ãIâm hoping to get some 386s,ä he says. ãThey may not Îrunâ Windows, but they can Îwalkâ it. And for the purposes of this program, thatâs good enough.ä