August 2002
Volume 40 Number 4

Ideas at Work

Linking Strategic Thinking and Project Planning: The Oregon State University Extension Forestry Experience

Mike Reichenbach
Extension Educator
University of Minnesota, Cloquet Forestry Center
Cloquet, Minnesota
Internet Address: reich027@umn.edu

Viviane Simon-Brown
Leadership Educator
Oregon State University
Corvallis, Oregon
Internet Address: viviane.simon-brown@orst.edu

Extension foresters at Oregon State University use a group project planning process to strategically focus more than 25 Extension foresters' efforts on projects of regional and statewide significance. The incorporation of goals developed in a strategic planning process was new in 1998 and resulted in better linkages between program planning and the Extension forestry mission and improved working relationships within the Extension team and generated new ideas for educational programs.

Group Project Planning

Oregon State University has used group project planning processes since the late 1980's. Group projects involve the coordination of activities among county- and campus-based faculty. A group project is defined as having one or more of the following characteristics:

• Involvement of staff from three or more counties.
• A project involving large amounts of time or money.
• A project having statewide significance.
• A project that will substantially improve the organization.

A full description of the group project planning process may be found in Garland and Adams (1992).

Integrating Project and Strategic Planning

In 1997, more than 25 county- and campus-based Extension faculty attended an annual planning meeting. Several Extension foresters suggested linking strategic thinking to the existing group project planning process.

Strategic goals, developed as part of a separate periodic strategic planning process, were used to focus the group's thinking on broad areas of importance. Proposed group project ideas were categorized by the strategic goal or goals they most closely fit under. Group project ideas for each goal were then prioritized by a vote of the group. The estimated time Extension foresters would commit to each goal and the estimated time needed to complete each project was used as a means of determining how many projects to engage in for the year. Prior to this enhancement, projects were not categorized, nor were estimates of time used as a means to determine how many projects to implement.

The enhanced planning process is summarized in Figure 1: The Enhanced Group Project Planning Process:

Figure 1.
The Enhanced Group Project Planning Process

Internal Review of the Enhanced Planning Process

Since the strategic planning process was enhanced in 1998, a focused internal review of the process was conducted. Using a scale of 1-10, with 1 being poor and 10 excellent, Extension forestry faculty were asked to evaluate the overall usefulness of the process and to evaluate each of the planning steps. In-person and telephone interviews encouraged a higher number of responses and proved to be more effective than fax or email.

Extension foresters rated the usefulness of the strategic planning process as 6.76, on a scale of 1 to 10, indicating better than average satisfaction. Interestingly, they rated the individual components of the strategic planning process higher than the "idea" of strategic planning itself.

Thirty-five percent identified positive impacts and cited the following:

• Provided balance,
• Focus,
• Direction,
• Validation, and
• Group cohesion.

A list of the evaluation questions, rankings, frequencies, comments, interpretations, and recommendations is available from the authors.

The integrated planning process as implemented in 1998 resulted in several positive outcomes.

Creating Tighter Linkages

The enhanced planning process ensured that projects implemented are linked to strategic goals identified in a separate strategic planning process.

Opening the Circle

The enhanced planning process allowed regional, national, and international issues and trends to influence group projects selected for implementation. One colleague called it, "looking beyond the trees"; another "opening the circle."

Improving Working Relationships

The enhanced planning process prioritized project ideas under each strategic goal, thus recognizing sub-groups or smaller divisions of the forestry discipline. This recognition improved working relationships between forest products Extension foresters and forest resources Extension foresters.

Thinking Out of the Box

Prioritizing group project ideas by strategic goals allowed new ideas to emerge. For example, a group project selected under the goal of engaging the public in a dialog about forests and forestry resulted in an Art Show to engage the public. Sixty-five thousand people at three locations in Oregon visited "Seeing the Forest: Art about Forests & Forestry." This project would not have gone forward under the previous planning model.

Tom Dowling (1998, personal communication), the strategic planning consultant hired to guide the process, highlighted the changes in Extension forestry planning that he observed:

• Better internal understanding about the future project opportunities;
• Greater agreement between resource allocation and organizational goals;
• Better understanding and communication between Extension foresters and the College of Forestry faculty;
• More focus on strategic goals when selecting group projects;
• Greater participation in the planning process by all faculty members irrespective of rank, length of service, or disciplinary focus; and
• Strategic decisions based on external data in addition to data generated internally.

Conclusion

The enhanced group project planning process ensures that the decisions to implement projects are based on sound data and align with Oregon State University's Extension Forestry Mission.

John Garland (1998, personal communication), one of those personally involved in the original development of the group project planning process, commented, "The end result is that there is no shortage of important things to do. Which ones I do as an individual and in cooperation as a group is the important decision." Most Extension foresters (68%) felt that the integration of strategic goals into the group project planning process helped define what should and should not be done.

References

Garland, J.J., & Adams, P.W. (1992). Coordinated tactical program planning among specialists and agents: The Oregon Extension Forestry experience. Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Education. 21(1).

What Incarcerated Youth Say Would Help Them Succeed: Can Extension Play a Role?

Eric Killian
Area Extension Specialist
Internet Address: killiane@unce.unr.edu

Randy Brown
Area Extension Specialist
Internet Address: brownr@unce.unr.edu

University of Nevada Cooperative Extension
Las Vegas, Nevada

William Evans
State Specialist
Human Development and Family Studies
University of Nevada
Reno, Nevada
Internet Address: evans@unr.nevada.edu

Introduction

Studies continue to document an alarmingly high prevalence of juvenile delinquency in the U.S.. and the number of youth in detention has increased (Snyder & Sickmund, 1999). Prior studies have consistently found that youth involved in the juvenile justice system are more likely to suffer problems in adulthood, such as unemployment, alcoholism, and dependence on welfare (Kazdin, 1992).

Although there are some notable exceptions, Extension professionals have not traditionally been involved with youth in the juvenile justice system. Nevertheless, because of the Extension system's considerable resources, there is an increasing opportunity to provide educational programming that can help these youth succeed.

A variety of programming approaches aimed at helping juvenile offenders develop into useful, law-abiding citizens have been developed. Unfortunately, these programs remain largely ineffectual, and recidivism continues to be unacceptably high (Josi & Sechrest, 1999). Researchers have suggested programs that teach youth life skills may be a critical component in reducing recidivism. These findings dovetail with Extension programming aimed at promoting youth development by enhancing life skills and suggest that Extension professionals may be positioned to provide delinquent youth with the skills they need to succeed and avoid recidivism.

When developing programs for youth, the important step of asking participants what they think provides critical but often over-looked information. In particular, youth in the juvenile justice system are rarely asked what they think would be effective approaches to helping them succeed once they are released from detention or complete the term of their parole. The purpose of the study reported here was to assess youth opinions of effective programming approaches for both inside and outside the detention system.

Methods

The data for the study was obtained from surveys of incarcerated youth in two Nevada youth detention facilities in the Las Vegas area. The surveys were conducted in collaboration with the Clark County Division of Family & Youth Services (CCDFYS) to understand youth perceptions of their detention experience and to aid in the development of community reentry programming. Youth responded to a survey designed to assess perceptions of the overall facilities, staff, and future programming, as well as items related to anger management, decision-making, violence, abuse, and gang affiliation.

The self-report survey instrument used for this study was developed to provide information for new programming. The instrument also assessed several other psychosocial variables, which provided a profile of the county's incarcerated youth. The scales and items used were based on prior research and focus group discussions with CCDFYS administrators and incarcerated youth. The survey was then piloted with a group of youth detainees for comprehension and readability. This piloting resulted in several content and formatting modifications.

The programming options used in the survey instrument resulted directly from focus group discussions with incarcerated youth. Two focus group discussions prompted youth to generate strategies and programs that might help them or their peers be successful once they return to the community. These discussions resulted in a list of 10 inside-of-facility programming options and 8 outside-of-facility options (Tables 1 & 2). These lists comprised the items that were rated by survey respondents. The rating scale for each option was as follows: very helpful, helpful, kind of helpful, and not helpful.

The sample was composed of 197 male and female detainees. The ethnicity of the subjects was distributed as follows: 27% Hispanic-American, 15% African-American, 39% European-American, 7% Asian/Pacific Islander-American, and 13% Multi-Ethnic. Eighteen percent reported living with both biological parents before their incarceration, 38% with only their mothers, 10% with only their fathers, 21% in stepfamilies, and 13% with grandparents, foster parents, or in other living arrangements. Ninety percent had been incarcerated in the detention facilities for 6 months or less.

Results

The findings from the survey reveal several strongly rated programming options. For example, job training both inside and outside of the detention facility was rated exceptionally high (Tables 1 & 2). Eighty-five percent of surveyed youth rated inside-facility job training as very helpful or helpful, and 92% rated outside facility job training as very helpful or helpful. In addition, computer training, arts and crafts, and recreation were also highly rated for inside-facility programming. For outside facility programming, 86% of youth rated having a safe place away from family to go when needed as either very helpful or helpful.

Table 1.
Incarcerated Youths' Rating of Inside-Facility Programming

Table 2.
Incarcerated Youths' Rating of Outside-Facility Programming

Discussion and Conclusions

Based on youth perceptions of what programs and activities they thought would help them succeed, there are several areas where Extension professionals can provide essential programming. Job training was rated highly by youth as an inside- or outside-facility program. Although Extension professionals offer classes in resume writing, interviewing skills, time management, etc., that could be very beneficial, many of these youth may even need more basic life skills preparation. For example, how to communicate with adults, how to dress for an interview, how to be on time, etc., might be areas in which Extension professionals could provide training.

Computer skills also were rated by youth as a programming area that would help them succeed. Many Extension systems are now providing technology training for both youth and adults. Present results suggest there is a need to extend this training to youth in or recently released from incarceration.

More generally, one of the most highly rated programming options for outside of the facility was having a safe place to go when needed. This finding suggests that youth need additional positive options outside of their family. Extension programs, which provide interactions with prosocial adults and peers, could be a safe place needed by recently released youth and could also help support youth on probation and parole to avoid further criminal activity.

Thus, programming with incarcerated youth, as well as community reentry programs and parole supervision, should focus more on the importance of the experiential component of the program cycle, which is the foundation and strength of Extension's youth development programs.

Although offering programs to incarcerated or recently released youth has a unique set of challenges, it is evident that there is tremendous opportunity to have Extension professionals increase their educational efforts with this audience. Youth in this study reported that they thought several programs might be helpful to them. The highly positive ratings of several options by the majority of youth in this study reflect their desire to participate in constructive programs.

In many juvenile justice systems, very few inside-facility or reentry programs are offered to youth. Not preparing these youth to succeed is an invitation to having them repeat the mistakes of their pasts. Extension professionals' expertise in program development, delivery, and evaluation can be a great asset to this often-over-looked "at risk" youth audience.

Even though all Extension offices may not be equipped to provide programming for this particular audience, Extension professionals may be able to offer collaborative support for juvenile justice system programs (e.g., helping juvenile justice staff understand youth development concepts, researching and locating appropriate curricula for their staff, or providing parent education and support to families). In addition, Extension professionals' experience with program development and evaluation models may strengthen existing or future programs targeting these youth. This support may provide the impetus to enhance youth programming with this audience.

Youth who are incarcerated have a greater likelihood to become incarcerated adults. Communities have a responsibility to try and help youth not travel this path. Thus, programming that will help them succeed is critically needed and, as these results reveal, even desired by youth themselves. Extension systems, with their vast array of resources and professional staff, have a great opportunity to help curb this trend and help this high-risk audience reach their fullest potential.

Note: Address correspondence to: Eric Killian, University of Nevada Cooperative Extension, 2345 Red Rock Street, Las Vegas NV 89146. For permission to use the Youth Detention Inventory (YDI) and instructions on how to do so, contact Eric Killian or Randy Brown at the above address.

References

Kazdin, A.E. (1992). Child and adolescent dysfunction and paths toward maladjustment: Targets for intervention. Clinical Psychology Review, 12(8) pp. 795-817.

Josi, D.A., & Sechrest, D.K. (1999). A pragmatic approach to parole aftercare: Evaluation of a community reintegration program for high-risk youthful offenders. Justice Quarterly, 16(1) pp. 50-80.

Snyder, N., & Sickmund, M. (1999). Juvenile Offenders and Victims: 1999 National Report. Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Washington DC.

Junior Pork Day--A Family Experience

Clinton P. Rusk
Assistant Professor
4-H Youth Department
Internet Address: cr@four-h.purdue.edu

Tracie Egger
Assistant to the Director of Academic Programs
Office of Academic Programs
Internet Address: tegger@purdue.edu

Krisanna Machtmes
Program Evaluator
4-H Youth Department
Internet Address: kmachtme@purdue.edu

Brian T. Richert
Associate Professor
Animal Sciences Department
Internet Address: brichert@purdue.edu

Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana

Introduction

Junior Pork Day is a special 1-day workshop held annually at Purdue University to provide youth and their parents with current information and hands-on learning to spark their interest in the swine industry. This fun-filled educational event encourages youth to further their education and helps them apply the information they learn to their individual swine projects. Junior Pork Day is targeted toward a joint learning experience between new 4-H swine members and their parents.

However, in addition, this event provides a significant recruiting opportunity for the Department of Animal Sciences by giving participants exposure to the Purdue campus and its faculty and staff. Because of the continued success of the program, the industry (e.g., Armour Swift-Eckrich, Inc. and several of Indiana's purebred swine associations) has enthusiastically sponsored the event to help defray the costs and allow more youth an opportunity to participate.

Program Description

During this educational workshop, youth are divided into three age groups (novice 1st year swine members, juniors in 3rd through 8th grade, and seniors in the 9th grade and above), which allows them to learn at different levels. Adults are grouped together with first-year 4-H members to create a family learning environment.

In the afternoon, senior members participate in learning opportunities planned specifically for them. In 2001, the seniors competed in a swine skill-a-thon that rotated them individually through a series of stations that tested their skills in the areas of genetic evaluation, parts identification, and general knowledge of the swine industry.

Each age group is given an opportunity to sharpen their swine selection and evaluation skills during the swine judging contest. Experts help participants learn to evaluate differences in the amount of muscle and fat, and structural correctness of pigs at various stages of development. Participants evaluate a variety of pigs and are encouraged to select those animals that will be the most profitable for their 4-H swine projects.

The second half of the evaluation training focuses on pork quality. Extension meat specialists help participants differentiate the components of pork quality in three main pork cuts and learn about consumer preferences. This continuum from the live animal to the retail case reinforces the concept that 4-H market hogs eventually become part of the food chain, so it's imperative for 4-H members to understand their role in raising a healthy and nutritious product.

2001 Workshop

The goals for the 2001 Junior Pork Day included:

• Providing an opportunity for beginning swine project members to gain needed assistance in selecting a project pig,
• Teaching participants how to compete in swine showmanship,
• Instructing attendees on the selection of high-quality cuts of pork, and
• Teaching first-year swine members what it takes to properly care for and feed a 4-H pig.

In 2001, Junior Pork Day focused on the breeding aspect of the swine industry. Special emphasis was placed on teaching the latest techniques of semen collection, artificial insemination, and embryology. Youth and adults also learned about the product side of the swine industry, as instructors taught them how to select high quality bacon, pork chops and hams. Knowing how to properly identify and select quality pork cuts will help all of the participants become more informed consumers.

After lunch, participants received hands-on training in swine showmanship, pork quality assurance, and swine-related health issues. Being good showmen not only enables 4-H members to compete with a sense of mastery, but it also makes exhibiting hogs more fun. Learning about health issues includes helping young producers understand what is meant by biosecurity and disease prevention. It is critical that 4-H members know how to recognize illnesses in their pigs and what to do and/or whom to call if their animals get sick.

Each year, the organizers of Junior Pork Day strive to cover current issues that may affect swine project members and their parents. In 2001, researchers presented the pros and cons of including the feed additive Paylean' in swine diets. Paylean' is a beta agonist approved in July 2000 for use in the finishing rations of market hogs. Junior Pork Day participants were given updates on the latest research findings and advised on the proper usage for optimum results.

Results

At the conclusion of the program, attendees were surveyed to see if program planners had been successful in meeting their goals and so feedback could be collected and analyzed in order to make changes or improvements for future programs. Survey instruments, developed for juniors, seniors, and adults, revealed the following results:

• 128 youth participated in the 2001 Junior Pork Day.
• 96% of these youth were 4-H members.
• 61% of the youth were males and 39% were females.

A cross-tabulation analysis demonstrated that youth attending Junior Pork Day for the first time benefited the most from the program. The following results indicate the responses from these first time attendees:

• 77.3% indicated the showmanship session helped them learn how to show swine.
• 66.7% indicated Junior Pork Day helped them realize that proper care and feeding would help them raise a champion pig.
• 64.3% were now confident to select their own pig for a 4-H project.
• 63.2% learned how to select good cuts of pork during the carcass session.

The 70 adults attending the 2001 Junior Pork Day were pleased with the quality of the sessions and the amount of information their children had an opportunity to learn during the program. One hundred percent of the adults that responded indicated that Junior Pork Day had been helpful to their youth and that they personally benefited from attending the program, as well. Following are some of their anecdotal responses.

• "My kids loved it. The showmanship and nutrition classes were very helpful, and the kids were very interested in the embryo development class because it was a hands-on experience."
• "They learned a lot about everything, especially about picking out their own pigs."
• "Our students learned that there is a lot more to raising hogs than cleaning pens and washing animals."

Adventure Programming Is an Interactive Way to Improve Leadership Skills for Junior Fair Board Members

Christopher D. Penrose
Extension Agent, Agriculture & Natural Resources and 4-H Youth Development
Internet Address: penrose1@postoffice.ag.ohio-state.edu

Pamela M. Montgomery
Extension Agent, Family & Consumer Sciences and 4-H Youth Development
Internet Address: pmontgomery@postoffice.ag.ohio-state.edu

Ohio State University Extension
Morgan County, Ohio

Introduction

Developing ways to improve leadership roles and group dynamics for youth can be a challenge. The Morgan County Junior Fair Board plans and runs Junior Fair activities, so understanding their role and working together are critical. Members (age 14-19) need to learn or improve their skills in the areas of:

• Communication,
• Working in close proximity,
• Problem solving,
• Teamwork, and
• Leadership.

This article presents an evaluation of how Adventure Programming initiatives helped youth improve their leadership skills.

Background

Adventure Programming is based on the concept of experiential learning. Experiential learning is defined as a process of learning in which individuals actively participate in the learning process (Association of Experiential Education, 1995). One type of experiential learning is Adventure Programming, which is "teaching the basics of communication, cooperation and trust in a milieu of FUN" (Rohnke & Butler, 1995).

This is accomplished by putting a group in an unusual situation in which they work together to solve a unique problem. This gives them a feeling of accomplishment. Then followed the facilitator works with the group to process the experience and to generalize and transfer the lessons learned to future endeavors. This is the foundation to the Adventure Programming initiatives used throughout the year for the Junior Fair Board.

Methods

Initiatives were selected based on their appropriate sequence and identified group goals. Sequencing was the key to the initiatives, allowing time for trust and rapport to develop between the members and adult advisors. Without an appropriate sequence to the initiatives, the facilitator might present an activity that is not suited for the group, leading to a diminished feeling of trust, feelings of insecurity, lack of learning, and/or inability to transfer knowledge to future endeavors (Rohnke, 1989; Rohnke & Butler, 1995).

Sequencing is the skill of matching initiatives to the group and determining the best time to offer an initiative. Karl Rohnke (1989) outlines the basic sequencing steps:

• Ice Breaker/Acquaintance,
• De-inhibitizer,
• Beginning Trust and Spotting, and
• Team Building/Problem Solving.

Ice Breaker/Acquaintance initiatives are designed to give group members the opportunity to get to know each other and become comfortable with physical contact. De-inhibitzer initiatives allow participants to take some risks and to do something unusual or appear inept in front of others. Beginning Trust and Spotting initiatives provide an opportunity for group members to trust both their physical and emotional safety to others. The Team Building and Problem Solving initiatives focus on communication, decision-making, social responsibility or personal responsibility. The initiatives, whether simple or complex, provide participants the opportunity to communicate, cooperate, and compromise with one another and learn to deal with strengths and weaknesses of other individuals in the group.

There are over 600 initiatives available in the various Adventure Programming resources that describe the initiative, list props, and give details on how to conduct and process the initiative. Among the references used in planning the initiatives for Morgan County Junior Fair Board are: Funn Stuff (Volumes 1-4), Silver Bullets, and The Bottomless Bag Again by Karl Rohnke and Quicksilver by Steve Butler and Karl Rohnke.

Results

The specific initiatives presented to the Morgan County Junior Fair Board were picked to match their goals and sequenced to provide time for members to get to know one another and build skills to be an effective team of leaders at the fair. The first initiative (ice breaker) involved each participant writing their name and one word (in cursive with their non-dominant hand) to describe how they felt writing in that manner. This made each participant feel awkward, providing a teachable moment, after which the facilitator related the experience to how new members would feel at the fair or other board meetings.

The communication initiative had one member look at a printed object and gave instruction on how to draw that object for another member who had not seen it.

The leadership development initiative required the group to stand close together on a small tarp and turn it over without stepping off.

In each case, the facilitator would use the uniqueness of the situation to relate the experience to situations that the group could face as fair board members.

Table 1 lists some of the initiatives in the order presented. Members were given a questionnaire at the end of the year on skill development from adventure programming initiatives. The table provides the results from the initiatives. The post-test was based on a Likert-type scale with 1 = no help to 5 = helped a lot.

Table 1.
Adventure Programming Initiatives

Adventure Programming initiatives provided some level of help in developing skills. Problem solving and leadership development scored the highest. Working in close physical proximity to others scored the lowest.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Skills were taught and youth were empowered to make decisions with adult advisor input and support. The youth took charge of the Junior Fair, which proved to be very successful. More initiatives will be provided with the next Junior Fair Board, and evaluations will continue.

The process an individual goes through following a well-sequenced set of initiatives can build a sense of self worth, greater understanding for others, and improved ability to work in a group. For educators working with committees or groups, youth or adults, Adventure Programming initiatives can build leadership, communication, problem-solving, and others skills in a fun way.

References

Association of Experiential Education (1995). The AEE Horizon, 15(1) p. 21.

Rohnke, K. (1989). Cowtails and cobras II. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hall Publishing Co.

Rohnke, K., & Butler, S. (1995). Quicksilver. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.

Secure Seat^SM: A Safe and Systematic Approach to Teaching Riding

Elizabeth A. Greene
Extension Equine Specialist
University of Vermont
Burlington, Vermont
Internet Address: egreene@zoo.uvm.edu

Jana Z. Dawson
President
The American Association for Horsemanship Safety, Inc.
Fentress, Texas
Internet Address: Jzdawson@aol.com

Introduction

Secure Seat^SM is a way to teach or learn a soft, balanced seat that is effective and comfortable for the horse and rider; it is not a seat in itself or a way to ride. A major aspect that Secure Seat^SM teaches the rider is to move with the horse. Many of the problems that riders encounter are a result of their improper position, bad habits, or interference with the horse's natural movement. Extension educators in 4-H and other program areas who are involved with rider training should investigate this teaching system.

Secure Seat^SM provides a way to teach a number of steps in a certain order, often eliminating many of the learning plateaus that beginner rider's experience. The skills are taught by means of some familiar exercises that improve strength and flexibility, and help to avoid the stiff rider, whose very stiffness puts him or her at risk. By learning to move with the horse, to maintain a low center of gravity, and to be flexible over a stable lower leg, the rider allows the horse to have a more comfortable gait. This particular method teaches riders to evaluate their own body position or alignment and to make corrections as needed.

Methods

All of the Secure Seat^SM skills are taught through a series of exercises. When the student can do the exercises, he or she has learned the skill. Further, when the position ceases to feel right, the student can go back to the original skills to regain the correct position without an instructor's guidance.

The skills that accompany the exercises are as follows (using "Joe" Rider as a universal rider).

Skill One: Achieving Correct Alignment

The ear, shoulder, point of hip, and back of heel must be in a line perpendicular to the horizon (Figure 1). To accomplish this, Joe is asked to stand up and balance in his stirrups without depending on either hands or legs for gripping (Figure 2). If he must move his legs to balance, then they are in the wrong place, and Joe must move his legs from the hip (i.e., not just lower leg adjustment) until he is able to stand and sit effortlessly in any gait (Figures 3a and 3b).

Figure 1.
Proper Alignment

Figure 2.
Finding the Correct Position

Figures 3a and 3b.
Student Listening to Instructor While Practicing "Checking His Position" by Standing in His Stirrups at the Walk

Skill Two: Lowering the Center of Gravity

Joe needs to become aware of where his body weight (i.e., center of gravity) is, because a lower center of gravity will provide a sturdier base. While Joe is standing in his stirrups, he can alternately rise up on his toes and sink down in the heels (without moving the lower legs away from the horse). He can also pinch with his knees, thighs, or the back of his calves to experience how "bracing" can raise his center of gravity (Figure 4) and to note where his weight is located at any time.

Figure 4.
Learning to Find the Center of Gravity

Skill Three: Unlocking the Lower Back

This skill will teach Joe to move side to side with the horse's natural motion, and later, to sit to the trot. After Joe checks his position (Skill One), he can imagine pedaling backwards while seated on a bicycle. This is the motion the horse's back makes at a walk (Figure 5), and Joe can move with the horse by alternately dropping his weight (from the hip) into each heel with the horse's movement. By learning to release stiffness in the spine and to move with the horse at an early stage in riding, Joe will eliminate many bracing problems later on.

Figure 5.
Moving with the Horse at the Walk

Skill Four: Moving the Upper Body Around and Over a Correctly Placed Leg

These exercises are used to teach Joe to use his seat and legs as an anchor (without bracing or gripping) as he moves his upper body. To teach this skill, familiar "stretching" exercises are used, with the emphasis focused on maintaining a stationary leg. Once Joe has checked his alignment, he must maintain the leg position while touching the horse's ears or tail, or his own toes on both sides with each hand (Figure 6).

Figure 6.
Properly Performed Stretching Exercises

During the toe-touching exercise, the rider must bring his nose to his knee. If he leans out "beside" the horse or steps into the stirrup on that side, he will pull the horse out of balance and possibly fall off (Figure 7). Joe should shift his weight to the opposite seat bone before leaning over (i.e., to the right seat bone prior to leaning left). Recognize that most inexperienced, overweight, and/or geriatric riders may be unable to touch their own toes while mounted, but their flexibility and stability in the saddle will improve with practice.

Figure 7.
Common Mistakes That Occur During Exercises

Skill Five: Moving with the Horse at a Trot

Joe will begin with the posting trot (western riders, too) by rising up and then gently sitting back down with each full trotting stride. The cadence will coincide with the movement of the front legs, so that "left, right" will correspond to "up, down." Once Joe can post successfully, he can move to the 2-point position (similar to light seat or jumping position). Joe will simply stand up in his stirrups (without leaning forward or hanging on to the front of the saddle) and allow the horse's trotting motion to shift Joe's weight from side to side (Figure 8). The weight shift is caused by the movement of the horse's hind leg, and Joe's weight shifts to the right just before the right hind hoof leaves the ground (or as the right hind toe breaks over).

Figure 8.
Moving with the Horse's Trotting Motion While in a Standing Position

Once Joe can stand and shift his weight with the horse in motion without falling forward or backward, he is ready to sit at a trot. In order to sit to the trot, Joe uses the lateral motion of the horse at the 2-point position, then simply bends his knees and sits, keeping the side-to-side motion going. If he has difficulty, it will be due to one of three causes:

1. Joe has not brought his shoulders back over the seat bones when he sits and is leaning slightly forward (Skill One),
2. Joe has stiffened his lower back in preparation for (or fear of) of the trot (Skill Three), or
3. Joe is pinching with his knees or thighs (Skill Two).

At the beginning, it will probably look sloppy, and it may take several tries before he is able to keep the motion going at the sitting trot.

Skill Six: Gaining Balance over a Stable Lower Leg

This skill is accomplished by performing the "7-7-7 exercise" at the trot (Dawson, 1997). The "7-7-7 exercise" consists of seven strides of each of the following positions repeated continuously: rising, 2-point, and sitting trot. When Joe accomplishes this skill, he will be able to recognize proper positioning and alignment, all unnecessary upper body movement will be gone, and the horse will move freely and comfortably under him.

Results and Discussion

Learning the skills is relatively easy if the instructions are followed exactly, because each consecutive skill builds on the previous one. The first skill, finding and keeping correct body alignment, relates easily to the well-known "ear-shoulder-hip-heel" rule. The Secure Seat^SM exercise allows Joe to check his own alignment by simply standing up in the stirrups. If Joe's legs are too far forward, he will have to compensate by leaning forward or grabbing the mane, and if his legs are too far back, Joe will fall forward on the neck.

As Joe moves his lower leg to a more correct position, standing up will become easier. In addition, he will have a more secure seat if the weight is allowed to sink into the seat and heels. Gripping with the knee or thigh will cause Joe to rise slightly and decrease the stability of the seat. If Joe is aware of the center of gravity and knows how to lower his weight in the saddle, he will have a deeper seat. Once that seat is established, Joe can learn to use a backward bicycle motion at the walk, a side-to-side motion at the trot, and a reverse wheel motion with the hip (left hip with left lead) at the lope or canter.

The various stretching-type exercises in Skill Four help Joe become flexible and in control of his upper body and, therefore, more able to recover body position when an unexpected spook occurs. Joe, who is learning to shift from side to side in a 2-point or light-seat position in time with the horse's movement, will at first exaggerate the movement until it can be accomplished consistently.

The sixth and final skill requires stabilizing the leg position and gaining balance over the leg. Riders who can alternate between these positions consistently and maintain the correct alignment and a stable lower leg will have achieved a more stable, safe and comfortable ride for themselves and their horses.

Summary

One of the major concepts that Secure Seat^SM teaches is to avoid interfering with the natural movement of the horse. By learning to move with the horse, maintaining a low center of gravity, and being flexible over a stable lower leg, the rider allows the horse to have more natural and comfortable movement. A comfortable horse will be naturally happier and therefore safer for both the horse and its rider.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Frances Greene, Dr. Ken Duft, and Dr. John McNamara for their critical review of the manuscript.

References

Dawson, J.Z. 1997. Teaching safe horsemanship: A guide to English and Western instruction. Pownal, VT: Storey Communications, Inc.

A Web-Based Cotton Harvesting Cost Calculator

Jeannie Nelson
Former Research Assistant
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics
Internet Address: Jeannie.Nelson@ttu.edu

Sukant Misra
Associate Dean for Research, College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources
Internet Address: Sukant.Misra@ttu.edu

Amar Devegowda
Former Research Assistant
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics
Internet Address: amarbd@usa.net

Texas Tech University
Lubbock, Texas

Jeanne Reeves
Associate Director of Agricultural Research
Cotton, Inc.

Introduction

Extension staff who work with cotton producers know that a combination of recent economic and farm conditions has resulted in reduced profits. Cotton producers have been subject to volatile cotton prices, changes in government support programs, increasing input costs, and unfavorable farming conditions. Because producers have no control or influence on any of these economic or farm conditions, it has become increasingly important for them to manage their costs more efficiently. Cotton producers have expressed concern regarding the costs associated with the harvesting process. The multiple alternative harvesting options that are currently available to producers make it difficult for them to determine the harvesting equipment configuration that would result in minimized harvesting costs given their individualized production scenario.

This article describes a program designed to help producers determine the least-cost stripper or picker harvesting systems given their individualized production scenario. The Web-based software, Cotton Harvesting Cost Calculator (CHCC), can be used to estimate harvesting costs under a variety of operating conditions. CHCC provides default values, including purchase costs of equipment, maintenance costs, operating costs, performance rate, etc., for each component of the harvesting system.

These values can be used as estimates in the calculation of harvesting costs. CHCC is designed to utilize user-supplied data to calculate harvesting costs by allowing each of the default values to be changed. This allows the calculated harvesting costs to be specific to the user's individualized production scenario. It is a valuable tool Extension staff can use as they work with cotton producers to help them improve their bottom line.

Software Overview

The CHCC can be used in two ways. First, the user can determine the harvesting cost of a specific stripper or picker harvesting system. The CHCC allows the user to choose from three types of strippers (four-row, six-row, and eight-row) and pickers (two-row, four-row, and six-row). The three types of cotton strippers can be chosen with or without bur-extractors. Additional equipment may also be used in combination with the stripper and picker harvesting machines, such as a boll buggy and module builder. The user can specify the number of each type of equipment so that the configuration exactly conforms to his production scenario.

The second application of the CHCC allows the user to compare costs associated with up to three alternative stripper or picker harvesting systems. The harvesting system with the lowest cost, given the specified production scenario, is determined and presented to the user along with the costs of other harvesting systems.

Cost Calculations

The CHCC computes the fixed, variable, total, and average costs associated with the harvesting equipment system(s) that is specified by the user. The fixed costs include equipment costs, which are amortized over the life of the machine, and taxes, housing, and insurance. The variable costs calculated by the CHCC include maintenance, fuel, and labor costs. The cost calculation procedure used in the CHCC is similar to that described by Nelson, Misra, and Brashears (2000).

CHCC Output

The average harvesting cost is presented in three units: cost per lint pound (cents), cost per acre (dollars), and cost per bale (dollars). The results also identify the number of days that would be required for the chosen harvesting system to harvest the acreage specified by the user.

When the user attempts to determine and compare the harvesting costs of multiple harvesting systems, the user must enter what he thinks to be an optimal number of days that would be required to harvest his acreage, given his unique scenario. This number of days that the user considers to be optimal acts as a time constraint when the least-cost alternative is identified by CHCC. When comparing multiple stripper or picker harvesting systems, the output consists of a list of each of the three stripper or picker harvesting systems, corresponding cost per lint pound, cost per acre, cost per bale, and the number of days required for each system to harvest the specified acreage.

The least-cost harvesting alternative is identified based on both the actual harvesting costs and the time constraint. Therefore, the CHCC first identifies the harvesting alternatives that meet the time constraint. From these choices, the alternative harvesting system with the lowest cost is identified as the optimal harvesting system, given the production scenario. In this case, one alternative will be highlighted as the least-cost alternative.

However, another alternative may have a slightly lower cost, but may require a few more harvest days than the time constraint. If the number of days required to harvest a given acreage is not constrained by time, the user may consider choosing the next best alternative. Once an optimal harvesting system and associated harvesting cost has been identified, the user can make a comparison between the owner's harvesting cost and the local harvesting charges.

Conclusion

The CHCC is a Web-based calculator designed to provide cotton producers with a user-friendly means to estimate the harvesting cost associated with a specific harvesting equipment configuration. As economic and farm conditions continue to negatively affect cotton producers, Extension staff can expect questions regarding minimizing costs, specifically harvesting costs, to increase in frequency.

Many producers may question the feasibility of a harvesting system that is currently owned, while others may attempt to identify a future harvesting equipment purchase that might minimize their harvesting costs. For example, many producers have questioned whether an eight-row or two four-row strippers is more efficient. This question, along with many others, can be quickly answered using the CHCC.

The CHCC is available on the Internet at http://www.aeco.ttu.edu/cer-institute/cottonharvesting/default.htm. Anyone with access to the Internet can easily use this software.

Acknowledgment

The authors acknowledge the comments of Phil Johnson and Alan Brashears on this report and the funding provided by Cotton Incorporated. College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources Publication Number T-1-549.

References

Nelson, J.M., Misra, S.K., & Brashears, A. (2001). Cost comparison of alternative stripper and picker cotton harvesting systems. Texas Tech University, College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources Publication Number T-1-532 (CER-00-13).

Copyright © by Extension Journal, Inc. ISSN 1077-5315. Articles appearing in the Journal become the property of the Journal. Single copies of articles may be reproduced in electronic or print form for use in educational or training activities. Inclusion of articles in other publications, electronic sources, or systematic large-scale distribution may be done only with prior electronic or written permission of the Journal Editorial Office, joe-ed@joe.org.