February 2005
Volume 43 Number 1

Ideas at Work

Social Marketing: Meeting the Outreach Challenges of Today

JoAnne Skelly
Extension Educator, Carson City / Storey County
University of Nevada Cooperative Extension
Carson City, Nevada
skellyj@unce.unr.edu

Introduction

Extension faces challenges and competition in changing economic times (Varea-Hammond, 2004). Why do some programs fall short of reaching desired goals? Often, the target audience's needs are not met, or the method used to disseminate information is poorly chosen.

Social marketing is a powerful tool that can improve an individual's, a group's, or a society's welfare. Often, the goal of Extension programming is to change behavior or to have new ideas adopted and used by the target audience. Social marketing uses traditional marketing strategies to create social change by maximizing audience response. "Social marketing is the application of commercial marketing technologies to the analysis, planning, execution, and evaluation of programs designed to influence the voluntary behavior of target audiences in order to improve their personal welfare and that of their society" (Andreasen, 1995).

The focus is on the target audience or society. While social marketing may use commercial marketing techniques, it differs from the commercial sector because the primary objective is to influence social behavior rather than to profit the marketing organization (Weinrich, 1999).

Tools in the Social Marketing Toolbox

There are six simple tools to define, design, and deliver the right market fit.

Know the Market

Effective social marketing begins with identifying and specifying the target market and their needs as precisely as possible. Whose behavior is to be influenced? What social change should occur? Research the audience's needs and the best methods to meet those identified needs. Tailor the program delivery approach to meet their needs.

Identify the WIIFM

Answer "What's in it for me" for the target audience. Social marketing builds consumer-centered programs (Weinrich, 1999). This goes beyond promoting the benefits of a program. There may be risks, and a potential client may have good reasons not to change. Identify why adopting the desired behavior is more valuable than maintaining an undesired behavior.

Ask, Ask, Ask, and Then Listen

Begin with a behavioral objective in mind. Find out why the audience is doing what they are doing. What is their current knowledge level? What are the audience's beliefs and attitudes related to the advocated behavior change? Ask the audience what they want, and listen to determine relevant needs (Brinckerhoff, 2003). Target the needs specifically.

Consider the Five P's

• Product--What kind of product must be offered to make the behavioral change attractive to the consumer/target market (Andreasen, 1995)? To succeed in social marketing, either develop a new product, or improve an existing product (Kotler & Roberto, 1989).

• Price--What is the price in time, energy, and money for the participants? What do they have to give up to adopt the new behavior? What do they see as the costs for their behavioral change, and is it worth it to them? Minimize the perceived costs, and reduce the barriers to changing. Maximize the potential benefits. From the program delivery perspective, where will the funding come from to research what behavior change is necessary and to implement and evaluate the program?

• Place--How can Extension reach the audience? Is there a new place to deliver the marketing message? Can a new location generate more enthusiasm in or be more accessible to audiences? How might distribution processes work more effectively for Extension consumers? Make products and services readily available to the target audience to effectively accomplish behavioral change. If a program in a classroom setting is poorly attended, train a trainer to deliver the program in a different venue; for example: train a beautician to present nutrition information to her clients. Reach them where they are.

• Promotion--What is the best technique to get the message out to the targeted audience? How can customer/media communications be more clear and compelling? Are there new ways to communicate with clientele and market the message of Extension? Can changes be made to capture the attention of clients and media? Promotional tools include advertising, public relations, media advocacy, personal selling, special events, and rewards for achieving the desired change. Find out the most effective way to reach the consumer. For example, Hispanic-American television households watch more television on average each week than total U.S. television households (Nielsen, 2004). Television promotion could be a good promotional tool for this market.

• People/Partnerships--How can Extension increase motivation and enthusiasm in internal audiences: staff, volunteers, the organization, and the community? How can Extension increase motivation and enthusiasm in external audiences: policy makers, media, partners, or donors?

Cross the Line

Be creative. Think outside the box, and be imaginative in marketing efforts. Be relative and meaningful to the audience. Be original, and state the message in a new way (Weinrich, 1999). For example, if a county government wants to change the watering practices of its resident to conserve water, it might work with wholesale nurseries to give away native drought-tolerant plants at water-efficient landscape workshops. This encourages participation at the workshops. Then, each participant could receive further plants when they have implemented the recommended water-conservation practices.

Create a "Bump in the Envelope"

An envelope that arrives in the mail with a "bump" in it, grabs the attention of the receiver. In social marketing, getting the target market's attention may be more than just a give-away. It can be memorable slogan, a catchy advertisement, or billboard. A successful slogan for a sheep-grazing fuels management project in Nevada was "Only Ewes Can Prevent Wildfire."

Conclusion

In today's non-profit market, most projects require a scientifically developed needs assessment, a monitoring process throughout the project, and a formal evaluation upon conclusion. All are factors in a successful social marketing effort. Social marketing has a systematic structure that includes pretesting of the strategy (Andreasen, 1995). Extension often involves people in educational opportunities as part of a social change campaign. This work can be effectively achieved through social marketing, which allows for improved audience identification, better product development, and targeted marketing for each outreach effort. This framework for changing behavior holds great promise for extending Extension's outreach on old and new issues.

References

Andreasen, A. (1995). Marketing social change--Changing behavior to promote health, social development, and the environment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Brinckerhoff, P. C. (2003). Mission-based marketing--Positioning your not-for-profit in an increasingly competitive world. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Kotler, P., & Roberto, E. L. (1989). Social marketing--Strategies for changing public behavior. New York, NY: The Free Press.

Nielsen Media Research. (2004). http://www.nielsenmedia.com/ethnicmeasure/hispanic-american/weekly_HH_viewing.html

Varea-Hammond, S. (2004). Guidebook for marketing Cooperative Extension. Journal of Extension [On-line]. 42(2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2004april/tt5.shtml

Weinrich, N. K. (1999). Hand-on social marketing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Incorporating Parental Goals in Parenting Programs Through Collaborative Relationships with Parents

Glenn E. Fox, Jr.
Associate Professor of Psychology
Department of Psychology
Tidewater Community College
Chesapeake, Virginia
gefox@tcc.edu

Introduction

Parent education has been identified as an important national priority (Kagan, 1995). However, parent educators commonly say that programming does not reach the audience it most needs to reach (DeBord, Roseboro, & Wicker, 1998). DeBord and colleagues (2001) show that a collaborative approach increases the reach of a program.

Research suggests that effective parent education involves assisting parents to meet their goals (DeBord & Matta, n.d.; Martinez & Velazquez, 2000). Collaborative discussion of those goals helps parenting, because parent goals influence parenting behavior (Fox, 1999; LeVine & LeVine, 1988; Kohn, 1979). This article details evidence of the influence of goals on parenting practices and provides suggestions for incorporating parent goals into parenting programs.

Parenting Goals and Practices: What We Know

Over several years, Robert and Sarah LeVine (1988) watched the Gusii of Kenya change their parenting goals and change their practices to match their new goals. The Gusii, traditionally agrarian, changed their goals from wanting children to farm to wanting children to get jobs in the growing cities. They realized that the best chance for their children to be successful would be found in the cities. As a result, Gusii parents began sending their children to formal schooling for longer periods of time and more often. This change was difficult; parents relinquished traditional control over their children and had less labor for their own livelihood. The Gusii's changes in the face of problems illustrate the power of parenting goals.

In the United States, Melvin Kohn (1979) demonstrated that class influenced parenting goals. He found that parents in middle class families valued independence, while parents in working-class families valued conformity and obedience. Similarly, Luster and colleagues (1989) found that working-class parents used more physical punishment, restrained children's actions more often, and put greater emphasis on enforcing rules as a means of guiding children than did other parents.

Further research has replicated and extended this work. Parents from south-central Virginia who endorsed more authoritarian goals for their children engaged in more authoritarian practices (Fox, 1999). Examples of these practices include physical punishments and not allowing children to question decisions (Fox, 1999). Parents who endorsed goals of independence used parenting practices that encouraged independence. Examples of these practices include respecting the child's opinion and allowing the child to make decisions for themselves (Fox, 1999).

Suggestions for Practice

There are a number of ways in which collaboration can be used to include parental goals. The following describes some common issues and three possible ways to make parenting programs more collaborative.

Common Issues

Clear, jargon-free, speech helps parents to understand and to feel included (Smith, 2001). As well, careful listening and asking about cultural differences also communicate acceptance and interest (Ferguson & Towsend-Butterworth, 1996; Martinez & Velazquez; 2001). Another common issue is that all collaborative approaches must recognize that parents have unique knowledge about their child (Ferguson & Towsend-Butterworth, 1996).

Soliciting Goals

The facilitator asks parents to elaborate their goals; she may also assist with clarification. She then can demonstrate how a program can help parents meet those goals. One goal may be success in school. The parent educator could then indicate the benefits for school performance of an authoritative style (e.g., Steinberg, Lamborn, Darling, Mounts, & Dornbusch, 1994). Gordon and Miller (2003) found such an opportunity to contribute substantially improved parental satisfaction in creating Individualized Educational Plans (IEPs); similar outcomes should occur in a parenting program.

Modifying Programs

A more involved collaboration involves modifying a parenting program to better fit goals. Such collaboration is particularly important when implementing pre-packaged programs such as STEP (Dinkmeyer & McKay, 1989) or the Nurturing Program (Bavolek & Comstock, 1991). Independence from parents is valued in both programs but is not valued in many cultures, such as Chinese-American (Fuligni, Yip, & Tseng, 2002; Stevenson, Chen, & Lee, 1992) and Italian-American (Rubin, 1994). Acknowledging family goals instead of individual would be more culturally congruent and improve outcomes. Similarly, Snell-Johns, Mendez,  and Smith (2004) report on an effective collaborative family therapy model. Parents chose their own goals and used workbooks and telephone conversations with family therapists for assistance in meeting those goals.

Another example of modifying a program is the creation of an IEP. Parents, teachers, and other professionals collaborate to create a plan for the child's education (Smith, 2001). Parents share their expectations of the child and indicate how they can help achieve those expectations (Smith, 2001). Such a process represents a modification because most of the outcome is still determined by experts.

Co-Creating Programs

A third degree of collaboration involves inviting parents to co-create the program. In this example, parents and educator work together from the beginning to construct an experience that is tailored to the needs generated by parental goals. Such a program may begin with, "How can I, as educator, help you meet your goals?" While the educator remains a source of knowledge, that knowledge emerges in service of parental goals, helping parents to both be more effective and exercise greater control.

An example of this approach is Comer's School Development Program, in which parents are involved not only in the program's daily work, but also in governance (Ferguson & Towsend-Butterworth, 1996). Parents thus decide on major issues of the program, rather than having a pre-defined role (Ferguson & Towsend-Butterworth, 1996). This level of collaboration, however, may have limited applicability. A group of parents who are overwhelmed by the tasks of parenting may feel less able to be so involved.

Conclusion

Parents actively construct their children's environments (Bronfenbrenner, 1990). Collaboration can help parents become true partners in parent education and harness that active processing to improve program outcomes. Such work validates family diversity and focuses attention on the primary goal: improving children's lives.

References

Bavolek, S. J., & Comstock, C. (1991). Nurturing program for parents and children 4 to 12 years: Parent handbook (2nd Ed.). Park City, UT: Family Development Resources.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1990). Discovering what families do. In D. Blankenhorn, S. Bayme, & J. B. Elshtain (Eds.), Rebuilding the nest (pp. 27-38). Milwaukee: Family Service America.

DeBord, K., Bowers, D. Goddard, W., Kobbe, A. M., Kirby, J., Mulroy, M., Myers-Walls, J., & Ozretich, R. (2001). Preparing parenting educators: The complexities, the competencies, and the challenges. Rochester, NY: National Council on Family Relations. Cited in DeBord, K., & Matta, M. A. (2002). Designing professional development systems for parenting educators. Journal of Extension [On-line], 40(2). Available at: http://joe.org/joe/2002april/a2.html

DeBord, K, Roseboro, J. D., & Wicker, K. M. (1998). Creative approaches to parenting education. Journal of Extension [On-line], 36(5). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1998october/a1.html

DeBord, K., & Matta, M. A. (n.d.). The challenges of parenting education professional development: The North Carolina parenting education community survey. Retrieved October 25, 2002 from http://www.ncpen.org/challenges.html

Dinkmeyer, D., & McKay, G. D. (1989). STEP: Systematic training for effective parenting (3rd Ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Institute.

Ferguson, S. & Townsend-Butterworth, D. (Compilers) (1996, April). A new understanding of parent involvement. Proceedings of the Family-Work-School Conference, New York, New York. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED405446. Retrieved September 5, 2004, from the ERIC database.

Fox, G. E., Jr. (1999). Parent goals and practices: To what extent do parental goals for socialization relate to their practices? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia.

Fuligni, A. J., Yip, T., & Tseng, V. (2002). The impact of family obligation on the daily activities and psychological well-being of Chinese American adolescents, Child Development, 73, 302-314.

Gordon, S. M. & Miller, H. L. (2003, April 21). Parents as active team members: where does accountability for a child's special education rest? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED480124.) Retrieved September 5, 2004, from the ERIC database.

Kagan, S. L. (1995). The changing face of parenting education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED382406). Retrieved September 5, 2004, from the ERIC database.

Kohn, M. L. (1979). Class and conformity: A study in values (2nd Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago.

LeVine, R. A., & LeVine, S. E. (1988). Parental strategies among the Gusii of Kenya. In W. Damon (Series Ed.), R. A. LeVine, P. M. Miller, & M. M. West (Volume Eds.). New directions in child development Vol. 40. Parental behavior in diverse societies (pp. 27-35). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Luster, T., Rhoades, K., & Haas, B. (1989). The relation between parental values and parental behavior: A test of the Kohn hypothesis. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 139-147.

Martinez, Y. G., & Velazquez, J.A. (2000). Involving migrant families in education. ERIC Digest. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EDO-RC-00-4) Retrieved September 5, 2004, from the ERIC database.

Rubin, L. B. (1994). Families on the fault line: America's working class speaks about the family, the economy, race, and ethnicity. New York: Harper Collins.

Steinberg, L., Lamborn, S. D., Darling, N., Mounts, N. S., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1994). Over-time changes in adjustment and competence among adolescents from Authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 65, 754-770.

Smith, S. W. (2001). Involving parents in the IEP Process. ERIC Digest E-611. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EDO-EC-01-6.) Retrieved September 5, 2004, from the ERIC database.

Snell-Johns J., Mendez, J. L., & Smith, B. H. (2004). Evidence-based solutions for overcoming access barriers, decreasing attrition, and promoting change with underserved families. Journal of Family Psychology, 18, 19-35.

Stevenson, H. W., Chen, C., & Lee, S. (1992). Chinese families. In I. Sigel (Series Ed.), D.B. Carter & J. Roopnarine (Vol. Eds.), Advances in applied developmental psychology: vol. 5. Parent-child socialization in diverse cultures (pp. 17-33). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

The 4-H Summer Cultural Arts Day Camp: Bringing The World to "My World"

Jeanne Brandt
Extension Family and Community Development Faculty
Beaverton, Oregon
jeanne.brandt@oregonstate.edu

Mary E. Arnold
4-H Youth Development Specialist
Corvallis, Oregon
mary.arnold@oregonstate.edu

Oregon State University

Ah, summertime, and the living is . . . tough . . . at least for youth in isolated communities and neighborhoods of western Washington County, Oregon. Families in this area have few affordable, accessible, and appropriate activities available for their children in the summer. In addition, the area has a significant Latino population and a higher than average number of immigrant families. Many families have limited resources, and there are few public transportation options available.

My World, a 4-H Summer Cultural Arts day camp was developed in an effort to address the summertime needs of youth and families and to provide educational programming to increase intercultural understanding. In doing so, the camp provides a safe and engaging place for youth to spend their free summer time and also contributes to the development of cultural competence in youth. Helping youth use time constructively and developing cultural competence are two key development assets identified for positive youth development identified by the Search Institute (Benson, 1997).

My World is a cooperative effort led by the Extension 4-H staff and numerous supporters and cooperators that enables Washington County children to participate in worthwhile summer programming at minimal or no-cost. Participation in the camp reflects the economic and ethnic demographics of the area. Over the past 5 summers, hundreds of youth have participated. In 2003, there were 5 separate summer camp settings with an enrollment of around 135 children.

Staffing and Funding

Bi-cultural/bi-lingual staff are hired through Oregon State University's PROMISE program (a minority student summer internship) and the Mexican Consulate. This allows the camp to control staffing costs and to locate staff with multi-cultural experiences and languages. A program director is hired each summer and is responsible for overseeing the actual day-to-day management of the camp as well as supervising the high-school aged staff assistants. The director also works with Extension staff to determine curriculum for each of the camp themes.

Program financial support comes from many sources, reaching a total of nearly $65,000 for the last 3 years. Supporters include the Oregon 4-H Foundation, Washington County 4-H Leaders Association, The Juan Young Trust, INTEL Corporation, The Spirit Mountain Community Fund, OSU Extension Administration (PROMISE salaries), and The Portland Trailblazers Community Builders Youth Corp. The grant writing process by Extension staff begins early in the year, and the number of camp settings depends on the total amount of grants received.

In addition to financial contributions, cooperation and in-kind assistance are extensive. All spaces used are free of charge. Family Resources Centers, school districts, Boys and Girls Clubs, and parks districts supply additional staff when camps are located at their facilities.

Program Plan and Method

Half-day camp sessions are held at multiple sites for 2 weeks. The educational goals of the camp are to:

• Provide a positive, supervised, learning environment for elementary school youth during summer vacation.

• Provide children living in communities with limited resources with the opportunity to experience fun, educational activities for a nominal cost or free of charge.

• Provide children of bi-lingual, bi-cultural families with the opportunity to participate in activities with staff and supervisors able to communicate and assist them.

• Teach community children about traditional 4-H projects, a variety of cultures, technology, and the natural environment through experiential, hands-on activities, crafts, foods, and active games.  

Sessions take place at local elementary schools or youth service centers, allowing local children without available transportation to attend. School counselors and program staff help recruit the children who would benefit most from involvement. The camp program director also goes to churches, apartments, and community centers where parents of children in the appropriate age range are located so that she can introduce herself, share information about the camps verbally, and answer any questions parents might have.

Establishing contact and a relationship with families in this way has greatly enhanced participation at the camps by children whose parents have limited English language skills. This is especially important when working with Latino families (Hobbs, 2001).

The camp activities are designed to inform participants about different cultures from around the world. Children are taught that each culture has unique aspects that can be shared and appreciated by all. Arts, crafts, games, dances, traditions, and foods are included. Each activity is introduced with background information regarding the history and application in its native country or ethnic group. American culture is included as well. Each day has a focus, sometimes a continent or country, or a theme common to multiple cultures. Activities include:

• Creating Japanese Carp Kites, Gyotaku (fish prints), African rainsticks, and Huichol Indian yarn art pictures.

• Learning Ballet Folkloric and Native American dances.

• Making fry bread and piúatas.

• Participating in an American Independence Day parade, watermelon seed spitting contests, and sack races.

• Learning to do sand art (rangoli, mandalas),and mask carving.

• Exploring the "culture" of technology, including learning to use laptop computers and peripherals (microscopes, printers, disk drives).

Program Evaluation

In 2003, an end of program evaluation was conducted to assess how well the camp participants met the learning objectives for the camp. Because of the age of the campers, and in some cases the language differences, the evaluation was conducted through an embedded assessment of a camp activity in which the campers were asked to draw a picture and write a sentence or two about what they learned at camp. Two program sites participated in the evaluation, 28 3rd and 4th graders at the first site and 18 2nd to 5th graders at the other site. The artwork was collected and given to an independent evaluator to assess how well the campers' art and statements matched the learning objectives. It is clear from the analysis of the pictures that participants met the learning objectives for the camp.

Specifically, the evaluations revealed that the children learned a great deal about the customs of other cultures through the craft activities in which they participated (N= 26; 57%) (Figure 1). In many cases participants explicitly stated the connection between the craft they made and the custom it represented. For example, one participant reported that: "On Wednesday we made worry dolls. What they say in Guatemala is that before bed you tell the worry doll your worries and in the morning your worries are gone"

Participants also reported learning about other cultures through technology, such as microscopes digital cameras, and computer programs (N= 16; 33%); 29 of the participants (60%) prepared their evaluations on the computer with a program called "Kid Pix" (Figure 1).

Finally, 14 (29%) reported learning about the different foods from different countries they made and ate (Figure 1). "For every day we study 2 new countries and we eat what the people from the country eats. We ate Sushi and Rice Crackers! It was so fun!"

Figure 1.
Percent of Youth Sharing the Ways They Learned About Other Cultures

Summary

Through the My World camp program, hundreds of children have spent their summer time learning about other cultures in a safe, supervised summer setting. In recognition of its impact, the My World summer day camp program received the NAE4-HA National Diversity Programming Award in 2002.

References

Benson, P. L. (1997). All kids are our kids: What communities must do to raise caring and responsible children and adolescents. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hobbs, B. B. (2001). Diversifying the volunteer base: Latinos and volunteerism. Journal of Extension, 39(4) [On-Line]. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2001august/a1.html

Using a Welcome Wagon Approach to Reach Out to Woodland Owners in Appalachian Ohio

David Apsley
Assistant Professor/Natural Resources Specialist
Ohio State University Extension, South Centers
Piketon, Ohio
apsley.1@osu.edu

Scott Bagley
Sustainable Forestry Program Coordinator
Rural Action
Glouster, Ohio
scott@ruralaction.org

David Samples
Associate Professor/Agriculture and Natural Resources Agent
Ohio State University Extension, Jackson County
Jackson, Ohio
samples.1@osu.edu

Introduction

Ohio's 29 Appalachian counties account for one third of the state's land base and 4.8 million acres or 64% of the state's forestland (Griffith, 1992). Nearly 80% of these acres are owned by an estimated 150,000 private individuals (Birch, 1994), and the number of private woodland owners is increasing due to parcelization (Best & Wayburn, 2001).

There are numerous resources available to assist landowners in making informed management decisions. However, only about 5% of forest landowners in northern states have forest management plans (Birch, 1994). Frequently this management shortfall results in haphazard timber harvests that often leads to a reduction in future forest productivity.

In an attempt to address these issues, Ohio State University Extension and Rural Action Sustainable Forestry initiated a joint effort with the objective of providing new woodland owners in Appalachian Ohio with the contacts and information needed to help them make informed decisions about the management of their forest resources.

A Three-County Pilot

Athens, Jackson, and Washington Counties in southeastern Ohio were chosen as pilot counties to represent the Appalachian region. These counties are on average 61% forested. The following process was used to identify new landowners for this outreach effort:

• Acquired land transfer information from county auditor records.

• Mailed contact information of agencies and organizations to consult for assistance.

• Provided management resources packets to interested landowners.

• Tracked responses through a database for follow-up with non-respondents.

Acquiring Landowner Information

To increase the likelihood of contacting landowners with forestland, only transactions with more than 10 acres that occurred in 2002 were recorded. Information that was collected from conveyance forms included: landowner contact information, property location and acreage, and transfer date.

A total of 545 land transactions representing 22,545 total acres (an estimated13,752 forest acres) were recorded (Table 1).

The Mailings

The initial mailing (late summer in Athens and Jackson Counties, early fall in Washington County) targeted conveyances in the first half of 2002. This mailing included a welcome and an invitation to pick up a resource packet at the County Extension Office. The second mailing (spring 2003) included more descriptive information about the effort, a contact sheet listing local assistance providers, and the invitation. This was sent to those who completed transactions in the second half of 2002 and non-respondents from the first mailing.

Forest Management Resource Packets

Resources packets included letters from the Welcome Wagon Committee and local Extension agent, and a variety of publications and materials selected to assist the landowner with management of their forest resources (Table 2).

Pilot Results

Thirty of the 545 landowners who were mailed invitations requested or picked up the packet. Response rates ranged from 2.8% to 8.9%, with an overall response rate of 5.5% (Table 3). Although this was less than our 10% response target, we did transfer more usable information in the second mailing, and the project drew additional requests from non-targeted woodland owners.

Where Do We Go from Here?

Additional funding was received from the Ohio Environmental Education Fund to expand the Woodland Owner Welcome Wagon project to include a total of 14 counties in 2005. Based on the results of this pilot project, the following modifications will be implemented in an effort to improve the potential success of this expanded project:

• Frequently use a multi-media approach to reach new and tenured landowners,

• Include contact information for local assistance providers with all mailings,

• Encourage other organizations and agencies to collaborate,

• Send at least three mailings within the first two years of ownership,

• Secure additional incentives to encourage participation,

• Develop a Web page as an additional method of information dissemination,

• Offer targeted educational programming in Welcome Wagon counties, and

• Use a follow-up survey to evaluate the process.

Acknowledgements

The Forest Welcome Wagon idea originated from discussions at the Southeast Ohio Forest Congress, organized and hosted by Rural Action in December of 2000. The authors would like to thank: Brian McCarthy, Marilyn Ortt, Dave Schatz, Jim Murray, Teresa Dennis, John Withers, Colin Donohue, and Chip Carroll for their ideas and enthusiasm; Rory Lewandowski, Teresa Stone, and Tracy Waite for their work in gathering landowner information and distributing packets; and county auditors and staff for their assistance data collection.

References

Best, C., & Wayburn, L.A. (2001). America's private forests, status and stewardship. Island Press. Washington, D.C. 268 pp.

Birch, T. W. (1996). Private forest-land owners of the United States, 1994. USDA Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Resource Bulletin, NE-136. 293 pp.

Griffith, D. M., DiGiovanni, D. W., Witzel, T.L, & Wharton, E. H. (1992). Forest statistics for Ohio, 1991. USDA Forest Service Northeastern Forest Experiment Station. Resource Bulletin, NE-128. 169 pp.

Water-Wise Plant Recognition Program

Rick Heflebower
Extension Horticulture Agent
Utah State University Extension in Washington County
St. George, Utah
rickh@ext.usu.edu

Teresa Cerny-Koenig
Extension Ornamental Horticulture Specialist and Assistant Professor
Utah State University
Logan, Utah
teresac@ext.usu.edu

Molly Waters
Water Conservation Coordinator
Utah Division of Water Resources
Salt Lake City, Utah
mollywaters@utah.gov

Ruby Ward
Extension Agribusiness Specialist and Assistant Professor
Utah State University
Logan, Utah
rward@econ.usu.edu

Introduction

Landscapes containing low water use plants are promising alternatives to conventional turfgrass-based landscapes and have the potential to significantly reduce overall landscape water use. Public interest in low water use plants is increasing, but most consumers have limited knowledge of which plant species require less water and where they can be purchased. Many nurseries and garden centers throughout Utah already carry low water requiring plants, but the public must be able to more easily recognize these plants in order to increase their use in Utah's landscape. The program described here encouraged the use of water-conserving plants in Utah's landscapes by developing a labeling and marketing program to enable the public to recognize some of the highest quality, low water use plant species.

Water Wise Plant Tagging Program Methodology

The water-wise marketing program was initiated by Utah State University Extension and the Utah Division of Water Resources and is a cooperative effort among:

• Utah State University Extension,

• Utah State University Center for Water-Efficient Landscaping,

• Utah Division of Water Resources,

• Utah Botanical Center,

• Red Butte Gardens,

• Utah Nursery and Landscape Association,

• Utah Native Plant Society, and

• Various water agencies and water conservation coordinators.

The committee, which included representatives from each of the previously mentioned organizations, began meeting in the fall of 2002 to select water-wise plants for recommendation in Utah landscapes. Originally, the committee was organized from individuals interested in native plants and was part of the Utah Nursery and Landscape Association. The recommended plant list contained 36 trees, 45 shrubs, 90 herbaceous perennials, 18 ornamental grasses, 15 ground covers, and four vines that met the following criteria:

1. Drought-tolerant,

2. Adapted to Utah's arid climate and cold winters,

3. Available in the industry,

4. Relatively easy to maintain in the landscape, and

5. Containing desirable landscape characteristics that remain desirable under limited water availability.

The committee defined a "drought-tolerant" plant as one that requires irrigation not more than once every 2 weeks under typical conditions and full establishment. A bright yellow tag with the words "water-wise plant" outlined by the state of Utah was used to identify the plants in this program and to attract the attention of consumers. A Web site <http://www.waterwiseplants.utah.gov/> was developed by the Utah Division of Water Resources with input from the committee. The Web site contains specific plant installation and maintenance information and an explanation of the plant tagging program. A listing of the organizations involved in creating the plant lists and the participating garden centers is also included.

Letters describing the program and tag request forms were sent to nurseries and garden centers throughout the state in January of 2003 by the Utah Nursery and Landscape Association. The program was also introduced and tag request forms made available at the state's green industry conference in January of 2003.

The request form asked interested businesses to fill out a questionnaire estimating the type, (hang tags for trees and shrubs or stakes for perennials, ground covers, vines, and ornamental grasses), and number of tags they would need for the upcoming season. The forms were to be returned to the Utah Division of Water Resources by the end of February of 2003. Each participant was also given a 3' x 2' sign that had the words "Proud Participant of the Water-Wise Plant Tag Program," a picture of the tags, and the Web site address.

Program Evaluation

A total of 50 nurseries and garden centers from throughout the state participated in the program, and over 150,000 hang tags and 250,000 stakes were ordered for the program.

Surveys were distributed to cooperating businesses in November of 2003 to assess the effectiveness of the program. Table 1 shows the results of that assessment on a scale of 1-5 (1 being poor and 5 very well).

Ninety-three percent of the cooperating businesses indicated that customer interest in drought-tolerant plants had greatly increased in recent years. The survey also showed that 87% of those participating used the water-wise plant tagging program in their employee training, and 73% used the signs that were provided in their information packets. Additionally, 27% mentioned the tagging program in their advertisements and educational seminars.

Nitrate QuikTest for Rapid Detection of High Nitrate Levels in Forages

S. Dennis Cash
Forage Crop Specialist, Associate Professor
dcash@montana.edu

Julie Hager
Nitrate QuikTest Project Coordinator
jhager@montana.edu

Linda Keddington
Associate Educator
lkeddington@montana.edu

Ron Carlstrom
Gallatin County Extension Agricultural Agent
acxrc@montana.edu

Montana State University
Bozeman, Montana

Introduction

Annual cereal forage crops (wheat, barley, oat, triticale, and others) are grown for hay on several hundred thousand acres. When cereals are grown under stressful conditions such as drought, these crops can accumulate levels of nitrate that are toxic to livestock (Cash, Funston, King, Wichman, 2002). High forage nitrate levels can cause many chronic symptoms, and in extreme cases result in abortion and death. The Montana State University Extension Service (MSU-ES) "Nitrate QuikTest" Program was initiated in 2000 to respond to the widespread problem of nitrate toxicity in hay crops produced under drought conditions. The Nitrate QuikTest was implemented to:

1. Provide formal and standardized training for our agricultural agents,

2. Maintain this useful service for livestock producers, and

3. Increase awareness about potential nitrate problems in this expanding roughage source.

Educational Approach

Training and Certification

A qualitative nitrate "spot" test (Helwig & Setchell, 1960) has been used by MSU-ES county agents since the 1960's, but was discontinued in 1999 due to liability concerns. The Nitrate QuikTest Program was initiated in 2000, and it requires formal training and annual certification similar to that for pesticide applicator licensing. The training materials consist of ES bulletins (Cash et al., 2002; Undersander et al., 2000) and research papers about nitrate toxicity, MSDS information, testing laboratories, and the Nitrate QuikTest protocols. The written examinations consist of multiple choice questions, which can be answered using all the reference materials.

In 2002, all training materials and certification/re-certification examinations were posted online <http://www.animalrangeextension.montana.edu/ ExtnAgents/Articles/Forage/Nitrate/index.htm> with continued opportunities for traditional training available.

Nitrate Testing

Due to the frequent incidence of nitrate accumulation, a rapid field test is needed to diagnose high nitrate levels prior to haying dryland cereals. The Nitrate QuikTest solution consists of 0.5 g diphenylamine dissolved in 20 ml distilled water, with the volume brought to 100 ml with 98% sulfuric acid (Anonymous, 1998). The Nitrate QuikTest kits contain the test solution, razor blades, eyedropper, safety goggles, rubber gloves, test protocol, training manuals, and the material data safety sheets (MSDS) for sulfuric acid and diphenylamine. There is a one-time fee of $20 for the test kit and training materials and replacement solution is prepared as needed and provided free of charge.

Outputs and Impact

The Nitrate QuikTest Program was implemented at an opportune time. Due to extreme droughty conditions throughout Montana since 1999, many cereal crops were harvested as emergency forage with a high incidence of elevated nitrate levels. Since 2000, we have certified 110 people in 50 counties (89% of all Montana counties, including two in Wyoming) to use the Nitrate QuikTest (Table 1). Twenty-three administrative assistants, 12 crop consultants, and 18 individual producers have been certified. Certification of crop consultants and producers has been very effective in many of our rural counties where grain producers reside over 25 miles from their county seat.

Certified users of the Nitrate QuikTest have quickly adopted the online training and certification process; in 2003, 98% of certification or re-certification examinations were completed online. The Internet site was originally intended to complement traditional in-service agent training; however, the online version has quickly evolved as the predominant educational tool for both agents and producers. Conventional hands-on training is still available for inexperienced new users, but rapid acceptance of the Intranet site has saved time, travel, and resources.

The Nitrate QuikTest has had an immediate and direct impact in Montana counties where annual cereal forages are harvested. Through 2002, Nitrate QuikTests were conducted on 6,615 forage samples, and 68% of the samples were toxic or questionable, requiring a delay in harvest and a laboratory nitrate test prior to feeding (Table 2).

The MSU-ES Nitrate QuikTest is a very successful outreach program, helping producers avoid costly livestock deaths or abortions due to forage nitrate toxicity. The economic impact of the nitrate problem in Montana cereal forages since 2000 has been estimated at between $13 million (replacement value of toxic high-nitrate hay) to $39 million (potential calf abortion losses) annually. The Nitrate QuikTest is a free service to livestock producers, and this program has reached many new Extension clients in the hay, feed, and animal care industries.

Additionally, Extension agents have an opportunity each year to discuss forage quality testing and general livestock nutrition issues with their clients. They also gain experience in field testing and participate in and measure the impacts of a relevant program and do so at little additional cost. We believe that the Nitrate QuikTest Program is a useful model for implementing timely, economical, and high-impact Extension programs.

References

Anonymous. 1998. Quick test for nitrate accumulation in fresh plant material. Retrieved April 2004, from http://www.noble.org/press%5Frelease/poisonforage/nitratetest.htm

Cash, S. D., Funston, R., King, M. & Wichman, D.M. (2002). Nitrate toxicity of Montana forages. Retrieved April 2004, from http://www.montana.edu/wwwpb/pubs/mt200205.pdf

Helwig, D. M, & Setchell, B. P. (1960). Observations on the diagnosis of nitrate poisoning in sheep. Australian Veterinary Journal 36:14.

Undersander, D., Combs, D., Howard, T., Shaver, R., Siemans, M., & Thomas, D. (1999). Nitrate poisoning in cattle, sheep and goats. Retrieved April 2004, from http://www.uwex.edu/ces/forage/pubs/nitrate.htm

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.

If you have difficulties viewing or printing this page, please contact JOE Technical Support.