attitudes toward soil and water conservation needs and potential climate change scenarios by farmers...

Attitudes toward Soil and Water Conservation, Climate Change and Information Sources by Farmers

in Dryland areas of the Inland Pacific Northwest

R. L. Mahler, J. D. Wulfhorst and S. D. Eigenbrode

University of IdahoMoscow, ID

Sponsors

• USDA-NIFA-406 Regional Water Quality

- 2000-2004- 2005-2010

• USDA-NIFA-406 CEAP• USDA-NIFA-REACCH

www.reacchpna.org

Methodology

• Statistically designed surveys were developed and administered to growers within the region

• The Dillman mail-based survey methodology was used.

• Over 5,000 farmers have been surveyed since 2002

Methodology (continued)

• Five different surveys were conducted in this 12-year time period

• Four step mail-based survey:- Step 1: letter, survey, return envelope- Step 2: reminder postcard- Step 3: more urgent letter, survey- Step 4: reminder postcard

Methodology (continued)

• Survey methodology was designed to achieve a grower response rate of at least 40%.

• Grower response rate exceeded 50% in two the the five surveys.

• Sampling error was less than 6%.

Reported Findings

1. Sources of Farmer Information2. Internet Use3. Use of New Technologies4. Views toward Climate Change5. Soil Conservation6. Water Conservation

1. Sources of farmer information

• Growers were asked about the trustworthyness of sources for farming information

Trustworthyness of farming information sources

Information source TrustProducers in same county 84.8%Company crop advisors 81.3%University Extension 73.0%Independent crop advisors 67.7%Local SWCDs 64.3%NRCS-state level 49.8%

2. Internet Use

• Growers were asked what they use the internet for and how frequently they use it

Use of Internet by Growers

Task Use, %Visiting web sites 88.1E-mail use 81.9Managing finances 56.4Sharing photos 49.6Downloading budgets/ag software

31.3

Watching movies/videos 19.3

Frequency of Internet Use

Frequency %Everyday 63.6Once or twice a week 16.9Few times a month 4.8Few times a year 3.3Never 7.9

App Use (smart phone or tablet)

App use %Yes, I use 25.4Yes, I have – but don’t use for farming

12.0

No 54.1I don’t know 4.1

3. Use of New Technologies

• Growers were asked of they use some of the newer farming technologies including:

- Guidance systems- Auto-steer systems- Section controllers- Variable rate systems

Adaptation of New Technologies

Technology Adoption rate, %Guidance systems 46.8Auto-steer systems 36.6Section controllers 25.5Variable rate systems

20.4

Impact of Age on TechnologyTech 20 to 40

years41 to 60

years>60

yearsP-value

Guidance 63.3 52.6 30.0 0.0001

Auto-steer

51.0 40.4 20.0 0.0023

Section controls

34.7 28.4 11.2 0.0260

Variable rate

22.5 25.3 10.2 0.0074

Impact of Years FarmingTechnology Years farming

contrastP-value

Guidance systems

16 to 30 vs. 46 to 60 0.0001

Variable rate systems

16 to 30 vs. 46 to 60 0.0074

4. Climate Change Views

• Grower views were compared to the urban public in the Pacific Northwest.

• The importance and merit of the climate change issue was surveyed.

• Grower sources on climate changes were evaluated on their trustworthyness.

Importance of Climate Change - URBAN

Importance 2011 2014% %

Important, must address 52 62Important, address if economical 15 13Don’t know 20 14Not important, don’t address 10 10

Importance of Climate Change - 2014

Importance URBAN FARMER% %

Important, must address 62 23Important, address if economical 13 29Don’t know 14 31Not important, don’t address 30 17

Merit of climate change - URBAN

How compelling?

2011 2014

% %Overwhelming 15 20Good 32 51Don’t know 14 10Science in disarray

29 13

Not compelling 10 6

Merit of climate change - 2014

How compelling?

URBAN FARMER

% %Overwhelming 20 9Good 51 24Don’t know 10 42Science in disarray

13 10

Not compelling 6 15

Trustworthyness of climate change information sources

Information source TrustUniversity Extension 47.8%Local SWCDs 42.7%Company crop advisors 41.6%Producers in same county 38.8%Independent crop advisors 37.2%NRCS-state level 35.3%

5. Soil Conservation

• Growers were asked about:- the importance of soil

conservation- their engagement in soil

conservation

Soil Conservation - Importance

Importance Percent of growersExtremely important 32.4Important 30.1Somewhat important

13.2

Less important 12.1Not important 12.2

Soil Conservation - Engagement

Engagement level Growers, %Highly engaged 42.8Moderately engaged 29.1Somewhat engaged 12.6Low engagement 7.1No engagement 8.4

6. Water Conservation

• Growers were asked about:- the importance of water

conservation- their engagement in water

conservation

Water Conservation - Importance

Importance Percent of growersExtremely important 16.6Important 24.5Somewhat important

34.2

Less important 16.6Not important 8.1

Water Conservation - Engagement

Engagement level Growers, %Highly engaged 17.4Moderately engaged 24.1Somewhat engaged 20.2Low engagement 18.0No engagement 20.3

Conclusions1. Growers consider local producers and local company crop advisors to have the best farming information.

LOCAL BESTSTATEWIDE WORST

2. Growers are internet literate; 63% use everyday; 80%+ visit web sites and use e-mail.

Conclusions3. A majority of growers use the internet to manage their finances.

4. Growers are adapting new farming technologies in the region; younger growers are much more likely to use these innovative techniques.

Conclusions5. The urban PNW public wants climate change addressed. Conversely, farmers are more cynical about climate change science.

6. Farmers trust University Extension more than other sources for climate change information.

Conclusions7. Over ¾ of farmers consider soil conservation important. In fact over 71% of growers are moderately or highly engaged in the use of soil conservation practices.

8. Farmers also consider water conservation important – but not as important as soil conservation. Over 41% of farmers are highly or moderately engaged in the use of water conservation practices.