| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
National Poultry Extension Workshop |
Plant and Animal Systems Unit, Cooperative State Research, Education, and Extension Service, USDA, Washington, DC 20250
Correspondence: 1 Corresponding author: rreynnells{at}csrees.usda.gov
 |
SUMMARY |
|---|
 TOP SUMMARY INTRODUCTIONDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
Key Words: animal welfare and behavior • multistate research committee • Support Personnel Award • meeting • portfolio evaluation
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
By forwarding information beneficial to persons in other departments or commodity areas, you help develop networks outside poultry or your discipline and thus strengthen our agricultural system. If you find information of value to others from this meeting, or from my emails, please pass it along. Our extension workshop programs are inclusive. Anyone wishing to be part of program planning and development is welcome. If you are not called, take the initiative and volunteer. We need volunteers for the 2008 organizing committee for this workshop.
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
USDA/CSREES.
Charlotte Kirk Baer joined the Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service (CSREES) Plant and Animal Systems Unit as national program leader (NPL) for animal nutrition. Charlotte most recently was a consultant, with an outstanding background and international reputation in animal nutrition. She has provided leadership for major science and technology programs in agriculture and natural resources through her work as director of the National Academies Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources and as program director for animal nutrition and health at the National Academies Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources.
Responsibilities
Responsibilities have essentially remained the same as in 2005 [1]. New and modified responsibilities will be addressed in this section.
Department Reviews.
Department reviews continue to be an important part of the job, are requested by departments through the CSREES system, and are now scheduled throughout the year. There is a wide variation in the type of review requested by departments. Some request the traditional in-depth Sunday through Friday (or longer) review, whereas others prefer a more superficial Monday through Thursday review. In any case, we attempt to work with the department to support their needs.
Multistate Research Committees.
The USDA/CSREES liaison responsibilities continue to be with several existing and new multistate research projects. With rewrite authorizations, the designation and some titles have changed: 1) NCR-1029 (formerly NCR-131; then temporary number 1981), Applied Animal Behavior and Welfare; 2) SDC-311 (formerly S-292), The Poultry Food System: A Farm to Table Model; 3) SDC-321 (formerly W-195), Environmental Issues Affecting Poultry Production; 4) NE-1022 (formerly NE-127), Poultry Production Systems: Optimization of Production and Welfare Using Physiological, Behavioral, and Physical Measurements; 5) WERA-1902 (formerly WCC-204, Animal Bioethics; temporary number 1361), Agricultural Bioethics; 6) NCERA-089, Swine Production Management to Enhance Animal Welfare; 7) W-1173, Stress Factors of Farm Animals and Their Effects on Performance; 8) NEAC-1000, Animal Science Advisory Committee; 9) NCCC-097 (formerly NCR-097), Regulation of Adipose Tissue Accertion in Meat-Producing Animals; and 10) SAC-002, Animal Sciences.
In recent news, NCR-1029 is now a full research committee! Congratulations to the team for their persistence and patience in achieving their goal that until now (initiated in 1981) has been a "mission impossible." This conversion was seen as an essential activity that will stimulate greater interest in committee membership and hopefully financial support.
The SDC-311 members met in Verona, Italy in September 2006, just before a World’s Poultry Science Association meeting. The SDC-311 committee is an exceptional committee that details their many accomplishments on their Web site at Auburn University.
The W-195 project was terminated by the western region directors. The committee is in the process of petitioning the southern region to authorize a similar multistate research committee, which currently has the designation of SDC-321. The committee is very grateful to the southern region for agreeing to accept their proposal and their commitment to the poultry system [2].
The NE-1022 members will hold their 2007 annual meeting in Annapolis, Maryland. The 2008 annual meeting will be in England, with potential cooperation with WERA-1902, NCR-1029, and related committees, and will be in association with the annual meeting of the International Society for Applied Ethology.
The importance of these meetings is reflected in our need to expand our understanding of animal welfare and behavior. There has been significant research in Europe on animal welfare issues for many years. There is currently a strong movement by the World Trade Organization, using the World Organization for Animal Health animal welfare guidelines in using animal welfare as an approved trade consideration. Documents being created are as follows: "Guidelines for the Humane Killing of Animals for Disease Control Purposes;" "Guidelines for the Land Transport of Animals;" "Guidelines for the Transport of Animals by Sea;" "Guidelines for the Slaughter of Animals for Human Consumption;" and the aquaculture series of "Introduction to OIE Guidelines for the Welfare of Aquatic Animals;" "Guidelines for the Humane Killing of Finfish for Disease Control Purposes;" "Guidelines for the Slaughter of Farmed Fish for Human Consumption;" and "Animal Welfare Definitions." These documents are proof that the animal welfare issue, rather than going away, will only increase in intensity and scope. The activities of multistate research committees are evidence of the expanding interest in animal behavior and welfare research topics in the United States.
The renewal process is underway for WERA-1902, Agricultural Bioethics. This and NCR-1029 are important committees because they provide opportunities for faculty to be involved in emerging issues and contribute scientific responses to some of the concerns that will have tremendous effect on all of food animal production. It would be beneficial to the industries and department of each state if consideration were given to participation on 1 or both of these committees.
A significant difficulty with participation in cutting-edge multistate research projects that are at the coordinating committee level (mistakenly interpreted by some as being of marginal value), and that involve new areas of science such as the integration of welfare and behavior and bioethics in research protocols, is the lack of respect provided to faculty participation during financial resource allocation or for promotion and tenure consideration. Animal bioethics and animal welfare and behavior research helps faculty and the animal systems address management and ethical questions and other issues of societal concern. If a person at a non land-grant university is interested in participating in a multistate research committee, he or she should contact the committee chair, the administrative advisor, or the USDA/CSREES liaison, as listed in the National Information Management Support System records. The National Information Management Support System was developed by the state agricultural experiment stations to facilitate the tracking, retrieval, and management of the national portfolio of multistate research projects.
Proposal Review.
As indicated previously [1], NPL review and approve Hatch Act projects submitted by all institutions participating in the multistate project before funds are released for project support.
Plans of Work, Accomplishment Reports, and Liaison Activities.
The system has changed this year. Rather than be assigned 1 or more state’s plans of work and accomplishment reports to review, and provide an opinion as to whether the USDA should accept (or request modification, or reject) the report, NPL are now assigned 1 or more states for which the NPL will function as the liaison for CSREES. This resulted in 2 extra accomplishment report evaluations for 2006. For the next several years, I am scheduled as the liaison for South Dakota (1862 and 1994 land-grant universities) and North Carolina (1862 and 1890 land-grant universities). In addition to the review and approval of the 1862, 1890, and 1994 land-grant university plans of work and accomplishment reports for research and extension, the NPL will visit the campus, learn as much as possible about the programs of these universities, and provide explanations to university personnel regarding CSREES programs and functions. The NPL will provide feedback for CSREES administrators and will attempt to assist land-grant university personnel in addressing specific questions.
Even for well-written reports, the review process is a very time-consuming activity, as it is for the state personnel who write the reports. The process can be relatively painless if the person submitting these documents follows directions. The NPL cannot approve the reports for further processing unless the reports meet the criteria provided in the directions.
It is very important that faculty provide solid information to their administrative personnel who prepare the documentation of activities and the effect (return on tax dollar investment) of these investments. There is increasing demand for accountability, and these reports are crucial in establishing the value of research and extension programs. Documenting the effect of extension and outreach efforts has been a daunting task due to the inability to use a Current Research Information System-type system as designed for research projects to summarize data for extension. Basil Eastwood is leading an attempt to help create a system in addition to the Current Research Information System to address some of these concerns.
Grant Reviews.
The NPL are panel members for various grants administered through CSREES. This year, I participated in the 1890 Land Grant University Animal Production Research Panel. I continue to administer 2 special research grants, 1 with 15-plus subcontracts. As mentioned previously, the most common problems with proposals include missing forms, incomplete or incorrect information, or information that is inconsistent with other portions of the proposal (e.g., budget numbers do not match the budget narrative). The more grievous problems include replacing quantity for quality of content, not proofreading the proposal or not even using spell check, vague references to expected outcomes or procedures to obtain data, and not following directions. Even special earmarked funds, which NPL are responsible for administering, will not be approved if the proposal is deficient. Most project directors who submit proposals follow directions, with their proposals being excellent and well-written and having only minor problems (even if they are not funded). However, others require major revisions, with the project director’s time better spent in other activities.
Meetings
National Extension Workshop.
As in previous years, on-site proceedings have been provided and are made available as a reference to others such as libraries [1]. Demand for these proceedings document the high quality of workshop presentations. It is important to recognize the contributions of committee members through their time and expertise. Committee members for the 2006 workshop were: Kevin Roberson (Michael Foods); Jacquie Jacob (MN); Curtis Novak (VA); Doug Kuney (CA); Audrey McElroy (chair, VA); Casey Ritz (GA); Chris Fritts (Tysons); Mike Davis (TX); Sally Noll (MN); Joe Hess (AL); Theresia LaVergne (LA); Susan Watkins (AR); and Ken Maciorowski (DE). Morgan Farnell (TX) and Mike Davis (TX) were co-editors of the proceedings. James Rock (CT) provided evaluation leadership as in previous years. Please contact the author if you want to work on this committee for 2008.
Future Trends in Animal Agriculture.
The background of the Future Trends in Animal Agriculture program was discussed previously [1]. The ongoing purpose of the Future Trends in Animal Agriculture program is to create opportunities for positive dialogue among industry, government, and animal activists so that common ground may be identified and important issues addressed. The hope is that industry and activist group personnel will better understand the complexity of these issues and respect the position of others rather than engage in positional bargaining. The ultimate goal is to find ways to improve animal well-being, which may also result in a balanced and comprehensive approach to dealing with related societal issues. The 2006 symposium was "Addressing International Trade Complexities of Animal Welfare" [3].
Food and Biobased Cafeteriaware Composting for Federal Facilities in Washington, DC.
The purpose of the symposium was to provide a forum for education and discussion of biobased cafeteriaware that would advance the use of these products through the development of viable markets. The intent was to also develop recommendations for appropriate composting technology and support operations options for large institutional-, metropolitan-, and regional-scale food composting. Other goals were to promote the support of biobased cafeteriaware for the Federal Biobased Products Preferred Procurement Program and to advance the adoption of compost quality and testing standards for federal procurement programs. The workshop was held on December 8, 2005, at the Henry A. Wallace Beltsville Agricultural Research Center in Beltsville, Maryland [4].
Southern Region Poultry Extension Workshop (Triennial).
Arlington, Texas, was the site of the 2005 Southern Region Poultry Extension Workshop, which now represents all extension regions. The triennial workshop chair was John Carey (TX), and Ken Anderson (NC) was the vice-chair. Nonpoultry science personnel are welcome and encouraged to participate in these meetings. This workshop will move to a 4-yr (quadrennial) schedule in 2009 [5].
National Poultry Waste Management Symposium.
The 2006 National Poultry Waste Management Symposium was held in Springdale, Arkansas, on October 23 to 25. This workshop traditionally focuses on poultry, but the principles and most, if not all, of the environmental issues apply to all animal species. The National Poultry Waste Management Symposium transition team has successfully transferred coordination responsibilities to land-grant university personnel [1]. Susan Watkins was the coordinator in 2006, with Casey Ritz (GA) coordinator for 2008 [6]. As in the past, the success of this meeting depends on having reliable volunteers to head the committees and sufficient personnel to work on the committees.
US Poultry and Egg Association International Exposition.
As in previous years [1], we hold several organizational meetings at the US Poultry and Egg Association meeting in January each year, and we greatly appreciate their continued support [7].
USDA and Other Information
Grants.
Grant procedures were discussed in previous reports [1]. Grant application forms, deadlines, and other information can be found at http://www.grants.gov or http://www.csrees.usda.gov/fundingopportunities/requestforapplications.
Portfolio Evaluation.
The CSREES portfolio reviews were discussed previously [1]. The 2005 review of the animal protection and welfare section resulted in a record score of 95. Our agency is now on a schedule of annual self-assessments until the next external review in 2010. Evaluation of programs is essential to land-grant university and USDA extension program success and continuation. It is important to identify the dollar or other quantifiable value your programs have for individual companies or farmers, or the poultry system. Keep a record of your successes and effects (similar to the "glory file" for promotion and tenure). Accomplishment reports, success stories, and other documented positive effects of your programs must be provided to decision makers who control budgets. They must also know and appreciate extension and the value of a land-grant university.
Projects
USDA Informal Animal Welfare Working Group.
For the past few years, USDA personnel from several agencies have held quarterly meetings to discuss current issues related to animal welfare or bioethics that could affect the US food animal production and processing system. We have a guest speaker from industry, academia, activist group, or government agency discuss their programs. The intent is to stimulate discussion among USDA personnel and to provide an opportunity for these personnel to network on a regular basis. If personnel are traveling or otherwise are not able to attend, a conference call option is available. I co-coordinate these meetings, which are not open to the public.
Diverse Voices in Agriculture.
In late 2004, I began a series of informal and on-demand seminars on a wide variety of current topics, with the primary intended audience being USDA personnel; however, the seminars are also open to the public. The purpose is to provide an opportunity to present ideas and issues to USDA personnel and others that they would not be exposed to through normal channels. Discussions have included the following: gas stunning of poultry, discussions of Council for Agricultural Science and Technology programs, comments from a representative of the Compassion in World Farming and one from the National Animal Interest Alliance, and a presentation on new technology for integrated Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point programs.
Animal Well-Being Assessment.
The Animal Behavior and Welfare Group at Michigan State University shares leadership with Purdue University and the University of Wisconsin for the Animal Welfare Judging Contest they developed and hold annually, which has been discussed previously [1]. Students evaluate live animals or CD-based situations of farm animal management and provide their reasoning to judges. In 2006, students from 4 universities participated. The committee now has a permanent structure that will enable them to better organize the meetings, develop judging scenarios, and move the contest to the next level.
Distribution Lists and Subscription e-mail Lists.
I continue to rely on e-mail as the primary system to get information to you, and I should be contacted if you want to be added to any distribution list. Lists include the following: animal rights and welfare, game birds, food safety, and those related to the multistate research projects. I am not authorized to provide information on agroterrorism. Contact me if you think an additional listing would be beneficial to poultry or animal science professionals.
American Poultry Historical Society.
American Poultry Historical Society programs have been discussed previously [1]. The American Poultry Historical Society continues to recognize career contributions to the poultry system through the hall of fame award and other contributions by their biennial award through the Poultry Science Association [8].
Poultry Science Association 2006 Tyson Foods Support Personnel Award.
Tyson Foods Inc. agreed to take over sponsorship of this important award, starting in 2006. We gratefully acknowledge the support of Tyson Foods for their leadership and support for this important award [9].
Karen Schwean-Lardner, University of Saskatchewan, was selected as the recipient of the 2006 Support Personnel Award for her exceptional contributions to the success of numerous poultry-related programs at the University of Saskatchewan. She supports a variety of projects for faculty and students in several diverse areas. The award will consist of a check for $500 and a commemorative plaque, inscribed with Karen’s name and the statement: "For outstanding contributions to the Department of Animal and Poultry Science at the University of Saskatchewan."
The 9 persons nominated for the 2006 award were all exceptionally qualified for the award and had a wide range of backgrounds. Fourteen persons reviewed the nomination packages, with individuals asked to recuse themselves if any potential for conflict of interest existed or could be inferred. To make the number of observations the same, the top 10 highest rank values (1 through 10) for each nominee were totaled to determine the award recipient. Nominators are highly encouraged to resubmit their packages for 2007.
|
CONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONS |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
|
REFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
|
TOPSUMMARYINTRODUCTIONDISCUSSIONCONCLUSIONS AND APPLICATIONSREFERENCES AND NOTES |
|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
