Community supported agriculture (CSA) is an alternative model of farming in which consumers become “members” of a farm, by contract, to receive a share of the harvest. Case study interviews were used to ascertain CSA grower perspectives, as indicated by sources of information and motivations. Like most organic growers, but unlike most conventional growers, few CSA growers have family background in agriculture. Common sources of information and strong informal communication were observed among CSA growers. Primary information sources include other growers, printed material, and conferences. Conventional sources of information used in agriculture, i.e., the cooperative extension system and formal agricultural education, appear to be underutilized and are ranked lowest in importance by CSA growers. CSA growers are motivated in their agricultural endeavors by multiple goals: marketing, education, community, and environment. Marketing was the most frequently cited primary goal, followed by education of consumers. For many CSA growers, the marketing motive is not solely monetary, but also philosophical, as a vehicle for achieving right livelihood and building an associative economy that redefines society's relationships to food and land.
Eva C. Worden
William B. Miller, Neil S. Mattson, Xiaorong Xie, Danghui Xu, Christopher J. Currey, Kasey L. Clemens, Roberto G. Lopez, Michael Olrich, and Erik S. Runkle
-applied ethephon. The effect of liming on ethylene release suggests a possible experimental approach whereby rate of ethylene generation may be modified by substrate pH. Despite the potential benefits of ethephon drenches in terms of regulation of stem extension
Juan Carlos Díaz-Pérez and Erick Smith
In this article, we make a short review of cooling techniques for high tunnels in tropical regions and share the experience of training bell pepper growers and extension personnel from the Dominican Republic regions of San José de Ocoa and Constanza
Shufu Dong, Lailiang Cheng, and L.H. Fuchigami
New roots of Malus domestica Borkh MM106 apple rootstock were divided into two categories, 1) feeder roots and 2) extension roots based on morphology and their ability to take up NH4 +, were studied. The roots were harvested in August from 1-year-old potted plants growing under natural conditions in Corvallis, Ore. Extension roots were thicker and longer than feeder roots. Average diameter and length were 0.89 and 45.29 mm for extension roots and 0.27 and 5.36 mm for feeder roots. Root special length (cm/g FW) and surface area (cm2/g FW) were 11.94 and 33.17 for extension roots and 108.97 and 93.38 for feeder roots. Maximum uptake rate, Imax, Km, and root absorption power, α (α = Imax•1/Km), for NH4 + absorption were 6.875, 0.721, and 9.48 for extension roots and 4.32, 0.276, and 15.63 for feeder roots. Feeder roots had stronger affinity to NH4 + (low Km) and higher NH4 + absorption power (high α value) than extension roots. The feeder roots were better able to uptake NH4 + at lower external solution concentrations than extension roots according to the nutrient depletion curve, which indicates feeder roots being more efficient than extension roots in nutrient absorption when NH4 + availability was low.
Matt E. Berman and Theodore M. DeJong
The primary period of shoot extension growth on field-grown peach trees occurs in the evening. Field measurements indicate a 2-3 fold increase in growth rate occurs in the late afternoon and lasts for about 2 hours. The daily growth pattern is correlated with trends in temperature, water potential and carbohydrate concentrations. Early morning and late night growth rates are apparently limited by low temperatures. Heating shoot tips at these times causes extension rate to increase greatly above that of controls at ambient temperature. The afternoon surge in extension growth rate is correlated with recovering stem water potentials. Artificially increasing stem water potential at mid-day by reducing transpiration causes extension rates to dramatically increase 2-3 fold. Starch is accumulated in the shoot extension zone during the day and depleted during the evening surge in growth.
172 WORKSHOP 28 Multimedia Computer Applications for Horticulture Teaching and Extension
W.J. Lamont Jr.
On-farm extension demonstrations are one of the best participatory research and educational resources available to extension specialists and county extension staff for presentation of new technology to agricultural producers. On-farm extension demonstration programs for intensive vegetable production, of which drip irrigation is a major component, can range from a complete package [3/4-ton truck, a trailer for transporting equipment, a tractor in the 36 to 42 HP range (i.e., Ford 3910) a plastic-laying machine, a bed press pan, hillers, and drip/overhead irrigation systems] with a price tag of about $40,000 used in a multistate, statewide, or multicounty program, to a small demonstration package using a household well source with a cost of about $250. The demonstration package used will depend on the scope of the program, local conditions, and economic realities.
John M. Gerber and John Masiunas
The Cooperative Extension Service (CES) is undergoing a period of self-evaluation (Gerber, 1985) and change (USDA Extension Service, 1988). As part of on-going discussions on the future of the CES at the Univ. of Illinois, a survey of the academic staff in the Dept. of Horticulture was conducted. The survey quantified the reaction of horticultural academic staff to recommendations taken from a federal study on the future of extension (USDA Economic Committee on Organization and Policy, 1987) and statements solicited from the Dept. of Horticulture Extension Committee. Recipients of the survey were asked to state their level of agreement or disagreement with the statements on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = no opinion, 4 = agree, and 5 = strongly agree).
John G. Richardson, James Stephenson, Gwyn Riddick, Allen Caldwell, and Maurice McAlister
To provide educational opportunities for small and part-time farmers, a project was implemented using selected extension delivery methods. Individual methods or combinations of these were used to meet farmer informational needs. A comparison was made between person-to-person and self-directed (or nonperson-to-person) methods to see which means of receiving extension information farmers preferred. Findings indicated that person-to-person methods were not as useful as the self-directed methods.
Commercial Horticulture Working Group, Extension Division, ASHS Compiled by Glenn `Cat' Taylor Department of Horticulture, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater