2nd National Extension Nat Res Conference-Abstract 18

Peter Smallidge and Marianne Krasny, Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY; James Finley, School of Forestry and Natural Resources, Penn State University, University Park, PA; and Thomas Monaghan, Department of Forestry, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS

A primary objective of many university natural resource programs has been to increase the awareness of and capacity for county-level natural resource extension programs. We will profile the strategies of 3 university programs that have sought to build this awareness and capacity. These 3 states share forest-dominated landscapes and a history of successful extension programs with commodity agriculture.

In New York, county program advisory boards identify local educational needs and allocate resources to accomplish extension goals. There are no natural resource area specialists and state specialists work directly with county agents to deliver programs. Natural resource stakeholder involvement on county advisory boards varies by county. Campus based approaches have focused on reducing barriers to county agent participation in natural resource programming. These approaches have included competitive grants for county programs, intensive training on specific topics, and integrating collaborative "on-farm" research. Agent inservice training sessions emphasize the importance of networking with local natural resource professionals.

In Pennsylvania there are 3 forestry extension area specialists who work with state specialists in delivering programs. County educational program needs are identified through campus-county liaisons with significant university input into program priorities. Area specialists work with county agents in developing and delivering local programs. The School of Forest Resources at Penn State University has developed and refined NREI, the Natural Resource Extension Institute. NREI provides a multi-day inservice training focused on a specific topic and is delivered without expense to county agents. NREI has focused on rural, urban, and youth issues, and has spawned similar efforts in other states.

The Department of Forestry at Mississippi State University has used a strategy involving a multifaceted approach: (1) area specialists who work with county agents and state specialists to deliver county-level short courses for forest landowners; (2) working with the Mississippi Forestry Association (MFA) to organize local County Forestry Associations (CFAs); (3) inservice agent training programs that focused on program planning instead of technical forestry; (4) standardized evaluation instruments to provide county agents with program impact data; and (5) extramural grants to improve publicity and promotion and enhance the quality of county programs. The results are an increased county agent demand for forestry programs, a close working relationship between the MFA and the MSU Extension Service, and unprecedented support for extension forestry by university administration and state political leaders.

Primary differences among states include: availability of area specialists, county versus campus determination of programming needs, prominence of county stakeholder groups, and the role of county extension with these groups. Our presentation will focus on how these strategies can be used to meet programming needs.