Evaluation of the impact of Lifetimewool on sheep producers

Self Cite

Abstract. Low rates of adoption of innovations in sheep management have been blamed on the poor targeting of messages, low relative advantage of the innovation, a focus on awareness-raising activities rather than adoption activities, poor 'packaging' of information and few effective tools to aid decision making. Lifetimewool, a national project that developed management guidelines for Merino ewes specific to regions and different times of lambing, used a 'review and improve' process to identify areas of interest, level of knowledge and the skills required by different sectors of the audience to adopt the new recommendations for ewe management. To match these needs and to effectively communicate information from Lifetimewool, a combination of simple and complex tools were produced which were practical, effective, regionally specific and credible. All of the products were designed as a 'family' in terms of design and content, allowing a recognition by the producer that they complemented each other and led producers through logical steps for making decisions on managing and feeding ewes. The average awareness of all tools by consultants and extensionists was almost 90% and average usage rates were above 50%. However, the usage rates varied dramatically between tools and users, for example, 46% of consultants used the feed budget tables compared with 76% of extensionists for a similar awareness. Of 1353 producers surveyed more than 55% were aware of the Lifetimewool tools and average usage within this group was 19% and related to the length of time the tool had been available. An estimated 14 000 producers were aware of tools produced by Lifetimewool. The uptake and use of these tools by the target audiences support our hypothesis that tools of differing complexities are required to cater for individual needs.

Section: Producersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Process For Developing Messages and Adoption Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Successful adoption of new guidelines for the nutritional management of ewes is dependent on the development of appropriate tools and information

Curnow¹,

Oldham²,

Behrendt³

et al. 2011

Self Cite

“…The responses to these questions were weighted to reflect the likely impact of each innovation on their livestock enterprise and the aggregate score was used to allocate each producer to a market segment according to their innovativeness (Rogers 2003). This approach determined the level of innovativeness of the participants before the training and whether the level of innovativeness of a producer influenced their degree of practice change as a result of participating in the program (Jones et al 2011). These categories of innovativeness were then split into two groups, with 'innovators' and 'early adopters' as one group and 'early majority', 'late majority' and 'laggards' as the other.…”

Section: Survey Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This proved to be the most effective of the approaches tested. Jones et al (2011) reported the results from a national survey which interviewed a random sample of 1200 sheep producers in 2008 and found that 90% of producers that had participated in Lifetime Ewe Management reported changing practices due to their involvement in the program, compared with 12% in the total survey population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Participation in Lifetime Ewe Management results in changes in stocking rate, ewe management and reproductive performance on commercial farms

Trompf¹,

Gordon²,

Behrendt

et al. 2011

Self Cite

Abstract. Lifetime Ewe Management is an extension program designed to assist sheep producers to improve their understanding of ewe nutrition and to develop the skills and confidence to improve their management. The course is based on a small-group extension model and was developed by the Lifetimewool project as a way to incorporate the research findings, economic modelling and producer guidelines developed by the project. Lifetime Ewe Management commenced in Victoria in the spring of 2006 and by the end of 2010, 221 producers had completed the 2-year program. The changes in knowledge, attitudes, skills, aspirations and management practices of 182 of these participants were examined. Participants of the Lifetime Ewe Management program increased their whole-farm stocking rates by 14%, increased lamb marking percentages by 11-13% depending on enterprise type, and decreased ewe mortality rates by 43%. These improvements resulted from a significant change in the perceived importance of managing ewes to condition-score targets to improve profitability and increases in the ability of participants to condition score ewes, assess pasture quantity and quality and feed budget. These changes were consistent regardless of how innovative the participants were at the beginning of the program. The appeal and success of the program was attributed largely to the small-group model where producers worked with their own flock under the guidance of a skilled facilitator and with access to effective decision-making tools. The Lifetime Ewe Management program design provides a blueprint for future extension programs striving to achieve widespread practice change.

“…Surveys show that few farmers routinely weigh ewes to manage their nutrition as they believe this practice has little value, is time consuming and/or expensive (Jones et al 2011). In addition, measurement of maternal liveweight must be corrected for gut fill, wool growth, conceptus and moisture (CSIRO 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The merit of condition score and fat score as alternatives to liveweight for managing the nutrition of ewes

Burgel¹,

Oldham²,

Behrendt³

et al. 2011

Self Cite

Abstract. The liveweight profile of Merino ewes is related to the production and profitability of the sheep enterprise, but few producers measure liveweight to manage the nutrition of Merino ewes. In this paper we examine the relationship between changes in liveweight and condition score using data from the Lifetimewool project and compare condition score and fat score as alternative monitoring tools. Analyses of liveweight and condition score data from 15 flocks of Merino ewes representing a range of different genotypes and environments showed that the relationship between change in liveweight and condition score was on average 9.2 kg per unit change in condition score or 0.19 times the standard reference weight of the flock. In two experiments experienced operators were used to estimate the condition score and fat score in over 200 ewes and accredited ultrasound scanners measured the eye muscle and fat depth at the C site in the same ewes. All assessments were repeated several times in random order. Within 24 h of the assessments the sheep were slaughtered at local abattoirs where the tissue depth at the GR site was measured on the hot carcasses. Both condition score and fat score were highly repeatable though subject to operator bias. They were related to each other and to the objective measures of fat and eye muscle depth at the C site. However, 95% of sheep below condition score 2.5 had a tissue depth (muscle and fat) at the GR site 3 mm, by definition equal to fat score 1. As the condition score of ewes on commercial properties often fluctuates between scores 2 and 3, and small changes in condition score within this range can have large effects on welfare and profit, we conclude that condition score is the most appropriate alternative to liveweight for managing the nutritional profile of ewes.