Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee
College Station, TX
April 2003
April 6, 2003

The meeting called to order by Roger Crickenberger and asked attendees to introduce themselves.

Meeting Participants:

Fuller Bazer
Carrie Castille
Roger Crickenberger
Tim Cross
Nelson Daniels
Joan Dusky
Chester Fehlis
C. Michael French
John Hayes
Jimmy Henning
Bill Hubbard
Joshua Idassi
Kim Kroll
Ross Love
Charles McPeake
Rosanne Minarovic
Michael Ouart
Charles Scifres
Ed Smith
Dan Smith

The group enjoyed a barbecue dinner and heard overviews from Texas A&M administrators regarding Experiment Station, Academic Programs and Extension Service.

April 7, 2003


Cooperative Extension Curriculum Project (CECP) (Joan Dusky)

  1. Reported on work that has been done in curriculum development.
    CCEP was being combined with the e-Extension effort within the region.
    Project already has a taxonomy in areas of 4-H and F&CS.
  2. ANR subjects are more difficult. States differed in approach (specialist vs. generalist).
    It was hoped that a survey of states would surface an overview of competencies needed for agent training among the states. The survey (planned for December 2002) didn't materialize.
  3. The concept hoped for was a "customizable library" of modules that could be developed to train new agents based on job assignment and competencies needed. A significant amount of that would include competencies that could be generalized for the region so that it will be developed and made available in a single module all in the region could use with state/geographic specific material supplemented. Key concept is to avoid duplication among states.
  4. The taxonomy for development was in three layers with as many layers (up to 9) as needed.
    The three suggested were:

    With the above plan, other components such as state specific information could be added in subsequent layers.
  5. It is hoped that the ANR Committee can agree on a taxonomy, an agreed list of subjects and assign committees of individuals from Southern Region (SR) institutions to develop them. Our SR Program Leadership Network (PLN) committee structure should be able to deliver.
    SR PLN has subject matter (ANR), staff development, IT, Educational Program Development combination in its committee structure to do this.
  6. As previously described appropriate file tagging (meta tagging or S.C.O.R.M. Systems) can be utilized for maximum interactivity and flexibility in module use.

    A key discussion is how many subject matter modules are needed. Suggestions:

    Equine, Forestry, potentially, Sustainable Agriculture, Risk Management (but emphasis for producers rather than agent training).
    (It was suggested that the SERA 19 "Rural Health" has already developed a curriculum on paper which could also be used for a guide.)
    Joan will come back with specific plans after further topics discussed on day two of the meeting.

SARE - PDP Program

Southern Region SARE PDP (Rosanne Minarovic)

  1. Indicated there was an opportunity for grant funds for a Sustainable Agriculture (SA) curriculum development from SARE PDP without affecting the "regular SR PDP allocation." She shared some specifics of project guidelines.
  2. SARE has an interest in developing a Sustainable Agriculture Core Training. They hoped to have a two-day planning meeting to develop it.
  3. Discussion continued on how the SR ANR PLN overall concept tracked in the layers from general to specific (i.e., general regional concept to state specific information OR soils to crop commodities).


  1. Discussed the concept of a core sustainable agriculture from the national perspective and its relationship to CECP.
  2. Both the SR and National concepts fit our PLN committee structure and capabilities. The group's consensus was that a sustainable agriculture curriculum with a strong design linkage to our CECP model of commodity production could be developed.
  3. It was decided that a committee recommended from the ANR committee would develop a proposal to go to both national and regional groups (2 separate budgets) to move forward with the core curriculum and engage other people as needed.
  4. The suggested committee members were:
    s Don Hamilton - University of Georgia
    s John O'Sullivan - North Carolina A&T
    s Mitch Owen- North Carolina State University
    s Julie Sexton - Mississippi State University
    s Mary Ann Sims - Kentucky State University
    s Mickie Swisher - University of Florida
    s Jeff Zinder - Clemson State University
    s Rosanne Minarovic indicated she would also help.
  5. Deadline - one page concept paper due April 22, 2003, after a proposed conference call with actual proposal due approximately June 15, 2003.

Administrative Advisors Report (Dan Smith)

  1. At the past joint Extension-Experiment Station Directors Meeting, concerns were expressed about operation of SERA-IEG's.

    a. Approximately 2000 faculty are involved in IEG's - lots of faculty and lots of faculty time. Concern: is there sufficient return on that type of investment.
    b. Three SERA-IEG's were eliminated.
    c. There is also concern relative to having enough Extension and Experiment Station Administrative Advisors.
    d. A review committee of Paul Coreil (LA) and Larry Turner (KY) will study SEA-IEG's to be sure the groups are active and that reports are in.
  2. Ron Brown, ASRED Executive Director, will be focusing his efforts on e-Extension and CECP projects. Extension Directors requested a business plan and that a national committee be developed regarding e-Extension.
  3. State CSREES Audits - indicated that Auburn and New Mexico were being audited for multi-state and integrated research and Extension accountability. We should expect more accountability efforts from CSREES in the future.
  4. Announced Alan Barefield as new SRDC Associate Director. Directors recommended SRDC revise policy and guidelines with regard to roles of SRDC Board and SR Directors on that Board. Also will study how community college partner representatives to have appropriate participation in programs and processes of SRDC.
  5. Next SR-PLN and Directors Meeting will be schedule in Arkansas so that there will be some time for joint meetings.
  6. David Foster was nominated from the SR for the Board of Agriculture.
  7. Indicated that Clemson had been reorganized into a Dean and Director of Extension type model.
  8. Dan indicated he would be replaced by Jon Ort (NC) as ANR Committee Administrative Advisor beginning November 2003.
  9. Dan complimented ANR Committee for their Multi-state efforts indicated more would be needed and that "turf protection" will no longer be a possibility.

Future ANR Meeting Dates:

AgroForestry (Bill Hubbard and Joshua Idassi)

  1. Discussed a regional project and regional publication on silvo-pasture "including grazing and haying operation in planted pine plantations).
  2. They will develop a proposal for possible SARE and/or RREA funding in the future.

Regional Forester's Report (Bill Hubbard)

  1. Bill Hubbard reported a successful forestry distance education event involving 12 Southern region states (plus Missouri). The program (21 hours of instruction) reached 4,200 people at 155 sites.
  2. Bill was commended by the ANR Committee for his work in the region.

Multi-State Program Agreements (Tim Cross)

  1. Shared information regarding development and operation of multi-state programming, especially related to shared personnel. The following examples were discussed:

    a. Mississippi -Tennessee Horticulture Agent
    b. Tennessee -Kentucky Tobacco Specialist
    c. Tennessee - South Carolina Horticulture/Packaging Specialist
    d. North Carolina - South Carolina - Georgia - Tennessee Research and Extension Apple Faculty Member
    e. North Carolina - South Carolina - Georgia - Tennessee Small Fruit Consortium Specialist
  2. Proposed positions included:

    a. Alabama - Mississippi - a Pecan-Small Fruits Specialist
    b. North Carolina - South Carolina - Georgia - Tennessee - a Burley Tobacco Faculty member
  3. Special concerns relative to multi-state agreements:

    a. One institution of record for fiscal and personnel function
    b. Evaluation input form "non-institution of record" states
    c. Concerns i.e.: liability and out-of-state travel policies need to be clear
    d. Salary tracking involving grant funds, match, etc., need to be clear
    e. Joint search committee for open positions are needed
  4. Also discussed:

    a. The informal, multi-state work in cotton - an important activity.
    b. The multi-state (MS-AR-LA) development of the Master Farmer Stewardship Education Program
    c. Accountability of document multi-state programs should include agents working in areas being covered by multi-state specialists (i.e., state accountability should include both specialist and agent FTE's, funds, contacts, etc.)
    d. There was consensus that, as mandated by CSREES and in light of tight budgets and lost positions, multi-state efforts (positions, programs, training resources) all make sense. We should expect more of it.

Regional Publications

As a follow up to the multi- state programs discussion it was mentioned that we no longer have the old, regional publication process (publications of SR Committees). However, with the e-Extension effort, we should have a way to develop multi-state program publications. A word of caution was added: states need to assure that intellectual property rights of authors are cleared up at the beginning of the publication development process.

Tuesday, April 8

PLC Report (Ross Love)

  1. SARE PDP Grant Opportunity for the Southern Region

    a. There must be a strong Extension tie to this program. Coordination of PDP by someone in Extension in the region is required. The RFP for this is expected in September or October 2003.
    b. A question for the SR ANR Committee: Does the committee want to submit a bid to have a state's institution or multi-state group of institutions manage this program and related grant? (In the past a $50,000 grant with up to $25,000 for salaries has been available for management.) The major work done is region-wide S.A. coordination and a regional SARE conference. Project should be a 3-year renewable project.
  2. Next PLN meeting

    Changes for next meeting include a joint committee (PLN-ASRED) meeting. ANR Committee time will be all day Tuesday with no Wednesday a.m. committee time. Wednesday a.m. will be for joint meeting time with Directors (ASRED).
  3. ANR Committee Plan of Work

    The new PLN structure will start to progress with its new role. Under the new PLN structure, committees are to develop a Plan of Work (POW). Ross Love said he had some ideas and would take a shot at POW development.
  4. ANR Committee Conference Call

    It was mentioned that we should be having quarterly conference calls (if no meeting). A conference call was scheduled for May 28, 2003 at 10:00 a.m. (EDT). A topic to cover was finalizing the POW.

Program Planning Committee for August 24-27 Meeting at PLN

The following committee was appointed:

Chair: Roger Crickenberger
Carrie Castille
Nelson Daniels
John Hayes
Charles McPeake
Michael Ouart

Natural Resource, Agriculture and Engineering Service (NARES) Discussion (Michael Ouart)

a. A list of publications and authors from Southern Region was shared.
b. The cost/benefit of regional membership was difficult to describe except that single state membership was not a possibility and cost of groups to join would be based on group size, etc.
c. Cost benefits may be able to be estimated by looking at a survey which Florida hired NARES to conduct.
d. With budgets short falls and more emphasis on electronic publications, it was decided that the committee would not make any recommendations to directors on this issue.
e. Individual states can still purchase items and after reviewing the UF survey, groups of states may still consider joining if it makes programmatic and economic sense to them.

AgroForestry Liaison Committee

Following the earlier discussion of AgroForestry on 4/7/03, a committee of Charles McPeake, Bill Hubbard and Carrie Castille will liaison with the group planning Southern Region Agro Forestry programs.

NRCS/Third Party Vendors (Technical Service Providers - TSP)

  1. Several states had developed grant proposals based on the pattern of Florida's 2002 agreement. However, none have been successfully funded.
  2. Florida's program was still operational. They have a web-based program on how to become a TSP.
  3. North Carolina - had done training for NRCS and Extension personnel, which included Pest Management and had an IPA staff person.
  4. Even though no agreements, almost all states had specialists being asked by NRCS to train their people.
  5. States varied in how nutrient management plans were going to be handled. In general, Extension was serving as "educator" and not in a regulatory/certification role.
  6. Some states reported that Soil and Water Conservation Districts will be certifying plans and TSP's beyond "self-certification."
  7. Tennessee announced that on April 9, 2003, the University of Tennessee and National NRCS would sign a MOU to do CNMP training.
  8. The Crop Consultants Association (CCA) have an MOU with NRCS for TSP training.
  9. Dan Smith suggested that Extension may want to look for ways to set up some formal partnership (an MOU with NRCS that spells out how they intend to partner). Virginia has done this (a base MOU). The base MOU makes it easier to do contractual work with NRCS and other agencies. May also want to do one with Soil and Water Conservation Commissions or Districts.


  1. It was decided that the ANR committee was interested in collective effort to have an Extension group develop a proposal to coordinate PPD efforts similar to the NLSU-NCAT effort.
  2. It would be best for an 1862-1890 Land-Grant partnership. The total grant potential would be for approximately $750,000. Kentucky, Oklahoma, Florida and South Carolina have all expressed some interest from 1862, 1890 or both. Representatives from these states were asked to discuss, decide and communicate back to the committee by April 22, 2003. Such a proposal would be strongly supported by the SR ANR committee.

CSREES National Program Leaders

  1. Dan Smith expressed concern about National Program Leader retirements. New NPL's jobs have changed so there is no liaison function with specialists (or with Regional ANR Committees) spelled out for them. No one at CSREES is opening doors for Extension with other federal agencies.
  2. Issue is how to connect with our "Federal Partner." Note a topic for future PLN Meetings "ECOP Liaison Committees."
  3. We may want to explore ECOP liaisons committees with CSREES on:
    -Risk Management
    -Pest Management
    -Other priorities as SR ANR committee suggests

Roger Crickenberger will try to get the E-COP Liaison Committees topic on the ANR Leaders Meeting Agenda at Green Bay, WI meeting.

Return CECP Discussion

MAJOR CATEGORIES (will have basic and advanced levels)

Agronomic Crops
Horticultural Crops






Animal Sciences
Fish (Aquaculture)


Natural Resources
Risk Management
Sustainable Agriculture
Others to be Considered


Food Safety/Security


Precision agriculture

Remote sensing

The group further developed Agronomic/Horticultural Crops, Animal Sciences, Forestry, Natural Resources and Risk Management.

Committees were appointed to review and further develop taxonomies. Committees are:

Agronomic/Horticultural Crops Ross Love, Ed Smith, Roger Crickenberger, Joan Dusky
Animal Sciences/Forages Roger Crickenberger, Charles McPeake, Michael Ouart, Jim Henning
Forestry Bill Hubbard, Tim Cross, Joshua, John Hayes
Natural Resources Mike French, Carrie, Nelson Daniels, Ed Smith, John Hayes, Joan Dusky
Risk Management/Economics Michael Ouart, Roger Crickenberger, Mike French, Tim Cross, Nelson Daniels

It was agreed that the committees would report back to Joan Dusky by May 15.

Following those discussions, Roger Crickenberger adjourned the meeting.