Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 1: Texas agricultural producers effectively evaluate and adopt research-based technology applications and best management practices for crop and forage systems to enhance their economic competitiveness in the global marketplace.

Statement of Support: Texas agricultural producers must compete globally. This requires rapid adoption of technology-based systems to improve quality and quantity of outputs at competitive costs per unit. Extension Data Summits and Texas commodity association leadership identified educational needs to achieve this goal.

Objective 1: Producers improve their knowledge of agricultural production systems to improve profitability and conserve resources.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Provide science-based, multidisciplinary programs to producers and associated agribusiness professionals relative to technology transfer in crop and forage systems.	2007–2012: Producers’ utilization of soil testing as the basis for nutrient management decisions increases 2% per year in order to maintain sustainable, environmentally responsible crop and forage systems. 2008: Producers increase knowledge of weed identification and management in conventional and reduced tillage systems by 5%. 2007: Producer adoption of IPM compatible tools to manage weeds, insects, and diseases will increase by 5%. 2008: Producers increase knowledge of improved crop and forage genetics by 10%. 2008–2012: Cow-calf producers will increase knowledge of year-round grazing systems by 5%. 2007–2012: Producers increase knowledge of the potential evapo-transpiration (PET) Network and other irrigation decision aids that monitor crop stress and water loss by 5%. (Also relates to Goal 1 in natural resources.)
Producers increase knowledge of cropping alternatives and production systems to meet the demands for feedstocks for the renewable fuel industry.	2007 - 2012: Producers increase their knowledge of bioenergy and biofuel crops and cropping systems by 5% annually.
Producers increase knowledge on cellulosic alcohol reduction to reduce soil losses due to the harvest of crop residues.	2008: Producers will gain knowledge of soil and water conserving production systems for cellulosic crop production by 2% per year.
Update Extension enterprise budgets for major crops, alternative production systems, and by geographic region.	2007–2012: Enterprise budgets updated and available on the Web for producers and county faculty by January 31 of each year.
Expand the use of distance technology to effectively reach producers and associated agribusiness professionals with relevant and timely educational information.	2007: Extension units maintain Web sites that are effective in meeting the needs of customers through periodic evaluations in 2007. 2007–2012: The number of educational sessions on Extension Web sites increases each year by 3%.
Effectively collaborate with faculty from the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station (TAES) and other universities to ensure Extension clientele are receiving the best science-based information.	2007: Project proposals including faculty from Extension, TAES, and/or other universities increase by 5% from base year. 2008: Sixty percent of Center field days include presentations from both Extension and TAES faculty.

Objective 2: Develop and conduct professional development programs for county and specialist faculty to enable them to effectively support educational programs on cropping systems.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Work with regional program directors to determine professional development trainings to be offered in each region.	2007–2012: By September 1 each year, planned professional development opportunities in cropping systems scheduled for the next calendar year. 2007 & 2009: Increase contact hours of professional development by 5% every two years throughout planning cycle.
Establish internal multidisciplinary committees to develop introductory professional development training for major Texas crops.	2007: Internal committees named for wheat, grain sorghum, and forage modules. 2007: Cotton and corn modules developed and online for county Extension agent access. 2008: Wheat, grain sorghum, and forage modules developed online for county Extension agent access.

Objective 3: Provide science-based, multidisciplinary programs for post-harvest/value-added food industry professionals including enterprises in the following major sectors: storage, processing, manufacturing, quality assurance, inspection, and distribution.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Identify industry groups and work with their leadership to prioritize relevant educational opportunities for entrepreneurs and other targeted audiences in value-added industry segments.	2007–2012: By September 1 each year, schedule completed for the next calendar year for continuing education targeting food industry professionals. 2007 & 2009: Increase contact hours of continuing education by 5% every two years throughout the planning cycle. 2007–2012: Participants increase knowledge by 15% based on instruments designed to measure mastery of subject matter.
Expand the use of distance technology to effectively reach industry clientele with timely educational information.	2007–2007: Extension units maintain Web sites that are effective in meeting the needs of industry clientele through periodic evaluations with focus groups. 2007–2012: The number of educational sessions on Extension Web sites increases each year by 5%.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 2: Texas livestock and poultry product producers and related agribusinesses effectively evaluate and adopt research-based technology applications and best management practices by region for sustainable and profitable livestock and poultry management systems.

Statement of Support: The diversity of the Texas landscape and environment markedly impact the potential for utilizing land resources for the production of livestock, as well as livestock and poultry products. Therefore, research-based technology must be adapted by region to meet the economic goals and environmental needs of producers and other groups within the livestock and poultry sectors. The Beef Roundtables and the Extension Data Summits identified this goal as highly important.

Objective 1: Livestock producers improve knowledge of production and management systems to improve quality, profitability, and sustainability

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Provide science-based, multidisciplinary programs to producers and associated agribusiness professionals relative to technology transfer in livestock systems through a variety of targeted and/or named educational programs.	2007–2012: Fifty percent of beef producers attending Beef Quality Assurance programs increase knowledge. 2007–2012: Forty percent of livestock producers/owners or users attending educational programs increase skills and adopt, or plan to adopt, best management practices to improve quality or profitability. 2007–2012: Forty percent of livestock producers/owners/users/commodity group representatives that attend educational programs report increased knowledge of best management practices to improve quality or profitability. 2007–2012: Ten percent of livestock owners/producers attending educational programs report a savings in money or increased profit due to adopting best management practices. 2007 - 2012: Livestock producers acquire the knowledge to utilize decision aid software and management information systems technology to effectively evaluate technology adoption and other management decision-based alternatives in the livestock production operation. 2008: Fifty percent of landowners consider their entire resource base (wildlife integration, nature-based tourism, hunting, and livestock production) when evaluating changes in the ranch operation. 2007: 65% of participating livestock producers, land managers, and landowners increase knowledge of best practices for management of feral swine. Increase knowledge of assistance available from Texas Wildlife Services Program by 5%. 2007–2012: Twenty technical service providers trained per year to assist concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) to obtain and maintain permits for environmentally sound disposal of animal wastes.
Update Extension enterprise budgets for major livestock species in the state, including alternative production and management systems, for various geographic regions.	2007–2012: Enterprise budgets updated and available on the Web for producers and county faculty by January 31 of each year.
Expand the use of distance technology to effectively reach producers and associated agribusiness professionals with relevant and timely educational information.	2007: Extension units maintain Web sites that are effective in meeting the needs of its customers through periodic evaluations. 2007–2012: The number of educational sessions on Extension Web sites increases each year by 3%.
Research planned, conducted and published with translational value for livestock production, management and use. Addresses improved management and/or decreased costs and/or alternative strategies relevant to modern day livestock ownership and production.	2007-2012 Research conducted by specialists as appropriate and published in both scientific and industry sources to support adoption of new practices and/or savings in time and money for livestock producers, owners and users.

Objective 2: Develop and conduct professional development programs for county and specialist faculty to enable them to effectively develop, deliver and support relevant educational programs on livestock production systems.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Work with regional program directors to determine professional development trainings to be offered in each region related to livestock production.	2007–2012: By September 1 each year, planned professional development opportunities in livestock production and management systems are scheduled for the next calendar year. 2007& 2009: Contact hours of professional development increase by 5% every two years throughout planning cycle.
Establish and maintain commodity committees and develop introductory professional development training or direct livestock industry support materials online for major Texas livestock species and enterprises.	2007 – 2008: Horse industry Workshops Planning / Input Committee established / operational. 2007 – 2012: Meat Industry Advisory Committee operational and functioning as necessary. 2007 - 2008: Beef cattle modules developed and online. 2007: Online Biology and Ranching course operational with evaluation component. 2007: Online Horse Evaluation module operational with evaluation component. 2007 – 2012: Additional specie modules developed. 2007 – 2012: Online DVDs address Beef quality and management, ranching, livestock transport, meat processing and safety, and horse theft awareness.
Develop educational support for county Extension agents and livestock owners.	2007: Incident Resource Teams (IRT) for Animal Issues formed. 2007 – 2012: Resource materials developed for each IRT.

Objective 3: Poultry industry participants increase understanding of waste management responsibilities and knowledge of best practices for reducing potential air and water quality problems.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Develop and conduct educational programs for poultry producers regarding expanded waste management responsibilities.	2007–2012: EPA and TCEQ requirements for dry litter poultry producers have been significantly reduced. Thus, Educational programs conducted each year, reaching 25% of target audience by 2012.
Conduct educational programs as requested by industry clientele to provide new and expanding producers with current environmental responsibilities.	2007–2012: Producers increase knowledge of best practices by 2% per year.
Develop and conduct educational programs for the industry to address air emissions problems from poultry facilities.	2007–2012: Seventy-five percent of poultry clientele receive training on this topic by 2012; an increase of 10% per year, pending EPA and TCEQ guidelines.

Objective 4: Poultry processing facilities adopt technology and management systems that improve product quality, profitability, and food safety.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Develop and deliver curriculum to clientele on Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) procedures, food safety, and plant efficiency.	2007–2012: Poultry processing personnel increase knowledge of production efficiency issues by 2% per year. 2007–2012: Compliance with HACCP plan increases by 2% per year.

Objective 5: Poultry growers increase adoption of best practices for improved competitiveness and compliance with animal welfare guidelines.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Develop and deliver educational programs to poultry growers concerning husbandry and facilities.	2007–2012: Production efficiency on performance standards increases by 2% per year.
Provide industry clientele with resources to train their personnel.	2007–2012: Seventy-five percent of poultry clientele receive training on this topic by 2012; an increase of 10% per year. 2007–2012: Welfare audit scores increase by 2% per year. 2007–2012: Compliance with animal welfare guidelines increases by 5% per year.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 3: Texas producers, agribusiness professionals, and landowners become more knowledgeable on approaches to assess risk and rewards in agriculture and natural resource-related operations, and how to evaluate and implement available risk-management alternatives based on personal and business enterprise goals.

Statement of Support: Risk is inherent at all levels of the food and fiber system. For the Texas food and fiber system to become more competitive, profitable, and sustainable, farmers, ranchers, and organizations, as well as communities that depend upon agriculture, must be better able to weigh the risks and projected impacts of alternative decisions on profitability and competitiveness. This issue was identified in the Extension Data Summits.

Objective 1: Producers and agribusiness professionals increase their knowledge and adoption of risk management alternatives and strategies.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Develop and conduct in-depth risk management training programs, such as Master Marketer, Advanced Topic Series (ATS), Tomorrow's Top Agricultural Producer (TTAP) Program, The Executive Program for Agricultural Producers (TEPAP), Profitability Workshops, and Personnel Management.	2007: Producers and agribusiness professionals attending in-depth programs increase knowledge of risk management strategies by 10%.
Develop educational and technical assistance programs for producer groups or agribusinesses that are considering coordinated production or marketing systems.	2007: Funding obtained to initiate an educational and technical assistance program for producer groups or agribusinesses that are considering ways to manage risk and add value to products.

Objective 2: Producers and agribusiness professionals improve their risk assessment and business management skills.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Conduct individual strategic planning exercises with producers through the Financial and Risk Management (FARM) Assistance program statewide.	2007–2012: FARM Assistance program participation increases by 3% each year.
Utilize the FARM Assistance database to analyze risk management practices and publish the results of these analyses.	2007–2012: An annual FARM Assistance program report published that illustrates the practices, structure, and characteristics of the most successful producers. 2007–2012: At least five applied research articles, Extension bulletins, or fact sheets published each year focusing on specific types of producers or specific issues important to risk management in Texas agriculture.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 4: Texas’ green industry sectors, including nursery, floral, landscape, and turf, will move toward their economic potential through demonstrations and evaluation of research-based technology and best management practices that meet economic and competitiveness criteria for business success.

Statement of Support: The green industry, including the nursery, floral, landscape, and turf sectors, is a rapidly changing segment of agribusiness with opportunities for expansion in several regions of the state. Technical and economic information is needed on alternative production practices pertaining to culture and nutrition, water quantity and quality, and pest management, etc., to encourage sustainability and additional business development. This goal supports Texas Community Futures Forum (TCFF) issues in economic competitiveness and viability, environmental stewardship, and agricultural diversification.

Objective 1: Promote the use of environmentally sensitive nutrient management programs in turf and landscape systems by homeowners, public turfgrass and landscape managers, and managers of sports venues.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Conduct workshops for sports turf and green space managers.	2007–2012: Sports turf managers participating in turfgrass field days and workshops will increase knowledge of water conservation and water audits by 10%. 2007–2012: Knowledge of workshop participants on best management practices increases by 10%.
Implement the Sports Athletic Field Education (SAFE) program working with managers of sports turf venues.	2007–2012: Participation in demonstration programs by sports venue managers increases 2% per year.
Train new Master Gardeners to implement environmentally sensitive practices in their home landscapes.	2007–2012: Increase the number of new Master Gardeners trained by 2% per year.
Train Master Gardeners to educate homeowners in implementing environmentally sensitive practices in the home landscape, including the utilization of adapted genetic materials.	2007: Master Gardener volunteers receive a CD with turfgrass and landscape management training materials. 2007–2012: Master Gardeners in Texas increase their volunteer hours 2% per year.
Conduct educational programming for turfgrass professionals and homeowners on the management and selection of water-efficient landscapes and irrigation systems.	2007–2012: Increase knowledge of turfgrass professionals and homeowners by 2% per year relative to the efficient use of water through audits and other educational programming.

Objective 2: Nursery, floral, and landscape professionals improve their knowledge of alternative production practices and management systems to improve quality, profitability, and sustainability.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Conduct field days for nursery/floral producers on water conservation and other best management practices.	2007–2012: Knowledge of field day attendees increases 10% relative to water conservation and best management practices.
Develop water conservation Web site for nursery/floral producers.	2007–2012: User educational sessions on Web site increase 3% per year after development.
Conduct workshops for nursery, floral, and landscape industry on economics, marketing, and management.	2007–2012: Knowledge of workshop attendees of economics, marketing, and management practices increases by 5%.
Develop and deliver training modules for labor force working in commercial landscape installation and maintenance.	2008: The green industry indicates that the trained workforce in this area has increased.
Identify and promote plant materials with superior resource efficiency characteristics for landscape professionals.	2007–2012: Production of selected resource-efficient plants increases by 5% per year.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 5: Through pesticide safety education, licensed and unlicensed pesticide users (including farmers, ranchers, pest control businesses, and the general public) will understand and adopt safer pesticide and nonchemical management methods for managing pests and will be able to continue their pursuit of business enterprises and employment.

Statement of Support: State regulations require farmers, ranchers, structural pest control businesses, government agency employees, political subdivision employees, and others who apply pesticides in their business to receive periodic training to maintain their state licenses. Training also is beneficial in preparing them to take licensing exams. This goal focuses on improving the knowledge of pesticide applicators regarding their own safety and the safety of others while protecting their business investment.

Objective 1: The knowledge and skills of pesticide users in Texas will increase while they maintain licenses to maintain their business ventures.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Conduct quality and relevant Pesticide Safety Education Program (PSEP) trainings that support the licensing activities of Texas’ three licensing agencies, and encourage the safe application of pest control products.	2007–2012: Number of specialized trainings maintained at current levels. 2007–2012: Producers and commercial operators receive education required to maintain pesticide applicator licenses.
Establish and maintain cooperative relationships with organizations to enhance Pesticide Safety Education Program activities.	2007–2012: Licensing agencies contacted regularly by PSEP leadership to assure PSEP program curriculum is relevant. 2008: PSEP leadership meets regularly with Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA) on transition of Texas Structural Pest Control Board to TDA.

Objective 2: Develop and conduct professional development programs for county and specialist faculty so they will be more knowledgeable in providing and managing continuing education programs that support pesticide applicator licensing.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Update and distribute relevant educational material, including manuals and Web-based programs, to county Extension faculty.	2007–2012: Ninety percent of new agricultural and natural resource county agents trained on PSEP within 12 months of employment.
PSEP leadership will coordinate trainings with regional program directors and provide annual updates on regulations and programmatic issues.	2007–2012: Centra Symposium trainings held each summer and made available to all county Extension agents with responsibilities in this area. 2008: An internal survey will be conducted to obtain feedback for PSEP program enhancement.

Objective 3: Encourage adoption of pesticide safety for pest- and pesticide-sensitive institutions, including schools, child care facilities, hospitals, nursing care facilities, and others.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Conduct annual mandatory and advanced IPM regional trainings for school IPM coordinators and other school IPM stakeholders.	2007–2012: Knowledge and implementation of IPM concepts measured by exam and follow-up surveys, with knowledge gain of 5%.
Maintain regular communication with school IPM facility managers, school IPM stakeholders, and interested agencies via newsletters, email, and letters.	2007–2012: At least 50% of all school districts annually reached via periodic electronic or print materials.
Develop IPM techniques and innovative training materials for institutions wanting to improve pest control while minimizing risks for employees and clienteles.	2007–2012: Five percent increase in understanding or adoption of key IPM concepts/measures achieved among institutional decision-makers of participating schools.

Objective 4: Increase urban pest control and safety education among urban pesticide applicators, including those who provide pest control for structures, turfgrass, and landscapes.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Conduct regular, Extension-sponsored pest management training programs for structural and landscape pesticide applicators.	2007–2012: Existing pest management workshops for urban pesticide applicators conducted and quality maintained, as measured by meeting attendance and post-program evaluations. Knowledge and skills increase by 10%.
Minimize the economic and environmental costs of urban pest control for Texans.	2007–2012: Measurable reductions achieved in costs or environmental risks associated with urban pest management practices. Case study to be conducted each year will reveal reduced costs of 10%.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 6: Small-scale agricultural operators and commercial producers in rural and suburban areas will become more knowledgeable in effectively identifying and evaluating diversification strategies for risk mitigation and improved economic sustainability based on total management goals and optimal resource-base use.

Statement of Support: Farms and ranches with less than $20,000 of cash receipts make up almost 80% of Texas operations in production agriculture. Recently, this segment has been expanding around urban population centers due to purchases of small acreage tracts. Extension has the opportunity to provide basic agricultural education and awareness to these families that have multiple objectives. This goal addresses an Extension Data Summit issue.

Objective: Small-scale agricultural operators and landowners increase their knowledge of traditional and organic production, as well as management alternatives to improve quality of life, sustainability, and environmental practices.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Pasture and land management (PALMAN) workshop conducted for absentee landowners and those new to agriculture.	2007–2012: Pasture and land management workshop for novices train 50 landowners annually. 2007–2012: Landowners attending PALMAN workshop increase knowledge on best management practices by 10%.
Plan and develop a Web-based delivery system to address the needs of the targeted audience.	2007: Task force formed to inventory current programs and identify specific needs of clientele. 2007: Comprehensive plan developed for Web-based delivery of subject matter to target audience (i.e., http://urbanrancher.tamu.edu). 2008–2012: User sessions on Web site increase by 5% per year after introduction.
Conduct Master Urban Rancher program to train volunteers to work with landowners new to agricultural operations.	2007–2012: Number of master volunteers increases by 2% per year.
Develop and deliver broad-based educational programs in livestock production and management targeted to small-scale, part-time farming and ranching operators, absentee landowners, and those new or returning to agriculture.	2007–2012: Ten percent of attendees report a savings in money or increased profit by best management practices adopted. 2007–2012: Twenty percent of attendees increase skills or plan to adopt best management practices to improve decision-making and solve problems related to selection, production, management, use, or marketing of livestock. 2007–2012: Fifty percent of attendees increase knowledge of best management practices to improve quality of livestock.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 7: Gulf fishers and aquaculture enterprise owners become more knowledgeable of technical and financial feasibility for value-added enterprises and of supply chain issues from production/harvesting to the consumer.

Statement of Support: Texas shrimp boat operations are facing significant economic stress due to rising fuel costs and increasing import competition. In fact, for two years in a row, the Texas shrimp industry has qualified for Trade Adjustment Assistance funding and education due to import competition. While some aquaculture operations are expanding, others are struggling to add value to their products in order to meet customer needs at competitive prices.

Objective 1: Offshore fishery management and marketing education to owners and captains to improve their knowledge of best management practices to improve quality, profitability, and sustainability of their operations.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Develop and deliver educational curriculum on best management practices to industry leaders and operators.	2007–2012: Fifty percent of program participants will increase their knowledge of best management practices to improve profitability.
Conduct standardized performance analysis of shrimp boat operations to identify critical management factors.	2007: Seven representative shrimp boat operations analyzed; summary information made available at industry conference.
Conduct state and regional workshops to disseminate information to the shrimp industry on ways to decrease take of non-targeted species.	2007: Develop new bycatch reduction devices and perform modification on existing gear.

Objective 2: Aquaculture and farm raised seafood enterprise owners increase knowledge of best management practices and marketing alternatives to enhance profitability and product quality.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Work with the Texas Aquaculture Association in developing and delivering relevant educational programming to the industry.	2007–2012: Fifty percent of program participants will increase their knowledge of best management practices.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 8: Producers, landowners, agribusiness firms, and the organizations that represent them will become more knowledgeable regarding global forces impacting Texas and the agricultural and trade policy alternatives and consequences relative to long-term enterprise profitability and ‘safety net’ opportunities from federal and state sources.

Statement of Support: Large segments of Texas agriculture depend heavily on the ‘safety net’ support of government farm programs. Cotton and rice are more dependent than other commodities, but all program crops certainly benefit from current policies. Many sectors of Texas agriculture are also dependent on export markets or face significant import competition. Large shares of the wheat, sorghum, and cotton crops are exported, while a growing share of beef and poultry product is also sent to foreign markets. In addition, Texas feedlots, stocker operations, and packing plants depend upon Mexican cattle to sustain their operations. Any changes could have significant impacts; therefore, it is important for these groups to monitor agricultural and trade policy alternatives relative to their operations. Extension is uniquely positioned to provide research-based, unbiased information on policy alternatives and consequences for commodity organizations.

Objective 1: Producers, commodity organizations, government policymakers, and agribusiness interests will receive cutting-edge applied research and analysis on U.S. agricultural policy issues.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Extension faculty will participate with TAES faculty in the Agricultural and Food Policy Center (AFPC) to analyze policy alternatives and provide consequences that are research-based for dissemination to policy makers and agricultural interest groups.	2007–2012: Twenty-five representative farm updates conducted each year. A minimum of two publications will be distributed through AFPC. 2007–2012: The Texas Agricultural Forum and other trainings will be conducted and attendee’s knowledge of policy alternatives and consequences will increase 5% based on exit survey evaluations. 2007-2012: Meeting participants will increase knowledge 5% based on a post-evaluation survey. 2007-2012: A minimum of five reports disseminated per year.
When the new farm bill passes, an intensive educational effort will be conducted by specialists and county Extension agents.	2007: Educational materials on new farm legislation available in 2007. 2007–2008: Producers attending Extension educational sessions on new farm bill increase knowledge by 10%.

Objective 2: Producers, commodity organizations, government policy makers, and agribusiness interests will receive cutting edge applied research and analysis on international trade and policy issues.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Specialized conference will be planned and implemented on opportunities such as exporting to Cuba.	2007–2012: Participants in specialized conferences increase knowledge on Cuba export opportunities, government regulations, and processes by 10%. 2007: At least one specialized conference planned and conducted in 2007.
Trade policy options and consequences for the 2007 Farm Bill will be analyzed and disseminated to policy makers and agricultural groups.	2007–2008: Group meetings held and publications distributed to policy decision makers and agricultural interest groups relative to 2007 Farm Bill.
Workshop series for small- to medium-sized beef processors will be developed and delivered.	2007: Educational curriculum developed on the basics of exporting for beef processors. 2007–2008: Curriculum delivered to beef processors with an increase in knowledge of 30%.

Objective 3: Commodity Associations, government policy makes and producers / agribusiness will receive applied research on impacts of invasive species and trade disruption.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Extension faculty and CNAS will develop methods to assess impacts.	2007-2008: Decision makers will receive results of four separate analyses of invasive species such as BSE, Zebro chip, citrus greening, and e-coli.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

Agriculture – Food, Fiber, and Green Industries

Goal 9: Agricultural producers, landowners, agribusiness, and county Extension agents become more knowledgeable of best practices to prevent, detect, and respond to potential biosecurity issues, whether naturally occurring or through bioterrorist action.

Statement of Support: The advent of the 21^st century has brought unparalleled concern over the safety of our food and fiber system from natural or bioterrorist introduction of detrimental pathogens. All of agriculture needs to be vigilant. The fact that Texas shares a border with Mexico and has multiple water ports from Beaumont to Brownsville certainly is cause for concern. Early detection and response are critical to saving millions of dollars in economic loss and potential loss of life. This goal responds to an issue identified in the Beef Roundtable and Extension Data Summits.

Objective 1: Livestock and poultry producers, agribusiness owners, and organization leaders will adopt best management practices associated with identifying foreign and emerging animal diseases and developing appropriate resource plans.

Strategy	Timeline/Measure(s)
Develop educational programs that teach livestock and poultry producers biosecurity awareness, epidemiology, common animal diseases, and media communication strategies.	2007–2012: Training team educates livestock and poultry producers on biosecurity awareness, epidemiology, common animal diseases, and media communication strategies. 2007: Evaluation protocols implemented to reveal intent to increase adoption of best management practices associated with foreign and emerging animal diseases. 2008: Knowledge of best practices increase by 10%. 2007-2008: Best Management practices for bio-security developed and in place for major livestock species to supplement routine educational programs conducted across the state. 2007–2012: Online newsletter series implemented and maintained that provides awareness of materials associated with market protection from foreign and emerging animal diseases. 2007-2012: Awareness information fact sheets on foreign and emerging animal diseases developed to supplement routine educational programs across the state.
Develop educational curricula to assist veterinarians and large livestock and poultry commodity groups and / or organizations in adopting a plan that protects their markets.	2007: Train-the-Trainers Foreign Animal and Zoonotic Diseases Curriculum for Veterinarians developed and implemented through an online library courseware system that provides text and images (partner with UC-Davis). 2007: Train-the-Trainers Foreign and Emerging Animal Diseases and Emergency Management Curriculum for Educators developed and implemented through an online interactive course system that provides text and slide and video presentations.

Objective 2: County Extension agents and veterinarians will be trained to and/or supported with resources related to foreign and emerging animal diseases and special incidents (IRTs) affecting the livestock industry. .

Strategy

Timeline/Measure(s)

Develop educational programs and/or resource materials that teach county Extension agents and veterinarians, and support the livestock owner / producer in area of biosecurity.

2007: Incident Resource Teams (IRTs) formed for Animal Issues, Severe Storms, Drought, Hazardous Ag Materials and All Ag-related Hazards. 2007: Train-the-Trainers Foreign Animal and Zoonotic Diseases Curriculum for Veterinarians developed and implemented through an online library courseware system that provides text and images (partner with UC-Davis). 2007: Train-the-Trainers Foreign and Emerging Animal Diseases and Emergency Management Curriculum for Educators developed and implemented through an online interactive course system that provides text and slide and video presentations. 2008: Verification protocol completed for trained individuals. 2008 – 2012: Resource materials developed for each IRT and for individual livestock species as appropriate.

Table of Contents
Index of Programmatic Goals and Objectives

________________________________

Contact:

Edward G. Smith

Director

Texas Cooperative Extension

112 Jack K. Williams Administration Building

7101 TAMU

College Station, TX 77843-7101

Ph: 979-845-7967

Fax: 979-845-9542

September 2007