Programme needs spring clean

13-04-2009 | Not Specified

Sport coaches parrot ‘you only get out, what you put in'.

It's true.

We got a lot out of the Monitor Farm programme when it ran at our farm, probably because we were forced to put a lot in.

Every three months we had to stand up in front of colleagues and explain feeding policies, buying or selling decisions and outline what we were doing next to lift production and make more money.

If nothing else, this focuses your mind on the big picture of the business, which is a sure-fire way to lift performance.

We had to put time aside to monitor and prepare -often during really busy times on the farm. But, in return, we got farm production consultants and animal health and pasture experts on our door-step willing to help.

The Monitor Farm folder included a guide for writing a business plan. We did it, stuck to it (mostly) and try to update it every year. We made good and bad decisions but at least we were being proactive. We tried a new sheep-breed, which we then didn't like. This taught us much about decision-making.

Having facilitators like Pete Anderson and Chris Mulvaney alongside helped us enormously. Their strengths were animal health and feeding and their mana boosted field day attendance.

The facilitator can make or break a Monitor Farm. The chairman needs to step in if problems arise between farmer and facilitator and there should be scope to move someone on if it simply doesn't work. The investment is too much to waste on half-hearted efforts.

I've heard some facilitators say that it's hard to make the Monitor Farm budget stretch to meet costs. This means there is little reward for that extra analysis on things like stock purchases and feed options over and above the normal expected feed budgets and retrospective farm performance analysis. Perhaps there needs to be extra funds for more of this as timely one-off analysis on a current ‘hot topic' is of huge interest and benefit to farmers.

It's hard to compute the overall value for farmers who attend Monitor Farm days. A farmer once said to me that if they learn even one thing, the effort to get there is of value. Most Monitor Farms start off with high attendance numbers. The rubber-neckers fall by the wayside and some less motivated miss a day and then don't come back.

Keeping enthusiasm going is something facilitators need to do better. One suggestion is that facilitators and community groups need to plan ahead more, so the next speaker is ‘pushed' at the previous session.

Advertising and marketing the Monitor Farm days should be a focus, even if it means budgeting more for this. Email notices are not enough. Flyers to mail-boxes and adverts in local papers should outline what farmers are going to get out of the up-and-coming day.

A phone-ringing tree using committee members may widen the audience and help grow the sense of community around a group. We tried shifting our Monitor Farm day from afternoon to during school hours (i.e. 10am to 3pm) to attract more women to the day but that didn't really work.

The Monitor Farm needs to think what it can offer over and above the ‘pay-to-join' farm discussion groups that seem to endure. The access to scientists and other experts tied up with Meat & Wool's research projects should be exploited. Its attractiveness to sponsors should be used to secure extra funding for ‘draw-card' speakers.

  Printable View