Marketing Methods Used in 2001
(percentage using each strategy)

East Central Region

State-Wide

-

Wholesale Buyers, Brokers

65.82

47.40

-

Grocery Stores

6.09

6.40

-

Growers’ Cooperatives

33.16

25.73

-

Farmers’ Markets

5.61

8.28

-

Direct Sales (Catalogs/Internet)

9.60

8.54

-

Community Supported Agriculture

1.02

1.79

-

Roadside Stands/Farm Stores

7.58

12.19

-

U-Pick Sales

2.03

6.83

-

Food Cooperative

1.02

2.31

-

Production/Marketing Contract

28.43

14.36

-

Institutional (schools, etc.)

1.02

1.88

-

Restaurants

2.54

3.32

-

Retained Ownership

9.64

6.60

-

Other

19.60

29.31

Farm Products Grown/Produced in 2001
(percentage growing each commodity)

East Central Region

State-Wide

-

Fresh Vegetables

11.44

10.05

-

Fresh Fruits

24.62

28.16

-

Fruits/Vegetables for Processing

16.92

10.53

-

Grains

41.71

17.15

-

Hay

38.31

28.60

-

Ornamentals (Flowers, Bulbs, etc.)

1.50

7.31

-

Eggs and/or Poultry

3.02

4.51

-

Dairy Products (milk, cheese)

1.50

2.98

-

Cattle and/or Cows

27.36

34.92

-

Hogs

0.50

3.15

-

Sheep

0.50

3.32

-

Goats

0.50

2.21

-

Value-Added Products (jams, etc.)

0.00

2.05

-

Other

14.51

16.62

Strategies to be Attempted in 2002-2004
(percentage choosing each strategy)

East Central Region

State-Wide

-

More Direct Marketing to Consumers

17.82

25.13

-

Diversify Products Grown on Farm

28.22

23.85

-

Explore Greenhouse Production

2.48

6.39

-

Add On-Farm Packing/Processing

5.94

4.86

-

Join Producers’ Cooperative

7.43

5.45

-

Market Directly to Stores/Restaurants

5.45

7.16

-

Use Product Labeling (e.g. “green”)

4.95

5.88

-

Other Strategy

13.86

17.21

-

NO RESPONSE

54.46

60.14

Farming Practices Used in 2001
(percentage using each practice)

East Central Region

State-Wide

-

Crop Rotation

55.15

32.06

-

Vegetative Buffer Strips

9.28

18.28

-

Reduced Tillage

31.44

21.50

-

Direct Seeding/No-till

12.37

13.79

-

Intercropping /Companion Planting

7.77

7.19

-

Cover Crops

28.87

23.02

-

On-Farm Composting

8.81

21.45

-

Apply Compost/Organic Materials

12.50

27.27

-

Fertilize at Agronomic Rates

67.71

49.82

-

Mulch Using Organic Materials

10.47

18.51

-

Use Manure as Fertilizer

27.04

42.40

-

Water/Soil Moisture Monitoring

50.00

32.47

-

Soil Conservation/Erosion Control

64.25

43.32

-

Soil Nutrient Testing

75.38

45.83

Release of Beneficial Predators

9.90

9.52

Pheromones

15.51

15.18

Monitoring Pest Populations

48.97

42.37

Intensive Rotational Grazing

13.02

22.16

Tillage for Weed Control

56.25

37.81

Precision Agriculture with GPS

14.81

6.89

Attitudes Toward Marketing and Farm Policy
(percentage of Those Who Neither Agree nor Disagree are not given)

East Central Region

State-Wide

Agree

Disagree

Agree

Disagree

-

Labeling products as “Grown in WA” would benefit producers

76.39

4.02

77.22

5.63

-

Biggest threat to my farm’s viability is falling prices

87.94

5.53

73.86

12.68

-

Free Trade Agreements will help my farm be profitable

32.66

39.70

21.91

45.50

-

Government-supported agriculture programs should be targeted to small/medium farms

60.80

17.59

68.23

14.39

-

“Buy Local” campaign could increase consumption of local products

49.75

15.33

57.22

13.82

-

Maintaining family farms is important to County’s future

89.39

5.05

86.60

4.82

-

Need is greater than ever for Public Ag. Research and Extension

68.00

10.50

63.79

11.45

-

Private Agribusiness can replace most University Research and Extension

13.13

57.07

13.03

56.38

-

In-County consumers should have more local foods made available

50.25

8.12

57.08

6.32

-

Direct Marketing is effective for keeping farms viable in my county

46.23

16.58

60.96

11.09

-

Significant demand exists for organic ag. products in Washington

26.02

33.67

39.43

23.18

-

Extension programs benefited my farm business

63.32

11.06

59.05

14.21

Level of Involvement in Farm Related Organizations from 1999-2001
(percentage of Those Who Are Not Involved are not given)

East Central Region

State-Wide

Somewhat

Very

Somewhat

Very

-

Farm Bureau

26.70

3.66

21.53

3.63

-

Commodity Commission

15.47

3.87

8.86

3.41

-

Grange

14.75

1.09

13.53

2.93

-

Growers’ Association

33.16

12.63

24.67

12.43

-

Growers’ Cooperative

23.76

8.84

18.95

11.62

-

Farmers’ Market Association

6.18

3.37

6.80

3.59

-

Other Farm Organizations

1.64

2.73

2.94

3.60

Attitudes Toward Farming and Environmental Issues
(percentage of Those Who Neither Agree nor Disagree are not given)

East Central Region

State-Wide

Agree

Disagree

Agree

Disagree

-

Environmental Regulations have negative impact on farming practices

76.17

9.85

74.26

12.52

-

Farmers’ Contributions to land stewardship are appreciated by public

25.39

55.44

28.60

53.51

-

Environmental Risks of GMOs are not well understood

73.57

8.29

69.18

8.04

-

Farmers should be paid for participation in wildlife programs

74.23

9.27

73.78

9.35

-

Local Gov’t should restrict non-ag. development in key ag. areas

74.23

18.04

65.82

19.02

-

Land should be farmed to protect long-term productive capacity

61.46

19.69

59.31

19.16

-

Consumer Concerns about GMOs outweigh overall benefits of their use

25.77

45.36

27.66

35.64

-

If a GMO were available in one of my commodities, I would try it

52.34

19.69

41.75

25.69

-

To protect against urban sprawl, ag. land restrictions will be needed

43.29

41.75

43.57

43.22

-

Farmers should be compensated if restricted from selling ag. land

80.31

8.81

81.03

9.97

Information Sources Accessed by Farmers During 2001
(percentage of Those Who Do Not Access a Particular Source are not given)

East Central Region

State-Wide

Once or Twice

>Twice

Once or Twice

>Twice

-

Other Growers/Farm Managers

26.66

54.87

27.70

45.52

-

Private Consultants

15.26

28.42

15.62

17.74

-

Commodity/Grower Associations

38.50

16.58

26.06

17.79

-

WSU Co-operative Extension

42.78

19.59

36.25

18.97

-

Farm Supply Dealer/Ag. Business

29.23

58.46

30.77

46.65

-

Farm Newspapers/Magazines/etc.

32.81

48.96

30.18

45.65

-

State Department of Agriculture

36.17

12.23

24.66

8.64

-

Farm Bureau

18.08

9.63

15.52

7.66

-

Natural Resource Conservation Svc.

24.33

11.11

18.24

7.51

-

Banker/Financial Consultant

26.20

16.04

16.86

10.66

-

Legal Consultant

27.13

13.83

18.43

7.27

-

Television/Radio

21.51

13.44

14.58

10.69

Internet

18.85

27.75

16.93

25.26

Farmers’ Current Moderate and High Priority Information Needs
(percentage of Those Not Indicating This Need are not given)

East Central Region

State-Wide

Moderate

High

Moderate

High

-

Soil Fertility Management

38.54

47.92

39.68

33.97

-

Farm Product Diversification

44.15

31.91

36.23

30.43

-

Non-Chemical Pest Management

38.30

20.74

32.98

26.96

-

Biotechnology, including GMOs