Agriculture in Northwest Region

For Printer-Friendly pdf version click here.
(Free Adobe Acrobat Reader required, download here)

Marketing Methods Used in 2001 (percentage using each strategy)
		Northwest Region	State-Wide
-	Wholesale Buyers, Brokers	46.28	47.40
-	Grocery Stores	12.17	6.40
-	Growers’ Cooperatives	10.64	25.73
-	Farmers’ Markets	11.17	8.28
-	Direct Sales (Catalogs/Internet)	10.58	8.54
-	Community Supported Agriculture	1.59	1.79
-	Roadside Stands/Farm Stores	21.69	12.19
-	U-Pick Sales	11.17	6.83
-	Food Cooperative	5.29	2.31
-	Production/Marketing Contract	13.23	14.36
-	Institutional (schools, etc.)	2.65	1.88
-	Restaurants	8.99	3.32
-	Retained Ownership	7.41	6.60
-	Other	37.31	29.31

Farm Products Grown/Produced in 2001 (percentage growing each commodity)
		Northwest Region	State-Wide
-	Fresh Vegetables	16.67	10.05
-	Fresh Fruits	19.79	28.16
-	Fruits/Vegetables for Processing	13.09	10.53
-	Grains	8.85	17.15
-	Hay	26.04	28.60
-	Ornamentals (Flowers, Bulbs, etc.)	18.32	7.31
-	Eggs and/or Poultry	7.41	4.51
-	Dairy Products (milk, cheese)	8.42	2.98
-	Cattle and/or Cows	47.12	34.92
-	Hogs	4.21	3.15
-	Sheep	4.74	3.32
-	Goats	3.68	2.21
-	Value-Added Products (jams, etc.)	7.37	2.05
-	Other	19.59	16.62

Strategies to be Attempted in 2002-2004 (percentage choosing each strategy)
		Northwest Region	State-Wide
-	More Direct Marketing to Consumers	33.85	25.13
-	Diversify Products Grown on Farm	23.44	23.85
-	Explore Greenhouse Production	9.38	6.39
-	Add On-Farm Packing/Processing	9.38	4.86
-	Join Producers’ Cooperative	7.81	5.45
-	Market Directly to Stores/Restaurants	11.98	7.16
-	Use Product Labeling (e.g. “green”)	10.94	5.88
-	Other Strategy	18.23	17.21
-	NO RESPONSE	65.43	60.14

Farming Practices Used in 2001 (percentage using each practice)
		Northwest Region	State-Wide
-	Crop Rotation	35.43	32.06
-	Vegetative Buffer Strips	30.11	18.28
-	Reduced Tillage	16.57	21.50
-	Direct Seeding/No-till	10.86	13.79
-	Intercropping /Companion Planting	11.49	7.19
-	Cover Crops	25.71	23.02
-	On-Farm Composting	32.18	21.45
-	Apply Compost/Organic Materials	38.86	27.27
-	Fertilize at Agronomic Rates	45.88	49.82
-	Mulch Using Organic Materials	28.99	18.51
-	Use Manure as Fertilizer	61.36	42.40
-	Water/Soil Moisture Monitoring	29.31	32.47
-	Soil Conservation/Erosion Control	31.98	43.32
-	Soil Nutrient Testing	42.53	45.83
-	Release of Beneficial Predators	8.09	9.52
-	Pheromones	8.19	15.18
-	Monitoring Pest Populations	36.78	42.37
-	Intensive Rotational Grazing	33.14	22.16
-	Tillage for Weed Control	43.93	37.81
-	Precision Agriculture with GPS	5.88	6.89

Attitudes Toward Marketing and Farm Policy (percentage of Those Who Neither Agree nor Disagree are not given)
		Northwest Region		State-Wide
		Agree	Disagree	Agree	Disagree
-	Labeling products as “Grown in WA” would benefit producers	80.11	5.68	77.22	5.63
-	Biggest threat to my farm’s viability is falling prices	62.14	19.77	73.86	12.68
-	Free Trade Agreements will help my farm be profitable	11.93	50.57	21.91	45.50
-	Government-supported agriculture programs should be targeted to small/medium farms	67.05	13.07	68.23	14.39
-	“Buy Local” campaign could increase consumption of local products	65.14	9.14	57.22	13.82
-	Maintaining family farms is important to County’s future	84.91	5.59	86.60	4.82
-	Need is greater than ever for Public Ag. Research and Extension	56.47	14.78	63.79	11.45
-	Private Agribusiness can replace most University Research and Extension	14.20	56.25	13.03	56.38
-	In-County consumers should have more local foods made available	64.17	5.20	57.08	6.32
-	Direct Marketing is effective for keeping farms viable in my county	73.41	7.51	60.96	11.09
-	Significant demand exists for organic ag. products in Washington	45.45	15.34	39.43	23.18
-	Extension programs benefited my farm business	51.13	17.98	59.05	14.21

Level of Involvement in Farm Related Organizations from 1999-2001 (percentage of Those Who Are Not Involved are not given)
		Northwest Region		State-Wide
		Somewhat	Very	Somewhat	Very
-	Farm Bureau	25.73	3.51	21.53	3.63
-	Commodity Commission	7.36	4.29	8.86	3.41
-	Grange	7.78	3.59	13.53	2.93
-	Growers’ Association	23.49	10.84	24.67	12.43
-	Growers’ Cooperative	12.27	5.52	18.95	11.62
-	Farmers’ Market Association	8.98	4.19	6.80	3.59
-	Other Farm Organizations	4.22	7.23	2.94	3.60

Attitudes Toward Farming and Environmental Issues (percentage of Those Who Neither Agree nor Disagree are not given)
		Northwest Region		State-Wide
		Agree	Disagree	Agree	Disagree
-	Environmental Regulations have negative impact on farming practices	78.34	12.78	74.26	12.52
-	Farmers’ Contributions to land stewardship are appreciated by public	31.66	55.00	28.60	53.51
-	Environmental Risks of GMOs are not well understood	67.59	6.15	69.18	8.04
-	Farmers should be paid for participation in wildlife programs	77.05	10.38	73.78	9.35
-	Local Gov’t should restrict non-ag. development in key ag. areas	73.18	15.65	65.82	19.02
-	Land should be farmed to protect long-term productive capacity	59.44	18.89	59.31	19.16
-	Consumer Concerns about GMOs outweigh overall benefits of their use	24.29	36.16	27.66	35.64
-	If a GMO were available in one of my commodities, I would try it	36.93	28.97	41.75	25.69
-	To protect against urban sprawl, ag. land restrictions will be needed	45.81	41.34	43.57	43.22
-	Farmers should be compensated if restricted from selling ag. land	85.31	6.21	81.03	9.97

Information Sources Accessed by Farmers During 2001 (percentage of Those Who Do Not Access a Particular Source are not given)
		Northwest Region			State-Wide
		Once or Twice		>Twice	Once or Twice	>Twice
-	Other Growers/Farm Managers	26.59		43.93	27.70	45.52
-	Private Consultants	18.63		18.63	15.62	17.74
-	Commodity/Grower Associations	21.61		14.81	26.06	17.79
-	WSU Co-operative Extension	39.52		15.57	36.25	18.97
-	Farm Supply Dealer/Ag. Business	27.81		49.70	30.77	46.65
-	Farm Newspapers/Magazines/etc.	23.25		52.33	30.18	45.65
-	State Department of Agriculture	23.45	</