Confinement Site Certification - Iowa State University Extension

2002 Confinement site manure applicator evaluation
Iowa State University Extension
Summary of Data Collected as of  12/31/02
Total Responses: 1135 (Workshop attendees:1072 Video attendees: 63)

Information presented
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Response
1. Feeding Strategies:
286
25%
766
67%
73
6%
1
0%
9
1%
 
2. Equipment Calibration:
336
30%
727
64%
59
5%
1
0%
12
1%
 
3. Dead Animal Disposal:
569
50%
523
46%
30
3%
2
0%
11
1%
 
4. Rules:
418
37%
673
59%
37
3%
0
0%
7
1%
 
5. Equipment Options & Land Application Concerns:
336
30%
711
63%
73
6%
0
0%
15
1%
 
6. Dry Manure (optional)
191
17%
610
54%
100
9%
9
1%
225
20%
 
 
Overall evaluation
Strongly Agree
Agree
Undecided
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
No Response
1. The information presented today was useful for my work.
232
20%
836
74%
47
4%
8
1%
5
0%
7
1%
 
2. The presenters were prepared and knowledgeable.
495
44%
614
54%
15
1%
0
0%
8
1%
3
0%
 
3. Would you be willing to attend a Pesticide Applicator Training meeting and this meeting during the same day?
230
20%
363
32%
289
25%
143
13%
85
7%
25
2%
 
 
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
No Response
4. Overall, how do you rate this program?
344
30%
719
63%
54
5%
5
0%
13
1%
 
Changes in Manure Management Practices
Adopted prior to training
Plan to adopt
Do not plan to adopt
Does not apply
No Response
1. Use different feeding strategies to reduce manure nutrients?
398
35%
301
27%
179
16%
212
19%
45
4%
 
2.  Calibrate manure application equipment to determine rates?
494
44%
451
40%
81
7%
71
6%
38
3%
 
3.  Use different manure injection equipment to meet residue requirements?
434
38%
294
26%
178
16%
172
15%
57
5%
 

 

line

Iowa State University Extension

 

 

|Home Page| |About IMMAG| |Contact/Help|

Copyright © 1997-2006, Iowa State University. All rights reserved.

Page last updated: June 3, 2007