Enteric fermentation from livestock accounts for over a quarter of the United States' methane emissions. A potent greenhouse gas, methane has 80 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. An emerging focus of research is the incorporation of algae (e.g., kelp, seaweed or microalgae) into livestock feed, with several studies documenting dramatic suppression of enteric methane emissions in cattle. As part of a nationwide multidisciplinary study of using algae feed supplements to reduce methane emissions and improve dairy productivity, we used focus groups and individual interviews to measure organic and conventional dairy farmer's knowledge and opinions of algae-based feed supplements. Our goals were to learn what both organic and conventional dairy farmers know about algae-based feed supplements, why they do or do not feed them to their cows and if they were interested in the methane-reducing potential of these algal-based feeds. We also sought to understand where they get valued information about animal nutrition. We found most farmers were aware of algae-based feed supplements on the market, but organic farmers were more familiar with marketing claims. Farmers reported feeding algae-based feed supplements to address herd health concerns, especially reproductive issues and pink eye, but expressed rising costs of the supplements as an obstacle. Both organic and conventional farmers expressed interest in suppressing methane emissions, but only if incentives are provided. Lastly, participants receive trusted information about feed supplements from their dairy nutritionists, who help them make decisions around feed purchasing and rations.

Weed management remains a high priority for organic farmers, whose fields generally have higher weed density and species diversity than those of their conventional counterparts. We explored whether variability in farmer knowledge and perceptions of weeds and weed management practices were predictive of variability in on-farm weed seedbanks on 23 organic farms in northern New England. We interviewed farmers and transcribed and coded interviews to quantify their emphasis on concepts regarding knowledge of ecological weed management, the perceived risks and benefits of weeds, and the perceived risks and benefits of weed management practices. To characterize on-farm weed seedbanks, we collected soil samples from five fields at each farm (115 fields total) and measured germinable weed seed density. Mean weed seed density per farm ranged from 2,775 seeds m−2 to 24,678 seeds m−2 to a soil depth of 10 cm. Farmers most often reported hairy galinsoga and crabgrass species (Digitaria spp.) as their most problematic weeds. The proportion of the sum of these two most problematic weeds in each farm's seedbank ranged from 1 to 73% of total weed seed density. Farmer knowledge and perceptions were predictive of total seed density, species richness, and proportion of hairy galinsoga and crabgrass species. Low seed densities were associated with farmers who most often discussed risks of weeds, benefits of critical weed-free management practices, and learning from their own experience. These farmers also exhibited greater knowledge of managing the weed seedbank and greater understanding of the importance of a long-term strategy. Targeted education focusing on this set of knowledge and beliefs could potentially lead to improved application and success of ecological weed management in the future, thus decreasing labor costs and time necessary for farmers to manage weeds.

Understanding farmers' knowledge of soil quality and health is essential to ensure transfer of appropriate technology for on-farm assessments. The objective of this study was to evaluate farmers' knowledge of soil quality by comparing their perceptions of soil conditions for “good” and “problem” soils on their farms with values of soil quality indicators as determined by established assessment protocol. Twenty-four conventional and organic farmers throughout eastern Nebraska were paired within regions of similar climate, topography, and soil type and their perceptions of soil quality indicators were queried using a written questionnaire. Questionnaire data were compared directly to values of soil quality indicators and perception accuracy indices were calculated. Overall, perception accuracy of soil quality indicators did not differ between conventional and organic farmers. Farmers' perceptions of soil quality indicators tended to be more accurate for “good” soils as compared to “problem” soils. Indicators that were incorrectly estimated at a frequency greater than 33% included available nitrogen and phosphorus, soil color, degree of compaction, and infiltration rate. Despite this, farmers' perceptions were correct or nearly-correct over 75% of the time for the majority of indicators evaluated in the study. Evaluation of social and managerial factors indicated that perception accuracy of soil quality indicators declined as the time of on-farm tenure increased. Results from this study indicate that agriculturists should seek out farmers' knowledge of soil characteristics as a first iteration to pointscale evaluation of soil quality.