Agroforestry VOLUME 21 ISSUE 1 Inside

turn his knowledge into action 

by managing land in the most 

beneficial way possible. 

Turning a Vision into a

Reality

Seven years ago, in order to make 

this dream a reality, Chris began 

converting a 250-acre loblolly 

pine plantation in Scottsville, VA, 

into a goat and sheep silvopasture 

system that resembles a pine 

savanna landscape. Since that 

time, he and friends have spent 

many weekends away from their 

graduate school studies and daily 

lives to thin and prune trees by 

hand, conduct controlled burns, 

fight invasives, and experiment 

6

8

Silvopasture 

and Fuel Breaks

Canada Cattle

Inside

Virginia is for Lovers — 

And Silvopasture

Throughout his life, Chris Fields-Johnson has been keenly 

aware of the need to preserve the 

natural landscapes he cherishes and 

that provide us with clean air to 

breathe, water to drink, and food 

to eat. As a graduate student of soil 

science at Virginia Tech, a forestry 

undergraduate, a student of Tom 

Brown Jr.’s Tracker School, and a 

former employee of the Virginia 

Department of Forestry, he also 

knows about the science behind 

soil restoration and forestry. This 

has given him a strong desire to 

Colleen Rossier

Program Assistant USDA

Office of the Chief Scientist

Washington, D.C.

Many Paths

to Success

See silvopasture pg. 3

4

Shade Coffee Production

6
2 Inside Agroforestry ] Volume 21, Issue 1

NAC Director’s Corner

A commentary on the status of agroforestry by Andy Mason, NAC Director

Thinking back over my 3+ years as NAC Director, I am 

once again asking myself, “What does it take to increase 

adoption of agroforestry?” We strive for this desired outcome: 

Thousands of producers across America are using agroforestry, 

increasing their profitability, and providing a wide range of 

public benefits/services for their community and nation. To 

realize this outcome, we need the four “Ps” -- more Peer-topeer learning, Professionals, Partnerships, and Programs all 

working together!

Peer-to-peer learning

We all know producers who have adopted agroforestry 

practices. We need to identify more producers in more 

counties and find ways to get them CONNECTED (i.e., peer 

to peer), with other producers who are not currently practicing 

agroforestry. Depending on local custom/culture, this may 

include good old workshops, visits to on-farm demonstration 

sites, and even social media tools.

Professionals

It is very important to have professionals with agroforestry 

EXPERTISE who can provide the technical, educational, 

and marketing assistance requested by landowners, Tribes, 

communities and others. Second best is to have professionals 

who can immediately refer a producer to someone else who 

has agroforestry expertise. 

Partnerships

Partnerships at the local, state, regional, national, and 

international level have clearly shown me their importance 

in bringing together people to increase awareness and 

understanding of agroforestry and how it can support 

landowner objectives as well as community and watershed 

goals. Examples of regional agroforestry partnerships include 

the Chesapeake Bay Agroforestry Team (see p. 11) and the 

Mid-American Agroforestry Working Group.

Programs

USDA and other state/local programs certainly have an 

important role in advancing the adoption of agroforestry. You 

may not know about a new agroforestry question in the Census 

of Agriculture, thanks to the USDA National Agricultural 

Statistics Service (NASS), which will help us learn who 

practices agroforestry across the US and also guide future 

outreach and assistance efforts. 

I’m interested to hear your thoughts about the four “Ps”. 

Please also let me know if there are ways NAC can help you 

advance the science, practice, and application of agroforestry. 

Please email me at amason@fs.fed.us.

Sincerely, 

Andy Mason

Adoption of Agroforestry – its takes four “Ps”

What’s New

13th North American Agroforestry Conference

The 13th North American Agroforestry Conference will be held June 19-21, 2013 on behalf of the 

Association of Temperate Agroforestry (AFTA) 

http://aftaweb.org/ . AFTA is a non-profit association 

that promotes the understanding of agroforestry in a 

North American context. This biennial conference will 

be hosted at the University of Prince Edward Island in 

Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada.

The conference will consist of two days of plenary 

and concurrent sessions (June 19 and June 21) that will 

address many aspects of agroforestry. A conference 

field tour of agroforestry in the Charlottetown area 

will occur on June 20. Participants who register for 

the pre-conference tour on June 17-18, will also visit 

agroforestry sites in New Brunswick.

Paper and Poster abstracts will be accepted until March 

30, 2013. The official language of the conference is 

English. All oral and poster presentations will be 

presented in English. 

For more information go to www.2013NAAC.com
 Volume 21, Issue 1 ] Inside Agroforestry 3

with forage establishment while 

they also learn how to raise goats 

and sheep. Chris and his friends are 

early adopters of this agroforestry 

system in Virginia and thus have 

much to learn on their own. Some 

of the things they are learning are 

the technical aspects of how to 

establish forages, how far apart to 

thin the trees, how many animals 

can graze per acre, how quickly to 

rotate the pastures, how to restore 

nutrients that have been extracted 

from the soil. Most importantly, 

they are learning how to finance the 

operation.

Other farmers in the area—both 

beginning ones like Chris as 

well as more seasoned ones—are 

facing similar issues. Some wish to 

start silvopasturing their lands to 

decrease heat stress in the summer 

by providing shade for their 

animals, while others are interested 

in diversifying their assets by 

combining the long-term income 

streams from the trees with the 

short-term income stream from 

goats or cattle. Others are interested 

in the environmental benefits that 

trees provide and wish to keep them 

on large tracts of their property 

while still producing animals. 

Without many mature silvopasture 

operations in the area, however, 

trying something new often seems 

risky for producers because it 

brings with it much uncertainty. 

Ready Assistance to Early

Adopters

This risk and uncertainty is why 

it is critical for USDA’s Natural 

Resources Conservation Service 

(NRCS), US Forest Service, and 

partners (including technical 

service providers, Cooperative 

Extension, and state agricultural 

and forestry agencies) to be able 

to provide technical advice and 

financial assistance to help farmers 

and ranchers make the leap to this 

new technology and way of doing 

things. Fortunately for farmers 

in Virginia, NRCS listened to the 

desires of producers in the area, and 

as of October 2011, they adopted a 

silvopasture establishment practice 

applicable throughout the state. 

This means that NRCS employees 

may now provide both technical 

and financial assistance to help 

producers establish silvopastoral 

systems on their land. 

This is a major step forward for the 

adoption of silvopasture systems 

in Virginia and demonstrates one 

of the three goals of the USDA 

Agroforestry Strategic Framework: 

that of integrating agroforestry 

into the USDA toolbox. For 

this to happen, “silvopasture 

establishment” first had to be 

established as a practice standard at 

the national level, which occurred 

in 2002. Then, the NRCS state 

office in Virginia reached out to 

J.B. Daniel, a grassland agronomist 

and grazing specialist who works in 

Farmville, and asked him whether 

the practice was appropriate for 

the state of Virginia. J.B. had 

met with a variety of landowners 

in various counties throughout 

Virginia over the last few years, 

so he knew that, yes, silvopasture 

was certainly a desirable practice 

that some producers are interested 

in, and one that NRCS would do 

well to support. To assist NRCS 

employees as they help landowners 

establish silvopastures, the NRCS 

created a “Job Sheet” based off 

of the national guidelines, which 

gives an overview about the types 

of decisions landowners need to 

address as they convert plantations 

or pastures into silvopastures.

Taking Agroforestry on the

Road

Mr. Daniel went one step further 

and organized a working field trip 

to several farms. The farms were 

in varying stages of silvopasture 

establishment: from a producer 

with early interest and large 

property holdings to another who 

is integrating poultry, but is still in 

the planning stages, to a high school 

What is silvopasture? How

can I establish it on my

land? How should I manage

my trees? How can I establish 

forage for my animals as

efficiently and effectively as 

possible? What type of 

rotation scheme do I need for 

my animals?

From silvopasture pg. 1

The field trip provided lots of opportunities for questions and discussion. - 

Source: Colleen Rossier

See property page 4
4 Inside Agroforestry ] Volume 21, Issue 1

teacher interested in converting land 

for educational purposes, to Chris 

Fields-Johnson and his business 

partner, Daniel Michaelson, who 

have already started managing the 

trees but have not yet moved their 

animals onto the property. 

Though it started out small, interest 

in this trip grew until it included 

employees from nearby county 

offices of NRCS and Virginia 

Department of Forestry (which 

administers the forestry aspects of 

NRCS conservation programs), 

NRCS experts from their technology 

support center in North Carolina, 

professors from Virginia Tech and 

Virginia State Universities. At each 

site, J.B. led a discussion focused on 

how to help each producer meet their 

goals by drawing from the varying 

expertise of the attendees.

After learning about resources 

available to assist them on the tour, 

Fields-Johnson and Michaelson have 

followed up with their local forester, 

and they plan to pursue assistance 

from the Environmental Quality 

Incentives Program. They also 

hope to establish partnerships with 

researchers, professors, and extension 

specialists who might wish to use the 

farm as a research and demonstration 

plot, which is a great need as: 1) on 

the research side, there is much left 

to discover about the best ways to 

implement silvopasture practices in 

Virginia and 2) on the extension side, 

as mentioned above, many producers 

will only try new practices once they 

see a fellow producer doing it.

Experts Share Expertise

The beauty of this quick trip was that 

the discussion not only benefitted 

each producer by helping them 

initiate a plan with their county 

District Conservationist but it was 

educational for all. Each expert 

learned about another expert’s 

field of study: the foresters learned 

what would be needed for forage 

establishment in a silvopastoral 

system while the forage specialists 

learned how to calculate basal area 

and how to identify the dominant 

trees to retain when thinning a 

timber stand. 

While this was a fantastic example of 

how USDA is starting to integrate 

agroforestry into the way it does 

business, there is much left to be 

done: more state NRCS offices still 

need to adopt agroforestry practices; 

more educational opportunities such 

as this one must be available for 

government employees, researchers, 

and producers to better understand 

these transformational systems; 

and more research must be done to 

learn the best ways to establish and 

manage silvopasture systems. Way to 

go, Virginia! ]

Shade Coffee Production Enjoys Resurgence

Shade coffee production in Puerto Rico has experienced a resurgence during recent years, after 

undergoing a dramatic period of deforestation to 

convert to coffee production under full sun. The revival 

of shade coffee production utilizes a combination of 

coffee shrubs and shade trees that form a secondary 

forest. Shade coffee production has been proven to 

provide environmental benefits such as soil erosion 

control, water quality and quantity improvement, and 

wildlife habitat. Shade coffee production also provides 

socioeconomic benefits such as the opportunity to 

develop other sustainable forest products, and the 

reintroduction of traditional jobs and cultural activities 

for local coffee pickers.

The coffee growing zone in Puerto Rico is located 

mostly in the humid mountains of the west-central 

section of the “Cordillera Central.” This area is 

chacterized by steep, mountainous topography and a 

cool climate in the humid and wet subtropical forest. 

The coffee tree or shrub originated in Ethiopia. The 

most common species grown in Puerto Rico are the 

Coffea arabica and Coffea canephora. According to Don 

José S. Alegría, coffee trees from the Dominican 

Richard Straight

Adapted from NRCS Fact Sheet, Managing Shade Coffee, Nov 2012

Coffee flowering under the shade of plantain in Puerto 

Rico - Source: NAC

From property page 3
 Volume 21, Issue 1 ] Inside Agroforestry 5

Republic were introduced to Puerto Rico in the 

town of Coamo in 1736. Coffee rapidly became 

Puerto Rico’s most important export product, with 

50 million pounds exported annually by the end of 

the 19th century. Currently, about 82% of the coffee 

planted in Puerto Rico is arabica.

Coffee Shrubs Under Shade

Coffee shrubs require certain environmental 

conditions to perform at their best in terms of vigor, 

growth and berry production. These conditions are 

achieved by planting coffee in locations with the most 

suitable environmental conditions. In Puerto Rico, 

not all coffee plantations may be located in areas that 

are ecologically suitable for coffee growth. Therefore, 

recreating favorable coffee growing conditions may 

be beneficial for both coffee production and for the 

environment. 

For example, the optimum growth temperature for 

arabica coffee varies from 60° to 65° F. With these 

conditions, coffee shrubs grow adequately, developing 

vigorous and healthy branches and leaves. The 

temperature in Puerto Rico’s coffee zone fluctuates 

between 55° to 85° F. One method to maintain ideal 

coffee-growing temperatures is to manage shade 

on the plantation. Healthy coffee plantations also 

require adequate moisture, in terms of both rainfall 

and relative humidity. Coffee shrubs require 70 to 

100 inches of rain per year and a relative humidity 

of 70 to 85%. Shade trees help to reduce potential 

evapotranspiration by modifying solar radiation. The 

amount of solar light in shade coffee plantations can 

be managed by pruning shade trees.

A Favorable Environment

• Soils: Trees provide valuable soil erosion control. 

Roots anchor soil particles in place and the canopy 

intercepts raindrops, reducing their erosive impact 

on the soil below. Leaf litter and other organic matter 

accumulates on the soil surface as mulch and is slowly 

incorporated into the soil, providing habitat for 

beneficial organisms.

•Water: The formation of a secondary forest by shade 

grown coffee helps increase water retention in the soil 

profile, benefitting base flow and helping to recharge 

aquifers. Trees improve water quality by helping to 

reduce soil erosion and storm water runoff, thereby 

reducing sediments and other potential contaminants 

dissolved in storm water.

• Air: Planting shade trees reduces wind speed in the 

coffee groves, benefiting pollinators and wildlife and 

reducing potential wind damage to coffee shrub roots.

• Plants: Development of tree strata (creating layers 

of branches) improves tree health and wildlife habitat. 

Planting leguminous trees also provides nutrients to 

the soil.

• Animals: Shade coffee production creates wildlife 

habitat that may benefit endemic and threatened 

species.

• Energy: Shade trees moderate the temperature 

on the coffee plantation, improving plant health, 

cooling buildings and providing a better working 

environment for farm laborers. 

Shade is not necessary in every ecosystem. Each farm 

must be evaluated to determine the practices and 

management methods needed to produce the best 

coffee and meet other landowner objectives. Other 

conservation practices suitable for coffee plantations 

are: planting along the contour, trails, vegetative 

barriers, pruning, nutrient management, integrated 

pest management, ecological pulping equipment, and 

waste management.

For More Information

Please contact the NRCS Field Offices or the State

Office in San Juan, Puerto Rico, at 787-766-5206, or

visit our Web site at: www.pr.nrcs.usda.gov. ]

Shade coffee production also 

provides socioeconomic 

benefits such as the opportunity to 

develop other sustainable forest products, 

and the reintroduction of traditional 

jobs and cultural activities for local 

coffee pickers.

Coffee and plantain provide a protective canopy at the 

top of the watershed that creates habitat and reduces 

erosion. - Source: NAC
6 Inside Agroforestry ] Volume 21, Issue 1

Agroforestry and Forest Restoration 

in Pennsylvania

The 2010 Executive Order for Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed 

includes developing a plan to maximize forest 

restoration in priority areas by 2012. Forest restoration 

includes lands with agroforestry potential. Because 

Pennsylvania contributes half of the freshwater flowing 

into the Chesapeake Bay, its land uses play a significant 

role in the Bay’s overall water quality. 

Today, forests comprise about 60 percent of the land 

cover in Pennsylvania. Its non-forested land base is 

largely agricultural. Despite the predominance of 

these land uses, agroforestry—the integration of trees 

and agriculture—is poorly understood and generally 

not considered by landowners or practitioners in 

stewardship planning. The landscape in Pennsylvania 

provides ample opportunities to explore the additional 

potential agroforestry practices provide in the Bay 

toolbox of best management practices. 

Land Ownership and Forest Distribution

About 70 percent of the 17 million acres of forest land 

in Pennsylvania is privately owned. An estimated 20 

Tracey Coulter

Watershed Coordinator, PA DCNR

Bureau of Forestry

Harrisburg, PA

Silvopasture and Fuel Breaks 

The Allen Edwards family tree farm near Colfax, CA 

has been in the family for more than 60 years. “When 

my father bought the property, it was essentially cutover railroad land, largely covered with weed oaks and 

brush, but with scattered large conifers and fair conifer 

reproduction, mostly Douglas-fir, under the oaks and 

brush,” Allen writes in a 2002 Forest Landowner article. 

During the first 50 years of ownership the Edwards 

family operated the tree farm part-time. When Allen 

retired, the tree farm became a full-time enterprise with 

a number of improvements including timber stand 

improvement. 

This landscape is prone to seasonal wildfires. Allen 

was well aware of the fire risks due to the topography 

of the American River Canyon nearby. With assistance 

from the Natural Resources Conservation Service, Allen 

treated about ten acres of his forest along a ridge with a 

shaded fuel break. A fuel break is a strip or block of land 

on which the vegetation and woody debris is modified to 

reduce the risk of fire crossing the strip or block of land. 

Allen removed underbrush and thinned trees in a strip 

about 400 feet wide along the ridge at a cost of $4500. 

His forethought and investment proved critical in 2001 

when a fire broke out in the adjoining canyon. Although 

Allen lost some of his forest, the fuel break provided a 

critical line of defense for the firefighters attacking the 

fire. The fuel break slowed the fire and sheltered the 

firefighters enabling them to stop the fire from going 

down the other side toward the community of Colfax.

With his loss of trees from the fire, Allen began exploring 

additional farm enterprises to supplement his cash 

flow so he was not dependent solely on the wood. His 

diversification included purchasing some Kiko and Boer 

goats for meat. The goats not only provide another farm 

product but they also have a key role in reducing fire 

risk. Once a fuel break is established by thinning the 

trees and reducing the underbrush, the work does not 

stop there. 

Keeping the fuel loads down is a continuous process. 

That is where the goats come into play. Through 

managed grazing, the goats browse the leaves and 

twigs of the shrubs including young live oak trees and 

ceanothus shrubs reducing the fuel loads. Edwards 

commented, “I did mechanically what I expect these 

guys to do biologically.” This is more cost effective 

because the goats are also providing a cash meat product. 

Improved air quality is also a benefit not only due to less 

wildfire risks, but there is also less need for prescribed 

burns to reduce the fuel loads. Prescribed burning can be 

expensive and complicated including all the effort to meet 

burn permit and smoke management requirements.

Allen uses a rotational grazing system with his goats. 

They will graze about a six acre paddock at a time. When 

they complete one paddock, they are moved to another 

area. Allen indicated that the ceanothus shrub that he 

called “sweet birch” has about 20 percent protein helping 

produce a high grade meat. He has about 40 goats that 

are protected by Great Pyrenees guard dogs due to 

predators like mountain lions, bears and coyotes.

See fuel breaks page 9

Bruce Wight

NRCS National Forester

Retired
 Volume 21, Issue 1 ] Inside Agroforestry 7

percent of those private forest lands 

occur on farms but are not generally 

well integrated into farming 

operations. A recent Penn State 

University (PSU) study of farmers 

and forest land owners found “that 

agroforestry could satisfy specific 

land management objectives within 

diverse populations” (Strong and 

Jacobson 2005). Furthermore, 

the plurality (36 percent) of 

respondents expressed interest 

in producing non-timber forest 

products or forest farming. One in 

four respondents indicated interest 

in practices to enhance livestock 

production, such as silvopasture, 

windbreaks, and riparian forest 

buffers. Nearly one-third of 

the respondents were interested 

in agroforestry practices that 

complemented timber management, 

including crop-tree management 

and forest farming. But perhaps 

the most relevant statistic for 

technical service providers and 

resource professionals was that 90 

percent of the respondents would 

consider adopting agroforestry if 

information were made available 

and if they could see working 

demonstrations. 

Statistics from the 2007 Census 

of Agriculture indicate that, 

while the number of farms in 

Pennsylvania is holding steady, the 

size of the average Pennsylvania 

farm decreased by 9 acres between 

2004 and 2007. Today the average 

Pennsylvania farm is 123 acres 

in size, while 38 percent of 

Pennsylvania farms are less than 

50 acres. New farmers are facing 

farmland prices ranging from $3,000 

to $7,000 per acre. As farm size 

shrinks and the cost of farmland 

rises, farmers are increasingly 

looking to glean more productivity 

from their land holdings, including 

their forest land.

Introducing Agroforestry

With the support of the US 

Forest Service, the Pennsylvania 

Department of Conservation and 

Natural Resources (DCNR) Bureau 

of Forestry and its partners have 

reached out to the agricultural 

community by providing 

agroforestry training, promoting 

forest-based income streams to 

farmers, and collaborating with 

educators and farmers to develop 

agroforestry demonstration 

sites. This partnership includes 

the USDA’s National Resource 

Conservation Service (NRCS) 

and Agricultural Research Service 

(ARS), Dickinson College, 

Pennsylvania Association for 

Sustainable Agriculture (PASA), 

Cornell University Cooperative 

Extension, and PSU’s Shaver’s 

Creek Environmental Center and 

Department of Ecosystem Science 

and Management.

Pennsylvania’s forestry community 

has a long-standing relationship 

with PASA, which leads 

forest-based workshops at the 

organization’s annual conference 

and seasonal workshops. The 

annual PASA conference held in 

early February attracts more than 

2,000 farmers and other supporters 

of sustainable agriculture. By virtue 

of their hands-on involvement in 

farming practices, farmers that 

participate in these workshops 

are perceived to be more inclined 

towards active stewardship of their 

forest land, than other Pennsylvania 

farmers. 

Woodland Pasturing and

Forest Health

Because of this perceived inclination 

toward active forest stewardship, 

the Bureau of Forestry and its 

partners have sought to engage 

this community in a “farm forest” 

conversation. This partnership has 

reached several hundred workshop 

participants with information on 

the basics of forest farming (e.g., for 

ramps, ginseng, and mushrooms), 

chainsaw safety, silviculture, nut 

production, charcoal production, 

working with consulting foresters, 

and silvopasture practices. Of 

all the subjects, silvopasture 

discussions garner the most interest 

among participants and the most 

consternation among foresters. 

In years past, Pennsylvania farmers 

traditionally pastured livestock in 

their woodlands, even driving them 

up into the mountains to feed on 

acorns and chestnuts. However, 

for over 100 years, foresters have 

lectured (and been lectured) on the 

havoc livestock causes in forest 

communities. In the end, foresters 

and farmers have generally avoided 

conversations about silvopasture. 

Nonetheless, the practice of 

woodlands pasturing has continued, 

often in ways that destroy forest 

regeneration and leaves bare 

soil devoid of suitable forage, 

Jim Finley, Penn State University, discusses canopy management in 

agroforestry systems. - Source: Tracey Coulter

See run-off page 8
8 Inside Agroforestry ] Volume 21, Issue 1

resulting in increased run-off and 

land of little value as either forest 

or pasture. Realizing this, some 

landowners are looking to foresters 

and other resource professionals 

to guide them in maximizing 

productivity while protecting 

natural resources.

The forestry community was 

largely unprepared to participate in 

this evolving dialogue. One Chester 

County grazier sought assistance 

from a local DCNR Service 

Forester, who in turn referred 

him to a consulting forester. The 

farmer gave each forester a copy 

of J. Russell Smith’s Tree Crops as 

required reading before silvopasture 

planning could begin on his farm. 

Foresters generally are not well 

versed in pasture development; 

fortunately, an NRCS grazing 

specialist joined the team, and the 

collaborative effort may provide 

one of Pennsylvania’s first on-farm 

silvopasture demonstration sites. 

A Demonstration Site for

Agroforestry Practices

Noting there was no single location 

where a suite of agroforestry 

practices could be viewed in 

Pennsylvania, the DNCR Bureau 

of Forestry reached out to the 

Dickinson College Farm in 

Boiling Springs, Cumberland 

County, to develop an agroforestry 

demonstration center. Dickinson 

College Farm is a 180-acre working 

farm that provides vegetables to 

the College’s dining hall, a local 

food bank, and members of the 

farm’s co-op. In addition to raising 

vegetables, herbs, and flowers for 

sale, the College Farm manages 

small flocks of sheep and laying 

hens. The farm is also used to 

demonstrate farming practices.

In 2011, the College Farm received 

a grant through the Chesapeake 

Bay Program Forest Working 

Group to demonstrate five principle 

agroforestry practices. Then, in 

summer of 2012, student interns 

supervised by the farm manager and 

other faculty members, collected 

baseline data for the planned 

agroforestry demonstration sites 

to document vegetation change as 

agroforestry practices develop. 

Agroforestry is an emerging 

conversation in Pennsylvania. 

There are many practitioners, from 

the Adams County farmer alley 

cropping pumpkins in his apple 

orchards to a Bedford County 

shiitake grower to a Jefferson 

County ginseng farmer and the 

Lancaster County silvopasturist. 

It is almost certain that few of 

them would recognize themselves 

as agroforesters. Here new 

partnerships are being formed as 

resource agencies, nongovernmental 

organizations, and colleges and 

universities are working with 

farmers across traditional land use 

boundaries to develop working 

landscapes, learning from and 

teaching each other as they go. ]

Shelterbelts, Beef Producers’ Behaviour, 

and Farming Practices: 

Using Social Marketing to Promote Change

Social marketing and the Internet are new tools in efforts to promote the use of shelterbelts for beef production 

in southwest Manitoba. Shelterbelts provide a number of benefits for farmers, including important ecological 

functions, by sequestering carbon while still leaving the majority of the land in agricultural production. 

As well as a number of other soil and water benefits, shelterbelts provide livestock protection from the cold 

winter winds. The reduced wind velocities greatly reduce the effect of cold temperatures on livestock, lowering 

animal stress and energy requirements. 

Beef producers also achieve significant environmental and financial benefits by using shelterbelts to support 

swath and bale grazing. Feeding the cattle directly on the pasture where they spread their own manure also 

results in large gains in nutrient capture. While not new to the industry, planting shelterbelts to support field/

bale grazing is an unfamiliar farming practice that requires livestock producers to change their established way of 

farming. 

Betty Kelly, Project Lead

Dr. Bill Ashton, Director

Rural Development Institute

Brandon University

Brandon, Manitoba

See shelterbelts page 9

From run-off page 7
 Volume 21, Issue 1 ] Inside Agroforestry 9

Is Allen’s combined timber 

and grazing system a form of 

silvopasture? It may not meet all 

the parameters of silvopasture, but 

it is an intentional and integrated 

system including dual management 

of the understory vegetation 

through grazing while at the same 

time managing the overstory for a 

long term timber product on the 

same land unit. His system is also 

interactive by manipulating the 

biological and physical interactions 

between the tree, crop and animal 

components. The intensity of the 

operation may not be as great as 

some silvopasture systems where 

additional annual inputs, e.g., as 

fertilizer, are included, but the 

results look a lot like silvopasture. 

Agroforestry comes in many sizes 

and shapes and may not always 

adhere to very strict definitions. 

For Allen Edwards, his tree and 

goat farm is a diverse enterprise that 

is protecting the natural resource 

base and providing his family an 

economic return. Allen calls his 

form of management “highland 

farming,” or “stacking enterprises” 

with the goal of every piece of 

ground being productive. If he and 

other small landowners can make 

a living from their land through 

diverse enterprises, there may be 

less selling of land for subdivisions. 

“Personally, I want to figure out 

a way that I can keep one or both 

of my kids around here, because I 

like my kids,” says Edwards. “But 

broader than that, I just don’t want 

to see all this land ripped up by 

subdivisions.”

(Note: article was adapted from “California 

Tree Farmers of the Year 2002” - http://www.

caltreefarm.com/ca_tree_farm_awards/2002.html

and “Allen Edwards: Goat Browsing”, http://ucanr.

org/sites/rrea/Land_Stewards/Goat_Browsing/, 

University of California Renewable Resources 

Extension Act Program) ]

From fuel breaks page 6

The Rural Development Institute (RDI) at Brandon University in Brandon, Manitoba, is investigating the 

attitudes of beef producers toward, and their adoption of, this environmentally responsible cropping and winter 

livestock feeding method, using alternating rows of planted trees and grazing fields. 

Changing Long-Established Farming Practices

Funded under Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s (AAFC) agricultural greenhouse gases program and 

spearheaded by Upper Assiniboine River Conservation District (UARCD) and RDI, this applied research 

project is exploring ways to increase the use of shelterbelts by Manitoba’s beef producers. With two interrelated 

but distinct components, this four-year project addresses important environmental and behaviour changes. 

First, the project aims to better understand beef producers attitudes toward farming, their perceptions of 

shelterbelts, and what incentives are needed to bring about voluntary changes in farming practices. In conjunction 

with a hands-on educational awareness component led by UARCD, a social marketing research component at 

RDI is conducting a multi-year 

study of the attitudes of beef 

producers. The project then 

will apply a staged, multifaceted 

awareness and information effort 

geared to raise beef producers’ 

awareness of shelterbelt benefits 

and increase their willingness 

to adopt the use of shelterbelts 

as part of their cropping and 

winter feed strategy—i.e., accept 

a commitment to change their 

farming practices. 

It is not the intention of 

the project to invent new 

farming methods but rather to 

demonstrate that unfamiliar 

practices such as alley cropping, 

when combined with proven 

From shelterbelts page 8

An interactive web site allows producer to share their experiences. See practices page 10
10 Inside Agroforestry ] Volume 21, Issue 1

winter feeding strategies, can 

benefit both the beef producer’s 

bottom line and the environment. 

However, there has been limited 

uptake by Manitoba beef 

producers. The project’s social 

marketing model provides a 

structure for determining why this 

is the case. As the project continues, 

the model will also provide a 

structure to evaluate strategies that 

are successful and why: i.e., which 

project activities actually encourage 

beef farmers to change their 

practices and increase the use of 

shelterbelts in their winter feeding 

operations. 

The Social Marketing

Approach

A synthesis of behaviour change 

models, coupled with previous 

experience and informed efforts of 

others, resulted in the formulation 

of a five-stage social marketing 

model to implement the goals of 

this project: 

• Awareness: inform beef producers 

of the importance and benefits of 

shelterbelts.

• Assessment: allow beef producers 

to evaluate barriers, costs, and 

opportunities of shelterbelts for 

their cattle operations. 

• Acceptance: prompt beef 

producers to decide whether or 

not to implement shelterbelts: i.e., 

answer Yes, No, or Maybe.

• Action: monitor those saying Yes 

in their efforts to rejuvenate and 

establish shelterbelts; assist those 

answering Maybe to decide on a 

Yes or No response; and explore 

why a No response has been given 

and what, if anything, can turn it to 

a Yes.

• Appraisal: record beef producers’ 

assessments of return on investment 

in field conversion to shelterbelts.

Key aspects of the project strategies 

include maintaining a field site 

for demonstrating alley grazing, 

creating a website that includes 

video clips of fellow beef producers 

talking about the importance of 

shelterbelts and bale grazing to 

their farm operation, and holding 

shelterbelt design workshops. 

An annual baseline survey of 

primary awareness and interest was 

conducted involving over 300 beef 

producers, which provided key 

data for the social marketing model. 

The information gathered by the 

baseline survey assists in planning 

appropriate awareness messages 

for the website and promotional 

activities at beef producer 

tradeshow events. 

Awareness

The UARCD is working directly 

with a local beef producer, Doug 

Caldwell near Kenton, Manitoba, 

to establish a quarter-section 

alley cropping and winter feeding 

demonstration site. In addition 

to consulting on the layout and 

assisting with planting the trees, 

UARCD will regularly monitor 

the site for wind velocities, animal 

and crop performance, and nutrient 

cycling in both the treatment and 

nontreatment areas, including 

changes in soil characteristics. 

The interactive website (http://

prairieshelterbelts.ca/) contains 

short video clips of existing 

shelterbelts and invites beef 

producers to take virtual tours to 

see 16 of their peers talking about 

the important role that shelterbelts 

and winter grazing play in their 

farming operations. Grounded 

in the belief that people are more 

likely to be influenced by others 

like themselves sharing their 

experiences, the video clips of the 

sites provide that peer connection. 

One click on an interactive map 

and a viewer is in a beef producer’s 

living room or touring his cattle 

feeding program. 

Assessment

Integrated with the demonstration 

site and the website are shelterbelt 

design workshops offered by the 

regional conservation districts, 

AAFC , and RDI. Up to 40 beef 

producers were invited to these 

hands-on workshops in the winter 

of 2012–2013, where they were 

invited to design new and expanded 

shelterbelts based on aerial photos 

of their own land. Producers can 

also assess the costs and benefits 

of shelterbelts for their operations; 

determine the number, types, and 

costs of trees and bushes necessary 

to create them; and identify the 

nearest source of seedlings. 

Acceptance and Action

After designing and assessing 

the related costs and benefits of 

shelterbelts, beef producers are 

given time to assess the value of 

pursuing their preferred design 

before making an implementation 

decision (Yes, No, or Maybe). 

Each workshop participant will 

receive follow-up calls to answer 

any remaining questions about the 

process and help identify specific 

considerations in order to reach a 

decision on implementation. The 

beef producers who do move to 

action with a Yes, will become ‘local 

champions’, and by their example, 

they will assist with sustaining 

change in favor of shelterbelts. 

These champions will be profiled 

on the website in the coming year.

Appraisal

Now in year two, this project is 

beginning an ongoing appraisal 

process. The collaborators continue 

to play unique and interrelated 

roles in helping the project 

accomplish its objectives. 

Results to Date

Analysis of first year primary data 

from baseline surveys completed 

by 231 Manitoba beef producers 

offers important information about 

See results page 11

From practices page 9
 Volume 21, Issue 1 ] Inside Agroforestry 11

beef producers, including their 

reasons for using shelterbelts and 

their perceptions on the use of, 

and benefits of, shelterbelts. For 

example, 68 percent of producers 

with shelterbelts strongly agreed 

that shelterbelts increase livestock 

protection, compared to 52 

percent of the producers without 

shelterbelts. 

A current challenge facing the 

project is how to best identify beef 

producers who are moving from 

the awareness to the assessment 

stage; and how to motivate them to 

participate in one of the workshops. 

Local advertising and personal 

invitations are proving the most 

effective to date, but inclement 

weather, location and timing are 

still barriers to full attendance. To 

address this, additional workshops 

are being considered for later in the 

winter. 

Future Plans

As the project moves into year 

2 and continues to work toward 

the long term goal of increased 

commitment to shelterbelts, these 

initial findings will give valuable 

direction to the project awareness 

and social marketing activities. The 

differences between the producers 

with and without shelterbelts will 

be tracked over the coming years to 

inform additional content for the 

website as well as the workshops. 

Ongoing data will also provide 

further information on the overall 

effectiveness of the project in 

promoting behavior change and the 

project’s effectiveness in motivating 

beef producers in southern 

Manitoba to increase their use of 

shelterbelts. 

This project is being implemented 

by UARCD (project proponent) 

in collaboration with: Manitoba 

Agriculture, Food and Rural 

Initiatives (MAFRI); AgriEnvironment Services Branch 

(AESB) of AAFC; Manitoba 

Agro Woodlot Program(MAWP); 

Manitoba Beef Producers (MBP); 

Manitoba Forage Council (MFC); 

and RDI. 

Each of the collaborators is excited 

about the anticipated long term 

results: 

• increased commitment to 

shelterbelts,

• reduced greenhouse gases from 

livestock production,

• a proven social marketing model 

that will inform future agricultural 

behaviour change projects.

For more information about this 

project contact: Ryan Canart, 

Upper Assiniboine River 

Conservation District, at uarcd@

mts.net, or Dr. Ashton, Director, 

RDI, Brandon University, at 

ashtonw@brandonu.ca. To visit 

the website and keep up to 

date on project activities, go to 

http://prairieshelterbelts.ca/. ]

A Strategy for Agroforestry in the 

Chesapeake Bay Watershed

Julie Mawhorter

USFS Natural Resource Planner

Chesapeake Bay Program

Farms and forests play a vital role in the economic, social and ecological landscape of the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Approximately 22 percent of the watershed—or 9 million acres—is given to agricultural land use. An 

additional 4.2 million acres of woodlands are part of farms in the watershed. The future viability of these working 

lands is threatened by high rates of land conversion and development. 

Retaining sustainable rural landscapes and economies must be at the heart of watershed protection and restoration 

efforts. The application of conservation practices by farmers is critical to reducing the runoff of nutrients and 

sediment into local waterways. 

The 2010 Executive Order entitled “A Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed” calls 

for federal agencies to “develop a Chesapeake Bay watershed strategy to maximize forest restoration in priority areas, 

including: residential land...; areas covered by community tree canopy...; gaps in core wildlife habitat;...abandoned 

mine land...; and agroforestry areas.” Teams were formed with expertise from across the watershed to develop 

content for the five strategy areas: agroforestry, contaminated lands, mine lands,urban and community trees and 

wildlife habitat.

The Agroforestry Team consists of representatives from federal agencies (USDA Natural Resource Conservation 

Tom Ward

Forester East National

Technology Support Center

NRCS

From results page 10

See team page 12
12 Inside Agroforestry ] Volume 21, Issue 1

Service [NRCS] and Forest Service); universities 

(Cornell University, Penn State University, and Virginia 

Tech); and state agencies (West Virginia, Virginia, 

Maryland, and Pennsylvania). The Agroforestry 

Strategy focuses on using trees in strategic and 

innovative ways to benefit farms and the Bay.

WHY AGROFORESTRY?

Agroforestry is the intentional mixing of trees and 

shrubs into crop and animal production systems to 

create environmental, economic and social benefits. 

Agroforestry practices bring together the ecological 

advantages of trees and other woody plants and the 

economic benefits associated with their products. 

By incorporating trees into agricultural landscapes 

Chesapeake Bay farmers can add environmental and 

economic buffers to their farming enterprise. By 

adopting agroforestry practices in wooded areas, 

landowners can receive an additional income stream 

that will help retain tree cover.

The USDA Agroforestry Strategic Framework (FY2011-

2016) states that agroforestry practices:

• Provide protection for valuable topsoil, livestock, crops, 

and wildlife

• Increase productivity of agricultural and horticultural 

crops

• Reduce inputs of energy and chemicals

• Improve water quality

• Diversify local economies

AGROFORESTRY, WHERE?

Agroforestry practices can be applied throughout the 

watershed to provide benefits to landowners and the 

Bay. Landowner outreach, technical assistance, and 

incentives for agroforestry will be focused in areas 

of greatest need and opportunity. NRCS has selected 

priority watersheds in which to focus supplemental 

cost-share funding for voluntary conservation practices 

through the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Initiative. 

These priority watersheds represent areas with the 

highest runoff of nutrients and sediment to the Bay. 

Implementation of riparian forest buffers and other 

agroforestry practices will be focused in these areas to 

accelerate Bay restoration efforts.

AGROFORESTRY, HOW? 

State forestry agencies in Maryland and Virginia are 

working with partners to apply GIS-based targeting of 

buffers at the county scale. These analysis tools identify 

areas where forest buffers are most needed and yield 

the greatest water quality benefits. The results help to 

guide outreach and technical assistance to landowners 

who are interested in incentive programs.

Implementation of other agroforestry practices, such 

as windbreaks, silvopasture, alley cropping, and forest 

farming, will depend largely on farm characteristics and 

landowner goals. Counties with a high concentration 

of pasture land provide a good starting place for 

silvopasture education and demonstrations. Areas with 

high poultry production are a good place to promote 

windbreaks, or “vegetative environmental buffers,” to 

manage air emissions and odors. 

Financial assistance to establish agroforestry practices 

is available from NRCS through Farm Bill programs 

such as the Environmental Quality Incentives Program, 

Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program, and Conservation 

Stewardship Program. Cost-share and rental payments 

to establish riparian forest buffers are available through 

the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program 

and Conservation Reserve Program, administered by 

USDA Farm Services Agency. Available incentives vary 

by state; information can be found online and at local 

USDA Service Centers. In some areas, state and local 

programs may also be available to provide assistance 

for agroforestry practices.

Technical assistance for installation of agroforestry 

practices is available from NRCS, state forestry 

agencies, consulting foresters, and local Soil and Water 

Conservation Districts. 

FOCUS ON PENNSYLVANIA

Although cost-share assistance for forest buffers and 

tree/shrub establishment has long been available, the 

term “agroforestry” and some of its practices are still 

Priority watersheds for Chesapeake Bay Watershed 

Initiative agricultural cost-share funding (FY2011). 

Source: NRCS

Chesapeake Bay Watershed 

Initiative (NRCS)

Priority Watersheds (2011)

See buffers page 15

From team page 11
 Volume 21, Issue 1 ] Inside Agroforestry 13

National Agroforestry Center

Update 2012

A Partnership of the Forest Service and Natural Resources Conservation Service

The USDA National Agroforestry Center (NAC) Update highlights annual accomplishments of NAC products, 

programs and research. For a complete summary of NAC 2012 accomplishments and activities or for more 

information visit nac.unl.edu or contact the Center at 402-437-5178 extension 4011.

Technology Transfer

New Working Trees Info Series

NAC developed a new informational series, Working Trees Info

in a one-page format and released six additions in 2012. They 

are “What is alley cropping?”, “What is a windbreak?”, “What 

is a riparian forest buffer?”, “What is agroforestry?” and “What 

are agroforestry’s income opportunities?” and What is Forest 

Farming?”

Two New NAC Technical Notes

NAC has developed and distributed two new agroforestry 

technical notes: AF Note – 43, “H: The Human Consideration in 

the Adoption of Agroforestry”; and AF Note – #37, “Pine Straw – 

a Profitable Agroforestry Enterprise”. Downloadable PDF issues 

are available at http://nac.unl.edu/agroforestrynotes.htm

Profitable Farms and Woodlands, new release, a practical agroforestry guide for landowners, farmers and ranchers

The guide was developed by a team of agroforestry specialists 

from the 1890 and 1862 Land Grant Universities, led by the 1890 

Agroforestry Consortium in close cooperation with NAC. The 

guide depicts step-by-step methods and principles on developing 

agroforestry practices for the purpose of enhancing the economic 

and environmental benefits of their farms, ranches and woodlands. 

Great Plains Windbreak Innovation/Renovation

Workshop

NAC partnered with the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 

Agroforestry Development Centre and numerous NRCS, 

Conservation District and State Forestry partners to hold an 

international conference on windbreak renovation & innovation 

at the International Peace Garden, July 24-26. There were 120 

participants, 85 on site and 35 online. Several follow-on workshops 

have been held and planned including a Southern Great Plains 

Renovation Conference in Dodge City, KS on May 21-23.

6th National Small Farm Conference

Rich Straight, FS Technology Transfer Lead, was invited to make a 

presentation at the conference in Memphis, TN. The presentation 

on opportunities in agroforestry for small farms was well attended 

as were the agroforestry stops on the conference field tour. NAC 

also hosted an exhibit at the September conference.

Tribal student intern in

Wisconsin

During the summer of 2012, the USDA 

National Agroforestry Center (NAC), 

the FS Office of Tribal Relations and 

the Chequamegon-Nicolet National 

Forest jointly sponsored Cody 

Westlund, a FS Tribal student intern 

who was stationed at the Forest 

Service’s North Great Lakes Visitor 

Center near Ashland, WI. Cody is from 

the Red Cliff Tribe and a student at 

the University of Wisconsin majoring 

in Game Design and Development 

with an art focus. With training 

and guidance from NAC, Cody 

worked closely with conservation 

agencies, local Tribes, and extension 

specialists to create visual simulations 

of agroforestry and conservation 

practices. Cody used CanVis, visual 

simulation software developed by 

NAC, to create a catalog of regionally 

relevant images that depict properly 

designed and located conservation 

practices.

Agroforestry Memorandum

of Understanding approved by

USDA and Agriculture and

Agri-Food Canada

The new memorandum, signed in 

April 2012, will facilitate expanded 

cooperation between the USDA 

National Agroforestry Center and 

Canada’s Agroforestry Development 

Centre (ADC) to collaborate on 

research and development, including 

the advancement of agroforestry 

science and tools for climate change 

mitigation and adaptation in temperate 

North America. The collaborative 

work of the two centers will also 

support the Global Research Alliance 

on Agriculture Greenhouse Gases.
14 Inside Agroforestry ] Volume 21, Issue 1

Research

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation Feature

Paper A paper authored by Forest Service and Ag Canada scientists, 

“Branching Out: Agroforestry as a Climate Change Mitigation & 

Adaptation Tool for Agriculture” was an invited feature paper for 

a special journal issue focused on conservation practices to mitigate GHG emissions in the Journal of Soil and Water Conservation’s September/October 2012 issue. Michele Schoeneberger and 

Gary Bentrup, NAC scientists were the lead authors. A presentation of the article can be view at https://docs.google.com/file/

d/0ByUmVw1Cqz5gblRYekNPc3NtNTg/edit?pli=1.

Journal of Forestry Cover Article and Commentary

 “A Role for Agroforestry in Forest Restoration in the Lower 

Mississippi Alluvial Valley” was the cover story in the Journal 

of Forestry’s January/February 2012 issue. The article explores 

agroforestry options and their potential to provide both profits for 

farmers and restore important functions and values of bottomland 

hardwood forests in a region where about two-thirds of the original 

forest has been cleared and converted to agriculture. The article 

was co-authored by Forest Service R&D scientists Mike Dosskey, 

Gary Bentrup, and Michele Schoeneberger at the USDA National 

Agroforestry Center. Andy Mason, NAC Director, helped lead the 

writing of a commentary for the December 2012 Journal of Forestry 

“Advancing Agroforestry through Certification of Agroforesters: 

Should the Society of American Foresters Have a Role?”

Forest Farming Networks

Research Forest Products Technologist Jim Chamberlain is leading 

NAC’s work with colleagues at the University of Georgia, Virginia 

Tech, and the Catawba Sustainability Center to establish long-term 

research plots. He is working with a local forest farming network 

to demonstrate the viability of native plants as an alternative 

income source, learning to understand how to grow and market 

native plants. Chamberlain is also examining the social factors that 

influence adoption of forest farming practices on private lands.

Conservation Buffer Research

Mike Dosskey, NAC research 

ecologist, was the featured speaker, July 

30, 2012, at two Capitol Hill seminars. 

His presentation featured a new GISbased targeting tool that shows where 

conservation buffers should be located 

in agricultural landscapes to maximize 

retention of sediments, nutrients and 

other water pollutants. For more 

information, including Dr. Dosskey’s 

presentation: http://www.ncfar.org/

Hill_Seminar_Series_2012.asp

2012 Science Delivery Award

Gary Bentrup was recognized with 

the Research & Development Deputy 

Chief’s Science Delivery Award for 

his creative efforts and contributions 

in the area of Science Delivery and 

Technology Transfer through sustained 

research productivity

NAC Webinar with NC State

Extension

Gary Bentrup, Research Landscape 

Planner, collaborated with North 

Carolina State University Extension 

and gave a webinar, A Practical Field 

Guide for Designing Conservation 

Buffers. There were 32 participating 

in group settings, 55 individuals 

participating. Attendees were from 28 

states, the District of Columbia, Puerto 

Rico, Brazil and Spain.
 Volume 21, Issue 1 ] Inside Agroforestry 15

relatively new to many producers 

and professionals in the 

region. In order to address this 

information gap, agency partners in 

Pennsylvania have been proactive 

in raising awareness about 

agroforestry and promoting its 

many benefits. For example:

• Agroforestry Workshops held in 

2011 and 2012 targeting producers, 

landowners, and natural resource 

professionals,with a focus on 

silvopastures, forest farming, 

buffers, and windbreaks. 

•Establishment of an agroforestry 

demonstration site at Dickinson 

College Farm through a PA-DCNR 

Bureau of Forestry grant from the 

USDA Forest Service. 

• NRCS in Pennsylvania updated 

its technical guidance to include 

agroforestry practices. The 

Guidance now includes standard 

criteria for all five agroforestry 

practices, financial program 

payment scenarios for windbreaks 

and riparian forest buffers, a Tech 

Note for establishing windbreaks 

around poultry production 

facilities, and Conservation 

Stewardship Program guidance on 

planting edible trees and shrubs as 

part of agroforestry practices. 

• NRCS in Pennsylvania also 

added Forestry and Agroforestry 

categories to its Conservation 

Innovation Grants program, 

including demonstrations of alley 

cropping, multi-story cropping, 

short rotation woody biomass 

added to annual crop rotations, 

direct tree seeding methods, and 

establishing pollinator habitat on 

forest edges. 

• The PA-DCNR Parks program 

obtained a grant to conduct a pilot 

“goats in the woods” project to 

remove invasive vegetation at King’s 

Gap Environmental Education 

Center in Cumberland County.

Future Actions

Promoting agroforestry will 

take place on several fronts, 

including increased cooperation 

with state agencies and outreach 

to individuals. Potential actions 

include:

• Work with NRCS State Technical 

Committees in the Bay states to 

promote agroforestry practices 

through Farm Bill programs.

• Train-the-trainer agroforestry 

workshops targeting resource 

professionals in the watershed is a 

first step toward reaching watershed 

landowners. Subsequent workshops 

will introduce agroforestry practices 

to landowners.

• Establish agroforestry 

demonstration areas by finding 

early adopters with working 

farms and forests willing to host 

visitors so that others can see 

the conservation and economic 

benefits first-hand. Pursue USDA 

Conservation Innovation Grants 

and other funding sources to 

establish these sites.

• Design and implement onfarm agroforestry research 

projects where other farmers and 

stakeholders can talk with scientists 

and learn about cutting-edge and 

regionally relevant science.

• Work with the NRCS Ecological 

Sciences staffs in the Bay states to 

get all five agroforestry practices 

included in the Field Office 

Technical Guide and Farm Bill 

programs. 

• Explore a Bay Branding campaign 

for agroforestry products similar 

to Edible Chesapeake but focused 

specifically on foods and products 

developed from businesses 

committed to sustainable working 

forests within the Bay area. 

The Agroforestry Strategy is 

Section 4 of the Chesapeake Forest 

Restoration Strategy (http://

executiveorder.chesapeakebay.net/

chesapeakeforestrestorationstrategy.

pdf ). To learn more, contact Sally 

Claggett, sclaggett@fs.fed.us or 

Tom Ward, Thomas.Ward@gnd.

usda.gov ]

CHESAPEAKE BAY AGROFORESTRY IN ACTION

The Catawba Sustainability Center (CSC) is a 377-acre tract of farm and forestland nestled in the Catawba Valley 

in the Upper James River Basin. The CSC is an Outreach and International Affairs initiative of Virginia Tech. At 

the CSC located in a key Chesapeake Bay headwaters, community members, students, and other stakeholders 

collaboratively learn about agroforestry in a setting focused on both economic growth and environmental 

stewardship. 

In 2008 Catawba Landcare, a local landowner group working at the CSC, expressed interest in agroforestry and 

a partnership with the USDA National Agroforestry Center. To date, the partners have established fruit, nut, 

and floral riparian buffer demonstrations, native medicinal forest farming trials, windbreaks, and edible roadside 

landscapes. They have also offered accompanying workshops and training events, which have contributed 

to over 3 miles of private riparian forest buffer plantings, a small demonstration windbreak, a forest farming 

demonstration plot, and installation of protective fencing. Future plans call for development of a silvopasture 

demonstration site. ]

From buffers page 12
16 Inside Agroforestry ] Volume 21, Issue 1

Upcoming Events

Mission

The USDA National Agroforestry Center (NAC) 

is a partnership of the Forest Service (Research & 

Development and State & Private Forestry) and the 

Natural Resources Conservation Service. NAC’s staff 

is located at the University of Nebraska, Lincoln, NE. 

NAC’s purpose is to accelerate the development and 

application of agroforestry technologies to attain more 

economically, environmentally, and socially sustainable 

land use systems by working with a national 

network of partners and cooperators to conduct 

research, develop technologies and tools, establish 

demonstrations, and provide useful information to 

natural resource professionals.

Policy

Opinions expressed in “Inside Agroforestry” are those of the author and do not necessarily 

represent the policy of the USDA Forest Service and the USDA Natural Resources 

Conservation Service. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination 

in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, 

and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual 

orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an 

individual’s income is derived from any public assistance. (Not all prohibited bases apply to 

all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of 

program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET 

Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write 

USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 

20250-9410 or call toll free 866-632-9992 (voice). TDD users can contact USDA through 

local relay or the Federal relay at 800-877-8339 (TDD) or 866-377-8642 (relay voice). 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

“Inside Agroforestry” is published by the 

 USDA National Agroforestry Center. 

 Phone: 402-437-5178; Fax: 402-437-5712.

•		 Andy Mason, NAC Director (202-205-1694)

•		Michele Schoeneberger, FS Research Lead

 (ext. 4021)

•		Richard Straight, FS Lead Agroforester (ext 4024)

•		NRCS Lead Agroforester — vacant

http://nac.unl.edu

May 21 - 23

Southern Great Plains Windbreak Renovation 

Conference. 

Dodge City, KS

http://nac.unl.edu/events/

southernplainsworkshop.htm 

May 22

Enhancing Habitats To Provide Multiple 

Ecosystem Services. 

Goldsboro, NC

http://www.cefs.ncsu.edu/newsevents/

events/2013/Enhancing-Habitats-2013-

Blank-Reg.pdf

June 9 - 14 

First International Symposium on Elderberry

Stoney Creek Inn. Columbia, Missouri, USA

http://muconf.missouri.edu/

elderberrysymposium/

June 19 - 21

13th North American Agroforestry 

Conference.

Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, 

Canada

www.2013naac.com

June 26 - 29 

2013 Cornell Maple Camp. 

Paul Smith’s College, NY and Lake 

Placid, NY

http://www.northernnewyorkmaple.

com

For more upcoming events, visit our

website calendar:

http://nac.unl.edu/events/index.htm

Inside Agroforestry PRSRT STD

POSTAGE & FEES

PAID

USDA — FS USDA National Agroforestry Center PERMIT NO G-40

1945 N 38th St.

East Campus–UNL

Lincoln, NE 68583–0822

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use, $300

Address Service Requested

VOLUME 21, ISSUE 1