April 16, 2009

Communicating with farmers – Getting your message across

By Dr Clive Dalton
Clive addresses a crowd of farmers and MAF staff at a Lands & Survey Angus field-day in 1976.

Farmers constantly need new information
To keep farmers and their staff up to date with new developments, good communication is essential by the many technical people, (consultants, farm advisers, sales and advertising people) who have information to impart.

Measuring efficiency
It’s very difficult to measure the efficiency of communication, without testing the recipients to see how much has been learned and acted upon. What many in the information business know, (but rarely admit or measure), is that communication is generally a very inefficient business.

No formal training
Few technical people who have to address farmers, have had any formal training in the craft of communication, and you would be hard pushed to find out where to go to get any. It’s a case of learning on the job – which may include not much ‘learning’. The result is hours of wasted time and money
Rarely do we ask anyone in our audience after a lecture or talk for an honest assessment – and if we do, they give us what we want to hear!

The good and the bad
Most folk looking back on their school, college or University days would be hard pushed to find more than 5% of those who stood in front of their class, as brilliant communicators. This is a frighteningly waste of peoples’ learning time when you think of it.

How few people do you hear say they were ‘switched on’ to a subject by a brilliant teacher, but how many more quote how they were ‘switched off’ a subject by some awful teacher? Maths would have to be top of the pops for this.

Key points if you have to give a talk
There’s a mountain of books on communication – a few readable and helpful, but most full of jargon and theory, and impossible to finish. The books have a major communication problem!

What follows are a few points, gleaned from many sources and from my personal suffering at the hands of others, as well as guilt over what I may have inflicted on others. They are some issues to think about if you have to give a talk, and if you want your audience to learn something.

What’s your aim?
Get this very clear right at the start. When you walk out the door after the talk, think what have you left behind in the minds of your audience? What did you set out to do?
  • To inform
  • To entertain
  • Provide a bit of both - “Infotainment”
  • Be memorable – will they remember both you and your message?
  • Provide value for money if they have paid!
The chance of success
This is a bit scary, but face the truth! It’s old news but is frequently forgotten. So you can see how your effort has to be allocated.
  • 7% is WHAT you say
  • 33% is HOW you say it
  • 60% is the ENERGY you used in saying it
Clearly, dull people and a dull talk cannot get a message across, no matter how good it is!

Message retention
This is also very scary. It’s amazing how many people sit through a talk, and think all the information will be in their heads after the talk for ever. It probably is, but it cannot be recalled and with age things get worse.
  • You remember only 25% of what you HEAR by the next day.
  • By the next week it would be about 5% if you were lucky.
  • Adding visual messages increases the retention rate.
  • Adding smells will increase it further!
  • Success depends on ‘listening skills’ – which we are not taught.
So the lesson is that you have to do a really good job with visual aids.

How to get it wrong?
These sins are far too common –but the last person to be aware of them is so often the speaker, and nobody tells them afterwards so nothing changes!
  • Too much information – tell them the least your audience needs to know.
  • Too little – no meat in the message.
  • Wrong place – it was impossible to learn in the environment. The speaker was not aware of how bad the conditions were for the audience.
  • Wrong time – nobody could learn at the chosen time of the talk for many reasons.
  • Above their heads – no chance of anyone understanding the message.
  • Boring – dull enough to make everyone beg for it to end.
  • Speaker not aware of the time spent so the meeting over-runs.
  • Poor chairman not doing his/her job – eg keeping speaker and programme to time.
  • Insulting audience’s intelligence.
  • Telling the audience what they already know– so wasting everyone’s time and somebody’s money.
How to get it right?
  • Wear your client’s shoes (gumboots)!
  • Check the venue. Will everyone in your audience be able to see and hear?
  • Check the seating – how comfortable are the seats.
  • Check visual aid equipment – have spares.
  • Check sound equipment – have spares.
  • Get a friend to sneak around the venue once you have started speaking to see everything is going OK.
  • Watch your audience’s behaviour – bad signs are people sleeping, sitting with head in hands, looking at the ground or the ceiling, fidgeting trying to get comfortable, clock watching, exhaling loudly, gasping for fresh air, talking to person in next seat, and walking out! Many speakers never notice these – believe it or not.
  • If the chairman doesn’t get people (who have sat for more than an hour) to stand and stretch, YOU take action and make them stand up. Don’t let them out of the room though!
How do we learn as children?
This is a vitally important issue, as so many people seem to think that when we grow up, we can put up with appallingly bad communication that you would never inflict on an innocent child! As mature beings, we learn the same way as kids do! We all crave for a talk that is:
  • Interesting
  • Relevant
  • Clear & simple
  • Rewarding
  • Entertaining
Who is your audience?
This is closely linked to the question of what is your aim. You are lucky if your audience is made up of people with identical interests, but even then, they will vary because of the points shown below. You can’t do much about this, other than be aware and try to modify your message.
  • Age
  • Sex
  • Leading busy lives – so time is precious.
  • Interest in the subject
  • Educational background
  • Social status
  • Religious & cultural status
  • Tiredness
  • Hungry –low blood sugar
  • In need of a smoke –agitated
  • Comfortable – how long have they sat on hard seats.
Profile of a 16-year-old
As a tutor approaching retirement, I was very aware of being horribly out of date when I had to teach young farm trainees straight from school who were from generation X and Y.

Now we are on to generation Z which are very different again. They need more guidance but they certainly know their rights. But I was amazed how few folk I talked to in the farming industry (especially employers who didn’t have teenagers), had thought about these issues. They judged 16-year-olds by what they remember of their youth.
  • Two thirds are from split homes. (Ten years ago this was one third).
  • They come from class sizes at school of at least 30.
  • Their concentration span is very short - max of 3-5 minutes – the time between TV ads. It used to be 5-7 minutes.
  • Low discipline levels in schools. Class disruption is normal.
  • Students want to talk continuously – they have been taught in groups and encouraged to talk so they don’t see a problem.
  • At school, they have been encouraged to work in groups which is good. However, sitting listening for periods of more than a few minutes is very hard for them, so they miss vital information only told to them once.
  • They can learn among noise, which in today’s world is also very good.
  • The love loud throbbing music – especially inside a vehicle or restricted space.
  • Teachers have had little time to help anyone with individual learning problems. Disruptive students get attention (that’s why they are disruptive), but quiet non-achievers in class can easily pass through the system having learned very little.
  • Many have a negative attitude to formal learning which is not their fault.
  • Little or no encouragement received from home for academic learning –in fact there could have been positive discouragement.
  • A large proportion will have no NCEA subjects due to lack of motivation and boredom.
  • Boredom is the main disease of high schools. The school system had betrayed them!
  • Many will have one or two NCEA subjects - generally not in academic subjects. Some may have done sixth form but not got any qualifications.
  • They are active people who like practical subjects.
  • At least twenty percent of them will smoke –and few will want to stop.
  • About 3% will have serious learning problems (ADD), and won’t be able to concentrate. They stop their class mates learning.
  • They all know about drugs and have seen them in primary school.
  • A very high percentage will have used them by secondary school and will be very knowledgeable.
  • So drugs in the workplace are now a normal part of the daily environment.
  • Poor literacy - many have reading age of 8-10 years or worse.
  • Maths ability is good with money, but they cannot do any sum without a calculator, even divide 1000 by 10. Mental arithmetic is beyond them – they are just not taught it.
  • They have fantastic finger dexterity, keyboard, computer and mobile phone skills. They can text without looking at their keyboard and while their phone is hidden in their pocket.
  • They walk around with a phone permanently in their hand, texting and checking for incoming texts with one hand. The other is for work!
  • Ninety percent are males with strong male stereotypes and attitudes to hygiene and pain.
  • Ten to twenty percent will have already had a driving conviction.
  • Twenty percent will be driving cars with no WOF or insurance.
  • Five percent will have hearing impairment from loud music.
  • They are growing rapidly and are always hungry.
  • They are high on testosterone and oestrogens.
  • Most will be sexually active - or they’ll tell you that they are!
  • Few are capable of a hard day’s physical work that a grown up can handle.
What makes communication difficult?
The theory talks about a ‘message’ which is ‘coded’ by a ‘sender’. This then goes to a ‘receiver’ who ‘decodes’ it. The three things that ruin this process are:
  1. Competition for your message from other messages.
  2. Bad coding by the sender and bad decoding by the receiver.
  3. Information overload at both ends.
Competition for the message is a major hazard. We ask why folk who came to our talk have done nothing about the message they took away so enthusiastically? The answer is simple - when they got home, there was at least 5 new issues that had blown up which needed urgent fixing. After that, they’ll have difficulty remembering when they attended your talk, what your message was and even your name. Ask some university students to give the full names all that lecture to them. The answer in communication terms is scary.

So you can see the value of a ‘take-home’ message that doesn’t look like junk mail and that they’ll keep (or their partner will keep) and not file in the bin.

Prioritise your message
This is very important as it stops your wasting your time, and more importantly, their time. Sort out what are your audience’s wants and needs (they may be very different).
Get this order of priority right. If time is short, cut number 3.
  1. Must know?
  2. Should know?
  3. Nice to know?
  4. Questions and discussion
Never, ever, cut out number 4! That should be THE highlight of your talk. If you are running out of time, cut out number 3 and go straight to 4.

The brain plays tricks
Speakers who make you ‘suffer’ their presentation regularly forget these basic points.
  • Our concentration spans are short – and getting shorter thanks to TV advertising.
  • The brain can cope with many issues at the same time, so our thoughts wander all over the place if what we are hearing is boring or deemed by our brains to be unimportant.
  • The brain works mega times faster than speaker can speak, or read words to us from a slide - which so many insist on doing.
  • The brain filters out things that it may consider unimportant.
  • The brain is lazy and smart (both at the same time) so it looks for the easy path.
  • It’s always interesting and a bit alarming when you ask someone who has been to a talk or presentation what they learned. Most will be struggling to give you a detailed account – but they’ll all add it was a good meeting.
Our brains differ – 7 intelligences
This too is well known and is a major reason for so many folk failing. We have different kinds of brains, and sadly for some, their’s cannot be accommodated in a teaching regime. The only hope is for individuals to do more themselves to cope, as teachers have enough problems!

Be aware of this as a learning strategy for yourself, and recognise it when you need to teach. From the list, find out which one(s) you are, and try to recognise what some other folk may be, especially those you have to communicate with.
  • Mathematical
  • Musical
  • Physical
  • Visual
  • Linguistic
  • Intra personal
  • Extra personal
A very sad tale
I had a 16-year-old farming student who could not pass one written test of the simplest questions – even on the third repeat. In fact, the more repeats he got, the worse he got. Yet on a bus trip of well over an hour, he sang the complete works of the Australian bush balladeer ‘Kevin Bloody Wilson’. His mates assured me he was word perfect! The lad had a musical brain, which I could not handle, as I couldn’t put my lectures to music with three expletives in every line. Sad to say, he was killed in a railway crossing accident when the train hit his tractor.

Six stages of learning
The books tell you this is the way to learn things. It’s also useful to know when you are teaching so that you can make the learning by your listeners easier if they need to remember things. You do things in the following order:
  1. Get set
  2. Get information
  3. Explore
  4. Memorise
  5. Show-U- Know
  6. Reflect
The major problem I found when teaching farming students (16-17-year olds) who had hated school, was that they had never been taught to learn. So they sat during class with arms folded, listening, enjoying the discussion, but assuming that they’d remember all they heard. They didn’t realise that for most of us, learning needs some kind of effort.

I had to make them write some things down and draw diagrams – to do something physical, as they had not learned (or not been taught these skills). The would ask me 'have we got to write this down'?

 As a result, they had nothing to use for 'revision' which they had never ever been shown how to do, and hence failed in any written tests. These students had fantastic practical skills, so their school record showing low achievement was so wrong! The education system had failed them.

Mind maps
I gave up on talking and expecting them to 'make notes'.  At University with many lecturers that's all you did - try to write down everything they said hoping that it would make sense when you re-read them. It rarely did!


Mind maps like the example above were my salvation and the students' too. You can see from the above example that we discussed everything that had to be done to prepare for calving.  We both learned so much from sharing information and experience – without the chore of them having to write many words down. It kept all our brains active, and by turning words into a picture, it was had high recall, which I proved by asking them to draw a mind map to answer questions in exams.

I used to hand out large A3 sheets so that they could keep the finished map to bring out in future years to work on with their staff before calving.  Different jobs could be allocated to different people and nothing slipped through the cracks.

These same students would struggle to write 50–100 words as an answer, but could  fill a whole A4 sheet with detailed information as they had very good recall. Communication had worked. 

For more information on mind maps - Google <‘mind maps Tony Buzan’>

Written words and spoken words
These are so different in terms of communication efficiency. Apparently with texting and emailing, more words are being written today than at any other time in history. But they are very different words to those used by anyone who sets out to write a handout, or god-save us, a manual!

You have to stop yourself writing ‘hard to read’ English in anything you give to a modern audience. Your only chance of getting anything ‘browsed’ is to write it in ‘spoken’ English or journalistic style.
  • You need to become a good browser and the trick is to only read the first sentence of each paragraph. Here are some interesting points that have been around for a while.Humans communicate best with sound.
  • Most visual image fades in 1 second – unless they are spectacular or shocking.
  • Sound memories fade in 4-5 seconds – again unless they are spectacular of shocking.
  • Voice tone gives “emotional impact” that no picture can do.
  • In journalism we strive for “colour” in our written words to try and imitate the spoken word.
  • Monotone is a killer – if the voice is dull, then our brains assume the speaker and the subject is dull too.
  • Ums, Ahs, Eh’s, You-knows, etc can kill listener concentration – listen to yourself on a tape, or view yourself (in private) on video. The shock can be overwhelming!
The handout
Handouts used to be considered important for the take-home message, but we know that most of them end up as junk mail, as there’s so much other material around of very high quality. So class handouts as a ‘nice’ idea but don’t rely on them being effective after your talk.

A good idea is to hand them out during the session, so keen folk who are trying to take notes can just highlight key parts as you go through.

The take-home CD, video or DVD
This is the latest idea, but again how many folk have time to sit and watch them – even if they know how to work the player! There used to be a figure when video recorders came out that at most, only 9% of recorded videos were ever watched. Thing won’t have changed.

The ‘slide’
Once upon a time we had projectors and 35mm slides. These were made from the colour pictures we took, but we also made stencilled words into 35 mm slides.

Then came the Overhead Projector (OHP) with a pack of multi-coloured pens, all of which we used, even if some like the brown and yellow could not be seen!

Then came the laptop computer and the digital projector with 'Microsoft Power Point'.  This is my view is death to communication!

The technology is not to blame for poor communication – it’s the way it’s been used which is the problem. What has happened, and is still going on because it’s easier with computer software, is that speakers are still producing ‘slides’ and abusing them rather than using them in their talks. Here’s what happens:
  • The slide has too much information. The rule is to have a maximum of five lines and five words per line.
  • The speaker reads the words on the slide out aloud to the audience – who can also read – and a hundred times faster than the speaker can read.
  • The speaker is simply using the slide as a memory jogger. This is now a worse problem as Power Point makes the production of slide so easy. People are typing out their talk in Power Point which we then have to endure.
  • Power Point also allows you to use fancy gimmicks, which fortunately many folk have not learned to use yet! Others go crazy with them which distracts from the message.
  • These slides go on forever and the meeting over runs, so there’s no time for discussion or questions. How often has the last speaker been asked to cut down their time because the chairman has failed in his/her duty!
  • Speakers should NEVER be allowed to over-run by chairmen.
Back to the board – why not?
Consider going back to basics. There was nothing wrong with the old blackboard (apart from chalk dust and finger nail scratchings), and the whiteboard (apart from pens that don’t work and permanent markers) provided that, it was in the hands of a skilled operator.

The big advantages are:
  • When you use a whiteboard really well, you cannot help being active. It’s hard for people to fall asleep or their minds wander off, when the speaker is leaping around and you are watching for the words or pictures to emerge.
  • You are actively combining words (from your mouth) with pictures (from your pen).
  • Rubbing out words provides action in anticipation for new ones, and gives a sense of progress through your talk.
  • It’s a good idea to write a sort of ‘menu’ for the talk down the side of the board before you start, and wipe bits off when finished. It makes the audience feel they are progressing towards the end – always an attractive destination in a talk.
Points for success
  • Double check the pens – always keep plenty of new ones and don’t lend them to anyone.
  • Check the caps have been tight, and get into the habit of always putting the cap back on while speaking.
  • Avoid green, and only use red for emphasis.
  • Check no ‘smartass’ has slipped a permanent marker into the set of pens. If you need to remove it, go over it with a proper whiteboard pen and rub the lines off straight away.
  • Make sure there is a cleaning cloth or duster.
  • Don’t stand in the one position all the time, as some in the audience may not be able to see. Check this out before and during your talk and make people move (nicely) if you find it easier to operate from one spot to avoid blocking their view.
  • Use mind map (see above).
  • The brain likes colour too – but don’t overdo it. Use colour to underline and highlight key words in your mind map.
Final thoughts
All you have is this – in any order:
  • Be simple
  • Be clear
  • Be brief
  • Be entertaining & be memorable
Fast track to improvement
If you want to improve your presentations real fast - just arrange to have your talk videoed. But view it in private first, as you can be devastated with the result. You will see things that you cannot believe you did!

At the end - for goodness sake END!
Some folk find ending very hard - they seems to get a pain when they have to sum up- so keep on to avoid it. Don't be fooled (if you are chairman) by  words like ‘finally’, or ‘to summarise’ or ‘to sum up’ which lifts the listeners’ heart, and then the speaker’s brain seems to find another thread.

The trick I find that works every time is the chairman - to dive in when they are drawing breath between sentences and say in a really loud voice over the microphone - 'And FINALLY'! They are so shocked, and the audiences laughter so spontaneous,  that they say - 'Well I'll stop there Mr Chairman"!

Yorkshire advice
Yorkshire folk are noted for their thrift with money, time and words. They have this advice for public speakers which is well worth remembering:
1. Stand up
2. Speak up
3. Then SHUT UP!

April 14, 2009

Agricultural communication: Stimulating agriculture - Lessons from Asia and the Pacific

Background to paper
By Dr D.C. Dalton

Geoff Moss wrote this paper 20 years ago, and the world financial meltdown, and the misguided drive to grow crops for engines and not mouths has again brought the problem into sharp focus. Geoff’s wisdom, agricultural experience and common sense on this massive topic is worth another airing, as it applies to the whole world now and not just developing countries. New Zealand’s expertise has a lot to offer in facing this challenge.

Stimulating agriculture - Lessons from Asia and the Pacific
By Geoffrey Moss
Occasional Papers in Rural Extension No. 7, 1989
Department of Rural Extension Studies, University of Guelph. Ontario, Canada

Extracts from a document produced in the Communication Technology Laboratory, a facility of the Department of Rural Extension Studies at the University of Guelph. Contact Geoffrey Moss at moss@xtra.co.nz for the complete paper, and take a look at his Moss Associates website here.

HELPING THE FARMER
Stimulating agricultural production in a developing country is a complex operation. Goals and objectives must be set, resources allocated, aspirations understood and governments, farming organizations and extension workers motivated to achieve those goals. Communication systems, extension services, research, training and marketing are only parts of the jigsaw puzzle. In my experience, here is what three elements in this system can achieve:



The Government can:
  • Set clear, realistic national goals.
  • Supply sound leadership.
  • Set up effective two-way communication systems.
  • Build up systems to facilitate increased production (transport, marketing, processing, education).
  • Involve agro-industry in planning.
  • Reorganize and streamline government departments.
  • Co-ordinate the activities of all government departments involved in agriculture.
  • Re-allocate resources from less productive departments into agriculture.
  • Legislate for increased production.
  • Minimize restrictive practices.
  • Overcome disincentives to increased population.
  • Promote land development and land settlement schemes.
  • Improve land surveying and ownership legislation.
  • Develop storage and marketing facilities.
  • Upgrade research and educational institutions.
  • Establish "think tanks", comprising planners and innovative experts.
  • Call in overseas consultants and trainers.
  • Send staff overseas to train and look for new ideas and markets.
  • Borrow money to help finance some of these measures.
Marketing organizations can:
  • Seek top prices for the farmer.
  • Develop new and better markets.
  • Process, package, and store produce to meet criteria of the market.
  • Research and develop new products.
  • Carry out an extension role.
  • Bulk purchase the best available seed, fertilizer and pesticides and supply them to the farmer at the lowest possible price.
  • Provide sound advice, adequate credit facilities, efficient services, and long term contracts.
  • Provide the farmer with best available breeding material.
  • Act as an effective link between the farmer and the marketplace.
  • Co-ordinate the supply of seasonal requirements, production and transport.
Extension workers can:
  • Encourage and support farmers and help them reach their personal objectives and aspirations.
  • Get messages directly to farmers.
  • Diagnose problems and call upon expert help when necessary.
  • Carry out field trials and demonstrate results.
  • Introduce new plant varieties and new management techniques.
  • Set up learning situations (field days, seminars, farmer schools).
  • Co-ordinate commercial and government agencies.
  • Arrange availability and distribution or resources, if necessary (seasonal finance, quality seeds, fertilizers, pesticides).
  • Advise commercial and government agencies.
  • Assist in marketing.
  • Organize farmer groups to share experiences.
  • Organize young farmers' groups to educate, develop and train rural youth.
  • Train other extension workers, teachers and rural leaders.
  • Encourage vegetable and small animal production.
  • Support rural life development.
  • Encourage good home management skills (health, child care, nutrition, cooking, family planning).

Why is agricultural extension not as effective as it should be? 


These are typical replies given by experienced people in the business:
  • Too much political interference.
  • Too many other jobs to do.
  • Too many supervisors.
  • Too many reports.
  • No clear job specification.
  • No detailed work schedule.
  • Unrealistic goals and objectives.
  • Inadequate transport.
  • Insufficient in-service training.
  • No effective links with research.
  • Low status, morale, and pay.
  • Duplication of services by rival departments.
  • Lack of strong leadership.
  • Insufficient technical information and support services.

Solutions to improve extension services
Replies from people involved in the business were:
  • Improve incentives and working conditions for extension workers.
  • Tell us what we should be doing and let us get on with our job.
  • Establish a resource bank of technical information and research findings for use by extension staff.
  • Current research recommendations should be made available rapidly to field staff in simple newsletters prepared by specialists.
  • District staff should organize regular training sessions in practical husbandry and extension methods.
  • Training centres with demonstrations and trial plots should be equipped to train farmers.
  • Field days should be conducted regularly every season.
  • Specialists and head office staff should visit districts more frequently.

TACTICS FOR CHANGE
A five Point Plan:
The following simple five-point plan sets out some priority areas in which, in my opinion, a great deal of work is still required in many developing countries.
  • Train trainers so that their skills will be multiplied and passed on to increasing numbers of extension workers and farmers.
  • Increase the ratio of women extension workers to help increase food production and improve the quality of family life.
  • Develop information and training support services to make staff more effective in their job.
  • Examine research priorities and ensure research results are being used effectively.
  • Upgrade management systems. Train managers in effective supervision and management skills. Involve staff in planning and restructuring their organizations.

IN SUMMARY

  • Agricultural extension faces immense challenges in the developing countries of Asia and the Pacific.
  • No two countries are the same and methods, which have been successful in one country, cannot easily be transferred to another.
  • International planners and extension workers should not lay down hard and fast rules; they must be flexible in their ideas and be prepared to alter their plans when necessary.
  • One should avoid making harsh comparisons between one country and another but rather try to stand back and get things in perspective. If one is from an industrialized country, it is salutary to try to think back to the time when your country was at a similar stage in development.
  • Countries are all at different stages of evolution and their goals may be very different. Is the country aiming for self-sufficiency or is it aiming at growing large surpluses of food for export earnings?
  • In too many countries a large part of the budget is allocated for military expenditure and this drain on resources limits the amount available for research and development efforts to increase food production. In all cases the extension worker plays a vital role.
  • I am convinced there must be more training in supervision and management skills for those in positions of authority in extension services.
  • At the same time, workers in the field must be well trained initially and then supported with reliable information and good aids and equipment.
  • Resources should be available for refresher courses in new methods and techniques and to share field experiences.
  • I must re-emphasize the training and the support for those already in the service to help the millions of women engaged in food production - the "invisible farmers" of Asia and the Pacific.

REFERENCES
  • Expert Consultation on the Establishment of the Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI) (1985). Bangkok: F.A.O. Regional Office of Asia and the Pacific.
  • Khan, Salma,(1984). Paper Prepared for Lecture Series One, Centre for Women and Development. Dhaka, Bangladesh.
  • Moss. G.R., (1979). Improving Agricultural Communications in Sir Lanka, Rome, F.A.O.
  • Moss, G.R., (1986). Sound Investment Areas for Non-technical Agricultural Research in Asia. Paper presented to the Technical Advisory Committee of the Food and Fertilizer Technology Centre for Asia and the Pacific Region, Taipei.
  • Moss, G.R., (1986). Stimulating Agriculture: A Manual for Training Agricultural Extension Workers. Bangkok: U.N.D.P. Asia and Pacific Programme for Development Training and Communication Planning in Asia and the Pacific.
  • Moss, G.R., (1987). Workbook for Stimulating Agriculture. Wellington, New Zealand: Moss Associates Limited.
  • Moss, G.R., (1987). Transferring Agricultural Technology: Guidelines for Agricultural Extension Planners. Paper presented at Agricultural Extension Seminar, Highlands Agricultural College, Papua New Guinea.
  • Moss, G.R., (1988). Trainers' Handbook. Singapore: Institute of Management.
  • National Agricultural Research. (1984). Rome: F.A.O.
  • Proceeding of the Commonwealth Association of Scientific Agricultural Societies (CASAS) South Pacific Regional Seminar, (1981). Self Sufficiency in Food Production in the Pacific: Opportunities and Constraints. Lautoka, Fiji.
  • Schultz, T.W. (1979). The Economics of Research and Agricultural Productivity. Paper presented at the Seminar on Socio-Economic Aspects of Agricultural Research in Developing Countries, Santiago, Chile.
  • World Bank, (1981). Agricultural Sector Policy Paper. Washington.

April 13, 2009

Bibliography of NZ Sheep Research 1932 - 1976

Links

1. Knol of Clive Dalton's NZ Sheep Research Bibliography listing Authors A-M
2. Knol of Clive Dalton's NZ Sheep Research Bibliography listing Authors N-Z

The beginnings of Online search in the 1970s

In the late 1970s, librarians at the Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre, Hamilton, got excited about a new development called ‘on-line searching’. From a tiny narrow store room in the library, the librarian (we were not allowed near the key board) would type into a teleprinter, the key words we gave her to search references on the subject. We were amazed at the speed – the printout would appear in our mailbox as fast as the next day!

We scientists thought this was incredible, but there was a problem - regularly our own names and published research didn’t appear on the list. This was a major concern, not just for sheep research science but for our egos! So the obvious question was what was in this marvelous database somewhere in cyberspace, and how far back did it go?

Knowing the amount of sheep work that had come out of Ruakura Research Centre, and the Whatawhata Hill Country Research Station alone, it was clear that the old material had not been picked up, so current researchers around the world would not know where it was, and then there was the bigger problem that future sheep researchers would assume it didn’t exist.

This sadly has proved to be true, and I regularly see research being repeated by young scientists who clearly have not found the old work. Google didn’t find it so it cannot have existed! But the situation has got worse, because libraries have actively done away with books and Journals on shelves. They have become ‘information hubs’, and are all concerned about ‘intellectual property’.

I now for example cannot access to the Ruakura library without going through a security check and unless I pay!

Let’s not blame the system

But let’s not blame the system, as a massive amount of important sheep research done in New Zealand never saw the light of day. It was never formally published to appear in major peer reviewed scientific journals which then should have been picked up. It was far easier for us scientists in a hurry to report research to farmers directly, as they were wanted to know to put the results into practice.

We had some great farmers’ journals and agricultural journalists to do just that. Full peer-reviewed journal publication was an agony, going through the hoops of writing, colleagues’ criticism, usually rewriting bits and regularly redoing statistical analysis.

Then came submission to the Journal’s Editorial Committee, who always had their two pennyworth which often meant going around, or half around the loop again. I regularly formed the opinion that the senior scientists on a research station who your work had to pass, got worse with age, and seemed to want to stop anything going out of the establishment, unless it had their name on it!

Then as we scientists aged, we got less keen to do battle with external Editorial Committees (with members from other research institutions), so Manila folders of data got put into filing cabinets, waiting for some younger scientist to come along, hungry for publications to get up the salary ladder, and who would do all the work and put our name on the finished paper! Sadly it often didn’t happen.

A long-hand search

When a ‘Scientific Liaison Officer’ at the Ruakura Research Centre, I thought I’d go through all the journals and books on the shelves in the extensive library, as well as all our other publications, from Ruakura, Massey and Lincoln when they were colleges - long before becoming Universities.

I hand wrote the references on cards and bits of paper, and filed them in a box in the Ruakura library where they sat for some years. I showed the material to Dr Alan Royal when he was at the NZ Meat Board heading the R&D Council, and he kindly got his secretary to typed them all up for me. She deserves a medal for her very accurate typing of my handwriting, and my sincere thanks. So now at least the material is ‘captured’ and available.
What is included in these bibliographies?

I have listed all papers and articles from New Zealand publications referring to ‘sheep’, and then all papers in other journals that reported research on ‘New Zealand sheep’. Against each reference I have given it a classification.

Classifications:

  1. General production & history
  2. Management
  3. Anatomy & Physiology
  4. Health & disease
  5. Behaviour
  6. Reproduction
  7. Growth & teeth
  8. Nutrition & feeding
  9. Lactation
  10. Breeding & genetics
  11. Meat & carcass composition
  12. Wool & skins
  13. Economics & marketing

April 11, 2009

50 years of artificial insemination and herd improvement in New Zealand.

By Clive Dalton & Claire Rumble.

Now a new Google knol - click here to read online.
Originally published by the Auckland Livestock Improvement Association, Private Bag, Hamilton.
ISBN 0-473-00294-9
April 1985
The cover of the book shows Moria Toomath (daughter of the late A.S. Wiley) of the Puhinui Jersey stud on her Koranui farm with a bull calf born in August 1984. Moira named the calf 'Puhinui King James' and he is rather special, because there are eight generations of AI breeding in his pedigree. His ancestry traces back to a foundation cow bought by Sydney Wiley in 1940. The Puhinui stud has been firmly based on AI breeding for 40 years.

Introduction (2009)

By Dr Clive Dalton

In musing over how things have changed in New Zealand dairying over the last 20 years, and the contribution genetics have made to this, I dug out the small book which Claire Rumble and I wrote in 1985 to commemorate “50 years of Artificial Insemination and Herd Improvement in New Zealand”.

At the time, Claire and I were employed by the NZ Ministry of Agriculture & Fisheries. I was a Scientific Liaison Officer at the Ruakura Research Centre (where folk had forgotten AI in New Zealand had started), and Clare was Technical Editor in our MAF Wellington Head Office. We thought it an interesting and important story then that should be recorded for posterity, and nobody else was going to do anything about it.

Claire and I got in contact again in 2009, and after all these years we thought that in these internet days, the material should be made accessible to anyone interested in New Zealand’s agricultural history and especially in dairy cattle breeding.

We can’t remember how many books were printed, but it was not a lot due to Jack Burton’s very small ‘slush fund’! It was not sold, but copies were given away to anyone LIA thought would be interested. It’s amusing now that many people can remember the publication, but few can find their copy. The book rarely turns up in second-hand bookshops.

The words have not been edited or updated. Sad to say, most of the people mentioned in the story have now passed on.

What’s the story about?
Tokoroa dairy farmer, and lifelong servant to the dairy industry, Dudley Lane summed the book up in his foreword.
“The book highlights the initiative and dedication of the scientists, technicians, administrators and farmers who pioneered the introduction of artificial insemination of dairy cattle in New Zealand.”
It’s really a bit of a detective story with the New Zealand dairy cow playing the lead role. New Zealand’s cow population was building up in the early 1900s and somebody must have decided to officially record their milk yield. Obviously farmers wanted to know which were their best cows, so they could breed replacements from them.

The first problem was how to handle all the data collected and from it sort out which were the best cows. It was the dawn of the science of statistics never mind genetics.

But then as the bull was the key to herd improvement, finding the top bulls was the key, and then they hit the wall over how to get more offspring from a bull.

Two popular sires in 1981
The Friesian (right) had more than 150,000 inseminations, and the Jersey more than 125,000.

The pedigree breeders held all the power and the sale of their bulls was the key to genetic improvement. Then the urge to speed up herd improvement made farmers start wondering if this new (and to many very dodgy) process called Artificial Insemination could be of use to get more from their bulls. This is the core of the tale.

AI or AB
This was a serious debate about which term to use, and you have to laugh about it now. New Zealand started with the term AI (Artificial Insemination), were diverted by the UK Milk Marketing Board to call it AB (Artificial Breeding), and then UK changed back to AI and left New Zealand in the lurch with a term that now is only use in NZ and Australia!

History of Herd Improvement
Dairy farming in New Zealand has always been a cooperative business, so this chapter is very important to understand the organisations that had to be set up – and made to work – to get anything going. Electricity was just being introduced to farms, milking machines were coming on stream, and pencil and paper was the means of recording everything. The introduction of the Burroughs ‘adding machines’ by Arthur Ward (a former accountant) for processing cow records was a revolution!

It was the dawn of statistical analysis – and Arthur had to lead the industry into this age. He persuaded Olive Castle to leave her maths teaching job in Wellington and join him. She should have been honoured for her contribution to the dairy industry but never was. Progeny testing, Sire Surveys and Contemporary Comparisons were developed by Olive and were copied world wide. It was a great example of the Kiwi way – of getting science into the paddock.

First steps to AI
Looking back now, this part of the story is mind blowing and you have to wonder if it could be done today with all the bureaucracy. The “NZ Co-op Herd Testing Assoc”, asked the Director General of Agriculture to get on and develop an AI service. Nice and simple – “get on with the job" mate!

The original AI laboratory at Newstead in 1952. The cars (from L to R) are Stan Southcombe's A40, Max Cooper's Morris Minor, and Sel Sheaf's A 90.

Remember what things were like. Rough roads, Model T and Austin cars, no electricity on farms, no idea of how to get semen from a bull on a farm (a pickle jar was used!) and then keeping the semen in a test tube in Tom Blake’s waistcoat pocket till he got to a cow on another farm to insert it into the vagina. The story and what the folk charged with getting the show on the road is amazing looked at from today’s systems.

Back to the beginning
This chapter is about an amazing man – Dr John James, a UK trained vet who came to New Zealand to do research on mastitis at Wallaceville. He sort of got diverted to Ruakura and the rest is history! It’s an amazing bit of history too – of what he achieved, like the invention of the straw to hold semen and the stainless steel insemination gun – 40 years before its time! The only gun left is in an AI museum in Russia!
Dr John James - the driving force behind getting AI working in NZ

Dr James led the research along a difficult and winding path of working out how to preserve sperm, dilute it to get more cows mated from one ejaculate, with the enormous challenge that only New Zealand has – to get all the cows mated over a period of 6 weeks in spring.

John James is generous in his recognition of all the staff at Ruakura and then at Newstead who helped to get the job done.

Semen for sale
One day, which must have been momentous, semen was offered for sale to commercial farmers with a very reasonable guarantee of success. Imagine the responsibility on the heads of all those involved, because if the cow didn’t get in calf, the farmer’s income next year was severely affected by the three-week delay in calving.

Then of course, once the novelty of the technique was accepted, farmers expected that they would be getting the very top bulls in the country, and that each year’s models would be better than last year’s. The pressure went on pedigree breeders which up to now were assumed to have the best stock. This assumption was now being questioned!

How to organise this distribution of semen took some very special people, and they didn’t fail to deliver. However one idea somebody had ‘failed to fly’. It was to send semen from Hamilton to Massey by carrier pigeon – which was in theory faster than the train! A saddler was commissioned to make the leather pouches needed.

AI goes to Northland
Apparently the dairy farmers in Northland had the clear impression that nobody cared much about them, so they got organised and were going to set up their own organisation. They went a fair way along the road and three wonderful stirrers who lived into their 90s made the Dairy Board see their point of view and provide an AI service.

AI made such an impact in Northland that the local management committee got a letter from a ‘Miss” requesting semen, saying she had never married but wished to have a family – ‘preferring Scottish and definitely not Irish blood’. She was available for interview any time. The meeting exploded with members clamouring for more details.

Technicians and training
The star of this chapter, and many would say of AI in New Zealand is Max Cooper (photographed in action below). Max was raised on a Hamilton farm, now with the city at its doorstep and had seen cows being inseminated on the family farm and thought it would an interesting job.

Over a very long career with the NZ Dairy Board, he led the charge of getting AI to work on farms, and to keep getting better results. He became a major trainer around the world. He was always the star turn at the annual Ruakura Open Days when buses taking farmers around the farm always ended at Newstead where Max had a bull primed ready to mount to deliver some future genetics for the industry.


Max told some great stories – all true! He was once accosted by a very nice lady who said she’d pay his wages if he stopped the ‘dirty pracice’ he was involved in. He tried in vain to explain it was a bull’s semen he was using on the cow. Many farmers always let the bull serve the cow before and after insemination and one farmer told Max that at the climax of mating, an electric pulse passed from bull to cow.

Forward into the fifties
The hero of this chapter is Pat Shannon (pictured). The progress which Pat and his colleagues brought about in the 1950s is an applied science classic. Pat is the first to acknowledge the help they got from “serendipity”!

The secret was in the dilution process as when they started they could get 10,000 inseminations from one ejaculate provided it was used within the first and at most the second day after collection. Their work (in 1956) got 150,000 inseminations from an ejaculate – and with massive advantages in keeping quality.

Taking the message to the farmer
This chapter pays tribute to the pioneering farmers whose supported the system set up to revolutionise dairy herd improvement. Herds were increasing slowly in size, the demand for proven bulls was increasing, the market for unproven ‘pedigree’ bulls had collapsed, and their was a storm of ‘plain speaking’ from pioneers like Dr C.P. McMeekan at Ruakura and Alan Candy.

These pioneers formed the NZ Society of Animal Production and the Dairy Board set up the Consultancy Officers’ Service. Things were really on the move. Jeff Stichbury of the Dairy Board drove the consultants, and relished the challenge of getting out in his Austin A40 to confront farmers the length of the land.

Which bulls to use?

This chapter is about the devopment of the ‘Sire Proving Scheme’ which had, and has continued to be the very core of dairy cattle improvement. It’s all about finding the best bulls which are then used as “Premier Sires”.

The process then developed to find the best cows from the extensive database of cow records (one of the biggest in the world) to be the mothers of future Premier Sires. Farmers put these cows up on contracts so any bull calves born were put back into the system to be progeny tested. This process has not changed – its only got bigger and better over the years.

Consolidation in the sixties
This bit of the story is about research to improve the extenders to keep semen viable for longer and the technology of deep freezing was racing ahead.

There’s a lovely (true) story of a farmer who was told to keep some semen in the FRIDGE. In those days semen was kept in glass ampules before plastic straws were invented. By mistake he put it in the FREEZER! It was duly thawed and the cow inseminated to produce a nice calf nine months later. He could claim to have pioneered the process!

The Eighties
By 1984, 70% of New Zealand dairy herds were using AI, and to most farmers, they’d never used anything else, so to them there was nothing ‘artificial’ involved. The story in this chapter is mainly about the administration changes that set things in place for the next two decades. Jeff Stichbury reckoned that the AI service and everything that went with it on herd improvement had produced 25kg of milkfat per cow per year more than would have been the case if the old ways had remained.

Records staff of Auckland Livestock Improvement Association in 1984.
Note: very few computers on desks!

Biographies
The book has biographies of Tommy Blake (1882-1966), Dr John James, Paul Kneebone and Stan Southcombe.

Table of events in date order
This is a very useful time line of events from 1909 (the start of Herd Testing) to 1984 (the formation of the NZ Dairy Board Livestock Improvement Council).


DEVELOPMENTS SINCE 1985?
Clive Dalton interviewed Dr Pat Shannon in April 2009 about developments since the book was published in 1985. Here are the points he made:


Pat Shannon aged 81 and still working two days a week at LIC
where he has been employed contributing to the dairy industry for 50 years.

Pat died age 90 on May 4 2016

  • The number of inseminations from an average bull's ejaculate has risen from 150,000 to 300,000.
  • The life of fresh semen in the field has increased from two days to four days.
  • The number of sperm in a straw of frozen semen has dropped from a minimum of 15 million to 10 million.
  • Semen carried by field technicians changed from test tubes to plastic straws in the 1990s.
  • Advances in computers have allowed more traits to be included in selection indexes.
  • Research into 'genetic markers' has allowed the time taken to prove a bull to drop from five years to one year.
  • Staff now have desk top computers linked to the Internet, instead of being linked to the main LIC computer.
  • Farmers can send and receive their data to LIC via their home computer and the Internet.

April 5, 2009

Geoff Moss: Make Your Next Presentation Memorable

Avoid making fundamental mistakes.
Key essentials for a successful presentation

By Geoffrey Moss

Marred by errors
Recently I attended a presentation by a famous scientist. It promised to be an interesting motivational address, but was marred by several errors which could have been easily avoided if there had been a little more preparation and rehearsal.

First, the chairman’s introduction was weak. He took the audience’s knowledge of the speaker for granted and failed to stress the background of such a famous speaker. Next he failed to tell them what they could learn from listening to the presentation.

The chairman's role
The role of a chairman, when introducing a speaker, is to raise the interest level of the audience and to prepare them to receive the speaker. His job is to remind the audience why the speaker is an authority on the particular subject and why the topic is important to them.

The chairman should have been given background notes for the introduction and the best person to prepare these notes would have been the speaker himself. The speaker had a good personality, and was very relaxed and chatted to his audience. They were enthralled with his anecdotes and were obviously motivated by his message. But when it came to his visual aids to illustrate his research results he made several basic mistakes.

Slides
His slides were too cluttered and some of the letters and figures were too small and difficult to read. Often when people prepare their Power Point presentation on their laptop it looks fine in their office. But when it is projected on to a large screen in an auditorium where there is often too much light, people at the back of the room are unable to read the writing or see the figures.

His colour combinations also left a lot to be desired. You should not use black lettering on a red background if you want a large audience to read it easily. Keep to the basic colours such as black or blue lettering on a white, yellow, or light blue background. White lettering on a dark blue background is also suitable.

You need strong contrasting colours and big letters so everyone can see the message. And don’t forget many men are colour-blind so avoid red and green lettering. The rule is to keep lettering simple and use bold colours when using visual aids.


Too much data
His second mistake was to present too much data on the screen for some of his research results. This is a very common mistake. Power Point presentations should be used only for headings or for presenting key points or illustrations. Data is best illustrated with graphs or bar charts or better still, give a handout. If you want to present a memorable message for people to take away, don’t bore them with long lists of figures or complex charts.

Equipment
Another mistake was not to have had a rehearsal with his equipment. When he started to call up his slides, using a wireless mouse, we were able to see the other data he had on his removable disc drive. This proved very frustrating for both the speaker and the audience.

Basic Principles
The fundamental principles when making a presentation are:
  1. Every person in the audience must be able to see and to hear the speaker clearly.
  2. They must be able to hear the questions from the floor.
  3. They must be able to see and understand the visual aids.
How often have you been to a presentation when these principles were not followed? Here are a few simple recommendations to make your next presentation memorable.

Helpful Guidelines
  • Ask yourself “Why am I giving this presentation? “What action do I want my audience to take? Write down your objective.
  • Write out your talk in full.
  • Remember it is what people want to know that is important – not what YOU think they want to know.
  • Don’t tell them things they already know. Tell them something new!
  • Don’t make too many points. Detailed oral presentations become boring and the audience will not remember the main message.
  • Use this written version as the basis of a copy for the media, or for a handout, or for a published report.
  • Rewrite a second version the way you speak. You can tape record this and listen to it until you remember the sequence of the main points.
  • Take a yellow marking pen and pick out your key memory words. Put these on a small card and practise speaking naturally to these headings. This will keep your presentation in a logical sequence and help keep you within you allotted time.
  • The only parts of a presentation you need to have fully memorised are your opening remarks to get your audience’s attention and your memorable conclusion.
  • The end should be a climax NOT an anticlimax!

  • When giving your presentation make it topical and be prepared to make instant changes if necessary.
  • Much will depend on the mood of the audience, or on comments made by previous speakers. If you have a flexible presentation you can often improve your message and make it more topical by referring to recent events or breaking news.
  • Prepare your visual aids carefully. Use these as your notice boards to show your audience where you are heading and to act as memory joggers for the points you are making.
  • People remember what they see longer than spoken words. You will be lucky if your audience remembers 20% of what they hear. But they often remember up to 80% of what they see. That is why you should use visual aids.
  • Keep the message on your visual aids simple and concise and your lettering large and bold.
  • At the end of your presentation distribute handouts with your business card attached. These should highlight your message and include vital data and copies of important slides.

Preparation is a Sound Investment
Your next presentation will only be as good as the time you put into its preparation. Time spent rehearsing and preparing effective visual aids is a sound investment.

Make Last Minute Checks
If things can go wrong, they will go wrong so always check out your meeting room for temperature, seating arrangements and screen visibility well before you are due to begin your presentation. Always take back-up visual aids such as transparencies just in case your Power Point projection equipment fails.

Don’t Say Too Much
Don’t try to tell your audience too much. Three good points made three times is better than boring your audience with too many details.

Chat to Your Audience
  • Smile at them. Tell them something new and don’t be afraid to share your ideas and emotions with them.
  • Refrain from reading your written speech – just talk to a few notes if necessary.
If you have put time into your preparation you can relax and enjoy the presentation and the rewards to follow.

Acknowledgement
To Geoffrey Moss for permission to publish this material. Geoff was my manager and mentor for many years in the NZ Ministry of Agriculture & Fisheries.

Geoffrey Moss has been a member of the Wellington Toastmasters Club for over 40 years. Eighty-two editions of his books have been published in 18 countries and in 11 languages. www.mossassociates.co.nz
Email: moss@xtra.co.nz

April 3, 2009

Cattle farm husbandry: Beef cattle breeds in New Zealand

By Dr Clive Dalton

Early history
Cattle were brought to New Zealand in the early 1800s by the first European settlers, to provide milk, draught power, meat, horn and hides. They also played in important role in breaking down bush and scrub during pasture development.

The Durham Shorthorn and the Red Devon were the first breeds to be used as the steers made ideal oxen, but as the population increased and farming developed, other specialised beef and dairy breeds were imported.

New Zealand was alert to the scourge of Foot & Mouth disease, so only imported cattle from countries where the disease was not endemic such as Britain. Beef cattle numbers were slow to develop till the invention of refrigeration in 1880, afte which time frozen and chilled beef became important exports. However it was not until the 1950s with the expansion of the American hamburger meat trade that beef production in New Zealand really expanded, and most of this meat came as a byproduct from the dairy industry.

In the early days of New Zealand’s beef industry, Aberdeen Angus and Hereford cattle from Britain were numerically the most popular until the 1970s, when over 20 “exotic’ breeds arrived, mainly from Europe, primarily to cross on to the Friesian and Jersey dairy breeds.

However, because of their scarcity, they were established as studs and exported from New Zealand to other countries because of our clean animal health status. You could say that today, most of these exotic breeds have been and gone, with only a few purebred stud herds left, and the New Zealand beef industry is based mainly on the crossbred Hereford x Friesian cow or the straight Holstein Friesian for bull beef.


Performance recording
Performance recording of beef cattle in New Zealand was started in 1963 and became Beefplan in 1973. At present there are a number of alternative recording schemes breeders can use, but they all use the same basic software to produce a range of Estimated Breeding Values (EBVs) which breeders use to select their stock.


New Zealand Angus

NZ Angus cows and calves
History
Originated as the native breed in the East of Scotland in the 18th Century and imported into the South Island of New Zealand as the Aberdeen Angus in 1863. In 1891 it was introduced to the North Island and hase been widely used ever since as a breeding cow on all types of country. The New Zealand Aberdeen Angus Cattle Breeders’ Association was formed in 1918 and in 1970 became the NZ Angus Association Inc. to run the breed’s affairs.

Features
  • Colour – all black. Some small white areas around the navel is allowed.
  • Polled
  • Medium size; good early growth rate; early maturing.
  • Good maternal ability; low calving trouble.
  • Adapted to a wide range of conditions; good forager on hill country; hardy.
  • Used as a straightbred beef dam and as a crossing sire on dairy breeds.


Beef Shorthorn

Beef shorthorn steer
History
Bred in Northern England in the last 1700s by the Colling brothers who produced both beef and dairy strains. The Scottish Beef Shorthorn developed in the early 1800s. Samuel Marsden brought the first Shorthorns to New Zealand in early 1814, and the first herd book of the NZ Beef Shorthorn Cattle Breeders’ Association appeared in 1884. The breed made a major contribution to New Zealand’s early land development. The breed’s affairs are now run by the NZ Beef Shorthorn Association Inc.

Features
  • Colour – red, roan (mixture of red & white) or white.
  • Polled with some horned.
  • Medium size; good early growth rate; early maturity.
  • Good maternal breed; good temperament; low calving difficulty.
  • Adapted to wide range of conditions; good forager.
  • Used as straightbred beef dam or as a crossing sire.


Galloway & Belted Galloway

Belted Galloway cow
History
These breeds developed in the West of Scotland in the 17th Century and are of very ancient origin. They were imported into New Zealand in 1947 and are registered in separate sections of the Galloway Herd Book. The breed’s affairs are now run by the Galloway Cattle Society of NZ Inc.

Features
  • Colour –Galloways are black, and the Belted Galloway is black with white band around middle. Both breeds can show dun or silver dun, or white coat colours as recessives.
  • Both breeds polled.
  • Extremely hardy breeds.
  • Long outer coats and thick undercoats.
  • Medium sized.
  • Slow maturing, but show good early growth when well fed.
  • Lean carcasses that yield well.
  • Used as straightbred beef dams and as crossing sires.
White Galloway cow and calf


Hereford

Polled Hereford bull

Horned Hereford steer

History
Developed in the West of England in the 18th Century and imported into New Zealand in 1869. The first her book of the NZ Hereford Cattle Breeders’ Association was published in 1899. Polled Herefords came to New Zealand from the USA in 1929 and were registered in a separate section of the Herd Book. The breed’s affairs are now run by the NZ Hereford Association Inc.

Breeders of Polled and Horned Herefords regular express the superior merits on their cattle over the others though the difference has never been scientifically proven. Wisely in New Zealand (but not in all parts of the world) both polled and horned Herefords are now entered in the same herd book.

Features
  • Colour – rich red with white head and strip along the neck (not to be right along back). Underside, dewlap, legs and tail switch are white.
  • Horned & polled.
  • Medium size, good early growth, early maturity.
  • Good maternal breed; easy calving.
  • Adapted to wide range of conditions; good forager.
  • Used as straightbred dam or as crossing sire, especially on Holstein Friesian dairy cows.
Hereford x Friesian cows (the Hereford white head is a dominant feature)


Red Poll

Red Poll cow and calf.
Photo from website of NZ Red Poll Cattle Breeders' Assoc.

History

Developed in the early 1800s in Eastern England as a dual-purpose breed for arable areas to utilise crop by-products. Introduced into New Zealand in 1898 as a dual-purpose breed, but is now used for beef. The breed’s affairs are now run by the NZ Red Poll Cattle Breeders’ Association Inc.

Features
  • Colour – dark red except for white tail switch.
  • Polled.
  • Medium size; good early growth, early maturing.
  • Adapted to wide range of conditions; good forager, easy calving.
  • Noted for longevity and docility.
  • Used as straightbred beef breed.

Red Devon

NZ Red Devon bull

History
Very old British breed originating in the West of England where it is referred to as the Devon, the Red Devon, or Red Ruby to avoid confusion with the South Devon. The breed was introduced to New Zealand in 1838 by James Busby and was used as draught bullocks, for milk, beef and hides. The first stock were registered in 18880 in a general all-breeds Herd book. The New Zealand Red Devon Association ws reformed in 1973 who now run the breed’s affairs.

Features
  • Colour – dark 'ruby' red
  • Horned and polled
  • Medium size; good early growth, early maturing.
  • Good maternal ability, easy calving and noted for docile temperament.
  • Adapted to wide range of conditions; good forager; noted for longevity.
  • Now classed as ‘rare breed’ in NZ.


South Devon
South Devon steers
History
Britain’s largest native breed, developed in the 18th Century in the West of England where it is noted for rich milk (Devon clotted cream) and tender beef. The breed was brought to New Zealand in 1970 when the South Devon Cattle Society of NZ was formed to run the breed’s affairs.

Features
  • Colour – red brown (copper) or medium red.
  • Horned
  • Large mature size with high growth rate; heavy calves at birth.
  • Quiet temperament; good maternal ability.
  • Milk yield: 3500-4500 L @ 3.9% fat.
  • Used extensively as terminal beef sire in NZ.


Welsh Black
Welsh Black bull losing winter coat

History
Of ancient Celtic origin and used traditionally in Wales as a dual purpose cow for rugged conditions. Brought to New Zealand in the early 1970s with the Welsh Black Cattle Society of NZ being formed in 1974 to run the breed’s affairs.

Features
  • Colour – Black; some patches of white on udder.
  • Horned & polled.
  • Medium size; long outer coat.
  • Very hardy, easy calving, good forager.
  • Good maternal ability; good temperament.
  • Slow maturing, but show good early growth when well fed.
  • Used as straight beef breed in NZ.
  • Now classed as ‘rare breed’ in NZ.

Highland

Highland bull

History
A very old breed which evolved in the cold wet West and North of Scotland, where is could be kept outside in winter.

Features
  • Colour – gingery red
  • Long shaggy outer coat and thick undercoat.
  • Noted for its long horns.
  • Small size, and late maturing, but when well fed shows good growth.
  • Lean carcasses that yield well.


Luing
History

Developed in the West of Scotland on the island of Luing by crossing and interbreeding the Highland and Beef Shorthorn. The breed was recognised in UK in 1966 and arrived in New Zealand in 1974 when the Luing Breeders’ Cattle Society of NZ was formed to run the breed’s affairs.

Features
  • Colour – varies from red to roan, golden white, cream and brindle.
  • Horned & polled
  • Medium size; extremely hardy, good forager.
  • Good maternal ability, easy calving.
  • Lean carcasses that yield well.
  • Used as straightbred beef in NZ.
  • Now classed as ‘rare breed’ in NZ.


Charolais

Charolais cow

History
Very old breed from central France where the first breed society was formed in 1864 and the first herd book was published in 1887. The first Charolais semen was imported to NZ for research purposes by MAF, as a breed for crossing on to
the dairy herd. After later importations of semen and animals, the NZ Charolais Cattle Society was formed in 1968 to run the breed’s affairs.

Features
  • Colour – white or creamy white
  • Horned & polled
  • Very large breed with prominent muscling, especially over the shoulder and rump; late maturing.
  • Very good growth rate to large mature size.
  • Lean carcasses that yield well.
  • Calves can be large at birth.
  • Good temperament.
  • Used widely as terminal sire for crossing.


Limousin
Limousin bull

History
Developed in the Limousin area of central France from different local races of ancient origin. The French Herd Book was established in 1886. Bulls were imported for MAF research trials in 1972 at which time the Limousin Cattle Breeders’ Society of NZ was formed to manage the breeders’ needs.

Features
  • Colour – golden red with lighter shade on underside.
  • Horns short & thick.
  • Large size with prominent muscling; late maturing.
  • Rapid early growth, good lean carcasses that yield well.
  • Calves can be large at birth.
  • Used as terminal sire for crossing


Blonde d’ Aquitaine


Blonde d'Aquitaine heifer
History
Originated in South West France from mixed races that were united in the Blond d’ Aquitaine in 1961. Imported into NZ for MAF trials in 1974. The affairs are now run by Australia New Zealand Blonde d’ Aquitane Society.

Features
  • Colour – solid wheat colour with range from white to light brown. Lighter rings around eyes, muzzle and underside.
  • Horns – cows have longer horns than bulls.
  • Large size with prominent muscling.
  • Very good growth rates to large mature size; late maturing.
  • Lean carcasses that yield well.
  • Calves can be large at birth.
  • Used as terminal crossing sire.


Simmental

Simmental cows and calves

History
Originated in Switzerland in the Simme Valley and in the mid 19th Century spread throughout the whole of Europe. Nearly have of the cattle in Europe are various types of Simmentals used for milk, beef and draught purposes. Introduced to New Zealand in 1972 by MAF for trials and then later by breeders as live animals and semen. The breed’s affairs are run by the Simmental Cattle Breeders’ Society of NZ.

Features
  • Colour – varies from dark red to pale straw with varying amounts of white on body and legs. White head similar to Hereford.
  • Horns
  • Large size; well muscled.
  • Good growth rate to large mature size; late maturing.
  • Calves can be large at birth.
  • Used for beef as a terminal sire and to produce crossbred dams.
  • Milk yields – 4500 litres @ 4% fat.
  • Lean carcasses that yield well.
  • Quiet temperament.

Belgium Blue

Belgium Blue cow

History
Originated in central and upper Belgium and were produced by crossing the local red-pied and black-pied cattle with English Shorthorn from 1850-1890. There are some suggestions that Charolais was introduced in the 19th Century. The breed was formally recognised in the 20th Century with a strain for meat and one for milk. Selection now is primarily for beef. The breed’s affairs are run by the Belgian Blue Cattle Society of NZ.

Features
  • Colour – white, blue roan or black.
  • Massive muscling, double muscling causing protruding hind quarter.
  • Late maturing, high growth rate; large mature size.
  • Calves are very large at birth in both purebreds and in cows they are mated to.
  • Imported to New Zealand in 1980s as terminal sire for dairy cows.

Italian White breeds


Piedmontese heifer

Romagnola bull

History
Three Italian breeds, Chianina, Chiangul, Marchiagiana, Romagnola and Piedmontes are of ancient origin and were developed for draught, meat and milk- in that order. These breeds were brought to NZ in 1974. Initially they were under one Breed Society but some are now separate.
NZ Chianina Cattle Breeders Society Inc, NZ Chianina Cattle Breeders Society Inc, NZ Romagnola Society, Marchigiana Breeds Society has been formed.
No other Breed Societies are listed.

Features
  • Colour – white to grey, some with black points.
  • Horned
  • Large mature size; well muscled.
  • Chianina is the largest breed in the world.
  • High growth rate and lean carcass that yield well.
  • Calves large at birth, but Chianina noted for ease of calving.
  • Used as terminal crossing sires.

Murray Grey

Murray Grey bull

History
Originated in the upper Murray River region in Australia from crosses between Angus and Shorthorn in 1905. The breed became popular and an Australian Breed Society was formed in 1962. Cattle were imported to New Zealand and the breed’s affairs are now run by the NZ Murray Grey Beef Cattle Society Inc.

Features
  • Colour – silver, silver grey, light and dark grey, or dun.
  • Polled
  • Medium size, good early growth, early maturing.
  • Good maternal ability, easy calving, quiet temperament.
  • Adapted to wide range of conditions; good foragers.
  • Used as straight beef breed or as terminal sire.


Wagyu
This breed was imported from Japan to produce beef specifically for export to that country. Wagyu beef is noted in Japan for the famous 'Kobe' beef which has large quantities of intramuscular fat producing plenty of 'marbling'. The New Zealand Wagyu Breeders Association Inc looks after breeders' needs.


Sussex
Originated in the South of England as a dual purpose breed for mixed farming operations. They are now used as a beef breed and were imported into New Zealand in the mid 1970s. Since 1975 the breed’s affairs are now run by the Sussex Society. In New Zealand, the breed is now considered to be a ‘rare breed’.

Lincoln Red
Developed in Eastern England’s arable area as a dual purpose breed called the Lincoln Red Shorthorn. The first Breed Society was formed in 1894 as previously they had been registered with other Shorthorns. In 1960 the word ‘Shorthorn’ was dropped. Lincoln Red cattle were imported into New Zealand in 1972 and are now classed as a ‘rare breed’. No Breed Society is listed.

Dark red in colour, polled & horned, medium size, good maternal ability, very adaptable. Used as straight bred.

Braham
Native to the Indian sub continent (Bos inducus as opposed to Bos taurus), and has been used widely in hot dry countries to develop new breeds and strains. It’s main physical features are the shoulder hump, large loose penile sheath and long drooping ears, all claimed to increase surface area to assist body cooling. Noted for tick resistance as well as heat resistance. Quiet temperament when reared with people but not in range conditions where they are handles infrequently. White or grey is the predominant colour. No Breed Society is listed.

Brangus
Developed on the USA in the 1930s from a 3/8 Braham and 5/8 Angus. They are all-black in colour and show many characteristics of the Braham. Were imported to New Zealand in the 1970s to be used as a terminal sire. No Breed Society is listed.

Santa Gertrudis

Santa Gertrudis cows

Developed on the King Ranch in Texas in 1851 from a gene pool of Texas Longhorn, Shorthorn, Hereford and American Braham. By 1920-30 the breed was stabilised and was recognises in 1940 in the USA. Cattle were imported into New Zealand in 1969 and the Santa Gertrudis Breeders’ New Zealand Association Inc was formed in 1968 to run the breed’s affairs.
The cattle are a dark red colour with small horns, and show some of the Braham high shoulder and penile sheath. They have been used in New Zealand as a straightbred for beef and as terminal sires.

Sahiwal

Sahiwal bull

An Indian milking breed and shows the typical Bos indicus features. Used in New Zealand to cross on to Holstein Friesian dairy cattle to produce first-cross heifers for export to Asia. These have been commercialised as ‘Taurindicus’. The Sahiwal is a reddish-brown in colour with some ranging to a yellow brown. Taurindicus are mainly dark red and black with a few yellow-browns appearing. No Breed Society is listed.

Taurindicus heifers bred for export


Maine Anjou
Developed in North West France from local strains about 1830 and recognised as a separate breed in 1925. Bulls were imported into New Zealand by MAF for trials in 1972. They are red and white in colour with some roan, are large well-muscled cattle with high growth rates. They are heavy boned and calves are large at birth. Used as terminal sire. The breed’s affairs are run by the NZ Maine Anjou Cattle Society.

Meusse-Rhine Issel (MRI)
Developed in Holland in the early 1900s as a dual purpose breed. Cattle are various shades of red with white areas. Very docile cattle with good dairy production (4500 Litres @ 4% fat). Large frame with good growth rates when used as a beef terminal sire in New Zealand. No Breed Society is listed.

Wagyu
Developed in Japan as a breed to produce their high quality ‘Kobe’ beef under indoor feedlot conditions. They were brought to New Zealand to establish the breed to produce beef to export to Japan by crossbreeding on to Holstein Friesian dairy cows. The affairs of the breed are managed by the NZ Wagyu Breeders Association Inc.

Salers

Red Salers heifer

A very old breed developed in mountain areas of South Central France as a dual purpose breed. Brought to New Zealand in the 1987 to be used for as terminal sires.
Mainly red in colour but also black, early maturing and good growth. Breed affairs are managed by the NZ Salers Society.

Gelbvieh
Gelbveigh steer

Pronounced (Gelf fee)Originated in Bavaria in Southern Germany in the late 18th and 19th Centuries, as a dual purpose breed and also used for draught. They were imported into NZ as beef terminal sires in the 1970s. Golden yellow or reddish in colour, but black coat colour is also possible. Medium size, horned or polled, adaptable to wide range of conditions. In NZ breed affairs are run by the Gelbvieh Cattle Breeders Society of NZ Inc.

Shaver
Development began in 1959 by Dr Donald Shaver in Canada, stabilised in 1985 from a mixture of breeds including the British Galloway, Highland, Red Devon, South Devon and Lincoln Red, and the European Gelbvieh, Salers, Blonde d’Aquitane and Maine Anjou. The ‘breed’ is now classed as a ‘composite’ and was brought to NZ in 1990. Control of the breed is under Shaver Beef NZ.

Miniature Hereford
These are genetically small Herefords (not dwarfs) and have all the qualities of Hereford cattle. Miniature Herefords originated in Texas in the 1930s. Embryos were imported into New Zealand from Canada and live animals from Australia in 1997 to establish the first breeding stock in New Zealand.

Miniature Herefords are pure Hereford and have to pass the strict criteria of the NZ Hereford Association and also to date have been registered with the Aust. & NZ Miniature Hereford Cattle Association. They are very popular on small farms and lifestyle blocks in New Zealand.

Lowline

Lowline

Derived from a cattle research project started by the New South Wales Department of Agriculture in 1974 with Angus cattle. Lowline cattle have been developed solely in Australia but have been imported to New Zealand in the 1980s as ideal cattle for small farms and lifestyleblocks. They have all the good growth and meat qualities of the Angus, and their mature size is similar to that which the Aberdeen Angus used to be in the 1950s when short legged ‘blocky’ carcasses were in demand. Breeders like to call them 'Lowline', rather than 'miniature Angus' which is what they really are.


Dexter


Dexters are a hardy breed of small mountain cattle, originally derived from the Celtic Kerry cattle of ancient Ireland. They are the smallest British breed of cattle and have proven to be a popular beef cow for small farms and lifestyle blocks in New Zealand. The coat is usually black, but it can be red or dun. The first Dexter cattle were imported to New Zealand in 1999 and the breed’s affairs are run by the Dexter Cattle Society New Zealand Inc.

Texas Longhorn

Texas Longhorn cow

The remnants of the old English Longhorn breed that were first to arrive in the pioneering days of the USA. They provided beef off the primitive early pastures of the prairies. The breed did a similar job in other challenging environments of Africa and Australia, and their long horns made them very useful as draught bullocks and to break down scrub. The breed has retained it's small to medium size and hardiness. It's a popular breed for rodeo roping and bulldogging because of its long horns and is now in the rare breeds class.

Pinzgauer

Pinzgauer heifer

This old red and white breed is descended from the red native cattle of Bavaria, originally bred for meat as draught animals, but were also kept to provide milk. Of quiet temperament they have all the features needed in a dual purpose cow. The white band down the back is called 'finching' and is similar to that in Herefords. A few purebred herds were established in New Zealand in the 1990s from imports. Now classed as a Rare Breed.