10.2190/ES.31.4.f M51208574380552G 6 Dairy Programs to Reduce Manure-Related Environmental Problems: The Case of the Louisiana Milkshed 367 383 20081013 20081013 20081013 20081013 M51208574380552G.pdf http://baywood.metapress.com/link.asp?target=contribution&id=M51208574380552G 4 Krishna P. Paudel Wayne M. Gauthier John V. Westra Larry M. Hall Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge Decreasing the amount of dairy manure by lowering the population of dairy cows is one route for coping with the problems associated with dairy manure. In Louisiana's major milkshed, a recent survey of dairy gave insights into rules that would both reduce levels of dairy manure and minimize conflicts with efficiency and equity. Payments to dairy producers for undertaking voluntary practices that either reduce cow numbers or mitigate environmental damages associated with dairy manure were more acceptable than mandatory programs. This study uses the "cheap talk" method to elicit values for willingness to accept (WTA) payment to participate in the milk diversion program (MDP) or the dairy termination program (DTP). The study compares the survey respondents' participation and amounts received in the MDP twenty years ago to hypothetical WTA payments if the programs were to be instituted today. Logistic and tobit regression models were used to identify the factors affecting dairy program participation and levels and reported bid values submitted by producers. Results indicated that past participation is the key variable in explaining future participation in a voluntary milk reduction program. Bootstrap results confirm that most of the estimated parameters fall within the range of the bootstrap confidence interval. H. F. Gale, Jr., Econometric Analysis of Farmer Participation in the Dairy Termination Program in North Carolina and Virginia, <i>Southern Journal of Agricultural Economics, 22</i>, pp. 123-131, 1990. R. M. Klemme, <i>Estimating and Interpreting Dairy Production Costs and Cash Flow Requirements. Economic Issues</i>, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Wisconsin, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, No. 82. T. O. Knight and K. A. Kubiak, Extension Decision Aids for the Dairy Termination Program: A Comparative Analysis, <i>American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 69</i>, pp. 777-785, 1987. J. M. Marsh, The Effects of the Dairy Termination Program on Live Cattle and Wholesale Beef Prices, <i>American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 7</i>:2, pp. 919-928, 1988. B. L. Dixon, D. Susanto, and C. R. Berry, Supply Impact of the Milk Diversion and Dairy Termination Programs, <i>American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 73</i>, pp. 633-640, 1991. C. W. Bausell, Jr., D. A. Belsley, and S. L. Smith, An Analysis of 1980s Dairy Programs and Some Policy Implications, <i>American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 74</i>, pp. 605-616, 1992. L. Zepeda, Asymmetry and Nonstationarity in the Farm Size Distribution of Wisconsin Milk Producers: An Aggregate Analysis, <i>American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 77</i>, pp. 837-852, 1995. National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), United States Department of Agriculture, 2006. D. A. Dillman, <i>Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method</i>, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 2000. K. P. Paudel, W. M. Gauthier, J. V. Westra, and L. M. Hall, Factors Influencing and Steps Leading to the Adoption of Best Management Practices by Louisiana Dairy Farmers, <i>Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 40</i>, pp. 203-222, 2008. N. C. Rahelizatovo and J. M. Gillespie, The Adoption of Best-Management Practices by Louisiana Dairy Producers, <i>Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 36</i>, pp. 229-240, 2004. R. G. Cummings and L. O. Taylor, Unbiased Value Estimates for Environmental Goods: A Cheap Talk Design for the Contingent Valuation Method, <i>American Economic Review, 89</i>, pp. 649-665, 1999. F. Carlsson, P. Frykblom, and C. J. Lagerkvist, Using Cheap Talk as a Test of Validity in Choice Experiments, <i>Economics Letters, 89</i>, pp. 147-152, 2005. Anonymous (b). <i>Logit model output.</i> Accessed from the Web on January 12, 2006, <a target="_blank" href='http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/output/old/logfoot.htlm'>http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/output/old/logfoot.htlm</a> Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ), State of Louisiana Water Quality Management Plan, 2004 Water Quality Inventory Integrated Report, Section 305(b) and 303(d) Reports, Appendix H: Louisiana's 2004 303(d) List. Internet site: <a target="_blank" href='http://http:www.deq.louisiana/gov/portal/portals/0/assistance/2004AppendixHCategory5.pdf'>http:www.deq.louisiana/gov/portal/portals/0/assistance/2004AppendixHCategory5.pdf</a> M. R. Burkart and D. E. James, Agricultural-Nitrogen Contributions to Hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico, <i>Journal of Environmental Quality, 28</i>, pp. 850-859, 1999. D. F. Boesch, R. B. Brinsfield, and R. E. Magnien, Chesapeake Bay Eutrophication: Scientific Understanding, Ecosystem Restoration, and Challenges for Agriculture, <i>Journal of Environmental Quality, 30</i>, pp. 303-320, 2001. H. M. Kaiser and D. R. Lee, An Aggregate Analysis of Bid Decisions for the Dairy Termination Program, <i>North Central Journal of Agricultural Economics, 9</i>, pp. 259-269, 1987. Cooperative Working Together, <a target="_blank" href='http://www.cwt.coop/'>http://www.cwt.coop/</a>