|
Oklahoma | I could go either way. I think they are a valuable asset when the right person is in the job. Alot of the employees have been allowed to become very "hidden" from the public and don't do much. There are alot of problems within the government related to accountability and lack of supervison that gives a rats rear so this festers (that is a whole different soap box of mine though)
At least in the county I work in, we have a new young agent that hit the ground running and is trying to make a hand. His supervisor however, I only see at co. commissioner meetings and other locations where he can kiss up. I have producers who have been waiting 4 years to have him come out and the new guy got there in less than a month.
I do think that maybe the agents don't need to be here for rural ag anymore due to crop consultants and other information available but there are alot of smaller producers that could still use the guidance and assistance. On that same token though, if you take away funding at the county level, does that mean that you end up loosing it also at the state/university level so it in effect eliminates the ag research projects done there?????
I know some people despite the entire system but I think there are very valid and useful points to the system when it works. | |
|
County Agent program.
