Survey of veterinary extension in the United States.

This research article analyzes the current state and challenges of veterinary extension services in the United States, gathered through a cross-sectional survey conducted with extension veterinarians. Main findings reveal that most extension veterinarians don’t engage in resident education or research activities, and there is a limited recognition, university support, and funding for their activities.

Methodology

• Two different surveys were designed to collect information about veterinary extension services in the United States.
• The researchers reached out to extension veterinarians listed by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the American Association of Extension Veterinarians.
• As the study is cross-sectional, data was collected at a single point in time, allowing for an overview of the current state of veterinary extension.

Findings

• A total of 34 states reported having at least one extension veterinarian.
• Over 60% of the extension veterinarians did not commit time to educating residents and were not involved in research activities. This might be due to their roles primarily being in providing direct service to the community.
• Surprisingly, 23% of the respondents did not report extension work even though they were listed as extension veterinarians.
• Within the services provided, 100% included programs for food animal producers, while 63% provided services for horse owners, and 37% catered to companion animal owners.
• Continuing education (CE) programs were provided by 96% of states for food animal veterinarians, 63% for equine veterinarians, and 52% for companion animal veterinarians. This shows that there is a focus on maintaining and improving the skills and knowledge base of veterinarians.

Challenges

• The study identified limited recognition of veterinary extension activities by universities as a key challenge. Without institutional recognition, these programs may struggle for validation and support.
• The lack of university staff to support Continuing Education (CE) programs indicates a resource constraint in providing these valuable services.
• Decreased support for companion animal extension programs highlights a potential lack of focus on this important area.

Conclusions and Recommendations

• Given the challenges identified, the researchers call for extension veterinarians to clearly articulate the mission of veterinary extension and advocate for its recognition and support.
• Collaborative programs could be developed across regions, leveraging shared resources and knowledge.
• The authors suggest that extension veterinarians should serve as catalysts, bringing diverse constituents together around common issues.
• Importantly, they stress that the mission of veterinary extension should not be seen simply as information transfer. Instead, it needs to be viewed as a nationally devised, locally distributed program of education and policy guidance in the field of veterinary services.