THE THREE-LEGGED STOOL

Some old-time dairy farmers from years ago can talk about the three-legged milking stool that allowed them to get close to the cows udder when they milked.   So, it is not surprising that there are also the three legs to the history of agriculture- education, research, and extension.  In previous blogs, I have covered both the educational side relative to the history of the Land Grant System, and the emergence of the Extension system.  These can be reviewed at www.whatceresmightsay.blogspot.com.  This blog posting reviews briefly the other aspect of the three-legged stool, research and the agricultural experiment stations.

 

BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE CREATION OF AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS IN THE U.S.:

The work of the more than 600 main Agricultural Experiment Stations and their branch stations across the United States has been tremendous and addresses a range of issues related to agriculture and the environment.  Research, being part of the Land Grant System and the Extension Service, is often called the “three-legged stool” of research, teaching, and education.  The pieces of the so-called stool were put together at different times in our history.  The first being the creation of the Land Grant College Act in 1862, followed by the Hatch Act of 1887, and finally the Smith Lever Act of 1914, with various amendments being added to these laws over the years.

 

Agricultural Research Beginning:

By all accounts, the need for directed agricultural research came from early European models. The first is said to have been in England in 1843.  It was followed in 1851 by a band of German farmers in 1851.  It was under the leadership of Dr. Samuel Johnson, then a professor of Chemistry at Yale, who went to Germany in 1853 to study their research system that the idea and energy for such system was established in the U.S., but it did not quickly begin according to history. The U.S. was an agrarian society in the beginning, and the records from that time indicate that even George Washington, a farmer himself, and a member of the first agricultural society in the U.S. in Philadelphia, advocated in his first address to the then seat of Government, indicated the need for a national board of agriculture.  He said, “that he would rather be on my farm than be emperor of the world.” Other national leaders of the time were farmers too unlike what exists in the national and even state policy making environment today.

 

Influence of Land Grant Act and helping to forge the future of Experiment Stations.

According to records, the funds from the sale of land scrips from the Land Grant Act to the State of Connecticut (each state received scrips for the sale of 30,000 acres of Western native American land for each member of Congress from the state) went to the Sheffield School of Yale College in 1862. (before the creation of the University of Connecticut).  Two of the professors there, Dr. Samuel Johnson, a professor of Chemistry, and William Brewer, a professor of Agriculture, had for years been active in promoting agricultural science in Connecticut and elsewhere in the United States.  Dr. Johnson had already gone to study the research system in Germany in 1853.  A Vermonter, Dr. W.O. Atwater, a post graduate student under Dr. Johnson, also went to Germany to study the Experiment Stations, and came back and with Dr. Johnson proposed to farmers at a meeting of the Connecticut State Board of Agriculture in 1873, that an Experiment Station be established in the state. It was not well received at first but with the support of funding from a private individual, the State granted $5,000 for the establishment of a temporary, two-year experiment station at Wesleyan University where Atwater was a professor.  The Station, the first of its kind in the United States, was started in 1875 with Atwater, a native of Burlington, Vermont, as its director.  

 

Other States soon followed the Connecticut Example Leading Eventually to the Federal Hatch Act:

Once an Experiment Station was created in Connecticut, and in 1886 other states quickly followed without federal authorizing legislation that came later.  States in this category included California, North Carolina, New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and Vermont.  The movement to secure Federal Aid for Experiment Stations took some time and lobbying by the agricultural colleges that than existed and their attached Experiment Stations.  A Resolution endorsed by this group in 1885 speaks to this need. It stated “that the condition and progress of American agriculture require national aid for investigation and experimentation in the several States and Territories: and that therefore this convention approves the principle and general provisions of what is known as the Cullen bill of the last Congress and urges upon the next Congress the passage of this. Or a similar act.” By 1887 the federal Hatch Act was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Cleveland.  At the time it was the largest government scientific enterprise ever started with the publications at the time reaching over half a million farmers directly.

 

The Vermont State Agricultural Experiment Station:  

With the support of the Vermont State Board of Agriculture, the state legislature passed an Act creating the Vermont State Agricultural Experiment Station and placed it under the charge of the University of Vermont and State Agricultural College.  According to the announcement of the Station by the Board of Control (see first annual report), it “is the wish to make the Station as widely useful as its resources will admit.  Every Vermont citizen who is concerned in agriculture, whether farmer, manufacturer or dealer, has the right to apply to the Station for any assistance that comes within its province to render, and the Station will respond to all applications as far as lies in its power.”

The first annual report indicated that a farm had been purchased with suitable buildings erected and stocked so that the Vermont Station at the time would be able to carry out work in the following areas:  farm crop experimentation; stock feeding; fruit and vegetable adaptation to the soil and climate of the state; plant diseases; impact of insects on vegetation; fertilizer analysis; and miscellaneous chemical work which may be sent in by farmers of the State.  

At the time the federal Hatch Act required that bulletins or reports of progress shall be published at each Station at least once in three months and sent to the Newspapers in the State where the Station was located.

 

Vermont State Experiment Station Today:

Much has changed at many levels since the passage of the Hatch Act and the establishment of the Vermont Agricultural Experiment Station.  Nationally this is no longer an agrarian country nor is Vermont an agrarian state.  Needs have changed relative to agriculture, food systems and the environment, as well as funding levels both from the federal and state levels.  This brief background paper does not address those issues, nor the list of major research outcomes over the many years relative to the work of the Experiment Station.  To obtain information on the operation and background of the State of Vermont Agricultural Experiment Station today, go to:  The University of Vermont, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Vermont Agricultural Experiment Station.  As noted on this site, funding for the Station comes from the US Department of Agriculture and the University of Vermont through the State of Vermont’s appropriations.  This site also states that the research done at the Station falls under the USDA goal areas of agricultural systems, food safety, nutrition, natural resources and the environment, and economic opportunities and the quality of life.

 

BLOGGER COMMENTS:

 Vermont agriculture is at a crossroads, and it has been before in its history.  It has gone from being defined first as a grain producing state in the early 1800’s followed by being a sheep raising state in the early 1800s, to a leading butter producing state after, and then with fluid milk to the cities thereafter.  According to records, it has always been in a state of change.  During all of these times there was a great deal of production diversity with other agriculture and agricultural related enterprises. Today the challenges are many to include climate change, market access, fair farm pricing and economic sustainability.  Vermont is becoming a non-agrarian state which is reflected in the makeup of the legislature that has less connection to the land as in the past.  This is true at the national level as well.  We need to remember that the three-legged stool of research, teaching, and extension education continues to be needed today as in the past.  

 

Bold new initiatives many be needed outside of what is considered the status quo. The entities created with the Land Grant Act of 1862, the Hatch Act of 1887, and the Smith Lever Act of 1914 were established to address these needs as they change.  I note that others have stated that while these Experiment Stations and their connected Extension Services have done a good job over the past in educating farmers and their families, that with less than two percent of the population engaged in farming today there is a great deal of ignorance on subjects related to agriculture.  Similar sentiments have been made by others relative to the dairy industry.  For example, in the 2013 Journal of Dairy Science it is stated that “sustainability is more than economic profitability: it also relates to environmental and societal concerns including the quality of life of farm workers and the animals in dairy farms.  Sustained engagement between and among producers, various sectors of the industry, consumers and citizens will be essential.”  As one thoughtful individual connected with UVM Extension has said, “it will take thoughtful inquiry, a long-term perspective, and new ways to measure success in order to assure a viable future for Vermont’s agriculture.”

 

Sources for this blog:

·      Wikipedia, Agricultural experiment station

·      The Seeds of Change 1600-1929-Growing A Nation, in growinganation.org

·      Agricultural Experiment Act of 1887

·      The U.S. Land Grant System: An Overview, Aug 29, 2019, by the Congressional Research Service

·      Clearness of Style, Plainness of Statement, Experiment Station Bulletins in The Early Years, by Lynn B. Padgett, in Journal of Applied Communications, Vol. 70, Issue no. 4, New Prairie Press, 2017

·      The Agricultural Revolution and the Industrial Revolution, England, 1500-1912, by Gregory Clark, UC Davis, June 2002

·      A Condensed History of American Agriculture 1776-1999 Timeline, in www.usda.gov

·      American Experiment Stations and their work in Vermont, Agricultural Report, Vermont State Board of Agriculture for the years 1893 and 11894, pages 86-97.

·      The First Annual Report, Vermont State Agricultural Experiment Station, 1887

·      History of the Station and Legislative Changes, see University of New Hampshire College of Life Sciences and Agriculture, NH Agricultural Experiment Station

·      History of the Hatch Act of 1887, by Linda Benedict and David G. Morrison, in www.lsuagcenter.com

·      See www.soyinfoCenter.com

·      The Future of Vermont Agriculture, by Vern Grubinger, October 8, 2018

·      See USDA Farmers.gov

·      Implications for Research Programs of Agricultural Experiment Stations, by G.M.Browning, Associate Director, Agricultural and Home Economics Experiment Station, Iowa State University

·      Storrs Agricultural Experiment Station Records, Archives and Special Collections, University of Connecticut Library

·      Agricultural Experiment Stations and Branch Stations in the United States, by Calvin Pearson and Amaya Atucha, Journal of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Dec. 2015

·      Science, practice and politics: German agricultural experiment stations in the nineteenth century, by Mark Russel Finlay, Iowa State University, a Retrospective Theses and Dissertations submitted for a PhD in History in 1992

·      The Pioneer Experiment Station, 1875 to 1975, A History by James G. Horsfall, by Antoca Press in association with Union College Press, 1992     

 -        A History of the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, at https://genevahistoricalsociety.com     Agricultural Experiment Stations in the United States by A.C. True, Director of the Office of Experiment Station, USDA

 

 

            COVID HAS SPIKED THE INTEREST IN LOCAL AND REGIONALLY PRODUCED FOODS

Most of us are aware of the challenges that exist when supplies of needed products are not available at the local or regional grocery stores.  It was not always that way, and when COVID impacted the flow of goods, a new reality set in.  It clearly has brought to the forefront all that has changed relative to food production, processing and food availability since the last major virus endemic in the state in 1918.

Vermont was classified as an agricultural state in 1918 with nearly 30,000 farms and with 79% of the land in agriculture.  While many of these farms shipped milk to one of the over 200 hundred local creameries that then existed, they were also very diversified and sustained themselves with what they raised.  Markets were local then as the large grocery chains did not exist, neither did refrigeration for preserving or moving products great distances without ice.  People were encouraged to grow food, not only for the war effort but also for their own consumption. Nationally more than 5.2 million new garden plots were cultivated in 1918.

So, what happened that resulted in the situation relative to food availability and food distribution?  When shopping at any major grocery chain store today, it is evident that consumers have available a global food pallet, unavailable to earlier generations.  It requires an efficient and timely transportation system.  Consumers can choose from seafood from Asia, cheese and wine from Europe, fresh fruit from South America, and a range of products from other countries and other regions of the United States.   Data exists today that illustrates the fragile nature of the current approach during a worldwide epidemic, and thus the need for a more resilient local and regional food system.

Unlike the 1918 period, the impact of Covid on local food needs was almost immediate.  Major news outlets carried stories of farmers dumping milk, breaking eggs, and getting rid of farm products.  This was due to the disruption of the food supply chain as a result of closure of restaurants, schools and other institutional outlets for food as well as the impact on some processing facilities due to Covid.  During this same period local food needs increased dramatically.  It was also reported that since the pandemic onset, nearly thirty percent of Vermonters experienced food insecurity, almost triple the 2018 levels.  There were vivid pictures too in the press of cars lined up to get food at Food Banks within the state and at other locations in the U.S. 

According to officials at the Vermont State Agency of Agriculture, the increase in the demand for local food increased dramatically as a result of the supply chain disruptions.  Community Supported Agriculture facilities, regional food hubs, farmers’ markets, all saw a brisk increase in demand.   With the closure and restrictions at many local restaurants, there was an increase in cooking at home, some with prepared meals and others in learning new skills.   Some have even suggested that cooking more at home might become the new normal post pandemic.

The question today that exists for Vermont’s farm sector as well as policy establishment is can a more resilient local food system be maintained and strengthened so that future disruptions do not occur?  Actions and plans by the Farm to Plate and the State Agency of Agriculture in creating Vermont Agriculture and Food System Plan: 2020, and of the Vermont Dairy Task Force deliberations are encouraging, but it will not be easy.  Industry consolidation is difficult to unravel today under existing anti-trust regulations and enforcement that propel consolidation at all levels in the food chain.  Even a recent study by the Kansas City Federal Reserve of Concentration and Consolidation in the U.S. Food Supply Chain: The Latest Evidence and Implication for Consumers, Farmers, and Policymakers concludes that “small farmers have a difficult role in modern agricultural supply chains.” It further elaborates by stating “that while small farms contribute to populating and preserving the vitality of rural America…that better polices for rural America, instead of trying to curtail efficiency-enhancing marketing arrangements would be to support these farmers directly without disrupting market forces that enhance efficiency.”  While times are different, even the Agriculture Focus Group Report to Governor’s Commission on The Economic Future of Vermont in 1989 seemed to recognize this reality when it said, “Vermont state policy should consistently and aggressively expand the base and profitability of its agriculture…an application of significant state resources over an extended period of time will be necessary to deal with this chronic situation.” 

Efforts continue in developing a more resilient regional food approach with Food hubs, Food Sheds, Farm to Plate and State Agricultural plans, Real Organic advocacy, Regenerative agriculture initiatives, and with dairy task force discussions on ways to overcome an outdated commodity pricing system.  It is therefore encouraging to also hear of a recent initiative behind a New England Feeding New England, a project of New England State Food System Planners Partnership.  It is a 14-member research team that is starting a year-long, multi-level research project to better understand the new food supply chain, consumer and retail behavior, and make projections for what it will take to get 30% consumption of regionally produced food by 2030.  It will not be easy of course as existing supply chains are said to RUTHLESSLY seek out the most efficient operators. 

In the Vermont Papers published in 1989, the two authors, John McClaughry and Frank Bryan, state “that if agriculture were to wither away to a memory, Vermont would in time cease to be anything unique.  It would become just a distant suburb of Boston, its character defined by tourist restaurants and shopping malls.  Not only does a living agriculture contribute so much to the character of Vermont but is absolutely indispensable to preserving the landscape which in our time has become so vital a component of the state’s economic attractions.”    Similar statements over time have been made by others.  David Donath in the publication The Vermont Difference, Perspectives from the Green Mountain State, in 2014, stated that “Defined by its iconic rural countryside of farms, forests, villages, and small cities, Vermont’s working landscape has emerged as key to the brand and quality of life of the state—and to its future.” 

Even an agriculture focus group report to the Governor’s Commission on The Economic Future of Vermont carried a similar sentiment in 1989 when it too elaborated on the value of the working landscape to the States culture and history.  It stated then “that if it wants to retain its rural character and working farms, it must come to grips with how socially and politically the state will grow into the future.”  These statements of the past are as valid today as when they were made.  While it is not 1918, there is a need for a resilient local and regional food system now as well as into the future.

                                                               -30-

Roger Allbee is a resident of Townshend, Vermont.  He is a former Vt Secretary of Agriculture, and a former CEO of Grace Cottage Hospital and Healthcare

Agricultural Leadership in Vermont After the Civil War, 1871-1908

In a  2012 paper on the history of the NY Agricultural Society, Bob Bitz covers the many historic achievements of the organization.  While his authored report is historic in nature relative to New York, the same approach with agricultural societies took place in Vermont later.  In Vermont in 1850, a State Agricultural Society was established. These societies had been erected in many counties in the state and were responsible for the local agricultural fairs that held  educational events that helped address farmer and farm family needs at the time (many of these county fairs still exist).  Former Governor Holbrook of Brattleboro, an agriculturist, helped to establish the state Agricultural  society and was elected as the first President .  He served in that post from 1850-1858.  By 1860 there were 941 agricultural societies in the US. These state agricultural societies were behind the creation of the State Board of Agriculture, Manufactures, and Mining in Vermont in 1872 as similar societies had been in the other nearby states.  By 1877 it was just referred to as the Vermont Board of Agriculture.

The Boards went on to establish Farmer Institute’s as a way to convey the best scientific knowledge and information at the time.  A need for this approach was best described as follows: “There was trouble in rural America during this era…. It was boring schools, antiquated farmer practices, and lack of knowledge of scientific farm practices.  Even though Land Grant Colleges had been established, the scant scientific knowledge was not making it out into the rural communities.”

The Vermont Board of Agriculture, Manufactures and Mining, Established In  Vermont in 1871

Under the initial Act, the Board was to consist of the Governor, the President of the State Agricultural College, and six others nominated by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate.  The Board was required to hold at least one business meeting each year, and one meeting for the public on matters relating to their investigations by discussions, essays, and addresses. Vermont was not the first state to create such a Board.  They had already been established in New York in 1819, New Hampshire in 1820, Massachusetts in 1855.  Perhaps the clearest purpose of the Board and its need was made in the address by its Chairman, Governor John W. Stewart in the first annual Report in 1872, and a statement by Matthew Buckham, President of the State Agricultural College.

Remarks by Governor Stewart on the Object and Aims of the Board:

“The object of the Board is two-fold.  First to benefit agriculture directly, increase the fertility of the soil, and render returns for labor more remunerative.  The second object is to give the people a new sense of the importance and dignity of agriculture; to give them to understand that it is the most dignified pursuit that any man follow. It involves a knowledge of the principles that underlie all the sciences, and the appropriation and employment of these principles….Agriculture is multifarious, including not alone the tillage of the soil, the raising of crops, but also horticulture, arboriculture, the breeding of animals; so much that is closely allied to science.  Indeed no pursuit is in my judgement so scientific as that of agriculture. The principal objective of the Board is to awaken interest and provide discussion among farmers themselves  The discussion of agricultural facts brings them home to mind far more forcibly than mere reading.  Boards of Agriculture are already in existence in other states, and unless Vermont means to fall behind, she must take hold of the work.”

Remarks by  Matthew Buckham, President of the State Agricultural College, Member of the Board, who will go on to serve under many Administrations

“If I do not mistake the signs of the times, agriculture has entered an era in which it is destined to make more rapid progress than in any previous age.  The stimulus has come from various quarters—partly from the necessity of competing with the more productive agriculture of the West; partly from the growing scarcity of labor…..; but mainly from the increased attention given by studious men to the applied sciences, nearly every one of which has a direct bearing upon agriculture. …this Board could do no greater service to the agricultural interests of the State than to devise some way in which the fundamental maxims of successful agriculture could be brought home to every farmer in the State”

What was Agriculture in Vermont Like in 1870? 

Agriculture in Vermont had already undergone many challenges by 1870. “The upheaval of the Civil War, the lure of the West, and the growth of cities drew people off the farms.”  It was difficult for families to make a living on steep and hilly and often rocky land, and many did not continue to try.  While alcohol production and consumption was significant in rural America and Vermont prior to 1850 (there were 125 to 200 active distilleries operating in Vermont in 1810), shorty after 1852 Vermont narrowly passed a law completely prohibiting the sale of alcohol which stayed in effect for fifty years impacting the use of farm products in the production and sale of alcohol. 

The Land Grant Act had been passed in 1862 and UVM had become a Land Grant College with a mission of education around agriculture and mechanical arts. In crops and livestock, Vermont had lost its position as a leading state in the production of grain and as the leading merino sheep raising state.  It had moved abruptly to dairy, first becoming a leading butter producing state. The opening of the Champlain Canal followed by the Railroads around 1850 made it easer to get to markets, but also allowed food and other products to be shipped in to Vermont and regional markets at a price that often was cheaper than having it produced locally.  This sentiment was expressed at many of the meetings (later called Institutes) held by the Board, and lasting often more than one day and in several town locations in the State.  In 1875, twenty public meetings were held, and in 1876 twelve, covering a period of sixty-four days, with several hundred subjects introduced. These Institute sessions were held throughout the period that the Board existed. In1904, for example, 48 Institute meetings were held throughout the State with attendance exceeding ten thousand.   The Board during the time of its existence was “judicious in the employment of men of lectures, selecting those who were expert in several lines of farming: stock raising, fruit culture, dairying, sugar making, sanitary conditions, farm building, markets, etc.  The aim was to create a higher grade of farming” by bringing both intelligence and enterprise together.”

Competition with the West and other areas had become severe by 1870, and the significance of this was best captured by the Reverend G. F.  Wright of Bakersfield, in a paper presented at a meeting of the State Board of Agriculture at St. Albans, March 6th and 7th, 1872

“Our railroad policy at the West is pushing the development of the agricultural region faster than the growth of other industries demands.  The significance of this is that it is useless for the Vermont farmer to compete with those of the West in raising those few staples of production that can be naturally raised west, and that they will bear storing and transportation without risk of injury, and without too much expense.  There is no doubt that the markets East can be supplied with wool, wheat, corn, pork, and beef from the West cheaper than we can supply them. …..But the great increase of population and of wealth at the East indicates a growing market for milk, for the first qualities of butter, and veal and mutton and for the products of the garden, the bee-house, the poultry yard and the fish pond. ….The Vermont farmer has a substantial hold on the future.  The soil, climate, abundance of pure water, the proximity to the markets of growing cities and villages, give the farmer unrivaled facilities for success in these branches of industry without losing all the profits in transportation.”

A similar sentiment was expressed by M.V.B. Hathaway of Hardwick at a Board meeting in 1878.  

“The only recourse …for the New England agriculture to protect her interests in the future, to successfully compete in her best markets with western neighbors, seems to lie in the improving excellence of her products.  Superior quality is everywhere recognized and rewarded.”

At the Vermont Dairymen’s Association meeting in Montpelier in 1888, it was stated that,  “Vermont can compete with any State in the production of first class dairy products.”

At a meeting in Vergennes in 1900, T.B. Harriott of Georgia, stated from a creamery and cheese factory standpoint “that with effort only can we retain and sustain the standard of Vermont butter and cheese to where Vermont maple sugar now stands unapproachable, the best in the world.”

Others expressed similar views.  At the Thirtieth Annual Meeting of the Vermont Dairymen’s Association Meeting held at Brattleboro, in January of 1900, the President, G.W.Pierce said,  “…The question has often been stated of late, how should we meet the western competition: its answer may be summed up in a few words, produce a better article.  We must constantly study the latest improved methods, constantly seek new ideas. …Our success depends in a great measure upon the marketing of our goods.  Let us sell as direct to the consumer as possible.”

Over its thirty-seven years of existence, the Board of Agriculture actively addressed ALL of the subjects important in helping to create a higher grade of farming in the state.  It did this through many Institute meetings each year throughout the state with papers delivered on a number of subjects relating to farming in the state,   Some of its accomplishments;

 

• Recommended the establishment of an Experiment Station at the University of Vermont:  The Board authorized the Secretary to the Board to attempt the establishment of an Agricultural Experiment Station.  It was noted, “These Experiment Stations have proven of so much value in Europe, and similar institutions have done such satisfactory work in our own country, that it is desirable that Vermont establish one.”  The Vermont General Assembly approved the law for the Experiment Station in 1886, and placed it under the charge of the University of Vermont and State Agricultural College.
• Brought increased scientific information to the farm community that before that time was not easily accessible on a number of subjects important to the success of agriculture and farming in the state.  At the time, the Federal Director of Agricultural Experiment Stations at USDA hailed the Farmer Institute initiative as carried out by the Vt. Board of Agriculture and in other Boards in other states as models of success.
• Raised concern about railroad passenger and freight rates that were not considered fair nor equitable, and supported the Grange efforts in this regard.
• Supported the need for increased cooperation among farmers and farmer groups, called the New Agriculture.
• Held Farmer Institute meetings in many counties of the State every year bringing the best scientific information available to farmers and their families, often joining the Vt Dairymen’s Association and the State Grange in the support of these sessions.
• In 1880s and early 1900s the “selling” of Vermont began in earnest and the Board of Agriculture tried to entice immigrants, mainly Swedes, to buy abandoned hilltop farm property.
• In 1891 the Board created a pamphlet, “The Resources and Attractions of Vermont,” and in 1893 the Board developed a list of desirable farms that could be bought.   

By 1909, the Board of Agriculture that had been established by the legislature was replaced  with the Commissioner of Agriculture, appointed by the Governor. The Commissioner abolished the Institutes and in lieu thereof established Movable Schools of Agriculture as adopted by other states, suggesting, “they could be held with not greater expense and with more efficiency than our old Institute system”.  Something of this sort was the First Annual Farmers’ Week under the direction of the State Agricultural College and the Commissioner of Agriculture.

Postscript:

Intelligence and enterprise by farmers utilizing the best scientific knowledge available was the important objective of the Farmer Institutes as carried out by the State Board of Agriculture over its thirty-seven years of existence.  According to records that exist, it was this concept of bringing the best scientific knowledge forth that led to the eventual creation of the Federal, State, and County Extension Service in 1914 with the passage of the Smith-Lever Act. It is stated that after the passage of this Act, federal authorities discouraged the use of federal funds for Farmer Institutes instead focusing on the role of the County Extension System.   It was a time in America when fifty percent of the population lived in rural areas, and thirty percent were engaged in agriculture.

Agriculture has changed significantly in the state.  In 1850 the State had 29,763 farms and a population of 314,120, and today Vermont has just over 6,000, U.S Census defined, operating farms and a population of approximately 625,000. Vermont was an agrarian state in 1870, and agriculture was the livelihood of most of the residents. Most of the leaders at the time had very close ties to the land and to farming. The early farm leaders and others recognized then the inability to compete with the West with many farm products produced in the East.  Many of those market challenges still exist.

Various ways have been used to address these economic hardships or challenges to include greater diversification of products on the farm, production and cost efficiencies, extension education, new product development, cooperative marketing, branding of products, better balancing of supply to demand, technology and market innovation. State programs are often used as well, to include current use taxation, purchase of development rights, conservation incentives, working landscape funding, Farm to Plate, Food Hubs, agricultural lending, and direct financial assistance.  The federal government’s role too has evolved with many laws, programs, and regulations.  

A review of history as continued in some of these old documents show that some of the issues are not new; just the generation dealing with them, and often the approaches used. It appears that the then advantage of the Board of Agriculture structure that existed for thirty-seven years was that it brought the best scientific information available at the time to farmers and their families and rural communities so that farming could be advanced through intelligence and enterprise.  It involved the highest attention of the State (Governor) and the State Agriculture College (President of the State Agricultural College), and eventually with the Experiment Station resources to address the needs and concerns of the farm community.  It has been noted by historic information on the topic of Farmer Institutes, that their function was absorbed by the Federal, State and County Extension Services in 1914 with the passage of the Smith-Lever Act, that placed its operational responsibility at the Land Grant Colleges. The County Extension, Home Economics and 4-H Agent structure that existed in Vermont up until the 1980s when it was changed to a regional specialist concept.  Extension is still based upon the old Farmer Institute approach with its connection to the State Agricultural College in connecting farmers and others with the best available knowledge on a subject that may be known to exist.

  

   

 

 

AN INTRODUCTION OF WHY SOCIETY VALUES COMMUNICATION

 These blog postings have focused on the changes in agriculture in Vermont since after the French and Indian Wars and the Treaty of Paris that ended the conflicts.  Vermont was quickly settled after that period by those who moved into the area seeking new land and opportunities.  Communications were in their infancy, relying on personal contact, messages and printed material.  Looking back to that time and to where communications are today, is a witness to a revolution.

 

In an article “1851 was the year of the Communication Boom,” published in the Brattleboro Reformer by the Brattleboro Historical Society on September 6, 2019, is information on major changes that took place in that period.  According to the article, in 1784 the State legislature established five post offices at key locations in the state: Brattleboro, Bennington, Rutland, Windsor, and Newbury.  Rider’s rode horses between the locations, and there was a connecting route between Bennington and Albany so that mail could be sent and received from other locations.   It is interesting to read this historical piece on the purpose of this action by the State Legislature then: “These post offfices will open a regular communication through the State by which the inhabitants on each side of the mountain will be relieved from the inconveniences they have heretofore labored under in keeping up a mutual correspondence, so necessary to a Union.”

 

Much has followed.  The first electric telegraph was invented in 1831 making it possible to send information long distances in a short period of time.  Apparently, it came to Brattleboro, according to the article by the Brattleboro Historical Society, in 1851 and eventually led to the creation of the Vermont and Boston Telegraph Company

 

After Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone in 1876, communications expanded. It did not reach rural areas in the U.S. until much later.   In my youth in the 1950’s and early 1960’s, we had party lines for the telephone and a local telephone exchange in the nearby town.  We did not have a T.V. until later and often ventured to the neighbors to watch the Mikey Mouse Club on a very small black and white TV, with poor reception as there was not any cable connections or satellite technology. In College we had to use pay phones and would only call on Sundays when the rates for calling home were much lower.  When I was stationed in Germany in the Army in the late 1960’s we had to go to the local German Post Office to arrange a call to the United States.  Before my mother passed away in 2013, we took our iPad and connected her to her youngest granddaughter then living in Ohio.  My mother was born in 1916 and grew up with a hand crank phone and without TV, but with a small family radio that they all set around in the evening to listen to.  When we connected her to her granddaughter who she could see on the screen, she kept saying, what will come next, what will come next!  So much had happened just in her lifetime.

 

As Tom Freeman indicates in his book The World Is Flat, people and businesses can connect almost instantly from almost anywhere in the world today. Video conferencing more recently is also changing how people interact.  It is used with virtual learning and with many businesses today.  It is having an impact at all levels in our society.                                                     

 

BRINGING BROADBAND TO VERMONT, ADDRESSING THE CHALLENGES 

 

Bringing new and effective technologies to rural America is not a new challenge as noted above.  I once asked my late mother about when did electric power come to the small southern Vermont rural town where I grew up.  She answered that the year was 1938, and they brought one electric line into our house. We had one fifteen-watt bulb, and I said to your dad who was farming with his dad, this is awfully bright, we will never need anything brighter!  She went on the say that they were afraid to put the electricity into the barn as it might start a fire.

 

We all know today of the impact that rural electric had in changing things on the farm and in rural communities. It would not have happened without the creation of the Federal Rural Electric Administration (REA) in 1935.  Its purpose was to initiate, formulate, administer, and supervise projects for the generation, transmission, and distribution of electric energy to rural areas.  It took until the 1960’s for some towns in northern Vermont to get power, decades after the rest of America. 

 

Like electrical power, farmers and rural residents in many areas developed their own telephone companies on a mutual or cooperative basis in the early 1900’s.  Some of us remember party lines and the local telephone exchange.

 

Bringing Broadband to rural Vermont is reminiscent of that past.  When my wife and I moved back to Vermont and the area that I grew up in, in the 1990’s, we were told that internet service would be available soon.  We quickly found out that our only way to have internet service was to go to the local library or to the hospital parking lot with our computer.  Likewise, years later when I was CEO of our local hospital and healthcare facility in Southern Vermont, even though we did have internet service at the hospital, we lacked the ability to connect with many of the patients in the nearby rural towns where internet service was still lacking.  Cell service in the area is still a problem.  At the hospital we did not have cell service until we created our own cell tower.  Vermonter’s have repeatedly been assured by various Vermont Administration’s that access for all is being aggressively addressed.

 

It is encouraging to hear of the formation of Communication Union Districts, that allow two or more towns to join together as a municipal entity for a means of building communication infrastructure together, like the rural electric and telephone cooperatives that existed in the past.  There are now about 11 CUD’s in Vermont, as towns turn to public options to provide coverage of areas that the private sector has passed over just as they did early on with electric and telephone service.  With some 61,000 Vermont households estimated to lack internet or have poor service, new options are needed.  We also hear of the goal of Elon Musk’s effort with Starlink to launch thousands of small satellites able to transmit fast internet signals down to Earth and the interest by some in our state in this technology.

 

Helping people connect to technology is always a challenge, especially for an older and rural population like we have in Vermont.  As with rural electric and telephone service of the past, institutions and programs are in place to assist with the adaption of these new technologies.  As a student of Vermont’s agricultural history, I am often reminded of the role of the federal, state, and county extension services which were established in 1914 as a way then to increase agricultural productivity, food security, and to address rural livelihoods as well as to be an engine to address economic growth.   The county agent, home economist, and 4-H leader were looked to as the go to people in the community. They became agents for change, for innovative ways to introduce new agricultural technologies and other new methods.  It was known that the young people in the community often adopted new ideas before their parents and other community members.   The 4-H clubs became one way to help make this education more connected to the countryside and to those that lived there.

 

Bringing Broadband to communities in Rural Vermont is more than just a connection. It is also a way to create a community of learning and a way of helping individuals and communities put knowledge to work to stimulate innovation.  While CUD’s and service providers are focused on bringing technology to rural locations in our state, there is a need for a community of learning.   Perhaps it is again time to reinforce the role and mission of 4-H and other Extension programs in putting this technology to work.  It is a way to stimulate innovation in schools, homes, and in business establishments in the community.  As one noted Vermont Extension Specialist has said about their role, “we marry technology and social capital to create a true community of learning…. it’s pretty magical.”

 

 

By Roger Allbee of Townshend, Vermont, is a former CEO of Grace Cottage Healthcare and also is a former Vt Secretary of Agriculture, Food and Markets. 

 

 

A VERY QUICK TRIP THROUGH VERMONT’S WORKING LANDSCAPE’S AGRICULTURAL HISTORY (from a presentation to the Brattleboro Rotary Club Meeting on Jan 31,, 2019)

REFLECTIONS                                         

Vermont has always had a rich agricultural history with many products produced from the land.  We know that the agriculture and food sector is much different today than that of the past and it will continue to be true in the future.  Change has been inevitable, with many things impacting this to include transportation, geography, soil types, competition, markets, family values, management skills, public policies, and whether or not farmers can actually make a living from the land.   

Early History:  The early white settlers were subsistence farmers who came to the area in large numbers after the French and Indian War and the Treaty of Paris.  These settlers predominately came from Southern New England and moved into the region now known as Vermont.  Their early commercial products were potash (black salts) and Pearlash (purified potash). In 1790 approximately 1,000 tons of this product was made from the ash of hardwood trees that had been cut to clear the land.  The product was sold to the United Kingdom and these subsistence farmers received about five dollars per 100 pounds. 

Before1820, over 200 distilleries in the state were making corn and rye whiskey and several thousand gallons of apple brandy (the 1852 Temperance Union put an end to this).   By 1820, the Champlain Valley was also a major grain producing region until the crops were impacted by disease and competition from other growing areas.  In the 1800’s Vermont was also a major hemp and hops growing region.  

In the early 1800’s a well-known enterprise took place when William Jarvis, U.S. Counsel General to Portugal, brought several thousand prized merino sheep to the state from Spain. Vermont became known as one of the sheep capitals of the World winning international awards for the best fleece.  This existed until the end of tariffs on imported wool in the 1840’s and fierce competition resulting in less expensive wool from other regions.  Slowly many Vermont farmers moved from sheep to the commercial production of butter from milk.  The State by 1850 became known for its high-quality butter, winning international awards. St Albans became known as the butter capital of the state.  By 1900 there were 186 creameries and 66 cheese plants in the state and support industries for these enterprises such as the making of butter molds and churns.  The switch from butter to fluid milk first occurred in the late 1890s, when the first milk train left Bellows Falls for Boston as the urban areas reached out for this product. Through the years, there always was a great deal of diversification on the farm with maple production in the Spring, apples in the fall, and other products as well.   The growth of apple orchards occurred early in the 1900’s with apples shipped as far away as South America.   Farms were relatively self-sufficient in meeting their food needs before they became more specialized as many are today. 

Importance of Education:  Education was very important to agriculture’s future almost from the beginning.  In the 1830’s agricultural societies (created local agricultural fairs) in the state and region were the early nucleus for this needed education.  In 1862, U.S. Senator Justin Morrill from Strafford, Vermont conveyed upon President Lincoln to sign the historic Federal Land Grant Act to educate the masses.  Until then a college education was only available primarily to the wealthy.  Andrew White of Cornell, and later Minister to Germany, called the Federal Land Grant Act the greatest contribution since Hamilton argued for the U.S. Constitution.  The University of Vermont became a Land Grant Institution in 1864 (after an earlier attempt to make UVM, Norwich, and Middlebury a joint Land Grant) with the addition of the State Agricultural College.  In 1887, a federal law was passed (Hatch Act) that established Experiment Stations in each state in connection with the Colleges.  They were to do research and investigation on agriculture and related topics.  Following this in the early 1900’s, the Federal Extension Act and Vocational Education laws furthered the educational and research connection to students and farmers as well as their families.  This outreach and focus, which continues to this day, was critical in connecting farmers and rural residents and their families with educational and research results.  The creation of the State School of Agriculture at Randolph in 1910 only furthered this educational approach.  It has been said that “for 70 years after the Land Grant Act, the focus was on research, teaching, farm education, and improvement in the use of agricultural resource.”

Transportation and Communications:  Both transportation and communications continue to play an important role in the transformation of agriculture and land resources.  In the beginning the state legislature authorized private turnpikes for transportation.  Waterways became important when the first United States canal in Bellow Falls was financed in 1792. This canal dealt with traffic on the Connecticut River through an elaborate canal system to Hartford, Ct.  From there products were shipped to other parts of world. The Champlain Canal in 1823 connected Lake Champlain to the Erie Canal.   This canal is said to have led to the demise of the self-sufficiency of New England Agriculture for it was known even at that time that goods could be grown cheaper in the West and shipped to the East for less than growing them here.  When railroads came in soon after this it again changed the whole trade and market environment. Trains opened up new markets and further increased competition with the West as well as other regions of the country.  The Interstate Highway System that was built in Vermont between the 1950’s and 1960’s, furthered both market access as well as market competition to farmers. The highway also created a sharp increase in people moving to the State.  Until this time the population of the state had been in decline.

Intervention Period by the Federal Government:  This intervention period largely came about due to crises.  These government interventions included but are not limited to:  

-The 1906 Food and Drug Act written as a result of the book the Jungle by Upton Sinclair. In his book Sinclair studied the meat packing industry and the impact it had on immigrants that had settled in Chicago. 

-The establishment of the Federal Land Bank in 1916 for long-term loans to farmers. This was enacted after the United States Commission to Europe, Russia and Egypt in 1913 studied agricultural cooperatives and rural credit.

-Laws established the farmer cooperative movement in 1922 with the Capper-Volstead Act; the Soil Adjustment Act of 1936 that created the Soil Conservation Service (now NRCS) as a result of the Dust Bowl; the 1936 Rural Electric and Telephone Act that brought electric energy and communications to rural America including Vermont.

-The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1937 after the Depression that put in place many of the agricultural development, lending, and market order programs that exist today.

-The book Silent Spring written in 1962 by Rachel Carlson led to the banning of DDT. 

-EPA was created in 1970 and the Clean Water Act in 1972 after the burning of the Cuyahoga River in 1969. 

-The Federal Farm Bills, passed every four years, were first created during the great depression that brought together urban and farm interests.  

States have not been immune to crisis over the years either.  Some of the activities or policies at the State level in Vermont have included the following:

-Laws passed in the early 1900’s to encourage the development of agriculture cooperatives.   They were passed when it was recognized that there was an urgent need for farmers to work together for better pricing.

-Act 250, a major environmental law that resulted from a study under Governor Dean Davis with the Gibb Commission.  The commission was established to find ways to address environmental issues with development of and around ski areas in the state.

 -The Currant Use Taxation of forest and agricultural land in 1979, created so that land is taxed according to its use and not on developmental values.

 

-The Purchase of Development Rights with funding from the Land Transfer Tax in the mid 1980’s through the Vermont Housing and Conservation Board; providing specialized lending programs for agriculture through the Vermont Economic Development Authority.

-Support of soil and water conservation.

 

-The Vermont Farm to Plate initiative and other support around market access and new product development,

 

-And more recently, funding toward the working landscape and agricultural sustainability. 

 

These are but a few of the state actions that have been taken over the years to support agriculture and the working landscape.

Today:   There has been a “Renaissance of the Past” with the locavore movement, farmers markets, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA’s), artisan cheeses, hemp production, distilleries, hops, local meats and vegetables, maple expansion, and other products.  Often it is new people doing old things with new technologies.  

The challenges are many as they have always been.  While Vermont is the most dairy dependent state in the United States, we are losing our dairy farms, with 11,000 before WWII, 1100 in 2008, and just over 600 today.  The State and its dairy industry are facing some of the same issues today that they faced with the decline of the Merino Sheep industry and with the butter trade as faced in earlier times with pricing, markets, and competition.   Also there has also been increased consolidation at all levels in the food and agricultural system over a long period of time and that continues today.

In early 2000 period, National Geographic stated that Vermont was the number one place to visit in the U.S. and the number five place in the World, and it was due to our working landscape and quaint villages, and that Vermont had a plan for the future.

Vermont’s history as well as its culture has been tied to and influenced through the years by its working landscape.  As changes continue to take place on the land, its landscape, and activities connected to it will continue to change as well.  Many of the old timers who had seen the loss of the merino sheep industry, the demise of the butter trade, made the statement that Vermont’s agricultural future is never competing with the West, but in developing those products that consumers in the growing markets in the Northeast will want (see whatceresmightsay.blogspot.com). 

Postscript Since the Rotary Presentation: Covid 19, the virus, has devastated the nation as well as the economy of the states.  Tom Brokaw, a well-known retired national reporter, has stated that Covid 19 is the worst crisis since the Civil War.  It has been said that “the state of Vermont is at a fork in the road, and that new roads to the future are opening up.” (see August 4, 2020 Vtdigger commentary by Jock Gill.)  In 1932, following one of the worst crises in the State’s history, the flood of 1927, a very comprehensive report was issued by the Vermont Commission on Country Life, Chaired by ex-Governor John E. Weeks. This Commission of about three hundred citizens of the state, studied over many months ALL aspects of the state and issued in 1931 the Report Rural Vermont A Program for the Future.  In the book, “Dateline Vermont” by Chris Graff, he states that “he believes the recommendations in the report in many ways set the agenda for the following few decades in our state”.

Covid 19 has changed the landscape and has brought to the surface the many issues that confront the state and our local communities to include, health care, education, agriculture, land use, food security, tourism, jobs, business viability, and more.  Perhaps it too has awakened in Vermonters a fuller sense of their power and has given them a new impulse that will be felt through the years.  In that regard, it is very encouraging to hear of The Vermont Proposition initiative being developed by the Vermont Council on Rural Development.  Its stated purpose “is to gather input from thousands of Vermonters to help build a “Vermont Proposition”—a set of ideas to drive common action and advance a successful and resilient future for the state.”

Perhaps in the future, someone will look back at this period and the result of the work in developing the Vermont Proposition, and will say, like Chris Graff did about the 1931 Report, that the Proposition helped to set the agenda for the state.

                                                                 

  

Note:  For more specific details on Vermont’s rich agricultural history, see www.whatceresmightsay.blogspot.com