As Bill Teague looks out over fields of wheat, groves of trees and livestock-dotted pastures — the farm where he has raised his family; the farm he has called home for 23 years — it’s not leaving this behind that concerns him the most. Instead, his worry lies with future generations.

“They wouldn’t learn anything about where their food comes from,” says Teague, director of Waynesville’s Mountain Research station.

The Mountain Research Station, one of 18 in the state, has demonstrated to thousands of schoolchildren that their dinner doesn’t originate from a grocery store. Since it opened, the 400-acre station has also been an invaluable resource to farmers both locally and nationally, teaching them farming methods that will help improve yield and profit. It’s estimated that agriculture is a $23 million industry in Haywood County.

But now, the future of the station hangs in jeopardy. The Haywood County test farm is one of seven in the state recommended to close due to failure to meet profit and performance guidelines.

This isn’t the first time the station has been in danger of shutting its doors. There was a scare last summer, when a bill in the legislature proposed closure. That didn’t come close to passing. This time, supporters of the research station say they’re a bit more worried.

“I’m a little concerned this time,” admits cattle farmer Neal Stamey.

A farming laboratory

As Teague ambles along the dusty roads of the farm in his large Dodge pickup, pointing out various projects along the way, it’s difficult to see how this station could be slated for closure. As he puts it, “every inch of space that you find around here has some kind of research” — and it’s true.

In one lot, different types of wheat grow side by side, the subject of a study on winter hardiness and disease resistance. The findings will be shared with farmers as far as the Midwest to improve their crop. This station was also the first in the state to grow Christmas trees — and nearby, a 20-year long project aims to create a genetically successful crop for the industry that now produces 100 million trees a year. Then there’s the goat study in which researchers seed different plants and determine which ones the goats prefer to graze on; the lettuce seedlings that are part of a statewide project to determine how to grow the crop locally without having to import it from California — and the list goes on.

With so much going on here, it’s hard to imagine how the research station could not be doing enough. But the 32 projects currently under way fall short of the state’s mandated 40. And according to the study commissioned by the newly formed Performance Evaluation Division, the shortfall in productivity is reason to close the Mountain Research Station and seven others, saving the state a total of $3 million a year.

Teague, though, questions the way the report was conducted. He’s not alone — 100 farmers gathered along with state Sen. Joe Sam Queen, D-Waynesville, Rep. Ray Rapp, D-Mars Hill, and Sen. John Snow. D-Murphy, last week to dicuss the findings and the importance of keeping the farm open.

“If we did the same research this report did on our station, we’d probably be shut down,” Teague says.

Teague’s biggest qualm is that the group evaluating the station relied solely on numbers and didn’t look at the overall importance of different projects.

“They did not indicate the scientific significance of each research station’s research. One project could be very significant — more so than 10 projects where they’re looking at a variety of corn that they’ve grown for 20 years and not brought any new ones,” he says.

Innovation is one aspect Teague says the group should have considered. The report also counted multi-year projects as one, though they require the same amount of effort and space as other projects. For example, a project that studies cattle management and looks at all aspects of a cow’s life from birth to carcass has a duration of seven years and requires almost half the test farm’s total acreage to conduct.

Additionally, a project that actually studied several different variables was counted as one. For instance, the lettuce project is really six different experiments, and studies variety, time of planting, phosphorus fertility, row spacing, herbicides and fungicides. It counted as one.

Teague says he prepared a detailed report of all projects underway at the test farm, but the group doing the study wouldn’t consider it.

“They would not even take what I had prepared for them. I said we spent nearly a week on this so I made them take it with him,” he says.

Rep. Rapp said it’s imperative to bring this to the attention of the legislature once more, even if the first attempt failed.

“Part of what we need is some quantification of the numbers of what’s going on here, plus the descriptors to go with that — the nature of the activity, and why some of these projects are unique to this site and can’t be replicated down state,” he said.

Its own best friend

The uniqueness of the mountain research station could be its saving grace. All the research stations have different environments, and crops that succeed in the mountains could be not at all viable by the sea. The climate can even differ dramatically within mere miles, says Jonathan Schultheis, a professor in the horticulture science department at N.C. State University.

“Believe it or not, you can have stations that can be as close as 30 minutes and have quite a bit of difference in their environment,” he said. The station in Fletcher is an example — though 30 miles away, the climate can be drastically different than Waynesville.

“There are things that go on here that can only go on with the soil types we have and the climate. This is where we have to make our case strongly that this facility has those unique properties,” said Rapp.

And though technology allowing crop researchers to create simulated environments means location matters less, that’s not a replacement for the real thing.

“It’s one thing if it works in a test tube, but when you put it on acre, half-acre plots, it may not work that well,” says Bill Skelton, director of Haywood County’s Cooperative Extension.

“If you do it in the lab, you actually do need field conditions. You can get very different results in the lab versus the field,” agrees Schultheis.

The importance of the Mountain Research Station also extends to having food closer to home.

“With the advent of high gas prices, we’re going to see a lot of emphasis on the local people producing food,” said Sen. Snow.

By teaching farmers ways to improve yield and stay in business, the test farm is helping give the community access to local produce.

“We have so much trouble with foreign imports and everything, we don’t have a lot of control. There’s a big demand for research at the local research station to help people produce food locally,” Teague says.

Rallying for the cause

Supporters of Waynesville’s test farm are taking a cautious, measured approach to saving it. Time is on their side, Rapp advises.

“The one thing is ... don’t look for a rush for judgement on this thing. We’re very slow in the legislature, and we don’t get things done too rapidly,” he said.

The recommendation to close the research station still has to go through several other committees in both the House and Senate. It’s important to note that the entire process is still in a very early stage. And one fear — that North Carolina State would close the research stations — is unfounded, says Schultheis.

Part of the research station report recommends that the stations be put under the control of N.C. State University rather than being jointly shared by the university and the North Carolina Department of Agriculture. N.C. State doesn’t necessarily have to follow the report’s recommendations, however.

“There’s been no advocation to close any of the systems,” Schultheis says. “The report advocated for the closure of stations mostly because of the number of projects. When they have unique conditions,” like some projects at Waynesville’s station, “you’d need to consider that,” he said.

Since much of research is “driven by the publish or perish theory,” says Haywood farmer Steve Sorrells, adding additional research at the test farm and upping the number of projects is still important. Part of the problem will be getting researchers to travel to Haywood County — some 230 miles from Raleigh.

“It’s not that the station is not capable of doing it, it’s that researchers aren’t doing it out here. If the university doesn’t want to send people out of Raleigh, maybe we should introduce some legislation,” he said.

Schultheis says distance is a factor when researchers pick a location.

“It is a consideration. You have to consider the cost of traveling to the mountains,” he said. In which case, “if Raleigh can’t come to us, we’ll just bring our own research,” suggests Sorrells.

Increasing the number of projects could be one way to save the test farm. The most important thing, says Rapp, is having as many convincing and concrete facts to present to the legislature as possible.

“Some of the folks on this committee are not going to appeal to emotions — they are going to say, what are the facts?,” Rapp said.

On May 7, a busload of farmers will travel to Raleigh to present their facts and opinions to the legislature in an appeal to keep the Mountain Research Station open.