Sustainable Agriculture in Page County - Part 2

Today’s post takes a look at the issues and opportunities section of the Page County Economic Development Plan’s two-page write-up on sustainable agriculture. As I mentioned yesterday, during the first part of this review, if anything in this plan creates a sense of urgency for me, it is right here, in this discussion of Page County industry, and the relative lack of importance it is given in this overall plan. The plan sets up the concept of a three-legged stool for the Page County economy – tourism, agriculture, and industry, I looked at the tourism section last week, and agriculture yesterday and today.

The plan outlines three strategies for developing sustainable agriculture in Page County, but provides little detail on how to implement them – doesn’t even call for the first step in implementation, an assessment.

Here are the three strategies:

• Plant substitute crops – soybeans and hay: soybeans to tap into the bio-diesel market with the side benefit of creating animal feed as a by-product; hay to cater to the growing number of horse farms in Page County.
  
• Emphasize sustainable approaches – take advantage of the growing demand for local produce and the areas proximity to larger markets in Harrisonburg and Northern Virginia.
  
• Repurpose resources – create an agri-tourism destination; transition poultry farms to horse farms; and create non-traditional agro-enterprises such as wineries in Page County.
  

These strategies and sub-strategies offer an excellent summary of current American culture’s relationship with agriculture. Of seven insights, only one of them even acknowledges a connection with food production, and one other considers agricultural production as an input to industry; all seven require major capital investment; and two of them are linked to the other economic stool-leg of tourism.

Past blog posts here have considered the economics of hay farming, as well as the sustainable agriculture approaches listed here. I haven’t been able to get further into an assessment of these subjects to determine whether they could be relied upon for a family’s livelihood, as much as I would like to believe they offer that potential.

I mentioned the absence of real planning here. What are the recommendations for developing sustainable agriculture in the 2008 Page County Economic Plan? Fine-sounding concepts, “innovation, communication, and cooperation” are emphasized and a program of forums, engagement, and even an agriculture summit are proposed. These are given lower priority than educating Page County’s political leadership.

Compared to the 2004 plan, this 2008 plan is short on details and imagination. Having completed a review now of tourism and agriculture, the next step is to review the strategy and goals for industry; given the appearance of much current emphasis on that sector – Project Clover, the purchase of developable industrial land – I’m anticipating there will be more detail there. That’s a pity, because as the plan itself says, Page County agriculture is a “$108 million industry” comprised of “400 small businesses.”

An industry and small businesses that were not given a priority in the 2008 plan, that is.