Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
By Anne Chesky
The family farm has long been an icon of Appalachia. Until industry
arrived in the region and began developing timber and mineral rights,
most Appalachians made their living farming land. This land was often
handed down family lines for generations. Recently, however, due to
increasing land development, mechanization of farming, and the growth
of agribusiness, family farms are no longer able to remain solvent and
descendents have been forced to sell family land.
In the late nineteenth century, a movement emerged that extolled
Appalachia as a region where tourists could view picturesque farms
and quaint mountain families hard at work. This movement came to be
known as agricultural tourism, or agritourism. The federal government,
to promote the local economy, funded most early agritourism. Over the
last several decades, however, families began to invite tourists onto their
farms for profit and, thus, fund agritourism ventures privately.
To determine the success of the agritourism movement many
questions must be answered. Have family farms that have embraced
agritourism become financially solvent? At what cost? Tourism brings
with it both positive and negative impacts—economically, socially, and
environmentally. Are tourists getting an authentic picture of the family
farm or a manufactured experience? Is this movement sustainable?
This essay will seek to answer these questions by studying two
Anne Chesky is currently pursuing her Master’s Degree in Appalachian Studies and
Sustainable Development at Appalachian State University.
88 Journal of Appalachian Studies Volume 15 Numbers 1 & 2
farms in western North Carolina: Maverick Farms and The Mast Farm
Inn. These farms, both located in Valle Crucis, have extensive histories
as family farms and both are now identified as agritourism ventures by
the North Carolina Department of Agriculture. Despite their historic
similarities, however, their development in the tourism industry has been
dramatically different.
and Danielle Deschamps. Since the purchase of the Inn, the Deschamps
sisters have significantly expanded operations. No longer simply a bed-
and-breakfast, the inn “designs, prepares, and manages numerous special
events from corporate retreats to weddings which make creative use of
[their] unique setting, authentically historic, and exceptionally photogenic
facilities. From weddings at the Barn, to Board Meetings in Raspberry Hill,
to Fashion photo shoots, to Porsche Rallies and Classic Car Club Concours
Parades, The Mast Farm Inn” (Mast Farm Inn n.d.b.) has captured much
more than a niche in the agritourism industry. The inn itself has gone
through some significant renovations to cater to the wealthy crowd that
passes through its doors. “Tubs-for-two, air conditioning, and a gift shop”
(Mast Farm Inn n.d.b.) are just a few of the improvements made to the
historic inn over the last few years.
Because of its history as an historic family farm, Mast Farm Inn is
considered an agritourism venture. The Inn’s growers tend around one-
fourth of an acre of organic gardens on the property. They grow flowers,
herbs, vegetables, and native plants, which the sisters use to supply the
restaurant with fresh food. The garden is open to guests and visitors and
the growers invite people to ask questions and take ideas for their own
gardens. Everything produced in the garden is used in the kitchen for
salads and seasonal specials. The mission of the garden is to focus “efforts
towards growing safe and healthful food . . . to bring positive change into
[the] local community of Valle Crucis, and beyond to the homes of all . . .
guests” (Mast Farm Inn n.d.c.).
Profitability
The real indicator of agritourism’s success is the direction the farm
family chooses to take. Maverick Farms admits that “the truth is that no
part of our agritourism has been significant to our operating budget—we
would not recommend that small farmers take on agritourism projects
if they are serious about raising vegetables/meat/fruit and do not have
94 Journal of Appalachian Studies Volume 15 Numbers 1 & 2
Authenticity
Both Maverick Farms and Mast Farm Inn are culturally important parts
of historic Valle Crucis. Because, however, of Mast Farm Inn’s popularity,
central location, and size, this farm is preserved in the National Historic
Registry and has been a much larger part of the revitalization of Valle
Crucis. Also, the Mast family name, due partly to the current prevalence
of the Mast General Stores, draws people to the farm. Maverick Farms is
small in size and although the main house was built around the same time
as the Mast Farm, the farmhouse is not on the National Historic Register
and has not achieved near the level of visitors as Mast Farm. To learn about
the agricultural heritage of North Carolina, the farm buildings preserved
at Mast Farm Inn present an authentic picture of agricultural building
construction, but do not offer much in the realm of historic interpretation or
education. Because Maverick Farms has not been preserved or recognized
in the same way, visitors can learn about current agricultural practices,
food production, and conservation, but not about agriculture’s history.
While fresh, local food can be consumed at each farm, only Maverick
Farms offers consumers the opportunity to purchase fresh food for later
consumption. Maverick Farms sells its produce through farmer’s markets
and CSAs. Many of those who purchase or consume food grown at
Maverick have helped in some way to grow the food. Through internship
programs as well as encouraging guests to work off a portion of their bill,
Maverick Farms is able to create pride in those who participate and ensure
a quality product that satisfies the consumer. Mast Farm Inn, though not
a true working farm, does harvest vegetables and herbs from its garden
for its restaurant. Mast Farm Inn restaurant fare is expensive—Maverick
Farms meals for guests are by donation (Buiso 2007)—and guests do not
participate or even see their food until it arrives cooked on their plates,
though the draw of local, well-prepared food attracts many residents of
the local community (Mast Farm Inn n.d.d.). Maverick Farms does host
infrequent farm dinners for the community at a cost of $35 per person to
help fund their farming operation. Many of the dishes are made from farm
food and all of the food is produced locally. While the dinners raise money
for the farm, they are more about creating community, and thus do not
cater to tourists (Maverick Farms n.d.b.).
More tourists in the region, however, mean more necessary
development of tourist infrastructure, more traffic, more roads, more
second home developments, etc. As development increases, property
taxes increase, and the pressure on farmers to sell their land increases.
Maverick Farms has already begun to feel this pressure. Because of these
problems, many operating farms have been lost to tourism development.
In some cases, agritourism becomes so popular that the family no longer
96 Journal of Appalachian Studies Volume 15 Numbers 1 & 2
continues to farm, but merely operates entirely for tourists. When this
happens, tourists may feel they are authentically involved in farm life,
when, in reality, they are not. Some farms show tourists what they want to
see rather than how farm life may really be, leading to a lack of agricultural
authenticity. Thus, farm visitors often get a skewed or romanticized view
of farm life and come away thinking that farming is “easy.” This may be
the case for some of the tourists that patronize Mast Farm Inn. Because
guests (as well as the family that owns and runs the Inn) do not participate
in farming, see others farming, or get an interpretation of what farming
was like in the past, the guests cannot understand what happens on a
“real” farm. In the same vein, however, because Maverick Farms has so
far been unsuccessful at attracting many tourists, visitors looking for an
agricultural experience would be better off patronizing Mast Farm Inn
than one of the many chain hotels in the area.
What has not been presented in this essay is an example of an
unauthentic agritourism venture, but this is a problem in the industry.
Despite their inauthenticity, these ventures tend to be very profitable
because they cater directly to their customers’ expectations of farming life,
regardless of whether this view is correct. The North Carolina Department
of Agriculture and Consumer Services currently have no regulations
stipulating who may register as an agritourism venture and be advertised
on their Web site (NCDA&CS Agritourism 2008). The current definitions
of agritourism are also so broad that almost any farm-related activity
could potentially be included—even city breweries, chocolate factories,
and art galleries are currently showing up in agritourism listings.
Though the agrarian lifestyle is dwindling in Appalachia, tourists
often still expect the quaint mountaineers of yesteryear. Because of the
profitability of “locally produced” goods, tourists often are not presented
with an accurate view of Appalachia. Often the “farmers” at farmer’s
markets have not produced their own goods, but have bought fruits and
vegetables at wholesale prices to sell as their own and thus out-compete
or delegitimize farmers who are trying to make a living or supplement
their income through agriculture. When farmer’s markets take place in
communities, such as at the Boone Farmer’s Market where Maverick
Farms sells their produce, these problems occur less because people within
the communities form relationships and can vouch for the legitimacy of
the product, but when tourists who have no relation to the community
become patrons, accountability becomes an issue.
Additionally, because some tourists come to these markets or farms
looking for the stereotyped “hillbilly,” residents find that it is profitable to
display this stereotype either through their own persona or through the
goods that they sell. For instance, at the Western North Carolina (WNC)
Selected Papers from the 2009 Conference 97
Farmer’s Market in Asheville a local artisan labeled “a good ol’ boy right
here in the mountains” sells “Hillbilly Credit Cards” (a slice of a young
tree), “Hillbilly Shot Glasses” (hollowed out tree branches), and “Hillbilly
Briefcases” (a pair of Fruit of the Loom underwear with a handle) (WNC
Farmer’s Market n.d.). While many vendors at the WNC Farmer’s Market
authentically identify themselves, others will exploit the long-held
stereotypes, which many Appalachian scholars are continuously working
to discredit. Whether these ventures are sustainable (the Hillbilly gift
items remain big sellers) is dependent upon the desires of the tourists that
spend their money for “fake” farm experiences.
Sustainability
At present, the most important indicator of sustainability appears to
be profitability. However, in some cases, authenticity seems to adversely
affect sustainability by preventing farmers from reaching out to all possible
markets to attract visitors. Whether lack of authenticity affects customer
understanding of, excitement about, or willingness to participate in food
production is not yet clear, but needs to be explored as agritourism matures
as an industry. In the end, however, low visitor turnout means low (or no)
profits and the ultimate failure of the agritourism venture.
The sheer volume of family farms currently turning towards
agritourism for added income is a testament to agritourism’s ultimate
success as an industry. Agritourism is by no means the silver bullet that
can save the family farm, but it is an avenue of bringing more money
into the farm family and, combined with other efforts, can make small-
scale farming profitable and sustainable as well as potentially educate and
excite visitors. Because Maverick Farms, though an authentic agritourism
venture, primarily attempts to cater to and create a desire for local food in
Valle Crucis and the surrounding community, the farm fails to successfully
tap into the thriving tourist industry in the region. Without this industry,
or other creative means of profitability, Maverick Farms may not survive.
Unfortunately, completely tapping into the agritourism industry may
force the Maverick Farm family to adjust their mission statement and
become a less authentic family farm. Mast Farm Inn already falls victim
to this problem as illustrated by the vast scope of their business model,
but this scope also allows them to influence large numbers of guests every
year. To create sustainable family farms through agritourism that lead to
visitor “enjoyment, education, or active involvement in the activities of
the farm” (Lobo 2008), farms must strike a balance between authenticity
and profitability.
98 Journal of Appalachian Studies Volume 15 Numbers 1 & 2
References
Biuso, Emily. 2007. Down on the farm with your sleeves rolled up. New York Times, November
23.
Blacka, Aaron, Pierre Couture, Charles Coale, John Dooley, Andy Hankins, Ann Lastovica,
Brian Mihalik, Charlotte Reed, and Muzzo Uysal. 2001. Agri-tourism. Virginia Cooperative
Extension: Knowledge for the common wealth. Publication Number 310 - 003 (November).
Lobo, R. 2008. Helpful agricultural tourism definitions. University of California Small Farm
Center.
Mast Farm Inn. n.d.a. History. http://www.mastfarminn.com/aboutus/history/index.html
(accessed 6 November 2008).
_____________. n.d.b. Mast Farm Inn homepage. http://www.mastfarminn.com/index.
html (accessed 6 November 2008).
_____________. n.d.c. Organic gardens. http://www.mastfarminn.com/aboutus/gardens/
index.html (accessed 11 November 2008).
_____________. n.d.d. Restaurant. http://www.mastfarminn.com/dining/index.html
(accessed 28 October 2008).
Maverick Farms. n.d.a. About. http://www.maverickfarms.com/ (accessed 11 November
2008).
______________. n.d.b. Agritourism. http://www.maverickfarms.com/agritourism.html
(accessed 11 November 2008).
National Register of Historic Places Inventory. 1971. Nomination form, Mast Farm, “Survey
and Planning Unit Staff.” N.C. State Department of Archives and History.
New York Times Magazine. 2008. Food fighters. October 12 (food issue), slide show, http://
www.nytimes.com/slideshow/2008/10/07/magazine/20081012-STYLE_5.html
(accessed 30 October 2008).
North Carolina Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. Agritourism. h t t p : / /
www.ncagr.gov/NCproducts/CatSubDirectory.asp?CatNum=1011 (accessed 30
October 2008).
Ollenburg, Claudia and Ralf Buckley. 2007. Stated economic and social motivations of farm
tourism operators. Journal of Travel Research 45(4): 444 - 452.
Pressly, Sibyl. 1990. Mast Farm Inn, family style. Valle Crucis, N.C.: Mast Farm Inn.
Ruggerio, Frank. 2005. Small farms get creative to survive. Appalachian Voice (February).
http://www.appvoices.org/index.php?/site/voice_stories/small_farms_get_
creative_to_survive/issue/31%20 (accessed 11 November 2008).
Schillling, Brian J., Lucas J. Marxen, Helen H. Heinrich, and Fran J.A. Brooks. 2006. The
opportunity for agritourism development in New Jersey. New Jersey Department of
Agriculture Food Policy Institute (October). www.njkeepitgreen.org/documents/
agritourismreport_2006.pdf (accessed 11 November 2008).
Starnes, Richard D. 2006. Agricultural tourism. In Encyclopedia of Appalachia, eds. Rudy
Abramson and Jean Haskell, 617 - 618. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press.
Strange, Marty. 2008. Family farming: A new economic vision. Lincoln: University of Nebraska
Press.
United States Department of the Interior. 1971. National Register of Historic Places
inventory—nomination form. Mast Farm Inn.
Western North Carolina Farmer’s Market. n.d. Hillbilly gift items. http://www.
wncfarmersmarket.net/cat5_1.htm (accessed 6 November 2008).
Wolfe, Hillary. 2008. Interview by author. Valle Crucis, NC, 7 November.
Copyright of Journal of Appalachian Studies is the property of Appalachian Studies Association and its content
may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express
written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.