Agriculture has been the number 1 industry in Montana since the territory became a state, and agriculture will remain the number 1 industry into the foreseeable future. As global population increases and arable land decreases, the real challenge of feeding hungry mouths will continue to escalate, yet rather than supporting agriculture, including ag research, the State of Montana seems to have a cavalier attitude towards the entire concept of reaping a living from the earth. This fact becomes painfully obvious when we compare Montana to its neighboring agricultural state, North Dakota.
North Dakota understands the importance of agriculture and supports it’s ag sector to ensure the health and stability of this vital industry. While Montana has allowed agricultural research to decrease in scope, North Dakota increases its funding for ag research with every legislative session. Both Montana and North Dakota each have seven research centers scattered throughout their respective states, but the similarities end there. Comparing two neighboring State research centers within the MonDak region, the Williston Research Extension Center (WREC) in Williston, North Dakota and the Eastern Agricultural Research Center (EARC) in Sidney, Montana, opens our eyes to the huge discrepancies and to the undeniable fact that Montana really does not consider ag research of much importance.
According to the Montana Agricultural Statistics Services, the EARC serves ten counties in eastern Montana that encompasses 13 million cropland acres, amounts to 27% of the crop acres in Montana, and accounts for over $600 million in agricultural receipts. The EARC operates under the measly budget of $430,000.
On the other hand, the WREC in Williston serves 5 million crop acres, accounts for 14% of the total crop acres in North Dakota, and has $550 million in total ag receipts. The WREC budget?? $1.6 million dollars, a budget that is more than three times the size of the budget the EARC has for its allotment. What is happening to agricultural research in Montana, and why?
Ken Kephart, who serves as head of the Montana State University (MSU) Department of Research Centers and also as the superintendent of the Southern Agricultural Research Center in Huntley, agrees that ag research in Montana faces serious challenges that must be addressed if the State intends to remain strong in agricultural production. "I am concerned about declining appropriations over time," Kephart states. "For example, in the 2002 special session, the legislature did away with capital equipment expenditures, and that situation continues today. No research center has received money for equipment from the Montana Legislature since 2002."
He continues, "The Montana State University system has five independent agencies, among them the Montana Agricultural Experiment Station, or MAES and the Extension Service. The legislature determines the amount of money provided to these agencies. We receive 80-85% of our budget from the State, and the remaining 15% comes from a federal formula funding."
Montana has seven branch off campus research centers. Kephart points out that many legislators mistakenly assume the funding they allocate goes entirely to the seven research centers, but this is not the way it works. "The MAES receives about $12 million from the State and $2 million from the federal government," Kephart comments. "People think that $14 million gets divided among the seven research centers, but that is not the case. The MAES represents the research arm of the entire College of Agriculture at MSU with researchers and research programs both on campus and at the research centers. Only about $2.5 million gets distributed among the seven research centers, and the remainder is spent on campus. Good agricultural research comes out of the main campus, but in perspective, the research centers have struggled to maintain programs."
The money received from the federal government has remained relatively static for the past two decades, but the funding from the state legislature has not. "The state budget, in terms of money allocated, has been increased through the years, but when we adjust these dollars for inflation, we discover we have $1 million less in real dollars to work with than the system was allocated twenty years ago," Kephart points out. "The result? We have experienced a 43% reduction in total personnel who work for the MAES over the past twenty years. This reduction has adversely affected both on- and off-campus research programs."
He continues, "We are having a difficult time recruiting and retaining faculty and staff that represent the core of the applied research programs in the department. We normally have 16 faculty positions, but currently we have six vacancies at five of the seven research centers. We have nine vacant support staff positions, so we are presently down from 50 people to 35. During the last session of the legislature, the MAES was only one of two agencies that received a budget increase, but it was only to offset the 8.5% cuts we received the year before. We didn't make any gains. We merely got back to square one from two years ago."
Several factors continue to contribute to the deterioration of ag research capabilities in Montana. "I feel our salaries are not competitive with other states and with industry," Kephart says. "As well, not as many universities are teaching applied agricultural research. We'd have an easier time finding a molecular biologist than we do finding a general agronomist. As well, the number of people from off the farm is also shrinking. We have people who before college had no background in ag production until they went to college. Moving from a metropolitan environment to a rural area can be a culture shock, and many of these people are not attracted to this change."
Individual research centers generally have strong support from locals, but Kephart says we as an agricultural community and state must widen our view and realize that all research centers across the state benefit agriculture and we as agricultural people must expect strong support for ALL research centers if we want agricultural research capabilities in Montana to strengthen and grow. "The state of Montana is provincial," Kephart notes. "There is excellent support for the local centers but locals often don't care about the other centers across the state. There is good research going on at all the centers. People seem to think we should close a few of them and use the money to shore up the others. That was tried and it didn't work. We need all seven centers where they are, and we as Montanans need to support all of them."
Unless we elect legislators that truly care about agriculture and that strongly support all aspects of agriculture, including research, the prospects for continuing quality ag research look grim. "It appears that legislators are less and less involved with agriculture," Kephart explains. "They have no background or previous ties to agriculture. Given the present economic environment, maintaining the money from the federal government will be harder and harder, and the future looks scary."
The gains the MAES made in the last legislature appear to have been merely a band-aid measure and do not address the long term future and need for expanded agricultural research programs in Montana. We as a people can do something about that. This is an election year. If you care about Montana's number 1 industry, quiz candidates long and hard, discover where they stand on agriculture, and what they intend to do if elected. Only by electing advocates for agriculture will we stand a chance of keeping our agriculture industry and particularly our agricultural research capabilities strong and vibrant.
Reader Comments(0)