Download our Logo
Vol. 30:2 ISSN 0160-8460 June 2002
Agriculture and Rural Life: Documenting Change in Minnesota and North Dakota
by James E. Fogerty
Aerial view of farmland surrounding a small farm in Dakota County, Minnesota, with forested hills in the foreground and gravel roads winding through the image. Photograph by Frank W. Gohlke, 1983, courtesy of the Minnesota Historical Society.
Agriculture is part of the American landscape. Even in states better known for their cities than their farms, agriculture is a fixture in the economic and scenic mix. The family farm remains an American icon-glorified by politicians, farmers, and many non-farming citizens alike. Indeed, the preservation of family farming-and of the communities it supports-has become a multibillion-dollar component of agricultural policy in the United States.
Nowhere is the place of agriculture more prominent than in the Midwest, where vast tracts of land are covered with fields of wheat, corn, soybeans, sugar beets, and a host of other crops. The viability of the small towns sprinkled across this region often depends directly upon income generated by farming. The economies of many states in the region were built upon the production of farms stretching to the Pacific, as were the fortunes of important sectors in the transportation, food products, and chemical industries.
The documentation of agriculture and its associated activities has always been part of the work of archives in the Midwest. Despite the inevitable disparity in size and scope of their collections, few would be found without some photographs, diaries, business records, and artifacts relating to the history of agriculture and the people who practiced it. At the same time, the very size and scope of agricultural enterprise makes systematic documentation difficult. The reality of thousands of individual farms and hundreds of farm-influenced communities in each state has often militated against large-scale documentary efforts.
Nowhere are the challenges in accurately reflecting the breadth and scope of agriculture more evident than in the archives of the Minnesota Historical Society and the State Historical Society of North Dakota. Neighbors separated only by the ribbon of the Red River of the North, Minnesota and North Dakota are linked economically as well as geographically. The produce of North Dakota's vast wheat fields flowed either to the flour mills of Minneapolis or to the grain terminals of Duluth for shipment to the East Coast or overseas. The railroads linking North Dakota to the rest of the nation were headquartered in Minnesota for nearly a century, and the states participate in a variety of cooperative efforts.
A particularly noteworthy aspect of the NHPRC's agenda to identify, preserve, and provide access to historical records has been the formation and support of historical records advisory boards in every state. Formed to collect data, seek public input and partnerships, and coordinate the work of records preservation, the state boards have proven important elements in implementing the NHPRC's goals on the local level. Minnesota and North Dakota maintain active state boards, both notable for the level of their involvement in projects to preserve state history. Periodic planning efforts in both states identified agriculture as a key component of state history, and noted the importance of ensuring adequate and accurate documentation of its importance.
Sensing the opportunity for a project of much more than statewide interest, the Minnesota Board invited members of North Dakota's board to a meeting in Moorhead in June 1992. As North Dakota board coordinator Gerald Newborg recalls, the "agenda laid out the two states' objectives. Minnesota objectives were stated to be 'documenting agriculture and rural life and the changing face of rural Minnesota. North Dakota objectives were given as examining the 'Red River Valley as a region transcending state and national boundaries.' The meeting had good representation and participation from both state boards, representation from the University of Manitoba added an international element, and our convergent interests were evident and well expressed. This was, all agreed, just the beginning."1
In 1995 the Minnesota Board commissioned two surveys of local organizations in the Red River Valley. The surveys-which combined work on the Board's priorities on agriculture, rural life, underdocumented communities, and volunteerism-aimed to compile information on organizations dedicated to providing services beyond those available from Government agencies. One survey dealt with organizations focused on agriculture and rural communities; the second with the area's large Hispanic community.
Both surveys were completed in 1996, and led to Board-sponsored meetings in Moorhead to which were invited individuals identified through the surveys. Held in November 1996, the two meetings included more than 30 individuals, in addition to members of the Minnesota Board and representatives from the North Dakota Board. Those in attendance included social service providers, migrant labor representatives, farmers, and advocates of rural economic development. In both instances, the meetings highlighted dedicated groups of individuals working to deal with the economic, political, and social realities affecting farmers, residents of small towns, and the region's Hispanic population. Many of these people indicated strong interest in working with the two state boards to ensure documentation of their work and their communities.
Armed with these results, the Minnesota Board --still seeking partners and a realistic way in which to deal with the huge issues it had identified-- commissioned two small oral-history projects. One focused on the evolution of the Hispanic community in Moorhead, and the other on the economic and social forces that led to the closing of a rural church. Both were funded by the Minnesota Historical Society's Grants in Aid program, and provided further insight into the complex web of issues involved in the larger project.
By 1998, members of both boards were impatient to take on a project dealing with the documentation of agriculture and rural life. At several meetings, the boards agreed to work together to frame a joint project, recognizing the challenges inherent in both cooperation and management on such a scale. The final project was proposed to the NHPRC in the spring of 1999 and funded late that year. Operations began early in 2000. In reviewing the project's operation the following items have special relevance.
Geographic Focus
Although the Red River Valley formed the larger geographic focus, it is nearly 175 miles in length, not counting the Canadian portion, and includes over 3,500 square miles. It is thus larger than the states of Delaware and Rhode Island combined. In order to craft a manageable project, the boards agreed to focus on a particular section of the Red River Valley, while seeking input beyond that area as necessary. The North Dakota Board chose three counties extending inland from the river, while the Minnesota Board selected a watershed district covering parts of seven counties. The areas are located directly across the river from one another, and include no towns with populations larger than 5,000. This ensured that the target area would indeed be rural, untainted by a larger urban area with issues unrelated to the hinterland.
Project Management
From its inception, the project promised major challenges. The largest of these was project management. The co-directors were located in Bismarck and St. Paul, headquarters of the respective boards and their sponsoring historical societies. The Red River is nearly 200 miles east of Bismarck and 250 miles northwest of St. Paul. Both project directors have major responsibilities in their agencies, and neither could relocate to the Valley for more than a few days every few months. Yet the work demanded a presence on site to build and maintain the network of contacts that would make or break the project.
The cross-river twin cities of Fargo, North Dakota, and Moorhead, Minnesota, were selected as the project headquarters. While not directly in the focus area, the cities provided infrastructure for the project office and available housing stock for the project manager. Recruitment of a project manager, whose work would last for 14 of the project's 24 months, concentrated on northwestern Minnesota and eastern North Dakota. As with so many aspects of this project, success was ensured by a combination of good planning and good fortune. Benjamin Leonard proved a model of entrepreneurial activity, boundless enthusiasm, excellent organizational skills, and the ability to connect with people. The latter was a critical asset, for Leonard had to cold-call dozens of people before each of the many meetings, explaining the project to busy farmers, businesspeople, municipal managers, educators, and social service providers. His success ratio was astounding.
The initial work-site for the project manager was space made available in the library of North Dakota State University in Fargo. The Minnesota Historical Society sent a computer, and with installation of a telephone Leonard was in business. Until June 20, 2000, that is, when Fargo was deluged with more than 10 inches of rain in less than 3 hours. Massive flooding inundated the NDSU library's lower floor, destroying Leonard's office, his computer, and many of his project files. Fortunately much of his research and many of his work notes had been sent electronically to the project directors, which protected those files from destruction. Office space was located at Moorhead State University, and Leonard relocated there within 2 days of the flood.
The project report details the numerous meetings held in both states and describes the interest groups assembled to discuss issues, provide individual perspectives, and recommend action. Meetings were also held with archivists from Minnesota, North Dakota, and Manitoba, and with historians whose work includes aspects of the history of agriculture and rural life. In addition, Leonard and board members met with more than 30 representatives of county and local historical societies in the region. Leonard also surveyed the holdings of 17 local, regional, and university archives in the Red River Valley, chosen to represent the actual disparities in size, funding, and collections.
In the end, project management worked because the project manager, board members, and staff worked hard to maintain contact and a visible presence in the area. Indeed, many board and project staff members came to view Fargo as a second home, for it served as the base of project operations.
Interstate Cooperation - The Realities
Melding state board goals, agendas, and meeting times is a major task not to be undertaken lightly. Even the choice of meeting sites is cause for deliberation, since sending board and staff members back and forth across state lines that may be hundreds of miles from their homes and work is no small decision, given the expense in both dollars and time taken from other tasks.
An interstate project must be a leading and simultaneous priority to all partners. Commitment to an idea or agenda is always possible in the abstract. It is when the inevitable meetings and consultations become reality that real days with real travel time and real preparation become challenges to commitment. In the case of the Minnesota and North Dakota boards, that commitment had to be maintained for 2 long years, through a dozen meetings and much sustained work. In retrospect, the very length of time it took to agree upon the project may have ensured its eventual success. When it was finally time to drive across snow-covered roads to meetings, commitment to a shared goal produced stellar cooperation.
Conclusions
The project's results and recommendations can be seen in two publications, both bearing the project title Agriculture and Rural Life: Documenting Change. The first is the Project Report, which contains an overview of each component, together with an extensive bibliography and list of web sites. Those were compiled from project research and information obtained directly from meeting participants. The second publication, Perspectives on the Issues, is a set of four very different essays, each offering a view of the topic and perspectives of value to those contemplating similar ventures. Both publications may be accessed from the web sites of the respective state boards, http://www.mnhs.org/shrab and http://www.state.nd.us/hist/Ag-rural-life.htm.
In assessing this interstate project, a reflection on the relationship between the NHPRC and the state historical records advisory boards is inevitable. While the state boards exist as independent entities, all were created under the leadership of the NHPRC. Funding other than that supplied by NHPRC has occasionally supported various state board programs, but the vast majority of funds used in state board projects have come from that single source.
Unusual as it is, the project Agriculture and Rural Life: Documenting Change proves that cooperation between state boards can flourish. Such projects may not be easily defined or rapidly implemented, but they can create interaction and regional agreement. Such cooperation can only strengthen records programs, particularly when, as in this instance, it creates a genuine dialog between records creators, users, and those charged with selecting and keeping the historical record.
James E. Fogerty heads the Acquisitions and Curatorial Department of the Minnesota Historical Society, and is Executive Secretary of the Minnesota State Historical Records Advisory Board.
Notes:
