Land Grant Universities’ increasing bias against independent agriculture increases incrementally over time. Here is a hypothetical conversation between a student - studying
for a masters degree in micro-biology - and agronomy and her professor-advisor that
could have occurred.

Student: I am really excited about crop genetics after taking three years of classes.
My grades are high and I think I could make a contribution in a Ph.D. program.
Professor: A great idea. We have some joint biotechnology programs with Monsanto, Cargill and DuPont which are exciting and could get you in the door for future employment with those companies.

Student: Well, I was thinking about pursuing hybridization strategies to generate higher yields and drought tolerance. In the last century, corn yields have gone from about 45 to over 190 bushels per acre using these techniques. I think more can be done.
Professor: That may be true, but companies can’t patent hybrid crops and so are not
funding these programs. It may be difficult to do. USDA program funding is not available either.

Student: I can do this research with far less money than genetic modification techniques.
I just need a desk, a crop plot, and some periodic equipment access. Any advances in hybrid crops can be made widely available for farmers because they will not be patented.
Professor: That’s the problem. The University Foundation is working hard to generate more patent applications and patent licensing revenue. They are far less interested in research not leading to patentable products and processes. University Foundation board members and one representative each from Monsanto, Cargill and DuPont sit on the Agriculture College Strategic Goals Committee. Starting a project outside these strategic goals is not prohibited, but it is difficult.

Student: Maybe I could do some work on a biotechnology project in return for conducting other research on non-patented products. I could have the best of both worlds.
Professor: An interesting idea, but you have to sign a confidentiality agreement if you work on a joint University project with the Monsanto Center for Crop Progress, the Cargill Future Crop Project, or the DuPont Global Farm Program. You can’t have one foot in and one foot out because the risk of disclosing proprietary and confidential information is too high.

Student: A confidentiality agreement? I thought this was a publicly funded university. Our research should be available for all farmers and ranchers because the taxpayer pays the bills.
Professor: Some people do object to private industry partnerships. But the critics are opposed to progress. Without the partnerships, three of the new Ag College buildings would not exist. Independent farmers are now of rhetorical relevance to the land grant mission, but are not our core customers any more. No one is interested in farming these days.

Student: The last Cooperative Extension Young Farmers Seminar in the North West part of the state attracted over160 beginning farmers.
Professor: Yes, but they are just niche farmers, or dying independents. We must look to the future. None of them are able to help fund any of our centers for progress.

Student: But isn’t the Land Grant University role to perform research for the broader ag sector in areas where private industry is unwilling to proceed? Shouldn’t our university identify the barriers to independent producer success and focus our resources on those areas?
Professor: You have good ideas in theory. And the University supports independent agriculture. The synergy of our public-private partnerships allows us to attract high quality researchers, establish comprehensive patent generating programs, and fund the University for the future. The benefits trickle down to the independent producer eventually. Studies show this.

Student: Well, I’ll have to think about this. I’m not sure it makes sense to narrow the University’s constituency. It seems like short term thinking. My dad received a degree here and had many opportunities and support for farming and the programs directly helped farmers.
Professor: Like I said, we must look to the future.

Student: But what kind of future? I’ll have to think more about my Ph.D. goals.MS