87

Can Agritourism Save the Family Farm in

Appalachia? A Study of Two Historic Family Farms
in Valle Crucis, North Carolina

By Anne Chesky

Has embracing agritourism allowed the family farm

to become financially solvent? Are tourists getting an
authentic picture of farming? Is this movement sustainable
environmentally, socially, and economically? This paper seeks
to answer these questions by examining the histories of two
farms in western North Carolina, Maverick Farms and The
Mast Farm Inn. Both have extensive histories as family farms
and are currently considered agritourism ventures. Despite
their similarities, however, their transitions into the industry
have produced dramatically different results.

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.

The Development of Agritourism

There is no universal definition of “agritourism” in current literature,
but the University of California’s Small Farm Center defines agricultural
tourism as “the act of visiting a working farm or any agricultural,
horticultural, or agribusiness operation for the purpose of enjoyment,
education, or active involvement in the activities of the farm or operation”
(Lobo 2008, 1). Agritourism ventures in western North Carolina boost farm
incomes through a variety of activities. Common agritourism services
include, but are certainly not limited to, farm demonstrations, pick-your-
own crop harvests, bed-and-breakfasts, farmers’ markets, Community
Supported Agriculture (CSA), school programs, harvest festivals, farm
dinners, farm tours, and work exchange programs. The services and
products offered generally change with the seasons as farm production
changes (Blacka et al. 2001).
Western North Carolina’s agricultural heritage began to draw tourists
to the region in the late part of the nineteenth century. North Carolina’s
tourism department distributed pamphlets and travel books advertising
vistas of small mountain farms where visitors could view, from a distance,
mountain families cultivating their property as they had for centuries.
This notion of a quaint, isolated, and untouched culture drew tourists to
the region despite the sometimes inaccurate, stereotyped view of rural
Appalachian farmers. As visitors flocked to the region to witness quaint
agrarian communities, the tourist industry in the mountains began to
develop more strongly. Visitors to Asheville, North Carolina were given
maps of the area and encouraged to make day trips out of the city to
view historic pastureland and then come back to the city to sleep, eat,
and spend money. This interest in a simpler way of life also fueled the
market for goods produced on farms—specifically handicrafts like quilts,
baskets, and wood carvings, but also agricultural goods like jams, jellies,
and preserves (Starnes 2006).
Agritourism kept growing as an industry throughout the twentieth
century and by the 1930s, federal and state governments took notice.
Agritourism became a vital part of stimulating the Appalachian economy.
The Blue Ridge Parkway and Great Smoky Mountains National Park
were constructed and, as part of their visitor outreach, began agricultural
Selected Papers from the 2009 Conference 89

history interpretation programs. By focusing on North Carolina’s small

farming communities and isolated family farms, government agencies
restored and preserved much of the agricultural heritage of the region
from the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. Visitors could walk
through restored buildings and other farm structures, view exhibits and
information about subsistence farming in the region, and obtain a realistic
view of rural life. Presently, many of these agrarian exhibits and living
history museums continue to be a vital component of western North
Carolina’s historic sites (Starnes 2006).
The historic and continuing significance of family farms provides
educational opportunities for those of all ages to learn about Appalachia’s
agrarian heritage as well as food production and land and resource
stewardship. Consumers can also buy fresh, local food directly from
farmers participating in agritourism operations thus creating markets
for local food and providing consumers with healthy alternatives to
processed foods (Schilling et al. 2006). By creating a relationship with
customers through agritourism, the farmer can get immediate feedback
about consumer preferences for items and services provided by the farm.
These interactions can raise awareness about where food comes from and
agricultural practices in general. When non-farmers are educated about
farming, support for family farms grows. Communities that embrace
agritourism have also been shown to have an enhanced quality of life due
to increased recreational opportunities, diversified economic bases, and
retention of farmland (Ollenburg and Buckley 2007).
The growing popularity of agritourism reflects the benefits accrued
by all parties involved. As the agricultural economy has become stagnant
for small farms, Appalachian farmers are beginning to recognize the need
to supplement their incomes by diversifying their products and services
through agritourism, which has increased profit margin potential as well
as on-farm and direct consumer sales of products and services. In the
United States, tourism accounts for $341 billion and creates 5.85 million
jobs. Tapping into this industry has already led farmers across the United
States to increase their profitability. The USDA estimated that between
2000 and 2001, over 82 million Americans visited a farm. In North
Carolina, between 2003 and 2004, 46 percent of agritourism operators
indicated that they saw an increase in income (Buiso 2007). In fact, the
Purdue Tourism Hospitality Research Center asserted that between 1997
and 2007, naturally and agriculturally based tourism was the fastest
growing sector of the travel and tourism industry (Schilling et al. 2006).
Agritourism is flexible and ventures normally have relatively low start-
up costs. The tourists that utilize agritourism services represent a high-
value and low-volume customer base thereby creating a fairly efficient
90 Journal of Appalachian Studies Volume 15 Numbers 1 & 2

and easily managed market. Visitor activities can be provided on a small

or large scale depending on resources available (Blacka et al. 2001).
As with any industry, the development of agritourism has negative
impacts too. Though starting an agritourism operation may be simpler
than starting other businesses due to the ready availability of products
and services that already exist on the farm, these ventures require
additional money and time, can be tedious and frustrating to plan, add
risk and liability when having visitors on a working farm, can increase
development in rural areas, and take time to establish a profitable business
model (Blacka et al. 2001).

A Short History of Maverick Farms

The farmhouse at Maverick Farms was built in Valle Crucis, North
Carolina around the 1880s by Harrison Clark, a farmer, who grew tobacco
until the 1950s. In the 1970s, Bill and Carolyn Wilson purchased the house
and surrounding acreage and founded Springhouse Farms. After thirty
years of farming and selling hand-picked vegetables to local restaurants,
Bill Wilson began renting the farm to his daughters Hillary and Alice
Brooke in April 2004 (Wolfe 2008). With the goal of preserving their family’s
small farm, currently under pressure from development, the sisters began
an experimental sustainable agriculture project (Ruggerio 2005).
Hillary and Alice Brooke Wilson, with help from Tom Philpott and
Sara Safransky, run the farm as an “experiment with human-scale farming
techniques and food preparation” (Maverick Farms n.d.a.). Continuing
their father’s tradition the Wilson sisters still grow vegetables, but have
branched out to include a “new education and outreach program to
connect local food producers and consumers” (Maverick Farms n.d.a.).
The four co-founders and co-directors of the farm come from diverse
backgrounds and although the two sisters grew up on the farm, neither
had experience running a farm. Three of the founders still hold off-farm
jobs to remain financially solvent and Tom Philpott agreed that though
they “were excited about farming . . . [and] excited about food, [they] were
pretty naïve” (New York Times Magazine 2008) when they first began to
experience the economic realities of farm life.
Their current operation model includes “reducing waste, saving
energy, and fostering local involvement” (Buiso 2007, 2) and their mission
statement reads, “Because we see social justice as the food system’s most
crucial issue, we are dedicated to transforming food and farming practices
to support cooperative, not subordinate, interrelationships between the
economy, ecology, society and politics” (Maverick Farms n.d.a.).
Maverick Farms has a complex business model, which includes “a
working bed and breakfast, farm dinners, a restaurant-supply business, a
Selected Papers from the 2009 Conference 91

farm-share produce-delivery network and a nonprofit incubator program

that teaches teenagers how to run a farm” (New York Times Magazine
2008). The farm has also recently become a 501(c)3 non-profit educational
center for food and farming (Maverick Farms n.d.a.). The agritourism
aspect to their business, namely the bed-and-breakfast, has gotten the
farm some recent media attention.
New York Times journalist, Emily Buiso, visited the farm’s bed-and-
breakfast in November of 2007. During her visit, Buiso stayed overnight,
helped harvest vegetables and prepare dinner, and interviewed the farm
family. When Buiso spoke to Tom Philpott about why they chose to branch
into agritourism, Philpott identified agritourism as an educational tool
and a way to spark interest in farming and local food in the general public.
He reported that despite the financial struggles involved with owning
and operating a small farm, Maverick’s farmers are not as interested in
turning a profit as in rebuilding the farming community in the western
part of North Carolina. In another expose in the New York Times Magazine,
Tom Philpott identifies why: “We could have a really nice business selling
expensive produce to rich second-home owners and cooking expensive
dinners for them,” Philpott said. “But we’re trying to be part of a movement
to build a sustainable-but-accessible and socially just food system” (New
York Times Magazine 2008).
Guests that come to stay at the farm pay $120 per night to stay in one
of the farmhouse’s three guestrooms. If they choose, the visitors may help
with farm chores and for each hour of labor they contribute, seven dollars
is subtracted from their total bill. The guests are invited to work off up
to 25 percent of the bill. Staying at Maverick Farms creates a community
experience through communal dining and encouraging guests to help
in the kitchen preparing food they harvested from the garden (Buiso
2007). All in all, Maverick Farms’ agritourism experiences are more about
education and creating community than profit.

The Maverick Farms family sets expectations for guests

on their website. Experience “the hustle and bustle of life
on a working farm, as well as the relaxed atmosphere we
strive to create. Each comfortable guest room is private
and most have reading chairs and desks. There are many
sitting areas around the farmhouse and yard to rest and
have conversation. Guests may play the concert grand
piano, borrow books from the libraries, play badminton,
and help harvest eggs, vegetables, herbs, and fruit from
the gardens.” (Maverick Farms n.d.b., 1)

92 Journal of Appalachian Studies Volume 15 Numbers 1 & 2

A Short History of Mast Farm Inn

In the late twentieth century, Joseph Mast settled in the mountains of
North Carolina, after immigrating from Germany, in an area now known
as Valle Crucis. He is said to have acquired the one thousand acres that
would become the Mast Farm in exchange for his rifle, his dog, and one
pair of leggings. Around 1810, his son, David Mast, built the first house
on the property, a two-room log cabin. The cabin still stands today and
is the oldest inhabitable log cabin in Watauga County. Throughout the
nineteenth century, the farm prospered producing tobacco, corn, small
grains, and hay for livestock (Pressly 1990).
Joseph Mast’s grandson, Andrew Mast, erected the farmhouse in
1885 and by 1900 the family had constructed sixteen different buildings—
thirteen of which are still standing. Contained within the buildings were
a livestock house, a storage room for hay, a tobacco curing room, a spring
house, a smoke house, an ice house, a blacksmith shop, a woodworking
shop, and a wash house. The buildings and the farm, “represent . . . the
wide variety of operations necessary to a self-sustaining farm complex .
. . [and] illustrate the progression of an enterprising pioneer family from
[the] rude early house on a small homestead to a larger, more comfortable
house, the seat of much larger land holdings” (National Register 1971, 3).
Within the next few decades, Andrew’s son Finley and his wife
Josephine enlarged the house, as transportation through the mountains
improved, to offer rooms and meals to travelers, mostly tourists, thus
beginning Mast Farm’s history as an agritourism venture. Josephine
Mast managed the house, vegetable garden, and dairy. She was also a
master weaver and sold many rugs, coverlets, and handbags to tourists.
After Finley and Josephine died in the 1930s, the farm and inn were all
but abandoned. Their blind son inhabited the house until 1964 when he
vacated the house as well. In 1972, despite having been abandoned and
in a state of disrepair, the Mast Farm Inn was recognized in the National
Register of Historic Places as having “one of the most complete and best
preserved groups of nineteenth century farm buildings in western North
Carolina” (National Register 1971, 3).
The house and land stood empty until 1984, when Francis and
Sybil Pressly, who restored the house and eventually reopened it as an
inn, purchased it. The reopening of the historic inn coincided with the
reopening of the Mast General Store by a different family and contributed
to the rebirth of Valle Crucis as a tourist destination (Pressly 1990). The food
grown on the farm while the Pressly family owned the inn was minimal
and used primarily to feed the inn’s guests. Sibyl Pressly maintained a
flower garden to teach about flower identification and drying (1990).
The inn is now managed by two sisters, Sandra Deschamps Siano
Selected Papers from the 2009 Conference 93

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.).

Are these Farms Profitable? Authentic? Sustainable?

Maverick Farm is a non-profit. Mast Farm Inn is a commercial
business. Maverick Farms is a farm first, and an agritourism venture
second. Mast Farm Inn, however, is primarily a bed-and-breakfast and has
preserved its farming history rather than continue it. Maverick Farms has
now been farmed by two generations of the same family, while Mast Farm
Inn’s small garden is tended by employees. Mast Farm Inn is significantly
more profitable than Maverick Farms and maintains many more full
time employees. These two farms provide interesting examples of how
agritourism can be profitable, sustainable, and authentic and whether
these ideas are mutually exclusive.

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

an alternate, core source of income” (Wolfe 2008). (Although, when

farmer’s markets and CSAs are lumped into the agritourism category—as
they are in some definitions—almost all of Maverick Farms sales come
from the agritourism industry.) Their bed-and-breakfast, which mainly
hosts tourists, does very little business, though the business that does
occur allows patrons a look at present-day family farming practices. The
members of Maverick Farms have studied farming and food politics. In all
aspects of their farming venture, they stay true to the mission identified on
their Web site, but they still are not financially solvent as a farm.
Mast Farm Inn, on the other hand, has had financial success in the
agritourism industry. Due to the popularity of historic buildings and high-
dollar bed-and-breakfasts in the area, Mast Farm Inn has done exceedingly
well financially. Their identification as an agritourism venture, however,
is more for marketing than for any genuine farming experience that they
might offer their guests. Even the organic gardens are rarely viewed by
guests—and if guests do visit it is typically a cursory walk-though to view
flowers rather than an educational experience. Mast Farm Inn has tapped
into any market where they see potential for profit, from agritourism to
weddings to Porsche rentals. While Mast Farm Inn is no longer a small
family farm, their profitability has allowed them to preserve and maintain
the buildings that are historically important to the town of Valle Crucis
and the agrarian history of the region. By opening the farm to tourists,
Mast Farm Inn has been able to tap into this vast market, introduce guests
to some aspects of farm life that they otherwise may never have seen, and
prevent the Mast family’s land and buildings from being developed—
unlike many other private living history museums that struggle to
maintain their historic buildings.
While it is possible to strike a balance between farm education and
profit building, this balance is often hard to maintain. Without a marketing
program, small farms are forgotten about by the very tourists that would
most benefit from a true farming experience. Advertising and marketing,
however, often fall under the radar of small farms like Maverick. Mast
Farm Inn, on the other hand, has no lack of money for advertising and
is normally fully booked on weekends throughout the year, with longer
stays booked during the high seasons of summer and fall. Those who come
for an authentic agritourism experience, however, may be disappointed.
While Mast Farm Inn has restored the old farm buildings they have also
upgraded them for their wealthy guests, even turning one into a gift shop.
Guests that come to the Inn are generally not looking to work in the garden
or prepare their own meals, and the Inn caters to this demographic well,
but the guests are not coming away from their stay with a better picture of
life on a present-day family farm.
Selected Papers from the 2009 Conference 95

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.