The Chef’s Garden: an agricultural science model-based

practicum
S.N. Goodyear, S.K. Asiedu and J.J.W. Grant
Faculty of Agriculture, Dalhousie University, P.O. Box 550, Truro, Nova Scotia B2N 6L4, Canada.

Abstract
In 2011, the Faculty of Agriculture at Dalhousie University made a Chef’s
Garden. Built on a market garden model, this venture grew out of students’
discussions and projects on the ideas of sustainability and the role the University
could play at a practical and pragmatic level. The garden formally began to
supplement part of the Agricultural campus’ cafeteria’s food needs in 2011 and 2012,
and therefore funding came partially from the University’s ‘food’ budget. In 2013, the
Dean offered funding to develop a 3-year proposal to operationalize the garden within
the Department of Plant and Animal Sciences. The future viability of the garden rests
on building ‘curriculum’ around the garden; indeed, integrated education can be an
important role for the garden. This purpose of the garden should be recognized, first
that being its original intent of supplementing the food needs of the campus cafeteria
and the campus community, and second to serve an education role. Beyond the
obvious value in campus food and teaching, it behoves the university to provide
leadership as the only agricultural campus in Atlantic Canada. The objectives are to:
transition the Chef’s Garden into the department; expand the market reach of the
garden beyond the Campus Food Services; explore and implement ways to integrate
the garden into curriculum both academic and non-academic; and generate revenue
sources for capital expenditures. This paper presents progress to date, lessons
learned and future directions.

Keywords: market garden, curriculum

INTRODUCTION
The Chef’s Garden in the Faculty of Agriculture at Dalhousie University originally grew
out of a student project on concepts of sustainability and the role the university’s gardens
could play at a very practical and pragmatic level within the university. From this initial
project a broader discussion arose, particularly among students and staff affiliated with the
Student Union Sustainability Club. In 2010, the university decided to move forward with a
campus garden based on the market garden model and closely following organic
management practices.
Many universities have moved forward with the development of edible campuses
centered around a food garden or small farm. Belliveau et al. (2013) conducted research at
the Dalhousie Studley Campus and concluded that there is high student interest in having
edible plants on campus and for the gardens to be available for foraging. They also point out
that edible does not detract from the aesthetic value of the gardens; rather, they complement
the existing ornamental plantings. Further, their research demonstrates that there is
growing interest in learning and becoming more aware of where food comes from and how
it is processed, a conclusion supported by the broader literature as well. An edible campus
can also serve an educational function. Reviewing models from other universities that
focused on student-led initiatives, Dalhousie chose a more hybrid approach (McGill
University, n.d.; Hopkins, 2012; Sayre and Clark, 2011; Wharton and Harmon, 2009). A
community-supported agriculture (CSA) model (Wharton and Harmon, 2009) was
considered, but the volume of food produced during the start-up is not sufficient to supply
both the campus food services and members of a CSA. A market garden model was
implemented instead (Bachmann, 2009). Such a model will more accurately reflect the

  Acta Hortic. 1126. ISHS 2016. DOI 10.17660/ActaHortic.2016.1126.8 69

XXIX IHC – Proc. Plenary Sessions of IHC 2014 & VII Int. Sym. Education,
  Research Training and Consultancy
Eds.: R. McConchie et al.
processes of small sale production for local sale – e.g., farm stands and farmer’s markets. The
project is faculty-led, with a garden manager overseeing the day-to-day operation.
Importantly, there is also student involvement in the form of direct summer employment,
volunteering, and senior honours projects.
The garden formally began to supplement the Agricultural campus’ cafeteria’s food
needs in 2011, so funding for the Chef’s Garden naturally came partially from the
University’s ‘food’ budget. However, with the merger of the then Nova Scotia Agricultural
College with Dalhousie University, there was no natural ‘home’ for the garden (in terms of its
oversight, funding, and management), and the garden was transferred to the Department of
Plant and Animal Sciences (PAS) with supplemental funding provided from the Dean’s fund.
The future of the garden rests on building ‘curriculum’ around the garden; indeed, education
will be an increasingly important component/role for the garden developing ‘edible’ themed
curricula. The garden therefore has a dual purpose of supplementing the food needs of the
campus cafeteria and the campus community, and serving an educational role.
The integration of the Chef’s Garden into curricula will foster a deeper understanding
of how and where our food is grown, processed and transported as key to appreciating
global food systems impacts.

GARDEN ESTABLISHMENT AND OPERATION

We now turn more specifically to the steps involved in establishing the Chef’s Garden
and its evolution over the past few seasons, after which we discuss significant highlights and
challenges. In the fall of 2010, a 0.4 ha site was chosen for its proximity to the main
instructional areas. The site had historically been used as research plots, but had remained
fallow for five years previous to the garden development. The area had access to irrigation
water and there were no plans in the short term to develop the area or to return it to
research. A student garden manager was hired in 2011, and in the first year emphasis was
on field preparation to make the area suitable for vegetable production. Activities were
focused on improving soil fertility with the addition of manure/compost and green manure
crops and to a lesser extent cash crop production. Cash crop production in the garden was
limited to salad crops and was supplemented with root crops grown in other areas of the
university farm. In 2013/14, production was increased to include a wide range of vegetables,
with species selected based on the needs of the university food services (Table 1). In
addition, there was minor production of edible flowers and ornamental vegetables, e.g.,
gourds and pumpkin. A fence was added to minimize damage from urban wildlife (e.g., deer,
groundhogs) and domestic pets (Figure 1).

Figure 1. A fence was added in 2012 in an effort to deter deer and to add to the aesthetics
of the garden.

70
Table 1. Main vegetable crops grown in 2013-14.
Family Species Crop Notes
Alliaceae Allium cepa Onion Green and cooking
A. sativum Garlic Hard neck
Apiaceae Pastinaca sativa Parsnip Harris Model
Daucus carota Carrot Nantes and imperator
Asteraceae Lactuca sativa Lettuce Leaf lettuce, red and green
Head lettuce, Romaine
Brassicaceae Raphanus sativus Radish Salad types
B. oleracea Cauliflower White and orange
B. oleracea Broccoli Standard
B. oleracea Cabbage Red, white, Savoy
B. napobrassica Rutabaga Storage root
B. rapa Turnip Summer crop
Chenopodiaceae Spinacia oleracea Spinach Baby spinach
Beta vulgaris Beet Fresh market
Cucurbitaceae Cucurbita moschata Squash Winter squash
C. pepo Squash Summer squash
C. pepo Zucchini Green and yellow
Cucumis melo Melon Sugar Baby
C. sativus Cucumber Field cultivars
Fabaceae Pisum sativum Peas Sugar snap
Phaseolus vulgaris Beans Green and yellow
Solanaceae Solanum tuberosum Potato Laboratory material
S. melongena Eggplant Mixed colour
S. lycopersicum Tomato Paste, cherry and table
Capsicum annuum Pepper Green, small number red

The garden was transitioned to the PAS in 2013 and was managed under faculty
supervision with a research assistant performing the field work. There were five plots in the
garden (Figure 2). Plots F1a and F1b have subsequently been combined. Each plot was
further sub-divided into four sub-plots (3.5 m wide for F1 and F2; 4.5 m wide for F3). One
sub-plot in each plot (25%) is left fallow each year. During the fallow year manure/compost
is added and the area planted with a cover crop. The cover crop is mowed in the fall and
ploughed in early spring. Limestone is added according to recommendations based on soil
sampling analysis. F4 is currently fallow, having been heavily manured and planted with a
green manure crop to build soil fertility. Field F3 is used for cucurbits, brassica, legume and
root crop production (carrot, parsnip, beet, etc.). Field F1 is used for salad crops, herb and
Solanaceae production. Field F2 has been used for more miscellaneous production and in
2014 was planted with potatoes for laboratory use.
In 2014, the garden was operated as in 2013. An active white tail deer population has
been challenging for the urban area generally, and this is doubly true for a market garden.
The existing fence has proven to be an insufficient barrier for the deer, so an electric fence
has been added to the existing fence (Figure 3a). The community garden located close by is
fenced with a protective mesh (Figure 3b). The two fences in close proximity also
demonstrate two different approaches for deer exclusion, and students will be able to
compare and contrast the two.

71


Figure 2. Plot plan of the Chef’s Garden. There are four plots in the garden; F1a and F1b
have subsequently been combined. Each plot is sub-divided into four sub-plots
(3.5 m wide for F1 and F2; 4.5 m wide for F3). F4, fallow.

Figure 3. Electric fence erected in 2014 (1a), contrasted with a protective mesh erected on
the community garden fence (1b).
Irrigation is supplied as needed using a trickle irrigation system. Mulches and row
covers are used for season extension and the mulch additionally for weed control (Figure 4).
The produce is harvested and cleaned before delivery to the University kitchen.
Emphasis is on producing a high quality fresh product. The volume required is determined
early in the week, and deliveries are made as required. Additionally, if the kitchens exhausts
supplies of a product, kitchen staff will harvest the items that are needed directly from the
garden. While the main product remains salad crops, broccoli, cauliflower, cucurbit and
solanaceous fruit, there is a small production of herbs and flowers (ornamental and edible).

DISCUSSION
The Chef’s Garden is currently in its fourth year, which is its third year of full
production. The campus food services unit is very pleased with the quality of the product
and remains an eager supporter of the project. The response from students, staff and other
customers has been favourable – in particular the ‘food to fork’ model is appreciated (J.
Andrews, pers. commun.). A logo has been developed (Figure 5) and is displayed whenever
produce from the garden is used by the Chef. The knowledge that food items are being
produced on campus is a point of pride for both campus food services and their customers.
There is good rapport with the Chef, and he visits the garden on a regular basis. The garden
is a stopping point during events such as the campus’ annual Open House/Field Day or for
tours of the campus gardens. It serves in promoting the local to campus food supply.

72

Figure 4. Ground mulch, red for tomatoes and black plastic for the remaining warm season
crops was used to increase soil temperature; the mulches also serve as a weed
control and aid in preserving soil moisture. Floating row covers were used to
raise ambient air temperature around the plants; the covers also serve as a
physical barrier for some insects.

Figure 5. Chef’s Garden logo. The logo is used by the campus food services whenever
produce from the garden is used in food served.
The challenge with engaging students more fully is the difference in timing between
academic and growing years. The academic year runs from September to April, while the
garden follows the growing season meaning students are away from campus for a part of the
growing season. However, students are actively involved in the garden as part of lab practice
in the fall and take part in the early greenhouse seeding in the spring. Students have worked
as volunteers and non-credit interns. The students have been innovative in their use of the
garden and the community garden; for example, they have held workshops on making pesto
sauces, canning, and healthy eating.
Academic use of the garden is increasing. A survey in 2013 indicated strong support
for the garden across all academic departments. Engineering has actively involved students
in the initial fence design and construction, as well as building the garden shed. Students
have designed, built and installed the gates to the garden. Agricultural economics will use
the income/expense sheets for practicum in various classes. A more focused discussion on
issues of local food, ethical production, and so on happens with social science, and the
Garden is also one of the stops for ‘art’ in the garden. Environmental sciences teach many of
core courses, such as weed science, plant physiology, and pest management, and for them
the garden is a valuable resource as a working farm for demonstrating many of the concepts

73
discussed in class. The plant sciences are heavier users of the garden with many labs being
integrated into the garden. The Vegetable Production course is moving to integrate its labs
more fully into the garden. The use of the garden as a resource for laboratory practice is
increasing with students spending more time studying. Field trips to working farms are an
important component of production-oriented courses, and being able to use the garden in
this way also represents a cost saving for the department. Soil analysis reports are used as a
teaching tool in both organic and conventional focused courses. The Garden also serves as a
site for student practicum for planting both perennial, fall planted garlic and annual crops.
The garden is linked to other on-campus activities, and one activity is directed by the
campus library. They have developed an active Seed Library, the first academic library in
Canada to do so, and are focused on heritage seeds and non-GMO seeds. The garden is
involved in saving seed and adding to the collection, as well as being part of the steering
committee. In cooperation with Grounds Maintenance, the pollinator garden is being
expanded, an effort intended to support increased populations of native pollinators.
An important lesson learned is that the garden is a valuable education resource, across
various disciplines and academic units in the Faculty. Curricula continues to evolve and
change, which will only increase the opportunities for integrating the garden into courses
and programs.
The greatest challenge has been to fit the garden management cycle into the institu-
tional management cycle – e.g., release of funds, hiring, etc. However, with each cycle, each
stakeholder is learning from the other and positive adjustments are being implemented. A
second challenge is that providing only for the campus food services does not establish a
sufficiently large market to realize economies of scale, so larger markets need to be estab-
lished. Increasing potential revenues, such as selling to the larger campus community, will be
a focus in the coming year.
The future direction of the garden is to maintain its role in supplementing the produce
needs of the campus food services but also to include sale to the university campus at large.
This is both to involve the large campus community more fully in the Garden, further the
conversation on local food production, and increase revenue. Now that the model has been
established and is running, the steering committee will be enlarged to also include sub-
committees with focus divided into academic, food production, and volunteer streams.

CONCLUSIONS
The initial four years of operations have demonstrated the feasibility of the campus
garden as a dual purpose resource. A strong foundation has been established for both
production and faculty involvement. Going forward, we can now involve students more
actively and directly in the operation of the garden beyond their experience in scheduled
laboratories.
The initial use of the garden by core plant science courses has proven the garden to be
an effective tool in supporting curricula. Course design will now include direct use of the
garden as a key resource. The garden lends itself to a multi-disciplinary approach with
various departments involved in its use.
Campus community sales, along with more social events around the garden, will
further food production knowledge and awareness. The Chef’s Garden adds to the plant
diversity and serves to reconnect the campus community with food.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Dean’s Fund and the Department of Plant and Animal Sciences.

Literature cited
Bachmann, J. (2009). Market Gardening: a Start Up Guide (ATTRA), www.attra.ncat.org.
Belliveau, M., Le Geyt, M., MacLean, R., Reeves, Y., and Woolgar, E. (2013). The Edible Campus: a Research Project
(Halifax, NS, Canada: Dalhousie University).
Hopkins, S. (2012). The Indiana University Campus Garden Initiative (Report). (Bloomington, IN, USA: Office of

74
Sustainability, Indiana University).
McGill University. (n.d.). Making the Edible Campus. http://www.mcgill.ca/mchg/files/mchg/
MakingtheEdibleCampus.pdf.
Sayre, L., and Clark, S. (2011). Fields of Learning: the Student Farm Movement in North America (Lexington, KY,
USA: The University Press of Kentucky).
Wharton, C., and Harmon, A. (2009). University engagement through local food enterprise: community-
supported agriculture on campus. J. Hunger Environ. Nutr. 4 (2), 112–128 http://dx.doi.org/
10.1080/19320240902915235.

75
76