In late 2016, UC Berkeley’s Capital Strategies department officially declared its intent to develop student housing on the only agricultural facility within walking distance of campus: The Oxford Tract, a 2.5-Acre plot of land containing greenhouses and a field. A combined force of students, faculty, alumni, and community members rose up in defense of this critical space, beginning a contentious debate that would span years.

The most recent development occurred on April 3rd, 2019, when Chancellor Carol T. Christ sent an email to the College of Natural Resources community, affirming her commitment to develop housing on the Oxford Tract. The affirmation came in spite of multiple reports from CNR suggesting that the Oxford Tract is too valuable a resource to be demolished in favor of housing. On April 15th, CNR dean David Ackerly met with students, faculty, and community members to discuss the Oxford Tract’s importance in a Town Hall setting.

Nine months later, there have been no major updates from either the Chancellor’s office or the College of Natural Resources. The “Defend Oxford Tract” Facebook page hasn’t seen a new post since last May. But the Oxford Tract is still slated for development, and while a formal timeline has yet to be released, the Chancellor’s April 2019 letter suggested that construction could begin in as little as three years.

Searching for a more recent update, I reached out to the Capital Planning department via email. Roqua Montez, a representative from the department, informed me that the development is currently in the “feasibility” stage - members of the planning department are in talks with CNR dean David Ackerly to “examine the existing research and teaching conducted...at the Oxford Tract.” The information will help them determine the best alternate site for current Oxford Tract operations. It is still unclear what the future housing development will look like; Mr. Montez informed me that the specifics will not be determined until they have developed a way to maintain research continuity.

Speaking with CNR Dean David Ackerly, I learned that much of this radio silence is simply a reflection of the slow movements of a large bureaucracy. Simply put, not much has developed since the Chancellor’s letter. A developer has not yet been chosen, there are no clear ideas of what the development will look like, and a price has not been calculated. Dean Ackerly also told me that he remains committed to upholding CNR’s “excellence in research and teaching and outreach to communities,” and that “it is very painful...to lose part of our research facilities,” especially one which also engages students and the larger community. He remains committed to maintaining a greenhouse facility at the Oxford Tract, unless an alternative location is found close enough to campus. It is almost certain that the field space will have to move to an alternate site.

However, there are major concerns for each of the suggested transition sites. The Gill Tract, another urban farm on university land, is already home to a community garden and rematriation space for the Ohlone people, plus it is too far from campus to host classes or provide access to labs. The lot between Smyth and Fernwald streets is another promising option, but it is adjacent to the Hayward fault, and quite the uphill trek if you’re coming from the west side of campus. And regardless of where the experiments are moved, there will be disruption of long-running agricultural experiments, such as one multi-year study that examines the long-term effects of not tilling soil.

The Oxford Tract’s field provides students and faculty with the chance to engage directly with the dirt. (Source: Aren Saunders-Gonzalez)

To learn more about what makes the Oxford Tract so critical to the CNR community, I spoke to three researchers intimately connected with the space.

The first was Joshua Arnold, a graduate student who has worked at the Tract for the past eight years, as both an instructor and a researcher. He explained to me how the Oxford Tract is the university’s last resource as a “Land Grant” University, because it is the only space near the central campus which allows students and faculty to engage directly with the land. Containing both greenhouses and a field, the Tract is unlike any other resource at Berkeley. It is critical for teaching classes such as ESPM 118, an agroecology course where students work in the field to develop hands-on practice with sustainable farming techniques, while also learning about experimental design in field-based research. The Oxford Tract has also been a key site for agroecological research, given its proximity to labs and other facilities on the central campus.

A sign hung on the fence around the Oxford Tract (Source: SOGA)

Josh particularly worries about the loss of field space at the Oxford Tract. He feels that the potential transition plans focus too much on “how things could be built on top of other things.” Residence halls with rooftop greenhouses are a common proposal, but that only addresses a small percentage of the Oxford Tract’s operations. Field experiments can’t simply be lifted five stories off the ground, he reminded me. Other suggestions involve hydroponics (growing plants directly in water) or other costly indoor techniques. But such research would only benefit farmers with access to such equipment; it would do little for smaller farms, especially those in the developing world, who need sustainable practices that can be implemented in a traditional field setting. Empowering such farmers with sustainable practices is a critical component of creating a more sustainable agricultural model. In an age where technology-driven agricultural solutions, such as genome editing with CRISPR, become more common, dwindling field sites grow even more important.

Next, I spoke with Coleman Rainey, another graduate student involved with Oxford Tract research. He voiced concerns about the lack of democratic decision making with the development process: “everything is happening behind closed doors...without student input.” While students have been involved in the Defend Oxford Tract movement and the Oxford Tract Planning Committee report, they have not had a voice in any of the recent negotiations. The decision to move forward with development also contravenes most of the opinions that students shared in the Oxford Tract Town Hall and the Planning Committee report.

Cole expressed that “the issue that’s happening at the Oxford Tract is emblematic of a much deeper and wider problem...of public goods, ecosystem services, and all of the...cultural, spiritual, practical benefits that land offers being pitted against the incessant and insatiable need for development.” For him, it comes down to a question about how we relate to land. Is it purely a commodity, or is it something with which we can build a relationship?

Coleman spoke a lot about the Oxford Tract as a space where students, faculty, and community members have learned to “see the land as a set of relationships.” He told me that thinking of the Tract solely in terms of its academic and research use is reductionist; it is also a unique cultural and spiritual resource for the University, plus a supplier of fresh produce for the Student Food Pantry.

But Cole believes that the Oxford Tract and housing can coexist. The space could be big enough to include both a housing component and an agricultural component. He imagines a new residential college at the site of the current greenhouses, themed for students interested in agriculture. However, he does feel that this space should only cover the existing greenhouse and parking lot space, because in an urban area like Berkeley, the field is too special to lose. Looking at the Oxford Tract Planning Committee report, it does seem like a possibility; a full 2.5 acres of the current Tract is taken up by parking lots, buildings, and greenhouses. This is an area only slightly smaller that the Unit 3 housing complex, which clocks in at about 2.8 acres, according to Google Maps measuring software.

Potential Housing Developments (Source: Oxford Planning Committee Report)

However, all likely scenarios point toward the field being developed, as Timothy Bowles told me a few days later. While he did say that the university has affirmed their commitment to maintaining a field teaching space, he is concerned about finding such a space close enough to campus. Like Cole, he feels that there hasn’t been enough discussion about the loss of teaching space. While he is confident that development will not begin until greenhouse operations are moved, he worries about construction occurring before a new field-site is in place. However, he does believe that a new, well-planned field site could meaningfully revamp Berkeley’s Agroecology program. If it must be developed, he is hopeful that the new space could have more room for student and community involvement. Like Cole, he believes that the field is the most critical part of the Oxford Tract, because it connects students to the soil.

Even though all three researchers felt relatively certain that the Oxford Tract will be developed, I left our conversations feeling hopeful about the future of agroecology at Berkeley. Their eyes lit up when talking about a residential college for agriculturally inclined students or a new, learning-focused field space at the Smyth-Fernwald plot. “We’re Berkeley -we’re supposed to be visionary,” Professor Bowles reminded me. The Oxford Tract housing plan is still nebulous, which gives us time to prove that visionary spirit and develop a new way of relating to the land that includes both housing and ecology.