COLD STORAGE INSPECTIONS.

Routine inspections of licensed warehouses..

Special inspections of unlicensed warehouses..

Inspections of plants operating as temporary storages.

Total warehouse inspections..

Inspections of wholesale and retail stores with reference to cold storage foods

...

Total number of inspections made...

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS.

Warehouse.

3,062

71

105

3,238

5,511

8,749

Food stored in warehouses over 12 months.

Goods not marked with date of receipt in storage.

Failure to notify buyer of date when goods were placed in cold storage

Report of cold storage holdings not rendered.

Unfit food held in cold storage.

Food held overtime, transferred from one warehouse to another and

returned to cold storage when once released and placed on market for sale..

Removal of cold storage marks and re-storage of food.

Total warehouse violations

95

Wholesalers and Retailers.

Misrepresentation of cold storage goods.....

27

Invoice not marked with words "cold storage goods".

23

50

Total number of alleged violations reported. . .

FEEDING STUFFS INSPECTION

145

To maintain the maximum milk production the dairy cow requires a liberal supply of nourishing feed. While most dairy farms produce sufficient roughage for the herd, the majority depend largely on purchased concentrates. By-products, at one time considered almost valueless, now form the bulk of the feed used. Among these are cottonseed and linseed meals and corn and wheat by-products. New York State poultry also consumes large quantities of concentrates. There are farms on Long Island using at some seasons of the year a carload of feed daily for duck feeding.

New York State has a special law regulating the sale of concentrated feeds. This law provides for the annual licensing of each brand of feed defined as a concentrate which is offered for sale, and requires the payment of a license fee on each brand.

Several states have laws with similar provisions, while in others a nominal fee is charged for a permanent registration and a charge per ton collected in addition. There are advantages to both systems. The principal disadvantage to the system in vogue in this state is that the manufacturer of ten tons of feed must pay the same amount for a license as the manufacturer of ten thousand tons. The apparent hardship thus caused was partly overcome by

the amendment passed by the 1924 Legislature which reduced the amount of the license fee from twenty-five to ten dollars on some of the unmixed feeds made in small quantities by numerous New York State millers. On the other hand, the system in use here is more easily administered than would be possible if a charge per ton were made.

New York farmers purchase approximately One Hundred Million Dollars' worth annually. The department protects the farmers and feeders of the state by inspecting feeds and enforcing guarantees on protein, fat, and crude fiber required by law.

The purpose of the feed law is to acquaint the purchaser with the character and quality of the feed offered for sale. Each package is required to be distinctly labeled to show the protein, fat, and fiber content. In the case of mixtures, a list of ingredients must be given. A certified copy of this information must be filed when application for a license is made. The law requires the commissioner to take at least one sample annually from each brand of feed offered for sale. Sampling of the various brands is accomplished by specially qualified inspectors. These inspectors also sample commercial fertilizers and agricultural seeds.

During the first nine months of the year, 1,745 samples of feeding stuffs were collected, representing 1,371 brands. The samples were forwarded direct to the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station, where they were analyzed and the results of analyses then reported to the department. A report of the collection of each sample is forwarded to this department by the inspectors. These reports show the label information given upon

the packages from which the sample was taken. This label information is compared with the registrations on file, and later with the results of analysis received from the chemist. Wherever material discrepancies are found between the guaranteed analysis appearing on the packages and the actual analysis reported by the chemist, appropriate action is taken.

A large amount of office work is made necessary in connection with the feeding stuff inspection service. As any difference between the brand name, guaranteed analysis, or ingredients given apon the packages and that appearing upon the application for

registration constitutes a violation; and, as many minor differences are discovered, a large amount of correspondence with the manufacturers of feeds is necessary.

During the twelve-month period ending September 30, 1924, 2,013 brands of feeding stuffs have been licensed.

FERTILIZER INSPECTION

The provisions of the law regulating the sale of commercial fertilizer are similar to the provisions regulating the sale of feeding stuffs, as outlined above. A license fee of twenty dollars is required to be paid for each brand of fertilizer offered for sale. Our records show that 1,102 brands have been registered during the year ending September 30, 1924. Our inspectors have secured 814 samples, taken from 633 different brands. Fertilizer samples are also analyzed at the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station at Geneva.

There are indications that the commercial fertilizer sold in this state during the past year has been standardized quite closely to the guarantee, and this has resulted in a larger number of samples than usual being found deficient from the guaranteed analysis.

Early in the year a conference, which was attended by representatives of the fertilizer industry, members of the Experiment

Station staff, and representatives of the department, was held. This conference was requested by the manufacturers as a result of the change in the statute doing away with specified tolerance in the case of fertilizers deficient from the guaranteed analysis. The fertilizer industry appears to be satisfied with the policy adopted by the department in dealing with deficiencies. The purchaser should obtain material conforming more strictly to the guarantee as a result of the amendment mentioned.

AGRICULTURAL SEED INSPECTION

Our inspectors have paid more than the usual attention to the collection of samples of agricultural seed. A short clover and alfalfa seed crop resulted in a limited amount of domestic seed. while the seed imported from foreign countries is of good appearance and may show up well in a germination test, many authorities hold that it is not suited to New York State conditions. It is very difficult to distinguish between domestic and imported seed. The seed analyst must be guided by the color of the seed and by the presence of characteristic weed seeds. Most seedsmen do not

label their seed to show the place of origin, and the purchaser has no means of determining whether the seed will be suitable for his local conditions. In some instances, evidence of actual deception as to place of origin was found. Out of 38 lots of seed purchased by the various state institutions on contract specifying domestic seed, 15 lots were reported by the Experiment Station to be imported seed.

An important conference between seedsmen, representatives of the agricultural press, the State Grange, the College of Agriculture, the Experiment Station, and the department was held by the commissioner early in October. The consensus of opinion expressed

after a full discussion of the imported seed situation was that the solution of the problem is in the hands of the seedsmen themselves. The conference was a stimulus to seedsmen to solve the problem.

A total of 564 samples of seed, not including samples of vegetable seed, has been secured during the year. In general, the label information required by the statute has been given on tags attached to the packages from which samples were taken. Where this has not been given, the department has corresponded with the seedsmen to insure compliance with the law. Where the seed has been found to be of less value than indicated by the label, evidence has been submitted to the Legal Bureau.

It is to be regretted that the amendment to the seed law submitted to the last legislature was not enacted. In addition to strengthening the law governing the sale of seed defined as agri