'
THE LIBRARY OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF
NORTH CAROLINA
THE COLLECTION OF
NORTH CAROLINIANA
C630.6
N8a
1960/62
KBBffiMKSf-WCHWEL
00017479836
This BOOK may be kept out ONE MONTH
ONLY, and is subject to a fine of FIVE
CENTS a day thereafter. It is DUE on the
DAY indicated below:
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2011 with funding from
Ensuring Democracy through Digital Access (NC-LSTA)
http://www.archive.org/details/biennialrepagric19601962
BIENNIAL REPORT
for 1960-1962
NORTH CAROLI NA
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
L. Y. BALLENTINE. Commissioner
RALEIGH, N. C.
10-62—I^M
2 *
c o
q- 4; o
>< - re
o -§
< -o < o
re o 3- »
3" vt
re
-r >
n' < 3T _,. *a
3" O 3"
n' re
0'
3
c
re c
</i 3" "O -*
VI Q re
0' c
V) *
"» c re W
re re_ re re
o3
o
re
Ql
a.
re
3
5'
c
5'
3"
w
3"
3 re
re
VI
< S" ?0 3' Z
vt"
re
n
re
o
re
to"
c
0.
3?'!
^ 3" re <o
3" O O
re 3 re 3
a. » a. "o
re ?3
o c !L 3 re
3
re
re
re
a.
0
re
re
3 3"
"*» re 3"
»* O 3 re
D.
c
3"
re 3
a
33
re_
6"
•<
< re a
re
o
n
3
re
vt 5.
re
5' <
re
3-
re
VI
A ^« a "D
re
a Z c
re
a,
XI
O
vt
VI o c re
5" 15. 0.
ID 3-
< 5. -t>
a. O re re
re «< re
3 vt
a.
3"
a
3
a.
3' 3
Q_
2.
re
in'
T3
O 3- n
3"
re 3
re
re
c
re
ID •*
-** 3 3
3' in -^
re
3-
o c ° X,
* >
re o
* 2
O 3
0re 3re3
5 * S
3 " ?
Ill
-. re
a
- ,
STATE BOARD OF AGRICULTURE
June 30, 1962
L. Y. Ballentine, Commissioner
Ex-Officio Chairman
J. Atwell Alexander Stony Point
Thomas O. Gilmore Julian
Hoyle C. Griffin Monroe
Claude T. Hall Roxboro
Thomas G. Joyner Garysburg
George P. Kittrell Corapeake
Charles F. Phillips Thomasville
J. H. Poole , West End
A. B. Slagle Franklin
David Townsend Rowland
Others who served on the Board during this biennium until the
expiration of their terms of office on May 4, 1961, were
:
W. I. Bissette Grifton
Glenn G. Gilmore Julian
J. Muse McCotter New Bern
ABOUT OUR COVER PICTURE
Our cover picture symbolizes the unbroken chain of rela-tionship
from the plowed field to the market basket, in-volving
modern technologies in every step from planting
and cultivation practices to the processing and packaging of
agricultural raw materials.
It also symbolizes the unbroken chain of protective serv-ices
provided by the North Carolina Department of Agri-culture.
Beginning with the feed, seed, fertilizer and insecti-cides
used by the farmer, protection is afforded not only the
farmer, but also the consumer of his production. At every
stage, the department has under scrutiny the grade, quality,
wholesomeness, sanitation, packaging, labeling and weight
or measure of every farm product moving into commercial
channels.
A study of this report will reveal how these and a host of
other protective measures benefit everyone concerned—the
farmer, the processor and the consumer.
(Plowing scene by Ralph Mills)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Board of Agriculture 3
Personnel 6
Commissioner's Summary , 15
Highlights of Board Meetings 32
Accounting Division 38
Chemistry Division 47
Credit Union Division 59
Dairy Division 63
Entomology Division 70
Farmers Market 77
Markets Division 81
Museum Division . 114
Publications Division 125
Research Stations Division 128
Seed Testing Division 142
Soil Testing Division 146
State Fair Division 149
Statistics Division 155
Veterinary Division 158
Warehouse Division 171
Weights and Measures Division 174
PERSONNEL
of the
STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
June 30, 1962
L. Y. Ballentine, Commissioner
Administration
John L. Reitzel Assistant Commissioner
Ruth C. Harmon Administrative Secretary
Hazel I. Horner Stenographer III
Barbara M. Williams Stenographer II
Division of Accounts
Grace H. Malloy , Accountant III
Alice W. Brantley _ Accounting Clerk I
Gaynelle Bulluck Cashier II—Dept. of Agriculture
Linda S. Creech Accounting Clerk I
Ollie G. Godwin __ Accounting Clerk I
Elsie W. Jordan Accountant I
Elizabeth W. Mitchiner Accounting Clerk II
Linda A. Rhodes Stenographer III
Annie F. Rosendahl __ Accounting Clerk I
Eunice G. Smith Accounting Clerk I
Peggy Y. Smith .._. Cashier I—Dept. of Agriculture
Patricia P. Teal Accounting Clerk I
Lunelle Yeargan .___. Accounting Clerk III
Publicity and Publications
M. Pauline DeCosta Public Information Officer III
Julia G. Dodson Stenographer II
Richard T. Evans __ Clerk I
William E. Gulley Public Information Officer I
Bettye T. Rogers Clerk II
Inspection
George A. Brown, Jr Feed, Fertiliser & Insecticide Inspector I
Thomas E. Carriker, Jr ....Feed, Fertilizer & Insecticide Inspector I
E. H. Cooper Tax Auditor III
Ewell E. Evans Tax Auditor II
Harvey C. McPhail.. .3= Feed, Fertilizer & Insecticide Inspector I
James R. Stevens Feed, Fertilizer & Insecticide Inspector II
Markets
John A. Winfield Director of Agriculture Markets
Wilbur S. Brannan Marketing Specialist III
Ruby P. Britt Stenographer III
Janice N. Burke Stenographer II
Charles L. Campbell, Jr _ Marketing Specialist III
Report For 1960-62
—
Personnel 7
John H. Cyrus ....Marketing Specialist HI
Jay P. Davis. Jr.. Marketing Specialist IV
Louise T. Dunn Stenographer III
Charles B. Elks Marketing Specialist IT
William J. Feimster ...Marketing Specialist II
Joe B. Gourlay Marketing Specialist III
Thomas E. Green, Sr Marketing Specialist III
Evelyn G. Harper Stenographer HI
Clarence E. Harris, Jr Marketing Specialist II
Glen C. Hatcher, Sk Marketing Specialist II
Wendell P. Hedrick Marketing Specialist IV
James P. Hockaday, Jr Marketing Specialist II
Robert D. Jenkins Marketing Specialist II
Julius P. Jenrette - - Marketing Specialist IV
Wallace G. Johnson Marketing Specialist III
Ethel Y. Kiker Marketing Specialist HI
Katherine B. Koppen .... Stenographer HI
William E. Lane _.. Marketing Specialist IV
Opal M. Liles. Laboratory Technician II
Staley S. Long, Jr Marketing Specialist HI
Hugh B. Martin Marketing Specialist IV
Neill A. Morrison, Jr Marketing Specialist HI
Charles G. Murray Marketing Specialist III
Lavinia E. Murray Accounting Clerk II
Hobart W. Myrick _ Marketing Specialist HI
Mary L. Norman .__ Stenographer II
Frances L. O'Neal.— Stenographer II
William G. Parham, Jr Marketing Specialist HI
Melvin J. Pierce Marketing Specialist III
Arthur K. Pitzer... Marketing Specialist III
Lois M. Pleasants Laboratory Technician III
Phoebe D. Powers Stenographer HI
H. D. Qltessenberry Marketing Specialist IV
Joan E. Regal ...Accounting Clerk I
B. S. Rich Marketing Specialist IV
Walter M. Sawyer Marketing Specialist II
Carson W. Sheffield Marketing Specialist IV
Beatrice L. Smith Stenographer III
Annie R. Strickland Stenographer II
Curtis F. Tarleton Marketing Specialist IV
Mallie A. Thomas Marketing Specialist II
Carl H. Tower.. Marketing Specialist IV
Vivian L. Traywick Marketing Specialist I
Euris R. Vanderford Marketing Specialist II
Grace F. Watkins Laboratory Technician I
Pauline M. Watkins ___. Typist I
Dewey C. Wayne Marketing Specialist IV
Barbara J. Wood... Stenographer II
Dairy
C. W. Pegram Director of Dairy Service
Lafayette H. Boykin, Jr Dairy Specialist II
Charles W. Dunn .....Laboratory Helper
Elmo H. Hollomon Dairy Specialist II
Paul R. Jordan, Jr Bacteriologist III
Dickson Q. Ketner Dairy Specialist II
W. L. McLeod Dairy Specialist II
Margaret L. Stubbs ..Laboratory Technician II
Mary M. Weathers Stenographer II
Giles M. Williams..... Dairy Specialist II
Francis Patterson.. Dairy Specialist HI
8 N. C. Department of Agriculture
Entomology
C. H. Brannon -State Entomologist
Hugh I. Alford, Jr.._. __. ...Entomologist II
James F. Greene Entomologist II
J. A. Harris... Entomologist III
Jesse F. Sessions — Entomologist II
Roy M. Schmarkey Entomologist II
Norma R. Williamson Stenographer II
D. L. Wray Entomologist III
Seed Laboratory
Willard H. Darst - Director of Seed Testing
James M. S. Blocker Seed Specialist
Shirley S. Bowling — Seed Analyst I
Magdalene G. Brummitt Seed Analyst II
Frances H. Colvix Seed Analyst II
Mahlon B. Dickens Seed Specialist
Stella W. Etheredge Seed Analyst II
Virginia B. Griffix Seed Analyst I
Kaye Frances Hymax Stenographer II
Theodora W. King. Seed Analyst I
Fred L. McHan Seed Specialist
Murphy G. McKenzie, Jr Seed Specialist
Tim H. Roberts Seed Specialist
Ewald Smith Seed Analyst II
Mildred W. Thomas — Seed Analyst II
Analytical
E. W. Constable State Chemist
Elizabeth B. Barefoot Stenographer II
Henry W. Barnes, Jr . Chemist IV
Elizabeth F. Bartholomew Microanalyst
Stanley E. Berkshire Food, Drug & Cosmetic Inspector
Samuel C. Boyd .....Laboratory Helper
Z. B. Bradford _._ ...Chemist IV
Burney A. Britt Chemist II
David E. Buffaloe Chemist IV
William B. Buffaloe ...Chemist I
Margaret B. Carter ___. Chemist II
James A. Chapman Laboratory Helper
Dorothy M. Davis.... Stenographer III
J. Whitt Davis Feed, Fertilizer & Insecticide Inspector I
Alicegrae F. Ferrell Typist III
John J. Filicky Chemist II
Evelyn A. Freeman Stenographer II
Robert L. Freeman Food, Drug & Cosmetic Inspector
Gilbert G. Garner Chemist I
Charles H. Godwin, Jr..... Food, Drug & Cosmetic Inspector
Pearl G. Gray Stenographer III
Samuel H. Hinton Laboratory Helper
Velva E. Hudson .. Typist III
Harold L. Jackson ___ Food Chemist
Jesse G. Jernigan Chemist II
Vera C. Johnson _. Chemist II
Frances L. Liles Stenographer II
H. C. Matheson Chemist II
W. P. Matthews Chemist IV
Harry A. Miller Chemist VI
William A. Morgan Laboratory Helper
L. M. Nixon Chemist V
Report For 1960-62
—
Personnel 9
Fred P. Nook ....Food, Drug & Cosmetic Inspector
H. F. Pickering — Chemist IV
J. S. Pittard Chemist IV
L. B. Rhodes Food Chemist
Clyde W. Roberts Food, Drug & Cosmetic Insnector
Don H. Smith Laboratory Helper
William Sylver, Jr Laboratory Helper
Robert N. Tulloch __ Chemist II
William T. Vick _._. Chemist I
George R. Winstead, III Chemist II
Crop Statistics
John T. Richardson Administrative Officer
Raymond R. Alford, Jr Miscellaneous Duplicating Machine
Unit Supervisor. G. S. 4
Mary S. Allen.. Research, Analyst I
Thomas W. Brand, Jr Analytical Statistician, GS-12
Louise W. Byrtjm Research Assistant
Ben E. Clayton, Jr. ____ Statistician I
Charlie H. Cross, Jr Duplicating Machine Operator III
Martha F. Early Research Assistant
Terry M. Edwards Duplicating Machine Operator II
Evelyn L. Finch Vari-Type Operator II
Jewell B. Hussey Research Assistant
Ida L. King Research Assistant
Minnie H. Langley... .Stenographer II
Florine C. Leonard Research Assistant
Mary F. Lloyd... Vari-Type Operator II
Carrie Mae Mann Research Assistant
Mary D. Matthews ...Research Assistant
Natalie R. Shearin Research Assistant
Robert H. Tilley Statistician GS-11
Olaf Wakefield Agricultural Statistician GS-13
Harry A. White Analytical Statistician GS-12
Soil Testing
Eugene J. Kamprath Director of Soil Testing
John O. Anderson Laboratory Helper
Billie G. Arrington Stenographer I
Lula S. Bell. Typist I
Evelyn S. Conyers Chemist I
Carolyn O. Copeland Chemist I
Joseph E. Douglas Laboratory Helper
Sealey Gardner Chemist II
Carolyn C. Holt Stenographer II
Alice J. Honeycutt Stenographer II
Juanita U. Matthews Laboratory Technician II
Gerald D. McCart Agronomist I
Alice F. McLamb Typist I
Ann H. Scott.. Chemist I
Dorothy R. Thornton Stenographer III
Charles D. Welch Agronomist II
Johnnie M. Woodall Stenographer I
James R. Woodruff Agronomist I
Veterinary
Hal J. Rollins State Veterinarian
Josephine A. Allen Stenographer III
John Dean Baker Veterinarian III
10 N. C. Department of Agriculture
Marvin A. Batchelok Livestock Inspector
Charles R. Border Veterinarian III
James C. Brown.__. ; . Veterinarian III
G. I. Bullock - Livestock Inspector
Rowland H. Butler... Clerk I
Allie W. Carter Livestock Inspector
Mary Esther Carter Laboratory Technician II
Julius B. Cashion —
_
Poultry Specialist I
Jesse J. Causby Poultry Specialist II
Kenneth G. Church.. .-__ Poultry Specialist I
James H. Clegg Poultry Specialist I
William W. Clements Veterinarian III
Alton L. Corbett Livestock Inspector
Eugene C. Couch Poultry Specialist I
Percy W. Dail, Jr Laboratory Helper
Lilly F. Daughtry Stenographer II
Guy E. Dowd Poultry Specialist I
Thomas H. Eleazer .. Veterinarian III
L. H. Fourie Poultry Specialist III
James A. Frazier Poultry Specialist I
George D. Fuller Livestock Inspector
William B. Griffin — Veterinarian II
Julian E. Guyton .Poultry Specialist I
Ralph Hamilton Veterinarian II
Nan M. Herndon .Laboratory Technician II
Oscar F. Hill Livestock Inspector
George Hinton Laboratory Helper
George L. Hunnicutt Veterinarian II
Geneva C. Hunt Stenographer II
G. W. Ivey Poultry Specialist II
Evelyn M. Jernigan Stenographer II
R. Russell Jeter Veterinarian II
Austin R. Johnson _.. Veterinarian III
William W. Keever Livestock Inspector
James D. Kelley Poultry Specialist I
Irene K. Kilpatrick Laboratory Technician II
Mary L. Kinsaul Laboratory Technician II
Eunice G. Lipham Laboratory Technician II
Fred D. Long Poultry Specialist I
Paul C. Marley Poultry Specialist I
Oren D. Massey, Jr Poultry Specialist I
James R. Miller Veterinarian II
Lola S. Mitchell Stenographer II
CoRRiNE K. Murray Laboratory Technician II
Nadine R. Nesbit Laboratory Technician II
Christine B. Oliver Laboratory Technician III
Mary D. Owen Laboratory Technician II
Walter G. Pearson Veterinarian III
Peter S. Penland Poultry Specialist I
Herbert P. Perry ____ Poultry Siiecialist I
Franklin Peterson Laboratory Helper
Clifford W. Pittman Veterinarian III
Lucy D. Ponder Laboratory Technician III
Hugh M. Powell Veterinarian III
Othell H. Price Stenographer II
Verlin E. Reese... Poultry Specialist I
James U. Richardson Laboratory Helper
Terrell B. Ryan _ Veterinary Virologist
Phil R. Sandidge ....Poultry Specialist I
George W. Simpson Poultry Specialist I
Dixie D. Southard Poultry Specialist I
Report For 1960-62
—
Personnel 11
Wilton S. Thorp - Veterinarian III
Mary G. Van Horn Laboratory Technician II
Claude G. Wilkes..... Veterinarian III
Kenneth C. Wilkins Laboratory Helper
Theron S. Williams _. Veterinarian III
John R. Woody Poultry Specialist I
Thomas F. Zweigart, Jr Director Diagnostic Laboratories
Research Stations
Cecil D. Thomas Director of Research Stations
William W. Allen Administrative Officer I
Geraldine P. Narron Stenographer II
Elwood Arlington Allen Maintenance Man I
Fenner B. Harris Herdsman I
Jacqueline S. Harrison Stenographer I
J. L. Rea, Jr Farm Superintendent II
Norman E. Callahan Farm Foreman II
J. M. Carr Farm Superintendent II
Elizabeth Floyd Stenographer II
Joanne C. Hatton - — Typist II
Chester Kearney .,—.. Farm Hand
Alton E. Wood Agriculture Research Specialist IV
Susan D. Killebrew Stenographer I
Clyde Z. McSwain, Jr ._._ Farm Superintendent II
Robert M. Smith ...Farm Foreman II
Thilbert A. Suggs Agriculture Research Specialist IV
Randolph Whitley Herdsman I
Theodore R. Burleson, Jr Poultryman II
Rufus Curtis Dairyman
James R. Edwards .....Agriculture Research Supervisor II
Bernice H. Harrell Stenographer II
Garfield Harris Farm Foreman II
William C. Holder Dairyman
Murray R. Whisenhunt Farm Superintendent II
Lena M. Neaves Stenographer I
Gordon D. Sheets Farm Foreman II
Dan L. Taylor Herdsman I
Dana F. Tugman.... Farm Superintendent II
Ernest W. English ..Poultryman
Jacob B. Matthews Dairyman
Melvin G. Richert Dairyman
John Sasser, Jr Farm Foreman II
Jesse W. Sumner Farm Superintendent II
B. L. Williams Stenographer II
Warren H. Bailey Farm Superintendent II
Samuel J. Childs _ Agriculture Research Supervisor II
Ralph Lynn Howard Agriculture Research Assistant II
Anne Y. Lentz Stenographer II
Samuel McKee Miller, Jr Farm Foremean II
Homer G. Smith Dairyman
James C. Taylor Herdsman I
Charles H. Tomlin Dairyman
Clark Wesley Walker Agriculture Research Supervisor II
William B. Mallory _ Farm Foreman II
Julia L. Skinner Typist I
Millis B. Wright Farm Superintendent II
William K. Brock. Farm Foreman II
Wallace J. Dickens Farm Superintendent II
Ruth 0. Lane Typist I
12 N. C. Department of Agriculture
Weights and Measures
C. D. Baucom... Superintendent of Weights & Measures
John I. Moore Weights & Measures Inspection Supervisor
Cecil C. Abernathy ____ Heavy Duty Scale Inspector I
Walter R. Burnette ____ Heavy Duty Scale Inspector II
Grady F. Hall Weights & Measures Inspector
Robert R. Hyatt .__. Liquid Fertilizer Specialist
Marion L. Kinlaw, Jr __: Weights & Measures Inspector
Grover R. Kiser Weights & Measures Inspector
Flora G. Lee Stenographer II
Rufus A. Malloy Weights & Measures Inspector
Jerry L. Morris ___. Heavy Duty Scale Inspector I
Leroy S. Plyler Weights & Measures Inspector
Ned A. Powell Heavy Duty Scale Inspector II
Arline A. Rabil Stenogrpher II
William D. Taylor Weights & Measures Inspector
James M. Vestal, Jr __ Weights & Measures Inspector
Dan C. Worley _. Weights & Measures Inspector
Gordon S. Young Heavy Duty Scale Inspector
State Museum
H. T. Davis Museum Director
Ludie V. Ashe Maid
Julian W. Johnson __ Museum Exhibits Designer
Ernest R. Jones Janitor-Messenger
F. B. Meacham Zoologist
Julia Lyles Nowell Stenographer II
Sara D. Prince Clerk II
Custodial
Henry L. Hall Stock Clerk I
Robert Harris Stock Clerk I
Raleigh Farmers Market
James A. Graham Manager
Virginia P. Johnson Stenographer III
Gasoline and Oil Inspection
C. D. Baucom Superintendent of Weights & Measures and
Director of Gasoline and Oil
Josephine Aguirre Stenographer I
Carey Mooney Ashley ..Chemist I
Milton Barefoot Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Maddrey W. Bass Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Malver L. Boyette Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Glenn R. Cates Chemist I
Lonnie E. Cayton Calibrator
Harvey Clodfelter, Jr Chemist I
Jack C. Connolly, II Chemist I
Milton C. Converse ...Chemist II
Emerson B. Deese, Jr.____ _' Liquefied Gas Engineer
Joseph Denton Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Paul H. Etheridge Chemist I
Thomas P. Gore Chemist I
Roy B. Hallman ....Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Elliott Harrison.. Laboratory Helper
Report For 1960-62
—
Personnel 13
Hugh F. Hayes Chemist II
Horace E. Hekman .._. —.Calibrator
Connie B. Hines, Se Calibrator
Ira G. Holloway ._.. - Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Laura E. Hood Stenographer II
Edwin H. Hutchins _ Chemist II
Dorval T. Jones Chemist I
Herman L. Jones Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Samuel K. Kelly Chemist I
Richard W. King Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Gertrud Lake.. Accounting Clerk II
Curtis R. Lindsay .Gasoline d- Oil Inspector
Robert H. McArver __. .. Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Robert E. Mullen : ...Chemist I
W. T. O'Briant: Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Douglas M. Pait Gasoline & Oil Inspector
William H. Perry Calibrator
Edsel H. Privette Calibrator
Parley B. Rasmussen, Jr .....Chemist II
Clyde W. Reeves. Gasoline & Oil Inspector
James R. Rivers Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Lindsey H. Roeertson, Jr Liquefied Gas Inspector
Joseph C. Roebuck Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Milton H. Rowe, Sr — - Gasoline & Oil Inspector
H. L. Shankle . Chemist V
J. T. Shaw _____ Chemist II
Harry W. Shelton ...Chemist I
Ray D. Sigmon Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Koy S. Smith Gasoline <£ Oil Inspector
David S. Spivey .Calibrator
Betty Jean P. Strobel Stenographer II
Ralph G. Thornburg Chemist II
James E. Turpin Gasoline & Oil Inspector
Bobby W. Tuttle .___ Chemist I
Howard L. Woodlief Chemist I
Cooperative Inspection Service
Beulah B. Pearce Accounting Clerk II
Eldridge C. Price- Marketing Specialist III
Samuel G. Rand _ Marketing Specialist II
Egg Marketing Act
Stuart A. Glover, Jr Marketing Specialist III
Henry S. Kennett Marketing Specialist II
Frederick D. Rowe Marketing Specialist II
Sara P. Wells Stenographer II
State Warehol'se System Supervision
A. B. Fairley Warehouse System Superintendent
Hazel K. Cobb ....Clerk II
Frank C. Person _ Warehouse Examiner
Martha E. Swindell Stenographer II
Structural Pest Control Commission
Rudolph E. Howell Entomologist III
Norman R. Howell ._ Pest Control Inspector
Barbara F. King __ Stenographer I
14 N. C. Department of Agriculture
Credit Union Supervision
W. V. Didawick -.Credit Union Administrator
A. S. Bynum ...Fiscal Examiner II
Joseph M. Jones _. Fiscal Examiner II
Rodney C. Orndorff Fiscal Examiner II
Esther M. Parrish Stenographer II
Howard L. Pijahn Fiscal Examiner III
Billy W. Ray Fiscal Examiner I
Distribution of Surplus Commodities
Samuel T. Avera Food Distribution Supervisor
Gladys R. Dudley Stenographer III
Catherine S. Holden Typist II
James M. Hunter, Jr Warehouseman
Cecil L. Morris Warehouseman
Lanelle S. Phillips Accounting Clerk II
William C. Taylor Food Distribution Supervisor
Bobby G. Thompson Stock Clerk I
State Meat and Poultry Inspection
Earl W. Stapp State Supervisor, Meat <£ Poultry Inspection
William L. Abbott Veterinarian HI
Clarence B. Barker ..Meat & Poultry Inspector
Billy R. Bradshaw Meat & Poultry Inspector
Bobbie W. Brannan Stenographer II
William C. Buchanan Meat & Poultry Inspector
Algie D. Cobb .. _ Meat & Poultry Inspector
Lewis J. DeMarcus ..Meat & Poultry Inspector
Norman C. Eason Meat & Poultry Inspector
Harry K. Edmondson Veterinarian II
James R. Griffin Meat & Poultry Inspector
James F. Holcomb ___. Meat & Poultry Inspector
Cornelius W. Jonkheer Meat & Poultry Inspector
George M. Kerr Veterinarian II
Burt W. Larsen _ Veterinarian II
Edmond G. Massad .Meat & Poultry Inspector
Woodrow E. McGimsey Meat & Poultry Inspector
Edward B. Moore Meat & Poultry Inspector
Clare W. Nielsen Meat & Poultry Inspector
Alexander W. Outterbridge Meat <& Poultry Inspector
Fred R. Parrish .._. Meat & Poultry Inspector
James Robert Phillips Meat & Poultry Inspector
Harley W. Reason ___ __ Meat & Poultry Inspector
Nicholas F. Shine Meat & Poultry Inspector
Roy S. Staton ...Meat & Poultry Inspector
William H. Taylor Meat & Poultry Inspector
Joseph L. Thompson ._ .Meat & Poultry Inspector
Peggy R. Upchurch . Stenographer II
Grady M. Williamson.... __ Meat & Poultry Inspector
Richard C. Yarbrough Meat & Poultry Inspector
BIENNIAL REPORT
OP THE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
By L. Y. Ballentine
Commissioner of Agriculture
It is pertinent to begin this report with a quotation from the
1958-60 biennial report. After discussing the multiple "prob-lems
of progress" which came to a head during that two year
period, I wrote:
"We are not over the hump. Both regular and emergency de-mands
on the Department can be expected to increase in volume
and importance for some time to come. Certainly we can expect
new problems in the biennium ahead, added to those not yet
solved. Some will need handling by legislative amendment ; some
will necessitate regulatory action by the Board of Agriculture;
some will demand changed or expanded administrative proced-ures
; and some will require action at all three of these levels."
That "biennium ahead" is now immediately behind us, and
retrospect reveals no need for changing the statement then made
in prospect. Yet each biennium develops one or more distin-guishing
characteristics of its own, and two seem to be particu-larly
outstanding as they relate to the Department of Agricul-ture
in the 1960-62 biennium. One is the compounding of prob-lems
by reason of a tighter over-all economy. The other, closely
related to the first, is the increasingly acute awareness on the
part of Department personnel that its protective services must
be an unbroken chain all the way from raw materials to the ul-timate
consumer.
A tighter economy means keener competition and a scramble
to get onto the market with something "new" or a frenetic
manipulation of all kinds of sales gimmicks. Examples of some
of these kinds of problems which have confronted the Depart-ment
during this biennium include slack-filled packages, so-called
cream substitutes, watered hams, innumerable weight-reducing
products purported to be a complete diet in a can or a bottle,
and other items which suddenly appear on the grocer's shelves
bearing brand names but not the name of any identifiable food
product.
16 N. C. Department of Agriculture
In short, this age of science which has brought us so many
fine things, also makes it possible to exploit frivolous, use-less
or even harmful things which are extolled as being of great
new benefit to the human race. Of course, many products are
worthy of such claim, and many others are not intrinsically
harmful. Bui in the competitive race to get out something "new",
there is an increasing tendency to put products on the market
before they have been tested or approved by the authorities
legally responsible for doing so. Tight competition affects ad-vertising
concerns, too, both within and between agencies, creat-ing
an increasing tendency to make extravagant claims for old
and new products.
Whatever the state of the economy, however, the unbroken
chain of protection has become a permanent necessity in today's
world. If such a chain can be said to begin anywhere that begin-ning
is with the ultimate consumer. Indeed, most of the Depart-ment
of Agriculture's regulatory programs must now be aimed
directly, first and foremost at protecting the ultimate consumer
;
but this involves protecting also what might be called the primary
and middle consumers.
For instance, the farmer is a primary consumer of the ma-terials
of agricultural production—seeds, feeds, fertilizers,
pesticides and numerous other chemicals and materials. But
protecting the farmer from unsafe or ineffective materials of
production not only protects his economic position, it also pro-tects
the middle consumer—the processor of his production
—
from harmful residues in food or feed crops, from low quality or
scarcity of the products he processes, and in many other ways.
Then the Department's protective responsibilities move into the
processing plant, checking on its sanitation and the wholesome-ness
of its output. But service and protection cannot stop there.
For the ultimate consumer, that first and last link in the chain,
the Department checks the finished product in retail trade
channels—its wholesomeness, the truthfulness of its labeling, the
accuracy of its weight or measure and many other factors of
health or economic importance. And the benefits of these ser-vices
pass back through the chain to the processor and farmer.
No one segment can be singled out as having an exclusive in-terest
in the protective measures.
These factors have increased both the quantity and complexity
of the Department's service and regulatory work. Indeed, it is
almost impossible to draw a line between the service and regu-
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 17
latory functions. It is always our desire to protect the con-sumer
without inhibiting progress. Therefore, the Department
must be increasingly alert to what is going on in every area of
its responsibilities and find ways to work with the industries
serving both farmers and consumers to help them meet reason-able
standards while still protecting the consumer.
Many of the problems which have had to be dealt with during
this biennium have involved both an economic hazard and a
potential health hazard to the consumers.
Packages, slack-filled or so formed in such a way as to deceive
the consumer regarding the amount of product he is getting for
his money, involves of course only economics. And this is a
matter that came to a head during this biennium primarily as a
result of tightening competition. When the Weights and Mea-sures
Division put on an intensive program to get packaged
materials in line with the law most of the industries involved
welcomed this move. This well illustrates that when the con-sumer
is protected the industries involved are also protected
—
that when one or two members of an industry get out of line
others are forced by competition to get out of line until finally
deceptive or fraudulent merchandising is the rule, rather than
the exception.
Both health and economics are involved in administrative and
regulatory measures concerning certain so-called cream sub-stitutes
and many kinds of weight-reducing or dietary products
which have come on the market. The former have been offer-ed
to the market under a variety of brand names and not bear-ing
the name of any food or dairy product which has been de-fined
and for which standards have been set. Some are offered
to be retailed in liquid form, displayed in dairy cases, and pack-aged
in containers like those customarily used for cream or milk.
Others are in powdered form for mixing with water. In
restaurants, where they may be held or mixed under insanitary
conditions and served at the table in unlabeled containers, the
consumer may not only be defrauded but may be subjected to
the hazard of high bacterial count. This is a matter that could
be tackled administratively under existing laws and regulations,
but it has severely taxed the personnel of the Dairy Division.
For new dairy products offered as weight reducing diets, it has
been necessary to draw regulations which would protect the
consumer's pocketbook from high priced products making ex-travagant
claims for their effectiveness. Warnings against their
18 N. C. Department of Agriculture
use as a total diet without a doctor's supervision had to be in-corporated
in the labeling. And the inspection and analytical
work has to be extremely careful to assure that all the vitamins
and minerals claimed to be in the product are actually there.
Changes in farm production and marketing patterns have
come on rapidly and will continue. These require keeping a
sharp eye on laws and regulations designed to protect the farm-er.
In the past, for instance, farmers bought their feeds and
fertilizers in bags. These could be inspected at the dealer's
place of business and samples forwarded to the Department's
Raleigh laboratory for analysis. Now a good part of the ferti-lizer
moves directly from the factory to the farmer's field. Much
is applied to the land in the delivery equipment and is not
stored anywhere between the factory and the soil. Feed is haul-ed
in bulk directly from the feed plant to the farmer's feeding
equipment; much of it under contract-feeding arrangements
whereby both the farmer and the feed manufacturer have a
stake in its quality, but from different standpoints. These
changes pose inspection problems.
Inspection programs, too, seem to have entered into an "eco-nomic"
phase and are, unfortunately, being appraised too much
on the basis of their cost instead of the value of the inspection
itself. At all times, and most especially in this time of exceed-ingly
keen competition, it would be extremely short-sighted to
permit changed merchandising methods to move the farmer away
from some of the long-time safeguards provided for his benefit
merely because the changes involve broader or more complicated
inspection services. Instead laws and regulations should be kept
abreast of these changes. This is not said for the purpose of pro-moting
distrust between farmers and the industries supplying
them with the materials of production. Rather it is intended
as a reminder that, like the case of slack-filled packages, only one
or two people intentionally cutting corners can, through compe-tition,
force others to cut corners until a generally bad situation
prevails, even though the large majority of the industries gen-uinely
desire to do right by their customers.
Inspection programs must also be geared to meet the unex-pected
hazards of progress. One such which the department
has had to deal with during this biennium is that of treated seed.
The treatment of seed with mercurials and other highly toxic
substances is now an almost universal practice. This is of great
benefit to farmers in preventing fungus and other diseases in
20 N. C. Department of Agriculture
their crops. But it presents hazards which have had to be dealt
with in a variety of ways. Regulations had to be adopted to pro-vide
for cautionary labeling of such seed, so that farmers and
others handling it will not inadvertently expose themselves to
danger. A continuing publicity campaign has had to be conduct-ed
to warn against holding left-over treated seed in unlabeled
containers or mingling it with feed for livestock. The depart-ment's
feed and food inspectors have had to exercise the utmost
vigilance to see that poison treated seed does not get into feed
and food products. It was even necessary to install special
equipment in the department's seed laboratory to protect analysts
from poison in the seed they test for purity and germination.
During the biennium covered by this report, too, it was dis-covered
that the seed of crotalaria, long grown as a cover crop,
was highly poisonous to livestock and humans. This has neces-sitated
an intensive program, both regulatory and educational,
to protect farmers from economic losses and consumers from
health hazards.
New Programs
One of the most important programs launched by the depart-ment
in its entire history is the compulsory inspection of meat
and poultry made possible by the 1961 General Assembly. This
program is moving off in an orderly and satisfactory manner.
Although the mandatory provisions of the laws did not become
effective until July 1, 1962, much preliminary work was neces-sary
to get the program under way. As this report is written
the inspection service has been provided for 36 meat slaughter-ing
plants, 36 meat processing plants and four poultry plants.
The preliminary work vividly revealed how greatly this man-datory
inspection was needed, particularly as it relates to plant
sanitation. The program is discussed in more detail in the Vet-erinary
Division chapter of this report. It is sufficient to say here
that this is another program, which, though aimed at the protec-tion
of ultimate consumers, will be of benefit also to both the
growers and processors of products for consumers.
Another act of the 1961 General Assembly which is of im-portant
benefit to both farmers and consumers was the purchase
of the Farmers Market at Raleigh. This facility, purchased by
the department as of July 1, 1961, is being paid for and operated
at no expense to taxpayers. It is noteworthy that after starting
without any funds, the market came to the end of its first year
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 21
of operation as a wholly state-owned facility having not only
paid out of its revenue the first installment and interest on its
purchase, a sum amounting to $25,509, but also for numerous
repairs and some additions. When the department purchased
the market there were 20 shed units for use by farmers. During
the past year 58 more have been constructed, making a total of
78.
This market has meant much, and can mean considerably
more to farmers and the economy of North Carolina. There are
four essentials for the success of such a market: (1) Facilities,
(2) management, (3) purchasing power, and (4) volume and
quality of produce. There will probably be need to add to this
market's facilities in the future but, for the time being, these
are reasonably sufficient. The market has good management.
It has more buying power than it has been able to satisfy with
quality products. Thus, the biggest need is for the farmers of
North Carolina to realize that here is a market for quality pro-duce
that will justify their making the effort to grow it. This
is one of the higher priced markets on the eastern seaboard and
our agricultural economy is missing a golden opportunity by not
taking full advantage of it.
In addition to the compulsory poultry and meat inspection
laws are other new programs initiated in this biennium which af-fect
both the producer and consumer of meat and livestock pro-ducts.
One of the most important of these was expansion of
facilities at the large animal diagnostic laboratory to take care
of virus disease diagnoses and also to incorporate in the same
facilities the poultry diagnostic work which had been operating
in "borrowed" quarters at State College.
A law enacted by the 1961 General Assembly which is of im-portance
to the State's increasing poultry industry was one re-quiring
an approved disposal pit or incinerator on commercial
poultry farms for the disposition of poultry which die of some
disease. The purpose of this law is to prevent the spread of
disease from one poultry flock to another.
A special appropriation granted by the 1961 General As-sembly
has enabled the cotton fiber testing laboratory to pro-vide
both expanded facilities and the personnel for processing
a larger volume of cotton samples. A preamble to the bill ap-propriating
these funds pointed out that "The State of North
Carolina could, with expanded facilities, improve cotton mar-keting
potential by having an adequate scientific appraisal of
22 N. C. Department of Agriculture
when, where and why cotton lint produced in North Carolina
in inferior in quality and could take correct measures and could
keep cotton mills and merchants fully informed of the superior
qualities of cotton if adequate funds were provided for the
modernization and expansion of the services of the Fiber Test-ting
Laboratory of the Markets Division of the State Depart-ment
of Agriculture."
While this special appropriation is very small, $3,400, it has
greatly enhanced the value of the cotton fiber laboratory's ser-vice
to the cotton growers and the cotton industry in this state.
A new product requiring legislative attention during the
biennium was the so-called "fortified" mulch, which came on
the market with the claim that it contained added plant foods.
It was necessary, therefore, to amend the Fertilizer Law to de-fine
such products and to provide for their registration and in-spection.
This is typical of the many new things that require
constant alertness on the part of the department.
In a samewhat similar category was the need for bringing
frozen dessert mixes under the ice cream law, which was done
by the Legislature in 1961. This was necessitated by the sharp
increase in the number of "soft-serve" establishments which
dispense semi-frozen desserts from the freezers for immediate
consumption. This type of operation involves preparation of
mixes in dairy plants for delivery to the soft-serve freezing
establishments.
New Legislation Needed
Of vital interest to the state's agricultural and over all econo-my
is the federal legislation designed to eradicate hog cholera.
With all-out state cooperation there is no reason why a crash
program for the eradication of hog cholera cannot be as success-ful
as similar programs have been in eradicating brucellosis,
vesicular exanthema, tuberculosis and other costly animal
diseases. Funds for North Carolina's participation in this pro-gram
are being requested in the department's budget for the
1963-65 biennium. For this important program a total of $179,-
958 is being requested for the two years of the biennium. With
matching federal funds this hog cholera eradication program
can mean literally millions of dollars to the economy of North
Carolina.
North Carolina's participation in the expanded food distri-bution
program for needy families involved the department's
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 23
commodity distribution section in sharply increased activities.
Details of this program are reported in the commodity distribu-tion
section of the Markets Division chapter of this report. How-ever,
it is pertinent to point out here that this expansion makes
increasingly acute the need for a new storage warehouse in Ra-leigh,
funds for which have been requested, but denied by each
legislature for the past 10 years. The urgency of this need cannot
be too strongly stated. The rented storage facilities at Butner
are not only inadequate but are unsafe and unsuitable for the
proper storage of food. Yet, not only is this program growing in
importance to the state through the increasing volume of foods
handled for schools, charitable institutions and needy families,
but also in many other ways. For instance, food supplies stored
in the state are available when disaster strikes, as was the case
when a freak storm devastated coastal counties last March, and
are also vitally important to our civil defense program. The
warehouse at Butner was constructed as a temporary building
during World War II. It is rapidly disintegrating and it is just
a matter of a short time before it will be altogether unusable.
Activities of the Administrative Offices
In the spring of 1961 a most important agricultural program
was launched in the state. Known as the Agricultural Opportuni-ties
Program, this project has had the full and aggressive sup-port
of Governor Sanford. What might be termed a blueprint for
the program was prepared by the North Carolina Board of Farm
Organizations and Agricultural Agencies. The three major ob-jectives
are
(1) To lift the farm income.
(2) Develop marketing and processing facilities.
(3) To promote education for family and community develop-ment.
The program calls for tackling farm income and marketing
problems on the basis of economic areas, rather than on the basis
of county or community enterprises alone, and a more total ap-proach
toward full development of both human and physical re-sources.
The Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner, as well as
many of the Department of Agriculture's division heads and
staff members, have been actively participating in this program,
attending meetings and helping to formulate projects for im-
24 N. C. Department of Agriculture
plementing it, as well as working directly for its implementation
in the various areas of the department's responsibilities.
North Carolina's progress places greater demands on all its
state officials to participate in coordinated activities at both the
state and federal levels. Currently the Commissioner of Agri-culture
for North Carolina is First Vice President and a member
of the Executive Committee and Chairman of the Transportation
Committee of the National Association of State Departments of
Agriculture; a member of the U. S. Department of Agriculture
Advisory Committee on Cooperative Work under the Agricul-tural
Marketing Act with the State Departments of Agriculture.
In the state he is a member of the Board of Directors of the
Agricultural Foundation of North Carolina State College, a mem-ber
of the Cotton Promotion Committee, the North Carolina
Board of Farm Organizations and Agencies, and Chairman of the
North Carolina Committee on Migrant Labor. He is also a mem-ber
of the Governor's Council on Occupational Health, the Gov-ernor's
Commission on Educational Television, the Governor's
Emergency Resource Planning Committee, the North Carolina
Council on Foods and Nutrition, the North Carolina Veterinary
School Selection Committee, the Board of Directors of North
Carolina Rural Rehabilitation Corporation, the Executive Com-mittee
of the North Carolina Council of Community and Area
Development, and Chairman of the Army Advisory Committee.
By legislation he is Chairman of the State Board of Agricul-ture,
and the State Board of Gasoline and Oil Inspection, and the
Board of Directors of the North Carolina Agricultural Hall of
Fame; a member of the North Carolina Milk Commission, the
Crop Seed Improvement Board and the Atomic Energy Advisory
Committee.
Certain laws also provide for participation of department per-sonnel
in the work of other state agencies. Under such a law,
Dr. W. H. Darst, head of the department's Seed Testing Division
is a member of the Crop Seed Improvement Board.
The Structural Pest Commission law provides for the appoint-ment
of a member of the department's Entomology Division
staff and another member representing the department at large.
Since its organization in 1955, Assistant Commissioner of Agri-culture
John L. Reitzel has been the appointee representing the
department at large, and since July 19, 1959, he has been secre-tary
to the Commission. J. A. Harris is the entomology division's
representative.
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 25
The Assistant Commissioner of Agriculture also represents the
department on the Animal Nutrition Committee at N. C. State
College.
All of these, and many other cooperative activities on the part
of the administrative staff, are essential to the effectiveness of
this department in carrying out its responsibilities.
Work assigned to the various divisions of this department is
described in chapters of this report prepared by division heads.
However, activities under several laws placed under the admin-istration
of the Commissioner of Agriculture are not covered in
other chapters. It is proper, therefore, that they should be re-ported
here.
One such law provides for the licensing and regulation of ren-dering
plants operating in this state. Unlike most laws admin-istered
by this department, authority to adopt regulations is not
placed with the Board of Agriculture, but with the Commissioner
of Agriculture acting with the advice of a rendering plant in-spection
committee. Composition of the committee is specified
by law to be "one member who shall be designated by the Com-missioner
of Agriculture and who shall be an employee of the
Department of Agriculture, one member who shall be designated
by the State Health Director and who shall be an employe
of the State Board of Health, and one member who shall be
designated by the Director of the North Carolina Division of the
Southeastern Renders Association." Dr. H. J. Rollins, State
Veterinarian, has been the Deparment of Agriculture member
designated to serve on this committee since it was organized in
1953. Other members are Dr. Martin P. Hines, veterinarian with
the N. C. Department of Health, and Joe Suggs of Rocky Mount,
representing the Southeastern Renderers Association.
There are now 14 rendering plants licensed to operate in the
state. All of these are inspected by members of the committee
at least once, some several times, each year to ensure continued
compliance with the law and regulations.
A law enacted in 1949 providing for supervision of all agri-cultural
fairs in the state is administered directly by the Com-missioner
of Agriculture. There are no funds appropriated for
its enforcement and the inspection work is "farmed out" among
qualified department personnel. This arrangement has worked
out very well, so far, and the law has done much to eliminate
abuse of the name "fair" by undesirable fly-by night carnivals
and tent shows. Under the law, only bona fide agricultural and
26 N. C. Department of Agriculture
industrial expositions may use the name "fair", and those classi-fied
as commercial (charging admission or operating traveling
shows or games) must be licensed by the Commissioner of Agri-culture.
To obtain such license, the fairs must meet minimum
standards adopted by the Board of Agriculture. There were 74
fairs licensed in the state in 1960 and 76 in 1961.
At the beginning of this biennium plans had been completed on
a shrine for the Agricultural Hall of Fame which was created by
a law enacted in 1953. However, just as work was about to start
it was learned that the North Carolina State Employee's Credit
Union, which had been housed in the Agriculture Building, was
going to construct a building of its own. Moving some depart-ment
offices into that space would make available a more suit-able
room for the Hall of Fame than originally planned, so work
on the shrine was halted. In the late spring of 1962 the State
Employees' Credit Union moved into its new quarters. As soon
as the vacated space can be remodeled for department offices
the Hall of Fame shrine will be constructed.
A number of farm commodity groups continue to avail them-selves
of legislation permitting voluntary self-help assessments.
Any such assessment must be approved by a two-thirds majority
in a referendum authorized by the State Board of Agrictulture
to be held by the association it certifies to be fairly representa-tive
of the growers of the commodity to be assessed. The assess-ments
are for the purpose of raising funds to promote the use
and sale of the commodities assessed. A provision of the law
allows an association the privilege of requesting the Commis-sioner
of Agriculture to collect the assessments for it, and a num-ber
of associations have chosen this method. Collections are
made by the Commissioner and handled throug the department's
Accounts Division. Total assessment funds collected and turned
over to the authorized associations during this biennium were as
follows
:
North Carolina Peanut Growers Association $108,900
North Carolina Cotton Promotion Association 47,800
North Carolina Cattlemen's Association 55,000
North Carolina Peach Growers Society, Inc. 10,600
N. C. Poultry Council, Inc. 95,500
N. C. Sweet Potato Association, Inc. (9 months) ____ 18,000
The assessments have proved an effective tool in the promo-tional
work of these and other commodity associations, and
many of them have been overwhelmingly approved in several
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 27
referendums. The law provides that continuance of assessments
must be approved by a two-thirds majority in referendums held
at three-year intervals.
One of the state's most important self-assessment programs
is that popularly known as "Nickels for Know-How". It derived
this nickname from the fact that the assessment is five cents a
ton on all commercial feed and fertilizer purchased by the farm-ers
of this state, and the funds are used to supplement agricul-tural
research. Since enabling legislation was enacted in 1951
the farmers of this state have enthusiastically endorsed this vol-untary
levy in four referendums. The law provides that the
referendums shall be conducted jointly by the governing boards
of the North Carolina Farm Bureau Federation, the North Caro-lina
State Grange and the North Carolina Agricultural Founda-tion,
Inc., with the approval of the State Board of Agriculture.
It also stipulates that the assessment shall be collected by the
Commissioner of Agriculture along with feed and fertilizer in-spection
taxes and remitted by him to the North Carolina Agri-cultural
Foundation. The Foundation, in turn, allots the funds
where needed to supplement or support needed agricultural re-search
and dissemination of research findings. During this
biennium "Nickels For Know-How" collected and turned over
to the Foundation totaled $337,317.80. The "Nickels" have done
much to help bring our farmers the "know-how" essential for
their adjustment to the "technological revolution."
Personnel Changes
On April 17, 1961 the department suffered the loss by death
of Dr. J. Sibley Dorton who for 25 years had served as manager
of the North Carolina State Fair. Dr. Dorton had a rare com-bination
of qualities which had enabled him to bring the Fair
to a position of pre-eminence in the southeast and make it one
of the outstanding exhibitions in the nation. He was an able
administrator, had an innate talent for showmanship and un-bounded
energy. His talent for making the greatest showing
for the minimum expenditure was a key factor in achieving the
Fair's pre-eminence while at the same time keeping it one of the
few state fairs in the nation operating on its own revenues with-out
tax fund appropriations. Finding someone to fill this very
large "pair of shoes" could not be rushed. Over the years there
had been close collaboration between the Fair manager and the
Commissioner, and this, combined with the fine organization
28 N. C. Department of Agriculture
Dr. Dorton left, has made it possible for the Commissioner to
direct the Fair and carry forward its tradition of success, pro-gress
and expansion. This arrangement will continue until the
position of manager has been filled.
In the loss of other key personnel by retirement or resignation,
the department has been fortunate in having capable staff mem-bers
available for on-the-job promotion. While loss to the depart-ment
of these capable and experienced people could be viewed
only with deep regret by the administration, it is, nevertheless,
a source of satisfaction to have on the staff capable, ready-trained
people to fill the vancancies.
C. W. Pegram, for 25 years head the department's Dairy Divi-sion,
elected to retire at the close of this biennium. His con-scientious
diligence has carried this division through the years of
North Carolina's phenomenal dairy industry expansion and the
growing number of regulatory problems involved in increased
technology in dairying and dairy products. Francis Patterson
who became head of the Dairy Division as of July 1, 1962 had
been for 15 years on Mr. Pegram's staff and for much of that time
had been assistant head of the Dairy Division. His experience
before coming to the department included 17 years as milk sani-tarian
with the City of Rocky Mount Health Department and
nearly four years as field representative in quality control work
with Southern Dairies in Atlanta, Georgia. He attended the
School of Public Health at the University of North Carolina. He
is respected throughout the dairy industry both in North Caro-lina
and surrounding states, for his ability and for his fine spirit
of cooperation in helping to overcome the many technical prob-lems
involved in this industry.
Fred P. Johnson, who for 24 years had headed the cotton and
engineering section of the department's Division of Marketing
retired in the spring of 1961. No other single person has done
more for the cotton industry of North Carolina than Fred John-son.
For him no hours were too long or task too difficult. He
regarded each technical problem as a challenge and never rested
until he solved it. Johnson's position was filled by H. A. Smith
who had been working under Johnson for a number of years.
Smith's own ability and personality, combined with his experi-ence
working under Fred Johnson, had made him a worthy suc-cessor
to this position. However, within a year after his appoint-ment
to this post Smith resigned to go into food processing work
in the Commerce and Industry Section of the N. C. Department
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 29
of Conservation and Development. Charles B. Elks who had
been working under Smith was named head of the section on
July 3, 1962. Elks has been with the Department of Agriculture
since 1959, first as a marketing specialist in the poultry and egg
section. He had transferred to the engineering section in 1961.
He holds a B. S. Degree in Agricultural Education from N. C.
State College and his experience includes seven years as voca-tional
agriculture teacher at Pantego High School and two years
as a county supervisor for the Farmers' Home Administration.
In January, 1961, O. W. Faison, who had headed the Marketing
Division's grain section for seven years resigned to accept a
position with Selective Service. He was succeeded by William
E. Lane who for six years had worked under Faison as a grain
marketing specialist. Faison had done an outstanding job dur-ing
years when North Carolina's sharply expanding grain pro-duction
placed a great strain on the limited staff of this section.
Equally outstanding has been the work performed by Lane since
he succeeded Faison. Lane is also a graduate of North Carolina
State College with a B. S. Degree in Agricultural Education.
These promotions within the ranks are significant of the
generally high caliber of employees in the department, indicating
the fine administrative ability of those they succeeded and the
generally conscientious devotion to duty which prevails in the
department's personnel. It is not only gratifying to have people
ready to step into the shoes of extremely able personnel which
the department must lose in the natural course of events, it is
also a financial saving to the state, since there is naturally an
investment in on-the-job training which must be given to any
completely new employee.
During this biennium, as has been true in all bienniums in re-cent
years, the department's resources have been stretched to
meet increasing demands and in many instances its human re-sources
have been stretched the farthest. The administration of
the department and the people of North Carolina owe a debt of
gratitude to many staff members at all levels who have volun-tarily
and willingly given every ounce of their energies to meet-ing
the demands.
State Board of Agriculture
The Board of Agriculture is the regulatory and policy making
body for the Department of Agriculture. Its membership cur-
E o
0) o "£
(A 0)
0)
Q£
4* o o o
u
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 31
rently, and by long tradition, represents the finest kind of in-telligent
agricultural leadership and dedicated public service.
The Board consists of ten members appointed by the Gover-nor
for six-year terms of office. However, the law provides for
staggered terms, so that not all expire at one time, and requires
that the members shall be active farmers, representing the major
sections and types of agriculture in the state.
The multiplying problems of progress place commensurately
heavier burdens upon this Board. Regulatory provisions on which
they must pass increase in complexity and in number. The Board
members are all busy farmers and businessmen, active in many
civic affairs at community and state level. Except for a nominal
pay for days actually in session or traveling on business for the
Board, their only compensation is the knowledge that they are
serving their state and their nation. Yet they give without stint
of their time and talents to the business of the Board not only in
formal sessions but in travel and other activities to further the
interest of the Department and North Carolina Agriculture.
Beginning on the following page is a summary of matters
brought before the Board in sessions totaling 13 days during this
biennium. This gives some idea of the duties and responsibility
of this truly "working" Board.
HIGHLIGHTS OF BOARD MEETINGS
1960-1962 Biennium
October 10, I960
Raleigh
Licensing
Seed Cleaners
Warehouse Loan
High Fiber
Poultry Feed
Rice Hulls in
Feeds
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, W. I. Bissette, Glenn G-.
Gilmore, Hoyle C. Griffin. Claude T. Hall, George P.
Kittrell, J. Muse McCotter, Charles F. Phillips, J. H.
Poole, A. B. Slagle.
Received report from W. H. Darst, head of the Seed
Testing Division, on possibility of controlling illegal
sale of N. 2 Lespedeza seed by licensing seed cleaners,
and recommended, Dr. Darst and committee continue
study of the inferior seed problem, to report again at the
next meeting of The Board.
Approved loan from Warehouse Fund of $7,500 to Farm-ers
Cotton Warehouse, Inc., Wagram, N. C. for expansion
of its warehouse.
Held public hearing on content of high fiber feeds for
pullets and young turkey hens, and voted unamiously
to extend the regulation governing it for another year.
Heard manufacturer's request that rice hulls be per-mitted
for use in feeds, and authorized a committee to
study the use of rice fiber in feeds.
Bottling Citrus in Held scheduled public hearing on a proposal to amend
Plants
A MUk regulations to permit bottling of non-carbonated and
artificial fruit drinks in Grade A milk plants. The hear-ing
was continued to the next meeting of the Board.
Fortified Skim
Milk
Rural Road
Identification
Right-of-Way
Agreement
Heard informal proposals by industry: (1) To add forti-fied
(vitamin-mineral) skim milk to definitions in regu-lations
and permission to raise percentage of solids
in skim milk; and (2) To establish definitions and
standards for a dietary modified milk to be sold as a re-ducing
diet. The Board referred these matters to an
authorized committee, its findings to be presented at a
future scheduled public hearing.
Endorsed a request to petition the Highway Commission
to continue using signs naming rural roads in addition
to a numerical sign system.
Approved right-of-way across old Piedmont Test Farm
in Statesville to the Highway Commission.
Peach Referendum Heard summary of votes cast in the Peach Referendum
Report favoring assessment.
November 21, i960 Present: J. Atwell Alexander, W. I. Bissette, Glenn G.
Rale '9 h Gilmore, Claude T. Hall, George P. Kittrell, J. Muse
McCotter, Charles F. Phillips, J. H. Poole.
Audit for Year Received for study report on audit of the North Caro-lina
Department of Agriculture from Mrs. Grace H.
Malloy.
Pesticide- Held scheduled public hearing on regulations governing
Fertilizer Mixes pesticide-fertilizer mixtures and pentachloronitroben-zene—
landplaster mixtures. Adopted regulations gov-erning
mixtures permitted to be sold until July 1, 1961.
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 33
Illegal Sales of
Lespedeza Seed
Heard report of committee's study of problems in policing
illegal sales of lespedeza seed, and recommended that the
study continue, the committee reporting to the Board
at its next meeting.
Prohibit Sale of Heard and approved administrative measures to pro-
Grain Containing n ibit sai e f grain containing crotalaria in excess of that
permitted by the federal government.
December 19, I960
Raleigh
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, W. I. Bissette, Glenn G.
Gilmore, Claude T. Hall, J. Muse McCotter, Charles F.
Phillips, J. H. Poole and A. B. Slagle.
Bottling Citrus Held public hearing on bottling of citrus and other fruit
F^t^Driifk ^!
61 drinks in dairy plants. Board elected to permit dairy
Dairy Plants plants to continue citrus and fruit drink operation un-til
an appointed committee could work out standards for
presentation to Board.
Fortified Grade A In a public hearing approved dairy regulations defini-
™-i?
un
»
e£»^Uk tion to provide skimmed milk with added solids to con-
With Added , . , , ,. 1A .., ,., , - ,
Solids tain not less than 10 percent milk solids-not-fat.
Dietary Modified
Milk
Held public hearing and adopted regulations permitting
sale of dietary modified milk for six-month period.
Counter ice Cream Held public bearing and adopted regulations permitting
Freezers installation of counter ice cream freezers to be used in
food preparation rooms where griddles and warmers are
provided with specific adequate ventilation.
Crotalaria
—
In a public hearing amended Seed Regulations, pro-
Prohibited Nox- hitated noxious weed seed list, to include crotalaria when iimoiu<s2 W\Veoepdn SSpeperdi
Warehouse Loan
Foreclosure
it is found in other crop seed.
Voted to authorize the Commissioner to complete fore-closure
on property securing loan from Warehouse Fund
to Traywick & Traywick, Albemarle. N. C.
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, W. I. Bissette, Glenn C.
Gilmore. Hoyle C. Griffin, Claude T. Hall, J. Muse Mc-
Cotter, Charles F. Phillips, J. H. Poole, A. B. Slagle.
Held a public hearing and adopted regulations and
standards for non-carbonated citrus juices and fruit
flavored drinks bottled in Grade A milk plants.
Voted to release a portion of land securing mortgage
for Warehouse Loan at Sandhills Bonded Warehouse at
Southern Pines.
Approved warehouse loan of $50,000 to Moyock Trading
Co., Inc., for construction of 32,000 bushels of grain
storage.
Confirmed earlier approval of lease of warehouse space
at Salisbury for storage of commodity distribution foods
for needy persons.
Feed Law Endorsed recommended changes in feed law to permit
rice hulls and some other materials to be used in feed-ing
stuffs, and to require registration of feeds used by
contract feeders.
Meat and Poultry Endorsed proposed compulsory meat and poultry in-spection
spection legislation pending in the General Assembly.
April 17, I96I
Raleigh
Xon-carbonated
Drinks Bottled
in Dairy Plants
Release of Land
Warehouse Loan
Lease of Food
Storage Space
34 N. C. Department of Agriculture
June I, 1961
Raleigh
Fertilizer Grade
List
Fertilizer-
Pesticide List
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, W. I. Bissette, Glenn G.
Gilmore, Hoyle C. Griffin, Claude T. Hall, J. Muse Mc-
Cotter, Charles F. Phillips and J. H. Poole.
After a public hearing, adopted Fertilizer Grade List
from previous year without changes.
Held public hearing and adopted pesticide-fertilizer list
for 1961-62.
Labeling of Colored After a public hearing amended regulations governing
Fertilizer fertilizers to require labeling where artificial coloring
agents are added to mixed fertilizers.
June 2, 1961
Raleigh
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, W. I. Bissette, Glenn G.
Gilmore, Hoyle C. Griffin, Claude. T. Hall. J. Muse Mc-
Cotter, Charles F. Phillips and J. H. Poole.
State Fair Audit Heard report on audit of 19 60 State Fair.
Bottling Lemonade Held public hearing and amended Food and Drug regu-rn
Grade A Dairy
]ations to permit bottling of lemonade in Grade A dairy
plants.
Frozen Dietary
Modified Milk
After a public hearing, amended dairy regulations to per-mit
manufacture and sale of frozen dietary modified
milk.
Right-of-Way at Recommended grant of easement for right-of-way to
Oxford station the state Highway Commission at the Oxford Tobacco
Research Station.
July 12, 1961
Raleigh
New Members
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, Thomas O. Gilmore, Hoyle
C. Griffin, Claude T. Hall, Thomas G. Joyner, Charles F.
Phillips, J. H. Poole, David Townsend.
New Board Members Thomas G. Joyner, Thomas O. Gil-more
and David Townsend were welcomed.
Sweet Potato
Referendum
Heard petition and approved North Carolina Sweet Po-tato
Association, Inc., as duly authorized agent to conduct
referendum on the question of assessment on commercial
sweet potato growers for purposes of promotion.
August 14, 1961
Raleigh
Presents: J. Atwell Alexander, Thomas O. Gilmore, Hoyle
C. Griffin, Claude T. Hall, Thomas G. Joyner, Charles F.
Phillips, J. H. Poole, A. B. Slagle and David Townsend.
Warehouse Loan Tentatively approved a loan from the Warehouse Fund
to the E. B. Grain Company, Inc., to increase its grain
storage capacity provided sufficient drying accomodation
was provided, the amount of the loan to be fixed at the
Board's next meeting.
Right-of-Way
Easement
Approved granting to Highway Commission a right-of-way
easement at the Oxford Tobacco Research Station
for a county road across the Station.
Calcium Carbonate After a public hearing, approved amendments to Feed
tr^Peed™ Weed Regulations gaverning percentage of calcium carbonate
and Poisonous in poultry feeds; and adding poisonous seeds and viable
Seeds seeds non-poisonous to list of ingredients not permitted
included in commercial feeding stuff for sale.
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 35
Poison-treated
Seed
Dietary Modified
Milk
Held a public hearing on labeling seed treated with
substances harmful to humans and other vertebrate
animals, approving amendments of seed regulations to
make them consistent with federal regulations.
Held public hearing continuing in effect dairy regulation
permitting manufacture and sale of dietary modifier!
milk until February 15, 1962.
Quiescently Frozen After public hearing, adopted amendments to the dairy
Confections regulations setting definitions for quiescently frozen
products.
Held a public hearing on counter-freezer installations,
and approved amendment to the dairy regulations re-quiring
inspection certificate before installation.
In a public hearing adopted amendment to dairy regu-lations
permitting sale of ice milk in % pint containers.
Counter-Freezer
Installations
Ice Milk
Containers
Commercial Weigh- Adopted amendments to weights and measures regula-ing
and Meas- tions to provide consistency, with some exceptions, to urmg Devices „ , n , * , , , , .
.
federal standards and regulations.
Railroad Encroach- Approved the grant of encroachment agreement to Alex-ment
at states- an(j er County Railroad for spur track along property
owned by the Department of Agriculture at Statesville.
Garbage-fed^ Swine Held public hearing and adopted rewriting of veterinary
ease aiea^ures
1S" re§ula tions government movement, sale and quarantine
of garbage-fed swine; and rewriting of regulations con-cerning
Bang's Disease to conform with federal regu-lations.
Land Purchase at Approved purchase of 20.6 acres of land and dwelling
Piedmont Station
^ ^ e a^ed t property adjacent to poultry testing area
as "buffer strip" to control disease contamination from
neighboring flocks.
October 16, 1961
Raleigh
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, Thomas O. Gilmore,
Claude T. Hall. Thomas G. Joyner, Charles F. Phillips,
J. H. Poole, A. B. Slagle, David Townsend.
Mexican Secretary Julian Rodriguez Adame, Mexican Secretary of Agricul-of
Agriculture ture met with the Board and as their guest visited the
State Fair.
Warehouse Loan
State Fair
Approved loan of $28,000 from the warehouse fund to
E. B. Grain Company of Battleboro.
Participated in ceremonies opening 19 62 State Fair and
dedication of Arena to late Fair Manager J. S. Dorton.
Inspected Fair.
January 29, 1962
Raleigh
Warehouse Loan
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, Thomas O. Gilmore, Hoyle
C. Griffin, Claude T. Hall, Thomas G. Joyner, Charles F.
Phillips, J. H. Poole, A. B. Slagle, David Townsend.
Approved a warehouse loan of $112,500 to Laurinburg
Milling Co., or half the cost of a grain storage facility,
whichever is less, pending availability of funds and sub-ject
to approval of plans by the Board.
Food Distribution Adopted resolution permitting Commissioner to lease
Warehouse Lease space on a continuing basis for storage of foods at Salis-bury
for distribution to needy persons.
36 N. C. Department of Agriculture
Space Rental at Approved lease of space at Farmers Market formerly
Farmers Market uged ag barber shop.
Meat and Poultry After a public hearing adopted rules, regulations, defini-
Reguiations tions and standards to carry out Compulsory Meat and
Poultry Inspection Laws.
Dietary Modified
Milk
Frozen Dietary
Modified Milk
Single-service
Containers for
Bulk Milk
Dispensers
Warehouse Loan
Extension
Extended effective date of regulations governing dietary
modified milk manufacture and sale to August 15. 1962.
Extended date of regulations governing frozen dietary
modified milk manufacture and sale to August 15, 1962.
Approved in principle and asked that regulations be pre-pared
governing use of five or six gallon single-service
containers to be used in bulk milk dispensers.
Extended loan payment due date on loan
storage to Fred Webb of Greenville, N. C.
for grain
March 5, 1962
Raleigh
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, Thomas O. Gilmore, Hoyle
C. Griffin, Claude T. Hall, Thomas G. Joyner, George P.
Kittrell, Charles F. Phillips, J. H. Poole, A. B. Slagle,
David Townsend.
Single-service
Containers for
Bulk Milk
Dispensers
Adopted regulation governing single-service
tainer units for bulk milk dispensers.
Veterinary Regula- Repealed sections of veterinary regulations dealing with
R°
n S
j
PC
i
lons serum and virus to swine intended for feeding and breed-ing
purposes, and sale and distribution of virulent hog
cholera virus.
Voluntary Meat Repealed articles of regulations dealing with voluntary
and Poultry meat and poultry inspection as superseded by the corn-
Articles Repealed
Second Creek
Watershed
Departmental
Budget 1963-65
pulsory law.
Endorsed petition for a Second Creek Watershed Im-provement
District, affecting agricultural economy in
Rowan County and the Piedmont Research Station.
Reviewed and approved budget for the Department for
1963-65.
Peanut Referendum Accepted report of referendum vote to permit assess-ment
on peanut growers for promotional purposes as
conducted by the N. C. Peanut Growers Assn., Inc.
May 30-31, 1962
Raleigh
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, Thomas O. Gilmore, Hoyle
C. Griffin, Claude T. Hall, Thomas G. Joyner, George P.
Kittrell, Charles F. Phillips, J. H. Poole, A. B. Slagle
and David Townsend.
Appointment of Approved Commissioner's appointment of Francis Pat-
Francis Patterson
terson to succeed C. W. Pegram, head of Dairy Division
;
'
;
" who retired June 30, 1962.
After a public hearing, ammended the regulations gov-erning
chemical standards for cottonseed meal.
sion Director
Cottonseed Meal
Chemical Stan-dards
Dietary Beverages Held a public hearing on a proposal to delete regula-in
Special store tions requiring dietary beverages to be placed in "Spe-cial
Dietary Foods" areas in stores. Deferred action.
Report For 1960-62
—
Administration 37
Dispenser Milk- Heard request to amend regulations to permit dispenser
Shake Machines milk-shake machines in soft-serve establishments selling
ill oOl L- Serve . --i-i-i-T-t "i-i
Estab. four percent ice milk. Voted negatively, but requested
further study of the situation.
Japanese Beetle
Warehouse Loan
After public hearing, voted to repeal the N. C. Japanese
Beetle quarantine, since a Federal quarantine eliminated
the necessity of such a state order.
Approved a loan of $24,000 to Shelby Bonded Ware-house,
Inc., Shelby, for the construction of additional
cotton storage.
state Fair Audit The report on the State Fair Audit was heard by the
Board and was accepted as presented.
May 31, 1962
Raleigh
Present: J. Atwell Alexander, Thomas O. Gilmore,
Claude T. Hall, Thomas G. Joyner, George P. Kittrell,
Charles F. Phillips, J. H. Poole, A. B. Slagle, and David
Townsend.
Fertilizer Grade Held public hearing and adopted fertilizer grade list and
rhtnr
a
Miv
Hepta " list of pesticide-fertilzer mixtures for 1962-63.
ACCOUNTS
Grace H. Malloy
Auditor
This division serves as the central fiscal and personnel division
for the Department Proper and for 19 other Special and General
Fund programs. Responsibilities of this division include: pro-curement,
acceptance of receipts, including the collection of taxes
and fees, and disbursement of funds, budget maintenance and
control, and personnel affairs for the 20 programs, and the col-lection
of assessments for seven agricultural promotional organ-izations
and foundations.
Financial report of the Department and the various divisions.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Code 28721
STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960-June 30, 1962
Summary by Purposes 1961-62 1960-61
I. Administration $ 48,683.60 $ 45,518.72
Accounting Office 63,704.33 55,422.80
Publicity & Publications 45,402.15 41,464.43
II. Inspection 73,745.90 72,601.72
III. Markets 399,430.15 361,577.16
IV. Dairy 78,336.43 72,623.90
V. Entomology ._ 88,768.76 85,977.68
VI. Seed Laboratory 95,889.77 89,557.93
VII. Analytical _____ 264,529.05 233,221.37
VIII. Crop Statistics 160,836.14 153,718.78
IX. Soil Testing 114,151.58 105,987.62
X. Veterinary 518,058.13 472,767.44
XL Research Stations 636,048.29 558,690.39
XIII. Weights & Measures _ 142,296.44 127,294.00
XIV. State Museum 39,836.56 40.023.92
XV. Custodial 18,644.48 18,335.62
XVI. Miscellaneous _ 153,682.56 137,687.68
XVII. Farmers Market 29,430.93
XVIII. Merit Salary Increments
XIX. Reserves __
Deferred Obligations Transferred to 1961-62 18,552.00
Total Expenditures $2,942,044.32 $2,720,454.09
Report For 1960-62
—
Accounts 39
Summary by Objects 1961-62 1960-61
11. Salaries and Wages $2,010,825.40 $1,849,436.65
12. Supplies and Materials 177.010.98 173.200.35
13. Postage, Tel., Tel., and Express 36,310.49 38,233.17
14. Travel Expense 203,433.44 202,886.69
15. Printing and Binding _. 34,617.80 33,135.89
16. Motor Vehicle Operations 17,596.52 18,215.41
17. Light, Power and Water 10,821.65 12,599.85
18. Repairs and Alterations _____ 61,413.37 45,988.87
19. General Expense 107,645.02 112,776.88
22. Insurance and Bonding 6,283.21 4,660.84
23. Equipment _____ 135,544.70 81,533.34
32. Additions and Betterments
33. Stores for Resale 16,849.63 21,097.02
Contribution to Retirement System 71,332.75 60,050.57
Contribution to Social Security 52,359.36 48,086.56
Reserves _
Merit Salary Increments
Deferred Obligations Transferred to 1961-62.____. 18,552.00
Total Expenditures $2,942,044.32 $2,720,454.09
Less Transfer from RMA 58,306.64 56,254.02
Less Transfer from AMA _____ 2,300.00 2,319.78
Less USDA Cooperative Agreement 2,237.56 1,964.18
Less Federal Cooperative Agreement..... 635.25
Less Research Stations Perquisites _ 12,703.84 12,631.62
Less Transfer from Cooperative
Inspection—Code 28731 3,726.00 3,726.00
Less Transfer from State Warehouse
System—Code 28727 3,283.00
Less Peanut Handler's Licenses.. _____ 1,850.00 1,840.00
Less Sale of Equipment ____ 8,104.63 2,159.43
Less Farmers Market 12,213.82
Less Transfer from N. C. State College 4,167.00 3,972.00
Less Market Inspection Fees _ 2,037.00
Less Deferred Obligations Transferred
from 1960-61 _____ 18,552.00
Less Transfer from Distribution of Surplus
Commodities—Code 28743 1,500.00
Less Transfer from State Meat and Poultry
Inspection Service—Code 28023 632.00
Less Transfer from Gasoline and Oil
Inspection—Code 12201 _____ 3,283.00
Total $2,822,009.40 $2,620,090.24
CONDITION OF FUNDS
1961-62 1960-61
Treasurer's Cash—June 30 _ $ 49,810.24 $ 49,259.73
Investments in Bonds and Premiums on Bonds 103,874.98 103,874.98
Total Credit Balance June 30 $ 153,685.22 $ 153,134.71
40 N. C. Department of Agriculture
DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE
Code 28721
STATEMENT OP RECEIPTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
1961-62 1960-61
Fertilizer T^x $ 400,193.76 $ 393,740.26
Cotton Seed Meal ;
Feed Tax 446.737.20 449,325. SO
Seed Licenses 29.987.00 29,282.00
Condimental Feed 11,543.00 8.340.00
Serum _ 18.894.39 19,658.94
Costs 11,404.27 9,816.01
Linseed Oil (152.38) 345.48
Bleached Flour 7,320.00 6,775.00
Bottling Plants 1,170.00 1,420.00
Ice Cream 4,345.00 2.435.00
Insecticides 38,130.00 38,140.00
Research Stations 206,072.62 204,284.98
Bakeries 2,580.00 2,460.00
Chicken Tests 97,111.49 95,880.99
Seed Tags - 29.950.01 30,570.70
Inspection Entomology 10,873.25 11,051.50
Oleomargarine ._ 6,250.00 1,000.00
Rabies
Land Plaster and Agricultural Lime 34,378.66 36,459.36
Fertilizer Registration 8,421.00 7,166.00
Miscellaneous - 71.81 59.29
Feed Registration - : 7,514.00 7,803.00
Canned Dog Food Registration 1,316.38 405.00
Lime Registration 405.00 450.00
Livestock Marketing Permits 4,100.00 5,800.00
Dog Food Stamps 14,150.95 12,499.14
Hatchery Fees and Supplies 3,521.00 4,039.00
Permits for Out-of-State Milk 75.00
Anti-Freeze Permits ._.. ..'.... 2,425.00 3,050.00
Weights and Measures Fees 9,992.50 9,927.50
Garbage Permits 482.00 317.00
Babcock Testers License 186.00 192.00
Tobacco Curers Tags - 8,117.50 7,699.00
Sampler's Licenses 480.00 508.00
Interest on Bonds 2,500.00 2,500.00
Land P aster Registrations 45.00 70.00
N. C. Sales Tax
Rendering Plant License 100.00
Recording Fee—Branding Cattle 6.00 1.50
Potash Lime Tags 37.50 37.50
Total Agricultural Receipts $1,420,559.91 $1,403,684.95
Contribution from General Fund 1,402,000.00 1,233,987.00
Total Revenue $2,822,559.91 $2,637,671.95
Report For 1960-62
—
Accounts 41
gasoline and oil inspection
General Fund—Code 12201
STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS
July 1. 1960—June 30, 1962
1961-62 1960-61
Revenue Appropriation $ 394.751.00 $ 329.376.00
Disbursements __ 383,3^0.82 31 5.670.75
Unexpended Balance of Appropriation 11,420.18 13,705.25
CONTRIBUTION FROM THE GENERAL FUND
General Fund—Code 28021
STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30. 1962
Revenue Appropiation $2,091,122.00 $1,435,523.50
Expenditures
Contribution to Department of
Agriculture—Code 28721 1,402,000.00 1,233,987.00
Contribution to Distribution of Surplus
Commodities—Code 28743 167,896.63 23,828.34
Reimbursement—Distribution of Surplus
Commodities—Code 28743 1,536.50
Purchase of Land Piedmont Research Station.... 14,646.75
Unexpended Balance of Appropriation 506,578.62 176,171.66
STATE MEAT AND POULTRY INSPECTION
General Fund—Code 28023
STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS
July 1. 1960—June 30, 1962
Revenue Appropriation $ 155,839.00
Receipts 671.15
Disbursements - 54,298.25
Unexpended Balance of Appropriation. 102,211.90
STATE WAREHOUSE SYSTEM—SUPERVISION
Special Fund—Code 28727
FINANCIAL STATEMENT
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1_ $ 10,238.55 $ 14,017.09
Revenue Collections 34,423.91 35,734.40
Miscellaneous Collections 723.85 13,241.14
42 N. C. Department of Agriculture
1961-62 1960-61
Disbursements
Expenditures 39,780.24 39,661.67
Miscellaneous Expenditures 723.85 13,092.41
Credit Balance—June 30 4,882.22 10,238.55
STATE WAREHOUSE SYSTEM—PRINCIPAL
Special Fund—Code 28729
STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Cash on Hand—State Treas. July 1 $ 17,765.23 $ 16,367.22
Receipts
Repayment of Loans _.__ 59,974.00 43,574.00
Sale of Bonds .__. 27,857.66 2,648.74
Sale of State Property 355.00 3,835.00
Payment of Loss Claim 10,000.00
Total Availability 115,951.89 66,424.96
Disbursements
Purchase of Bonds
Loans to Warehouses 78,000.00 47,500.00
Judgment and Costs 62.10
Foreclosed Mortgages 1,097.63
Loss Claim ___. ____ 27,266.37
Treasurer's Cash—June 30 10,685.52 17,765.23
Loans to Warehouses 545,572.00 527,546.00
Invested in 2%% U. S. Gov't Bonds 118,000.00 149,000.00
Total Worth—June 30 674,257.52 694,311.23
COOPERATIVE INSPECTION SERVICE
Special Fund—Code 28731
STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Treasurer's Cash—July 1 .__.. $ 253,713.33 $ 228,565.43
U. S. Treasury Bonds—2%% Par Value 40,000.00 40,000.00
Premiums on Bonds 1,175.00 1,175.00
Credit Balance—July 1 294,888.33 269,740.43
Receipts __.. 480,309.23 445,228.16
Disbursements __._ 459,501.24 420,080.26
Credit Balance—June 30 __.. 315,696.32 294,888.33
EGG MARKETING ACT
Special Fund—Code 28733
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 $ 13,601.39 $ 14,958.27
Report For 1960-62
—
Accounts 43
1961-62 1960-61
Receipts 25,571.18 23,303.99
Disbursements ___ 26,178.65 24,660.87
Credit Balance—June 30 ~ 12,993.92 13,601.39
STRUCTURAL PEST CONTROL
Special Fund—Code 28735
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1. 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 $ 18,433.83 $ 14,717.97
Receipts : .__. 18,034.00 17,162.00
Disbursements 19,238.13 13,446.14
Credit Balance June 30 _. 17,229.70 18,433.83
VOLUNTARY POULTRY INSPECTION
Special Fund—Code 28737
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 $ 2,161.70 $ 2,161.70
Receipts
Disbursements
Credit Balance—June 30 2,161.70 2,161.70
CREDIT UNION SUPERVISION
Special Fund—Code 28739
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 $ 28,767.44 $ 22,629.08
Receipts 57,787.68 53,141.27
Disbursements 53,280.72 47,002.91
Credit Balance—June 30 ..__. 33,274.40 28,767.44
DISTRIBUTION OF SURPLUS COMMODITIES
Code 28743
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 $ 105,126.97 $ 96,667.01
Revenue Appropriations 167,896.63 23,828.34
Revenue Collections _ 4,127.81 13,326.69
Disbursements 172,259.75 28,695.07
Credit Balance—June 30 104,891.66 105,126.97
44 N. C. Department of Agriculture
SHEEP DISTRIBUTION PROJECT
Special Fund—Code 28745
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
1961-62 1960-61
Credit Balance—July 1 $ 44,953.66 $ 51,553.22
Revenue Collections 49,681.71 34,844.90
Disbursements 32,210.84 41,444.46
Credit Balance—June 30 62,424.53 44,953.66
N. C. AGRICULTURE RESEARCH AND MARKETING ACT
FEDERAL FUND
Special Fund—Code 28749
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 $ 18,634.04 $ 18,307.84
Receipts—RMA Matching Fund 60,717.98 58,900.00
Disbursements
Markets Division Expenses in Connection with
RMA Project—Transferred to Code 28721 58,306.64 56,254.02
Crop Statistics Division Expenses in connection
with RMA Project Transferred to Code 28721- 2,300.00 2,319.78
Credit Balance—June 30 18,745.38 18,634.04
SPECIAL DEPOSITORY ACCOUNT REPORTING SYSTEM
Code 28751
STATEMENT OF RECEIPTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 _ ...$ 5,000.00 $ 8,000.00
Receipts—(Cash Bond Deposits)
Reporting System 500.00 500.00
Handler's of Farm Products
Livestock Markets 1,000.00
Disbursements
Refund of Cash Bond Deposit Reporting System.... 500.00 3,500.00
Refund of Cash Bond Deposit—Handlers of
Farm Products
Credit Balance—June 30 6,000.00 5,000.00
Report For 1960-62
—
Accounts 45
voluntary meat inspection
Special Fund—Code 28753
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
1961-62 1960-61
Credit Balance—July 1 $ 13,146.39 $ 13,352.07
Receipts 78,963.23 86,286.91
Disbursements 76,514.38 86,492.59
Credit Balance—June 30 15,595.24 13,146.39
OPERATION OP FARMERS MARKET
Special Fund—Code 28755
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 $
Receipts 67,524.04
Disbursements 61,218.51
Credit Balance—June 30 6,305.53
RESEARCH STATIONS WOODLAND MANAGEMENT
Special Fund—Code 28757
RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Credit Balance—July 1 $
Receipts 18,682.51
Disbursements
Credit Balance—June 30 18,682.51
PERMANENT IMPROVEMENTS OF 1953
Code 65342
STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Appropriation $ 2,809.54 $ 2,809.54
Disbursements
Unexpended Balance of Appropriation 2,809.54 2,809.54
46 N. C. Department of Agriculture
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS OF 1957
Code 65777
STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
1961-62 1960-61
Appropriation $ 72.83 $ 72,000.41
Transfer balance from Permanent Improvement
Fund of 1949 Code 64981 _ 1,374.30
Disbursements 73,301,88
Unexpended Balance of Appropriation 72.83 72.83
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS OF 1959
Code 65961
STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Appropriation $ 4,847.41 $ 37,778.70
Receipts Highway Commission ___ 525.00
Disbursements - 3,467.17 33,456.29
Unexpended Balance of Appropriation 1,380.24 4,847.41
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS OF 1961
Code 66108
STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS
July 1, 1960—June 30, 1962
Appropriation $ 25,000.00 $ 500,000.00
Receipts:
City & County Property Taxes
Raleigh Farmers Market, Inc.— 5,545.32
Disbursements 5,973.82 475,000.00
Unexpended Balance of Appropriation... 24,571.50 25,000.00
DIVISION OF CHEMISTRY
Dr. E. W. Constable
State Chemist
The work of the Division of Chemistry is constituted largely
of the administration of a group of state control laws, the bsaic
purposes of which are to safeguard the health, welfare, and eco-nomic
interests of consumers, to curb fraud, misrepresentation
and unscrupulous and destructive competition, and to promote
sound agricultural and business economics in the respective fields
as further indicated.
The products to which these control laws apply are fertilizer
and fertilizer materials; liming materials and landplaster; live-stock,
domestic animal and poultry feeds—both regular feeds
and medicated feeds ; automotive antifreezes, foods, drugs, cos-metics
and devices, oleomargarine, flour bleaching, and the en-richment
of foods with vitamins. Included also is the sanitary
inspection of bakeries, bottling plants, other food processing
plants, storages, vehicles and sales outlets through which these
products are handled. The division also administers the aerial
crop-dusting law which covers the application of pesticides by
aircraft.
Requirements which apply generally to these products are that
they shall bear specified, factual and informative labeling and
guarantees which must be lived up to.
It is further required that foods, drugs and cosmetics be whole-some
and free from adulteration or exposure to insanitation ; that
drug labeling shall carry adequate directions for use, cautions
against misuse and, in the case of dangerous drugs, notice of
restriction to prescription sale.
Pesticide labeling must also give directions for use, warnings
of danger, antidotes in case of accident, and first aid instructions
where needed. Registration with the Department of Agriculture
is required for fertilizers and fertilizer materials, liming ma-terials
and landplaster, commercial feeds, canned pet foods, and
pesticides. Operators in the application of pesticides by aircraft
must meet specific qualifications and must procure state licenses
before operation is permissible in this state.
48 N. C. Department of Agriculture
Activities under these various categories are given in follow-ing
sections along with other pertinent information.
Commercial Fertilizers, Agricultural Liming
Materials and Landplaster
The fertilizer and lime and landplaster laws, in addition to
the requirement for registration, require inspection of these
products in all parts of the state to determine compliance with
labeling requirements and the payment of inspection taxes, and
the collection of official samples for chemical analysis to deter-mine
if guarantees are lived up to.
The analyses required for fertilizer are for the major plant
food elements—nitrogen, phosphate, and potash; the secondary
plant foods—calcium, magnesium, sulfur, and boron; for acid-forming
qualities and chlorine ; and for the trace elements—man-ganese,
copper, iron, zinc and molybdenum. Those required for
liming materials are for calcium, magnesium, acid-neutralizing
value, fineness of particle size, and potash when that is included
in liming materials; and for landplaster, the content of calcium
sulphate.
Coverage for the biennium was
:
Official fertilizer samples 21,149
Unofficial samples of fertilizers and
materials for farmers 53
Official liming materials, lime potash
and landplaster 623
Total 21,852
Individual reports of analyses were forwarded to all concerned
as rapidly as work on respective samples was completed. Col-lective
results of the work were then made available to the public
in annual issues of the "Fertilizer Report" which is published by
the department for that purpose.
Results of the analyses and inspections showed that these
materials sold in the state during the biennium were generally
of good quality and measured up to the requirements and guar-antees
made for them. Deficiencies in plant food content and
other defects were found to be within normal range. Where these
Report For 1960-62
—
Chemistry 49
occurred the products were either removed from the market or
consumers were reimbursed according to the penalty provisions
of the respective laws.
Situations of more than usual note were the continued pub-licizing
by fertilizer manufacturers and sellers of trace elements
in fertilizers, yet with very limited registering, declaration by
label, and guaranteeing of these elements ; and the rapid expan-sion
in the use of liquid fertilizers, particularly nitrogen solutions
and to some extent liquid mixed fertilizers.
The inspection, sampling and analysis of these liquids were ex-tensively
expanded. There was some confusion in this area with
respect to responsibility for the products, their proper labeling
particularly when they were transferred to service and applica-tion
tanks, and at times the mixing of solutions of different
analyses and from different manufacturers. Extensive improve-ment
was made in this field, both in clearing up confusion and in
perfecting methods of inspection, sampling, and analysis.
In order to curb possible error and questions of error, all solu-tions
were sampled in duplicate and, when these materials con-tained
anhydrous ammonia which might escape because of its
volatility and thus result in error, samples were taken without
exposure to the atmosphere into containers with a weighed quan-tity
of distilled water. The high solubility of ammonia in water
eliminates question of its loss by evaporation as a cause of de-ficiency.
Deficiencies in plant food elements and other defects
in these solutions, although occurring at times, were at a low
level. Further improvement in this relatively new field is in
progress.
Commercial Feeds
The inspection of commercial livestock, domestic animal and
poultry feeds, regular and medicated, and of canned pet foods
was carried out statewide to determine compliance with require-ments
for labeling, inspection tax payment, and others. Official
samples were collected for chemical and microscopic analysis to
determine the content of crude protein, crude fat, crude fiber,
the presence and quantity of drugs, the presence and condition
of declared ingredients, substitutions, adulterations, and com-pliance
with guarantees and standards.
Coverage for the biennium was:
50 N. C. Department of Agriculture
Official feed samples 4,341
Unofficial feed samples 523
Analyses for medication in above feeds (237)
Samples run for farmers in forage
improvement program—N. C. Department
of Agriculture cooperating with N. C.
State College 2,000
Samples run in connection with N. C.
Experiment Station 350
Total 7,214
As rapidly as analyses were completed, individual reports were
forwarded to all concerned. The collective work of each year then
was made available to the public in the annual "Feed Report."
Summary of the work for the two years showed that in gen-eral
feed standards and quality were maintained on a satisfactory
level, as has been true over a period of years. In the limited num-ber
of deficiencies, deviations from stated composition and other
defects, consumers were reimbursed according to the penalty
provisions or the products were removed from the market.
As stated in earlier reports, a continuing problem is the large
increase in chemical work which is necessary to make full
analyses of a given number of feed samples. This is due to the
continually expanding number of feeds which contain growth
stimulants and drugs in both prophylactic and medicinal quan-tity,
and also the trend toward putting more than one of these
additives in given feeds. Analyses for these additives is neces-sary
for safety, to prevent fraud and destructive competition
and to assure the integrity of the feeds. The chemical analysis
for drugs and other additives is a specialty within itself and re-quires
facilities and applications different and apart from trie
usual analyses of feeds. The time and application required for
fully analyzing medicated feeds is approximately double that re-quired
for the non-medicated variety. Accompanying these com-plications
is the fact that the volume of feed consumed in the
state has nearly doubled during the past decade, but no commen-surate
increase in the inspection and analyses has been made.
Economic Poisons
The requirements of the North Carolina insecticide law, simi-lar
to those of the fertilizer and feed laws with the exception of
Report For 1960-62
—
Chemistry 51
providing no penalties for deficiencies, call for statewide inspec-tion
to determine compliance with such requirements as regis-stration,
payment of inspection taxes, general labeling and proper
packaging; and the collection of official samples for chemical
analysis to determine agreement with registration declarations
and guarantees made for the products.
The large number of pesticide chemicals on the market and the
various combinations of these chemicals which are used to serve
broadly varying conditions precludes the development of a prac-tical
penalty system as redress to consumers for defects and de-ficiencies.
Recourse in lieu of the penalty procedure is removal
of defective products from the market for reprocessing or de-struction
and, where consumers may have suffered significant
damage, notification of the situation to all parties concerned in
order that remedial steps may be taken.
The insecticide work load has been increased by the addition
of pesticide fertilizer mixtures which are permitted by regula-tions
adopted by the Board of Agriculture in response to an ur-gent
demand from farmers. The chemical work required to check
these mixtures is more involved and more extensive than that
required for the unmixed products.
In line with the pattern in preceding biennial reports, the cov-erage
in analytical work reported herein is based on calendar
years, (1960 and 1961) rather than fiscal years, since the insecti-cide
seasons, unlike the fertilizer seasons, naturally fall into that
pattern and insecticide laws are arranged accordingly.
Coverage for the biennium was as follows:
Official samples 2,548
Unofficial samples 12
Total 2,560
The work of the biennium showed that standards were main-tained
on a normal level as compared to experience over a period
of years and that generally satisfactory products were supplied
to consumers. The limited number of defective products found
on the market were dealt with as prescribed by law.
Reports of analyses on respective insecticide samples were for-warded
to consumers, dealers and manufacturers as rapidly as
52 N. C. Department of Agriculture
the work progressed through the season. The work of each
year collectively then was made available publicly through the
annual "Insecticide Report" which is published by the depart-ment
for that purpose.
Application of Pesticides by Aircraft
The North Carolina Aerial Crop-Dusting Law continues to
serve very well its original purposes which were to eliminate
the unethical practices, irresponsible performances and unscrup-ulous
and destructive competition which at one time plagued the
industry and engendered concerted moves to have the activity
outlawed by legislation.
The few complaints that have reached the department during
the biennium have been of a "nuisance" nature such as the spread
of dust and sprays beyond the property intended to be treated
and onto adjoining property where pesticides were not wanted.
This trouble arises both from the difficulty of applying pesti-cides
to small fields, particularly in more thickly inhabited areas,
and from the tendency of operators to proceed according to their
greatest convenience. Precise observance of property lines is
not practical in aerial applications. Also, in neglect of the rights
of others, operators prefer to start and stop applications beyond
property lines in order to simplify their work and to avoid un-treated
edges of fields.
No complaints have been received of "fraudulent business
practices" or "application in a faulty, careless, or negligent man-ner"—
these quoted expressions being the economic considera-tions
which the law does take into account as compared to the
"nuisance" considerations referred to above which the law does
not take into account. In all instances, fuller inspection pro-visions
particularly during the busy part of the season would be
advantageous.
Automotive Antifreezes
As has been characteristic since its enactment in 1949, the
North Carolina Internal-Combustion Engine Antifreeze Law has
continued to serve as a highly effective instrument in assuring
consumers of adequate supplies of high-grade products, in re-lieving
ethical manufacturers of unscrupulous competition, in
protecting consumers by keeping spurious products off of the
market and in relieving North Carolina merchants of the
Report For 1960-62
—
Chemistry 53
hazard of entrapment in damage claims as a result of buying
and selling, in good faith, antifreezes which were falsely repre-sented
as being entirely satisfactory.
Registrations for the biennium, covering both the alcohol or
volatile types, and the glycol or non-volatile types of antifreezes,
were 92 brands for the year 1960-61 and 107 brands for the year
1961-62, these representing a total of 54 manufacturers.
Two innovations appeared in the antifreeze field during the
biennium ; namely, permanent or glycol types of antifreezes claim-ed
to be suitable for year-round service for an indefinite period
of years, and the same type of antifreezes ready-mixed with so-claimed
specially treated water. The "long-term service" or
"never never never change" type was questioned on the basis of
there not being available any knowledge or information of cor-rosion
inhibitors which would last indefinitely or which would
prevent glycols from following the usual course of breaking down
in use over a period of time and producing by-product acids which
would neutralize all inhibitors and result in damage to the cooling
systems of automotive equipment. Several brands did carry a
feature which has promise of usefulness to motor vehicle owners
;
namely, an additive dye which imparts to the antifreeze mixtures
a bright red color. This color disappears when the mixture be-comes
corrosive thus serving as a danger signal.
The other innovation—antifreeze ready-mixed with water
—
was questioned since it was purported to be an antifreeze where-as
it was in fact, and should properly be labeled, a mixture of
water and glycol antifreeze. As a 50-50 mixture of water and
glycol, this product, particularly when not labeled so as to posi-tively
advise consumers of its true character, did not appear to
be in the interest of consumers since they would be led to pay
for canning and transporting water over long distances, and into
buying larger quantities of antifreeze than would be needed or
customarily used in many sections of the country.
Foods and Drugs
The several laws applying to foods, drugs, cosmetics and de-vices
which are administered through the department are the
Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Bakery Inspection Law, the
Bottling Plant and Soft Drink Inspection Law, the Artificially
Bleached Flour Law, the Oleomargarane Law and the Flour,
Bread and Corn Meal Enrichment Act. The basic purposes of
54 N. C. Department of Agriculture
these laws collectively are to assure consumers of a safe, whole-some,
economically sound and honestly labeled supply of the
various products covered.
Among the requirements to accomplish these purposes are that
the products be composed of sound and wholesome raw materials,
that they be handled, processed, packed and stored in a fully
sanitary manner, and that environment, housing, equipment, ve-hicles
and other facilities which may in any way contact or affect
the products be kept and used in a manner to preclude exposure
that may result in hurt or contamination.
Among the procedures for carrying out these purposes are
regular and systematic statewide inspections, written inspec-tion
reports as permanent records, recommendations for correct-ing
unsatisfactory conditions, closures, embargoes or other ac-tions
as prescribed by law. Summary of these activities follow.
Food Plant Inspections
Bakeries and Daughnut Plants 2,579
Bottling Plants 1,229
Other types of plants and storages (processing and
packaging meats, pickles, seafood, flour, meal,
candy, potato chips, fruits and vegetables, etc.) _3, 112
Total 6,920
Plant Operations Suspended
Bakeries 32
Bottling Plants 3
Others (as listed in preceding tabulation) 3
Total 38
Analyses of Samples, Embargoes
In addition to the foregoing inspection and actions, further
procedure for carrying out the purposes of the food laws is the
statewide collection of official samples and their analysis
—
chemical, physical, microscopic, optical, and others. These
analyses are indispensable tools since the final determination of
adulteration and misbranding is dependent on them.
Included in the work of the biennium was the handling and
Report For 1960-62
—
Chemistry 55
Food chemists work with an array of equipment in making a variety
of tests and analyses of food products.
checking of approximately 1,900 samples of various kinds and
339 embargoes. The samples represented both satisfactory and
unsatisfactory products, many of the unsatisfactory ones being
reflected in the embargo actions. The embargoes represented
all classes and types of foods—cereals, flour, meal, meats, vege-tables,
fruits, canned goods, bakery products, sugar, spices, can-dies
and others. Among the reasons for embargo actions were
misbranding, spoilage, insanitation, contamination by filth, in-sects,
rodents, worms and vermin, damage from storms, fires,
wrecks and other types of exposure, and other types of adultera-tion,
both inadvertent and intentional.
Fires, Floods, Storms and Wrecks
The loss of large volumes of foods, drugs and other products is
a usual toll taken by fires, floods, storms and wrecks. The lack of
knowledge by many people of the accompanying dangers involved
from damage, contamination and spoilage ; the temptation of
overzealous salvaging to minimize losses, the risk of epidemics
56 N. C. Department of Agriculture
are everpresent threats ; and can result in wholesale sickness and
injury. The impounding, supervision and direction of the separa-tion,
qualification and disposal of these products is a critical part
of the inspection work and is given prompt and preferential
attention.
During the biennium six fires of significant proportion were
dealt with in cities and towns of the state; namely—Siler City,
Raleigh, High Point, Winston-Salem, Greensboro, and Rocking-ham.
Covered also was one railroad wreck in the Four Oaks
area which exposed, damaged and destoyed large shipments of
food products enroute north from Florida, and a March storm
which wrought heavy damage and destruction to property, food
and drugs along the coastal area from Hatteras north. Total
losses in foods and drug products amounted to a value of approx-imately
$192,000.
Among embargo actions of more than usual moment was the
impounding and destruction of several lots of shucked oysters
in the coastal area of the state. Florida oysters, which were later
found to have been shucked in Florida plants where workers had
active cases of typhoid fever, were shipped to Eastern North
Carolina, mixed with local oysters and put on the market. All
were traced, embargoed and destroyed. These oysters could
have caused an epidemic, such as recently resulted from contami-nated
clams on the New York and New Jersey coasts. That
danger was obviated bcause all of the oysters were traced, em-bargoed
and destroyed. Cooperating in this action were the
health departments of Florida and North Carolina, the U. S.
Public Health Service and this department.
Poisonous Contaminations
Situations involving adulteration with toxic contaminants
which elicited attention over and above the average of such pro-blems
were the occurrence of crotalaria seed in soybeans and
corn and of chemical fungicides in feed and food grains.
The crotalaria contamination largely resulted from voluntary
crotalaria plants growing along with corn and beans, following
the use of the crotalaria in soil improvement. Under modern
methods the crotalaria is harvested along with the beans and
corn, creating a problem which resulted in the embargoing of
numerous freight car and truck loads of these products in both
North Carolina and Virginia, by authorities of both of these
states and of the U. S. Food and Drug Administration.
Report For 1960-62
—
Chemistry 57
Food inspectors check equipment and procedures in food plants to ensure that
products are processed in a sanitary manner.
58 N. C. Department of Agriculture
The required cleaning of the products before they could be
further moved in commerce resulted in extensive delay and clean-ing
costs, and hurtful losses from shrinkage. One operator
sought to curtail shrinkage losses by feeding the cleanings to a
herd of some 18 or 20 hogs. All of the hogs died. Surveys of a
following season indicated that a costly lesson had been learned
fast and well. Crotalaria was dropped from the list of crops
recommended for soil improvement.
Contamination of cereal grains with chemical fungicides re-sulted
largely from some seed processors trying to salvage their
excess stocks of fungicide-treated seeds by routing them into
the open grain market and mixing them with clean grain. Such
contamination in feeds, particularly for poultry, is ruinous. Al-though
human foods fare somewhat better because of the clean-ing
and hulling applied to grains for such use, the callous and
hazardous nature of the practice speaks for itself. Products
found so contaminated are seized under applicable laws. Also,
the Department of Agriculture has broadly publicized pointed
notice and warning against the practice, this to be followed by
appropriate further action as required.
CREDIT UNION DIVISION
W. V. DlDIWICK
State Superintendent of Credit Unions
The Credit Union Division was established by the 1915 Gen-eral
Assembly for the purpose of organizing credit unions and
supervising their operation. The supervision is to ensure that
each credit union is conducting its operation in accordance with
the law so that the members' money will be safe.
This biennial report reflects the operation and condition of
state-chartered credit unions doing business in North Carolina
for the year ending June 30, 1962.
With only minor exceptions, all credit unions continued to
show a substantial growth for the two years covered by this
report. At June 30, 1960, the total assets were $32,160,847.55 and
at June 30, 1962, the total assets amounted to $38,899,671.33, or
a net gain of 21 per cent. The increase in savings by members
is still not sufficient to take care of the demand for new loans.
Free loan protection insurance and life savings insurance to the
members have been big incentives to both borrowers and savers.
NEW CHARTERS :—During the two-year period, 10 new
charters were issued and 13 were cancelled. This is a net loss of
three credit unions. A special effort has been made to screen
all new requests for charters.
LIQUIDATIONS :—The practice of working with credit unions
in the process of liquidation is both time consuming for the divi-sion
and expensive for the other credit unions. However, I am
convinced that considerable savings have been made to the mem-bers
who have shares in the liquidated credit unions by this
practice. Unsound business practices and inaccurate records
seem to be the chief reasons for credit union failures. These
failures continue to occur more frequently among the smaller
credit unions.
LOANS OUTSTANDING :—The total outstanding loans to
members at June 30, 1962, was $29,130,332.68—an increase of
$3,636,961.43. These loans continue to be for provident purposes
and average less than $600 per borrower.
60 N. C. Department of Agriculture
INVESTMENTS:—Only a few state-chartered credit unions
have surplus money to invest more than the five per cent re-quired
by state law. Most credit unions are now complying with
the law in this respect. Occasionally, we find this investment
incumbered as security for a loan. The investment accounts have
shown an increase of $1,118,174.63 during the two-year period.
OTHER ASSETS:—As credit unions continue to grow, they
find it necessary to invest in office equipment, posting ma-chines,
and the like. Each year more credit unions desire to have
their own offices or buildings. At June 30, 1962, this account
showed an increase of $1,175,169.26 over June 30, 1960.
SHARES:—Members' savings accounts amount to about 90
percent of the total liabilities of state-chartered credit unions.
Credit unions come in all sizes. The State Employees Credit Union in Raleigh
was started 25 years ago with less than $500 invested by 1 1 members. Today its
assets are almost $5,000,000 and it has more than 13,000 members. Last year
this credit union was able to erect its own building, shown above, and moved out
of its former quarters in the Agriculture Building in mid-May of 1962. The build-ing
provides ample and efficient space for the credit union's operations on the
ground floor and in the basement, permitting rental o fthe two upper floors as a
source of revenue.
Report For 1960-62
—
Credit Union 61
These shares represent the principal source of funds available
to credit unions for loans to members. There has been an in-crease
of $6,205,729.54 in savings during the period covered by
this report.
DEPOSITS:—Members and non-members are permitted to in-vest
in a credit union through this account. It shows an in-crease
of $263,122.58 for the period.
RESERVES:—Many credit unions have found it advisable to
charge off losses to this account instead of carrying them in their
active files. This gives a truer picture of the financial condition
of each credit union as to its solvency. While this account has
been reduced to some extent, the reserve fund is still more than
sufficient to take care of foreseeable losses.
UNDIVIDED EARNINGS .-—This account is the undistributed
earnings after expenses and dividends have been paid. It has
been reduced percentage-wise during this period. Free loan pro-tection
insurance and life savings insurance, plus the desire to
pay higher dividends, are the reason for this decrease. Credit
unions have averaged paying a four and one-half per cent divi-dend
to their shareholders during this biennium.
INCOME AND EXPENSES :—The bulk of the credit union's
income is derived from interest earned on loans to members.
Salaries for employees make up the largest expense items for
credit unions as a whole. Salaries account for about 30 per cent
of the total expenses. The next largest single item of expense is
borrowers' protection insurance.
As required by law, we are making annual examinations of all
credit unions as well as follow-up examinations where they are
needed. Some credit unions are reluctant to correct practices
that are unsound and unsafe when pointed out to them by our
examiners. This points out the need for a revision of the Credit
Union Law.
Credit unions file a financial and statistical report each six
months with this division. The information contained in these re-ports
is compiled from our semi-annual reports.
NUMBER, MEMBERSHIP, AND ASSETS
OF STATE-CHARTERED CREDIT UNIONS
June 30, 1960 June 30, 1962
Credit Union Charters Outstanding _ 238 235
Total Members 100,000 96,352
Total Assets $32,160,847.55 $38,899,671.33
62 N. C. Department of Agriculture
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
ASSETS
June 30, 1960 June 30, 1962
Cash on Hand and in Banks $ 1,444,044.66 $ 2,252,563.12
Loans to Members 25,493,361.25 29,130,322.68
Investments 4,339,292.65 5,457,467.28
Other Assets 884,148.99 2,059,318.25
Totals $32,160,847.55 $38,899,671.33
LIABILITIES
Shares $25,675,601.40 $31,881,330.94
Deposits 1,062,285.98 1,325,408.56
Reserves 2,350,834.94 2,273,617.62
Undivided Earnings 3,072,125.23 3,419,314.21
Totals.... $32,160,847.55 $38,899,671.33
DAIRY DIVISION
C. W. Pegram
Director
The Dairy Division administers the laws and regulations gov-erning
milk and dairy products produced for sale in the state.
Most of the activities carried out by the division are directed
toward consumer protection with regards to wholesomness and
quality. But the protection advantages ultimately reflect in
benefits for consumer, producer and processor alike.
During the biennium, numerous technological developments
have brought about changes in procedures and many new pro-ducts.
Too, increase in the production of Grade A milk has
pushed the state into an even firmer position as a milk-sufficient
state.
The many changes, as well as the increase in production have
called for stepped-up vigilance on the part of the Dairy Division.
Introduction on the market of so called cream substitutes,
which presented both a hazard to the pocketbook and the health
of consumers, was handled under existing laws and regulations
relating to wholesomeness and labeling.
New dairy products offered as weight reducing diets present-ed
a similar challenge for the division, and necessitated drawing
of regulations which would protect the consumer. Proper label-ing
insures that the consumer is apprised of the contents and
can judge the effectiveness against the cost. Too, labeling pro-visions
require that the consumer be warned against using the
product as a total diet without a doctor's supervision. Critical
inspection and analytical work was called for, also, to ensure
that vitamins and minerals claimed are actually in the product.
Bringing frozen dessert mixes under the ice cream law during
the biennium has given more uniform regulations consistent with
laws in other states where this product enjoys a market.
Regulations provided by the Board of Agriculture in 1961 per-mit
the bottling of fruit drinks in Grade A milk plants. The
responsibility for control standards being met is, of course,
handled by the Dairy Division and added to the duties of its
personnel.
These and others matters that have reflected changes and addi-
64 N. C. Department of Agriculture
tions in the work of the Dairy Division are only part of the in-creasing
and expanding services provided by that unit.
In 1961 Grade A producers delivered 1,037 million pounds of
milk as compared with 960 million pounds in 1960. This increase
of more than eight percent is in line with the agricultural trend
in the state as dairying become more important. The daily pro-duction
per producer has increased, accounting for the higher
total production even though the number of producers has de-creased
by some 170 when compared with the number in dairy-ing
in 1960. Nearly $60 million in Grade A sales meant an
average of more than $15,000 per farm income.
In addition to the Grade A producers there are approximately
8,000 others who supply milk for manufacturing—evaporated
milk, cheese, butter, etc. These part time producers delivered
some 90 million pounds for a value of over three million dollars.
One of the principal duties of the Dairy Division is to supervise
the sampling and testing of milk and cream purchased on the
butterfat basis. During the last biennium over 56,000 check
tests were made covering the sampling and testing of 235 li-
One of the three mobile dairy laboratories operated by the Dairy Division to
provide faster and more efficient service in making butterfat tests and bacterial
analyses of milk and dairy products.
Report For 1960-62—Dairy 65
An interior view of a mobile dairy laboratory.
censed samplers and 91 licensed testers, which required 1,481
official investigations. Before samplers and testers are licensed
by the Dairy Division the applicants must pass an examination
attesting to proficiency and knowledge of their work. The divi-sion
supervises the work of the samplers and testers on the basis
of check tests made each month. Inspections are made of sam-plers'
methods and equipment, and of the Babcock testing lab-oratories.
This check and inspection work is most essential to the dairy
industry for it is upon the butterfat content that payment is
made to the producer, and the Milk Commission requires that
market milk contain a minimum of 3.6 percent butterfat. Under
a cooperative arrangement the Dairy Division makes the butter-fat
tests for the Commission and 2,446 such tests were made
during the biennium.
In addition the division makes other butterfat tests and bac-teria
analyses on milk and dairy products to see that they meet
state-wide minimum standards for consumer protection.
A new laboratory recently located at Fletcher is making it pos-sible
to give better supervision of tests for Western Carolina
66 N. C. Department of Agriculture
dairy farmers. The field unit at Fletcher, along with another
located at Salisbury, in addition to a mobile unit in the vicinity
of Charlotte, extends the work area over the dairy belts of the
state from the central lab located in Raleigh.
Along with other tests, residue analyses are being conducted
continuously. The possibility of carry-over of antibiotics used in
treating cows for certain diseases, as well as residues of pesti-cides
used on cows and feed, will continue as long as the useful
preparations are being applied. This situation, of course, is in-herent
with the advance in technology, and the division main-tains
special laboratory facilities for these special analyses.
The ice cream and frozen dessert inspection work requires much
time in both the field and laboratory. Samples are purchased
wherever they are offered for sale and delivered to the central
laboratory, where both chemical and bacterial analyses are made.
When deficiencies are found, plants are inspected to find the
cause and to insure that corrections are made. The Dairy Divi-sion
cooperates with the Division of Weights and Measures in
checking weights of frozen desserts.
During the past biennium 2,774 field inspections were made in
plants producing ice cream, and eight establishments were
closed for failure to comply with state standards.
While the Dairy Division is concerned with milk and dairy
products generally sold in packaged form, not only does it admin-ister
rules and regulations governing the contents and labeling,
but it also holds the responsibility for regulating products that
are dispensed in open containers from bulk or continuous dispen-sers,
and consumed on the premises.
With packaged products the division supervises labeling, work-ing
with processors to develop proper labels on milk and dairy
products which are not misleading to the consumer.
The division continually checks for adulteration of milk,
either by carelessness or intent. A total of 3,385 samples were
tested by cryoscope for the presence of added water during the
biennium.
In addition to making butterfat tests for the Milk Commission,
the Dairy Division cooperates with city, county, state and federal
agencies in handling matters pertaining to milk and milk pro-products
in their jurisdiction.
The division is presently engaged in a cooperative project with
N. C. State College Dairy Extension in testing for solids-not-fat
in milk. It is anticipated that in the near future an instrument
Report For 1960-62—Dairy 67
A modern Grade A dairy farm is designed so that milk goes direct from the
cow to bulk cooling tanks. The photo above shows the mechanical milker attached
to the cow. Milk flows from the cow through glass tubes into the farm bulk tank
shown in the bottom of the picture. The stainless steel bulk tank keeps the milk
cool and fresh until it is picked up by a tank truck for delivery to the pasteurizing
plant.
68 N. C. Department of Agriculture
will be developed which will permit testing, by electronics and
ultrasonics, for fat and solids-not-fat contents in milk.
Other inter-agency cooperation includes butterfat check tests
for the Federal School Lunch Program, reciprocal inspection of
ice cream manufacturers for others states, and inspection of
frozen dessert suppliers for U. S. Public Health Service.
The Dairy Division administers the Milk Import Law which is
designed to assure consumers that the quality and wholesomeness
of milk shipped into the state meets North Carolina standards.
However, 1961 marked the highest milk production year since
1957, with, an all-time record high per cow. Since the state is
self-sufficient in Grade A milk production, import milk problems
have diminished ; and the Dairy Division, cooperating with the
Milk Commission, aids in directing milk from plants having a
surplus to plants with a short supply in the state.
One of North Carolina's modern ice cream plants. This novelty machine,
making ice cream on a stick, is one of the newest and most efficient. It turns
out, wraps and packages 600 dozen ice cream bars an hour.
Report For 1960-62—Dairy 69
statistical report
1960-62 Biennium
Plant Investigations (butterfat check testing) .... 1,481
Milk Testers licenses issued _.. ____ 91
Milk Testers examinations given 17
Milk Sampler licenses issued- - 235
Milk Sampler examinations given __ 60
Butterfat check tests __ 56,624
Composite check tests __ 2,280
Butterfat tests, supervised 743
Butterfat tests for Milk Commission 2,446
Finished Milk Products Analyzed 4,244
Official butterfat notices sent to producers 4,800
Ice Cream plant inspections 2,774
Ice Cream and frozen dessert samples analyzed _ _ 6,886
Ice Cream plants closed 8
Cryoscope determinations 3,385
Lactometer tests _ 30
Gallons of milk embargoed 815
Antibiotic Tests - 1,154
Pesticide Analyses _ 161
DIVISION OF ENTOMOLOGY
C. H. Brannon
State Entomologist
The Division of Entomolgy has the responsibility of adminis-tering
the State Plant Pest Law and its work is concerned pri-marily
with the suppression and eradication of serious plant
pests.
In this era of rapid transportation plant pests may be dissemi-nated
very quickly all over the state, or from one state into an-other.
Many pests, once established, cause enormous losses to
our economy. The cotton boll weevil alone averages about $350,-
000,000 in its damage to the United States cotton crop. Insect
pests and plant diseases cause a damage of $10 to $15 billion
worth of production each year ! There are over 20,000 destructive
insects that would cause serious losses if introduced into the
United States. The Federal government maintains inspectors
at all major ports in order to prevent the introduction of these
serious pests.
The Division of Entomology cooperates with the Plant Pest
Control Division and the Plant Quarantine Division, of the United
States Department of Agriculture, in the task of suppressing, con-trolling,
and eradicating serious pests within the borders of this
state, and in an effort to prevent the entrance of pests which
may become established within our borders.
Nursery Inspection
There are 945 nurseries and 631 nursey dealers in North Caro-lina.
Each nursery must be carefully inspected at least once a
year by a staff member before a certificate can be issued. Nur-series
which may be infested or infected with pests under quaran-tine
are under constant supervision and may move their stock
only after stringent control specifications are met.
The careful inspection and certification of all 945 nurseries of
the state is the largest single project of this division. This
exacting duty requires the services of four staff members for a
period of about four months each year. Special problems, quar-antines,
and treatments require additional inspections and certi-fication
as demanded by various problems which require addi-tional
services each season.
Report For 1960-62
—
Entomology 71
Entomologists from far and near come to study the extensive insect collection.
Shown here, at right, is Dr. John R. Metcalfe, British entomologist, stationed in
Jamaica, who spent several weeks in 1961 with Dr. David L. Wray, at left, curator
of the collection. Subject of Dr. Metcalfe's research was Collembola, commonly
known as "springtails", tiny insects which are a problem in production of sugar
cane, Jamaica's most important single crop. Dr. Wray is an international authority
on Collembola.
Insect Collection and Identification
The large insect collection, comprised of over two million
specimens representing 16,000 different