No. 7. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 69 



R£)PORT OF THE STATE) VETERINARIAN. 



Hari'isburg, Pa., January 1, 1905. 

 Hon. N. B. Crik'hfiold, Secretai^y of Agriculture: 



Sir: I liave the honor to submit the following report upon the 

 veterinary sanitary work of the State for the calendar year 1904, I 

 have incorporated in this report the work that has come to me as 

 State Veterinarian and as secretary of the State Livestock Sani- 

 tary Board. While the State Livestock Sanitary Board is not defi- 

 nitely a part of the Department of Agriculture, no method for report- 

 ing upon its work is authorized excepting through the Department 

 of Agriculture. 



During the past year there has been no unusual event in relatiou 

 to the occurrence or repression of diseases of animals with the 

 exception of the appearance of an outbreak of Texas fever in tlie 

 eastern part of the State. This subject is referred to in more detail 

 in another part of this report. The contagious diseases of farm ani- 

 ))uils that have occurred in Pennsylvania have, on the whole, occa- 

 sioned less loss during the past year than has been the case for many 

 years. There is in most parts of the State a great deal of interest 

 in the repression of the diseases of animals and of public support 

 for the measures adopted by the State Livestock Sanitary Board. 

 p]ven when these measures cause inconvenience and temporary hard- 

 ship it is now realized that they are for the purpose of preventing 

 greater inconvenience and greater loss, and that the more thoroughly 

 they are enforced the more effective and prompt will be the results 

 from them. In general, where sanitary regulations are not satis- 

 factorily observed, it is because they are injudicious or because the 

 need for them is not sufficiently recognized. 



Keference has frequently been made in these reports to the diffi- 

 culty that has been experienced in connection with the enforcement 

 of measures planned to repress rabies of dogs. Disinclination to 

 obey rules of the State Livestock Sanitary Board in regard to the 

 muzzling or confinement of dogs has been due to the rather wide- 

 spread and very wrong teachings of some individuals who have 

 propagated the notion that there is no such disease as rabies or that, 

 if the disease does exist, it is not necessary to take any special 

 action in regard to it. While such views are still held by a few per- 

 sons, they are not held to anything like the extent that was the case 

 a few years ago, and are not now sufficiently prevalent to constitute 

 a serious impediment to the enforcement of required quarantine, 

 regulations. It is indeed strange that such views are held at all. 

 There is no more reason for doubting the existence of rabies than 

 for doubting the existence of glanders, anthrax or tuberculosis. The 

 disease is of just as clear-cut and definite character as any other dis- 

 ease of animals; indeed, it is generally much easier to trace an out- 

 break of rabies from animal to animal through a series of genera- 

 tions of disease that it is to trace tuberculosis, or anthrax, or black- 



