Dec, 1908.1 



l-Ki;i)lN(; STIFFS .\XD FERTILIZERS. 



ANALYSES OF FERTILIZERS. 



.\11 sjiiiiplcs of coiimicrciiil IVrl ilizcrs wci'c collcett'd l)y .Mr. 

 A. .1. Kiclijirdsoii as auciit for \hv State lioard of Awricultuic. 

 The list of licensed hi'aiids remains about the same from \-ear 

 to year and. therefore, thei-e are eai-h year about one hundred 

 l)rands collected and annly/ed. 



A nunilti'r of bi-iuds liaxc a liiuitrd sale and arc missed some 

 years, whih' otliei's are found Licnerally disti'ibnied over the state. 



Tile noticeable featuic of the fertilizers this year was the 

 number of brands wliich were slio'lifly low in nitrogen. In the 

 nuijority of such instances, the valuation of the fertilizer was 

 made good by an excess in eithei' phosphoric acid oi' potash. 



This depression in nitrogen was most noticeable in the lower 

 priced goods, and is another argument for purchasing the most 

 concentrated material offered. It is interesting at this point to 

 compare the amounts of plant food guaranteed to be sold foi- tl"' 

 in some of the leading fertilizers during the year. Tlie sum of 

 $15 is selected, because it was calculated from the Census of 

 1900. and the current prices of fertilizers; that it was the average 

 amount spent aininally for fertilizers by each farmer in the state. 



AMOUNTS OF PLANT-FOOD BOUGHT FOR $15.00. 



It is easy to see by this met bod of comparison that the man who 

 bought the $-10-fei'1ili/('i' Lint moi-e nitrogen, phosi)horic acid and 

 potash foi- his money than he wlio bought any cheaper brands, 

 and 111.' who bou'jlit the lowest pi'iced goods got least for bis money. 



