4 CONTROL BULLETIN NO. 148 



When the samples were received it was obvious that the feed was old. Follow- 

 ing the usual policy, the inspector was sent to get an official sample and further 

 data on the case. He found that the feed in question was delivered in March 

 1950 and that the samples sent were almost all the feed remaining. The owner 

 claimed that during a period of three or four months he lost 350 birds out of a 

 total of 900. He thought the feed had been stored too long before delivery and 

 wanted the Control Service to prove this more than a year after delivery. 



The policy followed in accepting samples of viscera and stomach contents 

 of animals in cases of suspected poisoning is somewhat similar to that for feeds. 

 In all instances a veterinarian's report is required. No analytical work will be 

 done if the results will serve no more useful purpose than the satisfying of per- 

 sonal curiosity as to the cause of death. 



However, if the animal or animals dying under suspicious circumstances are 

 from a herd or flock, it is felt that analysis is justified. The information gained 

 may be used to save the other animals. 



The outlines of several of the poison cases handled by the Control Service 

 during the past year are given here. It is believed that they will be of interest 

 to the farmers, feed dealers and manufacturers. One of the most baffling cases 

 encountered occurred in Rhode Island in the summer of 1950. Although this 

 Control Service was only indirectly concerned, it is reported here because of the 

 several unusual and intriguing aspects. 



A dairyman owning about 50 head of valuable stock suff'ered the loss of 14 

 cows. The herd was all kept in the same barn. All the animals had access to 

 the same pasture and all received the same brand of feed. The cows were kept 

 in three rows in the barn. The water to all rows was conducted by the same pipe. 



With no previous symptoms of sickness the cows in one row began to die. 

 Within about a week's time 14 cows, ail from the same row, were dead. The 

 cows in the other two rows were not even sick. The feed was suspected. It 

 appears that the man feeding the cows was not able to lift a whole bag of feed. 

 Therefore, it was his practice to dump the top third of a bag into a container 

 and feed this portion to the first row. The middle third of the bag was fed to the 

 next row, and the bottom third to the last row. Apparently this procedure was 

 always followed and the last row, in which the cows died, always received the 

 feed from the bottom third of the bag. 



It was reasoned by the dairyman that there was a toxic ingredient present in 

 the feed and that this ingredient sifted to the bottom of each of the bags of feed 

 used. There are obvious flaws in this line of reasoning. Apparently whatever 

 killed the cows was a strong poison. It seems unlikely that if this poison were 

 present in the feed it would sift down to the bottom third of each bag so thor- 

 oughly that there would be an insufficient quantity remaining in the upper two- 

 thirds to make the other cows just slightly sick. 



However, this possibility, as well as others, was explored thoroughly by the 

 Rhode Island State Chemist and his associates. The remaining feed was an- 

 alyzed and fed to other animals. The stomach contents of the dead cows were 

 fed to swine and the liver of one dead cow was fed to a cat. Some of the viscera 

 were fed to fish. In all these tests negative results were obtained. The Federal 

 Food and Drug Administration entered the case some time later and took samples 

 from the dead animals. So far as is known here, the Federal agency found no 

 conclusive evidence regarding the cause of the death of the 14 cows. 



