DOCSLIB.ORG

Florida Agriculture Statistical Directory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Dear Friends of Agriculture, It is my pleasure to present the 2008 Florida Agriculture Statistical Directory. This report presents a wealth of information about Florida’s vast and varied agricultural production through data that details land use, crop yields, commodity prices, crop rankings and more. This yearly report is invaluable to anyone who is involved in this dynamic business or who wants to better understand its complexities. The tables, charts and statistics contained in this report do an exceptional job of measuring the inputs and outputs, and presenting Florida agriculture in the context of “hard numbers.” But there is more to our state’s agricultural industry: our hard-working farmers, whose dedication, hard work and perseverance have made Florida agriculture into the diverse and highly productive industry that is respected throughout the globe. As evidenced by the ever-growing popularity of the “Fresh from Florida” label, consumers worldwide appreciate and seek out the quality products that our farmers provide. Maintaining these standards of excellence seldom comes easily as each year presents new challenges for Florida’s 40,000 commercial farmers. But, whether confronted by hurricanes, freezes, pests, diseases or fierce international competition, our state’s producers continually show that they are up to the test. Enterprising spirit, love of the land, and pride in their products are all hallmarks of the well- earned reputation of Florida’s farmers. In addition to enjoying the quality products that our farmers produce, Florida’s agricultural production benefits our state’s residents in other important ways as well. Florida agriculture has an overall economic impact estimated at more than $100 billion annually, making it a sound pillar of the state’s economy. Florida agriculture is directly and indirectly responsible for 763,065 jobs and adds $3.58 billion to state and local tax rolls. The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services works diligently to promote our state’s agricultural production and to help ensure the safety of these products from the field to the table. Our quality assurance and food safety programs help assure consumers of the wholesomeness of Florida agricultural products. I sincerely thank you for your support of Florida’s farmers and encourage you to look for the “Fresh from Florida” label when shopping. Sincerely, Charles H. Bronson Commissioner of Agriculture 1 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The acreage, production, and value statistics in this publication are the official State and USDA estimates prepared by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Florida Field Office in cooperation with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (FDACS). These estimates are effective as of May 2009 and can be revised later in the year or in the following year, if and when additional data become available. Any revisions made to these estimates, as well as estimates made after May 2009, are included in reports posted to the website shown below and available from the NASS Florida Field Office. Most of the data used to develop these estimates were provided voluntarily by growers, shippers, and processors and we sincerely appreciate their public spirited cooperation. The Florida Tomato Committee, the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association, floriculture and nursery producers, sales agencies, and transportation firms have provided valuable assistance and data throughout the season. The FDACS Bureau of State Farmers Markets and the County Agricultural Agents of the University of Florida Cooperative Extension Service were also very helpful in supplying area and county estimates. The individuals and organizations who make up the Florida agricultural industry need reliable and accurate estimates of production to make informed and knowledgeable decisions. Increasing unpredictability of commodity prices and competition from global markets make accurate and unbiased estimates even more important. Farmers, agribusinesses, producers groups, educators, researchers, legislators and the media all need these estimates to develop sound policies and to promote Florida agricultural products. I want to express my sincere gratitude to our dedicated staff of statisticians, support personnel, and field and telephone enumerators. They are the ones who have worked hard to collect, review, and summarize these important data and publish the results. All NASS reports are available free of charge at: • www.nass.usda.gov (National reports) • www.nass.usda.gov/fl (Florida reports) Jeff Geuder Director, USDA/NASS – Florida Field Office 2 i About the Florida Agriculture Statistical Directory The Florida Agriculture Statistical Directory has been published to provide you with reliable, compre- hensive information and data on Florida agriculture. People worldwide use the basics of food, fiber, and forestry products daily. Florida’s producers contribute mightily to the bounty enjoyed in Florida, the United States, and beyond. The following pages tell their story of productivity, innovation and delivery. This reference book is divided by sections for ease of use. The Agricultural Overview Section provides a general overview of Florida agriculture. The Agricultural Statistics Section presents comparative performanc- es of major commodity groups and benchmark economic data. Occasionally, numbers in rows or columns do not sum exactly. This usually occurs when large numbers are abbreviated or when composite prices are compiled. The difference in these cases is a rounding margin. The rounding of numbers occurs in these pages when space is a consideration. The Groups Directory Section offers contact information for a variety of agricultural related entities. Both public and private organizations are listed. The Department Contacts Section identifies the Florida Depart- ment of Agriculture and Consumers Services’ divisions with contact information. Together, these sections provide a view of Florida agriculture and its impact on Florida’s economy. If you need additional information, please call the Division of Marketing and Development at 850-488-4366. We are pleased to present the Florida Agriculture Statistical Directory. This book will provide excellent reference data year round. Keep it handy. The Editorial Staff Florida Agriculture Statistical Directory 3 Table of Contents Commissioner’s Letter ..........................................................................................................................................................................1 Acknowledgement ..................................................................................................................................................................................2 About This Directory .............................................................................................................................................................................3 Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................................................... 4-5 Florida Agriculture Overview ...............................................................................................................................................................6 Florida Cash Receipts ............................................................................................................................................................................7 Florida Cash Receipts - 2007 ...................................................................................................................................................................8 Florida Cash Receipts By Commodity Group and Year ......................................................................................................................9 United States Total Cash Receipts By Leading States .......................................................................................................................10 Florida Leading Cash Receipts By Commodity ................................................................................................................................11 Farms and Land In Farms ..................................................................................................................................................................12 Florida Farms and Acreage ................................................................................................................................................................13 Florida Hired Farm Workers ..............................................................................................................................................................14 Florida Farm Income and Expenses ...................................................................................................................................................15 Citrus .....................................................................................................................................................................................................16 2007-08 Season Citrus Highlights .....................................................................................................................................................17 Citrus Production By Areas and Counties .........................................................................................................................................18
Recommended publications
  • CATAIR Appendix

    CATAIR Appendix

    CBP and Trade Automated Interface Requirements Appendix: PGA April 24, 2020 Pub # 0875-0419 Contents Table of Changes ............................................................................................................................................4 PG01 – Agency Program Codes .................................................................................................................... 18 PG01 – Government Agency Processing Codes ............................................................................................. 22 PG01 – Electronic Image Submitted Codes.................................................................................................... 26 PG01 – Globally Unique Product Identification Code Qualifiers .................................................................... 26 PG01 – Correction Indicators* ...................................................................................................................... 26 PG02 – Product Code Qualifiers.................................................................................................................... 28 PG04 – Units of Measure .............................................................................................................................. 30 PG05 – Scie nt if ic Spec ies Code .................................................................................................................... 31 PG05 – FWS Wildlife Description Codes .....................................................................................................
  • Using Beef Cattle Genetics to Manage

    Using Beef Cattle Genetics to Manage

    Tall Fescue Endophyte Toxicosis in Beef Cattle: Clinical Mode of Action and Potential Mitigation through Cattle Genetics Richard Browning, Jr., Ph.D. Cooperative Agricultural Research Program Tennessee State University Nashville, TN 37209-1561 INTRODUCTION Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) is the most commonly used cultivated grass in the United States to feed beef cattle. Tall fescue is a cool-season perennial grass that many cattle producers ‘can’t live with, but can’t live without’ because of its hardiness and good forage yields, but adverse effects on cattle well-being and yields. The history of this forage and its effects on animal performance have been extensively reviewed (Hemken et al., 1984; Bacon et al., 1986; Stuedemann and Hoveland, 1988; Porter and Thompson, 1992; Stuedemann and Thompson, 1993; Porter, 1994; Bacon, 1995; Paterson et al., 1995). Tall fescue was unintentionally introduced from Europe sometime in the 1800s. Early university research on growing tall fescue in the U.S. began between 1907 and 1918 in Oregon and in Kentucky in 1931 (Alderson and Sharp, 1993). Tall fescue, primarily the Kentucky-31 variety, was planted across the U.S. throughout the 1940s and 1950s because of its excellent growth under various environmental stressors. Tall fescue may be found across the eastern half of the U.S. and the Pacific Northwest covering an estimated 25 to 40 million acres of pasture and hayland. It has been estimated that over 90% of tall fescue pastures in the U.S. are infected with the fungal endophyte Neotyphodium coenophialum (Bacon and Siegel, 1988; Glenn et al., 1996).
  • Postweaning Growth and Carcass Traits in Crossbred Cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano Maternal Grandsires E

    Postweaning Growth and Carcass Traits in Crossbred Cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano Maternal Grandsires E

    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Center Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska 2010 Postweaning growth and carcass traits in crossbred cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano maternal grandsires E. Casas USDA, ARS, US Meat Animal Research Center, [email protected] R. M. Thallman USDA-ARS Meat Animal Research Center, [email protected] L. A. Kuehn USDA- ARS, US Meat Animal Research Center, [email protected] L. V. Cundiff US Meat Animal Research Center, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/hruskareports Casas, E.; Thallman, R. M.; Kuehn, L. A.; and Cundiff, L. V., "Postweaning growth and carcass traits in crossbred cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano maternal grandsires" (2010). Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center. 374. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/hruskareports/374 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the U.S. Department of Agriculture: Agricultural Research Service, Lincoln, Nebraska at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. Published December 4, 2014 Postweaning growth and carcass traits in crossbred cattle from Hereford, Angus, Brangus, Beefmaster, Bonsmara, and Romosinuano maternal grandsires1,2 E. Casas,3 R. M. Thallman, L. A. Kuehn, and L. V. Cundiff USDA, ARS, US Meat Animal Research Center, Clay Center, NE 68933 ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to char- est marbling scores when compared with other grand- acterize breeds representing diverse biological types for sire breeds.
  • Multiple Choice Choose the Answer That Best Completes Each Statement Or Question

    Multiple Choice Choose the Answer That Best Completes Each Statement Or Question

    Name Date Hour 5 The Beef Cattle Industry Multiple Choice Choose the answer that best completes each statement or question. _______ 1. Early settlers primarily used cattle as ____ . A. work animals B. a source of meat C. a source of milk D. symbols of wealth _______ 2. The modern cattle industry is concentrated in the ____ . A. South and Midwest B. South and Southwest C. North and Northwest D. North and Midwest _______ 3. Cattle drives were necessary in the past because of the lack of ____ . A. retail stores B. refrigeration C. slaughterhouses D. year-round grazing _______ 4. Which beef cattle breed is known for its solid black color and excellent meat quality? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina _______ 5. Which beef cattle breed is from northern England and was often called a Durham after the county in which it originated? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina Introduction to Agriscience | Unit 5 Test CIMC 1 _______ 6. Which beef cattle breed originated in England and was originally much larger, weighing more than 3,000 pounds, than it is today? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina _______ 7. Which beef cattle breed is red with a white face and may also have white on the neck, underline, legs, and tail switch? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina _______ 8. Which beef cattle breed is one of the oldest breeds in the world and originated in Italy? A. Angus B. Hereford C. Shorthorn D. Chianina _______ 9. Which beef cattle breed originated in central France and was developed as a dual-purpose breed and is typically white or off-white in color? A.
  • Proc1-Beginning Chapters.Pmd

    Proc1-Beginning Chapters.Pmd

    Implications of Breed Type Evaluations Larry V. Cundiff Research Leader, Genetics and Breeding Roman L. Hruska U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Agricultural Research Service U.S. Department of Agriculture Clay Center, NE ()(,) Introduction 23.3 Quality, quantity, and cost of feed resources available for beef production vary from one region of the country to another and within regions, depending upon climatic factors and natural 23.3 resources available in specific production 14.8 situations. Diversity among breeds can be exploited by crossbreeding to optimize performance levels 8.5 and to match genetic resources with the climatic environment, feed resources, and consumer Percent preferences for lean and tender beef products. 8.5 Crossbreeding also provides for significant benefits 14.8 of heterosis on components of production efficiency. In this presentation, research results will be reviewed focusing on effects and utilization of 8.5 8.5 heterosis and breed differences, and on the importance of matching genetic potential with Straightbred Straightbred X-bred consumer preferences and the climatic cows cows cows environment. straightbred X-bred X-bred calves calves calves Heterosis Figure 1. Cumulative effects of heterosis for weight of calf weaned per cow exposed to breeding in crosses A crossbreeding experiment involving of Hereford, Angus, and Shorthorns (Cundiff et al., Herefords, Angus, and Shorthorns demonstrated 1974). that weaning weight per cow was increased by about 23% (Cundiff et al., 1974) due to beneficial was significantly greater than that of either effects of heterosis on survival and growth of straightbred Angus or Herefords (Nunez et al., crossbred calves and on reproduction rate and 1991; Cundiff et al., 1992).
  • For Immediate Release Brangus Are Not “Eared” Cattle

    For Immediate Release Brangus Are Not “Eared” Cattle

    For Immediate Release Contact: Doc or Patricia Spitzer FAIR PLAY, SC [email protected] or November 8, 2011 (864)972-9140 or (864)710-0257 Brangus Are Not “Eared” Cattle First and foremost we need to wrap our minds around the fact that God created cattle, he did not create breeds. And while in some cases natural barriers such as oceans and mountain ranges did affect genetic selection, for the most part it is humans who created breeds. And, if you go back far enough in history there really are no pure breeds, only our inflated misconceptions that they exist. That being said, there are two species that make up all cattle of the world; Bos Taurus cattle are primarily cattle populations that originated in the more temperate climates and Bos Indicus cattle populations developed in the more tropical regions of the world. Generally the US beef industry further subdivides Bos Taurus beef cattle into two groups. Continental Breeds of cattle are those breeds originating on the European Continent while British Breeds were originally from selections of bovine populations from the British Isle. It is also typical of US producers to wrongly lump all Bos Indicus breeds of cattle together. This is rather astounding as there are more recognized different breeds of Bos Indicus derivation scattered around the world than specific breeds of Bos Taurus derivation. Americans have also further compounded the confusion by creating new breeds by crossing a variety of specifically recognized Bos Indicus cattle to create the American Brahman and crossing cattle of Bos Indicus and Bos Taurus origin to create what some refer to as the American Breeds.
  • Comparing SNP Panels and Statistical Methods for Estimating Genomic Breed Composition of Individual Animals in Ten Cattle Breeds

    Comparing SNP Panels and Statistical Methods for Estimating Genomic Breed Composition of Individual Animals in Ten Cattle Breeds

    He et al. BMC Genetics (2018) 19:56 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12863-018-0654-3 RESEARCH ARTICLE Open Access Comparing SNP panels and statistical methods for estimating genomic breed composition of individual animals in ten cattle breeds Jun He1,2†,YageGuo1,3†, Jiaqi Xu1,4, Hao Li1,5,AnnaFuller1, Richard G. Tait Jr1,Xiao-LinWu1,5* and Stewart Bauck1 Abstract Background: SNPs are informative to estimate genomic breed composition (GBC) of individual animals, but selected SNPs for this purpose were not made available in the commercial bovine SNP chips prior to the present study. The primary objective of the present study was to select five common SNP panels for estimating GBC of individual animals initially involving 10 cattle breeds (two dairy breeds and eight beef breeds). The performance of the five common SNP panels was evaluated based on admixture model and linear regression model, respectively. Finally, the downstream implication of GBC on genomic prediction accuracies was investigated and discussed in a Santa Gertrudis cattle population. Results: There were 15,708 common SNPs across five currently-available commercial bovine SNP chips. From this set, four subsets (1,000, 3,000, 5,000, and 10,000 SNPs) were selected by maximizing average Euclidean distance (AED) of SNP allelic frequencies among the ten cattle breeds. For 198 animals presented as Akaushi, estimated GBC of the Akaushi breed (GBCA) based on the admixture model agreed very well among the five SNP panels, identifying 166 animals with GBCA = 1. Using the same SNP panels, the linear regression approach reported fewer animals with GBCA = 1.
  • Purebred Livestock Registry Associations

    Purebred Livestock Registry Associations

    Purebred livestock registry associations W. Dennis Lamm1 COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION SERVICE no. 1.217 Beef Devon. Devon Cattle Assn., Inc., P.O. Box 628, Uvalde, TX 78801. Mrs. Cammille Hoyt, Sec. Phone: American. American Breed Assn., Inc., 306 512-278-2201. South Ave. A, Portales, NM 88130. Mrs. Jewell Dexter. American Dexter Cattle Assn., P.O. Jones, Sec. Phone: 505-356-8019. Box 56, Decorah, IA 52l01. Mrs. Daisy Moore, Amerifax. Amerifax Cattle Assn., Box 149, Exec. Sec. Phone: 319-736-5772, Hastings, NE 68901. John Quirk, Pres. Phone Friesian. Beef Friesian Society, 213 Livestock 402-463-5289. Exchange Bldg., Denver, CO 80216. Maurice W. Angus. American Angus Assn., 3201 Freder- Boney, Adm. Dir. Phone: 303-587-2252. ick Blvd., St. Joseph, MO 64501. Richard Spader, Galloway. American Galloway Breeders Assn., Exec. Vice. Pres. Phone: 816-233-3101. 302 Livestock Exchange Bldg., Denver, CO 80216. Ankina. Ankina Breeders, Inc., 5803 Oaks Rd,. Cecil Harmon, Pres. Phone: 303-534-0853. Clayton, OH 45315. James K. Davis, Ph.D., Pres. Galloway. Galloway Cattle Society of Amer- Phone: 513-837-4128. ica, RFD 1, Springville, IA 52336. Phone: 319- Barzona. Barzona Breeders Assn. of America, 854-7062. P.O. Box 631, Prescott, AZ 86320. Karen Halford, Gelbvieh. American Gelbvieh Assn., 5001 Na- Sec. Phone: 602-445-2290. tional Western Dr., Denver, CO 80218. Daryl W. Beefalo. American Beefalo Breeders, 1661 E. Loeppke, Exec. Dir. Phone: 303-296-9257. Brown Rd., Mayville 22, MI 48744. Phone: 517-843- Hays Convertor. Canadian Hays Convertor 6811. Assn., 6707 Elbow Dr. SW, Suite 509, Calgary, Beefmaster.
  • Breeding Heifer Validation Program Major Livestock Show Breed Eligibility Guide

    Breeding Heifer Validation Program Major Livestock Show Breed Eligibility Guide

    Breeding Heifer Validation Program Major Livestock Show Breed Eligibility Guide This document is only to serve as a resource for determining the eligibility of specific breeds at major livestock shows. This is not a complete list of breeds eligible and livestock shows reserve the right to add/remove breeds at the discretion of show management. *Always refer to respective livestock show’s official rules and information. ü 1 ORB – Other Registered Breeds (Bos Taurus type, non-American), ARB – American Registered Breeds (Bos indicus type) ü 2 ORH – Other Recorded Heifer (Bos Taurus type, non-American) ü ARB – American Registered Breeds (Bos indicus type) ü n/a – means not applicable (i.e., breed not eligible for exhibition at show) BREED HLSR 1 SALE 1 SAN ANGELO 1 RODEO AUSTIN 1 FORT WORTH 2 STATE FAIR 1 HOT FAIR Angus Angus Angus Angus Angus Angus Angus Angus Beefmaster Beefmaster Beefmaster Beefmaster Beefmaster Beefmaster Beefmaster Beefmaster Beefmaster ARB ARB ARB ARB n/a ARB ARB E6 Certified (min 50% Beefmaster) Beefmaster ARB ARB ARB ARB n/a ARB ARB Advancer Braford ARB ARB ARB ARB n/a ARB ARB Braford F-1 ARB n/a ARB ARB n/a ARB ARB Brahman Grey Brahman OR Brahman ARB Brahman Brahman Grey Brahman OR Grey Brahman Red Brahman (Red & Grey (Red & Grey (Red & Grey Red Brahman OR Combined) Combined) Combined) Red Brahman Page 1 of 5 Breeding Heifer Validation Program Major Livestock Show Breed Eligibility Guide BREED HLSR 1 SALE 1 SAN ANGELO 1 RODEO AUSTIN 1 FORT WORTH 2 STATE FAIR 1 HOT FAIR Brahman ARB ARB ARB ARB n/a ARB ARB Golden Certified
  • Impacts of Beef Cattle Shortcourses

    Impacts of Beef Cattle Shortcourses

    Impacts of Beef Cattle Shortcourses Dr. Tim Olson Department of Animal Sciences University of Florida, Gainesville The first Breeder’s and Herdsmen’s Short - probably not such a good idea for the showman Course, the predecessor of the Beef Cattle Short either. Courses that have now been held for 50 years, was held on June 18th and 19th, 1951 at the University Mr. Joe Keefauver, an Angus breeder from of Florida. As the title of this first short course Tennessee, spoke on breeding and commented implies, the emphasis was on the production of that although the best cattle come from purebred cattle and the event was sponsored by linebreeding, most people can’t successfully do it the Florida Angus Breeders’ Association. About and most cattle aren’t good enough to be linebred 75 attended this first short course whose topics without running the risk of bringing out bad included fundamentals of feeding beef cattle by characteristics. A lot of emphasis was placed on Dr. R. S. Glasscock of the UF Animal Husbandry visual evaluation by the speakers, as might have Department, selection of breeding females by Joe been expected for the time, but Mr. Keefauver Keefauver, an Angus breeder from Tennessee and also added “You can’t tell for sure by looking, selection of a herd bull by Rae Ferrell, an Angus production is the ultimate test.” Mr. Keefauver breeder from Georgia. A local Gainesville was ahead of his time. Another speaker, however, veterinarian, Dr. Karl Owens discussed herd made the comment that “You won’t find a bull health issues including Bangs, Blackleg, Scours that is too short-legged.” Unfortunately this and Footrot.
  • Read Book the Complete Guide to Beef Cattle Farming: Look Inside To

    Read Book the Complete Guide to Beef Cattle Farming: Look Inside To

    THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO BEEF CATTLE FARMING: LOOK INSIDE TO DISCOVER HOW TO BECOME A BEEF CATTLE FARMER PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Morris Halliburton | 278 pages | 30 Jul 2010 | Createspace | 9781453711828 | English | United States How to Raise Beef Cattle for Profit on a Small Farm | Gone Outdoors | Your Adventure Awaits A single strand of electric wire works better at containing the cattle than barbed wire. Place a hay ring in the pasture. The hay ring reduces loss from round bales as the cattle consume them. Make sure the ring is near the gate so the tractor doesn't have to drive far to place the bale in it. Also make sure there is a water source for the cattle. Livestock water fountains work the best because they supply continual water to the animals. A stream or creek can be sufficient, as long as they don't go dry during hot weather. Purchase starter stock. Young animals are the best because they are cheaper. The first year you can choose to use all of the stock for breeding, or slaughter a portion as well. A large amount of information is available on beef production through books and magazines. With the electronic age, you can also access information over the internet from many universities and in particular, their Extension systems. For copies of printed information, you can also visit your local Extension Office. Other suggestions for developing a working knowledge of beef production are to join a local beef producers organization and visit with other local producers. Most producers are more than happy to share their knowledge.
  • Complaint Report

    Complaint Report

    EXHIBIT A ARKANSAS LIVESTOCK & POULTRY COMMISSION #1 NATURAL RESOURCES DR. LITTLE ROCK, AR 72205 501-907-2400 Complaint Report Type of Complaint Received By Date Assigned To COMPLAINANT PREMISES VISITED/SUSPECTED VIOLATOR Name Name Address Address City City Phone Phone Inspector/Investigator's Findings: Signed Date Return to Heath Harris, Field Supervisor DP-7/DP-46 SPECIAL MATERIALS & MARKETPLACE SAMPLE REPORT ARKANSAS STATE PLANT BOARD Pesticide Division #1 Natural Resources Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 Insp. # Case # Lab # DATE: Sampled: Received: Reported: Sampled At Address GPS Coordinates: N W This block to be used for Marketplace Samples only Manufacturer Address City/State/Zip Brand Name: EPA Reg. #: EPA Est. #: Lot #: Container Type: # on Hand Wt./Size #Sampled Circle appropriate description: [Non-Slurry Liquid] [Slurry Liquid] [Dust] [Granular] [Other] Other Sample Soil Vegetation (describe) Description: (Place check in Water Clothing (describe) appropriate square) Use Dilution Other (describe) Formulation Dilution Rate as mixed Analysis Requested: (Use common pesticide name) Guarantee in Tank (if use dilution) Chain of Custody Date Received by (Received for Lab) Inspector Name Inspector (Print) Signature Check box if Dealer desires copy of completed analysis 9 ARKANSAS LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY COMMISSION #1 Natural Resources Drive Little Rock, Arkansas 72205 (501) 225-1598 REPORT ON FLEA MARKETS OR SALES CHECKED Poultry to be tested for pullorum typhoid are: exotic chickens, upland birds (chickens, pheasants, pea fowl, and backyard chickens). Must be identified with a leg band, wing band, or tattoo. Exemptions are those from a certified free NPIP flock or 90-day certificate test for pullorum typhoid. Water fowl need not test for pullorum typhoid unless they originate from out of state.