of the most effective means for reaching the great majority of people. Hence an editorial and publicity department has been established as a part of our Extension Service. A well-trained agricultural journalist and newspaper man, Mr. Walter Stemmons, is now in charge of this work, succeeding Mr. Glenn H. Campbell, who resigned to go into the Army. His duties are to supervise and direct all educational publicity, edit all publications of the Extension Service, advise with the County Farm Bureaus in publicity matters, and have charge of the Extension mailing room. The work of this department during the past year has been principally with the Food Committee of the Council of Defense in charge of its publicity. The result during the past year of using the press as a means of Extension teaching has demonstrated the absolute necessity for maintaining adequate, well-organized educational publicity. Only by securing and maintaining cooperation on the part of the press can the Extension Service function in its fullest capacity. The publications of the Extension Service during the past two years have been issued in cooperation with the Food Committee of the Council of Defense. They are as follows: EXTENSION CIRCULARS. Joint Circular of Information No. 4-Selecting Rations for Dairy Cows. G. C. White, Karl B. Musser. February, 1917. Extension Circular No. 10-Farmers' 1917. December, 1916. Institute Announcement, Circular No. 11-Is Milk, Milk? H. F. Judkins. 1917. Circular No. 12-Increase and Conserve Poultry Products. R. E. Extension Circular No. 13-Growing Crops to Reduce the Feed Extension Circular No. 14-Orchard Spray Calendar. S. P. Hollister. April, 1917. Extension Circular No. 15-Common Diseases and Insects Attacking Garden Plants. BULLETINS. A. T. Stevens, G. H. Lamson. May, 1917. Bulletin No. 2-Poultry Selection, Care and Management (Revision). R. E. Jones. Bulletin No. 4-Home Canning. May, 1917. Bulletin No. 5-Farm Manure and Its Housing. B. G. Southwick, F. W. Duffee. July, 1917. Bulletin No. 6-Clover. B. G. Southwick. June, 1917. Bulletin No. 7-Studies from the Survey on the Cost of Market Milk Production. Karl B. Musser, G. C. White, B. A. McDonald, H. F. Judkins. July, 1917. Bulletin No. 8-Poultry Farm Management. R. E. Jones, I. G. Bulletin No. 9-Home Cheese Making. H. F. Judkins, P. A. Bulletin No. 10—A Plan for Short Term Farm Loans in Connecti cut. Guy C. Smith. November, 1917. Bulletin No. 11-Home Curing of Pork. J. A. Simms. November, 1917. EMERGENCY FOOD SERIES. Preserving Eggs in Water Glass. Cottage Cheese-An Inexpensive Meat Substitute. Save the Sugar for the Soldiers. Practical Methods of Drying Fruits and Vegetables. Eat Less Wheat-Try Wheatless Meals. Pickles-Chow-Chow-Chili Sauce-Sauerkraut, Etc. Jellies, Jams, and Marmalades. Peaches; Their Use and Conservation. Meat Substitutes. Wheat Substitutes. Milk. Cutting the Meat Bills with Milk. LOOKING TO THE FUTURE. The war has advanced the development of the Extension Service several years. The demands for assistance have increased many fold over the pre-war period. In order to meet the problems ahead of us there must be, therefore, no retrenchment in our activities. Instead it is imperative that our Extension organization be maintained on its present basis, extended to include other lines of work and developed to a higher state of efficiency. I wish to emphasize especially the urgent need of developing the marketing work, our junior Extension Service including the work with boys and girls and our home economics program. We should also have a specialist in fruit growing and in market gardening. Extension work is of such a nature that our policy must continue to be that of rendering practical service. Extension workers are constantly dealing with vital problems on the farm, in the home and in the community. In order that the Extension Service may give the assistance which will aid in the proper solution of the problems on the farm, in the home and in the community, it is necessary that our employees, in all branches of our work, be men and women, of the highest ability. With limited funds it is better policy, I believe, for the Extension Service to do a few things well than to attempt to carry out a more extensive program with inferior men and women. At the same time, however, it is our obligation to meet the demands for assistance which are being made upon us and consequently we must look forward to the time when those phases of our work which have not yet been taken up may be included in our program. The largest limiting factor up to the present time in the development of our Extension Service has been inadequate State appropriations for proper cooperation with federal appropriations available for Extension Service. Every endeavor, should be made to secure from the next session of our legislature sufficient State appropriation to enable us to take up and develop those phases of our work to which special reference has been made. WORK OF COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AGENTS. I. G. Davis, County Agent Leader. * L. A. Bevan, Fairfield County * E. A. Brown, Hartford County * A. W. Manchester, Litchfield County *John H. Fay, Middlesex County * L. F. Harvey, New Haven County A. B. Cook, New Haven County-Waterbury * F. C. Warner, New London County * John E. Gifford, Tolland County B. W. Ellis, Windham County *County Agricultural Agents, employed jointly by Connecticut Agricultural College Extension Service and County Farm Bureaus. GROWTH OF WORK-In April, 1914, New London County organized a Farm Bureau and the first County Agricultural Agent in Connecticut began work. On December 1, 1916, there were for the first time County Agricultural Agents and organized Farm Bureaus in every county in Connecticut. Since that time, five counties, namely New London, Windham, Tolland, Hartford, and New Haven, have employed assistant county agents. These assistant agents, altho primarily agricultural men, have devoted their efforts to a considerable degree to Junior Extension Work. There have been during the past year a total of fourteen agents and assistant agents devoting full time to county agent work. FUNDS SUPPORTING COUNTY AGENT WORK-While emergency agricultural appropriations have made possible the em ployment of assistant agents in some counties; Federal, state, county, College and town appropriations and contributions, which supported county agent work in the past, have been sufficient for the past two years. The greatly increased cost of operating farm bureaus the past two years has not been due to an increased agricultural department but to the addition of the exceedingly important household economics and boys' and girls' departments. The total cost of operating the average farm bureau agricultural department at the present time is approximately $4500 each year in addition to emergency appropria tions. SUPERVISION-The work of the county agricultural agents is directed jointly by the Agricultural or Executive Committee of the farm bureau and the County Agent Leader representing the United States Department of Agriculture and the Connecticut Agricultural College. The county agent carries out a program determined by his Agricultural Committee and adapts that program to each community by meeting the local director and committee and planning the work to be done in this community. MODIFICATION OF PROGRAM DUE TO WAR CONDITIONSThe war has wrought a great change in the program of the agricultural departments of the farm bureaus. The demands for the kinds of work previously done have greatly increased. There has been a greater call than ever before for assistance from the Extension Service of the College and the U. S. Department of Agriculture. The demand for assistance in cooperative organization has increased. Calls from farmers for advice and assistance have been multiplied many fold. All these calls the county agents have attempted to meet. But the great work of the agricultural departments during the war has not been to urge increased production, or to conduct educational demonstrations, but to help the great body of patriotic farmers supply themselves with labor, labor saving machinery, credit and the raw materials of production. In brief, the farm bureaus have recognized that production would be limited, not by a lack of the will to produce, but by a shortage of the means of production. To help to remove this shortage has been the county agents' main work. MILK SELLING ORGANIZATION—The most important work done during the biennium beginning October 1, 1916, was the assistance rendered to dairymen in effecting the present state organizations for selling milk. For a period of four months the county agents devoted themselves almost exclusively to assisting dairy farmers on this project. In the organization of the Connecticut Milk Producers' Association and the Connecticut units of the N. E. M. P. A., the county agents were an important factor. Some assistance was rendered in the organization of the Farmers' Dairy Company of Bridgeport. The results of this organization work have been far reaching. Thru the advances in prices secured the dairy industry of the state has been saved and every dairy farmer in Connecticut has directly or indirectly profited. EXTENSION SCHOOLS, INSTITUTES, ETC.-During the winter of 1916-1917 and again during 1917-1918 the county agents assisted the Extension Service of the College in arranging for extension schools and farmers' institutes and in many cases participated in the programs. In the two years just ending, 21 extension schools with a total attendance of 697, and 40 institutes with a total attendance of 2257 were held. SURVEY ON COST OF MILK PRODUCTION-In March, 1917, the county agents cooperated with the Connecticut Agricultural College in making a survey of the cost of milk production on about twenty-five farms in each county. The figures showed the cost of milk production for the year ending May 1, 1917, to be $.05.53 per quart and the price for the month of April of that year to be $.06.25 per quart. The average price received was $.0487. The survey was extensively used by the regional milk commission in adjusting the price of milk and enabled representatives of the farmers to present their case with conviction at various hearings. EMERGENCY WAR PLANTING-During the spring of 1917 the county agents and various representatives of the Agricultural College were active in stimulating the organization of various city and manufacturers' movements for food production in cities. It is estimated that from 30,000 to 40,000 men, producers of food, received instruction and supervision thru the county agents in this way in 1917. During 1918 this movement became more definitely organized in the cities and is at present being developed in many cities under a special committee of the Council of Defense Committee of Food Supply. In 1918 the Farm Bureaus in three counties appointed special county agents for food production work in cities. This work was seriously handicapped by a late start. D. E. Warner, special agent in Fairfield County, and J. H. McDonald in New Haven County, both accomplished valuable results. The work done in Bridgeport under the leadership of Mr. Warner and the Bridgeport War Bureau was outstanding. In five weeks Mr. Warner visited 2000 war gardens, conducted organized spraying demonstrations on the gardens of employees of various manufacturers in the city, organized a potato growing enterprise of twenty-five acres with the Police and Fire Departments and rendered much service of an advisory nature. The work in New Haven County had been well organized early in the season in connection with the manufacturers in New Haven and Waterbury. Meriden was well supervised by a special city agent, and Mr. McDonald, the special county agent for food production in cities, devoted his efforts to smaller cities of the county. He was well received and laid the ground for constructive work next year. The city work attempted by the farm bureau in connection with the manufacturers in Hartford County was not a success. In both New Haven and Fairfield Counties, employers have noted that the possession of substantial gardens tends to make employees more contented and to prevent the shifting of labor which is responsible for great economic loss. They also note the benefits of healthful outdoor recreation which these gardens afford to thousands of families. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF CITY WORK-The future development of food production work in cities is an important problem and one which may well engross the entire attention of a special force engaged upon a permanent basis. The present tendency is for the city rather than the county to become the unit of organization. This tendency is undoubtedly a sound one. The county agents, altho their field is distinctly rural, will encourage in every way the development |