The Great Fertilizer Fraud
State chemist warns farmers that nearly half of commercial fertilizers on the market violate state law.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Geo. A. Olson, the state chemist, reports that 49 percent of commercial fertilizer samples analyzed in 1916 were in violation of state law. Many manufacturers intentionally omitted potash, an essential ingredient, while continuing to market the products under names like 'complete' or 'vegetable' fertilizer. Due to the high cost of potash, some firms apparently hoped to deceive farmers by relying on past brand loyalty. Users are urged to refuse any product whose label does not clearly display the composition required by law.
“The elimination of potash from fertilizers which are recommended by the manufacturers as particularly suited to the growing of such crops cannot be too strongly condemned.”
This early 20th-century struggle for truth in labeling highlights the constant tension between corporate profit motives and the agricultural needs of the Columbia Basin, a theme that persists in modern agribusiness regulation.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.