The Origins of Local Government and the Federal System

Local government in New York has evolved over centuries. The governmental forms created by the people reflect functional concerns and a sustained dedication to basic ideas of representative government.

Although we often speak of three “levels” of government, the United States Constitution mentions only two: the federal government and the state governments. The federal system, however, implicitly includes the idea that the states, in the exercise of powers reserved to them by the United States Constitution, would provide for local governments in ways that would take into account local diversities and needs. To the extent that the states have made such provisions in the form of state constitutional grants of home-rule power to the local units, such as in New York, local governments have become, in fact as well as theory, a third level of the federal system.

The experiences of the millions of people who have lived in this state have provided the raw materials for the creation of present-day social and governmental institutions. This chapter reviews some basic considerations that are relevant to the following questions:

  • Why did New Yorkers of long ago create local governments?

  • What types of governments did they establish?

  • What did they believe about governmental power and its uses?

  • How did the land, its climate and its diversities contribute to the shaping of governmental patterns?

  • How did New Yorkers mesh their governmental patterns with those of the emerging nation?

The Heritage of History

A historian of county government will find that the familiar office of sheriff existed in England over one thousand years ago — as did the reeve (tax collector) of the shire or “shire-reeve.” [1]

Long before early European settlers began to plan their particular forms of governmental organization in New York State, the Iroquois Confederacy existed as a sophisticated system of government. The Iroquois Confederacy included extensive intergovernmental cooperation and operated effectively from the mouth of the Mohawk River to the Genesee River. The Iroquois had found it advantageous to substitute intertribal warfare and strife for a cooperative arrangement in which each of the six tribes carried out assigned functions and duties on behalf of all. The federal arrangement in the United States Constitution was patterned after the Iroquois Confederacy. The familiar patterns of local government in New York today, however, stem largely from the colonial period.

Colonial Government in New York

Established by the Dutch, the first local governments in New York began as little more than adjuncts to a fur-trading enterprise. Under a charter from the government of the Netherlands, the Dutch West India Company ruled the colony of New Netherland from 1609 until the British seized it in 1664.

At first the Dutch concentrated almost wholly on commerce and trade, particularly the fur trade. As early as 1614 and 1615, they established trading posts at Fort Nassau, near the present Albany, and on Manhattan Island. Serious efforts to colonize began in 1624, when New Netherland became a province of the Dutch Republic. Beginning in 1629, the Dutch established feudal manors called “patroonships” to expedite the effort of permanent settlement. This system bestowed vast land grants upon individual “patroons,” who were expected to populate their holdings with settlers who would then cultivate the lands on their behalf.

The Dutch rulers of New Netherland initially did not draw a sharp line between their overall colonial or provincial government and that of their major settlement, which was called New Amsterdam. It was not until 1646 that the Dutch West India Company granted what appears to have been certain municipal privileges to the “Village of Breuckelen” — lineal ancestor of the present-day Brooklyn — located across the East River from New Amsterdam. Fort Orange, which later became the City of Albany, obtained similar municipal privileges in 1662. In 1653 the “Merchants and Elders of the Community of New Amsterdam” won the right to establish what was called “a city government.” This was the birth of the municipality which would later become New York City.

The Dutch colonial period lasted for more than 50 years. In 1664, during hostilities leading up to the second Anglo-Dutch War, Peter Stuyvesant, the last Dutch governor, surrendered New Netherland to James II of England, who came to be known as James, Duke of York. The British easily adapted the governments previously established by the Dutch to their own patterns and then further modified them to meet the needs of colonial New Yorkers.

Pressed to name a single source for the present pattern of local government in New York, a historian may cite a number of dates and places and argue that each has validity. However, the most prominent single event in the development of contemporary forms of local government in colonial New York was the “Convention” of delegates, which took place in 1665 at Hempstead, in what is now Nassau County. The purpose of the event was to propose laws for the colony which only the year before had passed from Dutch to British rule. The laws proposed by these delegates were adopted for the most part and came to be called the Duke of York’s laws. They recognized the existence of 17 towns and created one county, called Yorkshire. Thus, the beginnings of town and county government in New York reflected colonial policies of the English government, certain Dutch patterns, and British colonial experience.

At a historic “General Assembly of Freeholders” convened in 1683 by Governor Thomas Dongan, participants passed a charter outlining the principles by which the colony ought to be governed. Known as the Charter of Liberties and Privileges, its principles were drawn from the Magna Carta and closely resembled our modern constitutions. Among other important actions, the Assembly divided the province of New York into 12 counties. The county became the basis of representation in the Colonial Assembly and also the unit of administration for the system of courts that was established at the same time. The charter was signed by the Duke of York and then vetoed by him five months later when he ascended to the throne as King James II. He abandoned the throne in 1688 and, in 1691, a new assembly elected under Governor Henry Sloughter passed new statutes reasserting the principles contained in the original charter.

The office of town supervisor also originated at this time in a directive to each town to elect a freeholder, to be called the “town treasurer,” “to supervise and examine the publique and necessary charge of each respective county.” It is of interest to note that the original function of this office, called the “town supervisor” after 1703, was to allocate county expenses among the towns. County boards of supervisors and county legislatures developed from the meetings of the colonial town supervisors for the purpose of apportioning county expenses.

In 1686, the British Crown issued charters known as the “Dongan Charters” to the cities of New York and Albany. A century would pass before another city was chartered in New York. The City of Hudson received its charter in 1785 by an act of the State Legislature and thus became the first city to be chartered in the new United States.

It is apparent that many of the basic patterns, forms, and some of the practices of local government in the Empire State already existed at the time of the Revolution. The first State Constitution, which became effective in 1777, recognized counties, towns and cities as the only units of local government.

The village emerged as a fourth unit of local government in the 1790s through a series of legislative enactments granting recognition and powers to certain hamlets (see [village_government#village_government]). This trend culminated in 1798, when the Legislature incorporated the villages of Troy and Lansingburgh. Neither now exists as a village; Lansingburgh was long ago absorbed into what has become the City of Troy.

Some Basic Beliefs

Local governments in the Empire State are more than merely products of four centuries of history; they also reflect basic beliefs and perceptions that are deeply held by past and present residents of the State.

There is a fundamental perception, widely shared among Americans, that although governmental power can be used to benefit the people, it can also be used to harm them. This awareness has fostered a firm conviction in New Yorkers that the people must not only promote the desirable uses of governmental power, they must also carefully protect themselves from the abuse of such power.

For this reason, many protective mechanisms have been put in place to hedge the constitutional and statutory provisions that authorize the use of power for specific purposes. These mechanisms are designed to assure that power will only be used for generally acceptable purposes and in ways which will not infringe unduly upon either the dignity or the established rights of the individuals, on whose behalf the power is presumed to be exercised.

Later chapters will identify and describe such protective measures as the judicial system, due process of law, certain constitutional protections, instruments of direct democracy (such as referenda, citizen boards and commissions), and other mechanisms of representative self government — all of which reflect a basic belief that we must subject governmental power to tight controls if we want to protect the people against tyranny, whether it is the tyranny of a king, a dictator or a political majority.

The people’s strong attachment to representative government has greatly influenced the organization and operation of local government. The Charter of Liberties and Privileges (also known as “Dongan’s Laws”) declared in 1683 that the supreme legislative authority, in what was then the colony, “under his Majesty and Royal Highness should forever be and reside in a Governor, Council, and the people met in General Assembly.” The Council and the Assembly, thus endowed with supreme legislative authority, constituted a bicameral (two-chambered) legislature in which at least the Assembly reflected a belief in representative government. In this particular case, representation was by counties. From the very earliest days, the forms of local government in New York have demonstrated the people’s firm belief in representative government.

In addition, New Yorkers have always regarded government in a very practical way. Conceiving of governments as instruments to carry out duties and functions to meet specific needs, they created local governments to carry out particular activities. The Constitution, the statutes, and the charters of the cities, a few villages and some counties spell out these duties and functions.

Since New Yorkers have typically created local governments to meet generally recognized needs, it follows that they would see the forms, powers and operational arrangements of local governments as devices to accomplish specific ends. Constitutional amendments, changes in state laws, and local legislative and administrative action have all facilitated the adjustment of form to function. Such measures have kept local governments responsive to the practical needs of the people they serve. Of course, it is not always easy to make such adjustments and later chapters will identify and describe tensions which develop when adjustments lag behind perceived needs.

The Land and the People

The functions of local governments reflect not only the history and beliefs of the people, but also their interests, how they go about the business of conducting their lives and the characteristics of their physical environment.

New York State encompasses an enormous variety of natural environments. While many local governments on Long Island are concerned with beach erosion and mass transit, those of the North Country often focus on such issues as winter recreation development and snow control.

New York State’s location and geography has influenced the shaping of local government in several fundamental ways. Occupying a prominent position among the 13 original colonies, New York firmly held its position as the nation expanded over the centuries that followed. More than one-third of the battles of the American Revolution were fought in New York, including two decisive battles in the Town of Stillwater and the resulting British surrender at Saratoga, which collectively became the turning point of the war. In New York City, the Federal Union came into being in 1789.

From the start, New York has been the nation’s most important roadway to its interior and its primary gateway from and to the rest of the world. The harbor of New York City and the waterways, railroads and highways of the state have provided the arteries over and through which a large portion of the nation’s commerce has flowed. Airline route maps for the United States and the world illustrate the convergence of transportation in New York State and New York City. New York’s natural resources and its people have maintained New York’s standing as one of the nation’s largest manufacturing states, and as the undisputed financial center of the nation.

If there is a single attribute that characterizes New York, it is diversity. Montauk Point at the eastern tip of Long Island, Rouses Point at the state’s northeastern corner, and Bemus Point near the southwestern corner share little beyond their designation as “Points,” and all abut bodies of water which are themselves diverse — the Atlantic Ocean, Lake Champlain and Chautauqua Lake, respectively.

The Land

New York has an area of 53,989 square miles, of which 6,765 square miles are water. Two masses of mountains — the Adirondacks and the Catskills — stand out in New York’s topography, while Long Island, a 1,401-square-mile glacial terminal moraine, juts 118 miles into the Atlantic Ocean from the mouth of the Hudson River at the tip of Manhattan Island. New York is additionally unique in that its 75 miles of shoreline on Lake Erie, more than 200 miles on Lake Ontario and approximately 165 miles on the Atlantic shore make New York the only state that is both a Great Lakes state as well as an Eastern Seaboard state.

The waters of New York drain literally in all directions: southward to the Hudson, Delaware and Susquehanna Rivers; westward to Lake Erie; and northward to Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River. Also, a small part of the state’s southwest corner lies in the Mississippi River watershed. Those New York waters drain eastward into the Allegheny River and onward into the Ohio River. The Ohio River empties into the Mississippi River, and ultimately, New York waters discharge into the Gulf of Mexico.

The rivers and waterways of New York greatly influenced the development of local government in the state. Settlement followed the waterways and hence river valleys saw the earliest local governments. Most prominent among the rivers, the Hudson is navigable by ocean-going vessels for nearly 150 miles inland to Albany. Also near Albany, the Mohawk River and the Erie Barge Canal extend westward from the Hudson River to form a water transportation route from eastern to western New York. In the southern tier region of the state the Susquehanna River, and to some extent the Delaware River, provided waterways along which commerce, trade and settlement moved. In the northern and northwestern parts of the state, Lakes Erie, Ontario, and Champlain, as well as the St. Lawrence River provided additional avenues for development.

The Climate

Meteorologists describe the climate of New York State as “broadly representative of the humid continental type which prevails in the northeastern United States, but its diversity is not usually encountered within an area of comparable size.” [2] This means that New York enjoys a climate of extremes — hot in the summer and cold in the winter.

Immediately east of Lake Erie, in the Great Lakes plain of western New York, and in those areas influenced by the Atlantic Ocean, such as Long Island, winter temperatures are often substantially more moderate. Long Island and New York City, for example, record below-zero temperatures in only two or three winters out of ten.

To understand the significance of this climatic diversity one need only glance at the average length of the frost-free season, which varies from 100 to 120 days in the Adirondacks, Catskills and higher elevations of the western plateau, to 180 to 200 days on Long Island. With its obvious implications for the agricultural and other economic interests of New Yorkers, the climate directly affects local government. In parts of the state that are referred to as “snowbelt” regions, the average yearly snowfalls exceed 90 inches. In these areas, local government must devote a major portion of its time and municipal budget to snow control on the highways and related challenges of highway maintenance.

The People

Nowhere is the essential diversity of New York more clearly demonstrated than in the ethnic and national origins of its people. From the earliest days of colonial settlement, the multiplicity of people coming to the great harbor at the mouth of the Hudson River nurtured the growth of the nation’s largest city. Immigrants from all over the world flowed through the vast funnel of New York City. While many went on to populate the nation, others remained residents of the city or the state. The languages of the world continue to echo on the streets of Manhattan.

For 16 decades prior to 1970, more residents of the United States lived in New York than in any other state. After 1980, New York was supplanted by California as the most populous state Based on 2010 Census data, the New York population of 19,378,102 now ranks third to the California population of 37,253,956 and the Texas population of 25,145,561.[3]

The downstate counties — Nassau, Suffolk, Westchester and the five boroughs of New York City — account for over 61.7 percent of the state’s population.

Distribution of New York Towns and Villages by Population Category.[1] reveals the diverse sizes of New York’s towns and villages. The largest number of towns and villages fall in the 500 to 2,499 population grouping. However, some New York villages have more than 25,000 people and some towns have populations over 50,000.

Table 1. Distribution of New York Towns and Villages by Population Category.[1]
Population Towns Number Towns Percent Villages Number Villages Percent






Up to 500





500 - 2,499





2,500 - 4,999





5,000 - 9,999





10,000 - 14,999





15,000 - 19,999





20,000 - 24,999





25,000 - 49,999





More than 50,000





Source: 2010 Census of the Population, courtesy of the Empire State Development.

  • As of December 31, 2017 the number of villages were 536

These population statistics and those of New York Counties with Population and Population Change by Type of Municipality, 2000 - 2010. [2] reveal a great deal about local government activity. In some areas of the state, the local governments habitually deal with issues of expansion and growth. They must provide basic public services and amenities under conditions of rapid expansion, and somehow finance these activities. In other areas, local governments oversee static communities where little or no growth is taking place. A few areas face issues associated with contraction, where, for instance, excess school facilities are visible in communities with declining populations of school-age children.

Figure 1. New York Counties with Population
Table 2. Population Change by Type of Municipality, 2000 - 2010. [2]
2000 2010 Percent Change Percent of Total Population






Towns [4]










Towns Outside of Villages





Cities other than NYC





New York City [5]





American Indian Reservations





The People’s Interests

If government does indeed exist to serve the practical needs of the people, it follows that local governments should reflect the desires of the people and devote efforts to their concerns.

New Yorkers, like most people, are vitally concerned with issues related to making a living. Government at all levels has a role in maintaining an environment that is conducive to such pursuit. Accordingly, some basic economic statistics concerning New Yorkers are in order.

More than one-sixth of those employed in New York State work for federal, state or local government. Whether or not employees of local school districts are included, local governments employ far more people in New York State than the state and federal governments combined.

The total non-agricultural labor force of the state in October of 2011 was estimated at 8,727,000; a 176,400 job increase over October of 2001. Service industries, including wholesale and retail trade, financial, transportation and other services, lead the way with over 89 percent of the non-agricultural employment in New York State.

New York State agriculture is surprisingly diverse and vibrant. Agriculture is not only a vitally important element of New York’s total economic life, it is often times the socio-economic backbone of New York’s rural communities. The positive impact that New York State agriculture has on the local economic multiplier estimates far exceeds the local economic multipliers of many other employment sectors.[6] Agriculture also provides many valuable quality-of-life benefits such as open space, habitat protection, agri-tourism and recreational opportunities in the form of hunting, fishing and snowmobiling. In 2007, there were 36,350 farms in New York State, comprising 7.2 million acres of land or about 25 percent of the state’s land area. The total value of agricultural products sold in 2007 was $4.4 billion dollars, which represents an increase of 51 percent over 1997 numbers, more than half of which was derived from dairy cattle and milk production.[7]

Figure 2. Map of New York Towns and Cities by Population Density

The Federal System

Among the factors that have influenced the nature and development of local government in New York, one of the most important has been the state’s role as a member – a charter member – of the federal union called the United States. The state and its local governments are an integral element of the federal system.

At the time the people of the United States were creating the Federal Union in 1787-1789, they deeply feared great concentrations of governmental power. Accordingly, the United States Constitution established more than one principal center of sovereign power.

Although the United States Constitution does not mention local governments, the constitutional fathers were well aware of its existence and importance; it is clear that they saw it as a vital and continuing element of American life. The First Congress made the intention of the framers explicit in 1789 when it proposed the Tenth Amendment – all powers which were not delegated to the national government would rest with the states.

Among other reserved powers, the states were free to subdivide not only their territory, but also their powers, authority, and functional responsibilities, as they believed appropriate to their unique needs and requirements. Accordingly, every state in its own way has provided for local governments and has endowed them with relatively independent authority to deal with issues that are regarded as local in nature. This has been done within limitations and according to applicable procedures set forth in the United States Constitution. The reapportionment of county legislative bodies to conform with the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment (described in [county_government#county_government]) provides a clear example.

When, as in New York, the people of a state have endowed their local governments with extensive home-rule authority through State Constitutional provisions, it is possible to regard the local government as a third level of the federal system. By delegation from the people of the state, the local government constitutes a third center of sovereign power, energy and creativity.

The Federal Idea

Local government in New York is more than a mechanical device or a set of legal formulas that channel political power toward specific objectives. It includes beliefs and values that reflect basic ideas and it embodies centuries of practical experience.

In 1789, the people of the several states were aware of and asserted their differences and diversities. If they were to accept a central government, it would have to recognize that the states would retain and exercise powers and decision-making authority in affairs of immediate and direct importance to the people in the places where they lived and worked. The American people still hold firmly to the idea of federalism. It operates both between the national government and the 50 state governments on the one hand, and between the individual states and their local governments on the other.

The federal system should not be viewed exclusively, however, as a means for limiting the concentration of power. It also permits the people to use power most effectively to deal with problems that are special and unique to different regions of such a highly diverse land.

By leaving the states free to organize and empower local government in response to the demands and needs of local areas, the constitutional framers gave a vast nation the capacity to achieve necessary unity without sacrificing useful diversity. Fostering the unity necessary to have a nation and giving free play to diversity at the same time is the essence of the federal system. Over two hundred years of American history demonstrate the suitability of local government for the nation as a whole, and for New York State in particular.

The National Government

A thorough description of the national government would comprise several lengthy books. Here are some fundamental facts:

First, the national government is a government of “restricted” powers. Over the years, presidential, congressional and judicial interpretations have found constitutional authority for adjusting and broadening the specific powers granted to the national government into functional areas that the framers could never have foreseen. Nonetheless, the Tenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which reserves powers to the states, is still applicable.

Article 1, section 8 of the Constitution grants Congress the power “to regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states…​.” Without formal amendment, this has sufficed to accomplish such diverse national purposes as the assurance of orderly air travel, electronic communication by radio, television and (potentially) the internet, and the maintenance of orderly labor-management relations in the nation’s industries.

Because the national powers alone cannot direct many areas of governmental activity efficiently or effectively, there has been a clarification — perhaps even a strengthening in some cases — of the roles of states and local governments in the federal system. We can see this, for instance, in some aspects of governmental action regarding environmental pollution. The national government has not been urged to assume the task of picking up solid waste matter from the curbs in front of homes throughout the country. Nor is this an appropriate matter for the states. The duty to collect solid waste is, by general agreement, a function of local government.

What, then, should the national and state governments do in the area of solid waste management? The national government sets standards, conducts and finances research to develop new technologies for waste disposal, and provides financial assistance to utilize the new technologies to meet the standards. State governments match the research findings to their particular needs, develop specific regulations and operational procedures to meet the standards, devise optional organizational arrangements, and provide technical and financial assistance to local governments with issues related to solid waste management.

Collaborative governmental action can also best handle many other areas of public service.

The Role of the States and Local Government

The states have “residual” powers. In the words of the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution, the states have “the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it…​.”

Some people assert that the states have “lost” power to the national government, as the latter has moved more and more into areas once regarded as the exclusive province of the states.

To some extent this may be true, but it is also true that state activity has grown. The situation is not so much one of relative gains or losses of power as it is of expanding governmental roles at all levels.

Recent experience shows that even as societal issues become nationwide in scope, they often retain state and local dimensions that make it desirable for the states and local governments to act in concert with the national government.

More and more, contemporary federalism has become a cooperative arrangement whereby national, state and local governments direct their energies toward common objectives. Consider the great highway network that now spans the nation. National, state and local governments all help to finance, build and maintain roads.

Any recent state or municipal budget includes a range of joint national-state-local actions that extends into familiar areas of modern life - public, health, social services, education, environmental pollution, and land-use planning. Local government officials increasingly find themselves cooperating in enterprises where they must coordinate their individual roles with officials who are similarly engaged at other levels of government.

The Contemporary Federal System

For more than a century and a half, people sought to clearly distinguish what the national government could do from what the states could do. The United States Supreme Court filled many shelves with learned discourses and decisions related to this purpose.

In recent decades, relationships within the federal system raise less questions of relative powers, and more questions regarding the portion of an overall governmental objective that each level of government can achieve. Since contemporary social problems have many facets and dimensions that cross governmental lines, it is no longer productive to view the federal system as an arena where antagonists contend for power. It is far more useful to consider which government can perform a given function, activity or duty and produce the best results.

The contemporary questions of federalism ask: how best to spread the costs of certain types of government programs among the tax-payers of the whole nation, how best to channel the dwindling natural resources of the nation to purposes of greatest benefit to all, how best to ensure that the powers of government are not used unfairly for the benefit of one segment of the society at the expense of others, and how best to ensure that citizens have a meaningful role in making decisions that are important to them.

In some ways the contemporary federal system operates in the way the framers envisaged. But we look at the system somewhat differently now than we did in the past. The root question of the national-state relationship has always been the extent to which the system would be centralized or decentralized. Today we often answer this question in terms of how much centralization or decentralization is necessary or desirable to meet agreed upon general objectives.

For local officials, one of the most significant attributes of the contemporary federal system is the array of federal financial grant programs that have been authorized by Congress, especially since World War II. The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance,, available from the Superintendent of Documents, contains more than 1,000 separate federal aid programs. Many, though not all, are available to local governments. The fact that a program appears in the Catalog does not necessarily mean that funds are readily available. Making a federal grant program operational involves three necessary steps. Congress must enact legislation that “authorizes” a relatively large amount of money for the program. Congress must then appropriate all or part of the authorized amount — usually a considerably smaller figure than the full authorization. Finally, the President must release the appropriated funds through the federal budgetary control mechanisms for administration by the designated federal agency.

In recent years, many federal categorical assistance programs have been consolidated into block grants in response to demands for a simpler aid system and greater flexibility in state and local use of federal funds. Despite the continued consolidation of domestic assistance funding into block grants, the dollar amounts allocated to various programs have been continually reduced.

The Future of the Federal System

The resolution of public problems often requires a multi-pronged approach that the federal system not only makes possible, but facilitates. Many of our challenges can only be overcome by focusing the efforts of people at all levels. This belief has renewed the interest in various forms of decentralization, both of authority and of capacity to deal with specific problems. At the same time, it is realized that popular participation in community decision making should always be encouraged in an increasingly pluralistic society.

Proper functioning of the federal system requires citizen participation, continual patience and compromise, and toleration of diverse views and approaches. The federal system of government is far from perfect. However, its inclusion of checks and balances, diffusion of authority over several levels, and paramount respect for overarching constitutional principles, makes it the strongest bulwark against tyranny that has ever been seen in the world.

1. Source: 2010 Census of the Population, courtesy of the Empire State Development.
2. SOURCE: 2010 Census of the Population, cited in the 2005 Annual Report, Office of the State Comptroller
1. Readers interested in the history of local government in New York will find informative the “Early History of Town Government” in McKinney’s Town law, prepared in 1933 by Frank C. Moore. Moore later became Comptroller and Lieutenant Governor of New York, and his essay appeared in all subsequent editions of Mckinney’s Town Law. Also of interest is the “History of the County Law,” prepared by James S. Drake as an Introduction for the 1950 edition of McKinney’s County Law.
2. Climate of New York, U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, “Climatography of the United States,” No. 60, p.2.
3. With a 2000 Census population of 18,976,457, New York now ranks third to California and Texas, which have 2000 Census populations of 33,871,648 and 20,851,820, respectively.
4. Includes villages.
5. Includes the five boroughs of New York City.
6. Policy Issues in Rural Land Use, Vol. 9, No. 2 December, 1996. Department of Agriculture, Resource and Managerial Economics-Cornell Cooperative Extension.
7. New York State Agricultural Statistics 2005-2006 Annual Bulletin, printed and distributed by NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets.

results matching ""

    No results matching ""