L 
 
 ON THE CONTROL 
 
 INSECTS 
 AND FUNGI. 
 
 Copyright, 1917, 
 
 By Fred Reinleiii, 
 Portland, Oregon. 
 
 Circular No. 151. July 20, 1917. 
 
ERATTA: <^'^ ^"^ 
 
 Several unfavorable conditions, lar^'ely ■ , ; -rd by the war, 
 combined to make it impracticable for me to reaa proof of this 
 Circular. The result is, it contains considerable typograph- 
 ical errors. Taking the Circular as a whole I find that these 
 errors do not lead to any misunderstanding. On page 12, par- 
 agraph 3, mention is made of an 'insect, admittedly extremely 
 injurious.' By this is meant the pear thrips. On page 32 
 you find 'The Cain Borer' for 'The Cane Borer,' also below, 
 on same page, 'sweet and sour-sweet' for 'sweet and non- 
 sweet.' On page 35 you find 'large pole pines' for 'lodge pole 
 pine.' On page 36 'broadly impossible' for 'blandly impossi- 
 ble.' On page 37 'millions of feet' for 'billions of feet.' also 
 preventative war' for 'preventive work. ' 
 
 On page 39 'left us available places' for 'left no available 
 places.' On page 34 it reads 'these savings' for 'these sow- 
 ings.' Quotation marks have been left out in a number of 
 places where they should have appeared. 
 
 StP \2ldi7 
 
ON CONTROL OF INSECTS AND FUNGI. 
 
 Copyright 1917. By FRED REINLEIN, Portland, Oregon. 
 Circular No. 151. July 20, 1917. 
 
 Inasmuch as anything: new pertaining to agriculture cannot 
 be satisfactorily introduced unless it can be shown that the mat- 
 ter had been submitted to the Department of Agriculture for ex- 
 amination, and had there been approved; it follow^s that it is the 
 duty of the Bureau of Ethnology to define its position in regard 
 to anything new that has bearing on the control of insects. 
 
 I have been wanting the Bureau of Ethnology to define its 
 position on new matter for 19 years past. What the Bureau at 
 present is wanted to act on is set forth in my Circulars No. 148 to 
 150. There was no action of any kind whatever taken on my 
 Circular No. 148, nor on those preceeding, as far back as No. 
 141. This was due, as explained in my Circular No. 150. to the 
 failure of the Chairmen of the Congressional Committees on Ag- 
 riculture to do their duty. 
 
 With the appearance of my Circular No. 149 Senator Geo. 
 E. Chamberlain of Oregon was asked to see to it that the Bureau 
 either admit that I am right, or else show wherein I am wrong. 
 As explained on page 18 of my Circular No. 150, Mr. Chamber- 
 lain w^as fair enough to give me a look at the tw^o replies he re- 
 ceived, which showed that the Bureau had done neither of the 
 two, but had handed him out a bundle of lies in each case. 
 
 Since Senator Chamberlain did not see to it that he got any 
 desired information on any given point the matter was taken up 
 w^ith the congressman from the district I then lived in, Hon. W. 
 C. Hawley, as stated on page 19, of my Circular No. 150. He 
 too, got first of all, a bundle of lies. 
 
 Circular No. 150 was meanwhile gotten out to explain in 
 handy form just what the Bureau w^as most wanted to take action 
 upon. Mr. Hawley was asked to see to it that action was taken, 
 
(2) J 
 
 and here is the essence of the reply he ^ot. "The suggestions 
 made by Mr. Reinlein in this circular (150) have been examined 
 by the experts of this Bureau, who are of the opinion that they 
 are impractical." 
 
 It is all a lie. If the experts had investigated the suggestions 
 they would not now want to hand out an opinion, for they would 
 then positively say wh^t their investigation had shown. An op- 
 inion, as used in law, is the formal decision of a judge or coun- 
 celor; not a mere claim as is the statement of the Entomologist: 
 but the claim is substantiated by giving the reasons upon which 
 the claim is based. Members of Congress can be expected to 
 know this. 
 
 For an illustration of how the Entomologist's claim works 
 out, take the description of the control of the range caterpillar, 
 as given on pages i to 3, of my Circular No. 150. The Bureau 
 has virtually nothing in the way of control that is tangible. They 
 expect to control the caterpillar b}^ natural enemies — parasites 
 and predatory insects, saying the value of the crop is too small 
 to allow of the use of artificial means, in the sense this form is 
 generally understood, which is true. 
 
 Having nothing better to offer than the development of par- 
 asites and predatory insects, and expecting this to solve the 
 problem, or at least make this do to placate the population of the 
 affected territory, is equal to claiming that it would be possible 
 to control the codlingmoth or any other insect by this course a- 
 lot^g. Man can merely assist in establishing natural enemies, 
 which in turn are often decimated b_v enemies of their own. The 
 means of control I suggested, first published in my Circular No. 
 146, issued Aug. 10, 1915, was calling for the systematic use of 
 poultr3\ 
 
 This suggestion was new; and the Entomologist, assisted 
 by his experts, could, without an investigation, right then have 
 handed out an opinion, showing why they arrived at that opin- 
 ion. They did nothing of this kind. 
 
 It had been shown to them that poultry could be made to 
 attack the insect the year around, and it was showi to them at 
 
 ©CLA478435 <ti C^ 
 
 
(3) 
 
 the very beginnincr that poultry is not expected at all to control 
 the pest by attackin^^: the full ^rown caterpillar, studded with 
 hairs. 
 
 Investigations, in this case, could have been begun at any 
 day of the year, hence should have been started immediately. 
 
 Or, to put it another way for an illustration, the Entomolo- 
 gist wants to say, in this case, that his experts claim that poul- 
 try will not attack the egg clusters of the range caterpillar du- 
 ring the 8 months the caterpillar exists in this form. He w^ants 
 to say that his experts claim, that as these egg clusters hatch 
 and each egg develops into a little caterpillar a quarter of an 
 inch long, poultry would not attack these voung w^orms, that 
 further, that these caterpillars while 3'oung, are gregarious and 
 are nearly always exposed to view% poultry would not con- 
 tinue to eat these young w^orms in very large numbers. When 
 present as pupae this insect is greedily eaten by skunks, and the 
 Entomologist wants to credit his experts with the claim that 
 poultry would not eat these pupae. Nor that they would eat of 
 the moths, usually within easy reach. 
 
 As a field station was already established for the breeding 
 of parasites, this investigation of the use of poultry could have 
 been made in the easiest and most inexpensive manner. 
 
 As explained on pages 4 to 10 on my Circular No. 150, a 
 judicious use of poultr}' can be made to absolutely control the 
 bollwevil and the boUworm. 
 
 The Bureau's chief reliance for control of the bollwevil prac- 
 tically from the beginning has been the early burning of the 
 stalks. As many farmers object to the burning, on the ground 
 that it impoverishes the soil, the Bur^u then conceeded that it 
 might do to cut the plants up w^ith the stalk chopper, plow the 
 trash under immediately and harrow and drag the ground "to 
 make it still more difficult for the insects to emerge," You See 
 neither the burning nor the burying kills any appreciable num- 
 ber of the adults. The burning has the advantage in that it kills 
 the immature stages in the infected squares and bolls; w^hile the 
 plowing in buries these immature stages and because of the 
 looseness of the soil due to burying so much vegetable matter, 
 
(4) 
 
 many of these will mature and emerge before settled cold weath- 
 er to successfull}' hibernate. 
 
 Again, these plants had been pumping water out of the soil 
 very heavily for weeks, and the soil is apt to be very hard for 
 anything like successful burying, and the work will be slow. 
 
 I had shown an improved wa^^ of securing the desired 
 result, consisting in throwing the soil at the last two or three 
 cultivations slightly towards the plant, sowing a cover crop, 
 preferably a legume, vetches for instance, at the last cultivation, 
 then cutting the plants off with the V stalk cutter when wanted, 
 burning the plants, and then have thus at once the field produce 
 pasturage, recovering from the air all and more of the carbonic 
 acid and nitrogen that was lost through the burning of the plants. 
 
 Since neither burning nor burying of the plants kills any 
 noticeable number of the adults the Bureau at an earh^ date sug- 
 gested that some of the plants be allowed to stand as traps, and 
 the wevil were then there to be killed with crude oil. It is hard 
 to see how such a' scheme could work, since the adult can readi- 
 ly fly off and being chittinous all over, they should be able to 
 stand a good bit of oil. Of late 3^ears nothing was heard of it, 
 the idea having evidently been found to be absolutely impracti- 
 cable and inefective. 
 
 Up to 191 3 the bollwevil was not known to feed on anything 
 other than cotton. Since then there was noted a decided tendan- 
 C3' of wevils to learn to feed and breed in plants other than cot- 
 ton. As a consequence, as explained on page 8 of mv Circular 
 No. 150, I soon realized that by destroying the bulk of the plants 
 and leaving a small part for traps, bending or rolling the plants 
 down to bring the wevil within reach of poultry, the wevil would 
 thus be exposed to attack till hibernation is fully under way, 
 which in warm winters in the lower cotton belt does not occur at 
 all, or is of very short duration. 
 
 This, as explained on page 9 of my Circular No. 150, led to 
 the suggestion of growing small patches of very late planted cot- 
 ton purposely for traps, and in turn it was found that such trap 
 patches would equally well serve to control absolutel^v the boll- 
 worm at the same time. 
 
(5) 
 
 With these trap patches in use a farmer may safely bury 
 his plants if he prefers, since most adults resulting- from buried 
 squares and bolls would hnd their way to the trap patches to be 
 picked off by poultry. 
 
 However, with a trap patch of late planted cotton on hand 
 to attract and hold for poultry the wevils that will yet emerge 
 from infested bolls and squares on the cut off plants, there is no 
 need for the fertility destroying burning of the plants, nor for 
 the cumbersome and doubtful burying. The burning of the stalks 
 not only means a loss of organic matter contained in them but it 
 means a much greater loss through the action of the fire on the 
 soil. On the other hand the stalks, if left as they were cut off, 
 will rot enough by becoming" overgrown by the covercrop to 
 cause no trouble when the covercrop is plowed in. The stalks 
 thus act beneficially by lessening evaporation of water, by keep- 
 ing a more even temperature, preventing eorsion, especially 
 while the cover crop is yet small, and finally furnishing humus. 
 
 Poultry can, under the supervision of man, be forced to pa- 
 trol the cotton fields during the growing season as needed. Early 
 in the season cotton fields offer very little inducement for wild 
 birds to visit them: food being found much more readily else- 
 where, especiallv in woods and orchards. 
 
 If a field to be planted to cotton is properly plow^ed well a- 
 head of planting time, few if any wevils that may have been hi- 
 bernating within will he able to emerge, and infestation will be 
 from without. As long as there are no squares, these wevils all 
 stay close to the edge of the field, feeding in the tips of the 
 plants where poultry can readily see them. By the time squares 
 appear, usually only about half of the wevils have 3^et emerged. 
 On pages 5 to 7 of my Circular No. 150, you find explained in 
 detail that wevils then prompth^ scatter over the field because 
 they then want to feed and oviposit in squares, unless secured, 
 by man under my former plan, and by poultry under my new 
 plan, within a day or two after their arrival at the edge. Even 
 then, however, infestation usually remains near the edge, grad- 
 ually progressing all over the field as infestation increases. Thus 
 it is doubtless best all around to leave the work of reducing the 
 number of hibernated wevils to poultry. 
 
(6) 
 
 With the wevils reduced the fall before throup:h the use of 
 trap patches, and such trap patches again coming into use, in 
 due time, the following season, and poultry on the watch virtual- 
 ly at all times, there is no chance for the wevil, the bollworm and 
 most other insects to appear in harmful numbers; all of which 
 the Entomologist claims he has investigated and found to be im- 
 practicable. This when he has nothing to offer for his plan of 
 hand-picking by man, after the wevils have scattered all over 
 the field, is only "guardedly" recommended, so that he can 
 make his get-a-way. 
 
 Cultivation destroys the natural home of wild birds. All the 
 protection man can give under the circumstances is not sufficient 
 to counteract the decrease in numbers thus occasioned. Again, 
 since cultivation destroys the fruits and seeds manv of these 
 wild birds normally live on, they cannot increase in numbers 
 sufficient to at least partly protect the cultivated crops, without 
 being compelled to levv a corresponding toll upon the crops. The 
 gallinaceous domesticated birds are developed from a species 
 that was capable of read}' flight, lived lo to 15 years, the female 
 la3^ing a few small eggs each spring. 
 
 The domesticated kind, evolved by selection, being unable 
 to fl3^ to an}^ extent, is thus specially fitted to work under the 
 supervision of man when and where it is wanted, doing thus lit- 
 tle or no harm, while doing good. And their number can be 
 regulated by man entirely corresponding to the need for their 
 services. 
 
 Thus, in the control of the three insects thus far mentioned, 
 there does not enter the use of any artificial means, poultry, un- 
 der the supervision of man, doing the work. Hence, this being 
 a clear-cut issue, it would seem best to force the Entomologist to 
 talk on these first. 
 
 I have shown in my Circulars Nos. 147 to 150 that there are 
 many other insects where poultry can thus be used to best ad- 
 vantage* and quite a number where their use offers the only 
 practical means of control. Grain and forage crops infested by 
 pests, often can be similarly controled by poultry as is the range 
 caterpillar, also it was shown that various caterpillars affecting 
 
(7) 
 
 timber trees can be coiitroled by poultry- when all else is im- 
 practicable, usually by the poultry scratchiiii^: for their pupae be- 
 low the surface of the ground. 
 
 It is not often that an insect is exposed to view during all 
 of its life cycle as is the range caterpillar, nor that it is within 
 the easiest possible reach of poultry at all times. 
 
 The gipsy and browntail moth, considered as pests affecting 
 woodlands, because of the loss value of trees grown for timber, 
 call for inexpensive means of control. Farmers' Bulletin No. 564 
 issued in 1914, pretends to offer such means. x-\s explained more 
 in detail on pages 17 and 18 of my Circular No. 147, and on 
 pages 7 and 8 of Circular No, 149, poultry can reduce the gipsy 
 moth in woodlands through securing part of the eggs, securing 
 some of the young caterpillars that tali off the trees or spin down, 
 scrape out older caterpillars that hide at the base of the trees 
 during the day, and secure some of the females before they ovi- 
 posit. 
 
 In addition, since the males are strongly attracted to light, 
 they could be trapped w^ith a trap such as I offer. This point is 
 discussed on pages 4 to 7 of my Circular No. 147. Also on pages 
 14 and 15 of my Circular No. 149, in discussing the control of 
 the leopard moth it is shown how the apparatus shown on last 
 page, or some similar make, can be fitted at small cost for a trap 
 to catch these insects in large numbers. 
 
 Farmers' Bulletin No. 788, the leopard moth, on page 9, 
 gives a good idea of what Chief Howard thinks makes a trap. 
 He sslys: "To what extent electric lights are serviceable ... has 
 not been definitely determined, — a method frequently advised 
 consists in placing shallow pans around the electric light poles 
 to attract the moths; the pans are partially filled with water and 
 a small quantity of kerosene is poured into them. The moths fly- 
 ing against the globes drop into the pans and are prompth^ kill- 
 ed when they come in contact with the oil." 
 
 As these globes are suspended about twenty feet above the 
 ground at the intersections of the centerlines of the streets, or 
 drivewa^^s in parks, I cannot see how "pans placed around elec- 
 tric light poles" could ever be close enough to the globe to catch 
 
(8) 
 
 moth; and therefore, I contend that the advise is all drawn from 
 imagination and that nothing" whatever has been determined as 
 claimed. 
 
 Also, Chief Howard does not want to talk about beneficial 
 and neutral insects that would also be caught. When I sent my 
 first catch — about 1500 insects, mostly ground beetles, which 
 are, on the whole, beneficial — to the Bureau, Chief Howard said 
 that if this is a fair sample of what the torch catches, its use 
 should be prohibited by law. 
 
 To use any trap to advantage the user has to know at least 
 approximately what kinds of insects he is catching, so that he 
 may use the trap only when there is a paying catch of injurious 
 insects being made. Assuming the Entomologist or someone else 
 has a trap that w^orks satisfactorily, it is the Entomologist's bus- 
 iness to encourage its use and educate the public to using it. 
 But with the Entomologist persistently claiming I am wrong all 
 around, it is unwise for me to push the use of a torch for a trap 
 and other matters, till other things not involving the use of any 
 apparatus has been settled. On page 5 of my Circular No. 147, 
 short reference is made to matter I published in regard to trap 
 tests, made by the late Prof. M. V. Slingerland. Cornell Univer- 
 sity, Utica, N. Y. These tests showed that mere pans with 
 water and kerosene do not catch anything worth while, and par- 
 ticularly nothing in the way of strong iiiers, of which the leopard 
 moth is one, and so is the male of the gipsy moth, and both 
 sexes of the brown tail moth. 
 
 The method you find described by me admits the insects to 
 the red hot burner through a ring of light about i ^ inches wide. 
 formed by two simple corresponding cone-shaped attachments 
 placed at this distance apart, and because of the heat, the daz- 
 zling light — dazzling by comparison with the darkness outside — 
 and the narrow space within, they become momentarily disabled 
 and drop through a hole in the low^er cone into a pail below. But 
 where bright lights interfere, or if a wider range of attraction is 
 wanted, as would he wanted in the case of timber insects in gen- 
 eral, I would use something else. 
 
 The Bureau of Ethnology has no tangible means whatever 
 
(y) 
 
 for controliiiR the gipsy moth in woodlands, except the breeding 
 of parasites and predator}^ insects. 
 
 Since these parasites are admitedly equally subject to attack 
 by natural enemies, they cannot, admitedly, be safisfactorly con- 
 trolled by man. 
 
 The Bureau, because of this now proposes, to give the ad- 
 vise to change as far as practicable the deciduous woodlands to 
 coniferous ones, because the gipsy moth can live only upon con- 
 iferous after having passed the first two stages upon deciduous 
 vegatation. 
 
 As explained on pages 2 to 5 of my Circular No. 148 and 
 elsewhere, as there quoted, the pines of New England, and ap- 
 parently all over the country, are now becoming infested by the 
 European pine shoot moth. As this insect selects nearly always 
 the apical bud for oviposition, if as yet uninfested, I had pointed 
 out that pouring some semi-liquid clay into the apical cluster of 
 buds before oviposition starts w^ould protect it, the female then 
 merely selectin a side shoot for oviposition. 
 
 The Bureau has no means of control. What they pass off as 
 such is 140 years old and consists in removing the infected 
 shoots. This, if the insect is at all plentiful, results in trees so 
 crooked and dwarfed, dwarfed through the repeated destruction 
 of the apical bud through successive years, as to possess no val- 
 ue. 
 
 This insect is night flying, and as near as can be seen a 
 satisfactory trap is the only feasible means of reducing the num- 
 ber of the adults. 
 
 There is no assurance whatever, in fact all odds are against 
 it, that it would be possible to make it pay to so keep down de- 
 ciduous vegetation that there would not be plenty of food to en- 
 able the gipsy moth to pass through the first two stages. But 
 even if this were feasible, the Bureau has no means of controlling 
 the pine shoot moth, and wants to condemn the plan evolved by 
 me. 
 
 For control of the brown tail moth in woodlands the Bureau 
 likewise, has nothing to offer, but claims that "elimination of 
 
do) 
 
 oak, scrub-apple and wild cherr}' would greath' assist in reduc- 
 ing the numbers of this pest." (Farm Bull. No. 564, page 20). 
 Oak is pretty hard to eliminate, and as the female can readily 
 fl^' long distances, thej^ simpl}- would oviposit in orchards. Be- 
 sides the caterpillar also develops ver3^ readih' on plum and wil- 
 low, also, for second choice, on elm and maple. In fact the cat- 
 erpillar feeds generally upon all deciduous trees, on many shrubs 
 and even upon herbage. (Farm Bulletin No. 264, page 16.) 
 
 It must be born in mind that for successful breeding little 
 of the preferred food plants, such as oak, is needed to enable all 
 the caterpillars hatching from eggs concentrated thereon to com 
 plete about one-third of their growth, after which time the}' can, 
 by migrating, complete their growth on less suitable food. 
 
 As both sexes are strong fivers and much attached to bright 
 lights, and because the females oviposit much more heavily in 
 territory adjacent to bright lights, the most feasible means of 
 protecting all of the valuable food plants thus affected would 
 consist in trapping the adults at these lights. I have very defh- 
 nite ideas of how this could be successfully done, but with the 
 Entomologist allowed to misuse his office I want to do nothing. 
 
 In woodlands, since these caterpillars frequently spin down, 
 also often fall off, or blow off by wind, poultry would keep them 
 at least partly under control. It is not known to what extent 
 poultry can eat these harry caterpillars, but there is very little 
 doubt that they can stand considerable of the smaller size when 
 taken along with other food. The trouble is, neither the Bureau 
 of Biological Survey nor the Poultry Division of the Bureau of 
 Animal Industry have any positive knowledge on this point to 
 offer. If the Entomologist had wanted investigations to be made, 
 and the point is he claims his experts made investigations of all 
 of m\' suggestions, he had his own staff to do this quite easily. 
 
 On page 18 of my Circular No. 150 I stated that the alfalfa 
 wevil is known to be readily found (and then eaten) by poultry. 
 The source of information for this statement is found in Agricul- 
 tural Bulletin No. 107, page 57, contributed by the Biological 
 survey, 19 14. The rather detailed evidence there given pretty 
 conclusivelv shows that it is onlv a matter of getting e- 
 
(ll) 
 
 noug:h of poultry on the job to make Mr. Wevil scarce. Under 
 date of Jan. 6, 1917, Mr. W. L. McAtee of the Biological Sur- 
 vey writes, in essence, that when opportunity affords, the Bureau 
 will be glad to make observations on the use of poultry in de- 
 stroying boll wevils, although the work relating to domestic 
 fowls pertains to the Bureau of Animal Industry. Youthus here 
 see that, in common with every sane man, Mr. McAtee does not 
 look at such use of poultry as impractical suggestions as the 
 Entomologist claims his experts pronounce it to be. The adult 
 alfalfa wevil is of about the same size as the boll wevil. As for 
 the immature stages, poultry forced to stay in cotton fields will 
 be mighty quick to pick on fallen squares and should be quick 
 in learning to hunt for the one containing a juicy grub. The 
 Bureau of Entomology had far the best means and biggest op- 
 propriations to test this out. 
 
 Since apple, pear, plum and cherry are the favorite food 
 plants of the browntail moth, orchards are their favorite feeding 
 ground. This problem of control is discussed more in detail 
 along with that of the gipsy moth at the passages cited. The 
 young caterpillars hatch after the middle of August and spend 
 the winter in webs in the top branches of the trees. In the spring 
 "if the infection is bad, the caterpillars are often numerous e- 
 nough to devour the leaves as fast as the trees are able to devel- 
 op them." (Farm Bui. No. 564, page 9.) Thus since poison 
 then could not be used, the Bureau advocates a spraying of 6 to 
 10 pounds arsenate of lead to 100 gallons of water, applied by 
 the middle of August to kill the young caterpillars soon after 
 hatching, a course expensive and uncertain, because there is 
 much vareation in time of hatching, and objectionable of danger 
 of poisoning fruit. 
 
 Of course a high power sprayer is required, The voung 
 caterpillar, if not killed then, will do but little damage that fall, 
 and an excellent way of control would be to go over the orchard 
 after the most of the leaves have fallen, say after the middle of 
 October, with a torch outfit constructed after the principle of the 
 towersprayer outfit, as described on pages 11 to 13 of my Circu- 
 lar No. 147. Selecting a warm spell the caterpillars will be ac- 
 
(.2) 
 
 live and drop ott upon feeling the heat. This would not kill them, 
 at least not at once, but poultry might be kept handy to pick 
 them up. They are then only about one-half inch long. Besides 
 in the absence of poultry, the ground can be licked where the^" 
 fall, thus killing them. 
 
 This use of the torch makes for the cheapest insect killing 
 agent known, where chemicals cannot readily be used. Also the 
 flame destroys the spores of fungi. This was conceeded as far 
 back as 13 year ago by the State Entomologist of Illinois, a mat- 
 ter dfscussed at some length on pages 10 and 12 of m^- Circular 
 No. 148. Every one connected with agriculture in the Eastern 
 States knows of the damage done by fungi. During hot moist 
 weather in summer, a licking with a torch is extremely swift 
 and cheap, and works in wet weather, while spraying does not. 
 
 A torch outfit of the tower type, it is shown on page 9 to 13 
 of my Circular No. 147, is far the best means of controlling 
 the insect, admitedly extremely injurious, now getting a good 
 foothold in the East. As there explained all you have to do is 
 apply a mild licking with the flame while the insect is in the lar- 
 val stage, when upon feeling the heat they will drop, when the}' 
 can be killed through more heat applied to the ground. The Bu- 
 reau has nothing at all that can approach this in cheapness and 
 efficiency. 
 
 As near as I ever could learn, I was the first to apply heat 
 from a torch for the destruction of insects. I did this first in 
 the late summer of 1896, with a view of trying to get rid of harle- 
 quin cabbage bugs. The following year this was kept up on in- 
 sects in general, and it was incidentally found, that the adult 
 harlequin bugs would fly to tassels of sweet-corn, where they 
 could be more easily secured. I suggested to the Secretary of 
 Agriculture in 1898. after publishing what I had found, that this 
 and other original knowledge I had published be acquired for the 
 public benefit. He said the government never had done any- 
 thing of this kind. Bad as this was the Entomologist now goes 
 him one better and claims I. am wrong all around. Taking this 
 harlequin bug for example, the country must sustain needless 
 heavv loss. In my Circular No. 141 I had pointed out that better 
 
(13) 
 
 trap-plants for this insect could be secured b}^ seeing to it to 
 have always some coneiferous plant going to seed, as then the 
 bugs would congregate on the seed stalks. Again, on page 24 of 
 mv Circular No. 147 it was further shown that poultry given ac- 
 cess to these trap plants would pick off the adults, and thus the 
 whole matter of disposing of these highly troublesome pests can 
 be made to almost take care of itself. This insect is highly in- 
 jurious in the Southern States. Thus the New Mexico Experi- 
 ment Station in one of their latest reports states that this insect 
 ranks first as a truck-crop pest jn that state. The Entomologist 
 has nothing that is practicable. 
 
 Another highly injurious sucking insect for the control of 
 which the Entomologist and his boasted experts have no practi- 
 cal means of control is the Mexican Conchucla, referred to in 
 various places in my Circulars No. 147 to 150, and discussed in 
 detail in my Circular No. 140, pages i to 15. This insect feeds 
 on almost anything, but prefers fruits and seeds. 
 
 Poultry in quantity will keep them in check on alfalfa or 
 other early lowgrowing crops, and by seeing to it that suitable 
 trap-crops Milo-maize for instance, to concentrate them on, are 
 supplied later, and have them picked off there by poultry, such 
 crops as peaches or grapes can largel}' be kept free. 
 
 This application of heat is also far the best means of control 
 for insects hiding in the ground or about a plant during the 
 night and cool part of the day, of which class the hop flee beetle 
 and the chinch bug are good examples, Thev are discussed at 
 length in previous Circulars. 
 
 If the loss to Texas by the boll weevil is 27 million dollars a 
 year, it is about 75 million for all of the infested area. My plan 
 saves this whole loss since under it poultry will keep this 
 and other pests in check, so that the plant will be able to set all 
 the fruit it can possibly mature. Taking all the evidence sub- 
 mitted by me, it is worth in insect-and fungus control over half 
 a billion dollars a year. 
 
 Representative Hawley upon getting his second batch of 
 lies was asked to see to it that the Entomologist be forced to 
 
(i4) 
 
 meet the issue. He did not secure any further reply. In common 
 with all the other members of Congress I had tried before, with 
 one exception, he did not want to express himself in any way as 
 to whether or not the evidence submitted is sound, just as if he, 
 in common wnth the rest, had no brains at all, and were not ex- 
 pected to have any and to use them. 
 
 The exception in the case is the representative of the 2nd 
 California Distrjct, Hon. John E. Raker, to whom reference is 
 made on page 12 of my Circular No. 148. Upon the issuance 
 of my Circular No. 147 his attention was called to this matter, 
 because Senator Gore had flatly refuse to do his duty, and he 
 declared himself ready to see to it that it be carried through for 
 whatever merit it might possess for the benefit of the public. In 
 common w^ith everybody else, including the Entomologist, he 
 was unable to point out anything that was not sound reasoning. 
 
 When my Circular No. 148 appeared in March 1916, he sug- 
 gested, since Senator Gore and Representative Lever had taken 
 no action, that I take the matter up with Senator Morris Shep- 
 pard, he being chairman of the Committee on Expenditures in 
 the Department of Agriculture. This was done and the matter 
 was brought to the attention of many other members of Congress, 
 which caused Mr. Raker to remark that this should bring results. 
 The results wanted were, that the Entomologist be forced to 
 either admit that I am right, or show wherein I am wrong. Well, 
 it did not bring any such results. Upon the issuance of my Cir- 
 cular No. 149 Senator Sheppard was again kept posted and he 
 asked the Department of Agriculture for an explanation. The 
 result was that under date of August 15 he wrote me he had been 
 advised my plans are not practicable, and that therefore he did 
 not desire to push the matter further. He never gave me a look 
 at What advise he got. Thus, he wanted to hang me without a 
 chance of defense. 
 
 Meanwhile Mr. Raker was kept posted, and upon getting a 
 copy of my Circular No. 150, he wrote, "Keep up your work and 
 results are bound to follow." This was not saying much, but 
 was saying more than all the rest of the Congressmen I had tried 
 
(i5) 
 
 before, put tos^ether. He, being unable to see anything but 
 sound evidence, simply wanted me to see it through, believing 
 this to be best for the public weal. 
 
 The evidence submitted shows that the Entomologist is 
 humbugging the people with their own good money. That, there- 
 fore, there is not a Congressman whose constituants are not af- 
 fected, and that, therefore, all members of Congress are in duty 
 bound to have the matter sifted to the bottom. 
 
 Mr. Raker having expressed a willingness to co-operate 
 with Mr. Hawley to the extent of getting the U. S. Entomologist 
 to define his position, he was asked, while this Circular was be- 
 ing prepared, to use his influence to get the Entomologist to act. 
 As a result I receive on March 17th a copy of the reply Mr. Ra- 
 ker had received from the Department of Agriculture. It simply 
 was a bundle of lies However, unlike all previous statements it 
 contained specific statements which were expected to be taken 
 for proof by Mr. Raker that I am wrong. These statements, al! 
 short, refer to the control of the range caterpillar, the boll wevil 
 and the Argentine ant. 
 
 In the case of the range caterpillar the Department claims 
 that my plan of control consists in "that turkeys be secured in 
 sufficient numbers to destroy the insect. It has been shown how- 
 ever, that on account of the poisonous hairs born by the cater- 
 pillar, turkeys will not feed upon it." This when it had been 
 pointed out to the Bureau from the beginning, nearly two years 
 ago, that the period when the caterpillar has poisonous hairs is 
 the most unfavorable time to attack it, that the insect is within 
 the reach of poultry the whole year around, and that the correct 
 time for attack is while it is present as egg, as young larva, 
 as pupae and as adult, as explained in detail' on pages i to 4 of 
 my Circular No. 150, and also in this Circular. 
 
 As the adults deposit their eggs on stems of wild grasses or 
 on weeds, the resulting caterpillars, no matter how plentiful, find 
 enough food for partial development on the range, but as they 
 run short, they attack, as far as accessible, cultivated grasses 
 and grains. It would be quit impossible to protect these crops 
 
(i6) 
 
 b}^ poisoning, since the caterpillar, being of the class of the 
 tussock moth, the gipsy moth and the browntail moth, or well 
 known to be extremel}^ resistant to poisons once they are ahcut 
 one-third grown, hence coming as they do in hordes, the}^ 
 would usually eat up the crop first before the poison could have 
 any possible effect. Hence with the Bureau silent on this point 
 all along, the only possible means of protecting cultivated crops 
 consists in keeping them down to harmless numbers on the range. 
 
 The Bureau's only proposed plan of control consist? in re- 
 lying on artificial introduction of parasites and of predatory bee- 
 tles. This is also the course that has been followed for the con- 
 trol of the gipsy moth in woodlands. But the Bureau frankly 
 admits that these parasites may in turn be decimated at any 
 time by hyper-parasites preying upon them, and for this reason 
 the Bureau pointed out that a surer means of avoiding damage 
 consists in changing the easily injured deciduous woodlands 
 to less easily injured coniferous tracts; a proposition that 
 holds out no chance of financial success. 
 
 In regard to the possibility of growing grain for poultry in 
 the range caterpillar belt. Mr. H. N. Vinall, of the Bureau of 
 Plant Industry was sounded for an opinion. He said in substance 
 that while rainfall is light even for sorghums it is possible to 
 grow fair crops of Dwarf milo and feterita. For details see Far- 
 mers' Bulletin No. 322, and Circular No. 122C. 
 
 In regard to my plan for controlling the boll weevil the De- 
 partment says: "Mr. Reinlein's suggestion is that chickens be 
 provided in sufficient numbers to destroy all or most of the wee- 
 vils as soon as they make their way into the fields." 
 
 On page 7 of my Circular No. 150 you find explained why 
 I had previously claimed that, by giving poultry, raised in suffi- 
 cient quantities to do the work, the run about the fields ^during 
 the period of emergence this "would certainly result in material 
 reduction at small cost." Ask the Department what they have 
 to attack the weevil with at this period. They have nothing. They 
 deliberately want to convey the inference that it would be quite 
 impracticable to have poultry in sufficient quantity handy, be- 
 
(i7) 
 
 cause, there bein^ no use for it at other times, it would be im- 
 possible to have them ready during the period of emergence. 
 They deliberately keep silent on the evidence shown on pages *8 
 to lo of mv Circular No. 150, which describes in detail the feas- 
 ibility of the use of poultry practically the year around, not on- 
 ly for the control of the boll weevil, but also of the boll worm, 
 the cotton catterpillar and several other important cotton in- 
 sects. They also want to convey the inference that there would 
 not also be plenty of work for poultry on other crops, thus mak- 
 ing it possible to economically sustain large flocks the year a- 
 round. 
 
 As explained on page 8 the Bureau's plan of plowing out the 
 plants in the fall, impracticable as it is on the whole, or the cut- 
 ting off of the plants, forces the weevil to hunt for food, and, 
 finding none, causes it to adapt itself to feed and breed upon 
 plants other than cotton. As shown there, it is manifest that if 
 this habit is allowed to bscoms fixed, control by the destruction 
 of the cotton plants in the fall, what there is of it now, wnll lose 
 its value, and control will bs made indefinitel more difficult. To 
 counteract this tendancy, I shovved there, as also in this Circular 
 that the best thing that can be done, is to provide trap patches 
 of verv late planted cotton. The Department wants to keep quiet on 
 this point, also wants to keep silent on how these trap patches 
 incidentally make possible the complete control of the boll w^orm. 
 Nor do they want to admit that poultry would pick on the fallen 
 infested squares and destroy the grubs within, keeping up this 
 work through all of the fruit setting season. 
 
 This habit of poultry of picking on fallen infested fruit I 
 had shown can be taken advantage of in many other cases. Smce 
 the Bureau wants to keep silent I wish to point out that this 
 habit is of very great value in the control of fruitflies, such as the 
 apple-maggot or the Mediterranean fruit-fly, (Ent. Cir. No. 160) 
 because, it will be shown, this course is the only really feasible 
 means of control. 
 
 Admittedly, for this group of insects, "no very successful 
 msans of control have bsen found." The Mediterranean fruit-flv 
 
(i8) 
 
 has not yet invaded this country, so far as known, but it is in 
 Hawaii, found there in 1910; and in Bermuda, supposed to be 
 there for about 503'ears. Hence, since it infests practically ev- 
 ery kind of fruit, including the tomato, egg-plant, string bean, 
 prickly-pear and pumkin, may have been brought into this 
 country years ago, but b_v having plenty of chance to diffuse and 
 by being similar in its work to the apple-maggot, may not yet 
 have been noticed. 
 
 Because of the great range of food plants, wild and cultiva- 
 ted, little good can be expected from the collection and destruc- 
 tion of fallen infested fruit. As a result "in regions where the 
 pest is well established, as in Australia and South Africa, much 
 attention has been given to devising effective remedies, other 
 than the collection and destruction of fallen fruit. A plan ... was 
 the covering of the trees with netting and ... was thougnt to be 
 practical. ... This plan apparently has not been followed to any 
 great extent." 
 
 The only other known means that has anN' chance of success 
 is the more recent use in South Africa of a poisoned bait spray- 
 ed over the trees for the destruction of the adult flies, evolved 
 by Mr. C. W. Mally (Ent. Cir. No. 160, page 18). The results 
 were surprisingly good. To get these results, however, it was 
 necessar\' that the bait was evenh' distributed over the trees, 
 prickly pears, bush, etc., around the orchard — Practically all 
 the flies present during any one day found it very quickly and 
 fed on it to their destruction..." (p. 19) 14 applications were 
 thus made and the cost for material was about 8c per tree. What 
 it cost with the labor added is wisely left out. Again, rains 
 might interfere, and the application of the spra>' to fruit as it is 
 approaching maturit_v might prove objectionable." Nothing is 
 said as to what effect such continued poisoning would have on 
 other insects, beneficial or neutral. 
 
 "...When (the larva are) fully developed, w^hich usually re- 
 quires a fortnight or three weeks, thev leave the fruit, w^hich has 
 as a rule fallen several days previouslv, and enter the ground, 
 seldom going deeper than one inch, depending on the nature of 
 the soil. There they soon change to pupaeia and remain for 12 
 
(i9) 
 
 days to three weeks, depending: on the season — (p. 13).. Pupae 
 were present under some of the deca3^ing peaches.,.. (p- 18). 
 
 Thus poultry going about cultivated or wild vegetation in- 
 infested, would simply have to pick on fallen fruit and thus 
 either hnd larva within, or would, upon turning the fruit, often 
 find pupae in full view, while those not feasible will be found by 
 scratching, usually within an inch of that very point. Hence, 
 economical control of this insect, or of the apple maggot, clearly 
 calls for the widest possible use of poultry; this is simply making 
 a systematic use of a domesticated kind of natural enemy. It 
 (the Mediterranean fruit fly) is without question the most de- 
 structive fruit pest on record in the w^orld toda3^"[p. 10] 
 
 "The Argentine Ant," the Department tells Mr. Raker, '*is 
 and insect which makes its nest in buildings.... Mr. Reinlein's 
 plan is to use a plumber's torch to drive the ants, which he be- 
 lieves Will carry their eggs and larva with them, iilto the open 
 where it wmII be devoured by poultry." 
 
 Every word is a lie. 
 
 In Entomology Bulletin No. 122 you read: "At all the in- 
 fested points the levee is found to be teeming with the ants and the 
 batture itself is a constant breeding place... Here the ant colo- 
 nies are found under every particle of drittwood and trash and 
 during almost the entire year they are in attendance upon Coc- 
 cidffi and Aphidida^ upon the willows." Ask the Departmeni 
 what means they have to control the pest there or on crops, 
 whereby attending lice and scale insects they make, it is estima- 
 ted by the Department, on the average 5 specimens grow where, 
 in their absence, one formerly was found before. 
 
 The Department has nothing, absolutely nothing that is at 
 all feasible. Just the same they want to deliberately fool the pub- 
 lic by refusing to even admit that poultry raised in a systematic 
 way to cope with such an enormous proposition has a chance to 
 be of anv value. This when they, in Bulletin No. 122 state that 
 the ants, when unmolested, very greatly interfere in the rais- 
 ing of chicks, from which it follows that poultry is by nature an 
 enemv of this pest. 
 
(20) 
 
 In summer time the ants appear to do as little excavating 
 as possible and seem to limit their efforts to excluding light and 
 water, etc. [E. B. No. 122, p. 56.] In case of danger the work- 
 ers' first instinct appears to be to remove the young [egg, larva, 
 pupae] to a place of safety, and they readily sacrifice their own 
 lives in order to accomplish this, [p, 40] Thus poultry, given a 
 chance, will simply scratch the whole combination up and eat 
 them up. For a beginning, however, to get a flock established at 
 this work in a badly infested locality, I had pointed out that it 
 might be of benefit to assist them some. One way would consist 
 in accelerating their destrucfibn by the use of a blast torch, the 
 kind shown on last page being a good type, and another way 
 would consist in exposing quick acting poisoned sweets to the 
 ants, which latter kills a limited number and drives the rest a- 
 wa}^ from that particular place, giving poultry an undisturbed 
 roosting place at night. 
 
 It is manifest that there is much wild land that needs clear- 
 ing, and a man wishing to rear poultry there should be welcomed 
 b}' any owner to do so, and this would result in a self-sustaining 
 well pajMug business, but if this work could not be made to pay 
 for itself, it would have to be done just the same, since there is 
 no more feasible wav known, and since without it the ants would 
 be masters of the land, and stay masters. 
 
 On page 1 1 of my Circular No. 150 I made reference to Ag- 
 riculture Bulletin No. 377, giving the results of poison experi- 
 ments to control the ants in houses. I showed on pages 11 to 
 14 that the most feasible means to obtain this consists in first of 
 all giving the widest possible use to poultry outside, and then 
 control the ants that have gone to nest in the houses b^' exposing 
 quick acting poisons, which kills a few and drives the rest away 
 quickly, stating expressly on page 13 that, "the use of poisoned 
 sweets for control in houses is a necessity." No talk about an^' 
 torch at all. You probabh' did not look for any such skillful ly- 
 ing on the part of any Executive Department. 
 
 "The experts of the Department are of the opinion that Mr. 
 Reinlein's plans are entirely impracticable ", the Department 
 
winds up its yarn. Then just let them point out what plans de- 
 scribed in this circular are impracticable. 
 
 The Bureau makes no attempt to point out any means ot 
 controlling- any invasion of cultivated crops by the ran^e cater- 
 pillar. There are no means that can be pointed out- Neither 
 they nor anyone else has any, except it be continued hand pick- 
 ing-. How entirely futile the use of arsenicals would be can be 
 gathered from a record of an outbreak of the yellow-bear cater- 
 pillar given in Entomology Bulletin No. 82, part V. "judging 
 from the results of these experiments, the arsenicals [applied to 
 larva one-fourth to three-fourths grown, whereas the rang cater- 
 pillar invades the ciop when nearly full grown, and is much 
 larger] cannot be depended on to control. "[p. 66] "On reach- 
 ing maturity the larva crawl under heaps of dead v\'eeds, tufts of 
 grass.... In such quarters, which offer but slight protection the3^ 
 
 construct frail cocoons There is no better method of fighting 
 
 this species than to burn the weeds, grass etc., under which the 
 pupae, [of the hibarnating brood,] find protection — " 
 
 But there is a batter way: Poultr}^ given the run through 
 such weeds, grass etc., will be able to get many of these pupae. 
 Besides there is also a Spring brood with insects in the pupael 
 stage during summer even still lighter protected- This course of 
 control I had shown in previous circulars to be applicable in 
 many other cases; especially in the control of certain timber in- 
 sects. 
 
 Whatever would burn is intended by nature to serve as pro- 
 tection for the plants and tor the animal life subsisting under 
 their protection, for providing breeding ground for ground dwell- 
 ing birds, for increasing humus, retaining moisture, preventing 
 erosion. Hence, such burning, often recommended by the Bureau 
 in similar cases, cannot be too strongly condemned. 
 
 Details for meeting the conditions that w^ill be encountered 
 in carrying on poultry raising on a large scale in the range cat- 
 erpillar territory are given in my Circular No. 146, pp. 9 to 14. 
 I may add that, since the succulent plants in that area are usual- 
 ly protected by strong spines, hence are not available for food, 
 it is feasible, where they are available, to render daily a small 
 
(22) 
 
 patch of them fit for nourishment, since they then provide both 
 food and drink. This can be done through the use of a cactus 
 burner or a hot air blast torch. A suitable t3^pe is shown on the 
 last page of this Circular. A little grain scattered through that 
 patch will attract all of the poultry to that spot. A supply of 
 feed can as readily be provided on the range as anywhere, 
 through the raising, in suitable valleys, of grains adapted to 
 semi-arid areas. It is also practical to raise green feed for win- 
 ter feeding, since at least the necessary breeding stock has to be 
 carried over, by the raising of root crops, hardy and not hardy, 
 and of vegetable plants, hardy in that territory, such as kale 
 and Brussel sprouts. 
 
 It is true that on page 12 of Bulletin No. 443 the Bureau 
 claims cultivated cereal crops can be protected against the range 
 caterpillar by spraying with a solution of one pound of powdered 
 arsenate of lead to 50 gallons of water. But where are the tests 
 to prove such an idiotic claim? The Bureau has found it neces- 
 sary to recommend the use of 3 to 5 pounds of arsenate of lead 
 to 50 gallons of w^ater for the destruction of newh^ hatched larva 
 of the browntail moth, then what can you expect from a third 
 and lifth strength solution of this where "the full grown larva 
 frequenth' measures 2/2 inches in length, with the diameter of a 
 man's index finger," (Bull. No. 85, p. 78) and w^here there is a 
 continual stream coming in from the surrounding range? 
 
 All the essential features of this, and much other matter be- 
 sides, was explained to Mr. Raker by the use of marked and an- 
 notated copies of my Circulars No. 146 to 150, and Mr. Raker 
 was asked to hand this up to the Department for action, after 
 having examined same. This he did, and he got the following 
 reply: "The experts of this Department are of the opinion that 
 Mr. Reinlein's plans are impractical. Apparently he is writing 
 theoretically and without any first-hand knowledge of the insect 
 concerned." 
 
 Thus seeing that Mr. Raker was giving me a chance at 
 making a defense, thev did not want to make any specific state- 
 ment this time, and did expect Mr. Raker to let the matter rest 
 upon their word that I am wrong, this when thev had been asked 
 
(23) 
 
 to show why their previous letter had not been a bundle of lies. 
 Naturall}^ Mr. Raker was asked, under date of April 13th, to 
 prosecute the matter further. 
 
 The far-reaching evils of erosion, their cause, their effect 
 and t leir prevention, are describsd in Yearbood Separate No. 
 688, Farms, Forests, and Erosion. ''In general anvthingthat in- 
 creases surface run-off, increases erosion... As a rule it is onl}' 
 when the natural protective cover of forests, brush, grass and 
 other plants is disturbed that serious and long continued erosion 
 results"' (page 8) 
 
 This is all new to the U. S. Entomologist and his experts, 
 judging by what they write. A good sample ot what they write 
 appeared recently in Agricultural Bulletin No. 416; The Red 
 Spider on Cotton. Under heading of Remedial" Measures, you 
 read on page 60: "Too much emphasis cannot be placed on the 
 importance of ridding all field borders, ditch banks, terraces, 
 etc. of all vegetation as far as possible — " 
 
 Since cotton is only one of the 183 kinds of plants the red 
 spider is known to feed on, employing this means in this and 
 in other cases as advocated by the Bureau, for instance in the 
 destruction of hibernating quarters for the chinch bug and the 
 boll weevil, would, a perusal of Separate No. 688 will convince 
 you, in the course of a comparative short time, turn the country 
 into a desert. 
 
 But aside from this I had shown throughout my Circulars 
 No. 139 to 150 that such destruction of host plants is all wrong, 
 and that the correct way of control consists in using the prefer- 
 red host-pants for traps if they are to be used at all as a means 
 of control. Since the Entomologist has been talking for about a 
 year to the effect that I am wrong all around, without offering a 
 particle of proof, I now prove them to be wrong once more, from 
 the latest available evidence. 
 
 On page 59 the authors state that the red spiders hibernate 
 on several of the native and door-yard plants. "These hosts 
 serve as sources of dispersion." Of course, what else could they 
 do if not treated. "By destroying during winter and early spring 
 
(24) 
 
 polkweed, Jerusalem oak, Jamestown weed, wild blackberr}^ 
 w^ild geranium and other plants w^hich breed the pest, much good 
 W'ill be done. This plan has been tested by the writer in several 
 instances and has given complete immunity the following sea- 
 son..." How these plants w^ere destroyed is not stated, proba- 
 bly by burning and grubbing out. How^ about the next season? 
 Has that work to be done over again every season? Of course 
 w^ith first choice food plants rem^oved, the spiders will subsist on 
 second, third and last choice plants. True, there is no practical 
 wa}' to treat the plants, especially in out of the wa}^ places, ex- 
 cept bv the w^a}' shown b}^ me as far back as 1898, b3' using the 
 hot air blast, for which work the type of torch shown on last 
 page is ver3^ suitable. These weeds are very often not on the 
 owners land and,' anyway, if on waste places; should be left there 
 except to give something better a chance, which in turn, will al- 
 so harbor spiders, 
 
 " In several instances of past severe annual infestation, 
 
 violets" (probably the most favored winter food plant) "adjoin- 
 ing fields have been thoroughly spra^^ed, wath the result that no 
 red spider appeared in these fields..," Therefore 3^ou see if you 
 only did treat these plants, thev would act as traps instead of 
 sources of dispersion. And hot air furnished by a torch is ex- 
 tremel}' cheap. Then again, since these plants ma^' not be on 
 the owners land, he can keep his crop clean b}^ giving the plants 
 near the source of infectation an occasional slight licking with 
 a torch. 
 
 With a practical means of controlling them on the crop at 
 hand, there is some very good reason why the winter host plants 
 should be left to themselves. Anything that kills the spiders 
 kills also, as a rule, the natural enemies that are present. If the 
 host plants are not treated, the}'- usualh^ become heavih^ infested 
 and in turn-much sought after by natural enemies of the spider, 
 causing the latter to increase in number. As the spider does not 
 spread fast the use of a torch near the edge of the field makes it 
 possible to absolutely control invasion. 
 
 Again, taking cotton for a sample, this crop is attacked bv 
 man^' other enemies. Suppose infestation by red spider had 
 
(25) 
 
 been prevented through desiruction of host plants, but the cot- 
 ton aphis were taking a hold. Repeated slight swift lickings 
 with a torch are far the best and cheapest means ol control for 
 this insect, and for aphis in general. On the other hand if noth- 
 ing was done and red spider is invading the crop, the spider is 
 thus being taken care of without extra work. 
 
 In thus using a torch other larger insects present will be 
 noticed, because they start to run when the,v feel the heat from 
 the torch, when they can be killed. A large part of these would 
 require hand picking or expensive contact insecticides. However, 
 as will be shown later in discussing boll weevil control, poultry 
 can be made to take care of these. 
 
 It has been suggested to Mr. Raker that the matter had 
 reached a stage when it would be speciallv opportune to have 
 him call the attention of Mr. Lever, Chairman of the House 
 Co;miittee on Agriculture, to it. As a result a letter was received 
 from him May 8, containing the following: ..."it is my purpose 
 to work with Mr. Raker or any other member of Congress that 
 can and will give their assistance to this matter. The Department 
 claims there is nothing in your idea, that you are wrong on all 
 points." 
 
 Thus Mr. Raker himself has found no evidence that I am 
 wrong. On the contrary wants to be shown if there is an3«thing 
 wrong about it. As for assistance, Mr. Lever is bound under 
 the law to make the Department meet the issues, admit that I 
 am right or else show what is wrong. 
 
 That poultry raising as a means of controlling certain insects 
 can be made to pay, and pay big, is pretty conclusively proven 
 by evidence presented in Year-book Separate No. 700: The 
 Thanksgiving Turkey. There on page 4 you find an account of 
 successful turkey-ranching carried on "in the unsettled foot-hill 
 region of California, and in certain sections of Arizona and other 
 western states." If turke}^ can thus be profitably raised on a 
 large scale in semi-arid, mountainous and very thinly settled 
 sections, it is not clear why there should be any barrier to the 
 systematic raising of chickens for both meat and eggs in the re- 
 gion infested by the range caterpillar, or elsewhere over low- 
 
(26) 
 
 priced land, for that matter. 
 
 Beginnings with the melting of the snow after mid-winter, 
 with insects then as 3^et completely inactive, and wild seeds 
 scarce or absent, stems of grasses or weeds carrying the promi- 
 nent egg-clusters of the hemilenca become the object of favorite 
 attack by poultry. The insect is exposed to attack in this form 
 as a rule, till June ist. 
 
 The larval period in the largest number of cases extends 
 from June ist to September ist— three months. That the poultry 
 would effectively attack the insect in the larval form is proven in 
 Ent. Bull. No. 85, p. 93: "On July 27, 1909 two robbins were 
 seen, each with a hemilenca larva in its bill — By this date the 
 majority of the larva are half grown. 'The birds fiew away with 
 these..— apparently only of the smaller ones — as if intending to 
 feed the caterpillars to their young." Thus if young birds can 
 stand such young larva, it is safe to say that poultry can eat 
 great numbers of the newly hatched and partly grown ones. And 
 of course it is all a matter of the number of poultry on the job, 
 whether any young larva would be left to grow big. There is 
 nothing objectionable about the pupae. Skunks eat them greeily, 
 although according to Chief Nelson of the Bureau of Biological 
 Survey there is at present no evidence to show that they eat of 
 the la^a, big or small. The adults are in plain uiew, resting on 
 stems of grasses during the day, hence subject to attack. Egg- 
 laying begins early in September, the species in this stage thus 
 being subject to attack from then on till covered by snow. 
 
 All this, with much" other matter, was in essence pointed out 
 in my Circular No. 146, August 10, 1915- As the Entomologist 
 has done nothing to satisfy himself as to the value of the evi- 
 dence submitted, it will be v/ell to see what he says about birds, 
 as enemies of the gips}'- and brown-tail moth. The latter of the 
 two seems to be the w^orst of all important hairy caterpillars as 
 regards the nature of the hairs.... The presence of caterpillars of 
 the brown-tail moth in large numbers was actually unbearable 
 on account of the poisoning... (Yearbook Separate No. 706. p, 2) 
 Birds have some importance as enemies ~ of the gipsy-moth..., 
 
(27) 
 
 pothunters..., have destroyed ^reat numbers of insectivorous 
 birds. "Much of the increase in the number of the pest is attrib- 
 uted to this." The caterpillars are preyed upon by the cuckoos, 
 the Baltimore oriole, the yellow-throated vires and the blue jay." 
 No destinction is here made between big and small caterpillars. 
 "The moths are eaten by many birds," which is pretty good ev- 
 idence that poultry would eat the moths of the range caterpillar, 
 "and the eggs are eaten by several species." (Farm Bull. No. 
 275, page 15.) Again, "birds are important in checking the 
 spread of the brown-tail moth. The caterpillar, like other hairy 
 
 species, are not so much eaten by birds, except certain ones 
 
 The moths... are preved upon to a great extent bv birds...." 
 (Farm. Bull. No. 264, p. 18.) 
 
 In regard to controlling such insects by means of natural 
 enemies, the Entomologist says in Year-book Separate No. 704, 
 page 9: '..,with other kinds,.,, which may exist in the egg stage, 
 in a crawling larval stage, in a quiesent pupael stage, and as a 
 flying adult, and which in their native homes are parasitized by 
 whole series of species of parasites, some attacking them in one 
 stage and some in another, and still. others in a third, it is not 
 such a simple thing to introduce and acclimatize the parasites 
 necessary to reconstitute the normal environment." And admit- 
 tedly these parasites are subject at any time to decimation by 
 hyper-parasites. 
 
 Since the gipsy- and brown-tail moth are principally tree- 
 feeding insects, they are usuallv out of reach of poultry. But 
 the3^ are also often within reach. ..."it is a common habit with 
 the larva (of the gipsy-moth) if they are disturbed, to spin silk- 
 en threads which are attached to the trees, and in this way low- 
 er themselves to the ground." (Yearbook Separate 706, page 5) 
 Thus if a larva lowers itself a few times with poultry on the 
 ground, the lowering is apt to be stopped for good. "...,Of 
 course the brown-tail moth is carried in the caterpillar stage just 
 as is the gipsy moth" (through their lowering on silken threads) 
 ".upon vehicles of different kind passing through the infested re- 
 gion and upon the persons of pedestrians as well,... (Farm Bull. 
 264, p. 13) "...small caterpillars [of the gipsy moth] immedi- 
 
U8) 
 
 atel}^ after hatching may be blown long distances b}^ the wind. 
 It has been proved that spread often occurs from a distance of 
 from 12 to 20 miles in this way. [Y-Sepr. 706, page 5]. How to 
 get rid of such scattered caterpillars the Bureau has not the 
 slightest suggestion to offer. With the woods patrolled b}' poul- 
 tr}^ for this and other pests, such as the brown-tail moth and the 
 tussock-moth, this would keep the incipient pest in check. 
 There is no means of extermination. The gipsy moth has been 
 discovered as far west as Cleveland, O. Being an isolated case, 
 everything humanel}' possible has been and is being done to 
 stamp out the pest. But with 3'oung caterpillars having been 
 blown 12 to 20 miles it cannot be told for years with any degree 
 of certainty whether the attempts at extermination have been 
 successful. 
 
 "Over half a million dollars is the yearly expenditure [for 
 the control of the gipsy moth] in Massachusetts at the present 
 time." [Y. S. No. 706, p 8,] This is for work by towns and 
 cities. In the woodlands the gipsy moth multiplies unhindered. 
 It will be seen then, that unless the moth there is kept in check 
 — and poultry is the only means in sight, the Bureau having 
 nothing to offer but parasites and elimination of favorable food 
 plants, such as oak — with the young capable of being blown for 
 miles, there will be a constant reinfestation of cleared areas from 
 this cause alone. This alone explains wh3' "it is inevitable that 
 new colonies will be found from time to time outside the region 
 now known to be invested,.." Thus in Dep. Agr. Bulletin No. 
 273, p. 18 it is estimated that the wind blows 210 million small 
 larva annuall}^ into the ocean, and the number is probably much 
 greater. It also emphasizes the necessit}^ of keeping this moth 
 confined to New England territory if rapid and general spread 
 over the United States is to be prevented." 
 
 In Year-book Separate No. 704, p. 14, the U. S. Entomol- 
 gist says: "On the whole, the work [of importing parasites of 
 the gipsy- and brown-tail moth] has been very successful, and 
 has helped in bringing about infinitelj'- better conditions in New 
 England so far as these pests are concerned, and while it is prac- 
 ticall}' certain that both the gipsy moth and brown-tail moth will 
 
(29) 
 
 gfradually spread westward,- it is equally sure that the imported 
 natural enemies will go with them, and that none of the long 
 continued disastrous outbreaks which we saw in Massachusetts 
 in the years prior to 1905 will occur further west." 
 
 Let us see: "...A large part of the funds expended by towns 
 and cities (in Massachusetts over half a million dollars a year) 
 has been used for the protection oi shade and ornamental trees, 
 it having been found impossible to carry on extensive work in 
 w^oodlands, owing to the extreme cost of these operations. The 
 beauty and attractiveness of most cities and residential sections 
 depend on the trees...." (Y. S. No. 706 p. 10) That means that 
 no funds were spent in woodlands except a little for experimen- 
 tal work to find out that such work as is done in cities and 
 residential sections involves their "extreme cost." The fact is 
 the woodlands are not accessible to spraying rhachinery, and 
 moreover represent far too low a valuation for this and all other 
 artificial means of control, hence the insect there is left to breed 
 unchecked. The "long continued disastrous outbreaks" have 
 been and are existing there right along. "Enough pressure was 
 brought to bear, however, in the fall of 1899, to cause the dis- 
 continuance of State appropriations for the control of these in- 
 sects... Matters became so serious in 1905 that work was resumed 
 by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts..." Thus you see the 
 "disastrous outbreaks" this humbugologist speaks about refer- 
 red to conditions in towns and cities during a period when the 
 state spent no money for 5 3'ears. 
 
 The "infinitely better conditions" thus leaves the country 
 at large without control, and as for work of the parasites, the 
 insect does sufficiently well in spite of those to require the use 
 of half a million dollars in towns and cities in Massachusetts a- 
 lone. Poultr}' is a natural enemy of these and other insects, the 
 only natural enemy that can be definitely controlled by man in 
 its work, hence should for control in woodlands and farms, form 
 the chief reliance in control. 
 
 As for control in cities and residential sections this could be 
 simplest secured through trapping the adults, in the case of the 
 
(so) 
 
 g-ipsy moth of the male only. If woodlands and farms are con- 
 trolled bj^ poiiltr3^ the number of brown-tail moths congregating 
 in cities will correspondingly decrease, and thus greatly reduce 
 the necessity for control there. If 3'ou will see to it that your 
 Congressman uses his influence to see to it that action 
 is taken on the matter in hand, I propose to show you how these 
 moths can be trapped in vast numbers at surprisingly low cost. 
 Until this is done you will have to look to the Secretary of Ag- 
 riculture and his experts to show you how this trapping is done. 
 Mr. A. S. Weiant, the author of Year-book Separate No. 700 
 was asked to tell what he knows about poultry as a means of 
 controlling insect pests. He said to do this one should be an en- 
 tomologist. Speaking of turkeys as largely occupying his at- 
 tention, Mr. Weiant says: "As a means of keeping down grass- 
 hoppers I can vouch tor them," There is no good reason why 
 chickens should not answer as well. If so, this then simply 
 proves that I was right when I said as far t)ack as in my Circu- 
 lar No. 147, p. 15, that the correct means to control grass-hop- 
 per outbreaks consists in judiciously using poultry: that since 
 their stronghold is in the high, dry, rocky lands, dangerous in- 
 vasions from that source can l>e prevented by having large flocks 
 of poultry roam over these otherwise nearly idle lands. Over 
 further on Mr. Weiant says: "Turkeys are naturally g:reat ran- 
 gers and when given the opportunity can pick up the most of 
 their food in meadows, grain fields, pastures, alfalfa fields, etc' 
 Then why not raise enough of them to utilize all of the ex- 
 isting opportunity? And why should chickens not do as well? 
 I have noticed in the South that turkeys spend very little time 
 in the cotton fields provided there are any pastures or grain 
 fields to roam in. This is just what one would expect. Meadows, 
 grainfields and woodlands offer far better feeding than cotton 
 fields early in the season when poultry vrill be wanted to be kept 
 in cotton fields on purpose as needed, the shortness of food sup- 
 ply forcing them to hunt for weevils and attack fallen infested 
 squares, pick up Argentine ant workers to keep them from fost- 
 ering aphis infestation, during which they render far more val- 
 ue in spite of requiring more grain and more attention, than 
 they would l-)y consuming food where it is more plentiful. 
 
(3r) 
 
 An insect must become quite common before it can form 
 an appreciable portion of the food of (wild) birds..." Bui. 107, 
 pa^e 2. If so, you cannot expect wild birds much to reduce the 
 boll weevil, since being multi-brooded, reduction in number of 
 hibernated adults is what is most needed, and a small number is 
 admitedl_v easil\' able to produce an off-spring large enough to 
 destroy the crop. 
 
 The natural food of the turkey consists of insects, green 
 vegetation, seeds and luits of various kinds." On page 4 of 
 Year-book Separate No. 700 Mr. Weiant points out that tur- 
 keys greatly relish acorns and that where these are plentiful but 
 little grain need be used for fattening them in the fall, which fits 
 in nicely wuth turke}' raising in the woodlands of New England, 
 consisting as the^^ do largely of oak, as a means of keeping 
 down gips}/- and brown-tail moth infestation. "Of the insects 
 turkeys seem to prefer grass-hoppers to all others, but the}^ will 
 also eat circkets, grubs and worms of various kinds, flies, but- 
 ter-flies, moth, etc." There is no reason why they should not eat 
 of the hemilenca moth (range caterpillar). These being on the 
 grass-stems in plain view, simply waiting to be picked. As at 
 that time, late fall, there are hardly any grass-hoppers, thev 
 represent the food most easily available. "Some insects thev 
 appear to let strictly alone. For example I have never seen a 
 turkey eat an ant. a caterpillar, or a potato bug." Now ants may 
 be too small, besides they might eat them in the form of larva 
 and pupa, if not as adults. As to caterpillars, if fullv growm 
 hairy ones are meant by this, it is correct enough. How^ about 
 the small and spineless ones? Only careful tests can tell. 
 
 As to what birds do in the way of destroying the Argentine 
 ant you read on page 73, Ent. Bull. No. 122: "On one occasion 
 Mr. G. A. Runner observed an English sparrow industriously 
 picking up the Argentme workers from a trail which crossed a 
 wude roadway at Baton Rouge. This habit is not, however, a 
 common one with this bird." If this sparrow could get at noth- 
 ing else, a condition that can be imposed on poultry, the habit 
 would become common at once. 
 
 "The flicker, or yellowhammer, Calaptes auratus, has of- 
 
(32) 
 
 ten been seen industriously- digg-ing up shallow ant nests in 
 lawns and grass plots, evidenth^ for the purpose of obtaining 
 the pupa and larva, and should doubtless be credited with being- 
 the most important natural enem}^ w^hich this ant has in the 
 South.,." What the Entomologist was wanted to show^ all along 
 was wh}^ poultr,v would not also dig up these nests. 
 
 Speaking of poultry catching moths, it should be borne in 
 mind that the adults of some borers most difficult to control are 
 moths. 
 
 Take the sugar cane moth borer. This insect is, in Ento- 
 mology Circular No. 139, p. 2, conceded to do enormous dam- 
 age. Figures there given place the loss on plant cane alone used 
 in one factory in three years previous to 191 2 at $145,445. 
 
 Since the U. S. Bureau of Entomology has published very 
 little in regard to the life history of this insect, I asked Gover- 
 nor Pleasant of Louisana for the favor to request his State Ex- 
 periment Station to send me a copy of their Bulletin No. 70, 
 second series: The Cain Borer. This was done. The remedies 
 there given consist in substance in planting the cane as near as 
 possible in the fall, burning all trash, and of culling cane and 
 corn in the spring. The borers in the buried fall-planted cane 
 are not able to emerge as adults through anything as thick as 
 one-half inch of loose soil. "The windrowed areas should be 
 systematically gleaned after removal'of cane for spring planting 
 and all pieces of cane destroyed by fire or carefully buried..." 
 [p. 923] " all trash [cane tops] should when cut be so arranged 
 upon the cane rows as to hasten drying and whenever dry should 
 
 be fired " (p. 924) The borer's "only food in Louisana has 
 
 been found to be sugar cane, corn, Johnson grass, Guinea corn, 
 sorghum, (sweet and sour-sweet) and possibly two other large 
 grasses." (page 927.) 
 
 But to burn or bury all waste is a pretty big job, besides 
 burning any kind of vegetation means a loss. The Department 
 of Agriculture fathers the statement that "the burning of a wheat 
 stubble deprives the land of as much fertility as the producing 
 of five crops of < wheat." If so the main loss is sustained through 
 the action of the fire upon the soil. 
 
(33) 
 
 *'Ever_vbody [with but few exceptions] burns the trash — 
 vet with this only known effort practiced alike in every commu- 
 nity, the borer multiplies to a destructive extent in one section 
 and is practically subdued in another." (p. 902) 
 
 Thus you see the need for something better, or at least for 
 some effective additional means of control. 'Tf fall planting on- 
 ly be made... the enclosed borers must remain until the cane is 
 scraped in the spring ajid the few which w^ill then escape would 
 be hardly enough to produce much harm during the summer..." 
 (page 904). 
 
 Let us see: On page 925 is given the record of a cane cul- 
 ling bee. 420 acres were culled in the early spring, filling 120 
 sacks, each having 333 borers, or a total of 39960, this makes a 
 catch of 95, say 100 borers to the acre. A female lays on the av- 
 erage 300 eggs. Thus one female emerging from every 3 acres 
 of scraped cane might do all this damage. Suppose 10 infested 
 stalks per acre of first brood were missed. This gives us live re- 
 sulting females, at 300 eggs each, or 1500 borer of second brood 
 during say, June-July. 750 females will result, at 300 eggs each 
 you have 225,000 borers of the third brood during August-Sept- 
 ember: and 3,375,000 per acre for the 4th brood during October- 
 Nove Tiber. While such numbers do not occur, more likely be- 
 cause ot cannibalism than of all other causes combined, it shows 
 that the insect has the faculty to increase to such numbers as 
 can subsist under such competition. 
 
 "Corn is more succulent, more rapid in development and 
 thus in the economy ot the borer assures the development of ma- 
 ny more specimens than if cane were the only food plant of the 
 first two broods..." (page 912). Infestation of young corn is 
 shown to be about ten times heavier than cane. (p. 912) 
 
 Investigations have shown that 87 per cent of the moths e- 
 merge prior to April 15th. Moths come from the pupa cases at 
 night and after expanding their wings remain hanging to some 
 plant or other object during the entire following day. The second 
 night mating takes place and a few eggs may be deposited.. The 
 moths are not shy and unless vigorously disturbed will not take 
 flight during the day..., (p. 910)- 
 
(34) 
 
 Since windrowed areas produce the largest number of moths, 
 a stand of young corn there, with the moths hanging on the 
 plants can be made to serve as a trap, since, the poultry given 
 access: the moths can be largely secured. In the past the advice 
 given was that "...limited tracts of corn badly infested with the 
 iDorer in close proximit\^ to cane should be completely destroyed 
 to protect the cane crop from succeeding broods..." (p. 925-); 
 now with poultry at work there is no need of reducing the acre- 
 age of corn, or abandoning corn for a vear or more, as recorded 
 on page 914 to have been foimd beneficial in preventing heavy 
 infestation of cane. 
 
 "...few if an}^ moths emerge during the colder months of 
 winter. ..(p, 910) ...the m.oths w^hile existing in small numbers 
 confine their attacks to the ends of the rows and to the ditch 
 bank rows..." [p. 903]. This either means that the earliest e- 
 merging adults have Vv^intered outside of the fields hidden, away 
 under some heavy vegetation, or else it means that the insect 
 has hibernated as larva on plants on the ditch bank and more 
 adults have developed there early than did in the fields; or it 
 means both. At any rate the thing to do is, instead of planting- 
 no corn, to plant corn by preference in the ditch bank rows and 
 as near as possible at the ends of the rows, and to protect also 
 the interior cf the field by strips of corn, kept patrolled all 
 through the season by po'ultry. It is obvious that there must be 
 ahvays corn on hand that is young. To this end tvro crops of 
 corn are grown on these strips, some corn, beginning on March 
 ist. being planted at intervals of one month up to September ist. 
 While harvesting of cane is going on and before there is frost, 
 the borer, with corn present, planted August ist and September 
 ist, will virtually confine oviposition to these savings. These 
 should be left standing. A legume can and should be sown be- 
 tween at the last cultivation. Stock may be admitted after frost 
 and the whole thing must be plowed down nicely before the be- 
 ginning of emergence, say before Match loth. 
 
 If poultry be not used, it Vv'ill be readily seen that the nor- 
 mal requirement of corn could not be produced without endan- 
 gering the cane crop unless a great deal of care is used culling 
 
(35) 
 
 the corn. It would not seem feasible to cull millet by hand, 
 hence under the old system millet must be left out of the crop 
 rotatian. 
 
 As practicality all of the cane growing area is overrun by the 
 Argentine ant, poultry is needed all through the summer to pick 
 up the workers to prevent undue multiplication of the measly 
 bug and of aphids. Besides there are numerous other insects af- 
 fecting corn and cane, and other crops necessary^ to allow at 
 least of some diversification, which poultry can be more or less 
 successfully used to control. 
 
 Another highlv injurious day-flying moth is the adult of the 
 peach-tree borer, which deposits her eggs at the base of the trees. 
 Poultry allowed to roam through the orchard with a view of 
 keeping down insects in general, would secure a certain number 
 of these, reducing the need for other means of control. 
 
 A day-flying moth that does very similar work, ovipositing 
 at the base of the trees, is the sequoia pitch moth. It is at pres- 
 ent the most destructive insect to the large pole pines in certain 
 parts of Montana. Poultry made to roam the woods in sufficient 
 quantity for controling insects in general would increase the use 
 of the land and to a certain extent keep this pest in check. 
 
 In his report for 1916 the Entomologist makes the claim 
 that tests are being carried on by the Bureau of Entomology that 
 hold out the possibility of a chance of discovering successful 
 methods of preventing the establishment and spread of the pine- 
 shoot moth, and of the European pine-saw fly, both "introduced 
 shortly before the plant quarantine act became operative." [p. 
 16]. The first named insect has been introduced, as stated in 
 Agr. Bull. No. 170, as far back as 191 1, was found in 1914 in 
 20 localities in nine states, in one case, the work then being 3 
 years old. Both sexes are strong fliers, laying their eggs in the 
 apical and other terminal buds of pine trees, thus offering not 
 the slightest chance of extermination as explained in detail in 
 my Circular No. 145 and 146. Yet even as late as this the Ento- 
 mologist wants to humbug the people into believing that its es- 
 tablishment can yet be prevented, when for means of control it 
 has nothing but the removal and burning of the infestedshoots. 
 
(36) 
 
 In the case of the European pine-saw fly, extermination is, 
 if possible, even more broadly impossible. The adult is a fly. 
 The eggs are laid in the needles on the tips of the trees. The in- 
 sect was discovered in August 1914 in Connecticut. It has two 
 broods, which means rapid dissemination. This insect, together 
 with the larchworm, it was shown on pages 16 and 17 of my 
 Circular No. 149, has been decribed rather minutely in the re- 
 port of the Connecticut State Entomologist for 191 5. Mr. 
 S. A. Robicer of the Bureaa of Entomology at Washington, is 
 
 there quoted as saying that " it has a large number of host 
 
 trees" [in Europe] "and would no doubt adapt itself readily to 
 
 the conditions in America "[Rep. Conn. Ent. 1915, p. 119]. 
 
 Thus extermination if attempted, would involve examination of 
 pines and other conifers for many miles around the original in- 
 festation means of extermination there are none. As to means 
 of control. 'Tt is eivdent that Diprion simile is freely attacked 
 here by American species of parasitic Hymenoptera and Diptera, 
 but it is not known as 3'et whether any Europeean species were 
 brought into this country in the cocoons of the sawfly". Other 
 practical means, necessary when the parasites fail, the Ento- 
 mologist has none. The use of poultry makes it possible to 
 secure the larva as they spin down or fall down occassionally, 
 or when they migrate over the ground to other trees. The larva 
 being hairless should make choice eating for poultry. "In 
 Europe raking up and destroying the leaves and other rubbish 
 under the trees in the fall is recommeded to distroy the cocoon." 
 [p. 123]. A far better way would be to have the cocoons 
 scratched up and eaten by poultry. 
 
 The larchsaw fly is single brooded, spends the winter in a 
 cocoon beneath rubbish on the ground and thus can easily be 
 controlled by poultry, besides the caterpillars are subject to at- 
 tack when on the ground. 
 
 This insect ''invariably chooses the young, green, terminal 
 twig in which to insert the eggs., When the apical terminal 
 shoot is affected... a permanent kink may be caused... It is an 
 injury which cannot be prevented..." page 127. Poultry, by 
 keeping the insect down to limited numbers will prevent the in- 
 
(37) 
 
 sect from layinpr any great number oi eo-g-s into any one shoot, 
 and thus prevent any great injury to apical shoots. 
 
 This saw-fly "during several extensive outbreaks since 1880 
 has killed from 50 to 100 per cent of the mature larch over vast 
 areas in the north-eastern United States and south-eastern Can- 
 da.,. aggregating many millions of feet." (Rep. Conn. p. 60) 
 The chief factors in the control of the larch saw-fly are its nat- 
 ural enemies, which consist of birds, mammals, a large number 
 of parasitic and predaceous insects, and a fungus disease." 
 (Rep. Conn, Ent. p, 130). But since outbreaks do occur with 
 this and many other insects of similar habits, why not use poul- 
 try when and where it is needed? 
 
 vSince the Entomologist talks about half of his time about 
 what great good parasites, native and imported, are doing as 
 the result of the work of his Bureau, it is well to see what the 
 pine shoot moth has done in Europe in spite of its parasites, 
 and in spite of continued preventative war against it... If the 
 attack is slight, it results in the branching of the tree," (since, 
 if uninfected, the moth selects the apical bud for oviposition) 
 but if the attack is severe and continued for several 3'ears, as 
 we have seen it, then hardly any bud is spared and the pines be- 
 come stunted into miseral31e small bushes..." (Dept, of x\gr, Bui. 
 No. 170, p. 2.) 
 
 "It is reasonable to suppose that some of the native para- 
 sites on some of the native species of Evetvia will in time also 
 attack Evetvia buoliana (the imported pine shoot moth) in this 
 countr}^ — in fact parasitized larva have already been observed — 
 but these native parasites cannot be relied upon to keep in check 
 their natural hosts, the American pine shoot moths, which spo- 
 radically become ver\" abundant and ver}^ injurious, in spite of 
 the parasites and presumably will be less effective in controlling 
 the newly introduced host." (p. 9.) "None of these native spe- 
 cies (of pine shoot moths) can, however, even with this advan- 
 tage [of having two broods annually] be compared in destruct- 
 iveness to the European species just introduced... "[p. 8] 
 
 Since chiefh^ young trees are chosen for oviposition, I had 
 shown in ray Circular No, 145, page 7, that the sensible thing 
 
(38) 
 
 to do is to protect, if possible, the apical bud in some \va3' when 
 the adults are about laying their eggs, the most feasible way ap- 
 pearing to me to be the pouring of some semi-liquid cla}^ over 
 the apical bud, causing thus the moths to oviposit on a side 
 shoot, which serves just as well. I also described in my Circulars 
 No. 145. 147 and 149, pages 13 to 15, how these moths and 
 ether night flying insects might be. trapped. 
 
 Virtually all this and more was shown in my Circular No. 
 145, June 7, 1915, The Chairman of the Congressional Commit- 
 tees on Agriculture^ Senator Thomas P. Gore and Representa- 
 tive Asbury t . Lever were urged to have the U. S. Entomolo- 
 gist either admit this to be correct, or else show why it should 
 not be correct. Pouring semi-liquid clay over the apical bud ei- 
 ther protects it or it does not protect it. "Early in August [in 
 Europe) the eggs are laid singlj^ on the nevv' buds of the next 
 years growth..." page 5. The adult will not of course, oviposit 
 on hardened clay, when she has plenty of side shoots' serving 
 fully as well. The Chairmen mentioned therefore should have 
 forced the Entomologist to define his position. And this applies 
 to all issues involved. 
 
 Protecting the apical bud b}' an application of semi-liquid 
 clay ma3^ be a simple enough idea. On thS other hand this insect 
 "has been the subject of much stud^^ and of an extensive litera- 
 ture from the time it was first described b^^ Schiffermnller in 
 1776 to the present day." The U. S. Entomologist frankly savs 
 his Bureau is the best thing of the kind on earth. The fact re- 
 mains, no one has pointed out this simple idea before; and now 
 the Entomologist wants to pretend to be unable to see any good 
 in it. And Messrs. Gore and Lever thus far, have wanted me 
 to be hanged on that pretense. 
 
 The apparatus shown on last page was designed with a 
 view to meet the needs for an apparatus, that v/ill enable the 
 man having a limited am.ount of vegetation, ranging in size 
 from big trees down to grasses, to keep same free of insects and 
 fungi. In a few cases, with the codling moth for instance, the 
 proper use of arsnicals is the best thing at present known, but in 
 the case of all sucking insects, and in any case vv^here poison is 
 
(39) 
 
 for one reason or another not sa.tistactor_v ag^ainst bitini^" insects, 
 with the exception of where the^^ can be controlled by poultry, 
 or by trap crops, or by the torch used as a trap at night, the 
 use of heat is far preferable to emplo^ving the contact insecticides 
 now officialb/ recommended. 
 
 It may be well to mention here that now flour mills and 
 other buildings infested by insects are being fitted, as the best 
 means known for control, with heating apparatus of such capac- 
 ity that insects may be killed simply by giving so much heat 
 that they will die purely because of high temperature, doing a- 
 wa_v w^ith the many objections incident to using poisonous gases. 
 
 The use of heat from a torch, was first described b^^ me in 
 in 1898 and was first used b:v me in 1896 as a means of controll- 
 ing the harlequin cabbage bug. In his report for 19 16 the Ento- 
 mologist on page 18 says: ' ...Such remedies as trap-crop plant- 
 ing and the destruction of the bugs with special burners are a- 
 mong the most successful," in combating the harlequin bug. As 
 for the trap crops, I had shown as far back as 1898 the adult 
 bugs congregate on the tassels of sweet corn. More recently I 
 have showm that by seemg to it to have at all times some cruci- 
 ferous plant going to seed, the bugs will congregate on the seed- 
 stalks and can be kept dowm by poultry, doing away with the 
 use of heat, special or otherwise. But old or new, according to 
 the Entomologist I am wrong either way. 
 
 The adult harlequin bug lays her eggs on the underside of 
 the leaves of cruciferous plants^ which leaves are mostly invert- 
 ed spoonshaped; hence the 3^oung bugs usually cannot be seen 
 without moving the leaf. Because of this the simplest means of 
 control consists in concentrating the adults in plain view upon 
 tassels of sweet corn or seedstalks of cruciferous plants. They 
 then can be picked off by hand or by the use of poultr3^ 
 
 On page ly of his report the Entomologist speaks about the 
 control of the spinach aphis by lady beetles in the truck district 
 of tidewater Virginia. He says "the extensive cutting down of 
 trees and removal of underbrush for planting of truck crops left 
 us available places for the ladybirds to hibernate..." Then how 
 
(4o) 
 
 cjoes he expect these ladybirds to become and stay plentiful in 
 the fields, since, moreover, they go to feed on lice on most of the 
 crops and since all these crops need treatment as to insects and 
 fungi, which treatment of necessity also kills the ladybugs. He 
 says the plants cannot be reached, even with an underspray. I 
 claim there is an "underspray" that reaches them, that is, 
 reaches the lice hidden in the hollows of the inverted spoon- 
 shaped leaves, especially when the plant is growing nicely in 
 the spring. And this sprav consists in the use of heat as ap- 
 plied by a torch. Some kind of knapsacktype torch is the thing 
 to use and the essential feature in its use is to use it early, oft- 
 en, and swiftly, letting the heat blow slantways upon the ground 
 a few inches from the plants as they are approached. The heat 
 waves will then roll in between the leaves. 
 
 Without thus controlling the aphids, on the spinach, this 
 crop will act as a winter host on a large scale for this and var- 
 ious other kinds of aphids, resulting in abnormally heavy in- 
 festation of succeeding crops. 
 
 The special features of the apparatus shown consists in that 
 the handle of the pistonrod of the pump located in the center 
 serves also as a hook, making it possible, after remoying the 
 shoulderstrap, to hook the apparatus from branch to branch in 
 a tree. This does very well with the man having but few trees, 
 making him independent in his work, since the official recom- 
 mendations call for something else in many dilierent cases. 
 
 For big trees in large numbers. I have described on pages 
 II to 13 of my Circular No. 147 how suitable apparatus furnish- 
 ing heat can be gotton up. Heat thus applied is far the best 
 means to destroy the stem mothers of aphids and the adult 
 pcarthrips as they congregate upon the bursting buds of fruit 
 trees and fruit bushes. 
 
 I had also shown how apparatus applying heat to lowgrow- 
 ing vegetation, such as oats infested with the spring grain aphis, 
 can be constructed, using, if desired, as far as practicable fit- 
 tings from the outfit used for orchard work. 
 
(4i) 
 The sprinii- grain aphis is usually held in check by natural 
 enemies — for details see Enr. Circular Xo. 93, Revised. The 
 natural enemies rather often fail. The latest occurrence was 
 rii^^ht in 1916, as recorded on page 12 of the report. On pages 
 12 and 13 of my circular No. 144 I had shown at some length 
 that the Entomologist has no tangible means of control. The 
 use of heat does destroy the pest and should come into effect as 
 soon as the danger of an outbreak becomes apparent. 
 
 The Reinlein 
 
 Knapsack 
 
 Gasoline Torch 
 
 Pat. No. 739.S,?t 
 Sept. 15. 1903 
 
(SKE,,Sf:.,.?O^^GRESS 
 
 015 793 690 6 •