The use of the gasoline torch in fighting insects and fungi ..

ISB 959
R38

(1914

re, 1 | Use of the Gasoline Torch
in Fighting Insects and Fungi

Copyright, 1914, by FRED REINLKIN, Susanville, California
a a ess 2 a cee eee

CIRCULAR No. 140 (No. 139 continued) APRIL 18, 1914

Entomology Bulletin No. 64, part 1, gives an account of
tests mate at Barstow in western Texas in 1905 of the destruc-
tiveness of a pentatomid bug, known as the Mexican
conchuela. The account mentions that an associated species,
the grain bug, possessing a capacity for injury of the same
character, has destroyed as far back as 1895, 40 acres of peas
| and 2 acres of lima beans on a certain farm in the territory
now infested by the conchuela and has since earned a bad repu-
tation by its destructiveness to wheat and oats in. Colorado
and elsewhere. The account also sets forth on page 8 how ano-
} ther pentatomid bug, the green tree bug, destroyed in Florida
30 acres of cowpeas, and also a crop of tomatoes. ‘‘In general

the Mexican conchuela may be said to be almost omnivorous,
| showing preference, however, for fruits and seeds.’’ (p. 8).
The crops affected in 1905 at Barstow, a short distance south
| of the southeastern corner of New Mexico, were cotton, alfalfa,
| grapes, peaches, Milo maize and garden vegetables.
**....Fields devoted io alfalfa are capable of harboring the
conchuela in enormous numbers”’ (p. 3) “....the principal
danger....lies in the fact that a choice breeding place is fur-
nished the insects which may multiply to enormous numbers
and spred to other ereys....In infested alfalfa fields, when
the seed is present, the tnes may be seen clinging to the seed
clusters, extracting the 1ich juices by means of their thread-
like setae. The seed pod when once fed upon shrivels.-. . . Cut-
ting of the alfalfa checks the multiplication of the pest, but
| also has the effect of driving the bugs elsewhere in search of
food ....’’(p.4). On Milo maize ‘‘the conchuelas had been very
| abundant by August 4, as many as 25 of the insects frequently
being noted on a single head....’’(p. 5)... .‘‘The tendency of

the conchuelas to congregate on certain individual peaches was

| —_ /

2 ONG

very marked as has likewise been observed in their occurrence
upon the cottonbolls’’ (p. 6). ‘‘Garden crops were affected to

a considerable extent by this destructive pest....The crops-

which suffered most were peas, beans and tomatoes’’ (p. 7):

The wnter, Dr. A. W. Morrill, on page-12 and 13 suggests,
as a means of making the raising of a crop of alfalfa seed possi-
ble when these bugs shall have spread over wide areas, the con-
struction of a hopperdozer, fitted with revolving fans and oper-
ated from behind.

Now a hopperdozer that will serve this purpose, it may be
easy enough to construct and to operate. But, in the first place,
the pest can multiply on most any other crop where the hopper-
dozer cannot be used and from where they can go to attack
grapes, cotton and other late crops. Then, again, alfalfa and
the clovers have a number of serious other enemies, one or more
of which may be also present and the aim would have to be to
devise a means that would be effective against both. Thus the
alfalfa, or clover or timothy on which the conchuela or kindred
species may feed and multiply may be infested also with the
clovermite and the hopperdozer would be of no use against
it. This mite lives upen the surface of leaves of trees and
plants. There is no feasible means of control of this pest as a
field insect except the use of heat as generated by a torch. This
is so because there is nothing that will produce as much kill-
Ing power against sucking insects as gasoline, or some other
substance that may be iound to produce the same effect at
less cost, turned into heat, and appled under pressure.

Bugs ure as a rule more or less gregarious and a single
burner torch would in most cases answer to keep the bugs in
alfalfa down and also check the mite to that extent. When
the alfalfa is cut, the bugs will migrate to anything within
reach that suits them. This class of bugs flies readily during
the warm part of the day and will attack as readily tall trees
as low growing crops. In order to enable the man who has a
mixture of crops to defend against these and other bugs, or
lice, or scale insects, or fungi, there should be at his disposal
an apparatus that will give the widest possible use. If there is
anything better than the torch designed by me, I do not know
jt. This torch is shown on last page.

©ClLA373306
May 51414 Ao?

2
re)

However, special requirements will eall for special types of
construction. This alfalfa, or clover, might be attacked also by
the alfalfa looper or alfalfa catapillar, and it would then seem
best to construct a torch on similar lines as a four-row potato-
sprayer; that is, a highwheeled cartskeleton is to support a
seat for a driver and furnish room for a 10, 20,
or 50 gallon tank, and with it as many leads of burner can be
made to be kept gcing from it as may be desired. And these
burners ean be arranged as high or as low, and as close or
as far apart, blowing forwards, backwards or sidewards, ai!
or part of them, as may be desired. There is no gearing to eith-
er of the two wheels and in order to give the apparatus the
widest range of usefulness the axle might be constructed of
pipe and the wheels could, by using set screws, be spread as
far apart or as close together as may be desired, so that the ap-
paratus could be used between rows of corn against the cinch-
bug, or against the conchuela on Milo maize or cotton, or any
kind of insect on any kind of low growing crop, such as the
melon or cabbage louse, not otherwise readily and economically
affected by contact poiscns, or where these sprays are entirely
prohibitive in cost, as for instance against the spring grain
aphis. More about construction will be said later.

In Entomology Circular No. 137 you find an account of the
alfalfa weevil, but you find not even a suggestion as to a reme-
dy. ‘‘From what i is known of the insect in Europe and in the
light of its behavior since its discovery in this country there
seems little hope for anything from it but dispersion and des-
truction (p. 7)....The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station
during the season of 1910 carried out a great number of field
experiments with different methods of controlling the weevil,
but none of these has so far given entirely satisfactory
results....’’ (p. 8). And the account does not give even any
50, 10 or half per cent satisfactory results. And there is ad-
mittedly danger of rapid spread. Then again, this weevil may
be able to breed on any kind of clover.

As the conchuela’s ally, the grain bug, is already infesting
the fields of ‘‘Colorado and elsewhere’’, and the alfalfa weevil
is apt to show up there in quantity at any time, we have to de-

4

vise means to combat the two if possible at the same time. Be-
sides there may be other pests to be considered. .

The alfalfa weevil emerges as adult in Utah by the end of
No- 137.) These eggs are deposited in the top part of the
March and the female lays eggs till early in July (Ent. Cir.
plant and the young hatching from them make their way to
the leaves, shown by an illustration to be mostly at the tops.
Now, the hopperdozer suggested by Dr. Morrill against the
conchuela could ke expected to work to get the grain bug; and
it may work to get the weevils, and it may not; anyway, it is
much less likely to get the young larvae. These apparently
feed on the sunny part of the plant unless the weather be very
hot and the bulk of them would be fully exposed to a_ blast
from a multiple torch that might blow down on them. Since
hatching begins by the middle of April, the aim would have to
be to begin to apply the blast then and keep it up at such in-
tervals and as long as examination shows it to be necessary.
This would certainly get the young larvae and may, by injuring
or killing outright the adults, make the larvae crop mighty
small, and thus solve the problem.

Since setting above to type the report of the U. S. Entomolo-
sist for 1913 has come to hand. On page 7 reference is made to
the Bureau’s plan of controlling the alfalfa weevil. ‘‘....A+
present it is necessary to cut this (first) crop prematurely....
After taking off the premature first crop, brush draggins....
reduces the number of the weevil....The same follows for the
third erop.’’

Why the first crop must be cut prematurely is not statedl,
but the known aim is to cut the crop at a time when the larvac
are most plentiful. This, in experimental work, las a_ very
strong tendency, especially if followed with brush dragging, to
drive the adults to other fields not cut so early.

Compare this with Entomology Cireular No. 137, p. 3: ‘‘If
the field is mown over’’ (meaning the usual time) most of the
larvae will of course be shaken off.... While some of these per-
ish those that survive and live upon the fresh growth together
with those hatching from eggs deposited after the mowing de-
velop sufficient numbers to overwhelm and destroy the second
crops, <4"

5

Premature cutting of the first crop, then, simp!ty leaves that
many more eggs to be deposited into the secorid crop. And, am
the case of the alfalfa weevil at least, the crops do not mature
fast enough to prevent a large part of the weevi's to Geveiop
from eggs laid in the spring or after the first cutting into
adults, and many more will in either case reach at least the
pupae stage, probably then hidden away in the soil at the foot
of the plant. Brush dragging, rough as it is on the plants, wil!
kill a certain percentage of larvae, but is cannot imateriaily
affect the adults and pupae.

Then, again, the plan proposed by the Bureau precludes the
erowing of seed. At the rate the Bureau advocates early cut.
ting to control clover insects pests where is the seed to come
from? Over a large territory the conchuela and grainbuy at.
tack this crop and seed growing is not advisable there, unless
backed by the use of some practicable means of attack ‘hen
the alfalfa caterpillar is threatening the crop and early cutting
is advised for it also. Then there is the alfalfa looper, described
in Entomology Bulletin No. 95, part VIL, feeding on many
plants besides clovers. The adult, a moth, is readily attracted
to light and could probably be held in check by a_ traptorch.
Then there is, chiefly in the Eastern States, the clover root
cureulio and the lesser clover leaf weevil, described in Ento-
mology Bulletin No. 85, parts I. and III., the former feeding
readily also upon grasses. Any of these may at any time be-
come serious. Their habits are more or less similar. A multiple
torch must be considered to be the all around most feasible
means of control. This use of a multiple burner would be of
special benefit in case of many larvae surviving a cutting. It
could be then applied sharply immediately after removing a
crop, while the larvae are clustering about the stumps.

Speaking of the alfalfa caterpillar in Entomology Circular
No. 133 the writer says on page 7 that ‘‘at Indio, California,
on July Ist, he found larvae feeding upon sweet clover which
strangely enough they seemed to prefer to a patch of alfalfa
erowing close by. Eggs were also observed to be very aumerous
upon the leaves of the sweet clover at the sanie time” It
might be possible, therefore, to concentrate this or other clover
insects upon patches of sweet clover or some other jreterred

6

food plant, and by making war on the insects here the elds at
large might be protected.

On page 10 of his report for 1913 the Entomologist states that
the spinach aphis cannot be controlled by any sprayer as yet
tested when it occurs on spinach.—Well, and when it occurs on
plants other than spinach, is it then also the spinach aphis, or
does the spinach merely act as a first class trapcrop for most
any old kind of aphis to steer over the critical winter period
under its protection? Of course, infestation begins any time
after the crop is up in the fall, and continues by influx and
breeding upon the plants till frost stops activity. Every ex-
perienced gardener well knows that this feeding causes the
leaves to assume the shape of in inverted spoon, and that this
holds good in substance with all other plants, and that then no
spray applied with any kind of sprayer or torch can do its best
work. He knows that control would have to begin in the fall,
and that the crop is too low priced to stand the expense of a
series of applications of the usual contact insecticides, and be-
sides, the foliage, in its normal state, is mostly so flattened
against the ground that no spray can readily enter. On the |
other hand a blast from the torch either of the hand type or
multiple type could, because of its low expense, profitably be
made to blow in hetween the leaves and the ground, beginning
when the plants are yet small, and before there is any tendency
of the leaves to curl up. This, of course, prevents the aphis
from getting established. What little injury might be to the
plants will be readily outgrown during winter and_ spring.
There is an end to infestation after the hibernation period is
once reached, and the treatment has to be all finished by that
time. As the crop is to be marketed as early as possible, no
treatment is wanted to be given in the spring.

In thus keeping the aphis down on spinach or other suitable
crops, this in turn protects the other vegetation in the spring
from the infestation that would otherwise come from the
spinach—and other fields.

Similarily you heard a good deal to the effect that the cotton
red spider spreads from violets in the planter’s yard to the
cotton. To destroy the violets is no good, because, there are wild
plants the spider can hibernate on even better, one being the

7

wild geranium, ancther the glechoma. The most feasible plan
then is to use the violetsas trapplants, and clear the spiders
out by repeated stight lickings with the torch.

This principle of utilizing and treating trapplants is appli-
cable in many similar cases.

In reference to the Argentine ant the Entomologist says in
his report for 1913 on page 6: ‘‘The work on this destructive
species consisted largely of an experiment in the extermination
of the pest in a town in Mississippi in which it had_ recently
become established. The best results were obtained with the use
of a very diluted sweetened solution of sodium arsenite-’’

With no practicable means offered for the control,of this ant
in its stronghold in the uncultivated country and on cultivated
crops, any extermination in any town cannot be more than tem-
porary. My measures of control at large are described in my
Circular No. 138 and also on pages 1, 2 and 15 to 17 of my Cir-
eular No. 139.

Now, as to injury to the crop by the blast, just put your
mind at ease. On page 7 of Entomology Bulletin No. 64 Dr.
Morrill cites a case of conchuelas migrating on July 17, 1905
in Mexico from an adjacent alfalfa field to a ten acre vineyard
heavily loaded with fruit. ‘‘Kach cluster of grapes was at-
tacked by several bugs, the maximum noted on a single cluster
being 25’’. The owner, without consulting Dr. Morrill, had
the grapes picked, expecting this loss of food would check the
insects to the benefit of the cotton fields. ‘‘This step was,
however, inadvisable, since the fruit, which was of compara-
tively small value, would have served as a trap at which the
bues could have been eastly destroyed when so thickly concen-
trated.’’ He does not say how easily and by what means. As
he was willing to sacritice the grapes, it does not lock as though
he knows of an easy way to fight the conchuela on cotton.

The account does not give any advice as to control on cotton,
but promises such advise in a future publication. ‘‘ As it was,
the bugs gathered in groups of hundreds on the trellis posis
and on the vines, principally at the forks, where they were
destroyed, partly by spraying and partly by use of a gasoline
blast torch. The last mentioned method, while effective in its

8

destruction of the pest, injured the vines to a certain extent ia
nearly all cases.’’

Now, if the spray did not injure the vines, why did they use
a torch at all? Well, it seems the owner got sick of tl:e ex-
pense of using the spray. There is no more need to 1mnjuré
the plants than there is a need to cut yourself, even without
using a looking glass, when using a razor. If you have enough
sumption you can use a razor without cutting yourself, and if
you have not, you have to use a safety hoe. A razor works
quickest, and costs the least in the first place and next to noth-
ing in upkeep, but it involves danger of injury. In using a
torch there is a general tendency to give more heat at any one
time than should be given. The bugs in question would have
died probably as well, although slower, had they gotten less
heat. I once applied the torch for about 2 seconds to a mature
squash bug, without apparently injuring it, then caged it, and
in a day or two it was dead. Moreover the adult bugs, which
are much more difficult to kill than the immature ones, wenld
in many cases fall to the greund and could be there given
enough heat to cause their death within a day or two. This
falling off would be the more likely to take place, if the heat
be applied early in the morning while they are sluggish, and,
moreover, the vines ther have dew upon them and are then
much less hikely to be injured than during the heat of the day.
Thus in the case of the alfalfa weevil the use of heat sufficient
to cause the death of the adults need not injure the crop at all.
But if it did, it would merely affect the tips, and the plant
would readily out grow it. At any rate, the larvae require
very much less heat. And any larvae that were not destroyed
will become adults any time after June 15. These adults then
feed upon the fresh growth, but also eat the bark from
the stems, thus heing by the time the grainbug would be in
business in quantity aguin exposed to attack by a blast, and
this up till hibernation time.

Besides, it is quite likely that the adults are attracted to
light and thus, being during most of the growing season in the
adult stage, this weevil could be controlled by the use of the
torch used as a traplight, as described in my Circular No. 139,
p. 11 and elsewhere.

9

This capacity of the torch as a trap becomes of importance in
the case of an insect. like the clover root borer, the adult of
which is but little in evidence and the immature stages of
which work below the ground. Since alfalfa and clover es-
cape from cultivation, that is, provide volunteer plants to
breed in, and as this beetle is known even now to be able to
breed in some leguminous plants other than clovers, the chances
that ‘‘the only preventive measure yet tried that gives any pro-
mise of success is summerfallowing as soon as the (clover) crop
is removed’’ (Ent. Cir. No. 119, p. 5) will be of rea: practical
value are very slim ehiefly because alfalfa is wanted to stay
for a number of years and would thus act as a_ breeding
ground. This beetle, it is quite likely, can be trapped with a
torch and that is therefore at present the most promising means
of control.

Of course birds might keep it in check. But birds, like the
rest of us, want a home. The burning of all shelter near fields
as a means of protection against insect pests is so often advo-
cated by the Bureau of Entomology, it looks hke they do more
to keep the birds down than all the bird butchers put together.
It is of course true that such shelter provides hibernation
places for injurious insects, but it is also manifestly equally true
that it does so for their parasites, hence must be considered as
neutral ground, at least as a rule.

There is a number of insects infesting the stalks and roots of
several important crops, such as the cotton stalk borer, the corn
stalk eurculio and the sugarcane borer. There is usually noth-
ing in the way of a satisfactory means of control known. Most
of these insects have a well defined flying season, and in com-
mon with many otner injurious adults fly at night, and using
the torch as a light trap will be found on the whole to be the
most satisfactory means of control.

Entomology Circular No. 152 treats on the rice water weevil
and methods for its control. The chief means of control, as
there given, ‘‘consists in the practice of draining and allowing
infested rice fields to dry sufficiently at the proper time or be-
fore the attacks of larvae have greatly weakened the

plantaiy, ? pic) . .
This plan is not favorable to an extension of rice growing, or

10

of growing rice at the lowest cost, because 1t wiuld be often
difficult to re-flood the fields.

In addition, as a means of control, “considerable numbers of
weevils can Se captured at lights ata destroyed’’ (p. 20).

This latter point is made more clear on page 18. As early as
on page 6, however, reference to this is made by stating, that
while the ‘adults ‘show no inclination to fly during the day
and even refuse to expand the wing's on being tossed into the
CME os te that they can fly for long distances is clearly proven
by their attraction to artificial hght at night.’’

In tests made to exploit, if possible, this inclination to fly to
light ‘‘a portable acetylene outfit was used to furnish hght, be-
ing operated near ricefields 1 mile from town (Crowley, La.) ”’

‘‘Some of the best results were as follows, the weevils being
taken on a cloth screen that was provided for the purpose of
inducing them to alight: On the night of May 26, 1910, Mr.
Van Dine started the light at 8 o’clock and captured over 40
weevils in the first 15 minutes. Later the breeze invreased and
only strong flying insects came to the light.’’

‘Starting the hight at 8 o’clock on July 19, after a day of
heavy rains, Mr. Hood collected 24 weevils in 45 minutes. But
on the night of July 29, which was clear and warm with slight
south breeze, he placed the light in the middle of the rice field
and caught 125 weevils between 8 and 9 o’clock.’’

You find reference made to the use of the gasoline torch as
a traptorch at night, substantially as described by me as long
ago as 1903, on pp. 8 to 15 and pp. 22 to 24 of my Circular No-
139. You read there on pp. 11 and 12 that while this torch
does not make a bright light the very first catch I made con-
sisted of 1500 insects—that bein& the number estimated by the
official Entomologist at Washington, to whom it was. sent.
Hence the poor catches of weevils at Crowley were not due to
any lack of light. The trouble, rather, was, there was a super-
abundance of it, whereas, as explained on page 12 in the ease
of the torch, all is dark around it, causing the insects to bump
their heads against the red hot burner and become disabled
and drop into the pail below. This with the improvements sug-
gested on pp. 13 and 24 would result in a greatly increased
eatch, probably resulting in making it possible to catch tobac-

ek

- ¢o hornworm moths in large quantities when they are plentiful.

As near as can be seen, the Bureau’s outfit at Crowley re-
quired the attendance of one person. This makes it quite ex-
pensive, and the few weevils caught probably represented a
trifling part of the total number present. With the torchtrap
designed by me you put enough gasoline in the tank to enable
it to burn the time desired, you hang it up on a tree branch or
a light tripod made out of 1x2 stuff, and that is all the work
there is to it.

This kind of torch might now be in use for years and the
rice weevil kept under perfect control at trifling cost had the
Bureau seen fit to duly investigate the evidence I presented
to them 11 years ago. For my part it was about the same to me
whether cr not the gods are fighting against stupidity in vain;
T realized I would be the biggest fool of all to try to force my
way through then, and decided the thing to do was to wait till
the people would get sick of the kind of investigations the
Bureau was dishing up, and do not yet see why I should change
my mind.

There is now also the alfalfa midge established in southern
Arizona and New Mexico. Being, in my judgment, a_ sawfly,
there is nothing in the way of direct control in sight except
that it might be trapped in’ quantity by the use of the torch
or else attacked in its larval stage with a multiple torch.

Of course, anything that kills an injurious insect will, gener-
ally speaking, also.kill the beneficial ones present, and the torch
is no exception. You have to know what you are trapping, or
leave the trap alone. This is work for the Bureau of Ento-
mology to investigate and the work was there for 10 years
Past.

This use of a multiple torch I had advocated as far back as
1903 against such insects as the Hessian fly when in the larval
stage. Many of this class of flies get exceedingly numerous
sometimes. In 19°53 I was called upon to clear by the use of a
torch two 10 and 12 foot plum trees covered with larvae.Speci-
mens sent to Chie! Howard were reported as being larvae of a
sawfly.

ss the larger part of the fall brood of Hessian fly

appears and is gone within a week ...... ’” (Ent. Cire. No. 70,

2

p. 14).*The eggs are gen€rally placed in the grooves of the up-
per surface of the leaves...... The young larva as soon as it
is hatched makes its way down the leaf and behind the
sheath.’’ (p. 3.)

This hatching, in the case of the fall brood, oceurs usually
during cool weather, uually while the nights are quite long,
and the total effective temperature for each day is not great,
hence development will be slow and if a multiple torch be
made to play at intervals of 2 or 3 days during the critical
period upon the plants, there 1s no good reason why the bulk
of them skeuld not be destroyed at small cost.

Ground beetles are considered to be normally carnivorous
and, like most sawflies, beneficial, but when abundant will, as
deseribed in Entomology Bulletin No. 82, part II in the case of
the slender seed «orn ground beetle, attack corn and do great
damage. There is every reason to believe that these insects nor-
mally live on all kinds of animal food they can get, and when
shert attack any vegetation from young weeds up to oats and
corn, attracting nerely special attention in the case of corn by
being compelled t» live upon one kind of plant that affords
with the usual incident prompt destruction of young weeds a
very meager supp!y of food at sprouting time over good sized
areas. These beetles are readily attracted to light and _ consti-
tuted nearly all of the first catch I ever made with a torch, as
described on page 11 of my Circular No. 139. The traptorch is
probably the best thing to control the maize bill bug: It also, is
used early in the season in fields that were the year before in
cowpeas, probably the only satisfactory means to control the
cowpea cureulio.

Speaking of the conchuela and its partner, the grain bug,when
a crop of alfalfa, wheat, oats or some other crop they have been
attacking is cut, or is maturing , the adult bugs, being strong
fliers, readily fly to other crops, and are in a position to select
the one best suited to their fastidious taste. At Barstow in 1905
‘“shortly after the 10th of July (Ent. Bull. No. 64, p. 6), coinei-
dent with the cutting of alfalfa, the bugs were noticed on the
fruit of these (peach) trees.’’ (‘‘Fruit of the earliest varieties
in their first fruiting season’’), ‘‘which was just beginning to
ripen. The trees soon became very heavily infested, and on

1

July 20 it was not uncommon to see from 10 fo 15 on a single
peach and in one instance 20 were counted. The tendency of
the conchuela to congregate on certain individual peaches was
very marked, as has likewise been observed in their occurrence
upon cotton bolls....but all on the attacked trees were ulti-
mately destroyed. The injured fruit became shrunken in spots
ard spongelike to the touch, finally falling to the ground....’’

For control on peaches Dr. Morril recommends fumigation.
**Peach trees when pruned in accordance with the practice of
the leading growers are low enough to permit handpicking of
all the fruit’’ (evidently presupposing the use of short steplad-
ders) ‘‘and are correspondingly easy of fumigation-’’ He
recommends the use of a cheap tent, and as fumigants he rec-
ommends tobacco stems, pyrethrum, or bubach. This is sup-
posed to soon stupify the insects and cause them to fall to the
eround ‘‘where they can be easily and quickly killed....This’
methed of fumigation is inexpensive and has the further ad-
vantage of requiring but a few minutes’ work for each tree’’
(p. 14).

I deny that this method of control is inexpensive. Also
peach foliage is very likely to be affected by the fumes. Then,
again, these peaches wall act as a constant means of concentra-
ting bugs and there would be no end to fumigating while ripen-
ing fruit is on.

The only practical way, for commercial purposes, is to apply
heat with a torch, and apply the heat with a little gumption.
Avoid using the torch during the heat of the day and this for
two reasons: First, high temperature causes tree and fruit to
give off moisture more rapidly for the time being than the
roots can assimilate. Apply the torch therefore in the morn-
ing, the earlier the better, or in the evening. This work could
be done even during the night, same as hydroeyanic acid gas
fumigation is carried on during the night. There will be more
or less dew upon the foliage and fruit which will prevent pra-
etically all injury, if the torch is kept moving. Second, the
higher the temperature the more apt are the bugs to fly off
when they feel the blast approach. In fact, in that case, you
have to work going backwards, so as to come upon the bugs
with the blast suddenly.

14

On the other hand, the tendeney of the conchuela to congre-
eate on certain individual peaches, and cotton and other fruit—
which habit to thus congregate seems to be common to most
bugs of this class—makes it easier to that extent to reduce in-
jury from the use of the torch to the minnimum, because the
rest of the plant does not receive any treatment at all.

The aim must be to give the bugs one or more swift lickings
at a time ard repeat this rather than to try to kill them on the
spot. Besides, there is a whole lot more than low-down peach
trees tobe considered. The conchuela and the grain bug are
liable to attack and breed in anything that is suitable. You
might have in your yard rosebushes, or a philadelphus, or a
syringa (lilac) or citrus fruits in bloom or fruit, or a clematis
(paniculata or viginica) as a porchvine, or a bed of petunias
or heliotrope, or, of trees, a paulonia, or alarge blooming chest-
nut, cr an aceacia, and any of them, when in bloom, and some,
as the paulonia, also, when setting seeds, may be simply cover
ed with the pests. You might not care to go to any great
trouble to save the erop of blooms, but the fact remains that
any of these plants or trees simply acts as a trap and at the
same time as a means of multipliction and would be abandoned
when no longer attractive in favor of other food plants, such as
garden truck, all kinds, sizes and shapes of fruit trees (except
nuts), grapes, cotton, corn and grain in general. Hence yor
want some apparatus that will make it possible to attack them
cheaply and effectively under these multivarious conditions.
In a general way the torch designed by me and above re-
ferred to would be what you want. For treating trees you
cannot climb this apparatus is to be used in conjunction with
a fruitpicker’s ladder, or with a stepladder, folding, or solid,
built perferably upon sled runners:

And, moreover, it has long been known that there are other
sucking insects attacking cotton and other important crops in
other parts of the world, and these may get a foothold in this
eountry, and should therefore upon arrival be met by suitable
means of control.

How best to control these bugs and other sucking insects
that may be also present, then or at some other time, when they
attack commercial orchards, or cottonfields, or vineyards, or

tS

eitrus-groves, is altogether another question. Fumigation, all
things considerec, will not do. When you use a torch on fruit
like peaches you might spoil the outside of the fruit a little by
the repeated slight liekings you are advised to use, but you
spoil only a small fraction as much as the bugs would spoil if
you used no torch and used-anything else you might think
would do instead.

As to control of conchuelas m eottonfields: Reference has
been made above to Dr. Morrill’s cbservation that they show
a tendency to congregate upon certain individual cotton bolls.
Thus, a handtoreh of the knapsack type would lick them off
on these without touching the rest of the crop. However, I am
satisfied that a very large part of the bugs that otherwise
would go to cotton could be concentrated upon Milomaize, or
upon corn, and especially sweet corn, if these latter do well
there.

On page 3 of my Cireular No. 139 you will find reference,
made to my experience in 1897 (not 1907 as
stated there and also on page 2 by mis-
take) of the adult harlequin cabbagebugs concentrating upon
the tassels of sweetcorn, feeding upon the pollen. I published
this observation soon after, and tried to get the Bureau of En-
tomology and some Southern Entomologists to fully investi-
gate this point. The Burean did nothing, and one entomolo-
gist did at least so much as to say, in effect, that to claim, that
an insect that has never been observed (to his knowledge at
least) to feed on anything but cruciferous plants, such as cab-
bage, does feed upon a radically different type of plant, is an
absurdity on its face.

Well, they feed upon the pollen of sweet corn just the
same, and on the pollen only, as claimed.

It does not follow from this that I] want to maintain that
there could be no better way of congregating the adults. this
the more as there «an be no pollen in the spring when it would
be especially desirable to get rid of the hibernated adults. In
the South where niany cruciferous plants of commercial value
stand outside all winter I would suggest to so time a batch of
mustard or other highly attractive plant to act as a trap that it
will bloom at the time of emergence and then secure the adults

16

by hand or by the ase of the torch. In the North I have found
ruta bagas highly attractive. Some roots kept over winter and
set out in the spring would throw up flower shoots and thus
provide a means of close concentration. Or cabbage stumps
from last fall’s erop might be planted among the spring crop.
All these would send up shoots on which the adults would be
exposed. Similaril; stumps from the early crop might be plant-
ed among the late crop. This would cause seed stalks to shoot
up, attracting and exposing the adults to ready view.

On page 5 Dr- Morril makes reference to the occurrence of
conchuela upon Milo maize, his observations beginning on Au-
gust 11. The crop was then nearing maturity and nothing
was thus observed as to what attraction the blooms exerted
upon the bugs. As it was, the owner stated that by about Au-
gust 4, they ‘‘had been very abundant, as many as 25 of the
insects frequently being noted on a single seedhead.’’ It would
seem therefore that by planting rows of Milo maize through
the cotton, the pugs could be conveniently concentrated, and
then destroyed by the use of the torch. The rows might be
planted at varying dates. The torch works much quicker and
cheaper than handpicking, if it be used during the cooler part
of the day, and with maize in ample supply to work on, this
will offset any Jittly injury to bloom and seed by the blast.

For control of conchuelas on grapes grown low a knapsack
torch would be the thing, as it is for many other grape
troubles, as described on pp. 20 and 21 of my Cireular No. 139.

Reference has already been made on page 31 of my Circular
No. 139, that to apply heat to medium and large trees, or to
hopvines, special outfits would have to be designed to apply
the heat economically and effectively. The Bureau thus far
had nothing to say about this, or anything else.

Although the knapsack torch will, with a good pressure,
work with the burner swayed three feet or more above the gas-
oline supply in the tank, the aim will always have to be to get
into use, as far as possible, an apparatus that will carry the
gasolime supply at an elevation higher than the object to be
treated: This is the more easily carried out because a little
gasoline runs a long time and the outfit to carry the supply
eould be constructed correspondingly light.

t7

We will assume a large number of tall trees, say 40 feet, of
sufficient value to warrant some expense for treatment is ser-
iously affected with some louse, scale insect or caterpillar. The
use of arsenicals is very often neither practicable nor effective
against caterpillars, the several reasons for which you find on
pp. 17 and 18 of my Cireular No. 139.

To carry a tower elevated to that height from the ground
and allow of a wide range of work by enabling it to go over
rough ground, it would not be too much to space the wheels
16 feet apart.

Assuming the whole outfit to be constructed of iron, it
could be built up with the end in view of making it possible
to use as much as possible of the several parts in putting up
some smaller apparatus that will be necessary where the high
outfit is not needed and cannot be used because of its width.

Thus, for axles, pipes could be used, and the wheels could
be held in place by the use of set screws. The wagongear pro-
per, clanrped to the axles, and the tower, could be used only
for this outfit, but the gasoline tank, pipes, hose and burners
could be detached and with some shght alterations, together
with the wheels, be used to get up a smaller, lower outfit hav-
ing the wheels 12 or 8 feet apart. Again, this would furnish
most of the parts needed to get up a two wheel multiple bur-
ner of any desired width for treating insects on lowgrowing
crops such as alfalfa, wheat or oats. As the wheels can _ be
elamped where wanted, cultivated crops lke potatoes could
be easily treated by constructing a two-wheel apparatus drawn
by one horse with the wheels running in the rows on either
side, and, say, 4 burners stationary or manipulated by hand
as may be required. The potatobug is easily poisoned, but a
blast blowing over a row of potatoes would lick off most of the
fungus spores. ;

Karmers’ Bulletin No. 557 treats on the potato tubermotn-
The means by which the Bureau intends to control this in-
sect is what I wish to call attention to. The insect feeds upon
solanaceous plants and tobacco. To ‘‘insure success’’ In con-
trol ‘‘the first measure consists in the maintenance of clean
methods of cultivation. This implies that all infested potato-
plants and solanaceous weeds such as the _ groundcherry,

18

bull nettles, horsenettles and volunteer potato plants, growing
in the same vicinity as the potatoes must be destroyed. This
can be done by prompt burning as soon as insect infestation
Ie MANILESE Ys) 6°. Tit pao

Now, the adult, a moth, seems to be a good flier, able to
readily cover miles to find foodplants. As tobacco grows wil:
in many places, this makes it still more impracticable to keep
down the breeding material. The other proposed step of con-
trol, croprotation, is of no value, if the adult can fly for miles.

Of course, when affecting stored potatoes, control by fumiga-
tion can, as is claimed, take place.

‘‘Care in digging is advisable in order not to cut into the
tuber or leave the dug potato in the field over night where re-
infestation could oceurr’’ (p. 4.) From this it would seem,
that the moth is nightflying and possibly could be trapped
in quantity with the torch. Also, since, ‘‘the eggs are laid upon
the leaves or on other parts of the plants and the minute cater-
pillars or worms quickly bore between the surfaces of the
leaves or into the potatoskin, which they mine in every direc-
tion, finally devouring the exterior’’ (p. 1) 1t would seem that
keeping the plants well dusted with a mixture of parisgreen
and flour, or airslacked lime, especially near the base of the
plant, would destroy many of the worms.

The greatest value of the several types of torch apparatus
referred to will probably be found to consist in their ability of
licking off the spores of any kind of vegetation at a cost of only
a small part of any other treatment known, and thus make it
possible to largely prevent the enormous losses in the sections
of the country where the rainfall is ample and even abundant,
and to that extent makes possible the production of heavy
crops.

The Bureau of Plant Industry never made any definite state-
ment in regard to the use of the torch as a fungicide.

On page 32 of my Circular No. 139 you find reference made
to a statement by the State Entomologist of Illinois in a report
having not at all any aim at boosting the use of heat, either as an
insecticide or fungicide, and which is to the effect that the
flame in a test in the fall of 1902 licked the spores off of a lilac
plant and that in a few days new ones had cropped out. This.

19

if the leaf was not injured, was only natural, and this in itself
proves that the heat necessary to destroy spores need not in-
jure the leaf, at least not materially.

Thus far the Department of Agriculture has deliberately de-
¢lined !to define its position in regard to the use of the torch
as either an insecticide or fungicide, at least they have taken
no action at all in regard to my Circulars since the issuance of
my Cireular No. 134, of December 21, 1912, and they have
carefully avoided to touch the essential features of my Cir-
culars from No. 117 on, dating back to December 3, 1910.

On page 5 of his report for 1913 the Entomologist states
that experiments in the handpicking of the early apnearing
bollweevils and of the first infested squares gave in the Miss-
issippi Delta an average increase in yield of $3.22 per acre.

As far as this plan is to be followed, it will be up to the far-
mers to see whether they can hire the abnormal help required to
do this work on the plantations at large, without having to
pay higher wages than was necessary to secure the needed help
for experimental work.

The whole thing is antedeluvian, and the Bureau knows it.

As to the possibility of some simpler means of accomplishing
the destruction of hibernated weevils, the bollweevil oracle
speaks thus on page 43 of Farmers’ Bulletin No. 344: ‘‘The
idea of attracting weevils to a few early plants or traprows
seemed hopeful at one time. Practical work in the field ,how-
ever, has shown that nothing whatever can be expected from
this means. The difficulty is that the early plants exert very
little ‘attraction’. Ji). : iE

I had shown as far back as my Orhlar No. 48, September
26, 1905, from imvestigations recorded on page 110 of Entom-
ology Bulletin No. 51 relative to gradual attraction of hibern-
ated weevils to scuares, that weevils, emerging as they did in
that case from within the field (at Victoria, South Texas) move
so little about that one-fourth had failed to gather upon trap-
plants close by (cotton growing from last year’s stumps) hav-
ing squares, many fully four weeks old. This is merely the best
possible proof of the Bureau’s claim ‘that they are ‘perfectly
satisfied to feed upon one or more less advanced plants if they
happen to find these first.

20

I had all along contended that the first step in weevil con-
trol is a field clear of weevils, and that this can be aecomplhsh-
ed by plowing that field, whether 1t was in cotton or other
crop, so that any weevils present are safely buried during the
hibernating period. Being then numbed none could crawl out
even if only slightly buried by accident, and any weevil that
might not have been buried at all and that might become act-
ive because of warm weather setting in would go outside of
the field in search of food, and finding none would secrete it-
self outside of the field. Hence infestation, under my plan,
starts from without.

Although there are additional proofs, the claim that the wee-
vils settle originally at the edge was proven as long ago as
February 18, 1905, in my Circular No. 32 from a table on pro-
gress of infestation given in Entomology Bulletin No. 51, p.
115. The infestation, as subsequently learned through Dr.
Hunter, had started from a cottonseed house near the corner
where infestation first was noticed on August 6. Infestation,
therefore, did not start ‘‘some time in July’’ as claimed on
page 115, and the inference I had originally drawn from that
claim that infestation was due to influx from other fields, be-
connng heavily infested, was not correct, but infestation had
been going on since spring, yet even then was by August 6 con-
fined to a small area. The field, apparently, was late in setting
squares.

Previous to the issuance of my Circular No. 1171 had held
that because of this evident original settling at the edge of the
field it would be possible to let the weevils breed in the row or
rows at the edge, and secure them by the picking off of the
most advanced squares. The Bureau, without giving any
specific reasons, on the other hand claimed that this plan does
not work.

I concluded, then, that there was somewhere a rub, and in
my Circular No. 117 I was able to show for the first time where
the rub comes in. I showed there that with the setting of
squares, and incident commencing of oviposition, the female
would require 2 to 6 clean squares per day, and that this
would mean that the bulk of the weevils would have to start
almost immediately in search of uninfested plants all over the

Past

field, and that to prevent this the only way consisted in picking
the weevils off daily at the edge of the field after squares have
begun to form. Before this time, dusting the outer rows with
arsenate of lead would be helpful.

This feature was gone over much more in detail in my Cir-
cular No. 127. My Circular No- 187 treats on the weevil prob-
lem as a whole and specifically points out on page 7 that letting
newly emerged weevils feed upon squares at will means let-
ting them get beyond control. This point you find pretty ful-
ly discussed on pp. 4 and 5 of my Cireular No. 139. The es-
sential feature for success in control is that under this plan
there are no adult weevils and weevilinfested squares scatter-
ed all over the field to pick up, the latter mixed with normally
shed uninfested squares, but the work is confined to the outer-
rows for the rest of the emergence period—about three
weeks—and this securing of the adult weevils could probably
be greatly facilitated by the use of a knapsacktorch. On pp.
29 and 30 and 33 to 35 you find the reasons why fall destruc-
tion of the stalks, as reeommended by the Bureau, is necessari-
ly ineffective.

And during all this time I was working to the end of hav-
ing Congress in general and the Chairman of the House Com-
mittee on Agriculture in particular, insist on a full ventilation
of this matter. The closest I came to it thus far was im a letter
from the present chairman, Hon. Asbury F. Lever, written
December 17, and received by me December 29, in which he
said that ‘‘my information is that the officials of Depart-
ment of Agriculture have never received any circulars from
you in reference to the bollweevil.”’

I thereupon sent him three letters from Chief Howard in
which he acknowledged the receipt of a number of circulars:
As a matter of fact, there were 12 sets of my Circulars No. 137,
138and 139 sent through him to entomologists working under -
him, and he was told that the object of this was to make it as
handy as possible for him to get his forces ready to hammer
me down-—-if he wanted to undertake the job, as otherwise I
would hammer him down. Mr. Lever was told this, and was
asked to return the letters sent him, but they did not come
back, nor was anything heard from him otherwise.

22

Of course copies of this Cireular No. 140 will go to various
members of the Department of Agriculture, and, for my part,
they are, as always in the past, expected: to make a statement
up to the minute.

THE REINLEIN KNAPSACK
GASOLINE TORCH

PATENT NO. 739,221; SEPTEMBER 15, 1903

Distinet in having the panip located in center of tank, witk
the handle operating the pump formed like a hook, and cap-
able of being locked against movement by means of a pin, thus,
by removing the straps, making it possible to hang it about in
trees or on a ladder.

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

IAN

Wo

Mh My, th
v

Wy
by i én ie

wy
a

‘

¢
i

et
cae

asi
‘ ‘ Vy
/ Hye! :
a
, ee
ih er
Pm

j

i

vy

up

Be a
ie bol vl Bibra
i" y
whi

Mx is

ean, ‘
a Ki One fakes