WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 1917. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. FEDERAL HORTICULTURAL BOARD. STATEMENTS OF MR. W. D. HUNTER, IN CHARGE OF SOUTHERN FIELD CROP INSECT INVESTIGATIONS, BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY; MR. C. L. MARLATT, CHAIRMAN OF THE FEDERAL HORTICULTURAL BOARD, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; MR. C. S. SCHOFIELD, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; AND MR. ED L. AYERS, CHIEF INSPECTOR TEXAS STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. CONTROL OF THE PINK BOLLWORM. The CHAIRMAN. The provision in the bill relative to the pink bollworm is as follows: On account of the menace to cotton culture in the United States arising from the existence of the pink bollworm in Mexico, the Secretary of Agriculture, in order to prevent the establishment and spread of such worm in Texas and other parts of the United States, is authorized to make surveys to determine its actual distribution in Mexico; to establish, in cooperation with the States concerned, a zone or zones free from cotton culture on or near the border of any State or States adjacent to Mexico; and to cooperate with the Mexican Government or local Mexican authorities in the extermination of local infestations near the border of the United States. For rent outside of the District of Columbia, and for the employment of such persons and such means in the city of Washington and elsewhere as the Secretary of Agriculture may deem necessary, $500,000, to continue available until expended. Who is in charge of that? Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Marlatt, who is just now busy on the telephone, is chairman of the board; but I think we can proceed, if you are ready, by permitting me to make a preliminary statement. The ground I expect to cover deals in an explanatory way with what the pink bollworm is, how it affects cotton, and what the situation is in Mexico at the present time. I would also like to say a few words about what the introduction of the pink bollworm in the United States would mean to our cotton culture. The pink bollworm in one stage is a moth, and I have a specimen of it here. These moths deposit their eggs on the fruit of the cotton plant. The eggs hatch into larva, which in a few days bores inside of the cotton fruit. If it happens to be a form or square it falls to the ground, and so the crop is lost, but if it happens to be a boll, the boll does not drop, but a portion of the interior, or, in many cases, all of the interior is destroyed. So that, regardless of the stage of the cotton plant which is attacked, the fruit is directly or indirectly destroyed. In the summer time this insect develops from the egg to the moth in about 10 or 15 days, and consequently an enormous number of individuals, or an enormous number of generations, are developed in the course of a single season. They may become so numerous toward the close of the season that they destroy all the crop as it forms. Later on in the season, however, instead of developing into the moth stage again, the larva or grub become quiescent, and in that stage they may last for at least two years. Consequently, there is every opportunity for the shipment of this insect from one part of the world to another in its quiescent stage, in which it is contained in cotton seed. Now, what I have said indicates the two respects in which the pink bollworm affects cotton. First, it reduces the production of the fruit, and, second, on account of the injury to the fruit, it reduces the amount of oil that can be obtained and reduces the quality of what is expressed. From observations made in Egypt, it was determined that from 10 to 30 per cent of the oil content was lost on account of the ravages of this insect in the seed. At the present time the pink bollworm is found in Egypt, where it was introduced about 10 years ago; in South America, where it was Introduced more recently; and in India, where for ages it has been an important cotton pest. It also occurs in the Hawaiian Islands, where it was introduced some years ago from India. In 1911, in connection with the exploitation or culture of Egyptian cotton in Mexico, some 10 tons of infested Egyptian cotton seed was brought to Monterey. Naturally the infestation was rather low, and the insects did not show themselves conspicuously in the crop of the next year. In fact, the Egyptian cotton produced a very good crop, and that cotton sold at Mexico City at a higher price than any other cotton ever brought in that market. The planters naturally found out about it, and there was a sharp demand for the seed produced for planting purposes. Some of those seed went into the Laguna district, where perhaps four-fifths of the cotton in Mexico is produced. That is an area of about 1,200 square miles, something like 200 miles from our frontier. Our investigations have shown. that the insect is thoroughly distributed over that Laguna territory, and our records indicate that quantities of the infested seed may have been shipped within the last few years from the Laguna district to regions much nearer the United States. As you know, Mr. Chairman, we have a boll weevil in this country which affects the cotton plant in somewhat the same manner that the pink bollworm affects it. While we have the boll weevil, the other countries have the pink bollworm, and in that way the two insects operate to equalize the difficulties in production. The situation that confronts us now is such that unless something is done the United States is pretty certain in a very short time to get this second very destructive cotton pest. Then the United States will be suffering under the handicap of the boll weevil in the first place, and further from this most destructive cotton pest. Then, it is very doubtful, with the conditions now obtaining in this country, with the high price of labor and the diversion of labor to other industries-it is very doubtful whether under this double handicap the United States would be able to maintain competition with the other cotton-producing counties of the world. In that view of the situation, the Department of Agriculture considers that the crisis which confronts us is a most serious one. Just to-day, Mr. Chairman, we received the latest information from Egypt concerning the damage from the pink bollworm there. I have here a publication of the Egyptian ministry of agriculture which gives the records of the infestation by the pink bollworm in central, lower, and upper Egypt. This diagram here [indicating] indicates the percentage of cotton fruit growing in the field which became infested by this insect, beginning in July, 1916, and running through until October. By the middle of July, according to this statement, 5 per cent of the green fruit was infested, by the 1st of September 30 per cent of it had become infested, and by the 1st of October 80 per cent of it had become infested. Their cotton season corresponds more or less closely to our own. The important thing about this chart is that it indicates approximately what would happen in this country if this insect became established-that is, by October 1, 80 per cent of the growing bolls would be infested. I would like to read a sentence or two at the end of this report: Considering that the pink bollworm is an imported pest which has been in Egypt less than 10 years, its increase has been enormous, It now occurs everywhere cotton is grown in Egypt. In the last week of October 87 per cent of the grown bolls in lower Egypt, 78 per cent in middle Egypt, and 60 per cent in upper Egypt were attacked by it. The difference in the percentages of infestation there is on account of the relative dates of the introduction of the pest. It was introduced first in lower Egypt, and the infestation there is the highest, or 87 per cent. It was introduced last in upper Egypt by natural spread, and there the infestation was 60 per cent. But everything indicates that in the course of a very few years the injury in upper Egypt will be fully equal to that in the lower part of the country. I think that is all I have to say in this connection, but Mr. Marlatt, who is the chairman of the horticultural board, has a further statement to make. and Mr. MARLATT. Mr. Chairman, it would perhaps be desirable to make a statement of what has been done in relation to this pest, of what we now want to do in addition to what we are doing. When this insect was discovered in Mexico, and when we realized the risk that it was to our cotton culture, we promptly, under the authority given in the plant-quarantine act, stopped the movement of cotton seed from Mexico to the United States. The CHAIRMAN. When was that discovered? Mr. MARLATT. Last fall, in November. The United States has been the normal market for all the Mexican cotton produced. We stopped the movement of cotton seed to the United States. There was at that time in Texas some 10 mills that had purchased seed from Mexico during the immediately preceding months. These mills had quantities of Mexican seed in stock, and they were milling it. The department applied to Congress for an appropriation to facilitate the disposal and cleaning up of the seed that was already in Texas and for the safeguarding of the border by the supervision of freight and other traffic between Mexico and the United States. Perhaps it should be stated that most Mexican freight cars have been used at one time or another in carrying cotton seed, and they are often foul with cotton seed in the cracks and crevices. It became necessary to fumigate and clean up all of such cars entering the United States from Mexico. Much of this freight is, however, transferred at the border and is there cleaned and fumigated, and this work is extended to the baggage of passengers. Many Mexicans entering the United States may bring in cotton seed as packing for kitchen utensils and that sort of thing. Fifty thousand dollars was granted for that work, and that work is going on. Mr. GILLETT. Did the State of Texas contribute anything toward it? Mr. MARLATT. The State of Texas has not made any direct contribution, but they have been cooperating with us in this work through their inspection forces. Mr. AYERS. We had a very small appropriation. Mr. MARLATT. They did not contribute to the national fund. Mr. AYERS. It is about $5,000. Mr. MARLATT. The mills in Texas that had received Mexican cotton seed have now ground up all that seed and the waste seed about the mills, and other hulls and waste that had been taken out of the mills for fertilizer have been cleaned up and burned. We are now keeping a close supervision of the territory about these mills and the neighboring cotton fields are being inspected frequently to determine whether there has been any infestation. So far no infestation has been discovered, and we are hoping that no infestation has resulted from this Mexican seed. This work is being done under the $50,000 appropriation referred to. That appropriation is ample for the clean up about mills and the field inspection in Texas and for the safeguarding of the border traffic. With respect to the latter, there are many points of entry in that 1,500 miles of border from El Paso to Brownsville, and even extending farther west along the border of New Mexico. The border inspection at the principal points of entry is taken care of by a force of competent inspectors, and the department is being helped in that work by the customs service along the border. That covers, Mr. Chairman, the work we are now doing. That, however, is not enough to safeguard us, and Mexico remains a menace. The insect is already distributed, as Dr. Hunter told you, throughout the Laguna district, which is the large cotton-producing district of Mexico. Seed from that district has been sent out for planting purposes to various other parts of Mexico. In two or three instances it is definitely known that such seed has been sent close to our border. There are now two large fields of cotton close to the border planted with seed from the Laguna district, and these fields and perhaps thers may develop the insect on our immediate border. We are sking now for an appropriation of $500,000 to further safeguard the situation. The object of this appropriation is set forth in a letter frm the Secretary of Agriculture to the Secretary of the Treasury, which has been referred to your committee. Yesterday a conference was held with the State officials of Texas-a conference which was alled at the invitation of the Secretary of Agriculture. The commissioner of agriculture of the State of Texas and other official representatives of the State designated by the governor of Texas were present, and also a committee of cotton growers from the lower Rio Grande Valley. As a result of that conference the plan of work which was detailed in the letter referred to from the Secretary of Agriculture may be slightly modified. The work now contemplated may be discussed under three items: First, the establishment of a cotton-free zone along the border of Texas The CHAIRMAN. In Texas? Mr. MARLATT. Yes, sir; in Texas. We can not do it in Mexico, but We can do it possibly in Texas. This insect may infest Mexican cotton fields near our border, but its flight is normally limited, and if there is an area of, say, 50 miles, which it can not easily bridge, it is reasonable to believe that it may be kept out of our country for many years, at a saving of hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Mr. GILLETT. How far can it fly? Mr. MARLATT. It is an insect that has a short, quick flight, usually of only a few yards or a few rods. Mr. GILLETT. Then, why do you need anything like an area of 50 miles? Mr. MARLATT. Because it may make repeated flights. Mr. GILLETT. It feeds on cotton alone? Mr. MARLATT. The mature insect does not feed on cotton, and possibly not at all, but it may feed on flowers, like some other moths. The chance of its being carried 50 miles is very remote, especially under the conditions obtaining along the border. As to this border strip, 95 per cent of it does not grow any cotton, and it will not impose any hardship on the majority of the people living there to maintain a cotton-free zone. There are three counties at the very end of the strip. next to the Gulf, near the mouth of the river, in which a considerable quantity of cotton is produced. Those counties were represented at our conference yesterday. Mr. GILLETT. Would the moth fly across the river? Mr. MARLATT. Yes, sir; it might easily fly across the river, and it might easily be carried across the river accidentally, but it probably would seldom be carried over the river with the supervision we now maintain, and certainly not over such a strip as I have indicated. The second proposal under this appropriation is to maintain, so far as may be possible, a cotton-free zone on the Mexican side of the border. That can be done by frequent inspections of the adjacent territory in Mexico, and such work is now possible even under the present disturbed conditions. By such inspections we would expect to locate at the very earliest moment any possible infection on the other side. The third proposal covers a general survey of the infected area in Mexico that is, the Laguna region, which is about 200 miles south of the border, and of any points of infection which may have resulted from the shipment of seed from that center. The object of such survey is to determine the possibility of the extermination of the pink boll worm in Mexico. If such extermination should prove possible in Mexico, this insect could then be eliminated from this continent. If we do not find it possible to exterminate the insect in Mexico, no human power will prevent it from coming across the border eventually; but the border control outlined may prevent the insect from coming across for 15 or 20 years. Unless, therefore, the pink boll worm can be exterminated in Mexico, sooner or later, by hand of man or hand of nature, it will get across. With this outlook, if it is possible to exterminate this insect in Mexico, it would certainly seem that we would be justified in undertaking it. The survey here proposed is to determine the spread in Mexico and to determine the practicability of extermination. If by such survey we find that extermination is impracticable, we will have to rely on the border control. If. however, the extermination of the insect should prove to be reasonably |