38o NEW YORK STATE MUSEUM 



Reference to the table shows that beetles taken on the sprayed 

 area and fed on sprayed foliage, all died within a comparatively 

 short time, specially those captured about the middle of July and 

 later. Those taken on the sprayed foliage and fed on unsprayed 

 leaves, lived a considerably longer time, deposited more or less 

 egg clusters, and in general compared very favorably with those 

 taken on unsprayed foliage and fed leaves that had not been 

 poisoned. These records were made by Mr Nixon, and he states 

 that those fed on sprayed foliage appeared to die as much from 

 starvation as from the poison, and this seems very probable, since 

 we know that in vineyards the beetles exhibit a marked preference 

 for unpoisoned leaves. This latter table in connection with the 

 field experiments, clearly shows that some of the beetles can 

 be destroyed by arsenical sprays, and if the vines are 

 kept covered with poison a considerable degree of protection 

 results. It is difficult to state the precise amount, but from data 

 at hand we are inclined to place it at from 50 to 60%, possibly 

 more. Much depends on the thoroughness with which the work 

 is done, and in the case of very rapidly growing vineyards like 

 Mr Falvay's, in which we experimented last year, the protection 

 would probably be much less. This is borne out by reference to 

 our beetle catcher records [see p. 371], where it will be observed 

 that fully as many beetles were taken on the rows treated in 1903 

 with arsenical poisons, namely numbers 25 to 61, as from any 

 other section of the experimental area. A single application of 

 poison was made in this instance and under such conditions it 

 can hardly be considered as having checked the insect to a marked 

 degree. Sprayings should be made at intervals of not over four 

 or five days after the beetles become abundant, and if three can 

 be made at four day intervals it is very likely that much greater 

 protection will be obtained than if only two were made at five or 

 six day intervals. 



Restoration of injured vineyards. One of the most serious 

 troubles with this pest, has been that considerable if not a large 

 proportion of the injury is inflicted before the vineyardist is aware 

 of the danger. Watchfulness will, to some extent, obviate the 

 trouble but in many cases the pest becomes abundant before the 

 owner knows of its presence and much damage is caused at the 

 outset. Our experiments in Mr D. K. Falvay's showed that it 

 was possible for the roots to be badly scored by the grubs and 

 yet the vines recover with comparatively little loss of vitality, 

 provided remedial measures are promptly adopted. The roots 



