NOTES ON OOLLEOTING, ETC. 



227 



I THINK that the honeydew accounts for the faikire of sugar. I 

 have clone absokitely nothing in the woods, thougli there were swarms 

 of Nocture about, but on the top of the downs, on palings, I have 

 found insects come very freely. — There were a few Agrotls cinerea, but 

 A. exclamationis, A. segetiua, Leiicania iiallens, L. comma, A. corticea, 

 Miana atrigilis, M. fascinncda and Apamea hasilinea were in swarms, 

 with a few Aplecta advena. But as all my best insects are woodland, I 

 have had a desperately bad season. If it had not been for my larva? I 

 should have been nowhere. I did some grass sweeping in the spring- 

 time, and have bred some thirty Leucania impura, one Apamea nculea, 

 one Triphcena interjecta and one A. gemina — not a very varied bag so 

 far.— G. M. A. Hewett, Winchester. June 26th, 1893, 



With regard to the failure at sugar, we seem to know as yet very 

 little. In 1892, a continuously fine May and early June produced 

 heaps of moths. Hundreds came to almost every patch, and this was 

 wonderfully general. With a still finer May and June this year, 

 insects would not come and no enticement seemed to fetch them. 

 Therefore, the fine weather could hardly be answerable for the differ- 

 ence, as both years were almost equally fine. This year vegetation was 

 marvellously early, last year it was much later, and during May and 

 June there were fewer flowers and other naturally attractive baits. 

 The moon, too, was bright during both periods, but last year one corres- 

 pondent wrote : — " The moon nor anything else seems to prevent them " ; 

 and many of the most successful sugaring nights were bright with moon- 

 light. But bright days, with a scarcely perceptible east wind, which, 

 however, produced extreme radiation at night, did stop moths coming 

 to sugar throughout July and part of August, 1892, and we have had a 

 considerable number of similar days and nights during the current 

 spell of abnormally brilliant weather. This, then, may account in j^art. 

 But that flowers and honeydew are chiefly responsible for the diiference 

 between the two years is as yet m}' present oi^inion. Everywhere in 

 June the place was surfeited with the latter, even the grass on our 

 London railway banks, and the area, compared with the small districts 

 we sugar, must be immense. Another point that makes me feel that 

 " honeydew " is largely responsible, is that those localities most destitute 

 of flowers and herbage are always the most uniformly profitable for 

 sugar. Coast downs and sand hills are proverbially prolific in their 

 production of large numbers of species and specimens at the artificial 

 " sweets," and these places are particularly devoid of natural attractions 

 until the rushes and sedges blossom, and then Nocture sometimes 

 swarm at them. A bright day, with no perceptible breeze until the 

 sun goes down, and then a slight haze from the ditches, rising and 

 curling and spreading over the banks, informs you that what little 

 breeze there is, is easterly, and you may as well pack up j^our tra])s at 

 once and go home, even in the best places. I have ofttimes at Deal 

 left friends on such nights to work in their wretchedness, whilst I have 

 gone as quickly as possible to the high ground to " dusk," and then 

 made my way home. Sugar will not pay anyAvhere on such nights, 

 the moths will not stay to feed. But there are nights when countless 

 thousands come — literally thousands, when they jostle each other for a 

 place on flowers and sugar ; on such nights you stand still while the 

 perspiration runs down your back in streams, but there is no east wind 

 then, no radiation, and, probably, no honeydew, but to what attractions 



