April, '19] O'KANE: LIMITATIONS IN INSECT SUPPRESSION 157 



to bequeath the penalty for that misfortune to other states, any more 

 than it would assume the right to ask other states to help bear its 

 burden of fire losses. As a matter of fact, however, in the case of any 

 really threatening insect that has been introduced into the United 

 States at some point and has actually become established, the pest is 

 a matter of concern for other states, usually for all of them. It has 

 made its start at one particular point, not through the carelessness of 

 the state, as a rule, but by chance; and, in any event, the personal 

 views of individuals as to responsibility will have no effect on the 

 dispersion of the pest into new territory. 



The state in which an outbreak has begun may fairly assume an 

 obligation to assist in control measures. In the first place, it has the 

 problem within its midst. The thing is there. It is doing damage. 

 It is a fact on hand. Aside from this, the state may be of real assist- 

 ance to the federal authorities. For example, a federal quarantine 

 can concern itself only with shipments interstate. Movement of the 

 pest or its host from the infested area to other areas not invaded and 

 within the same state is not subject to control by the federal regula- 

 tions. Such movement may be controlled by state authority. 



It would seem, therefore, that a campaign for control of an insect 

 outbreak may profitably be laid upon both the Federal Bureau and 

 the states immediately concerned; and this applies as well to the 

 necessary study of the insect and its enemies. 



The nature of the outbreak itself will determine what degree of con- 

 trol may properly be undertaken. But that degree should be thought- 

 fully and carefully weighed early in the campaign. It is one thing to 

 retard the spread of a new insect pest; it is another thing to control 

 it; it is still a different thing to suppress it; and it is again otherwise 

 to exterminate it. Very rarely, indeed, may we rightly set about our 

 campaign with the promise of extermination, either implied to our- 

 selves in the arrangement of our campaign, or expressed to the public 

 in any announcements or, especially, in requests for funds. Once in 

 a great while an outbreak arises where actual extermination or eradica- 

 tion is reasonably within hope. For example, I feci that we have such 

 a situation at this moment in the European corn borer, although the 

 possibility of actual extermination is problematical and will cease to 

 be a possibility in another year or two. The work in progress against 

 the gipsy moth is, to my mind, partly a matter of retarding spread, 

 partly a campaign for control through the introduction of parasites, 

 but only remotely a possibility of suppression and the latter only if it 

 should happen that the introduced parasites prove extraordinarily 

 efficient. It is not now a campaign of extermination, thougii once, 

 years ago, it had that possibility in it. 



