April, '12] WASHBURN: GRASSHOPPERS IN .MINNESOTA 115 



and did not in any way injure crops. We used, in most of our experi- 

 ments, field sprayers which covered 23 feet at one time. We used 

 approximately 50 gallons per acre, at a cost of about 30c, this estimate 

 based upon the retail price of arsenite, namely, 22c per pound. The 

 location of the water supply is an important feature in the cost of 

 labor. Further, we believe that when vegetation is quite rank an 

 acre would call for something more than 50 gallons. This poison did 

 not kill immediately, — from 24 to 36 hours elapsing before the insect 

 gave up the ghost, but it is to be noted that a partial paralysis was 

 the immediate result of partaking of the poison. The insect was 

 immediately made sick and ate nothing. 



We received from various farmers of intelligence congratulations 

 upon this method, and statements of their success in using it . 



Of course, the question at once occurs to the practical farmer as to 

 whether this is dangerous to stock. We have made tests along this 

 line, and while it must be remembered that any poison is detrimental 

 and frequently fatal if taken in too large amounts, we feel convinced 

 from our experiments, that, as ordinarly used by a farmer l^earing 

 the above fact in mind, no bad results will happen. A Holstein bull 

 was fed with forage poisoned with this spray in the above proportions, 

 being fed about 15 pounds of this each day for ten days, and showed 

 absolutely no symptoms of poisoning. On the other hand we observed 

 unpleasant symptoms in a young heifer fed with the same kind of 

 forage, and later, when this same animal was turned upon a grass 

 plot, where the grass has been drenched with poison applied, (through 

 an error of an assistant), three times as copiously as it should have 

 been, after eating ravenously of this over-poisoned forage, rapidly 

 developed symptoms of arsenical poisoning and died. As you will 

 readily see, these conditions would never arise in actual farm practice. 



As regards fall plowing it is possible that we will have to qualify 

 recommendations in that connection, and the advice that Ave have 

 given to this end in years gone by may represent an example of the 

 general acceptance and promulgation of certain remedies, the thor- 

 oughness of w^hich has not been properly tested. 



In the first place, farmers for the most part will not plow in the 

 late fall. They have large tracts of land to handle, and, as a rule, 

 feel that they must begin their plowing immediately after the crop 

 is off the ground. This is before egg-laying takes place. Our field 

 agent, ]\lr. Somes, doubts the efficacy of the plow unless it is followed 

 by the harrow. He claims that more real good results from cultivation 

 with a harrow, since that has a tendency to break up the egg masses 

 and expose the eggs to the effects of bleaching and drj'ing, and render- 

 ing them more easily accessible to their natural enemies. He further 



