190 JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY [Vol. 9 



after case could be mentioned of earnest effort which has come to no 

 permanent good because of lack of supervision. I commend to this 

 section the desirabihty of definite public utterance on this question 

 for the guidance of the appointing powers and state legislatures. 



At a conference of apiary inspectors held at the invitation of Mr. 

 Frank C. Pellett, Apiary Inspector for Iowa, in Keokuk, Iowa, on 

 September 8, 1915, Mr. N. E. France of Wisconsin called attention to 

 a lack of cooperation among inspectors of adjacent states and made 

 certain suggestions for overcoming the deficiency. To bring this 

 before the section I desire to present the question for consideration. 



The brood diseases of bees do not respect state boundaries and it 

 would be well for an inspector to know of cases of disease found in 

 counties that adjoin his state. This could be done simply by corre- 

 spondence between the inspectors but this probably will not be done 

 in many cases unless some regular system is devised. 



As the inspectors know, the Bureau of Entomology notifies the in- 

 spector when a sample of diseased brood is received from the territory 

 under his supervision. If it is the wish of the inspectors, the Bureau 

 will gladly extend this by receiving reports of inspection along state 

 lines and notifying the adjoining inspector. This will be rather 

 easily done in conjunction with our maps on the distribution of the 

 diseases. 



Possibly this will not give as much information as the inspectors 

 would like to have and it may be considered desirable to devise some 

 other method of giving the information. In any event it would seem 

 desirable that the prevalence of the disease be indicated and not 

 merely a notice sent of the existence of the disease. 



It would probably be desirable to have records of all cases of disease 

 kept in some central office but this is beyond the needs of the case in 

 point. 



There is need of greater publicity of the work of the apiary inspectors, 

 if for no other purpose to stimulate interest in the control of disease. 

 Such publicity would do much to point out any waste of funds and I 

 would suggest the desirability of gathering together every year the 

 records of inspection in all the states where this work is done. To give 

 the number of apiaries visited, the number that are being visited for 

 the second time that season, the number that have been visited 

 previous seasons, the amount of disease found, the monej' expended, 

 as a total and per colony, and all available data as to any reduction 

 in the prevalence of disease would do much to point out deficiencies 

 and to stimulate to better work. It would, in fact, be the application 

 to inspection of the methods of modern efficiency. Such a summary 

 might be prepared by the Secretary of this section and published in 



