go 
possible, these species would be exterminated (as indeed many 
of them are nearly now) in two seasons, within a radius of 
ten miles from the city. These species should be eliminated 
from the course. 
3. From all I can learn, none of the nature study material 
has ever been supplied to public schools from the Board of 
Education. This is probably one of the chief reasons why the 
so-called “nature study” is not such, except in name; and why 
such a large proportion of teachers and principals are either 
indifferent or positively opposed to it. I saw a lesson taught 
on “the lion,” with only a plaster-of-Paris cast of that animal 
as a basis. The syllabus specifies studying the characteristic 
motions, calls, color, and care of young. ‘This with a plaster- 
of-Paris cast! 
The value of the work, if properly done, would seem to 
justify the expenditure of a considerable sum annually to supply 
the teachers with suitable material. It is not that the teachers 
are incompetent or poorly prepared by the training schools; 
but the restrictions under which they work really make a high 
grade of nature study teaching impossible. 
4. May I presume to suggest the plan of appointing a com- 
mittee to revise the nature study course, and that this committee 
have as chairman an expert in that line (obtained from outside 
the city if necessary), and that both the principals of the public 
schools, and the public school teachers, and in addition, the 
biology teachers of the city high schools, be represented on the 
committee. 
Finally, I wish to add that the Brooklyn Botanic Garden 
has been organized primarily to be of help to local schools in 
the teaching of botany and nature study, and we, in turn, would 
welcome any suggestions as to how we may become of greatest 
assistance in this connection. 
I am, gentlemen, 
Yours very sincerely, 
STUART GAGER. 
Jus 

Up to May 15, 1913, no further action on the question by 
the Committee on Stud’es and Text Books had been announced. 
. STUART GAGER. 
