100 GRASSHOPPERS AND OTHER INJURIOUS INSECTS OF 1911 AND 1912. 



Suggested Changes in Our State Inspection Law. 



The newly enacted Federal law, establishing a Quarantine 

 Board which has power to quarantine any part or the whole of a 

 state as far as nursery stock is concerned, should, of itself, show 

 us the need of a more stringent inspection law in Minnesota, since 

 under those conditions Minnesota nurserymen could ship no stock 

 out of the state and intra-state shipments would in all probability 

 be restricted. 



Our present law is faulty in many respects, viz. : the entomolo- 

 gist cannot legally inspect ornamental or nursery stock on private 

 grounds where stock it not grown for sale, although there may be 

 the most startling evidence of the presence of dangerous insect 

 pests, imported or domestic, thereon. At present, inspection only 

 takes place once a year and then only upon request of the owner. 

 It is evident that a pest may have established itself in the nursery 

 subsequent to inspection, and the owner, not desiring and not ask- 

 ing for inspection the following year, unconsciously be the means 

 of a very undesirable insect gaining a firm hold. 



Our law as now worded directs the inspector to grant a certif- 

 icate to anyone raising nursery stock, if such stock is free of pests. 

 Such a party may be merely an agent, owning only a quarter of an 

 acre, or even renting said ground, which is frequently merely a 

 place where left-overs or unsalable stock is planted. This condi- 

 tion of affairs should be provided for and guarded against. 



The entomologist believes that the State, not the nurserymen 

 (as at present) should pay the expense of inspection, for manifest 

 reasons. 



Post office authorities and express companies have recently be- 

 come quite caieful in insisting upon a certificate of inspection being 

 attached to every package of stock, stating that it "was grown 

 where inspected." This has given rise in Minnesota at least to some 

 peculiar requests upon the part of one or two parties selling stock. 

 Without mentioning names we will say that A represents a Minne- 

 sota dealer who buys stock and has it shipped directly from a 

 grower in some other state to his customer, but A does not wish 

 to advertise the nurseryman (in New York, let us say, or in Penn- 

 sylvania) from which he purchases and he also desires his customer 

 to think, if possible, that the order comes from his (A's) establish- 

 ment. Therefore, A asks the Minnesota inspector to sign his name, 

 officially, to a statement to the effect that the stock shipped "was 

 inspected where grown," said declaration to be attached to each 



