15 



farms, from which the insect had undoubtedly spread to his own. Wild 

 vines of strawberry and Potentilla were growing' in some abundance in 

 the vicinity of tne strawberry beds wlien these were v isited in May of 

 1893, but were little troubled by the weevil, the cultivated varieties 

 "Sharpless" and "Charles Downing" being- greatly preferred. Mr. 

 Behrend reported that a neighbor of his, Mr. W. E. Garrick, had also 

 sustained some loss through this weevil. 



The insect was again destructive in Anne Arundel County, at Arnold 

 and at Harmans. Mr. R. S. Cole, of the latter, place, wrote that there 

 was a shortage of at least half the crop in 1892, and in 1893 about a 

 third was destroyed. The species had been noticed there for upwards 

 of ten years, the principal damage being to the "Sharpless,'' " Hoif- 

 man," "Michel's Early," an<I "Bid well" varieties. 



Mr. L. J. Atwater reported injuries to "Sharpless" berries in Mont- 

 gomery County, near the District line. One crop was completely ruined. 



In Virginia, in Alexandria County, Mr. W. T. Sprankle, of Falls 

 Church, who was one of the heaviest losers in 1892, gathered good crops 

 the past two years, the weevil appearing in injurious abundance in only 

 one portion of his fields. He reported that those who had lost entire crops 

 in 1892 did not suffer much loss in 1893. Capt. William S. Patton, West 

 End, Fairfax County, reported complete loss of a crop of " Sharpless," 

 and added that the fruit-growers of his vicinity had abandoned this 

 variety on account of its susceptibility to weevil attack. 



Information was also received of the presence of this insect in a 

 number of other localities in Maryland and Virginia but no serious loss 

 was incurred. The insect was noticed in Delaware again and reported 

 to Mr. M. H. Beckwith, of the State Experiment Station, in strawberry 

 fields about Clayton. It was also troublesome in a few localities in 

 southern New Jersey during the two years past and so reported by 

 Prof. J. B. Smith in the preceding volume (p. 191) and by letter. It did 

 not, however, do any spe(ual injury. In fact, the insect has been much 

 less abundant the past two years than in 1892 and appears to be on the 

 decrease in these States. 



Extensive damage was reported to the strawberry during May of the 

 current year by a correspondent in Columbia County, Pa., and as the 

 injury was due to the severing of the stalks there can be no doubt that 

 the strawberry weevil was the culprit. 



Accounts of similar injuries in recent years have been received from 

 New York State, but with no report as to the extent of damage. 



A number of our correspondents have complained particularly of the 

 damage done b^^ the destruction of the staminates used in the fertiliza- 

 tion of pistillates, the product being dwarfed and useless fruit. 



The presence of the insect in 1892, when the greatest damage known 

 in its history was done, was reported too late in the season for experi- 

 mentation with remedies, and circumstances were equally unfavorable the 

 past two seasons. Such remedial experiments as were performed were 

 by correspondents of the Division, and we are particularly indebted to 



