12 



broods as well as destroying many weevils that take refuge in the 

 windrows as soon as the plants are uprooted, is feasible, effective, 

 and economical, and consequently should be generally practiced. 



The tendency of some planters to allow the plants to stand in the 

 field, in the hope of securing a top crop, is one of the most serious 

 obstacles in the fight against the weevil. The statistics as well as the 

 testimon}'^ of the most experienced cotton planters in Texas show that 

 there has not been any appreciable top crop produced in Texas in 

 more than three 3'ears in the past quarter of a century. It is, there- 

 fore, safe to state that the gain to the planter the following season la 

 a lessened number of weevils will alwa3's more than compensate him 

 for the loss of anj^ top crop he is likely to obtain. 



The Department's experiments show that the matter of spacing the 

 rows is rather uncertain. The distance depends upon the nature of 

 the soil and the variety of the cotton grown. Moreover, much depends 

 upon the season. During a very wet 3^ear plants will grow to such 

 an extent as to make the greatest feasible distance unimportant from 

 the weevil standpoint. In this matter the planter must always act in 

 accordance with the experience he has had upon his land. It will be 

 well, however, to bear in mind that the distance between plants in the 

 row is fully as important as the distance between the rows. The 

 nearer the soil area to each plant approaches a square, the greater the 

 yield will be. At the same time, too great spacing, besides decreasing 

 the yield, actually' dela3^s the fruitage, and is, therefore, especialh" to 

 be avoided. As nearly as a rule can be formulated, it ma3^ be stated 

 that on the river bottom soil, which produces the bulk of the Texas 

 crop, a distance of 5i feet between the rows in a series of 3'ears would 

 not be too great, while there are very few upland fields where 4 feet 

 would be too great. A point in this connection that is frequently 

 overlooked is in the great saving of labor when the rows are wide. 

 For instance, it costs about one-third less to crop a field with rows 6 

 feet apart than one with rows 4 feet apart. 



INEFFECTIVE METHODS OF COMBATING THE WEEVIL. 



In order to save the cotton growers useless expenditure of time and 

 means, attention is called to certain ineffective methods of combating 

 thb boll weevil. 



NOSTRUMS. 



Several specifics in the form of poisons for the destruction of the 

 boll weevil have been widely advertised. At the laborator3^ in Vic- 

 toria these have all been tested and found absoluteU' useless. The 

 weevii being an insect that in all stages except one feeds well protected 

 in the square or boll, and takes nourishment in the remaining stage 



