45 



II, li:is Ik'cii jiskcd ''\\'li;il (lien wctiild yon have lis (l(»? SImikI 

 idle \\Iiil('(li(' disease dcsti-oys our clicsdnit foi-csls " My 

 aiiswci- is this: It may be well to restrict the lraiisj>ortat ion of 

 diseased nursery stock, but this is all that it is worth while to 

 ' attempt at present in the line of combat ini; the disease, /t is hcl- 

 icr to (ittciii/if iiolhiiif/ llniii to inistr <t tarf/c (iiiioiiiit of jtnltlic 

 ■iiioiu:// on (I iiK't/iofl of coirlrot irhicJi there is erei\i/ reason to tx;- 

 tierv vnnnfrt sueeecft. I believe in beini;,- honest with the pnblic 

 and admittinji fraidcly that we know of no way to control this 

 disease. I favor moderate-.sized api)ro})riations for investiii:ation 

 of the disease, bnt none at JiU to be used in attempts to control it 

 by any method or methods at present known. 



What will be tlie fntnre conrse of the disease can only l>e con- 

 jectured, bnt it can be safely predicted that notliinjj; Avliicli man 

 can now do will materially alter its conrse. However, the sitini- 

 I ion is l)y no means hopeless. That the <lisease has already reach- 

 ed its zenith and will now i^radnally subside is (piite i)ossible. 

 There have been other epidemics, and other kinds of trees and 

 ]dants have been threatened Avitli destruction thi'ou,i;li disease, 

 but such a Ihinii has never actually happened. So far as known, 

 no plant lias ever been exterminated by disease. It is unlikely 

 that the chestnut will be exterminated. 



THE (UIAIIJMAX: It occurs to the Chair that the situaticm 

 would su.nj^est discussion at this time, Imt it would pro1)ably be 

 jjetter to continue wiil! (»nr ])ro<»Tamme as it Avas ably laid out by 

 those wlio liave provided for this Conference, and have the dis- 

 cussion aftcM' we have heard the papers. AVe will, therefore, call 

 for tl'.e next i)aiter, entitled "Hoav Further Research nmy Increase 

 the Efficiency of the Control of the Chestnut P.ark Disease,'' by 

 Professor W. Howard IJankin, Cornell University, Ithaca, NeAv 

 York. 



1. Metralf, II. nnd Collins, -I. F. The control of the chestnut bark disease. U. S. D. A. 

 Fanners' Bnl. 4G7, 28 O. 1911. 



2. I.oe. cit. p. n. 



3. Reported by Tir . IMetealf at a eonferenee on tlie eliestnnt bark disease held in Albany, 

 N. y., October 10, IDll. 



4. U. S. n. A. Farmers' Bui. 4G7:11. 



5. U. S. I>. A. Farmers' Bui. 467:10. 



G. Metealt and Collins. The present status of the chestnut bark disease. U. S. !>. A. Bur. 

 Plant Indus. Bui. 141, Part V, p. 46. 30 S. 1909. 



7. Clinton, G. P. Report of the Botanist, IWJS. Conn. Kxp. Sta. Rpt. of ]9()7-190S: 879-800. 

 July, 1909. 



