89 



SPRAYING FOR INSECT PESTS 



Dr. E. Porter Felt, State Entomologist, Albany, N. Y. 



Primarily and fundamentally we are dealing with a 

 business proposition. Spraying is protective not curative; 

 it is a species of insurance, not reimbursement; it differs 

 from both life and fire insurance, in that returns are not 

 conditional upon demise or destruction but upon production. 

 The profits are proportionate to the activity of insect pests 

 and the development of fungous diseases, and yet the assur- 

 ance of comparative crop safety is worth something. 



It is evident that the remedy must not be worse than 

 the disease, though the speaker knows of cases wnere spray- 

 ing was conducted in good faith and the latter condition of 

 the orchard was worse than the first. A man dependent for 

 a living upon his trees may advantageously keep clear of 

 experimental work, especially of the kind which may jeop- 

 ardize the existence of- his orchards. Trees are living 

 organisms and the mere fact that they have successfully 

 withstood a given treatment one season, gives no assurance 

 that the same will be true another year, though it may go 

 far to establish a probable freedom from injury. The great 

 trouble with a man unaccustomed to experimental work is 

 that he jumps at conclusions and soon is taking greater 

 chances than are justified by the available facts. If I could 

 say but one thing, it would be this: Cultivate such a con- 

 servative and prudent habit that it will be impossible to 

 adopt on a large scale, any method or procedure whicli is 

 not thoroughly justified by competent authority. 



Does spraying pay? The mere fact that most commer- 

 cial orchardists and a large number of farmers spray one or 

 more crops, would indicate that this is a paying operation. 



