20(5 BOARD OF AGRICULTURE. [Pub. Doc. 



ations than were recommended, the work has suffered severely 

 from delay of action by the Legislature. In 1893 the reduced 

 appropriation did not become available until April 12, and the 

 committee reported that " by reason of the delay at least six 

 weeks of the best working time of the year passed unutilized." 

 In 1894, notwithstanding the fact that the committee reserved 

 about $30,000 for use in the late winter and early spring, the 

 new appropriation did not become available until May 23, and 

 the whole force was discharged two weeks before that date, 

 for want of money to pay their wages. Last year the force 

 was discharged on February 6, because the appropriation was 

 expended, and the work could not be resumed until May 17. 

 The fine weather of February, March, April and half of May 

 passed unutilized. 



The committee feel obliged to reiterate what was said in 

 their report last year : ' ' The work has suffered in the past 

 three years almost as much by delay of appropriations as by 

 refusal to appropriate the sums asked for by the committee." 

 In 1895 the delay in making the appropriation was greater 

 than in any one of the three preceding years, and the work 

 suffered in a correspondingly greater degree. It seems to the 

 committee that it is the opposite of economical management 

 to deal with this problem as has been the practice in the past. 

 Either the work should be abandoned, or the appropriations 

 should be ample for the vigorous prosecution of the work, 

 and should be promptly made, so that the money can be used 

 to the utmost advantage. The committee took substantially 

 the same position in the report of 1895, as follows: "The 

 committee believes that the work of extermination should be 

 continued, but is also firmly of the opinion that, if the Legis- 

 lature is unwilling to appropriate the sum necessary for an 

 aggressive campaign for extermination, the law should be 

 changed so that the Board of Agriculture shall be required to 

 conduct the work only along the line of preventing the spread 

 of the gypsy moth. The committee further believes that, if 

 the Legislature is unwilling to provide sufficient funds for 

 restricting the spread of the gypsy moth and holding it in 

 check, the work should be discontinued entirely." 



The committee should not be held responsible for failure if 

 their plans and recommendations are ignored. The final sue- 



