ivS MONTANA EXPI<]RIM1<]NT STATION 



"3. Cooperate willi lc(lcral and State tifhcials and ])rivate own- 

 ers in efforts to estal)lish the most economical and eft'ective insect 

 control policy in special forests and in forest areas where general 

 co-operation is essential for the ])romotion of common interests. 



■■\'ery trnly }-ours. 



-A. ]). HOPKINS, 

 "in ( 'liar^'c of 1^'orest Insect Inxestip^ations." 



THE MONTANA INSECTICIDE LAW. 



The Federal Insecticide Act of 1910 has iurisdictioji o\er adul- 

 terated and misbranded insecticides and fungicides that have en- 

 tered into interstate cc^mmerce. but ])re\'ious to i(}ii Montana had 

 no protection against adulterated or other fraudulent products of 

 this character that might originate within the State boundaries. 



The Twelfth Legislati\'e Assembl}' enacted a wise and sufficient 

 law, the ])ro\'isions of which are verv similar to those of the lA-deral 

 act. In fact, the two laws are identical in their essential provis- 

 ions. The responsibilitv for the enforcement (^f the law is placed 

 u]jon the Director of the Experiment Station and the State Ento- 

 mologist. 



Up to the present time practical!}' all of the insecticides and 

 fungicides used in Montana ha\-e been shi])pc(l in, and ii is to be 

 expected that for some time to come onl\- comparativelv small 

 amounts will be manufactured here. Yet, as the orchard business 

 mcreases and general agriculture develops, tliere will be a con- 

 tinuall}- increasing amount of home manufacture of these ])rodncts. 

 There is already prospect that in the near future one or move 

 lime-sul]^'hur i)lants will be erected in the orchard districts. 



The matter ol ])urity and correct branding of an insecticide 

 is of much importance. The Iruit grower and the farmer should 

 get what they buy and i)a_\' for and not an inferior or adulterated 

 product. We have known of a nund)er of cases in which an inferior 

 insecticide was used and the farmer, failing to secure the desired 

 lesults, lost hea\il\- in the crop he had ho])ed to protect. The 

 loss, then, was not alone through i)aying for a high-class jiroduct 

 and getting an inlerior one. but al>o through loss of the cro]i wdiich 

 the adulterated insecticide failed to ])rotect. 



It is |)erhaps still more unfortunate when the farmer fails to 



