STATE WORK IN MASSACHUSETTS, 1890-1900. 27 



the gipsy moth. Many of the observations have been published in 

 the report by Forbush and Fernald already cited. 



Unfortunately, conditions in the territory infested were not very 

 favorable to the increase of insectivorous birds, and this, of course, 

 served to limit their activities and usefulness. A few species, among 

 which may be mentioned the crow, while destroying many of the 

 larvfe, undoubtedly aided the spread of the gipsy motli by dropping 

 live caterpillars in uninfested sections. 



Field observations were made and work in rearing the insect 

 enemies of these moths was carried on by Messrs.. A. H. Kirkland, 

 A. F. Burgess, F. H. Mosher, and others. 



A few species of hymenopterous and dipterous parasites were found 

 working in the field and small numbers of the adults were reared at 

 the insectary. Among the predaceous enemies were several species of 

 beetles (Carabidse) and stink bugs (Pentatomidse) which were found 

 feeding on the larvae in the field and were studied in detail in the 

 laboratory. 



Although not an insect, the common toad should be mentioned as 

 doing valuable work in destroying such specimens of the insects as 

 came within its reach. 



The rapid development and unprecedented injury caused by the 

 gipsy moth after the state work was abandoned show conclusively 

 that native natural enemies are entirely unable to cope with the 

 situation. 



PROGRESS OF THE STATE WORK IN MASSACHUSETTS, 1880-1900. 



The administration of any extensive public work almost invariably 

 arouses more or less antagonism, and the gipsy moth work was no 

 exception in this respect. In compliance with the provisions of the 

 law which provided for the extermination of this insect, no effort was 

 made to introduce its parasites or natural enemies from abroad, as it 

 would have been necessary to allow extensive colonies of the insect 

 to remain untreated in order to give introduced parasites an oppor- 

 tunity to become established. Some criticism was occasioned by 

 this manner of handling the work and in addition to this many 

 property owners in sections of the State which were not infested 

 failed to see the necessity for making large appropriations to destroy 

 the insect. Active opposition developed in some sections of the 

 infested territory, which was occasioned by ignorance as to the 

 methods of carrying on the work. 



Realizing that the work was of a different character from any that 

 had been attempted previously, and that new methods and devices 

 must be employed to handle the problem with any degree of success, 

 great effort was made to test in a practical way any suggestions that 



