210 MEETINGS OF HORTICULTURAL INSPECTORS. 
communications with regard to nursery infestation, and that each should notify 
every other of such cases of infestation and attempts at evasion of the laws as 
might from time to time come to his notice.”—Resolution by the secretary unani- 
mously adopted. The session then adjourned until morning. 
: October 7—9 a. m.—The meeting was called to order by the chairman, and the 
third topic was discussed. 
Topic 3—* Interstate cooperation for the control of horticultural pests whose 
area of distribution extends across State lines.” In the discussion of this 
topic several cases were cited in which it was shown that cooperation was nec- 
essary to produce the desired results. This question was disposed of by the 
adoption of the following resolution offered by Mr. Fernald: 
| “Resolved, That interstate cooperation for the control of horticultural pests 
whose area of distribution extends across State lines is most desirable and 
should be as complete as the laws of the States concerned will permit, and that 
in the treatment of any particular pest preference should be given to such cases.” 
| Topic 4—“ Is it desirable that nurserymen should pay any part, or all, of the 
expenses of nursery inspection required by law, either directly or as a fee for a 
certificate?” Mr. Smith and others thought that nurserymen should not pay a 
fee for or bear the expense of the ordinary inspection, but in cases where extra 
inspections were made for the special benefit of the owner he should pay the ex-. 
pense thereof. Mr. Fernald agreed, but thought that the nurserymen should be 
required to take out a license at a small fee as a matter of record in the office 
of the inspector. Mr. Butz thought it advisable to charge a small fee for tree 
to tree examinations in cases of infestation, if the owner of the infested nursery 
desired it. Mr. Smith’s plan was to advise the owner to clean up his nursery 
before the inspection is made. Mr. Hamilton thought that in justice to the 
nurserymen no charge should be made for the inspection. Mr. Burgess thought 
it inconsistent to make free inspections of nursery stock and charge fees for the 
inspection of other commodities, such as oil and fertilizers. 
The discussion was concluded by the adoption of the following resolution of 
Mr. Smith: 
““ Resolved, That it is the sense of this body that the nurserymen should not be 
required to pay the expense of the ordinary inspection of nursery stock.” 
Topic 5—‘‘Is it desirable that the entire cost of insecticide or fungicide 
measures required by law should be borne by the owner of the affected prop- 
erty?’ In the discussion of this topic the consensus of opinion was that the 
State should not bear the cost of the treatment of private premises, and the fol- 
lowing resolution by the secretary was adopted: 
“ Resolved, That the entire cost of insecticide or fungicide measures required 
by law should be borne by the owner of the affected property.” 
Topic 6 was passed over for later consideration. 
Topic 7—‘ Lists, reported by members, of nursery pests in their States whose 
continued presence will prevent the certification of a nursery.” Mr. Smith’s 
practice in New Jersey was to withhold certificate from nurserymen whose 
premises were found infested with San Jose scale, at least until all infestation 
was eliminated. Stock actually infested with black knot was not certified. 
Yellows could not be detected on nursery stock and was hardly considered as a 
factor in the inspection. Crown gall was inspected for, so far as possible, after 
the stock was dug and visibly diseased plants discarded. Woolly aphis—badly 
infested stock was destroyed. The occurrence of Aspidiotus ancylus, A. forbesi, 
and Chionaspis furfurus would not bar the stock. The occurrence of any scale 
insect on imported stock would prevent certification, and the presence of Diaspis 
pyricola especially would act as a bar. 
