Losses dub to the hull wkevtl. 



23 



At 13 cents a pound for lint (average price in 1909) the 1908-1910 

 average yields would mean an average loss from the average yield of 

 IS!):; 1S97 of the following amounts per acre: 



Texas $3. 90 



Louisiana 15.25 



Arkansas 5.20 



Oklahoma 1 1 . 05 



Mississippi 1.95 



Messrs. Norden & Co., of New York, have made a conservative 



estimate of the average annual loss in the various States, as follows: 



Percent. 



Texas, about 15 



Louisiana L5 



Arkansas L5 



M ississippi ■ 21 



The Bureau of Statistics of this department estimated the losses 

 to the cotton crop in 1909 from various causes as shown below: l 



Table III. — Amount of injury to cotton crop of 1909 due to various causes. 





Loss in seed cotton per acre from— 



State. 



Climatic 

 condi- 

 tions. 



Boll 



weevil. 



Boll- 

 worm. 



Other 

 insects. 



Plant 

 diseases. 



Miscella- 

 neous 

 causes. 



Total. 



Arkansas 



Pounds. 

 112.2 

 38.8 

 103.3 

 147.3 

 100.4 



Pounds. 



21.5 

 148.8 



14.1 

 11.0 

 37.6 



Founds. 

 2.5 

 8.5 

 8.0 

 3.7 

 8.7 



Pounds. 

 0.7 

 1.3 

 0.7 

 0.4 

 0.0 



Pounds. 

 14. 1 

 11.0 

 18.8 

 2.2 

 7.7 



Pounds. 

 0.7 

 1.4 

 3.1 

 3.4 

 0.6 



Pound?. 

 152. 





209.8 



Mississippi 



148.0 





168.0 



Texas 



155.0 







A verage of infested region . 



100.4 



46.6 



6.2 



0.6 



10.8 



1.8 



166.4 



According to this estimate, the boll weevil was responsible for 

 28 per cent of the loss in the five infested States and 14.9 per cent 

 of the loss in the United States. This loss was estimated as 1,267,000 

 bales of 500 pounds, which, at the current price of cotton in 1909, 

 would be worth $88,056,500. Although the estimate of the Bureau 

 of Statistics may be high, it was based upon the reports of numerous 

 trained observers throughout the infested territory. 



Frequently misconceptions arise regarding the manner in which 

 the weevil has affected cotton production in Texas. This is due to 

 the fact that the total crop of the State has been maintained more or 

 less regularly since the advent of the pest. In order to obtain exact 

 information on this point we must examine the statistics of produc- 

 tion in different parts of the State. 2 



It is necessary to divide the State into three areas. These are 

 ('astern, central, and western Texas. The divisions are made in 

 accordance with variations in normal annual precipitation and other 

 factors. Eastern Texas as used in this bulletin is bounded on the 

 west by a line running practically north and south from the western 



•Crop Reporter vol. 12, No. 12, p. 94, December, 1910. 



2 The following four paragraphs and table, are extracted, with a few tnodificationsj from Circular No. 122, 

 Bureau of Entomology, pp. S 8. 



