flict with other interests, not least of which are some of those concerned 
with mosquito control. There are enough examples, however, of a kinder 
control that has not appreciably interfered with wildlife conservation to 
warrant the belief that many of the conflicts between the two interests 
could well have been avoided. Certainly, the apparent excellent results 
of some mosquito-control work, such es that of Clarke and’ Myer in Illinois, 
and Crosthwait in Maryland, lead to the hope that conservation and mos- 
quito-control interests as a whole can be more ha rmoniously coordinated 
if the proponents of each are but equal to the task. © 
As a background for the discussion. of certain factors pertaining 
to the possible coordination of wildlife conservation and mosquito control, 
it should be understood. that the personnel of the Biological Survey in=. 
cludes a number of men who have had considerable training in the field of 
entomology and that fundamental entomological knowledge is being increased 
continuously by their researches and experiences, especially as a result 
of the many years of study of the food habits of insectivorous birds and 
Other animals. They feel able, therefore, to speak with some degree of 
understanding on the entomological as well as the wildlife aspects of the 
problems involved in the coordination of conservation and control. 
The first requisite for such a coordination, it seems to me, is a 
mutual recognition of certain fundamentel rights and obligations of both 
wildlife-conservation and mosquito-control interests. For example, one of 
the primary dutges of the Biological Survey is to restore, protect, and 
manage wildlife and its habitat. Other governmental agencies are concern- 
ed with developing methods for the control of insects that affect man and 
animals. The Biological Survey cannot approve drainage projects that be- 
come unnecessarily destructive to wildlife. On the other hand, this Bu-~ 
reau heartily approves and recognizes the necessity and the emer ieLet 
results of such control, 
To ail of us the mosquito is an obnoxious pest and its frequent 
presence about our homes makes it all the more objectionable. All agree 
that its extermination would benefit mankind exceedingly. The matter in 
question, however, is how mosquito elimination is to be accomplished. 
From the conservation standpoint, masquito-control projects range 
widely in type. Some are concerned with the elimination of mosquitoes 
in such areas as urban centers, where the question of wildlife conserva 
tion does not enter. Others involve control on aquatic areas that con- 
stitute waterfowl habitat more or less remote from any htmen habitation, 
Under natural conditions, the menace and annoyance from mosquitoes, in 
these remote places does not warrant the destruction of the wildlife . 
values of .the particular area by ruinous drainage methods. The wildlife 
conservationist has no sympathy with the type of mosquito-control project 
that is based on nothing more fundamental than merely the benevolent de- 
sire to employ relief labor. Such a project furnishes an outlet for re- 
lief labo¥, to be sure, but so sore the tearing down of churches, schools, 
and other public structures. The unnecessary destruction of an essential 
part of a great natural resource for-the purpose of mosquite control is 
conparable to the curing of dendruff by scalping, or the riddance of rat 
infestation by burning a granary. Any justifiable mosquito-control 
~2- 
