32 
BULLETIN 640, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
fruits unless they could first prove to the satisfaction of the property 
holders that each fruit was infested. This restriction placed upon 
the activity of the inspectors led to numerous difficulties between 
inspectors and those opposed to clean culture. This law also pro- 
hibited a systematic gathering of all host fruits within a given area, 
thus necessitating many examinations for the removal, as they 
ripened, of the fruits of each single tree. As fruits ripen rapidly in 
the semitropics, it proved a physical impossibility to arrange visits 
of inspectors frequently enough to prevent infested fruits from falling 
to the ground. 
The data of Tables II and III demonstrate the immense number 
and diversity of host trees and shrubs in Honolulu and the ease with 
Fig. 27.— Ball kamani trees grown for shade and ornament. This tree grows to a large size, and some- 
times in dense thickets in the forest. Its fruits ripen at all seasons of the year and are badly infested by 
the Mediterranean fruit fly. (Authors' illustration.) 
which the fruit fly, uncurbed by climatic conditions, finds fruit for 
egg laying during any day of the year. It is absurd to endeavor to 
remove all the fruit from many of the huge trees of the islands. There 
are numerous large trees (figs. 27, 28) beneath which infested fruits 
may be gathered each week in the year, yet the trees are so tall and 
brittle that no inspector can remove the fruits before they ripen. 
One yard in Hilo has 15 host trees from 20 to 50 feet high. To these 
examples might be added many others in which the removal of fruits 
is equally impracticable. Often the fruits of the star apple, for 
instance, ripening in the tops of tall trees do not fall until long after 
they have shriveled up and until after the many larvae developing 
within have matured and dropj^ed from them to the ground. One 
