276 BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY AND PLANT QUARANTINE [Oct.-Dec. 
were to be excluded and thus necessarily of a given plant when that plant was 
known to be available in the United States. For the first few years following 
the promulgation of Quarantine 37, no attempt was made to establish definite 
quantity limits of imports. The volume of imports was controlled to some ex- 
tent by selecting permittees and by refusing permits for what were believed 
to be available varieties. The public became more acquainted with the proced- 
ure for importing as time passed and consequently as the work grew, the need 
for quantity limits became apparent if the quarantine were to accomplish its 
announced purpose. Some rather liberal quantity limits were established dur- 
ing the fiscal year 1925 and these were somewhat reduced for the fiscal year 
1926. No limits were placed on narcissus bulbs until the second year of importa- 
tion under special permit. All the early limits applied to the' varieties or in 
some cases, species, and importations were made cumulative in the fiscal year 
1927, except for narcissus. Thus when an importer had entered the limit of a 
variety he would be refused permits for further importations of that variety. 
Narcissus limits were made cumulative in the fiscal year 1929. In the fiscal 
year 1930 the narcissus quantity limit was placed on a generic basis and the 
previous cumulative principle was abandoned for that genus. The same step 
was taken beginning with the fiscal year 1931 for all other genera. Between the 
fiscal years 1925 and 1931 there was a gradual lowering of quantity limits. 
In establishing the quantity limits on a generic basis, the old bases, which 
differed for the amateur and commercial grower and as to the origin of ma- 
terial, were discarded and one set of limits was made to apply to all without 
regard to the origin of the material. While as noted although there had been a 
general and gradual reduction in limits from those first established in 1925 to 
the ones which became effective on July 1, 1930, it may be said that to a great 
extent the importers themselves set the new limits of July 1930. As a basis for 
formulating these new limits, analyses were made of the importations of 
genera principally imported and it was found that, broadly speaking. 100 plants 
of a genus of tree or shrub, 100 to 500 plants of a genus of herbaceous peren- 
;nials, and 1,000 to 50,000 of a genus of bulbous and other root-crop genera 
'would amply meet the needs of the importers as shown by actual records of 
their importations when limits were more liberal. Therefore, while the new 
limits appeared to involve drastic reductions, actually they fitted nicely with the 
importing habits of the public at that time. Habits of course formed as a 
result of the procedure followed in picking and choosing the few who should be 
given the privilege of monopoly in production of those varieties of plants em- 
bargoed and discouraging the thousands of individuals who would have lilted 
and who merited the same privilege. Some consideration was given to the ease 
with which a kind of plant could be reproduced, its susceptibility to unfavorable 
transit conditions, the popular demand for it, but in view of the general restric- 
tions effected by these limits, the question of pest risk — the real fundamental 
factor in question — was not considered in setting the limit on any one genus. 
Protests as to certain limitations were received and the limits were reviewed 
.and in some instances revised with liberalizations, effective July 17, 1931. 
When the limit of 100 plants was established for chrysanthemums and a 
limit of 250 was set for carnations, it did not mean that chrysanthemums in- 
volved any greater pest risk than carnations. The decision was made more on 
the basis of -the relative ease of propagating the chrysanthemum. The placing 
of a limit of 500 for azaleas and rhododendrons, with a comparable limit of 100 
for conifers, was based more on relative demand. Likewise, demand and pur- 
ported horticultural difficulties influenced the placing of 50,000 for the limit of 
iris bulbs, while a limit of only 1,000 was established for oxalis. 
When the limit was raised on July 17. 1931, from 1.000 to 5.000 for gladiolus 
■and tuberous begonias and was not raised for gloxinias, the question of demand, 
not pest risk, entered into the picture. The fact that the limit on gloxinia was 
not likewise raised was due only and entirely to the lack of evidence that a need 
for greater liberality existed in the gloxinia limit. Some limits, as for example 
the one on delphinium, were raised largely because of the heavy losses from 
storage rots, heating, and other unfavorable transit conditions. 
So much for the history of quantity limits. Their original purpose was in 
line with the announced purpose of Quarantine 37 namely, the ultimate exclu- 
sion of all stock not absolutely essential to the horticultural needs of the 
country. More recently they have been looked upon as justified only as a menu'^ 
for reducing the total volume of imports to that which could be adequately in- 
spected by tlie pers;onnel, and with the facilities available. They no longer 
: serve even this purpose. 
