1*; ANMWI. REPORTS OF DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, 1936 
plant board, of the quarantine they had maintained on Ke\ West on aeooont 
of the presence of the West [ndiao fruitflies. Trapping and scouting work 
ate the possible presence of rruitflies oe the mainland, with the Idea 
uring Information as to their current Btatus and distribution, was carried 
on intensively during the latter part of the fiscal year, the expenses incident 
to this work being met by the State. No authentic larval .infestations have 
been discovered .-it any point on the mainland, and during the la^t few months 
of the fiscal year do specimens of adult fruit Hies were taken in traps. In 
addition to the finding of two forms of the West Indian fruitfly at various loca- 
tions in the southern part of Florida, scouting and trapping operations di» 
the presence of two other related fruitflies. These appear to represent unde- 
scribed species concerning which little is known. While their field hosts have 
do! been determined, available information suggests that they do net attack 
fleshy fruits of commercial value. 
JAPANESE BEETLE QUARANTINE AND CONTROL 
TRAP SCOUTING IN NONREGULATED TERRITORY 
Trap scouting for the Japanese beetle (PopiUia japonioa Newm.) was carried 
on during the summer of 1935 in 213 towns and cities in 13 states. Approxi- 
mately 58,000 traps were set, nearly double the number employed In the previous 
year's annual survey of nonregulated territory. Japanese hectics were captured 
in 120 communities. The results of trapping in 1985 disclosed 'M small, first- 
record Infestations, 8 of which were in North Carolina. 11 in Virginia, l each 
in Maryland and Maine. 4 in West Virginia, and !> in Ohio. With the exception 
of the first-record infestations at Marietta, Ohio. Pulaski. Va., Chester and I'ar- 
kersburg, W. Va.. and certain suburban areas adjacent to the infestation in 
Richmond, Va.. all these initial finds were of fewer than Id hectics each. Trap- 
ping in ( M cities and towns gave negative results. Finds in St. Louis. Chicago, 
and Indianapolis are outside a 500-mile radius from the center of infestation. 
All other points at Which catches were made are within that radius. 
in Greenville, S. C, from collections of a single hectic in 1983 and 2 beetles 
in 1934, collections during the summer of i<>:>,r> jumped to so in 4 times the 
number of traps set the previous year. Beetles did not reappear in Charleston 
and Florence. S. (\, where soil treatments were made after the discovery of a 
few hectics in each locality prior to 1934. 
Control measures thus far applied in St. Louis, Mo., are definitely promising. 
Over 10,000 traps were operated throughout the city from May 10 to September 
2, 1935. Traps concentrated in areas where 1351 beetles were caught in i'.»:;i 
able to catch only 904 hectics, a reduction of one-third. Total catches in 
the city were 125 under those of 1934. 
There was a threefold Increase in the number of hectics trapped in Indianapo- 
lis, in 1934, 'lie first year irap^ were used in that city. 17 beetles were caught. 
In 1935, with over three times the number of traps in operation. 57 hectics were 
ied. 
iii Chicago »'► beetles were caught in slightly over i.ooo traps in 1984, and in 
L935 :;!> I ties were collected in over 3,000 traps. Of this total. 23 hectics were 
collected in the immediate vicinity of the Chicago Produce Terminal, and '.> addi- 
tional beetles were caught in nearby Bectiona ^\' the remaining five trap 
catches, two were made in a residential district 6 miles from the produce termi- 
nal ami three in another residential section 7 miles from the main area 
Starting with 1932, there have hceti annual catches in Detroit o\ 8, 1, 10, and. 
in 1935, '-'•"• heet lev. ah hut t wo of those caught in i!»:'.r» were trapped in the 
general locality of the Michigan Centra] Railroad depot and the New- York 
Central right of way. Other than two catches of two beetles each, all Detroit 
finds were of Bingle beetles on scattered premise s. 
First-record Infestations, most of them of "tie or two beetles each, were found 
in Ohio ;it Akron. Chillicothe, Oonneaut, Hills and Dales Village, Lancaster, 
Marietta, Salem, Toledo, and Wooster. Previously discovered Infestations, 
which have fluctuated in quantities collected within a range of from i to 24 
beetles, recurred at Canton, Cleveland, Bast Liverpool, Bteubenville, Youngstown, 
and Zanesville. The Columbus Infestation showed ;i pronounced increase in 
L935, with 92 beetles found over an area of approximately 12 square miles. 
Trapping in West Virginia was carried on during 1930 in 19 cities and towns, 
with resulting captures in '•> localities. Beetles were trapped for the first time 
