448 
JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY 
[Vol. IS 
However, it is now certain that I cannot be in attendance at that time, hence- 
will comply with your request by sending a short letter which, if thought suitable* 
can be read at the meeting. This letter I have addressed to Mr. E. O. Essig, as Sec¬ 
retary, and am enclosing it herewith. You can transmit it at your convenience. 
Thanking you very much for your invitation, which I regret I am not able to> 
accept, I beg to remain 
Very truly yours, 
Wilmon Newell, 
President. 
May 31, 1920. 
Mr. E. O. Essig, Secretary, 
Pacific Slope Branch, 
American Association of Economic Entomologists, 
Seattle, Wash. 
Dear Sir: 
The writer has delayed reply to Mr. Melander’s letter of April 30 in the rather 
forlorn hope that circumstances would shape themselves so that he could attend the 
session of the Pacific Slope Branch of our Association. However, developments 
have been such that it will not be possible for me to be in attendance, and I take 
this method of extending my greetings to your members and wishing for you a most 
pleasant and profitable meeting. 
It seems to me the time has arrived for the economic entomologists to be more 
aggressive and to place the value of their profession more prominently before the pub¬ 
lic. Within the past two years there have been rather numerous complaints to the 
effect that entomologists are not as well paid for their services as the value of their 
work seems to merit. This must be conceded, but at the same time it must also be 
conceded that the economic entomologist has not made his services indispensable 
in the way that members of many other professions have. When it is realized 
that the entomologist is as necessary to agricultural production as is the chemist or 
the implement manufacturer this state of affairs will be remedied. 
The economic entomologist has his future and that of his profession in his own 
hands. If he shows that he is, collectively, able to inaugurate, execute and complete 
entomological projects of magnitude which either prevent enormous losses from 
injurious insects or make the recurrence of such losses impossible he will come to be 
considered as a necessity, rather than as a convenience. 
With few exceptions entomologists have thus far confined their efforts to investi¬ 
gating the habits of insects and in devising or recommending palliative methods. 
By “palliative” methods we mean such measures as merely reduce the loss without 
eliminating it or preventing its recurrence. Spraying, using poisoned baits and em¬ 
ploying cultural methods all fall within this category. The employment of insect 
parasites or fungous diseases for control of a pest may be considered in the same 
light: they may reduce the losses, but they do not remove the source of the loss. 
The time has come when entomologists should make ready for really big under¬ 
takings, such as the eradication of injurious species or prevention of the establishment 
of injurious forms new to our country. 
We have only to glance over past history to see the opportunities along this line 
which have presented themselves, only to be neglected. Take the case of the gypsy 
moth, for example. Twice in the history of this insect in America its eradication has 
been within reach at moderate cost and with a minimum of effort. The expendi¬ 
tures out of public funds in fighting this pest have, to the present time, aggregated 
