of maple and ash were allowed to remain. On one side of the area large pines predominated which were mixed with gray birch and an occasional oak. The last two species were removed leaving a pine stand with an occasional maple, chestnut, or ash tree. The brush was cut over the entire area except the seedlings and sprouts of the same species as the trees left standing. No gipsy moth injury has been observed during the summer of 1912, frequent observations having been made by Mr. H. R. Gooch, who had charge of the thinning operations in this and several other selected areas. The infestation appears to be about the same as it was last year. Other areas have been thinned leaving solid pine and hemlock stands and no injury has resulted to the trees during the past summer. In one case a remarkable decrease in the number of egg clusters has been noted, while in the adjoining unthinned block a slight increase has been observed.

It is apparent that it will be necessary for a number of years to pass before the final results of this work can be given, but the information at hand is of such practical importance to owners of woodland that it seems well to make public the results that have been secured. In this connection it should be said that very thorough and detailed observations are being made, both in the field and by means of laboratory tests, to secure exact information on the feeding habits of gipsy moth caterpillars in each stage and on all the food plants which are common to New England. The data secured during the past summer are not yet ready for publication, but the results indicate that the oaks should be eliminated as rapidly as possible from our woodlands.

While they are the chief offenders they are not the only species that should be eliminated. Gray birch is a common species and is of low value as far as the wood is concerned. In some cases it is useful as a nurse crop for pine but its susceptibility to gipsy moth attack renders it a dangerous companion for the latter. Neglected or wild apple and willow trees should be destroyed as they furnish attractive food for the caterpillars. First stage gipsy moth caterpillars do not feed freely on pine or hemlock and the same is true in regard to some of our hardwood trees. In fact, it is exceptional for first stage caterpillars to grow and develop when their diet is confined to certain species. If half-grown or larger caterpillars feed on the same plants a large percentage of them will develop and if the same thing happens in the field where the infestation is at all severe, defoliation by the larger caterpillars often results to species which are not particularly favored as food by the younger larvæ.

From the present data it appears that oaks of all species are the greatest menace to improvement and development of New England forests as far as the gipsy moth is concerned. If these were cut the

injury by this insect would be greatly reduced, and the same holds true with the brown-tail moth. In certain sections the oaks predominate, but the region is suitable for growing white pine, which is far more valuable, and it is becoming apparent that the oaks will be eliminated, either gradually as a result of moth attack and other insect injury or by the efforts of man to bring about a better forest condition which will at the same time serve to hold these destructive pests in check.

Woodland owners outside the moth infested area should interest themselves in the proper care of their woodlots and should eliminate the oak growth as rapidly as possible so that the trees in their forests will not furnish suitable food for the species when it arrives. In the infested woodlot the problem is more pressing and difficult and needs immediate action if great injury is to be prevented.

PRESIDENT W. D. HUNTER: The next paper will be presented by Mr. Glenn W. Herrick.

MR. GLENN W. HERRICK: With the consent of the Association I wish to read at this time a paper on the control of two fruit flies, Rhagoletis pomonella and R. fausta, as a substitute for the one on the printed program.1

ABSTRACT OF PAPER ON THE CHERRY FRUIT FLIES

By GLENN W. HERRICK

The results obtained by Mr. Illingworth in controlling the apple maggots encouraged him to try similar control measures against the closely allied cherry fruit flies.

It was soon discovered that, in addition to the old species, Rhagoletis cingulata, another little known species, Rhagoletis fausta was present and doing much injury to the fruit. This species had been reported as injurious to cherries in British Columbia in 1907.

The flies were first seen in the orchard on June 8, 1912. They were first seen ovipositing in the field on June 24. The first maggots were found June 30. Full grown larvæ emerged from cherries on July 8. By the middle of July most of the larvæ of R. fausta were found to be mature.

The length of life of the flies confined in glass cages was one month. The flies were supplied with drops of water daily and fed with crushed cherries.

The paper on "Some External Parasites of Domestic Fowls," has been submitted by Professor Herrick for publication and appears below.

CONTROL. A portion of the orchard was sprayed on June 10 just after the flies were seen and again on June 24. No heavy rains fell during the intervening two weeks. A sweetened mixture of 21 lbs. arsenate of lead, 14 gals. of cheap syrup, and 50 gals. of water formed the spraying solution. It was applied to the lower branches. of each tree by hand.

On July 11, two crates of cherries, containing an average of 6,400 cherries to the crate, were picked from the sprayed portion of the orchard. The first crate, picked from the tops of the trees in the outside sprayed row, contained seventeen maggots. In the crate picked from the lower branches there were only two maggots. A crate of cherries picked from the check trees was badly infested with curculio and brown rot and fully one-third of the fruit contained maggots. The check rows showed less and less infestation the nearer they were to the sprayed trees.

Flies captured, on the check rows next to those sprayed, died in a day or so, showing that they had obtained poison by going over on the sprayed trees.

All the evidence appears to show that the flies are easily poisoned and that they travel from tree to tree for a considerable distance from where they emerge.

There is considerable evidence being gathered to show that the ordinary codling moth spray, without the addition of syrup, will control these flies.

PRESIDENT W. D. HUNTER: This paper is now open for discussion. A MEMBER: I would like to ask if Rhagoletis cingulata and fausta are in the same orchard.

MR. G. W. HERRICK: Yes; they were found in the same orchard at Trumansburg, N. Y., but this test was tried wholly on fausta. MR. W. C. O'KANE: Were all the trees infested?

MR. G. W. HERRICK: The fruit in that orchard was, and in two other orchards, it was badly infested.

MR. W. C. O'KANE: Did all the trees have fruit the previous year? MR. G. W. HERRICK: I do not know.

MR. W. C. O'KANE: Do you know whether there was such fruiting and infestation the previous season as to insure an equal amount of flies throughout the orchard?

MR. G. W. HERRICK: The flies were on all the trees.

MR. W. C. O'KANE: The reason I bring this point up, is because in the work with the apple maggot we have found it necessary to have the yield, the disposition of the fruit, and the amount of infestation

the previous year recorded, in order to draw conclusions from our spraying.

MR. G. W. HERRICK: In this case we do not know definitely except that the crop during the previous year was a failure.

A MEMBER: May I ask if this ground was heavy clay?

MR. G. W. HERRICK: It was clay soil mixed with gravel and quite stony.

A MEMBER: It has been my experience that cherries are not infested so much on clay soil.

Mr. G. W. HERRICK: There are a good many cherry trees not far from this orchard, but the latter are rather isolated. The fly does not seem to travel very far. The feeding habits of this species are practically the same as those of the house-fly as given in Dr. Howard's book on this subject. The flies are constantly sucking from the fruit which shows the manner in which they get their food from the fruit and leaves.

SOME EXTERNAL INSECT PARASITES OF DOMESTIC

FOWLS

GLENN W. HERRICK

Domestic fowls, especially the hen, constitute one of the most important sources of food supplies in America. It is amazing to find that during 1911 the value of poultry in the United States reached a total of $154,663,220 and the value of the eggs produced in the same year in New York State alone amounted to the astonishing sum of 17,102,000 dollars. It is evident that poultry occupies an important. place in the life economies of the American people and any pests injuriously affecting domestic fowls are worthy of careful consideration. The study of the external parasites of domestic fowls has extended over several years with many interruptions and delays. It has been difficult to collect the different species infesting fowls and even yet. we have not been able to obtain all the species that I feel surely exist in the United States.

According to the different authorities on Mallophaga there are at least eight species infesting the hen, four or five the goose, three or four the turkey, four the duck, four the pea fowl, three the guinea hen, and seven the pigeon.

In addition to the Mallophaga we find that there are in this country at least eighteen species of mites parasitic on the domestic fowl, two species of fleas, one fowl-bug, one tick, and possibly one fly.

Among these parasites the Mallophaga hold the most interest for the author. Some of the most interesting questions of development,

variation, etc., arise out of a consideration of the geographical and host distribution of these parasites. They are wingless insects of worldwide distribution existing wherever members of the bird tribe are found. They are parasites that live for their whole life on the body of their host. They, of course, migrate from one host to another when the hosts are in actual contact, when in copulation; when brooding over the offspring; or when huddling together on perches. Moreover there is occasionally an opportunity for the parasites of a host to actually migrate to a host of another species. For example, we find a certain species of hen louse on the turkey, especially when the two species of domestic fowls are in the same yard. We have also found two species of hen lice on guinea hens where the latter were allowed to frequent the perches and houses of the hens. Kellogg has found the same species of louse on both a cormorant and a pelican shot on the rocky shores of the Pacific Coast where these two species of birds congregated and evidently came in actual contact. But as Kellogg further points out another explanation must be given for the distribution of those species of Mallophaga that are found on birds of the Old World and on closely related birds of the New World. There are many instances of this kind, yet these birds do not come in contact, nor within thousands of miles of each other. Kellogg offers an exceedingly interesting explanation of this phenomenon in distribution. He says, "that the parasitic species has persisted unchanged from the common ancestor of the two or more now distinct but closely allied bird-species." That is to say, these species of Mallophaga existed on the ancestors of the host birds and have persisted ever since without change although their hosts have become modified into different species. This may be explained by the fact that the Mallophaga are surrounded by an environment, namely, the feathers, skin, and temperature of the host, that do not change although the host itself may change. These are not economic questions perhaps but they are intensely interesting

ones.

The more important question from an economic point of view is how these parasites injure poultry. The Mallophaga have biting mouth parts and do not suck the blood of their host. In fact, it is doubtful if any of the Mallophaga parasitic on domestic fowls ever get any blood except in case of a wound or bruise on the host from which the blood may issue. In such instances the parasites may eat the dried scales of blood. Blood has been found in some instances in the stomachs of bird lice, probably obtained in the manner just described. Kellogg notes a species of Mallophaga that lives inside of the pouch of the California Brown pelican and clings to the wall of the pouch by its mandibles. Moreover, he has found a small area