may be accomplished, however, without going to the extreme of attempting to give major emphasis to all. The selection of fields for major emphasis should be done with care. In state-supported institutions like ours the major interests of the state should be considered. The major emphasis should be placed where it will be likely to have continued state support. In deciding what fields to develop we should also consider what other institutions are doing and try as far as possible to divide up the field in such a way as to avoid unnecessary duplication and insure that each kind of work shall be adequately represented and developed. We might even cooperate with each other to that end and thus aid in building up and maintaining certain centers where our students and investigators may go for certain types of work.

Perhaps the greatest factor in this work of development is the individual. Where the inspiring spirit is there the work will be done. When the spirit goes the work lags. We should find some way, however, to avoid this waste and endeavor to get institutions to adopt a permanent policy in supporting such centers both in personnel and facilities.

We could all help in many ways by recognizing such centers and cooperating in their development and maintenance.

Turning now to the more specific problems, there is a general agreement that the great need at present is for emphasis on the economic and social problems of agriculture and country life; costs of production and distribution and factors influencing these costs; how may these factors be controlled so as to reduce hazards and fluctuations and stabilize agriculture on a paying basis; what are the relations of price to consumption; what is the effect on consumption of fluctuating price? Similar studies should be made of the effect of price received by the producer on quality and quantity of production; how may production be controlled so as to meet probable needs without serious under or over production; the problems connected directly or indirectly with surpluses; organization and cooperation; agricultural financing; statistical and information service; transportation and storage; wholesale and retail markets; competing foods; effect of eat-more-this or eat-more-that programs; systems of farm management; how should these systems be modified to meet changing conditions; how should they be handled in cases of emergency, such as we faced during the World War; were we right in our stimulation programs during the war; could a better plan be devised in case of another emergency; how can the farmers better organize their resources, land, labor, and capital; equalization of taxation and the host of related problems in this field; the proper use of undeveloped lands and lands better suited to forests or grazing; conservation of fertility; use of fertilizers; and prevention of erosion and gradual washing away of the best soil where we hardly suspect it. This last field has has been greatly neglected the losses from this washing and erosion are enormous. Dr. Bennett, of our Bureau of Soils, estimates that erosion takes one hundred million dollars out of the farmers' pockets annually. The National Industrial Conference Board recently estimated that our fields suffer an annual net loss of 5,900,000,000 pounds of plant food, taken out in the crops removed in excess of what is returned

in manures, fertilizers, and crop residues. These are subjects that need careful investigation both as to facts and methods of control.

How may we hasten the process of soil formation from its original rock sources? What part do living organisms play in this process? How may we improve the methods of manufacture, distribution, and use of artificial fertilizers? Great progress is possible in this direction in increasing efficiency and decreasing costs. Much greater emphasis must be placed on the problems of the manufacture and use of concentrated fertilizers.

Great progress is being made in plant and animal breeding. The day of the scrub is past and still the scrub predominates among our crops and livestock. But this is not so much a problem of research as it is education and extension.

Great progress is being made in the control of diseases and insect pests of our crops and livestock. The losses are measured in billions of dollars every year. We need continued and greatly increased research

in these lines.

It is unnecessary to particularize further. The time is drawing near when we shall need more facts in all these lines to enable us to supply the world's need for food. The fact finders and the fact users need to be part of a highly and efficiently organized social structure, stabilized on as high a standard of living as other social groups, and recognize, as all must, that the welfare of each is interdependent.

W. H. Larrimer, Senior Entomologist in Charge, Cereal and Forage Insect Investigations, delivered the following address.

THE EUROPEAN CORN BORER

BY W. H. LARRIMER

HISTORY AND INTRODUCTION

The European corn borer, as its name implies, is a native of Europe. In Hungary and other parts of southern Europe, where it has been known for years as a serious pest, it continues to do considerable damage in restricted areas and under certain favorable conditions. Very probably it gained entrance into the United States in 1909 and 1910 in broom corn imported from Hungary and Italy. It was first found in America near Boston, Massachusetts, in 1917. Since then it has been discovered in New York and Ontario where in each case it very likely occurs as a result of a separate introduction. The corn borer was first found in Ohio in August, 1921, on Middle Bass Island in Lake Erie to which it doubtless spread from the Ontario infestation. This western infestation, which is the one causing greatest concern, now covers about 90,000 square miles in the States of Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, Indiana, West Virginia and Michigan.

LIFE HISTORY

The corn borer is commonly thought of as a caterpillar, the form in which it does all its damage. It has, however, the usual four stages

in its life history in common with other insects. These are the egg, the larva or caterpillar, the pupa and the adult or moth. In the New England area there are two generations a year, while in the western infestation there is only one. In either case it passes the fall, winter and spring in the larval stage. The moths lay 300 to 600 eggs on the under surface of the leaves of corn or other host plants. These eggs hatch in from three to five days and the young larvae soon bore into the green, more tender, portions of the plant. In the case of corn the most obvious sign of an infested plant is usually the broken tassel. As the borer increases in size it travels downward through the stalk, sometimes leaving it at one point to enter again farther down. It may enter the ear at any point or bore up through the shank. Several borers to a stalk weaken it considerably and in case of heavy infestation the plant may be killed.

FOOD PLANTS

In the New England infestation the corn borer attacks over two hundred plants including field crops, vegetables, flowers, grasses and weeds. The chief injury is to corn of all varieties though some injury, usually slight, is done to celery, rhubarb, beans, beets, potatoes, tomatoes, hops, hemp, dahlias, gladolii and many other flowers and vegetables. In the western infestation the favored host plant has been corn with some infestation in other plants, most of which are weeds.

NATURE OF THE PEST

The corn borer is one of the most formidable corn pests. In southern Ontario, Canada, in 1925, over an area of 400 square miles corn of the dent varieties similar to those grown in our own Corn Belt was totally destroyed as to commercial value, while many hundreds of acres more were seriously damaged. This area of destruction was increased in 1926 to 1,200 square miles. At the same time corn acreage was reduced 90 per cent. There is every reason to believe that similar losses as a result of injury by this pest will occur in our great Corn Belt within a very few years unless the most energetic and strenuous efforts are made to combat it. It is our hope to delay this injurious invasion by control work in all of its phases, including parasite introduction, for several years and possibly for an indefinite period.

CONTROL PROGRAM

The experience and judgment, advice and counsel of the best entomological, agronomic, and control specialists in the country, state, as well as federal, are available and are being directed toward the solution of this problem. The program briefly consists of: (1) scouting to determine the extent of spread of the insect; (2) quarantine to prevent long distance spreads; (3) clean-up of the infested area to keep the abundance of the pest to a minimum; and (4) research to discover the most promising control including the introduction of parasites from Europe, the native home of the pest.

THE OUTLOOK

The corn borer has now entered the threshold of the great Corn Belt of the United States. The farmer in the infested area, which is now relatively small, is especially unfortunate and deserves every possible consideration. He is hard hit by quarantine regulations, clean-up recommendations which must be enforced, if necessary, higher cost of production with no increase in price, and a possible reduction in yield. He is fighting his own fight, of course, but he is none the less fighting for every farmer in the Corn Belt. The lower the infestation is kept in the infested area, the slower the spread into new territory. Considerable caution must be observed in discussing the possibilities of further development regarding this pest. When a large portion of the Corn Belt becomes infested the remaining portion is sure to be benefited for the time being by comparatively lower cost of production and increased selling price. Eventually, however, the entire Corn Belt will become infested. Corn will continue to be grown as a major crop in spite of the corn borer, but the cost of production will certainly be increased. The threat which this pest carries is tremendous. It is not just one more insect. It is the European corn borer.

Fig. 1.-Map showing the present known distribution of the European corn borer in

the United States. The solid black designates the area of infestation through 1925. The infestation was discovered in the shaded area during the year 1926.

SECTION ON AGRICULTURE-EXTENSION WORK

TUESDAY MORNING, NOVEMBER 16, 1926.

W. A. Lloyd, Regional Agent in Charge of Western States, Office of Cooperative Extension Work, presented the following paper:

SOME FACTORS AFFECTING TENURE IN EXTENSION WORK

Br W. A. LLOYD

Since 1904, when James Evans, now assistant chief of the Office of Cooperative Extension Work, was appointed one of the first two special agents of the Bureau of Plant Industry in Texas to inaugurate demonstrations in connection with the control of the cotton boll weevil, about 9,000 extension employees have been on the rolls of the Department of Agriculture. This does not include extension specialists or other state employees not under federal appointment. It is probable in round numbers that 10,000 persons either are or have been enrolled in extension work since its beginning. There are now under federal appointment about 4,086 employees. In other words, there are approximately 5,000 ex-extension employees.

From 1904 to 1914 there was a gradual increase of special agents, or county agents as they came to be called, principally in the southern states, though following 1911 a few northern states began developing similar work. The passage of the Smith-Lever Act in 1914 provided gradually increasing funds for financing extension work over a ten-year period. There followed a period of conservative development which was greatly accelerated by special appropriations during the period of the war and by increases in the appropriations for extension work made directly to the United States Department of Agriculture. The war funds were discontinued following the armistice and the step increases in the regular Smith-Lever and supplementary Smith-Lever appropriation hardly made up for this loss. Following 1920 there was a disposition in many of the states to cut appropriations. In some states very severe cuts were made. In most of the states since 1920 substantially stationary conditions have prevailed so far as available extension funds are concerned. Increases have been made in only a few. In the meantime the cost of extension work per person involved has increased. The problem of personnel falls then into two general parts:

(1) From 1904 to 1920 a period of gradual and at times very rapid expansion.

(2) From 1920 to the present time which has been largely one of

maintenance.

At the time the Smith-Lever Act was passed and for a few years following it was a matter of discussion as to whether the position of county extension agent would be such as to make possible a long period