COMMENCEMENT AND PROGRESS OF ANNUAL REPORTS OF OBSERVATIONS OF INJURIOUS
INSECTS
In the spring of 1877 I issued a short pamphlet of seven pages, entitled
“Notes for Observations of Injurious Insects,”[27] in which I suggested
how much a series of observations in relation to insect ravages on food
crops was to be desired; this not merely for scientific purposes, but
with a view to finding means of lessening the amount of yearly loss
which tells so heavily on individual growers, and also on the country at
large. I pointed out shortly that many insect attacks could be remedied,
if attention were directed to the subject; and also that many would
probably be found, if reliable information could be procured, to be
coincident with multiplication or diminution of insect life. On the way
in which this increase and decrease were affected by surroundings, such
as plants, &c., suitable for food or shelter; by agricultural
conditions, such as drainage, nature of the soil and of manures; and
also by the state of the weather—I gave some guiding notes, and
requested information from agriculturists and entomologists, who were
both practically and scientifically qualified to aid in the matter. I
also added some short remarks as to the nature of the entomological
observations desired; as of date, and amount of appearance of larvæ
(grubs); amount of injury caused; and any other points of use and
interest that might occur to the observer. And further (as some sort of
assistance in the commencement of the plan of campaign) I gave a list of
about eighteen of our commonest crop, fruit, and forest insects, with
short descriptions in the very plainest words I could use, in most cases
accompanied by illustrations.
As my name was then little before the public, although I had worked on
entomology for a good many years, I requested permission of two of my
scientific friends, the Rev. T. A. Preston, one of the masters of
Marlborough College, and much interested in phenology (_i.e._,
observation of natural phenomena); and Mr. E. A. Fitch, Secretary of the
Entomological Society, to allow me to add their names as referees. To
this they kindly consented, but with the stipulation from Mr. Preston
that he did not wish to co-operate further. I believe I may say with
regard to Mr. Fitch such a very small amount of communication took place
that it would not have been worth while to mention the matter, excepting
_pro forma_, on account of the names being recorded. These were soon
removed from succeeding reports as unnecessary. The pamphlet was widely
circulated and the request for observations was responded to far more
cordially than could have been expected. Notes regarding insect
appearances, together with observations of their habits, and of
practicable methods of prevention, were forwarded by observers—who were
qualified both as technically scientific and practical workers—from
localities scattered over the country as far north as Aberdeenshire in
Scotland and south to Hants and Devonshire in England. In fact the
communications were quite sufficient to show that the plan was approved
of from an agricultural point of view, and might be continued hopefully.
In after years I was told that it was very well received by the press. I
have been greatly indebted since both to the agricultural and general
press, but at the time it did not seem to me to be peculiarly warmly
welcomed, nor I think was it likely to be, until it had more to say for
itself. The pamphlet was not of many pages; the knowledge of the great
mischief caused by insect pests, and the need of prevention of their
ravages, was not spread abroad as at the present day, and I was not able
at first to utilise to the best advantage the information sent as I had
no working reports of my own to help me as to examples of the best
methods of arrangement.[28]
From the first I had excellent contributions. Various members of our
Entomological Societies were good enough to send me notes on insects to
which they devoted special study, and so also were members of the
Meteorological Society, regarding points of natural history, bird life,
weather, &c., connected with entomological considerations, and regarding
which they were special observers. Agriculturally I had good help also
from other quarters, and amongst many who assisted me, I will take leave
to especially give the name of the late Mr. Malcolm Dunn, the Duke of
Buccleuch’s superintendent at the Palace Gardens, Dalkeith, N.B. We
never met, but whenever I applied to him he was unfailing in prompt and
serviceable reply. As a commencement, the introductions with which he
favoured me to the leading foresters and horticulturists of North
Britain, were of such invaluable aid that I should be ungrateful not to
mention his name as of one to whom I owe a deep debt of gratitude.
In the report for the year 1881 I altered the plan of arrangement to one
which so far as I can judge met all that was needed for practical as
well as scientific service so conveniently that I have since adhered to
it. The information was classed under headings of (_a_) farm crops,
(_b_) orchard and bush fruits, and (_c_) forest trees, regarding which
observations of insect attack were forwarded. These headings were
arranged alphabetically, for instance: Apple, Bean, Corn and Grass, Hop,
Oak, Peas, Pine, Turnip, &c., &c. Any information as to live stock or
animal insect pests was similarly placed (that is, alphabetically)
amongst the other attacks, under the headings of Deer, Grouse, Horses,
&c., &c., as the case might be; but beyond what was absolutely
necessary, as in the case of Ox warble, I endeavoured to avoid entering
on stock infestations as leading to investigations very unpleasant to
myself either to make or to discuss, and very much better left in the
hands of veterinary surgeons. Following each heading, the observations
were placed which had been contributed during the season, and which
appeared to be of sufficient interest to be recorded, regarding the
special crop, or fruit, &c., referred to, these being given with
locality and date, as far as possible in the contributor’s words, and
over his own name, unless by request, or for some special reason. This
plan of giving the very fullest recognition possible of the source of
the information, I, for three very special reasons, most strongly
recommend to the consideration of all my readers not fully accustomed to
practical reporting:
1. That thus the information may very often carry conviction with it by
the name of some well-known agriculturist or cattle-breeder being
appended.
2. That to do otherwise is a robbery of the credit of the contributor,
and a false appropriation of it by the reporter, wholly unbecoming an
honest worker.
3. That the full recognition is a great protection to the reporter or
compiler of the reports from plagiarism of his own work. There are
people who think nothing of appropriating the credit of true workers,
and who absorb also rewards in the shape of salaries and official
position based on their own questionable conduct.
In the year 1881 it seemed desirable to change the running heading at
the top of the pages. The name of the crop, fruit, or other subject to
which the paper referred was henceforward placed at the top of the
left-hand page, and the name of each successive attack to it at the top
of the right-hand page; as, for instance, Cabbage at the left side, and
the different kinds of infestations recorded during the year which might
occur to Cabbage, as Cabbage butterfly (large white), Cabbage-root fly,
Cabbage moth, on the right-hand heading. At the beginning of each paper,
the name of the crop, or fruit, was given in large capitals, and beneath
and at the heading of each successive paper, the name of the injurious
insect to be referred to, also in English, with the scientific name, and
authority for the same following. The observations of contributors were
inserted unbroken, so that the methods of prevention and remedy noted as
successful by each observer were thus recorded in connection with the
accompanying peculiarities of cultivation, soil, manure, weather, &c.
The whole life history of the insect, so far as known or accessible, was
given, and sometimes, as in great attacks or in special circumstances, a
“summary” of the preceding recorded information; this being, wherever
possible, followed by some paragraphs or pages of “Methods of Prevention
and Remedy.”
In matters of phraseology, selection of the very plainest and shortest
words that I could choose was part of my plan, and after the first few
years I exchanged the short table of contents for a plain working index.
Illustration always appeared to me a very important part of the work, so
that readers might start with the knowledge of the appearance of the
insects under consideration, gained by a glance at the accompanying
figure, without having the trouble of trying to form a kind of “mind
picture” from the descriptions given, often very unlike the true
object.[29] At first—in the small beginning—the numbers needed were also
small, and I think the little stock of figure blocks with which I
started, and for which I was indebted to the kind courtesy of a friend,
amounted to _one dozen!_ This matter, however, I set right as soon as
possible by the purchase from Messrs. Blackie & Sons, of Glasgow, of
electros of most of the beautiful wood engravings given in Curtis’s
“Farm Insects,” under an agreement that the accommodation was granted on
condition of my using the figures only in my own publications. Some of
the illustrations I drew myself on the blocks, and as time went on, and
infestations, little or not at all entered on before, required
illustration, I engaged the valuable assistance of two brothers,[30]
which was continued thenceforward throughout the work. It appears to me
that it is hardly possible to exceed the beauty of their work, whether
in characteristic representation or in precise and accurate details. I
have had great pleasure in the entomological approval which has been
bestowed upon it. Illustrations from other sources have of course been
used, always, so far as I am aware, most carefully acknowledged; and so
far as has been in my power, I have endeavoured that the illustration of
each infestation should show the insect (where it was possible to do so)
in each of its successive stages of life, as of the caterpillar or
maggot (scientifically the _larva_); the chrysalis (_pupa_); and the
perfect insect, butterfly, beetle, sawfly, &c., as the case might be.
This matter is of great importance agriculturally, for how else (it may
be asked) in common circumstances, excepting by a good, plain
illustration, is a farmer or fruit-grower to know what the connection is
between the grubs and maggots which he finds underground or on his trees
and the moths or beetles which he may notice in his fields or orchards.
To give a single instance, how seldom the grey, cylindrical, legless
grubs of the Daddy Longlegs are known to have anything to do with the
large, gnat-like, two-winged flies which are to be seen floating over
our grass-fields in legions where the larvæ have been destroying
underground. And so the work went on, and I believe that I may say
that—from the great amount of useful information contributed, together
with my own co-operation in entomological verification, adding requisite
details, publishing the year’s communications, and distributing them to
my contributors—it answered fairly the purpose for which it was set on
foot. And year by year we gained knowledge till we possessed serviceable
information on the main points, both of habits and means of prevention
of the greater number of our really seriously injurious farm, orchard,
and forest pests of Britain.
Those who wish to investigate in detail the various kinds of infestation
noticed during the first twenty-two years of my observations will find
them in “The General Index to my Annual Reports on Injurious Insects,
1877-1898,” compiled at my request by Mr. Robert Newstead.[31] In this
index the insects are arranged alphabetically under their popular and
also under their scientific names, with references to the various Annual
Reports in which notices of their observation are recorded, or papers
given on them, and also of the pages in each paper containing
information on their habits and history and means of prevention. Lists
are also given of crops and plants, stock, &c., affected. The index thus
affords a fair summary of the advance of our knowledge of crop
infestation during the years referred to.[32]
In the year 1881 I published a digest of the information sent in up to
date in an octavo volume of 323 pages, very fully illustrated, entitled
“Manual of Injurious Insects, with Methods of Prevention and Remedy”;
and in 1890 I followed this by a much enlarged demy-octavo second
edition of 450 pages, bearing the same title. In 1898, under the title
of “Handbook of Insects Injurious to Orchard and Bush Fruits, with Means
of Prevention and Remedy,” pp. 280, I included the special observations
on fruit infestations which had been sent me. In 1900 I published a
pamphlet (also illustrated) entitled “Flies Injurious to Stock” (pp.
80), [p. 304] giving reports of observations of life history and habits,
and also of means of prevention of a few kinds of infestation. These
were given as shortly as they could serviceably be dealt with, excepting
in the case of the Warble fly, _Hypoderma bovis_. Into this it appeared
desirable to enter more fully, it having been under my observation since
the year 1884, and having been carefully written on in every detail of
habits and means of prevention, as observed by my contributors and
myself in this country.
Besides the above publications, I arranged, for gratuitous circulation,
various four-page leaflets on our commonest farm pests. Each contained
an illustration and as much information as I could manage to condense
into the limited space. Among the subjects discussed were the widely
destructive Wireworm and equally destructive grubs of the Daddy Longlegs
or Cranefly, the Mangold-leaf maggot, the Mustard beetle, the minute
Stem eel-worm (which causes the malformed growth of cereal plants known
as “tulip root” and does much harm in clover shoots), the Warble fly and
the troublesome Forest fly. Our recent investigations have proved this
last to be present in two other districts at least, besides the New
Forest and its vicinity in Hampshire, to which previously it had been
supposed to be almost limited (p. 138). For the leaflet on the Warble
fly, its history, and easily practicable methods of prevention and
remedy, there has been such a large demand that various issues have been
successively printed amounting to 170,000 copies, including 15,000
copies which the Messrs. Murray, of Aberdeen, requested permission to
print at their own cost.
The original plan (or rather that which gradually formed in the first
few years) of arrangement of the Annual Reports appeared to meet all
requirements, so long as the requirements of the case remain unaltered.
Year after year such information as had been asked for was sent,
gradually completing most of the histories of our seriously injurious
crop and orchard insects, but in the report for 1899 it was requisite to
make some arrangement for insertion of disconnected additional
observations of appearance, habits, &c., of insects, previously referred
to. These I gave accordingly in an appendix under the heading of “Short
Notices,” not to encumber the report with repetitions that could be
avoided.
In 1901, when about to publish my report of observations of the
preceding year, it appeared to me that a large proportion of the new
information contributed bore on points of scientific entomological
interest, or of occasional appearance of little observed attacks of very
little interest or use to the majority of our agriculturists and orchard
growers, and quite foreign to the broad scale consideration of pests,
which was the object of these reports. It seemed something more than
_un_necessary to continue this work, and I, therefore, inserted the
following notice in the preface of my Annual Report for 1900, thus
closing the series with the closing century:—
“_But now, although with much regret, I am obliged to say that I feel
the time has come for discontinuing this series of Annual Reports._ When
I commenced the work in 1877, comparatively little was known of the
habits and means of prevention of insects seriously injurious to our
crops, and of this little a very small amount was accessible for public
service, and I undertook the series of reports in the hope (so far as in
my power lay) of doing something to meet both these difficulties.
Firstly, by endeavouring to gain reliable information of the kind
needed; and secondly, by publishing this, with all requisite additions,
and especially with illustrations, at a price far below the publication
expenses, so that it might be accessible to all who wished to purchase,
but especially by sending a copy of each Annual Report to each
contributor who had favoured me with useful information. It seemed to be
but right and fair that those who kindly helped in the work should have
their courtesy acknowledged to the best of my power, and I have
continued the reciprocation throughout. But the work was hard; for many
years for about five or six months all the time I could give to the
subject was devoted to arranging the contributions of the season for the
Annual Report of the year, with the addition of the best information I
could procure from other sources (in every case, whether of contributors
or otherwise, _fully acknowledged_). As the consultation enquiries were
kept up during winter as well as summer, I found the work, carried on
single-handed, at times very fatiguing. But so long as there appeared to
be a call for it, I have tried to do what I could. Now, however, the
necessities of the case have (as a matter of course) been gradually
changing. Year after year information has been sent, gradually
completing the histories of most of our worst insect pests, and now
additional information is rare (as is to be expected after twenty-four
years’ observations) on points of great agricultural importance.
“I claim no credit to myself in the work; but those who will look over
the names of the contributors, given with their information, will see
how deeply indebted I am to them, and to other good friends, who have
placed their experience and great knowledge at the public service. To
them, and to all who have assisted me, and to some who have allowed what
began as agricultural communications to ripen into valuable friendship,
I offer my grateful thanks and my deep appreciation of their goodness,
and I trust they will believe that if, as I well know, much of my work
has not been so well done as it would have been in better qualified
hands, at least I have earnestly tried to do my very best.”[33]
On the publication of the above-mentioned report, I received many kind
letters from friends, and I was much gratified by the press allusions on
the matter. These, obviously, it would not be desirable for me to do
more here than just allude to generally, with my thanks.[34]
------------------------------------------------------------------------