Who is boll weevil

By World War I , calcium arsenate had been found reasonably effective in poisoning the insect, and during the s fluorides were introduced. Mally's cultivation practices continued to be a sensible and important way to manage boll weevil infestations. Organic pesticides and traps depending on synthetic sex pheromones have not been so effective with the boll weevil as they have been with other insects.

The possibility of eradication of the organism simply by suspending cotton culture for two or more years over a broad region has not been disproved, but neither has it been fully tested. Since the boll weevil does not survive well on the High Plains of Texas, this region seems to be more favorable to future cotton production than the coastal areas.

Boll Weevil eradication renewed in Virginia and North Carolina in and progressed across the Southwest. Efforts across Texas gained momentum in , and by achieved success in all regions except the Lower Rio Grande Valley, where the semi-tropical climate hampered efforts. All 11 West Texas zones declared total eradication.

The Lower Rio Grande Valley also experienced substantially reduced numbers of boll weevils from the previous year. James C. The following, adapted from the Chicago Manual of Style , 15th edition, is the preferred citation for this entry.

All copyrighted materials included within the Handbook of Texas Online are in accordance with Title 17 U. The TSHA makes every effort to conform to the principles of fair use and to comply with copyright law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Boll weevils entered the U. By the s they had spread through all of the major cotton-producing areas in the country. The scope of the damage was breathtaking, as were the control efforts thrown at this insect: at one time, one-third of the insecticide used in the U.

In , the chief of the U. Despite the arrival of the boll weevil, cotton production at first actually increased in the U. Cotton production moved in advance of the weevil, creating a boom in cotton plantings in areas that were weevil-free. But as the cotton spread, so did the boll weevil — costing cotton growers billions in revenue.

Then, in , something novel happened. The National Cotton Council of America unanimously agreed, for the first time ever, on a piece of farm legislation.

Among other things, that legislation called for cotton research to be expanded — and the boll weevil to be eliminated. This was an unusual step for many reasons. First, efforts had been made to eradicate insects in livestock before, but no one had ever tried it with a crop pest; this was breaking new ground. Second, this was going to cost a lot of money, which would require the support of the federal government. Third, nobody had yet come up with a way to eradicate the insect.

Finally, once eradication began, the eradication process would become a common pool resource. Because of this, cooperation would be vital, given that there would be a temptation for individuals, or whole regions, to get a free ride, relying on the contributions of their neighbors to the eradication effort.

So mandatory farmer participation was a must. One by one, each of the challenges were addressed, requiring close collaboration at every step.

Insect eradication was not an entirely new concept. This technique was pioneered in the s to eliminate screwworm, a parasitic insect pest of cattle.

These funds were used to increase personnel and develop education programs to better manage the boll weevil. Programs included field monitoring, in which scouts surveyed fields for the presence of weevils; the use of treatment thresholds to determine the most economical time to spray; and other cultural or management tools. After proving successful, eradication programs were expanded to include South Carolina in , and Georgia and southern Alabama in During the next eight years, the program expanded throughout Alabama.

As program personnel worked to implement eradication, they encountered many problems, which included underestimating costs and labor shortages. Other issues included negative environmental effects associated with aerial pesticide applications and outbreaks of other destructive pests.

When eradication was achieved in Alabama, yields improved significantly and insecticide inputs decreased dramatically. After suffering tremendous losses in their harvests and investing massively in insecticides for almost 80 years, Alabama farmers were now able produce two bales of cotton per acre in years with good rainfall and were freed almost completely from using foliar insecticides. Since , no economic damage resulting from the weevil has been reported from Alabama.

The last weevil captured was a single find in Mobile County in At about the time that weevils were eradicated, seed for genetically altered varieties of cotton became available to growers. These new varieties repelled worm pests and encouraged beneficial insects to help with some other pests.

A few insect pests of cotton, such as plant bugs and stink bugs, occasionally build to levels requiring spraying in this low-insecticide environment, but none will likely ever have the potential to cause catastrophic losses like the weevil.

Boll Weevil Monument The boll weevil had profound and devastating effects on agriculture and society in Alabama for much of the twentieth century. It's really interesting how invasive species such as the boll weevil always seem to evolve and manage to build new, more powerful defences against our constant efforts to control their population. Luckily, we don't have the weevil here in the UK for now but this does not prevent local academics and industry experts from participating in research projects and developing a sustainable solution to the problem.

As a pest expert, I follow the topic closely and am waiting to see what they will come up with in the end. Comments are not published until reviewed by NCpedia editors at the State Library of NC , and the editors reserve the right to not publish any comment submitted that is considered inappropriate for this resource. NCpedia will not publish personal contact information in comments, questions, or responses.

If you would like a reply by email, note that some email servers, such as public school accounts, are blocked from accepting messages from outside email servers or domains. If you prefer not to leave an email address, check back at your NCpedia comment for a reply. Please allow one business day for replies from NCpedia.

Skip to main content. Is anything in this article factually incorrect?