STATE REGISTRATION AND LICENSING REGULATIONS: A NEW PROGRAM (OHIO)

We enacted a bill in Ohio this year, Senate Bill 445, that has to do with the application of pesticides. It is a very wide bill as you would normally look at it with most of the meat going to come from the regulations that are presently being written into it. In other words, the framework was developed and accepted by the two houses in our state legislature and empowered the Director of Agriculture to establish the regulations or the so-called teeth to this bill. The governor signed the bill in June and it became effective in September. The committees as of this time are meeting to develop philosophies and regulations that will be promulgated and brought into hearings and sifted through, and eventually, with a target date of December of this year, (1970), brought to the Director of Agriculture's office for acceptance. There is a committee established for rodent and bird control which is very well represented by our industry here in Ohio. John Beck (Rose Exterminator Company) is the chairman of the committee, William B. Jackson (Bowling Green State University) and Robert Yaeger (Cincinnati) are also on the committee. The important feature of this new law, in terms of pest control operators, is the examinations that will be required. We operators and our service people will both be tested and licensed, if sufficient proficiency is demonstrated on the tests. For your information they use a little different terminology in the bill than we in the industry normally use. We think of an applicator in the industry as service people. In the bill an applicator is defined as an operator. Therefore in reading the law the word operator means the man who does the job, the service man. Just the reverse is true in the industry. We think of the operator as the man who owns or manages the company while these people are referred to in the bill as applicators. The Bill calls for the development of schools for the training of our people throughout the state. Those of us who are in bird control should begin to prepare ourselves to meet this request, to be available for the schooling, have our people available for the schooling, and give this program all the co-operation that we can.

THE EFFECTS OF ORNITROL ON WILD POPULATIONS OF RED-WINGED BLACKBIRDS AND GRACKLES

For the past three years the New Jersey Department of Agriculture, in coop¬eration with the New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station, has conducted field evaluations on the effects of reproductive suppressants on wild populations of red-winged blackbirds. These studies have been performed in conjunction with the North East 49 (a Federally sponsored regional project which presently has nine states in the North East and Ohio cooperating to develop means to combat bird damage to agricultural crops) regional project on control of bird depredations. Field evaluations in 1968 and 1969 centered around the effects of TEM (tri-ethylene melamine) on the reproductive rates of red-winged blackbirds. At the close of the 1969 season further field testing of the chemical was discontinued because of the material's apparent lack of effectiveness as a reproductive inhibitor. In 1970 the field evaluations were conducted to determine the effects of Orni-trol (20, 25-diazocholesterol dihydrochloride, supplied by G. D. Searle and Company, Chicago, Illinois) on the reproductive rates of red-winged blackbirds. A small colony of common grackles was also studied during this same investigation.

1969 ASSESSMENT OF BLACKBIRD DEPREDATIONS ON FIELD CORN IN OHIO AND MICHIGAN

In 1966, when the annual damage survey was initiated, Dr. C. R. Weaver, Statistician at the Ohio Agriculture Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio, drew up a sampling plan, balancing costs against desired precision. The plan included three combinations of fields to be sampled and stations per field for high damage areas, three combinations for moderate damage areas, and two combinations for light damage areas. Alternatives for the high damage area included (1) 497 fields with two stations per field (± .48), (2) 775 fields with two stations per field (± .26), and (3) 235 fields with ten stations per field (— .68). For the moderate damage areas, the alternatives were (1) 441 fields with three stations per field (± .26), (2) 155 fields with three stations per field (± .50), and (3) 235 fields with ten stations per field (± .32). The light dam¬age area alternatives were (1) 297 fields with three stations per field (- .26), and (2) 81 fields with three stations per field (± .50). The original survey in 1966 sampled eight counties in three regions. In 1967, 14 counties in the same three regions were sampled. Two new counties were added to one region and two new regions with two counties each (treated as one region for sampling purposes) were added to the 1968 survey. The 1968 survey was of sufficient size to be representative of the corn damage picture in Ohio and Southeast Michigan. The 1969 survey was identical to the 1968 survey.

BLACKBIRD DAMAGE AND CONTROL--AN INFORMAL SEMINAR

The object is to hash over a few problems as we see them on this red-winged blackbird situation. I'm Mel Dyer, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario. Around the table are Tom Stockdale, Extension Wildlife Specialist, Ohio Cooperative Extension Service, Columbus; Maurice Giltz, Ohio Agriculture Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio; Joe Halusky, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbus, Ohio; Daniel Stiles, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.; Paul Rodeheffer, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbus, Ohio; Brian Hall, Blackbird Research Project, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario; George Cornwell, Virginia Polytechnic Insti¬tute, Blacksburg, Va.; Dick Warren, Peavey Grain Company, Minneapolis, Minn.; Bob Fringer, N.J. Department of Agriculture, Trenton, N.J.; Charles Stone, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbus, Ohio; Larry Holcomb, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio; Doug Slack, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, Wooster, Ohio; Charles Wagg, N.J. Department of Agriculture, Trenton, N.J.; Dick Smith, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Columbus, Ohio; and Jim Caslick, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Gainesville, Fla. As I see the situation, as a director of a red-winged blackbird research project, we have a problem which has been defined in human terms concerning a natural animal population.