41

HISTORY OF MOSQUITO CONTROL IN BRITISH COLUMBIA C. L. NEILSON ' AND L. C. CURTIS ?

AS early as 1856, J. K. Lord (7) encouraged Provincial Governmen t collected mosquitoes in the Lower partiCipation. Fraser Valley of British Columbia The number of proj ects varies and made pungent remarks on their somewhat from year to year. This is a bundance and habits. His determin­ 1argely because adequate control has a tions, however, we l' e generally not always been achieved on account f:wlty. The first careful study of mos­ of lack of funds or loss of key per­ quitoes in the province was by H. G . sonnel in the district. At present Dyar . (-1) . wbo vi-sited the Kootenay there are twenty-five cities, towns, or . district and' i'inconver Island in 1903. districts a ctively engaged in mos­ IJ'1 19 19"he made a journey through qui to control. the northern part of the province, The largest control district in the and collected from Prince George to province is that of the Fraser Valley Atlin (2). From 1899 to 1919 Fletcher, Mosquito Control Board, which con­ Trehearne and Hewitt made collec­ sists of the Municipal Districts of tions, all of which appear to have Richmond, Burnaby, Maple Ridge, been submitted to Dyar for determin­ Pitt Meadows, Coquitlam, Surrey, a tion and publication. Langley, Matsqui, Mission, Kent, and In 1919 Hearle began a study of Chilliwack, together with the City of mosqUitoes in the Fraser Valley in Mission and the Village of Harrison response to a request from the mun­ Hot Springs. The annual expenditure icipalities of the lower mainland for is about $25 ,000. a mosquito control programme. In In the Interior, the cities ot· Revel­ 1920 he published a preliminary re­ stoke, Kamloops, and Kelowna spend port of his findings (4) . This work approximately $3 ,000 annually, while concluded with a full report publish­ the Penticton budget is near $1,800. ed by the National Research Council All have been engaged in mosquito (5) and a published list of the mos­ control for about thirty years. Other quitoes of British Columbia (6) . cities dOing control work include Within two years of the establish­ Kitimat, Prince George, Quesnel, and ment by Hearle of the Livestock In­ Grand Forks. Of the smaller centres, sect Laboratory at Kamloops in 1928, Merritt, Clinton, and Salmon Arm are mosquito control programmes were active. started at Kamloops and Kelowna. Interest in contrOlling mosquitoes Other mosqUito control work is car­ grew over the next 15 to 20 years until ried out by the following organiza­ by 1948 Gregson (3) reported that tior.s : Barriere and Louis Creek Mos­ twenty-four communities were prac­ quito Control Association, Little Fort tising' mosquito control. Since 1948 L. Mosquito Control Board, Central C. Curtis has continued mosquito North Thompson Board of Trade investigations at Kamloops and has (Birch Island - Clearwater) , Lower acted as a technical adviser. Since North Thompson Mosquito Control 1953 C. L. Neilson has cOllaborated Committee, Sicamous Mosquito Con­ with Curtis as technical adviser and trol Committee, Solsqua Farmers' In­ stitute, Malakwa Farmers' Institute, Arrowhead Chamber of Commerce, 1 Provinc ictl Entomolog ist . Doug las Building, Vic· toria, B. C. Wasa Mosquito Control Committee, Christina Lake Community Club, and 2 E:nto lllology Laboratory . Box 210. Kanlloops, B.C . Falkland-Westwold Board of Trade. PHIl( . I': \ ")"0 .\1 o!.. S O(· . 8(( !T. ( ' 01.1 · .\11 : 1.\. V O I..:)<...: (l!IGll. 111-:(·. 1. i!lt} l

It is expected that new control organ­ Financing of the various control izations will opera te at Spences operations h as been largely by city Bridge and in the Invermere district. grants, or in smaller communities by Areas that conduct sporadic control fund-raising activities and gifts. The include Argenta, Golden, Norgate Fraser Valley Control Board operates P:1.rk in North Vancouver near the on funds contributed by the various First Narrows Bridge, Oliver, and bodies on a population basis, and the Savona. Federal and Provincial governments Con trol measures now consist make annual contributions. The Pro­ mainly of larviciding with 1 per cent vincial Department of Agriculture has DDT in oil at 2-3 gallons per acre or for the last two years made very with DDT in gelatine capsules ("Toss­ small annual grants to ten of the widely scattered rural districts in its" ) 3 or treatment of breeding areas before hatching with five per cent order to encourage their efforts. The granular aldrin or heptachlor at 1-2 gr ants afford the Provincial Entomol­ pounds per acre. ogist an excellent opportunity to work with the communities to improve Larviciding by the use of aircraft th eir techniques. is carried on as a regula r practice in In conclusion, it is olir belief that the Fraser Valley, and at Kitimat, th e time has come for Provincial Kamloops, the North Thompson Val­ legisla tion under which control areas ley, and a few smaller areas as the may opera te, raise funds in an orderly occasion demands, and as money is manner, finance the purchase of ? vailable. Engine-equipped ground heavy equipment, and provide con­ i> prayers for both larviciding and tinuity of employment for skilled adulticiding are used at Penticton , workers. It would give workers the Ke!owna, Kamloops, Revelstoke, Kiti­ right to entry upon lands for the ma t Louis Creek-Barriere, Clinton, a batement of mosquito nuisance, a nd Sica'mous, and Grand Forks. Similar protect individual workers from da m­ equipment was used by the Fraser age claims. At the same time, it would Va llev Mosquito Control Board in give a ffected property owners and 1961. . Other ground work is largely ratepayers a voice in the direction of clone by knapsack sprayer, granular operations. insecticides, or "Tossits." However, A further desirable development insecticide-treated sawdust is still would be an aSSOCiation of mosqUito used, and a few aerosol generators control workers to provide means for are operated from the exhaust of administrators and operators to dis­ .i eeps, trucks or tractors. (;USS the many mutual problems that

. -3- W;-:;:,; Inc., West Palm Beach , FI ;I. . U.S. A. may a rise in this difficult field .

References 1. DYar. H. G. 1904. Notes on the mosqui toes oj B riti ~ h Columbia. Proc. Entomol. Soc. . \Vas h. 6: 37·41. 2. ---- 1921. The musq uitoes of Ca nada. Tra ns. Roy. Can. In st. Toronto. 13(1): 71·120. :3. GregsO!1, J. D. 1952. The his[(Jry 01' the sturly (J[ external arthropods a ff ecting mall and animals in B.C. Proc. Entomol. Soc. B. C. 48: 22·24. 4. Hearle, E. 1920. The importance of mosquitoes, wi th notes on some B.C. species. Proc. Entomol. Soc. B. C. 13·15: 132·135. 5. ---- 1926. The m f )3q uitoes of the lo wer Fraser Va ll ey, B. C. and t heir control. Nat'!. Researc h Co uncil Rep. No. 17 . 6. 1927. Li st of (he' mosquitoes d B.C. Proc. Entomol. Soc. B.C. 24: 11·19. 7. Lord, .J . K. 1866. The Naturalist in Vancou v~ r Is la nd and British Co lumbia. London.