berries showed only 0.4 per cent. decay, while the commercially handled
fruit had 4.6 per cent. After 8 days in the car the difference was
vastly greater. The carefully handled fruit showed only 2.2 per cent.
decay, but with the commercially handled this percentage had risen to
26.7, or more than one-quarter of the entire shipment. When the fruit
was examined a day after it had been taken out of the ice car, the
evidence was equally strong in favor of careful handling. Carefully
handled fruit that had remained 4 days in the car was found a day after
its withdrawal to show only 1 per cent. of decay against 17.5 per cent.
in commercially handled berries. Carefully handled fruit left in the car
8 days, and then held one day, showed only 8.1 per cent. of decay as
against 47.6 per cent. in commercially handled fruit.
The following year experiments were made with actual shipments instead
of with the stationary refrigerator car, and the results confirmed
previous conclusions. It was found, for example, that there was less
decay in the carefully handled berries at the end of 8 days than in the
commercially handled berries at the end of 4. Carefully handled fruit
that was 4 days in transit, and had then been held one day after
withdrawal from the refrigerator car showed less than 1 per cent of
decay, whereas commercially handled berries subjected to the same test
showed nearly 10 per cent.
Orcharding in Minnesota.
RICHARD WELLINGTON, ASST. HORTICULTURIST, UNIVERSITY FARM, ST. PAUL.
This paper is purposely given a broad title so that it may cover any
questions which come under the head of orcharding. Many of you who have
been pestered with an "Orchard Survey Blank" can easily guess what
subjects are to be taken up. Thanks to many of the members of this
society and other fruit growers for their hearty co-operation, a large
amount of data has been collected from fifty-three counties,
representing most of the districts within the state. As would be
expected certain counties have contributed much more information than
others, probably owing to their greater interest in orcharding. For
example: Thirty-one replies have already been received from Hennepin
County, seven from Goodhue, six from Renville, five each from Houston,
Meeker and Rice, four each from Chippewa, Dakota, Mower, Polk and
Wabasha, three each from Blue Earth, Nicollet, Ottertail, Pine, Ramsey,
Steele, Washington and Watonwan and one or two each from the remaining
counties. Perhaps if the right parties had been reached the low-standing
counties would have a higher ranking.
The best way to present the data is an enigma. If all the information
was given at one time we would need a whole day instead of fifteen
minutes. Of course much of the material is a repetition, and a general
summary will cover the main facts in most cases. Nevertheless it is not
feasible to take up all of the subject matter in this short period, and
therefore the first two topics on the survey blank have been selected,
namely, orchard sites and protective agencies. At a later date, if you
are sufficiently interested in dry facts other subjects, as soils,
dynamiting, orchard management, stock of fruit trees, methods of
planting and pruning, varieties for various localities, etc., will be
taken up. Some of the subjects, like sites and soils, will be treated as
state problems, while others must be considered as sectional.
Minnesota, as you all know, contains many different climatic conditions,
and consequently its orchard practices and recommendations must vary
accordingly. To meet this problem the writer, in consultation with Prof.
Cady, divided the state into six sections, namely, the southeastern,
east central, northeastern, northwestern, west central and southwestern.
Many counties are, of course, in an intermediate position and might be
thrown into either of the adjoining sections, but an arbitrary line
must be drawn somewhere. Freeborn, Waseca, Rice, Goodhue and all the
counties east of them are placed in the southeastern section. Nicollet,
LeSueur, Sibley, McLeod, Wright, Isanti and the counties to the east are
included in the central east, and Pine, Mille Lacs, Morrison and the
counties to the north and east are placed in the northeastern section.
Beltrami, Hubbard, Ottertail and the counties to the west are placed in
northwestern section; Traverse, Douglas, Todd, Stearns, Meeker,
Renville, Yellow Medicine and the enclosed counties in the west central,
and the remainder to the south and west are in the southwestern section.
Thus, when the various sections are mentioned, you will know what part
of the state is being referred to.
_Site of Orchard._ By site of orchard we refer to its location, that is,
whether it is on rolling, level or hilly ground, and the direction of
its slope, provided it has one. From past experience it is believed that
an orchard situated on a north slope is ideally located for Minnesota
conditions, as its blossoming period is retarded and consequently the
liability of injury from late frosts decreased. But all people who want
orchards do not possess such a slope, so they set out their orchards on
the most convenient location. A few growers have orchards sloping in all
directions, and their opinion on the influence of slope on hardiness and
retardation of the blooming period should be valuable. It is of interest
to note that, out of 108 reporting on the levelness of the orchard
ground, only twelve had level ground, two level to nearly level, one
level to decidedly rolling, twenty-nine nearly level, seven nearly level
to slightly rolling, three nearly level to medium rolling, twenty-nine
slightly rolling, four slightly rolling to medium rolling, eighteen
rolling and three decidedly rolling. A glance at the figures shows that
the majority of orchards are on nearly level to slightly rolling land.
In addition to the numbers given thirteen reported a slight slope, one a
slight slope to a medium slope, two a slight to a steep slope, sixteen a
medium slope, one a medium to a steep slope, and five a steep slope--the
emphasis being laid on the moderate rising ground. No grower reported an
orchard location entirely at the base of a slope, but six reported
orchards extending from the base to the top of the slope, two from the
base to midway of the slope, twenty-five at midway of the slope, seven
from midway to the top and twenty-two at the top of a slope--the high
ground evidently being preferred for orchard sites. As a general rule,
as would naturally be expected, those who reported their orchards on the
top of the slope usually reported their ground as either high or medium.
Of ninety-six reports on the elevation of the orchards only four
reported low land, and two of these were on top of a slope, two low and
medium, one low and high, forty-six medium, fourteen medium and high,
and twenty-seven high--the medium taking the lead. These figures have
been given of the state as a whole, but when the sections are considered
the southeastern and the west central take the lead in the highest
percentage of high ground in comparison with the lower ground; the
southeastern and east central, for the greatest amount of rolling land;
and the southwestern, for the most level or nearly level land.
[Illustration: Down the long row. View in well cared for orchard of J. M.
Barclay, Madison Lake.]
As for the effect of direction of slope on hardiness, there were many
varied opinions. Thirty stated without question that the direction had
an effect, thirty-one stated that it had no effect, and seventy-two
admitted that they did not know. Of those answering in the affirmative
only seven had two or more distinctly different slopes, while fifteen of
the negatives had two or more slopes for comparison. Nine of those who
stated they didn't know had two or more slopes upon which to base their
judgment. In summing up the direction of sites preferred, seventy-seven
recommended a northerly slope, nine had no preference, one preferred
southeast, one west, one west and east, two east, one north and east,
one northeast or east, and sixty-four expressed no opinion. Two growers
stated that the north slope prevented early bloom and thereby lessened
liability to injury from late frosts, two growers stated that northern
slopes decreased the loss of moisture, and one stated that the northeast
slope gives the largest fruit and the west the best colored.
As a brief summary of the reports on orchard sites, it may be stated
that high ground, rolling or sloping to the north, is preferred by the
majority of growers who filled out these orchard survey blanks.
_Protective Agencies._ Under this heading comes windbreaks of all kinds,
whether hills, natural timber or planted trees, and bodies of water
which ameliorate the climate. Out of fifty-four replies from the central
east section, sixteen reported that their orchards were favorably
affected by lakes, the benefit coming in most cases from the prevention
of early and late frosts. One grower attributed the cooling of the air
during the summer as a benefit and two stated that the bodies of water
furnished moisture. Two growers in the southeast section received
favorable influences from the Mississippi River, and one in the
southwestern and two in the west central sections thought they received
beneficial effects from lakes. According to this data, orchards in the
east central section, owing largely to the influence of Lake Minnetonka,
are greatly benefited by the presence of water.
Windbreaks are a very important factor in successful orcharding in
Minnesota, even though one party in the southeast section and three
parties in the central east noted no beneficial effects. According to
reports from the central west and southwest sections they are of great
benefit and in some cases indispensable to apple growing. As would be
expected by any one who is acquainted with Minnesota, the planted
windbreaks are a more important factor in the prairie country than in
the natural wooded and hilly regions. In the southeast section, five
orchards were reported as protected by bluffs and hills, three by both
hills and natural woods, two by natural woods, two by both natural and
planted woods, and twenty-one by planted woods; in the central east
section, one by a hill and a planted windbreak, one by a town, fifteen
by natural timber, two by natural and planted timber, and nineteen by
planted windbreaks; in the northeast section, two by natural and four by
planted windbreaks; in the northwest section, three by natural and two
by planted windbreaks; in the west central section, one by a hill and
natural timber, five by natural timber, two by natural timber and
planted windbreaks, and eighteen by planted windbreaks; and in the
southwest section, one by a hill and natural woods, one by a hill and
planted windbreak, two by natural timber, and fifteen by planted
windbreaks. If Meeker County, which has natural timber, was not included
in the central west--and perhaps it should have been included in central
east--this section would have only one orchard protected alone by
natural timber; and if Blue Earth County was eliminated from the
southwest, this section would have no orchard protected alone by natural
timber.
The beneficial effects from windbreaks may be summed up as follows:
Twenty-five reported that they prevented fruit from being blown off
trees, nine that they prevented trees and limbs being broken by winds
and storms, ten that they protected trees from injury by winds without
specifying the kind of injury, four that they reduced injury from
frosts, ten that they either prevented or reduced winter injury, four
that they helped to retain moisture, five that they helped to hold snow,
eight that they prevented snow drifting, five that they protected
orchards from hot and dry winds, three that they permitted the growing
of apples, and one that they supplied all advantages.
The kinds of trees recommended for windbreaks and the methods of
planting are numerous and variable and to discuss them at length would
take too much time. However, the principal facts may be briefly
enumerated.
In eighty-five reports that listed set out windbreaks, it was found that
fifty-seven growers had used evergreens, thirty-seven willows,
twenty-nine box elders, twenty-five maples, seventeen cottonwoods,
thirteen ashes, eleven elms, eight poplars, four oaks, four plums, three
nuts and one apple. The evergreens consisted of thirteen Scotch pine,
eleven evergreens (not named), eight Norway spruce, five spruce (not
named), three balsam, three Austrian pine, two white pine, one yellow
pine, two cedar, two white spruce, two pine (variety not named), two
fir, two jack pine, one Black Hills spruce, and one tamarack. In the
willows were given twenty willows (variety not named), two
laurel-leaved, seven white and eight golden; in the maples, sixteen soft
maples, two hard maples, one silver-maple and six maples (kind not
named); in the poplars, five Norway, one Carolina, two poplar (kind not
named); and in the nuts, one black walnut, one butternut and one walnut.
The major part of the box elders, cottonwoods, willows and ashes were
noted in the central west and southwest sections. Thirty-seven
experienced growers of windbreaks, the most of them living in the
southwest, west central and southeast sections, recommended the
following trees for windbreaks in the given proportions, twenty-four
evergreens, fifteen willows, seven maples, six poplars, five elms, five
box elders, three elms, two plum, two cottonwood, three hedges, one oak,
one hackberry and one black walnut. The evergreens are decidedly the
most popular, and among the varieties mentioned Norway spruce takes the
lead for those recommended, and the Scotch pine for those planted.
There are about as many different systems of planting used as growers.
The main point in all cases was to have a planting that would stop the
wind and storms. A few growers advocated the use of a hedge or plum
trees to fill in under the windbreak, while one grower desires a
circulation of air under the branches of his trees. Cultivation and
intercropping of windbreaks are also recommended in a few cases. The
distance of planting varies, of course, with the trees or shrubs used.
For example: one grower recommends 8 ft. x 8 ft. for large deciduous
trees, and another grower, 6 ft. x 12 ft. apart in rows and two rows, 12
ft. apart. For Scotch pine one grower advocates eight feet. In some
cases a mixture of many kinds of trees is recommended, and then again
only one kind. One very solid windbreak is made up of a lilac hedge,
four rows of jack pine, four rows of Norway poplar and one row of
willow. Another is one row willow, one of evergreen, one of willow and
one of evergreen.
Various distances between windbreak and orchard were used and
recommended. A large number of orchards were started at about twenty
feet from the windbreak and a few as close as one rod, but these
distances proved to be too close. One grower, however, recommended close
planting and later the removal of a row of trees in the windbreak when
more space was needed. The recommended distances for planting varied
from thirty to 500 feet, although seventy-five to 100 was satisfactory
in most cases.
More details have been given in regard to orchard sites and windbreaks
than many of you are probably interested in, but for one who is planning
to set out an orchard they should prove of value and profit, as they are
based upon the experiences of many of Minnesota's best orchardists.
My Experience with a Young Orchard.
ROY VIALL, SPRING VALLEY.
About ten years ago we acquired some land three and one-half miles north
of Spring Valley. This land is very rough and was originally covered
with heavy timber, in fact, about one-third of our large orchard was
cleared and grubbed out the fall before planting.
When I became interested in fruit growing one of the first things I did
was to join the Horticultural Society and to the knowledge obtained
through this membership we owe in large measure what success has come to
us.
The eighteen acres selected for our main orchard slopes quite abruptly
to the north and northeast. In fact, the slope is so steep that the
ground, if kept under cultivation, would wash badly, and this was the
real reason for seeding down our orchard at the time of planting. The
orchard is now seven years old, and the trees have never had a particle
of cultivation. Part of this ground was in grain and seeded to alsike
and timothy the year before; the balance was the new land referred to,
which we had broken and immediately seeded down to alsike and timothy,
with oats as a nurse crop.
Our first problem was what varieties to plant, in what proportion and
where to buy them. In this we adopted the recommendation of this society
at that time, choosing Wealthy, Duchess, Patten Greening and
Northwestern Greening, with fifty Malinda and fifty Iowa Beauty. We now
have in addition two small orchards with nearly forty varieties
altogether. The varieties, for the large orchard were divided as
follows: 250 Duchess, 250 Patten Greening, 300 Northwestern Greening,
1,000 Wealthy. Were I to set another commercial orchard of the same size
it would contain 500 Duchess and the balance Wealthy. While the Patten
Greening is an ideal tree and an early and prolific bearer, there is
with us a much larger per cent of imperfect and diseased fruit than of
any other variety. Tree for tree, I believe the Duchess will produce
_more_ saleable _fruit_.
Where to buy our trees was decided for us in one of our first numbers of
the Horticulturist, viz., at the nearest reliable nursery. That this was
good advice is evidenced by the fact that out of the 1,900 trees we have
found but two that were not as ordered.
Our next problem was, at what distance to plant the trees. The more
information we sought the less sure were we of the best plan. We were
advised to plant all distances from 12 feet by 16 feet to 24 feet by 32
feet. We finally concluded to take about an average of them all and
decided on 20 feet by 20 feet, and so far have had no reason to regret
it. We have put up the alsike and timothy every year for hay with the
usual machinery, and there has not been over a half dozen trees
seriously damaged. Our trees were nearly all three years old, 5 to 6
feet, and we find they do much better in sod than a smaller tree.
Having the orchard set out the next thing was to protect the trees from
mice and rabbits. This we did by making protectors out of wire cloth,
using different widths, from 18 to 24 inches, cutting it in strips 10
inches wide and holding it about the trees by three pieces of stove pipe
wire at the top, middle and bottom. Not counting the time of making and
putting them on these cost us from 1-1/2 cents to 2-1/2 cents each, and
lasted from three to four years. We used a few made of galvanized wire
cloth, which lasted much longer.
Three years ago we commenced replacing these protectors with a wash of
white lead and raw linseed oil mixed to the consistency of separator
cream. The first year we painted only fifty trees, the next year 100,
the next 300, and this last year we painted every tree on the place. We
can see no bad effects, and it certainly protects against mice and
rabbits and, what is equally as important, against borers also, and the
cost per tree, including labor, is much less.
We have also used the lead and oil with splendid results in treating
trees affected with canker. We had quite a number of Wealthy so
affected, and we cut out the affected bark and wood and then covered the
wound with lead, and in almost every case it has proved a cure, that is,
stopped the spread of the canker.
The second year our orchard was set out we began to mulch the trees with
grass cut in the orchard, clover straw, pea straw--anything we could
get. We were unable to mulch the entire orchard that year, and before we
got the balance mulched you could tell as far as you could see the
orchard which trees were mulched and which were not. The former not only
made a better growth, but had a healthier look. Now I do not want you to
get the idea that I am advocating the sod system except in locations
similar to ours. Were our orchard on more level ground I not only should
have cultivated the first three years, as advocated by most authorities,
but would have continued the cultivation in some degree at least.
Nevertheless, on account probably of the very favorable location, I
think our orchard will compare favorably with any cultivated orchard of
the same age. Having the orchard set out, protected against mice and
rabbits and mulched, we found that the real work of raising an orchard
had just begun. First came the gray beetles the following June, and they
ate the new growth off several hundred trees before we discovered them.
At that time, not knowing what else to do, we hand picked every one we
could find and destroyed them. These beetles we found came from oak
groves on the south and west, and the next year we sprayed with arsenate
of lead six or eight rows of trees on that side of the orchard, and as
we have since then sprayed the entire orchard each year we have had no
further trouble.
Next came pocket gophers, and before we learned how to stop them we had
lost a number of trees by their chewing off the roots just beneath the
surface of the ground. By opening their runways and placing well down in
them a piece of carrot or potato in which has been placed a little
strychnine we succeeded in getting rid of them entirely. Next came the
woodchucks. They were very destructive with us, chewing the bark above
the protectors as well as the roots. Trapping is the most successful
method we have found, and by keeping a half dozen traps out all the time
we held them in check. Eternal vigilance must be the motto of the
successful orchardist.
In the year 1913 we picked our first crop of apples, that is, in
sufficient quantity to be considered in a commercial way. Our Duchess we
sold in barrels at $2.00 net. Wealthy we packed in bushel boxes, making
two sizes, the larger, three inches and over, we called No. 1, and they
sold for $1.25 per box net. The balance or smaller ones were also sold
in boxes and brought us $1.00 per box net. Patten Greenings brought us
80 cents and Northwestern Greenings, 90 cents per box. Our neighbors,
who sold to the local and transient buyers in bulk and in barrels,
received 75 cents to 90 cents per hundred pounds, or $2.00 per barrel.
The past year we had only about 75 bushels of all kinds. With the
exception of Duchess and possibly Patten's Greening we shall certainly
sell our next crop in bushel boxes.
We are top-working about 50 Patten's Greening to Jonathan, Delicious,
McIntosh Red and King David. As the work was only started a year ago
last spring I cannot tell you of its success or failure. So far the best
results seem to be with the Jonathan.
We also have about thirty varieties of plums, including many of Prof.
Hansen's new hybrids. Of these the Opata seems to be the most hardy and
prolific, but it is subject to brown rot, which, this past year was so
bad that we lost more than half the fruit. We have it top-worked on
several varieties of native plums, and it was similarly affected there
also. This was the only variety in our orchard of 150 trees that was so
affected. We have fifteen Surprise plums, set seven years, that have not
yielded altogether a peck of plums. Only lack of time kept me from
grubbing them out last spring. This past season they were so heavily
loaded that we had to prop the limbs and then thin out the fruit.
We endeavor to spray all our trees twice with commercial lime-sulphur
and arsenate of lead--the first time immediately after the blossoms
fall, the second two weeks later. Our spraying outfit consists of a
Morrill & Morley hand pump, fitted in a 100-gallon tank, which we
mounted on a small, one-horse truck. We operate it with three men, one
to drive and pump and one for each line of hose, spraying two rows of
trees at once. With this outfit we can spray 400 to 500 trees (of the
size of ours) a day.
* * * * *