Stambaugh 63 points, which recalculated using the present constants
would be 62 points, while all the 10 prize winners in the 1929 contest
were awarded more points than 62, the nut taking the tenth prize being
awarded two points more or 64 and the nut taking first prize being
awarded 19 points more or 81, the difference being largely in generally
superior cracking quality of the 1929 nuts.
The highest awards for butternuts, in print and readily referred to, are
in the 1919 report where the butternut taking first prize was awarded 67
points, which after recalculation with present constants would be 65
points, and there were nine prizes awarded this year where the score was
higher than 65.
The shagbark hickories were disappointing, none equalling several of the
best ones reported in the 1919 contest. This is laid to the general poor
quality of the shagbark hickory nuts in 1929. One observing contestant
sent in nuts from the 1928 crop, as well as nuts of the 1929 crop, to
show us how much better they were normally than were those of the 1929
crop, and as a matter of fact the 1928 nuts sent in by him tested out
several points higher than those of the 1929 crop. On the other hand,
other hickories, Carya laciniosa and Carya ovalis, which never before
were awarded prizes in a nut contest, this year came up into the winning
class and we had some large laciniosas of real merit this year, a matter
which is likely to be of great importance, as it is noted in
considerable detail later on.
The chestnuts were few in number, yet some very good nuts were received,
and as most were from trees which had been growing in sections where the
blight has been present for many years, it is believed that they will be
of value in getting a blight resistant chestnut of horticultural merit.
This work now is really under way.
The beechnuts received were but 4 in number and were pretty good
although too small to be of horticultural value. Considerable is noted
later on the likelihood of getting larger beechnuts and a way is
suggested to get them.
Under the headings black walnuts, hickories, chestnuts, butternuts and
beechnuts will be found an abstract of the awards of prizes awarded
each. It is believed that this will be all that there will be time to
present to the convention. The results of each test in detail will be
typed out for printing in the report for it is believed these are of
permanent value. Results of tests on many of the well known nut
varieties will also be given. Some of these appeared in the 1919 report
but owing to the change in the constants necessitated by the discovery
of new and better nuts these figures are somewhat out of date. Some of
these also appeared in the 1927 report but there are serious
typographical errors there and it is believed that it will be of value
to have results of the tests on nuts of the 1929 contest appear in the
1930 report, in connection with tests on well known varieties.
The prizes to be awarded are as follows:
Black Walnuts--10 Prizes--Amount $100.00
Hickories--25 Prizes--Amount $120.00
Butternuts--12 Prizes--Amount $106.00
Chestnuts--11 Prizes--Amount $103.00
Beechnuts--4 Prizes--Amount $ 21.00
________
Total $451.00
That there are more than ten prizes, when there were prizes offered but
for ten, is due to our custom, when two or more nuts receive the same
score and win a prize, to provide an additional prize of equal amount
for each one.
There have yet to be awarded prizes for those chestnuts of the 1929
contest which show high resistance after being inoculated with blight
spores. This cannot be done for two years at least for scions must be
gotten growing and have reached a diameter of 3/8" to 1/2" before this
can be properly done.
The writer intended, when the contest reached the stage just now reached
to endeavor to get a meeting of those members best qualified to pass on
characteristic "quality and flavor of kernel" of those nuts put down by
him as prize winners. This is the only characteristic where personal
opinion has not been replaced by the precise methods, but time did not
permit.
The delay in completing the 1929 contest has been very unsatisfactory.
It has been caused by a combination of circumstances which it is not
believed will occur again. Instead of a contest limited to one nut, as
the 1926 contest was, we had here, as well, butternuts and hickories in
large numbers, the hickories in particular being more numerous than the
black walnuts, and the nuts came in very late, all of which largely
increased the nuts to be gone over and delayed Dr. Deming in the
preliminary examination. The nuts did not reach me till the last of
April, a time when spring work outside was pressing. It takes a person
of some experience before even the weighing methods in force for
measuring quantitatively nut characteristics can be properly done and
while some work was done on the contest practically every day from April
24th on, only about an hour a day could be put on it, and it went so
slowly that after about a month, I set about hiring someone who should
devote his or her time to it. It took about six weeks before someone was
obtained and properly trained, which brought us into July, since which
time the work went on well but the number of nuts was large and I had to
personally pass on the final award, which must be carefully done and
necessarily a good deal of time was taken, far more than anticipated.
The experience of this year's contest has shown me how to better handle
another if it falls to my lot to do so. I would get Dr. Deming to send
in the nuts, which after the preliminary examination, he thought worthy
of carefully testing, instead of waiting till the preliminary
examination of all received had been completed. This would get them
here in the winter when work is light for the man I have here, who is
thoroughly trained for making these tests. Those rejected at first by
Dr. Deming he could go over again later, as is his custom, and possibly
pick out some good ones which did not show up well when first received.
BLACK WALNUTS
The black walnuts sent into the 1926 contest were the best that had been
seen up to that time, yet those received in the 1929 contest are so far
ahead of those as to make us wonder if we shall again find a contest
where the black walnuts received equal those received in 1929.
Most remarkable was the case of Mrs. E. W. Freel of Pleasantville, Iowa,
who sent in black walnuts from four different trees, each one of which
took a prize, No. 1 the first, No. 2 the second, No. 3 the eighth, and
No. 4 the tenth, the first time in the history of the nut contests that
anything approaching this record has occurred. This is also the first
contest where a nut of any other black walnut species than Juglans nigra
has come anywhere near the prize winners.
The score card used in the 1929 contest was the same as that used in the
1926 contest but with the constants recalculated as required because of
nuts received in the meantime which made this necessary.
The prizes awarded are noted below:
Name and Address Species Score Prize Amount
Mrs. E. W. Freel, Pleasantville, Ia., Nut. No. 1 nigra 81 1 $ 50.00
Mrs. E. W. Freel, Pleasantville, Ia., Nut No. 2 nigra 74 2 15.00
Mrs. J. A. Stillman, Mackeys, N. C. nigra 73 3 10.00
Annie M. Wetzel, New Berlin, Pa. nigra 72 4 5.00
John Rohwer, Grundy Center, Ia., The Iowa nigra 71 5 5.00
Mrs. Irwin Haag, New Castle, Ind. nigra 70 6 3.00
Dane Learn, % Harley Learn, Aylmer, Ont.,
R. R. No. 6 nigra 69 7 3.00
Mrs. E. W. Freel, Pleasantville, Ia., Nut No. 3 nigra 68 8 3.00
A. F. Weltner, Point Marion, Pa., R. F. D. 1 nigra 67 9 3.00
Mrs. E. W. Freel, Pleasantville, Ia., Nut No. 4 nigra 64 10 3.00
_______
$100.00
There are some 32 other black walnuts worthy of honorable mention which
were awarded from 55 points to 63 and which it is believed are worthy
of experimental propagation. One of these is from A. E. Grobe, Chico,
Cal., species, hindsii, total award 61 points, which is the only
California black walnut of value sent in to the contests up to this
time.
Nut notable for size were received from:
Mrs. R. F. Frye, Carthage, N. C., R. No. 1, Box 22, Wt, 38.0g, nigra,
score 57.
C. T. Baker, Grandview, Ind., Wt. 31.8g, nigra, score 57.
A. P. Stockman, Lecompte, La., Wt. 36.7g, nigra, score 56.
Nuts notable for cracking quality were received from:
Mrs. E. W. Freel, Pleasantville, Ia., CQC 100%, CQA 67.3%, total 38
points, nigra, 81 points total.
Mrs. J. A. Stillman, Mackeys, N. C., CQC 100%, CQA 65.3%, total 38
points, nigra, 81 points total.
J. U. Gellatly, Gellatly, B. C., Cold Stream No. 14, CQC 100%, CQA
40.0%, total 33 points, nigra, 55 points total.
Annie W. Wetzel, New Berlin, Pa., CQC 100%, CQA 37.8%, total 32 points,
nigra, 72 points total.
A. F. Weltner, Point Marion, Pa., R. F. No. 1, CQC 100%, CQA 38.0%,
total 32 points, nigra, 67 points total.
Mrs. A. Sim, Rodney, Ont., CQC 100%, CQA 39.3%, total 32 points, nigra,
55 points total.
Nut notable for high percentage of kernel:
Ferdinand Huber, Cochrane, Wis., 32.8% 12 points, species nigra, total
award 49 points.
Mrs. E. W. Freel, Pleasantville, Ia., Nut. No. 1, 31.6% 11 points,
species nigra, total award 81 points.
Attractive color of kernel:
While a number were awarded four points out of a possible 5, none of the
black walnuts sent in were especially notable in this respect.
HICKORIES
This is the first lot of hickories that has come in for a contest
conducted by the Association in a number of years. The last contest,
that of 1926, was for black walnuts only. It is true that at the meeting
of the judges who passed on the black walnuts entered in the 1926
contest there were a number of fine hickories shown which had been
received in the contest conducted by the Philadelphia Society for the
Promotion of Agriculture, but so far as the writer is aware we have to
go back to 1919 to reach the last contest at which prizes were awarded
for hickories.
The 1926 contest marked a notable change in the method of awarding
prizes. As noted at some length under black walnuts, that score card was
made simpler, by the judges who passed on the nuts received in the 1926
contest, by awarding points previously given for characteristics that
seemed of less importance to others, so the hickory score card was
carefully gone over to see if a similar change could not be made to
advantage.
As it is believed that hickory nuts will be sold in the shell, as are
pecans, it was not possible to do this to the same extent as with black
walnuts. However, the characteristic "form," which is difficult if not
almost impossible to estimate with any kind of precision, it was thought
for the present at least might be disregarded. Husking quality is
important but it was impossible to properly award points for this
characteristic in a nut contest, because the nuts are husked before
being sent in. The points allowed for excellence in these qualities were
added to others, which gave 10 points to Cracking Quality Absolute
instead of 5, and 25 points to Quality and Flavor of Kernel instead of
20.
It has been generally considered that a nut which is awarded 55 points,
even though it took no prize, was worthy of experimental propagation.
There were 40 hickories in the 1929 contest which were awarded 55 points
or more. Of those actually awarded prizes for a combination of good
qualities, twenty-one in number, thirteen were thought to be shagbarks,
or it might be more exact to state that we had not sufficient evidence
to think them to be otherwise, although some are suspected not to be
pure Carya ovata, four were thought to be Carya Dunbarii (Carya ovata x
laciniosa), two were thought to be Carya ovalis, and two Carya
laciniosa. In this contest the shagbarks showed up poorly, 68 being the
highest score awarded, when from the number of entries one would have
expected the highest to have been awarded 71 points or over. On the
other hand this is the first contest where a prize has been awarded to a
shellbark, Carya laciniosa. Among hickories awarded 54 points or over
were five shellbarks, two of them large ones, one weighing 24.3g, 20 per
lb. and one weighing 27.6g, 17 per lb.
The importance of this will be realized when we consider that, in the
1929 contest, out of 21 prize winning nuts four prizes were awarded to
nuts believed to be Carya Dunbarii (Carya ovata x laciniosa) and there
were two or three others that may prove to be. While natural hickory
hybrids are not particularly rare yet they are far from common. At one
time, while on the levees north of Burlington, Iowa, the number of pecan
x shellbark hybrids seen impressed the writer, yet a careful count
showed these hybrids to be only about 1 hybrid in 100 pure pecans.
Considerable experience in making or attempting to make hickory hybrids
leads the writer to believe that the proportion of hickory hybrids will
be much less than this. If, however, we assume it to be 1 in 100 and the
fact that among this years meritorious nuts hybrids are 4 out of 21 or 1
out of 5, we would calculate that the chances of getting meritorious
nuts out of hybrids is about 20 times as great as out of pure species.
We really have not sufficient data at present to attempt to make such
calculations yet the glimpse they give us of the promise of wonderful
results from the systematic production of hybrid varieties between
selected parents is most alluring.
The number of prizes awarded to Carya Dunbarii (Carya ovata x laciniosa)
shows a line of work of particular promise. We have plenty of good
shagbarks, Carya ovata, and now that he have really good shellbarks,
Carya laciniosa, of large size, fair cracking quality and good flavor
which we never had before, we have selected material for the production
of shagbark x shellbark hybrids, a class which has produced the Weiker
hickory, four of the 1929 contest prize hickories and some other
hickories of merit which have come to the attention of the writer during
the past two or three years. As we have a number of good northern
pecans we have also selected material for the production of pecan x
shellbark hybrids, a class which has produced the McAllister pecan. If
the 1929 contest does nothing more than to bring to light these fine
shellbarks it is worth all it cost.
The contest also has shown some mockernuts of large size and better
quality than ordinary but still not good enough to be in a class with
the shellbarks noted above. The number of years that we have been
testing hickories without getting good shellbarks leads us to hope that
we will eventually get good mockernuts.
The prize winning hickories are noted below:
Name and Address Species Points Prize Amount
Mrs. C. Lake, New Haven, Ind. ovata 68 1 $25.00
Ferdinand Huber, Cochrane, Wis. ovata 67 2 15.00
John D. Bontrager, Middlebury, Ind. ovata 65 3 10.00
John Roddy, Napoleon, Ohio Dunbarii ? 64 4 5.00
Steve Green, Battle Creek, Mich. ovalis ? 63 5 5.00
[A]Mrs. Hamill Goheen, Pennsylvania
Furnace, Pa. Dunbarii ? 62 6 3.00
Menno Zurcher Nut No. 1, Apple Creek, Ohio ovata 62 6 3.00
Edgar Fluhr, Kiel, Wis. ovata 61 7 3.00
[A]Elmer T. Sande, Story City, Ia. Dunbarii ? 61 7 3.00
N. E. Comings, Amherst, Mass. ovata 60 8 3.00
Edward Renggenberg, Madison, Wis. ovata 60 8 3.00
C. D. Wright, Nut No. 1, Sumner, Mo. laciniosa 60 8 3.00
Mrs. John Brooks, Ottumwa, Ia. ovata 59 9 3.00
Arlie W. Froman, Bacon, Ind. ovata 59 9 3.00
[A]Mrs. C. E. Hagen, GuttenBerg, Clay
Co., Ia. Dunbarii ? 59 9 3.00
L. S. Huff, White Pigeon, Mich. ovalis ? 59 9 3.00
J. K. Seaver, Harvard, Ill. ovata 59 9 3.00
Joseph Sobelewski, Norwich, Conn. ovata 59 9 3.00
Caleb Sprunger, Berne, Ind. laciniosa 59 9 3.00
Grace Peschke, Ripon, Wis. ovata 58 10 3.00
John Muriel Thomas, Henryville, Ind. ovata 58 10 3.00
[A] Means that these varieties were known to the Association before
the 1929 contest.
There are nearly as many others which came within two or three points of
being prize winners and which it is believed should be propagated
experimentally. These will be noted on the complete report. There are
also the following which are notable for unusual excellence in one
characteristic and which it is believed should be propagated
experimentally and are here given honorable mention.
George S. Homan, Easton, Mo., laciniosa large, Wt. 24.3g, 56 H. M. 3.00
Mrs. E. W. Freel, Pleasantville, Ia., Shellbark, No. 1, laciniosa
large, Wt. 27.6g, 54 H. M. 3.00
W. P. Ritchey, Marietta, Tex., alba large, Wt. 25.7g, 44 H. M. 3.00
J. Droska, Pierce City, Mo., alba large, Wt. 23.7g, 39 H. M. 3.00
_______
$120.00
BUTTERNUTS
The last contest where prizes were offered for butternuts was that of
1919 and no nuts of value were entered. The 1929 contest has a number of
unusually good ones.
The score card for butternuts was revised for this contest on the basis
of the one adopted for the black walnut in the 1926 contest and the
constants recalculated.
The prizes awarded are noted below:
L. K. Irvine, Menominee, Wis. cinerea 83 1 $ 50.00
H. J. Thill, Bloomer, Wis., Box 109 cinerea 78 2 15.00
C. F. Hostetter, Bird-In-Hand, Pa. cinerea 75 3 10.00
John F. Kenworthy, Rockton, Wis. cinerea 74 4 5.00
F. E. Devan, Rock Creek, Ohio cinerea 73 5 5.00
E. J. Lingle, Pittsfield, Pa. cinerea 70 6 3.00
John Hergert, St. Peter, Minn., Nut No. 1 cinerea 69 7 3.00
Evert E. Van Der Poppen, Hamilton, Mich. cinerea 66 8 3.00
Mrs. A. B. Simonson, Mondove, Wis. cinerea 66 8 3.00
Mrs. E. Sherman, Montague City, Mass. cinerea 64 9 3.00
W. A. Creitz, Cambridge City, Ind. Bixbyi ? 64 9 3.00
Mrs. Abbie C. Bliss, Bradford, Vt. Nut No. 1 cinerea 61 10 3.00
At first it might be thought that but one species of nuts would be sent
in as butternuts, and this was true up to 15 or 20 years ago. The chance
hybrids of the Japan walnut and the butternut, named Juglans Bixbyi by
Prof. C. S. Sargent of the Arnold Arboretum, resemble the butternut so
much that as time grows on it is increasingly probable that these will
be sent in as butternuts. One came in to the 1919 contest and it is
thought that the Creitz of this contest may possibly be such.
CHESTNUTS
The chestnuts received were relatively few in number but most of them
were from sections where the blight had been present many years. Those
that were from sections where this condition did not prevail were not
allowed to enter. There were a few American chestnuts, some very good
ones, from sections where the blight had not destroyed the native
chestnut but these were not entered. As it happened all entered were of
Japanese or Chinese species, which was somewhat of a disappointment to
those who hope that a blight resistant American chestnut will yet be
found. It certainly looks so far as if varieties of chestnuts for the
blight area, of horticultural value, would be Japanese, Castanea
crenata, or Chinese, Castanea mollissima.
The chestnuts were judged early and scions sent for in order to get a
start on the second part of the chestnut problem, that of testing the
resistance of these seemingly resistant varieties to the chestnut
blight. The scions received were disappointing in quality and
disappointing in the extent to which they were gotten started this year.
The writer set scions on Chinese (mollissima) stock, Mr. Hershey set
them on American (dentata) stock and the U. S. Dept. of Agriculture set
them on Japanese (crenata) stock, but owing to the poor scions only part
of them are growing. The writer got eight varieties out of twelve to
start but it is questionable how they will do, for mollissima stock is
thought to be good only for mollissima varieties and the varieties were
all crenata, and so, while a start has been made on the problem of
getting blight resistant chestnuts of horticultural value it is only a
start and much work remains to be done.
The prizes awarded were as follows:
Name and Address Species Points Prize Amount
Frank B. Austin, Milford, Del. crenata 70 1 $50.00
C. Warren Swayne, West Grove, Pa. crenata 66 2 15.00
Charles V. Stein, Manheim, Pa.,
R. F. D. No. 1, Nut No. 1 crenata 61 3 10.00
Dr. W. C. Deming, Hartford, Conn. Mollissima 61 [A] -----
Charles V. Stein, Manheim, Pa.,
R. F. D. No. 1, Nut No. 2 crenata 59 4 5.00
Helen W. Smith, Linden Lodge, Stamford, Conn. crenata 54 5 5.00
May Cline, Route 2, Belvidere Rd.,
Phillipsburg, N. J., Nut No. 2 crenata 53 6 3.00
May Cline, Route 2, Belvidere Rd.,
Phillipsburg, N. J., Nut No. 1 crenata 51 7 3.00
Howard A. Folk, Brielle, N. J. crenata 51 7 3.00
W. Russell Parker, Box No. 2, Little
Silver, N. J. crenata 47 8 3.00
Ralph P. Atkinson, Setauket, N. Y. crenata 46 9 3.00
Victor Page, Elmsford, N. Y. crenata 41 10 3.00
Frank Atler, Edison, Pa. crenata 40 11 3.00
[A] Not entered in contest.
BEECHNUTS
Never before, so far as the writer is aware, has there been a score card
proposed for beechnuts, but the need of one is apparent and the
following is suggested till a better one is found. It is not doubted
that one will appear, for our present score cards for hickories,
walnuts, etc., are the result of changes made as nuts received in the
contests have shown such to be advisable, and work on the beechnut is 10
years or so behind that on other nuts.
Size is the most important characteristic in the beechnut, for all are
thin shelled and practically all are well flavored. If we had a beechnut
the size of a chestnut we should have a most valuable addition to our
nuts. The points awarded for size have therefore been on the basis that
eventually we would get a beechnut the size of a chestnut, although we
are very far from that now. Forty points are allowed for size and it is
figured that eventually we will get a beechnut 4 grams in weight which
is the weight of a medium size chestnut. The constants used in figuring
the number to be awarded for other characteristics require little
comment for they are figured on the basis of existing nuts as constants
have hitherto been calculated. The suggested score card is as follows:
Weight 40 points
Color of shell 5 points
Percent of kernel 15 points
Ease of removing pellicle 15 points
Quality and flavor of kernel 25 points
Total 100 points
The details and methods used in judging beechnuts this year, also the
calculations of the constants and the details of the awards, will be
typed for the report.
The prizes awarded were as follows:
Mrs. John M. Pepaw, Johnson, Vt. grandiflora 40 1 $10.00
Mrs. George Marshey, Johnson Vt. grandiflora 39 2 5.00
James Radle, Harbor Springs, Mich. grandiflora 38 3 3.00
Anthony Andreson, Burke, N. Y. grandiflora 35 4 3.00
Fagus sylvatica sylvatica 44 [A] -----
Fagus sylvatica purpurea sylvatica 41 [A] -----
______
$21.00
[A] Not entered in the contest
It is not believed that nuts of Fagus sylvatica (European beech) will
test out better, generally, than nuts of Fagus grandiflora (American
beech) but the beechnuts were not tested till late, and the European
beechnuts had been kept in a refrigerator, while the American beechnuts
had not, which very likely may have been the cause for better retaining
both the flavor and pellicle-removing quality, which made these nuts
receive more points for these characteristics and so be awarded more
points than the first four.
The meager results in getting beechnuts large enough to be of
horticultural value in this contest, as well as in previous contests,
and the failures of considerable effort on the part of the writer
independently to locate large beechnuts, have caused him to put much
thought on the matter and to have come to the conclusion that the search
should be conducted in Europe as well as here, for the following
reasons:
The beech in Europe is much more esteemed as a valuable tree than here,
largely because of its value for fuel.
It has for many years, if not for centuries, been a tree that has been
largely planted in those forests, state and private, which have been
managed on the basis of sustained production, and it is not doubted that
the men in charge are more familiar with the beech trees in the forests
under their jurisdiction than is the case in America.
The European beech has shown the most amazing variation in color, size
and shape of leaves, color of bark, and habits of growth, which have
been perpetuated by grafting as ornamental varieties, and it seems
likely that there are equal variations in the nuts which only remain to
be discovered.
In short, while there may be no more large fruited beeches in Europe
than here, it is believed that the chances of finding them are better.
ATTENDANCE RECORD