Full text of "Pennsylvania State Horticultural Association news"

See other formats

Title: Pennsylvania State Horticultural Association news, v. 9

Place of Publication: State College, Pa.

Master Negative Storage Number: MNS# PSt SNPaAg096.2

P4f

Penni

^tiia "State

Horticultutaf ^As^gciStion News

Vol. IX

State CoOegeJPai.'March, 1932

No.l

Proceedings of the
State Horticultural Association

of Pennsylvania
for 1932

C V,

Seventy-third Annual Meeting
Held in Harrisburg, January 19-21

THE PLACE TO BUY YOUR
SPRAY MATERIALS » » »

Twenty years in the Insecticide business. We manufacture
and distribute a complete line, as follows :

**Hy-Grade" Lime-Sulphur Solution

**Hy-Grade" New Process Oil— 90% Paraffine Oil ,^ ^ ^ ,

10% Special Soap (no water) Recommended by U. b. Oovt.
Entomologists

Sunoco Spray

Nicotine Sulphate, 40% and 50% Nicotine. We specialize hi this

material. Special price
Paradichlorobenzene (Peach Borer Destroyer)
Sulphurs (all grades)
Wettable Sulphur (for Summer spray)
Jersey Dry Mix (for Summer spray)
Koppers Flotation Sulphur (for Summer spray)
Arsenate of Lead
Calcium Arsenate
Bordeaux Mixture
Casein Spreader

Copper Sulphate (Blue Stone) all grades

Lime, high Calcium, especially fine for spraying purposes, approved
Oxo Bordeaux

SULPHATE AND COPPER DUSTS (all standard formulas)

For Peaches, Apples, Potatoes, Vegetable Crops, etc.

Cyanamid, carrying 22% Nitrogen; exclusive representatives-
reduced price

Natural Chilean Nitrate (Champion Brand)— largest distributors

— reduced price

Carload lots direct from Eastern Ports; less carload from Hagerstown
Before purchasing elsewhere, get our prices

HAGERSTOWN SPRAY MATERIAL CO.

fHagerstown Sulphur Worksl
Hagerstown, Md.

SOUTHERN CHEMICAL CO.

Winchester, Va.

Pennsylvania State
Horticultural Association News

Published by the Association
Issued Quarterly at State Collese, Pa. Subscription, 50e

Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office at State Coliese, Pa.

Vol. IX

State College, Pa., 0\iarch, 1932

No.l

Proceedings of the
State Horticultural Association

of Pennsylvania
for 1932

Seventy-third Annual Meeting
Held in Harrisburg, January 19-21

THE PLACE TO BUY YOUR
SPRAY MATERIALS

» » »

Twenty years in the Insecticide business. We manufacture
and distribute a complete line, as follows:

•*Hy-Grade" Lime-Sulphur Solution

**Hy-Grade" New Process OU— 90% Paraffine OU ^^ « ^ -*

10% Special Soap (no water) Recommended by U. S. Oovt.
Entomologists

Sunoco Spray ^, , ^,

Nicotine Sulphate, 40% and 50% Nicothie. We specialize in this

material. Special price
Paradichlorobenzene (Peach Borer Destroyer)
Sulphurs (all grades)
Wettable Sulphur (for Summer spray)
Jersey Dry Mix (for Summer spray)
Roppers Flotation Sulphur (for Summer spray)
Arsenate of Lead
Calcium Arsenate
Bordeaux Mixture
Casein Spreader

Copper Sulphate (Blue Stone) all grades

Lime, high Calcium, especially fine for spraying purposes, approved
Oxo Bordeaux

SULPHATE AND COPPER DUSTS (all standard formulas)

For Peaches, Apples, Potatoes, Vegetable Crops, etc.

Cyanamid, carrying 22% Nitrogen; exclusive representatives-
reduced price

Natural Chilean Nitrate (Champion Brand)— largest distributors

— reduced price

Carload lots direct from Eastern Ports; less carload from Hagerstown
Before purchasing elsewhere, get our prices

HAGERSTOWN SPRAY MATERIAL CO.

{Hagerstown Sulphur Works]
Hagerstown^ Md.

SOUTHERN CHEMICAL CO.

Winchester, Va.

Pennsylvania State
Horticultural Association News

Published by the Association
Issued Quarterly at State Collese, Pa. Subscription, 50c

■ Entered as second-class matter at the Post Office at State Collese, Pa.

Vol. IX

State College, Pa., SMarch, 1932

No.l

Proceedings of the
State Horticultural Association

of Pennsylvania
for 1932

Seventy-third Annual Meeting
Held in Harrisburg, January 19-21

FOR EVERY AGRICULTURAL

PURPOSE
A SPRAY OR DUST

Green Cross Lead Arsenate

Gives greatest deposit over 9
other competing brands of
LEAD ARSENATE,

Facts shown in recent research conducted
by Washington State Experiment Station.

Exhaustive Wash. State Test Shows 'WCkS'' in Lead

50 55 (.0 fvS 70 75 .^) ^5 W 95 100

6 LUCAS I

Why not have the BEST- - it costs no more!

INSECTICIDES FUNGICIDES

Vineland, New Jersey

Philadelphia Boston New York

Pittsburgh . Chicago

State Horticultural oAssociation

of Pennsylvania

Proceedings of the State Horticultural
Association of Pennsylvania for 1932

OFFICERS FOR 1932

President R- T. Criswell, Chambersburg

Vice President 1^- G. Reiter, Mars

Secretary R. H, Sudds, State College

Treasurer <^- B. Snyder, Ephrata

Executive Committee: The above officers and C. J. Tyson, Gardners;
Sheldon Funk, Boyertown; and H. F. Hershey, Hamburg.

STANDING COMMITTEES

Legislation and Representatives on Agricultural Council: C. J.

Tyson, Gardners, Ch.; H. S. Nolt, Columbia; W. W. Livingood, Robesonia.

State Farm Products Show and Exhibition: H. S. Nolt, Columbia,
Ch.; J. L. Mecartney, State College; Paul Thayer, Carlisle.

Insect Pests: T. L. Guyton, Harrisburg, Ch.; H. N. Worthley, State
College; H. E. Hodgkiss, State College.

Plant Diseases: H. W. Thurston, State College, Ch.; R. S. Kirby, State
College; K. W. Lauer, Harrisburg.

Game Laws: J. A. Runk, Huntingdon, Ch.; F. E. Griest, Flora Dale;
T. L. Guyton, Harrisburg.

True-To-Name Trees: F. N. Fagan, State College, Ch.; F. M. Trimble,
Harrisburg; G. L. Baugher, Aspers.

SPECIAL COMMITTEES

Peach Rates: Sheldon Funk, Boyertown, Ch.; C. E. Raffensberger,
Biglerville; H. W. Skinner, Chambersburg; S. E. Linde, Orefield.

Inspection Rates: Paul Thayer, Carlisle, Ch.; M. A. Slade, Biglerville;
H. A. Shank, Lancaster; E. A. Meyer, Biglerville; E. A. Nicodemus, Waynes-
boro.

Shenandoah-Cumberland Four State: R. T. Criswell, Chambersburg^
Ch.; E. A. Nicodemus, Waynesboro; C. E. Raffensperger, Biglerville; G. A.
Stuart, Harrisburg.

— 4 —

PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS

R. T. Criswell, Chambersburg, Franklin County

When this Association convened in this room a year ago, there
was some concern about what the coming year had in store for us.
There was some anxiety over business and financial conditions.
But who among us had any thought that the year 1931 would
be as disastrous in a business way as it has been?

In 1930 the drought caused fruit growers and other farmers
enormous losses. A large crop in 1931, for the most part of
high quaUty fruit, has been disposed of or will be disposed of at
either an actual loss or practically no profit in many instances,
although compared to other lines of farming the fruit industry
has been less unprofitable. Compared to other sections of the
country, Pennsylvania probably was hit as hard as any other
state in the marketing of its peaches but it is faring better in
the disposition of its apples than most other states. Compared
to manufacturing enterprises, retail stores, and other businesses,
the fruit industry in Pennsylvania has probably been better
during the past year than the bulk of them. We should, there-
fore, be encouraged to stem the tide of adversity, feeling con-
fident when this depression has run its course and the necessary
financial readjustments have been made, that we shall find
our business again on a profitable basis. Whether in adverse
or prosperous times the production of fruit and vegetables in
Pennsylvania is economically sound and we should confidently
expect that they will be profitable over a period of years, what-
ever adversities we may go through in a particular season.

Our present difficulties have been brought about largely by
our own follies. Surely when the wheels of industry stop by
reason of production being in advance of current needs we
might conceivably have a gleeful holiday and make merry over
leisure while we were still enjoying the fruits of our past industry
did we but manage properly. With our facilities for production
it is possibly entirely practicable for us to so arrange our affairs
that we could still enjoy prosperity when we can lay aside our
tools. The problem of how to accomplish this is one for all of
us to think about and work upon.

— 5 —

SECRETARY'S REPORT

R. H. Sudds, State College, Centre County

Our meeting place this year is again in the South Office
Building, and from the indications of the 1931 Farm Show we
have not been unwise, after all, in taking this room. The Show
Building last year was and still is not altogether i^al as a meet-
ing placi; it is not accessible under the present traffic conditions.
We also think there will be fewer interruptions here, so we are

back in the same place. , , , i . ^ i • i

Our memberships have fallen off shghtly, but not alarmingly.
Last year we had 805 members, whereas this year there are
763— not a very great drop, after all. M. A. Moore, Lititz,
wins the new membership prize.

In regard to our financial condition, you will see from the
report of our Treasurer, Mr. Snyder, that we are in very good
shape. While the revenue may be lower this year, we are,
nevertheless, in sound condition.

Concerning pubUcations, I promised you last year that we
would have bigger and better ones; this has been fulfalled.
I had hoped to expand our pubUcations during 1932 so that you
would get it every two months. But, in view of the advertising
situation— you know commercial concerns have been pretty well
affected by the financial conditions— it has been necessary to
postpone that for perhaps a year or so. Our news letters are
carried mostly by the advertising in them, and it is necessary
to have advertising so that we can pubUsh such a large number
of pages. In regard to advertising, be sure, when you write to
advertisers in our pubUcations, that you mention haying seen
the ad in the Pennsylvania State Horticultural Association pub-
lication. The advertisers like to know if they are getting some
return for the ten dollars per page which they spend.

I have been unable to coUect advertising bil s for last year s
program and proceedings from R. W. Doebler TurbotviUe;
this advertiser is indebted to the Association to the amount ot

$20

I have written him about it repeatedly, but I can^t get an
answer— why, I don't know. There is nothing wrong with his

advertising material. i j i. oi. x r« n

In 1933 the famous experimental orchard at fetate college,
planted by J. P. Stewart, wiU be 25 years old. There wiU be
several celebrations held there at that time; the nature and
extent of these is not yet settled. At least one of these attairs
should be held there by this Association. Progress announce-
ments wiU be made from time to time. ,_ . , i u

Mr CrisweU did not teU you, in his report, that he has been
very active, attending at his own expense various fruit meetings
at Washington and New York. He is also working on freight
rates for export apples that go from this state to seaports, and
he will also attend a future meeting in regard to the quarantines
and embargoes on foreign plant products.

— 6 —

TREASURER'S REPORT, 1932

G. B. Snyder, Ephrata, Lancaster County

Receipts
1931

Jan. 22 Cash balance on hand $ 58.24

Jan. 22 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 76.00

Jan. 23 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 235.25

Jan. 23 Wm. J. Noll, membership 3.00

Feb. 12 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 143.25

Mar. 4 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 224.00

Mar. 21 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 121.00

May 9 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 123.30

May 9 D. M. Wertz, refund of premium 6.25

July 6 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 66.00

Oct. 5 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 46.00

Oct. 20 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 52.00

Oct. 26 Interest on $500 Liberty Bond 21.25

Oct. 26 Interest on two $100 Apartment Bonds 12.00

Oct. 26 Interest on $100 Certificate in Bank 4.00

Nov. 14 D. M. James, for B. S. Flora adv 2.00

Nov. 10 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 13.00

Nov. 11 Titus Nursery Company 10.00

1932

Jan. 7 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 32.50

Jan. 12 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 46.00

Jan. 14 R. H. Sudds, memberships and adv 40.00

$1335.04

Disbursements
1931

Jan. 26 Mary E. Bowmaster, expense to Harrisburg

meeting $ 15.80

Jan. 29 E. C. Auchter, expenses to Harrisburg meeting 11.66

Jan. 31 C. H. Gould, expenses to Harrisburg meeting 35.62

Feb. 7 J. R. Magness, expenses to Harrisburg meeting .... 13.49

Feb. 11 Dunmire Printing Co., Printing 10.29

Feb. 18 Mary E. Bowmaster, stenographic services 70.00

Feb. 21 Dunmire Printing Co., Post cards for dues notices 10.65

Feb. 25 Dunmire Printing Co., Printing Proceedings 465.50

Apr. 23 Dunmire Printing Co., 500 stamped envelopes 13.96

June 4 Dunmire Printing Co., 2000 Envelopes for News

Letters.. 16.00

June 25 Mary E. Bowmaster, Stenographic service 7.00

June 25 Dunmire Printing Co., Printing News Letters 108.00

July 6 F. G. Jacoby, Treasurer's bond premium 7.50

July 23 R. H. Sudds, Expense to Apple Grade Conference,

Washington, D. C 27.08

Sept. 8 Mae Corson, Stenographic services 3.00

Oct. 5 Dunmire Printing Co., Printing News Letter 126.00

Oct. 19 Dunmire Printing Co., Bill and Letter heads 13.45

Oct. 21 Dunmire Printing Co., Printing 13.96

Oct. 26 Mae Corson, Stenographic service 2.00

Dec. 16 Oskamp Nol ting Co., 1 loving cup_ 15.46

Dec. 17 Dunmire Printing Co., Envelopes for 1932 Program 5.75

Dec. 19 Mary E. Bowmaster, Stenographic service 20.00

1,012.17
1932

Jan. 19 Cash balance in bank .•. 322.87

$1,335.04

— 7 —

Two $100.00 Mortgage Bonds $ 200.00

One Liberty Bond 500.00

One Bank Certificate 100.00

Cash Balance «5J2.»7

$1,122.87

We, the undersigned auditing committee, have duly examined the accounts
of C. B. Snyder and found them correct as stated above.

W. W. LiviNGOOD, Chairman
Rev. I. M. Lau
M. E. Johnston

REPORT OF THE INSECT PEST COMMITTEE

"Like the poor, the bugs are always with us; sometimes it is
one or two kinds, but more often it is quite a collection of msect
species", says the program. This sentence pretty well sum-
marizes the insect condition as it occurs in the orchards of the
state year after year. There are certain old timers that seeni
to persist and hold their numbers; in spite of the combmed
efforts of orchardists and entomologists, they continue each
year to take a toll from our profits Not only is the loss occa-
sioned by the poor grade of fruit produced, but a much heavier
loss is incurred by the cost of spray appUcations in material
and labor. As a whole, 1931 was not especially unusual in the
amount of damage caused by insects, although certain species
did considerable damage in restricted localities. Because of the
closeness of money, many orchardists were forced to omit certain
important orchard practices and thus leave their orchards open
to a heavier loss than usual.

The information as to the occurrence and damage caused by
the horticultural insects has been furnished by the various
agencies with which the members of this committee are asso-
ciated. Professor Hodgkiss has furnished a very complete report
for the greater part of the state. This record cannot be given
in all its detail, but it will serve as a basis of all that is to follow.
Fifty species are recorded as doing damage to horticultural
crops, thirty-two of which were found in apple. The rosy
aphis, green aphis, codhng moth, red spider, San Jose scale,
scurfy scale, oyster shell scale, tree hoppers (several species),
tent caterpillars and fall webworms are rather general over a
large part of the state, and caused damage in certain locaUties.

The apple and thorn skeletonizer, an insect fairly new to this
country, was found doing considerable damage in Forest and
Crawford Counties. As implied by the name, the larvae of this
moth skeletonize the leaf of the apple, sometimes completely
browning the leaves of the tree. Round-headed apple tree
borers, flat-headed apple tree borers and certain bark beetles
were found locally through the state and caused considerable

— 8--

damage. The bark beetles tend to follow in orchards which
have suffered from lack of fertilizer or water, and in the areas
where the drought was severe in 1930 will likely continue to
cause loss. The pistol case bearer appeared in several orchards
in different parts of the state and caused severe loss in spite of
attempts at control. The cigar case bearer was evident in the
northeastern counties. A general infestation of the canker worm
occurred through the western counties. However, they were not
as numerous as in 1930, and did not cause as much defohation
as in previous years.

The plum curcuho which we all remember so well in 19^0 and
which gave promise of being a major pest this year, did not
occur in large numbers except in a few restricted localities m
the northeastern counties; its cousin, the apple curcuho, was
reported as occurring locally and much less in number than it
has in the last five years.

The codhng moth,— one of the old offenders and a pest which
seems to be always with us and ever ready to jump right in and
cause a great loss if we for one moment hesitate in our spray
appUcations or try to economize by picking out only such trees
as may give promise of a crop, — was present in 1931, living up
to its reputation. The reports coming to the committee indi-
cate that this insect was present in force all over the state, and
that it was severe in certain commercial orchards, including parts
of Frankhn, Adams, York, and Cumberland Counties, causing
as much as fifty per cent wormy fruit in a few instances. Al-
though we have talked about this insect for years and have felt
at times as though we knew something about its control, it still
stands out as the major pest in the apple orchard. Reports
from all parts of the state show that the number overwintering
in the orchard is about one-half that of this time last year.
This should not be interpreted to mean that we are to let up
in any way in our fight to control this insect. Along with these,
certain leaf rollers were general in the western and northwestern
counties. The red-banded leaf roller and a few similar species
did very considerable damage in the central and eastern counties
in September and October.

Another old timer which has lain more or less inactive for
some time, although it has been known to occur each year in
restricted localities, is the ^^railroad worm'' or apple niaggot.
It is reported as severe in Luzerne, Wyoming, Bradford, North-
ampton and parts of Cumberland and York Counties. Im-
portance of controlUng this insect is of special interest to those
growers who are interested in the export trade, particularly to
England. Some of our growers experienced inconvenience this
past season in having their fruit returned to them after it had
been sold for export trade due to government inspectors finding
the maggot.

The leaf blister mite occurred in a scattering infestation over
the state, not occasioning any great loss in any particular
locality.

_9 —

Leaf hoppers of one species or another occurred in outbreak
proportions in the southeastern apple growing section. The num-
bers became quite abundant in the later part of the growing season.

An interesting new insect has come to our attention many
times the past season. It is one of the giant hornets which has
been introduced into this country recently. It is now found in
certain localities east and north of the Susquehanna River;
recently it has been reported from State College. This insect
has rather peculiar habits and is probably most often noticed in
its habit of gnawing off the bark of certain trees. Outstanding
of these are the smaller twigs of lilac. The females are equipped
with a stinger which is quite fierce in its proportions and just
as efficient as it looks. The committee would hesitate to say
that this would some time become a major pest, but it may
cause considerable damage to nurseries and to young trees in
the orchards.

Of the two red bugs, the one we entomologists call MaUnus,
assumed outbreak proportions in the northeastern counties and
was generally abundant in several localities. Its cousin, Mendax,
was comparatively scarce all over the state.

Certain stink bugs were found feeding on the fruit of apple
and peach in Beaver, Lawrence, Fayette, and Erie Counties.
In the east, the Japanese beetle did very considerable damage
to the early ripening apples in the Philadelphia area.

In the nuseries, the San Jose scale continues to be the major
pest of the apple stock. In the western half for instance, one-
half of the nurseries inspected had rather severe outbreaks of
this insect. In the eastern nurseries, the apple tree borer did
some damage and certain other borers were responsible for heavy
losses to other fruit and ornamental stock. The San Jose scale
not only increased in nurseries but also in orchards. We said
something like this last year in our report, but we believe there
was more marking of fruit due to this scale this year than there
has been in Pennsylvania the past ten or fifteen years. We
attribute this entirely to faulty spray applications.

A late survey of the orchards in the southeastern part of the
state shows an unusual number of aphids and red spider eggs
on the trees. This may point to a severe outbreak of these
pests in 1932.

Peach Orchards. — Reports from all over the state indicate
that in general the plum curculio was less important this year
than it has been for some time, although certain local outbreaks
were reported from the eastern part of the state. The peach
lecanium scale was very abundant in the central and southern
counties. This is another insect which will multiply at an
alarming rate if complete spraying is not practiced. Peach tree
borers were found to be severe all over the state in untreated
orchards. These borers also did considerable damage in the
nurseries to small trees. Certain bark beetles of the shot-hole
borer variety were found in orchards in low vitality due to the
drought of the preceding year.

— 10 —

YOU

v/vr

"A CLEAN FRUIT CROP

AND

A GOOD TREE LEFT"

The days of desperate remedies are gone.

No longer does the doctor dress the babies' cuts with Iodine.

No longer do they dip sheep in carbolic acid.

And today the best fruit growers use

NIAGARA KOLOFORM

Many times more toxic than ordinary sulphur sprays.
Burning and russetting reduced to the minimum.
No Abrasion to cut pumps and valves.
Easy to mix and easy to apply.

The man that uses Koloform will tell you that he gets a clean
fruit crop and has a good tree left.

NI AG \RA KOLODUST

Now that orchardists are actually dusting in the rain,
when control emergencies arise, they are realizing that
the use of Kolodust is a climax in economy and the only

really safe material they can use. ^

NIAGARA COPODUSTS

There is a lot of difference between Niagara Copodust and
ordinary copper lime dusts. A noted plant pathologist
once said that only about 20% of the so-called Mono-
hydrated Copper Sulphate (Dry Copper) on the market
was fit to use. Name sent on request.

Niagara Copodust are made from the very best dried copper
(not burnt copper) and they are also treated with a material to
make a greater percentage of colloidal copper and stronger
Bordeaux membranes.

Ask for a demonstration

NIAGARA SPRAYER & CHEMICAL CO., Inc.

MIDDLEPORT, N. Y.

— 11 —

Reports on the Oriental fruit moth indicate that in all the
areas except in the northwest, the insect did about one-half the
damage in 1931 as it did in 1930. Counts of fruit grown near
Harrisburg gave an average of nearly fifteen per cent wormy
fruit in the varieties up to and including the Elberta. There
was about twice this amount in varieties ripening later. Some
injury to apples was reported for this species.

The mite which caused the silvering of the peach leaves was
generally abundant throughout the state and caused consider-
able damage. These mites are rather small and difficult to see,
and seem to be on the increase in their severity. In the Phila-
delphia area, the Japanese beetle occurred in sufficient numbers
to cause damage to the early fruit.

Pear Orchards. — Green aphids, codhng moths, pear slugs,
and pear Psylla were general wherever pears were grown in the
state. The slugs caused complete browning of the leaves on
unsprayed trees in many cases. Round-headed borers, bark
beetles, blister mites and the pear midge were also abundant
in certain restricted localities. Curculio and San Jose scale were
not reported as doing a great damage in any of the commercial
pear orchards. The red spider and plant bugs caused concern
to some growers.

Cherry Orchards. — There was a general outbreak of aphids,
and reports came in from all over the state of the damage caused
by this insect. Weather conditions and parasites are the con-
trolling factors determining the abundance of this species. By
the middle of summer, the parasites were on the job and many
colonies were completely killed out.

The leaf slugs were present and defoUated many unsprayed
trees. Both the peach tree borer and certain bark beetles were
present in some localities. The cherry maggot was very scarce,
and only a few reports were received of damage by this insect.
Webworms appeared to be unusually numerous this season, and
fed very extensively on unsprayed cherry foliage.

Grapes. — The usual grape insects were present in the vine-
yards. In unsprayed vineyards the grape berry moth caused a
heavy loss. There was a general outbreak of the leaf hopper
throughout the state, and it was especially heavy this year in
the eastern part. In the early part of the year, the grape flea
beetle occurred abundantly in the eastern counties. Cane galls
and Phylloxera were local and reported occasionally. The
Japanese beetle caused trouble to local grape plantings in the
Philadelphia district and probably will cause a great deal of
concern when once it is established in large numbers in the grape-
growing districts of the state.

To Summarize: The horticultural interests of the state
suffered from the attack of several insects in 1931. Codling
moth and San Jose scale took a heavy toll in poorly sprayed
orchards. San Jose scale was the major pest of fruit nursery
stock. The plum curculio was not present in the large numbers
expected at this time last year. The Oriental fruit moth for

— 12 —

the most part, was about one-half as numerous as m 1930.
Certain leaf feeders such as the pear slug, cherry slug and web-
worms were present in numbers, and caused severe defoliation

in unsprayed orchards. ix r xu • • 4. « +

As has been stated, this report is the result of the joint effort
of your committee and the men associated with it.

T. L. Guyton, Chairman.

H. N. Worthley.

H. E. Hodgkiss.

CONTROL OF CEDAR APPLE RUST BY THE
ERADICATION OF RED CEDARS

K. W. Lauer, Bureau of Plant Industry, Harrisburg,

Dauphin County

The Bureau of Plant Industry of the Pennsylvania Depart-
ment of Agriculture has been active during the past two years
in protecting apple orchards from cedar apple rust. This disease
is known among pathologists as an alternate host disease m
that it passes a part of its life on each of two different plants
before it completes its life cycle. The hosts or carriers of cedar
apple rust are the common red cedar and certain varieties ot
apples. The fungus passes back and forth regularly from one
host to the other spending the summer on the apple where it
does the greatest amount of damage.

When red cedar trees are numerous in the vicinity ot an apple
orchard the damage caused by the disease is frequently so severe
that it ruins the apple crop entirely. Severely infested orchards
often show the foUage so badly damaged that the trees appear
at a distance to be almost as brown as though the leaves were
badly scorched. The disease is known to have been so severe
in several instances that it completely defohated the trees by
August These trees put out a new set of leaves the same year
but were unable to survive the rigors of the following winter.
Any reduction in the normal healthy leaf tissue not only hinders
the development of the fruit but also the growth of the tree.

An interesting fact of this disease is that certain varieties are
very susceptible to the disease while others are highly resistant.
A few of the susceptible varieties are York, Jonathan, Wealthy,
Rome, Smokehouse, Ben Davis, and Grimes; Stayman, Dehcious,
Baldwin and Northern Spy are resistant to leaf injury but
susceptible to fruit infection. It appears that most of our
common varieties are susceptible to either leaf or fruit infection
and in several cases to both. R. S. Kirby reports both Summer
and Winter Rambo and Smokehouse as being very susceptible
to fruit infection. He also found the Delicious, Rome, Golden
DeUcious, York, Paragon, Stayman, Northern Spy, Mcintosh,
Wealthy, Winter Banana, and Yellow Transparent as being
subject to fruit infection.

The department of agriculture is interested in protecting
orchards from cedar apple rust by having the red cedars in the

— 13 —

immediate vicinity of the orchard removed. Removal of such
trees can usually be brought about through the cooperation of
the orchard owner and the neighboring cedar tree owners with
the department. Orchard owners whose trees are suffering
damage from this disease should get in touch with this depart-
ment. Under an amendment of 1929 to the Plant Pest Act,
the department is authorized to compensate cedar owners for
the loss of any cedar trees removed at the direction of the depart-
ment to protect apple orchards from the cedar apple rust fungus.

During 1930 and 1931, 60,242 red cedar trees were removed
as a protection to ten different orchards containing 17,244 apple
trees. These orchards were located in Adams and Franklin
Counties. The cedar trees removed belonged to sixty-four
farmers who were paid a total of $1,469.88 for the loss of their
trees. Cedar trees removed under this plan remain the property
of the owner. The cost of removing cedar trees over this two-
year period averaged $.0852 per apple tree protected or less
than nine cents per tree. In one year the increased returns to
the grower would be paid many times over even though his
infection before the cedars were removed was less than 5 per
cent.

A REPORT OF FURTHER EXPERIMENTS WITH

CHEMICALLY-TREATED BANDS FOR

CODLING MOTH CONTROL

H. N. Worthley, State College, Centre County

Records of codUng moth catch in bait pails show a great
scarcity of adult codUng moths in August of 1931 as compared
with the same month in 1930. In consequence, the late pene-
tration of larvae into the fruit which was of such great concern
in 1930, was almost absent in 1931, and the natural population
of hibernating larvae is much lower now in most orchards than
it was a year ago. However, many orchards contained such
large numbers of moths of the overwintering generation of
1930-31 that damage was severe, and the codUng moth popula-
tion in many plantings still remains at a dangerous level. For
instance, a hasty survey in October of 1931 in five commercial
orchards in the Biglerville section revealed an average of 83%
injured fruit, 21% wormy fruit, and 34 worms per hundred
apples. Barring the operation of natural agencies, the writer
feels that in these orchards and doubtless in many others, a
reasonable spraying schedule must be temporarily supplemented
with other artificial means of kiUing the codling moth, before
the infestation will be reduced to the point where spraying alone
can be depended upon to produce satisfactory results.

— 14 —

Treated bands very effective in 1930.— As a measure to
supplement spraying in heavy codling moth infestations, the
use of chemically-treated bands for trapping and killing cocoon-
ing larvae has seemed to offer much promise. The Proceedings
of the State Horticultural Association of Pennsylvania for 1931
contain an account of the work of the Pennsylvania Experiment
Station with chemically-treated bands in 1930. The results
reported at that time were of a preUminary nature, being based
on an early examination of one-sixth of the total number of
bands employed. In order to complete the record, and to
indicate the final effect of the bands on larvae wintering in
them, table 1 has been prepared.

Table 1. — chemically-treated bands for codling moth control

State College, Pa., 1930-1931

Bands Tested

No.

8
8

Total
larvae
caught

No. Moths
Emerged

Per Cent
Moth Control

Type

Summer
1930

Spring
1931

Summer
1930

Spring
1931

Beta-naphthol red en-
gine oil aluminum
stearate double-dip-
ped

8360

9221

4562
2129

6
315

6
1057

99.7

99.3
99.1

100.0

Beta-naphthol red en-
gine oil double dip-
ped

99.9

Beta-naphthol red en-
gine oil (commercial)
Untreated

99.7

The percentages of moth control given in Table 1 are based
on a comparison of the percentage of moth emergence from the
treated bands with that from the untreated bands. All the
bands employed were almost completely effective in preventing
the emergence of moths.

Types of bands tested in 1931.— The trials of 1930 were so
encouraging that this phase of our codUng moth experimental
program was enlarged in 1931. Five different types of band were
obtained from E. H. Siegler of the Federal Bureau of Entolomogy.
These were supplied in widths of four, three and two inches.
The bands manufactured in Pennsylvania under the ''Govern-
ment formula'' developed by Siegler were tested, as were two
types of band manufactured in Indiana under formulae developed
at the Indiana Agricultural Experiment Station. A report
having been received that the use of tar oil winter wash for scale
and aphis control had shown results against hibernating codling
moth larvae led us to try bands soaked in this material. Table 2
explains the constitution of these various bands, and gives the
designations by which they will be reported in this paper.

— 15 —

Table 2. — types of codling moth band tebted-1931
All bands of single-faced corrugated strawboard

Gov't No. 1 Single-dipped, 4", 3", 2" width
Gov't No. 2 Double-dipped, 4'', 3", 2" width
Gov't No. 3 Single-dipped, 4", 3", 2" width,

0.5 oz. aluminum stearate added
Gov't No. 4 Double-dipped in roll, 3", 2" width
Gov't No. 5 Single-dipped in roll, 3", 2'' width
Penna. (Comm'l) Double-dipped m roll, 4", 2" width . ,

Above bands treated with 1 lb. beta-naphthol dissolved in 1.5 pints red

• ••j

Indiana Beta. Single-dipped in roll, 4" width

Indiana Alpha. Single-dipped in roll, M' width,

1 cake para wax added
Beta—betanaphthol / 1 lb. in 1.5 pints

Alpha— alphanaphthylamine \ diamond paratfin oil ... ^ , ,

Tar Oil. A commercial winter wash. 2" bands soaked in undiluted wash

The effectiveness of the bands and the abiUty of bands of the
various widths to trap the larvae were tested on a total of two
hundred thirty trees located in three different orchards, namely;
the experimental block of the department of zoology and
entomology at State College, the orchard o/ F^ed Greist at
Floradale in Adams County, and the orchard of E. A. Nicodemus
at Waynesboro in FrankUn County. The bands were examined
(without disturbing) at intervals throughout the season when
protruding dead larvae, pupae, and empty pupal skms were
picked off and recorded. They were removed from the trees
in November, at which time all dead individuals found between
the band and the tree were recorded. They were then kept
in the screened insectary at State College until late December,
when they were torn apart for the completion of the record.
Sound living larvae from the various types of band have been
allowed to spin new cocoons in untreated strawboard. Moth
emergence records will be obtained from these in the sprmg.

Wide bands versus narrow bands— Some demand has
been created, particularly in the middle west, for a four-inch
band, the claim being made that longer, darker tunnel afforded
causes more larvae to remain within the shelter of the wide band.
In order to test this point, and following a suggestion made by
Siegler, bands of the same treatment, but of different widths
were compared in the following manner.

The tree-trunk to be banded was measured with a piece ot
cord, which was then doubled to determine half the circum-
ference of the trunk. A piece of wide band was cut to this
measure and fastened to the east half of the trunk, and a similar
piece of narrow band to the west half of the trunk, the ends of
the two bands meeting on a north and south Une. The next
tree in the series had the wide band to the west and narrow
band to the east, and so on until the series was completed.

By this means it was thought to avoid errors due to any
uneven load of fruit in different portions of the tree, and any
possible tendency on the part of the larvae to seek shelter on

— 16 —

<>^

the more protected side of the trunk. A catch of larvae no
greater in one half-band than in the other (a 50-50 ratio) would
indicate that band-width was not an important matter. The
size of the difference in numbers of larvae caught in the two
halves would be a measure of their relative attractiveness to the
cocooning larvae.

One hundred sixteen trees were banded for these comparisons.
In few cases did the wide half catch more than sixty percent of the
total larvae trapped. In one case the narrow half caught fifty-
six percent, leaving forty-four percent for the wide band. Within
these limits the various combinations tested showed consider-
able variation, with the narrow half in the lead on some trees,
and the wide half on others. A summary of the results at State
College is given in table 3.

Table 3. — catch of codling moth larvae in paired half-bands of

different widths

State College, Pa., 1931

Total larvae Larvae per linear inch of band

Type of band per tree 4" half 2" half

Gov't No. 1 255 5.8 4.6

349 7.8 8.0

Gov't No. 2 310 ' 7.5 5.9

226 7.3 3.8

Gov't No. 3 316 7.6 4.6

432 9.3 5.8

Penna 235 4.0 5.3

94 2.8 1.5

Untreated 83 3.0 0.7

94 1.8 1.1

Average 5.7 4.1

Per cent of total (4" vs. 2") 58 . 1 41.9

Per cent of total {M' vs. 2-2^0 54^ 45^6

In the ten trials reported in table 3, the narrow half-band
led by a narrow margin in two cases. The average of all trials
showed a 58-42 ratio in favor of the wide band. Similar tabu-
lation of the results obtained at Floradale gave a 53-47 ratio,
while at Waynesboro the ratio was 47-53, the narrow half in
the lead. Trials with four-inch versus three inch, and three-
inch versus two-inch bands, were even less conclusive, and will
not be reported.

In examining the records for hints regarding the reasons for
the variations noted above, it was soon noticed that the number
of larvae trapped by the bands was different in the different
orchards, and that the more larvae trapped, the greater the
preference for the wide band. To make this point clear, table 4
has been prepared.

Of the three records given in table 4, only that obtained at
State College appears to show any real preference on the part
of the larvae for the four-inch band. Here there were over two
hundred larvae per band, while at Floradale and Waynesboro
there were less than one hundred larvae per band. The record

— 17 —

strongly suggests that it is not the greater darkness of the four-
inch tunnelfbut the fact that more larvae can get into it without
crowding, that determines the superiority of the wide band.

Table 4 —codling moth population determines need for wide bands

4" vs. 2" bands, 1931 ^^^^^^

% in Ave. larvae % wormy
Locality wide half per band fruit ^^^^^ Notes

State College 58.1 239.4 73.1 ^^^^''^^'''^ ^'^-

Last 2 sprays omitted;

Floradale ... 53.3 84.2 20.0 light crop, trees

t ioraaaie_ «^^ well-scraped.

Well-sprayed ; big trees

Waynesboro 47.2 45.0 9.5 ^l^J^.^^^l

moved in July

The kind of single-faced corrugated strawboard employed in
making codling moth bands contains thirty-six holes per toot
When apphed to the tree-trunk seventy-two tunnels per toot
are provided. However, the most effective bands kill larvae
before they have time to spin cocoon to obstruct the tunnel,
and after death they shrivel and dry up. One live arya and
four or five dead ones have been taken from a single tunnel.
The writer does not recall finding more than three cocoons in
the same two-inch tunnel, so that narrow bands treated with a
slow-acting material would accommodate fewer larvae than ttie
same width of band impregnated with a mixture that will kill
the larvae before they spin up. With bands treated with the
Government formula it is doubtful if wide bands will be neces-
sary unless two hundred larvae per foot of band are ex-
pected. It might be mentioned that on the five well scraped
trees reported last year as catching 96% of all the larvae on the
trees the larvae were present at the rate of one hundred eigtity-
six per foot of two inch band.

Where larger numbers of larvae are expected, a second two-
inch band placed beside the first should be about as effective as
a single band of four-inch width, as indicated in the comparison
given at the bottom of Table 3. ^^ \r ^ ^•4.

How good are the different materials tested?— Mortality
records from the half-band series of treatments were kept, and
were supplemented by similar records from an additional one
hundred fourteen trees on which whole bands of the ditterent
types were used. The results were not greatly different in the
different localities, so they have been combined, and are pre-
sented in table 5. , , ,,^ i. r

Insofar as the bands prepared under the ^'Government tor-
mula'^ are concerned, results in 1931 check closely with those
obtained in 1930. The addition of aluminum stearate to the
formula (Govt. No. 3) and double-dipping (Govt. Nos 2 and 4
and Penna.) increased the effectiveness of the bands. At b lora-

— 18 —

\>i

dale and Waynesboro Govt, bands 2 and 4 were torn apart in
November, so that a width comparison could be sent to Mr.
Siegler. At this time a high percentage of larval control was
not evident. At State College late in December Govt, band
No. 2 showed 98.1 percent control of larvae.

Table 5. — effectiveness oi
All widths

' TREATED BANDS, 1931

All localities

Type of band

Total

larvae

trapped

Summer-
Moths
emerged
No. %

-1931
Moth
Control

Mid- winter —

Living

larvae

No. %

1931-32
Control of
larvae

% •

Govt. No. 1

.- 3235

0.49

98.1

719

29.8

61.5

Govt. No. 2

.. 2368

0.21

99.2

324

18.3

77.0*

Govt. No. 3

.. 2733

0.14

99.4

154

7.6

90.4

Govt. No. 4

.. 1336

0.07

99.7

141

14.1

82.3*

Govt. No. 5

.. 1323

0.54

97.9

248

25.1

68.7

Penna

.. 5595

0.34

98.7

726

17.4

78.1

Indiana Alpha...

.. 3235

0.67

97.4

979

41.4

48.0

Indiana Beta

.. 3025

101

3.30

87.0

1396

61.4

23.0

Tar Oil

885

2.03

88.1

541

81.9

0.0

Untreated

563

143

25.39

335

79.7

•Examined in
Januarv.

November. Other bands examined in late December and

In the prevention of mid-summer moth emergence alphanaph-
thylamine in the Indiana formula gave results approximately
equal to the single-dipped ''Government formula^ ^ bands, but
the Indiana Beta band did not approach the others in effective-
ness. In addition, the Indiana bands seemed to lose strength
as the season advanced and contained many living larvae at the
time of the final examination. Tar oil as used gave unsatisfac-
tory results.

Amount of material in band influences eifectiveness. —

In the preparation of bands, the corrugated strawboard is run
through a hot bath of the chemical dissolved in oil, or a roll of the
strawboard is dipped in the bath. Upon cooling, the chemical
crystallizes out. In bands prepared under the ''Government
formula*' a greasy mixture of oil and chemical incases the whole
band. This layer is built even thicker by running or dipping the
bands again (double-dipping). In the Indiana bands, doubtless
due to the less viscous oil used, and to its later evaporation, no
greasy layer is in evidence. The bands appear to have soaked
up the oil, leaving a powdery coating of crystals on the surface.
This makes them lighter and easier to handle than the bands
treated with red engine oil.

— 19 —

When it was discovered that the Indiana bands had not main-
tained their effectiveness, it was thought that this fact might be
accounted for by the amount of the chemical mixture deposited
fn the bands "Accordingly measured lengths of various four-
iSch bands were weighed, in duplicate, and compared with the
weight of untreated strawboard. The results are given in table 6.

Table 6— amount of chemicals in treated bands.

Type of band Weight-Grams Grams chemical

•' ^ per foot per looi

Govt. No. 4, 4" 63.0 44 2

Govt. No. 3, 4" »»1 32 4

Govt. No. 1,4" f-^ 26.4

Penna., 4' ... |§ f 3.3

Indiana Alpha, 4" f^- ^

Untreated, 4".- '^'^ :^:^

Granting that a uniform grade of strawboard was used in all
baS, the^ight-hand column in table 6 g>ves a '•ough ^^ea «
the weight of chemicals deposited per foot of band. The fagures
are rubfect to some error due to the fact that the lengths used
were remnants, and had lost some of the coating in handling
Unfortunately, no Indiana Beta band was available. This loss
seemed greatest in the most heavily treated bands. 1 he Fenn
syrania^and is double-dipped, and prepared according o the
Government formula. Its lower weight is doubtless due to the
type oHed engine oil used. That in the Government bands in
1931 S called Niantic oil, and evidently gave the heavier coat
ing Efficiency of the bands seems to be determined by the
amountof the chemicals deposited in them. The results seem
rS ate that the extra expenditure for the heavier coating^ is
not iustified by the small increase in the control of mid-summer
moths afforded. However, only 65% of the normal amount o^
rain fell at State College in the period from July 1 through
November 30, so that the bands can be said to have si^ered
onlv 65% of the normal amount of weathering With normal or
exlsfve weathering, and the possibility of a partial th^^^^^
hrood of codling moth such as occurred in the southern part 01
Se state In l5, the bands used should offer the most promise
of maintaining their efficiency throughout the season

Do all the worms on the tree get into the band?— In the
report last year figures were given to show that ninetj-six per-
ppnt of all larvae were taken under the bands. Ihis seemea
eLonaWe, since cage experiments in New Jersey have shown
over ninety percent of the moths emerging from under the
?Jugh bark of the trunk. However, in Indiana, reports state
that "more than half and sometimes as many as 80 Percent
of the larvae can be trapped. In view of this wide variation
eight of the banded trees at Greist's were examined carefully
during the summer for pupal skins, and were gone over very
thoroughly in November, at the time the bands were removed.

— 20 —

In all, 530 individuals were removed from the eight trees, of
which 388, or 73.2 percent, were in the bands. The favorite
cocooning places outside the bands seemed to be the narrow
crotches that could not be scraped clean, and pruning scars and
cankers among the upper branches, together with bark scales on
the trunk and main branches that had not been removed, or had
loosened up after the scraping, which was done in June. All
these shelters were more abundant at Floradale than at State
College. Apparently the thoroughness with which other favor-
able hibernating places can be removed from the trees will
determine to a large extent the proportion of the total population
trapped by the bands. With a highly effective band, control of
the moth population of an orchard will vary from 70 to 95
percent, depending upon the smoothness of the trees.

What is the place of treated bands in the codling moth
control program? — The decision to use chemically-treated
bands in addition to spraying and packing house sanitation
rests, of course, with the individual grower, and should be
based on a thorough knowledge of the codhng moth situation
in his own plantings. The experience of the Experiment Station
with the codling moth and with the practice of banding, may
justify the following suggestions.

First — determine the amount of wormy fruit. If this does not
run to fifteen per cent or more of the crop, banding is not likely
to catch enough worms to justify the expense (See table 4).
Banding should not be considered for young, smooth-barked
trees, but only for trees large enough to have rough, scaly bark.

Second — re-examine past spraying operations to determine
how these may be improved from the standpoint of timeliness,
thoroughness, and use of proper materials. If the best job
possible has been done to no avail in cleaning up the codling
moth, banding may be considered. It should be understood,
however, that chief reliance must be placed on spraying, and that
bands are a supplement, to aid in the reduction of heavy infesta-
tions.

Third — if '^plague spots'^ such as packing sheds, storage
cellars, and cider mills, exist in the orchard, and have compli-
cated the problem of codling moth control, consider the advis-
ability of banding fifteen or more rows about such spots.

If banding is decided upon, the course of economy would
suggest a 2-inch band applied in June, and a second 2-inch
band to be placed above the other in August, if the numbers of
larvae present are large. Trees may be prepared for banding at
any time before June. Be careful and thorough in removing
every possible flake of loose bark. If many hibernating larvae
are found, catch the scrapings on a sheet, and gather and burn
them. In June apply the bands snugly about the trunks, corru-
gated side against the bark.

The cost of banding. — No extensive figures relating to the
expense incident to the banding of trees are available. At
Floradale the tree-trunks averaged nearly four feet in circumfer-

— 21 —

ence Two hundred fifty trees required one 1000 foot roll of
band, and took one man eighty-one hours to scrape. Placing
bands on two-hundred fifty well shaped trunks of this size
should be less than a day's work for two men. On this basis the
total cost for banding in a similar orchard should not exceed
five dollars per acre.

SOME TESTS OF SPRAY MATERIALS AGAINST SAN
JOSE SCALE AT THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE COLLEGE

H. N. Worthley, State College, Centre County

During the fall of 1931, while making fruit counts in con-
nection with codling moth control experiments in Franklin and
Adam Counties, the writer was surprised to find considerab e
amounts of scale-marked fruit in various widely-scattered apple
orchards. The situation, while not serious, seemed threatening,
and led to a decision to bring the matter to the attention of this

^"^Habits and Injury.— In early fall scales in all stages of
development will be found on the bark of limbs and twigs,
and if numerous, on the fruit. Winter temperatures kill the
older and younger scales, those about one-third grown remaining
ahve These continue growth in the spring, becoming mature
at about apple-blossom time. Two forms of scales may be seen
The female scale is nearly circular, 1/12 inch in diameter, with
a raised nipple at the center, while the male scale is oval, l/^&
inch long, with a nipple near the larger end. These ash-grey
scales cover and protect the living insects beneath. 1 he adult
males are tiny, two-winged yellow flies. These seek out the
plump, sac-like yellow females, which remain beneath the scale
covers, and which after mating, produce living young over a
period of about a month. The young scale insects are like tiny
yellow lice. They crawl about for a time and then settle down
to feed. At the first molt the females lose eyes, legs and feelers,
becoming mere yellow sacs fastened to the tree by their thread-
like mouth-parts. The successive molted skins mixed with a
waxy secretion, form the protecting scale.

There arc probably four complete generations of scales pro-
duced each year in Pennsylvania, and each maturing female in
the spring will, under favorable conditions, have progeny num-
bering millions by fall. The pumping of sap by all these tiny
beaks is a great drain on the trees. As late as 1922, during an
outbreak of San Jose scale in Illinois, one thousand acres of
mature apple trees were killed outright. Infested fruit ha^ a
mottled appearance, due to a red area about each scale. Ihe
scales are most abundant about the stem and calyx ends ol the

ControL— Lime sulphur, 1.03 specific gravity (dormant
strength) has been the standard remedy for San Jose scale for

— 22 —

c. p. o.

■^i^T

(Trade Mark Reg. U. S. Patent Office)

SAVES TWO-THIRDS NICOTINE COST

The efficiency of C. P. O. is demonstrated by the repeat orders received
each year. ^

FRUIT GROWERS

Use 6 pounds C. P. O. SOLID 1/3 pint BLACK LEAF 50

100 gallons WATER

to control ROSY and GREEN APPLE APHIS, also LEAFHOPPER on
Apples, Pears, Grapes and many other fruits. This spray costs about 1 cent
a gallon.

VEGETABLE GROWERS

To control plant lice and many other insects attacking vegetables, such
as Potatoes, Turnips, Radishes, use the above formula. A special formula,
containing C. P. O., controls the Harlequin Cabbage Bug (Terrapin or Lincoln
Bug) without the addition of any insecticide.

NURSERYMEN

Use C. P. O. as a spreader and activator for nicotine to control JUNIPER
SCALE, EVONYMUS SCALE, PINE NEEDLE SCALE, RHODODEN-
DRON LACE BUG, RED SPIDER and most other soft-bodied sucking
insects.

PRICE LIST

C. p. O. SOLID C. P. O. LIQUID

450-lb. barrels $45.00 55-gallon drums $44.00

250-lb. half-barrels 27.50 30-gallon drums 27.00

100-lb. kegs 12.00 10-gallon drums 10.00

(F. O. B. Philadelphia, Containers Included)

Manufactured only by

Crystal Soap and Chemical Co., Inc.

6300 STATE ROAD, PHILADELPHIA, PENNA.

Ask us about COLLOIDAL CRESYLIC ACID, the improved Cresylic
Acid used in delayed dormant sprays to control Aphis and Red Mite by
destroying the over-wintering eggs.

— 23

years. Outbreaks due to neglect, and calling for drastic action
have resulted in the use of dormant spray oils which, when
Drooerly applied at 2 percent or more of actual oil have given as
Tod or\eUer control than lime sulphur With oils as we as
lime sulphur, only those insects hit by the spray will be killed,
so thorough application must be the rule. ^^^ to the enormous
reproductive powers of this insect, a very high kill is demanded
in the dormant or delayed dormant spray. i^ ^f iu^

In most discussions of scale control no mention is made of the
effect of materials used in the foliage sprays in killing the crawhng
and newly-settled young. That the summer apphcations may
be verv important in scale control will be shown.

Expertaients with dormant sprays.-In 1931 single rows
of badly-infested mature apple trees were sprayed with a series
of dormant and delayed dormant combination sprays. Count
trees of Grimes and Stark were selected, and the percentage of
living scales was determined by the examination of two thousand
scales on two and three year old wood both before and after treat-
ment. The results appear in Table 1.

Table I.^control of san jose bcale in delayed dormant application

State College, Pa., 1931

Row

Treatment

3
4

Lime sulphur, 1.03..-
Lead arsenate, 3 lbs.,
nicotine sul., 1 pint...

% Live Scales

Before

Diamond parafl&n oil, 4 gals, in^l
Bordeaux, 8-8-100 /

"Dendrol" spray oil, 4 gals.|
with Bordeaux substitute f

"4840" spray oil, 4 gals, with^
flotation sulphur, 20 lbs J

Diamond paraffin oil, 4 gals.—]
blood alb. emul. Lime sulphur,
1.008

15
6

Check-rows 1-5, Grimes.

Tar oil winter wash, 5 gals.— \
dormant I

Check-row 6, Stark.

50.3

36.6

45.1
54.1

47.8

47.7
51.5

52.2

After

Per Cent
Reduction

4.35

0.00

2.90
2.05

3.50

48.6
7.29

47.1

91.4

100.0

93.6
96.2

92.7

0.0

85.8

9.8

The spray combinations used were prepared as follows:

Row 1. The standard delayed dormant spray. , , . ,
Row 2. Two pounds of copper sulphate were dissolved m two
gallons of water, and the solution stirred into four gallons of
raw oil. In another container two pounds of quicklime were

— 24 —

^•>.

slaked in two gallons of water. The two mixtures were com-
bined with stirring, pumped over twice with a bucket-pump,
and added to a 6-6-100 Bordeaux mixture in the spray tank.

Row 3. The Bordeaux substitute (a copper-lime mixture
thought to be less injurious to fruit than Bordeaux) was run
through the strainer into about ten gallons of water in the tank,
with the agitator running. Four gallons of ''Dendrol" miscible
oil were added, with water to make one hundred gallons.

Row 4. Twenty pounds of the flotation sulphur paste were
thinned with water, and worked through the strainer into five
gallons of water in the spray tank, with agitation. Four gallons
of the miscible oil were poured in, and water added to cover
the paddles. After about three minutes agitation water was
added to make one hundred gallons.

Row 5. Three ounces of a mixture composed of one part dark
powdered blood albumen and two parts fullers earth was made
into a paste with water and added to five gallons of water in the
tank, agitator running. Four gallons of raw oil were added.
As the tank was filled to one hundred gallons, lime sulphur
concentrate to make 1.008 specific gravity (about 2.5 gallons)

was added.

The sprays above were applied on April 17, with the trees in
a typical delayed dormant stage of development.

Row 6. A commercial tar oil winter wash, five gallons per
hundred, as a straight dormant appUcation on April 8.

None of the oil sprays caused more injury to the buds than the
standard delayed dormant spray used on row 1. Bordeaux
mixture and the Bordeaux substitute as used in the later foUage
applications, caused severe russeting of the fruit.

It appears in Table 1 that the oil sprays as used gave better
control than Ume sulphur, with the exception of tar oil winter
wash. Subsequent to the counts a few living scales were found
in row 2. The scale population was high, some trees being
visibly weakened by the scale attack. The mature trees used
received about eight gallons of spray per tree, with every effort
at thoroughness of appUcation. Ten to twelve gallons per tree
should have been used to insure the highest degree of control.

Experiments with foliage sprays.— The same rows of trees
noted in Table 1 received five foliage apphcations, a different
combination spray being used in each row. All drop fruit
throughout the season, and all picked fruit, from certain count
trees showing a good set, was scored for scale injury. The
results appear in Table 2, as per cent of scale-marked fruit.

It is apparent in Table 2 that the Bordeaux sprays, in which
copper replaced sulphur as the fungicide, allowed San Jose scale
to develop practically unchecked. Many of the fruits in ro>ys
2 and 3 were incrusted with scales at picking time. As shown in
row 4 flotation sulphur was much less effective than lime sulphur
in holding down the scale. The percentage figures are some-
what misleading, however, for in row 4 there were relatively few
scales per apple as compared with rows 2 and 3. That the Ume

— 25 —

Table 2.— effect op foliage bprays on san jose scale

Row

1
2
3

5
6

Materials in 5 foliage sprays

Lime sulphur, 1.008

Lead arsenate, 3 lbs

*Bordeaux, 8-8-100

Lead arsenate, 3 lbs

♦Bordeaux sbustitute

Lead arsenate, 3 lbs

Flotation sulphur, 20-100

Lead arsenate, 3 lbs

Lime sulphur, 1.008—-

Lead arsenate — casein, 3 lbs. ;
Hyd. lime, 3 lbs

As row 1

♦Checks

Grimes

4.6
67.4
83.8
52.5

7.6

80.0

Jona-
than

69.1
75.2

Ben
Hur

3.0
55.4
57.2

Rome

73.8
41.0

York

77.7

41.8

33.7

89.8

sulphur used in row 1 should have produced such a high per-
centage of scale-free fruit is evidence of the beneficial effect of
this material. In row 6, summer strength lime sulphur followed
tar oil winter wash, which failed to control scale in the spring.
Under these conditions it could not be expected to hold the
scale in check. Incidentally, the difference between rows 1 and
2 should convince any grower that his success in hghting ban
Jose scale will not be affected by any failure on the part of his
neighbors to secure control. . ax x

Summary.— In a series of San Jose scale sprays at btate
College in 1931 dormant oils gave better control than winter
strength lime sulphur, while tar oil winter wash failed to kill a
satisfactory percentage of scales. Following a satisfactory dor-
mant kill of scales liquid lime sulphur in the five fohage applica-
tions held scale in check, while flotation sulphur and copper
sprays failed. Following an unsatisfactory dormant kill of scale,
liquid Ume sulphur failed to prevent scale increase. 1 he vast
difference in the amount of scale-marked fruit on adjacent trees
receiving different spray materials is convincing proof that the
individual grower need not fear the effect on his own plantings
of scale infestations in neighboring orchards.

OLD IDEAS OF INSECT CONTROL
IN A NEW SETTING

H. E. Hodgkiss, State College, Centre County.

Insects exert an important influence on man. The attraction
often is irresistible. A natural reaction is to ward off the con-
dition Consequently the occurrence of insects creates an atti-
tude of hate— a desire to destroy them. This warfare progressed
for centuries in a somewhat blind, haphazard fashion. Indi-
vidual attempts to combat invasions of the pests were as a rule
unsuccessful, consequently such experiences led to collective

— 26 —

efforts which were more productive although their greatest
hindrance was the lack of information on the growth and seasonal
activities of the insects. The accumulation of such facts was
slow but the realization of the tremendous problem became the
incentive to organized effort which is a comparatively recent
development. Our knowledge of insect suppression has grown
tremendously during the past three decades. The successful
conduct of most of the battles against fruit insects has won the
confidence and aroused new interest on the part of growers
toward insect control. The intrinsic worth of many of the
repressive measures is now a subject for starting perennial argu-
ments and these are indicative of a healthy condition that has
developed within the industry.

There are two schools of thought with respect to suppressive
practices. One is that economy in insect control is obtained
through the use of a minimum dosage of the insecticide and a
maximum amount of the liquid in the form of a spray to the
tree. The second theory employs maximum dosages and mini-
mum amounts of material per unit concerned. Two phases of
the situation often overlooked in discussing insect suppression
valuations are; (1) that insofar as the insects are concerned the
presence of the pests on a plant is a menace, and (2) that the job
is to remove the menace before it becomes serious enough to
endanger the crop. Costs of insect suppression are relative and
decrease proportionately with the yield. True economy is
obtained by preventing the multiplication of the insect hordes
ordinarily present in an orchard. The precise system to use is
not the objective. Whether the practice is designated right or
whether it is considered to be wrong is an item in the procedure.
The purpose is to obtain control.

The past few years may go down in entomological history as
one of the most turbulent periods in modern fruitgrowing.
These experiences are in accord with the spirit of the times.
The old order of things appeared to be entirely turned aside.
There was a concerted urge for easier means of securing protec-
tion from insects. ^ If the purpose had been what it appeared to
be these efforts would have been worthwhile. The unfortunate
result of this agitation, however, has been to unsettle the con-
fidence which had been developed by years of experimentation
and fortunate experience with insect control practices.

We are beginning to observe the results of these fads in an
increasing difficulty to control particular species of insects in
apple plantings. Now is an appropriate time to stop and take
stock of the present situation. It is not too late to orient our-
selves and try to discover why we are unable to rid the orchards
of insects that for nearly three decades were easily suppressed.

Fifty species of insects were listed during 1931 as attacking
pome and stone fruits and grapes. I have selected three of these
for the purpose of this discussion.

The San Jose Scale. — The San Jose scale was outstanding
in its superabundance particularly in the Cumberland valley,

— 27 —

lower Susquehanna river areas, and in the western tier counties.
The reason for this was not obscure. The long period of com-
parative freedom from scale damage to fruits lulled many
growers into a false sense of security. During recent years these
men neglected the very essence of protection and saug*^* to
gain economy in initial spraying costs by either omitting the
scale strength appUcations of proven insecticides or tailing to
remember that the insect thrives on the newer growth of the
outer and inner branches and in the tops of the trees. The con-
dition in rather restricted areas is so serious at the present time
that important questions are arising as to the effectiveness ot

^"^MStTnsectSdes advocated for the destruction of the San
Jose scale are efficient when they are diluted correctly and if
the trees are covered thoroughly. Where the applications are
incomplete the amount of protection obtained frona the use of any
of these materials is relatively small. Those of us who went
through the period when the whole aspect of fruit production
was changing on account of the tremendous destructiveness of
the San Jose scale reaUze the extent of the reahgnments in apple
growing that took place until effective control measures were
devised The San Jose scale can he controlled. Whether or not
history will repeat itself depends upon the attitude of the individual
grower to this particular problem and the degree of his determination
to suppress the insect.

The Rosy Apple Aphis.— The rosy apple aphis is somewhat
periodical in its abundance and destructiveness. It appears to
build up in numbers during extended periods of dry weather and
under this condition often reaches the proportions known as an
outbreak. On account of its alternation of food plants the
increase varies directly according to the numbers leaving the
summer host and returning to the trees. A rather dry warm
autumn is conducive to the concentration of migrating adults
on the trees with a proportional increase in egg laying individuals
and consequently the numbers of eggs deposited may be large

Eggs of the rosy apple aphis are not ofte'n detected by the
fruit grower although his attention may be directed to an abund-
ance of those of other species deposited on the bud spurs, or on
the succulent growth of terminals, or in the centers of the trees.
Such observations have been responsible for an interest in sup-
pressive measures through appUcations designed as ovicides.
The economy of an ovicide for this purpose was recognized long
before the standard control practice was devised. The results
of experiments on the use of insecticides for egg killing are well
known although perhaps they have escaped the attention ot
many in this audience. It may therefore not be out of place to
call attention to some of the earlier investigations conducted
in the eastern fruit growing area in an attempt to find a suitable

ovicide for this purpose. xu xt v i^

A series of experiments was conducted at ^^^^^^"^ r^^^^^

Agricultural Experiment Station during 1905 and 1906. i here

— 28 —

was a rather high per cent of kill by certain common insecticides.
The outstanding ones were the lime sulphur wash and commer-
cial spraying oils. Field experiments using these substances did
not result in an appreciable reduction of damage and for this
reason further efforts were designed against the young nymphs
at the hatching period. More recently an extensive series of
experiments was conducted in New Jersey and as a result of
these tests the conclusion was reached that the most effective
means of control was through the use of the standard practice.
However, these and later experiments at the New Jersey Experi-
ment Station brought out the fact that one-half of one per cent
cresyUc acid ''running approximately 95 per cent active agent''
when added to an oil emulsion resulted in an appreciable kiUing
of aphid eggs. Within the last two years an emulsified tar
oil has been tried out rather extensively and trees sprayed
with this compound seem to have been relatively free from
aphis attack in early spring. While these products appear
to be efficient the costs are rather high. The range of usefulness
of ovicides seems, therefore, to depend to a large extent on their
availability as substitutes for standard materials in the control
of red spider or the San Jose scale when the buds are dormant.
Further investigations of this phase of the problem are necessary
before definite statements can be made with respect to the values
of these newer materials or their combinations.

A goodly number of growers applied some type of an insecti-
cide as an ovicide at the time of the delayed dormant period of
bud development in 1931. Many of them expected by this
practice to secure control of the rosy aphis, San Jose scale, red
spider and the apple red bugs. On account of the outbreak of
the rosy aphis the practical value of a number of these materials
when used by orchardists was rather easily determined. Since
the opportunity presented itself we collected a considerable
amount of data on infestation conditions. These figures have
been correlated and are presented in this paper in order to give
apple growers a clearer view of the state wide conditions with
respect to suppression valuations. No attempt is made to
discuss the relative merits of the insecticides. Comparisons are
used chiefly to point out some of the reasons for the failures in
insect suppression. The figures are tabulated as averages per
tree.

Approximately 100 orchards were examined in late June or
early in July after the peak of rosy aphis development occurred
on apples and before the injured foUage had dropped. When
the records were analyzed it was found that the materials em-
ployed comprised four different kinds of insecticides. There
were eight brands of spraying oils, two types of sulphur com-
pounds, and three brands of nicotine sulphate (40 per cent
nicotine). These preparations are commonly known to growers
under several commercial brand names. The figures are arranged
in Table 1.

— 29 —

Table 1.— compamsons of materials psep as ovicides or aphicides

|i|^

Time of
Application

Average infestation per tree

1 1

Material

Leaf
Clusters

Fruit
Clusters

Fruits
Injured

Termi-
nals

L. S.—
Nicotine .—

Del. Dor.

No.
32.9

No.
25.3

No.
52.8

No.
20.6

Oil

Del. Dor.

1628.4

1348.6

3487.5

400.4

Calcium
Sulphide .-

Del. Dor.

3864

2493.7

7452 . 2

434.3

Sodium
Sulphide . ..

Del. Dor.

5909

1874.6

7082 . 7

373.7

Codling Moth Suppression.— The carry-over of codling
moth larvae due to the tremendous outbreak during the summer
of 1930 created infestations which many apple growers were
unable to suppress. Fortunately the second brood apparently
was of small importance although adults emerged in large
numbers during the first week in August. Five pojson sprays
were suggested last year. The first was at the petal fall, i tie
fifth was early in August. Fewer growers applied the full com-
plement of sprays than at any time during the last four years.
Consequently the losses in blemished fruits caused by these
failures were considerable. Some growers left off essentia
sprays and these men experienced losses directly proportional
to the degree of importance of the spray omitted. Other nien
apparently were able to omit the final cover spray if the earlier
applications had been timely and were thoroughly applied.

Spraying Information.— In order to gauge the correctness
of the spraying information annual counts are made in a number
of orchards at harvest. These as a whole represent a fair cross-
section of the insect conditions in the state. The orchards are
selected at random and this year some 300 places were visited at
harvest. These records were separated into three groupings and
the figures computed on that basis indicate that the average loss
was, in completely sprayed orchards, 4.5 per cent; in partly or
poorly sprayed plantings 15.7 per cent; in unsprayed orchards
67.1 per cent.

THE RELATION OF OLD IDEAS TO NEWER METHODS

OF INSECT CONTROL

In connecting the data for 1929 and 1930, we sensed that
there was developing in the minds of a considerable number of
apple growers a doubt as to the need for strict attention to the
fundamental principles of insect control. Counts made during
1931 showed that this attitude had a practical bearing on failures
to secure reasonable control of particular species such as codling

— 30 —

moth, the apple red bugs and the rosy aphis. The survey of
orchard conditions was made at critical periods in the develop-
ment of fruit injuries and on account of the superabundance of
the codUng moth and rosy aphis we have selected the figures
related to these species as a basis for comparisons of insect sup-
pression practices.

The Selection of Insecticides. — In a number of orchards
direct comparisons were obtained of insecticides used for the
rosy aphis. The owners are reputed to use great care with
respect to timing, mixing and applying sprays. The demon-
strations, therefore, are indicative of the maximum benefit
which may be expected from the insecticides. The data has
been arranged and charted for the convenience of this discussion.
Table 2 includes comparisons of lime sulphur with or without
nicotine in combination, and unsprayed trees.

Table 2. — comparisons of insecticides used as aphicides

Material

Time of
Application

Conditions with respect to rosy

aphis

Orch.

Leaf
Clusters

Fruit
Clusters

Fruits
Injured

Terminals

No.

L. S.—

Nicotine
None

Early Del.
Dormant

No.

20
224

No.

104
434

No.

269
504

No.

Unsprayed

203

L. S.—

Nicotine
L. S.

Del. Dor

2
767

2599

160.5

L. S.—

Nicotine
L. S.

Late

539
1307

269
1185

269
2370

447

Del. Dor

342.5

Table 3. — comparisons of insecticides as aphicides

Material

Time of
Application

Conditions with res

jpect to rosy

' aphis

Orch.

Leaf
Clusters

Fruit
Clusters

Fruits
Injured

Terminals

No.
4

Oil
None

Del. Dor

No.

8104
5723

No.

2700
1849

No.

8130
5547

No.
234

Unsprayed

131

Oil

Oil L. S.

Dormant

874.5
1229

1966.5
2274.5

2805

9588.5

198

Del. Dor

558

Oil L. S.
Oil-
Nicotine

Del. Dor

1229
64

2274.5
. 34.5

9588.5
23

558

Del. Dor

Oil
Oil

Del. Dor

Del. Dor. and
Pink

4616.2
272.7

2077.4
260.5

12641.2
1180.5

985.6
243.6

— 31

h *

\l^

Comparisons of spraying oil with and without either hme
sulpffsolution or nicotine, and unsprayed trees were made in
offer orchards. In order to avoid confusion in evaluating the
treatments these figures have been arranged in a separate chart,

'^ The^standard poison for codling moth is arsenate of lead
There are a number of commercial brands of this material
which are being used by apple growers in Pennsylvania. Each
Sd is reputed to exhibit a greater effectiveness against codling
mSth thaS any of the other compounds. Recent investigations
Tthe Washington Experiment Station indicate that there are
differences in the condition of the deposits on fruits and that
oE factors such as coverage and weathering are important
and require equal consideration. No essential differences in
control were found between any of the brands tested

Spreaders or modifiers are often used with arsenate of lead
to reduce burning of the foliage and fruits in extremely hot
weather Such materials should not be applied in early summer
unless growers are prepared to clean the fruit at harvest.

Timing of Applications.— The proper timing of sprays in
relation to the efficiency of insecticides has received much a ten-
tion in past seasons and since this factor entered into the analyses
of the practices it has been considered a P^Per subject for your
consideration. The most of the orchards visited were treated
either with one material or with a combined spray. I" ^any ot
them the times at which the insecticides were applied differed
soSwhat and the counts disclosed rather interesting differences
n suppression. In Table 4 the lime sulphur was used in the
proportions recommended for the respective periods and nicotine
sulphate (40 per cent nicotine) was added at the rate of 1 pint
in 100 gallons of the dilute lime sulphur.

lAB

Material

Time of
Application

Conditions with respect to rosy

1 1

aphis

Treat.

Leaf
Clusters

Fruit
Clusters

Fruits
Injured

Terminals

No.
1

L. S.—
Nicotine

Early Del. Dor.

No.
302.5

No.
1750

No.
6212.5

No.
187.5

L. S.—
Nicotine

Del. Dor

67.2

L. S.—
Nicotine

T^ate
Del. Dor

447

418

2432

142.5

L. S.—
Nicotine

Pink

1273.5

933

5598

381

L. S.—
Nicotine

Calyx

2205.8

1901.8

7690.2

458

> 'J

— 32 —

— 33 —

7Bw»w*i^r«'

Table 5 is a comparison of spraying oils ^PP^f^ according to
the recommendations of the compounder at different periods
either wHh ov without a fungicide. Nicotine was used as a
follo"p spmy with lime sulphur as the fungicide in most
instances.

Table 5.-comparisons of the timing of sprays for the rosy apple aphis

Conditions with respect to rosy aphis

Treat.

No.
1

Material

Time of
Application

Oil

Oil
Oil

Late Del. Dor.

Leaf
Clusters

Oil
Nicotine

Del. Dor.
Pink

No.
46

Fruit
Clusters

Oil
Nicotine

Del. Dor.
Pink

1.1

No.
63.4

Fruits
Injured

No.
190.7

Terminals

1.7

2.1

Del. Dor.
Calyx

Oil
Oil—
Fungicide

Del. Dor.
Through
Season...

160

3.7

No.
83.5

1.2

4.6

163.2

1.5

3.5

536.9

1.1

3.8

208.4

6.9

Some interesting conditions as regards ,^hf/!^;^^ o the
applications for codling moth were recorded ^^ h™t J 9I
orchards In 55 orchards where the last spray was omitted the
injured W^ averaged 7.2 per cent. The last two sprays were
left off in 20 orchards with an average damage of 10 per jent^
Omitting the last three appUcations in 16 orchards increased the
average loss to 15.6 per cent of the apples harvested.

The Value of Proper Methods in Insect Control.— It is
oftTn stated that insecticides of determined jnent do ^^^^^^

control of the rosy aphis even when ^^^\'^\^''^^

It is recognized that such conditions do exist. Under-equip

1 ABLE I

Time

.-^(0 vy* u» »».» »

Kind of
job

Average infest

ation per tre

Treat-
ment

Leaf
Clusters

Fruit
Clusters

Fruits
Injured

Termi-
nals

Nicotine
Oil 4%

Del. Dor.
Del. Dor.

Good
Poor

762

6303

4783

210
8575

39
8452

1050
31500

2
1057

35
3026

34 —

ment, lack of thoroughness in application or improper machinery
often enter into this situation. Comparisons were made of
nicotine and spraying oils applied either according to standard
recommendations or the recommendations of the compounders
of the materials as to the timing and dilution of the insecticides.
The manner of application is illustrated in Table 6.

Codling moth injury in 96 orchards in which the full number
of sprays was applied was 2.6 per cent. In 180 plantings where
at least one of the applications was omitted or where the oper-
ation was poorly done the damage was 9.9 per cent. Thirteen
of the places visited were unsprayed and in these the losses
amounted to 36.2 per cent.

Importance of Efficient Machinery. — In collecting the
data it was observed that different types of machines were
being used and that these apparently factored in the variability
of control. Where spraying oils were applied for aphis suppres-
sion by means of a stationary outfit, using a non-rigid distributor
the number of injured apples averaged 149 to each tree. Portable
outfits using a non-rigid distributor were somewhat less efficient
and where these were used the dwarfed apples averaged 4086
per tree. Portable outfits, having semi-rigid distributors were
operated in some plantings and in these the dwarfed apples
averaged 13,620 to each tree.

Efficiency in operation was outstanding in some orchards
and enabled some men to control codling moth with a minimum
number of applications. Data taken in several orchards showed
that losses due to codling moth entries where the stationary
outfit, non-rigid distributor was used did not exceed 1.2 per cent;
with portable outfits, non-rigid distributors, 3.5 per cent; with
portable outfits, semi-rigid distributors 8.7 per cent.

Comparisons of Valuations in Insect Control. — This same
system of evaluation was used to ascertain the comparative
effectiveness of the recommended practices in the insect control
program. The figures collected indicate the conditions found in
the 300 orchards in which counts were made and these represent
a fair cross-section of the state wide conditions with respect to
the control of the more important species of insects which
caused damages during 1931.

If the percentages of insect injury are applied to the estimated
total apple production for 1931 of 14,000,000 bushels the mone-
tary values of following a definite system of insect suppression
are ascertained. These comparisons indicate that the potential
insect losses amounted to $4,697,000. Insect losses due to a
faulty program of spraying would have been as much as
$1,099,000. If a complete program had been followed in all
the orchards the insect losses would have been reduced to
$315,000. The difference between complete and partial treat-
ment was $784,000.

A Comparison of Programs for Insect Control. — The

question often is raised as to how completely the control prac-
tices are followed by fruit growers. The industry is often sep-

— 35 —

!«

arated into two groupings which for convenience in comparing
Se practices may be stated as (1) the commercial a^^^^^^^^^
general Both of these categories contain a number of orchardists
X Jught to be considered in the other grouping^ However
Tthe distinction is made according to the numbers of men
ihose business is the production of ^^.-'^ -^^^^Zf^^^^
basis for making the choice. Approximately 92 per cent ot tne
growers wW business is apple production applied seven fohage
fornvs and 75 per cent of them made eight apphcations as was
s^gge steS in the spraying information^ The average of the
insect control in this area amounted to 95.5 per cent.

The area in which orcharding is conductedchiefly by men whose

principal interest is in other farm ^P^r^^^f,.^^^^^^^^^
standing comparison. The records indicate that about 95 per
cenf or more of these farmers applied four early sprays After
She first cover spray fewer men followed the plan and only about
70 oer cent of them applied the second cover spray. Under
ILsrcondTtions the amount of insect control was 84.3 per cent
The chart Table 7 indicates the relative response to msect control
JractS^^ state and is presented as being a basis fo™^^^^^
at a conclusion as to the underlying causes of serious insect

"^^ Appk^'Sowers often lose sight of the purpose of an insect
contrS prog^^^^ They most often are thinking in terms of the
ri'Kprays applied and not of the -mbe^;;^^^^^^^^^^
damaging fruits during the growing season. The sprays are

Table 7.— a comparison of insect control programs

^^ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

Xff^' cl^ ^ ^iL COVER SPRAYS J

n^ h>^^' ^^ K^ k"^ h^T l2Mn bu J41

SPRAY APPLICATION

— 36 —

timed and the insecticides are suggested for use during effective
periods for the suppression of these pests. The omission of one
or more treatments most often results in an incomplete degree
of suppression and a corresponding loss in numbers of perfect
apples. Such fruits may be marketable but the practice insures
a gradually increasing carry-over of the insect infestation. This
condition exists in restricted areas where the insect suppression
practices are not uniform.

It has been pointed out that the selection of suitable insecti-
cides, the proper timing of sprays, and the practicing of correct
methods of making the apphcations factor not only in the con-
trol of the rosy aphis and the codling moth, but also enter into
the suppression of all apple infesting insects. It is important
to note that under our present methods of fruit growing efficiency
in distributing the spray is of equal significance.

Our earlier ideas of insecticidal materials and their effective-
ness for particular purposes have been revised and may yet be
further improved. The underlying principles of the selection
of suitable materials, the proper timing of sprays, thoroughness
in making the applications, and the use of efficient machinery
have not changed and can not be disregarded. The solution of
our apple insect problems of past years was not obtained by new
insecticides alone. Those of the present will be settled only
when the great body of fruit growers accept the fundemental
ideas of insect suppression and develop the practical apphcation
of them under the new situations.

Mr. J. R. Stear: I was very much interested in the differences
of control that Professor Hodgkiss brought out from different
times of applying the delayed dormant spray. I would like to
ask Professor Hodgkiss this question: Can you tell me how many
days there were between what you call an early delayed dor-
mant, a delayed dormant, and a late dormant?

Professor Hodgkiss: This work not having been experimental,
there is no record of the number of days difference in these.
These figures which I have quoted are the results of check-ups
in the various orchards, and are determined, largely by the
interpretation, by the fruit-growers, of the different spraying
periods as we recommended them. What I have been trying to
do is to point out these conditions and indicate to growers the
program that they ought to follow, to increase the amount of
insect-free fruit.

'THE FUTURE OF SPRAY RESIDUE REMOVAL

IN PENNSYLVANIA"

H. G. Ingerson, John Bean Manufacturing Co., Lansing, Mich.

A brief review of the status of residue removal in states with
codling moth conditions and climatic conditions similar to
Pennsylvania, may help you to understand better why I believe

— 37 —

v™, m»v have this problem some time. The residue situation
fs'LTacurinthe'latltudes similar to »uthe,nP«^^

Si ii rtctt rt'ro, *tiiae"7hrs|«

that determines the amount of spray material on the fruit and
SluJftS'se'verity of the residue P-ble™ I do not mean
that all of the fruit growers 1-°/ -f.^lt^Jr-^^^^^^^^^

a wsrtn rSuH^f rth^ ~ ~^ -^^^^

ing into the marketing problem m part of this country.

Consider briefly the status of residue removal in states closely
adiacent to Pennsylvania: Most of you know that this matter

fiJt be arSe acute^n southern New ^f «fy^.^,\\^ Slem of
Wpw Tersev growers have been confronted with the problem oi
^VcodLrmoth infestation requiring very thorough spray
applications continuing well into the late summer- Jn 1927

the first fruit washers were put into ^^"-^ ^f ^\'^,?,7*'^^Jent t7me'
These have been added to each season until at the present time,
a considerable proportion of the growers are equipped to remove
reSes TheV have even found it necessary to wash the
summer' varietTes such as Starr, Transparent Dutchess. Dela-
waThas not had quite as serious a codUng moth problem and in
general avoided the necessity of residue removal until the 1931
SS The northern counties of Maryland adjacent to Penn-
!^.t!?ni<. have used fruit pohshers for a number of years and in
IVsrand 1931 Sailed several fruit washers. I am sure I am
correct when I state that the codling moth is no respect or of
stSe hnes and what I say here as applying particularly to
central and southern Pennsylvania, applies with much more
force to the entire Shenandoah-Cumberland section of Mary-
and Virginia and West Virginia. Virginia has used fruit
ckaning eqS pment for several seasons, perhaps leading in the
Dercentage of^fruit passing over cleaners of some type among
fheFastem states This is easily understood when we realize
h'at^'arS a^6§% of the crop during some seasons is exported
■md therefore must meet the world tolerance of .01. i he same
iril condition applies to the section of West Virginia included
general conuuiun .w ivi^nv of the drv tvpes of cleaners

in this same general fruit belt, ^^lany ol tne ary lype

h-.vo been in use for several years and in 193U and iy'*\>'Ou
s^derable nimber of washers were put into service. Sou hern
SRwher "conditions are quite similar to ^^itions m s^^^^^^^^^^^
Pennsylvania, avoided the residue problem unt the past season,
Mrowine severe losses from late broods of codling moth in 1930
and rheaTcarryV^ into 1931. Quite a goodly volume of

— 38--

fruit cleaning equipment was put into service this past season.
To go a little farther west, but where conditions were still some-
what similar to southern Pennsylvania the fruit sections of
southern Indiana and Illinois have turned to fruit cleaning
equipment as the surest way of producing fruit free from objec-
tionable residues. I could continue and give you the status in
all the other Eastern states but this will serve to show how
fortunate you are in Pennsylvania to have avoided the necessity
of this program up until this time. I think most of those present
know the present situation in Pennsylvania*. There have been
a few of the fruit dry cleaners or polishers in use in the southern
parts of the State for several seasons, but they have been used
not so much for residue removal as simply to improve the
market appearance of the product.

FRUIT WASHING IN PENNSYLVANIA

In the summer of 1930 I was surprised to visit a fruit packing
house near Easton and find a commercial fruit washer in service
there. Inquiry brought out the fact that this washer was
installed not to remove spray residue, but rather to remove
coatings of cement dust from the harvested fruit, the orchard
being located in a section of cement factories. With a few
exceptions, this constitutes the fruit cleaning equipment now
in use in Pennsylvania. Following this summary of conditions
in the states adjacent to Pennsylvania, we will now consider
the features that will influence future policies in this matter.
Our old enemy, the codling moth, is at the bottom of this fruit
cleaning program. Let's see what the present status, so far as
codling moth infestation and control is concerned.

STATUS OF CODLING MOTH INFESTATION

IN PENNSYLVANIA.

When I was in attendance at your meeting three years ago,
one of the leading growersf in addressing the Association stated

*A check up on the arsenic residue analyses made on Pennsylvania apples
in 1931 shows the following facts:

Apple orchards or lots of fruit analyzed 278

Samples analyzed which exceeded the domestic tolerance

of .012 19

Shipments held up until arsenic was removed 14

Counties in which the bulk of the samples were collected 15

(These samples were collected from practically all of the large
orchards in the state which export fruit or sell in carload lots
into interstate shipments. The bulk of the samples were col-
lected in Adams and Franklin counties with a good many from
Cumberland, York, Erie, Lancaster, Lehigh, Berks, Centre,
Wyoming, Perry, Bedford, Dauphin, Lycoming and Fulton
counties.)

Number of washers in the state 6

Approximate number of mechanical brushes or wipers 50 — 60

Collected by Federal-State inspectors, analyzed by the Bureau of Foods
and Chemistry, Harrisburg. Data from D. M. James, Bureau of Markets.

fR. E. Atkinson, Bucks County, 1929 Proceedings, Page 88.

— 39 —

that failure to control codling moth was simply a matter of
cSelessT^ Continuing, he said, ^1 am sure that our

Seff rom co^dUng moths are less than one-tenth of one percent.
Slfwas at%he end of the 1929 growing season. I venture
that even with thorough spraying, he might po^^^^^^^^ ha^e a
verv different report for the seasons of 1930 and 1931. What
Ire the factors that have caused codUng moth to build up to
sich great proportions and do such unusual damage during 1930
and 1931Y I think our entomologists all agree that a combmation
of mild winters and hot, dry summers, accounts for this con-
diti^i. The mild winters allow thousands of codhng nupth to
live over for the next season, that under more severe conditions
Tould die The long, hot summers affect the codling moth
Tpulauin in several ways: More broods develop under these
SS conditions but more especially a much greater number
Tetrw W. S. Hough, Virginia, has shown that when
high temperatures exist during the egg-laying per od 20%
more of the young worms make entrance to the fruit if the tem-
Trature is Ibovf 80 degrees, than occurs with temperatures
below this point. Without attemptmg to predict what the
Sance of this winter may do to codUng moth, we certain y
know that up to this time, conditions have been unusually
favorable to the big brood of worms which went into winter
quarters at the end of the past season, to live over and be ready
for business with the setting of the 1932 crop.

A SUGGESTED CODLING MOTH PROGRAM FOR 1932

I think we should face this matter squarely and recognize
that we have an epidemic condition of codling moth Population
in at least a few of the Pennsylvania orchards as we go into the
\932 SSln. Some growers tU to the weather or Providenc^
to give them a reasonably clean crop fpr 1932 No orchard
prolram is stronger than the weakest link and if failure to
Krol codling moth is the limiting factor in your Profitable
orchard operations, I am sure you are gomg to meet this epi-
demic with strong-arm methods. Some of you are using treated
bands and in this way reduce the emergence of codling moth a
certa n amount.* Some of you will use bait pails or traps a^
the time of moth flight and in this way get rid of a certain
nercSge of moths. These measures are no doubt necessary
SJerf much worth-while but in the Ught of the present
knowledge, the chief dependence will be put upon arsenic
sS fo^ moth control. Experience in heavy infesta-

tions has shown the absolute necessity of very thorough spraying
agTnst the first brood of worms, which begin to hatch from two
to Zee weeks after petal fall and continue for several weeks.
In ceSn parts of the State and in certain individual orchards
careful thorough spraying against this first brood combined
with one application in early July for second brood, has, with

*See H. N. Worthley's 'Treated Bands for Codling Moth Control."
both in the 1931 Proceedings and in this issue.

— 40 —

normal weather conditions and normal codling moth population,
kept your crops reasonably free from codling moth injury.
What you will do in 1932 along these hues will be determined
to a large extent I am sure, by what you have done and what
results you have secured in the past two seasons. The apple
industry in Eastern states as well as the West face this threat
of heavy losses from codUng moth in 1932. I shall not attempt
to tell you how many spray appUcations you shall make or
when you shall make them— Your spraying service will give
you this information.

I know that many of the growers present will agree right now
that they would be glad to take the necessary steps to meet
any residue problem if they could be assured of controlling
codUng moth satisfactorily and then could remove any objec-
tionable residue at nominal cost. Work along these Unes has
been carried on in the Winchester, Virginia Field Station,
Branch of the Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station, under
the direction of W. S. Hough. Hough reported at the Virginia
Meeting that under 1931 conditions, he could apply three
applications of arsenate of lead, adding one pint of fish oU soap
for each three pounds of arsenate of lead, making the petal fall,
three and five weeks appUcations without having excess of
residue. He continued by saying that if codling moth population
is high it wiU require one or two sprayings in July in which case,
residue is likely to result. He further stated, '4f a thorough
application is made after July First the fruit wiU need to be
washed, to meet the requirements.'' Professor Hodgkiss of
Pennsylvania reported to your meeting last year in connection
with his discussion of the Pennsylvania spray schedule and
methods,— 'The Umiting factor in codUng moth control was the
last or July application. Orchardists who omitted this spray
had losses which were as high as 35.2 percent of the matured
fruit. Where the treatment was used in conjunction with the
earlier applications, the amount of damage was smaU and did
not exceed 3.8 percent. The average for the area was 1.6 per-
cent.'' I am not sure what recommendations are being made
by your spray service as to the use of stickers in the early season
appUcations. I do know, however, that in the other sections
with conditions somewhat similar to southern Pennsylvania,
that an increasing number of the better growers are using fish
oU with arsenate of lead as a sticker in their first brood appU-
cations with splendid success in the way of increased control of
first brood worms.

The early part of the season the fruit is growing very rapidly
and every young worm which enters the fruit at this early stage
may mean two or three hundred descendants, for late season
entrance after the time of effective spraying is over. Therefore,
we should do everything possible in the way of improving our
spray material combinations, our methods of appUcation and
timing of these early season sprays to reduce this first brood to
the very minimum.

— 41 —

Now when we come to spraying for second brood, and at
least in some years in the Southern counties of the state, a third
brood, we need to consider carefully what our program shall be.
Shall we put on one July application and hope for a clean crop?
Or shall we make one or two additional applications and be
sure of a clean crop so far as worms are concerned? Before
making this decision we should consider the other angle of the
spray residue problem, to which we shall now turn. For the
purpose of the balance of this discussion I shall assume that
you have made one or more second brood applications of arsenate
of lead and that you have the residue problem to meet.

WHY SHOULD WE REMOVE RESIDUE?

Some of you may feel that the requirements of the Govern-
ment on the amount of residue allowed on fruit are unreasonable.
However, when we reaUze that this regulation is only one small
part of the general program of the careful guarding of the public
health and that many phases of this program effect the health
of our own famihes, we will be more ready to comply with the
requirements. Some of you are saying that you have eaten
apples covered with spray material for twenty years and are
still alive. True, arsenic poisoning from the amounts on sprayed
fruits is not quick acting and we never hear of any deaths from
this cause. The same thing is true of the slow progress tubercu-
losis but we all appreciate the need of ordinary precautionary
measures and not a one of us present would knowingly drink
milk from tubecular cattle. A number of years ago the ripe
olive industry of California was careless in some of its packing
methods and cases of poisoning occurred which were directly
traceable to ripe olives. The publicity given this matter in the
general press was a blow to this particular industry from which
it has not even as yet recovered. We can all remember a similar
happening in connection with the oyster industry. Some
twenty or more years ago some injurious materials were used in
the preservation of foods in canning and in other ways. The
present pure food laws were set up to guard the health of the
American public against these injurious materials. The appli-
cation of these laws to fruits and vegetables is not new simply
that conditions in our industry have in recent years brought
the necessity for considering these requirements. The purpose
of these laws is to make all food materials safe not only for
strong healthy persons, but for invalids and children, I am con-
fident that there is not a fruit grower at this meeting that
would offer fruit for food purposes if he knew that it contained
even a slightly injurious amount of any material. The govern-
mental departments are authorized to determine the foods that
are injurious and to see that practices are changed or steps
taken to remove these objections. All parties in any way inter-
ested in the fruit industry have been very careful to keep this
entire matter in its proper place.

— 42 —

The amount of residue you will have on your fruit following
these summer appUcations will depend on a number of factors
No doubt many of you think it will depend very directly on
the amount of rainfall following the appUcations. True, this
will have a slight bearing on the amount of residue but careful
records kept for the past six or seven years in New Jersey,
Virginia and other eastern states that have been studying this
matter, show that this is one of the least important items enter-
ing into the residue situation. Ordinarily rain water does not
remove appreciable amounts of arsenate of lead. If it would,
we would be in a sorry plight, for as soon as a rain came following
spray application our trees and fruit would be unprotected and
we would need to go right back with another coating. These
arsenate materials are not soluble in water, in fact, the govern-
ment has set up just as rigid instructions on the percentage of
arsenic that can be soluble in water in the manufactured spray
materials, as they have on the amount of arsenic that could be
present on apples for consumption, and the insecticide manu-
facturers have had to comply with these objections the same as
we as growers must now comply with the requirements on
market fruit. It is true that the atmospheric conditions together
with rainwater have a slightly solvent effect but chemical analyses
have shown this to be very slight. The effect of rain in adding
size to each individual fruit no doubt accounts to a large degree
for the apparent difference in amounts of residue following
rainy periods and preceeding rains. In the season of 1931 the
fruit sections of Southern Indiana after experiencing something
of a drought in the early part of the growing season, in the latter
part of August and the early part of September had a very great
excess of rainfall coming in the form of violent downpours as
well as all-night soaking rains. The men conducting work in
that state saw the opportunity to collect some valuable data
on this matter of the effect of rainfall on spray residue and made
a very complete series of analyses of fruit picked before these
heavy rains and directly after, and the differences in residue
content were very slight indeed.

VARIETIES DIFFER IN RESIDUE CONTENT

Different varieties are constantly showing different amounts
of residue, these differences being quite closely correlated with
the texture of the skin of the fruit. Smooth skinned varieties
such as Duchess, Wealthy, and Jonathan will retain less residue
than rough skinned varieties such as Baldwin and Rhode Island
Greening. Under Virginia conditions in 1931, Stayman and
Ben Davis sprayed on the same dates as York and Winesap,
showed less residue than these latter varieties even when they
were harvested earlier. The shape of the variety no doubt has
some bearing on the amount of residue. The area of the calyx
basin and stem cavity compared to the balance of the surface
is no doubt a determining factor. However, we have our varie-

— 43 —

ties and we are not going to change them because of the amount
of arsenic that they will retain. The factors that are within our
control are the spray materials that we use, the amounts we
use and the time of apphcation and removal. .

SPRAY MATERIAL COMBINATIONS USED
EFFECT THE EASE OF THEIR REMOVAL

Whenever codling moth population builds up many growers
demand of the experiment stations new and better spray ma-
terials. W. S. Hough presented a paper at the 1931 Virginia
Meeting entitled, ^^Can CodUng Moth be Controlled by Arsenical
Sprays?'' I shall quote here Hough's conclusion,— ''In conclu-
sion let me repeat that lead arsenate can be relied upon to con-
trol the codling moth. The number of appUcations, however,
will have to be increased in some instances until the infestation
is cleaned up. The adherence of lead arsenate may be increased
by the addition of one pint of fish oil (eight ounces) for each 100
gallons of spray containing three pounds of lead arsenate*.

During the season of 1931 our experience with substitutes
for lead arsenate in July sprays resulted in severe injury to the
fruit where one and two gallons of summer oils were used per
100 gallons of water and severe injury to the foUage where four
pounds of Barium fluosiUcate per 100 gallons were used."

Arsenate of lead alone and in combination with sulphur mix-
ture is not especially difficult to remove. Lime added to these
mixtures aids the removal of residue and apparently also reduces
the possibility of its killing effect on chewing insects. Arsenate
of lead combined with casein spreaders is somewhat more
difficuly to remove than with the spreader left out. Arsenate
of lead combinations with oils or oil soaps are difficult to remove
and require a fair knowledge of removal methods. These are
the materials that spread the coating of arsenate of lead evenly
over the fruit and foliage and are the ones that are apparently
giving the best control of codling moth. I think, therefore,
that our removal program should be based on the removal of
these materials.

TIME OF REMOVAL

Little difficulty has been experienced in the East even with
these lead and oil combinations where the cleaning was done at
harvest time. A few weeks of storage however, makes the
removal of these materials very difficult as apparently the
coating of wax which the fruit lays down in storage covers the
spray material and all and after this waxing occurs, strong
washing solutions must be used and in some cases heated solu-
tions must be resorted to. I would emphasize therefore, that
there is great desirability in residue removal right at the harvest
time.

*"They" say the combination of the common sort of fish oil with lime
sulphur makes sensitive stomachs do nose dives and tail spins — even strong
ones wabble a bit. (Secretary)

— 44 —

EXTRA

SPRAY NEWS

EXTRA

New Development in Arsenate

of Lead Production

IMPROVED PROCESS
INCREASES KILL-
ING POWER

More reason than ever before for
specifying and using NuREXFORM
arsenate of lead this year. Another
definite improvement in the prod-
uct has been made that increases
the killing strength* Through Rex
Research Fellowship at Mellon
Institute of Industrial Research an-
other improvement of processing
has been developed.

Recent improvements make NuREX-
FORM even more desirable than in the
past. While our label states * 'Arsenic
Oxide (AS2O5) content 30%'* NuREX^
FORM now contains not less than
321^% . . . this is the killing agent.

NuREXFORM stays in suspension longer.
What does this mean to you? In the

first place all the NuREXFORM that
you put into the tank gets on the trees . . .
none settles to the bottom becoming a
hard, useless cake to be scraped out and
thrown away . . . wasted.

NuREXFORM does not clog up the
screens and nozzles, thus saving much
time that is often necessary to clear up
these obstructions. These two savings
alone justify your using NuREXFORM.

Many fruit growers report 20% more
sound fruit with NuREXFORM than
with ordinary lead. Users say less than
1% wormy fruit and with the new
NuREXFORM intelligent spraying
should result in a worm free yield.

Although NuREXFORM costs slightly
more per pound . . . results considered it
is the most economical arsenate of lead
you can use. Let us send you more com-
plete information.

The TOLEDO REX SPRAY COMPANY

Toledo, Ohio

Other REX Materials Include

Rex Lime and Sulphur Solution
Rex Dry Lime Sulphur
Rex Oil Emulsion
Rex Bordo Mixture
Rex 85-15 Sulphur-Lead

Mixture
Rex 90-10 Sulphur-Lead

Mixture

Rex 80-10-10 Sulphur-Lead

Dust Mixture
Rex Copper Dusts
Rex Sul-Powder
Rex Calcium Arsenate
40% Nicotine Sulphate
Sulphur

IMPROVED % DRY ARSENATE OF LEAD

DRYARSENATEOFLEAD^

9^^^t»lkm,^ttmi^*A^m%it I P<»*«*<

•M>« •««••■ •M •«■

*>*» m^i-^ .».^ »A**f..^.— "• •—

J2POI$ON|(

THE TOLEDO ftEX SPRAT CO.

T«i«**. •M*»

t ft^mm ttm**

1 — ■:

— 45 —

CHEMICALS FOR RESIDUE REMOVAL

A lot of work has been done by different Eastern experiment
stations the past few seasons in trials of chemicals for fruit
washing purposes. These materials range all the way from
commonly used weak solutions of hydrochloric acid to rather
complicated chemicals known in the industry as de-gumming
materials. If the practice is followed of washing at harvest
time I think that weak solutions of hydrochloric acid will be
most generally used for some time to come because of our
quite complete knowledge of how to use this material success-
fully and its low cost. I would say that this material at the
present time is as generally used for fruit washing when washing
is necessary as arsenate of lead is used for control of chewing
insects.

OTHER RESIDUES TO BE REMOVED

The past two seasons have been generally ^^^^^orable to
aphis outbreaks in the Eastern fruit sections. If in 1932 the
spring is wet and cold, we will no doubt have our usual amounts
of scab and aphis infestation. Following this aphis infestation
we will have a certain percentage of our fruit covered with the
black, sooty fungus that grows in the honeydew. While this
fruit is oftentimes in the sections of the trees where it does not
color sufficiently to meet the U. S. No. 1 grade, yet in many
cases, it would meet the No. 3 requirements except for this
coating of aphis residue. This material can be removed satis-
factorily at the same time that spray residue are being removed
The same thing holds true for the specking lollowing the leat
hopper infestation which is often serious in certain sections in
dry summers and falls. This was so serious in certain orchards
in the Shenandoah section in 1930 that some fruit washing
equipment was installed to remove this leaf hopper residue
even when the spray residue was not a serious factor.

There is one other phase of this residue removal or washing
operation that I should mention. Along with the washing
process goes the drying. While there is a difference of opmions
as to the necessity of drying so far as storage quality of packed
fruit is concerned, there is no difference of opinion as to the
desirabihty of the fruit being dry for the packing operation
both from the standpoint of appearance of the fruit and the
efficient work of the packing house crew. With these dryers as
regular part of the packing house equipment fruit can be picked
in the early morning with the trees wet with dew or following
rain, brought into the packing house wet, put through the
dryer and be ready for immediate packing. You all know how
rushed the late harvest season is and how many times you
would Uked to have put your packing crew to work on mornings
following rains and heavy dew but you have had to hold ott
until it was ten or eleven o'clock and the fruit was dry. Ihis
one feature is going to be of great value especially to the larger

— 46 —

orchardists where the harvest period is all too short and every
hour gained is a real help.

SUMMARY

I have tried to bring to you from the experiences of the past
few seasons in all the Eastern fruit growing sections and my
reasons for believing that the Pennsylvania growers if so directed
by the spraying service may pursue a more aggressive program
of spraying to reduce codling moth losses and that this possible
increased spraying activity if carried out may require spray
residue removal. I have tried to show the importance of early
season spray applications and suggested the use of more effective
stickers to be used in combination with arsenate of lead with
these early season applications. I further state that with the
epidemic of codling moth infestation it is my belief that one or
more midsummer sprays may be applied at least in some areas
of the Southern part of Pennsylvania and this will be done in
a few cases with the knowledge that residue removal will be
required. I have pointed out the main factors effecting the
amounts of residue and have tried to assure you that even with
the use of the most effective spray combinations, residue can be
satisfactorily removed if done at harvest time and with materials
and equipment now in general use.

Senator Pratt (Georgia): Will calcium arsenate adhere as
well as lead arsenate?

Mr. Ingerson: I would rather pass this question on to some-
one else. Professor Worthley, the question is asked concerning
the comparative adherence of calcium arsenate over arsenate of
lead, so far as rain-removal is concerned.

Professor Worthley: We have made no analyses, but I
would be inclined to suppose that it would be somewhat similar.
Our best way of judging that would be the control figures in the
final analysis. We do know that calcium arsenate will often
defoliate apple trees; it is not safe to use on them.

John Runk: I have in mind scarcity of water. How much
water does it take to remove this residue, and how much water
does it require to operate this washer?

Mr. Ingerson: The water used in the washer is primarily
used in the machines to rinse off the acid or the other materials
that have been used to remove residues, and also to remove
arsenic. The usual recommendation in that line — a safe recom-
mendation— is two gallons of water for each bushel of apples
washed. In some cases they have been safe with less than that,
but two gallons of water per bushel of apples washed is a safe
program to follow.

Professor Worthley: I should like to make a point con-
cerning curculio. Probably most everybody realizes that insect
conditions change from year to year in the^ same locality and
that in different parts of the state, in the 'same year, insects
will be different. Professor Hodgkiss will back me up in the

— 47 —

statement that the curcuUo situation is more mjurious in some
parts of the state than the codUng situation is. And it s true
the curcuUo spraying is largely an early seasonal problem.
That is not to say that codhng moth will not become serious in
that section; it is not to say that some sections which are now
quite bad with codUng moth will not, in another five years, feel
that they have it under control and not need to spray excessively
for control. We have other pests coming in— there always will
be Take, for instance, the case bearer. We don t know what
problem we may have to face within the next few years, because
the case bearer is working north and is proving to be a tough
customer wherever it is found in abundance.

I think we all realize that the amount of arsenic that is going
to be necessary to apply to apples, on an average, is not going
to be reduced in the next few years. And, under certain con-
ditions of infestation, it is quite possible that there will be
excessive arsenate which it will be necessary to remove. We
have had the hope, here in Pennsylvania that in general we
could get away without washing because of the increased cost of
washing. We feel, however, that the bug man should not be
made the goat on the washing proposition, because in many
cases it is not only arsenical residue that counts, but generally
cleanliness of the fruit. As an investigator in insect control
I would be tickled to death to see the whole state covered with
washing machines for this reason: It would mean that I could
plan experimental work in insect control without worrying what
shape the growers would be in, from the point of arsenical
residues. As I mentioned yesterday, in one heavily infested
orchard, codhng moth population was high— in Adams County
with four cover sprays following petal fall, all of our treatments
showed excesses of arsenic that, under the law, would have to
be removed before sale, with the exception of one plot where
the spraying was confined to first brood and the application
went on to the second of July. If washers were conimon, investi-
gators wouldn't have to think of substitute materials for arsenate
of lead that have not proved to be successful for supplementary
measures for arsenate of lead. We could say— they have already
said this at some stations— put on the arsenical sprays that are
going to be necessary to control your particular pest, and, it
that gives you excess residue, wash! So far we haven t been
quite ready to say that in Pennsylvania, because it seenis to us
that the percentage of cases in which the spraying schedule has
left dangerous residues has been too low to make a general
recommendation of the adoption of washers a reasonable one.
The problem is not going to be less in the coming years, however,
than it is now.

Mr. Ingerson: I am glad Professor Worthley has given the
feehng of the Pennsylvania Experiment Station and men. My
purpose in explaining the situation in all the states around
Pennsylvania was* partly to point out how fortunate yo^ nave
been up to this time in being able to avoid this thing. And 1

— 48 —

know full well that you have been following your extension
service, and that they have been striving to help you and advise
the thing which was proper.

ROADSIDE MARKETING

C. J. TYSON, Gardners, Adams County

My experience with roadside marketing has not been very
long, nor compared with that of other members, very extensive.
It started in the fall of 1928 and never has run more than $200.00
per week. The best average was eight weeks in 1930 which
totaled $1,200.00 and ten weeks in 1931 which totaled a little
over $1,500.00. Needless to say it took three times as much
produce to make the same average in 1931 as in 1930.

Getting into roadside marketing was accidental with me. I
never thought I wanted to bother with it, especially over week-
ends and at the end of the day when we feel that we have earned
some rest. We are located on a fairly well traveled concrete
road between Carlisle and Gettysburg, thirty miles from Harris-
burg. Our orchard lies on both sides of the highway and does
its own advertising so that we soon found ourselves bothered
at all hours with people asking if we had apples for sale. It
became a question of turning everyone down or concentrating
our retail selling as to time and place.

In the fall of 1928 we set out some apples around the entrance
to our lawn — no room for display — no safe parking space on
either side of the road and a generally messy appearance. With
cars parked on both sides of the road and only a single lane
between it was a miracle that no bad accidents occurred. In
that year we learned from experience some basic things which
we had known more or less as theories and which those of you
who have been selling at the roadside will recognize as funda-
mental.

Probably the first essential is plenty of room both for display
of your produce and for parking of cars. You cannot make a
lot of apples and miscellaneous produce look well in a crowded
space nor can you create the impression of volume — a funda-
mental in good merchandising — if you have no room to display
your wares.

Parking space for plenty of cars and trucks will always help.
You can hardly have too much. Parking should, of course,
leave the entire paved road-way clear for traffic. Parking on
both sides of the road is very desirable and when this is not
possible ample space for turning should be provided on one side.
If possible, parking space should be provided on each side of
the stand. Regular customers like to pull in and stop approach-
ing the stand. Transients who are attracted by the stand itself,
will often stop if there is room to park after passing the stand.

So much for the location. Now we feel that we have learned
a few things about roadside marketing as it applies to our own

— 49 —

conditions, always subject to change for afto t^^^^^^ y^^^^
growing apples I am ready to admit that I know very little

^^We do not like to sell on Sunday. We like our rest and any-
how we do not believe in it. Under our conditions our ^^^^^^^
sails would not amount to much if we refused to sell on Sunday
-too many of our regular customers work every day in stores,

'^We fin'our fruit for display into one-half peck peck one-^^^^^
bushel and bushel baskets. Our people buy the same apples
hPtter in baskets than in crates. We rarely give the basket
wftf the pSSse filling everything into heavy p^^^^^^^
Most buyers prefer to carry bags rather ^^^f^^baske^^^^^^
cars. Occasionally packed-up bushels are sold in the bajets^

We mark each package on display with a plain price tag^
We lose some customers who read the prices from their cars
Zd driveTi. Usually these are bargain hunters and would
not become valued customers. We encourage all to get out of
Xircar^and examine the fruit at close range We are much
mo e sure of making sales in this way than when we attempt
Tdescribe and prici the goods through the car ^Jow^ j^
Our stand is located in the orchard. It is not pretentious it
looks hkrwhatiS^ farmer^s outfit. We sell our own fruit

prtaar ly If we are short any variety which is in demand we
5o S hesitate to buy it if we can and when asked do not h^^^^^^
to tell our customers. They seem to appreciate the /e™

We have sold peaches, apples, quinces, Pears crab apples
and anv surplus of flowers and vegetables which our garden
producel We have not grown vegetables especially for the
stand. I doubt whether we have traffic to warrant it. I have

not mentioned the by-products. u ^ r.^ .>larifvinff

We sell sweet cider with fair success. We have ^o clarify ng
or steriUzing equipment. Our People do not like benzoated
cider so we sell it while it is sweet and when it starts to turn
Se consign it to the vinegar barrel. I hope to be better eqmpped

'Te make apple butter which our customers tell us is the best
they ever ate and they come back repeatedly to buy it 1 ms
gives us an opportunity to sell more apples so we value the
butter business for two reasons. We sell in quart and half

^^M we^have no permanent building adjacent to our stand.
We have used tents for our surplus supplies A roomy, correctly
built, ventilated or refrigerated storage close to the roadside
is a most important part of its equipment and we are hving in
hopes.

ROADSIDE MARKETING

F. G. REITER, Mars, Allegheny County
Roadside marketing presents its advantages and its Problems
and we have experienced both. If you are a small grower and

— 50 —

can be in direct contact with your customers, you can really
get out of roadside marketing all the pleasure and profit there
is in it. You may have the difficulty at times of not having
sufficient quantities of certain products particularly in demand.
If you are a large grower and have not had experience in road-
side marketing, you will find there a project entirely different
from wholesale selling. However, if you are in a location where
you can develop roadside marketing, it should prove quite
advantageous and profitable.

In selling wholesale to large stores, dealers, or produce yards,
your fruit must be firm and not showing ripeness, while for
roadside trade, fruit must be ripe; ready to eat from the hand
or it is not in demand. You can often take soft peaches, ripe
plums or apples that could not be sold wholesale and get much
more than market value by direct selling. If your supply of
this ripe fruit is large, make your price more attractive and you
will wonder where all the customers came from.

I do not mean by ripe or soft fruit that you can sell fruit
beginning to decay. If you consider quality important in the
wholesale market you will find it much more important in direct
selling. In roadside marketing you must set a high standard of
quality and win the confidence of your customers by keeping
up to that standard if you hope to develop a large trade.

The two principal complaints I hear in roadside marketing
are lack of uniformity and quality in the products and price not
in line with the market. The first one I feel is most important.
We should be most particular about the quality of our products;
have them as near uniform as possible. When the products are
uniform and well packed we must display them to advantage in
a building or surroundings that are neat and attractive. To get
customers to stop, we should have things just a little different,
just a little more attractive and after they have stopped you
must be salesman enough to sell them.

Now as to price. I think .the producer is entitled to all the
price for his product the quality demands, but no more. If your
price is high and your quality low your customers will not come
back and your business will not flourish. You will always find
a few customers holding out for price but the majority of people
are wiUing to pay a good price for a good product and will come
back if they get fair treatment.

The greatest problem we find in seUing direct is to have a
sufficient quantity of the product most in demand and not an
oyer supply of the same product or other products at other
times. Here the wholesale and roadside marketing go hand in
hand, but the difficulty is that should you hold over too large
an amount for retail trade and allow it to become too ripe, it
cannot be sold on the wholesale market except at a sacrifice.

The principle of roadside marketing is ideal. To furnish
direct to the customer, tree ripened fruit, fresh vegetables and
other products in the best possible condition is really a step
forward in marketing. However, we must always keep in mind

— 61 —

the viewpoint of the consumer and by working for^iis interest
DrS our owj,. There has opened up in our district, several
fofdSLTaXets where many of the Products w^- PU-f^^^^^^^
at the Pittsburgh wholesale terminal. While this^^ not lair
romnetition as whatever is done at roadside markets m tne
cSunity Veflects in a way on all in the business, yet we do
no?^rke tlis competition seriously The od saying s^^^^^^^
cood ^^You can't fool all the people all of the time, aiKl it is
our iob to win our customers with quaUty and service. Having
S many Tears experience in roadside marketing, we believe
it is He Jy practical and profitable outlet for our products.

SOME FRUIT GROWERS' PROBLEMS

H. M. ANDERSON, New Park, York County

Today almost everyone seems to be immersed in proble^^^^^
hard for him to solve. I know of few sights that are more
nathetrc than that of a man with a dependent family who is
Eut of fuXand cannot find work; probably few situations are

"Tho'liTaTd?^^^^ fellow men are in that position and have
been for some time. Beside their troubles ours seem slight, but
the fruit grower has his problems, past, present and future.

Many of our worst problems of the past have been pretty
defiSy solved for us. For instance, yellows, borers, and
b?own rJt In the peach orchard can be readily controlled if we
iMnw instructions My first commercial peach orchard was
wted out bTy^^^^^^^^^ before it had paid its cost but last year less
rharone-quarter of one percent of my trees showed signs of

'"^ Scab "" codling moth and aphis in the apple orchard can be
almost as effectively controlled if ^e everlasti^^^^^^
them In fact our production is pretty efficient, one ot our
bigSst problems is now keeping production m line with con-

'"^Manrgrowers always have a ^^bigger acreage^^ P/S^^^^o^o'S
seem to figure that if 20 or 30 acres will normally net $2 ,000^00 or
SaS oS'?hen 200 or 300 acres will net «20,000J0 or $3^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I know of no more fallacious reasoning. In the first place very
few of us are 200 or 300 acre men. Again, where large plantings
arl made it is usually necessary to plant upland and low land
and the grower finds himself saddled with acres of boarder
trees- just as most dairymen find themselves with boarder cows.
AUo? the large peach orchards and some of the apple orchards
with which I am familiar have considerable acreages that bear
only when everybody has a crop, and the markets are glutted.
SomeTry fine crops of fruit last year did not pay for marketing,

^'\fX|roTe^^^^ cut out unprofitable orchards or parts

of orchards, think how profitable the remaimng acreage wou d
become Another solution of the glutted market problem would

— 62 —

be the keeping of second grade fruit at home, but I am too close
a student of human nature to believe that we would ever agree
to do that and do it.

Sometimes I think that if "varieties to plant" were discussed
from a different viewpoint it would stop some unwise planting,
and help the demand to catch up with the supply. For instance,
Stay man somehow is especially subject to scab and it frequently
loosens and falls before it is well colored or because it cracks so
badly when dry spells are followed by rain and warm weather.
There is a real problem that has, I fear, no satisfactory answer.
I always lose some Stayman by cracking and some years I have
lost thousands of bushels; many others have had similar losses,
and if a satisfactory remedy can be drawn out here I am sure
it will be a great benefit to many of us. I have heard recently
that the use of a complete fertilizer instead of nitrate alone is
very beneficial, and I mean to try it next spring.

The six weeks of warm weather preceeding Christmas created
a real problem for those of us who had apples in common storage.
The immediate solution was rapid marketing; the ultimate
solution will probably be cold storage, but in the meantime I
have bought a 24-inch fan and will probably buy another and
drive them with electric motors at night and on frosty mornings.
This equipment with careful control of ventilating outlets would
have paid for itself last fall and left a nice profit.

Because of hot weather in peach harvest and over-production
most peach orchards are now polluted with mummied peaches
that are covered with millions of brown rot spores. Many of
these peaches are still on the trees and there is going to be a
real brown rot problem next spring if there ever was one. We
are going to need more frequent and more thorough spray
applications than for many years.

Another problem to be solved next spring by many of us is an
infestation of red spider resulting from the past two dry sum-
mers. Red spider is epidemic only after dry seasons. In passing
through the Yakima Valley last August I saw the worst and
most extensive infestations of red spider that I ever hope to see,
and they told me that it is always a menace there. I have never
before found it necessary to use oil on peach trees to control it,
but feel that I certainly must do so next spring.

And then the fruit grower has some important moral problems
to face. I will mention that of Sunday sales at this time. I do
not believe that the Lord ever intended us to work seven days
in the week. History tells us that no nation that has ignored
the Sabbath, or tried to eliminate it, has continued to prosper,
and generally speaking, that is true of individuals as well.
You are famiUar with God's dealing, with his chosen people;
how he prospered them, and tinae after time in their pride and
arrogance they forgpt Him. To bring them back He visited
adversity upon them and in their adversity they repeated and
were reinstated. Yes, prosperity and depression date back
thousands of years— times must be hard occasionally to keep

— 53 —

hiimanitv within bounds, and I suspect that we will continue
to have adveSy when we need it, and prosperity when we can
stand it throughout the future. In the meantime I want to
voice the conviction that if there are a lot less Sunday sales
Ind other forms of Sabbath desecration, and more cons.demtion
for our fellow man, we will be more nearly ready for the pros-
perity to which we all look forward so hopefully and so con-
fidently.

MY ORCHARD EXPERIENCE THIS YEAR

HARRISON S. NOLT, Columbia, Lancaster County

Anv fruit grower who was able to make expenses much less
profit is a rial orchardist. One of the most important experi-
ences we had this year was the old, old story of thmning. Our
SteLron friends have been lecturing and preachmg to us for
Tearrrhow thin fruit, but we are afraid yet we wi" thin too
hard I learned this year that Yellow Transparent should be
tid very early. Ordinarily we are taught to wait until the
ji drop to thin but as the fruit set was unusually heavy it
was nSary to thin much earlier, and the results were we had
too many small apples and they could not develop size. In our

'TaTwXrraS t^'^.,1 Any ot us who ,ai|ed .o

put on all the sprays were told we were the losers. Even a
?ear such as this with low prices a ew bushels of fancy fruit
which went to the cull pile, would help to pay that high spray

"^f'S^one row of Smokehouse which did not get the late
summer spray and as a result we had quite a few which were not
peS T know we lost a lot more first class fruit than that one
Say would have cost. We know what the old standby materials
\Zln\2m^ nicotine, and lead, will do; we growers can not
affordt^o experiment' with the newer materials which m^^^^^
clever salesmen are selUng us. That is the job of State College^
I had some interesting experiences in prumng. We have a
block of five year old apple trees makmg nice g^ hk^^were
them bore a lot of apples this past summer. When they were
planted we tried to buy all large size one year trees, but with
some of the varieties we had to take two year old trees instead
We tried the debudding method on the one-year trees leaving
a few extra Umb and during the first few years Pruning them
lightly, taking out only a few crossing hmbs those causing the
trees to be out of balance. This winter we are pruning them
harder and shaping up the trees, selecting the best hmbs and
strongest crotches for the framework of our future trees /The
two year trees which were headed in the nursery row did not
make any more growth and are not as nicely shaped; the one
j^ear tree? have now more fruit buds and are in better condition
to bear heavy loads of fruit in the future while their yield this
summer was heavier than we usually have on trees of that age.

— 54 —

Do we always know when is the best time to pick our fruit?
We picked our Smokehouse four times this fall. Some of the
first were put in cold storage and were a bit too green when
picked. When they were taken out they scalded badly in a
short time. The last picking hung too long, losing the real
Smokehouse taste.

This season particularly the apples hung very well on our
trees allowing them to ripen nicely. However, we allowed a
second picking of Stayman to hang too long, resulting in a little
water core; there was also a sHght trace of it in our Delicious.

Then the next question came up. What shall we do with our
fruit; shall we sell or store in cold storage, or at home? We did
some of each. I had a few early apples ripening in the height
of the peach season; as they were too small, they were given
away. Up until this time our county consumed practically all
the apples we grew, and we had a good local market. However,
this year we found we had too many apples at home and had to
look for markets in Philadelphia and elsewhere. This put us
in competition with our neighboring states and the price was
ruinous.

Just a few days ago, I head an experienced commission man
say, *'We have only two grades of apples this year — first and
fourth. All the fruit that does not grade No. 1 will be placed
in No. 4, and the price we get for anything but No. 1 fruit is
anything but satisfactory.''

Again, I know we were spoiled the past few seasons by having
such a good export market. That market wanted a small
apple, while our consuming public wants better apples. They
have been educated to it by our western growers bringing in
their fancy fruit.

I am sure if we had left half of our apples in the orchard this
year, we would all be better off. We would not have the expense
of harvesting which is a great deal more than pulling them off
and leaving them drop.

We put too much of that before-mentioned fourth grade fruit
on the market. What happens if a person buys fruit because
it is cheap and the top of the package looks nice, and the fruit
is not in its prime, some unripe and some overripe? That
customer will become disgusted with apples and will turn to
citrus fruits ; then you and I must suffer, because we discouraged
consumption.

Don't forget the honest pack. I have heard that discussed
every year I have come to these meetings. A glimpse at the
exhibit of commercial classes at the show building this year will
tell you what I mean.

I learned considerable the past few days in the show room.
The fruit on exhibition there is just as fine as any one could wish
and less western fruit is offered for sale there than other years.
Our people will eat Pennsylvania apples if we give them the
quality.

— 55 —

Our experience with peaches was very similar to apples
Best size and quaUty will always sell even though we do not get
much cash fo? it. But think of the fun one gets from selhng
nice clean fruit with no complaints from customers because of
. small, wormy or knotty peaches.

SOME ORCHARD OBSERVATIONS
GUY L. HAYMAN, Northbrook, Chester County

It is one thing to observe but we find it quite another thing
to reduce those observations to intelhgent writing Your secre-
tary told me to talk about anything, but to bear down on
eSom cs, or marketing, or some vital phages of our business^
Presumab y, these observations are to cover the crop year just
passed! We shall try to cover the two phases of production and

"" W?1oUow as closely as possible the college spray service,
taking chances here and there, in making certain omissions
On the whole, however, I should say we are about 90 per cent
regular. Our personal observations as to results obtained last
summer may conflict somewhat with counts «^ade by Messrs^
Hodgkiss and Kirby, but I am probably looking at the job from
another ang^e. ^^^ ^^^^ .^ evidence than anytime since 1925.
It was far from serious but annoying just the same, becond,
bitter rot, while not an economic factor, showed up more than
ever before. Third, peaches showed entirely too much brown
rot. Fourth, nicotine sprays seemed ineffective m controlling
aphis and leaf hopper. Aphis were not very destructive, but the
leaf hopper has us very much concerned Fifth a slight trace
of scale now and then, with codhng moth almost perfectly con-
trolled and comparatively little curcuho mjury Sixth, the
brightest spot in the peach deal was the very shght damage from

Oriental moth. , u „^-. r-^^A Tni+o

Observations during the past few weeks show more red mite
than we care to see, probably due to omission of oil sprays last
year On December 6, while prumng Dehcious, we found a
water sprout with a few live leaves and a bunch of green aphis.

The wettest weather in two years caught us during the apple
bloom, but Rome seemed to be the only variety seriously affected
as to polUnation. Under John Ruef's guidance, bouquets were
placed in Stayman and DeUcious The set on both varieties
whUe not heavy, was quite satisfactory. Weather conditions,
considered, we were well pleased.

From a production standpoint, Stayman proved a great dib-
appointment. Early russeting, growth cracks in perfectly clean
apples, and dropping all summer, reduced the set from about
65% to 30%. Size and color were not up to par and sphtting
continued until harvest. Leaves were seriously injured by eaf
hoppers, and in spite of a satisfactory twig growth and leat

— 56 —

KOPPERS

FLOTATION SULPHUR

CONSTANTLY INCREASING SALES PROVE
IT IS GIVING SATISFAQORy RESULTS

KoppERS Flotation Sulphur controls Apple

Scab without injury to foliage ... no russeting
even with the most susceptible varieties.

KoppERS Flotation Sulphur controls Peach

Brown Rot and leaves a beautiful finish on the
ripened fruit.

KOPPERS Flotation Sulphur, in addition to

the present paste form, is also available in a dry
wettable form for use in liquid sprays and a dry
powder to be used as dust.

KOPPERS PRODUCTS COMPANY

PinSBURGH, PENNA.

— 57

development, the late season found the leaves pale and lacking
in vitality. Perfectly beautiful apples could not be packed
because of cracked surfaces. It is suggested that this general
unsatisfactory condition was a sort of drought hand-over,—!
hope that is the correct diagnosis. As usual we were too stingy
with our thinning, where real hard thinning should have been

The freeze of April 30 reduced our peach crop to almost 50%
of normal and as things turned out, that proved to be a blessing.
Following the practice of former years, we refrigerated our
peaches picked at the week ends. The results were saddening
and as we now feel, peaches will never again be stored. Our
peaches have been marketed for years about as follows: One-
third at home in a retail way; one-third wholesale more or less
directly and the balance consigned to Phila lelphia, Chester, or
Wilmington. It has always been possible for us to fix and
maintain our own retail prices but last summer we had nothing
to say about it. Our philanthropic friends in Delaware caused
us no end of trouble. Early in the season, truck peddlers with
Delaware peaches had established a retail price of three baskets
for $1.00, and later developments made even that price seem
like robbing in the eyes of the buying pubUc.

The retail trade which we have taken years to develop has
been of little advantage to us this season, and in some respects
has been a positive nuisance.

We entered the apple harvest expecting a poor market, and we
have not been disappointed. It may be interesting to give our
marketing experiences with our individual varieties. Wealthy
was moved promptly and did fairly well. Smokehouse, usually
a best seller, dragged along, with hot weather and disinterested
buyers making the deal barely staisfactory. Jonathan went for
export in mid-September, ten days too early for color The
price of $3.40 per barrel at our station made this probably the
best deal of the season. The same buyer was wilUng to pay
$3.10 for Grimes to be shipped September 10, but we preferred
to mess around with our cold storage peaches and passed the
deal by. That was the dumbest trick of the year. Dehcious
have moved well until two weeks ago. The market demand is
now 100% Stayman and other varieties must be shipped in
against the tide, whenever a break presents itself. Winter
Banana, usually a fair seller, has been almost hopeless. Men
who last year paid $2.00 for large Bananas, this year treated
them as a joke. Almost half our Romes were carried in common
storage at home. Usually we sell them from January to March
with little difficulty. Our last load went out on January 8 and
they were too ripe to be very attractive. The common storage
has failed us this year and we are thankful our best fruit was not
stored there.

Our Philadelphia market has indicated that it is done with
common storage stock for this year. Two weeks ago, three inch
Stayman from cold storage brought $1.50, while a comparable

— 58 —

pack from an excellent grower^s common stock sold for 90 cents.
These apples were sold at the same time by the same commission
house. I am advised that on Monday the difference had
stretched from $1.65 to 75 cents.

You may be interested to hear of a consignment of Summer
Rambo, which a commission man received last week from the
Cumberland Valley. I am told that they sold a day or two ago
for 25 cents per bushel.

An innovation noted on the Philadelphia market this winter
is the appearance of two boys with a Chevrolet truck hauling
oranges in bulk from Florida, returning with apples. They
make two round trips weekly, covering 5200 miles every seven
days. We are informed that a similar service operates between
Baltimore and some Florida point on a 35-hour basis. These
are just some indications of the physical obliteration of distance.

My final observation is a hope that 1932 brings you all less
worry and more profit than the year just passed.

OUR STATIONARY SPRAY PLANT

J. H. WEINBERGER
Zionsville, Lehigh County

At our 1928 meeting Dr. Fletcher gave us a paper on ^^Our
Competitors in the Pacific North West'^ in which he concluded
a brief history of their extensive and ever increasing use of
stationary spray plants with this statement, *'I am convinced
that the stationary spray system will gradually supersede the
portable outfit in the East as well as in the West." At that
time three-fifths of the 2500 apple growers of the Wenatchee
district were using stationary spray plants and out of 343 installa-
tions in 1927 only 18 were portable.

Since quite a few of us are still using the latter, a further
discussion of the problem may be justified and of interest to
some of you, notwithstanding the fact that this is the fifth
consecutive year we have done so.

In reviewing these and other papers on the subject, I find our
experience for the first year in close agrement with that of others.
The plant our secretary asked me to describe is a combined
stationary spray and irrigation system, intentionally designed
for both purposes within the limits possible. Instead of designing
for a minimum size of pipe consistent with reasonable friction
losses, it was my object in designing this plant to determine
upon the maximum size of pipe ppssible that would still afford
sufficient velocity in the pipe to prevent settlement of spray
material. In addition to this the pumps were duplicated, the
power plant increased and a second pipe line laid from the
plant to a point 2000 feet distant where it feeds into the spray
system for distribution. The extra cost incurred in order to
use the system for irrigation purposes was $1800.00. We find
it convenient to use these pumps alternately in spraying and

— 69 —

there is a factor of insurance delay against due to pump trouble.
Provision to drive the pump with a tractor has also been made,
at slight extra cost, in order to guard against delay due to engme

The pump installed has sufficient capacity to provide for the
spraying of 140 acres of fruit in a two or two and one-half day
period. An irregular area of 80 acres was piped last sprmg, all
of which is included in a rectangle approximately 1500 feet wide
and 3500 feet long. The spray plant is located at a creek on
one of the short sides of the rectangle. The tract is rolhng with
a general elevation of 125 to 200 feet above the creek level at
the plant. The trees range from 17 to 32 years in age.

A two-inch main line, centrally located, extends from the
plant through the tract for a distance of 2800 feet where it is
divided into two one-and-a-quarter-inch branches both of which
are later reduced to one inch and come to dead ends at the last
laterals. At 200 foot intervals every fifth tree row, three-
fourths inch laterals are run from the main line m both directions
to the edges of the orchard. A shut-off valve has been placed
on each lateral close to the main and several valves have been
placed on the main Hne to limit the flow to certain areas. An
outlet valve or hydrant with snap-ons for hose connections has
been placed at alternate trees along the laterals. All pipes
were laid to grade so as to drain to outlets. All of the laterals
which were temporarily laid along tree rows on the surface.

The combined plant outfit consists of two 40 gallon Friend
force pumps and a 100 gallon rotary tank filling pump mounted
tandem on an eyebar frame with a 1000 gallon tank which is
equally divided. Each pump is clutch connected to a drive
shaft which also drives the agitator. The pump shaft is belt
driven by a second-hand automobile engine.

This outfit is substantially housed in a one and a half story
building, the upper story of which is constructed to carry a
season's supply of lime sulphur if necessary. The building is
located at a bank which makes it possible to roll the hme sulphur
barrels into the attic over a short trestle. The operator while
fining the tanks stands on a platform which is level with and
an extension of the top of the tank. The lime sulphur is dumped
into a trough in the floor above by rolling the barrel over it,
from which it drains into a tank mounted several feet above
the tank floor. From this it is tapped into vessels and measured
for use. All the other material needed to make up the spray
mixture is stored on the platform. When the full capacity of
the pump is used up it requires a refill about every 12 minutes.
This period varied from 15 to 22 minutes, depending ^Poi^.^^^
size of disks used and the general working conditions, with eight
men spraying.

Method of Spraying.— We start spraying near the plant,
one gun to a lateral and work away from it to the far end.
Finally when the main contains enough spray material to com-
plete the spraying, plain water is pumped into the main. This

— 60 —

avoids waste of spray material which may thus be limited to
that held in the laterals to about two per cent of the total used.
We spray with an approximate pressure of 400 pounds at the
nozzle. This requires a pump pressure of 450 pounds when
the sprayer is close to the plant, varying up to 550 pounds
when farther away. Ten trees are sprayed from each hydrant
with a 100 foot hose, using the long system. This system
requires more hydrants than the square system but less
dragging of hose and less hose length. By proper procedure
the sprayers in our layout move only 50 feet of hose while
spraying.

Kind of Pipe. — We used copper alloy pipe because of its
probable long life. Our bids indicated only a slight advance
for the copper alloy pipe over plain black pipe. Weathering
tests on iron pipe and plates demonstrate that a small percentage
of copper in iron tends to make it rust resistant and under any
conditions extends its life.

Size and Length of Hose. — It is not economical to use a
3/8 inch hose. It consumes too much pressure. In the discus-
sion on Mr. Farley's paper*, a member brought out the fact
that in a test the pressure was reduced 50 pounds at the nozzle
attached to a 200 foot hose when a 3/8 inch hose was substitted
for a 3^inch hose. The tables indicate an even higher difference.

Another member in discussing the same paper asked the
question, *What is the relative cost of putting in enough pipe
lines so that one man spraying by himself carries only 100 feet
of hose?" To anyone contemplating a stationary plant this
question is most important. The papers of former years indicate
hose lengths in use varying from 75 to 225 feet with one, two or
three men to a single hose and gun. When cover crop growth
rises with a rising thermometer a hose longer than 100 feet
handled by one man is liable to slow him up due to fatigue.

We applied nine sprays this year with this plant; on the first,
second, third, and fourth the average of all the sprayers for the
job was 30 trees per hour. The cover crops were low and there
was very little or no foliage. The trees have an average spread
of about 30 feet and an average height of 20 feet. On the fifth
(petal fall), sixth, and seventh sprays the same men averaged
24 trees per hour. Increased foliage and cover crop conditions
slowed them up. On the eighth and ninth sprays with the
foliage very heavy and the temperature high they averaged 21
trees to the hour. In the last two sprays three thirty-second-inch
disks were used, on all other one-eighth.

If we had located our laterals 400 feet apart we could have
saved $650.00 in the first cost of laterals and hydrants but in
the nine sprays of the season we would have incurred an extra
operating expense of $240.00 for labor to drag hose. This at
six per cent represents an investment of $4000.00. In less than
three years that saving in first cost would be dissipated in wasted
labor.

•^K^

n^S

*1929 Proceedings, Page 70.

— 61 —

Velocity, Friction and Pressure Losses.— It is generally
considered good practice to design for a velocity of 2.5 feet a
second. It is necessary to maintain this velocity at all times in
actual practice. A continued low velocity of less than one and
a half feet a second will settle heavy material such as arsenic
while too high a velocity will cause undue pressure losses. It is
of first importance to have a definite plan in mind, design for
it and then chart it for a guide in operation.

Timeliness in Spraying.— Our technical advisors have im-
pressed upon us the importance of shortening our accustomed
period of spraying. In response some of us have sacrificed both
quality and economy in our attempt to gain time, by using
large disks or multiple brooms to pour on large quantities of
material in a hasty, indifferent way. True economy is practiced
by having sufficient equipment and employing enough labor to
put on the least amount of spray material that will give you
complete coverage in the desired time. We formerly used two
250 gallon tank portable sprayers, with 12 gallons per minute
pumps driven by five horse power engines capable of maintaining
325 pound pressure on the pump gauge with two leads of hose
operating. These sprayers were horse drawn by teams respond-
ing to verbal direction from one of the men spraying. With
this equipment four men were able to spray the orchard now
piped in a period ranging from 4.5 days (180 hours labor) for
the early sprays to 6.5 days (260 hours labor) for the later
sprays. The sprayers were refilled at tanks so located as not to
require more than a one-fourth mile trip. Using the stationary
spray plant with eight men spraying and one man operating
the plant, the same orchard was sprayed in 10 hours (90 hours
labor) for the early sprays, ranging to a period of 15 hours (135
hours labor) for the later sprays. Almost as much labor was
required to lay and bury the pipes. The stationary plant con-
sumed 40 per cent of the gasoUne required by the portable
spray outfits.

By this method of spraying each man is by himself on a
lateral where he does not get the drift of another, nor does he
skimp his work in order to catch up with a moving sprayer.

The additional pressure caused the spray to break into a finer
mist for close work and it enabled the men to reach and hit
what they aimed at in the tops. Occasionally we could not reach
the tops of trees on windy days in other years, and found it
necessary to return to finish a spray. That was not the case
this year.

Cost of Plant.— The total cost of piping 80 acres, including
a pump and engine to provide for 140 acres complete, excluding
the building was $2,607.55. Pipes and fittings $19.00 per acre;
laying and burying $4.37 per acre; engine, pump and accessories
$5.25 per acre, making a total for the complete plant of $28.62
per acre not including the building.

— 62 —

Sunimary of Advantages.— Better protection against insects
and diseases; better job of spraying; cheaper in operating
although some material is wasted; saves cover crops from being
destroyed; avoids bruising growing fruit; a reduced loss in
depreciation of outfit; pleasanter spray conditions for those
engaged at it.

CAREFUL HANDLING OF FRUIT IN PREPARATION

FOR STORAGE OR MARKET

G. W. PECK, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

I am going to present a few thoughts concerning the handling
of apples which seem to me important if we here in the East are
going to meet successfully increasing competition from apples
from other sections, as well as from other fresh fruits and vege-
tables.

The careful handling of fruit throughout harvesting and pack-
ing operations and care in handling the barrel or box or basket
after it is packed is equally as important as any one of the
orchard practices which the most successful growers maintain in
their orchard business. Certainly it is true that the most success-
ful growers see to it that their fruit is carefully handled. None
of you, I am sure, attempt to grow apples in a commercial way
without giving particular care to the control of insect and
fungous troubles. In the packing operations insect and fungous
injured apples are graded out*. An apple with a few scab spots
or one with curculio stings or with limb rub is fully as valuable
as one showing bruises or stem punctures as the result of care-
less handling. At packing time these bruises and punctures may
be hard to detect. Many of them occur in picking or in allowing
the graded fruit to run into the barrel or basket. It takes some
little time for these bruised spots to become discolored and give
the apple a bad appearance, therefore the packer never sees
them. The barrels are headed or the baskets covered and they
go to storage or market, but when they are exposed for sale
these bruises show up to disadvantage. Frequently decay will
have set in where fruits were punctured or bruised. There is
no other defect which will condemn a package in the eyes of a
prospective buyer as quickly as the presence of fruit showing
decay.

For a few years at our New York Horticultural Society meet-
ings at Rochester and Poughkeepsie, barrels and bushels of
packed apples have been taken at random from the packs of
various growers, dealers, and associations, then placed on dis-
play. The packages are opened and each one graded by Federal
inspectors. Some of you who have attended these meetings and
have seen this exhibit will agree that the most serious defects,

*Even though fruit dajnaged in that way appears too often in the show.
See the footnote under the Partial List of Fruit Prizes.

— 63 —

taking the exhibit as a whole, were bruises, stem punctures,
press marks, and decay. A very high percentage of this daniage,
which seriously reduces the value of a package, could be ehmi-
nated with little or no additional cost to the owner if proper
steps were taken to enforce careful handling of the fruit in every
operation from the time it leaves the tree until the fruit is packed.
In these exhibits at Rochester and Poughkeepsie I believe we
can see a marked improvement in the past year or two in the
matter of bruising. Each year more growers are coming to
reahze that careful handling and proper packing of their truit
are fully as essential as care in keeping defective apples from the
package.

And your question is, how are you to get the average help to
handle apples carefully? It is my beUef that at the present time
there is enough help available to come fairly close to doing as
they are told; and by the way, the help are not always the ones
to blame. There is many a grower who gives little consideration
to the way his fruit is handled by his men or by the way he
himself handles it.

It costs little, if any, more to handle an apple carefully in
every step, from the time it leaves the tree until it is packed
and placed in storage or on the car or truck than it does to
handle it carelessly. And certainly fruit showing press marks,
stem punctures, rim cuts and bruises will never sell for as much
money as fruit of equal quality in other respects but with these
defects not present. If any one doubts this statement all you
have to do is to spend a little time at some market where pro-
duce is being sold from the car in small lots. Four years ago, I
had an opportunity to watch this for a period of two nionths in
Detroit. I was engaged at this time in inspection work with the
Merchants^ Dispatch, Incorporated. Each day from thirty to
over a hundred cars of perishable fruits and vegetables were
received. At that time quite a number of cars of apples in
bushel baskets were coming in from Western New York and
quite a good many from Michigan. From the very first day I
was impressed with the fact that the buyers wanted quality, not
only in apples but in every other line of produce. A very good
car of apples carefully handled and packed and free from defects
would frequently be sold out before we could get around to make
an inspection of the load. Well, those were the cars that seldom
a claim against them so it didn't make much difference whether
we got a record of them or not. But the car showing bruises,
stem punctures, press-marks or rim-cuts, scab, worms, decay or
any other serious defect or a combination of them all, was
always the one to sit around for three or four days or a week
before all the load could be disposed of. It requires a lot more
selling effort to dispose of such fruit and always prices on such
a car would be below the market.

I expect that all of you have occasion to take your meals at
various restaurants and hotels from time to time. Being on
extension work in New York State I live on the road a good

— 64 —

share of the year. Isn't it a remarkable thing, how many of
the restaurants and hotels take perfectly good food and spoil it
in the process of getting it ready for the table? The same thing,
exactly, applies to too many growers in the fruit business'
Every effort is spent in pruning, fertilization and spraying in
growing a crop with high quality and then through carelessness
in the process of harvesting and preparing it for market this
high quality is ruined. You will agree that the buyer and con-
sumer are fully as able to find and appreciate high quality in a
pack of apples as you or I are able to locate and appreciate a
good meal. The buyer remembers the brand or the pack which
stands for dependable quality, just as you or I don't forget the
restaurant that served the good food.

Each crop of apples represents considerable of an investment
not only in the orchard itself but in spraying equipment, orchard
tools, spray materials, fertilizers, labor, packages, harvesting and
packing equipment. As yet, however, comparatively few growers
and handlers of apples in general have come to fully appreciate
that this fruit must be carefully handled at every step from the
time it leaves the tree until it is placed in storage or on the car
truck if it is to present an attractive appearance on the market
and successfully meet the increasing competition from other
fruits and fresh vegetables. Careful handling is equally as
important as careful grading out of other defects from the pack
The grower who is eliminating both these troubles from his pack
IS the one whose crop is in demand. He has comparatively little
competition. Such a grower has little to worry about so far as
the future of the fruit industry is concerned. A year ago I had
a number of our New York State growers tell me it was one of
. the best years they had ever had. Less than two months ago a
man in the Hudson Valley told me that this was going to be his
best year. In every instance these were our very best growers.
They grow their crop well, harvest and handle them carefully,
and put up an absolutely dependable pack.

The trade is quick to recognize dependable quality in a pack of
fruit and a grower has nothing to lose while such a reputation is
being made. I venture to say there are growers in this audience
whose fruit going on consignment to the New York or other
large market is frequently sold before it reaches destination, for
50 cents to a dollar or more per barrel, above the market. I
know a number of instances where this has been the case with
some of our New York growers. Certainly this reputation for a
fine pack is a valuable asset. There is no good reason why a lot
more growers might not enjoy this reputation and incidentally
very materially increase the profits from their orchards.

I appreciate that careful handling is only one of the things
that goes to make up a fine package of apples. Good color and
size and freedom from blemishes all enter into it.

I would like to give you the results of some work which I did
with Mcintosh in 1927 and in 1928. Each year I harvested,
for this purpose, around twenty-five bushels of fruit. Each year

— 66 —

lip

all the fruit used in this work was harvested from the same tree.
With one lot of Mcintosh each apple was allowed to drop into
the picking basket from six to ten inches. With another lot,
each apple was dropped from twelve to fifteen mches, while
with others they were very carefully handled and except for an
occasional apple they were not allowed to drop or bruise m the
operations of picking or packing. In the operation of grading
the carelessly picked apples were emptied and packed without
any particular care to prevent bruising. They were handled
about as the average grower handles them. The carefully
picked apples were carefully handled in every operation. One
lot was run over a Rex sizing machine. The apples were graded
and packed and placed in cold storage the same day they were
harvested, and each year the middle of January they were taken
out of storage and sent to the Horticultural Society meetings
at Rochester where they were on display. The following table
gives the average of the two years results in the different methods
of handUng. And, by the way, it is not patched up to prove
my contention that apples should be carefully handled. 1 he
percentages give exactly the condition in which we found the
fruit.

INFLUENCE OF CARE IN HANDLING McINTOSH APPLES

Harvested— Graded— Packed— Stored on Same Day

Withdrawn Middle of January

Method

of
Sizing

machine
machine
machine
by hand

Method

of
Handling

careless
careless
careful
careful

each Apple

Dropped

inches

12—15

6—10

—00

% of Fruit

s Showing

Degree

Blue mold

Bruises

35
28
00
00

Serious

Slight

negligible

On both years when these experiments with Mcintosh were
conducted, there was at least a dollar a bushel difference
January 15 in the market value of these carefully and carelessly

handled apples. , , . ,

This topic of '^Careful HandUng^' would not be properly
covered without having something to say with reference to press
marks in barreled apples and rim cuts in baskets.

A very high percentage of the serious bruising and crushing
of fruit at the tail end of the packed barrel could be avoided.
A high percentage of the packed barrels of apples show unnec-
essary damaging press marks in varying degrees. It seems to
be the common belief that if a barrel is filled to an inch or an
inch and a half beyond the staves and the head pressed m a
tight pack in insured. As a matter of fact, such barrels are
almost sure to be slack— and show decay— after the fruit has
remained in storage for a considerable time. If, in filUng the
barrel with fruit, it has been properly racked down three or

— 66 —

TREXLER FARMS

DISTRIBUTORS FOR

National 25 Track Tractors

Bean Sprayers and Dusters

Boggs Graders

Everite Water Pumps

Prater Hammer Mills

Champion Potato Machinery

Lowell Hand Sprayers and Dusters
General Chemical Co. **Orchard Brand" Insecticides and Fungicides
Chipman Chemical Co. "Atlacide'' For Eradication of Canada Thistle

and Noxious Weeds

**Nichols'' Brand Bluestone

Orchard Tools, Ladders and Packages

DEALERS FOR
Case and New Idea Full Line of Machinery
A Complete Line of All Carried in Stock

Warehouse at Levans on
AUentown-Slatington Highway

Mail Address
OREFIELD, PA.

Phone
Allentown 3-6657

MALONEY BROS. NURSERY CO., Inc.

DANSVILLE, N. V.

DANSVILLE'S PIONEER NURSERY

FRUIT TREES, SHRUBS, VINES
AND ORNAMENTALS

WRITE FOR OUR FREE CATALOG

— 67 —

■Hi

all the fruit used in this work was harvested from the same tree.
With one lot of Mcintosh each apple was allowed to drop into
the picking basket from six to ten inches. With another lot,
each apple was dropped from twelve to fifteen mches, while
with others they were very carefully handled and except for an
occasional apple they were not allowed to drop or bruise in the
operations of picking or packing. In the operation of grading
the carelessly picked apples were emptied and packed without
any particular care to prevent bruising. They were handled
about as the average grower handles them. The carefully
picked apples were carefully handled in every operation. One
lot was run over a Rex sizing machine. The apples were graded
and packed and placed in cold storage the same day they were
harvested, and each year the middle of January they were taken
out of storage and sent to the Horticultural Society meetings
at Rochester where they were on display. The following table
gives the average of the two years results in the different methods
of handhng. And, by the way, it is not patched up to prove
my contention that apples should be carefully handled, ine
percentages give exactly the condition in which we found the
fruit.

INFLUENCE OF CARE IN HANDLING McINTOSH APPLES
Harvested— Graded— Packed— Stored on Same Day

Withdrawn Middle of January

Method

of
Sizing

machine
machine
machine
by hand

Method

of
Handling

each Apple

Dropped

inches

careless
careless
careful
careful

12—15

6—10

—00

% of Fruits Showing

Blue mold

35
28
00
00

Bruises

Degree

Serious

Slight

negligible

On both years when these experiments with Mcintosh were
conducted, there was at least a dollar a bushel difference
January 15 in the market value of these carefully and carelessly

handled apples. , , , , i

This topic of ^^ Careful HandUng^' would not be properly
covered without having something to say with reference to press
marks in barreled apples and rim cuts in baskets.

A very high percentage of the serious bruising and crushing
of fruit at the tail end of the packed barrel could be avoided.
A high percentage of the packed barrels of apples show unnec-
essary damaging press marks in varying degrees. It seems to
be the common belief that if a barrel is filled to an inch or an
inch and a half beyond the staves and the head pressed in a
tight pack in insured. As a matter of fact, such barrels are
almost sure to be slack— and show decay— after the fruit has
remained in storage for a considerable time. If, in filling the
barrel with fruit, it has been properly racked down three or

— 66 —

TREXLER FARMS

DISTRIBUTORS FOR

National 25 Track Tractors

Bean Sprayers and Dusters

Boggs Graders

Everite Water Pumps

Prater Hammer Mills

Champion Potato Machinery

Lowell Hand Sprayers and Dusters
General Chemical Co. "Orchard Brand" Insecticides and Fungicides
Chipman Chemical Co. "Atlacide" For Eradication of Canada Thistle

and Noxious Weeds

"Nichols'* Brand Bluestone

Orchard Tools, Ladders and Packages

DEALERS FOR
Case and New Idea Full Line of Machinery
A Complete Line of All Carried in Stock

Warehouse at Levans on
Allentown-Slatington Highway

Mail Address
OREFIELD, PA.

Phone
Allentown 3-6657

MALONEY BROS. NURSERY CO., Inc.

DANSVILLE, N. Y.

DANSVILLE'S PIONEER NURSERY

FRUIT TREES, SHRUBS, VINES
AND ORNAMENTALS

WRITE FOR OUR FREE CATALOG

— 67 —

four times, and has been properly tailed so that each fruit on
the end takes a part of the pressure as the head is forced in
there is no reason why the apples shou d stand more than a
quarter of an inch beyond the ends of the staves Very little
bruising will result of this is done and the fruit will hold better
and longer in storage, and fewer slack barrels will result. Much
of the shrinkage in barreled apples going out of storage could be
eliminated if they were properly packed when they went in, and
promptly stored after picking. ^u «e o

It is not uncommon to find from a peck to even as much as a
quarter of the contents of a barrel so badly bruised and crushed
that this part of the package is practically worthless due wholly
to the fact that too much fruit was forced into the tail in heading.
It should not be necessary to mention that the corrugated side
of paper caps should be placed away from the fruit. In some
packs a lot of them get in the barrels wrong side up, giving
the fruit a washboard effect which detracts from its appearance.
Any such condition is likely to impress a buyer that he may
expect the same carelessness to prevail m the pack.

Rim cuts in baskets are largely taken care of by the use of over-
size caps. If the baskets are filled too high, and the outside rmg
stands too high, rim cuts are likely to happen in the operation
of putting on the covers or handUng the basket in loading and
unloading. Fastening the cover at four points not only helps
very materially in preventing rim cuts but it holds the tace
intact. Baskets should be carefully racked down and should
not be over full. If baskets are so full that the face takes all
the pressure of the covers and the weight of packages above
those in the lower layers of a loaded truck or car or in storage
are likely to show more or less bruising and crushing, i His is
particularly true with tender varieties and fruit somewhat over-
ripe. I would not want you to gain the impression that I am
advocating less than a bushel of fruit in a bushel basket. A
slack package will likely show every apple in the bushel or barrel
with more or less serious bruising if it is shipped for any great
distance and handled two or three times before it is opened.
If the barrel and the basket are properly racked the contents
will be held in place without over-filling and comparatively
little bruising or press marks will result. Over-filling of a pack-
age certainly will not take the place of racking in the process ot
fining. Racking is an important operation, and one too frequently
neglected or forgotten, or an operation considered not necessary.
The package looks alright before the head is pressed in or the
cover put on, but when it comes out of cold storage or is opened
up on the market after having been handled a number of times
is where neglect of this operation in packing shows to disad-
vantage. . . .,1
There are just two or three other points in connection witn
the handUng of apples which have a very distinct bearing on
their keeping quality and market value. These do not have
to do with particular care in handUng, however, but are closely

associated with it.

— 68 —

Good size and good color are important qualities which have
a marked influence on salability and price. Some growers
experience difficulty in attaining these trade demands and
particularly in the matter of color. Where everything in the
line of good cultural practices is properly carried out, and where
color and size are not of the best, it would seem that, in some
orchards at least, growers might well delay harvesting oper-
ations for a few days. Experiments with Baldwin and Dehcious
have shown that prior to full maturity these varieties increase
in size at the rate of about a cubic centimeter a day. At this
time, too, fruit takes on color rapidly and particularly so if
weather conditions are favorable with cool nights and bright
clear days. Except with a few varieties such as Mcintosh and
also except for severe wind storms the loss in the few apples
which drop is more than made up in increased size in those
remaining on the trees. Usually a high percentage of the drop
apples at this time have ripened somewhat early due to some
defect. I appreciate that in this connection a grower with an
orchard in an exposed position may suffer serious loss from
winds. In fact the loss from wind is occasionally severe in
orchards with the most sheltered location. With Mcintosh
and to a lesser degree with some other varieties the loss from
dropping may be severe with little or no wind. In general,
however, the tendency with many growers seems to be to start
harvesting operations before best size and color have been
attained.

With varieties which tend to scald badly in storage it seems
quite essential to allow them to attain full maturity and good
color before harvesting in order to reduce this possible injury.

The stage of maturity on its keeping quality either in cold or
common storage. Immature and overmature fruit will scald
much more and show more decay in storage or when held for a
few days after being withdrawn than will fruit harvested at a
hard-ripe, properly matured stage. The following table gives
the results of experiments with Rome Beauty carefully con-
ducted by U. S. D. A. These percentages are the average of
four years work. Similar results have been obtained by Carrick
at Cornell with this and other varieties. For varieties which
tend to scald badly in storage the use of shredded oil paper will
be found of practical value in reducing this injury. Experiments
mdicate that about two pounds per barrel, distributed through-
out the package is the proper amount to use. Shredded oil
paper will not correct the results likely to follow from failure
to store promptly, or from harvesting the fruit in an immature
or overmature state, or from carelessness in any of the handUng
operations.

For long keeping apples should be placed in cold storage just
as soon after they are harvested as possible. Lowering the
temperature quickly not only very greatly increased the life of
the fruit but holds in check such diseases as apple scab, Jonathan
spot, Baldwin spot, blue mold and internal breakdown. Fruit

— 69 —

KEEPING QUALITY OF Af PLES AS AgFECTED BY MATURITY

Date
withdrawn

Jan. 10
Jan. 10

Condition at
Harvest

Feb. 17
Feb. 17

Mature
Immature

Bad Scald

Day
withdrawn

April 1
April 1

May 7
May 7

Mature
Immature

Rome Be
0.0%
0.0%

Bad Scald

10 Days

Later

Decay
Day

withdrawn

auty
1.7%
49.9%

Mature
Immature

0.0%
20.5%

1.0%
48.9%

3.5%
58.9%

5.4%
70.5%

10.4%
81.5%

0.0%
0.1%

Decay

in Ten

Days

0.0%
0.0%

0.1%
0.6%

0.2%
0.0%

17.8%
81.6%

0.0%
0.2%

0.1%
0.4%

1.6%
9.8%

2.7%
18.0%

held in the orchard or packing shed at comparatively hign tern-
peratures for a few days after picking will not hold nearly as
long in storage or present the bright appearance when taken out,
as when stored promptly. , ,

A very high percentage of the decay, blue mold fungus which
shows on apples coming out of storage is the result of stem
punctures and bruises. Seldom will this fungus enter an umn-

^""fn cTndusion I would like to suggest that as an inexpensive
means to make the apple business somewhat naore profitable
we give greater care in the various operations of handling.

SOME MOISTURE PROBLEMS IN THE ORCHARD

R. D. ANTHONY
State College, Centre County

Within recent years the results of studies conducted in a
number of states have compelled us to revise some of our ideas
about soil moisture relations. The abnormally dry conditions
during the last three years have made it especially desirable that
we become famihar with these newer ideas and their influence
upon orchard practice. ,

The fact that some of our eastern fruit growers have attempted
to irrigate some of their trees also seems to justify our consider-
ing the general problem of moisture relations at this time. We
might add, in passing, that several of these temporarily irriga-
Son outfits hastily riiged up when the drought of 1930 became
so severe proved very profitable investments. , , ^ , ,

I think that most of us have been taught that a dust mulch
was necessary to break capillary action and thus conserve soi
moisture. Now, soil scientists tell us that the movement of soil
moisture by capillary action is so slow that the effect of culti-
vation in stopping the capillary rise practically is negligible
except when the soil is close to the water table, a condition
which is seldom found in our Pennsylvania orchards.

— 70 —

To understand this principle and its effect upon orchard
practices let us see what happens following a summer rain during
which an inch has fallen. The upper part of the soil has become
saturated. This excess rapidly drains downward due to the
action of gravity but, if the soil was very dry before the rain,
this downward movement stops at about 4 to 8 inches, depend-
ing on the condition of the surface of the soil at that time. When
this gravity movement has ceased, the amount of water remain-
ing in the soil is called its ^^field capacity'^ a term with which we
shall need to become familiar. If the soil is somewhat damp
when the ram begins, the downward movement of water by
gravity may extend for several feet. Its lower extent marks
the lower hmit of the area that is holding moisture at its field
capacity; a rain does not partially wet a soil. If the entire
column of soil is at field capacity before the rain, all the water
taken m by the soil moves downward until it reaches the water
table.

As soon as the rain ceases, two other forces begin to remove
water from the soil. Evaporation takes place from the surface
and in a week may remove a considerable part of the moisture
m the upper 4 or 5 inches. After that time surface evaporation
IS very much slower and is negligible below 6 or 8 inches

Below the surface 8 inches the chief force which decreases
the soil moisture below the field capacity is the action of plant
roots. Again, at this point, we have had to remodel our ideas
We used to think that capillary action could bring sufficient
naoisture to the plant to supply its needs; now we have to think
of the plant roots as growing out into new soil to get additional
water when the moisture in the original root area is used up.

With this the case, we can see how important it is that a tree
should have the ability to make a rapid root growth and also
have available unoccupied soil holding a maximum supply of
water into which its roots may extend.

A small amount of the water which the tree takes up from the
soil IS retained by the tree and used in growing new wood or
fruit but most of it is lost through the leaves by transpiration
A tree transpires from 300 to 500 pounds of water for every
pound of dry weight which it produces. The rate of loss by
transpiration is influenced chiefly by the dryness of the air,
the temperature, and the abihty of the plant roots to secure
water. Thus fruit trees growing in the dry air and high summer
temperatures of southern California require much more water
than in New York or Pennsylvania.

Different soils are able to hold different amounts of water at
held capacity. In the spring at State College, after we have
had favorable conditions of rain and snow fall, the Hagerstown
silt loam m the Experiment Orchard will hold water equal to
about 30 per cent of the dry weight of the soil.

Fruit trees can make httle use of water in excess of the field
capacity; in fact, their roots may be injured if the gravity water
drives out the soil oxygen for too long a period. Not all of the

— 71 —

water that is in a soil at its field capacity can be \is^<l by the tree
As the moisture percent decreases, the soil resists further loss
with greater and greater force until the tree roots are no longer
Se to overcome this force. If the roots then can not grow nto
new soil, the tree wilts; so the percentage f ^^f ^/ J^^^^^
this time is called the wilting coefficient of the f ^l- ^n ^he
college orchard this runs between 8 and 10 Per cent This then
leaves water available for plant growth at the field capacity
equivalent to over 20 per cent of the dry weight of our soil
A sS moisture of 20 per cent is equivalent to about 3 inches of
water per foot or over 80,000 gallons per acre one foot deep

If we had a sandy soil which is less retentive of moisture,
we would have a much lower field capacity and probably around
To per cent available instead of 20 per cent. This may not
mean only half as much moisture in a sandy soil It is not the
amount of rain which falls on the surface which is significant.
With some of our heavier clays where the physical condition has
become poor, the run-off may be so heavy that only a long con-
tTnueTrSn penetrates deeply. With the fighter soils penetra ion
is much more rapid, and consequently a much larger proportion
of The rain becomes available to the plant roots Cultivation
which breaks up a surface crust usually increases the Penetration
It has been our experience at State College that if our soil
moisture is about at field capacity when growth starts in the
Sg, apple trees have been able to make nearly a normal
Sowth even through three months of practically no effective
rainfall provided the limestone rock has been far enough down
to give 'the tree roots a volume of soil which could act as a reser-
voir. Closely planted trees, as where fillers are used, would
have less water available to them.

A very large part of the root system of an apple tree may be
in the upper two feet of soil, though some roots may go down 20
feet or more in a deep soil. During a serious drought the soil
moisture in the upper area may be exhausted because of the
presence of such a large amount of roots These lower roots
, may then secure enough water to keep the tree alive but not
enough to prevent wilting.

At times when the entire root area is in soil well supplied
with moisture we may have temporary wilting. During hot
weather when the air is very dry, leaf transpiration may be
more rapid than is the water intake by the roots. At such
times the leaves are able to draw water from nearby fruits.
During the night or following a rain, when the rate of transpira-
tion is lowered, these wilted fruits again become firm. It was
probably these changes which caused so much fruit splitting
with Stavman and drought spot in Baldwin these last two years.
We some times have drought conditions in the orchard when
the Weather Bureau records of total rainfall would not indicate
such to be the case. When the available moisture in the surface
foot of soil at the college has been used up, it will take nearly
three inches of rain to penetrate one foot. Under such a con-

— 72 —

dition a half inch of rain does not penetrate below the zone of
surface evaporation and practically is all lost as far as tree roots
are concerned. Any time when a considerable proportion of
the rain during the growing season comes as light showers, the
effective rainfall in the orchard is much below the total rainfall.

This throws some light on the problem we face when we start
to irrigate an eastern apple orchard. An application of 1000
gallons per tree in an orchard planted 40 x 40 is equivalent only
to one inch of rain. If the soil is so dry as to need irrigation 3000
gallons per tree would be nearer the right amount to use to
maintain proper growth. The use of 50 gallons per tree may help
a little in keeping a tree alive especially if the water is concen-
trated in a limited area but it should not be thought of as an
irrigation.

Many of our cultural practices modify the soil moisture rela-
tions. It takes as much water to grow a heavy cover crop as to
carry mature trees through the summer. Fortunately in the
east we usually have abundant moisture for both. If, on June 1,
we could foretell with certainty the advent of a serious drought,
we would not seed a cover crop in the cultivated orchard. If
we do seed the cover and the drought comes, our loss of soil
water through the cover may not be important. A drought to
be serious must begin by early July while the cover is still small.
If the ground is in fine condition with the moisture close to field
capacity, it can maintain both tree and cover; if the moisture
and nutrition conditions are less favorable, the cover will be
killed before its roots have penetrated deeply enough to have
competed seriously with the apple roots.

In the sod orchard, conditions are somewhat different. Here
we have a crop making a heavy demand on soil moisture early
in the season, a demand which drops way down when the grass
is cut and left as a mulch. If our droughts came in May and
June when the sod growth is vigorous, sod might seriously
deplete the soil moisture. Our experience has been that droughts
during mid summer do not cause a greater water loss in sod
plots than in cultivated plots growing a cover crop. This has
been true both with blue grass and alfalfa.

If we must cease to consider cultivation as of value in breaking
the capillary movement of water to the surface, has cutivation
any other value in conserving soil moisture? We have seen
how, under modern soil theories, the chief factor which removes
available moisture from the lower soil is the action of plant roots.
Cultivation is still of value in conserving moisture but it does
so by destroying the weeds which otherwise would be using
considerable quantities of water. That cultivation does not
differ materially in its results from scraping which cuts the weeds
without disturbing the soil has been verified recently at State
College by Professor F. G. Merkle of the agronomy department

Many of you know that our horticultural department is
recommending the use of short sod rotations as a desirable
orchard practice. The ability of apple trees to grow normally

— 73 —

and fruit heavily under this sytem of management during the
last two years in which the total rainfall deficiency has been over
19 inches, has been one of the factors leading us to this recom-
mendation. We think two conditions are responsible for the
ability of these trees to withstand dry weather. Turning heavy
sods into the soil is proving the fruit grower's best methods of
building up the organic content of orchard soils. Increasing the
organic content of the soil increases the amount of water which
the soil can hold at field capacity and so increase the amount
available for plant growth. The presence of sods or sod residues
decreases the run-off with heavy rains; consequently there is a
much deeper penetration of gravity water and a greater volume
of the soil has its moisture built up to field capacity — our reservoir
is larger. The channels left by the decay of grass roots aid in
this downward movement.

The experiences of the last few years hold two lessons for us,
first, the prime importance of selecting a site which has a deep
and retentive soil; and second, the necessity of maintaining that
soil in such a condition that profitable tree production can be
continued through the most serious droughts which we may
expect under Pennsylvania conditions.

Mr. Miller: Did you say what causes the apple to split?

Dr. Anthony: When it gets dry you sometimes get con-
ditions where you see corn leaves rolling at noon. The next
morning the leaves are all right, but there will be the same
rolling the following noon; this is temporary wilting. There is
a loss through the leaves too heavy and too rapid for the roots
to bring water up fast enough. Under similar conditions in the
apple trees, the leaves steal the water from the fruit. When
night comes and transpiration slows down, then the fruit gets
water back again — spongy at noon, firm at night. It is these
conditions of rapid change of moisture in your fruit, that are
probably the cause leading to so much splitting.

Mr. Miller: The fruit in some orchards will split and some
wont. I often wondered why that was.

Dr. Anthony: I think we can say, with quite a good deal of
certainty that it is simply too irregular a moisture supply.

Question: How would you handle alfalfa?

Dr. Anthony: We have been running soil determinations in
all of our plots for four or five years. It has been our experience
that usually there is more moisture in our alfalfa plot than in
any of our regularly cultivated plots that are growing a cover
crop. With us, we cut alfalfa about in the blossom, and this
cutting usually precedes the initiation of a drought with us by
a week or two. It is very seldom, as I said before, that we have
seriously dry weather during the early growing season — early
May and June. So that we grow our first crop of alfalfa and
get it cut before we have seriously dry weather. Under these
conditions we have had no trouble at all with alfalfa using up
moisture.

— 74-^

I might say that four or five years ago Lehigh County had
a very dry spell; I think it was fully as dry as in 1930. Mr.
Fenstermacher told me at that time their areas in alfalfa were
in better condition than equal areas under cultivation, which,
I think, did not have a cover crop. So I believe we can say,
under Pennsylvania conditions, that it will be a very excep-
tional year when we have trouble from lack of moisture in the
alfalfa block. If it does look as though it were too dry, I would
advance the cutting of alfalfa.

Question: Is alfalfa better than blue grass?

Dr. Anthony: Well, I think we could answer that by saying
that as many of our growers as think they can grow alfalfa
successfully are trying it. Alfalfa gives you a nitrogen supply
which you do not get from blue grass. Nitrogen is pretty cheap
in the fertilizer bag now, so I would not go to too much trouble
to grow alfalfa. But if I could grow the alfalfa as easily as the
blue grass, I should use alfalfa.

Question: How about sweet clover?

Dr. Anthony: I think we should consider it more as a cover
crop than as a sod. Ask Professor Fagan that question when
he talks on cover crops.

While some of our growers are trying to use sweet clover more
as a permanent cover, I am inclined to believe, for the time being
at least, we had better consider it as an addition to our cover
crops.

Mr. Moore: Will early cultivation encourage a deep rooted
tree?

Dr. Anthony: I am not so sure about that; I wish I did know.
My own personal feeling is this: If you want deep roots, get a
deep soil; your roots will go down if you have proper soil con-
ditions. Those treatments, which in the first year or two lead
to shallow rooting, such as mulching, are not desirable in the
young orchard. After the first year or two I don^t believe we
need to worry much. Once your roots get started, if you have
such a depth and richness of soil that your nitrogen conditions
and your air conditions are right fairly deep, then you will have
deep roots.

Question: Professor, did you use any subsoiling in any of
your experiments?

Dr. Anthony: Not yet.

Member: I tried that on a hillside orchard, and it seemed to
me that, in the fight rains, especially, and in the light snows, as
they melted, there was much less run-off.

Dr. Anthony: At the West Virginia Station^s new research
farm at Kearneysville not far from Martinsburg, they are
using a deep sub-soiling to precede the planting of certain
blocks of their trees. I think it will pay us to watch their
experience.

Two years ago north central Ohio was harder hit by the
drought than we were and most of the orchards in this section
showed signs of suffering from lack of water. I was in one

— 76 —

orchard where a deep tillage tool, penetrating from 22 to 24
inches, had been run two or three times between young trees.
When we studied the penetration of moderate rains in this soil,
we found damp soil for about three inches from the surface,
except where the subsoiler had run. Here moisture had pene-
trated to the bottom of the furrow and along the sides where
the tight soil had been broken by the plow. This soil had a
heavy hard-pan to a depth of 18 inches to two feet. Ripping
through this hardpan was permitting deeper penetration of
moisture and was probably a benefit in this orchard. The tool
was not run close enough to the trees to cut many roots.

EXCERPTS FROM THE ANNUAL ADDRESS OF G. S. L.

CARPENTER, PRESIDENT, MARYLAND STATE

HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY, AT THEIR

THIRTY-FOURTH ANNUAL MEETING

At the present time, our apple industry is meeting with the
most difficult marketing conditions ever experienced. The
industry was never in its entire history confronted with so many
tariffs, embargoes, total or partial, or restrictions, as it is today;
and they are steadily increasing instead of diminishing.*

Exports to England, Scotland, Wales, Irish Free State,
Belgium, France, Holland, Denmark, Roumania, Poland and
Germany must be free from spray residue and apple maggot.
Vigilant policing on our part is required to avoid further action.

England, Scotland, Wales and the Irish Free State allow only
fruit of No. 1 quality or better to be shipped between July 1st
and November 15th each year.

The Argentine estabhshed by a Decree such drastic import
sanitary restrictions that the movement of fruit from our section
was seriously curtailed.

Poland, Roumania, Peru and Japan have a total embargo
against us, and the Agrarians and Hitlerites in Germany head
a strong movement to embargo us completely there.

Heavy duties and tariffs have been recently set up against
us in many countries.

The Belgian duty on apples in baskets was raised on December
10th from 5 to 25 francs per 100 kilos. A kilo equals 2.2 pounds.

France has a duty of 7J^ francs per 100 kilos, but a bill is
now pending to quadruple this.

Holland has a duty of 8 per cent based on valuation. How-
ever, Holland advises, because of our tariff and bulb quarantines,
we can expect a duty raise.

Sweden has a duty against us of $1.98 per barrel.

Norway, from August to January, has a duty of $4.94 per
100 pounds plus surtax of $2.47 per pounds; balance of year
$2.47 plus $1.23 surtax.

Denmark has a duty of 60 cents per barrel.

•Secretary's Note — This is only too true.

— 76 —

For Quality Fniif
and Yeaetables

Just "Paint" It On
the Roosts

Kills lice on your en-
tire flock, whether 50
birds or 5000. When
chickens perch upon
roosts that have been
painted with "Black
Leaf 40", fumes are
slowly released that
penetrate the feathers
and kill the lice.

KILL INsAECTV^/

AS A SPRAY, •'Black Leaf 40", Nicotine Sulphate,
kills aphis, thrips, leaf-hopper, red-bug, psylla, etc.,
both by contact and by its nicotine fumes. Com-
bine it with Lime Sulphur, Lead Arsenate, Bor-
deaux, etc., if you wish, and make one spraying do
double duty.

AS A NICOTINE DUST, for orchards, truck crops
and gardens, mix "Black Leaf 40" w^ith an alkaline
carrier such as Hydrated Lime, as described in our
free spraying and dusting chart.

"BLACK LEAF 40" is the world's leading nicotine
insecticide. Endorsed by Experiment Stations.
Deadly to all soft-bodied sucking insects. Non-in-
jurious to foliage. Ask your Experiment Station.

KILLS BY CONTACT and FUMES

While the eflFectiveness of Black Leaf 40" is primarily
dependent upon direct contact (wetting), a secondary
advantage is furnished by the "gassing" effects of the
penetrating nicotine fumes set free in the spraying ma-
terial. This two-fold action is an advantage not pos-
sessed by any non-volatile spraying solution.

BLACK LEAF 40" CONTROLS POULTRY LICE

The treatment requires only a small paint brush, a can
of "Black Leaf 40" and a few minutes' time for "paint-
ing" the solution on top of the roosts. Easy, effective
and cheap. Eliminates all individual handling of birds.
Ask your Dealer for information or write us.

TOBACCO B\- PRODUCTS CHEIVIICAL CORPORATION, Incotporalmd

Loulavllle, Kentucky

I
I

77 —

Finland has a prohibitive duty of $10.00 per barrel.

Poland has a duty of $1.52 per barrel.

Canada has a sliding scale tariff based on valuation fixed by
Order in Council amounting to approximately 30 cents per
bushel and 90 cents per barrel.

The Argentine, a duty raised from 7 to 32 per cent.

Most serious of all to us would be a tariff against apples from
the United States, which is contemplated by the British Govern-
ment in which preferential treatment for the British common-
wealth of nations is provided. {Now 10% ~ Begun March 1.]

I believe that these tariffs, embargoes and restrictions which
have been placed against our apples, are a direct result of the
tariffs, embargoes and quarantines used by our Government
to protect certain of our industries. Yet, we cannot blame any
of these Governments, who have used our procedure as a basis
for their own. Certainly it is retaUation, but can we blame the
Argentine, when her grapes, cattle, turkeys and corn by eni-
bargoes or quarantines are totally or partially restricted in their
movement to our country for issuing similar decrees against us?

Added to these trade barriers, we have a decreased buying
power abroad and a depreciated exchange. Many countries have
gone off the gold standard. On January 2nd, the pound was
worth $3.40 instead of $4.86. In Denmark, Norway and Sweden,
the value of the kroner averaged 18.7 cents instead of 26.8 cents
and in the Argentine, the peso is worth 23.75 cents instead of
42.44 cents.

Our apple industry has been developed to supply the World's
markets and is seriously in need of all outlets. 1926 was a dis-
astrous year, yet we exported more than 7,000,000 barrels of
apples. This year to December 19th, we have exported only
1,573,904 barrels, 735,704 less than 1930, a year of low produc-
tion.

Of course, it follows that the fruit which we cannot export
will be offered on our domestic markets for sale, though much
of it is not suited for this trade. At the present time, wholesale
prices on apples, according to Government reports, are the
lowest that they have been since the records were first kept
in 1910.

For many years, we have been improving our laws for the
standardizing of our pack of apples. This year, our movement
of graded fruit has been curtailed by the heavy volume of
Unclassified fruit distributed in bulk and in packages by trucks
and rail to all areas. We face the loss of much of the benefit
derived from our standardization unless this movement out of
our state of inferior fruit is curtailed or regulated.

In the past, our industry has worked along Unes of improve-
ment most necessary for a particular section. I believe the
time has come when we should act not as individuals, states or
sections, but as an industry, and that all sections growing apples
in our country should work together in solving and progressing
their common interests.

— 78 —

I feel that the horticultural societies of Virginia, West Virginia,
Pennsylvania and Maryland should work as one in the handling
of problems and situations which affect this area.

Our industry does not dare depend on the hope for better
times as a solution for their problems. The situation is so serious
that concerted efforts must be made, if our industry is to prosper.
I believe we can do much.

READ THIS IF YOU HAVE MARKETED OR HOPE
TO MARKET APPLES IN NEW YORK STATE

STATE OF NEW YORK

DEPARTMENTS OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS

ALBANY

^, ^ ^ January 18, 1932

Mr. George A. Stuart, Director
Bureau of Markets
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

Dear Sir:

On January 12th our apple inspectors located in New York City report
the inspection of several closed packages of apples which were branded
"UtiUty, 2}4 up, York Imperial, United States of America, Joe Zilch, Cider-
ville, Pa." Our inspectors called our attention to the fact that this shipment
of apples was overfaced in that the specimens of apples on the face end of these
vackages were of a larger size than the remainder of the apples throughout the
basket^. They state that they were faced with apples 23^" in diameter or
larger.

On this same date, and at the same pier, our inspectors report the inspec-
tion of another lot of apples which were marked, ''Dehcious, Summit Farm,
2J^ in. Min., James Dandy, Appletown, Pa." Our inspectors note that the
'packer neglected to stencil the grade on these packages and on January 15th our
mspectors report the inspection of another lot of apples at Pier 29 which
were marked "Ben Davis, 2}i" and up, William Hill, Harbor St., Seaport,
Pa.

Our inspectors note that the packer neglected to stencil the grades on
any of these baskets^. While our inspectors did not examine these shipments
of apples to ascertain the grade, they did open several packages to ascertain
if the face represented an average of the contents. Our statute relative to
packing and grading of apples, requires that all lots of apples exposed for
sale in either open or closed packages must not be overfaced. The apples
on the face end must represent an average of the apples throughout the
packages. This law applies to apples grown and shipped in this State.

As I have the reports relative to these apples on my desk, I thought you
might be interested in the mformation and I am very glad to call it to your
attention.

Very truly yours,

P. M. Eastman,
Assistant Director.

lYou may overface 15% in Pennsylvania but not in New York.

2In New York, the U. S. Grade must go on the package.

Secretarv's Note: Ficticious names and addresses, of course, but you'd
be surprised!

— 79 —

^1;

MODERN DEVELOPMENTS IN
SPRAYING PRACTICE

H. G. INGERSON, John Bean Mfg. Co., Lansing, Mich.

Since my last attendance at your meeting in January, 1929,
many developments of great importance to the country at large
and to our fruit industry, have taken place. In considering the
material for this discussion, I have referred back to the reports
of your Pennsylvania meetings held during the past three years,
and find very little discussion of the mechanics of spraying. In
view of the unusual destructiveness of codling moth the past
two seasons, I believe a discussion on spraying methods is
timely.

I need not go into detail as to the importance of spraying.
It is generally conceded that spraying is one of the most impor-
tant orchard operations, but I doubt if many of us have given
thought or careful consideration to just how expensive an
operation spraying is. I have been keeping reports of spraying
costs from different sections of the East for several years and in
compiUng these, I have been surprised at the uniformity and
the high per acre cost shown by these actual records kept over
a period of years by experienced orchardists in your neighboring
states of Ohio and New York. In your Pennsylvania reports for
1929, you will find detailed cost figures on spraying, presented
by a leading orchardist in Ohio*. Under his conditions he opera-
ted three large power sprayers, supplying spray materials to them
from a supply tank mounted on a motor truck. His averages are
for three years with man labor figures at 40 cents per hour. It has
cost him from 1^ cents to 2J^ cents per gallon for the spray
material applied to the tree. Figuring an average application on
mature bearing trees at 10 gallons and taking an average of his
cost of 2 cents per gallon, we have 20 cents per tree per applica-
tion. I take it that you average at least five applications per sea-
son here in Pennsylvania, or spend $1.00 on each tree each year
for the privilege of spraying it. Figure the number of trees per
acre in your orchard and you are spending from $30 to $50 per
year for your spraying operations.

Another large Ohio grower who keeps careful cost records,
summarizes his cost figures by stating *The average cost of
spraying is a Httle over $25.00 per acre annually.^' A recent
survey of orchard costs in the Western New York fruit sections,
quite similar to Pennsylvania conditions in many ways, shows
the following:

•Frank Famsworth, 1927 Proceedings, Page 144.

— 80 —

60 ORCHARDS SURVEYED, EACH OVER 30 YEARS OF AGE

No.

Farms

Average
No. of
Sprays

Spraying

per acre

Barrels
Packed
Per acre

Growing

of
Sprays

Man
Hours

Total
Cost

cost per

Barrel to

picking time

1 or 2
3 or 4

5
6 or 7

5
21
22
12

1.4
3.4
5.0
6.1

3.3
8.1
11.4
15.1

$9.36
20.65
30.78
31.82

26
33
44
50

$2.32
1.69
1.52
1.32

Cost of $9.36 to $31.82 per acre for spraying, averaging 8 gallons per
tree per application.

Note the increased yield and decreased production cost per
barrel as the number of spray applications increases.

The relation of acreage to spraying cost is clearly shown in
the following table:

(Orchards more than 30 years old, Dunkirk Soils)
NEWFANE, NIAGARA COUNTY, 1928

Acres of

Number

of
orchards

Average
acres of
bearing
orchard

Number

of
Sprays

Spraying

bearing
orchard

Man hours
per acre

Cost
per acre

0—14

23
24
13

9.6
22.4
50.2

4.4
4.3
4.4

14.2

10.5

7.5

$35.45
24.07
20.95

15—29

30 and over ...

I simply bring these figures to your attention to emphasize
the importance of the spraying program in your cost of produc-
tion. / am sure that you are all agreed that the only hope for
profitable orchard management during the next few years is in
lowered production costs. It is to this program that I hope to
bring some suggestions during the remainder of this period.
Before discussing the newest things in spraying equipment,
however, I think we will do well to look over the surprisingly
rapid improvements in sprayer construction beginning with the
first use of spray pumps back in 1885 and noting the results
by definite periods up to the present time.

You will note that I have divided the different factors on
which sprayers are rated into pump capacity, pressure and power.
Before considering the newer developments further, consider for
a minute just what these things mean in terms of actual spray-
ing service. The pump capacity means the actual gallons per
mmute pumped by the outfit being, used. This capacity may
not all be used through the nozzle; in fact, a return to the sprayer
tank of from 20 to 30% of the actual discharge of the pump is a
desirable condition and the best quality of spray will be delivered
through the nozzles only when this condition exists. The matter
of pressure has been discussed frequently but I am sure there is
much misunderstanding of just what the pressure actually does

— SI —

EVOLUTION OF SPRAYING EQUIPMENT

i'<

Period

Pump capacity

gallons per

minute

Pressure

pounds

per sq.

inch

Engine

power

used

H.P.

Tank

size

gallons

Average

gallons per

day per

spray

man

1885-1895

Hand— 1 to 2 gal

60-75

none

200-300

1895-1905

Home made and first
commercial 2-5 gal-

75-150

1-1 H

50-100

400-600

1905-1910

Small factory ma-
chines 4-6 gal

150-200

2-3

50-200

500-800

1910-1915

Medium factory
machines 6-10 gal.....

200-250

3-4

100-200

600-1000

In 1916

Spray gun invented.

1915-1920

Factory 10-20

250-275

4-10

200-300

800-1200

1920-1930

Factory 10-35

300-500

4-15

200-500

1000-1500

Stationary

Factory 10-40.„

300-600

4-20

500-1000

1500-2500

Portable is
Stabilizing at

. Factory 12-20

300-350

6-12

200-300

1000-1200

Stationary

according to

acreage

covered.

for us in the spraying operation. The more recent research
work along these Unes has proven conclusively that the princi-
pal benefit of high pressure is in breaking the particles of spray
solution into the finest parts, or into the so-called mist. It can
be demonstrated that a stream of water can be thrown to just
as great a height operating at 100 pounds pressure as at 500
pounds pressure. This may come as a surprise to many of you
but the present large capacity fire-fighting apparatus does not,
for the most part, operate at high pressure. Instead of this, it
depends on large volume to raise the stream to the desired
height. Many fruit growers have felt that the height to which
they could throw a stream depended entirely upon the pressure
at the spray pump. This opinion is erroneous to the extent that
you must have volume with this pressure to attain distance.
Since the average fruit tree does not grow, or at least should not
grow, to a height much exceeding 30 feet, it is readily seen that
pressure alone for throwing spray material to great elevation is
not of the greatest concern to the fruit grower. I think we will
have to agree, then, that pressure is mainly for the purpose of
breaking the spray material up into its fine particles.

Another important item that has not been given enough con-
sideration by the fruit grower, is the loss of pressure between the
pump and the spray nozzle. I have seen many outfits in use

— 82 —

with the pressure gauge reading 300 pounds,— when I was satisfied
that the pressure at the nozzle did not exceed 200. This loss
IS occasioned by restrictions in the hose, in the coupHngs and
fittings, and at other places along the Une. The expense of
having good sized pumps and engines to properly power them is
in this way, partly lost so far as any good to the user is concerned!

Now to discuss the most recent developments in spraying
equipment and practice, I would say that a very sure trend at
the present time as shown in the last table, is a change from
sprayers having pump capacity of 6 to 10 gallons per minute to
units running in capacity from 12 to 20 gallons. These slightly
larger pump capacities have been shown to be more suitable for
operating two lines of hose and two spray guns as regularly used
by the average grower. Along with this change in pump capacity
has come a change in spraying pressures from 250 and 300
pounds up to pressures all the way between 300 and 400 pounds
probably averaging about 350. Another important change from'
the economic standpoint is the tank sizes of from 150 and 200
gallons up to 250 and 300 gallons quite generally used by the
larger commercial orchardists at the present time.

While horse-drawn sprayers are by far the most generally
used, the newer development in portable sprayers are in the
tractor and motor truck models.

Tractor hauled sprayers have been in quite general use now
for ten years. More and better tractors on fruit farms have
served to bring tractor sprayers into increasing favor and more
general use. No doubt the most important of these develop-
ments are the improvements in tractors and their ability to haul
sprayers under orchard conditions. This has come about both
by the use of larger and heavier units and improved principles
for giving better traction. Another factor that has contributed
to the adoption of this type of equipment has been the replace-
ment of horses in many of the other orchard operations,such as
hauling fruit out of the orchard. Fruit growers have realized
that if they could haul their sprayers under all conditions with
a tractor, they could, to a large extent, be reheved of the expense
of carrying a team through the year, principally for the spray-
ng operation.

A more recent development in the tractor hauled outfits is in
the use of the tractor engine as the power unit for the spray
pump. This practice has some advantages, in that it saves a
part of the first cost of a separate engine. It also saves part of
the operating cost of this separate sprayer engine. No doubt
another large factor is that by figuring on the use of the tractor
for powering the sprayer, the grower can justify the purchase
of a tractor such as he needs for his other orchard work, that
would not be justified if he were not to use it for his spraying
purposes. No doubt the greatest saving affected in tractor-
sprayer use is in the keeping cost of a team.

This tractor powering of sprayers has its disadvantages, and
any grower considering this type of equipment should consider

— 83 —

savant some of your CnsyvaSa districts. _^ The advantages
Suhei tocS- ?ut«s generally far ^''"■el. f » *»<1™«^^^^^^^^^^

?rgSr "» on' h ta";rSding Idle during the spraying

il^aTLr;si'::erge; a,:s SitSVtrS^^^^^^^^

haul their sprayers on their motor truck.

The advantages of this type of spraying ^equipment are ol
PoiTrse Quick returning from spraying operations to the falling
stSn and in tWs way often saving the cost of an extra supply

~ s? rso °M=Sf S

orhaTpurposes do not have -''Pl^^r^t^^K^rave^Cugh
pump at the same time they are propelling t*^e jPr^y^^^^^"" ^^J
the orchard The disadvantages mclude possible damage to
Irees and fruit, from the higher mountings of the truck outfit, and
rcouTse a mkor truck a'fter being used for ^Praymg ^s not in
every way presentable for road work. In a few cases trie motor
trucks are being used with power takeoff attachment and we
Sk for this Jo'increase with the new devt?rl I'To the
sprayer transmission to adapt the fP^^J of the pump to the
rliffprent soeeds of the motor truck. Such devices are now
available a'nd we now look for an increased use of both the
tractor and truck type of equipment.

Along with these new developments in Po^taWe sprayers has

come rial progress in discharge eq^iP^^^^nh^d soravJrs were
remember when standard equipment on orchard sP^-y^^ ^^^^^
two long bamboo-covered rods with a Y at the end, eacn carrying
Zo smfu capacity nozzles. These were replaced to a very large
AvtPnt in 1916 with the advent of the spray gun. 1 neea ^oz go
into de ail a to tie advantages and disadvantages of this dev^^^^^^
Regardless of the disadvantages, we all know that the spray

gun' came into very nearly universal '^^rtlffion ItilVof the^n
loro-P nprcentaee of our fruit growers. The difficulties ol tne gun
weS Scrpally ?hat! in the hands of careless operators, foliage
Tnd fru rinmrv resulted. This became so serious in some sec-
ti^^JlSK where summer heat aggravated t^^^^^^^
ininrv that much time and effort was put tortn oy ainereut
ex&enfsSn workers along with the manufacturers, in

— 84 —

developing suitable types of nozzles and rods to properly dis-
tribute the spray material, even under hot weather conditions,
without foliage or fruit injury. This equipment has been quite
well standardized and improved until now there are available
units carrying from three up to as many as eight nozzles in one
cluster, and arranged with such exactness so as to dehver the
spray material as one unit of wide penetrating mist. These are
replacing spray guns in the hands of many growers, applying all
the spray in the form of a fine fog and doing it without the danger
of spray injury that exists with the use of the spray gun.

You may wonder that I have omitted any mention of station-
ary spray equipment. You have had this subject discussed on
your program for at least the past three years, and it is to be
discussed during th s session. I have purposely omitted this,
feeling that the interest of this type of equipment is not as great
as a few years ago because of the present economic conditions
and also the development of these other, more rapid methods
of spraying with portable sprayers. This does not mean that
the stationary outfit does not have a place in Pennsylvania; I
am sure that it does. This place is where one stationary outfit
will replace several portable units and in the case of the steep
hill orchards where the hauling of portable rigs is either done
with too much difficulty or at too great an expense. Under
these conditions the stationary sprayer will come into its own
and allow operators under these conditions to do a real job of
spraying at nominal cost.

PENNSYLVANIA APPLE DISEASE CONDITIONS

1929-1930-1931

R. S. KIRBY, State College, Centre County

At all times, and to even a greater extent at a time like the
present, the biggest question in apple disease control is, ''How
can I most economically produce commercially clean fruit?''
The answer to this question can only be given after one has a
knowledge of the diseases present and has an understanding of
when, including how and with what procedure to control each
disease.

In order to get accurate information on the occurrence and
development of apple diseases in Pennsylvania during the past
three years, the extension pathologists have made nearly 3000
visits to orchards, examined 20,000 scab perithecia to determine
the stage of spore development, examined over 1,000,000 apple
leaves and 1,000,000 apples to determine the presence and
severity of the different diseases.

During the past three years a special effort has been made to
get information on the occurrence of the different diseases on the
fruit at harvest time. A total of 935 orchards, including un-
sprayed, partly sprayed and completely sprayed have been

— 86 —

visited and 485,097 apples examined and records made of the
occurrence of diseases on each apple, and of the spraying program

followed. . 1 u J •

A knowledge of the diseases present in unsprayed orchards is
of prime importance since such information is the only way to
know what diseases we are combating when spraying. Table 1
shows the percentage of the six most common diseases present
in unsprayed orchards in Pennsylvania in 1929, 1930, and 1931.

Table 1 —percentage of disease present in unsprayed orchards and

RAINFALL 1929, 1930, AND 1931

Percentage Diseased Apples

Year

Scab

Sooty
Blotch

Brooks
Spot

Blotch

Black
Rot

Rust

Total

1929
1930
1931

87.2
73.9
80.5

9.2

8.7

46.0

4.4
7.5

8.0

1.0
2.2
3.9

.6
.2

1.5

.01
.01
.20

100.0

92.5

100.0

Average

80.2

24.4

6.8

2.6

.07

97.5

Rainfall in Inches

1929.
1930.
1931.

April

6.12
2.71
3.33

May

4.81
3.03
5.28

June

3.56
4.20
3.71

July

2.81
2.23
5.28

August

2.52
1.47
4.01

Total

19.82
13.64
21.81

Note: Figures based on counts of 7368 apples in 52 orchards in 1931, of
5282 apples in 39 orchards in 1930, and of 4976 apples in 19 orchards
in 1929.

The figures in Table 1 show conclusively that very few apples
free of disease can be produced without spraying in Pennsylvania;
that scab is the most important single disease of apples within
the state; that sooty blotch is of second rank followed by Brooks
spot, blotch, black rot, and rust. .,,.«. . i-

The effect of rainfall on the occurrence of the different diseases
is worthy of note. The year 1929 represented one of the worst
scab years of recent times, yet the total rainfall was not as great
as in 1931. This condition was apparently due to the excessive
rainfall during April, 1929, which enabled scab to bring about
severe early infestions while in 1931 there was very little rain
until after blooming or the middle of May. In 1930 there was
an average of 73.9 per cent scabby apples which was 6.3 per
cent below the three-year average but when it is remembered
that during the dry season of 1930 there was a deficiency of 7.02
inches of rainfall below normal between April and September,
it appears that scab even under adverse weather conditions is a
menace that can only be held down by proper control measures.
The figures in Table 1 show also that such diseases as sooty
blotch, Brooks spot, blotch, and black rot are not affected

— 86 —

materially by the early season or pre-blossom rains but are
proportional to the amount of summer of after-blooming rains.
Since climatic conditions vary markedly over a state like
Pennsylvania it is expected that the occurrence of certain diseases
might vary. Table 2 shows these variations.

Table 2.— percentage of apples in unsprayed orchards affected with

diseases in different districts of PENNSYLVANIA 1931

Percentage Diseased Apples

District

Scab

Sooty
Blotch

Brooks
Spot

Blotch

Black
Rot

Rust

Southeast

80.2
92.6
79.0
74.0

80.7

55.9

27.4

0.1

15.4
2.6
5.4
0.0

6.5
1.2
4.4
0.1

1.8

1.4

1.9

Juniata Valley

Central

.5
1

Western

.1
.0

Note: The Southeast District includes Adams, Schuylkill, Carbon counties
and all counties to the south. The Juniata Valley District includes
Perry^ Juniata, Mifflin, Huntingdon, Blair and Bedford counties.
Ihe Central District includes Franklin, Cumberland, and all counties
to the north of the Southeast and Juniata Valley Districts. The
Western District includes Somerset, Cambria, Clearfield, McKean
counties and all other counties to the west.

The figures in Table 2 show that scab is severe in all parts of
the state but that the other diseases are the most severe in the
Southeastern district and that they become less common the
further one goes to the north or west in the state.

The study of the occurrence of apple diseases in unsprayed
orchards in the four districts of the state shows that the relative
importance of the individual diseases varies so much that spray-
ing programs should be modified to meet district or local con-
ditions. Table 3 shows the relative occurrence of different
diseases in the four districts of Pennsylvania.

Table 3.—

APPLE DISEASES IN VARIOUS DISTRICTS EXPRESSED IN PERCENTAGES
OF TOTAL DISEASES IN UNSPRAYED ORCHARDS

Pennsylvania 1929, 1930, 1931

Percentage of total disease

Disease

Southeastern
District

Juniata
Valley

Central
District

Western
District

Scab

44.4
37.3
12.4
4.12
1.08
.13
.02

69.5
26.6
.80
.36
.42
.17
0.0

87.8
8.4
1.8
1.44
.6
.02
.01

99.9
.01
0.0
.01
.01
0.0
0.0

Sooty blotch-

Brooks spot

Blotch

Black rot

Rust._

Bitter rot

The figures in Table 3 indicate that apple growers in the
\Vestern district should almost entirely concentrate their apple
disease control program on scab control, but that the growers

— 87 —

in the Southeastern district must follow a program to control
at least four or five diseases remembering that 55.6 per cent ol
different diseases present on unsprayed apples at harvest time
were other than scab. In the Juniata Valley district growers
should plan their program to guard against sooty blotch as well
as scab since it is nearly 40 per cent as prevalent as scab In the
Central district scab represents 87.8 per cent of the problem but
growers in Franklin, Cumberland, Dauphin and Northumber-
land counties must keep sooty blotch and blotch in mind when
working out their spraying program.

Value of the Different Sprays in Controlling the

Various Apple Diseases

A special effort has been made during the past three years to
determine which of the disease sprays are the most important
in the control of each apple disease and how many sprays are
needed to grow apples commercially free of disease. Disease
counts were made of 79,655 apples in 168 orchards where growers
had applied all but one of the disease sprays. Included in this
were six demonstrations where growers had each time they
sprayed omitted that spray from a different block of two to

Table 4 shows how scab increased when each of the sprays
were omitted.

Table 4.-increase in percentage of scabby apples over completely

SPRAYED BY OMITTING DIFFERENT SPRAYS, PENNSYLVANIA, 1929, 1930, 1931

Spray Omitted

Percentage of scabby apples

Delayed Dormant.

Pre-pink

Pink

Petal Fall

10 Day

20 Day

3rd Summer

4th Summer

None

1929

2.7
26.2
1.7
5.2
4.4

1.8

1930

7.6
20.6
1.6
2.3
2.3
11.9

.0
1.0

1931

Average

3.5

5.2

17.3

3.5

2.3

14.2

7.6

6.0

4.2

6.2

4.5

1.3

Note: The figures for spray omitted "none" or complete spraying are based
on counts of 283,659 apples in 430 orchards.

The bottom Une designated as 'spray omitted none' gives the
percentage of scabby apples under complete spraying, ^or
?ach spray omitted the figures show the increase ^ percentage
of scabby apples over that in the conjpletely sp^ayed The two
blank spaces under 20-day and third summer m 1929 and the
one under third summer in 1930 appear because sprays were
not recommended for disease control at that time. The third
and fourth summer sprays in 1931 usually represent a spray

— 88 —

recommended for disease control about July 1 to 10 and recorded
as the third summer or recommended the last of July and recorded
as the fourth summer spray. Disease conditions within each
county determined when the sprays were recommended. The
figures in Table 4 show that in two of the three years the pre-pink
was the most important spray for scab control, and that the
petal fall was the most important in 1931 when the first pro-
longed rains occurred immediately after petal fall. The omitting
of the delayed dormant spray was of importance only in 1930
when scab spores matured exceptionally early. The effect of
the dry weather during the delayed dormant period in 1931 is
strikingly shown with only a .1 per cent increase from the
omission of this spray.

The pink spray apparently was of only minor importance.
However, scab counts made early in each summer showed that
its omission resulted in considerable apple stem infection and
that two-thirds of the apples infected during the period of pro-
tection from the pink spray dropped before harvest. Further,
during at least two of the three years there occurred exceptionally
dry weather during the blooming period.

The fourth summer spray applied the last of July seems in
general to have little effect on scab control. The third summer
spray applied about July 10th can under most cases take the
place of the fourth summer spray and be of greater value in
scab control.

The figures in Table 5 show how sooty blotch increased when
different sprays were omitted.

Table 5. — increase in percentage of apples affected with sooty
blotch over completely sprayed by omitting different sprays

Pennsylvania, 1929, 1930, 1931

Spray Omitted

Percentage of Appl

es with Sooty Blotch

1929

1930

1931

Average

Delayed Dormant...
Pre-pink

.05

4.3
.1

.2
.4
.1
.2

.7
23.1

.1
.01

3.2

3.9

18.4

3.6

.07
17

Pink

Petal Fall

1 13

10 Day

1 53

20 Day

11 69

3rd Summer

18 40

4th Summer

2 97

None

.16

The pre-blossom sprays have very little effect on the amount
of sooty blotch, while the twenty-day and third summer sprays,
which give protection to the fruit from June to August, are
very important in sooty blotch control. Therefore, growers in
districts where the disease is severe should take special care to
see that their apples are thoroughly protected with spray from
June to July.

— 89 —

In the case of Brooks spot the figures in Table 6 show that
this disease, like sooty blotch, is affected very little by pre-
blossom sprays. Most of the infection occurs after petal fall
with the heaviest infection occurring 20 to 60 days after petal
fall.

Table 6. —

INCREASE IN PERCENTAGE OF APPLES WITH BROOK's SPOT OVER

completely sprayed by omitting different sprays
Pennsylvania, 1929, 1930, 1931

Spray Omitted

Percentage of Apples with Brook'

s Spot

1929

1930

1931

Average

Delayed Dormant....
Pre-Dink

.0
.0
.0

.0
2.5

10.4
1.9

1.2

2.6

43.9

2.3

8.0

6.5

5.6

Pink

Petal Fall

3.1

10 Dav

3.9

20 Dav -

22.2

3rd Summer

5.6 .

4th Summer

3.5

None

During the past three years Brooks spot has in all but the
most severe cases been held in check by Uquid lime sulphur
sprays. The splitting of the old 14-day spray in two parts at
10 and 20 days after petal fall has helped to reduce the amount
of Brooks spot. In severe cases one or two appUcations of
Bordeaux has almost completely controlled the disease.

The figures in Table 7 show that bitter rot is a disease which
may not be present every year. There was more bitter rot in
the state in 1931 than for the past six or seven years. The
severity of bitter rot is apparently influenced very little by the
application of lime sulphur sprays.

Table 7. — percentage of apples affected with bitter rot
Eastern and Central Pennsylvania 1929, 1930, 1931

Sprays Omitted

Percentage of Apples with

Bitter Rot

1929

1930

1931

All (Unsoraved)

.25

Delaved Dormant

Pre-oink

Pink

Petal Pink

10 Dav

.26

20 Day

3rd Summer

.36

4th Summer

.80

None (All Applied)

.001

.18

The abnormally high temperature occurring from July to
September in 1931 combined with the sUghtly above normal
rainfall accounted for the increased amount of the disease in the
Southeastern part of the state.

The control program for orchards where bitter rot is severe
should include plans to remove the bitter rot mummied apples
from the trees and to make one or two appUcations of Bordeaux
if weather favorable to the disease occurs during July and
August.

Such diseases as blotch and black rot are present in very
small amounts in completely sprayed orchards. Lime sulphur
almost completely checks these diseases. However, where twig
and limb cankers of blotch are common, Bordeaux is needed as
a clean up measure.

The figures in Table 8 show the percentage of apples affected
with all diseases increased when the different sprays were
omitted.

Table 8.-

-increase in percentage of diseased apples over completely
sprayed by omitting different sprays
Pennsylvania, 1929, 1920, 1931

Spray Oitted

Percentage of Diseased Apples

1 1

1929

1930

1931

Average

Delayed Dormant....
Prfi-pink

1.4

24.2

3.2

7.8

14.5
3.8

8.5
22.2
2.1
3.7
5.7
78.1

.0
1.1

7.0

5.8

24.8

19.4

1.1

28.1

4.7

2.2

3.3

17 7

Pink

2 6

Petal Fall

10 6

10 Day

10 9

20 Day

39 6

3rd Summer

28 1

4th Summer

6 4

None

2.4

— 90 —

The figures show that in five out of the seven disease control
sprays the omission of one spray caused an increase of over ten
percent of diseased apples. In the case of the pink sprays,
counts made before harvest showed at least ten percent disease.
The fourth summer spray is not considered as one spray since
its place has been taken by the earlier or third summer spray.
The delayed dormant spray is therefore the only spray that
may be of doubtful value in disease control. However, the
delayed dormant spray is Ukely to be important whenever scab
spores are mature at that period.

Table 9 tells the complete story of what happened when
sprays were omitted, all applied either as recommended or not as
recommended.

In unsprayed orchards there was an average of only 2.5 per
cent disease-free apples. With six sprays omitted, or one spray
appUed, there was 21.2 per cent disease-free apples. When five
sprays were omitted, all applied eithier as recommended or not as
disease-free apples. With four sprays omitted there was 53.5
per cent disease-free apples.

— 91 —

Table 9. — relation of spraying practices to apple disease control

Pennsylvania, 1929, 1930, 1931

100

97.7

90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

97.7
Complete 6f sprays

{Goal of Disease Control
by Spraying

1 Spray Omitted 91 . 4 |

Substitute material 88.5

82.4
2 Sprays omitted

I 71.5

' 3 sprays omitted or poor timing

60 . 8 poor method

53.5
4 sprays omitted

32.0
5 sprays omitted

21.2
6 sprays omitted

unsprayed 2.5

When outstandingly poor methods of spraying were used, such
as missing parts of trees, using worn-out spray guns or half
strength material, there was 60.8 per cent disease-free apples.
Omission of three sprays or poor timing in the most important
sprays gave 71.5 per cent disease-free apples. Omitting two
sprays resulted in 82.4 per cent disease-free apples. Use of
substitute material resulted in 88.5 per cent disease-free fruit.
With one spray omitted, there was 91.4 per cent disease-free
apples. Application of a complete spraying program which
varied shghtly in different counties but averaged 6 2/3 sprays
for the state gave 97.7 per cent fruit free of disease at harvest
time.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON NURSERY
STOCK CERTIFICATION

Your committee held its annual school for nurserymen during
the past sumn^ier. The main course study was with cherries
and peaches. At their own expense the nurserymen made it
possible for the committee to have Professor W. H. Upshall of
the Ontario Experiment Station, Vineland, Ontario, as instructor
in identification of peach and cherry varieties. Professor Upshall
has devoted considerable time to making a study of leaf charac-
ters; his help at the school was very beneficial. Twelve different
nurserymen gathered at the George W. Stein & Son Nursery,
Wrightsville, York County, where cherry varieties were studied.

In the afternoon the group was entertained at the Root
Nursery at Manheim, Lancaster County, where considerable
work with the peach varieties was carried on.

One of the outstanding features of the school is the high
degree of cooperation the fruit tree nurserymen of Pennsylvania

— 92 —

are showing. They are doing their best to keep each other's
blocks free from mixtures of varieties. They are working
together, helping to supply each other with absolutely true-to-
name buds. As an example, I cite the case of one nurseryman
who gave his services to another nurseryman, assisting in the
culling of a large peach block.

I regret very much to report the illness of one of your com-
mittee, Mr. H. G. Baugher of Aspers, Adams County. The past
summer was the first time for years that Mr. Baugher has not
taken an active part in the nursery school.

Your committee feels that Pennsylvania nurserymen are
making a sincere effort to keep all their fruit tree stocks true to
name.

F. N. Fagan,
F. M. Trimble,
H. G. Baugher.

STRAWBERRY PRODUCTION AND MARKETING

GILBERT S. WATTS, Bellwood, Blair County

I am not an authority on strawberries, nor am I a strawberry
specialist. We are truck farmers and market gardners, and,
along with that enterprise, we grow about five acres of straw-
berries each year.

In the first place, we lay great emphasis on very early planting.
And from our experience, it seems to be a very important factor
in getting a good stand. If we set very early, we have low
temperatures, evaporation is not so rapid, soil moisture is more
abundant. It seems we are pretty sure of a fine stand if we set
extremely early. Incidentally, we fall plow our strawberry
plantation, and then we don^t dig up the soil too deeply, we
harrow; we like it firm. Early in spring the plants are dormant,
or quite likely to be very nearly so. In our own case, as I said,
we are market gardners, and very early planting of strawberries
is a good aid to intercropping. In intercropping we must be
careful that we don^t overreach and injure the strawberries.
By planting very early we have found some intercrops that are
of considerable help to us. We'll come to that in just a minute.
Incidentally, we do use a transplanting machine. I have heard
some of you say you do. And our feeling is that straight
through we get better, thicker roots by machine planting than
we have ever been able to get by hand planting. It is my
absolute judgment that if we don't get good stands, it is because
we are at fault, not the machine. In the last six years we have
done all our planting by machine.

We use our own plants of recent years ; it saves us much money.
But, more than anything else, because if we get disease — or
insect-infested plants, we wbuld stand to lose heavily. A few
years ago, we brought in red spider in this way, — it just knocked
out a few acres for us to the point of no crop at all. Since that

— 93 —

time we have been introducing new varieties of plants. We
have, over in an extreme corner of the farm, an experimental
plot. We put the new ones there for a year until we see what
we have on them. If they are clean, we put them in with the
rest of the stock.

We grow, mostly, Howard 17 (Premier), and sometimes
people say, *'Why don't you grow Chesapeake?'' Briefly, it is
this: The Howard 17, under our conditions, makes us the most
money: that is all there is to it.

Aberdeen looks pretty interesting. We have had some for
two years — an acre of it — this year it certainly looked very
good.

Briefly, our fertiUzation is to broadcast and harrow in plenty
of 1-2-1 fertiUzers before planting. In recent years it has been
concentrated fertilizers. We set the drills at 15 to 20 inches,
using four to five hundred pounds on the acre. That is a narrow
width for strawberries, perhaps, but we intercrop. A few weeks
later we intercrop with such things as beets or lettuce. We may
give an early top dressing of nitrogen, and then in August
apply a top dressing of sulphate of ammonia; the nicest way to
put that on is a little wheelbarrow type of fertiUzer distributor.

Spring appUcations of nitrate of soda or sulphate of ammonia
in the bearing year used to be quite a regular thing with us, but
since we have gone to the August appUcations, we haven't done
much spring top dressing, except where we plant on a poor
knoll of ground, where the plants are not going to make suffi-
ciently vigorous growth.

Some of you may be interested in intercropping. I don't
know how intensively you may operate. Briefly, this is our
schedule : We intercrop our whole strawberry plantations in the
first year. Perhaps the thing that works best is beets and
lettuce plants. We set out around about 50,000 beet plants to
market very early — bunch beets — and these are put right in the
middle between the strawberry rows. We plant strawberries
usually from two to three and a half feet apart, running a row
of beets right down the middle, and the land that isn't sown to
beets takes lettuce for an intercrop, and the rest of the area is
set with radish seed, three rows only about four inches apart,
right down the middles. Onion sets are planted between the
strawberries for green onions. In that way we get a greater
return from our land the first year, and by intercropping we are
justified in a Uberal fertilizer program.

We fruit the plantations but once, with a few exceptions,
because we feel that we get finer berries. I believe most of you
will agree with me in that the expense of establishing a new
plantation is not likely to be greater than that of renewing and
carrying on an old one. The second year we almost invariably
plow the berries, and as soon as the last picking is made, harrow
it down thoroughly and prepared a soUd bed, and plant bunch
beets, — that crop has worked better to follow with strawberries

— 94 —

than anything else we have handled. When the beets are pulled,
we often follow them with a rye cover crop.

We have always removed the blossoms the first year to induce
better formation of runners, and the way of doing that may
vary. We have found a gang of small boys with old razor
blades with only one cutting edge, will snip them off in good
shape; we think that method faster than scissors. At the first
weeding, which comes soon after pulling out of these onion
plants, we do place runners. We don't spend a lot of time; we
simply turn each runner into place and use a stone or clod to
hold it in place; I believe that helps a lot in getting good thick
roots early enough in the summer so that the plants have heavy
crowns before winter.

Of course we all know what it is to bend and hoe — the weeds
love the strawberry patch. If some of you haven't tried it,
I believe you might be interested to work with some of the
small hoes that are on the market, little half-moon-shaped hoes;
or there is another hoe that is seven inches broad, but only one
inch high, sharpened on the broad side and on both ends. And
with that little hoe we can reach in and pich out a weed and do
practically all the work standing up and, I think, with a little
more speed than we have before, when we didn't have those
special hoes.

I warn you to be careful about the kind of mulch you get
into your strawberries. That seems to be a trying problem.
We buy our mulch because we don't grow grain crops, and we
do try to be careful to get wheat straw, if we can, that is reason-
ably free of wheat seed and wheat.

There is one point on which we lay the strongest kind of
emphasis, and that is the establishing of individual responsibility
on the part of every picker. We find it takes, usually, twelve or
fifteen pickers per acre to keep our berries picked up as they
should be. That means that we have anywhere from sixty to
eighty pickers on the job. We used to have quite a time getting
the sort of work done that we wanted done. The last few years
we used two bosses in the picking job. We have a row boss, as
we call him, who stays in the patch and sees that the pickers
stay to the rows to which they are assigned to work and don't
drift off to another row; he also sees that the berries are not
tramped on, and that the picking is done in a clean and orderly
manner. Then, at the point where we pack — at the edge of the
field — is the packing boss. He has an assistant to place the
berries in the crates. And here is the crux of the whole matter;
the packing boss keeps all empty baskets under control, so that
empty baskets can be obtained only through him or
his assistant. And, as the baskets are filled, it's only a matter
of a moment to indicate, bj'' a. common lead pencil, a picker's
number on the rim of the basket, **No. 6," or **No. 3," as the
case may be; each basket is marked with the picker's number.
Therefore individual responsibiUty is established one hundred
per cent right then and there. If the packing boss or row boss

— 96 —

.1)

finds bad work, that^s all right. But may be some of its gets
through, or there's a case of carelessness, or neglect, or dis-
honesty in pack; it is discovered up at the market or by a whole-
saler up in Altoona or Pittsburgh, or even the retailers that
these berries reach ; they can tell from the number on the basket
who was at fault, for every one is signed by the picker. The
result is that we have discharged only one picker in the last
year. That particular picker was one of those people who,
unfortunately, seem not to have the capacity for doing honest
work We feel that it is a great step forward to have an organi-
zation of pickers. The individual's signature goes on everythmg
we pack for market, whether it is in the field or in the packing
house. The signature of the person that packs goes on the run
of the basket— not too conspicuously— you could cover it with
a nickel. Nevertheless every fellow feels his responsibility, and
it relieves the management of a great deal of worry and unpleas-

antness.

Last year we took on some new pickers, and we began to
watch these new pickers closely. We found a few deficient;
they were topping their berries more than was right; with a
little instruction we soon had those people in line.

So I feel that, if we are going to make a success with straw-
berry picking and marketing we have to put this responsibihty
right back on each picker where it belongs. We have a respon-
sibility to ourselves and to our buyers, and the Packer has a
responsibility to us. And there is no reason why they shouldn t
put it where it belongs.

We try to pick daily, and we usually get pretty well over the
patch every day, unless the weather turns cool. It is not always
necessary to go over the place every day.

Some of vou may be interested in our experience with irri-
gation of strawberries— I know some of you irrigate straw-
berries. We use all of our Unes, sprinkler type, portably. In
other words at the end of the strawberry field, which is 436 teet
long, we have hydrants, one and a half inch, built at fatty-toot
intervals. That field is 500 feet wide, and two sprinkling lines
seem to give us plenty of capacity to water the five and a halt
acres; that is, there are 500 feet to the line, ten sets of these
pipes. In other words by moving two pipes five times, we can
water the whole thing, with the result we can put an inch ot
water on our five acres of berries every five days. I hat seems
absolutely sufficient, and I know that we have increased our
yield by several hundred crates on a number of occasions by
having water. Do we water at time of picking? Yes, as soon
as the pickers are out of each 50-foot section, the water follows
behind. We try to be a little careful about the water, of course,
for we don't want moldy or rotten, soft berries. We had two or
three unexpected pickings the first year through irrigating.

On the subject of marketing I have nothing unique to offer.
I think it gives a great deal of satisfaction when I go to sell to
wholesalers by telephone, as most of it is done,— to know ttiat

— 96 —

SuNocd

IP^

Now Sold

Reduced
Prices

and

Delivered Free to Your Railroad Station

SUNOCO

SELF-EMULSIFYING

SPRAY

Controls Scale, Aphis, Red Mite

Mixes with hard water
Will not freeze
Effective and safe

Write for Spray Mantuil and Prices

SUN OIL COMPANY

spray Department

1608 Walnut Street
Philadelphia^ Pa*

Columbus, Ohio, 1 74 E. Long St.
Producers of Blue Sunoco Motor Fuel

— 97 —

this individual responsibility is back of every quart of berries
in evS-v crate Most of you do your own selling, and if you

SsS^rSsfncereS^^^^^^^^^

emanates from the salesperson to the buyer, fo I fee* that
that is the starting point of our whole market-that confadence
in pverv buver that every package is rignt.
"SVde^arketing his 'been talked of a ot; some of us may
he tired of hearing about roadside marketing. Yet 1 wonaer
wheE the poslbihties in ^o-^'^^.Z^J^^^^
touched; that may seem radica but I ^«^^^f '^^^^^^
may los; quaUty even more ^^P^^y than sweet c^^^^^
thev do But if we give the people the thing that they ^aye in
rnfnd in the roadsidf market idea-fresh farm Product^^^^^^ the
point of origin, and then giving it to them so good that they can
find no fault in it, I believe we have a great future

We lav great stress on display and keeping a display hlled up.
If ^ is ktfhi the evening, and the berries are almost gone-we
have a table which Ic^ eighty boxes of berries spread

ourfor easy inspection, and eventually they are pretty well
sold-and there Tre holes in the display, probaby only tw^^^^^^^^^
boxes left, we push them up into a compact g^^^^P^/^^^^.^^^^;^ '^^
no one likes to think he is getting the last pick of anything. We
kLp th^^^ filled up,lnd to attract attention we use price
tags I think that is an important thing in our roadside market-
inf * There may be some reason for not putting a price tag on a
beautiful fur coat in an exclusive shop; but those reasons, what-
evrthey are, don't apply to strawberries or anything e se on
the market. I feel that the price is a piece of ^n^ormation to
which I, as a buyer, am entitled, without having to ask it We
Reason it out this way: Many customers are extrem^^^^^^
in buying; they are bashful. If they must ask the price, ma
certain sinse they are compelled either to buy or to re use to
buy, with resultant embarrassment or resentment, whereas, it
the price is in plain view, the customer can make up his own
mfndTn the freest manner^ and, incidentally, save some of your
time by selling himself.

Our wholesale movement has gone, in the last Y^ar, mostly
to the chain stores, and of course, to some of the local wholesale
houses We ^'sign'' every crate of berries with our distmctive
tag just as each individual box is signed by the picker, which
helps us to find and hold our market.

Finally, I want to raise one little question: We have advertised
our strawberries in the newspapers in a imited way, not to
exceed two or three per cent of our gross sales, and we have had
a great response. It is almost like stepping on the gas in a high-
powered car. And the more advertising we do, it seems, the

— 98 —

more response we get, because the people look for it and respond
to it. Last spring or early summer, we had a very hot week and
local ice cream manufacturer in our city of 75,000 carried a full
page ad every day, featuring an enticing dish of ice cream.
While he was running this, there was quite a crop of raspberries
picked in our community, many of which didn't find any too
good a market. In another week people were around looking
for raspberries and couldn't find them. I know, because they
came to market and wanted raspberries after the crop was gone.
You would be surprised how much profit there would come to
you growers by using advertising to the extent of two or three
cents per crate.

Question: How did you handle that bed after it was renewed?

Mr. Watts: We don't renew our beds. To make a story out
of it, at sometime between the first to the fifteenth of April, we
will go into the plants that were set out last spring and dig as
many as we need — virgin plants that have never borne fruit —
and those will be put on a new plantation. Then a year from
next spring, we again take no fruit, and set them out to make a
new plantation. In other words, we use young plants all the
time.

Question: Does the picker put his name on each box of
berries he picks?

Mr. Watts: The man who fills the baskets puts the number on.
It may seem like a great deal of pettiness to do it that way.
But it is done just with a lead pencil.

APPLE POLLINATION

H. F. HERSHEY, Hamburg, Berks County

This question of apple pollination is a pretty big and wide one.
A lot has been published about it, but I am going to give my
own experience.

When we bought our orchard ten years ago, we acquired a
block of Delicious apples of about 40 acres, and they were
planted 18 by 18, with a fourth of them Stayman apples in
between. We had a pretty bad combination, which we didn't
know at the time, but which we found out afterwards. Our
Stayman wouldn't poUinate the Delicious, but the DeUcious
would pollinate the Stayman. Why they were planted so
closely I don't know, but we had to take one full row of the
trees out; and, as we had quite a large planting of Stayman, we
decided to remove the Stayman and half of the Delicious. So
we have a block of about eight hundred trees, practically solid
Delicious, with a few odd variety trees scattered throughout.
These Delicious have not done very much towards earning their
keep in the last few years.

We became more and more interested in pollination work.
We observed, around the edge of the orchard where we had

— 99 —

some Smokehouse* and close to some ^^^^^^^ t^f uTthef wTgS
nearly every year quite * jew apples, ana .^^^ ^^^

away, we had fewer ^J^d ^l^f.^Pf ;^;irte had no Delicious at
center of the block, fifty-five trees wide, we ^^^^^^

all. Before P^o«^«£s Jock is n^w Seventeen yea'rs of age-
T ntU ^h^ ir f etp:'we have not had an pp.j^a le

drfa^d ftCmSL^s, SS^nVthinTto apVoach the

earning of their keep. nnllinate these Delicious.

We decided to use bouquets^ tariSs possibly fifty trees

^? N^'l ?of scUS'fhrUhT Sf to' the'se tr'ees we
out of 1,800 scatterea ^"^^^f ' Anven Snow trees were

^^'..'""lor^lf DelicforSes" immediatdy surrounding
in this block, ine ueuciuu& tic^ ^^

these Snow apple trees had a g«°^/^°P- th;^^aie Gano was a
Ganos mixed in there, and we o"^«^«"* ^^^^^^^^ good sets of

good pollinizer ^-^^XnoTZJ^ is no' much'of an apple,
Delicious around the Gano. ^eewauKie ib poUini-

"'^^ il^DeSSii' %! EavelS hree^Tftf Pe'wauki'e trees

i: ms'uiZhni^-^e^eJ these Peewaukie trees are, the

DeUcious trees are Practically aU loaded^ ^^^

In 1930, Ruef, together ^^^t^C.S. Adams, County ^^^^, ^^^

rf "oT'Ddidous %e bSght mSny ten-qua?t buckets and
Sot atS rtituUo^weJot a lot'oj |allo-^^^^^^
these all th-utf e on,hard-every o^^^^^^^^^^ ^,^

row had two cans on it. we iook "^' ^, /^ . ^^^ water.

Irk on S^^^^^^^ Sunday afternoon, when I came to examine
The buckets, th^y were all, practically ^«^P^^^^^^^^^
bloom had withered and dried up. ^e also had^^^^^
ence that year with the extremely hot weather, we man l
take the best of care of the bloom in transporting it ^rom one
nart of the orchard to the other, and it wilted, and some of it
"Zlr'^eZ.:^^^^^ But with all the varieties we used that year
where the bloom was put up in good shape, we had tairiy goou

•Smokehouse is regarded as of doubtful value as a poUinizer. See McDaniels,
1931 Proceedings, Page 9lSecretary s Note.

— 100 —

results. Where the bloom withered — you could almost tell it,
row for row — we didn't have results. That year we used some
sixty hives of bees scattered through the orchard; they weren't
very strong hives or colonies, but they apparently did the work.

Question: How many acres did you say you had?

Mr. Hershey: Forty acres, 1800 trees.

Question: Do you think that is enough bees?

Mr. Hershey: I don't believe it was quite enough for the
condition of those hives. They weren't strong enough.

Mr. Hershey (continuing) : We used only Transparent bloom
in 1931. We had a block of Transparent trees which we hadn't
pruned, but were profuse with bloom. We got our buckets up
again and got them filled with water, and we had very reason-
able sets. It wasn't so hard to transport the bloom as it had
been the year before, and we filled all our buckets with bloom,
putting them up just about as high in the tree as we could — two
buckets to a tree, every other tree in every other row — and the
response was wonderful. I might say, in that connection, this
year we changed our plan on the bees, and we bought twenty-
five packages of five pounds each and scattered them in four or
five places in different parts of the orchard. Now, I am inclined
to believe, from our experience this past year, that the purchase
of package bees is probably the proper thing to do, because you
have a much stronger colony of bees. I am not a bee man,
don't know much about them, — don't like them. It seems we
have to have them although I got rid of these bees as soon as
possible.

The 1931 results were very marked. We have no check on
this block of Delicious; it is rather hard to get, but you could
tell even at harvesting time every tree which had a bucket
hanging up in it.

Question: Do you think that the trees that didn't have the
buckets weren't as good?

Mr. Hershey: It wasn't quite as good, but good enough.
This year we had an average on our Delicious of about eight
bushels per tree — not a great average.

Now I believe — it is my candid opinion — that this year the
Stayman Winesap is a fairly good pollinator, because this block
of Delicious butts into some Stayman Winesap trees, and we
could see no marked difference at all for pollination purposes.
I believe that, while we say that Stayman Winesap pollen s
non-fertile, that statement has to be qualified, because I can
remember in 1926 — an apple year when we had lots of Stayman —
we had a solid block of Stayman that had a wonderful set on it,
and they couldn't possibly have gotten pollen throughout the
entire block if the Stayman had not been fertile*.

Question: Have you ever found anything to pollinate York
Imperial?

*The great mass of experimental evidence shows that Stayman is usually a
poor pollinator. Hershey's case is the exception, rather than the rule. —
Secretary's Note.

— 101 —

Mr. Hershey: I don't think they need it. We grow very few

^Question- Do you think it would be advisable to place
grX on the top of every third tree in every third row to your
Delicious block and graft the Jonathan or Gano .'

Mr Hershey: We are doing more than that ourselves. We
are top working these trees, and I aim to have a graft on every
See And we are using yellow apples We are usmg 1 rans
oarent and we are using Grimes, and we are usmg Golden
DeUdous I don't know if we will ever pick those apples or
market them or not-may be we will, and may be we won t
STt's too much trouble, we are going to let them drop, because
we have the rest of our Delicious trees, and what we want is

%?e1™n: Do you keep account of the labor expense for this

poUination on the forty acres? j • u^ ^. ton m^n nt

Mr Hershey: It takes us two days and eight or ten men at
•I cost' of forty or fifty dollars, because we use low-cost labor.
Question? Do you really think that Delicious will polhnize

^^mS" Hershey: I think it will. Work that has been done by
Professor Auchter, now in the U. S. Department of Agriculture
shows that Golden Delicious is a very good pollen source and
it is good for Red Dehcious. I believe that we all have got to,
in a way, work this thing out for ourselves. Another plan is to
use different varieties in grafting. For instance, if you use all
Grimes-and Grimes is pretty often barren only fvery other
vear— and you take Transparent, one year it is full of bloom,
inother year it has practically nothing, unless you go through
and pull all your bloom off earlier, or the apples off early. But
I believe if you use three varieties— and I am using yellow
varieties so that there is no chance of getting them mixed with
the Delicious— that that's going to rid you of a lot of your

■^Question : Have you tried any poUinizer on Black Twig?

Mr Hershey: We have some Black Twig. I presume that

most any of the recommendations that are given out by the

experiment station for Stayman will hold for the Black Iwig.

Question : Doesn't your set get too heavy? . > f

Mr. Hershey: They didn't this year, although we had a few

such trees. They are pruned pretty hard; they will stand a

heavy set.

Mr. Hershey (continuing): I don't know if cross-poUinatioji
had any effect on the quality of the Delicious or not, but we
have had better apples, snappier apples this year than we have
ever had before, even when the trees had only a few apples,
half a bushel or a bushel on them.

Question: What objection would you have to placing the
bouquets on the ground?

Mr. Hershey: I don't think the bees will work through
them as well as they should. We have had lots of limbs, quite

— 102 —

close to the buckets, that you could see right in around the
bucket that the pollination was much better than farther away
from the buckets. There may be other methods. I know some
people use barrels, put a lot of bloom in them; but it's not a
great deal of work to put the bloom up there if you have got
good, active fellows. They will soon take it off.

Question: Did the bees prefer Grimes Golden?

Mr. Hershey: I don't know that they do. They certainly
worked in the Transparent block; it was full of bees. I don't
believe that they are very partial to any one kind of bloom.

Question: Did you have to cut up many trees to get blossoms?

Mr. Hershey: We cut up the Transparent, and we are sorry
we didn't cut them up more.

STORING PEACHES AND APPLES AT THE ORCHARD

SHELDON FUNK, Boyertown, Berks County

We put in the cold storage plant back in 1925. We have
operated it ever since, and I have learned a few things about the
operation of cold and common storage. But before I take up
that subject, I would like to say just a few words along another
line; that is that I believe I express the sentiment of the fruit
growers of Pennsylvania when I say that I believe that at the
present time State College should pay particular attention to
anything that means the cutting of costs in the production of
apples and peaches. I believe we have got to cut corners where-
ever we possibly can. I, personally, no longer try to compete
with the western fellow who is putting up the boxed apple.
/ firmly believe that we in Pennsylvania are commercial growers,
that we are not supplying fruit to that extra high-class consuming
market, but that we are producing fruit for this great army of
middle class people who want good fruit, but donH particularly
care whether it is U. S. No, 1 or Extra Fancy. I believe it's up
to us to cut costs, to cut corners wherever we possibly can.
And I am sure that sometimes the men at the College run across
something, some ways by which, possibly, the results will not
be quite as good, but we can get sufficiently good results with
just a little less cost. And it is right along that line that I
would like to present this subject of storing peaches and apples
at the farm, or at the orchard.

Different conditions in the country, in the growing sections,
naturally make more difficult storage, handling, and marketing
conditions. We have such districts as Adams and Franklin
Counties, where there are large quantities of apples and peaches
grown ; and the same thing is true in New York State where the
natural thing has been the development of commercial cold
storage plants, and, undoubtedly, that is the best proposition
there. But then, again, there are a great many districts in
Pennsylvania, — this is true in Berks County and in many other
counties — where such a great quantity of fruit is not produced,

— 103 —

in which ihe erection of a commercial ^^/dstorage plant wou^^^
not be a commercially profitab e Proposition It is under those
^V^ndifions that we find a particularly fine place for this home
storage of peachrsand apples. And by "home storage" I mean
not only common storage, but also cold storage, so that I would
like to treat it from that standpoint.

While a great many of you men have your own common storage
Dlants whfcMs very good, I'm sure that if you ever put in a cold
storac^^lant you would find that it was one of the best invest-
mentf vou ha?e ever made, because it works right along with
S common storlge plant so very nicely. Some of you may
saf thatthS is not I good time to bring up a cold storage propo-
sSon because it is a lather expensive venture; I know that cost
has been the' factor which has prevented a great many men
from going into the cold storage proposition The cost will,
nXrallv vary greatly, depending upon what type of storage
^ou conSruct,^and whether or not you have a suitable building
to begin with If you are going to construct a new building
naturS your costs are going to be considerably higher But
I bSJvou can figure on a cost of somewhere between one and
wo dollars per bushel; that is, an initial ^o^f^ ^oVa co?d
between one and two dollars per bushel capacity for a com

^* There are quite a number of refrigerating systems; I shall say
onlv a word about them, because I don't know enough about
?£ toTay more. I ha^e an ammonia direct expansion; some
men use the Bryant system; I don't doubt that it is a very
Sfactory one. Just within the last few years, there has been
a new system introduced which looks very good to me I know
of several growers in Pennsylvania who have mstalled them,
and I believeTt is the coming system, for under that plan we
do away with all the coils which are on the roof of the room or

on the sides of the room in the older system, BL-nl'^in the
taken over the coils placed in one corner of the building in the
Bryant, and there is a very much better circulation of air m
that way, and much better ventilation than under the old types
of refrigeration. Anybody interested in refrigeration would
natSally look into that, and I am not going to spend any more
time on that subject.

Now. when it comes to operation of the storage you are gomg
to have a great variation, the cost dep^^^ing upon how m^^^^^
overhead you have. In my own case the monthly cost of oper-
ation per bushel runs between one-third of a cent and one cent
That is the actual cost of current consumed My man who
takes charge of all the sales and does the work hves right there.
He attends to the cold storage; and it requires very little atten-
tion, with practically no overhead cost to me. Now I do^ t
figure interest on investment, but the cost will range between
one-third of a cent and one cent per month During the peach
season it was jammed to the doors— everything it would hold,
and we were running as hard as we could run, and then the cur-

— 104 —

rent bill averaged about one cent per bushel on peaches during
the hot months, at the present time it isn't running over two-
thirds of a cent per month.

Question: What capacity have you?

Mr. Funk: I have 15,000 bushels capacity. I have two units,
a 2-ton automatic unit and a 4-ton hand control; the idea being
that when we are bringing stuff into storage we run the two
units as hard as we can. After we have it cooled down to the
proper temperature, we throw off the 4-ton machine and let
the 2-ton run ahead as long as it is necessary. I was rather
interested in what Mr. Hayman said this morning relative to
the storage of peaches, and 1 was wondering what the trouble
was that he had with his peach storage this past year. We
have been storing peaches for quite a number of years, all grades,
all sizes,— and our results have been uniformly successful. I
have been more than pleased with our results on the storage of

peaches.

Question: How long do you storage peaches.^
Mr. Funk: Ordinarily we don't figure on holding peaches
more than four weeks. We put peaches in just as we need a
place for them. Elbertas will start a Uttle before Labor Day;
I find the market is usually glutted Tuesday following Labor
Day. The result is that we put such stuff in the storage house
in order to relieve the market on Tuesday following Labor Day.
We usually store pretty heavily then. The peaches may be
coming along pretty fast, and if the picking gangs happen to
run ahead of the packing gangs, and I find that we are going to get
an accumulation of stuff in the packing house, instead of slowing
down the picking I merely send trucks into the orchard and let
them haul the field-run stuff directly into the storage bouse
just as it comes out of the orchard.

This past season, they filled up the rooms so rapidly we
couldn't get the temperature down fast enough, and in such a
case stuff will go bad every time. Put it in as fast as you can,
but pull your temperature down; don't let that temperature
get up to 40 degrees or 45 degrees and stay there for two or
three days. It may run up to 45 when you are putting in the
stuff, and I have had it run up to 50, but get it down to 35 mside
of a couple of days, or you will lose the peaches.

Question: Wasn't it rather mean packing or sorting after
you took them out of storage?

Mr. Funk: We had to be careful not to bring them out too
fast. It was necessary to take out not more than twenty-five
bushels at a time and run those over the grader, because if you
let them lie around in hot weather, they will sweat very fast,
making a bad looking pack. The best type of peach to store is
the good, hard first-pick peaches. But it may be that you have
a market for them; if you have, sell! Put something in for which
you don't have a present market.

Another nice thing about a cold storage plant on your own
place is that it works so nicely for anything else that you may

— 106 —

be growing. In my case we grow several hundred bushels of
pears. And we have, perhaps, a hundred or two hundred bushels
of plums and the like. Now you know it is the finest thing in
the world to be able to take this stuff into the cold storage house,
if you don't happen to have the time or a market to sell it today.
Let the plums and pears stay there until you are ready to sell
them, — until the other people have sold and you find a good

market.

Now there is one thing I want to say about that peach situa-
tion this afternoon before I leave it, and that is we were just a
little bit lucky this fall with our weather conditions, — that is
one gamble that you are taking to storage peaches. A peach is
a hot weather fruit; your market is gone just as soon as the
weather turns cold. We had a very warm fall, and it certainly
helped move peaches this year, — some of them were held for as
long as five and six weeks.

Question: Do the peaches lose flavor in two weeks?

Mr. Funk: They begin to lose flavor not in two weeks, but
in four weeks — just as soon as they begin to turn brown at the
stone, they begin to dry; when they begin to turn dry they need
to be moved. You must get them out. They will not turn
dry in three weeks.

Question: Do you drive trucks right into the cold storage

plant?

Mr. Funk: We go in with hand trucks. The time you run
up your temperature is when you try to put two cars, for instance,
in a room of 5,000 bushels capacity. If you take a room of that
size and put two cars of hot peaches in it in one afternoon, you
are liable to find that is too much unless you have a very large
equipment so that you can pull down the temperature quickly.

Question: Is there any taste or smell from the storage given
to the fruit?

Mr. Funk: Absolutely none, unless the ammonia gets out;
that will affect the flavor.

Question: Do you have humidity to maintain.

Mr. Funk: My humidity works out well, just by chance.
We have coils running overhead. When you are holding a
35 degree temperature and stop refrigerating, a drip will result.
The ice will melt off the coils and there will be plenty of moisture
— the humidity is very good. That's one thing that I think
was partly due to the fact that we had better results this year
in our own storage — because of the humidity. I find, where a
cement floor is used, the air feels a little too dry. In other
words, with dry air there may be a temperature of 32 or 33,
but it doesn't seem as cold as when there is a higher humidity.
Then it may be actually two or three degrees higher by the
thermometer, yet you think it is very cold. It is because of that
high humidity, which is very essential. If I had a cement floor
in a storage room, I think I would cover it over with something
else. I would use sodium silicate, which would close up those
pores, or put on something like Amiesite.

— 106 —

Question: I understand commercial houses have circulating
air?

Mr. Funk: They have humidity controlled circulating air.
Along that line I want to add a word about apple storage. We
work apples in very much the same way. We put in early
apples, and cold storage is a splendid thing to have when early
apples come along. If the market is a bit slow, you can put
them in and by holding them a little while you can often get
better prices. Two years ago I had about half my Duchess,
all of my Wealthy, and all of the later stuff that followed, until
the following April but that was not a good proposition. Never-
theless, it usually works out very nicely in the keeping of all
those early and summer apples. We feel that we must have
storage for everything that we want to hold for any length of
time, up to Stayman. Beginning with Stayman we use the
common storage, but everything up to and including some of the
Stayman we try to put in cold storage.

The condition of apples when picked has considerable to do
with the keeping qualities. A green Smokehouse will not hold
up, but let a Smokehouse first get good color and it will keep a
long time — we just cleaned up the last Smokehouse a week to
ten days ago; they came out in splendid shape. I had those
apples in a room that was running somewhere between 35 and
40, but they came out in good condition; whereas, if they had
been green they would not have been in good condition. So I
think it is always going to pay us, on most varieties, to pick
anywhere from two to three times. We usually pick about
three times, and I feel that is a yery profitable operation.

Question: Did you say you had trouble with Smokehouse
and Summer Rambo last year?

Mr. Funk: I had very little trouble with Smokehouse this
year. But last season we had a lot of trouble with breakdown;
I learned a lesson on Summer Rambo, and we watched them
and got them out before they started. But why it is that
Summer Rambo acts that way I don't know; it is more than I
can understand. We have had a lot of trouble with it.

Question: Speaking of picking them three times; do you
pick by the hour?

Mr. Funk: Yes, everything is done by the hour. We store
everything orchard run, — that is another nice thing about
having our own plant right at our own place. You bring them
out of the orchard and put them right in; you pay no attention
to packing or grading until you have them all in. It helps to
utilize your labor; it distributes that labor cost very much more
than if you have got to run them through the packing house
and pack them out regardless of packing conditions or regardless
of money. That is another place we can cut costs by having a
storage house right on the place.

Question: How far is it from the orchard to your storage
house?

— 107 —

Mr. Funk: The storage house is probably a mile or a mile
and a half away— two miles, possibly, from the farthest part
of the orchard. We now store almost entirely in baskets. I
like the stave baskets— sometimes called an "export tub.'' That
is a ventilated stave basket, the finest thing I know of for
storage. Now I know a lot of men use crates, and possibly they
will keep just a Httle better in crates than they will in baskets;
but my objection to the crate is that you have an added over-
head, you don't sell them in crates; whereas, in baskets, you
can get rid of baskets and don't lose that package, even if it is
getting poor. And then, again, the crates take up so much
room. When your place is limited you are still two-thirds filled

up.

Question: How do you arrange your baskets?
Mr. Funk: Just the same as you load in a car.
Question: Do you put a lid on?

Mr. Funk: We put a Ud on and pack them down the same as
you would in a car. I put everything in this year without caps,
thinking that we would get better results, but it was a failure.
Hereafter I am going to use caps, they cut off a certain amount
of ventilation, but I find that the drivers invariably make the
baskets a little too full, and then, in handling them, cut a few
apples; and you usually have two or three rotten apples right
on top. Put on a cap, and you overcome that.

Question: How cheap would commercial storage have to be
to compete with a home storage plant?

Mr. Funk: I could not give you definite figures on that, but
it would have to be considerably less than now. Of course, you
can't blame these cold storage men; they have a tremendous
overhead that I don't have. They have an office force, and they
have a day and a night man — may be more than one day and
one night man. You see, they have a big overhead that I
don't have.

Question: What kind of floor have you?
Mr. Funk: I have concrete, cork, and wood in two rooms,
and concrete, cork, and Amiesite in another room. I said I put
that Amiesite on the concrete,but I put the cork on top of the
concrete and then Amiesite on top of that.

Mr. Tyson: I might make a brief report of the Legislative
and Agricultural Council Committee. We haven't had any
definite work referred to us in legislative lines, and, so far as I
recall, nothing of direct interest to this Association has come
up in legislative lines in the last years. We all certainly are-y
and in this respect I lap over into the organization of the Agri-
cultural Council — much interested in keeping in touch with
other farmers of the state — other rural people — in matters which
do touch legislation. And, while previous legislatures have not
progressed as far as we should have liked to see them, we still
have hopes. One of those questions — the outstanding one,
possibly, in the minds of people today — is the question of
taxation; and the Agricultural Council, composed of three

— 108 —

representatives from each of the agricultural interests of the
state, particularly those meeting here during this week, has had
it particularly in mind. Another of their activities has been
the development of the rural electrification — the spreading of,
the extending of electric lines into the country— and trying to
see to it that those lines are made to reach farmers on as reason-
able a basis as possible. Apparently a good deal has been
accomplished in that direction, even though many of us still
feel that it costs too much to get electric current in outlying
places — certainly, we still feel that some of the rates are too
high. But this organization, with the committee, has spent a
great deal of time on the subject and have handled the specific
claims of a great many of our country people; it certainly has
been responsible for many of the improvements that we have
seen taking place over the last few years.

In the matter of taxation, the Agricultural Council has a
committee that has been working for several years, and during
that time has conferred with a large number of local and state-
wide associations organized for the study of the tax situation.
And I feel sure that it is only a matter of time, and that the
studies made by these committees are going to result in a plan
whereby most of us, at least, can get power lines, and when
that time comes it certainly will be reflected in legislative action.

HOW THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
CHECKS UP ON ARSENICAL RESIDUES

D. M. JAMES, Bureau of Markets, Harrisburg, Dauphin County

I desire to mention for your information the way that the
State Department of Agriculture has been assisting in the spray
residue check-up work, that is, to assist growers to know where
they stand on arsenate spray residue. Through the cooperation
of the Bureau of Foods and Chemistry and the Bureau of
Markets, we worked out a system in these last two years, which
has done very nicely, and we have not had any serious difficul-
ties. As far as I know, there have been no Pennsylvania apples
in difficulty because of excessive spray arsenate.

Probably some of the growers, particularly those outside the
commercial districts, who are not famiUar with this method we
have worked out, may wish in the next year, if we go about
the same way of handling it, to make use of this service. The
way we have handled it is like this: We send out our shippmg
point inspectors between the peach and apple seasons, about ten
days to two weeks, when there is Httle inspection work to do.
Last year we had about twenty-five men who covered prac-
tically the entire commercial district, mostly through Adams,
Franklin, and York counties, including the larger growers in
other districts. Now they collected orchard samples of the
apples, and these were sent in here to Harrisburg and were
analyzed within a few days— last year there was so much rush

— 109 —

that it took a week to ten days to catch up one time. But, as
the shipments had not started, this was no serious handicap,
because an orchard inspection was made before the shipment

started.

The growers who ran high on arsenic were notified, and if
later on we took a single sample and it was found to be too high,
they were cautioned about exporting those apples without wash-
ing or brushing. There were only six washers in the state that
we know of; there are a good many brushes which may take off
some arsenic, although they are not effective if there is much.
Now in the past season, we analyzed 278 samples, and of these
19 were found to exceed the domestic tolerance, which is slightly
higher than the export tolerance*. There were 14 shipments
held up until the arsenate was removed, and I might say I
don't think any of these were held long enough so they couldn't
be shipped later.

We are trying to cooperate with the fruit growers, to help
them eliminate this arsenate residue, and to advise them if
their stock will pass the export and domestic tolerance. There
has been no expense charge ; the regular force of the Department
of Agriculture has been able to put on this service, without
creating any excitement or doing any advertising. It has been
carried on quietly, but it has been rather thorough, and we have
found it to be effective.

Question: Do you make the examination in Harrisburg?

Mr. James: We will examine the samples that are sent in,
but we can't consider that an official test for an export certificate.
One of our inspectors will be glad to examine any apples that
are sent in any time; but, in order to give you an export form
certificate, we can't do that. We have to collect the samples
and know the conditions of the apples in the orchards.

Mr. Runk: I spoke to our President yesterday and asked
his permission to present a Uttle matter that, perhaps, I am very
much worried over — the problem of the itinerant peddler. I
don't know what he has done in your community, but in our
community he has torn things to pieces. We had trucks coming
from New York, we had trucks from Virginia, we had trucks
coming in from New Jersey, we had trucks coming in from
Delaware and all over the East, hawking and seUing stuff any-
where from fifteen to twenty-five cents a bushel. I thought so
much about it, and it became such a factor in our marketing
problem that I tried to get some information together; I have
here some clippings from The Packer and in order to make this
very brief I am just going to point out what has been done in
some of the states. (Mr. Runk then read a clipping concerning
action in Missouri, another clipping concerning Tennessee and
fines levied on persons selling without various Ucenses and
permits.) The Farm Bureau of Ohio on December 6, 7, and 8,
1931, took this matter up and passed a resolution, which I am
not going to take time to read to you, dealing with the problem,

*See the complete table on page 39 in this Proceedings.

— no-

asking for legislation or the study of conditions which would
warrant legislation in the future. In the state legislature of
Utah a few weeks ago they went after it from the standpoint
of carrying diseased and infected fruits in without inspection.
I believe our Bureau of Markets here in this state, with which
Mr. James is connected, has authority to inspect and control
the correct labeUng of fruit, but has nothing to do with the
control of the sale. The National League of Merchants, which
met in Miami, Florida, just a few days ago, went into this
problem very thoroughly. We have reports from a number of
different districts in Kansas, especially Troy, Kansas, going into
the details of how these trucks are just wrecking the established
business interests of the community. This is what is happening
in our local, our established channels of trade — we have no
movement for lower grades of apples, whereas a few years ago
we had demand for truckloads of second grade, or the equivalent
of utility grade of fruit.

In the National League of Merchants, which met in Florida
last week, as I said, they appointed a committee, a standing
committee to study and investigate this proposition and take
up proposed legislation. The horticultural associations of both
West Virginia and Virginia have taken action on this problem
within the last few weeks, have established committees to make
a study of the situation and to propose legislation in the future.
Our legislature will not be in session until a year from now; but
if this problem is as serious everywhere in the state — and I have
talked with a number of men since I came to the meeting, and
they say **We are facing the same thing". I do think we ought
to study this problem, not doing anything which will drive the
legitimate trucking business to the wall, but instead trying to
do something that will drive these itinerant peddlers out of our
markets — if necessary, tax them to death.

I present this simply as a matter for thought; I have no
recommendations whatever to make, other than to stir you up
and get you to thinking about it, and to hope that something
can be done in the future to take care of our established markets.

RESOLUTION

WHEREAS the accommodation rendered by the Department
of Agriculture, in connection with the use of the meeting room
and also the services of Mr. D. M. James and Mr. T. L. Guyton,
are very much appreciated.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that this Association
wishes to thank the Department of Agriculture and these gentle-
men for their services.

H. S. Nolt, Chairman,
F. S. Dickenshied,
C. H. Bruce.

January 21, 1932.

— Ill —

ORCHARD COVER CROPS

F. N. FAGAN, State College, Centre County

During the past 23 years your Experiment Station has con-
ducted in the orchard at State College, cover crop, culture, and
fertiUzer work. Like much similar work little valuable mfor-
mation developed in the early periods of the tests. The work at
the college has resulted in one general problem ; namely, orchard
soil fertility. For fifty years your Experiment Station has con-
ducted field fertility tests of farm crops. Much valuable mfor-
mation for the orchardist has incidentally developed from this

The cover crop system followed at the Pennsylvania State
College from 1908 to 1929 was clean culture throughout the
summer, seeding the cover crop in late summer. Often the
seed was not sown until after August 15 and many times m the
case of rye not until September. The covers used in this early
period were rye, oats, rape, and millet in the non-legumes, and
soy beans, cow peas, various clovers, and winter vetch in the
legumes. From 1924 to 1928 the seeding dates of covers were
advanced from late August to July 1 in 1928. During this change
of seeding dates we noted an increase of cover grown resulting
from the longer period of time the covers were able to grow.
In the non-legume covers, rye and oats had to be discontinued
since they are not suited for hot, dry weather which we generally
have in July and August. Very often the other covers such as
the clovers, rape, and millets had very little chance to make
much growth due to the hot, dry summer weather, when they
were not seeded until July.

However, whenever we did get a good growth of cover, we
noted that tree growth did not seem to be hurt in any way by
the fact that growing cover crops were in the orchard during
the summer. In fact why did we not ask ourselves the question
years ago, ''Why should covers growing in a cultivated orchard
hurt tree growth if sod growing in the orchard apparently did
not injure tree growth?'^ To be sure, we would naturally have
answered this question by saying we keep the grass cut once or
twice in the sod orchard. We could also cut cover crops if they
grew too vigorously.

In 1929 we advanced the seeding dates of covers to June 1
and this practice has been followed each year since that date.
What were the results? First, we grew the best and largest
covers the orchards have ever had even though 1929 and 1930
were the dryest years the orchards had had since planting in
1908. The covers got the benefit of the soil moisture resulting
from the winter snows and the spring rains. Because of this mois-
ture still in the soil, the covers could get enough start to weather
the dry period of July and August. This was especially true of
the clovers, for in the springs of 1930 and 1931 we had fine
clover to turn into the soil. Second, we saved the cost of culti-
vation for the months of June, July and August. That alone

— 112 —

is worth thinking about during the present period of economic
depression with the accompanying low prices for the harvested
fruit. Third, the competition of the cover for soil moisture
with the trees, of course, is present when we seed June 1 but we
could detect no bad results to tree growth in 1929, 1930 or 1391,
nor to the size of harvested fruit. Peaches, apples, cherries,
plums and grapes showed no bad results developing from the
lack of cultivation in June, July, and August. In fact in the
poorer soil blocks of the college orchard we noted that the lack
of moisture in 1929 and 1930 killed the cover crops while the
trees continued to grow, for in many blocks the covers growing
under the branch spread, died while in the middle of the rows
the cover continued to grow. This indicates that the tree will
care for itself in competition with the cover crops. Fourth,
with only this short period of cultivation, that is late April
and early May, we reduce the destruction of what organic
material we turned into the soil from the year before. Soil
Science in the last thirty years has taught us that continued
cultivation of the soil tends to hasten the decay of soil organic
matter.

With the old practice of June, July, and August cultivation,
we were destroying what little organic material we had grown
in the cover of the preceeding year. Early seeding of covers will
continue in the Experiment Station orchards until harmful
effects show up, if they ever do; your Station workers do not
believe injurious results will follow from such a practice.

Early seeding opens up the subject of the best covers to use.
The non-legume covers suited for this work are the millets.
Sudan grass, sorghum and even corn broadcast. Likely others
will develop as time goes on. The legume covers fit well into
this system. There is no question at all in the minds of state
agricultural experiment station workers and farmers that the
growing of clovers on land ever hurt the soil. When we seed
clovers early they get enough growth to carry over their life
during dry periods of summer and are well rooted to withstand
the following winter. Mixtures or one alone of the cheap clovers
such as crimson and biennial sweet clover seeded in late May
make a good growth and usually winter well. Even during the
dry summer of 1930 the sweet clover seeded in late May and
early June pulled through and produced a heavy stand in 1931.
Soy beans seeded in late May made good covers in 1930. It
is needless to say that the lime requirements must be satisfied if
one expects to grow clovers and it is also needless to say that a
soil where clovers can be grown annually will not become poor
from such a practice, where a good standing results.

The work at the Experiment Station indicates that it is just
as important to fertilize the soil for the benefit of the cover as
it is to fertilize the soil for the direct benefit of the trees. There
are very few soils in the orchard districts of Pennsylvania where
grain or grass will not respond to applications of phosphate
fertilizers.

— 113 —

There are strong indications in the work at State College
pointing to the practice of early seeding of covers in young
orchards. The more covers grown and incorporated into the
soil during the early years of the orchard will tend to offset the
smaller amounts one may grow after the t^ees ^J^^P^, f^^^^^^^
of the soil with their roots, and shade the soil with their leaves.
In older orchards, covers may make rather a small growth due
to low soil fertility, competition with the tree roots for moisture
and shading. Mixed sweet and crimson clovers have made good
growth in 22- and 23-year-old apple orchards where the trees
fully occupy the soil, when seeded before June 1. Even early
spring seeding would be satisfajetory in establishing clovers for
the first time It is possible to grow alfalfa in older orchards.
Millets and Sudan grass seem to make good growth even in
older orchards where shading is rather heavy. One must
remember, however, that cover crop growth depends, even with
early seeding, on soil fertility and water holding capacity of the
soil But with early seeding the cover will get the benefat ot
the* higher moisture content resulting from spring rains and

winter snows. ' 4.^ u^

Heavy covers resulting from early seeding niay have to be
mowed down during midsummer to lessen the harvesting diffi-
culties. Sudan grass, millet, and the clovers mowed in mid-
summer with the cutting bar set high, wiU produce second growth
from the stools but still not enough growth to interfere with
fruit harvest, except on very stony soils.

Any cover that lives over the winter months as alfalfa, clovers,
or grasses, may rob the nitrate from the soil in early spring just
at the time the trees most need this element, during the period
from when the trees are breaking bud through blooming. Heavy
stands of covers under the trees can easily be checked but not
killed by discing or by the use of a heavy spring tooth harrow.
This will prevent the cover from taking as much nitrate from the
soil. Where clovers or alfalfa are being used for covers, annual
seeding may or may not be necessary following the spring discing
or harrowing, depending upon the severity of cultivation. It the
operation cuts up the growth to such an extent as to uproot or kill
part of the cover, then it would be advisable to broadcast four to
six quarts more of seed to the acre. It is weU to remember that
native grasses wiU gradually run out legumes if some means ot
destroying the grasses, such as discing or harrowing, are not
resorted to. By annual harrowing it may be possible to put off
for many years the much more expensive job of plowing.

From this discussion it will be seen that the purpose of culti-
vation in the orchard may be reduced to two main points:
First, the checking of any rank growth of cover living over the
winter so that the cover will not take nitrates from the soil at
the time the fruit tree needs them; second, the preparation of a
suitable seed bed to receive the new seed.

The main object of a cover crop is to supply organic material
to the soil. If it cannot be grown in the orchard, then it may

— lu-

be grown elsewhere and hauled in the same as manure. By
proper handling and fertilization beginning when the orchard is
young, there is no reason why enough cover cannot be grown
each year to hold a satisfactory organic supply in the soil.
This cannot be done by trying to grow non-legume or even
legume covers without satisfying such crop's soil and fertility
requirements. This cannot be done by following clean cultiva-
tion from early spring through June, July, and half of August.

Experience with general agricultural crops shows that the
need of crop rotation is an established fact. The orchardist may
find it desirable to follow a rotation of different cover crops over
a period of years. In other words, the continuation year after
year of a millet or Sudan grass cover may result in an unfavorable
soil condition resulting in a poorer growth of cover which would
lessen the annual amount of organic material returned to the
soil. What rotation will be needed is a question for the future.
I doubt whether with the legume covers this rotation will be
necessary but legume insects or diseases may develop to the
extent that we will find it necessary to practice rotation systems
of covers, taking into the rotation one year of millet, or one of
Sudan grass, or one or two years of our native grasses, and back
to beans, winter vetch, sweet clover, crimson clover, or mixtures
of legumes.

Question: Did you use rye as a cover crop?

Mr. Fagan: We had to cut out rye and oats for early seeding;
they are cool weather plants. When we sow rye and oats early
there is rust in both of them, with the result that they do not
amount to anything. Therefore, rye and oats have to be dis-
carded for seeding around the first of June.

Question: Was the soil acidity high?

Mr. Fagan: We checked the acidity. The soil has been
limed. We are trying to keep the soil reaction at the point
where the acidity can not enter as a factor. We have to lime it
again this year.

Question : If, after meeting the lime requirement and having
a good stand, what fertilizer would you be inclined to use with
sweet clover seeding, with that history?

Mr. Fagan: If you want to use sweet clover under such
conditions there is little chance of your having any trouble
getting a stand. You will probably have to continue using some
nitrate for the benefit of your trees, even though you grow
sweet clover.

Question: How do you sow cover crops?

Mr. Fagan: We generally drill. In the older part, where we
can't do that, we broadcast and then harrow it in with a spike-
tooth harrow, with the teeth sloped back. A cultipacker is an
ideal tool for this and you can get a seeder fitting. They make
one with a box seeder — even with the fertilizer attachment —
that will fit right back of the cultipacker with the seeding tubes
running in front of the rear discs.

— 116 -

Question: What is the difference in using sulphate of am-
monia and nitrate of soda?

Mr Fagan : You must keep your ammonium sulphate appli-
cations offset with lime as you need them If the soil becomes
so acid that you can^t grow a cover, you will then have to ottset
the acidity with lime or pulverized Umestone.
Question: How about fertiUzing cover crops?
Mr Fagan: From past experience we can say that without
any fertilizer for the benefit of your cover, a non-leguminous
cover is not going to give you enough growth by seeding it in
late or mid-summer to keep your soil in good condition, we know
we must fertiUze if we are going to use non-leguminous cover
crops. We know that soil is not going to become poorer as
long as we can grow heavy stands of clover.

Question: When should rye be turned in to get the greatest
amount of green manure?

Mr. Fagan: The soils men say before it begins to get stemmy
and too tough to rot up.

Question: How long do you let Sudan grass stand before
you mow?

Mr Fagan : If you get stands of Sudan such as I have seen
in places, you will have to mow it because if you don t you
couldn't get your pickers to go through.

Question: How many years can you keep sweet clover?
Mr Fagan: It is a biennial plant. It will grow a large root
this year; next year that same individual plant will grow,
bloom, and seed. Then that stalk is done for. But, if it makes
seed, that seed will come up the following spring to go through
the same cycle. Of course very few men let it grow up in a
bearing orchard on account of the harvest problem. Under-
stand, here's another point that we may run into. By growing
such heavy covers through the orchard we may be getting so
much stuff in there that we may increase our insect and disease
problems. We had it in a part of the college orchard in 1931,
where the grasshoppers cleaned off the lower leaves on the
apple trees in a tall millet cover crop.

Question: With the sweet clover in peach orchards, do you
still recommend nitrate for the trees?

Mr. Fagan: I would, if the trees were not growing vigorously
enough.

Question: Do you think you would increase the amount of
brown rot with such a heavy cover crop in peach orchards if
there happened to be a wet July and August?

Mr. Fagan: We have controlled brown rot by spraying and it
we had a wet season and the chances of an epidemic of brown rot
in the orchard continued to be good, we would probably r^^ the
risk of mowing and controlUng the brown rot by spraying. That
brings up other orchard economic questions. I wouldn't be sur-
prised that, through the drought-affected sections of Pennsylvania,

— lie-

in the next two or three years, our experiment station workers are
going to be asked the question: ''What's the matter with these
trees? They are dying off." And if you come up to State
College a year from now, maybe two years, you will see parts of
the orchard standing there, dead. While in general they pull
through year after year there are parts of them with poor cover
crops or where no covers have been put in, and where we have
added nothing from the outside. Probably we can't grow much
cover crop in a bearing orchard. If so, we should take a piece of
land outside and and grow a lot of cover crop, mow it and haul
it in. Manure is out of the question, but you can grow some
other stuff and haul it in there at low cost, then plow it in next
spring.

Question: Do you consider soy beans a satisfactory and
economical cover crop?

Mr. Fagan: We have some prices on seed. I received them
in December, and they are expensive, — a little more expensive
than some of our clovers. They will not winter and furnish
something green in the spring. Our soils men say that the green
crops plowed down act better in the soil than a dry crop, for
the simple reason that your soil bacteria must take nitrate out
of the soil to give them energy to break down any dry, strawy
material. The bacteria break down the green cover crops more
easily. Crimson clover and sweet clover can be purchased this
spring at about five dollars a bushel; six to eight quarts to the
acre is not a prohibitive seeding.

Question: What would happen by discing the soy beans in
the fall before they die?

Mr. Fagan: They probably would decay a little faster.
There would be nothing wrong with it, as far as I can see.

Question: Is there any chance of self-reseeding by not discing
until spring?

Mr. Fagan: They will reseed themselves if seed matures pro-
vide they do not germinate the same as some of our other seeds —
a little early and then freeze.

Question: Which variety of millet will give the rankest
growth?

Mr. Fagan: We have had pretty rank growth with Japanese,
German, and Hungarian millet. I would say most of the millets
that we have been growing for hay will succeed in the north.

Question: Do you delay the plowing in the spring in order to
get some green material to turn under?

Mr. Fagan: Until late April or the middle of May.

Question: Does a partial discing in the spring prevent the
clovers from competing with the trees at blossom time?

Mr. Fagan: That is about what it amounts to. If your
clovers are heavy, you may want to check them. The difficulty
is to keep them ifrom taking the food that you are putting on
for the trees.

— 117 —

REPORT OF INSPECTION RATE COMMITTEE

PAUL THAYER, Chairman
Carlisle, Cumberland County

This Inspection Committee was appointed to see what could
■Sim "gness.to cooperate wij u^ ^ far -^"-f" tt«heTu°l

r-niild save a httle money by a rearrangement of the work by ine
usf of stite-owned cars instead of using private cars, and that he
f-fu thAv oniild afford to reduce the expense somewhat. We put

feporfi^^^^^^ concession from the Secretary, and that

""'SZ^Y^L'^m^^^^ and I don't want to take much
of yourTme but I do believe that the P^nnf van- ^^^^
Sowers in particular should take some action at this time in
Savoring to have the freight rate reduced-and possibly have
refrLeratS reduced also. Virginia growers have just

cSdTv^^^^^^^^ reduction in freight; bdieve th^^^

instead of peaches being considered first-class, ^^^^^^^^ now
shinned out as sixty percent of first-class in Virginia, ims
S a 'considerable reduction In studying tl^e case ^^^ some
nnints in Virginia, the rate to New York City is not very mucn
LeSer thaK points in Pennsylvania-that is, in

tlu^lJ^n Pennsylvania' Railroads, natural y do no wan
to reduce freight rates more than they must, but, on t he otner
L^nTu L^^^^^^ that the railroads are begin-^^^^^^^^^^^
unless they do something and do it pretty nuick^y , t^^^^^ ^tr ;
going t.o lose practically all of their peach traffic close to the
Wer cities Last year we had men who were wilhng to truck
i^rVfdiSator tucks into Boston at the same rate tlmt the
"iho^^^^^^^ were charging. And it looks to m^ - th^^^^^^^^

this would be a very opportune time to ^^^^''^l^^^^
Since the Virginia people have gotten it, I see no reason wny

Secretary's NoTE-This committee has been continued. Another reduc
tion may be effected this year.

— 118 —

we should not get the same classification. It^s entirely possible
that the railroad people would be willing to go along with us in
an endeavor to hold some of this traffic that they see they are
losing. And I believe that the Pennsylvania growers at this
time should take some step in that direction— a reduction in
the freight rate and also a reduction in the refrigerating cost.
The cost of refrigeration runs from forty-five to sixty dollars —
that is, in any case, and I think that is general— and that I feel
is really an exorbitant charge. It isn't a great deal more from
very much more distant. I should like you to consider that
matter.

President Criswell: You have heard Mr. Funk's remarks.
I think the main thing here is to get a committee authorized to
inquire into and take such action as they see fit — even going
to the extent of — if necessary — soliciting and raising, by private
subscription, among us funds to handle the matter. Will any
one make such a motion?

Upon the motion of Mr. Greist, which was properly seconded,
it was unanimously decided to appoint a committee to inquire
into the peach rates and take such action as its members find
advisable.

Secretary's Note: The peach rate reduction benefits Penn-
sylvania; it is in effect March 1. Refrigerating rates are still
the same, — Funk says we may get action on them.

A FEW FRUIT PRIZES AT HARRISBURG
What the Customer Receives

Class 73 Commercial Barrel First Places Only

Paragon

Rome

Stayman

York

Baldwin

Stark

Ben Davis

Class 74 Commercial Bushel

Baldwin — Ben Davis— (Gano and Mcintosh no Firsts) —

McKnightstown Adams
Biglerville Adams

Mifflinburg Union
York Springs Adams
Mechanicsburg Cumberland

Karns & Davidson Chambersburg Franklin

Guy L. Hayman

Northbrook

Chester

Geo. A. Goodling

Loganville

York

Dan Sherly

Cashtown

Adams

C. J. Tyson

Gardners

Adams

Guy L. Hayman

Northbrook

Chester

H. R. Worthington

West Chester

Chester

W. K. Grove

York Springs

Adams

Rome

Geo. Oyler

Stayman

Arthur Rice

N. Spy

Mt. Valley Fruit

Farm

York

W. E. Grove

Stark

N. E. Mowery

Smokehouse

119

OTHER PRIZES

Class 75 County Exhibits 1st— Delaware; 2nd-Franklin;
3rd— Lancaster; 4th— Chester, and 5th— Snyder.

Gabriel Hiester Cup Awarded to FrankUn Co.— Most mem-
bers placing.

State Horticultural Association Cup awarded to Harrison
Nol?ColSrLancaster County,-Best bushel in the show.

Tmoortant! The judge observed privately that while bruises
and stem punctures may not be the growers' fault, apples do
not become sadly polluted with scale or scab except in the
orchard. Also! pfckhig off the tiny scale insect itself still leaves
the red ring and it is still considered insect injury.

If Jou looked over the exhibits, you will know what the judge

meant.

MARKETING THROUGH CHAIN STORES

E. DANA SUTLIFF
Shickshinny, Luzerne County

I note that the principal part of your prograin this afternoon
pertahis to marketing, and there is another word that I would
like you to take into consideration with that word "^arketrng
And^that other word is '^salesmanship.'^ Now, through the
agency of State College and the county agents, we are able to
produce good fruit but if we can't get the price for that fruit
the work has been in vain. All the work from State College is
on the producing end, and the big part of the business is selling,
and unC you can sell that fruit profitably, you will have to
use red ink in your bookkeeping. Now, what is it that consti-
Ses saiesLnJhip? Before I go on with this matter o^^^^^^^^^^^
manship, I want to say that my problem will fit the growers
of two to five thousand bushels of apples.

I am going to relate a little incident of just a week or two
ago, Tsfw a man in the market and I looked his ruit over;
nooked the man over. I thought, 'That man won't sell that
load of fruit '' I saw him two days later, and I asked mm,
''How dS^^^^^ find the market?" He replied '1 took twen y
bushels of apples to market; I worked hard all day, and I sold
four bushels; the rest I brought home.; ^ What was the matter
Was it that man's fruit? I looked carefully at his fruit; it wasn t
graded as it should have been; possibly twenty per cent of his
Ipples should have been taken out, and then he would have had
a nice product*. But here! I am going to describe that man to
vou To start with, that man's hair had grown down to his
coat collar. I dare say that his face had not felt a razor for two
weeks— possibly longer. The edges of his collar were all frayed

■ *Secretary'8 NoTE-Looks like State College still had some opportunity
for missionary work in the production end.

— 120 —

out; he was wearing a pair of overalls that the ladies wouldn't
have wanted with them at the table. He had on an old pair of
arctics that were well-stained with barnyard juice. His apples
were in old black crates. Could you expect that man to sell
apples? If he had come to your door and tried to sell your wife
apples, would she have bought? No!

I was in a store the other day, when a bright, energetic-
looking man selling a specialty came in. In these times you
might think that was a hard thing to put across, but I want to
tell you how that fellow went at it. We are all susceptible to
flattery, and flattery is a valuable asset in salesmanship, if you
don't carry it too far. Use such flattery that may be under-
stood as a compliment. The first thing that young man did
was this: He stood looking at the shelves in that store, and he
said to the merchant, "What a neat arrangement you have for
your goods!" And he began to talk trade with the merchant, —
that is, in regard to different brands of goods. He didn't tell
the store man at first what he was representing. But finally
he broke the news to him and told him what he was selling.
The merchant said to the young salesman, "I don't want to
handle that; money is scarce, and I couldn't sell that." However,
the salesman, with ingenuity, persuaded the merchant that it
was a good proposition, and he placed that goods in the man's
store.

In contrast with that, on the same day I saw a salesman in
another store. He came in with a long face, and he told how
hard the times were — they were getting worse and worse. That
man was selling staple groceries, and the merchant was actually
low on some of the items that that fellow sold. And you could
see a different expression on the countenance of that merchant
while this salesman was talking to him. Did the salesman get
an order? No, he did not get an order! Do not have a good
product alone, but first let your appearance be neat and clean!
A smile is one of the most valuable assets that there are in sales-
manship. And the successful salesman is the one who takes
advantage of every opportunity. Another valuable asset to
anyone who has anything to sell is the ability to tell a story.
Get them from your papers, magazines, and make use of them
when you go to make a sale, for they are a big help.

Now I am going to get down to the meat of my address —
"Marketing Apples Through Chain Stores." We are told today
that the chain stores handle forty per cent* of the groceries that
are sold at retail. The growth and volume of their business is
tremendous. But what about the fruit? Are they selling forty
per cent of the fruit? They are not! At least not in the country
where I come from. The independent merchant has it all over
the chain store in selling fruit. I sell to both, and the independ-
ent has a decided advantage. Now there is a reason for that.

*Secretary's Note — Chair stores today are handling east of the Mississippi
River about 50 per cent of the perishables, according to B. A. Leeper, general
manager, National Fruit and Vegetable Exchange.

— 121 —

^^1

To start with, you should know how the chain stores are managed;
they have their central office, then they have a traveling man
that has some fifteen stores that he visits each day. And then
thev have the store managers. Now invariably,—! am sate m
saving —seventy-five per cent of those store managers are young
men and young women from the towns in which those stores
are located. They get their training in the store, but they do
not know anything about fruit. I know a lot of them to whom
an apple is an apple; I know that to the traveUng manager an
apple is an apple; and I know that to some of the produce
buyers for these big chain stores an apple is an apple,— they do
not know apples and they have a lot of undesirable fruit unloaded
on them For two years in succession one of the chain stores
in our section has had two carloads of Stark apples in October
You all know what a Stark apple is. It is all right now, but
would you want to eat one in October? No! And neither do
the people in town! They take those apples and distribute them
around to their stores, and they sit there, and they sit, and they
can^t sell them. I have seen York Imperial by the carloads in
our market as early as October 5; they would be put out and
sold by the chain stores. It is any wonder to you that they are

not seUing apples? . ,. i .., r xu u •

Now I am going to tell you what I did with one of the chains.
Three years ago my son, who does considerable trucking, had
about three acres of cauUflower; went to market one day, but
came back rather discouraged. He had thirty dozen cauliflower.,
and he said, ^'Dad, I didn^t bre^k even on that cauhflower
I want you to help me.^' I said, -All right. ^^ I thought of the
chain stores. I went to the Wilkes-Barre manager, and I said,
-Now look here. We have some fine cauliflower; its high
quality, and we will stand right back of our product. What
I want to do is to take your Nanticoke stores, furnish them
cauliflower every other day. I will guarantee the freshness ot it.
If there is any carried over two days that shows any signs of
deterioration, I will simply take it out and replace it.''

-Well,'' he replied, -that's something new. We have never
done anything like that before; but you can try it."

So I did They took every bit of cauUflower that we had.
I took out from their stores possibly three dozen cauUflower
until the season was over. That was something that made
them place confidence in me, because they knew that I did just
exactly as I had agreed to do. They sold more cauliflower in
those few stores in Nanticoke than they did in any of the torty
other stores, the manager told me that he had under that branch,
and they made some money from it. I am stiU doing business
with that same store. They had confidence in me, and I have
tried not to betray that confidence; I have kept that up.

So finally I made up my mind it would be the easiest way
to market my apples. I went to the same general manager. ^ 1
said, -Now I have another proposition to put up to you. You re
not getting the fruit trade in Nanticoke; I would like to build

— 122 —

up that trade and make you some money, — take a car of our
fruit, too." -WeU," he asked, -what is your proposition?" I
replied, -My proposition is this: I will pack my apples in bushel
baskets for you, and I will leave those at the stores. As fast
as I learn the requirements in each neighborhood, I wiU guaran-
tee the sale of the apples. If any apples deteriorate, I wiU give
allowance for them, you to furnish me with empty packages."
-WeU," he said, -go to it."

Here is something that I found. In a local market such
as we have, we need a great many varieties. It took me some
time to find this out, but I found that some few stores could
seU Greenings; I found about eight out of ten that couldn't sell
Greenings — there wasn't any use in putting them off there.
I had stores that would take the old GiUiflower as high as ten
bushels a week; I had three stores that I left GiUiflower in,
and they couldn't seU an apple. So there it was. But, by
having a great many varieties of apples, and learning the neigh-
borhood, I have marketed practicaUy my entire crop to that
chain store ever since.

Now, in regard to price, you may think that a chain store is
a price-wrecker. They try to handle everything just as reason-
ably as they can; but they don't want to handle anything unless
they make money on it. Last FaU, as soon as my apples started,
I went to them and I said, -Now my apples are started. How
about price?" -Wait a minute," the manager said, then got
me an invoice of a carload of U. S. No. 1 apples at sixty-nine
cents a bushel laid in Wilkes-Barre. I saw the apples; they
were aU right, too. I replied, -I can't do it. I can't bring you
any apples for less than eighty-five cents." He declared, -It's
too much money. We get eight cents for that package; that
cuts the price of those apples to sixty-one cents. You are asking
us twenty-four cents more, and we are going to give you an
empty package. We can't do it this year." It ran along for
ten days, then I had a telephone caU, and the manager said,
-Start to deUver apples." One of those cars was a car of Stark
apples. They took them out to their trade and they couldn't
seU them. Now, with the apples,— as you heard one of the
speakers remark here this afternoon,— for this wholesale ship-
ping trade, they must be hard; whereas, if you have a local
market, you can market your apples in season. You can buUd
up a reputation on your fruit. One of the stores on Main Street
in Nanticoke got a box of western apples before Christmas;
on last Tuesday (Jan. 12) that store stiU had haU a box left.

They were fancier than mine, I wiU admit, but the salesgirl
said, -As long as your apples are in here, the trade wUl take
your apples in preference to paying the price at which those
western apples are selUng." So that, if you want to seU apples
to the chain stores, or to any other store, you have got to gain
the confidence of the person who is going to buy your apples.
Don't betray that confidence. Another thing: If you are doing
wholesale business, don't do a retaU business. When anyone

— 123 —

stops me on the street and asks me for a bushel of apples, I
simply refer him to the nearest store handling my apples.

ILLINOIS GROWERS GAIN BY REDUCTIONS

IN FREIGHT RATES*

Freight rate reducfons on lUinois peaches wi 1 open a new
outet for the 1932 crop into interior cities of Pennsylvania,
New York and other eastern states, accordmg to the llimois
Agricultural Association. This action, sought by organized
peach growers of southern IlUnois since early last summer, will
mean a reduction of from $23 to $99 a car on freight, opening a
market for an estimated 1,000 cars of peaches annually in a
territory not reached heretofore. The decision cuts approxi-
mately one-third from the former rates on peaches and is effec-
tive anywhere on Central Freight Association lines, which extend
as far east as Buffalo and Pittsburgh. It has the effect of plac
ing IlUnois rates into this territory from 6 to 8 cents below the
rates from the southeastern peach belt. Simi ar adjustments
are being sought on Unes reaching into the New England states
to open additional territory.

THE FUTURE OF THE APPLE INDUSTRY

HON. HARRY FLOOD BYRD
Winchester, Virginia

When history records the happenings of the year 1931, it will
probably be said that it was the worst apple year that we have
ever known, but, of course, we apple growers are not m a class
by ourselves in that respect. Not only did we have the world-
wide depression to contend with, when by the governments
estimates we were supposed to have had the second largest crop
in our history, but also during the harvesting period we had the
collapse of the EngUsh pound, which, insofar as my particular
district is concerned, created a very difficult situation for us
to meet. And even the weather has been against us, because
we had those hot spells during the harvesting season. Then,
during December, the warm weather made it possible to market
cull apples— apples which otherwise would not have been placed
in competition. Notwithstanding these conditions, we in Virginia
feel optimistic about the future of the apple industry, because
we believe that it is on a sound foundation, insofar as the funda-
mentals are concerned. Consider that in 1900 there were
203,000,000 apples trees of all kinds and descriptions in this
country, while in the census of 1925 this number has been
reduced to 100,000,000— less than half in a period of twenty-
five years. So far as commercial trees are concerned, they have

*From "State and Federal Marketing Activities", Bureau of Agricultural
Economics, U. S. D. A.

— 124 —

been declining at the rate of about one million trees per year.
When you recall the fact that it takes from ten to twelve years
for apple trees to bear heavily, I believe that the time is soon
coming in this country, when we will have little fear of an over-
production of apples, except in a very occasional year, such as,
the year that we have just gone through. So we feel that there
is a great deal in the future to look forward to, especially by
reason of the fact that our crop is cleaned up every year, while
producers of corn, cotton, wheat, and some other things, have
surpluses carried over from year to year. But notwithstanding
this favorable outlook for the future, there are very grave
problems that we must meet for the immediate future of our
industry. I came here this morning, in the hope that some
practical method could be found whereby we could cooperate
together in this great Shenandoah-Cumberland region, because
I want to say to you fruit-growers that there is no other part of
America that has the advantage that we have in the production
of apples. We can produce as high a grade apple as any other
part, and we have the tremendous advantage of the accessibility
to eastern markets and a low freight on seaboard export. When
you consider that it costs the far-western apple-growers seventy-
five to eighty-five cents a box to deliver their apples in New
York City, while it costs us only fifteen cents a box, it gives us
an enormous advantage.

I think the time has come when we must put up a better
grade of apples so as to compete with the apples from the North-
west. My brother and I had an experience this year; we were
able to sell some fancy Stayman, deli :ered in New York —
15,000 bushels— at a price equal to that paid for extra-fancy
Stayman from the North\^est, we paying fiteen cents freight
rate, the Northwest paying seventy-five to eighty-five cents,
depending upon whether or not there was refrigeration.

The chief problem is in our hands to solve, and if we don^t
solve it, then we deserve to be forced out of the apple business.
I mean that we must grow better apples; that is solely and
entirely within our own hands. I have been in the apple business
for 28 years, and in that long period I have never made any
money on Unclassified or even No. 2 apples. They may pay the
carrying charges; they may pay the cost of harvesting and the
cost of growing and spraying, but there^s no profit in any apples
except No. 1 apples. And, as I view the situation today, from
a growing standpoint, the problem that all of us have is to
increase very greatly the percentage of No. 1 apples that we
produce from our respective orchards; and our profits will be
determined by the percentage of No. 1 apples as compared with
apples of off-grades. I want, out of my experience of 28 years,
to give just a few of the principal ways, in my judgment, of
increasing the percentage of No. 1 apples.

Now, the difficulty that we all have today in getting No. 1
apples is mainly in color. That is the most difficult problem
that we have to solve in our section, especially with the York

— 125 —

Imperial. And I want to say this to the Pennsylvania apple
growers, that while we have speciaUzed in the York Imperial,
we are willing to admit that the Pennsylvania York is the finest
finished York that is placed on the market; that has been shown
time and time again by the fact that you obtain higher prices for
Pennsylvania Yorks than we do for Virginia Yorks. Having m
mind the object of increasing the color on red varieties, because
that is what it is coming to in every market in the world, the
most important thing to do first is a thorough pruning; it is to
prune more than we have pruned in the past. I don't mean an
excessive pruning, to the extent of stripping the trees of the fruit
spurs, but I mean that there must be sufficient sunUght let into
the inside of the trees, so as to increase the color, because we
must bear in mind that the only two things that will bring color
to apples are first, maturity, and second, sunlight. And the
apples are not going to color where you do not have the proper
pruning. So the first thing we should do is to give our trees a

thorough pruning. , , , j x i

With respect to spraying, that is so thoroughly understood
that I will not refer to it, except to say this: That the greatest
mistake that I have always made in spraying is to omit any
spray that is recommended by the agricultural extension service.
When in doubt, spray! That is my advice. Don't omit, by
reason of the cost or anything else, a single spray that is urged
upon us by those who know better than we do as to when and
how to spray for the different pests that we must control.

The next great problem confronting us, as I see it, is the treat-
ment of the soil, and, as to that, there is very little information
available. By that I mean soil treatment so that we can obtain
the maximum of production and maximum of quality at the
same time. It's a very difficult thing to do, because we know
that when we stimulate the trees and bring about increased
bearing, we may reduce the color. I am convinced, over long
experience with nitrogenous fertiUzers, that while they are
necessary to maintain production, yet the use of nitrate of soda
and other fertilizers of this kind reduces the color because it
extends the growing season of the apple, increases the leaf
surface, and to that extent shades the apple and reduces the
color. I do not mean that we should not use nitrate of soda.
I have used it extensively all through these years. But this year
I have determined to reduce the nitrate of soda in the hope that
I can obtain a larger percentage of No. 1 apples, insofar as color
is concerned, than I have in the past. Then, I believe, we must
come to thinning as a regular orchard practice, that we must
thin to obtain color and to obtain a uniformity of size.

Last year, for the first time, my brother and I attempted to
prop all of our trees in our 21 orchards, which I think had a
great advantage, lifting up the apples that hung over each other,
and bringing color to those that were underneath. In other
words, I think that we must put every thought and attention
that we have to the idea of, first, growing apples free of insect

— 126 —

and disease injury, and, secondly, of growing well-colored apples
of the red varieties. I think the time has come, by reason of
the reduced export demand, that we must expect that we can
obtain a fair price only for red apples that are supposed to be
red and which present a good appearance when they are offered
on the markets on the other side.

Now, as I say, the first great problem confronting us is to
grow better apples. The next problem is to pack the apples
better. I think probably we are among the worst offenders this
year in the condition that existed. There is no doubt about it
that the apple-growers of the East — I do not say they deliber-
ately did it, nevertheless they accomplished it — virtually de-
stroyed the European markets for, possibly, a period of thirty
to sixty days by dumping on these markets the most inferior
apples that could be imagined. In other words, grades of
apples that were not marketable in this country were sent to the
European markets and England, and those markets were vir-
tually destroyed, insofar as any profit was realized by the
growers, for the space of sixty to ninety days.

Now I think there ought to be some cooperation between us;
I believe that all the growers can cooperate together. And I
come to you, not for the purpose of criticizing Pennsylvania,
because as far as I know Pennsylvania is not especially to be
criticized; but I come to apologize for my own state of Virginia,
because I think she was more responsible than any other for the
situation that occurred this year.

There is a great deal to know in regard to packing apples.
As for us, we have packed for export for years, and we know
that we must pack our apples tightly. No matter how fine the
package is, if they arrive slack on the markets abroad, they will
not obtain a good price. I have been using shredded oil paper.
Even if you do not export the apples, it is a very advantageous
thing to do, because it gives a much better appearance to the
apples, a refinement, which I think you are compensated for
by the increased price. I think it is absolutely essential where
you store your apples, because it is the cheapest insurance you
can possibly obtain against scald. And today there are scalded
apples not in shredded paper, but I have not as yet, seen scalded
apples in shredded paper properly used. So far as my brother
and I are concerned, we expect to use shredded paper on all of
our apples, whether they are shipped immediately to the market
or stored for later shipment.

Now, of course, the facing is very important, and it is not
necessary for me to tell you that. I have always tried to get
the best apples of that particular grade for the face, and I do
not see any reason to change that practice, although, of course,
the apples should not be too much overfaced*.

I believe, too, the time has come when we must size our
apples in quarter-inch sizes. In the first place, as a selfish

♦See the letter on page 79 from the New York State Bureau of Markets.

— 127 —

proposition, if we have the grading machinery to do it, it would
be a wise thing to do, because there are less apples in a barrel
that are uniformly graded than where the sizes vary, so that the
holes in between them can be filled up by the smaller sized apples.
Mr. Ralston, who represents the Virginia State Horticultural
Society, has written us, advising that all of our export shipments
be put up in quarter-inch sizes in the future. Now there is
nothing else that I can say about the packing of apples.

Now, those two problems I have mentioned that lie within
our own capacity to solve are, first, to grow good apples, and,
second, to pack them better.

There is another great problem confronting us, and that is,
we must advertise apples to the world and to the American
people. Consider that in the past ten or fifteen years, many
new fruits have been thrown on the market in competition with
apples. Take the tremendously increased consumption of grape-
fruit, oranges, plums, and peaches. Some of the oldest of you
growers will remember that years ago the apple-growers had
virtually a monopoly of the fruit trade, but now we must com-
pete not only with other apple-growers, but with these new
fruits of very attractive appearance and flavor that are being
constantly placed on the market. And I hope that some plan
can be worked out, whereby the apple-growers, if we do nothmg
more, can advertise the apples from the Shenandoah-Cumber-
land region— this production of the milUons of barrels— that we
can work out some plan to do that to advantage.

I want to tell you of an experience we had in Virginia last
year. We got through a plan to assess each apple grower two
cents a barrel. We collected, by reason of it, between fifteen and
twenty thousand dollars; not all of the money has been collected
yet. We used that money to send a representative abroad —
Mr. Ralston— who is one of the most capable men we could
secure to represent us in Continental Europe. He has done a
great deal to smooth over the great difficulties that confronted
us this year. We used the balance of it to ;idvertise Virginia
apples in the South by means of full-page arlvertisements, and
by radio and other means. Of course, Virginia can do very little
alone in this matter, and we can accompUsh very much only if
all the apple-growers join, but at least the apple-growers of the
East and, more especially of this particular section. And I hope
that you in Pennsylvania will very carefully give thought to
some plan whereby we can cooperate in this and other matters.
We passed a resolution at our horticultural meeting held in
December, urging that the states in tl e East cooperate for these
matters, and requesting me, as president of the Virginia State
Horticultural Society, to call a meeting of the presidents of all
of the other societies in the East for the purpose of conferrmg
about these and other matters. I have written to the different
presidents, and we expect to have a meeting very shortly in
Washington. I hope very much that we may work together.
Virginia doesn't desire to go alone in advertising or anything

— 128 —

else. We realize that all of our fortunes are linked together
that we can either succeed as a whole, or fail as a whole; we are
prepared to cooperate with you in every practical and feasible
way,— p epared to guarantee certain subscriptions or in any
other way that this committee of the presidents of the different
societies could devise.

Now I think it is hardly necessary Tor me to say anything
more about advertising in this day and age, when it is the chief
medmm of mcreasing the sale of any product, because I believe
that the progressive grower of Pennsylvania, if there could be
any practical way to bring it about, would cheerfully cooperate
Of course, the great difficulty we had in Virginia lay in attempt
ing to collect the money from the individual grower. The
Western people do not have that, because they have their great
selling organizations, and they can assess so much per box for
advertising and deduct it from the sales as made. Up to this
date we in the East, have not gone into cooperative marketing
to the extent that we are able to do that. But there is no reason
why this should not be done. In Virginia we had each individual
grower sign a statement that he would contribute to the horti-
cultural society two cents on every barrel of apples that he
marketed, and so far we have had no difficulty whatever in
collecting this sum. And we hope very much that we may be
able to cooperate with Pennsylvania and work out some solution
of this problem.

The next great problem confronting us, as I see it, is some way
to prevent the loss of our foreign markets. I am going to talk
frankly about this matter, and I do not want anything that I
say to have a political inference, because while I am a Democrat,
I have no desire in any way to mix up politics with my business.
Our foreign markets are the greatest single difficulty as I see it,
confronting us in the future. I do not mean to infer that these
things that have occurred only recently in the restriction of our
foreign markets are in retaliation of the tariff restrictions placed
m this country. But I make this as a statement of fact, that
prior to the last eighteen months that there wasn't a single
nation in the world that imposed a single restriction upon the
importation of American apples. Within the last eighteen
months these things have occurred : The Argentine has virtually
excluded barreled apples by the most drastic regulations con-
ceivable, with which it is impossible for us to comply. They
provide that you must give a certificate that there is not even a
suspicion of an insect injury of any character or description;
further providing that, if such injury should be discovered, they
have the privilege of confiscating these apples and charging us
the cost of dumping them into the ocean, or wherever they do
put them. And then, furthermore, they require that every
individual apple be wrapped in oiled paper. To give you an
idea of how this restriction affects an individual grower, such as
my brother and I, in the year 1930 we sold 25,000 barrels of
Ben Davis to go to Argentina, for four dollars a barrel obtained

— 129 —

in cash as the apples were shipped. This year we so d one car
to KO to Argentina, and we got three dollars and fifty cents a
barS aC wrapping each individual apple, after exammmg

each apple, to see that there was not a f ^glS,J°/f *„t°?^f ffi
character or description upon that apple. The result was that
Argentina last year took 250,000 barrels of apples from America,
and thS ySarW 5,000 barrels. Now that is the greatest
market that our country has for Ben Davis.

You are faced with the restrictions that have been placed
upon the importation by England, and we may as well face the
cold fact that England, within the ^^xttvelve months, v^ill
unquestionably put a tariff on apples m addition to the restric-
Ss that they have placed, and when that is done, we shal
have received, so far as export trade is concerned, the worst
Wow that we have ever had, speaking directly of Virginia and

'""iS'^^lSi'ts .ity^in the last thirty days placed a tariff
on apples, of ten dollars a barrel -practically prohibitive! Spain
has completely embargoed American apples; Portugal and Peru
and iSy have done the same. France has greatly mcreased the
trriff so has Germany. Netherlands has not only increased the
tariff,' but has pro^We'd the most drastic regulations with respect
to insect infestation. ^ • u^

That is the situation that has occurred in the past eighteen
months. Prior to that time throughout the long years we had
been able to ship the American apple anywhere without any
restriction whatsoever placed upon it I ^^ ^^\^^'''^^^^^^^^
lyze the causes as to why these conditions have come about
I am simply stating the facts as they exist, because I, myself
have been shipping for years seventy per cent ^J "^^ ^^^P ^^^^
these markets. Let us think for a moment what the export
trade means to the apple business. We normally export twenty
per cent of the apples grown in this country; twenty Per cent ot
them are exported to some foreign nation. If that twenty per
cent is forced on the domestic markets, no matter how greatly
the crop may be reduced-unless it is a abnormally low crop- t
will virtually destroy the profit that we may have in the domestic
market All of our prices are determined by export prices.
England takes sixty-three per cent of the apples that we export ;
Germany takes about twenty-five per cent; France, about ten
per cent; and so forth.

Now, what can we, as apple-growers, do to relieve this con-
dition? I am frank to say, perhaps, we can do httle. i*jere js
one thing that has brought about this situation, and I would like
to bring it to your attention, because there is something we
can do One thing that has brought about these restrictions
and retahations, or whatever they are-entirely independent of
the tariff-is that the American government ^as been exceed-
ingly unreasonable in the importation of (;ther foodstuffs coming
into this country— with respect to what is known as the quaran-
tine regulations.^^ I had an example not long ago from the

— ISO-

Argentine— where grapes alleged to have been infected with the
Mediterranean fruit fly, were shipped to this country. And
these grapes, through the examination, were so unreasonably
handled that they were virtually destroyed by opening every
package. As you know, grapes thus handled will not keep.
Another instance was called to my attention, when a large ship
ment of turkeys was made from the Argentine to this country.
While these turkeys were in transit, an order came presumably
from the Secretary of Agriculture, that the legs of the turkeys
had to be cut off before they landed in America, because of the
danger of foot and mouth disease, although they were willing
to certify that these turkeys had not been within a thousand
miles of any foot and mouth disease in Argentina. We had
difficulty not long ago with England. We were prohibiting
England from shipping potatoes into this country, notwithstand-
ing they were willing to pay the tariff, because of some alleged
disease, and we denied the request of the English government
to have an inspector from this country sent to England to inspect
the potatoes before they left there, to assure us that they did
not have this particular disease. In other words, we are asking
these foreign governments to take our certificates, the certifi-
cates of our government, as to the freedom of our shipments
from these particular insects and things like the apple maggot
that are so damaging, of course, and then we deny to the other
governments the same privilege that we ask for ourselves.

Entirely independent of the tariff situation, which of course
will have to be handled by a general policy as formulated by the
American people and not for the benefit or salvation of any
particular industry, I believe that we can do much by impressing
those in authority that, with respect to this quarantine regula-
tion, we can do much by a meeting of the presidents of these
different horticultural societies; impressing upon those in
authority the great damage that is being done to us by the
unreasonable regulations that they themselves have imposed. I
hope that your society will approve of a meeting and instruct
your president — as I know he will be glad to do — to cooperate
with us in these matters.

I want to say a word about the general outlook for agriculture.
I think it is a great problem for the American people. It affects
the apple industry, of course, just as vitally as any other producer
of foodstuffs. Wherever you go, over the American nation, you
find the farmer, the backbone of our government, suffering from
an unreasonable depression. Not only this year, but from
1920 on, the farmer has not made a fair profit on his labor or on
his investment. It has been so long since he has made a profit
that many farmers would hardly recognize it if they met a
profit in the street.

Now, the turning point has got to come. I speak as one inter-
ested in the future of this country — not entirely from the stand-
point of dollars and cents, but from the standpoint of one
interested in the stability of our government. And I say,

— 131 —

Hi,«.,t fpnr of successful contradiction, that the best guardians
S\hese fundamental inst^^^ of our government' ^,^«ffJ,^J^

ifoo iVt^lv to he led astray by these new fads and ism s
Sat are S brought to the attention of the American people
Se those wh? live on the farms, who own their farms and who

"^Now rillTS.^CSl£es'lS^t farmers should go to
wSgton and aTflvors. That has never been may way o

"tl 1™ '"mTLtion of Virginia farmers who are l.i„g
J^Ay bAe t™ ;o'^boa*; *r K Ss 1'

Ss Thev put that property up for sale, which they should not
Se donef becluse t£s £ no%ime to force Properf up f^r sale

SrwSrJX^p'irt hL^terTyT/fo? X a^d »
five tLuSnJ dollarsrone-half of the r^tg^HownTo see htm

Su^: f ;rdru\?erW wU^^^^^^^
was wilUng to sacrifice the property which was worth every
Slar of ie mortgage, ^ and would be worth ^t in a^ Jo^^t^^-,

^s'to rtcTuseTetooXis fiYty'ceAts on the dollar and we
Sughro'ur own bonds, which are selling on Jhe marked at forty-
twofand we saved our company by buying th^se bonds

Now that is what is occurring over this land, and I say fhaUhe
time has come for you and all of us, regardless of politujl parties
f n QPrvp notice on those in authority that we are not abKin^
J^ors but tS^ asking that justice be done us in pro

por?[on to the justice done to European nations an^gr^^^^^
ness interests of this country. The time has come tor us to
^iZri ourselves because if we don't there is going to be a disaster
fn" h s co^^^^^^^^^^ going to affect every business^n^^^^^^^

what it is or where it is. I think some way should be devised.

— 132 —

Credit is what the farmer needs today; I don't mean, in connec-
tion with that, to borrow more money. I think it would be
extremely unwise to make it easy for a farmer who does not owe,
to borrow. I think he should be discouraged in every possible
way. What I mean is this: That those farmers who are good,
worthy citizens should be permitted to renew these loans and, if
necessary, have a moratorium on the interest for a certain time,
so as to enable them to pay their loans and continue in business.
I can not see why that can not be done. We have all these other
things being done. Let the federal government make some
arrangement with these farm loan banks — release frozen assets
in the banks of agricultural communities. Why, they think
that land today has no value. Try to borrow! Land! The
only thing in the country that can not be destroyed, the only
thing that will be here, perhaps, after the cities are gone and the
industries have ceased to operate. Land today, is the only
thing in the United States that is not worth anything for the
purpose of making a loan. Let them go to the farmers and say,
''Here, we recognize this condition that exists today. We
recognize that you are in just as bad shape today as Germany is,
as these other European nations are, and we are going to give a
moratorium to you." Let them say to the farmers, ''We have
confidence in your future. We will arrange some way, by
governmental intervention and operation, some way to enable
you to continued your loans, both in the local banks and by
direct loans made from the boards, and, if necessary, reduce the
interest temporarily, and in some way include the interest that
is reduced in the principal of the loan." I do not mean that that
is exactly how it could be carried out, but I know that if these
things that are being done for the benefit of other people can be
accomplished, then it can be done for the farmers!

I am here for the purpose of offering to you, on behalf of the
Virginia State Horticultural Society, our cooperation in these
problems — not only with regard to the apple business, but also
with regard to other matters relating to agriculture. We are all
together; we should stand together. This great Cumberland-
Shenandoah region has a tremendous possibility in the future
of the apple industry. If we should cooperate, — we have never
done it heretofore — but if we should, we would be the greatest
single force, I think, in the apple industry of America today.
And I am here to offer to you the cooperation of the Virginia
people, to express the hope that you will join with us, without
the idea of any selfish advantage to any of us. We will not ask
selfish advantage, and I know that you will not, but rather, join

together for the preservation of ourselves. We see every other
industry in this country amalgamating and joining, so that
today the basic profits of the land are being controlled by single
industries cooperating closely together — the oil, the copper indus-
try, and everything else. But we see practically no cooperation
among the farmers.

— 133 —

T r.f +.. Kp fr«nk with vou and say that I do not beUeve that
the SStion of the fam^^^^^ i° artificial panaceas

Sp federal government, under Mr. Hoover, was required to
endeavor artElly to hold up the price of certam comrnod^ies
w fhev attempted to do an impossible thing. The United

everywhere I* J^'^^^b^^/STWireff^^^^^ to stabilize the price
^f^'Z^! T think it was a very unfortunate thing for them to
Irmot lecau fl think it wm discredit farm relief in the future
-shZddfscourageus,butthat the Farm Board should be con-
— snouia aibwui as , thought about the future of the

S BoarS ' Let fhe F^JmBofrd, financed by the United
Itat"slove?nment, be an agency for the purpose of disposmg of

%iltZ£\fZT£:to:'S^^^^^^> as we have and
CWna i'lTvTng f or that wheat why would it be - -Po-M^^^^^
fr.r fViP PVrlpral Farm Board to sell direct to tne county ui

Si^a^s'mSwheat as they -g^^ ^s je ^t^, VcTur^^^^
n\.'^r^a if Tipppssarv for the payment of that wneat: wi coui&c,

?htrniTm%Tt\ot be pafdln ^f > ^ut we^l^^cl^^^^^^

ThalwouW be a proper adventure in business; it would not be
ihat wouia DC a p v panaceas that are

Sngleredtf us, which are based on arWial condition.
Tf the Fa?m Board sells to China at the regular price of wheat a
Lat blocTof Xat which it would not sell, otherwise, and takes
t^e risk of payment, it gets that much wheat out of consumption
In thfs countr^ I simply cite that thing as one of the oppor-
runiiesXt now exist? for the Farm Board to dispose of the

-ffen,TtSthit\t:e7nS^^^^^

SJs thl Titl^\^S&^ ^ ^ f a c
of t™ soil independent of the human consumption for food of
tLse product^ believe that chemistry and agriculture should
be murm^^^^^^^ allied in the future than it has been in the

^' But I will not bore you with these opinions of mine, because
I fm s mply hereto express the hope that you will cooperate
liSujS'that we wan? to cooperate with y-- ^^^^^^^^
to you the best wishes and greetmgs of the fruit-growers oi

^'iWoENT Cuiswell: 1 am sure we very "^^cl^/PP^';;ff^^
the goodwill and offer of cooperation from the Pre^^d^^^^
Virginia State Horticultural Society. I should like to say that
vosterdav at a meeting of the Executive Committee of this
rstdSn,1h: iSt 'which Governor Byrd ^-^ P^^^^^^ ^s
talked over, and your president was authorized to attend any

— 134 —

conferences and to join with Virginia in any of these problems
that it seems wise. However, it might be that a resolution of
this Association would be a good thing for record. If you
members concur in this thought, let us have a resolution.

President Criswell announced that Mr. G. S. L. Carpenter,
president of the Maryland State Horticultural Society had
arrived and wished briefly to address the meeting.

Mr. Carpenter: I am more than glad to be here as a repre-
sentative of the Maryland State Horticultural Society, and I
am sure that Maryland will join with all of the sister states in
producing and working out anything that may be of benefit to
the entire industry.

Mr. H. a. Shank, Lancaster County, presented a motion that
the Pennsylvania State Horticultural Association cooperate with
the Virginia Society, in accordance with the invitation extended
by President Byrd, as well as with Maryland, in accordance
with Mr. Carpenter's message. The motion was seconded by
Mr. J. Gordon Fetterman, and it carried unanimously.*

THE PROPOSED PENNSYLVANIA BRAND

On March 2 at Harrisburg, at the instance of Miles Horst of
the Pennsylvania Farmer, about 75 representatives of various
agricultural organizations met to consider the possibilities of a
Pennsylvania label or brand, similar to the New England quality
label which goes only on certain better farm products of that
section. The State Horticultural Association had about 25
members on hand.

The group as a whole agreed that the idea of a Pennsylvania
Brand for use on certain grades of farm products was worth-
while and a committee composed of two men from each society
interested will meet in Harrisburg in the near future to select
a brand.

Briefly, the idea behind it is this: Pennsylvania farmers pro-
ducing several lines of farm products are said to be losing their
own markets to an extent varying with the farm product in
question. Why not protect our own markets and help sell our
surplus in other states by using certain good grades of this
perishable produce?

The particular grade or grades of apples, for example, in
which the Pennsylvania brand could be used, would be deter-
mined by this Association; no new fruit grades will be made to
confuse anyone. Growers who wished to use this brand on all
or part of their stuff — and its use would be purely voluntary —
would have to sign in writing a pledge that they would adhere
to the grades with the understanding that they would lose their
license to use the Pennsylvania brand, as well as their whole
supply of labels for obvious continued failures to grade properly

♦Secretary's Note — The Cumberland-Shenandoah Four State Committee
here authorized has already met and is actively considering some of the
problems of that area. See page 4 for the personnel of this committee.

— 135 —

under the proposed standards. The Pennsylvania brand labels
would cost so much each; probably not a very large sum, which
would go for advertising, etc. Each would contain the grower s

license number. , , , , .„ ,

Possible abuse of the brand in many ways would be protected
bv a law with teeth in it so that the brand would mean something.
Without this backing the brand is useless. Incidentally, this
inspection and police work should not increase taxes,— to this,

vou can all say a fervent "Amen!" , •„ . • i... ,i

Much work must be done before this brand will be in actual
use, if the fruit growers and the farmers want it. Suitable
legislation must be secured and hundreds of detai s arranged^
Much educational work will have to be done by State College
so that prospective users of the brand and consumers under-
stand what it means. , . j u j
Remember, nobody will have to use this proposed brand,
but if they do, they will be required to live up to it, just as in
the case of the U. S. Grades in Pennsylvama If, for instance,
the users want to market part of their fruit under this label,
and part otherwise, it would be perfectly all right. This scheme
is not designed to help fruit exports as much as to protect our
own markets and to help secure others on a quality basis. It is
not designed to make you wealthy but to help move superior
products at fair prices. Neither State College nor Harrisburg
will push it unless you want it; neither in the first place suggested

' This whole plan is merely begun and we want your reaction
to the idea. Write your Secretary, R. H. Sudds, State College
giving him your thoughts either for or against it If you don t
like it and fail to say so, we will have no way of knowmg your
pleasure. If you think it is promising, write also. Your Asso-
ciation officers and committee want your opinions. It you
respond as you should, the June News Letter will present part
of the discussion. Whether you Uke it or not, send at least
a card.

— 136 —

A HISTORY OF FRUIT GROWING IN

PENNSYLVANIA

11. The Transition Period (1827-1887)

S. W. FLETCHER, Professor of Horticulture,
The Pennsylvania State College

The sixty years from 1827 to 1887 witnessed far greater changes
in fruit growing than the 200 years of the Colonial Period.
Within the span of a single generation fruit growing was trans-
formed from an incidental feature of general farming to a highly
specialized industry.

THE GOLDEN AGE OF THE AMATEUR

The period from 1827 to 1859 was the golden age of the
amateur. An amateur is one who grows fruit primarily for his
own use and pleasure, not to sell; '*To grow fine fruits, flowers
and vegetables is esteemed one of the most laudable under-
takings of a country gentleman." The chief impetus to fruit
growing before the Civil War was the interest of wealthy ama-
teurs, gentlemen who had country seats and employed English
gardeners. Such were Marshall P. Wilder, of Boston, who grew
over 2000 varieties of fruit on his fifteen acre estate, and WiUiam
Hamilton, of Philadelphia, who reported, in 1840, that he had
just imported 500 European varieties of pears in one shipment.
Marshall P. Wilder ''loved to take his friends through his fruit
garden, when he would pick a pear from this tree and from that,
slice them carefully, and give each a taste." He was a connois-
seur on varieties.

Other distinguished pomologists of the amateur period, whose
memory we delight to honor, were CM. Hovey, editor of the
Magazine of Horticulturey our greatest single repository of early
American horticulture, for 34 years, from 1835 to 1868; A. J.
Downing, editor of The Horticulturist from 1846 to 1853 and
author of 'Truits and Fruit Trees of America" (1845), which
had more influence on American pomology than has any other
book, before or since; Patrick Barry, successor to Downing as
editor of The Horticulturist, and author of "The Fruit Garden";
and W. D. Brinckl^, of Philadelphia, who produced, by hybridi-
zation, a number of valuable varieties of small fruits and who
was a leader in American pomology for a quarter of a century.
These gentlemen made possible the organization of the Penn-
sylvania Horticultural Society, in 1827, the Massachusetts
Horticultural Society, in 1829 and the American Pomological
Society, in 1852.

The First State Horticultural Society.— li was natural that the
first State Horticultural Society should be born at Philadelphia.
That city had been the commercial and horticultural center of
the country for over a century. It was the metropolis of the

— 27 —

under the proposed standards. The Pennsylvania brand labels
would cost so much each; probably not a very large sum, which
would go for advertising, etc. Each would contain the grower s

license number. . . ^

Possible abuse of the brand in many ways would be protected
by a law with teeth in it so that the brand would mean something.
Without this backing the brand is useless. Incidentally, this
inspection and poUce work should not increase taxes,— to this,
you can all say a fervent ^'Amen!*' , .„ t. . ^ i

Much work must be done before this brand will be in actual
use, if the fruit growers and the farmers want it. Suitable
legislation must be secured and hundreds of details arranged.
Much educational work will have to be done by State College
so that prospective users of the brand and consumers under-
stand what it means. j i j
Remember, nobody will have to use this proposed brand,
but if they do, they will be required to live up to it, just as in
the case of the U. S. Grades in Pennsylvania. If, for instance,
the users want to market part of their fruit under this label,
and part otherwise, it would be perfectly all right. This scheme
is not designed to help fruit exports as much as to protect our
own markets and to help secure others on a quality basis. It is
not designed to make you wealthy but to help move superior
products at fair prices. Neither State College nor Harrisburg
will push it unless you want it ; neither in the first place suggested

This whole plan is merely begun and we want your reaction
to the idea. Write your Secretary, R. H. Sudds, State College,
giving him your thoughts either for or against it. If you don t
hke it and fail to say so, we will have no way of knowing your
pleasure. If you think it is promising, write also. Your Asso-
ciation officers and committee want your opinions. If you
respond as you should, the June News Letter will present part
of the discussion. Whether you hke it or not, send at least
a card.

— 136 —

A nnT/^^XT

A HISTORY OF FRUIT GROWING IN

PENNSYLVANIA

II. The Transition Period (1827-1887)

S. W. FLETCHER, Professor of Horticulture,
The Pennsylvania State College

THE GOLDEN AGE OF THE AMATEUR

The period from 1827 to 1859 was the golden age of the
amateur. An amateur is one who grows fruit primarily for his
own use and pleasure, not to sell; ''To grow fine fruits, flowers
and vegetables is esteemed one of the most laudable under-
takings of a country gentleman." The chief impetus to fruit
growing before the Civil War was the interest of wealthy ama-
teurs, gentlemen who had country seats and employed EngUsh
gardeners. Such were Marshall P. Wilder, of Boston, who grew
over 2000 varieties of fruit on his fifteen acre estate, and WiUiam
Hamilton, of Philadelphia, who reported, in 1840, that he had
just imported 500 European varieties of pears in one shipment.
Marshall P. Wilder ''loved to take his friends through his fruit
garden, when he would pick a pear from this tree and from that,
sUce them carefully, and give each a taste." He was a connois-
seur on varieties.

Other distinguished pomologists of the amateur period, whose
memory we delight to honor, were CM. Hovey, editor of the
Magazine of Horticulturey our greatest single repository of early
American horticulture, for 34 years, from 1835 to 1868; A. J.
Downing, editor of The Horticulturist from 1846 to 1853 and
author of "Fruits and Fruit Trees of America" (1845), which
had more influence on American pomology than has any other
book, before or since; Patrick Barry, successor to Downing as
editor of The Horticulturist, and author of "The Fruit Garden";
and W. D. Brinckl^, of Philadelphia, who produced, by hybridi-
zation, a number of valuable varieties of small fruits and who
was a leader in American pomology for a quarter of a century.
These gentlemen made possible the organization of the Penn-
sylvania Horticultural Society, in 1827, the Massachusetts
Horticultural Society, in 1829 and the American Pomological
Society, in 1852.

The First State Horticultural Society, — It was natural that the
first State Horticultural Society should be born at Philadelphia.
That city had been the commercial and horticultural center of
the country for over a century. It was the raetropoHs of the

— 27 —

nation, with a population of nearly 200,000. The only other
centers of population in Pennsylvania at that time were Pitts-
burgh, (including Allegheny), 25,000, Lancaster, 7000, and

Reading, 7000. . ^

The Pennsylvania Horticultural Society was organized on
November 24, 1827, with fifty-three members. During its early
years, and until about 1870, the activities of the Society centered
on fruit fully as much as on ornamentals, which now are its
chief interest. Then, as now, the Society laid stress on exhibi-
tions. The first pubUc exhibition of fruit in America was held
in Philadelphia on November 3, 1828.

This was the formative period of American systematic pomol-
ogy. SeedUng fruits were being brought to pubUc attention in
great numbers and there was intense interest in the subject of
new varieties. Their merits were debated by different culti-
vators, in convention and in print, at great length, and often
with much heat. The Pennsylvania Horticultural Society
encouraged the introduction of promising seedUngs in Pennsyl-
vania and neighboring states, and fostered the exchange of
trees and cions. At its meeting on March 18, 1853, the Society
described a ^^promising seedling apple'^ this was the York

Imperial.

Little attention was given to cultural methods and none what-
ever to marketing problems. An attempt was made to make
the Society a scientific body, by the appointment of Professors of
Horticulture, Botany, Chemistry and Entomology. These
titles were purely honorary; the Professors served without pay,
and were merely expected to prepare ''at least one essay a year
on subjects connected with the application Of the science to
cultivation.'' This was a generation before the founding of the
Agricultural Colleges and Experiment Stations.

It is gratifying to record that the mother of American horti-
cultural societies is in a flourishing condition, with a member-
ship of over 4000, practically all amateurs from the vicinity of
Philadelphia. It adheres strictly to the amateur ideals upon
which it was founded. With the Massachusetts Horticultural
Society, it is the chief exponent in America of the culture of
ornamentals for pleasure, not for profit. Would that the Amer-
ican Pomological Society, which originally occupied a similar
field in fruit growing, had been equally faithful to its trust !

THE FRUIT GARDEN AND ORCHARD HOUSE

The fruit garden, as distinct from the orchard, was the domi-
nant feature of American pomology until 1850. Dwarf trees,
especially dwarf pears, were more popular than standards in
the fruit garden. Even in those days of slavish copying of Old
World horticulture, comparatively few American gardeners
trained dwarf trees against walls or in the intricate geometrical
designs so popular in Europe. Dwarfs were grown mostly in
the open, and trained in the natural way, like standards. For
many years a sharp controversy raged among horticultural

— 28 —

authorities as to the comparative value of dwarf and standard
pear trees. After 1850 it became increasingly evident that
dwarf trees could not compete with standards in commercial
production, and they gradually disappeared, save in home gar-
dens.

In the fruit gardens of wealthy amateurs, and for dwarf trees,
the Old World practice of ''trenching,'' advocated by Thomas
Rivers of England, was followed faithfully by imported EngUsh
gardeners. This consisted of digging a trench three feet deep
around the tree, at a distance determined by its size, usually
from 3 to 6 feet. The trench severed most of the lateral roots,
hence it was an effective means of keeping the tree small of stature
It also brought tardy trees into bearing the first season after the
roots were cut. Orthodox English gardeners filled the trench,
each year, with compost in which the new roots could feed.
Root pruning and trenching passed out about 1870.

Forcing Fruits. — The forcing of fruits under glass was profit-
able in Pennsylvania, in a limited way, until southern fruits
began to arrive in quantity, about 1875. Forced fruits were
grown either in pots or in borders. Detailed directions for the
ca<re of the ''orchard house" were given in all the horticultural
magazines. In 1876, it was reported: "From a single peach tree
planted in a tub and kept in a hot house there have been sold,
in 18 years, no less than $2,300 worth of peaches, some of them
at $36 per dozen, many at $24 to $28 per dozen, and all at an
average of $18 per dozen. They were sold mostly in the months
of February and March. ''^ Nectarines, apples, pears, apricots,
figs, strawberries and other fruits were grown in the orchard
house. Pineapples were grown in pots quite extensively for
the Philadelphia market as late as 1856; "At $5.00 each they
would pay.'' Forced strawberries sold for $5.00 a quart. It
may, perhaps, be permitted even the present lavish generation
to wonder at these prices, and the people who would pay them.

The fruit most commonly forced, however, was the grape.
European varieties were grown, mainly Black Hamburg, either
in the cold grapery or with heat. The grapery was an important
commercial venture near Philadelphia until about 1880; in
1875 there were fifteen in Chester County alone. They were
mostly lean-to glass houses, 14 to 17 feet wide and 100 feet long,
heated by a boiler but not piped ; the smoke flue was carried the
length of the house. Some vines produced 30 to 40 pounds of
grapes each; net profits of $700 a year were reported in houses
100 by 17 feet. Forcing of fruit ceased to be successful com-
mercially after 1880.

FOOD FOR MAN AND BEAST

Previous to 1850, fruit was grown mainly as a minor feature
of general farming, save for a few large orchards near Phila-
delphia, New York, Boston, and Baltimore, which could be

^Gardener's Monthly 18:82, 1876.

reached better by the sailing sloop than by the indifferent roads
of that period. Fruit still was grown largely to feed to stock.
Orchards received httle care. This is evidenced by the state-
ment of J. J. Thomas, an eminent pomologist, in 1850; he esti-
mated that it cost 2H cents a barrel to produce apples in Western
New York, ''which makes them the cheapest of all foods for
man and beast.'' This cost of production would hardly allow
for much tillage, pruning, fertiUzing, or spraying— but the word
spraying had not been coined then. Labor was cheap. In 1828,
farm laborers in Chester County received $80 to $100 a year;
40 cents a day with board, or 62H cents a day and ''find himself .i
Even as late as 1862, prominent fruit growers recommended the
more extensive culture of apples because "pork is cheap and it is
necessary that cheap feed be used in making it.'' Sweet apples
were planted extensively "to please the hogs."

The more potent fruit juices, such as apple jack, peach brandy
and hard cider, continued in high favor in spite of the growing
popularity of even more ardent spirits distilled from rye, wheat
and corn. Nearly every farm had a cider press. Cider was not
considered "prime" until it was two or three yeard old. The
profits of a majority of orchards were derived chiefly from the
feeding of stock and the sale of fruit Uquors.

About 1830 a vigorous temperance movement swept the
northern states and made many converts, even among fruit
growers. "Many worthy men", said the Farmers' Cabinet, in
1837, "have resisted the march of the temperance cause, because
they would have to sacrifice their orchards. Others, in their
zeal to do away with the evils of excessive drinking, have actually
cut down their trees." The centuries-old controversy between
the Wets and the Drys seems to have been conducted with
fully as much heat and mutual intolerance one hundred years
ago, as it is today. Witness this damning indictment: "Cider
drinkers are the most brutish and cruel of all the unhappy tribe
of inebriates. They are also pecuUarly subject to rheumatism,
inflamed eyeUds, headache, bleeding at the nose, sores and
ulcers, affections of the stomach and bowels, and premature
trembling of the hand and head."^

Early Commercial Fruit Gromngf.— Previous to the Civil War,
commercial fruit growing on any considerable scale was mainly
limited to a few plantings easily accessible by boat to the four
large cities,— Philadelphia, New York, Boston and Baltimore.
There was considerable planting of peaches and strawberries
in the Chesapeake Bay region about 1840. Philadelphia was
supplied with fruit mainly from Delaware and Anne Arundel
County, Maryland. In 1847 The Horticulturist reported:
"Major Reybold of Delaware has about a thousand acres of
peaches. They think nothing of sending 5000 bushels to market
per day for some weeks."^ Commercial apple culture began
about 1825, along the Hudson River where the fruit could be

^Letters of William Darlington, American Farmer 10:73, 1828.
'Farmers' Cabinet 1:231, 1837.
»The Horticulturist 2:465, 1847.

— 30 —

easily shipped to New York by boat. It was packed in straw-
headed barrels and brought $1.00 to $1.50 a barrel, package
returned. Commercial fruit growing, however, did not develop
rapidly until after 1850, when improvements in transportation
and the growth of cities made this possible.

THE SILK CRAZE

The silk craze of 1826 to 1839, while not strictly horticultural,
was closely alhed with the nursery interests of that period.
L. H. Bailey calls it ''the wildest speculation in American agri-
culture.'' ''Silke-worme seeds'' were sent to Virginia in 1627;
at various times all of the colonies had attempted to establish
the industry, but with indifferent success. The introduction of
the multicaulis mulberry, in 1826, was the spark that fired the
powder: 'Tew farmers have any idea of the vast profits in the
silk business. Four hundred and twenty pounds of silk were
produced from four acres planted with mulberry. This silk sold
for $3.50 per pound, amounting $1,470." Net profits of 47 to
112 per cent annually on an investment of about $437 an acre
were confidently predicted. "When the fact is generally known
that any young lady, by a few hours of pleasant recreation each
week at home, can clothe herself in a splendid suit of native
silk at the low price of 123^ cents a yard, there will not be a
garden without its mulberry trees."i It was predicted, "Every
available acre, from New England to the Gulf, will be covered
with the mulberry. Every farm will have cocooneries, and the
farmers' wives and daughters will feed the worms, and spin and
twist the thread."

The price of mulberry trees soared skyward. They were
easily propagated from hard wood cuttings, yet at the height of
the mania one-year-old trees sold for $2.00 to $5.00 each. Many
nurserymen gave up all other propagation in order to make the
most of this golden opportunity. Fortunes were made— by
nurserymen — in a single season. One over-heated propagator
announced, "On one acre, 30,000 trees can be raised, and the sum
of $35,000 reaUzed in a single season." Philadelphia was the
center of the craze; in 1838 there were nearly a million trees
within fifty miles of the city. The largest plantings were at
BurHngton, New Jersey.

The bubble burst in the fall of 1839, with a resounding pop.
A disease appeared, many of the trees in the northern states
were winter killed, the technique of silk culture was difficult to
master, and people came to their senses. In the spring of 1840,
"hundreds of thousands of trees were offered to farmers, in
vain, at a penny each, for pea-brush." So closed one of the
most amazing episodes in American horticulture.

'Farmers' Cabinet 1: 140, 1837.

31 —

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, 1835 TO 1860

The foundations of modern commercial fruit growing were
laid in the industrial revolution of 1835 to 1860. These twenty-
five years witnessed a remarkable transformation m the lite ot
the nation; from the industry of the home, the shop and the
farm, to the industry of the factory, the wage system, and the
city; from the self-sufficient farm, on which was grown practi-
cally all that was needed to feed and clothe the family, to the
speciaUzed farm, which produced one or more cash crops; from
a population that was mainly country-dwelhng and agricultural,
to a population that was mainly city-dwelhng and manufac-
turing Pennsylvania, with its wealth of mineral resources,
played a major part in this transformation of a nation. Ihe
radical changes that took place in American fruit growing after
1859 cannot be understood without a knowledge of the economic

conditions that caused them. . ^i • j i. • i

Turnpikes,— The most important factors in the industrial
revolution were the successive improvements in transportation,
from the trail to the turnpike, the steamboat, the canal and the
railroad. In 1794 the first turnpike in America, from Phila-
delphia, to Lancaster, was opened. The cost of construction was
borne by private interests, who were permitted by the btate to
charge toll. This turnpike was so successful that during the
next 30 years Pennsylvania chartered 80 companies, which
built 2200 miles of toll road. The cost of transportation, how-
ever, was high; the toll was about IH cents a mile for a one-
horse cart. It cost $100 to carry a ton of freight from Pitts-
burgh to Philadelphia over either of the two great arteries ot
travel to the West, now known as the Lincoln Highway and the

William Penn Highway. ,

Steamboats.— The next improvement in transportation was the
steamboat. Soon after 1807, when Robert Fulton made his
first successful trip up the Hudson, steamboats appeared on ail
the navigable rivers. They were particularly serviceable in
opening to settlement the vast territory west of the Alleghenies,
which had a population of 1,500,000 in 1820. By 1825 a large
percentage of the traffic from the West had deserted the over-
land routes and had turned down the Mississippi River to New
Orleans, to the chagrin of the merchants of Philadelphia and

c!^na!I— New York met this challenge with the Erie Canal.
This was opened from the Hudson to the Great Lakes in 18 J5,
the Great Lakes were connected with the Ohio River by cana
in 1832. The Erie Canal immediately became the chief channel
of trade between the West and the East. The produce of the
rich Mississippi Valley, chiefly grains and meats, now had an
easy outlet to Eastern markets. The Canal gave New York
city commercial supremacy over Philadelphia, which it has held

to this day. ,. ,. , «i.„„^

Pennsylvania was fully aware of this impending disadvantage,
and sought to overcome it by building a water route of her own

— 32 —

to the West. A great system of ''internal improvements" was
begun in 1824 and completed in 1834, at a cost of $10,000,000.
This was a combined water, rail and turnpike route from Phila-
delphia to Pittsburgh, through central Pennsylvania, covering
a distance of 394 miles. The Susquehanna and Juniata Rivers
were canaUzed; the Alleghenies were scaled with the Portage
Railroad. This consisted of a series of inclined planes using
stationary engines for power. This route never was as successful
as the Erie Canal, but it helped Philadelphia to meet the chal-
lenge of New York, for a time. Freight rates between Pittsburgh
and Philadelphia dropped from $100 to $15 a ton. Other
canals and canalized rivers were developed, but their period of
usefulness was short and their effect in hastening the industrial
revolution of the East was comparatively sUght.

Railroads.— The giant that transformed the East from a region
that was mainly agricultural to one that is mainly industrial
was the railroad. It was born in Pennsylvania. The first rail-
roads in the United States were short service lines used in the
Pennsylvania coal regions as early as 1815. They were operated
by gravity, horse power, and even by sails; locomotives were
not used until 1831. The first trunk line railroad, the Erie, was
opened in 1825. The first in Pennsylvania was a Une from
Philadelphia to Columbia on the Susquehanna River, to connect
with the State-operated canal route to Pittsburgh.

The rails used on all the early hues were of wood, capped with
strap iron. After iron rails appeared, in 1844, railroads increased
rapidly and challenged the canals for the traffic of the rapidly
expanding nation. In 1850, the rail mileage had increased to
9000; in 1860, every state east of the Mississippi was covered
with a network of railroads. By 1852, when the Pennsylvania
Railroad was opened to Pittsburgh, there was no longer any
doubt as to the outcome of the competition between the railroads
and the canals; rail transportation had been demonstrated to
be quicker and cheaper.

Pennsylvania Coal and /ron.— Pennsylvania played a major
role in the drama of the industrial revolution, especially in the
building of railroads, because of her vast resources of coal and
iron. Anthracite coal was discovered in 1769 and ^^ark-loads
of it were floated down the Schuylkill River to Philadelphia;
but difficulties of transportation were great, and there were no
suitable stoves and furnaces. The coal industry did not flourish
until 1834, when the hot air blast furnace came into common
use, and 1850, when coke ovens were introduced. Bituminous
coal came into common use about 1850. By 1870, water power,
which had been supreme hitherto, had been superseded largely
by steam power.

The smelting of iron, long a minor industry in Pennsylvania,
was revolutionized in 1840 by the substitution of anthracite coal
for charcoal. This made it possible to replace the wooden rails
of the first primitive railroads with heavy iron rails. The rapid
extension of trunk line railroads that followed not only created

— 33 —

a market for Pennsylvania coal and iron, but also furnished a
means of transporting these heavy, crude products at a moderate
cost. By 1860, the iron industry of Pennsylvania was m full
blast The first oil well in western Pennsylvania was drilled
in 1859; in 1862 the output was 3,000,000 barrels Pennsyl-
vania coal, iron and petroleum— basic resources which thus far
have determined the industrial supremacy of nations— were
indispensable factors in preparing the way for the new era.

Markets for Fruit.— The immediate effect of railroad building
was to extend the radius of territory available for the food sup-
ply of a city from several score to several thousand miles. 1^ arm
products began to pour into the East from the Mississippi
Valley. The population west of the Alleghenies increased from
1,500^0, in 1820, to 4,500,000, in 1840. The opening of vast
areas of land to settlement, free, under the Homestead Act ot
1862, stimulated immigration to such an extent that during
the twenty-year period from 1860 to 1880, 5,500,000 persons
came to the United States; most of them settled m the West.
Wheat, corn and cotton became the chief money crops. Ihe
reaper, thresher and other improved machinery replaced much

hand labor. , . /.^ xu f

Manufacturing, which had come into being after the war ot
1812, now definitely split off from agriculture. Previously it
had been conducted mainly in the shop and the household, with
the labor of the family and apprentice assistants. There now
arose a system of factory labor, compensated by wages and
assisted by power. The workers became a speciahzed non-
agricultural class— consumers, not producers of farm products.

Self-sufficing farming ceased ; speciahzed farming, as commer-
cial fruit growing, appeared. Since the farmer now had products
to sell, he could buy clothes and other family necessities. Indus-
trial towns sprang up, mainly in the northeastern states. In 18UU
there were only three cities of over 8000— Philadelphia, New
York, and Boston. In 1840 there were 33, five of which were in
Pennsylvania-Philadelphia, 205,000; Pittsburgh, 21,000; Alle-
gheny, 10,000; Lancaster 8,000; Reading, 8,000. By 1860 the
number of cities had increased to 82, and Pennsylvania had a
population of 3,000,000, nearly a third of which was urban.
Between 1860 and 1880 the population of the United btates
increased from 31,000,000 to 50,000,000, or at the rate of 26
per cent each decade. City markets, the pre-requisite of com-
mercial fruit growing, now were available. The stage was set
for the great expansion of the fruit growing industry that
followed.

**BOOM" DAYS

The advent of commercial fruit growing, as distinct from
general agriculture and amateur fruit growing, was marked by
the organization of various state horticultural societies to repre-

— 34 -

sent its interests. The first was The Fruit Growers' Society of
Western New York, now the New York State Horticultural
Society, organized at Rochester in 1856; the second was The
Fruit Growers' Society of Eastern Pennsylvania, now the State
Horticultural Association of Pennsylvania, organized at Lan-
caster on September 1, 1859. The time honored amateur
organizations, such as the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society,
could not be expected to express the new spirit of commercialism
in fruit growing. They were concerned chiefly with varieties
and exhibitions, not with cultural problems and marketing.
The State Horticultural Societies have been a major factor in
shaping the development of the industry.

The building of railroads, the great increase in population, the
opening of the West, the development of industries in the East,
and the discovery of gold in California (1849), resulted in a
prolonged period of expansion. The 27 years from 1845 to
1872 were indeed the ''golden era'* of American pomology.
Optimism was unbounded; there was no cloud in the sky, not
even one as big as a man's hand. The panic of 1857 had practi-
cally no effect on this exuberant enthusiasm. Even the exhaust-
ing Civil War checked the speculative fever but slightly; after
the war it continued with increasing fervor until 1872. Then
the inevitable day of reckoning came.

''Too many fruit trees can hardly be planted,'' counseled one
sanguine Pennsylvania pomologist, in 1856; "let fruit for the
million be our battle cry." The Berks County Agricultural and
Horticultural Society offered substantial premiums to those who
would plant the largest number of fruit trees, each year. At its
first meeting, in 1856, the Fruit Growers' Society of Western
New York "Resolved: that this convention confidently recom-
mends to the farmers of western New York an increased and
extensive cultivation of fruit for market, as an easy, sure and
safe means of securing ample and speedy profits. It is morally
certain that the fruit market cannot be overstocked to the
prejudice of largely remunerative prices for many years to come,
if ever."i

Big Profits. — The columns of The Magazine of Horticulture,

The Horticulturist, and Gardeners^ Monthly were illuminated with

glowing accounts of big profits made and to be made in fruit

growing. Then, as now, however, the East had to take second

honors when competing with the Pacific coast in the gentle art

of telling big stories. As reported in 1856, "Apples of large size

from Oregon were offered at fruit stands in San Francisco at

$4.50 apiece. Many persons purchased and ate them, even at

this rate. If this taste continues, who will say that the orchards

of Oregon shall not come to be as valuable as the gold mines of
California. "2

An ebullient Californian wrote to the editor of The Horti-
culturist, in 1855, "Apples are worth $8 to $12 per bushel and

'The Horticulturist 6:147, 1856.
naiD 6:328, 1856.

— 35 —

find ready sale at that price. At this rate, one acre of land in
apple trees, allowing 14 bushels to the tree, which is a low esti-
mate, and 40 trees to the acre, gives the sum of $4480 per acre.
This is a matter of fact, not of speculation. It is the opinion ot
some of our wisest men that good winter apples will command
iust as high a price in the San Francisco market for the next
thirty years, at least.'' It is a shame to spoil so good a story by
adding a sequel; but the cold fact is that apples sold in the
San Francisco market thirty years later for less than $1.00 a

bushel.

The heaviest plantings were of the apple. In 1850 The Hortt'
culturist reported, ^It seems as though every farmer in the iLast
is planting an apple orchard.'' These plantings were mostly
what we now know as ''the old farm orchards, plantings ot 1
to 5 acres as an incidental feature of general farming. 1 he old
farm apple trees we see today are only the remnants ot ttie
miUions of trees planted in Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio and
other northeastern states between 1845 and 1870.

Peach plantings had attained significant proportions some-
what earlier, especially in the Chesapeake Bay region withm
wagon haul or sloop ride of Philadelphia. After 1835 there was
an orgy of peach planting. In 1848 the peach crop of Delaware
alone was estimated at 5,000,000 baskets. Fortunes were made
in a single year— and lost with equal celerity ''We are mformed
on the best authority," said the Gardeners' Monthly, m 1860,
"that there is a peach orchard on the eastern shore of Maryland
that contains 600 acres, the net profit on which last year was
$40,000; and that the owner was offered $60,000 for the crop
this year, the purchaser to pick the fruit and take it to market.
Successive "peach kings" rose, reigned for a brief year or two,
and then reluctantly yielded the crown to another.

THE REIGN OF THE PEAR

The pear now is such an insignificant feature of Eastern fruit
growing that we are Ukely to forget that it vied with the apple
for popular favor until about 1875. At the 1860 meeting of the
Fruit Growers' Association of Eastern Pennsylvania the state-
ment was made, and not disputed, "Pears do better everywhere
in Pennsylvania than apples." A few years later, in 1867, the
same group discussed the question, "Is not the pear the most
certain of the tree fruits in Pennsylvania?" The answer was,
"It is." In 1853, Patrick Barry reported, "Sales of pears tiave
been made at Philadelphia this season at prices calculated to
give an impetus to their culture. Duchess d' Angouleme pears
sold at Isaac Newton's Fruit and Ice Cream Store, on Chestnut
Street, for one dollar each, and smaller specimens at seventy-
five cents each. Mr. Newton was selling a stock of Vicar ot
Winkfield pears, on December 2, 1852, at seventy-five cents a
dozen, to eager buyers. Our correspondent says he immediately
sat down and ordered pear trees for all the vacant spots in his

— 36 —

garden. We only add that we think him a sensible man."i
And again: "Bartlett pears have been selling on the New York
markets, at wholesale, for $9.00 a barrel. One cultivator of this
delicious fruit realized at the rate of $9,200 per acre." The itahcs
are mine; those four words are significant.

Tobias Martin, of Mercersburg, Pa. owned one of the most
famous pear orchards of the East. It was planted 400 trees to
the acre, with dwarfs as fillers. In 1870 he sold his fruit at the
following prices:

"Bartlett, extra fine, $1 to $1.50 a dozen

"Bartlett, first class, $4.00 per bushel

"Lawrence, Vicar, Easter, $24 per barrel

"Duchess, Clairgeau, $3 to $5 a dozen."

Another celebrated pear grower was Edwin Satterthwaite, of
Jenkintown, Pa. He had over 7000 trees, of about 500 varieties.
He marketed his fruit in Philadelphia; "the prices usually obtain-
ed are $8 to $12 per barrel."^ We must remember, however,
that the editors of all the horticultural periodicals of that day
also were nurserymen — they had trees to sell. Possibly there
was another side to the picture.

Other fruits had their brief day in the sun during this expan-
sive era. In 1865, "One fruit grower near New York sent 1600
bushels of plums to market, for which he received $14 a bushel. "^
In 1856, Pennsylvania-grown apricots sold for $15 a bushel in
Philadelphia. In 1854 the United States Patent Office imported
cions of Prune d' Agen, now the French prune of California, and
distributed them throughout Pennsylvania and neighboring
states. It was confidently expected that the northeastern states
would become a great prune region rivalling that of France;
"the State of Maine alone is capable of raising dried prunes
sufficient to supply the wants of the entire Union." Prune
trees sold for $5 to $10 each. At the Pennsylvania State Fair
held at Pittsburgh in 1856, fresh prunes "sold readily at 50
cents a quart. "^ The prune trees produced fairly well, but the
climate was not favorable for drying the fruit, and they rotted
badly. The prune industry became established on the Pacific
coast about 1880.

GRAPE FEVER

The speculative fever in fruit growing developed in its most
virulent form in the culture of the grape. American viticulture
began about 1830 on the banks of the Ohio, at Cincinnati, and
prospered under the expert guidance of Nicholas Longworth.
The Ohio River then was "The Rhine of America." Grapes were
grown chiefly for wine making; it was thought that eventually
this would become one of our major agricultural interests.
Ohio retained its preeminence in grape culture until after 1850.

»The Horticulturist 8:98, 1853.
'The Horticulturist 27:345, 1872.
'Ibid 20:106, 1865.
<Ibid 6:145, 1856.

— 37 —

There were centers of production in the East, notably in the
Finger Lake region of Western New York and at Reading
Pennsylvania. The dominant varieties were the Isabella and

the Catawba. , , , ^ -^ i „*„

The building of railroads and the development of city markets
revolutionized the industry. With the introduction of the Con-
cord, in 1853, the culture of grapes primarily for wine making
gave way to their culture primarily for dessert purposes. Fresh
grapes sold for 10 to 15 cents a pound in Philadelphia. The
Chautauqua-Erie grape belt, including Erie County, Pennsyl-
vania, came into prominence.

The next fifteen years were a nurseryman s paradise, une
nurseryman recalls the "good old days:" "Ten thousand Dela-
wares would go in a box four feet square; shipped by express
COD, they would bring back $1000 in a few days A man
entered our office and asked if we would take $4000 of Govern-
ment bonds for 5000 lonas, which were then selling at $1.0U

each. I took his money. "1 . u„.,+ iccn

The days of big profits in grape growing departed about l»»u
when California entered the market. In ten years, between 1880
and 1890, the grape acreage of California increased seven times
from 35,518 to 213,230 acres, which was more than the combined
acreage in all the Eastern states. Prices fell to a very modest
level, save for a few hectic years after the national prohibition
law went into effect.

A STRAWBERRY "KING

»»

Strawberry growing had well developed commercial centers
as early as 1830, especially in tlie Chesapeake Bay region As
would be expected, this fruit reacted strongly to the stimulus ot
"good times"; being practically an annual, it is one of the most
mercurial of fruits. Strawberry "kings," with uneasy crowns,
were numerous Pennsylvania contributed one, however, who
deserved the title. The Reverend John Knox, of Pittsburgh a
retired Methodist minister, was one of the most skillful culti-
vators of the strawberry and the grape in America, baid 1 he
Horticulturist, in 1869, "Mr. Knox's name long since has become a
household word throughout the country; but few towns have not
heard of him and his Jucunda strawberry." From 1850 to
1872, his farm was the Mecca of horticulturists from every state
in the East. He practiced intensive culture, and kept the plants

'" The berries of his leading variety, the "Knox's 700", which
later was found to be the old Jucunda, grew to a very large size;
they were commonly "5^ inches round; 16 to 24 fill a quart.
Even the conservative editor of Gardeners' Monthly, Thomas
Meehan, was moved to exclaim, "The size of these berries was
the largest anyone ever saw. They might easily be mistaken by
a near-sighted person for tomatoes. While I left strawberries

iTrans. Pennsylvania Fruit Growers' Society 1878, p. 635.

— 38 —

selling in Philadelphia at 10 cents a quart, these were being
shipped to Boston, New York, and all parts of the East for
$1.00 a quart/' And The Horticulturist reported: **Rev. John
Knox of Pittsburgh succeeded in making his land devoted to
the Jucunda strawberry pay from $1200 to $1500 an acre, and
frequently sold fancy berries at $1.00 per quart. These quart
baskets often held but 18 berries From 2}^ acres last year
he realized $3600 net. He estimates his cost of production as
about $200 an acre.^'^ John Knox held annual grape and
strawberry exhibitions, which attracted wide attention. The
intensive methods in strawberry culture now in vogue do not
differ materially from those practiced by him in 1865.

THE END OF THE RAINBOW

At the end of the rainbow was found, not a pot of gold, but
disillusion and disenchantment. The inevitable reaction from
twenty-five years of horticultural inflation came in 1872. There
were four major causes of the depression which began then —
post-war economic distress, increasing competition from dis-
tant fruit growing regions, over-planting in the East, and heavy
losses from the depredations of insect pests and fungous diseases.

The railroads were not an unmixed blessing. While they made
possible the industrial towns of the East — the markets of the
fruit grower — they also opened the door to competition from
districts several thousands of miles away. By 1858, strawberries
from Norfolk, Virginia, had begun to reach northern markets in
considerable quantity, mainly by boat; they soon forced northern
growers to discontinue the culture of early varieties. Northern
peach growers had a similar experience, beginning with the first
shipments from Georgia, about 1866. 'Teaches carefully packed
in crates are sent from the neighborhood of Augusta, Ga., to
New York and Philadelphia, the earliest reaching these markets
June 20-25, and commanding at first as high as $15 to $20 per
bushel. An average of $5 a bushel may be counted on."2 Florida
oranges began to appear on northern markets in quantity
about 1868.

California Enters the Market. — The most serious competition,
however, came from the Pacific coast, following the rush of the
^'forty-niners'' to California in search of gold. At the exhibition
of the Pennsylvania Horticultural Society in Horticultural Hall,
Philadelphia, September 25-27, 1867, ''the exhibit arousing
the greatest enthusiasm was the one staged by Dr. Strenzel,
of California. It included pears, grapes, plums, quinces and
pomegranates." This was the first exhibit of California fruits
in the East. There was no suspicion then of the impending
sharp competition. The completion of the first transcontinental
railroad, the Union Pacific, in 1869, was followed by the first
all-rail shipment of fresh fruit to Eastern markets, the same year.

>The Horticulturist 1871, p. 210.
The Horticulturist 21:241, 1866.

— 39

The Southern Pacific was completed in 1876 and the Santa Fe
in 1885; these gave added impetus to the rapidly expandmg
California fruit industry.

In 1873, Tobias Martin, a shrewd pear grower of Mercersburg,
Pa., gave voice to inspired prophecy: '^California is going to
knock the spots out of our pear market.^ His prediction has
been fulfilled. Naval oranges were introduced i^^t^ /-^ q?^? "^
from Brazil in 1873 by William Saunders, of the United States
Department of Agriculture, previously a Philadelphia gardener.
The first train load of California oranges was shipped to Eastern
markets in 1882, and the first full train load of deciduous fruits
in 1886 By 1887, California citrus fruits flooded the East, to
the distress of eastern apple growers. The first full ^^^ipload of
bananas arrived in 1857 but the trade did not develop rapidly

until after 1881. , , _.

The lack of refrigeration in transit, however, was a constant
threat to the southern and Pacific coast fruit trade. Distant
growers never could be sure that their fruit would reach eastern
markets in salable condition. There were ^^^^^ 1^^^,^.^/]^^^^^
1880, distant shippers became much discouraged Ihen came
refrigerator car service, in 1887, and transcontinental frmt
growing was established on a more stable basis.

Over-Produciion.— The horticultural debacle of 1872 and the
years immediately following also was due, in part, to over-
production. The tremendous apple plantings of the 50 s were
i^ist coming into heavy bearing. More fruit was produced than
could be consumed to advantage under the crude marketing
conditions that prevailed then. Moreover, a l^rge Percentage
of the ^'boom" plantings had been injudicious, with little regard
for site and soil adaptations; there was ''an orchard on every
farm " Cold storage facilities for fruit were practically non-
existent; there were ruinous gluts in the autumn, and a dearth
of apples in late winter. Pests had multiplied and there were no
efficient means of controlling them.

There were numerous laments for "the good old times, when
apples grew almost spontaneously, and of unsurpassed quahty.
The sad deterioration in apple production in this region (Lan-
caster County, Pa.), may be ascribed chiefly to the ravages of
insects. It is probable that more than half of the apple trees
planted hereabouts are killed by the borer. Curculio, fungi-
pests, and codhng moth (principally, perhaps, the latter),
destroy the fruit. Whether we are ever able to grow the apple
here again depends chiefly on whether we can get rid ot the
codUng moth. Very few pear trees remain; bhght has carried
them off. Raspberries and blackberries are an uncertain crop,
due to rust; and grapes are stricken with mildew and rot.

This depressing story was repeated, with variations, year after
year. Between 1872 and 1887 "the decadence of horticulture in
America'^ was the theme of many sorrowful discussions at
horticultural meetings. In 1881 a disgruntled Berks County,
Pa., grower reported: "The market was glutted with apples.

— 40 —

It scarcely paid to haul them from the orchard. Six cents a
bushel was paid at the cider mills and distilleries." He derived
some consolation, however, from the fact that apple jack sold
at $1.50 a gallon.

In his presidential address before the Pennsylvania Fruit
Growers' Society, in 1876, — the Centennial year at Philadelphia
— Edwin Satterthwaite of Jenkintown, discussed the situation
frankly: "It must be admitted that the prospects of fruit grow-
ing as a business are not encouraging. Rapid and cheap con-
nection with all the world has brought us in close competition
with the more favorable soils and climates of other states, and
the cheap labor of distant lands. At the same time, it is obvious
that the depression in the business of fruit growing is not caused
entirely by these influences, but is largely due to the general
stagnation in business, the blighting effects of which are ruining
every enterprise. * * * It is quite evident that there is now more
fruit produced and sent to market than can be disposed of at
remunerative prices. It is important to know whether this
condition arises entirely from excessive production, or partially,
perhaps largely, from the general stagnation in business, which
has reduced the ability to purchase of the mass of consumers.''
This statement might stand very well for 1932, also!

CHANGES IN CULTURAL METHODS

The transition period witnessed comparatively few changes in
cultural methods; research in the application of the sciences to
horticulture did not get well under way until after 1887. Practi-
cally all bearing orchards, except of peaches, were in sod. The
prevailing opinion was expressed by W. G. Waring, Professor of
Horticulture at the ^Tarmers' High School, near Boalsburg,
Pennsylvania," — now The Pennsylvania State College — in 1852:
^*The worst enemy of the orchard is the plow." At the 1863
meeting of the Pennsylvania Fruit Growers Society, it was
agreed: *^An orchard never should be cultivated in eastern
Pennsylvania after it commences to bear." At the 1868 meeting
of this society, the statement was made: ^^The finest crops of
fruit come where the orchards are not disturbed by the plow."
The propaganda for intensive tillage of orchards, which was
brought to the East from California, did not make headway
until after 1880.

There were many ardent advocates of the grass mulch, chief
of whom was Thomas Meehan. Some of our present day investi-
gators recommend **sod rotations," or temporary sods, in the
apple orchard, as one of the most practical means of maintaining
the organic content of the soil. This ought to be a good method,
for it has the sanction of antiquity. It was advocated a hundred
years ago: * ^Another cause of unthriftiness in apple orchards is
to suffer grass crops to grow in the orchard for more than two
or three seasons, without breaking up the sod. As a general rule,
after planting an apple orchard keep the ground for the first

— 41 —

few years in some cultivated crop; after that if grass crops are
grown in it, three seasons at the most should not pass without

^^7S^^^^ after 1887 orchards received very

little fertiUzing, except the droppings of Ja;^";;.-^^^^^
in them and infrequent manurmg. Bone dust and wood asnes
wereTppS occasionally. In 1856 the Philadelphia Guano .
Span? introduced this product from ^^slands m the Caribbean
sea '^ and sold it at $40 a ton. It was pronuonced the best
fertiUzer for orchards because it contained '^80 per cent of

^^r^ni^ng" applications of the mineral plant foods

were advised, but seldom made. At that time the theory of
Suizhig was to burn the plant, analyze the ash, and apply as
feSzer the materials it contained in largest quantity; hence
stress wa^^^^^^ on potash, phosphorus and lime as the essentia
SedSs of an orchard f ertihzer. Nothing was said about
nitrogen Not until after 1880, however, was there any general
rSst in commercial fertilizers; in that year the Western
New York Horticultural Society listened to a ^^Report of the
Committee on Directions for Applying Fertihzers. ^^.^^

There was httle change in the art and science of pruning
The -natural method^' was practiced by most growers. Ihe
majority opinion was expressed by Cyrus T. Fox of Reading
Pa in 1886- '^So many orchards have been rmned by pruning
that my adVice is, don^t. Never learn to prune, and never
prune I have yet to see an orchard that has been benefited
by the appUcation of the knife.^' In 1868, Thomas Meehan
who was far ahead of his time in horticultural science, clearly
stated a principle of pruning that now finds wide acceptance and
application, as a result of recent research: J'l'^^flJ^^'J
tendency to check the growth of the trees, and should be prac-
ticed only to gain some other point. ''2

INSECT PESTS INCREASE

Insect control was not a critical problem in fruit growing until
after 1850, when commercial plantings had become extensive
In 1853, Patrick Barry expressed the opinion, ;^The three greatest
drawbacks in fruit culture in America are the Pf ^ ^ligh^^
curculio and the plum tree wart.'^ The pest problems ot
PenSVant in 1852 were noted by W. G. Waring, of Boalsburg,
Center County: ^Caterpillars are not nunierous and are easily
destroyed. Aphids seldom injure any shoots but the over-
luxuriant. Canker worms and borers are unknown here. Ihe
most obnoxious pest in the apple is the worm at the core ; in
some seasons, very few summer or fall apples are clear of it^
There has been no blight, but of rank shoots, for years. Ihe
curculio is as destructive here as in other places. The plan ot
keeping swine in the plum orchard has been tried here, with

>Fabmerb' Cabinet 8:164, 1843. iqao « oq

»Proc. Pennsylvania Fruit Growers Society, 1808, p. ^rf.

— 42 —

entire success. The Yellows have swept off thousands of peach
trees and those remaining are so weakened by curled leaf in the
spring that we rarely enjoy good peaches.''^

The curculio was particularly destructive. Many highly
original methods of control were proposed. A. J. Downing
relates the experience of *'a cultivator of fine fruit in Queens
County, New York, who has actually succeeded in fencing out
the curculio. His plum orchard is surrounded by a perfectly
tight board fence, 9 feet high, furnished with a tight gate. The
trees are loaded with plums, very few having been stung by the
curculio; while on a few trees outside, 20 feet distant, the crops
are literally destroyed/' 2 No less effective, apparently, were the
measures of another energetic cultivator, who '^ paved the ground
beneath the trees, for a space 9 to 10 feet wide, lengthwise of
each row.'' Jarring the branches, and collecting the curculios
on sheets was practiced quite successfully after 1867.

The codling moth received special attention after 1860. Con-
trol was sought mainly by scraping off the rough bark, keeping
stock in the orchard, and by tying a hay band around the trunk
to trap the pupating larvae. ^*We direct the attention of all
orchardists," said one public spirited fruit grower, in 1871, ''to a
simple and practical method of exterminating the codling moth,
at an expense of not over $1.50 an acre. About the first of June,
take wisps of rags — cotton or woolen — and place them in the
lowest forks of the tree, or wind them around the trunk. All the
worms, ascending and descending, will crawl in and remain.
Now we know where the worms are; how shall we kill them?"
He, himself, knows the answer. 'Take a clothes wringer, place
an end of the rag in the rollers, and run the rag through. Every
worm will be annihilated. "^

Insect Control in 1871, — The status of insect control in the
apple orchard, in 1871, was reported by S. S. Rathvon, of
Lancaster, Pa., a noted entomologist:"^

Oyster-shell scale. — Paint the limbs with whale oil soap or
neat's foot oil.

Borers — Cut them out. Cover the base of the tree with tin
or paper protectors.

Canker Worms — Place a band of sticky material around the
trunk.

Tent Caterpillar. — Cut out the egg masses in winter; burn the
nests in spring.

Aphids. — Syringe them with tobacco decoction.

Curculio. — Keep livestock in the orchard; jar the limbs and
collect the insects on sheets.

Codling Moth. — Scrape off the loose bark; band the trees; keep
stock in the orchard.

After 1870 the depredations of insect pests became very
serious. In 1865 the Fruit Growers' Society of Western New

'Proc. American Pomolooical Society, 1852, pp. 80-81.

'The Horticulturist 1:204, 1846.

Hjardener's Monthly 13:169, 1871.

<Proc. Pennsylvania Fruit Growers' Society, 1871, pp. 70-95.

— 43 —

York voted: ^'Resolved, that the man who allows caterpillars to
multiply in his orchard is a nuisance." Many orchards were
stripped of their foliage annually by the canker worm and the
codling moth took heavy toll.

Between 1870 and 1880 the idea was current that one of the
most practicable means of keeping insect pests in control was to
foster birds. With this in view, English sparrows were imported
into the United States, about 1880, by E. Lewis Sturtevant,
Director of the New York State Experiment Station. He Hved
to regret it. By 1878 many growers were desperate, and some
began to cut down their orchards.

The First Arsenical Spray. — At this juncture a remedy ap-
peared which saved the day. Paris green was used in the control
of the Colorado potato beetle before 1870. It was first used in
orchards about 1872, on the recommendation of LeBarron, State
Entomologist of lUinois. In that year, ''C. M. Hooker, of
Rochester, N. Y., reported the successful use of Paris green in
the control of canker worms. He mixed it with air-slaked lime,
plaster, ashes or flour, and dusted it on. The same material
has been used for the control of current worms, for several
years. ''1

The first mention of orchard spraying was in 1881, when J. S.
Woodward, of Lockport, N. Y., reported that he had found a
method for controlling codHng moth that was much more
effective than banding. His remedy was to '^apply Paris green,
one pound to 100 gallons of water, by means of a force pump,
while the fruit is small and in an upright position." This infor-
mation seems to have been received with considerable skepti-
cism in Pennsylvania. In 1883 PJntomologist S. S. Rathvon, of
Lancaster, informed the Fruit Growers' Society, * ^Applica-
tions of liquid Paris green, administered through a force pump
or syringe, have been recommended for the control of codling
moth, but I have not heard that the remedy has any following
at all."

In 1887 the Society debated the question, ^'Should we, as
a Society, encourage the.use of Paris green for the destruction of
codling moth?" There were many doubting Thomases. Con-
centrated lime-sulphur was first used as an insecticide in 1881,
for the control of San Jose Scale in California. Knapsack and
barrel pumps were used until 1894, when the first power sprayer
was introduced. Not until after 1890, however, was there much
interest in sprays for insect control.

DISEASE CONTROL

There was even less progress in disease control, largely because
life history studies on the nature of fungous and bacterial
diseases had not been made. Periodic outbreaks of peach
Yellows devasted the country; the epidemics of 1851, 1874 and
1886 were especially destructive. The advice of Judge Richard

'The Horticulturist 28:79-80, 1873.

— 44 —

Peters, of Philadelphia, in 1806, ^Tromptly, on the first symp-
toms of the malady appearing, remove the affected trees,'* had
not been generally followed. Many theories as to the cause of
Yellows were advanced; usually is was ascribed to ''sour sap
resulting from immature wood that has been frozen.'' One of
the first to suggest the parasitic nature of the disease was Josiah
Hoopes, of West Chester, Pa., who was one of the best informed
horticulturists of his time: ''The Yellows presents every feature
of an organic disease. The dissection of a diseased tree plainly
shows that a poisonous virus has penetrated to every part of it.
That is why the disease is so easily communicated to healthy
trees in pruning. "1

No progress was made in fire blight control until after its
bacterial origin was discovered by Burrell, in 1878. It was
commonly considered to be "vegetable apoplexy, caused by a
surcharge of the electric fluid." In 1837 the Pennsylvania
Horticultural Society offered "a premium of Five Hundred
Dollars to be paid to the person who shall discover and make
pubUc an effective means of preventing the attack of the disease
usually termed pear blight." This munificent offer brought forth
a host of panaceas, such as soaking the ground with soap suds,
wrapping the limbs with a rag that was sprinkled with brim-
stone, driving rusty nails into the tree to give it "an iron tonic,"
and "physicing" the tree with doses of calomel, inserted beneath
the bark. No award was made.

Black Knot of plums was found to be due to "the sting of an
insect, which was identified by a noted entomologist as Membra-
cis buhalusy one of the tree hoppers." John F. Bennett, of
Pittsburgh, whom the editor of The Horticulturist considered "a
close observer," discovered the cause of rot in grapes: "It is a
blow or wound received, causing death to the part receiving it,
and spreading decomposition into the surrounding parts. What
is there in Nature that gives blows causing death? Lightning

does."

"Black spots" (scab) were observed on apples, also the crack-
ing of pears, but these were dismissed casually by Patrick Barry,
in 1853, as "the results of seasonable variations in climate and
of unsuitable locations." In 1847 Brown Rot of plums and
peaches was attributed by another pomological authority, A. J.
Downing, to "grossness and over-luxuriance. Apply shell Ume
at the rate of 40 bushels per acre." Thirty years later, in 1887,
the Fruit Committee of the State Horticultural Association of
Pcnnsjdvania still attributed the rotting of plums to "some
mysterious cUmatic influence, and no remedy is likely to be
found." But William Saunders advised Pennsylvania fruit
growers in 1868, "I have come to the conclusion that lime and
sulphur are disastrous to all fungous matter."^ He advocated
dusting grapes with sulphur to control rot and mildew; this
counsel was followed, with considerable success.

»Proc. Pennsylvania Fbuit Growers' Society, 1870, p. 76.

'The Horticulturist 22:14, 1867.

»Proc. Pennsylvania Fruit Growers' Society, 1868, p. 29.

— 45 —

After 1875 complaints about ''fungoid troubles'' increased,
particularly brown rot on the peach and black spot on the apple.
Relief was at hand. After the discovery of Bordeaux mixture
by Millardet at Bordeaux, France, in 1882, it was introduced
into the United States by F. Lamson Scribner, in 1885; but
there was practically no spraying with fungicides until after
1890.

OTHER CULTURAL PRACTICES

The operation of fruit thinning recently has had many con-
verts, as a result of contemporary research, but it is by no means
a modern practice. About 1840 the peach orchard of Isaac
Reeve and Jacob Ridgway, ''situated on the Delaware River,
near Philadelphia'' had more than a local reputation. "In 1839
they gathered 18,000 bushels of first rate fruit from 170 acres,
whereof only 50 acres were in full bearing. When the fruit has
attained the size of a small musket ball, it is thinned. By this
judicious management, the amount of fruit is but little dimin-
ished in measure, but its size and beauty are greatly improved.
During most of the season it sold on the Philadelphia market
for $4.50 to $6.00 the basket of three pecks."i

No less an authority than Andrew Jackson Downing recom-
mended the paragriley or hail rod, a European device. He
described it thus: "To make the hail rod, a rope of straw is
necessary; it must be made of ripe wheat straw soaked and
twisted, and twenty-five feet long. Through the center must
run a strong twine of tow yarn. The cable is fastened to a stake
of the same length, with copper wire, and armed at the top with
a point of tin, 1}^ inches thick and 8 inches long, placed in
direct contact with the tow yarn. The hail rods should be set
about 600 feet apart, on the most elevated points." This
device was reputed to have protected whole districts in Europe
from hail, by "abstracting the superabundance of electricity
from highly charged clouds." It was powerless, however, to
sooth the more tempestous spirit of American hail storms.

About 1870, "barren" or "sterile" trees and orchards, began
to attract much attention. It was thought that the blossoms
failed to set fruit because' of excessive wood growth. In 1870,
that keen observer, Josiah Hoopes of West Chester, Pa., exam-
ined the pollen of many different varieties of apples and decided
that the main cause of sterility was the lack of a sufficient
quantity of viable pollen. He recommended cross-pollination,
through the mixed planting of varieties. 2

THE PROCESSION OF VARIETIES

This sixty-year period saw the decline, in the East, of the pear,
plum, nectarine, apricot, quince, currant and gooseberry, and
the rise of the apple, peach, grape, raspberry and strawberry.

•Farmers' Cabinet 6:338, 1841.

'Proc. Pennsylvania Fruit Growers' Society, 1870.

— 46 —

By 1875 the pear, once a rival of the apple for the crown of the
"King of Fruits," had sunk into comparatfve insignificance.
In 1881, it was reported by the Pennsylvania Fruit Growers^
Society, "The consumption of pears is small, compared to apples
and peaches. There is no demand for pears in winter and during
most of the summer and fall the markets are full of peaches,
grapes, plums and melons, which are preferred to pears. The
Blight, also, has been responsible for the decline of the pear.''
The Society then recommended that pears "be not planted for
a money crop.''

The quince, neglected and almost forgotten today, was one
of the most popular of all fruits previous to 1850, when every
housewife prided herself on having a bountiful supply of home-
made jellies, jams and preserves. "The quince is one of the
most profitable of our fruits, always finding a ready market at a
generous price. The demand for this fruit in the Philadelphia
market has far outrun the supply for many years past."i The
currant and gooseberry suffered a similar fate, and for the same
reason. Thus fruits, as well as varieties, rise and fall, and per-
haps rise again, with the passing of the years.

Varieties Increase. — At the beginning of this period, the
advantages of grafted fruits were just beginning to be recognized.
For fifty years, from 1827 to 1867, most of the time at horticul-
tural meetings was devoted to discussions of varieties. Named
sorts increased rapidly, and nurseries flourished. In 1825 Prince,
the celebrated Long Island nurseryman, offered 116 varieties
of apples, of which 61 were American. Fifty years later, in
1872, Downing described 1856 varieties of apples, of which 1099
were of American origin. Probably less than one third of these,
however, were in general cultivation.

The American Pomological Society, organized in 1852, was
the most important stimulus to the introduction and testing of
varieties; its Catalog of Fruits was accepted as the infallible
guide to variety adaptations. This was the heyday of syste-
matic pomology. The fame of A. J. Downing and his brother
Charles, of Patrick Barry, J. J. Thomas and Marshall P. Wilder,
rested far more on their knowledge of varieties than on their
cultural skill. About 1860 systematic pomology was submerged
in the rising tide of commercial fruit growing; it has been a
comparatively minor factor in American pomology ever since.

Between 1840 and 1860 there was much discussion of the
"running out" of varieties. "There is a notion prevalent with
many cultivators of fruit that the cankered state of many old
pears is due to their approaching extinction, in consequence of
the death of the original or parent tree, from which the first
cions were taken. They beheve that the progeny never outlive
the original seedhng or, if they do, are never thirfty growers
thereafter. "2 It was supposed that the seedling tree derived its

^Farmers' Cabinet 5:210, 1840; 8;223, 1844.
The Horticulturist 2:109, 1847.

— 47 —

longevity and vital force from the seed; that every time the
seedUng tree was' divided, as in propagation, its longevity and
vitally were decreased in proportion; that there was a fixed
limit to the life of the seedling and all its progeny (about 100
years, in the case of the apple), hence the necessity of constantly
producing new varieties from seeds.

This theory was first advanced by Thomas Andrew Knight,
in England, who made the dogmatic assertion, ''Every variety
carries within itself the limitations of its own existence." It was
difficult, however, to reconcile this theory with the luxuriant
growth of the Bon Chretien pear, a European variety at least
700 years old which was renamed the Bartlett in America.
Henry Ward Beecher, a distinguished horticulturist as well as
an eloquent preacher and publicist, repHed, ''Any one tree may
wear out, but a variety never.'' That was the conclusion finally
reached, and now held. Running out is due chiefly to neglectful

culture.

The fruit Hst adopted by the Pennsylvania Fruit Growers
Society, in 1869, is representative of the variety situation in the
early days of commercial fruit growing:

Summer

Red Astrachan
r]arly Harvest
Sweet Bough

Apples

Fall

Maiden Blush
Porter
White Doctor

Winter

Fallawater

Smith's Cider

Baldwin

Smokehouse

Ridge Pippin

Long Island Russett

Summer

Doyenne d' Ete
Osband's Summer
Tyson

Pears

Fall

Bartlett

Seckel

Belle Lucrative

Howell

Urbaniste

Sheldon

Winter

Lawrence

Vicar of Winkfield

Winter Nelis

Peaches

Hale's Early
Troth's Early
Crawford's l^Larly
Large Early York
Old Mixon Free
Susquehanna
Stump the World
Ward's Late
Crawford's Late
Smock

Plums

Yellow Gage

Jefferson

Richland

Cherries

May Duke
Early Richmond
Black Tartarian
Governor Ward
Yellow Spanish
English Morello
Bleeding Heart
Late Kentucky

48 —

Grapes

For Table Use:

Hartford Prolific

Concord

Clinton

Martha

Catawba

For Wine:

Clinton
Ives

Blackberries

Lawton
Wilson

Strawberries

Raspberries

Wilson's Albany Philadelphia

Agriculturist Clark

Triomphe de Gand Doolittle

Green Prolific Brinckl^'s Orange

Ida Falstolff

Philadelphia Hornet

Currants

Red Dutch
Cherry
White Grape

Gooseberries

Houghton

Cluster

Downing

There has been a practically complete change in varieties of
the peach, strawberry and raspberry since 1869. The reign of
the Elberta peach did not begin until after 1880. The standard
varieties contributed by Pennsylvania have been comparatively
few; chief of these are the York Imperial, Smokehouse and
Jeffries apples, and the Kieffer, Seckel and Tyson pears.

STORING AND MARKETING

Improvements in methods of storing and marketing fruit
during this period were slight. After 1850 there was renewed
interest in the construction of common storage houses, mostly
bank cellars. These were found valuable for local market
growers, but unsatisfactory for wholesale growers. Between
1860 and 1870, many insulated fruit houses were erected, ice
being stored in a room above the fruit. The patented ''Nyce
Fruit House" was of this type. In 1865 Thomas Meehan reported
''Mr. Nyce and his friends are making fortunes out of the idea."
A considerable number of these houses were erected in Pennsyl-
vania, especially near Reading. The cost (stone construction,
walls insulated with sawdust) was ''about $2000 for a house
holding 4,000 bushels, and requiring 1,000 tons of ice a year."
One of the most successful of these ice fruit houses was that of
Dr. J. H. Funk, of Boyertown, Pa.; it "had a capacity of 3,000
barrels and cost $7000." Cold storage with artificial refriger-
ation, as appHed to fruit growing, has developed mainly since
1895.

Canning. — The commercial canning of fruits and vegetables,
patent for which was granted in 1825, began to attract attention
about 1847. After 1860 it developed rapidly; by 1870 it was
firmly estabUshed as an adjunct to the fruit industry. According
to The Horticulturist for 1871, "It is quite common to find

— 49 —

THOMAS MEEHAN, of Philadelphia

Editor of Gardener's Monthly for thirty years. He made many contributions to Amer-
ican pomology ^ especially in the application of the science of botany to fruit gromng.

— 50 —

canning factories in every county in all of our large peach grow-
ing districts. If it were not for them, to relieve our markets of
surplus fruits, we fear fruit culture would be a very unsatisfac-
tory occupation/' The commercial sun-drying and evaporation
of fruits has developed since 1872, mainly on the Pacific coast;
they were the salvation of the California deciduous fruit industry
of that period.

By the close of this period, in 1887, there had been but little
improvement in marketing methods. There were no standard
grades, no standard packages, and no cooperative marketing.
Barrels, baskets and boxes were of all sizes and shapes. The
ethical and business standards of growers in grading and packing
were none too high; the '^stove-piping" of barrelled apples was
not uncommon. Growers all too frequently were fleeced by
middlemen; there was no market news service.

Transportation losses frequently were heavy. The lack of
refrigeration in transit was a constant menace to distant ship-
pers. The ventilator car, introduced in 1870, was an improve-
ment over the box car, but did not give assurance that the fruit
would reach distant markets in salable condition. The labor of
a year might come to nought because of a seemingly unavoidable
delay of a few hours in transit. Then, far more than now, the
grower with good local markets enjoyed a great advantage over
his distant competitors. The refrigerator car, first used in the
meat packing industry in 1869, and adapted to the fruit trade
in 1887, destroyed that advantage to a large extent.

This period witnessed the rise of the export trade, which is
an important factor in the economics of the apple industry.
Apples had been exported in limited quantities to the West
Indies and to Europe, in ice boats, since 1790, but the trade did
not reach any considerable proportions until after 1845. In
1868 the United States exported 15,000,000 bushels, mainly to
Great Britain; in 1888, 37,000,000 bushels. These were mainly
Baldwin, Yellow Newton and Bellflower. The first mention of
York Imperial as an export variety was in 1878.

THOMAS MEEHAN

Pennsylvania's contribution to the group of distinguished
horticulturists of the Transition Period was Thomas Meehan, of
Philadelphia. He stands out from his contemporaries as did
John Bartram, Bernhard M'Mahon and Richard Peters, also of
Philadelphia, in the Colonial Period. Meehan ranks with Hovey,
Downing, Thomas and Wilder in his contribution to American
pomology, more especially in the application of the science of
botany to fruit growing. He was recognized as the leading
vegetable biologist of his day.

Thomas Meehan was an English gardener, a graduate of the
apprentice system at Kew Gardens. He came to America in
1848, at the age of twenty-two. For five years he was Superin-
tendent of Bartram 's Garden, and private gardener to several

— 51 —

THOMAS MEEHAN, of Philadelphia

Editor of Gardener's Monthly for thirty years. He made many contributions to Amer-
icnn pomology, especially in the application of the science of botany to fruit grounng.

-- 50 —

'>^

canning factories in every county in all of our large peach grow-
ing districts. If it were not for them, to relieve our markets of
surplus fruits, we fear fruit culture would be a very unsatisfac-
tory occupation.'' The commercial sun-drying and evaporation
of fruits has developed since 1872, mainly on the Pacific coast;
they were the salvation of the California deciduous fruit industry
of that period.

By the close of this period, in 1887, there had been but little
improvement in marketing methods. There were no standard
grades, no standard packages, and no cooperative marketing.
Barrels, baskets and boxes were of all sizes and shapes. The
ethical and business standards of growers in grading and packing
were none too high; the ' 'stove-piping" of barrelled apples was
not uncommon. Growers all too frequently were fleeced by
middlemen; there was no market news service.

THOMAS MEEHAN

— 51 —

wealthy patrons of horticulture near Philadelphia. In 1853, he
established Meehan's Nurseries. He was the sole editor of
Gardener's Monthly, published at Philadelphia, during its exist-
ence of thirty years, fVom 1859 to 1889. This magazine had an
influence on American horticulture not surpassed by any other
publication, not even Hovey's Magazine of Horticulture. There
were no Experiment Station bulletins then, and but few books;
the horticultural periodical was the chief source of information,
and the editor spoke with authority. ,, ^ , ^, ^^,

Gardener's Monthly was exceptionally free from the personal
bias and petty controversies that marred the pages of contempo-
rary magazines. Meehan also differed from many editors in that
he never used his journal to further his nursery interests He
helped to organize the State Horticultural Association of Penn-
sylvania in 1859, and participated in every annual meeting for

^^wLrthe Transition Period closed, in 1887, fruit growers were
submerged in gloom. In that year, the Committee on Orchard-
ing of the State Horticultural Association of Pennsylvania
reported: "Fruit growing in Pennsylvania is not a profitable
business", and there was no dissent to this from the floor of the
Convention. Many orchards were abandoned or cut down. But
there were better days ahead.

— 62 —

STATE HORTICULTURAL ASSOCIATION

OF PENNSYLVANIA

MEMBERSHIP LIST— 1931

Name

Abbey, J. H.

Abildgaard, Wm.

Abraczinskas, Andrew

Abrams, I. B.

Acme Veneer Pkg. Co.

Adam, J. N.

Adams, C. S.

Adams, J. F.

Adams, W. S.

Adams County Fruit Packing

and Dist. Co.
Adler, A. and Son

Allen, S. W.
Allen, S. L. Co.

Allen, Howard G.

American Lime and Stone Co.

Anderson, Ralph

Anderson, H. M.

Anderson, H. W.

Anderson, C. R.

Ansbacher Siegel Corp.

Anwyll, Harry L.

Atkinson, D. W.

Atkinson, R. E.

Aument, Andrew

Baldesberger, W. P.

Balmer, Clayton

Balthaser, G. W.

Banzhaf, W. H.

Barnard, C. P.

Barnes Hursery & Orchard Co

Barr, I. C.

Bart ram, Frank M.

Bartram, G. Maurice

Baugher, G. L.

Baugher, H. G.

Baumgartel, Wm. E.

Beach, F. H.
Bean, John Mfg. Co.
Bear, JacoV)
Bear, John W.
Bear, Arthur
Bear, Paul A.
Beatty, J. E.
Beaver, James B.
Beaverbrook Farm
Beaverson, E. S.
Beck, John A.
Beck, A. F.
Beeman, S. C.
Behrens, H. A.
Bender, Iv. J.

Post Office

North Girard

John Bean Co., Lansing, Mich.

Catawissa

Beach Haven

Orchard Park, N. Y.

West Chester

Easterly

Dover, Delaware

Aspers

Biglerville

Front & Richmond St.,

Philadelphia
Ottsville
5th & Glenwood Sts..

Philadelphia
New Park
Bellefonte
Fawn Grove
New Park
Stewartstown

920 Shore Ave., Pittsburgh
50 Union Square, New York City
Harrisburg
Wrightstown
Wrightstown
Safe Harbor, R. 2
Bridgeville, R. 2
Manheim, R. 1
Wemersville
Muncy

Kennett Square
Wallingford, Conn.
Greencastle, R. 2
Kennett Square
West Chester
Aspers
Aspers
Fairacis Farm,

Sewicklev Hgts.
Columbus, Ohio
Lansing, Mich.
York, R. 10
York, R. 10
York, R. 10
Mt. Wolf, R. 4
North Girard
Mifflinburg
Brandywine Summit
York, R. 5
White Deer, R. 1
Perkasie, R. 1

Dundee Farm, Sewicklev Hgts.
120 Samboume St., Wilkes-Barre
Allen town, R. 4

County

Erie

Columbia
Luzerne

Chester
Berks

Adams

Philadelphia
Bucks

Philadelphia
York
Centre
York
York
York
Allegheny

Dauphin

Bucks

Lancaster

Allegheny

Lancaster

Berks

I^ycoming

Chester

Franklin

Chester

Adams

Allegheny

York

Erie

Union

Chester

York

Union

Bucks

Allegheny

Luzerne

Lehigh

Name

Benn, Robert P.
Benner, Hartford G.
Bell, R. H.
Bickley, Mrs. Mae E.
Billmeyer, H. W.
Bingham, A. H.
Bingham, W. O.
Bishop, Wm.
Black, H. M.
Black, M. C.
Blaine, G. W.
Blessing, David H.
Boak, Everett
Boles, McClellan T.
Boltz, Peter R.
Bonear, Chester
Bonham, Boyd, Jr.
Borry, E. E.

Bountiful Ridge Nurseries
Bovard & Baldwin

Boyd, Paul C.
Boyer, Jay
Boyer, John F.
Boyer, W. W.
Boyer, J. M.
Brace, Harold G.
Bream, D. M.
Breidenbaugh, H. L.
Brenneman, John S.
Bricker, E. B.
Brinton, R. F.
Brinton, H. C.
Broomell, J. Howard
Brossman, Morse
Brown, H. W.
Brown, J. Turner
Brown, Bert C.
Brown, M. G.
Brown, Norman C.
Brown, S. A.
Brown, J. E.
Brubaker, J. C.
Bruce, R. C., Jr.

Bruckhart & Son, J. W.
Bruner, W. W.
Bucher, F. S.
Buck, Warren W.
Bullock, W. H.
Bupp, Jere
Burk, Paul H.
Burkett, Peter B.
Carpenter, G. S. L.
Carroll, Frank B.
Carter, E. C, Jr.
Carter, Jj. A.
Carter, George
Catherwood, James C.
Cation, W. R.
Central Chemical Co.
Chapin, Irvin
Chase Bros. Co.

Post Office County

Bangor ^^'^^Tlth

Coopersburg ^ .^ ^^^^^^

Bureau of Plant Industry, Harrisburg

Quakertown, R. 5

Quakertown, R. 2

St. Thomas

Doylestown

Idamar, R. D.

Allison Park

North East

4 N. Court St., Harrisburg

New Castle, R. 4

Hanlin Station

Lebanon

Honesdale

Hunlocks Creek, R. 2

Stevens, R. 2.

Princess Ann, Md.

655 E. Washington St.,

New Castle
Delta

Mt. Pleasant Mills
Middleburg, R. 4
Bilgerville
Lykens
Dallas, R. 3
Chambersburg
Boyertown
Lancaster, R. 7
Lititz

West Chester
Hanover
Bridgeport
Ephrata, R. 4
Box 756, AUentown
New Park

Marion Center, R. 3
Woodbine, Md.
Wavnesboro, R. D.
Orefield, R. 1
McDonald
Lititz, R. 1
Superba Laboratory, 910

Michigan Blvd., Chicago, 111.
Lititz

Middleburg, R. 4
Lancaster, 642 Woolworth Bldg.
Elizabeth
Honesdale

York, R. 2 ^ ^^ ^

Buttonwood Farm, Beverly, N.J.
Fogelsville
Hancock, Md.
Neshaminy
Allison Park
Treesdale Farms, Mars
Emaus

Gibsonia, R. 3
Orrtanna
Hagerstown, Md.
Shickshinny, R. 3
Rochester, N. Y.

Bucks

Lehigh

Franklin

Bucks

Indiana

Allegheny

Erie

Dauphin

Lawrence

Washington

Lebanon

Wayne

liuzerne

Lancaster

Lawrence
York
Snyder
Snyder
Adams
Dauphin
Luzerne
Franklin
Berks
Lancaster
Lancaster
Chester
York
Montgomery
Lancaster
Lehigh
York
Indiana

Franklin

Lehigh

Washington

Lancaster

Snyder

liancaster

Allegheny

Wayne

York

Lehigh

Bucks
Allegheny
AUeghenv

Lehigh
Allegheny

Adams

Luzerne

Name

Chase, Chas. T.

Clair, H. A.

Clark, B. M.

Close, E. V.

Coates, W. B.

Coffroad, L. C.

Garber, H. F.

Consolidated Paper Co.

Cooper, C. A.

Cope, F. A., Jr.

Couch, H. R.

Cowan, W. H.

Cornwall Farms and Orchards

Cox, J. W.

Craig, Albert B.

Craighead, E. M.

Crawford, J. B.

Crawford, Thos. H.

Creasy, C. W.

Creasy, Luther P.

Creighton, Mrs. T. S.

Cressman, C. K.

Crissman, W. R.

Crist, James D.

Criswell, R. T.

Croft, F. W.

Cromley, P. S.

Crouse, E. A.

Crowell, Samuel B.

Crowell, A. & T.

Crowell, Ralph T.

Cummings, J. F.

Cummings, J. W.

Curtis, Ellicott D.

Daniels, Arthur

Davenport, Eugene

Dayton, R. S.

Dean, Rev. J. W.
DeCou, Benj. S.
DeLong, Cletus Y.
Dennis, A. J.
Detweiler, Ira K.
Dickenshied, F. S.
Dickey, Samuel
Dickinson, B.^ M.
Diehl, Ed. B.
Dietz, H. J.
Dill, Robt.
Diven, W. C.
Dochat, C. J.
Druck, Albert
Drumheller, J. R.
Duke, D. R. & B. F.
Duncan, Miss Eleanor C.
Dunlap, James M.
Dunlap, R. Bruce
Dye, H. W.
Eby, Henry R.

Eckman, I. W.

The Edgerton Mfg. Co.

Edgerton, J. Russell

Post Office

County

Bala

610 Walnut St., Perkasie

Indiana

Lawrenceville

Gum Tree

New Holland, R. 2

Mt. Joy, R. 3

Monroe, Mich.

1000 Highland Ave., Coraopolis Allegheny

Montgomery

Bucks

Indiana

Tioga

Chester

Lancaster

Dimock

Shelocta, R. 3

Roaring Spring, R. 2

Cornwall

New Castle, R. 5

Sewickley

2742 N. 2nd St., Harrisburg

Fayetteville, R. 1

Fayetteville

Catawissa, R. 1

Blue Ridge Summit

Barto, R. D.

Indiana

Walden, N. Y.

12 N. 2nd St., Chambersburg

St. Thomas

Danville, R. 6

Gettysburg

Edgemont

Avondale

Buckingham

Sunbury

New Wilmington

Bantam, Conn.

Lake Ariel, R. 3

Plymouth

Woodbourne Orchards,

Dimock
Adrian

Norristown, R. 1
Mertztown, R. 2
Zionsville, R. 1
36 N. 8th St., Lebanon
Zionsville, R. 1
Oxford

5634 Station Ave., Pittsburgh
St. Thomas
Penn Square
North East
Livermore, R. 2
Lancaster, R. 2
Wrightsville, R. 2
Boyertown, R. 1
60 W. Queen St., Chambersburg
323 E. King St., Shippensburg
Shippensburg, R. 2
Dept. of Welfare, Harrisburg
Middleport, N. Y.
Room 2, Court House,
Pittsburgh

Susquehanna

Indiana

Blair

Lebanon

Lawrence

Allegheny

Dauphin

Franklin

Columbia

Franklin

Berks

Indiana

Franklin

Montour

Adams

Delaware

Chester

Bucks

Northumberland

Lawrence

Wayne
Luzerne

Susquehanna

Armstrong

Montgomery

Berks

Lehigh

Lebanon

Lehigh

Chester

Allegheny

Franklin

Lancaster

Erie

Indiana

Lancaster

York

Berks

Franklin

Cumberland

Dauphin

Sunbury, R. 2
Plymouth, Ind.
Westtown

Allegheny

Northumberland
Chester

Name

Edminson, William
Eisaman, G. A.
Elbell, Geo. H.
Elder, George K.
Eldon, Robert M.
Eagleman, J. G.
Ebling, Aaron
Englemen, E. Y.
Evans, Roland

Evans Brothers

Evans, W. H.
Everhart, W. J.
Everhart, G. W.
Fagan, F. N.
Fans, David C.
Farley, A. J.
Fassett, F. H.
Fawcett, K. I
Feeg, A. C.
Felty, G. O. B.
Fenstermacher, P. S.
Ferrall, Geo. K.
Fetterman, J. Gordon
Field Force Pump Co.
Filbert, R. J.
Fisher, Isaac L.
Fisher, Fred
Flack, M. Raymond
Fletcher, S. W.
Flinchbaugh, H. H.
Flora, Wm. H.
Forbes, R. M.
Forry, S. E.

Foster, C. W.

Francis, CD.

Frantz, Ira

Freed, A. J.

Freed, W. A.

Fretz, J. Franklin

Frey, Harry E.

Frey, C. H.

Frey, John L.

Friday, G. P. & Son

Friend Mfg. Co.

Funk, Sheldon

Gackenbach, C. A.

Gardenhour, G. W.

Ciarmau, Albert S.

(larrahau, R. II.

Gay, Arthur

(lehman & RoseubergcT

Gehr, Harvey .1.

(iousl, Edw. A.

(iibbon, Ira K.

(iibsou, W. F.

GiUan, C. F.

Gillan, G. C.
Gillau, R. J.
Glebe, Wm.
Glick, Jacob R.

Post office

New Wilmington

East Springfield

Rossiter, R. 1

Lewistown, Maine

Aspers

Geigers Mills

Reading, R. 2

Noxen

Longwood Farms, Kennett

Square
Meadow Craft Farm,

Glen Mills
Plainsville

219 E. Philadelphia St., York
S. George St., York
State College
York, R. 9

New Brunswick, N. J.
Meshoppen
Lafayette, Indiana
Robeson a, R. 1
Millersville
Allentown, R. 3
401 Barr Ave., Grafton

Media

Elmira, N. Y.

Fox Chase

Soudersburg

W'ernersville

West Chester, R. 5

State College

Loganville

Wrightsville

Erie, R. 1

Ephrata, R. 1

Girard, R. 2

225 N. 17th St., Allentown

Dallas, R. 3

Racine

Ottsville, R. D. 1

York, R. 6

North Girard

c-o C. K. Whitner Co., Rcadmg

New Castle, R. 1

Gasport, N. Y.

Boyertowu

Orefield, R. I

Smithsburg, Md.

North Charles St., Manheim

Kingston

Dallas, R. 3

Soudertou

Waynesboro
, Zion Hill

Hlairsville, R. 1

Voe

St. Thuma

St. Thomas
St. Thomas
Delaware Water Gap
Lancaster, R. 5

County

Lawrence

Erie

Indiana

Adams

Berks

Wyoming

Chester

Delaware

Luzerne

York

Centre

York

Wyoming

Berks

Lancaster

Lehigh

Allegheny

Delaware

Philadelphia

Lancaster

Berks

Chester

Centre

York

Erie

Lancaster

Erie

Lehigh

Luzerne

Beaver

Bucks

York

Erie

Berks

Lawrence

Berks
Lehigh

Lancaster

Luzernt^

Luzerne

Bucks

l'>aukliii

Bucks

IndiauM

York

rranklin

Franklin

Monroe

Lancaster

If,

Name

Good, James, Inc.

Good, Harvey
Goodling, G. A.
Goshorn, Taylor L.
Gould, C. H.
Gramm, H. V.
Graybill, C. W.
Graybill, N. Charles
Greenwalt, Edgar
Greger, E. N.

Greist, C. A.
Griest, Frederick E.
Grimshaw, Harry
Gross, H. S.
Group, Foster C.
Grove, W. E.
Grubbs, E. B.
Gutelius, Ray D.
Guyton, T. L.
Haag, Arthur M.
Haas, W^illiam
Haase, Herman
Haase, Alfred H.
Hacker, A. L.
Haddock, John C.
Hafer, Ray
Haines, Granville E.
Halderman, E. N.
Hall, L. C.
Hann, Jesse
Harbison, C. F.
Hardt, C. W.
Hart, H. V. Co.
Hartzell, Floyd R.
Harshman, John W.
Hartman, Scott W.
Hartman, D. L.
Hartman, L. E.
Hassinger, H. C.
Haudenshield, Chas. H.
Haudenshield, Crist L.
Hausman, George B.
Haverstick, Paul E.
Hawkins, E. B.
Hawkins, Chas. A.
Hayes, S. B.
Hayman, Guy L.
Hays, H. S.
Heacock, O. J.
Head, J. B.
Heinz, Henry
Heisey, S. A.
Helwig, D. B.
Herr, C. H.
Herrick, R. S.
Hershey, H. S.
Hershey, Paul M.
Hershey, C. Maurice
Hershey, H. F.
Hersh, H. H.
Hess, Paul G.

Post Office

County

2111 E. Susquehanna Ave.,

Philadelphia
Lancaster, K. 8
Loganville
Qmncy

Haydenville, Mass.
St. Thomas, R. 1
Middleburg, R. 4
New Windsor, Md.
Lenhartsville, R. 1
324 N. Glenside Ave.,

Glenside
Guernsey
Flora Dale
North Girard
York, R. 10
Gardners
York Springs
Fair iew
Mifflinburg
Bureau of Plant Industry, Harrisburg
1230 Robeson St., Reading
Overlook Orchards, Coplay
Narrowsburg, R. 1, N. Y.
Narrowsburg, N. Y.
451 Hamilton St., Allentown
Wilkes-Barre
Fayetteville, R. 1
Mt. Holly, N. J.
Doylestown
North Girard
Hunlocks Creek
New Castle, R.
245 N. 2nd St., Harrisburg
Hagerstown, Md.
Sharpsburg
Smithsburg, Md. R. 1
Palm

Little River, Fla.
Cly

Beavertown

Noblestown Road, Crafton
Mt. Oliver, Pittsburgh, R. 6
Coopersburg, R. 2
642 Wool worth Bldg., Lancaster
Delta
Delta

Enon Valley, R. 1
Northbrook
York, R. 2
Biglerville

114 E. Market St., York
Narrowsburg, N. Y.
Greencastle, R. 4
Catawissa, R. 1
Lancaster, R. 2
Des Moines, Iowa
East Petersburg
Ronks, R. 2
Paradise, R. 1
Hamburg
Steinsburg
Mt. Alto, R. 1

Lancaster

York

Franklin

Franklin
Snyder

Berks

Montgomery

Adams

Erie

York

Adams

Erie

Union

Berks
Lehigh

Lehigh
Luzerne
Franklin

Bucks

Erie

Luzerne

Lawrence

Allegheny

Berks

York

Snyder

Allegheny

Lehigh

Lancaster

York

Lawrence

Chester

York

Adams

York

Franklin
Columbia
Lancaster

Lancaster

Berks

Burks

Franklin

Hess, Ray B.
Hess, Elmer E.
Hess, Willis A.
Hetrick, D. W.
Hile, Anthony
Hileman, W. Carl
Hill, William D.
Hines, Zenas
Hoffman, H. A.
Hoffman, Frank G.
Hoffman, H. L.
Hoffman, R. C.
Hoff master, J. G.
Holt, Herbert
Hood, T. C.
Hoopes, Wilmer W.
Hootman, H. D.
Horn, W. H.
Home, Davi
Horner, J. M.
Horst, J. Morris
Hostetler, Abram
Hostetter, Dr. J. E.
Hostetter, H. Herman
Howard, P. H.
Howe, Homer B.
Huber, Edwin B.
Huey, S. R.

Hunsberger, Howard K.
Hunt, M. H. & Son
Hunt, N. M.
Hunter, James
Hutchinson, J. D.
Hutchinson, T. G.
Huyett, Irwin B.
Hydrauhc Press Mfg. Co.
Hykes, E. S.

Ingham, M. M.

Irey, Allen M.

James, D. M.

Janes, G. T.

Jayne, Allen

Jefferson, Thomas H.

Johnston, Mrs. F. C.

Johnston, M. E.

Johnston, R. S.

Johnston, J. H.

Kaiser, Frank A.

Karns, J. H.

Kauffman, A. L.

Kauffman, C. E.

Kauffman, J. B.

Keller, L. F.

Keller, Paul J.

Kelly Bros. Nurseries

Kelso, James

Kcmery, C. H.

Kendig, Dr. J. D.

Kerchner, Harvey T.

Kerr, F. P.

Kerr, S. W.

Kessler, Geo. W.

Ketner, Jacob B.

Post Office

Mt. Alto, R. 1

Conestoga, R. 1

Winchester, Va.

Beavertown

Curwensville

New Castle, R. 3

North East

Clymer, R. 2

Bridgeville, R. 2

Birdsboro, R. 2

Butler, Star Route

Arendtsville

Muddy Creek Forks

Coopersburg, R. 2

Saltsburg, R. 1

West Chester

East Lansing, Mich.

Chambersburg, R. 10

York, R. 3

250 Conway St., Carlisle

Lebanon, R. 3

Johnstown, R. 3

Gap, R. 1

Lebanon, R. 5

Dover, R. 1

Benton

232 S. Main St., Chambersburg

New Castle, R. 3

Perkasie

510 N. Cedar St., Lansing, Mich

New Castle, R. 4

Wexford

Rear 84 Scott St., Wilkes-Barre

New Wilmington

Reading, R. 2

Mt. Gilead, Ohio

York, R. 10

New Castle, R. 5

Boyertown

Bureau of Markets, Harrisburg

North Girard

West Auburn

Wycombe

Dallas

Connoquenessing

New Wilmington, R. 1

1031 Capouse St., Scranton

Chambersburg

Ronks, R. 1

124 S. Hartley St., York

York, R. 7

Selinsgrove

Gettysburg, R. 5

Dansville, N. Y.

Enon Valley

West Chester

Salunga

Lenhartsvillc

233 Kelly Ave., Wilkinsburg

Jacksonwald

Tyrone

Wernersville

County

Franklin
Lancaster

Snyder

Clearfield

1 iawrence

Erie

Indiana

Allegheny

Berks

Butler

Adams

York

Lehigh

Indiana

Chester

Franklin

York

Cumberland

Lebanon

Cambria

Lancaster

Lebanon

York

Columbia

Franklin

Lawrence

Bucks

Lawrence

Allegheny

Luzerne

Lawrence

Berks

York

Lawrence

Berks

Erie

Susquehanna

Bucks

Luzerne

Butler

Lawrence

Lackawanna

Franklin

Lancaster

York

Snyder

Adams

Lawrence

Chester

Lancaster

Berks

Allegheny

Berks

Blair

Berks

Name

Key, Wm. H.

Kibbler, C. P.

King, M. G.

King, Howard

Kintner, G. H.

Kister, U. G.

Kistler, H. C.

Kleppinger, B. M.

Klugh, H. E.

Knappenberger, Thomas

Koch, C. H.

Koehler, Paulus E.

Koozer, Harry

Koppers Co., Labs.

Kraus, J. W.

Kraybill, S. S.

Kreidweis, John

Kuhns, Oscar H.

Kuhns, Victor

Kunkel, Geo. E.

Kyle, Wm. B.

Landis, H. D.

Landis, D. M.

Lau, Rev. I. M.

Lau, L. E.

Lau, L. B.

Laub, H. H,, Jr.

Laudenslager, John

I^audenslager, Martin

Lehman, G. E.

Lehman, Sylvester

Leibhart, Samuel

Lemmon, D. R.

Lengle, Paul H.

Leonard, F. E.

Lepole, Walter

Lewis, S. V.

Lewis, L. A.

Lewis, Nelson

Lewis, L. N.

Linde, J. Eric

Linville, Arthur S.

Livingood, W. W.

Long, D. Edward

Long, Clayton

Longenecker. Howard G.

Loop, H. S.

Loop, A. I.

Loose, H. H.

Lord, John

Luginbuhl, R.

McClelland, J. B.

McCormick, C. M.

McCormick, James

McDonald, R. C.

McFarland, J. Horace

McGcor^e, Mrs. Katherinc

McGinnis, C. R.

McGowan, Howard

McHenry, Clarence

Mcllvaine, J. S.

McKee, T. C.

McKee, J. M.

Post Office

Verona, R. 1

572 W. Market St., York

Mt. Wolf, R. 1

New Castle, R. 7

Mehoopany

Etters

Lenhartsvillc, R. 1

Coopersburg, R. 2

Harrisburg

Zionsville

McKeansburg

826 Washington Ave., Monaca

Indiana

Koppers Bldg., Pittsburgh

Barnesville

Mt. Joy
Bridgeville

Allen town, R. 3

Allentown, R. 2

Orwigsburg

Zionsville

Girard

Lancaster, R. 7

715 Manor St., York

East Berlin, R. 2

77 Chestnut St., Lewistown

Orefield, R. 1

Wrightsville, R. 2

York, R. 9

Wrightsville, R. 1

North Girard

Pine Grove

Carlisle, R. 1

Akron

Wyoming, R. 1

Wyoming, R. 3

Pittston, R. 1

County

Allegheny
York
York
Lawrence
Wyoming
York
Berks
Lehigh
Dauphin
Lehigh
Schuylkill
Beaver
Indiana
Allegheny
Schuylkill
L ncaster
Allegheny
Lehigh
Lawrence
Schuylkill
Lehigh
Erie
Lancaster
York
York
York
Mifflin
Lehigh
Lehigh
York
York
York
Erie
Schuylkill
Cumberland
Lancaster
Luzerne
Luzerne
Luzerne

210 Summit Ave., Ligonier Westmoreland

Orefield, R. 1 Lehigh

Media, R. 2 Delaware

Robesonia ^?^,^^

Fayetteville Franklm
Corvallis, Oregon

Mt. Joy
North East
North East
Menges Mills
Wyoming, R.

Lancaster

Erie

York

Luzerne

3 Nassau Blvd., Lynbrook, Long Island

Canonsburg

New Castle, R. 2

Harrisburg

Inwood, W. Va.

Harrisburg

Orrtanna

Reading, 523 Oley Street

Gei^ers Mills

Indiana

Fayetteville

East Springfield

Harrisburg

Washington
Lawrence
Dauphin

Dauphin

Adams

Berks

Indiana

Franklin

Erie

Dauphin

Name

MacNeal, William H.
McPherson Brothers
McPherson, Roy P.
Maderia, A. B.
Maflfet, Miss M. A.
Maloney Brothers Nursery
Marble, L. M.
Markey, Elmer J.
Marsh, H. V.
Martin, A. C.
Martin, J. O.
Marvil Package Co.
Mattern, Jos. C.
Mattes, Paul
Matthews, W. H.
Maule, Norman C.
Maurer, J. Edward
Mayer, Jj. E.
Mayer, Guy S.
Mechling, E. A.
Meeder, J. V.
Meehan, S. Mendelsohn

Melcher, George W.
Merkel, Floyd
Messmer Brass Co.
Mesta Brothers
Meyer, AUen
Meyer Milling Co.
Miles, H. C. C.
Mill, Erwin
Miller, Edward W.
Miller, C. Clayton
Miller, Frank M.
Miller, Carroll P.
Miller, L. P.
Miller, H. W.
Miller, C. M.
Miller, Amos
Miller, H rvey
Miller, Jos. C.
Miller, W. C.
Minnich, C. S.
Mitchell, E. B.
Mitterling, John T.
Mohr, Frank J.
Mohring, F. G.
Monosmith, S. B.
Montz, Wm.
Moon, Henry T.
Moore, M. A.
''Contributing Member"
Morgan, J. C.
Morhman, Dick
Morse, Carl

Mt. Breeze Orchard Co.
Moyer, B. J.
Moyer, Levi S.
Murry, Edward A.
Musselman, L Z.
Musser, H. W.
Musser, W. E.
Myers, F. F. & Bro.

Post Office

County

Parkesburg

Chester

Bridgeton

York

LeRoy, New York

Sinking Springs

Berks

264 Franklin St., Wilkes-Barre

Luzerne

Dansville, N. Y.

Canton

Bradford

York, R. 2

York

Seven Valleys, R. 2

York

Muddy Creek Forks

York

Mercersburg

Franklin

Laurel, Delaware

310 Newry St., Hollidaysburg

Blair

Emaus, R. 1

Lehigh

Box 313, Salem, Ohio

Willow Street, R. 1

Lancaster

Kratzerville

Snyder

Boyertown
Willow Street

Berke

Lancaster

Moorestown, N. J.

North Girard

Erie

380 Dorset St.,

Germantown

Philadelphia

Bally

Berks

Hamburg

Berks

2700-2706 S. 7th Blvd., St. Louis, Mo.

Finleyville, R. 1

Washington

Annville

Lebanon

Annville

Lebanon

Milford, Conn.

Ottsville

Bucks

Romney, W. Va.

Marion

Franklin

42 Main St., Waynesboro

Franklin

Martinsburg, W. Va.

Paw Paw, W. Va.

Newville

Cumberland

Hanover, R.

York

Loganville

York

Safe Harbor, R. 1

Lancaster

Catawissa, R. 1

Columbia

Leesport, R. 1

Berks

Harrisburg, R. 3

Dauphin

Mt. Pleasant Mills

Snyder

Fogelsville

Lehigh

North Girard

Erie

Weisel

Bucks

Coplay, R. 1

Lehigh
Bucks

Morrisville

Lititz

Lancaster

c-o M. A. Moore, Lititz

Lancaster

Girard

Erie

Narrowsburg, N. Y.

New Wilmington

Lawrence

Fayetteville, R. 1

Franklin

Middleburg
Blooming Glen

Snyder

Bucks

Punxsutawney, R. D.

Indiana

Orrtanna

Adams

Lititz, R. 5

Lancaster

New Bethlehem, R. 3

Clarion

Ashland, Ohio

Name

Myers, H. L.

Myers, Paul M.

Myers, Levi M.

Nash, Duane H.

Neiman, Otto

Nelson, C. D.

Newell, Henrietta B.

Newman, H. W.

Newcomer, Aaron

Newton, E. M.

Niagara Sprayer & Chemical

Company
Nibert, Wm.
Nichols, Oliver T.
Nicodemus, Ed.
Niering, Theo.
Nissley, D. H.

Nolt, Harrison S.
Norton, Carlos E.
Northup, H. J.
Northrup, A. M.
Noss, J. A.
O'Conner, Haldeman
Omwake Brothers
Oswald, Francis E.
Page, CM.
Palmer, Alex S.
Panovec. Victor
Parker, Capt. H. B.
Parks, Milson
Pannebaker, Wm. M.
Paschal, John
Passmore, Norman S.
Passmore, S. S.
Paxson, Edw. M.
Paxson, Samuel L.
Peifer, Walter
Pennock, Geo. S.
Perrigo, A. H.
Pherson, J. L.
Philip. George

Poff, Curvin
Poor, D. Vi.
Powers, R. A.

Pratt, B. G.
Rahauser Brothers

Raine, J. Tom
Rankin, Charles C.

Ray, Edgar S.
Redinger, Austin H.
Ret»d, Merton
Reichard, Chas. W.
Reid, Vernon & Sons
Heilly, R. G.
Keinhold, E. C
Heist, Allen E.
Heist, Henry G.
Reiter, F. G.
Rhine, H. L.
Rhodes, Chesley

Post Office

Dover, R. 2

Lancaster, R. 8

Siddonsburg

336 Hickory Lane, Haddonfaeld, N.

Dover, R. 3

1211 Scotland Ave., Chambersburg

Langhorne, R. D.

New Castle, R. 4

Smithsbut^, Md.

New Wilmmgton, R. 1

Middleport, N. Y.
Indiana, R. D.
Downingtown
Waynesboro
Wapwallopen, R. D.
142 E. Chestnut St.,

Lancaster
Columbia, R. 1
Sewickley, Box 160
Dalton
Wilkes-Barre
New Castle, R. 3
13 N. Front St., Harrisburg
Cireencastle
Orefield
Etters

Berwick, Nova Scotia
Easton, R. D.
State House, Boston, Mass.
Canonsburg, R. 3
Virgilina, Va.
Kennett Square
Glen Mills, R. 1
Mendenhall
Lumberville, R. D.
Lumberville
St. Thomas, R. 1
165 W. Essex Ave., Landsdowne
West Chester

Volant , , ^_.„

1700 McFarland Road, South Hills

County

York

Lancaster

York

Franklin

Bucks

Lawrence

Indiana

Chester

Franklin

I^uzerne

Lancaster

Allegheny

liUzerne

I^uzerne

Lawrence

Dauphin

Franklin

Lehigh

York

Northampton

Washington

Chester

Delaware

Bucks

Franklin

Delaware

Chester

Lawrence

Allegheny
York

Pittsburgh

York, R. 5

Narrowsburg, N. "i .

Glenshaw, R. 1 ^^ , ^.

50 Church St., New \ ork City

Greencastle

Fairview

The Kenilworth, Alden Park

Germantown
West Chester
Oley, R. 2

McKeau
Waynesboro

McKeaii

North. Girard

Elizabeth, R. I

Palmyra, R. 2

1 166 Avon Hd., Schenectady, N. 1 .

Mars Allegheny

McClure ^ ^, Snyde,^

Elysburg Northumberland

Allegheny

Franklin
Erie

Philadelphia

Chester

Berks

Erie

Franklin

Eri(^

Erie

Allegheny

Lebanon

Name

Post Office

County

Rice, Daniel

New Bloomfield

Perry

Richardson, W. T.

Whiteford, Md.

Rick, John

c/o C. K. Whitner Co., Reading Berks

Rick, Charles M.

431 Windsor St., Reading

Berks

Ridgway, H. W.

Ambler

Montgomery

Rilling, Harvey

North Girard

Erie

Rinn, D. F.

Indiana

Rittenhouse, J. S.

Lorane

Berks

Rittenhouse, S. B.

Lorane

Berks

Ritter, Henry A.

Coopersburg

Lehigh

Ritter, Elias

Selinsgrove

Snyder

Ritter, Astor

AUentown, R. 3

Lehigh

Rinehart, E. S,

Mercersburg

Franklin

Roberts, J. Earle

220 Dock St., Philadelphia

Philadelphia

Roberts, Arthur

McKnightstown, R. 1

Adams

Roberts, Preston T.

Prospect Hill Fruit Farm, Moorestown, N. J.

Roberts, A. J.

Moorestown, N. J.

Roberts, Byron

Moorestown, N. J.

Roberts, Emmor

Moorestown, N. J.

Roberts, Horace

Moorestown, N. J.

Rhode, W. C.

Pikesville, Md.

Rhode, William

Johnstown

Cambria

Rohlfing, F. F.

Hummelstown

Dauphin

Rohrer, Geo. H.

DryArille

Berks

Root, J. W.

Manheim, R. 1

Lancaster

Roth, Edwin

Orefield

Lehigh

Royer, John

Akron

Lancaster

Rozelle, H. E.

Pittston, R. 1

Luzerne

Ruef, J. U.

State College

Centre

Ruhl, Dr. H. F.

Manheim

Lancaster

Rumsey, Wm. A.

Conneaut, Ohio

Rumsey, William H.

East Springfield

Erie

Runk, J. A.

Huntingdon

Rutt, Amos S.

Lancaster, R. 7

Lancaster

Rutter, Walter W.

New Holland, R. 2

Lancaster

Sadler, C. H.

214 Beaver Road, Emsworth

Allegheny

Salsgiver, Andrew

Indiana, R. 7

Indiana

Santord, Don

Dow Chemical Co., Midland.

Mich.

Sanville, F.

West town, Box 25

Chester

Satterthwaite, Lewis P.

Newton

Bucks

Satterthwaite, Frederick

Yardley

Bucks

Scarff's Nurseries

New Carlisle, Ohio

Schantz, Horace

1736 Hamilton St., AUentown

Lehigh

Schantz, H. A.

Lentz Bldg., AUentown

I^ehigh

Schantz, L. M.

Orefield, R. 1

Lehigh

Schieferstein, Wm.

Leesport

Berks

Schle^el, Edwin

Orefield, R. 1

Lehigh

Schmidt, Jos. G.

Hawley

Wayne

Schmidt, Morris

437 E. Allegheny Ave.,

Philadelphia

SchoU, Paul

Fogelsville

Lehigh

Schoonover, W. E.

Dallas, R. 3

Luzerne

Schreiber, Harry F.

Zionsville

Lehigh

Schuldt, J. Carlton

Elizabethtown

Lancaster

Seachman, Geo. E.

Red Lion, R. 1

York

Seaman, George

Honesdale

Wayne

Searle, Alonza T.

Honesdale

Wayne

Seifert, H.

Springtown

Berks

Settlemeyer, C. T.

Wilmore, R. D.

Cambria

Shaffer, Frank H.

Chmaber of Commerce Bldg.,

Pittsburgh

Allegheny

Shaffer, Charles N.

Perkasie

Bucks

Shaffer Brothers

Ariel

Wayne

Name

Shank, H. A.
Sharpe, Walter K.

Shattuck, J. H.
Shaw, R. C.
Sheadle, Misses
Shearer, E. R.
Shearer, Walter J.
Sheble, Earl
Shenk, D. W.
Shenot, Edward
Shenot, Henry
Shenot, C. P.
Sherman, Mrs. Francis
Shermeyer, Harry A.
Sherwin-Williams Co.
Sho waiter, A. R.
Shultz, Chester K.
Sidler, Anton
Siegfried, A. H.
Sierer, John
Sierer, Clark
Simmons, S. L.
Simpson, J. A.
Skinner, H. W.
Skinner, Sam M.
Slade, J. E.
Slaybaugh, Glen
Smedley, W. P.
Smedley, S. L., Jr.
Smedley, S. L., Sr.
Smith, A. Woodward
Smith, S. A.
Smith, J. R.
Smith, William
Smith, Lawrence
Smith, George K.
Smith, Philip S.
Smith, G. E.
Smith, I^eonard R.
Smith, Roland M.
Smith, James E.
Smith, Wm. M.
Snavely, Misses
Snavely, H. Meyer
Snavely, Ammon
Snavely, H. H.
Snyder, C. B.
Snyder, Fry and Rick
Snyder, Simon R.
Snyder, Elmer
Snyder, T. S.
Snyder, C. E.
Spangenberg, M. T.
Standard Chemical W rks
Stauffer, T. H.
Stauffer, Wallace
Stear, J. R.
Stein, Ge .E. & Son
Stein, Henry
Stephens, A. Woodward
Stitzer, G. E.
Stonebraker, H. W.

Post Office

Lancaster, R. 7
167 Lincoln Way East,
Chambersburg

Erie, R. 6

Stewartstown

Jersey Shore, R. 4

Saltsburg, R. 1

Vinemont

Hamburg

Lancaster, R. 7

Wexford

Sharpsburg

Wexford

Frazer

York, R. 5

Cleveland, Ohio

Reinhol iS, R. 1

Barto

York, R. 9

Selinsgrove

Mt. Pleasant Mills

Mt. Oliver, R. 6., Pittsburgh

Indiana, R. 5

Chambersburg

Shepherdstown, W. Va.

25 N. 14th St., AUentown

Gettysburg, R. 5

Media

Newtown Square

Blairsville, R. 1

Yoe

Indiana

Berwick, R. 2

Box 22 South River, N. J.

Akron

Laughlintown

Bethlehem, R. 4

Farm Bureau, Mt. Holly, N. J.

Marion Center, R. 2

Bethlehem, R. 4

Orefield, R. 1

Westmont Fruit Farm, Lebanon

Lebanon, 1505 Oak St.

Manheim, R. 1

Willow Street

Ephrata, R. 1

Reading, R.

Ephrata, R. 1

Masonic Homes, Elizabethtown

Brodbecks

Valley View

Hamlin

Reading

Lititz, R. 4

Quakertown, R. 2

Ligonier

Wrightsville, R.

Woodville

Mooresburg ^,.«,. ,

221 E. Chestnut St., Miflflmburg

Indiana, R. 7

County

Lancaster

Franklin

Erie

York

Lycoming

Indiana

Berks

Lancaster

Allegheny

Chester

York

Lancaster

Berks

York

Snyder

Allegheny

Indiana

Franklin

Lehigh

Adams
Delaware
Delaware
Delaware

Indiana
York

Indiana
Columbia

Lancaster

Westmoreland

Lehigh

Indiana
Lehigh
Lehigh
Lebanon
I^ebanon
Lancaster
Lancaster
Lancaster
Berks
Lancaster
Lancaster
York
Schuylkill
Wayne
Berks
Lancaster
Lehigh
Westmoreland
York
Allegheny
Montour
Union
Indiana

Name

Stoner, Bertha
Stover, Jacob E.
Strasbaugh, E. F.
Straub, W. D.
Strawser, A. A.
Strong, T. M.
Struble, Vern T.
Strype, Fred C.
Sudds, Richard H.
Sun Oil Compan
Swank, Luke H.
Swartz, D. H.
Swartz, Emma
Swartz, A. D.
Tarbert, D. F.
Taylor, Ralph S.
Thayer, Paul
Thomas, Charles L.
Thomas, John
Thomas, Edwin W.
Titus Nursery Co.
Tobacco By-Products Co.
Treichler, Raymond
Trexler, Harry C.
Trexler, T. A.

Turrell, Elmore

Tyler, W. D.

Tyson, Chester J.

Tyson, Edwin

Tyson, WilHam

Uncle Peter's Fruit Farm

Unger, D. H.

Urffer, Charles

Valentine, August

Vierheller, A. F.

Vogel, E. H.

Wagener, D. D. & Co.

Wagner, J. S.

Wagner, Charles

Wakefield, E. B.

Walborn, Geo. W.

Walker, F. W.

Walker, William

Walp, Charles F.

Walton, Robert .1.

Wandless, G. II.

Way, D. H.

Wayne County Farm Bureau

Weaver, C. F.'

Weaver, Abram

Weaver, Wm. S.

Webster, Joseph

Weigel, H. M.

Weicksel, Dr. Amelia

Weimer, E. A.

Weinberger, J. H.

Weinman, R. B.

Welshans, D. D.

Welshans, M. C.

Wenger, Benj. G.

Wernig, Charles M.

Wertsch, Edwin

Post Office

Hellam
York, R. 9
Orrtanna
Middleburg, R. 4
Mt. Pleasant Mills
Blairsville, R. 4

Athens ,. , ^.^

148 L fayette St., New \ork City

State Coll ge ^, ., ^ , , .
1608 Walnut St., Philadelphia

Johnstown

County

York

Adams

Snyder

Indiana

Bradford

Clymer, R. 1
Spring Grove
Spring Grove
Dallastown, R. I
West Chester, R. D.
Carlisle, R. 0
King of Prussia
Dauphin
King of Prussia
Waynesboro, Va.
Louisville, Ky.
Coplay
Allentown
126 Chestnut St.,

Sunbury
Noxen
Dante, Va.
Gardners
Flora Dale
Flora Dale
Mt. Carmel
Boyertown
Coopersburg, R. 2
Coopersburg, R. 2
College Park, Md.
Lancaster, R. 3
Easton

Black Lick, R. 1
McClure

Homer City, Star Route
Freeburg
Connoquenessing, R. 5

New Castle, R. 1

401 E. 3rd St., Berwick

Hummelstown

Wexford

Port Matilda

Honesdale

York, R. 9

Scalp Level

Macungie

West Grove

Harrisburg

Perkasie, R. D.

Lebanon

Zionsville

Koppers Bldg., Pittsburgh

Jersey Shore, R. 3

Ephrata, R. 3

York, R. 2

Stevens, R. 2

Centre

Philadelphia

Cambria

Indiana

York

Chester

Cumberland

Montgomery

York

Montgomery

Lehigh
Lehigh

Northumberland
Wyoming

Adams
Adams
Adams
Northumberland
Berks
Lehigh
Lehigh

Lancaster
Northumberland
Indiana
Snyder
Indiana
Snyder
Allegheny
Lawrence
Columbia
Dauphin
Allegheny
Centre
Wayne
York
Somerset
Lehigh
Chester
Dauphin
Bucks
Lebanon
Lehigh
Allegheny
Lycoming
Lycoming
Lancaster
York
Lancaster

Name

Wertz, D. Maurice
Wertz, George M.
Westrick, F. A.
Wheeler, C. B.
Whisler, Edgar
Whitcomb, Paul
White, F. Hayes
Widders, J. B.
Wiland, Carl
Williams, Luther
Williams, F. W.
Wills, F. A.
Wilson, Geo. E.
Wink, E. F.
Winter, L. M.
Wister, John C.

W^itherow, R. T.
Wohlin, Fred
Wolf, Frank L.
Wolfe, Charles
Wolff, F. B.
Wolgemuth, Abner
Woods, D. A.
Woodward, N. H.
Worley's Nursery
Worthington, H. R.
Wotring, Oscar A.
Yiengst, John
Yoder, Ira L.

Yohe, Jay W.

Yohe, Geo. S.

Young, R. C.

Young, June

Young, Miles

Young, J. Fred

Youngs, L. G.

Zeigler, John A.

Zeigler, Calvin E.

Zellers, E. B.

Ziesenheim, J. R.

Zook, I. F.

Zundel, G. li.

Post Office

Waynesboro

Johnstown

Patton, R. 2

H unlocks Creek, R. 2

Etters, R. 1

York, R. 4

liverpool, R. 1

Lancaster, R. 3

922 N. 2nd St., Harrisburg

Indiana, R. 1

Indiana, R. 4 , , , .

1523 N. 26th St., Philadelphia

Wilkinsburg, R. 1

Lenhartsville, R. 1

Hellam, R. 1

Clarkson & Wister Sts.,

Germantown, Philadelphia
Punxsutawney
Perrysville
North Girard
Aspers
Lima

Mt. Joy, R. 1
Alexandria
Mendenhall
York Springs
West (Jhester
Orefield
Lebanon, R. 5
Middleburg
Fayetteville
Spring Grove
Chambersburg, R. 1
Narrowsburg, N. Y.
Narrowsburg, N. Y.
Ellwood City, R. 1
North East
York, R. 11

529 W. Market St., York
Montgomery
North Girard
Curryville
State College

County

Franklin
Cambria
Cambria
I^uzerne
York
York
Perry
Lancaster
Dauphin
Indiana
Indiana
Philadelphia
Allegheny
Berks
York

Philadelphia
Jefferson
Allegheny
Erie
Adams
Delaware
Lancaster
Huntingdon
Delaware
Adams
Chester
Lehigh
Lebanon
Snyder
Franklin
York
Franklin

Lawrence

Erie

York

Lycoming

Erie

Blair

Centre

INDEX

PAGE
4

Officers and committees, 1932...

President's Address

Secretary's Report

Treasurer's Report

Insect Pest Committee Report

Cedar Rust Control— K. W. Lauer

Codling Moth Bands— H. N. Worthley

San Jose Scale Spray Materials-H. N. Worthley 22

Old Insect Control Ideas, New Setting-H. E. Hodgkiss

Spray Residue Removal Future in Pennsylvania-H. G. Ingerson 37

Roadside Marketing— C. J. Tyson.- *

Roadside Marketing— F. G. Reiter

Some Fruit Growers' Poblems— H. M. Anderson

My Orchard Experience— H. S. Nolt

Some Orchard Observations— G. L. Hayman

Our Stationary Spray Plant— J. H. Weinberger ^^

Careful Fruit Handling— G. W. Peck '

Moisture Problems in Orchards— R. D. Anthony

Carpenter's Annual Address

''Red" Letter— New York Shippers

Modern Spraying Practice— H. G. Ingerson ^^

Pennsylvania Apple Disease Condition— R. S. Kirby

92
Nursery Certification Committee Report

Apple Pollination— H. F. Hershey

Apple and Peach Storage— Sheldon Funk

Legislative and Agricultural Council Committee Report 108

State Arsenic Residue Check-up— D. M. James 1^9

Resolution...-

Orchard Cover Crops— F. N. Fagan

Inspection Rate Committee Report

Some Harrisburg Fruit Prizes

Marketing Through Chain Stores— E. Dana Sutliff 12

Peach Freight Rate Committee

1 24
Illinois Peaches Coming to Pennsylvania

Future of the Apple Industry, Hon. H. F. Byrd

The Pennsylvania Brand

History of Fruit Growing in Pennsylvania, Part II, S. W. Fletcher ^^^
(follows page

ADVERTISERS

PAQB

Hagewtown Spray Material Co., Spray Materials, FertUizers Front Cover

Lucas Kil-Tone Co.. Insecticides, Fungicides

Niagara Sprayer A Chemical Co., Insecticides, Fungicides "

Crystal Soap & Chemical Co., Inc., Insecticides 23

Adams County Nursery & Fruit Farms-Fruit Trees. Ornamentals. 33

Toledo Rex Spray Co., Insecticides. Fungicides «

Koppers Product* Co., Fungicides -■--•■- --■•";•---•

Trexler Farms, Insecticides, Fungicides, Packages. Machmery and Tools 67

Maloney Brothers Nursery Co.. Inc., Fruit Trees, Ornamentals. 67

Tobacco By-Products & Chemical Co.. Inc., Black Leaf 40 77

Sun Oil Co.. Sunoco Oil Spray, Gas and Oil •

McCormick & Co., Inc.. Pyrethrum Products -"- ««ar

Bountiful Ridge Nurseries, Fruit Plants, Ornamentals. Rear Uover

B G Pratt Co., Scalecide and Sulfocide Sprays Rear Cover

Patronize these firms— They make our
publications possible. Mention the
Association Proceedings when inquiring.

^ RED ARROW

NON- POISONOUS

INSEa SPRAY

(PYRETHRUM SOAP)

i i

The most highly concentrated liquid pyrethrum soap spray on the market.
Kills both chewing and suckling insects. Non-poisonous — Non-inflam-
mable. While Red Arrow will function effectively without additional soap,
by conditioning the final spray solution with our RED "A" Liquid Soap, the
toxicity of the pyrethnun charge may be materially increased with a reduced
cost per spray gallon.

PYSOL

A concentrated non-poisonous Pyrethrum product compatible with
Arsenicals and Bordeaux also adapted for use with hard waters.

PYRETHRUM DUSTS

RED "A'' PYRETHRUM POWDER— Most finely powdered pyrethrum
on the market. Standard toxicity — Size particles uniform. Separated
by air-float process.

BLACK ARROW INSECT DUST— Compounded for agricultural and
horticultural use. Non-poisonous. Standard toxicity. Economical.

RED **A" SOAP

A liquid neutral potash cocoanut oil product — 40% soap. An insecticide
in itself. An activator and spreader for contact insecticides.

IMPORTANT: RED ARROW PRODUCTS ARE STANDARDIZED.
Tests start with the raw materials and are extended to the finished product
when each batch is actually tested on insects. This assures both the manu-
facturer and consumer of the uniform killing power associated with our
products.

McCormick & Co.^ Inc.

Standardized Liquid & Dust Pyrethrum Products

Baltimore, Nd., U. S. A.

MONEY MAKERS

fRAOIMAIIK

rhe DELICIOUS Supreme

The tried and proven ALL RED
DELICIOUS APPLE

TRRtC /HARK We^

THE IMPROVED ALL-RED STAYMAN

The tried and proven planters* dream of a beautiful solid red
Stayman's Winesap apple. Write for information.

GALLIA BEAUTY

The All Red Rome 'Beauty

LOBO

THE IMPROVED McINTOSH

STARR

New Jersey's best early apple

GOLDEN JUBILEE

THE BEST EARLY PEACH YET INTRODUCED

We have thousands of fine one and two year trees of the above varieties
grown to meet your most exacting requirements, also a complete variety off
all fruits, ornamental shrubs, shade trees, roses, evergreens and azaleas and
rhododendrons.

STRAWBERRY PLANTS

Aberdeen, Blakemore, Premier, and Howard 17, Washington — a new
very late variety. Mastodon Everbearing and other standard varieties. We
have for spring delivery about 5,000,000 disease free, well rooted, true to
name plants.

Send for free catalogue today. Get our new 1932 low prices before buying
anjrwhere.

BOUNTIFUL RIDGE NURSERIES
Princess Anne, Maryland

RED ARROW

NON- POISONOUS

INSEa SPRAY

(PYRETHRUM SOAP)

The most highly concentrated liquid pyrethrum soap spray on the market.
Kills both chewing and suckhng insects. Non-poisonous — Non-inflam-
mable. While Red Arrow will function effectively without additional soap,
by conditioning the final spray solution with our RED "A" Liquid Soap, the
toxicity of the pyrethrum charge may be materially increased with a reduced
cost per spray gallon.

PYSOL

A concentrated non-poisonous Pyrethrum product compatible with
Arsenicals and Bordeaux also adapted for use with hard waters.

PYRETHRUM DUSTS

RED "A" PYRETHRUM POWDER— Most finely powdered pyrethrum
on the market. Standard toxicity — Size particles uniform. Separated
by air-float process.

BLACK ARROW INSECT DUST— Compounded for agricultural and
horticultural use. Non-poisonous. Standard toxicity. Economical.

RED **A" SOAP

A liquid neutral potash cocoanut oil product — 40% soap. An insecticide
in itself. An activator and spreader for contact insecticides.

McCormick & Co., Inc

Standardized Liquid & Dust Pyrethrum Products

Baltimore, Md., U. S. A.

MONEY MAKERS

TRAOI MARK RMMTtM*
tNUt^PATIKrOPriQl

rhe DELICIOUS Supreme

The tried and proven ALL RED
DELICIOUS APPLE

THE IMPROVED ALL-RED STAYMAN

The tried and proven planters' dream of a beautiful solid red
Stayman's Winesap apple. Write for information.

GALLIA BEAUTY

The All Red Rome 'Beauty

LOBO

THE IMPROVED McINTOSH

STARR

New Jersey's best early apple

GOLDEN JUBILEE

THE BEST EARLY PEACH YET INTRODUCED

We have thousands of fine one and two year trees of the above varieties
grown to meet your most exacting requirements, also a complete variety of
all fruits, ornamental shrubs, shade trees, roses, evergreens and azaleas and
rhododendrons.

STRAWBERRY PLANTS

Aberdeen, Blakemore, Premier, and Howard 17, Washington — a new
very late variety, Mastodon Everbearing and other standard varieties. We
have for spring delivery about 5,000,000 disease free, well rooted, true to
name plants.

Send for free catalogue today. Get our new 1932 low prices before buying
anywhere.

BOUNTIFUL RIDGE NURSERIES
Princess Anne, Maryland

Here is a new economy spray

LATE

Delayed Dormant Spray

SCALECIDE 1 -50 and SULFOCIDE 1-150

Many apple growers have their orchards so free of scale that were it not
for apUs, red mite and a few minor pests, they could omit the dormant spray
altogether.

This new spray— the late delayed dormant— takes the place of the dor-
mant or delayed dormant and the prepink spray as well, at a considerable
saving in cost.

This late delayed dormant spray has unique advantages.
First— Both the advantages of an oil spray and a sulphur spray.
Second— Cheaper than delayed dormant lime sulphur— as low as cheap oil

sprays.
Third— A combination that will kill every aphis you hit, also for red mite

and other soft bodied insects hatching at that time.
Fourth— Greater safety through the use of weaker dilutions of proven safe

materials.

Fifth— Application at a time when insects are more easily controlled than at

the delayed dormant period.

Follow this spray with Scalecide 1 to 100 and Sulfocide 1 to 200 as a

pink spray making lime sulphur and nicotine unnecessary and bring your

crop up to the blossom period in the finest possible shape at the least cost.

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "Pennsylvania State Horticultural Association news"

See other formats