FORTY-FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT. 81 



The crop of 1913 being badly injured by severe drouth was an unusual- 

 ly bad crop to handle, being very expensive both to pick and pack, such 

 a large per cent of the apples being under size. 



It will be seen, therefore, that a fair comparison can only be made 

 between the crops of 1911 and 1914. I think I might wait for many 

 years to find two crops as nearly alike as these two years and as the 

 1911 crop was handled in the old fashioned way and the 1914 crop was 

 handled in the new way, the difference in the cost is interesting. The 

 old system of hand packing in the orchard cost 48c per barrel and 

 the new system of hauling to the packing shed and the use of the grad- 

 ing machine cut this cost down to 32i/2C, making a saving of 15%c per 

 barrel. But you must not lose sight of the difference between the value 

 of the crops ])acked under the old and new system. 



The 1911 crop was orchard run and sold as such. 



The 1913 crop was packed Al's, No. I's and No. 2's. The Al Gano 

 sold at picking time for |3.00 per bbl.; the No. 1 at $2.50, and the No. 

 2 at |2.00. At this time orchard run Ganos were selling in Kansas 

 City at 11.50 per bbl. 



It is comparatively easy to keep accurate records of cost if the work 

 is properly systematized and it is quite as essential as an accurate 

 accounting system for a merchant. Many growers keep records covering 

 cost which they subtract from gross income to determine profit or loss. 

 The trouble with this system is that it does not tell which, until the 

 thing is over. However, it is not possible when presenting figures of 

 cost such as those given above to say with accuracy what saving in cost 

 has actually be acomplished because we have only the figures of other 

 years on which to base comparisons and as no two years are alike it 

 leaves us without definite comparative data. However, the greatest 

 benefit to the grower does not come through the possible, 10 or 15c per 

 barrel which he saves in jiacking, but in the increase in the value of 

 the fruit itself when properly packed and accurately graded to size. The 

 grading machine will not make good apples out of poor ones nor will 

 it put up an honest pack if it has a dishonest boss. What it will do, 

 however, is this — it will enable a man who honestly desires to pack his 

 fruit right to do so without penalizing himself. It will standardize his 

 })ack, making it possible for him to maintain uniformity from one end 

 of the barrel to the other and from the first to the last barrel. 



In my own case, I installed the machine because I believed it would 

 pay for itself and pay a profit in the saving in packing cost. My records 

 satisfy me that it has done this but the greatest benefit came somewhat 

 as a surprise to me, as I did not realize that the appearance of the fruit 

 would be so greatly improved and its market value consequently in- 

 creased. 



Horticultural methods so far as production is concerned have been 

 the source of much discussion and study and the past ten years show 

 a marked improvement along the line. Our methods of preparing the 

 fruit and marketing it show vast room for improvement. It is not prac- 

 tical for a man with 20 acres of orchard to spray with a hand pump. 

 It is a waste of effort. He can accomplish the same work more quickly, 

 better and cheaper with a power sprayer. Does not the same thing apply 

 in preparing his crop for the market? If he can secure a machine which 

 will save expense, lighten labor and enable him to do his work better, 

 11 



