Page 8 



BETTER FRUIT 



October 



FiGuru-: 17. Winter Nelis. I'ruit hrajich taken fruni an olti tree. Note that 

 the greatest number of I'luit-buds are borne on vigorous new wood produced 

 by thinning out ok! spurs. The old unprunetl spurs bear mainly leaf-buds. 



Figure 18. Bartlett pear. Old spurs which have been blooming annually but 



setting a very small number of fruits. At a spurs which bloomed but set no 



fruit, some of them af^ain producing fruit-buds the following season. 



saved to produce fruit. Such a con- 

 dition actually can be brought about, 

 especially with young trees, through a 

 method of early sumiiier ijruning, 

 whereby .some of the branches, instead 

 of being allowed to grow normally, are 

 headed back sulhcienfly early in the 

 season to allow laterals to spring from 

 them and develop terminal and even 

 axillary fruit-buds. 



The amount of pruning to be done in 

 winter on any variety of fruits so as 

 to pi-odnce the maxinuim number of 

 fruit-buds depends upon so many 

 factors that no specific recommenda- 

 tions can be made. Two facts must be 

 observed, however, when dealing with 

 normal apple or pear trees of average 

 vigor, and, in a general way, all other 

 deciduous-tree fruits. First, if a large 

 amount of wood is rcmoveil in heading 

 back a one-year-old branch, lateral 

 branches, and not fi-uit-buds, will be 

 produced from the remainder. Second, 

 if the heading back is very slight, fruit- 

 buds may and are apt to be ijroduced, 

 but they are likely to be borne near the 



cut, with the result that below them 

 few or none of the buds will break and 

 long barren spaces on the branches will 

 exist. It is a safe rule to bear in mind 

 that the greatest influence is felt in the 

 vicinity of a pruning cut. Thus, if a 

 long branch is cut back severely, the 

 greatest gi-owth response will come 

 near the ]joint of cutting, though there 

 will be some response throughout the 

 whole limb. Or again, if a dense or tall 

 pear tree, for exam])le, has the top cut 

 back without a thinning out or cutting 

 back of the remaining branches, the 

 first or greatest response will be near 

 the cut. This principle is of importance 

 in pruning very old trees in which 

 masses of spurs have been formed, but 

 which arc not producing annual profit- 

 able crops. Annual crops of bloom arc 

 produced, but the crop of fruit is light, 

 and what is produced is often inferior. 

 In such cases it would be better to re- 

 move some spurs entirely and thin out 

 others in order again to bring about 

 a vegetative response directly within 

 the remaining spurs tlieinselves rather 



than to take out many large branches 

 or merely to cut back the top or saw 

 olT the ends of all large limbs. Such a 

 spur jiruuing may not be advisable each 

 year, but will serve as an occasional 

 rejuvenating means. The removal of 

 some branches will probably be neces- 

 sar\- in conjunction with the spur thin- 

 ning, and of course the removal of all 

 (lead wood is essential. The main i)oint 

 to be emphasized, however, is this: 

 There will be less unbalancing of the 

 trees and more real stimulation to fruit 

 production if the cutting is distributed 

 rather than more or less localized. 

 Figure 18 represents part of two very 

 old spurs. They have been producing 

 fruit-buds and flowers for many years, 

 but have matured but few fruits, due to 

 a lack of vegetative vigor. Figure 20 

 shows a portion of a spur which had 

 been thinned and shows a strong, al- 

 most too vigorous vegetative response 

 as a result, while Figure 22 illustrates 

 how these vegetative shoots again be- 

 come strong fruit spurs in the course of 

 two or three years. 



In this connection attention is called 

 to those lateral branches of moderate 

 length which bear terminal fruit-buds 

 anti are freiiuently abundant in young 

 trees just coming into bearing. If not 

 excessively long, say not over twelve 

 inches, it is the best policy not to re- 

 move the terminal bud, since if it is 

 left to remain the chances of having the 

 lateral buds on such a branch develop 

 into fruit-spurs are much greater than 

 if the branch is headed back. Even if 

 fruit does not set from such a bud, the 

 beneficial effect is greater if it is not 

 removed. Of course if the branch is 

 excessively long and limber head it 

 back. Frec|uently, in pears and in 

 many varieties of ap])les, such laterals 

 of from three to eight inches in length, 

 if left alone become the first really pro- 

 ductive areas of the tree, but are ruined 

 if removed or heavily cut back. This 

 statement is in no way intended to dis- 

 courage the ])ractice of shortening in 

 or heading back those more or less nu- 

 merous lateral, vegetative branches 

 which fre(iuenlly grow in large num- 

 bers in the lower inner portions of 

 young trees. In fact there is reason to 

 believe that if some of these branches 

 are allowed to remain and are cut back 

 to three or four inches in length they 

 can be developed into early and valu- 

 able fruiting wood. 



The time or season during which 

 fruit-buds are formed is a matter 

 worthy of consideration. The practice 

 of summer pruning largely hinges on 

 such a knowledge, because if the jirun- 

 ing is (lone at one season of the year, 

 and is to have an immediate effect, sulli- 

 cient time must be allowed for fruit- 

 buds to develop during the i)art of the 

 season which remains. The amount of 

 culling that may be ijcrinissible early 

 or late in Ihe season is entirely dilTer- 

 ent. Farly summer ])runing may, and 

 sometimes should, be heavy to bring 

 about a vegetative response, while a 

 late summer pruning must be light in 

 order th;d a heavy vegetative res|)onse 

 may be avoided. Too late a summer 

 pruning ina,\ fail of lis pui'ixise abso- 



