BETTER FRUIT 



EDITOR: W. H. WALTON 



STATE ASSOCIATE EDITORS 



OREGON — C. I. Lewis, Horticulturist. 



\VASHlX(iTON — Dr. A. L. Melander, Entomologist : 

 O. M. Slorris. Horticulturist. Pullman. 



COLORADO — C. P. Gillette. Director anrl EntomoloKlst ; 

 E. B. House. Irrigation Expert, State Agricultural College, 

 Fort Collins. ^ , ^ „ 



ARIZONA — E. P. Taylor. Horticulturist. Tucson. 



WISCONSIN— Dr. E. D. Ball. Madison. 



MONTANA — O. B. Wliipple. Horticulturist. Bozeman. 



CALIFORNIA — C. W. Woodworth. Entomolosist. Berke- 

 ley; W. H. Volck. Entomologist, Watsonville: Leon D. 

 Batchelor. Horticulturist. Riverside. 



INDIANA — H. S. .TacUson. Pathologist. Lafayette. 



An Illustrated Magazine Devoted to the Interests 



of Modern, Progressive Fruit Growing 



and Marketing. 



PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY 



Better Fruit Publishing Company 



703 Oregonian Building 



PORTLAND, OREGON 



All Communications should be addressed and 

 Remittances made payable to 



BETTER FRUIT PUBLISHING COMPANY 



Subscription Price: 



In the United States, $1.00 per year in advance. 



Canada $1.50; Foreign, including postage, $1.50. 



Advertising Rates on Application 



Entered as second-class matter April 22, 1918, 



at the PostofTlce at Portland, Oregon, under 



the Act of Congress of March 3, 1879. 



Volume XIV 



Portland, Oregon, October 1, 1919 



Number 4 



Timely Advice for the Prospective Orchard Planter 



By Gordon G. Brown, Horticulturist, Hood River Experiment Station 



WHEN the Editor of Better Fruit 

 sug.gested that I write an article 

 on this siib.iect it seemed as 

 though we were being carried back to 

 the old days of 1909 and 1910 when ad- 

 vice upon the subject of planting was 

 most plentiful. Then, we were advised 

 to plant according to a multitude of 

 ideas. Those who have gone through 

 the ups and downs of the past ten years 

 now have some pretty definite ideas of 

 their own as to whether this advice was 

 good or bad and also whether it was 

 prompted by the get-rich promoter or 

 the horticulturist of actual experience 

 whose purposes were above reproach. 

 .Surely we have all learned. 



The subject upon which I have been 

 asked to write is a broad one and I 

 prefer to view it in that light. It goes 

 much beyond the mere laying off of an 

 orchard and planting trees. What are 

 the problems involved? To me the mat- 

 ter unfolds somewhat according to the 

 following definite questions, arranged 



' — ;": — ~ — 7- — "^ — ^ 

 \ / \ .' \ ' \ / \ / 



^^¥VY^^'^ 



v-^ 



f q <f <f 9 q 

 9 9 9 9 9 



,r-, \ 



l:j.ii'-4>4c--i----— 



1-Y-5-"f': 



•■-i-Tf-!--'r 



X" 



99999 9,*.* 





99<?9(? (?.<?o* 



9 <? 9 9 <? 9j<? .9,9. 



o O o o o 



9 . 9.9 



9 <? <?<?■? 9 



O . o 9 



9 <f Q Q 9 9 



o o d o * 

 « e 9 a o 



9 9 Q 9 <? (i 



Q 9 o o o 



. 9 .. 9 . 9 



HEXAGONAL SYSTEM OF PLANTING 

 1, Field staked by use of triangle. 2, Field set. 

 3, Field properly thinned. 4, Field properly 

 rowed off by running lines. 5 and 6, Illustra- 

 tions of improper thinning. 



with some idea of sequence. Consider- 

 ing the enormous plantings of apples a 

 few years ago and the experiences in 

 securing a market, is there any need of 

 further planting? Assuming that there 

 is such a need, shall it be on a large or 

 small scale? Then follows another 

 series of questions of a different char- 

 acter but equally, if not more, import- 

 ant. What variety or varieties shall I 

 plant? Upon what kind of soil shall 1 

 set my trees? What are the details to 

 be observed in dealing with the nursery 

 man and finally, planting? Upon the cor- 

 rect answer to these depends success. 



Let us go back to the first question 

 suggested: that regarding the need of 

 additional planting. Let us consider 

 apple statistics recently compiled by the 

 United States Department of Agricul- 

 ture. These data point out clearly that 

 there is no actual need for wholesale 

 planting according to the proportions 

 of ten years ago. On the other hand, 

 there is an actual need for further 

 planting upon a conservative scale for 

 two definite reasons. Taking the United 

 States as a whole there are compara- 

 tively few trees coming into bearing 

 since there has been little planting 

 since 1910. Furthermore, market de- 

 mands are expanding and the produc- 

 tivity of certain apple districts which 

 have furnished the bulk of the tonnage 

 in the past is declining. This is true of 

 Western New York which has furnished 

 approximately one-fourth of the normal 

 commercial apple crop of the United 

 States. This is due largely to the fact 

 that the trees are old. Many were 

 planted in the late sixties. This is also 

 true of the New England Baldwin Belt 

 including Maine, New Hampshire, Ver- 

 mont and Massachusetts. Commercially, 

 the states of the Pacific Northwest have 

 superceded, or at least equalled, the 

 output of Western New York. 



What of pears? Due to the ravages 

 of fire-blight in most states the industry 

 has declined almost to the vanishing 

 point. This fact is now greatly re- 

 flected in gross tonnage for the United 

 States and also in prices which are es- 

 pecially remunerative for all standard 

 sorts. Canneries have paid as much as 

 $80.00 per ton for Bartletts and are call- 

 ing for more. The industry is now 

 largely centered in California and Ore- 



gon. In the former state in 1917 there 

 were 19,233 acres in bearing and 28,069 

 non-bearing. When viewed in the light 

 of the country as a whole, the total 

 acreage is comparatively small. There 

 is room for additional planting of pears 

 but on a conservative scale. 



In Oregon during the past few years 

 prices for Italian prunes have been very 

 high. Many prune growers have made 

 large fortunes from one or two good 

 crops. The result has been that thou- 

 sands of acres of new plantings have 

 been set. The demand for prune trees 

 is so great that the nurserymen are 

 charging from fifty to seventy-five cents 

 per tree and in some instances more. 

 Obviously a greater market for the vast 

 tonnage of prunes that will be borne in 

 a few years must be found. It can 

 scarcely be said that present high 

 prices of prunes should be taken as a 

 safe index of what prices may be ex- 

 pected when yields are doubled and 

 trebled. There is no need for hysterical 

 planting along this line. 



\^^lat about nursery stock? The need 

 of securing first-class trees has been 

 emphasized so often as to be almost 

 axiomatic. It should be vigorous, free 

 of insects or disease, true to name, and 

 preferably one year old from the bud. 

 Incidentally, it is urged that the largest 

 nursery stock is not necessarily the 

 best. Trees four feet or higher that 

 caliper about five-eights of an inch just 



THE RECTANGULAR SYSTEM OF PLANTING 



1, Field lined. 2, Field set. 3, Proper thinning. 



4, Improper thinning. 



