/p// 



BETTER FRUIT 



Page 7 



cost in spraying often exceeds the cost 

 of the materials used. 



High pressure is mainly valuable in 

 lessening the time it takes to spray, but 

 high pressure increases the range of a 

 nozzle and adds to the penetrative force 

 of the spray, thus bettering the chance 

 of doing effective work. 



The bodies of insects are greasy and 

 hard to wet, yet many sprays depend 

 on coming in actual contact with the 

 insect in order to kill. Many insects 

 and many eggs are located in the lower- 

 most crevices of rough bark, out of 

 reach of any but a penetration system 

 of spraying. 



Therefore, spray thoroughly. Direct 

 attention to the hardest places to reach. 

 Cover every surface. Wet behind the 

 buds and into the bottom of every 

 crack. Fill the lower calyx cup. Do 

 not try to economize on spray by doing 

 superficial work or by missing the ends 

 of the branches. For all orchard spray- 

 ing, use a high-pressure pump, 250 

 pounds if possible. Use only nozzles 

 of the Clipper or Bordeaux type, as 

 they alone combine speed, range and 

 penetration. Use an 8-foot spray rod. 

 Have a crook-joint to set the nozzles at 

 an angle of forty-five degrees. Spray 

 from a tower if the trees are beyond 



reach from the ground. For dormant 

 and calyx spraying throw most of the 

 liquid downward, stroking the branches 

 from the tips toward the trunk, but 

 some spraying must be done in every 

 other direction as well. Do not try to 

 improve on the formulas by adding 

 other ingredients or by using the spray 

 stronger than recommended. There's 

 a reason. 



Watch your spray pump. Have it 

 overhauled and in readiness before it 

 is time to spray. Wash out the spray 

 liquid at the end of each day's work. 

 In freezing weather drain off the 

 liquids when through. 



Cost of Operation and Returns from Evaporated Fruits 



By Dr. J. S. Caldwell, Plant Physiologist of Washington Agricultural Experiment Station, Pullman, Washington 



[Editor's Note. — This article was prepared 

 by Dr. J. S. Caldwell, Pullman, Washington, 

 after extremely careful research work covering 

 a period of many months. It is the Editor's 

 opinion that the information is the most prac- 

 tical and valuable upon the subject that has 

 ever been published and should be of great 

 value to every fruit district, for the reason that 

 every fruit district should be interested in 

 evaporation. Conserving the waste has already 

 impressed itself upon the fruit growers as a 

 vital necessity, and therefore prompt consider- 

 ation should be given. The information con- 

 tained in this article was delivered in the form 

 of an address before the Fruit Growers* Con- 

 ference at the Ninth National Apple Show, 

 Spokane, commanding the most serious consid- 

 eration, resulting in a discussion by the grow- 

 ers which brought out many features and facts 

 effectively and beneficially. This discussion 

 will appear in the April edition of "Better 

 Fruit," consisting of about two pages.] 



TO attempt to deal with the varieties 

 of fruit and berries which can be 

 profitably grown for the cannery 

 would be to start an endless discussion. 

 I shall therefore confine myself to a 

 discussion of the varieties of fruits 

 which can be utilized through the 

 medium of the evaporator and a state- 

 ment of the returns which the grower 

 may be expected to realize from such 

 products. I trust that the members of 

 the conference may realize clearly that 

 in attempting to make a doUar-and- 

 cents presentation of this subject I am 

 undertaking a task which is made ex- 

 tremely difficult by a number of causes. 

 The Northwest has not thus far pro- 

 duced any considerable volume of any 

 evaporated fruit other than prunes. In 

 consequence, the prices at which other 

 dried fruits have been marketed have 

 been determined by the relations of 

 supply and demand in a restricted ter- 

 ritory, in which Northwestern pro- 

 ducers do not come into competition 

 with producers in other regions, and 

 have not been primarily determined by 

 the prices ruling in the great export 

 markets. When our territory begins to 

 produce annually a volume of dried 

 fruits greater than can be absorbed by 

 adjacent non-fruit-producing states, we 

 shall come into competition with East- 

 ern makers of evaporated fruits, and 

 shall have to market our product at 

 prices determined by the visible sup- 

 plies of the country at large, not by the 

 quantities we may have to offer. While 

 this is not likely to result in a general 

 and permanent lowering of the prices 

 received, it will necessarily result in 

 yearly fluctuation of prices between 

 wider limits. Also, our markets for 



evaporated apples in particular are 

 chiefly found abroad, and the whole 

 course of our export trade has been 

 interrupted by the war, that portion of 

 our exported fruits which would have 

 normally been taken by Germany hav- 

 ing been absorbed by the Allies or by 

 the Scandinavian countries. With the 

 close of the war there will necessarily 

 occur material changes in the avenues 

 of distribution of our evaporated fruits; 

 Germany will no longer occupy the 

 place of a middleman in our dealings 

 with Russia, and the Pacific Coast 

 States will be in position to compete on 

 even terms for considerable business 

 formerly monopolized by other por- 

 tions of the United States. In the face 

 of such a reorganization, no amount of 

 study of past conditions in the dried- 

 fruit industry can enable anyone to 

 make a forecast as to the trend of 

 prices for the next five or ten years 

 which can be anything better than a 

 guess, but evaporated fruits have shared 

 in the general upward trend of prices 

 for the past two years and there is 

 every indication that the general level 

 of present prices will be maintained for 

 some years to come. 



The evaporation of this surplus fruit 

 must by no means be considered as 

 a panacea for all the ills of the grower; 

 while it offers very real and substan- 

 tial possibilities of aid, these possibili- 

 ties have, and of necessity always will 

 have, very definite limitations. These 

 should be very clearly understood; 

 some uninformed or reckless enthusi- 

 asts have done much harm by state- 

 ments as to the possible returns to the 

 grower from evaporating his low-grade 

 fruit which are very wide of the facts. 

 Such statements create dissatisfaction 

 with the returns obtained from mate- 

 rials sold to operators of existing 

 plants and may lead to disappointment 

 and financial loss on the part of those 

 who are led by such statements to en- 

 gage in the business. Unfortunately 

 some of our best Northwestern horti- 

 cultural journals have given circulation 

 to such misleading articles; one such 

 journal published an article in Septem- 

 ber, 1914, which so completely sum- 

 marizes the current misinformation in 

 regard to the profits to be realized from 

 the drying of fruits that I must quote 

 it in some detail by way of contrast to 



the actual facts. This article states, in 

 speaking of 20,000 tons of cull apples 

 produced in a certain locality, that they 

 "would make 12,000,000 pounds of dry 

 fruit worth approximately $1,200,000." 

 Continuing, the statement is made that 

 "an evaporating plant would insure 

 growers $16.00-$20.00 per ton for 

 apples and would permit of the pro- 

 duction of a first-class article at a price 

 under 5 cents per dried pound, or at 

 present would pay growers operating 

 their own plants about .?35.00 a ton for 

 second-grade apples." By way of con- 

 trast with this glowing statement, I 

 may state the facts, which are that 

 20,000 tons of cull apples would yield 

 250 pounds per ton, or a total of 

 5,000,000 pounds of dry fruit, which 

 was worth at wholesale in the city in 

 which this article was written 7% cents 

 per pound, or $362,500. While I have 

 no means of knowing by personal ex- 

 perience, I am assured by people with 

 better opportunities for knowing that 

 there is a very considerable difference 

 between $1,200,000 and $362,500. More- 

 over, any grower operating his own 

 plant who realized $35.00 per ton from 

 his apples would have had to find a 

 market willing to give 14 cents per 

 pound, instead of the current price of 

 IVi cents, for the dry product. The 

 operator of a dryer paying $20.00 per 

 ton for evaporator stock would have 

 been facing a cost of 8 cents for the 

 raw material from which to make a 

 pound of dry stock, yet the writer of 

 this article would have him produce a 

 first-class dry stock at a total cost less 

 than 5 cents per pound. I shall not 

 lead you further into the realms of 

 frenzied finance traversed by this au- 

 thority, but shall try to return to and 

 to remain upon the solid ground of 

 established facts. The facts are: (t) 

 The evaporator can never compete in 

 the normal market for apples of fancy 

 grade; it can utilize only slock of C 

 grade or culls. (2) The evaporator can- 

 not profitably handle peaches. (3) The 

 evaporator does not offer a more profit- 

 able method of disposing of entire 

 crops of berries than is offered by the 

 open market, under anything approach- 

 ing normal conditions. (4) The evap- 

 orator offers absolutely no possibilities 

 for the profitable utilization of vege- 

 tables. AATiile there still exists a mar- 



