Jamuiry, 1922 



BETTER FRUIT 



Fage Nine 



Improvement in Orchard Management 



Bv Gordon G. Brown 



Horticulturist at Hood River Branch Exferiment Station 



FOR A number of years the Hood 

 River branch experiment station 

 has been conducting a searching in- 

 vestigation of the apple orchard business in 

 the Hood River Valley. Comparatively 

 few statistics were available which defin- 

 itely indicated the economic trend towards 

 which the fruit growers were moving. 

 The study has been to determine "who's 

 who" in the apple business and, as far as 

 possible and practicable, the underlying 

 causes which are associated with a high 

 standard of success upon the one hand, and 

 only mediocre or poor results upon the 

 other. 



The aim has been to pick out the im- 

 portant factors in orchard management 

 such as pruning, thinning, propping, til- 

 lage, irrigation and fertilizer practices and 

 to study these with reference to diflFerences 

 in net results as above indicated. The 

 difference in time spent in these operations 

 and in the case of spraying, for instance, 

 the amount of material applied has been 

 used largely as a working basis. Average 

 costs per acre and per box in many cases 

 have been determined on a six-year basis. 

 This includes average costs for the period 

 1913 to 1918, inclusive. 



The period mentioned is one which is 

 naturally divided into two distinct epochs: 

 The one from 1913-1915, inclusive, and 

 the other from 1916-1918, inclusive. The 

 former is designated as the First period 

 and the latter as the Second period. The 

 former period is identified by clean cul- 

 tivation practices, lack of cover or shade 

 crops and fertilizers. An inadequate spray 

 program also prevailed. Tree growth dur- 

 ing this period was inadequate; yields were 

 small ; dry rot, fruit pit and small apples 

 resulted. 



The Second period marks several dis- 

 tinct changes in management for the 

 better. Nitrate of soda as a fertilizer came 

 into general use. A three to five pound 

 application furnished immediately avail- 

 ible nitrogen which had been so completely 

 depleted by clean tillage. The use of al- 

 falfa, vetch and clover became general. 

 An improved spray program, accompanied 

 by better equipment, also featured the 

 Second period. 



As a result of an improved program 

 yields increased 46 percent. The percent- 

 age of extra fancy fruit increased from 

 34.6 to 47.0 or 12.4 percent. A corres- 

 ponding increase in gross value of fruit, 

 net to the grower, by this selling agent also 

 resulted. 



The writer has divided the orchards into 

 groups upon the basis of merit. This 

 grouping relates to a six-year average per- 

 formance, as related to yields in packed 

 boxes per acre (exclusive of culls and cook- 



i\l nut tiiiiii inn nnininnnt ninn n nli^ 



I Ei'cn horticulturists and growers | 



I are likely to overlook the fact that | 



i imfortant -progress has been made in | 



I recent years in the more scientific | 



I management of co?nmercial orchards | 



I of the North-.i-est. In making a st-udy | 



I of the orchard management in the | 



I Hood River Valley, icith farticular | 



I reference to yields, grades and caltu | 



I of fruit, Gordon G. Brozvn has done | 



I a service of real value to every | 



I Northzvestern affle grower. In | 



I felting forth the results of his study, | 



I as done in this article^ he has ren- | 



I dered an additional service of great | 



I value. The grower who will care- | 



I fully m.ull the facts here presented, \ 



I comparing with results in his oztm | 



I orchard, is sure to obtain pointers of | 



I value as a guide for his own practices | 



I in the future. | 



fllinilininnnnnnnnininnnnnnnin i niit innnnnninininninnillli; 



ers) ; percentage of extra fancy and four- 

 tier sizes and gross value of fruit per acre. 

 The groups are arranged as follows: 



Yields per acre — Group 1, 386 boxes; 

 2, 257 boxes; 3, 186 boxes. 



Percentage of extra fancy — Group 1, 

 5 5.0 per cent; 2, 44.9 per cent; 3, 3 5.3 

 per cent. 



Percentage of four-tier sizes — Group 1, 

 65.0 per cent; 2, 51.5 per cent; 3, 33.0 

 per cent. 



Gross annual value of fruit per acre — 

 Group 1, $461; 2, $290; 3, $204. 



THE reader will at once note great dif- 

 ferences in the average performance 

 of the different orchards as shown in the 

 above grouping. The difference of $257 

 per acre, gross value, between Groups 1 

 and 3 is most striking. 



What are the associated causes? In the 

 first place, the writer wishes to make plain 

 that the orchards in all groups are quite 

 representative of the section. The average 

 age is over 1 5 years. Inferior orchards 

 subjected to gross neglect and evidently 

 inferior are not included in this study. 



The one big factor in large gross returns 

 is that of yields. Heavy tonnage permits 

 of a large volume of business. On an 

 average there is little difference in the 

 percentage of extra fancy fruit or four- 

 tier, sizes produced by the orchards in 

 Group 1 ($461 per acre) and Group 3 

 ($204 per acre). On the other hand 

 Group 1 produces 365 boxes per acre as an 

 annual average against 182 boxes for 

 Group 3. 



Size of Orchard — One of the most 

 interesting comparisons relates to the acer- 



age handled. Large acerages and large yields 

 appear incompatible. Likewise, to a certain 

 extent, we find this true of the percentage 

 of high grade fruit produced. Group 1 

 (yields) averages 10.01 acres of bearing 

 orchard: Group 2, 14.46 acres: and Group 

 3, 25.73 acres. Furthermore Group 1 

 (55.0 per cent extra fancy) handles 16.50 

 acres as .against Group 3 (3 5.3 per cent), 

 which handles 23.69 acres. Very few ex- 

 ceptions are found to the above rule. The 

 reasons are obvious. Small acerages usually 

 receive better care and are personally 

 supervised by the owner, who takes an 

 active part in the work. On the other 

 hand, much hired help is used on the 

 larger tracts and often inefficiency creeps 

 in. 



Irrigation — Irrigation is a fundamental 

 practice in the Hood River Valley. Rain- 

 fall for the entire year, though ample, is 

 not sufficiently well distributed during the 

 summer months to permit ample tree 

 growth and maximum production. Since 

 the introduction of alfalfa or clover in the 

 orchard the moisture requirements have 

 practically doubled. This varies according 

 to the age of plants and methods of hand- 

 ling. Where alfalfa is cut for hay it is 

 evident that maximum moisture require- 

 ments prevail. The customary practice is 

 to make at least one cutting for hay during 

 early summer. A second cutting is often 

 made before picking time, but the hay is 

 not removed. The aim of such a practice 

 is to permit organic matter to return to the 

 soil. 



Thorough discing during early spring 

 is the usual method of incorporating such 

 organic matter within the soil. Such a 

 practice also tends to discourage weed seed 

 dissemination and to form a mulch. Some 

 growers do not cut alfalfa in the orchard, 

 for thus the moisture requirements are 

 greatly reduced. Since alfalfa, when 

 allowed fully to mature, returns more 

 plant food to the soil than when it is cut 

 at an earlier stage of development, it seems 

 reasonable that the practice of not cutting 

 would afford better results. 



Striking differences appear under labor 

 charges, "man days per acre," for irriga- 

 tion. Therein probably lies one of the 

 fundamental causes for differences in 

 results. It is apparent that where the total 

 supply of water is only four "miners 

 inches" to the ten-acre unit, economy in 

 application must be practiced. Such econ- 

 omy is obtained in careful attention to 

 details such as the proper making of rills, 

 the head of water used, etc. Often water 

 is allowed to run in one part of the orchard 

 too long. The result is a failure to irrigate 

 the orchard with sufficient frequency and 

 {Continued on page 19) 



