PROTECTING FRUIT ON THE PRAIRIES. 



PROTECTING FRUIT ON THE PRAIRIES. 



BY ELI NICHOLS, NEW CASTLE, COSHOCTON COUNTY, OHIO. 



Suppose two farmers settle in the open, bleak prairies of the West. Each 

 plants an orchard. One in the broad plain, exposed to sun and wind ; the other 

 surrounds his lot with a double row of Norway fir, pines, or other evergreens, 

 and then plants his fruit-trees alternately with the black spruce, or some similar 

 tree. Which, at the end of thirty years, would be the most thrifty, and which 

 would have produced the most regularly ? The protected orchard probably 

 would. In support of this opinion, I offer : First. Orchards, otherwise as well 

 situated in the prairie country, but protected by woods, grow and bear better than 

 those in the open prairie. Second. Fruit-trees, in a wooded country, bear and 

 flourish better than those in a prairie country, other things being equal. Third. 

 Great and sudden changes of temperature are injurious to fruit-trees. Those who 

 have travelled in winter, in prairie countries, know the temperature is much milder 

 and more equable in the woods than in the open prairies. The same is experienced 

 where there are large, open fields in countries originally timbered. Fourth. The 

 old men in timbered countries almost all recollect, that the first orchards, when 

 the openings were small, were more fruitful and healthy than now, when cultiva- 

 tion has destroyed most of the forests. Fifthly. I set out a number of evergreens 

 two years ago. Part of these were well protected with forest timber — part were 

 not. The first were scarcely touched by the past or present winter, while the 

 unprotected were all scathed, and some killed. Fruit-trees, especially peach-trees, 

 were much injured by last winter ; those well protected, scarcely at all. There 

 was abundant evidence of this in my orchards. 



That evergreens would be better than other timber, I do not know. My re- 

 collection of the pine woods of Virginia is, that they are warmer than other woods 

 in cold, windy weather. But in Ohio, where I have spent most of my life, ever- 

 greens are scarce, and I have never witnessed their influence on fruit-trees. Dif- 

 fering as they do in their growth and habits, I have supposed they would rob 

 fruit-trees less than other forest-trees would. That is, that each kind of tree 

 might find its own proper nourishment with little injury to the other. The great 

 object of writing this is, that I may possibly induce you, Mr. Editor, or some of 

 your numerous readers, to communicate some facts, from good authority or per- 

 sonal knowledge, showing the effect which evergreens and fruit-trees have on each 

 other. So sanguine am I, that already I have some growing. But many years 

 must elapse before mine will tell the tale. 



The experiment should be a fair one. Young trees set in near proximity to 

 old ones, are always injured. The experiment, to be fair, should be where trees 

 of not greatly dissimilar ages have grown to maturity together. In the old yards 

 and grounds of the Eastern States, and of England, I should think this had often 

 occurred. Who will let us know? 



By my theory, the apple, pear, and peach, love company. They seem to me to 

 have been in their natural habitat, much like our plum, crab-apple, hawthorn, &.c. 

 The plum and crab-apple, if left by themselves, where woods are cleared into fields, 

 usually soon perish, but, if left sparsely interspersed with other trees, they flourish 

 greatly, and bear abundantly. Even the oak seems to love association. Where 

 it grows singly, it sends out its long, horizontal limbs, as if in search of that shade 



d protection, which no kind neighbor affords it. Nature starts all her forests 

 ickets, and thins them out as room is needed. IIow cruel, then, is it in man 



