NOTES AND COMMENTS. 



209 



THINNING FRUIT. 



SANDSTEN (Maryland Exp. Sta.) has 

 been conducting experiments in thin- 

 ning, and in Bulletin 82 calls the attention 

 of fruit growers to its importance. He says 

 it pays to thin peaches and plums after the 

 June drop, the former to not less than five 

 inches apart and the latter two or three 

 inches apart. Apples and pears should be 

 thinned when about the size of small crab 

 apples, leaving the fruit four or five inches 

 apart. 



Among the advantages to be gained are 

 more regular crops, stronger and more 

 shapely trees, less disease, and larger, better 

 colored, more uniformly ripened and more 

 saleable fruit. 



These excellent results, however, need not 

 be expected by the fruit grower who ne- 

 glects the other requisites to successful fruit 

 growing, such as pruning, spraying, fertiliz- 

 ing and cultivation. 



That even a worthless orchard can be 

 made to pay by attention to these details has 

 been proved by Mr. Tweedle, of Fruitland; 

 and by many others. Card (Rhode Island 

 Sta.) has issued a bulletin showing the ex- 

 cellent results of three years' work on less 

 than an acre of orchard. Though previous- 

 ly worthless, the third year's crop of apples 

 sold for about $80; showing that few parts 

 of the farm can be made to pay better than 

 a well managed apple orchard. 



THINNING PEACHES AND PLUMS. 



PROF. BEACH, of Geneva- has made 

 some experiments in the thinning of 

 peaches and plums, and has not met with 

 such results as would lead him to advise it in 

 commercial orchards. Thinning, he thinks, 

 should constitute the last resort after details 

 of fertilizing, cultivating, draining, pruning, 

 etc., have been attended to. He thinks, in- 

 deed, that pruning is the most economical 

 method of thinning the crop. 



The professor should mention the varie- 

 ties treated ; for this would, no doubt, be the 

 key of the problem. We have seen too 

 many experiments tried in thinning out the 

 fruit of over-loaded Alexander peaches to 

 doubt its importance. The size of the fruit 

 remaining was doubled, and consequently 

 sold at a proportionately higher price, but 

 the number of baskets gathered was as many 

 from the thinned trees, as from similar trees 

 not thinned. 



Prof. Beach does, however, grant " that 

 systematic thinning of fruit, combined with 

 skillful care in other directions, may ma- 

 terially strengthen the tendency of the tree 

 to bear annually." 



THINNING THAT PAID. 



AFTER all. facts are the best proofs, 

 and these are constantly accumulat- 

 ing in evidence of the advantages to be 

 gained by the enterprising fruit grower by 

 judicious thinning. Of course it will not 

 pay in every instance, and no rule will fit all 

 cases. A young vigorous tree will carry 

 a much heavier load of fruit without its size 

 being lessened than an older tree, while on 

 poor soils even close thinning will fail to 

 produce large sized fruit. 



The following effect of thinning was ob- 

 served by A. T. Jordan (Amer. Agr. 1902) 

 on two trees set in 1897. The set of fruit 

 on one tree was 862 peaches, and on the 

 other tree 852. From the first tree 69.5 per 

 cent, of the total set of fruit was removed, 

 leaving to mature 263 peaches. From the 

 second tree 31.9 per cent, of the fruit was 

 taken, leaving to mature 580 peaches. From 

 the tree which had been most heavily thin- 

 ned 2.83 baskets of fruit were obtained. The 

 average weight of the peaches from this tree 

 was 4.48 ounces, the price offered per bas- 

 ket by the leading grocers was $1.00, and 

 the total value of the peaches from the tree 

 was $2.83. From the tree less severely 

 thinned 3.92 baskets of fruit were obtained. 



