-l4- 



BRUSHING UP 



I have been on the receiving end sf a lot of kidding about wiping apples 

 to make them shine i I do not have any idea that wiping apples is geing to remove 

 any active spray residue. The materials have to be put on in such a way and at such 

 times to prevent any actual active spray residue being on the apples at harvest time. 



Sometimes there is dust or some of -the spent or inactive residues on 

 the apples that takes away the shine and first class look of an apple. It is these 

 residues that make an apple look dirty or dull that I believe should be removed be- 

 fore they are sold. 



But I am told, you cannot do it without damaging the applet That, I 

 have got to be shownl I realize that a lot of bruising may be done in the process, 

 but I do not believe it is necessary. The polishing devices have not got to be so 

 tough as all that. All vre are trying to do is what might be done with a light wipe 

 of a handkerchief and certainly that does not bruise an apple. 



It would seem from observations, that most of the damage to apples is 

 done GOING INTO and COMING OUT OF the wiping machines. There are at least one or 

 two makes of wipers that fit over tha elevator section of the sizing machine that 

 give the apples a polish on the way by. 



Anyway, as long as I can go into grocery stores and see bulk unpolished 

 apples for one price and then right along side a neat pile of apples that have had 

 the caress of a wiping cloth and a little attention to display, selling for a much 

 higher price, I am going to keep right on talking about vj-iping apples, 



■JHBHBHHBHHHHBi- F, E, Cole 



CANADIAN IMPORTS 1953-5U 



In Chicago, on August ll+th, the U, S, Canadian Apple Committee met, as 

 it has each year since the start of Y/orld Vifar II, when apple exports from North 

 America to Europe were abruptly cut off, E, Palmer Hart and John Chandler repre- 

 sented the NorthesBtj Henry T/7, Miller, Jr. and M, E, Knouse, the Southeast, for the 

 U. S. 



A quick run-down by the U, S, team revealed that our forth-comijag apple 

 crop, estimated at 100 million bushels, was slightly larger than the short crop of 

 1952, but well below the ten year average of 109 million: that Mcintosh showed the 

 greatest increase over last year, up 70^, with Delicious doi/m 20;^ in the East, but 

 higher in the West, showing an overall iiicrease, and with Winesaps up from 1952 

 about 10^, All other varieties in the U, S, indicated decreases, with Yorks barely 

 S0% of 1952 production. It was estimated that 70 million U, S, apples vrould be 

 sold as fresh fruit, against 65 million in 1952-53 and that 26 million bushels would 

 be processed, the remaining k million being used on farms and therefore not a factor 

 in commercial channels. 



The U, S, gave out export figures for the U, S, 1952 crop as follows j 

 To United Kingdom (England) not one bushel, whereas in the five years before Viforld 

 ?/ap II we have sent U-l/ii million bushels each year to United Kingdom markets 

 alone: to all European countries, we shipped 37,000 bushels of apples in '52-'53, 

 against 8 million before the war. Our total exports last year to all countries was 



