llMXi.] PUBLIC DOCUMKNT— No. 33. 49 



another crop in lilOii. While trees severely headed back 

 recovered less rcadil}' Iroiii the eff'ects of freezing, those 

 which finally bore the crop made distinctly better growth for 

 the pruning. 



The trees lightly pruned were cut back only a i)art of the 

 l)revious year's annual growth, — from one-third to one-half. 

 The largest percentage of recovery was shown by these trees, 

 and they bore slightly larger crops of fruit in 1905 than any 

 of the others. On the other hand, there appeared to be more 

 breakage of large branches, the heads are left in less satis- 

 factory form than on trees severely headed back, and the pros- 

 pect for carrying a good crop in 190() seems to be slightly 

 less. 



The trees left without pruning are now distinctly the 

 poorest in the orchard, with the exception only of those that 

 were "dehorned." The percentage of loss was high, the 

 crop of 1905 was inferior to that on the pruned trees, and 

 the present condition of these trees is unsatisfactory. 



As the result of this experiment, the following practice 

 would seem to be indicated : — 



1. Prune peach trees moderately, removing not more than 

 one-third to one-half the previous year's annual growth, 

 when the wood has been injured by freezing. 



2. AYhen only the fruit buds are killed, the wood being 

 uninjured and the trees in good condition, prune severely, 

 cutting back the annual growth to two or three buds. It 

 may be expedient to cut some branches back even into two 

 or three year old wood. 



