APPLES 



289 



viously is attended with less rislv. A very 

 common practice is to leave more or less 

 of a stub iu the removal of limbs. This 

 is a source of serious mischief. Such 

 wounds cannot heal over. They are off 

 the channels of cambial activity, and the 

 edges of the bark die; the end dries and 

 begins to decay. Fungi find lodgment, and 

 soon decay proceeds downward to the 

 main branch, or else the fungi starting in 

 the bark soon spread to the main limb, 

 girdling it, and causing the death of large 

 limbs, sometimes the whole side of a tree, 

 and even the entire top. Instances of all 

 these results are extremely common. 



Whatever season is preferred by the 

 operator, limbs should be cut off closely 

 and parallel to the general direction of 

 the parent branch. In the removal of 

 limbs a sharp well-set saw, giving a 

 smooth, clean cut, is as good an instru- 

 ment as can be found. The rough work 

 of the hatchet, or axe, is as much out of 

 place in an orchard as in surgery. The 

 rough wounds have a tendency to retain 

 . particles of dust and moisture, offering 

 bacteria and the spores of fungi a very 

 favorable place for starting into activity. 

 Bruising and tearing of the bark about 

 the edges of the wounds is also very 

 serious. The smoother the cut the bet- 

 ter. In sawing off large limbs the cut 

 should be started on the under side. 

 Wounds should be coated over in two or 

 three days after being made, with an 

 adhesive waterproof antiseptic coat. White 

 lead mixed with linseed oil is one that 

 the writer prefers. Boiled coal tar is also 

 satisfactory. Especial attention should be 

 given to coating the entire wound. The 

 lower edge is the weakest point about 

 the wound on account of being the last 

 to dry off after rains. Another coat later 

 is very desirable. 



Ernest Walker. 

 Fayetteville. Ark. 



Pruning from Conneoticnt Tiewpoint 



Regarding this subject there exists a 

 great difference of opinion, both among 

 fruit growers and official horticulturists. 

 The conflicting recommendations of the 

 various authorities are due partly to the 

 varying conditions under which apples are 



grown, but more particularly to our meag- 

 er stock of experimental evidence relating 

 to the subject. On traveling through New 

 England one becomes impressed with the 

 great variety of tree structures. Some 

 trees have large broad heads with open 

 centers and some are so crowded that 

 their heads have not had a chance to ex- 

 pand. Some are low headed, some high 

 headed, and some have been beheaded. 

 Others have been pruned from beneath as 

 high as a man can reach with an axe 

 and others, by far the largest number, 

 seem never to have been pruned at all. 



With so many conflicting opinions as to 

 how a tree should be pruned, it seems 

 necessary that the fruit grower should set- 

 tle upon some form of tree structure, and, 

 starting with the young tree, develop his 

 ideal. Varieties and individuals differ 

 greatly in form and habit, but even in 

 the most stubborn cases it is possible to 

 approach the ideal. Each tree must be 

 pruned with respect to its own individu- 

 ality. A tree that is making a strong 

 growth should have a different treatment 

 from one making a weak growth, and a 

 tree with an upward tendency demands 

 different training from one with a spread- 

 ing habit. Pruning should be regarded 

 as a work of training rather than of 

 correcting. In the treatment of neglected 

 trees it is necessarily a work of correc- 

 tion, and it requires several years of this 

 work to make up for the lack of training. 



The Low Headed Trees 



The general tendency at the present 

 time is to grow low headed trees and the 

 number of advocates of the high headed 

 structure is becoming smaller every year. 

 The necessity for thorough spraying since 

 the advent of the San Jose scale has done 

 much to bring about this change of ideals. 

 Low headed trees are not only more easily 

 sprayed but they can be pruned more con- 

 veniently and the fruit can be more eco- 

 nomically thinned and harvested. It is 

 difficult to estimate the difference in the 

 cost of harvesting fruit from high and low 

 headed trees, but it is probable that there 

 would be a difference of at least 25 per 

 cent in favor of the latter. Low headed 

 trees are less susceptible to injury from 



