SHIPPING MASSACHUSETTS APPLES 3 



to volume of production. In Table 2 are listed the quantities of the principal varie- 

 ties produced by g:ro\vers in each group. 



The information on rail transportation is reliable. Carriers are required to 

 publish tariffs of rates and charges for supplementary services as well as regulations 

 covering the types of service which they can perform. Statements herein presen- 

 ted are correct as of February' 1, 1933. Since changes occur frequently in the 

 tariffs it is desirable that growers check currently with the railroad those parts of 

 the bulletin which apply to their shipments. 



Data pertaining to truck shipments were secured from the growers. This is the 

 only accurate method. General trucking information is inadequate because publi- 

 city of rates or services by truck operators is not required. 



Data on the markets are not as detailed as would be desirable, due to the fact 

 that it was necessary to collect the data by correspondence. 



Table 2 — Relative Importance of Varieties on the Basis of Volume of 

 Commercial Production. 1931 



Total 



Mcintosh 



(bushels) 



67 reports 



3,105 

 26,942 

 19,500 

 15,050 

 15,646 

 68,587 

 11,500 

 66,516 



226,846 



Baldwin 

 (bushels) 

 60 reports 



3,640 

 14,446 

 11,414 

 10,700 



7,140 

 24,713 



2,800 

 60,500 



135,353 



Special Problems Confronting Massachusetts Apple Growers. 



The population of the United States increased more than 17 millions between 

 1920 and 1930. Forty-nine per cent of this increase was north of the Ohio anrl 

 east of the Mississippi. The data available show that there has been no discernible 

 increase in the consumption of apples within this area. On the basis of carlot 

 unloads, as reported by the United States Department of Agriculture, there has 

 actually been a slight downward trend; but when the movement by motor truck is 

 added to the rail unloads the data show that total consumption is practically 

 unchanged. It appears, therefore, that apple consumption is not keeping pace 

 with increase in population. In fact, the consumption of apples has not increased 

 in the last decade. In contrast,_there has_been*a_marked increase in the use of 

 other fruits. 



This situation presents a serious problem. All growers of apples might ask 

 themselves why their product is not holding its own in the markets. Has the 

 saturation point been reached in apple consumption? Is it indifference to proper 

 merchandising on the grower's part which prevents apples from meeting with favor 

 among buyers? Are the retailers shifting consumers' demand? If it is desirable 

 that all apple growers consider the situation, it is particularly pertinent for the 

 Massachusetts grower. 



