22 N. H. Agricultural Experiment Station [Bulletin 257 



Orchard 8, on the other hand, spent a very small amount of time 

 on pruning ; only 151 man hours per 1.000 mature trees were used one 

 year, and due to illness the next spring no time was devoted to prun- 

 ing. As an average for the three years, three farms put less than 

 400 hours per 1,000 mature trees, seven farms between 400 and 600 

 hours, and two over 600 hours. The average for all the farms was 

 474 hours per 1,000 mature trees in 1926, 576 in 1927 and 643 in 1928. 

 The average for all farms for the three years was 567 hours. 



The great variation between orchards is not due to a difference in 

 speed of work but to amount and type of pruning. The men in Or- 

 chard 2 with a high labor requirement per mature tree units work as 

 rapidly, if not more rapidly, than most orchardists; but the work 

 is done more intensively and perhaps more thoroughly. It seems 

 possible that some orchardists may be too particular, that detailed 

 pruning of small branches, although desirable from the point of view 

 of plant physiology, does not actually give sufficient benefit to justify 

 the cost. The actual difference in results if somewhat larger branches 

 are cut out is difficult to measure, but it is thought that in pruning 

 on the larger orchards there is need of a different viewpoint which will 

 be discussed elsewhere in this bulletin. 



Pruning per 1.000 mature trees in Orchard 7 varied from 174 man 

 hours in 1926 to 593 in 1927. Orchard 3 varied from 709 in 1926 to 

 281 in 1927. This lack of uniformity' can be accounted for by the 

 fact that pruning is somewhat indefinite as to annual requirements. 

 ?nd the orchardist if crowded with work may delay some pruning until 

 the next year. They may all plan to prune systematically about so 

 much each year; but, as an actual fact, pruning is fitted in between 

 jobs that are more definite as to time requirements. It is noticeable 

 that construction of buildings, pleasure trips, opportunities to use 

 team or trucks to financial advantage, or other orchard operations have 

 first choice for the orchardist 's time. But since this is the case, those 

 who are irregular from year to year and fit pruning into other op- 

 portunities for financial gain are actually getting the pruning done 

 cheaper than is indicated by comparison of hours of labor, as they 

 are using time in pruning that has less value. It is marginal time 

 to a large extent. There may be losses in yields due to irregular 

 pruning, but if so, it is difficult to secure evidence. And as far as any 

 indication from a three-year study is concerned, those who prune the 

 most irregularly and for that matter those who do very little pruning 

 seem to be getting as good yields and as high quality of fruit as those 

 who are regular and do much pruning. Pruning is recognized to be 

 a long-time task. It is possible that those who prune most are laying 

 the foundation for greater profits 5 or 10 years hence. The writers 

 are unable, however, to find visible evidence of this fact from present 

 appearances of the orchards. 



In general, on the larger fruit farms the labor on pruning is spread 

 over the available period, while on Ihe smaller farms the operation is 

 done in April and May when conditions are more ideal. As shown in 

 Table 6 the large farms 2 and 7 and the medium-sized Orchard 5 did 

 considerable pruning in December, January and February. On the 



