40 University of New Hampshire [Sta. Bull. 321 



THOUSAND CRATES 



JUN^ JUL. I julA JUL. is JULaa JUI..29 AU&5 Aua.iz aug. 19 AUC.2« S£P 2 



\X/EEK ENDING 



Fig. 13. Volume of shipments ol blueberries according to the state of 



origin. Pxiston. IQ.iQ. 



New Hampshire blueberries in Boston 



Since New Hampshire dues not have a particularly g-ood reputa- 

 tion on the Boston market, the following sugg-estions for improve- 

 ment may be in order : 



(1.) The production and planting oi early maturing and hard}', 

 large, cultivated types. 



(2.) Greater use of cleaning- machines (See Fig. 14) for low Inish 

 blueberries and of sizing machines for both low and high 

 bush blueberries to facilitate sale of berries under grades 

 and brands. At least one grower has developed a sizing ma- 

 chine and several are now using cleaning machines. 



(3.) Increased participatit)n of growers in improved production 

 practices such as weeding, btirning. ])nming. fertilization, and 

 selection (tf stocks rrconiim-iKK-il 1)\ (.•.\])i'rinu'nt stations 

 ancl by successful growers. 



W'hen quotations on Xew Hampshire l)lueberries are compared 

 with those of Maine and Nova Scotia on the same sale dates we find 

 that over the last five years (1935-1939) Maine blueberries averaged 

 3..^ cents i:)er (|uart higher, and Nova Scotia berries, 5.6 cents per 

 (|uart higher than Xew Hampshire berries. 



The poor reputation and lower prices of Xew Hampshire berries 

 may be partly due to some shiimients of low bush l>lueberries which 

 have not been properly cleaned and sized. 



