78 NUT CULTURE Iff THE UNITED STATES. 



transplanted in 1859, are reported to be in excellent condition. John P. Eoe attrib- 

 utes their success to their being grown from northern seed. Alvin S. Bennett, 1 the 

 grower, said, in 1884: "The seed was grown at Groton, Mass. The trees are growing 

 on a northern slope, in sandy soil with gravelly subsoil." Attempts to grow the 

 chestnut in the prairie States have, in the main, been unsuccessful. A majority of 

 the reports from Illinois express great dissatisfaction at the results of eiforts to grow 

 the nut there, and from Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, and Texas come similar reports, 

 except where the trees have been protected. There are a few trees in most of the 

 prairie States that occasionally produce nuts, but in general they are with difficulty 

 maintained in good condition, owing to the disastrous effects of dry winds and cold 

 winters. A simple and effective protective device for use in those States is noticed 

 under the discussion of the Persian walnut (p. 30). In Florida the chestnut does 

 poorly on its own roots, but grafted on chinkapin, it is reported to make a satisfac- 

 tory growth on the thin sandy soil of that State. California reports more failures 

 than successes. A grove of 250 trees at Sonoma, now about 15 years old, has been 

 bearing a few nuts during the past five years. At Nevada City and at Winters the 

 American chestnut is fruiting. 



DECLINE OP VIGOR IN THE CHESTNUT. 



From causes not well understood there is a marked decline in the vigor of the 

 chestnut throughout the broad area of territory in the Southern States, where the 

 white man found this tree among the most thrifty of the original forests. Down to 

 the first quarter of the present century there seems to have been no mention of the 

 trouble in the chestnuts of that section. Within the memory of residents of the Gulf 

 States the chestnut flourished in all their higher lands. In point of time, the trouble 

 seems to have begun on the most southern limit of chestnut growth, and there the 

 destruction has been most complete. It has pushed its encroachments throughout 

 Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina, and is now reported in the strong- 

 holds of chestnut growth in North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. Observation 

 of the native chestnut growth in Maryland and Virginia discloses the fact that many 

 trees are dying without apparent cause. In some sections this is attributed to the 

 ravages of insects; in others to an unknown disease resembling blight. There is 

 need for a more thorough investigation of this subject than has yet been made. No 

 injury to the Japanese or European chestnuts planted in this country is yet reported. 



PRODUCTIVENESS. 



There is a wide difference in the fruitfulness of wild trees some bearing but a 

 few nuts annually, others yielding regular crops of one or more bushels to the tree. 

 This difference will need to be taken into account when selecting trees from which 

 to propagate, for there is no reason to doubt that the bearing habit, whether it be 

 generous or scant, will follow the tree into cultivation. Though generally unisexual, 

 chestnut trees standing alone so frequently fail to produce nuts that the opinion 

 has been frequently expressed by various observers that the chestnut is sometimes 

 dioacious; thus Fisher Ames, Lakeside, Mich., reports: "I have one seedling which 

 has stood alone for forty years and given but five perfect burs. It .blossoms every 

 year." 



Joshua Shaw, Ilion, N. Y., says : " I know a few trees in the country that bear 

 very fine nuts if two or more trees stand near each other. A lone tree will have 

 burs, but false nuts." 



Such cases do not necessarily prove that the solitary trees were pistillate, pro- 

 ducing no staminate blossoms; and in the absence of any authentic record of mature 

 trees found by actual examination at blooming time to be dioacious, it is more than 

 likely that the barrenness of solitary chestnut trees will be found to arise from a 



1 Wisconsin Horticultural Society, Report 1884, page 111. 



