32 THE AMERICAN APPLE ORCHARD 



spraying-. Room has to be left in the orchard for the 

 spraying outfit to pass readily about within reach of 

 all sides of all the trees. If a row of fillers is placed 

 midway between two permanent rows, there is always 

 a certain amount of land which is thereby kept out of 

 cultivation. If cultivation is a good thing — and it 

 certainly is — then its benefits are mitigated by sd 

 much as the cultivated area is reduced. If cover 

 crops add valuable elements to the soil — and they un- 

 doubtedly do — then the amount of these elements is 

 reduced in proportion as the fillers occupy space 

 otherwise available for clover or peas. 



In answer to this last objection, it may be said that 

 inasmuch as cultivation, fertilization and growing of 

 cover crops are directed chiefly to the end of fur- 

 nishin3^ to trees an adequate food supply, the inroads 

 made upon the stock of plant food by the fillers, and 

 by the reduction in caltiva'tion and cover crops, may 

 be largely made good by the application of an extra 

 amount of fertilizer. It is, of course, fully recognized 

 that when fillers are planted in an orchard, much 

 more liberal fertilization must be given. The tem- 

 porary trees must not be allowed to feed at the ex- 

 pense of the permanent ones. 



Considering fully the arguments on both sides of 

 the cjuestion, and entirely without prejudice, I feel 

 bound to believe that the practice of interplanting in 

 apple orchards is desirable for fruit growers who 

 have the intelligence to understand their own busiiiess 

 and the courage to attend to it. I may add, further- 

 more, that I have sufficient faith in the modern up- 

 to-date fruit growers to believe that a great many 

 fulfill these requirements. Another argument for the 

 feasibility of double planting is that this system has 



