1160 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF PRACTICAL HORTICULTURE 
Percentage Amount 
Product Value of loss of loss 
Cereals 2... cece eee eee ee eens ne $2,000,000,000 10 $200,000,000 
Way ...... cee ee 530,000,000 10 53,000,000 
Cotton 6... ce cee ee te eee nee 00,000,000 10 60,000,000 
TODACCO oc. cee eee vee cee eee eee aes 53,000,000 10 5,300,000 
Truck CropS.... cece eee eee ene 265,000,000 20 53,000,000 
UPAVS ccc cee cet ee eee eee ne 50,000,000 10 5,000,000 
BruitS ...0. cee wee ee ce weet eee 130,000,000 20 27,000,000 
Farm ForestS....0 2... ccc cece eee e eee 110,000,000 10 11,000,000 
Miscellaneous CropS ........ee ee ee eee 8,000,000 10 5,800,000 
Animal Products........... weee oeee 1,750,000,000 .. 175,000,000 
OTAl cee cc cece cee crew eneneees $5,551,000,000 os $595,100,000 
Natural Forests and Forest Products... ........-.-5 100,000.000 
Produce in Storage... .. ccc cee ee weet eee eee 100,000,000 
1) 
In 1889 Professor Forbes reached the 
conclusion that the annual loss to crops 
in the state of Illinois was $2,375,000. 
It is estimated that in 1892 insects 
caused a loss of $2,000,000 to the apple 
crop of Nebraska. Professor Sligerland 
estimates that in 1897 the insect taxed 
the apple growers of New York $2,500,000. 
In 1900 one-half of the crop of Idaho was 
damaged, while in 1901, the loss was 
even greater than that. Mr. McPherson 
estimates that in Idaho the loss in 1902 
was $250,000. In many sections of the 
Pacific Northwest the loss in that year 
was from 50 per cent to 75 per cent. The 
American Agriculturist estimates that the 
average apple crop for the five years 
from 1898 to 1902 was 47,000,000 barrels. 
This includes apples of first and second 
quality. 
It has been shown by careful observa- 
tions in various apple-bearing states that 
the codling moth may cause a loss of 
from 20 per cent to 40 per cent of the 
fruit which would otherwise be sound and 
marketable. In computing the actual 
monetary loss to the apple growers of 
this country by the codling moth, we 
prefer to take the lower estimate rather 
than the higher. This 20 per cent de- 
crease in merchantable apples would rep- 
resent some 12,000,000 barrels, and at an 
average profit of $1.00 per barrel indi- 
cates a loss of $12,000,000, less the value 
of this fruit for cider, vinegar or some 
other use which brings in small returns. 
The average price for cider apples will 
not exceed 30 cents per barrel, which 
would represent a reduction of $3,600,000, 
leaving a net loss of $8,400,000. The loss 
throughout the country in small orchards, 
ee a ee ad 
supplying local needs, undoubtedly aver- 
ages much higher than in the large com- 
mercial orchards which supply the bulk 
of the fruit of the markets. The esti- 
mate made by Mr. Simpson of the loss in 
such home orchards is $3,000,000, which 
added to our former figures gives a total 
direct loss to the apple crop annually 
from the codling moth of $11,400,000. 
One would be perfectly justified in esti- 
mating the actual loss in merchantable 
apples at a much higher figure than 20 
per cent, and an average might be as- 
Signed of 85 per cent to 40 per cent, 
which would have very greatly increased 
the apparent monetary loss. The apple 
is a perishable fruit and must be con- 
sumed within a limited period. It is not 
like wheat and other cereals the standard 
grades of which have fairly fixed values 
and which may be kept indefinitely. The 
cold storage system has very much ex- 
tended the marketing period of apples, 
but the attack by insects greatly reduces 
the amount of fruit of actual cold stor- 
age capacity, and the bulk of the crop 
must find an immediate market. There- 
fore, if the additional fruit which is now 
rendéred unsalable by the codling moth 
should be thrown on the market, the ac- 
tual price of apples would probably be 
affected even more than the increased 
supply would indicate. The increase in 
our export apple trade, which is being ac- 
tively encouraged by the Department of 
Agriculture, and the development of cold 
storage facilities for fruit, will undoubt- 
edly increase the market for apples from 
year to year. Nevertheless, one is war- 
ranted in taking the lower estimate con- 
sidered above in view of the probable 
