APPLES 
yiousl} 1» attended with less risk. A very 
common practice 18 to leave moie o1 less 
of a stub in the 1emoval ot limbs. This 
ig a source of sellous muschief. Such 
wounds cannot heal over. They are off 
the channels of cambial activity, and the 
edges of the bark die, the end dries and 
begins to decay. Fungi find lodgment, and 
soon decay proceeds downward to the 
main branch, or else the fungi starting in 
the bark soon spread to the main limb, 
girdling it, and causing the death of large 
limbs, sometimes the whole side of a tree, 
and even the entire top. Instances of all 
these results are extremely common. 
Whatever season is preferred by the 
operator, limbs should be cut off closely 
and parallel to the general direction of 
the parent branch. In the removal of 
limbs a sharp well-set saw, giving a 
smooth, clean cut, is aS good an instru- 
ment as can be found. The rough work 
of the hatchet, or axe, 18 aS much out of 
place in an orchard as in surgery. The 
rough wounds have a tendency to retain 
particles of dust and moisture, offering 
bacteria and the spores of fungi a very 
favorable place for starting into activity. 
Bruising and tearing of the bark about 
the edges of the wounds is also very 
serious The smoother the cut the bet- 
ter In sawing off large limbs the cut 
should be started on the under side. 
Wounds should be coated over in two or 
three days after being made, with an 
adhesive waterproof antiseptic coat. White 
lead mixed with linseed oil is one that 
the writer prefers. Boiled coal tar is also 
satisfactory. Especial attention should be 
given to coating the entire wound. The 
lower edge is the weakest point about 
the wound on account of being the last 
to dry off after rains. Another coat later 
is very desirable. 
ERNEST WALKER, 
Fayetteville, Ark 
Pruning from Connecticut Viewpoint 
Regarding this subject there exists a 
great difference of opinion, both among 
fruit growers and official horticulturists. 
The conflicting recommendations of the 
various authorities are due partly to the 
varving conditions under which apples are 
289 
giown, but more paiticularly to our meag- 
er stock of experimental evidence relating 
to the subject. On traveling through New 
England one becomes impressed with the 
gleat variety of tree structures. Some 
trees have large broad heads with open 
centers and some are so crowded that 
their heads have not had a chance to ex- 
pand Some are low headed, some high 
headed, and some have been beheaded. 
Otheis have been pruned f10m beneath as 
high as a man can reach with an axe 
and others, by far the laigest number, 
seem never to have been pruned at all. 
With so many conflicting opinions as to 
how a tree should be pruned, it seems 
necessary that the truit grower should set- 
tle upon some form of tree structure, and, 
starting with the young tree, develop his 
ideal. Varieties and individuals differ 
greatly in form and habit, but even in 
the most stubborn cases it is possible to 
approach the ideal. Each tree must be 
pruned with respect to its own individu- 
ality. <A tree that is making a strong 
growth should have a different treatment 
from one making a weak growth, and a 
tree with an upward tendency demands 
different training from one with a spread- 
ing habit Pruning should be regarded 
as a work of training rather than of 
correcting. In the treatment of neglected 
trees it is necessarily a work of correc- 
tion, and it requires several years of this 
work to make up for the lack of training. 
The Low Headed Trees 
The general tendency at the present 
time is to grow low headed trees and the 
number of advocates of the high headed 
structure is becoming smaller every year. 
The necessity for thorough spraying since 
the advent of the San Jose scale has done 
much to bring about this change of ideals. 
Low headed trees are not only more easily 
sprayed but they can be pruned more con- 
veniently and the truit can be more eco- 
nomically thinned and harvested It is 
difficult to estimate the difference in the 
cost of harvesting fruit from high and low 
headed trees, but it is probable that there 
would be a difference of at least 25 per 
cent in favor of the latter. Low headed 
trees are less susceptible to injury from 
