69, 



dnr.G^G fror, cliseases ard insects. Sons gro^^ert^- consider nn unsprr.yed vine- 

 yard as unnecessary a risk as an uninsured building. Avf^ilable information 

 for Ch^uteuqua-Erie viney-'rds for 5 years indicates that -''hether the sprayed 

 vineyirds yielded better thnn those f*ot spr^.yjd depended upon the season. In 

 1927 and again in 1928, there ros not much differ mce in yield between sprayed 

 and unsprnyed vineyards but in 1925 the sprayed (or dusted) vineyards yielded 

 about one fifth more than, neighboring vineyards not sprayed (or dusted), 

 (tnble 65.) For the 5-year period, 1924-1928, the nverago yields -^-ere 9 

 percent hi??her on the sprayed or dusted vineyqrds than on the vineyards that 

 ^rere not sprayed or dusted. 



Tr-ble 65» - Comparison of relative yields in viney^^rds not spr'^.yed or 



dusted rith yields in vineyards sprayed or dusted, 

 Ghaut auqur. -Erie area, 1924-1928 





; Yinevr, 



irds 



: T jrcentare of average 

 ; yield, for vineyards - 



: Increase 



: in yield 

 : in vineyards 

 ; sprayed 





Year : 



: N(Dt sprayed 

 ; or dusted 





Sprayed ; 

 or dusted : 



: Not spr-tyed 

 1 . or dusted 



: Spr^^yed ; 

 ; or dusted ' 







; Humbor 





Number : 



: P jrcent : 



: Percent : 



Percent 





1924 J 



1925 : 

 1986 : 



1927 : 



1928 : 



1 41 



; 55 



73 



104 





47 : 

 54 ; 



71 : 



71 ; 



103 : 



92 : 



; 90 : 



95 : 



101 : 



98 : 



; 106 : 

 ; 110 : 



: 104 : 

 : 98 : 

 : 102 J 



: f 14 

 : f 20 

 ; f 9 

 : - 3 



1 4-4 





Average : 







: 



95 : 



; 104 : 



f 9 





In the Finger L^kes area a majority of the intervie^7ed rrorers did not 

 spray or dust their vineyards in 1928. Dr. Reddick ^/^ ^^riting in 1918 points 

 out that about 1908, end : even earlier, the grape gro^~er of Keuka Lake area 

 ras very proficient in the prep^^ration of Bordeaux mixture and in the operatior 

 of ": spraying machine,, but that since about 1910 black rot had practically 

 disappeared from these vineyards. Do^^ny m.ildoT^ is common in the Finger Lakes 

 area. 



The sprayed vineyards studied about Pulteney and Naples yielded better 

 in 1928 than the unsprayod vineTOrds* The fev vineyards that vers sprayed in 

 the other Finger Isakes areas did not yield so ttbII, on the average, as the 

 vineyards that rere not sprayed. 



Differences in climate largely explain v;hy a majority of the vineyard 

 acreage in Arkansas T-^as spr'^yed 3 or more times during the season ^'^hereas in 

 the Finger Lrkes area a majority of the vineyard acreage ^-tis neither sprR37'ed 

 nor dusted. Climatic conditions are m.ore favorable for grape diseases in the 

 Hudson Valley than in the Chautnuqua-Erie belt or in the Finger Lakes area:^ 

 About three fourths of the vineyard acreage studied in the Hudson Valley Fas 

 spr^ye(^. or dusted in 1928. 



9/ Roddick, Donald, Grape Spraying for Lake Keuka. Yates County Farm Bureau 



NoTSp June 1918, 



