74. 



Table 70. - 



N'mber of sprcyors and dusters of indicated kind on farms 

 studied, by areas, 19S8 1/ 





Sprayers used 



in vineyards : 



Spray-: 



ers on: 



farm : 



but noi: 



Dusters usee 



I in : 



Dus ters 







Ovmod 





^: Hired : 



": for : 



: vine- : 



vineyard£ 



on 











*" Owned : 



Hired : 

 , for : 



faiia 



iir oa : 





but not 





PoT7er ! 



.Trac- : 

 tion : 



. Hand 



: yr.rd : 

 : use : 



used in: 

 vine- : 



Power: Han.d : 



.vino- : 

 . yard : 



used in 

 vine- 













vard : 





use 



; yards 





; Number: 



.Number: 



;Nuiubei 



»:Number: 



.Number; 



Numb cr : Numb er : 



; Number; 



.Number 



Niagara Co*,N.Y.: 

 Chautauqua Go.,N.Y: 

 Finger Lakes ,N.Y: 

 Fudson YaHqy^^Y, 

 Pennsylvania i 

 MicMgan 

 Arkansas (1929) 



2 : 

 23 : 

 , 13 : 

 : 19 : 

 ; 51 

 : 47 : 

 : 67 : 



2 : 



. 14 : 



: 1 : 

 ; 1 



1 

 ; 2 



: 2 

 : 10 



: 2 : 

 5 : 



: 11 : 

 : 12 

 : 13 



: 3 : 



; 22 ; 

 . 23 : 

 : 7 : 

 : 9 ; 

 ! 8 : 

 : 1 • 



; 4 J 

 1 ; 



; 6 : 

 : 16 ; 



; 3 



; 6 



; 1 



: 6 

 : 6 



: 1 

 : 5 

 : 2 

 : 1 

 : 4 



Total 



: 222 



: 18 



i 15 



: 43 



: 73 



: 27 ; 



! 10 



: 12 



: 13 



l/ SoBie sprayers and (iistors were ov/nod jointly by 2 growers • Each share of a 

 sprayer or duster reported in the study v/as counted as one machine, except where 

 records were obtained from both owners of the machine. 



Traction sprayers were also cheaper to 'operate than power sprayers. 

 Inventory values for traction sx.raycrs averaged but §47 per machine compared 

 witji |226 for power sprayers ♦ (table 72«) In the Finger Lakes area an applica- 

 tion of spray was applied with traction sprayers for 75 cents less per acre than 

 v;ith power sprayers, but only one half as raich spray was applied per adre with 

 the traction outfit. Most of the traction sprayers were over 20 years old and 

 no now traction sprayer had been purchased since 1919 by the growers interviewed 

 in the Finger Lakes area. 



On the average, in Michigan in 1928, it cost about $1.20 less per acre 

 to dust once than to spray once* Michigan f^rov/ors dusted 3.7 acres in about 

 the. time required to spray one aero. One important advantage that dusters have 

 over sprayers is that a dustdr will cover a vineyard in much less time than a 

 sprayer; this probably explains why so many of the Icrgcr x^ineyards in 

 Michigan were dusted. Michigan gj^owers that reported dusters had, on the aver- 

 age, 37.5 acres of vineyard and 5.2 acres of orchard. Michigan grtDwers having 

 one sprayer or a share interest in one sprayer had an average of about 22 acres 

 of vineyard and 7 acres of orchaxd. ' 



Most of the growers' interviewed having a sprayer or duster owned but 1 

 machine. Seven Arkansas growers had moro than 1 sprayer; the average number 

 w\as 3. These 7 farms had an average of 50 acres of vineyard and 76 acres of 

 orch^^rd, or for each sprayer an average of 16 acres of vineyard and 24 acres 

 of orchard, (table 73»j In areas where the tim.e of applying the vineyard spray 

 is less exacting than in Arkansas, a much larger grape acreage is cared for per 

 sprayer. Th.us in the Chautauqua -Erie belt and in the Finger Lakes area where 

 vineyards, if" sprayed, are usually sprayed but once during the season, the 

 farmers having one ^power sprayer had on tiie average about 30 acres of vineyard 

 and 12 acres of orchard* 



