•THIRTY-FOURTH FRUIT-GROWERS ' CONVENTION. 15- 



tax your patience to pursue it further. But this subject is paramount 

 to ail others you may consider at this Convention, unless it be that of 

 the proper legal equipment of the State and county horticultural officers, 

 and this matter is to be considered by a special committee appointed at 

 this meeting. From the field assessment notes of fourteen counties of 

 the State, and embracing fifty fruit-growihg districts, the average 

 assessed value of orchard trees is $50.50 per acre, and the average 

 assessed value of the land bearing these trees is $140 per acre. The 

 best orange land in Orange Count}^ is assessed at $310 per acre including 

 the trees. Covina reports show some assessments as high as $500 an 

 acre for land and groves. San Bernardino County has land standing 

 at $375, and $125 for the trees. The highest assessment of fruit land in 

 Santa Clara County is $560 for land and orchard. But I have taken 

 the highest and lowest and all intervening values in these fifty localities 

 from the fruit-growing districts north and south, and the average 

 assessment for land and trees is $190.50 per acre. An equal number 

 of farming land reports shows the average assessed value to be $31.20, 

 and grazing lands average $7.60. From this showing it appears that 

 bearing trees make the taxpaying duties of the land six times as great 

 per acre when compared with that of farms, and twenty-five times as 

 great when compared with stock land. But some one may say: "Look 

 at the immense value of these lands to the owners, An orange grower 

 at Riverside could sell his grove for $2,000 an acre and walk away with 

 the money. What would the public get out of that transaction?" I 

 would answer that the grove still remains. Of the $12,000,000 assessed 

 valuation of this county, it is safe to say that $6,000,000 lies within 

 cannon shot of this hall. The town lots and their improvements are 

 assessed at about one third that of the acreage and its improvements. 

 Hence, the business and professional men of Riverside are doing busi- 

 ness on practically a $6,000,000 capital with an investment of only 

 $2,000,000. Rough figuring, you say, but it is smooth enough no doubt 

 to slide far below the realities, for no one can estimate the business 

 value, the residential value, or the future value altogether that accrues 

 from the turning of a wilderness into a garden ; the value of the 

 tourists who come here to see what the fruit-growers' activities have 

 actually created here in taxpaying wealth and homelike beauties. And 

 so it is in a hundred horticultural districts throughout the State. Can 

 you say this of the other landed interests, some of which cover whole- 

 townships without a home ? With the exception of a few shipping and 

 trade centers, and a few health and summer resorts, every live city or 

 town in the State is in the midst of a fruit district, as no other industry 

 approaches horticulture in the work of buildins- up other industries of 

 the State. 



Then why should not the orchardists require more adequate protec- 

 tion for their fruit trees and \ines? There are over 40,000^000 fruit 

 trees growing in the State at this time and 315,000 .acres of vines. If 

 the growers were allowed but one cent for every five of these orchard 

 trees, to say nothing of the vines, it would provide an annual fund of 

 $80,000 with which to guard our boundaries from further invasion, 

 stamp out perils already established, unify the work of quarantine and, 

 control throughout the State, and equip the office of the State Com- 



