PEACHES: PRODUCTION ESTIMATES, ETC. 19 
there was a decided decrease in the number of bearing trees in Dela- 
ware during the decades included in the tabulation, though from 
1890 to 1900 the decrease in Sussex County was comparatively small. 
This decline in the extent of the industry is probably traceable prin- 
cipally to three causes—the destruction of the trees by yellows and 
by the San Jose scale and the competition of the fruit with that pro- 
duced in other regions. During the years when peach growing in 
Delaware was at its height there was comparatively little competition 
in the industry, since extensive planting of peaches had not yet oc- 
curred in many sections. 
The areas about Camden and Wyoming in Kent County, about 
Bridgeville in Sussex County, and about Milford in both these coun- 
ties are among the more important centers of production at present, 
but in a general way peaches are grown more or less throughout 
these two counties in localities within easy hauling distance to ship- 
ping stations. 
Varieties Comparatively few varieties make up the bulk of the 
crop. These are principally the Carman, Belle, Reeves, Elberta, 
and Frances, with the Elberta Jargely predominating. 
MARYLAND. 
Distribution—For a century and more, peach growing in Mary- 
land has been a prominent agricultural enterprise. This applies 
particularly to certain Eastern Shore counties and to Anne Arundel 
County, on the western shore of Chesapeake Bay. During the late 
eighties and the nineties large interests were developing in Washing- 
ton County in the western part of the State. Probably the zenith 
of peach growing on the Eastern Shore was reached about 1875 to 
1885, coincident with its largest extension in Delaware. Subse- 
- quent changes have been not unlike those that have occurred in Dela- 
ware. These changes are suggested by the census figures presented in 
Table ITT. 
TABLE IiI.—Peach trees of bearing age in certain counties in Maryland. 
Counties. 
Census of— 
: Queen Washing- 
Caroline. Kent. Gitar tant 
TigeXO 1) aces AS Se SO a SSAA Ss te ee, GRID Ne REA 2 670,828 | 1,758,005} 1,287, 496 124,105 
SOO weet ne Mi Gen Ee Re Nader eld ae eas Nic ak) ee 628, 284 484, 249 565, 640 828, 352 
TCT OS See cy, Rea A Se SNE BAGG Cn EOE Uae ag UAT er oa ee 175, 339 | 190, 594 119, 804 260, 596 
. The figures in Table III are self-explanatory. The decline of 
peach growing shown was due to a combination of factors. The 
most potent influences were probably the prevalence of yellows and 
