24O 
THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN. 
fall, but the matter will be urged upon them, and they will given per¬ 
sonal instructions in the matter until we get the whole system in work¬ 
ing order. 
We are not rushing blindly ahead and forcing our nurserymen against 
their will, without giving them full opportunity to see the “ whys ” 
and “ wherefores.” Fumigation is not an experiment, and', if by 
spending 25 cents and an hour of time, the nurseryman may prevent a 
fruit grower from losing 5,000 trees, is it not a fair expense ? We 
have shown that the scale is not the only pest to be guarded against in 
this way, for with the green aphis, woolly aphis, oyster shell bark 
louse, scurfy scale, round-headed borer, flat-headed borer, bag-worm, 
peach borer, and others that are a hundred times more common than 
the San Jose scale, we have abundant justification for the position that 
we take. 
In this connection I will read an item of my own which appeared in 
a recent issue of the American Agriculturist: 
“I think it is only a question of a very short time before it will be one 
of the regular operations of the nurseryman, whether it is compelled 
by legislation or not. In the meantime, where great interests are at 
stake, I do not think laws compelling fumigation are out of place, but 
rather a necessity. Some people are inclined to look upon fumigation 
requirements only with reference to the San Jose scale, but it is equally 
fatal to other insects and cannot fail to be of very great benefit to the 
fruit grower. The cost of fumigation to the nurseryman, as compared 
with the cost of spraying, etc., to the grower, is small. Of course, a 
system of fumigation will not do away with the necessity of spraying 
but will greatly decrease the loss that growers now sustain from the 
attacks of various insects.” 
After all, the nursery legislation will benefit the nurseryman, for 
whatever encourages the grower to increase his orchards and to give 
them better care, will benefit the man who sells the trees. We have 
heard it said that the nurserymen are satisfied to have the growers care¬ 
less, for by the dying of neglected orchards they are able to make new 
sales. 
This may sound plausible, but a healthy and profitable tree will do 
much more to encourage orcharding than a dead one. In spite of all 
that science and teaching can do, there will be plenty of trees to die, to 
make room for a normal number of sales. 
Let us hope that the Southern Nurserymen’s Association will stand 
ready to encourage all that goes to protect the fruit grower. No one 
objects to high taxes if he see the benefits, and the intelligent, progres¬ 
sive fruit growers will not be the ones to object to paying the cost of 
the fumigation or inspection, in the slightly increased cost of trees. 
We do not believe that the cost of inspection fees, and fumigation (in¬ 
cluding time) is more than ten cents per thousand for any nurseryman 
with an acre or more of stock, unless he ships in very small lots and 
has to fumigate them all separately, so it can be easily seen that the 
matter of fumigating stock is not one of any great expense. 
In this state, the commission controlling crop pests which has this 
work in charge (and is supported in the work by the Department of 
Agriculture), is endeavoring to work in complete accord with both the 
growers and the nurserymen. Both are now working with us very 
satisfactorily. 
When harmony shall supplant discord, and co operation take the 
place of opposition, our nurserymen and fruit growers all over the 
country will find that our interests are mutual, and the whole question 
of nursery control will find Chappy solution. 
APPLE EXPORTS. 
The apple exports of the United States and Canada for the 
season 1900-01 make a total of 1,346,030 barrels, included 
among which are 203,333 boxes of California apples. Total 
exports for the previous season amounted to 1,293,121 barrels, 
including 149,515 California boxes. For last season the chief 
port of export was Boston with 409,979 barrels, Montreal com¬ 
ing next with 249,219 barrels, followed by New York with 
240,635 barrels. The chief port of import was Liverpool with 
814,100 barrels, London following with 251,322 barrels, after 
which came Glasgow with 225,061 barrels. 
HORTICULTURE IN WASHINGTON. 
Prof. S. W. Fletcher horticulturist for the state of Washing¬ 
ton, who had been visiting eastern horticultural centers told 
the editor of American Gardening that the horticultural pos¬ 
sibilities of Washington are great. Cherries, by actual 
measurement, are 1inches in diameter, and as to straw¬ 
berries—they are so large that no quotation would be made 
for fear of not being believed. Blackberries make canes fif¬ 
teen feet in length and are laid over on to a trellis just as we 
do grapes hereabouts, and the fruiting season endures from 
June till October. The state produces apples and pears of ex¬ 
cellent quality in which an export trade to China and Japan 
is already well established. Soft fruit is shipped in refrigera¬ 
tor cars as far as St. Paul, Minn. 
There appears to be no difficulty of production, but the 
question of reaching proper markets at a proportionate cost is 
the serious problem that confronts the Washington fruit 
grower. The climate of the state is very salubrious, and with¬ 
out excessive heat in summer. There is a wonderful depth of 
soil; it is fifty feet and more at Pullman, where the ex¬ 
periment station is. 
NURSERY STOCK IMPORTS, 1896—1900. 
Bulletin 24 of the section of foreign markets of the United 
States Department of Agriculture, prepared by Frank H. 
Hitchcock, chief of that section, shows the sources of the 
agricultural imports of the United States for the five years 
1896 to 1900. 
Under the head of Nursery Stock the following values are 
shown: 
Countries from which 
Imported. 
' 
1896. 
Fears I 
1897. 
Snded . 
1898. 
lUNE 30. 
1899. 
1900. 
Annual Aver¬ 
age, 1896-1900. 
$ 
1 
* 
$ 
$ 
$ 
Per ct.. 
Netherlands. 
507.362 
350,882 
299,149 
286,797 
348,472 
318,533 
36 01 
France. 
178,565 
202.187 
100,375 
122,739 
160,423 
152,858 
1.7 28 
Belgium. 
143,031 
124,646 
116,878 
130,864 
172,639 
137,612 
15 56 
Germany. 
77,683 
76,680 
59,368 
63,229 
83.546 
72,101 
8.15 
Bermuda. 
104,852 
78,528 
50.988 
38,424 
65,652 
67,689 
7.65 
United Kingdom. 
67,279 
53,436 
76,663 
49,523 
52.424 
59,865 
6.77 
Japan. 
22,904 
25.972 
24,516 
41,748 
60.513 
35,131 
3.97 
Canada. 
24,486 
22,615 
7,402 
1 678 
2.806 
11,798 
1.33 
Italy.. 
3,477 
4.980 
8.845 
11.421 
3.114 
5,568 
.63 
Chinese Empire . 
5,238 
8.692 
3.849 
4,440 
5,441 
5,532 
.63 
British West Indies_ 
4,652 
2,874 
2,849 
2.955 
2,212 
3,108 
.&5 
Hawaii. 
1,208 
2,166 
1,393 
3,286 
4 151 
2,441 
.28 
Hongkong. 
955 
941 
2,849 
3,212 
2,730 
2,137 
.24 
Brazil. 
507 
1,779 
2,323 
2,849 
933 
1,678 
.19 
Colombio. 
1,586 
1,588 
2,609 
1,127 
780 
1,138 
.17 
Austria Hungary_ 
2,525 
2,983 
649 
734 
652 
1.509 
.17 
Mexico. 
3.276 
704 
1,241 
1,371 
647 
1.448 
.16 
British Africa . 
3 580 
716 
.08 
Turkey, Asiatic. 
220 
990 
1,410 
474 
376 
694 
■08 
Switzerland. 
414 
378 
1,903 
394 
59 
630 
.07 
Venezuela . 
360 
61 
178 
369 
1,118 
417 
.05 
Azores, and Madeira Is- 
lands. 
325 
. . 
27 
1,300 
330 
.04 
Denmark. 
17 
151 
251 
821 
248 
.03 
Cuba . 
263 
286 
17 
274 
227 
213 
.02 
British Australasia. 
278 
363 
15 
155 
162 
.02 
British East Indies. 
39 
93 
157 
284 
94 
133 
.02 
Portugal. 
5 
560 
113 
.01 
Costa Rica. 
30 
5 
370 
28 
87 
.01 
Porto Rico. 
100 
258 
72 
.01 
Honduras . 
4 
2 
61 
114 
36 
1 
Guatemala___ 
78 
71 
30 
Auckland, Fiji, etc. 
136 
27 
Nicaragua. 
20 
112 
26 
Russia, European. 
101 
20 
British Honduras_ 
36 
30 
13 
Sweden and Norway... 
5 
7 
46 
3 
12 
Turkey, European. 
40 
8 
- 002 
British Guiana... . 
10 
25 
7 
Spain. 
32 
6 
Argentina. 
25 
5 
Dutch East Indies. 
22 
4 
Philippine Islands.. .. 
20 
4 
Danish West Indies.... 
10 
2 
Dutch Guiana... 
5 
1 
Total. 
955,307 
963,977 
762,158 
768,982 
972,385 
884.662 
100.00 
