326 
THE NATIONAL NURSERYMAN 
well, but is shy in shipping qualities, to California, and by 
irrigation, under prevailing climatie conditions, i^roduccs 
not only a fine eating fruit, but the best shipping orange 
known to commerce. But the contact is limited. In Florida 
and Australia nature says, “Nay, nay, Pauline, that lovely 
fonn of yours belongs only to California.” And yet, left 
alone to its own sweet will, this fruit fails of perpetuation. 
So intelligent contact not only has its place, but is part and 
parcel of the scheme of things as they arc—it provides man 
an everlasting job where son succeeds father without contest 
of wills or the use of probate courts. Contact a Spitzenberg 
apple in Oregon and Washington and nature rewards you 
by augmenting your bank account; do it in other sections 
and she negatives your effort and reduces the bank account; 
plant raisin grapes in central California and a bountiful 
harvest insures you a living; do it in Utah and you are up 
against it. Again, man changes the native vegetation of 
Australia to California, and with it the white cottony 
cushion scale (Icerya purchasi), but without its natural 
enemy. Result, nature’s equilibrium is destroyed, the white 
scale becomes established and almost ruins California’s 
citrus industry, its onward march of destruction being finally 
stopped in the restoration of nature’s balance by the intro¬ 
duction of the Vedalia Cardinalis, of blessed memory, and 
the scourge disappears. Again, California experiments 
with the fig, a native of Asia Minor, and finds the trees grow 
well. Many are planted but fail to produce a fruit the 
equal of that produced in its native soil. -Again, the balance 
is disturbed. The Capri fig, the home of the fructifying fig 
wasp, is at first allowed to flourish where nature put it; 
later we import it also, but still no good curing fruit. Then 
it remained for our own Mr. Roeding, in conjunction with 
the Federal Department of Agriculture, to go to Asia Minor, 
exploit the little fig wasp {Blastophaga grassoruni) which 
fertilizes the fruit, and presto change, nature’s equation is 
re-established, and California now grows annually carloads 
of genuine Smyrna figs. And so many, many other instances 
of a like nature might be cited. In exploiting production by 
suiting the conditions to the fruit, and the fruit to the 
environment, I hardly think that pomology is being over¬ 
done, nor that its possibilities have been always intelligently 
appreciated. 
In the development of a fruit growing section we hear 
much of big profits; the promoters shout it from the house¬ 
tops; the commercial bodies sing it to various accompani¬ 
ments of blare of trumpets and sounding of cymbals; the 
floating literature of the day dilates on it, and even the 
children lisp it to their fellows. But what of the losses— 
the failures where nature has been wrongly contacted? 
I know it is the unwritten law that these be consigned to 
the records of the past; that to dig them out of their abysmal 
depths is not only hazardous, but subject to inspection and 
quarantine, if not destruction. Nevertheless, these experi¬ 
ences are danger signals along the highways of pomology, 
and as such have a compensating value. You all know of 
them; no state is immune. In California there are several 
where orchard planting was promoted twenty or more years 
ago, and literally, hundreds of thousands of trees were 
planted under adverse conditions, where today there is 
probably not two per cent of permanent commercial tree 
growth to tell the story of human endeavor misapplied. 
Again, a fruit is often misplaced in certain localities, but 
finally finds its equation, and so becomes a recognized factor 
in the horticultural resources of a State. In California this 
is measurably true of the olive and almond. 
Our lines of thought lead to two conclusions, viz., success¬ 
ful fruit culture demands, first, proper environment and 
conditions, and second, that man’s contact with nature’s ' 
workshop bo in sympathy with her moods and requirements. 
Failure is a disregard of both, and results from natural as 
well as artificial causes. In other words, man disturbs the 
balances, and then things begin to go askew, the difference 
between maximum success and utter failure being merely a 
matter of degree. To reduce the matter to mathematical 
dimensions is impossible for want of specific data; but in a 
broad way we know that this contact with the universe, if 
reckoned by the number of trees planted but failing of 
fruition, has resulted in more failures than successes. In¬ 
deed, if the opinion of the Federal Division of Pomology is 
to be believed, only about fifteen percent of all fruit trees 
sold annually ever make commercial propositions. Coming 
down from federal to state and locality estimates, it is the 
consensus of opinion of people conversant with orchard 
conditions in Arizona, California, Idaho, Oregon, Texas, 
Utah and Washington that there is a variation from ten 
to fifty per cent, with an average as a whole of twenty-seven 
per cent. Stated conversely, seventy-three per cent of the 
trees sold annually and planted never attain commercial 
importance; in the judgment of others, and applied at large, 
this percentage will be somewhere about eighty-five per cent. 
Of the total number of fruit trees of commercial |)lantings 
of bearing age, it has been said that sixty per cent are profit¬ 
able in Arizona, forty-six and two-fifths in California, fifty 
in Texas, thirty in Utah (being the only states from which 
estimates have been received); of the total trees and vines 
coming into bearing, the percentages that will prove com¬ 
mercial investments are estimated at eighty in Arizona, 
forty-four in California, fifty-two in Idaho, twenty in Oregon, 
fifty in Texas, thirty in Utah, and fifty in Washington; 
with elimination of the unfit by reason of natural causes, 
such as unsuitable situations and climate, insect pests, 
diseases, etc., the data shows ten per cent in Arizona, thirty 
in California, twenty-five in Idaho, fifty in Oregon, twenty- 
five in Texas, thirty-five in Utah, fifty in Washington; 
elimination by bad management, absent ownership, ignorant 
methods, land put to other uses, Arizona, ten per cent, 
California twenty-six, Idaho twenty, Oregon thirty, Texas 
twenty-five, Utah thirty-five, Washington fifteen; averag¬ 
ing fruit production in periods of five to seven years, net 
percentages covering the following entire states are; Arizona 
ten, California eight, Texas seven and one-third, Utah ten, 
Washington ten; under exceptional conditions average 
maximum results under intensive culture are: Arizona 
twenty-five, California sixteen, Texas twenty-five, Utah 
forty and Washington forty. Wide differences in these 
averages must be attributed to personal experiences and 
limited sources and areas covered, to varying condition on 
which they are based, and to individual opinion. As such- 
