Trees, Fruits and Flowers of Minnesota Part 6

This paper is purposely given a broad t.i.tle so that it may cover any questions which come under the head of orcharding. Many of you who have been pestered with an "Orchard Survey Blank" can easily guess what subjects are to be taken up. Thanks to many of the members of this society and other fruit growers for their hearty co-operation, a large amount of data has been collected from fifty-three counties, representing most of the districts within the state. As would be expected certain counties have contributed much more information than others, probably owing to their greater interest in orcharding. For example: Thirty-one replies have already been received from Hennepin County, seven from Goodhue, six from Renville, five each from Houston, Meeker and Rice, four each from Chippewa, Dakota, Mower, Polk and Wabasha, three each from Blue Earth, Nicollet, Ottertail, Pine, Ramsey, Steele, Was.h.i.+ngton and Watonwan and one or two each from the remaining counties. Perhaps if the right parties had been reached the low-standing counties would have a higher ranking.

The best way to present the data is an enigma. If all the information was given at one time we would need a whole day instead of fifteen minutes. Of course much of the material is a repet.i.tion, and a general summary will cover the main facts in most cases. Nevertheless it is not feasible to take up all of the subject matter in this short period, and therefore the first two topics on the survey blank have been selected, namely, orchard sites and protective agencies. At a later date, if you are sufficiently interested in dry facts other subjects, as soils, dynamiting, orchard management, stock of fruit trees, methods of planting and pruning, varieties for various localities, etc., will be taken up. Some of the subjects, like sites and soils, will be treated as state problems, while others must be considered as sectional.

Minnesota, as you all know, contains many different climatic conditions, and consequently its orchard practices and recommendations must vary accordingly. To meet this problem the writer, in consultation with Prof.

Cady, divided the state into six sections, namely, the southeastern, east central, northeastern, northwestern, west central and southwestern.

Many counties are, of course, in an intermediate position and might be thrown into either of the adjoining sections, but an arbitrary line must be drawn somewhere. Freeborn, Waseca, Rice, Goodhue and all the counties east of them are placed in the southeastern section. Nicollet, LeSueur, Sibley, McLeod, Wright, Isanti and the counties to the east are included in the central east, and Pine, Mille Lacs, Morrison and the counties to the north and east are placed in the northeastern section.

Beltrami, Hubbard, Ottertail and the counties to the west are placed in northwestern section; Traverse, Douglas, Todd, Stearns, Meeker, Renville, Yellow Medicine and the enclosed counties in the west central, and the remainder to the south and west are in the southwestern section.

Thus, when the various sections are mentioned, you will know what part of the state is being referred to.

_Site of Orchard._ By site of orchard we refer to its location, that is, whether it is on rolling, level or hilly ground, and the direction of its slope, provided it has one. From past experience it is believed that an orchard situated on a north slope is ideally located for Minnesota conditions, as its blossoming period is r.e.t.a.r.ded and consequently the liability of injury from late frosts decreased. But all people who want orchards do not possess such a slope, so they set out their orchards on the most convenient location. A few growers have orchards sloping in all directions, and their opinion on the influence of slope on hardiness and r.e.t.a.r.dation of the blooming period should be valuable. It is of interest to note that, out of 108 reporting on the levelness of the orchard ground, only twelve had level ground, two level to nearly level, one level to decidedly rolling, twenty-nine nearly level, seven nearly level to slightly rolling, three nearly level to medium rolling, twenty-nine slightly rolling, four slightly rolling to medium rolling, eighteen rolling and three decidedly rolling. A glance at the figures shows that the majority of orchards are on nearly level to slightly rolling land.

In addition to the numbers given thirteen reported a slight slope, one a slight slope to a medium slope, two a slight to a steep slope, sixteen a medium slope, one a medium to a steep slope, and five a steep slope--the emphasis being laid on the moderate rising ground. No grower reported an orchard location entirely at the base of a slope, but six reported orchards extending from the base to the top of the slope, two from the base to midway of the slope, twenty-five at midway of the slope, seven from midway to the top and twenty-two at the top of a slope--the high ground evidently being preferred for orchard sites. As a general rule, as would naturally be expected, those who reported their orchards on the top of the slope usually reported their ground as either high or medium.

Of ninety-six reports on the elevation of the orchards only four reported low land, and two of these were on top of a slope, two low and medium, one low and high, forty-six medium, fourteen medium and high, and twenty-seven high--the medium taking the lead. These figures have been given of the state as a whole, but when the sections are considered the southeastern and the west central take the lead in the highest percentage of high ground in comparison with the lower ground; the southeastern and east central, for the greatest amount of rolling land; and the southwestern, for the most level or nearly level land.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Down the long row. View in well cared for orchard of J. M.

Barclay, Madison Lake.]

As for the effect of direction of slope on hardiness, there were many varied opinions. Thirty stated without question that the direction had an effect, thirty-one stated that it had no effect, and seventy-two admitted that they did not know. Of those answering in the affirmative only seven had two or more distinctly different slopes, while fifteen of the negatives had two or more slopes for comparison. Nine of those who stated they didn't know had two or more slopes upon which to base their judgment. In summing up the direction of sites preferred, seventy-seven recommended a northerly slope, nine had no preference, one preferred southeast, one west, one west and east, two east, one north and east, one northeast or east, and sixty-four expressed no opinion. Two growers stated that the north slope prevented early bloom and thereby lessened liability to injury from late frosts, two growers stated that northern slopes decreased the loss of moisture, and one stated that the northeast slope gives the largest fruit and the west the best colored.

As a brief summary of the reports on orchard sites, it may be stated that high ground, rolling or sloping to the north, is preferred by the majority of growers who filled out these orchard survey blanks.

_Protective Agencies._ Under this heading comes windbreaks of all kinds, whether hills, natural timber or planted trees, and bodies of water which ameliorate the climate. Out of fifty-four replies from the central east section, sixteen reported that their orchards were favorably affected by lakes, the benefit coming in most cases from the prevention of early and late frosts. One grower attributed the cooling of the air during the summer as a benefit and two stated that the bodies of water furnished moisture. Two growers in the southeast section received favorable influences from the Mississippi River, and one in the southwestern and two in the west central sections thought they received beneficial effects from lakes. According to this data, orchards in the east central section, owing largely to the influence of Lake Minnetonka, are greatly benefited by the presence of water.

Windbreaks are a very important factor in successful orcharding in Minnesota, even though one party in the southeast section and three parties in the central east noted no beneficial effects. According to reports from the central west and southwest sections they are of great benefit and in some cases indispensable to apple growing. As would be expected by any one who is acquainted with Minnesota, the planted windbreaks are a more important factor in the prairie country than in the natural wooded and hilly regions. In the southeast section, five orchards were reported as protected by bluffs and hills, three by both hills and natural woods, two by natural woods, two by both natural and planted woods, and twenty-one by planted woods; in the central east section, one by a hill and a planted windbreak, one by a town, fifteen by natural timber, two by natural and planted timber, and nineteen by planted windbreaks; in the northeast section, two by natural and four by planted windbreaks; in the northwest section, three by natural and two by planted windbreaks; in the west central section, one by a hill and natural timber, five by natural timber, two by natural timber and planted windbreaks, and eighteen by planted windbreaks; and in the southwest section, one by a hill and natural woods, one by a hill and planted windbreak, two by natural timber, and fifteen by planted windbreaks. If Meeker County, which has natural timber, was not included in the central west--and perhaps it should have been included in central east--this section would have only one orchard protected alone by natural timber; and if Blue Earth County was eliminated from the southwest, this section would have no orchard protected alone by natural timber.

The beneficial effects from windbreaks may be summed up as follows: Twenty-five reported that they prevented fruit from being blown off trees, nine that they prevented trees and limbs being broken by winds and storms, ten that they protected trees from injury by winds without specifying the kind of injury, four that they reduced injury from frosts, ten that they either prevented or reduced winter injury, four that they helped to retain moisture, five that they helped to hold snow, eight that they prevented snow drifting, five that they protected orchards from hot and dry winds, three that they permitted the growing of apples, and one that they supplied all advantages.

The kinds of trees recommended for windbreaks and the methods of planting are numerous and variable and to discuss them at length would take too much time. However, the princ.i.p.al facts may be briefly enumerated.

In eighty-five reports that listed set out windbreaks, it was found that fifty-seven growers had used evergreens, thirty-seven willows, twenty-nine box elders, twenty-five maples, seventeen cottonwoods, thirteen ashes, eleven elms, eight poplars, four oaks, four plums, three nuts and one apple. The evergreens consisted of thirteen Scotch pine, eleven evergreens (not named), eight Norway spruce, five spruce (not named), three balsam, three Austrian pine, two white pine, one yellow pine, two cedar, two white spruce, two pine (variety not named), two fir, two jack pine, one Black Hills spruce, and one tamarack. In the willows were given twenty willows (variety not named), two laurel-leaved, seven white and eight golden; in the maples, sixteen soft maples, two hard maples, one silver-maple and six maples (kind not named); in the poplars, five Norway, one Carolina, two poplar (kind not named); and in the nuts, one black walnut, one b.u.t.ternut and one walnut.

The major part of the box elders, cottonwoods, willows and ashes were noted in the central west and southwest sections. Thirty-seven experienced growers of windbreaks, the most of them living in the southwest, west central and southeast sections, recommended the following trees for windbreaks in the given proportions, twenty-four evergreens, fifteen willows, seven maples, six poplars, five elms, five box elders, three elms, two plum, two cottonwood, three hedges, one oak, one hackberry and one black walnut. The evergreens are decidedly the most popular, and among the varieties mentioned Norway spruce takes the lead for those recommended, and the Scotch pine for those planted.

There are about as many different systems of planting used as growers.

The main point in all cases was to have a planting that would stop the wind and storms. A few growers advocated the use of a hedge or plum trees to fill in under the windbreak, while one grower desires a circulation of air under the branches of his trees. Cultivation and intercropping of windbreaks are also recommended in a few cases. The distance of planting varies, of course, with the trees or shrubs used.

For example: one grower recommends 8 ft. x 8 ft. for large deciduous trees, and another grower, 6 ft. x 12 ft. apart in rows and two rows, 12 ft. apart. For Scotch pine one grower advocates eight feet. In some cases a mixture of many kinds of trees is recommended, and then again only one kind. One very solid windbreak is made up of a lilac hedge, four rows of jack pine, four rows of Norway poplar and one row of willow. Another is one row willow, one of evergreen, one of willow and one of evergreen.

Various distances between windbreak and orchard were used and recommended. A large number of orchards were started at about twenty feet from the windbreak and a few as close as one rod, but these distances proved to be too close. One grower, however, recommended close planting and later the removal of a row of trees in the windbreak when more s.p.a.ce was needed. The recommended distances for planting varied from thirty to 500 feet, although seventy-five to 100 was satisfactory in most cases.

More details have been given in regard to orchard sites and windbreaks than many of you are probably interested in, but for one who is planning to set out an orchard they should prove of value and profit, as they are based upon the experiences of many of Minnesota's best orchardists.

My Experience with a Young Orchard.

ROY VIALL, SPRING VALLEY.

About ten years ago we acquired some land three and one-half miles north of Spring Valley. This land is very rough and was originally covered with heavy timber, in fact, about one-third of our large orchard was cleared and grubbed out the fall before planting.

When I became interested in fruit growing one of the first things I did was to join the Horticultural Society and to the knowledge obtained through this members.h.i.+p we owe in large measure what success has come to us.

The eighteen acres selected for our main orchard slopes quite abruptly to the north and northeast. In fact, the slope is so steep that the ground, if kept under cultivation, would wash badly, and this was the real reason for seeding down our orchard at the time of planting. The orchard is now seven years old, and the trees have never had a particle of cultivation. Part of this ground was in grain and seeded to alsike and timothy the year before; the balance was the new land referred to, which we had broken and immediately seeded down to alsike and timothy, with oats as a nurse crop.

Our first problem was what varieties to plant, in what proportion and where to buy them. In this we adopted the recommendation of this society at that time, choosing Wealthy, d.u.c.h.ess, Patten Greening and Northwestern Greening, with fifty Malinda and fifty Iowa Beauty. We now have in addition two small orchards with nearly forty varieties altogether. The varieties, for the large orchard were divided as follows: 250 d.u.c.h.ess, 250 Patten Greening, 300 Northwestern Greening, 1,000 Wealthy. Were I to set another commercial orchard of the same size it would contain 500 d.u.c.h.ess and the balance Wealthy. While the Patten Greening is an ideal tree and an early and prolific bearer, there is with us a much larger per cent of imperfect and diseased fruit than of any other variety. Tree for tree, I believe the d.u.c.h.ess will produce _more_ saleable _fruit_.

Where to buy our trees was decided for us in one of our first numbers of the Horticulturist, viz., at the nearest reliable nursery. That this was good advice is evidenced by the fact that out of the 1,900 trees we have found but two that were not as ordered.

Our next problem was, at what distance to plant the trees. The more information we sought the less sure were we of the best plan. We were advised to plant all distances from 12 feet by 16 feet to 24 feet by 32 feet. We finally concluded to take about an average of them all and decided on 20 feet by 20 feet, and so far have had no reason to regret it. We have put up the alsike and timothy every year for hay with the usual machinery, and there has not been over a half dozen trees seriously damaged. Our trees were nearly all three years old, 5 to 6 feet, and we find they do much better in sod than a smaller tree.

Having the orchard set out the next thing was to protect the trees from mice and rabbits. This we did by making protectors out of wire cloth, using different widths, from 18 to 24 inches, cutting it in strips 10 inches wide and holding it about the trees by three pieces of stove pipe wire at the top, middle and bottom. Not counting the time of making and putting them on these cost us from 1-1/2 cents to 2-1/2 cents each, and lasted from three to four years. We used a few made of galvanized wire cloth, which lasted much longer.

Three years ago we commenced replacing these protectors with a wash of white lead and raw linseed oil mixed to the consistency of separator cream. The first year we painted only fifty trees, the next year 100, the next 300, and this last year we painted every tree on the place. We can see no bad effects, and it certainly protects against mice and rabbits and, what is equally as important, against borers also, and the cost per tree, including labor, is much less.

We have also used the lead and oil with splendid results in treating trees affected with canker. We had quite a number of Wealthy so affected, and we cut out the affected bark and wood and then covered the wound with lead, and in almost every case it has proved a cure, that is, stopped the spread of the canker.

The second year our orchard was set out we began to mulch the trees with gra.s.s cut in the orchard, clover straw, pea straw--anything we could get. We were unable to mulch the entire orchard that year, and before we got the balance mulched you could tell as far as you could see the orchard which trees were mulched and which were not. The former not only made a better growth, but had a healthier look. Now I do not want you to get the idea that I am advocating the sod system except in locations similar to ours. Were our orchard on more level ground I not only should have cultivated the first three years, as advocated by most authorities, but would have continued the cultivation in some degree at least.

Nevertheless, on account probably of the very favorable location, I think our orchard will compare favorably with any cultivated orchard of the same age. Having the orchard set out, protected against mice and rabbits and mulched, we found that the real work of raising an orchard had just begun. First came the gray beetles the following June, and they ate the new growth off several hundred trees before we discovered them.

At that time, not knowing what else to do, we hand picked every one we could find and destroyed them. These beetles we found came from oak groves on the south and west, and the next year we sprayed with a.r.s.enate of lead six or eight rows of trees on that side of the orchard, and as we have since then sprayed the entire orchard each year we have had no further trouble.

Next came pocket gophers, and before we learned how to stop them we had lost a number of trees by their chewing off the roots just beneath the surface of the ground. By opening their runways and placing well down in them a piece of carrot or potato in which has been placed a little strychnine we succeeded in getting rid of them entirely. Next came the woodchucks. They were very destructive with us, chewing the bark above the protectors as well as the roots. Trapping is the most successful method we have found, and by keeping a half dozen traps out all the time we held them in check. Eternal vigilance must be the motto of the successful orchardist.

In the year 1913 we picked our first crop of apples, that is, in sufficient quant.i.ty to be considered in a commercial way. Our d.u.c.h.ess we sold in barrels at $2.00 net. Wealthy we packed in bushel boxes, making two sizes, the larger, three inches and over, we called No. 1, and they sold for $1.25 per box net. The balance or smaller ones were also sold in boxes and brought us $1.00 per box net. Patten Greenings brought us 80 cents and Northwestern Greenings, 90 cents per box. Our neighbors, who sold to the local and transient buyers in bulk and in barrels, received 75 cents to 90 cents per hundred pounds, or $2.00 per barrel.

The past year we had only about 75 bushels of all kinds. With the exception of d.u.c.h.ess and possibly Patten's Greening we shall certainly sell our next crop in bushel boxes.

We are top-working about 50 Patten's Greening to Jonathan, Delicious, McIntosh Red and King David. As the work was only started a year ago last spring I cannot tell you of its success or failure. So far the best results seem to be with the Jonathan.

We also have about thirty varieties of plums, including many of Prof.

Hansen's new hybrids. Of these the Opata seems to be the most hardy and prolific, but it is subject to brown rot, which, this past year was so bad that we lost more than half the fruit. We have it top-worked on several varieties of native plums, and it was similarly affected there also. This was the only variety in our orchard of 150 trees that was so affected. We have fifteen Surprise plums, set seven years, that have not yielded altogether a peck of plums. Only lack of time kept me from grubbing them out last spring. This past season they were so heavily loaded that we had to prop the limbs and then thin out the fruit.

We endeavor to spray all our trees twice with commercial lime-sulphur and a.r.s.enate of lead--the first time immediately after the blossoms fall, the second two weeks later. Our spraying outfit consists of a Morrill & Morley hand pump, fitted in a 100-gallon tank, which we mounted on a small, one-horse truck. We operate it with three men, one to drive and pump and one for each line of hose, spraying two rows of trees at once. With this outfit we can spray 400 to 500 trees (of the size of ours) a day.

THE NATIONAL FORESTS--besides being the American farmer's most valuable source of wood, which is the chief building material for rural purposes, are also his most valuable source of water, both for irrigation and domestic use. In the West, they afford him a protected grazing range for his stock; they are the best insurance against flood damage to his fields, his buildings, his bridges, his roads, and the fertility of his soil. The national forests cover the higher portions of the Rocky Mountain ranges, the Cascades, the Pacific Coast ranges, and a large part of the forested coast and islands of Alaska; some of the hilly regions in Montana and in the Dakotas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas, and limited areas in Minnesota, Michigan, Florida, and Porto Rico. In addition, land is now being purchased for national forests in the White Mountains of New England and in the southern Appalachians. In regions so widely scattered, agricultural and forest conditions necessarily differ to a great degree, bringing about corresponding differences in the effect of the national forests on the agricultural interests of the various localities. Wherever agriculture can be practiced, however, the farmer is directly benefited by the existence of national forests and by their proper management.--U.S. Dept. of Agri.

GARDEN HELPS

Conducted by Minnesota Garden Flower Society

Edited by MRS. E. W. GOULD, 2644 Humboldt Avenue So.

Minneapolis.

SOME SUGGESTIONS FOR THE USE OF COAL ASHES--