Home
  By Author [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Title [ A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z |  Other Symbols ]
  By Language
all Classics books content using ISYS

Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ]

Look for this book on Amazon


We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month
fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: Northern Nut Growers Association Report of the Proceedings at the Thirty-Seventh  Annual Report - Wooster, Ohio, September 3, 4, 5, 1946
Author: Northern Nut Growers Association [Editor]
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
Copyright Status: Not copyrighted in the United States. If you live elsewhere check the laws of your country before downloading this ebook. See comments about copyright issues at end of book.

*** Start of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Northern Nut Growers Association Report of the Proceedings at the Thirty-Seventh  Annual Report - Wooster, Ohio, September 3, 4, 5, 1946" ***

This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.



+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|DISCLAIMER                                                              |
|                                                                        |
|The articles published in the Annual Reports of the Northern Nut Growers|
|Association are the findings and thoughts solely of the authors and are |
|not to be construed as an endorsement by the Northern Nut Growers       |
|Association, its board of directors, or its members. No endorsement is  |
|intended for products mentioned, nor is criticism meant for products not|
|mentioned. The laws and recommendations for pesticide application may   |
|have changed since the articles were written. It is always the pesticide|
|applicator's responsibility, by law, to read and follow all current     |
|label directions for the specific pesticide being used. The discussion  |
|of specific nut tree cultivars and of specific techniques to grow nut   |
|trees that might have been successful in one area and at a particular   |
|time is not a guarantee that similar results will occur elsewhere.      |
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+



Northern Nut Growers Association INCORPORATED

Affiliated with The American Horticultural Society

37th Annual Report

CONVENTION AT WOOSTER, OHIO

SEPTEMBER 3, 4, 5 1946



Table of Contents


   Officers and Committees                                             3
   State Vice Presidents                                               4
   List of Members                                                     5
   Constitution                                                       21
   By-Laws                                                            22
   Proceedings of the Thirty-Seventh Annual Convention                23
     Address of Welcome--Dr. J. H. Gourley                            23
     Response--John E. Cannaday, M.D.                                 24
     Address of Retiring President--Carl Weschcke                     24
     Report of Secretary--Mildred M. Jones                            25
     Report of the Treasurer--D. C. Snyder                            26
   Aims and Aspirations of the Ohio Nut Growers--A. A. Bungart        27
   Notes on the Annual Meeting                                        31
   Nut Growing Under Semi-Arid Conditions--A. G. Hirschi              32
   Weather Conditions versus Nut Tree Crops--J. F. Wilkinson          37
   Nut Tree Notes from Southwestern Ohio--Harry R. Weber              39
   Black Walnut Nursery Studies--Stuart B. Chase                      40
   My Experiments, Gambles and Failures--John Davidson                42
   Nut Trees in Wildlife Conservation--Floyd B. Chapman               45
   Commercial Aspects of Nut Crops as far North as St. Paul,
     Minnesota--Carl Weschcke                                         48
   The 1946 Status of Chinese Chestnut Growing in the Eastern
     United States--Clarence A. Reed                                  51
   Bearing Record of the Hemming Chinese Chestnut Orchard--E. Sam
     Hemming                                                          58
   Walnut Notes--G. H. Corsan                                         60
   Self-fruitfulness in the Winkler Hazel--Dr. A. S. Colby            60
   Hickories and Other Nuts in Northwestern Illinois--A. B. Anthony   61
   Nut Trees for Ohio Pastures--Dr. Oliver D. Diller                  62
   How Hardy Are Oriental Chestnuts and Hybrids?--Russell B.
     Clapper and G. F. Gravatt                                        64
   Growing Chestnuts for Timber--Jesse D. Diller                      66
   Improved Methods of Storing Chestnuts--H. L. Crane and J. W. McKay 71
   Essential Elements in Tree Nutrition--W. F. Wischusen              73
   Nut Tree Propagation as a Hobby for a Chemist--Dr. E. M. Shelton   83
   Notes on Propagation and Transplanting in Western
     Tennessee--J. C. McDaniel                                        87
   Propagating Nut Trees Under Glass--Stephen Bernath                 90
   The Economic, Ecological and Horticultural Aspects of
     Intercropping Nut Plantings--Dr. F. L. O'Rourke                  91
   Nut Work at the Mahoning County Experiment Farm, Canfield,
     Ohio--L. Walter Sherman                                          93
   The Ohio Black Walnut Contest of 1946                              96
   1946 Iowa Black Walnut Contest                                     98
   Grafting Methods Adapted to Nut Trees--H. F. Stoke                 99
   Beginnings in Walnut Grafting--C. C. Lounsberry                   103
   Forest Background--John Davidson                                  106
   Graft the Persian Walnut High in Michigan--Gilbert Becker         111
   Pecan Growing in Western Illinois--R. B. Best                     112
   Random Notes from Eastern New York--Gilbert L. Smith              114
   Yield and Nut Quality of the Common Black Walnut in the
     Tennessee Valley--Thomas G. Zarger                              118
   The 1946 Field Tour--C. A. Reed                                   124
   Report of Resolutions Committee                                   126
   Obituary--Gourley, Bixby                                          126
   Letters to the Secretary; Notes; Extracts                         128
   List of Exhibits                                                  133
   Attendance                                                        134



OFFICERS OF THE ASSOCIATION


 _President_--CLARENCE A. REED, 7309 Piney Branch Rd., N.W., Washington,
 D. C.

 _Vice President_--DR. L. H. MACDANIELS, Cornell University, Ithaca, N.
 Y.

 _Treasurer_--D. C. SNYDER, Center Point, Iowa

 _Secretary_--MILDRED M. JONES, BOX 356, Lancaster, Penna.

 _Director_--CARL WESCHCKE, 96 S. Wabasha St., St. Paul, Minn.

 _Director_--DR. A. S. COLBY, University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill.

 _Dean_--DR. W. C. DEMING, Litchfield, Conn.

 _Parliamentarian_--JOHN DAVIDSON, 234 E. Second St., Xenia, O.


EXECUTIVE APPOINTMENTS


 PARLIAMENTARIAN                                       John Davidson

 LEGAL ADVISERS                           Sargent Wellman, Harry Weber

 AUDITING                       E. P. Gerber, G. A. Gray, R. E. Silvis

 FINANCE                       Carl Weschcke, Harry Weber, D. C. Snyder

 PRESS AND PUBLICATION  L. H. MacDaniels, George L. Slate, G. H. Corsan

 VARIETIES AND CONTESTS--Gilbert Becker, Gilbert L. Smith,
                         L. Walter Sherman, A. G. Hirschi, Seward Bethow

 SURVEY                                                   John Davidson

 EXHIBITS--H. F. Stoke, Mrs. G. A. Zimmerman, Mrs. Herbert Negus,
     I. W. Short, Gilbert L. Smith, H. H. Corsan, G. H. Corsan,
     L. Walter Sherman, J. F. Wilkinson, Royal Oakes, Seward Berhow,
     George Brand, A. G. Hirschi, R. T. Dunstan, Spencer B. Chase and
     Abe Margolin, Carl Weschcke,

 PROGRAM--Mildred Jones, George L. Slate, L. H. MacDaniels, O. D. Diller,
     Thomas G. Zarger, R. P. Allaman, Clarence A. Reed

 MEMBERSHIP--Mrs. S. H. Graham, A. A. Bungart, Mrs. Herbert Negus,
     George Kratzer, Lewis A. Theiss

 NECROLOGY--Mrs. H. F. Stoke, Mrs. John Hershey, Mrs. William Rohrbacher,
     Mrs. John Davidson, Mrs. J. F. Jones

 PLACE OF MEETING (Both 1947 and 1948)--George L. Slate, L. H. MacDaniels,
     G. H. Corsan, D. C. Snyder, G. J. Korn

 OFFICIAL JOURNAL--American Fruit Grower, 1770 Ontario St., Cleveland, Ohio



State Vice Presidents


   Alabama                      LOVIC ORR

   Alberta, Canada            A. L. YOUNG

   Arkansas               SEARLES JOHNSON

   British Columbia, Can.  J. U. GELLATLY

   California          DR. THOMAS R. HAIG

   Canal Zone              L. C. LEIGHTON

   Colorado                    W. A. COLT

   Connecticut        WILLIAM G. CANFIELD

   Delaware                EDWARD C. LAKE

   Georgia                G. CLYDE EIDSON

   Idaho                      FRED BAISCH

   Illinois                JOSEPH GERARDI

   Indiana         DR. CHARLES H. SKINNER

   Iowa                        E. F. HUEN

   Kansas                      H. S. WISE

   Kentucky                DR. C. A. MOSS

   Louisiana            J. HILL FULLILOVE

   Maine                RADCLIFFE B. PIKE

   Maryland              WILMER P. HOOPES

   Massachusetts      DR. R. A. VAN METER

   Mexico                 JULIO GRANDJEAN

   Michigan                GILBERT BECKER

   Minnesota                R. E. HODGSON

   Mississippi         DR. ERNEST A. COOK

   Missouri         DR. F. M. BARNES, JR.

   Nebraska                  GEORGE BRAND

   New Hampshire          L. A. DOUGHERTY

   New Jersey       MRS. A. R. BUCKWALTER

   New York                CLARENCE LEWIS

   North Carolina       DR. R. T. DUNSTAN

   Ohio                        G. A. GRAY

   Oklahoma                 A. G. HIRSCHI

   Ontario, Can.             G. H. CORSAN

   Oregon                         E. RUSS

   Pennsylvania        H. GLEASON MATTOON

   Quebec, Can.          GORDON L. SOMERS

   Rhode Island             PHILLIP ALLEN

   South America      CELEDONIA V. PEREDA

   South Carolina         JOHN T. BREGGER

   South Dakota          HOMER L. BRADLEY

   Tennessee             THOMAS G. ZARGER

   Texas                  KAUFMAN FLORIDA

   Utah                  GRANVILLE OLESON

   Vermont                  A. W. ALDRICH

   Virginia            DR. V. A. PERTZOFF

   Washington            F. D. LINKLETTER

   West Virginia         MEYER S. SLOTKIN

   Wisconsin                W. S. BASSETT

   Wyoming                   W. D. GREENE



Northern Nut Growers Association

Membership List as of January 4, 1947


  ALABAMA

  Orr, Lovic, Penn-Orr-MacDaniel Orchards, R. D. 1, Danville
  Richards, Paul N., R. D. 1, Box 308, Birmingham


  ARKANSAS

  Johnson, Searles, Japton
  Upham, Harry, "Quinta Nogalada", Cove
  Williams, Jerry F., R. D. 1, Viola


  CALIFORNIA

  Armstrong Nurseries, 408 N. Euclid Ave., Ontario
  Field, Lt. Eugene A., USN, U.S.S. Whitney, c/o Postmaster, San Diego
  Haig, Dr. Thomas R., 3344 H St., Sacramento
  Kemple, W. H., 222 West Ralston St., Ontario
  Parsons, Chas. E., Felix Gillet Nursery, Nevada City
  Walter, E. D., 899 Alameda, Berkeley
  Welby, Harry S., 500 Buchanan St., Taft


  CANADA

  Brown, Alger, R. D. 1, Harley, Ontario
  Casanave, R. D. 2, Euburne, B. C.
  Corsan, George H., "Echo Valley", Islington, Ontario
  Crath, Rev. Paul C., R. D. 2, Connington, Ontario
  Eddie & Sons, Ltd., Pacific Coast Nurseries, Sardis, B. C.
  Elgood, H., 74 Trans Canada Highway West, Chilliwack, B. C.
  English, H. A., Box 153, Duncan, B. C.
  Filman, O., Aldershot, Ontario
  Gellatly, David, Box 17, Westbank, B. C.
  Gellatly, J. R., Westbank, B. C.
  Giegerich, H. C., Con-Mine, Yellow Knife, NWT
  Housser, Levi, Beamsville, Ontario
  Maillene, George, Naramata, B. C.
  Manten, Jacob, R. D. 1, White Rock, B. C.
* Neilson, Mrs. Ellen, 5 McDonald Ave., Guelph, Ontario
  Papple, Elton E., R. D. 3, Gainsville, Ontario
  Porter, Gordon, Y.M.C.A., Windsor, Ontario
  Somers, Gordon L., 37 London St., Sherbrooke, Quebec
  Trayling, E. J., 509 Richards St., Vancouver, B. C.
  Wagner, A. S., Delhi, Ontario
  Wood, D. F., Hobbs Glass Ltd., 54 Duke St., Toronto, Ontario
  Yates, J., 2150 E. 65th Ave., Vancouver, B. C.
  Young, A. L., Brooks, Alta.


  CANAL ZONE

  Leighton, L. C., Box 1452, Cristobal


  COLORADO

  Colt, W. A., Lyons
  Wilder, W. E., 915 West 4th, La Junta


  CONNECTICUT

  Canfield, William G., 463 West Main St., New Britain
  David, Alexander M., 408 S. Main St., West Hartford
  Dawley, Arthur E., R. D. 1, Norwich
**Deming, Dr. W. C., Litchfield
  Frueh, Alfred J., West Cornwall
  Graham, Mrs. Cooper, Darien
* Huntington, A. M., Stanerigg Farms, Bethel
  Jennings, Clyde, 30 West Main St., Waterbury
  Lehr, Frederick L., 45 Elihu St., Hamden
  LeMieux, W. E., 44 Grove St., Rockville
  McSweet, Arthur, Clapboard Hill Rd., Guilford
  Milde, Karl F., Town Farm Rd., Litchfield
  Morencey, Edward, 37 Kensington St., Manchester
* Newmaker, Adolph, R. D.,1, Rockville
  Page, Donald T., Box 228, R. 1, Danielson
  Pratt, George D., Jr., Bridgewater
  Rodgers, Raymond, R. D. 2, Westport
  Rourke, Robert U., R. D. 1, Pomfret Center
  Scazlia, Jos. A., 372 Matson Hill Rd., South Glastonbury
  Senior, Sam P., R. D. 1, Bridgeport
  Tower, Sidney, 31 Birchwood Rd., East Hartford
  Walsh, James A., c/o Armstrong Rubber Co., West Haven
  Warfel, Robert, 1675 Main St., Glastonbury
  White, Heath E., Box 630, Westport
  White, George E., R. D. 2, Andover


  DELAWARE

  Lake, Edward C., Sharpless Rd., Hockessin


  DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

  Librarian, American Potash Institute, Inc., 1155 16th St.,
    N. W. Washington 6
  Reed, Clarence A., 7309 Piney Branch Rd., N. W., Washington 12


  GEORGIA

  Eidson, G. Clyde, 1700 Westwood Ave., S.W., Atlanta
  Hunter, H. Reid, 561 Lakeshore Dr., N.E., Atlanta
  Neal, Homer A., Neal's Nursery, R. D. 1, Carnesville
  Skyland Farms, S. C. Noland & C. H. Crawford, 161 Spring St.,
    N. W. Atlanta


  IDAHO

  Baisch, Fred, 627 E. Main St., Emmett
  Dryden, Lynn, Peck
  Hazelbaker, Calvin, Lewiston
  Kudlac, Joe T., Box 147, Buhl
  Rice, E. T., Parma
  Swayne, Samuel F., Orofino


  ILLINOIS

  Adams, James S., R. D. 1, Hinsdale
  Allen, Theodore R., Delevan
  Anthony, A. B., R. 3, Sterling
  Baber, Adin, Kansas
  Best, R. B., Eldred
  Bolle, Dr. A. C., 324 State St., Jacksonville
  Bontz, Mrs. Lillian, 161 W. Massachusetts Ave., Champaign
  Bradley, James W., 1300 N. Prospect Ave., Champaign
  Breeden, Robert G., Lane Technical High School, 2501 W. Addison
    St., Chicago 18
  Bronson, Earle A., 800 Simpson St., Evanston
  Churchill, Woodford M., 4250 Drexel Blvd., Chicago
  Colby, Dr. Arthur S., University of Illinois, Urbana
  Colehour, Francis H., 411 Brown Bldg., Rockford
  Dietrich, Ernest, R. D. 2, Dundas
  Dintelman, L. F., Belleville
  Edmunds, Mrs. Palmer D., La Hogue
  Frey, Mrs. Frank H., 2315 West 108th Place, Chicago
  Frey, Frank H., 2315 West 108th Place, Chicago
  Frierdich, Fred, 3907 W. Main St., Belleville
  Gerardi, Joseph, Gerardi Nurseries, O'Fallon
  Haeseler, L. M., 1959 W. Madison St., Chicago
  Helmle, Herman C., 123 N. Walnut St., Springfield
  Johnson, Hjalmer W., 5811 Dorchester Ave., Chicago
  Jungk, Adolph, 817 Washington Ave., Alton
  Kilner, F. R., American Nurseryman, 508 S. Dearborn St., Chicago
  Knobloch, Miss Margaret, Arthur
  Kreider, Ralph, Jr., Hammond
  Livermore, Ogden, 801 Forest Ave., Evanston
  Logan, George F., Carpathian Nursery, Dallas City
  Maxwell, Leroy C., 1606 W. Washington St., Champaign
  Oakes, Royal Bluffs
  Powell, Charles A., Hickory St., Jerseyville
  Pray, A. Lee, 502 North Main St., LeRoy
  Sonnemann, W. F., Experimental Gardens, Vandalia
  Valley Landscape Co., Box 488, Elgin
  Walantas, John., 7048 S. Union Ave., Chicago
  Werner, Edward H., 282 Ridgeland Ave., Elmhurst
  Whitford, A. M., Whitford's Nursery, Farina
  Youngberg, Harry W., Port Clinton Rd., Prairie View


  INDIANA

  Behr, J. E., Laconia
  Boyer, Clyde C., Nabb
  Garber, H. G., Indiana State Farm, Greencastle
  Gentry, Herbert M., R. D. 2, Noblesville
  Glaser, Peter, R. D. 1, Box 301, Evansville
  Hite, Chas. Dean, R. D. 2, Bluffton
  Minton, Charles F., R. D. 5, Huntington
  Morey, B. F., 453 S. 5th St., Clinton
  Olson, Albert L., 1230 Nuttman Ave., Fort Wayne
  Pritchett, Emery, 1340 Park Ave., Fort Wayne 6
  Prell, Carl F., 803 West Colfax Ave., South Bend
  Ramsey, Arthur, Muncie Tree Surgery Co., Muncie
  Skinner, Dr. Charles H., Indiana University, Bloomington
  Sly, Miss Barbara, R. D. 3, Rockport
  Sly, Donald R., R. D. 3, Rockport
  Tormohlen, Willard, 321 Cleveland St., Gary
  Wallick, Ford, R. D. 4, Peru
  Warren, E. L., New Richmond
  Wilkinson, J. F., Indiana Nut Nursery, R. 3, Rockport


  IOWA

  Andrew, Dr. Earl V., Maquoketa
  Beeghly, Dale, Pierson
  Berhow, Seward, Berhow Nurseries, Huxley
  Boice, R. H., R. D. 1, Nashua
  Cerveny, Frank L., R. D. 4, Cedar Rapids
  Christensen, Everett G., Gilmore City
  Cole, Edward P., 419 Chestnut St., Atlantic
  Crumley, Joe F., 221 Park Rd., Iowa City
  Ferguson, Albert B., Center Point
  Ferris, Wayne, Hampton
  Gardner, Clark, Gardner Nurseries, Osage
  Harrison, L. E., Nashua
  Hill, Clarence S., Hilburn Stock Farm, Minburn
  Huen, E. F., Eldora
  Inter-State Nurseries, Hamburg
  Iowa Fruit Growers' Association, State House, Des Moines
  Kaser, J. D., Winterset
  Kivell, Ivan E., R. D. 3, Greene
  Kyhl, Ira M., Box 236, Sabula
  Lehmann, F. W., Jr., 3220 John Lynde Rd., Des Moines
  Lounsberry, Dr. C. C., 209 Howard Ave., Ames
  McLeran, Harold F., Mt. Pleasant
  Meints, A. Rock, Diron
  Miller, Robert H., Box 604, Spencer
  Rohrbacher, Dr. Wm., 811 East College St., Iowa City
  Schaub, John M., 911 Locust St., Ottumwa
  Schlagenbusch Bros., R. D. 3, Ft. Madison
  Snyder, D. C., Snyder Bros., Inc., Nurserymen, Center Point
  Steffen, R. F., Box 62, Sioux City
  Van Meter, W. L., Adel
  Welch, H. S., Mt. Arbor Nurseries, Shenandoah
  Wood, Roy A., Castana


  KANSAS

  Borst, Frank E., 1704 Shawnee St., Leavenworth
  Boyd, Elmer, R. D. 1, Box 95, Oskaloosa
  Burrichter, George W., c/o Mrs. James Stone, 3011 N. 36th St.,
    Kansas City
  Funk, M. D., 1501 N. Tyler St., Topeka
  Hofman, Rayburn, R. D. 5, Manhattan
  Leavenworth Nurseries, R. D. 3, Leavenworth
  Schroeder, Emmett H., 800 W. 17th St., Hutchinson
  Wise, H. S., 579 W. Douglas Ave., Wichita
  Yoder, D. J., R. D. 2, Haven


  KENTUCKY

  Alves, Robert H., Nehi Bottling Co., Henderson
  Baughn, Cullie, R. D. 6, Box 1, Franklin
  Cornett, Lester, Box 566, Lynch
  Gooch, Perry, R. D. 1, Oakville
  Moss, Dr. C. A., Williamsburg
  Tatum, W. G., R. D. 4, Lebanon
  Watt, R. M., R. D. 1, Lexington
  Whittinghill, Lonnie M., Box 10, Love


  LOUISIANA

  Louisiana State U., A. & M. College, General Library, University
  Fullilove, J. Hill, Box 157, Shreveport


  MAINE

  Pike, Radcliffe B., Lubec


  MARYLAND

  Crane, Dr. H. L., Plant Industry Station, Beltsville
  Eastern Shore Nurseries, Inc., Dover Rd., Easton
  Fletcher, C. Hicks, Lulley's Hillside Farm, Bowie
  Gravatt, G. F., Plant Industry Station, Beltsville
  Harris, Walter B., Andelot Inc., Worton
  Hodgson, Wm. C., R. D. 1, White Hall
  Hoopes, Wilmer P., Forest Hill
  Kemp, Homer S., Bountiful Ridge Nurseries, Princess Anne
  Kienle, John A., Land's End Farm, Queenstown
  Kingsville Nurseries, H. J. Hohman, Kingsville
  Lewis, Dean, Bel Air
  Mannakee, N. H., Ashton
  McCollum, Blaine, White Hall
  McKay, Dr. J. W., Plant Industry Station, Beltsville
  Negus, Mrs. Herbert, 4514-32nd St., Mt. Rainier
  Porter, John J., 1199 The Terrace, Hagerstown
  Purnell, J. Edgar, Spring Hill Rd., Salisbury
  Shamer, Dr. Maurice E., 3300 W. North Ave., Baltimore
  Thomas, Kenneth D., 10 N. Ellwood Ave., Baltimore 24


  MASSACHUSETTS

  Atwood, Gordon E., 60 Crescent St., Northampton
  Beauchamp, A. A., 603 Boylston St., Boston
  Brown, Daniel L., Esq., 60 State St., Boston
  Fitts, Walter H., 39 Baker St., Foxboro
  Fritze, E., Osterville
  Garlock, Mott A., 17 Arlington Rd., Longmeadow
  Gauthier, Louis R., Wood Hill Rd., Monson
  Graff, George H., 46 Chestnut St., Brookline 46
  Hanchett, James L., R. D. 1, East Longmeadow
  Kaan, Dr. Helen W., Wellesley College, Wellesley
  Kendall, Henry P., Moose Hill Farm, Sharon
  Kibrick, I. S., 106 Main St., Brockton
  La Beau, Henry A., 1556 Massachusetts Ave., North Adams
  Rice, Horace J., 5 Elm St., Springfield
* Russell, Mrs. Newton H., 12 Burnett Ave., South Hadley
  Short, I. W., 299 Washington St., Taunton
  Stewart, O. W., 75 Milton Ave., Hyde Park
  Swartz, H. P., 206 Checopee St. Checopee
  Trudeau, Dr. A. E., 14 Railroad St., Holyoke
  Van Meter, Dr. R. A., French Hall, M. S. C., Amherst
  Wellman, Sargent H., Esq., Windridge, Topsfield
  Westcott, Samuel K., 79 Richview Ave., North Adams
  Weston Nurseries, Inc., Brown & Winter Sts., Weston
  Weymouth, Paul W., 183 Plymouth St., Holbrook


  MEXICO

  Grandjean, Julio., Ave. Cinco de Mayo, num. 10, Mexico City


  MICHIGAN

  Andersen, Charles, Andersen Evergreen Nurseries, Scottsville
  Avery, R. O., R. D. 2, Brooklyn
  Aylesworth, C. F., 920 Pinecrest Dr., Ferndale 20
  Barlow, Alfred L., 13079 Flanders Ave., Detroit, 5
  Becker, Gilbert, Climax
  Blackman, Orrin C., Box 55, Jackson
  Bogart, Geo. C., R. D. 2, Three Oaks
  Boylan, B. P., Cloverdale
  Bradley, L. J., R. D. 1, Springport
  Buell, Dr. M. F., Dept. of Health and Recreation, Dearborn
  Bumler, Malcolm R., 1097 Lakeview, Detroit
  Burgart, Harry, Michigan Nut Nursery, R. D. 2, Union City
  Burgess, E. H., Burgess Seed & Plant Co., Galesburg
  Cook, E. A., M.D., Director, County Health Dept., Corunna
  Corsan, H. H., R. D. 1, Hillsdale
  Daubenmeyer, H., 7647 Sylvester, Detroit
  Emerson, Ralph, 161 Cortland Ave., Highland Park 3
  Gage, Nina M., 6550 Kensington Rd., Wixom
  Hackett, John C., 315 Diamond Ave., S.E., Grand Rapids 6
  Hagelshaw, W. J., Box 314, Galesburg
  Hay, Francis H., Ivanhoe Place, Lawrence
  Healey, Scott, R. D. 2, Otsego
**Kellogg, W. K., Battle Creek
  King, Harold J., Sodus
  Korn, G. J., 140 N. Rose St., Kalamazoo 24
  Lee, Michael, Lapeer
  Leist, Dewey, 119 Livingston Dr., Flint
  Lemke, Edwin W., 2432 Townsend Ave., Detroit 14
  Lewis, Clayton A., 1219 Pine St., Port Huron
  Mann, Charles W., 221 Cutler St., Allegan
  Mason, Harold E., 1580 Montie, Lincoln Park 25
  McMillan, Vincent U., 17926 Woodward Ave., Detroit 3
  Miller, Louis, 130 O'Keefe, Cassopolis
  O'Rourke, Prof. F. L., Hort'l Dept., Michigan State College, E. Lansing
  Otto, Arnold G., 4150 Three Mile Drive, Detroit
  Reist, Dewey, 119 Livingston Dr., Flint
  Scofield, Mrs. Carl, Box 215, Woodland
  Scofield, Carl, Box 215, Woodland
  Stocking, Frederick N., Harrisville
  Stotz, Raleigh R., 1546 Franklin, S.E., Grand Rapids 6
  Tate, D. L., 959 Westchester St., Birmingham
  Wargess, R. D., 11 Rose St., Battle Creek
  Whallon, Archer P., R. D. 1, Stockbridge


  MINNESOTA

  Andrews, Miss Frances E., 48 Park View Terrace, Minneapolis
  Cothran, John C., 512 N. 19th Ave., E. Duluth
  Donaldson Co., L. S., 601 Nicollet Ave., Minneapolis 2
  Hodgson, R. E., Dept. of Agriculture, S. E. Exp. Sta., Waseca
  O'Connor, Pat H., Hopkins
  Skrukrud, Baldwin, Sacred Heart
  Vaux, Harold C., R. D. 4, Faribault
  Weschcke, Carl, 96 S. Wabasha St., St. Paul


  MISSOURI

  Barnes, Dr. F. M., Jr., 4952 Maryland Ave., St. Louis
  Bucksath, Charles E., Dalton
  Campbell, A. T., 8117 Meadow Lane, Kansas City 5
  Fisher, J. B., R. R. H. 1, Pacific
  Giesson, Adolph, Pine Hill Farm, Weingarten
  Hay, Leander, Gilliam
  Howe, John, R. D. 1, Box 4, Pacific
  Johns, Jeannette F., R. D. 1, Festus
  Nicholson, John W., Ash Grove
  Ochs, C. T., Box 291, Salem
  Richterkessing, Ralph, R. D. 1, St. Charles
  Schmidt, Victor H., 4821 Virginia, Kansas City
  Stark Brothers Nurs. & Orchard Co., Louisiana
  Stevenson, Hugh, Elsberry
  Thompson, J. D., 600 West 63rd St., Kansas City 2


  NEBRASKA

  Adams, Frederick J., 5103 Webster St., Omaha 3
  Brand, George, R. D. 5, Box 60, Lincoln
  Caha, William, Wahoo
  Clark, Ivan E., Concord
  DeLong, F. S., 1510 Second Corso, Nebraska City
  Ferguson, Albert B., Dunbar
  Ginn, A. M., Box 6, Bayard
  Hess, Harvey W., The Arrowhead Gardens, Box 209, Hebron
  Hoyer, L. B., 7554 Maple St., Omaha
  Lenz, Clifford Q., 3815 Maple St., Omaha 3
  Marshall's Nurseries, Arlington
  Weaver, Francis E., Box 312, Sutherland
  White, Bertha G., 7615 Leighton Ave., Lincoln 5
  White, Warren E., 6920 Binney St., Omaha 4


  NEW HAMPSHIRE

  Dougherty, L. A., University of N. H., Durham
  Lahti, Matthew, Locust Lane Farm, Wolfeboro
  Latimer, Prof. L. P., Dept. of Horticulture, Durham
  Malcolm, Herbert L., The Waumbek Farm, Jefferson
  Messier, Frank, R. D. 2, Nashua
  Ryan, Miss Agnes, Mill Rd., Durham


  NEW JERSEY

  Bangs, Ralph E., Allamuchy
  Beck, Stanley, 12 South Monroe Ave., Wenonah
  Blake, Dr. Harold, Box 93, Saddle River
  Bottom, R. J., 41 Robertson Rd., West Orange
  Brewer, J. L., 10 Allen Place, Fair Lawn
  Buch, Philip O., 106 Rockaway Ave., Rockaway
  Buckwalter, Mrs. Alan R., Flemington
  Buckwalter, Geoffrey R., Route 1, Box 12, Flemington
  Cumberland Nursery, R. D. 1, Millville
  Donnelly, John H., Mountain Ice Co., 51 Newark St., Hoboken
  Dougherty, Wm. M., Broadacres-on-Bedens, Box 425, Princeton
  Franek, Michael, 323 Rutherford Ave., Franklin
  Fuhlbruegge, Edward, R. D. Box 234, Scotch Plains
  Gardenier, Dr. Harold C., Westwood
  Goitein, Louis, 1081 S. Clinton Ave., Trenton
* Jaques, Lee W., 74 Waverly Place, Jersey City
  Jewett, Edmund Gale, R. D. 1, Port Murray
  Lovett's Nursery, Inc., Little Silver
  Mann, Philip, 115 Bloomfield Ave., Newark
  McCulloch, J. D., 73 George St., Freehold
  Mueller, R., R. D. 1, Box 81, Westwood
  Piskorski, Mrs. Adelaide M., 604 Jersey Ave., Jersey City 2
  Ritchie, Walter M., 402 St. George St., Rahway
  Rocker, Louis P., The Rocker Farm, Andover
  Sheffield, O. A., 283 Hamilton Place, Hackensack
  Sorg, Henry, Chicago Ave., Egg Harbor City
  Sutton, Ross J., Jr., R. D. 2, Lebanon
  Szalay, Dr. S., 931 Garrison Ave., Teaneck
  Terhune, Gilbert V. P., Apple Acres, Newfoundland
  Todd, E. Murray, R. D. 2, Matawan
  Tolley, Fred C., Berkeley Ave., Bloomfield
  Trainer, Raymond E., Roller Bearing Co., Box 480, Trenton
  Van Doren, Durand H., 310 Redmond Rd., South Orange
  White, Col. J. H., Jr., Picatinny Arsenal, Dover
  Williams, Harold G., Box 344, Ramsey
  Yorks, A. S., Lamatonk Nurseries, Neshanic Station


  NEW YORK

  Barton, Irving Titus, Montour Falls
  Beck, Paul E., Beck's Guernsey Dairy, Transit Rd., E. Amherst
  Benton, William A., Wassaic
  Bernath's Nursery, R. D. 1, Poughkeepsie
  Bixby, Henry D., East Drive, Halesite, L. I.
  Blauner, Sidney H., 290 West End Ave., New York
  Bradbury, Captain H. G., 30 Fifth Ave., New York 11
  Brinckeroff, John H., 150-09 Hillside Ave., Jamaica
  Brook, Victor, 171 Rockingham St., Rochester
  Brooks, William G., Monroe
  Cowan, Harold, 643 Southern Bldg., The Bronx, New York 55
  Davis, Clair, 140 Broadway, Lynbrook
  DeSchauensee, Mrs. A. M., Easterhill Farm, Chester
  Dutton, Walter, 264 Terrace Park, Rochester
  Ellwanger, Mrs. William D., 510 East Ave., Rochester
  Fagley, Richard M., 29 Perry St., New York 14
  Feil, Harry, 1270 Hilton-Spencerport Rd., Hilton
  Flanigen, Charles F., 16 Greenfield St., Buffalo
  Freer, H. J., 20 Midvale Rd., Fairport
  Frifance, A. E., 139 Elmdorf Ave., Rochester 11
  Fruch, Alfred, 34 Perry St., New York
  Garcia, M., 62 Rugby Rd., Brooklyn
  Graham, S. H., R. D. 5, Ithaca
  Graham, Mrs. S. H., R. D. 5, Ithaca
  Graves, Dr. Arthur H., Botanic Garden, Brooklyn
  Gressel, Henry, R. D. 2, Mohawk
  Gunther, Eric F., 25 E. Waukena Ave., Oceanside, L. I.
  Gwinn, Ralph W., 522-5th Ave., New York
  Hasbrouck, Walter, Jr., New Platz
  Hill, Ben H., 375 Beverly Rd., Douglaston, L. I.
  Hubbell, James F., Mayro Bldg., Utica
  Iddings, William, 165 Ludlow St., New York
  Irish, G. Whitney, Valatie
  Kelly, Mortimer B., 17 Battery Place, New York
  Knorr, Mrs. Arthur, 15 Central Park, West Apt. 1406, New York
  Kraai, Dr. John, Fairport
  Larkin, Harry H., 189 Van Rensselaer St., Buffalo 10
  Lewis, Clarence K., 1000 Park Ave., New York
  Lewis, H. W., c/o Ann Cangero, Roslyn
  Little, George, Ripley
  Lowerre, James D., 1121 Bedford Ave., Brooklyn 16
* MacDaniels, Dr. L. H., Cornell University, Ithaca
  MacEwen, Harold, R. D. 5, Fulton
  Maloney Brothers Nursery Co., Inc., Danville
  Mevius, William E., E. Church St., Eden
  Miller, J. E., R. D. 1, Naples
  Mitchell, Rudolph, 125 Riverside Drive, New York 24
  Mitchell, Thomas, 16 E. 48th St, New York
* Montgomery, Robert H., 1 E. 44th St., New York
  Mossman, Dr. James K., Black Oaks, Ramapo
  Newell, P. F., 53 Elm St., Nassau
  Oeder, Dr. Lambert R., 551 Fifth Ave., New York
  Ohliger, Louis H., R. D. 2, New City
  Page, Chas. E., R. D. 2, Oneida
  Penning, Tomas, R. D. 3, Box 158, Saugerties
  Price, Jacob, Price Theatre Co., 352 West 44th St., New York 18
  Price, J., 385 Arbuckle Ave., Cedarhurst, L. I.
  Rasmussen, Harry, R. D. 1, 85 Frederick St., E. Syracuse
  Rebillard, Frederick, 164 Lark St., Albany 5
  Salzer, George, 169 Garford Rd., Rochester
  Schlegel, Charles P., 990 South Ave., Rochester
  Schlick, Frank, Munnsville
  Schmidt, Carl W., 180 Linwood Ave., Buffalo
  Schwartz, Mortimer L., 1243 Boynton Ave., Bronx
  Sheffield, Lewis F., c/o Mrs. E. C. Jones, Townline Rd., Orangeburg
  Slate, Prof. George L., Experiment Station, Geneva
  Smith, Gilbert L., State School, Wassaic
  Smith, Jay L., Chester
  Steiger, Harwood, Red Hook
  Stern, Otto, Stern's Nurseries, Geneva
  Stern-Montagny, Hubert, Erbonia Farm, Gardiner
  Szigo, Alfred, 77-15 A. 37th Ave., Jackson Heights, New York
  Timmerman, Karl G., 123 Chapel St., Fayetteville
  Waite, Dr. R. H., Willowwaite Moor, Perrysburg
  Weis, John F., Jr., R. D. 1, Carter Rd., Fairport
  Wichlac, Thaddeus, 3236 Genesee St., Cheektowaga 21
  Wilson, Mrs. Ida, Candor
  Windisch, Richard P., W. E. Burnet & Co., 11 Wall St., New York
* Wissman, Mrs. F. de R., 9 W. 54th St., New York


  NORTH CAROLINA

  Dunstan, Dr. R. T., Greensboro College, Greensboro
  Finch, Jack R., Bailey
  Malcolm, Van R., Celo P. O., Yancey County
  Parks, C. H., R. D. 2, Asheville


  OHIO

  Barden, C. A., 215 Morgan St., Oberlin
  Bitler, W. A., 322 McPheron Ave., Lima
  Bungart, A. A., Avon
  Chapman, Floyd B., 1944 Denune Ave., Columbus 3
  Cinadr, Mrs. Katherine, 13514 Coath Ave., Cleveland 20
  Clark, R. L., 1184 Melbourne Rd., East Cleveland 12
  Clay High School, R. D. 5, Toledo 5
  Cole, Mrs. J. R., 163 Woodland Ave., Columbus 3
  Cook, H. C., R. D. 1, Box 125, Leetonia
  Cranz, Eugene F., Mount Tom Farm, Ira
  Crawford, L. E., Sylvarium Gardens, 5499 Columbia Rd., N. Olmsted
  Davidson, John, 234 E. 2nd St., Xenia
  Davidson, Wm. J., Old Springfield Pike, Xenia
  Diller, Dr. Oliver D., Dept. of Forestry, Experiment Sta., Wooster
  Dubois, Miss Frances M., 4623 Glenshade Ave., Cincinnati 27
  Elliott, Donald W., Rogers
  Emch, Frank, Genoa
  Evans, Maurice G., 335 S. Main St., Akron 8
  Fickes, Mrs. W. R., R. D. 1, Wooster
  Foraker, Major C. Merle, 152 Elmwood Ave., Barberton
  Foss, H. D., 875 Hamlin St., Akron 2
  Franks, M. L., R. D. 1, Montpelier
  Frederick, Geo. F., 3925 W. 17th, Cleveland 9
  Garden Center of Greater Cleveland, 11190 East Blvd., Cleveland
  Gardner, Richard F., 1474 Wagar Ave., Cleveland 7
  Gauly, Dr. Edward, 1110 Euclid Ave., Cleveland
  Gerber, E. P., Kidron
  Gerhardt, Gustave A., 3125 Jefferson Ave., Cincinnati
  Gerstenmaier, John A., 13 Pond S. W., Massilon
  Goss, C. E., 922 Dover Ave., Akron 2
  Gray, G. A., 3317 Jefferson Ave., Cincinnati 20
  Hamlin, Howard E., 1945 Waltham Rd., Columbus 8
  Haydeck, Carl, 3213 West 73rd St., Cleveland 2
  Headapohl, Miss Marjean, R. D. 2, Wapakoneta
  Hill, Dr. Albert A., 4187 Pearl Rd., Cleveland
  Hoch, Gordon F., 6292 Glade Ave., Cincinnati
  Holley, Dr. C. J., 11 Elm St., Bridgeport
  Hunt, Kenneth W., Yellow Springs
  Irish, Charles F., 418 E. 105th St., Cleveland
  Jacobs, Homer L., Davey Tree Expert Co., Kent
  Jacobs, Mason, 3003 Jacobs Rd., Youngstown
  Jacque, John V., 13722 N. Drive, Cleveland 5
  Kappel, Owen, Bolivar
  Kintzel, Frank M., 2506 Briarcliffe Ave., Cincinnati 13
  Kirby, R. L., Box 131, R. 1, Sharonville
  Kratzer, George, Kidron
  Krok, Walter P., 925 W. 29th St., Lorain
  Laditka, Nicholas G., 5322 Stickney Ave., Cleveland 9
  Lashley, Chas. V., 216 S. Main, Wellington
  Lehmann, Carl, Union Trust Bldg., Cincinnati
  Livezey, Albert J., Barnesville
  Madson, Arthur E., 13608-5th Ave., E. Cleveland 12
  McBride, William B., 2398 Brandon Rd., Columbus 8
  Meikle, William J., 730 Thornhill Dr., Cleveland
  Metzger, A. J., 724 Euclid Ave., Toledo 5
  Miller, Arthur R., R. D. 4, Wooster
  Mutchler, Glenn M., Box 10, Massillon
  Neff, Wm., Martel
  Nicolay, Chas., 2259 Hess Ave., Cincinnati 11
  Oches, Norman M., R. D. 2, Brunswick
  Olney High School, R. D. 1, Eggleston Rd., Toledo 5
  Osborn, Frank C., 4040 W. 160th St., Cleveland
  Pomerene, W. H., Coshocton
  Poston, E. M., Jr., 2640 E. Main, Columbus
  Rowe, Stanley M., R. D. 1, Box 83, Cincinnati 27
  Scarff's Sons, W. N., New Carlisle
  Schaufelberger, Hugo S., R. D. 2, Sandusky
  Shelton, Dr. E. M., 1468 W. Clifton Blvd., Lakewood 7
  Sherman, L. Walter, Mahoning Co., Exp. Farm, Canfield
  Shessler, Sylvester M., Genoa
  Silvis, Raymond E., 1725 Lindbergh Ave., N. E., Massillon
  Soliday, E. C., 834 Madison Ave., Lancaster
  Southart, Dr. A. F., 24-1/2 South Main St., Mt. Gilead
  Smith, Sterling A., 630 W. South St., Vermilion
  Spring Hill Nurseries Co., Tipp City
  Stocker, C. P., Lorain Products Corp., 1122 F St., Lorain
  Sylvarium Gardens, L. E. Crawford, 5499 Columbia Rd., N. Olmsted
  Thomas, W. F., 406 S. Main St., Findlay
  Toops, Herbert A., 1430 Cambridge Blvd., Columbus
  Urban, George, 4518 Ardendale Rd., South Euclid 21
  Van Voorhis, J. F., 215 Hudson Ave., Apt. B-1, Newark
  Walker, Carl F., 2851 E. Overlook Rd., Cleveland
  Weaver, Arthur W., 318 Oliver St., Toledo 4
* Weber, Harry, R. Esq., 123 E. 6th St., Cincinnati
  Weber, Mrs. Martha R., R. D. 1, Morgan Rd., Cleves
  Weibel, A. J., 4130 Florida Ave., Cincinnati 23
  Whitmer High School, 5530 Whitmer Drive, Toledo 12
  Willett, Dr. G. P., Elmore
  Wischhusen, J. F., 15031 Shore Acres Dr., N.E., Cleveland 10
  Yates, Edward W., 3108 Parkview Ave., Cincinnati 13
  Yoder, Emmet, Smithville


  OKLAHOMA

  Hirschi's Nursery, 414 N. Robinson, Oklahoma City
  Hubbard, Orie B., Kingston
  Hughes, C. V., 5600 N. W. 16-R No. 2, Box 564, Oklahoma City 8
  Jarrett, C. F., 2208 W. 40th, Tulsa
  Meek, E. B., R. D. 2, Wynnewood
  Pulliam, Gordon, 407 Osage Ave., Bartlesville
  Ruhlen, Dr. Chas. A., 114 W. Steele, Cushing
  Swan, Oscar E., Jr., 1226 E. 30th St., Tulsa 5


  OREGON

  Borland, Robert E., 219 Mill St., Silverton
  Carlton Nursery Co., Forest Grove
  Dohanian, S. M., P. O. Box 246, Eugene
  Flanagan, George C., 909 Terminal Sales Bldg., Portland
  Miller, John E., R. D. 1, Box 312-A, Oswego
  Russ, E., R. D. 1, Halsey
  Schuster, C. E., Horticulturist, Cervallis


  PENNSYLVANIA

  Allaman, R. P., R. D. 1, Harrisburg
  Anundson, Lester, 2630 Chestnut St., Erie
  Banks, H. C., R. D. 1, Hellertown
  Barnhart, Emmert M., R. D. 4, Waynesboro
  Beard, H. G., R. D. 1, Sheridan
  Blair, Dr. G. D., 702 N. Homewood Ave., Pittsburgh
  Bowen, John C., R. D. 1, Macungie
  Breneiser, Amos P., 427-N. 5th St., Reading
  Brenneman, John S., R. D. 6, Lancaster
  Brown, Morrison, Carson Long Military Academy, New Bloomfield
  Buckman, C. M., Schwenkville
  Catterall, Karl P., 734 Frank St., Pittsburgh 10
  Clarke, Wm. S., Jr., Box 167, State College
  Creasy, Luther P., Catawissa
  DeHaven, Edwin, 404 Wall Ave., Pitcairn
  Dewey, Richard, Box 41, Peckville
  Dible, Samuel E., R. D. 3, Shelocta
  Diefenderfer, C. E., 918 Third St., Fullerton
  Driver, Warren M., R. D. 4, Bethlehem
  Ebling, Aaron L., R. D. 2, Reading
  Etter, Fayette, P. O. Box 57, Lehmasters
  Gardner, Ralph D., Box 425, Colonial Park
  Gebhardt, F. C., 140 E. 29th St., Erie
  Gorton, F. B., 4110 Emmet Dr., Erie
  Heasley, George S., R. D. 2, Darlington
  Heckler, George Snyder, Hatfield
  Heilman, R. H., 2303 Beechwood Blvd., Pittsburgh
  Hershey, John W., Nut Tree Nurseries, Downingtown
  Hewetson, Prof. F. N., Fruit Research Lab., Arendtsville
  Hostetter, C. F., Bird-In-Hand
  Hostetter, L. K., R. D. 5, Lancaster
  Hughes, Douglas, 1230 East 21st St., Erie
  Jackson, Schuyler, New Hope
  Johnson, Robert F., R. D. 5, Box 56, Crafton
  Jones, Mildred M., 301 N. West End Ave., Lancaster
  Jones, Dr. Truman W., Coatesville
  Kaufman, M. M., Clarion
  Kirk, DeNard B., Forest Grove
  Knouse, Chas. W., Colonial Park
  Leach, Hon. Will, Court House, Scranton
  Long, Carleton C., 138 College Ave., Beaver
  Losch, Walter, 133 E. High St., Topton
  Mathews, Mrs. Geo., R. D. 2, Cambridge Springs
  Mattoon, H. Gleason, 258 South Van Pelt St., Philadelphia 3
  McCartney, J. Lupton, Rm. 1, Horticultural Bldg., State College
  Mercer, Robert A., 435 E. Phil-Ellera St., Philadelphia 19
  Miller, Elwood B., c/o The Hazleton Bleaching & Dyeing Works, Hazleton
  Miller, Robert O., 3rd & Ridge St., Emmaus
  Moyer, Philip S., Union Trust Bldg., Harrisburg
  Niederriter, Leonard, 1726 State St., Erie
  Reidler, Paul G., Ashland
  Rial, John, 528 Harrison Ave., Greensburg
* Rick, John, 438 Pennsylvania Sq., Reading
  Robinson, P. S., Gettysburg
  Rupp, Edward E., Jr., 57 W. Omfret St., Carlisle
  Sameth, Sigmund, Grandeval Farm, R. D. 3, Kutztown
  Schaible, Percy, Upper Black Eddy
  Schmidt, Albert J., 534 Smithfield St., Pittsburgh
  Sheibley, J. W., Star Route, Landisburg
  Shelly, David B., R. D. 2, Elizabethtown
  Smith, Dr. J. Russell, 550 Elm Ave., Swarthmore
  Stewart, E. L., Pine Hill Farms Nursery, R. D. 2, Homer City
  Stewart, John H., Yule Tree Farm, Akeley
  Stoebener, Harry W., 6227 Penn Ave., Pittsburgh
  Theiss, Dr. Lewis E., Bucknell University, Lewisburg
  Twist, Frank S., Northumberland
  Waggoner, Charles W., 432 Harmony Ave., Rochester
  Washick, Dr. Frank A., 501 Cottman Ave., Philadelphia 11
  Weinrich, Whitney, 134 S. Lansdowne Ave., Lansdowne
  Wicks, Dr. A. G., 227 Baywood Ave., Mt. Lebanon
* Wister, John C., Scott Foundation, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore
  Wood, Wayne, R. D. 1, Newville
  Wright, Ross Pier, 235 West 6th St., Erie
  Zimmerman, Mrs. G. A., R. I, Linglestown


  RHODE ISLAND

+ Allen, Philip, 178 Dorance St., Providence
  R. I. State College, Library Dept., Green Hall, Kingston


  SOUTH AMERICA

  Pereda, Celedonia V., Arroyo 1142, Buenos Aires, Argentina


  SOUTH CAROLINA

  Bregger, John. T., Clemson


  SOUTH DAKOTA

  Bradley, Homer L., LaCreek National Wildlife Refuge, Martin


  TENNESSEE

  Howell Nurseries, Sweetwater
  McDaniel, Dr. J. C, Tenn. Dept. of Agriculture, 403 State Office
    Bldg. Nashville 3
  Meyer, James R., Agronomy Dept., University of Tenn., Knoxville
  Rhodes, G. B., R. D. 2, Covington
  Richards, Dr. A., Whiteville
  Roark, W. F., Malesus
  Zarger, Thomas G., Norris


  TEXAS

  Florida, Kaufman, Box 154, Rotan
  Price, W. S., Jr., Gustine


  UTAH

  Jeppesen, Chris., Wildwood Hollow Farm Nursery, Provo City
  Oleson, Granville, 1210 Laird Ave., Salt Lake City 5
  Peterson, Harlan D., 2164 Jefferson Ave., Ogden


  VERMONT

  Aldrich, A. W., R. D. 3, Springfield
  Ellis, Zenas H., Fair Haven. Perpetual Membership "In Memoriam"
  Farrington, Robert A., Vermont Forest Service, Montpelier
  Foster, Forest K., West Topsham
  Ladd, Paul, Hilltop Farm, Jamaica


  VIRGINIA

  Acker, E. D., Co., Broadway
  Brewster, Stanley H., "Cerro Gordo", Gainesville
  Burton, George L., 728 College St., Bedford
  Case, Lynn B., R. D. 1, Fredericksburg
  Dickerson, T. C, 316-56th St., Newport News
  Gibbs, H. R., McLean
  Johnson, Dr. Walter R., Garrisonville
  Morse, Chandler, Valross, R. D. 5, Alexandria
  Nix, Robert W., Jr., Lucketts
  Pertzoff, Dr. V. A., Carter's Bridge
  Peters, John Rogers, P. O. Box 37, McLean
  Pinner, H. McR., P. O. Box 155, Suffolk
  Powell, Frank, Stuart
  Stoke, H. F., 1420 Watts Ave., Roanoke
  Stoke, Dr. John H., 408-10 Boxley Bldg., Roanoke
  Thompson, H. C., Short & Thompson, Inc., Hopewell
  Variety Products Co., 5 Middlebrook Ave., Staunton
  Virginia Tree Farm, Woodlawn
  Webb, John, Hillsville
  Zimmerman, Ruth, Bridgewater


  WEST VIRGINIA

  Cannaday, Dr. John E., Charleston General Hospital, Charleston 25
  Cross, Andrew, Ripley
  Frye, Wilbert M., Pleasant Dale
  Glenmont Nurseries, Arthur M. Reed, Moundsville, W. Va.
  Golden Chestnut Nursery, Arthur A. Gold, Cowen
  Gross, Andrew, Ripley
  Holcomb, Herbert L., Riverside Nurseries, P.O. Box 5, S. Charleston 3
  Hoover, Wendell W., Webster Springs
  Margolin, Abe S., University of West Virginia, Morgantown
  Slotkin, Meyer S., 629-10th Ave., Huntington


  WASHINGTON

  Altman, Mrs. H. E., 2338 King St., Bellingham 9
  Barth, J. H., Box 1827 R. D. 3, Spokane 6
  Bartleson, C. J., Box 25, Chattaron
  Biddle, Miss Gertrude W., 923 Gordon Ave., Spokane 12
  Carey, Joseph E., 4219 Letona Ave., Seattle
  Clark, R. W., 4221 Phinney Ave., Seattle
  Denman, George L., 1319 East Nina Ave., Spokane
  Ferris, Major Hiram B., P. O. Box 74, Spokane 1
  Jessup, J. M., Cook
  Kling, William L., R. D. 2, Box 230, Clarkston
  Latterell, Ethel, Greenacres
  Linkletter, F. D., 8034-35th Ave., N.E., Seattle 5
  Lynn Tuttle Nursery, The Heights, Clarkston
  Martin, Fred A., Star Route, Chelan
  Naderman, G. W., R. D. 1, Box 370, Olymphia
  Shane Bros., Vashon


  WISCONSIN

  Bassett, W. S., 1522 Main St., La Crosse
  Brust, John J., 135 W. Wells St., Milwaukee 3
  Dopkins, Marvin, R. D. 1, River Falls
  Downs, M. L., 1024 N. Leminwah St., Appleton
  Johnson, Albert G., R. D. 2, Box 457, Waukesha
  Koelsch, Norman, Jackson
  Ladwig, C. F., 2221 St. Lawrence, Beloit
  Mortensen, M. C., 2117 Stanson Ave., Racine
  Zinn, Walter G., P. O. Box 747, Milwaukee


  WYOMING

  Greene, W. D., Box 348, Greybull

    * Life Member
    + Contributing Member
   ** Honorary Member



CONSTITUTION


ARTICLE I--NAME

This Society shall be known as the Northern Nut Growers Association,
Incorporated.


ARTICLE II--OBJECT

Its object shall be the promotion of interest in nut-bearing plants,
their products and their culture.


ARTICLE III--MEMBERSHIP

Membership in this society shall be open to all persons who desire to
further nut culture, without reference to place of residence or
nationality, subject to the rules and regulations of the committee on
membership.


ARTICLE IV--OFFICERS

There shall be a president, a vice-president, a secretary and a
treasurer, who shall be elected by ballot at the annual meeting; and a
board of directors consisting of six persons, of which the president,
the two last retiring presidents, the vice-president, the secretary and
the treasurer shall be members. There shall be a state vice-president
from each state, dependency, or country represented in the membership of
the association, who shall be appointed by the president.


ARTICLE V--ELECTION OF OFFICERS

A committee of five members shall be elected at the annual meeting for
the purpose of nominating officers for the following year.


ARTICLE VI--MEETINGS

The place and time of the annual meeting shall be selected by the
membership in session or, in the event of no selection being made at
this time, the board of directors shall choose the place and time for
the holding of the annual convention. Such other meetings as may seem
desirable may be called by the president and board of directors.


ARTICLE VII--QUORUM

Ten members of the Association shall constitute a quorum but must
include two of the four officers.


ARTICLE VIII--AMENDMENTS

This constitution may be amended by a two-thirds vote of the members
present at any annual meeting, notice of such amendment having been read
at the previous annual meeting, or copy of the proposed amendment having
been mailed by any member to each member thirty days before the date of
the annual meeting.



BY-LAWS


ARTICLE I--COMMITTEES

The Association shall appoint standing committees as follows: On
membership, on finance, on programme, on press and publication, on
exhibits, on varieties and contests, on survey, and an auditing
committee. The committee on membership may make recommendations to the
Association as to the discipline or expulsion of any member.


ARTICLE II--FEES

Annual members shall pay two dollars annually. Contributing members
shall pay ten dollars annually. Life members shall make one payment of
fifty dollars and shall be exempt from further dues and shall be
entitled to the same benefits as annual members. Honorary members shall
be exempt from dues. "Perpetual" membership is eligible to any one who
leaves at least five hundred dollars to the Association and such
membership on payment of said sum to the Association shall entitle the
name of the deceased to be forever enrolled in the list of members as
"Perpetual" with the words "In Memoriam" added thereto. Funds received
therefor shall be invested by the Treasurer in interest bearing
securities legal for trust funds in the District of Columbia. Only the
interest shall be expended by the Association. When such funds are in
the treasury the Treasurer shall be bonded. Provided: that in the event
the Association becomes defunct or dissolves then, in that event, the
Treasurer shall turn over any funds held in his hands for this purpose
for such uses, individuals or companies that the donor may designate at
the time he makes the bequest or the donation.


ARTICLE III--MEMBERSHIP

All annual memberships shall begin October 1st. Annual dues received
from new members after April first shall entitle the new member to full
membership until October first of that year and a credit of one-half
annual dues for the following year.


ARTICLE IV--AMENDMENTS

By-Laws may be amended by a two-thirds vote of members present at any
meeting.


ARTICLE V

Members, shall be sent a notification of annual dues at the time they
are due and, if not paid within two months, they shall be sent a second
notice, telling them that they are not in good standing on account of
non-payment of dues and are not entitled to receive the annual report.

At the end of thirty days from the sending of the second notice, a third
notice shall be sent notifying such members that, unless dues are paid
within ten days from the receipt of this notice, their names will be
dropped from the rolls for non-payment of dues.



Proceedings of the Thirty-seventh Annual Convention


Report of the Proceedings of the Northern Nut Growers Association at its
thirty-seventh Annual Convention, held at Wooster, Ohio, September 3, 4,
5, 1946, in the auditorium of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station.

The convention was called to order at 10 A.M. with the President, Carl
Weschcke, in the chair.



Address of Welcome

By Dr. J. H. Gourley, of the Wooster Experiment Station

The thing that would strike me particularly about this meeting we are
having is to see people come from so far away; a group that is on fire
with interest in a fruit which has no great economic importance, in a
place like the central west, in comparison with other fruits. Another
thing that is interesting, as contrasted with other fruit groups, would
be this; that the extent to which nuts become of great economic
importance in these places lies very largely with you. It seems to me
that without the insistent desire of a very small minority of people an
industry like this would not get very far.

Ohio has not done as much as she should. You may have come to Ohio to
give us a shot in the arm. On behalf of the Director, I want to extend
to you a cordial welcome to the Experiment Station and to Wooster. This
Station has 3600 acres of land and one-third is at Wooster--1200 acres.
We have 15 district and county farms, 63,000 acres in state forests and
parks.

This station has introduced a number of varieties of wheat. Sixty to
seventy-five per cent of all wheat in Ohio is grown from varieties that
originated at this station.

This station was organized in 1882 at Columbus. The Federal Hatch Act
permitting this type of organization was passed in 1887; thus Ohio was
five years ahead of the Federal Act. In 1892, the station was moved from
Columbus to Wooster. The state act provided that an experiment station
should be located within fifty miles of Columbus, but later it was
permitted to extend the distance to 100 miles. They settled on Wooster,
which is 90 miles.

The tendency is to work more and more closely with the State University.
The trend seems to be so they will function as one agricultural
institution.

I would like to extend the keys of the Station to you, but the keys may
not unlock the fruit storage.

I trust you will have a most profitable time while you are with us.



Response

By John E. Cannaday, M. D., Charleston, West Virginia


It is a pleasure to meet here under such favorable auspices and to be
received with these hospitable words by Dr. Gourley. In recent years,
Ohio has gone far in nut growing under his leadership and that of his
staff. Pennsylvania also has done a great deal to put nut growing on its
feet. My own state, West Virginia, is also making good headway.

In the early 1900's I got the 'bee', but I lost two or three of my first
few trees. In 1917 I imported some chestnuts from Japan for planting and
tried out various schemes in nut growing. In my opinion, chestnuts are
the most important nuts for human food that grow in the temperate zone.
It is interesting to observe how chestnuts follow true to seed in many
respects. I have been advised that all of the chestnuts grown in China
are from selected seed.

Every foot of steep mountain land in some sections of Italy is said to
be completely covered with chestnut trees. In my state, the weevil is
the scourge of chestnuts; I had hoped that after the chestnut blight
destroyed our native chestnuts, the Chinese and Japanese chestnuts would
be free from that pest. Where it came from I do not know, unless it came
from the chinkapin. West Virginia has chinkapins and these, being blight
resistant, apparently have kept up the supply of weevils. Occasionally,
shortly before the chestnuts begin to ripen, a few decay from some type
of rot.

I took a census of my chestnut trees recently and found 80 trees of
bearing age. Some of the largest are 22 to 24 feet in height, with a
trunk diameter of 5 inches or more. None have been pruned but have
maintained their normal branch formation and grow low. The timber tree
must be yet to come. I have read interesting statements to the effect
that in parts of China and Burma, there are chestnut trees of timber
shape and size. Chestnut trees are likely to become of extreme
importance in our future economy. The nuts fill a very significant place
in our dietary needs. We should continue to plant chestnut trees and
take care of them. I have also from 350 to 400 younger trees that are
coming on, and I want to plant additional chestnut trees every year. The
black walnut and hickory nut are very important, but the chestnut crop
is the corn crop of the nuts.



Address of Retiring President

Carl Weschcke, St. Paul, Minnesota


Our last convention at Hershey, Pa., in September 1941, was a very
outstanding one. Not only was it successful because of good attendance,
excellent addresses and the places of interest we visited, particularly
the home of Mildred Jones, our Secretary, at Lancaster and of the late
Dr. G. A. Zimmerman at Linglestown, but it was important because it
marked the beginning of a long period during which we had to forego our
conventions. The death of Dr. Zimmerman shortly before that meeting
dampened our usually jovial spirits when we were entertained at his
home, but his wife did much to alleviate this.

To me, the last convention we held was by far the most important since
the very first one at New York in November, 1910, because at it I
received the honour of being chosen president for the ensuing year. This
was during the era when presidents were usually re-elected for a second
term, but I assure you that I have not served as president for this long
period because I have been seeking to emulate other presidents, but only
because the war years prevented our holding the annual meetings at which
our officers are elected.

In mentioning any part of the history of our group, we should always
remember that we owe its existence to Dr. Deming, who is now Dean of the
Association.

Now it is not my province to make a long speech about the N. N. G. A.,
because a number of other people will talk to you about it. I believe
that the growth of our society in recent years has fulfilled the fondest
dreams of Dr. Deming, since we have almost doubled our membership since
1941. We now have approximately over 600 members. People all over the
United States are becoming aware of the value of nuts as food important
to men. It is too bad that nuts have not been available on a competitive
price basis with other foods, and that luxury prices have limited
interest in nuts among the women buyers. A better understanding of the
uses and comparative value of nuts is gradually coming about which will
result in a tremendous demand on the nut-growing industry, which of
course, includes the nurserymen who develop and grow all varieties of
nut trees.

It is unfortunate for our newer members that they will never have the
opportunity of knowing those men who were among our earliest and most
valued associates whom death has recently taken from us and that they
are thus deprived of the pleasure and knowledge they might have gained
through personal contact with the wisdom and friendliness these men
displayed. Let us all take advantage of every opportunity we have to
meet with and learn from the senior members of our group who are with us
today. They are the salt of the earth, I assure you.

To those of you who have come long distances from your homes to attend
this annual meeting of the N.N.G.A., to our hosts and to all of my good
friends here, may I express my great pleasure at meeting again with you
after so long a time.



Secretary's Report

Mildred M. Jones, Lancaster, Pennsylvania


In addition to the regular routine duties of answering inquiries about
the Association, sales of reports, giving information about nut trees,
where they may be obtained, and sources of additional reading material
and reference material about nut tree work, a large part of the time I
could devote to Association affairs this year was in preparation for
this meeting.

Because of travel restrictions, and the fact that the Canadian National
Exhibition would not be held this fall, and assurance from the Toronto
Convention and Tourist Association, Inc. that the Exhibition would be
resumed in the fall of 1947, and that it would be a newer and greater
show, it seemed advisable to place these facts before the members, and
allow them to vote on their preference for a meeting place this fall. In
addition to responses from the officers, I received 63 votes from
members, 37 of which were for Wooster, Ohio, 24 for Beltsville,
Maryland, and 3 for Canada. Since the letter asking for votes carried
the understanding that we were putting the Canadian meeting off for a
year by voting for a place in the U. S. this year, and were not
canceling the Canadian invitation, this would explain the small vote for
Canada.

Our program committee this year was comprised of three members and
myself--Mr. C. A. Reed, whose many years of Association work and wide
acquaintance made him an invaluable source of suggestions; Dr. Oliver
Diller, who took charge of the tremendous task of handling local
arrangements; and Mr. A. A. Bungart, who helped greatly in procuring
speakers. These men helped so splendidly that I should like here to
voice my thanks and appreciation.

Much new data for the revision of the 4-page pamphlet giving information
about the Association, sources of seeds, nut tree nurserymen, and
reference material for reading has been gathered for printing. Since I
accepted the secretaryship in time for the first convention after the
war, it seemed advisable to me to hold this material until it could be
turned over to my successor who will be elected at this meeting, rather
than put the Association to the expense of printing only a small number
of circulars.

A good many inquiries were received during the year for sources of
certain varieties of nuts. It would help the secretary, and also the
members, to have a list of those who have nuts for sale.



Treasurer's Report


For Period from October 1, 1945 to September 30, 1946

   RECEIPTS:

   Annual Membership                       $871.00
   Contributing Membership--
     Philip Allen                            10.00
   Sale of Reports                          154.80
   Zenas H. Ellis Legacy                    950.00
   Miscellaneous                              4.00
                                           -------
                                                       $1,989.80

   DISBURSEMENTS:
   Subscriptions to Fruit Grower           $ 79.40
   Supplies                                  12.52
   Secretary's Expense                       60.52
   Treasurer's Expenses                      41.94
   Miscellaneous                             10.00
                                           -------
                                                          204.38
                                                      ----------
   Excess of Receipts over Disbursments                $1,785.42
   Balance on Hand--October 1, 1945                     1,474.46
                                                      ----------
   Total Balance--September 1, 1946                    $3,259.88
   Deposited in Walker State Bank        $3,236.07
   Cash on Hand                              23.81

                                                       $3,259.88



Notes on the Annual Meeting


A telegram was sent to Dr. Deming in reply to one of greeting from him,
and various committees were appointed.

Mr. Corsan suggested that an exhibit of nuts be placed on display in the
Royal York Hotel, Toronto, Canada.

Mr. Hirschi said that for killing trees by poison he uses two pounds
white arsenic, one pound caustic soda and one gallon of water.

A member stated that a few drops of mercury would answer the same
purpose.

Mr. Hirschi stated that he found the Niblack pecan an almost perfect
cracker, bringing a premium price.

Mr. Wilkinson stated that while the Niblack pecan had never been a
prolific bearer, the nut has few equals. Perhaps intensive cultivation
would improve the bearing.

It was voted to leave the date of the next meeting to the executive
committee.

Mr. Spencer Chase, of the TVA, invited the members to meet in Tennessee
at an early date.

The President: "We should consider this a fine invitation for 1948. For
1947 we should honor our commitments and go to Canada."

A free discussion occurred on the suggestion to establish a nut journal
and on the proposal to raise the dues.

The President suggested that the way to get the work of association done
promptly would be to pay for it.

Dr. McKay expressed doubt about the inadvisability of raising the dues.

Mr. Walker thought that if the dues were raised it should be to the
extent of a dollar on account of the inconvenience of sending fractional
currency. The treasurer suggested the advisability of getting out a
mimeographed letter to record progress. Mr. Slate emphasized the
importance of producing a good report to hold the members.

Mr. Hershey also approved the idea of getting out a news letter or
progress report. The President suggested that one thousand members would
settle the whole question. Mr. Jay Smith stated he thought the
Association should advertise in some way, especially in sportsmen's
magazines.

A motion on the part of Mr. Stoke to raise the dues by fifty cents per
year was lost.

The nominating committee made the following nominations for officers for
the ensuing year, 1946-47:

   Clarence A. Reed, President
   Dr. L. H. MacDaniels, Vice-President
   Miss Mildred M. Jones, Secretary
   D. C. Snyder, Treasurer

The nominating committee also, through its chairman, Mr. Weber,
recommended that appropriate steps be taken at the next annual meeting
to amend the Constitution to consolidate the offices of treasurer and
secretary so that they can be filled by one person, and that the
remuneration of the secretary-treasurer be fixed at fifty cents per
member.

Mr. Stoke moved that the report of the nominating committee be approved,
and that the nominees be declared elected. Motion was seconded and
carried.

Mr. D. C. Snyder offered the following resolution:

     "Because of the great and enduring service that Dr. William C.
     Deming has rendered the Association, I move that he be named Dean
     of the Association and be given an honorary life membership,
     without payment of dues."

The motion was seconded, and carried with applause.

On being called to the chair, the newly-elected President, Clarence A.
Reed, spoke as follows:

     "I take this as a very great honor; it is an equally great
     responsibility. All I can say is that I appreciate it deeply, and
     that I will give you the best service I have in me."

The Ohio Section of the Northern Nut Growers Association, Inc.,
submitted a copy of its Constitution containing a provision that it
affiliate with the Northern Nut Growers' Association by having its
accredited members become also members of both Associations.

After an open discussion by officers and members of both Associations, a
resolution was adopted by the Northern Nut Growers' Association
expressing appreciation to the Ohio organization for their offer of
affiliation, and accepting such affiliation on the terms stated.

It was also brought out as the sense of the meeting that the Executive
Committee work out any necessary details in connection with this and any
subsequent affiliation on the part of any district or state Association,
the same to be submitted to the next annual meeting of the Northern Nut
Growers' Association for ratification.

It was also recommended that the President appoint a member of each
affiliating Association to the Executive Committee of the Northern Nut
Growers' Association.

This statement is made in lieu of an accurate transcript of the
proceedings, or a verbatim report of the resolution as adopted, neither
of which is available.



Aims and Aspirations of the Ohio Nut Growers

A. A. Bungart, Avon, Ohio


In one of the previous bulletins of the NNGA, there appeared an
eighteen-point program formulated by the Ohio Nut Growers. No doubt you
are wondering what has been done and is being done to make this program
function. We have eliminated one point, the one on the pollen bank. At
the time our program was being prepared we assumed that nut pollen could
be stored for several weeks or months: Since nut pollen does not remain
viable in storage, we shall substitute a point on the use of lime,
fertilizers of various formulas and the use of trace elements in nut
culture.

The Ohio Forestry Association on January 18, 1944, passed a resolution
approving our eighteen-point program.

As you are well aware, the war put a damper on many activities, nut and
otherwise. Here in Ohio, the nut crops of 1944 and 1945 were virtually
failures; even the crop of 1946 is decidedly spotty. Yet in spite of the
war and adverse weather conditions, the Ohio growers are looking
forward, and planning for the future. As a group we are directing our
efforts to the attainment of two specific objectives.

In the first place, we have almost $300 collected as prize money for
State nut contests. I take this opportunity to announce a donation of
$105 from Mr. John Davidson, of Xenia, Ohio. With the aid of such a
generous contributor, we are able to offer a first prize of $50; second
prize of $25; third prize of $15; fourth prize of $10; fifth prize of
$5; and five one-dollar prizes for black walnuts.

In three or five years we intend to have another contest; either a
sweepstakes of $110, or a repetition of the amounts offered this year.
We may keep the contest open next year and the year after for those
wishing to enter nuts for the final awards. In this way, too, we include
black walnuts which are not bearing this year.

Our follow-up will work something like this: We intend to keep a record
over the years of the performance of each of the ten prize winners and
the ten honorable mentions of the 1946 contest. To that end we have made
a score card. The first section of this card will contain information
useful to the Department of Forestry and to nut culture in general, but
it will not be a factor in selecting the prize winner unless a virtual
tie might result in the sweepstakes contest. This section will include:

     1. Location--owner, County, rural route, village, town, state
     route, etc.

     2. Location of Tree--isolated, moderately crowded, in dense woods,
     farm, pasture, city lot, fence row, general ecology; types of other
     trees in neighborhood, air drainage, exposure.

     3. Size of Tree--circumference 4-1/2 ft. from the ground, probable
     age, height, limb spread; shape, tall, short; symmetry or lack of
     it.

     4. Type of Soil--bottom land, slope and direction, upland; clay,
     loam, alluvial; presence or absence of humus; acidity; sod or
     cultivated, mulch or not; depth and kind of subsoil.

     5. Moisture Conditions--presence of stream or tile drain, proximity
     to to stream, lake, pond, etc.

     6. Fertility Conditions--wild natural state, near barnyard,
     fertilized or not with manure or commercial fertilizers,
     application of lime, etc.

The second section will contain information that will aid in awarding
the final prizes. Superior rating under this head might, in the final
judging, make an "honorable mention" of the 1946 contest the best all
around performer three or five years hence. This section will include:

   1. Resistance to disease and insect pests                  2 points

   2. Bearing habits over the given period; annual, biennial,
      occasional                                              7 points

   3. Length of growing season; rate of growth; time of
      blossoming (staminate and pistillate flowers), time of
      leafing out, time of nut ripening, time of leaf fall    4 points

   4. Size of nut clusters, range in number of nuts, per
      cluster, number of pounds of immature nuts              2 points

   5. Size of crop in proportion to tree                      5 points

                                                   Total     20 points

Some formula will have to be worked out for the last, i.e., size of crop
in proportion to the size of tree. Perhaps we might say the crop equals
(pounds of nuts) / (r squared x h) in which "r" would represent the
radius or half the limb spread and "h" the height, measured from the top
to lowest branches.

For example, if a tree that yielded 100 pounds of nuts had a limb spread
of 20 feet and was twenty feet high, it would have a value of 100 / (10
squared x 20) or 1/20. The fraction, of course, could be eliminated if
the number of nuts were substituted for pounds. It is hardly likely that
such a formula would be used for all the trees, probably only in
instances where scores in other respects were close.

The third section of the score card will record the rating of the judges
on the cracking qualities and other characteristics of the nuts
themselves. Any form accepted and approved by the NNGA will be
satisfactory.

We plan to use this system for hickory, butternut and other nut
contests. Without a Mr. Davidson, however, we shall be compelled to
reduce our prizes for the other contests.

I should like to take this opportunity to thank Mr. C. A. Reed for
originating this plan. He told us we ought to know more about the trees
from which the prize nuts were taken. Our score card aims at a complete
record.

Our second aim is to secure a full time research worker in nut culture
under the Horticultural Department of Ohio. We have the promise of
Director Secrest that he will include in his biennial budget an
appropriation for such a specialist. We have the encouragement of Dr.
Gourley, the head of the department. But both men will expect us to do
our part. Both expect us to speak for our group and our project when the
time comes. We accept that responsibility.

Our group has already contacted the members of the finance committee
that passes on the budget, and we expect to have our representatives
present when the budget is discussed in committee. At present, to be
sure, we cannot furnish or even promise an endowment in money. Sixty Nut
Grower members can scarcely compete with such powerful groups as the
Apple Growers, the Hybrid Corn Breeders, the Poultrymen and others. We
can, however, furnish an endowment of men. Among our members we have
such men as Mr. Davidson, Mr. Shessler, Mr. Cranz, Mr. Smith and Mr.
Weber, along with many others who have done a great deal with nut trees.

A research worker could draw upon their advice, their experience, their
technique. He would have as his assistants men who were actuated by no
mercenary or selfish motives, and would give of their time and trees to
make this dream a reality. Certainly much of the experimental work such
as the crossing of varieties could well be performed on the trees of
individual members.

The need of such an expert is obvious. The job of getting ahead in nut
culture is too big for any one of us. We all know, frequently to our
regret, that nut growing is a slow and at times a discouraging business.
If we are honest with ourselves we have to admit failures again and
again; yet the work is creative and fascinating. We always plan to
eliminate some blunder, to perfect some method, next year.

Sometimes a man has a green thumb, or a magic touch, or whatever it
takes to make grafts grow, or buds take, or hunches to succeed. Such a
man was Mr. Otto Witte, of North Amherst. As a nonagenarian, he was ever
looking ahead to another year with his beloved trees, but he died in his
nineties. Some of his prize trees have been cut down and probably others
will be. What has happened to the experiments of 60 years? Another such
man was Mr. Ross Fickes, of Wooster, whose skill in grafting nut trees
was at once our envy and our admiration. When his farm is sold, will the
new owner sense the hand of the master and watch carefully over the
walnuts and hickories, or will he cut them down?

I suppose that death brings an end to many a business, but the nut
business is a new one, and a slow one, too. It is regretted that a life
time of patient care and painstaking research is lost to us and to nut
culture.

True, a nut specialist will not keep death from the door of nut growers,
nor will he save their groves from destruction, but he can keep a record
of each grower's trees. He can plant his trees and lay out his plantings
on state land where there would be more assurance of permanency. Once a
nut department is established there is good reason to suppose that the
work would go on until certain objectives were attained.

Well, what should our specialist specialize in? May I suggest a few
activities? Such a specialist would be the proper person to keep the
score cards of the prize-winning black walnuts, hickories, butternuts
and English (Persian) walnuts of nut contests held in the state. He
would have the time and space for grafting scions from such trees for
further observation and study.

In the second place, he could plant and study other varieties under
identical conditions and observe their performance. By correlating these
data with the records of individual growers he ought to be able to
recommend certain varieties of nut trees for various sections of the
state.

In Ohio, we have chapters of the Izaak Walton League; we have Friends of
the Land; we have sportsmens clubs; we have extensive tracts of
municipal and state land. We have the problem of doing something
constructive with strip mining areas; we have, and will have under
contour farming, little crazy-quilt blocks of land unsuitable for
cultivation. All these agencies and all these needs tie in with the
intelligent use of trees, particularly nut trees, because they serve a
fourfold purpose; lumber, food, erosion control, and a balanced wild
life. Here is where the nut specialist would enter the scene. By
collecting data, by pooling the results of the individual growers, and
especially by selection and breeding, he should be able to recommend the
proper varieties of nut trees for specific needs.

It seems to me, however, that the main job of such a worker should be to
produce a streamlined black walnut, a thin-shelled, good-cracking,
fast-growing walnut.

The black walnut is, indeed, a regal tree. It grows all over the State.
Here is a tree of almost infinite variation. What an opportunity for the
genetic scientist! What an opportunity for the nut specialist!

In connection with the improvement of the black walnut as a nut and
timber tree, the specialist might well investigate the English or
Persian walnut. What about the possibilities of Circassian walnut
lumber? What is to prevent the growers and the specialist from planting
the English walnut for timber? Here in Northern Ohio, English walnut
trees have been cut for timber. There are probably several hundred
English walnut trees scattered through the northern counties of Ohio.
Some of them are from 10 to 18 inches in diameter. A few are second
generation. As these trees seem to be fairly rapid growers it would seem
reasonable that nuts from these hardy trees would grow into valuable
timber, apart from the value of the nuts.

Perhaps all these aspirations and aims seem Utopian. Probably such a
program would keep a dozen workers occupied. In cooperation with the
Forestry Department, however, students might be assigned to study
certain phases of nut culture. A Ph.D. dissertation might well be
written on the variation of the Thomas walnut in Ohio.

In conclusion, the Ohio growers will try to produce better nut trees.
Through prize contests they hope to find what nature has produced.
Through the services of a scientist they hope to find what man can
produce. The two aims dovetail. We are reasonably certain of the prize
contests; we are not yet certain of securing the nut scientist.

Ohio is host to the NNGA this year. May the Ohio growers ask you for
your moral support in this venture? The NNGA is the mother organization.
Through the efforts of the officers, past and present, the association
is in a flourishing condition with prospects of a very bright future.
Whatever we do in Ohio, whatever will be done in other states and
countries will be a monument to the NNGA. The groping years, the hard
years, are behind. The spade work has been done. We want you to feel
that the aims and aspirations of the Ohio growers sprang from your
advice, your experiments and enthusiasm.

I would like to add a final word about the unique advantage we enjoy
here in Ohio. We have the cooperation of a powerful and excellent farm
paper, "The Ohio Farmer." Through its pages our contests get a wide
publicity. Mr. Ray Kelsey has furnished us with 5000 folders announcing
the contest and the purpose behind it. We have the cooperation of the
Experiment Station here at Wooster and its affiliated agencies. Drs.
Secrist and Gourley have been kind, encouraging, helpful. Dr. Oliver
Diller, of the Forestry Department, and Mr. Walter Sherman, of the
Mahoning Farm, have helped and worked with us in a hundred ways. We feel
the NNGA ought to know about this harmonious and whole-hearted team
work.



Nut Growing Under Semi-Arid Conditions

A. G. Hirschi, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma


The pecan is the major nut crop in Oklahoma. The timber growth along the
rivers and creeks contains enough pecan trees, if they were properly
distributed, to make one continuous pecan grove entirely across the
state.

Pecan improvement work is only in its beginning. The Oklahoma Pecan
Grower's Association was organized in 1926. It is devoted to the general
improvement of the pecan, and to the dissemination of information gained
by the members from their experience and observation. Dr. Frank Cross,
head of the Department of Horticulture of our A & M College at
Stillwater, is very active in nut improvement and is giving us much
valuable assistance. Early in the history of our association we began to
graft the large improved varieties on our seedling trees. True, many
mistakes were made. I recall when all our trees producing small and
inferior nuts, were cut down level with the ground, and the sprouts
growing from the roots, were budded or grafted to paper-shells. This
meant a long wait for production. We soon realized it was better to stub
back the limbs and graft these, or permit the sprouts to develop and bud
them, plus saving most of the framework of the trees, which gives us
heavy production of grafted pecans in a short time.

Competing growth, that is underbrush and all kinds of trees other than
pecans, rob the grove of moisture, sunlight, and plant food. This growth
was formerly removed by hand grubbing, but now with a large bulldozer it
is pushed right out of the ground into piles where it is burned. Now the
ground is clean, no stumps to grub out, and ready for a cover-crop or
clean cultivation. Nothing remains but pecan trees, some elm, hackberry
and oak, too large for the bulldozer. These are poisoned and burned
right where they stand the following winter. For poisoning a mixture of
two pounds of white arsenic and a pound of caustic soda to a gallon of
water, if applied from an oilcan with a spout in an open circle chopped
in the bark so as to girdle the tree, will usually deaden it in a short
while. Within the year nothing is left but pecan trees. These are
watched carefully for production and shelling quality and, if not
desirable, or standing too thick, are removed for greater spacing for
permanent trees.

Today, only the smaller pecan trees are top worked, either to named
varieties or to selected seedlings. Due to changed conditions of market
and labor, the native pecan has come into its own. The pecan sheller
buys 90% of the native pecans. He will pay only a few cents more for the
big paper-shell. The native pecan is as staple as butter and eggs. Every
produce man buys them for the shelling plants. This leaves the big
paper-shell to seek a special market at an advertising cost. Due to the
small differential in the wholesale price of the native and the
paper-shell, the larger native trees are no longer top-grafted but are
encouraged in every way for heavy production.

Thus, when creek and river bottom thickets are opened up to sunshine and
air, nothing left but pecan trees properly spaced, and this on land
usually considered worthless, these trees will quadruple in production
and pay a handsome return on a $200 per acre valuation. This is a real
and altogether possible two-story agriculture to those who are fortunate
enough to own undeveloped pecan timber land. Many of our members have
beautiful groves redeemed from the wild with bounteous crops of nuts
overhead and cattle grazing on enriching cover crops underneath. The
pecan means a lot to the farmers of Oklahoma. The average yearly tonnage
is about 16,000,000 pounds, with a peak production of 30,000,000 pounds.
This amounts to an average of $2,000,000 annually, with a peak of
$5,091,000.

I want to show you what it means to some of our members to develop their
native pecans, either as natives or grafted to improved varieties. The
proceeds from one lone pecan tree in Mr. Skorkosky's cotton patch paid
the taxes on his farm several different years. Thus encouraged, he
redeemed a small thicket, added a few nursery trees of paper-shells,
about ten acres in all, which now often makes a return equal to the rest
of the farm. Mr. Kramer paid $1,000 for 10 acres, with part in seedling
pecans. He sold $1,000 worth of pecans several different times, and the
rest of the farm makes a good return in pasture and hay. He also has 51
acres that often makes a return of $50 per acre in pecans, besides
pasturing 20 Herfords. Mr. Kramer destroys trees by girdling. Mr. Pfile
makes it a business to buy farms on which there are pecan thickets. One
farm has 70 acres, all top-grafted to improved varieties. Trees were
small and no production for five years, supporting production for the
next four years. Tenth year grossed $8,500; eleventh year, $5,400;
twelfth year, $1,800, and this year his conservative estimate is
$10,000. Mr. Camp has 600 acres in pecans, 90% improved varieties. He
planted 50 acres on upland sandy land on terraces, with pecan trees 40
feet apart and an apple tree between each two pecan trees. The tenth
year he produced 8,000 pounds of paper-shells and 4,000 bushels of
apples. More recently he planted 125 acres on upland, but planted the
pecans 60 feet apart on terraces with an apple tree between. In this
orchard he produces 3/4 of a bale of cotton per acre and plants vetch in
the fall between cotton rows. In October he had four crops on this land,
cotton, vetch, apples and pecans. He says apple trees alternated with
pecans on terraces are OK. Cotton, potatoes and sweet potatoes between
the terraces for the first ten years are OK, but vetch as a winter cover
crop to improve the soil must not be neglected. Grover Hayden has the
largest native pecan grove in the world--1,800 acres fenced hog tight.
He started 31 years ago as a farm hand. He had rather have 500 acres of
pecans than 1,000 acres of alfalfa. Now after 30 years he owns the place
at a purchase price of $90,000, not counting improvements and equipment.
His average production is about 300,000 pounds per year. In 1935, he
produced 400,000. He held back his 1941 crop and together with his 1942
crop, he sold both for $61,000. Think of the faith a man must have in
pecans in Oklahoma to go in debt for $71,000 as Mr. Hayden did! He rode
a pony that was mortgaged for all it was worth from Arkansas to this
ranch.

Those of us who do not have native or seedling pecan trees to work with,
must develop orchards from nursery trees. I was raised on a poor farm in
Missouri. I always had a desire to take a poor piece of land and see
what I could do to improve it. Consequently, I planted 225 improved
pecan trees of 25 different varieties and all other kinds of nut trees,
fruit trees and a variety of berries on a piece of worn-out upland,
pronounced by our county agent to be the poorest piece of ground in our
county, and predicted it would be a complete failure.

I planted the pecan trees 60 feet apart, and interplanted with other nut
and fruit trees. The trees were planted on the contour with youngberries
and many others planted in rows between the tree rows, making a perfect
soil conservation arrangement. Barnyard fertilizer was used to start the
trees. Every September, vetch and rye were sown as a cover-crop and
soil-builder and disked into the soil the following spring. Clean
cultivation is practiced during the summer to conserve moisture. This
procedure has been adhered to most rigidly without a single crop
failure. At 12 years most of the trees are producing $25 worth of
paper-shells. The youngberries and plants sold have paid the expense of
the orchard and a handsome profit besides, until the trees needed all
the room. This project has proved to my satisfaction that profitable
nuts and fruit crops can be grown on upland, if soil conservation and
improvement are practised. The limiting factors of nut and fruit
production are plant food and moisture, and if these are supplied, good
production is assured.


Black Walnuts

The native black walnut of Oklahoma is small and of little value. Most
pecan growers have a few native black walnut trees they graft to the
improved varieties. I have Thomas, Stabler, Ohio, Mintle, Myers, and
others. Thomas has been used most extensively, but does not fill well on
upland. However, in deep sand and low bottoms it fills perfectly. It is
an alternate bearer and is subject to sunscald in our hot dry summers.
Ohio and Stabler have not proven satisfactory. Mintle is a fine nut,
splendid cracker, fills well, but is an alternate bearer. I like Myers
very much, a consistent bearer, has thinnest shell of all, vegetates
after frost in spring, has abundant foliage and twigs, holds leaves
until late autumn. Myers is my choice of all varieties at present.
However, as with pecans, what varieties to use is each grower's
individual problem. We will be looking for better varieties 50 years
from now. For five years I am offering $25 annually for the best
seedling black walnut. Write to our A & M College, Horticulture
Department, Stillwater, Oklahoma, for rules and regulations of the
contest.


How to Make Money with Black Walnuts

I believe I have discovered the best way to market black walnuts. I have
not had much success selling them either husked or unhusked, "too hard
to crack." Then someone remarked, "If you would crack them and put in
some horseshoe nails to pick out the meats, they might sell." There it
is: the secret is discovered. The lowly and almost extinct horseshoe
nail will sell cracked black walnuts. I have the reputation among local
hardware dealers of having more horses than any man in Oklahoma. Black
walnuts and horseshoe nails are reminiscent of the good old days down on
the farm. The big fat meats of improved cracked walnuts peering through
the sides of one or two pound cellophane bags pinned shut with a couple
of horseshoe nails is a temptation few people can resist. Leave a few
packages with your grocer or druggist and try it. I get 25¢ per pound
for the whole walnuts, and 35¢ for those cracked. I sell several
thousand pounds every season, and since the black walnut does not become
rancid we sell them all the year. I have a down-town shop window to
display nuts and fruits. We husk our walnuts by running them thru an
ordinary corn-sheller, or by jacking up the rear wheel of an automobile,
put on a mud chain, with a trough underneath, place car in gear and
scoop walnuts into trough in front of the wheel. This will husk them
rapidly and well. We should promote the growing of more improved black
walnuts. Most catalog nurseries still list seedling walnuts. We sold
3000 Thomas and Myers black walnut trees to one mail order nursery, and
they could have used more.


English Walnuts

I tried all the California varieties, but these lacked hardiness. The
Wiltz Mayette grew into a big fine tree but the 1940 Armistice Day
freeze proved fatal. Breslau, Broadview, Schafer, and several others
with some 25 Carpathian seedlings are just coming into bearing. Some
give promise of adaptation here. I am determined to find a prolific and
adapted variety. In the meantime we must content ourselves to grow this
most attractive tree with its large waxy leaves and beautiful
light-colored bark as a useful novelty.


Heartnuts

Here is a surprise nut and tree to Oklahoma people. Both are unlike
anything ever seen here. When they see this most unusual tree, with its
tropical leaves and taste the delicious nuts they want a tree for their
yard. Visitors stare in amazement at the immense catkins, and the
grape-like clusters of nuts that develop later. This is a heartnut year.
In most all varieties, ten to fifteen nuts to the cluster hang from the
terminal of each twig. The leaves sun-burn easily. In spite of this we
had a heavy crop of well-filled nuts. Of the several varieties I have,
Stranger is the most prolific. Fodemaier, and Walters bloom late enough
to escape our late spring freezes, are larger nuts, and should prove to
be the best eventually.


Butternuts

Butternuts grow native in Missouri and Arkansas. Our section is most too
hot and dry for them. However, I have a few grafts of Buckley and
Weschecke bearing nicely, grafted on native black walnuts.


Hickories

The wooded hills and river bottoms contain several kind of hickories. I
have several pecan trees grafted to the Pleas and McCallister hybrids,
but they are light producers in Oklahoma. I have 80 acres of river
bottom hickory nuts in southwest Missouri that bear abundantly.


Oriental Persimmons

Persimmons grow native here. The Early Golden, an American variety, is
very productive and ripens in September long before frost. Of the
Orientals I have Tamopan, Eureka, Fuyu, Data Maru, Tanenashi. Most all
bear heavily, in fact usually overbear. They stand our dry weather
better than does the native persimmon. The very large fruit usually in
colors of yellow and red attract much attention from visitors who think
they are oranges. The persimmon belongs to the ebony family. The fruit
contains as high as 40% sugar and in the Orient is a national dish. We
propagate them by grafting our native stock.


Pawpaw

The Pawpaw is native in Missouri and Arkansas and in the eastern part of
Oklahoma. It is a beautiful tree and very productive. We shade the small
trees here until they get started, after which they do quite well. The
fruit is a favorite with many.


Chestnuts

I think the greatest tragedy that ever befell American horticulture was
the chestnut blight. Not so long ago every hill and mountain-side east
of the Mississippi River, from near the Gulf of Mexico to the Canadian
border was covered with native chestnut trees producing millions of
pounds of food for man and beast. Today all has been devastated by this
terrible blight and nothing remains save leafless trunks, like
tombstones, in memory of a grand food tree.

In 1889, Tom and Mary Jones left their Kentucky mountain home to
establish a new one in Oklahoma. As with all pioneers they brought seeds
of many species with them, including chestnuts. I now own the farm they
homesteaded. On it today there is an American chestnut tree 4 feet in
diameter with a limb-spread of 50 feet. This grand tree has been an
inspiration to me, surviving our hot dry summers and outliving two
generations of fruit trees by its side. This beautiful tree, now nearly
60 years of age, was proof-sufficient that chestnuts would grow in
Oklahoma. I began to plant chestnuts. I planted all the Riehl
varieties--Progress, Dan Patch, Van Fleet and others. I also had Boone,
an American and Japanese hybrid, brought about by Endicott, also of
Illinois. These have borne well. Being isolated and outside of the
native chestnut range, they have not blighted.

Since 1906, the Government has imported many thousand seed chestnuts
from China. Later, it distributed little trees among the nut growers in
an effort to re-establish chestnut growing in this country. This Chinese
chestnut is blight-resistant. The best Chinese seedlings have been
selected for propagation and have been named; of these I have Stoke (a
hybrid), Hobson, Carr and several others. They are very prolific and
often set burs the same year set out. Mr. Stoke sent me scions of the
newer varieties this spring--Colby's hybrid, and Stoke seedling's Nos. 1
and 2. I grafted these on Chinese stocks; they set burs and matured nuts
the same year grafted. The named varieties of Chinese Chestnut are the
most precocious bearers of all the nut trees, are adapted and worthy of
planting over a wide area. It should be the duty of every man who is
interested in food trees to lend a hand to help re-establish chestnut
growing in this country, now that we have blight-resistant varieties.

Almost within the shadow of our State Capitol, on a main highway leading
from our fair city, I have planted 2-1/2 acres of blight-resistant
Chinese chestnut trees, as a living memorial to our only child, Harold,
who gave his life to our country in a Jap prison camp in the
Philippines. We shall devote the rest of our days to this Living
Memorial, and leave means for its continuance, so that passers-by in
generations to come may be reminded of the world's greatest tree
tragedy, and to demonstrate that chestnuts which once grew native over
half the nation, and were laid low by a terrible disease, may again be
grown.

In conclusion, let me warn you to improve your soil continually. NO TREE
CAN BE BETTER THAN THE SOIL IN WHICH IT GROWS. No man is a greater
exponent of soil improvement than one of Ohio's most illustrious sons,
Louis Bromfield. In his book, "IN PLEASANT VALLEY," he says, "What we
need is a new kind of pioneer, not the sort which cut down the forest,
and burned off the prairies, and raped the land, but the kind which
creates new forests and heals and restores the richness of the country
God has given us."



Weather Conditions versus Nut Tree Crops

By J. F. Wilkinson, Indiana


Nut tree crops, like other crops, are dependent on heat, light and
moisture in proper amount at the right time to produce a crop of nuts of
normal quality; soil conditions also to be taken into consideration.

These conditions are probably more essential to a nut crop than most of
us have realized; even the weather of the preceding season of late
summer and fall may affect or determine next seasons nut crop.

The size of the nut depends on the weather in Spring and early Summer,
for when the shell is once formed and hardened little more growth can be
expected under any conditions, while plumpness of kernel depends on
favorable conditions in late Summer and Fall.

After the shell is formed it fills with water which gradually changes to
kernel, beginning at outer part next to shell, and unless there is
plenty of heat, light, and moisture, kernel may not be filled, which
will cause kernel to shrink, and not be plump, neither will it have
normal germinating vitality, flavor, or weight.

In the past there have been seasons when nuts were not up to normal
quality, but I did not realize then just what caused this condition,
until a few years ago, I heard a party remark that a dry season was an
indication of a good nut crop the following year.

Recalling back several seasons this, as a rule, has been true,
especially where there was no unusually early Fall freezes, and Spring
weather was favorable.

The season of 1944 here was one of the driest on record. Up until the
middle of August, nut trees were showing signs of going dormant. Late in
June, sap was getting so low that I did all my budding late in June, a
month earlier than usual.

This early dry weather caused the nuts that year to be very small,
especially on trees growing under less favorable conditions. Trees that
were well cultivated produced nearer normal sized nuts.

About the middle of August rains began, and these nuts were well filled.
The rains of August brought new life into the trees causing them to hold
their foliage unusually late, and not being thoroughly dormant before
cold weather, at which time no doubt many of the fruit buds were killed,
with the result that a very light crop of nuts was set in Spring of
1945.

Spring opened very early with a bright warm March starting growth before
usual time, even some trees set Pistillate bloom by the first of April;
then later in April it began raining, and rains continued most of the
Summer with much cool, cloudy weather with the result that most of the
nuts failed to properly fill, or mature. This was true of hickory nuts,
walnuts and pecans of both the named varieties and native seedlings.

While the 1945 nut crop was very light of both pecans and walnuts, I had
a few trees with fair crops, though none of the nuts had well filled
plump kernels.

Some of the first nuts to ripen seemed to have fairly well filled
kernels after gathering and kernels got dried out, they shriveled and
lacked flavor.

Walnuts seemed to suffer even worse than the pecans. I was not able to
find a walnut tree in this section that produced good planting nuts;
even farm crops suffered, especially corn of which much of the crop was
not of normal quality.

The spring of 1946 began very much as in 1945 with a very warm March,
again causing trees to start growth unusually early, and this spring,
pistillate bloom was visible on some pecan trees in the last days of
March. This weather condition remained until about the middle of April
when cool rainy weather set in lasting for a month with frosts and light
freezes as late as May 10th, which took all the nut crop in this section
with the exception of a very few walnuts, and these were of very poor
quality.

Another very peculiar thing happened in Spring of 1946. The Posey and
Giles varieties, both of which are usually heavy bloomers of Stamen
bloom, failed to set a single catkin this spring, while trees of other
varieties growing near them set heavy crops of catkin bloom.

The behavior of nut trees in this section in the past two years, both of
which have been unusual seasons, is evidence that nut crops are subject
to weather conditions, not only of the present, but of previous season
as well.



Nut Tree Notes from Southwestern Ohio

Harry R. Weber, Cincinnati, Ohio


Influence of Stock on Scion

At my farm home in the northwestern part of Hamilton County, Ohio, at
about 800 feet elevation, on clay soil, the Carpathian walnuts commence
growth too early in spring for their own good and my comfort, well
knowing what lurking Jack Frost can do to them. These Carpathian walnuts
are uninfluenced by their black walnut understocks, the Schafer variety
alone excepted. I also have two Schafer trees that came grafted
apparently on Carpathian understock; but these start as early as the
others.

The Schafer exception, to which I refer, is grafted on a native black
walnut stock to which the Broadview variety also had been grafted. (The
Schafer variety is patented. I had permission to use the graft as I
did.) With these two hardy varieties in the same tree, which itself is a
late starter in the spring, I unwittingly laid the foundation for an
unanticipated result. This became apparent after a severe early spring
frost in 1945 caused me to examine all my hardy (Persian) walnut trees
to note the effects of that freeze. The new growth of Broadview on the
same tree with the Schafer was frozen, while the Schafer with the rest
of the tree was dormant. The new growth of the other two Schafer trees;
of Breslau top-worked on two trees; of Broadview on another tree; of an
unknown variety on still another tree; all trees being native black
walnut, all were frozen. The same was true as to Breslau seedlings and
also a Kremenetz on Minnesota black walnut. Of course, all these trees
staged come-backs with no bad after effects.

In April, 1945, we had a severe hail storm that clipped clean the second
new growth from these trees. The topworked Schafer was still dormant,
while its companion Broadview in the same tree suffered like the rest.
The spring of 1946 showed the topworked Schafer still dormant, while all
the others were active. The Broadview on the same tree with the Schafer
was almost in full leaf before the Schafer and the rest of the
understock showed signs of growth. A number of persons thought the rest
of the tree was dead.


The Keystone Black Walnut

I have a cut leaf black walnut tree, of value as an ornamental, which
originated in Pennsylvania. Although it had catkins for several seasons,
not until the past season did it produce, and then only one lone nut.
The husk of that nut had a smooth exterior similar to that of a Persian
walnut; but it lacked the characteristic black walnut odor. In fact, it
had none. If this tree has any Persian walnut blood in its makeup, that
hybrid strain may have manifested itself in the foliage; in any event,
there was an influence of some kind that caused the change in the usual
type of foliage. I was more interested in planting the nut to see what
kind of foliage the seedling will have rather than in cracking it for
examination to determine its value as a nut.


Throp Walnut

The parent Throp tree stood bordering a road along the Ralph Throp farm
in Indiana, 40 miles from my home. About six years ago, with the
permission of Mr. Throp, and being a very old tree, it was cut down as
its branches interfered with overhanging wires. When I last saw the
stump early in 1942, it had staged a come-back by throwing numerous
suckers. However, the main point in mentioning this tree is to register
the fact that it bears two kinds of nuts, single-lobed, or peanut type,
and doubled-lobed, with the peanut type predominating. A Throp tree of
mine showed this variation, and on my next visit to the Throp farm, in
the presence of Mr. G. A. Gray, one of our members, Mr. Throp definitely
confirmed the fact that the parent tree bore the two kinds of nuts
aforesaid and that the peanut type predominated.

I am prompted to make this statement for the reason that one of our
prominent members, well versed in the performance of our best varieties
of northern nut trees, had not been aware of the dual performance of the
Throp tree, until I called it to his attention.



Black Walnut Nursery Studies

S. B. Chase, Tennessee Valley Authority, Norris, Tennessee


Briefly summarized, here are the results of a series of black walnut
nursery studies undertaken in 1940 and 1941 by the Tennessee Valley
Authority. The object was to develop nursery practices which would yield
the large uniform seedlings most desirable as understocks for grafted or
budded trees.


Germination and Stratification

It is known that either fall- or spring-planted walnuts germinate
readily if the nuts are viable and if those planted in the spring are
properly stratified over winter. To find out just what effect spring and
fall planting has on germination and to compare various methods of
stratification, three seedlots were given the following treatments on
November 28, 1940:

   1. Planted in seedbeds            5. Stratified at 65-75° F
   2. Stratified outdoors            6. Stored dry at 45-50° F
   3. Stratified at 38-40° F         7. Stored dry at 45-50° F
   4. Stratified at 45-50° F            subsequently soaked in
                                        water prior to planting

Nuts from the three seedlots were kept separate and planted in random
plots in three seedbeds. Each treatment was therefore represented nine
times with a total of 162 nuts in each treatment.

To determine whether time of outdoor stratification has any effect on
germination and emergence, three other seedlots were treated as follows:

   1. Planted November 28, 1940         5. Stratified January 30, 1941
   2. Stratified November 28, 1940      6. Stratified February 20, 1941
   3. Stratified December 19, 1940      7. Stratified March 13, 1941
   4. Stratified January 9, 1941

These three seedlots were also planted in three seedbeds with a total of
135 in each treatment.

With one exception, all nuts in the two tests were planted April 3,
1941. One of the two lots stored dry was soaked in water for five days,
then planted April 7. Seedbeds were equipped with screen wire cloth at a
depth of 10 inches.

~Results~: In both tests, fall nut planting resulted in the best
germination. Germination was higher for nuts planted in the fall than
for nuts stratified on the same day for spring planting, although the
difference was significant only in the second test. Outdoor
stratification produced the best results, followed in order by indoor
stratification at 38-40° F and 45-50° F. None of the nuts stored dry
germinated. Time of stratification proved to be important. Any delay
after November 28 resulted in reduced and retarded germination and
consequently smaller seedlings.


Depth of Planting and Seed Orientation

The effect of planting depth on germination and on seedling size was
investigated by planting black walnuts one, two, three, and four inches
deep. Other nuts were planted in three positions: (1) radicle end up,
(2) on side, and (3) radicle end down.

~Results~: Germination was unaffected by any of these treatments. The
emergence of the seedlings was retarded by deep planting and hence the
final diameter of seedlings was smaller. There was little difference in
seedlings from nuts planted one and two inches deep but they were
noticeably larger than those planted 3 and 4 inches deep. Planting nuts
with the radicle end down invariably produced seedlings with undesirable
crooks in the root-stem region which made them unsuitable for grafting.
Planting nuts radicle end up produced straighter seedlings than planting
them on their side. The latter method was the most economical for
nursery practice.


Seed Size

To study the effect of kernel size on size of seedling produced in the
nursery, nuts from nine wild trees and Thomas nuts were planted. Kernel
weights ranged from 1.21 to 5.61 grams; nut weight from 6.5 grams to
24.3 grams.

~Results~: With one exception where germination was poor, nuts with
small kernels produced small seedlings and nuts with large kernels
produced large seedlings. Under nursery conditions the need for
uniformly large seedlings for budding and grafting is apparent. The
results of this study indicated the desirability of using seed nuts with
large kernels for production of understocks.


Seedbed and Budding Studies

Density of stand in seedbeds influences seedling size. As size of
seedling is important in budding and grafting black walnut, information
on the most desirable spacing in seedbeds was needed. In three seedbeds
Thomas nuts were planted in three nut spacings: 4 x 4 inches, 5 x 5
inches, and 6 x 7 inches. In other plots nuts were planted 4 x 4 inches
and after emergence the stand was thinned. All seedlings from the
thinning test were set out in nursery rows the following spring and
those large enough were budded in the summer.

~Results~: Increasing the spacing produced seedlings of larger girth and
shorter height--a desirable characteristic in black walnut budding
stocks. The most desirable spacing appeared to be 6 x 7 inches. Even
though the number of seedlings resulting from this spacing was
approximately half the number produced at 4 x 4 inches spacing, more
usable seedlings were produced at the wider spacing.

Thinning seedlings spaced 4 x 4 inches resulted in larger girth of those
remaining--very similar in size to seedlings spaced 5 x 5 inches.
Seedlings from the thinned and unthinned plots averaged 0.62 cm. and
0.55 cm. in diameter, respectively. In the nursery row 73 percent of the
larger transplanted seedlings were large enough for budding the
following summer, while only 59 percent of the smaller seedlings
attained proper size. Bud survival was 22 percent on the larger stocks
indicating the desirability of using large stocks.



My Experiments, Gambles and Failures

John Davidson, Xenia, Ohio


In reading the past reports of this Association, I find one thing
lacking. One becomes interested in a report dated, let us say, 10 or 20
years ago, which contains an account of a project then started. It had
great possibilities. What was the outcome? We do not know. No mention of
it has appeared since. Did it fail? Let us say it did. Why? The answer
to this final query is almost, if not quite, as important as would be an
account of the means employed to make it successful--if it succeeded.

I should like to know, for example, whether anything remains of the
Neilson-Post project in Michigan and what its history has been. I should
like to hear more, also, about the outcome of many of Mr. Gerardi's
intensely interesting and original experiments, such as his method,
described in the 29th Annual Report, of asexual propagation of heartnut
trees on their own roots; or his method of artificially creating
beautifully marked burls on black walnut logs by systematically and
repeatedly scoring the bark. These and many others. Which experiments
were successful and which were not? Mr. Gerardi's original and
adventurous mind is the sort that should be probed for the benefit of
those who come after us.

My report today is my own short and tentative contribution to such a
resume.

In the 1938 Report, on page 73, you will find my ambitious and
optimistic "Farm Plan for Nut Tree Planting." In it I tried to outline a
plan which could be used by any practical farmer with but slight
sacrifice of useful land. Its last sentence reads as follows: "Meantime,
I shall have kept practically all my land in profitable use all the
time." Well, that depends upon what is interpreted as "profitable use."
Tree growth is surely profitable.

The plan, in substance, was as follows: First, plant 20 acres in a
modified forest formation to selected seed, mostly black walnut, the
trees to stand 8 feet apart in rows 22 feet apart. Use the space between
the rows first for truck gardening and later for an interplanted row of
some fast-growing species for timber. No grazing permitted. Second,
plant another 20 acres to a nut orchard using grafted trees of named
varieties spaced 80 feet apart. Protect from livestock and permit
grazing. Finally, plant seed in another 30 acres, spaced 80 feet apart,
the seedlings to be eventually topworked to the wood of promising
discoveries from the first plot. Protect and cultivate or graze.

What has been the outcome of this plan to date? The proposed plan worked
very well in a 20-acre plot where a meadow was planted to an orchard of
grafted trees, mostly pecans and Carpathians, which were protected by
cattle guards, but was not completed in the seedling 20-acre plantation
where the trees stood 8 feet apart in rows 22 feet apart. No grazing was
permitted there, but berries and truck crops were put out. I couldn't
keep it up. The reason: a World War, and lack of help for the intensive
type of farming required for the project. Finally, when I attempted to
interplant the rows with fast-growing trees, weeds choked out most of
them in spite of my own efforts. My own physical and time limitations
defeated me in the interplanting undertaking.

This leads up to an enumeration of my mistakes. First, I did not start
early enough in life. The elements of health and strength have their
part in success. Then, too, let us see what might have been the result
if I had started at the age of 20. Remember, in this first tract of 20
acres I planned a forest plantation of selected black walnut seedlings,
some chosen for nut quality and some for large, straight timber growth.
A tract of 20 acres planted 8 x 8 x 22 feet will hold about 4500 trees.
Allow for thinning and other reductions. If only 1250 trees should reach
log size in 50 years, that is, by today for me, at an average of $50
each, they would come to $62,500--a very tidy estate.

Just now there are perhaps 2500 well grown trees in the good portion of
the ground in this 20 acres. Pleasantly enough, they do not now seem to
need the interplanting of faster-growing trees in order to develop
upright growth but are pushing each other up as they stand, 8 x 8 x 22
feet apart. In this planting, then, there is evidence of successful
timber growth in the good ground but of almost complete failure in the
poor ground.

Another failure is to be noted in my original plan for cattle guards.
These guards were 12 feet in diameter, and about 6 feet in height. These
were satisfactory for sheep after I had installed pipe for posts, but
not for cattle. Trees grow horizontally as well as vertically. Cattle,
reaching for these side shoots, reached over the guards and pushed in
and under. I later reduced the guards to a 6-foot diameter of stronger
woven fence-wire with 6-inch stays, not 12-inch, and raised the height
to not less than 10 feet. The cattle may now nibble off the side shoots
if they wish but the vertical growth is protected. Above 10 feet the
trees can spread out without danger.

Others say, "Permit no grazing at all." This statement, I think, should
be made with certain qualifications. Where bluegrass bottom is used for
the orchard planting of pecans or black walnuts, there is a possible
slight reduction in growth from lack of cultivation, but this loss will
be nowhere nearly proportionate to a farmer's loss of pasturage. And
even in my 8 x 8 x 22-foot planting of seedlings, though no grazing was
permitted while the trees were young, now the older trees are large and
strong enough in the good soil to take care of themselves. Some lower
branches are rubbed off but they should be off anyhow. Also, thank
heaven, the weeds are at last kept down by grazing, the grass is
utilized and, most important of all, the hazard of grass fires is
entirely wiped out. I know of a neighbor's planting destroyed in this
way and I shall always fear fire. I should not permit grazing in a
general purpose woods lot where young growth is constantly coming on.

Failure three: I have failed completely to interest my tenant in my
project. Each mowing or clean-up job is just a chore to him. I can't
blame him. Why should I expect anything else? With a World War on hand,
and with his son in the army, and with two farms to care for, the
immediate bread-and-butter jobs come first and my mowing suffers.
However, the wonderful trees somehow continue to grow in spite of weeds
and wars, perhaps a bit more slowly than they otherwise might, but I am
in no hurry.

The last war casualty was my original plan to make a further orchard
planting of seedlings in loco, ready to be top-worked to the wood of
some outstanding find among the selected seedlings. It has not been
done--period.

I think I do have one or two rather outstanding nuts among the
seedlings, but this leads up to another casualty which must be faced by
all of us--a temporary one, fortunately, namely, crop failures due to
the weather. The larger trees began to bear at age seven. Then, three
years ago we had a drouth. For the two years since then, we have had
summer in March and winter in May. The catkins were mostly killed and
the pistillate bloom was delayed in growth upon the new wood until most
of it came too late for even such pollination as was so sparingly
available. Thus we have had no generally good nut producing season for
three years in our part of Ohio. As a result, my truly outstanding nut
is still in hiding, and I am waiting for a good season to bring it out.

Another disappointment with me has been the Carpathians. They partially
winter-kill each winter. Their trunks still live and send up shoots. I
let them stand, hoping for an eventual hardening of the wood. I regard
them not as failures but as not yet proven.

For purely experimental purposes I planted apple and peach trees close
up to the walnuts. Whichever won out was to stay. Both are there yet.
There is as yet no sign of the results of toxicity. They stand,
literally, arm in arm.

One success I feel may safely be chalked up. In selecting seed for my
original planting, some were chosen for better nuts, as stated, and some
because of the magnificent growth of the parent trees. One such tree
gave me seedlings that are definitely superior in growth to other trees
which stand in equally good soil--in fact, in adjoining rows. This is
noteworthy.

As for the seed selected for nut quality, because of the three poor
producing seasons now past, the result is not so apparent. I can only
say that, out of some score or more sources, the nuts produced upon such
seedlings as have fruited tend to resemble the qualities of their
parents. They all show some variations. Each nut tree is a new
individual but with a family inheritance strongly enough marked to make
the planting of seedlings, when done in large quantities, from the best
parents, a sort of gamble in which the percentage is in favor of the
gambler--which is, as you should know, unusual.

One utterly complete failure must be noted. I shall never again plant a
black walnut seed or tree in any but good soil. Even the best
inheritance cannot prevail against hardpan or worn-out soil.

I was unfortunate, when I made my first and largest planting of seed, in
not knowing about the Northern Nut Growers Association. So I advertised
for local nuts, paying double for the seed I accepted. So far as the
seed which was selected because of the timber growth of the parent tree
was concerned, I am well satisfied. But nut quality was only fair; far
below the quality of our named varieties. Then, through the fine
missionary work of Harry Weber, I was introduced to the NNGA. All my
replanting since then has been from seed bought from the member's
plantations. Next year I expect some of them to come into bearing.

Most of you are chiefly interested in grafted or budded trees, and this
is as it should be. Where sure results and the best possible nuts are
the aim, one would be utterly foolish to plant a seedling. Upon the
other hand, where plantings are made in great quantities, as is the case
with foresters, state or federal agencies, colleges and other
institutions--and with occasional individuals like myself who find their
greatest interest in this particular exciting gamble, I think it is
fairly well demonstrated that the percentage of success can be turned in
favor of the planter by intelligent selection.

But where can the best seed be found? The answer is as plain as the nose
on your face. The best possible source is in existing plantations of
named, proven varieties. As a farmer, I should not use a cross-roads
maverick when I can use a registered Jersey, Hereford or Angus. As a
planter of black walnuts, or any other nuts, either for timber or wood,
I should not pick up my seed haphazardly from cross-roads trees. Every
nut produced by planters of orchards of the best named varieties should
be in active demand by state and national agencies for their own
plantings, and the seedlings from them should be available for the
widest distribution to the public. This urgent demand for better seed
will make existing plantations of proved varieties more profitable and
will fill our forests and farms with far better trees.



Nut Trees in Wildlife Conservation

By Floyd B. Chapman Ohio Division of Conservation & Natural Resources


Attesting to our great faith in the value of the nut trees for wildlife
conservation and restoration, the Ohio Division of Conservation and
Natural Resources has distributed free of charge, to cooperating
landowners: 132,000 American hazelnut, 1000 European and American hazel
hybrids, 1000 pecans, 1000 butternut, over one thousand shagbark
hickory, 1500 Asiatic chestnut, 2000 black walnut trees, and more than
50 bushels of black walnut nuts for seed spotting. This program has only
been in operation since 1942, and I think a great deal has been
accomplished in spite of the war and difficulties in growing and
shipping of nursery stock. This record would not be so impressive had we
not been able to take advantage of a vast amount of surplus stock made
available when the U. S. Soil Conservation Service closed out a large
nursery in this region.

To show how dependent are certain wildlife species on an adequate supply
of nut mast, I need only mention one group, the squirrels. Much
information concerning the abundance of squirrels in the original
forests is on record. It is also well known that nuts of several kinds
were always plentiful: native chestnuts, walnuts, butternuts, hazelnuts,
hickorynuts, and beechnuts. The supply was so large that an occasional
crop failure was unimportant; much of the production from the preceding
year was still available. Numerous wild animals, including squirrels,
deer, rabbits, raccoons, and others fed on the native chestnut. It was
such an important staple in the diet of many animals that its passing is
one of the most devastating blows to befall the wildlife of this
continent. In order to compensate for the loss of the chestnut, and at
the same time restore some of the food and cover destroyed through
pasturing of woodlots, and the removal of fencerow cover in clean
farming, the Division of Conservation instituted its popular tree and
shrub unit planting project four years ago. In this program, units of
100 or 200 pine trees and shrubs for food and cover are distributed free
of charge to farmers who will plant them as suggested and protect them
from fire, grazing, and cultivation. American hazelnut was extensively
used in this project during the first two years. Since then we have been
unable to obtain seedling plants in the large quantities that are
needed.

The Division also has several other wildlife restoration projects in
which the nut trees are utilized. These are a farm pond project, a small
wildlife refuge program, and a fencerow cover restoration proposition.
In the pond development program, a farmer is assisted in impounding a
small body of water, from which livestock is fenced, if he will agree to
permit hunting on a portion of his farm. The pond margins are seeded to
a grass mixture to prevent soil erosion and silting, and several hundred
trees and shrubs having value as wildlife food and cover are planted in
the area. The land immediately surrounding the pond becomes a wildlife
refuge where no hunting is permitted. Many Asiatic chestnuts have been
planted on these sites, in addition to American hazelnuts, and
considerable seed spotting with black walnuts has been accomplished.

In the small refuge plan, areas are selected, developed for wildlife by
planting and other management measures, and are then closed to hunting
for a period of years. Many hazelnuts, butternuts, some hickorynuts,
walnuts and Asiatic chestnuts have been used in this work. Our own field
men plant the seedlings or assist the landowner in planting them, then
give advice on the culture of the plants.

In the third undertaking, which is research to determine the best
methods of restoring or developing fencerow food and cover strips;
nearly a thousand hazelnut hybrids have been planted. Among these
hybrids are: Barcelona x European Globe, avellana x Italian red,
Barcelona x purple aveline, Barcelona x Cosford, Barcelona x Italian
red, Rush x Kentish Cob, and Barcelona x various other types. The better
sorts of hazelnuts have been used in this project to familiarize the
farmers with them so that they will have an incentive to grow something
valuable in fencerows. We have found that most farmers will not listen
to the argument of growing anything in fencerows purely for the benefit
of wildlife. By using a more subtle, convincing, and practical approach,
we are convinced that success will be attained and that wildlife will be
benefitted in the end.

In addition to these projects which are of a statewide nature, the
Division of Conservation owns some 14,000 acres of game lands on which
experimental plantings of nut trees have been made. From plantings of
Chinese chestnuts established in 1941, we are now beginning to realize
definite returns. On the Zaleski State forest game area, one of these
trees, now about 6 feet high, is bearing 21 burs this year. In
connection with a squirrel research problem, one of our field men,
Robert Butterfield, is carrying on some experiments in fertilizing nut
and other trees which should yield some very valuable information. I
recently saw a plot of Castanea mollissima which had been treated with a
33-1/2% nitrogen fertilizer. Planted on poor, acid, eroded soils in the
hill country, these have barely survived. After treatment, the yellow,
stunted foliage changed miraculously to a striking dark green, the
leaves grew larger, and the entire plants showed every evidence of
healthy growth. It has been suggested that interplanting chestnuts with
black locust might have the same beneficial effect and we intend to try
it.

None of us has ceased to hope that some day the blight which has
stricken our native chestnuts can be conquered. We can be assured that
whenever a resistant variety of chestnut does originate in the wild,
squirrels will find it and give it widespread distribution. In Ohio,
squirrels are still proficient in locating the few sprouts that are
fruiting, burying the nuts and forgetting them in the woods each year,
with the result that we always have a few seedling trees coming on. Last
spring, I found several bushels of chestnut burs cached in a sandstone
cave in southern Ohio by woodrats.

The States which are most interested in the nut trees from the
standpoint of wildlife are usually those in which squirrels or wild
turkeys are important game species. If those who are growing nut trees
commercially would concentrate their efforts in these states which
extend from Pennsylvania to Missouri and throughout the south, I think
they would be helping themselves and contributing in an important
measure to wildlife conservation and recreation. I think many States,
and I know this is true of Ohio, would like to introduce some of the
better named varieties of walnuts, hazelnuts, filberts, and other nut
trees to the landowners of the State through conservation projects which
I have described, but the cost is thus far too prohibitive for stock
which is distributed by us free of charge. I am personally interested in
the fine program of nut tree research which is being initiated in Ohio
and elsewhere. The hill culture experiments are especially interesting
and valuable. However, I believe every grower should give increasing
attention to the possibilities of nut trees in conservation, to the end
that better and more prolific varieties can be made available for this
purpose. States which can use good nut tree stock in their conservation
work should be solicited, their interest aroused in plantings for the
dual purpose of home use and wildlife, and a few select varieties sold
or given to them each year for experimental use. Some growers are
already generous in releasing a few new and promising nut tree varieties
for trial growing in various sections of the country.

Most Conservation departments are financed on an annual basis with funds
from hunting and fishing licenses. This prevents our knowing from year
to year exactly what our requirements are going to be in the line of
planting material. Such stock cannot be contracted for even one year
prior to purchase. We have no Division-owned nursery for propagating
game food and cover plants, and nearly all hardwood stocks are purchased
from commercial nurseries. Most states prefer to purchase nursery stock
that is grown locally, and if nut growers could succeed in lining up
their own state conservation departments, I am sure that they could
expand their production to furnish the stock needed, both at a profit to
themselves and at a price we could afford to pay.



Commercial Aspects of Nut Crops As Far North As St. Paul, Minnesota

By Carl Weschcke, St. Paul, Minnesota


For the benefit of those new members who are not familiar with my nut
tree plantation at River Falls, Wisconsin, I wish to explain its
geographical conditions. Situated in the 45th parallel, longitude
92-1/2°, about 860 feet above sea level, this is a very severe climate
for growing most species of nut trees. Fortunately, I did not realize
that fact 30 years ago, and I learned a great deal about the hardiness
of many species and varieties and the difficulties of growing them
before I was convinced of it. My optimism in those years so ruled me
that I was influenced by it to try out such tender species as almonds,
English walnuts, filberts, pecans and chestnuts, along with hardier
types such as butternuts, black walnuts, hicans, hickories and hazels.

To give you a rough idea of the testing I did, I will mention some of my
work among hickories. I was fortunate enough to have a forest of
bitternut trees on my land. It is a well-known fact that, at least
temporarily, these bitternut hickories lend themselves well as grafting
stock for many superior varieties of hickories, hicans and pecans,
although the last species seldom is considered permanently compatible
with bitternut. The number of varieties I tested on bitternut stock is
roughly about 75. During the years since I started such grafting, most
of these have been lost by natural elimination, lack of hardiness or
incompatibility. Those varieties which on my place have proved hardy and
compatible with bitternut stock for at least ten years are: Bridgewater,
Cedar Rapids, DeVeaux, Glover, Kirtland, and Weschcke. Those which have
endured well on this stock for from 6 to 15 years are: Barnes, Davis,
Fox, Leonard, Milford, Netking, Platman, and Taylor. Among hybrids which
have stood for 10 years or more, there are: Beaver, Burlington, Laney,
Pleas, and Rockville. Of pecan, there are Hope and Norton. There are a
few other survivors of whose identity I am not certain, as they have not
yet fruited. This does not mean that all of those listed have borne, but
only that the identity of some of the survivors can not be established
without such verification.

Preeminent among the hickories which have produced nuts, stands the
Weschcke variety, which has borne the greatest quantity with the most
regularity. This variety, grafted on bitternut in 1932, produced one nut
that year. Its bearing record has been unbroken from then to 1946, when,
on May 11, the temperature dropped to 26°F and on May 12, a similar, low
temperature was accompanied by four inches of snowfall. Pictures I have
on display verify these statements. The frost at that time destroyed the
whole crop in a nearby 30-acre orchard of apples, pears, plums, and
nuts. Although the first growth of Weschcke was totally destroyed along
with the crop, the second growth contained a fair distribution of
pistillate flowers which probably would have produced nuts, had they
been pollinated. The Weschcke produces no pollen, being one of those
curious freaks of nature which aborts its staminate flowers before they
reach maturity.

Other hickory hybrids and shagbarks which have borne satisfactory crops
on my farm, with fair regularity, are the Beaver, Fairbanks,
Bridgewater, Cedar Rapids, Kirtland, Siers and Laney, in the order of
their worth. The remaining varieties that I mentioned have not yet
fruited, although I hope they will do so.

The facts I have given are my reasons for recommending the Weschcke
hickory as a tree suitable for commercial use in the north. I realize,
of course, that farther south, where hardiness is not so essential a
quality, other trees may be just as satisfactory. I might also mention
that the size and cracking qualities of the Weschcke variety are also
commendable. The quality of the kernel, which is practically 50% of the
total weight of the nut, is praised by all who have tasted it.

It is with great regret that I admit that I have no black walnut
varieties which I can recommend for commercial use this far north.
However, I would place Ohio ahead of Thomas, because of its greater
hardiness. The ease of hulling, the size and appearance of Thomas, plus
its productivity, would certainly place it first were it not for the
frequent winter-killing it suffers, to which Ohio, of course, is not
completely invulnerable. Other varieties which have been fairly
satisfactory but which are not as well-known, include Patterson and
Rohwer. The fact remains, however, that not one black walnut I have
tested has produced a regular and satisfactory crop, although they have
been more productive than native butternuts. At present, I would rule
out both species as apparently having no commercial value in the
northern climate where my plantation lies, although they may be
satisfactory for home orchards.

Before leaving the hickories, I do want to mention that I feel there is
a good chance for growing pecans in this climate. I have seedling trees,
now more than 20 years old, which are in bearing but do not mature their
fruit. It is possible that some of these may become acclimated to an
extent that their cycle of dormancy will reduce itself, bringing their
period of flowering early enough in the spring to allow sufficient time
and heat units for maturing the nuts.

Early in my experimental work, I tested chestnuts and chinkapins but met
with poor results. Only in the last few years have experiments with them
been successful enough to warrant their being mentioned as commercial
possibilities in the north. At present, I have several Chinese and two
American varieties, as well as one chinkapin, which have proved hardy
and fruitful. Further testing is necessary before I can report anything
definite about them.

I have grafted on native plum stock most of the almonds which have been
considered hardy, including the hard-shelled varieties from Michigan and
the Northland from the Pacific Coast. Some have flowered but none have
set nuts. All proved too tender for our climate. I feel more hopeful for
success with some of the many seedling hybrid plums I am growing. A
number of these have edible kernels and the trees could be considered
for their fruit as well as for the kernels of their seeds.

Among other species of walnut I have tested is the heartnut, which is a
sport of the Japanese walnut. This is a worthy nut and has done well
when grafted on black walnut stock. Only two varieties have proved hardy
and only one of these, Gellatly, has produced good crops for a long
time. Were it not for the insect pests which attack it and, worse still,
the sapsucker, this tree might be considered for semi-commercial use in
the north. The sapsucker is a woodpecker. It chips out bark right down
to the wood, girdling large limbs and killing whole sections of a tree.
This results in an excessive amount of succulent, tender growth which is
subsequently winter-killed. Insects attack the new shoots, laying their
eggs in the bud and stem portions, causing immature growth which stunts
the tree and prevents its bearing. I have also found the heartnut
difficult to graft, even on black walnut, which is a favorable
combination.

I began testing Persian walnuts 30 years ago by grafting them on wild
butternut stock. Although many grafts were successful, not one even
lived through a winter. It was not until 1937, when I grafted hundreds
of trees with thousands of grafts of the many varieties of Crath
importations from the Carpathian Mountains, that I succeeded in getting
any to survive our winters. A few eventually bore nuts, but the severity
of our winters and the inroads of new insects during the war years
finally proved fatal to them. I made strenuous attempts to save the
varieties by regrafting, but I was wholly unsuccessful. Right now, I am
not at all hopeful that Persian walnuts of any kind can ever survive
very long this far north.

We now come to the last group of species mentioned at the beginning of
this report, namely, filberts and their hybrids. In my opinion, these
have potentialities of commercial value in the north. Even the frosts of
May 11th and 12th this year (1946) did not wipe out the crops which had
been set. With proper pollinization, I am certain that their production
will become as reliable as the corn crop in this part of the country. At
the banquet, I shall give each of you a sample of a new product made
from these nuts.

The combination of qualities of the cultivated filbert from Europe and
our wild Wisconsin filbert results in an extremely hardy plant, with
characteristics sometimes like the former, sometimes like the latter.
Many times, the hybrid combines the best of each. I am testing these for
field culture, to be cared for much as corn is. I expect to have three
experimental farms before very long, demonstrating the success of
commercial orchards of these hybrids which I call "hazilberts."
"Hazilberts" is a word I coined by borrowing from the names of its
parents. It has been readily accepted by the lay public and is easily
understood to refer to hybrids between hazels and filberts. Furthermore,
I was able to obtain a U. S. trademark on this for application to these
plants.

Hazilberts are all subject to the native hazel blight, ~Cryptosporella
anomala~, a fungus infection. They are also susceptible to another
blight similar to the bacteriosis of the Persian walnut. More serious
than these, though, is the damage caused by a curculio, which cuts down
heavily the production of nuts if measures are not taken to combat them.
Breeding has demonstrated that some hybrids are so resistant to the
inroads of this pest that they may almost be considered immune,
especially when they are interplanted with other hazilberts which do
attract curculios and so act as trap-plants. In this way, the insects
are encouraged to concentrate in one place where they may be poisoned,
thus protecting the main-crop plants. Since pollinators are required for
filberts anyhow, the pollinators may be the trap-plants. This is
actually the case in the initial plantings. Clean cultivation will also
do away with many of the curculios, since they depend on unbroken soil
in the fall for their metamorphosis.

The presence of blight makes it unwise to depend on a single-trunked
tree and I find that great productivity can be maintained when the plant
is allowed to grow in stools having from three to five trunks. The
management of such plants is like that of raspberry bushes, except that
instead of thousands of plants per acre to be cared for, with hazilberts
there are only 145, 15 x 20 feet apart.

Judging by the number of nuts on small plants, one may reasonably expect
crops to average one-half ton of nuts per acre. The hybrids I have grown
so far have been self-husking. The size of their nuts is good, some
measuring an inch in diameter. For commercial purposes, however, the
large size is not particularly desirable nor necessary.

In conclusion, I want to say that there is a very promising situation
developing for these nuts commercially. Not only are these hazel-filbert
hybrids easily planted, but they are easy to propagate, since they are
one of very few species of nut trees which are easily propagated by
layers and root sprouts. Out of more than 600 hazilberts which I planted
in the fall of 1945, only about a dozen were dead in June of 1946, which
gives you a practical idea of the ease and safety of transplanting them.



The 1946 Status of Chinese Chestnut Growing In the Eastern United States

By Clarence A. Reed U. S. Plant Industry Station, Beltsville, Maryland


Introduction

The Chinese chestnut, Castanea mollissima, now dominates interest among
well-informed chestnut planters of the eastern United States almost to
the exclusion of other species. Since its introduction in 1906, it has
had but one important competitor, the Japanese chestnut, C. crenata.
Among the world's most important producers of tree chestnuts, only these
two species are effectively resistant to blight. However, the Japanese
chestnut lacks the palatability to which Americans are accustomed and
for all practical purposes it has been rejected in this country. Many
small plantings still survive; but this species serves better for shade
and ornamentation than for food production.


Description of the Chinese Chestnut

The nut of this species is usually of good size, roundish in form, not
pointed at the apex, and with the basal scar smaller than the lower end
of the nut. A certain amount of gray down is on the surface. This down
may be confined to a small area about the apex or it may cover much of
the upper end of the nut, and it may be thick, thin, or scant. The nut
may have good cleaning quality, meaning that the kernel and its pellicle
are easily separated. Cleaning quality may be good from the time the nut
falls from the tree or it may become so only after curing for a time.
Once it develops it may remain good as long as the kernel is usable or
it may last for a short while only. In texture and in palatability, the
kernel of the Chinese chestnut is not excelled by any other true
chestnut. Individual nuts are sometimes sweet from the first but the
great majority become so only after being cured for a week or 10 days.
Very few nuts of the pure species fail to be sweet when fully cured.

In the open the Chinese chestnut tree attains much the same size and
general proportions as does the apple but it may become somewhat larger,
more upright and considerably taller. Young seedlings vary greatly in
form and are often ungainly and unsymmetrical; but others are all that
could be desired with respect to symmetry. Early lack of symmetry tends
to become less objectionable as the tree grows older and is seldom
conspicuous after the first decade or so.

In fruitfulness, many of the seedling trees of bearing age are
definitely disappointing. Also in many cases the nuts are small. To
judge the species by the past fruiting performance of a majority of its
representatives in this country would leave little justification for
commercial hope. However, there are a good many individual trees about
the country whose performance record is excellent and a large number of
these are under careful observation as potential varieties.

The species has gained rapidly in popularity since the middle 'thirties
when enough good-performing trees began bearing for a fair appraisal of
the species to be possible. It was also at about that time that trees
for planting began to be available from the nurseries. Before then trees
could only be had in limited numbers from the Department of Agriculture.
Today, they are listed in nursery catalogues of one or more firms in
each of a half dozen or more states. The total number of trees yet
planted is comparatively small and both nurserymen and planters up to
this time have proceeded cautiously because of the newness of the
industry and its uncertainties.


Environmental Requirements

The Chinese chestnut requires much the same conditions of climate soil,
and soil moisture as does the peach, but there are indications that it
will succeed somewhat farther both north and south. As with the peach
air drainage must be good and frost pockets must be avoided, for while
at the latitude of the District of Columbia, the flowering period is
from late May until toward the end of June, growth begins early and may
be badly damaged in April. This is especially true during such seasons
as those of 1945 and 1946 in the middle Atlantic States when summer
temperatures prevailed during a great part of March, and new shoot
growth up to two inches had developed when sub-freezing temperatures
killed all new growth and so injured the buds that at Beltsville,
Maryland, and general vicinity there were no crops in either year. In
some cases young trees were killed out-right as were occasional older
trees that had become devitalized in some way.

Young trees are so sensitive to lack of soil moisture that sometimes
whole plantings are killed by drought. Spring growth is rapid as long as
the soil is moist but root development is shallow during the first few
years and, unless watered, trees are likely to fare badly in case of
prolonged drought. Another serious type of injury, especially to newly
planted trees, is sunscald on the exposed sides of the trunks. Probably
the best means of prevention is to head the trees low enough to provide
for shading by the tops.

It is said[1] that at the altitude of 2200 feet in West Virginia, snow
and ice frequently cause much injury to young trees. It is a notable
characteristic of the species for young trees to retain their leaves
during much of the winter. Unless these are removed soon after turning
brown, they are apt to become heavily weighted with wet snow and to
cause severe breakage. Hail and spring freezes also cause much damage in
that locality. The last, however, is not peculiar to high altitude alone
as frost injury is frequent at much lower elevations. It was generally
in evidence in central Maryland during the springs of 1945 and 1946 as
has already been mentioned. This type of injury is easily overlooked,
but the cambium will be found dark if a cut is made through the outer
bark. Recovery usually takes place rapidly if the injured trees are left
undisturbed, but healing will be slow if they are dug up for
transplanting or the tops are severely cut back in preparation of the
stock for grafting.

[Footnote 1: Verbal statement by Mr. Authur Gold, of Cowen, W. Va., made
during April, 1946.]


Bearing Ages

Young trees may bear a few nuts three or four years after being
transplanted, but it usually takes from 10 to 12 years for tops to
become large enough to produce profitable crops. While there are
occasional trees that become profitable at these ages, there are many
that do not. The only significant record of yields yet made public is
one reported by Hemming.[2] His statement shows that 18 seedling trees
planted in 1930 bore an average of 29.5 pound (green weight) during six
of the eight years from 1937 to 1944, inclusive, when crops were large
enough to be separately recorded for each tree. The range in total
production per tree for the six years was from 106 to 277 pounds. At an
arbitrary price of 25 cents a pound, the average gross return per tree
would have been $7.39 for each of the six crops. The 1944 crop was a
practical failure. That of 1946, amounted to about 1000 pounds, or an
average of about 55 pounds per tree.

[Footnote 2: E. Sam Hemming, Easton, Md., "Chinese Chestnuts in
Maryland," Ann. Rep't., Nor. Nut Growers Association, Incorporated, vol.
35, pp. 32-34. 1944.]


The Seedling Tree

The original planting stock of the Chinese chestnut as grown in the
United States consisted wholly of seed nuts imported direct from the
Orient. It was therefore, inevitable that a period of seedling
development should follow. The great majority of the earliest trees
grown proved unfit for use as potential varieties, although with some
exceptions, they produced nuts that were sweet and palatable. Since the
middle 'thirties, superior strains have been introduced, cultural and
environmental requirements have become better understood, and the
outlook for commercial orchards is much improved.

To a great extent the seedling has served as well as would a grafted
tree for the pioneer experimental work that had to be done. It has been
far better than no tree at all and even now it has its advantages. With
it there is no expense for grafting, no problems of congeniality between
stock and scion and those of cross pollination are held at a minimum.
Moreover, it must not be forgotten that it is only from seedling trees
that superior varieties are possible. In 1946, the year in which this
paper is being written, very few grafted trees are available from any
source.


The Grafted Tree

The first varietal selections were made in 1930. Quite unavoidably they
were chosen solely by what could be judged from the nuts with no
knowledge of the bearing habits of the parent trees. These were first
grafted in 1932 and first catalogued in 1935. Already by 1946, some had
been supplanted by others of greater promise. Few grafted trees have
been brought into bearing and with minor exceptions, it has not been
possible to obtain bearing records. It is, however, mainly with the
grafted tree that the future of the industry is expected to be built up.


Individual Varieties--Abundance

This variety was first catalogued in 1941 by Carroll D. Bush, then a
nurseryman at Eagle Creek, Oregon. Of the very few trees of this variety
sold by him, one went to Mr. Fayette Etter, Lemasters, Penna., with whom
it early became a favorite among 7 or 8 he had under test. During 1945,
he sent a quantity of Abundance chestnuts to Dr. J. Russell Smith,
Swarthmore, Penna., who in turn forwarded 12 specimens to the Plant
Industry Station. These arrived October 11 and were immediately placed
in a refrigerator. On October 22, they averaged 50 to the pound and
ranged from 38 to 76. The appearance was very attractive as the color
was a rich brown and there was very little down over the surface. The
cleaning quality was also very good and the flavor excellent.

The Abundance has attracted considerable attention and, while it does
not appear to be listed in any nursery catalogue, a number of leading
growers are using it in top working seedling trees and it may soon be
available through regular nursery channels.


Carr

The Carr chestnut originated as one of two seedlings sent by the
Department of Agriculture in 1915 to the late R. D. Carr, Magnolia, N.
C. Sixty-two nuts from Mr. Carr were received by the Department in 1930.
These were not especially attractive as the surface was thickly coated
with gray down. The lot averaged 58 per pound and the nuts were
considered large. Cleaning quality was very good and the flavor was
sweet and pleasing. The variety was immediately named in honor of Mr.
Carr although propagation did not begin until 1932. It is believed to
have been the first variety of the species ever grafted in this country.
The work was performed by H. F. Stoke, Roanoke, Va. Later the Carr
became available for several years from a number of nurseries. It was a
strong grower but often failed to make good unions with its stock and is
not now in general favor.


Hobson

This also originated as one of two seedling trees sent to a private
grower by the Department. He was Mr. James Hobson, Jasper, Ga., in whose
honor it was named in 1930. It was later taken up by commercial
nurserymen and widely distributed for several years. It has much in its
favor as it is easy to graft, precocious, prolific, annual in bearing,
and the nuts are very sweet. Also, the cleaning quality is very good,
but the nuts are too small to meet market requirements of this country
to best advantage. Furthermore, being small, they are expensive and time
consuming of labor at time of harvest. The average per pound for a lot
of 110 nuts received in 1930 was 78. Others received during later years
were even smaller. The variety rapidly lost favor with most nurserymen
and its propagation was largely if not entirely discontinued. However,
for home use, it is much to good to be abandoned at this time.


Reliable

Reliable was an introduction of H. F. Stoke, Roanoke, Va., by whom it
was propagated for a short time only, beginning in 1938. It is not known
to have been catalogued by any other nurseryman. Ten fresh nuts in 1939
averaged at the rate of 79 to the pound. Six days later, after further
curing had taken place, the number became 101 to the pound. Aside from
having a good bearing record, there appears to be little reason for
continuing this variety.


Stoke

This variety appears to be the result of a natural Chinese-Japanese
cross. The original tree was grown by H. F. Stoke, Roanoke, Va., whose
attention was attracted to it because of its habit of maturing early. He
reports that in southwestern Virginia, burs often begin opening during
the third week of August. In appearance, the nuts greatly resemble pure
Japanese. The parent tree bears well but the nuts are lacking in good
quality. Insofar as known propagation has been discontinued.


Yankee (Syn. Connecticut Yankee)

The Yankee originated as a chance seedling on property of E. E. Hunt,
Riverside, Conn. It was first propagated by Dr. J. Russell Smith,
Swarthmore, Penna., in northern Virginia by whom it was first catalogued
in 1935. The writer has seen no specimens but according to Dr. Smith,
the size and other features are very good. The parent tree is said to
bear well and to be hardy where it is located, which is not far from
Long Island Sound in the extreme southwestern corner of Connecticut.


Zimmerman

This originated as a 1930 selection made by the late Dr. G. A.
Zimmerman, Linglestown, Penna. Very few sound nuts of Zimmerman have
ever been produced, for soon after the first crop the identity of the
tree became lost and eventually it was destroyed together with others in
an overgrown nursery row where it stood. In one known case where there
are grafted trees of bearing age, the nuts are regularly destroyed by
weevils. Such nuts as have been seen by the writer have been of a dull
brown color and have had surface down only about the apex.

The Zimmerman was first catalogued in 1938-39 by Dr. Smith. It is
probable that as many trees of this variety have been sold and planted
as of any one variety but performance records are difficult to obtain.


Potential Varieties

Other varietal selection are being made, mainly by the Bureau of Plant
Industry, Soils, and Agricultural Engineering from trees at its various
field stations. Some of these are already under test as grafted stock in
various parts of the country. The most promising will be released to
commercial nurserymen as soon as their superiority over existing
varieties is established.


Pollination

There is much evidence that chestnut pollen is largely carried by
insects although this has not been fully established. The Chinese
chestnut is largely, although apparently not wholly, self sterile; more
than a single seedling or grafted variety should be included in any
planting. Several seedlings or several varieties would be better. In
seedling plantings, all trees that produce inferior nuts should be
removed in order to avoid danger of undesirable pollen influence,
either on nut characters, or on the genetic makeup of the embryos if the
nuts are to be used as seed.


Harvesting and Curing

Chestnuts should be harvested daily as soon as some begin to ripen and
drop to the ground. They should be placed at once on shelves or in
curing containers with wooden or metal bottoms through which the larvae
of any weevils with which the nuts may be infested cannot penetrate and
reach the ground. In areas of infestation, these grubs soon begin to
bore their way out of the nuts and leave conspicuous holes in the
shells. All infested nuts should be promptly burned.

In order to cure chestnuts to best advantage, they should be spread
thinly on floors, or on shelves, or in shallow containers as just
described, and held in a well-ventilated room. They should be stirred
frequently and held for from 5 to 10 days depending both upon the
condition of the nuts and the atmospheric conditions at the time of
harvest: During the period of curing, the nuts will shrink rapidly in
weight and the color will change materially. Both luster and brightness
will largely disappear and, although still attractive, the nuts will
quickly become dull brown. Three weeks is about as long as Chinese
chestnuts usually remain edible without special treatment.

Chestnuts should be marketed as promptly as possible both to minimize
deterioration and to take advantage of good prices which are usually
highest early in the season.


Storing

Chestnuts in sound condition when stored may be kept fit for eating or
planting for several months by any one of several methods. When
available, cold storage with temperatures somewhat above freezing is the
simplest and generally the most satisfactory method. Stratifying method.
Stratifying in a wire-mesh container buried deeply in moist but
well-drained sand is very satisfactory and successful. Another method is
to hold the nuts in a tightly closed tin container either in a
refrigerator or in cold storage at 32° F. Burying under a porch or in
the shade of a house or even in a bin of grain, preferably wheat or rye,
is also a good method. Regardless, however, of temperature or other
conditions, germination is likely to begin in early March and nuts
intended for planting should be hastened into the ground as promptly as
possible after that time.


Insect Pests

The two chestnut weevils are the principal insects attacking the nuts.
These are exceedingly well-known in certain large areas where the
chestnut is grown and in these areas both are often extremely abundant.
Unless checked in some way they often render whole crops unfit for use.
One of most effective means of control is to plant trees only in well
populated poultry yards; however, in large developments, this is
impracticable and other methods must be employed. In preliminary work
carried on by the Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine at
Beltsville, DDT has given very encouraging results in the control of the
weevil. The weevils have sometimes been called curculios, under which
name they were well discussed by Brooks and Cotton.[3] The Japanese
Beetle is also a serious pest as chestnut leaves are among its favorite
foods. Control methods have been given by Hadley.[4] Another insect pest
which feeds on the leaves is the June bug or May beetle. It works mainly
at night and feeds on the newest leaves. It is seldom seen and usually
disappears about the time when the operator becomes aware of its
presence.

[Footnote 3: Fred B. Brooks and Richard T. Cotton, "Chestnut Curculios."
U. S. Dept. Agr. Tech. Bul. 180. 1929.]

[Footnote 4: C. H. Hadley, "The Japanese Beetle and its Control." U. S.
Dept. Agr. Farmers' Bul. 1856. 1940.]


Diseases

Blight is the disease attacking the chestnut tree with which the public
is most familiar. The Chinese chestnut is strongly resistant although
not immune as few old trees entirely escape attack in areas where blight
is prevalent. In most cases healthy vigorous trees of this species
overcome the disease within a few years after being attacked. The ones
that die are usually those that have been devitalized in some way. The
nuts are subject to attack by any of several diseases either before or
after the harvest. A preliminary report on these has been made by
Gravatt and Fowler.[5]

[Footnote 5: G. F. Gravatt and Marvin Fowler. Nor. Nut Growers Ass'n.
Proc. 31: 110-113. 1940.]


Present Extent of Planting

With few exceptions the known plantings consist of small numbers of
trees about residences. Occasionally there are one or two hundred trees
in orchard arrangement. Production is not large and in most cases all
sound nuts are either consumed locally or used by nurserymen and others
for planting. The quantity that has reached the wholesale market is
known to be small although a beginning in that field has been made.


Future Outlook

Extensive expansion has not appeared possible in the near future until
the 1946 crop was harvested. This was unexpectedly large and a number of
tons are known either to have been planted immediately or set aside for
planting in the spring of 1947. It is conceivable that annual production
of nuts available for seed purposes will increase rapidly. In this case,
the extent of planting within the next few years will be entirely a
matter of guesswork.

Extensive planting in the early future cannot be considered economically
safe for in addition to the usual number of problems that must be solved
in establishing any new horticultural enterprise, chestnut growers must
expect keen competition with imports from both Europe and Asia. At the
outbreak of World War II, an average of more than 16 million pounds of
chestnuts were yearly being imported into this country.[6] These imports
will doubtless again appear with the return of normal international
relations.

[Footnote 6: Computed from Table 541, p. 413, Agricultural Statistics
1938. U. S. Dept. Agr. 19]

Furthermore almost an exact half-century ago, the chestnut outlook was
regarded as being so bright that it could hardly go wrong. During the
middle and late 'nineties extensive chestnut developments were
established in certain eastern districts mainly by use of Paragon and
other varieties of European parentage. Thousands of small plantings were
developed about home grounds and occasionally there were large orchards.
The greatest developments were conducted by top working suckers that
sprung up from stumps of native chestnut trees on cutover mountain land.
Hundreds of acres were handled in this manner. Without exception, all
ended in financial disaster.


Summary

The nut of the Chinese chestnut is an excellent product. It is
unexcelled in sweetness and general palatability by any other known
chestnut. The tree bears well and is about equally as hardy as the
peach. It appears to require much the same conditions of cultural
environment as does that fruit. It is practically the only species of
chestnut now being planted by informed growers in the eastern part of
the United States.

It is thus far grown in this country almost entirely as seedling trees.
Variation is about what was to be expected, with the majority of bearing
trees proving to be poor producers and, in most cases, with nuts too
small to sell well.

Varietal selections of much promise are being made; the first appeared
in 1930 and were first catalogued in 1935. Some of the earliest have
already been dropped as their defects came to be known, and others of
greater apparent promise have originated. The process of selection is
constantly going on and further introductions should shortly appear.

By taking certain simple steps chestnuts in sound condition may be kept
in usable condition for many weeks.

The Chinese chestnut is subject to attack by certain serious natural
enemies. These include both insects and diseases and the tree as well as
the nuts are affected. However, all that are now known appear
controllable.

Past planting has been largely limited to small numbers of trees mainly
about residence grounds. The total number of trees available for
planting has never been large, due chiefly to the scarcity of seed nuts
needed for nursery use. Production, however, rose sharply with the
harvest of the 1946 crop which was unexpectedly large. Annual production
may continue to increase since the number of trees of bearing age is
likely to become appreciably greater each year. Nursery planting is
likely to be proportionately greater. The extent of future planting will
doubtless be correspondingly influenced.

Present enthusiasm over the Chinese chestnut is very great and it is
possible extensive planting may soon take place. It is believed,
however, that this would be unwise from an economic point of view. There
are many uncertainties in connection with the industry in its present
state of development, and, not improbably there will be keen competition
in the market with imported chestnuts from both Europe and Asia as soon
as international relations become normal.



Bearing Record of the Hemming Chinese Chestnut Orchard

By E. Sam Hemming, Easton, Maryland


Our Chinese chestnut trees have aroused such interest that we are sure
the readers of the Proceedings will wish to hear of the large crop
harvested in 1946. A year ago an unseasonal spring brought a frost that
killed back the six inches of soft new growth. As a result, the 1945
crop amounted to less than 250 pounds. This year the 18 trees produced
1138 pounds, 938 by actual weighing and 200 estimated. This is an
average of 63 pounds per tree, with the largest crop of 124 pounds on
No. 19, and the smallest on No. 14 of 22 pounds.

These trees are now 18 years old and were unfortunately planted too
close. But using a spacing of 30 feet × 30 feet, they would have borne
3000 pounds per acre and if planted 40 feet × 40 feet would have borne
1600 pounds per acre. Figure this crop at 25¢ a pound and you would get
a really high return. This year the price was much better than that, but
we planted the crop.

The tree record was as follows: Number 1--38; Number 2--25; Number
3--30; Number 4--52; Number 5--44; Number 6--30; Number 7--42; Number
8--40; Number 9--45; Number 10--58; Number 11--56; Number 12--48; Number
13--58; Number 14--22; Number 15--50; Number 16--80; Number 18--86;
Number 19--124; Total of 938 + 200 (estimated) = 1138.

It is also worthy of note, that No. 19 is spaced 30 feet from No. 18 and
No. 16 is the same distance from No. 18, while all the other trees are
spaced 16 feet apart. An acre of trees like No's. 16, 18 and 19, spaced
30 feet apart, would average 96 pounds per tree or 4200 pounds per acre,
a really tremendous crop.

We had one disappointment this year, in that our method of controlling
the weevil was not completely effective. To our chagrin we found that,
while we were diligently picking the nuts up each day, some of the
larvae were escaping through the cotton bags to reinfest the ground.
Next year, we will use metal containers and we are sure that will stop
them. We will fumigate if necessary. We do not particularly fear the
weevil as we are sure that spraying, and fumigation will clean them up;
after that proper harvesting should control them. We have heard that the
U. S. D. A. has found the use of DDT to be effective. In another county
a raiser of hybrid corn seed dusted his corn with DDT by plane, to kill
the Japanese beetle, for $3.00 per acre. Surely that method would be
adaptable to chestnut orchards to control the weevil.

At the present time we are using our entire crop for seed purposes and
this year we sowed 40 to 50 thousand nuts. We carefully grade the seed,
not only discarding any infested nuts, but all moldy, split or
undersized nuts, so that we get trees grown only from the choicest. By
doing this we feel that although the trees are seedling raised, they
come from parent trees that are bearing well, and from which all
extraneous pollen is excluded so that the customer has a good chance of
getting a tree that will bear well.

The seed is sown in the fall, because it keeps better that way and
germinates better too, although we have some trouble from a mole-mice
combination. The seeds are sown in shallow trenches 6 inches apart and 2
inches deep and back--filled either with sawdust or light soil. On top
is mounded a further 4 to 6 inches of soil which is removed in the
spring. This reduces damage from freezing and thawing.

We do not doubt for a moment that the Chinese chestnut is here to stay
as an important food crop for the United States.



Walnut Notes

G. H. Corsan, Islington, Ontario


I find the Ohio, Ten Eyck, Stabler, Allen and Wiard black walnuts
inferior and unsuitable. The Stabler has only a small crop every five
years. Very excellent varieties, I find, come from Thomas seedlings.

The black walnut makes an excellent stock for the Persian walnut in low
and slightly damp ground. I bud the Persian on the black during August.

The Japanese heartnut and the butternut x heartnut hybrid can be grafted
on black walnut. The Persian walnut when grafted on the black decidedly
outgrows the latter. The reverse is the case when Japanese heartnut,
Japanese butternut, or hybrids of either are grafted on the black.

So far I have not found one good butternut worthy of naming, but there
is one Japanese butternut that grows in clusters of 17 or even more that
has a very thin shell; it is the Helmick. I have, however, very many
named as well as unnamed black walnut seedlings that are very excellent
nuts.

This has been a very cold summer and I cannot state yet as to the
maturing of the larger black walnuts, as they require a long season to
mature properly. Pecan and hican trees grow well at Echo Valley and the
small twigs harden up so that there is never any winter killing but the
nuts do not fill well; in consequence I am using the trees as stocks for
grafting with good shagbarks. The Weiker hickory ripens nicely with me
and I consider it one of the best varieties in every way.



Self-fruitfulness in the Winkler Hazel

By Dr. A. S. Colby University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois


To insure fruitfulness in nut plants it is generally recommended that
more than one variety of each kind be planted in reasonably close
proximity to help in bringing about cross-pollination. Then, with other
conditions being favorable, the grower would be more certain of good
yields of well-filled nuts.

With specific reference to the filbert, the literature contains
references to the effect that provision for cross-pollination is
essential. However, one exception is listed. In the report of the
proceedings of the 26th (1935) annual meeting of the Northern Nut
Growers' Association, D. C. Snyder of Iowa says on page 47, "The
catkins of Winkler always come through the winter bright and the
variety can be depended upon to bear without other varieties near for
cross-pollination."

The writer has been interested in this subject for several years. The
question arises; how near were Mr. Snyder's Winklers to other varieties
and in what direction with reference to the prevailing winds? It is not
known just how far filbert pollen may be carried and still function. A
planting of Winkler filberts consisting of about 30 bushes was set on
the University Farm at Urbana in 1940. Crops have been borne annually
since that time. The planting was isolated from other filberts to the
southwest by about one-fourth of a mile.

In an effort to determine whether the variety was self-fruitful, plants
were dug in the early winter of 1943 after the rest period was over and
reset in the greenhouse. The plants leaved out in January, 1944, and
both male and female flowers appeared soon after. The pollen was applied
to the pistils both by shaking the branches and by means of a camels
hair brush. Nearly all the blossoms set and the nuts carried through to
maturity. The experiment was repeated in 1944-45 with the same results.

It is therefore concluded that the Winkler filbert is self-fruitful and
may safely be planted alone where climatic conditions are favorable for
filbert production.



Hickories and Other Nuts in Northwestern Illinois

By A. B. Anthony, Sterling, Illinois


I have something like 25 grafted hickories of my No. 1 (Anthony)
variety. The largest tree now has a trunk of 5-1/2 inches in diameter;
has 20 nuts on it this year; and while it has had but few nuts each
year, has missed bearing but one season in the past seven years. Other
No. 1 trees run from 3-1/2 inches, in diameter down to about 1 inch. One
3-1/2 inch tree is offering its second bearing with five nuts this
season. All these trees were grafted in cutover woodland tracts and
moved here except the largest one which was moved in 1930 and grafted in
1933, 30 inches high and never trimmed for a higher head. Heavy annual
catkin bloomer, few pistillates so far.

Of my No. 2 variety, one tree transplanted in 1927 now has something
like 25 nuts on it. The No. 3 hickories, five of them, have never borne
either pistillate or staminate blooms. No. 4 is a hican from the parent
tree of which I have had but three good nuts. The weevil moth works so
well in dense woods that rarely are the nuts good there. The nuts are
attractive and should not discolor like the lighter hickories, should
their opening husks get rained upon when maturing.

Men of the future must decide on the merits of these trees. Of the two
Hagen trees grafted in 1931, one now has its first nuts, eight in
number. I have been told that some one will cut these trees down some
day. One of our county or state officials said a short time back that
"if hog troubles keep coming on as of late, in 50 years we will not be
able to raise hogs." With corn being the main hog food and the corn
borer coming, this may come to be quite true, and then perhaps more men
will get new vision as to where their meat is coming from.

The past three years have offered almost no hickories at all. Hickories
do not like shade, but they have to grow where the squirrels have
planted them. Carrying a nut 100 yards to bury it would doubtless be
about a squirrel's limit. I have noticed in timber of sizeable growth a
north slope showed no young hickories, while a south slope showed a
scattering few. Oak trees in this section predominate when it comes to
groves of one species. Cottonwood trees come up here and there, probably
because their seed is wind-carried. Willow sticks get carried down
stream and get lodged, and grow. I have known a few young oaks to come
up on my place all of a mile and a half of such woods. How come? It is
probably the combination of the blue jay and squirrel, this time. No
trouble for the blue jay to travel some distance and put his acorn in a
bark crevice of cottonwood or willow tree. Along comes a wandering
squirrel, finds the acorn, and if not hungry enough puts in the ground
where it has a chance to grow. I have seen blue jays start off with
chestnuts and the nearest trees they could reach were willows one-fourth
mile or further away.

For some reason there seems to be a tendency for the hickories to bear
in seasons when the black walnut does not and the walnut to bear when
the hickory fails. Last year, except for filling, walnuts did reasonably
well and this year, at least with my Rohwer variety, the yield is still
better except that the nuts are unusually small, doubtless because all
of July and up to the 9th of August it was very dry.

Throughout my years there have always been walnut trees on the place,
first started by a pioneer land owner, then squirrels took it up, so I
have a choice of stocks I did not have in hickories.

Two of my Rohwer trees have trunks 12 inches in diameter; one is 11
inches and the other 14 inches in diameter. For years these trees,
grafted in 1931, have been very profuse with catkins, but with few nuts.
I have heard other complaints of it not bearing.

My complaint with all walnuts grown in Northwest Illinois is that so
many kernels turn out black and immature. I am inclined to blame it, in
part, to the walnut shuck, which takes in so much moisture. The hickory
shuck is much dryer and never has so many immature kernels. Late summer
is generally the dryer part of our growing season, which can well be the
cause. In the year 1940, we had an excess of moisture in that it rained
day after day all through August, and that is the only season I can say
we had good walnuts with practically all good, light-colored kernels.

I have a few Thomas walnuts planted on the edges of the lowest flat
ground I possess, hoping that they may there get more moisture and
produce completely matured nuts.

We had on August 9th about one inch of rain and since that 2-1/2 inches
more. So far, throughout this month, I have been carrying about 15
gallons of water daily to two Rohwer trees and hope for some better
filled walnuts, though they are unusually small. I am writing this
August 24th.



Nut Trees for Ohio Pastures

By Dr. Oliver D. Diller, Wooster, Ohio


Today I would like to discuss for a few minutes the possibilities of nut
trees for shade and nut production in permanent pastures on Ohio farms.

One of the most important developments in Ohio agriculture during the
past decade has been improvement of pasture land through fertilization,
new varieties, and combinations of grasses and clovers, and better
methods of management. As one drives over the State it is evident that
many farmers practice "clean" agriculture which means clean fence rows
and treeless fields. Shade on a hot summer day is an important item to
contented cows, so today I am going to plead the case for a cow out on
pasture on a sweltering day. I believe that nut trees, particularly
black walnuts, can be of real service in the fence rows and the interior
of hundreds of permanent pastures in Ohio.

In 1939, L. R. Neel,[7] of the Tennessee Agricultural Experiment
Station, published an interesting article on the effect of shade on
pasture. The results indicated distinct improvement in the carrying
capacity of the pastures which had black locust and black walnuts spaced
regularly throughout the fields. Improvement was evident both in the
amount of Kentucky bluegrass and the pounds of beef produced. So far as
I know, no evaluation has ever been made of the direct effect of shade
on the contentment and consequent increase in efficiency of cattle for
either beef or milk production. I believe this is an important factor
and is frequently used as an excuse for woodland grazing.

[Footnote 7: Neel, L. R., 1939. The effect of shade on pasture. Tenn.
Agr. Exp. Sta. Cir. 65.]

Another study similar to the one in Tennessee was conducted by R. M.
Smith in southeastern Ohio during the period 1939 to 1941.[8] Dr. Smith
made an intensive study of the effects of black locust and black walnuts
upon ground covers and he found that in poor pastures black walnut trees
improved both the species composition and chemical content of the plants
growing under the trees. He rated walnut high as an ideal pasture tree
because of its period of leaf activity; its light crown canopy; its
small, fragile leaves which decompose rapidly, and are high in mineral
matter and nitrogen; its deep tap root which competes very little with
the surface rooted grasses for moisture and nutrients; its hardiness;
and finally its high commercial value.

[Footnote 8: Smith, R. M., 1942. Some effects of black locust and black
walnut on southeastern Ohio pastures. Soil Science, Vol. 53, No. 5.]

It seems apparent, therefore, that the introduction of improved black
walnut trees into permanent pastures would be practical from the
agronomic angle to say nothing about the beneficial effect of shade to
livestock and possible income from occasional crops of high quality
nuts.

One stumbling block to the adoption of this idea is the protection of
the trees during the period of their establishment. The conventional
cattle guard with three or four long posts supporting a wire fence is
expensive in both labor and materials.

During the spring of 1946 in connection with my forestry instruction at
Ohio State University, I had as one class project the planting of 50
black walnut seedlings of selected parentage in the cattle and poultry
ranges on the University farm. Thirty of these trees were planted along
a fence row at 32 foot intervals and were protected by a single electric
wire connected to a battery charger.

The set-up is illustrated in figure 1 which shows the charger at one end
of the line and the wire supported by the line posts and a short single
post opposite each tree. The one year old seedlings were planted 4 feet
from the fence at alternate posts and the wire zig-zagged along the line
to create the guards around the trees. Within a few days after planting
and completion of the electric guards the trees were mulched to control
weeds and conserve soil moisture.

While this experiment has been in effect for only one growing season,
the results, to date, indicate that this method is effective in
providing protection from livestock. Growth and survival of the trees
has been very satisfactory thus far.

The advantages of this method appear to be the rather low cost of labor
and materials and ease of installation.

Within the next decade, we should be able to determine how the nuts from
these seedling trees compare with the parent tree and there should be
adequate shade for all classes of livestock on either side of the fence.



How Hardy Are Oriental Chestnuts and Hybrids?

By Russell B. Clapper and G. F. Gravatt Plant Industry Station,
Beltsville, Maryland


One of the questions most frequently asked in regard to the Oriental
chestnuts is, will they thrive in a given locality? Broadly speaking,
with respect to temperature requirements these chestnuts have been found
about equally hardy with the peach. Some strains of the Chinese chestnut
appear to be superior to the Japanese chestnut in hardiness.

The Chinese chestnut is more widely planted in this country than the
Japanese chestnut and more information has been collected on the
hardiness of the former species than of the latter. The Chinese chestnut
is growing satisfactorily in certain plantings as far south as Orlando,
Fla. and the other Gulf States, northward to the southern tip of Maine,
and westward as far as Iowa. But many areas within this large zone are
unsuitable for growing Chinese chestnuts because of more severe climatic
conditions.

Specific data have been obtained relating to several types of winter
injury of Oriental chestnuts and hybrids. This information is limited to
the performance of mostly young trees and to a comparatively small
number of locations.

The fall freeze that occurred in mid-November, 1940, was studied in
detail by Bowen S. Crandall,[9] formerly of this Division. Widespread
damage occurred to Oriental chestnuts in the central parts of South
Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama. Temperatures before the freeze had been
mild, and heavy rains in early November had broken a drought. On the
nights of November 15 and 16, temperatures of 12° and 14° F. were
reported by various farmers, and a drop to 20° F. was general on the
night of the 16th. The damage to chestnuts by this freeze was increased
because of the mild temperatures and heavy rains that preceded the
freeze. The chestnut trees were not able to attain complete dormancy.
Those trees, however, that were growing on uplands or on sites that were
well air-drained suffered much less damage. Apparently equal damage was
inflicted to Chinese and Japanese chestnuts.

[Footnote 9: Crandall, Bowen S. Freezing injury to Asiatic chestnut
trees in the South in November, 1940. Plant Disease Reporter 27:392-394.
October 1, 1943.]

On one farm near Columbus, Ga., four plantings were located at different
elevations. The planting at the lowest elevation, maintained as a well
cultivated orchard, suffered almost 100 per cent loss from this fall
freeze. The trees at the highest elevation, in a forest planting, were
practically uninjured. The damage from this freeze varied from killing
of buds and shoots to killing of complete trees. Many owners of chestnut
plantings did not notice the damage until the following spring.
Fortunately fall freezes of this magnitude occur only infrequently.

In the winter of 1944, this Division lost 23 per cent of its hybrids at
Glenn Dale, Md., from freezing following abnormally high temperatures.
The hybrids had been fertilized in October of the preceding year, but
the effect on the extent of freezing damage is not known. The months of
November, 1943, through March, 1944, were characterized by extremely
variable temperatures. For example, in November a minimum of 15° F.
occurred on the 17th, a maximum of 72° on the 19th; in December a
maximum of 66° on the 3rd, a minimum of 2° on the 16th; in January a
minimum of 8° on the 17th, a maximum of 74° on the 27th; in February a
minimum of 11° on the 2nd, a maximum of 72° on the 25th; in March a
minimum of 8° on the 10th, a maximum of 81° on the 16th.

The extremes of temperatures in any one of these months may have been
sufficient to cause damage to chestnut, although the extent of damage is
influenced by the physiological conditions within the tree. The usual
type of injury to the hybrids was a killing of the cambial cells
extending from the base of the trunk up to varying heights. The cambial
region was grayish-black and the inner bark was sappy and
greenish-brown. More trees were injured and killed on the lower portions
of the plot than on the higher portions.

This catastrophe afforded opportunity to study resistance of the hybrids
to freezing. In the lower part of the plot there were several 3-year-old
American chestnut seedlings that were not damaged. Sixteen per cent of
first generation hybrids of Chinese and American chestnut were killed.
Chinese by American backcrossed with Chinese were killed to the extent
of 36 per cent. Chinese by Japanese chestnut of the second generation
were killed to the extent of 35 per cent.

Despite this extensive killing of hybrids by extreme variations of
winter temperatures, older Chinese and Japanese chestnuts on slightly
higher ground in the same plot suffered no visible injury. These old
trees have rough bark, which may serve as an effective insulator against
extremes of temperature. In 1944, there was no damaging late spring
frost, and these old trees produced the largest nut crop in their
history.

Winter temperatures of -25° F. or lower are usually injurious to
Oriental chestnuts. A few reports of chestnuts surviving temperatures of
-25° F. have been recorded, but usually Oriental chestnuts do not thrive
in those northern States or regions where such temperatures occur.

Many of our cooperators report that late spring frosts frequently cause
failure of chestnut crops. Damaging frosts in late spring occur more
frequently and over greater areas than early fall frosts or extreme
winter temperature variations. A late spring frost in 1945 reduced the
chestnut crop at Glenn Dale, Md., from 50 bushels expected to 3 bushels
actual. A freeze of 24°F. on the nights of April 4 and 5 was sufficient
to inflict this damage after two weeks of abnormally warm weather. Many
of the trees were visibly injured, with wilted or dried unfolding buds.
Other trees on higher ground were not visibly affected, yet they
produced no crops.

Again it was noted that the American chestnut, followed by American
chestnut hybrids, sustained none to little damage. The American
chestnut, besides its inherent resistance to freezing, leafs late in
the spring. Most of the crop of nuts obtained in 1945 was produced by
the American chestnut hybrids.

Late spring frosts in 1945 were very extensive, reaching throughout the
eastern and northeastern States, and there were practically no chestnut
crops. There were also numerous reports of late spring frost injury to
chestnut in the Central States.

In order to reduce freezing injury to Oriental chestnuts, it is
essential that they be grown on sites that have excellent cold air
drainage. As an approximate rule, these chestnuts should be planted on
sites similar to those that are best for peaches. The orchard planting
is not the only type that is subject to winter injury; forest plantings,
ornamental plantings, and plantings for wildlife are also subject to
winter injury especially if they are not on the most favorable sites.



Growing Chestnuts for Timber

By Jesse D. Diller Plant Industry Station, Beltsville, Maryland


Before the turn of the century, and even before chestnut blight had
swept through our eastern forests, destroying one of our most valuable
commercial timber trees, European and Asiatic chestnuts had been
introduced. They made variable growth in the Gulf States, along the
eastern seaboard from Florida to southern Maine, the southern half of
Pennsylvania, southwestern Michigan, southeastern Iowa, down the
Mississippi River Valley and on the Pacific Coast. These trees were
grown for horticultural purposes, and for the most part, represented
large-fruited varieties of Japanese chestnuts. They were not regarded as
having forest-tree possibilities for in the open situations in which
they were usually planted to insure early fruiting, the trees developed
low-spreading crowns, resembling orchard trees. However, after the
blight became fully established and it became apparent that our American
chestnut was doomed, and that these scattered Asiatic chestnut trees had
a natural resistance to this disease, a new interest developed in the
Asiatic chestnuts as a possible substitute for the American chestnut.

The interest in and need for resistant, forest-type chestnuts became so
great that the U. S. Department of Agriculture imported from the Orient
seed of strains that might be suitable for the production of timber,
poles and posts, with tannin and nuts as valuable by-products--qualities
inherent in our native chestnut. The Division of Forest Pathology,
Bureau of Plant Industry, Soils, and Agricultural Engineering has been
carrying on the project of testing Asiatic chestnuts as timber trees.
Professor R. Kent Beattie of this Division was in China, Korea, and
Japan from 1927 to 1930, and collected over 250 bushels of seed for
shipment to this Division. The seeds represented four species: Castanea
mollissima--the Chinese chestnut; C. henryi--the Henry chinkapin; C.
seguinii--the Seguin chestnut; and C. crenata--the Japanese chestnut.


Direct Seeding Studies

At the very beginning of these investigations in growing Asiatic
chestnuts as timber trees, it was believed that greater success in
establishment could be obtained by planting seedlings, rather than by
direct seeding. In direct seeding trials during the early thirties the
planted nuts were promptly devoured by rodents. Sixteen years of field
experience has proven the soundness of this belief. The imported nuts
were planted in the Division's nursery at Glenn Dale, Md., and the
resulting seedlings distributed as 1- and 2-year-old trees to
cooperators throughout the eastern United States.

In order to thoroughly test the possibilities of direct seeding as an
economical method of establishment, this Division during seven years
(1939 to 1942, and 1944 to 1946) planted over 7,000 nuts by direct
seeding in 200 locations in 18 eastern States. It was suspected that the
greatest hazard to direct seeding in or near forests would be rodents.
Accordingly, in the spring of 1939 and 1940, 400 nuts and 600 nuts,
respectively, were coated with a strychnine-alkaloid rodent repellent,
and a comparable number of seeds, for both years, were left untreated to
serve as checks. The checks were held in sphagnum moss at Beltsville,
Md., and the nuts to be treated were packed in sphagnum moss and
expressed to Denver for treatment by the Division of Wildlife Research,
the Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior. Only 5.9 and
2.5 per cent of the treated seeds developed into seedlings, whereas 22.6
and 13.5 per cent of the untreated seeds produced seedlings. Not only
did more of the treated seeds fail to germinate than of the untreated
seeds, but the seedlings from the treated nuts were less vigorous.
Because of the results obtained, the rodent-repellent study was
discontinued at the end of the second year.

In 1941 and 1942, over 4,000 untreated chestnut seeds, representing 22
strains, were planted in 12 locations in eight eastern States. The seed
source was entirely from American-grown, Asiatic chestnut trees growing
in 28 locations in 16 eastern States. They represented Chinese,
Japanese, hybrids, and also a limited quantity of American chestnut
seed. Seed of the American species was included primarily to determine
whether or not it differs from the Asiatic species with reference to
establishment by direct seeding. The results for the two years confirmed
our earlier beliefs: Only 2.2 per cent in 1941, and 4.0 per cent in
1942, developed into seedlings, of which only a remnant have survived.
No species or strain differences were apparent.


"Tin Can" Method

In 1944, the tin-can method was employed in planting 400 nuts in four
eastern States. By this method 15.5 per cent of the planted nuts
developed into seedlings, representing a fourfold increase over results
obtained for the three previous years. One end of a No. 2 can is
removed, and a cross is cut in the other end with a heavy-bladed knife.
The open end of the can is then forced into the ground, over the planted
nut, so that the top lies flush with the ground level. The four corners
at the center of the cut top then are turned slightly upward, to allow a
small opening through which the hypocotyl of the developing seedling can
emerge. The can completely disintegrates by rusting within two or three
years, and does not interfere with the seedling's development.

An examination made of the various burrows about the tin cans, and also
of the teeth marks on fragments of chestnut seedcoats lying about,
indicated that not only squirrels, but other rodents, such as chipmunks,
field mice, moles, and even woodchucks were probably involved in the
direct seeding failures.

In 1945 and 1946, the tin-can method was tested widely on farms, to
determine its possibilities in securing establishment of
blight-resistant chestnuts without a great outlay of cash to farmers. In
1945, five seeds were distributed to each of 90 cooperators residing in
the Piedmont and southern Appalachian regions, and in the lower
Mississippi and Ohio River valleys; and in 1946, to 38 cooperators
residing in the Middle Atlantic States. Preliminary results indicate
that 40.0 and 37.2 per cent of the nuts planted by the farmers developed
into seedlings. It should be pointed out that these results are not
strictly comparable with those of previous years, because most of the
farmers preferred to plant the chestnuts in their gardens, and under
these conditions the nuts were not exposed to the severe competition and
the extreme rodent hazards that occur in the forests.

Further proof of the superiority of planting seedling stock over direct
seeding as a method of establishment is indicated in the results of an
experiment initiated in 1939. One hundred and fifty 1-year-old seedlings
and 150 nuts, all of the same Chinese strain, were planted on cleared
forest lands in the Coastal Plains, the Piedmont, and the southern
Appalachian regions, and in the Middle West. At the end of the eighth
year, at each location, establishment and development of those
originating from the 1-year-old transplants were better than those
originating from seed, and their average survival was six times greater.


Distribution of Planting Stock

During the period 1930 to 1946, the Division of Forest Pathology
distributed thousands of Asiatic chestnut seedlings to Federal, State,
and private agencies for experimental forest plantings in 32 eastern
States. The ten States receiving the most planting stock, in the order
named were: North Carolina, Tennessee, New York, Pennsylvania, West
Virginia, Virginia, Ohio, Georgia, South Carolina, and Maryland. The
purpose of this seedling distribution was to obtain information
concerning the little-known characteristics of the Asiatic
chestnuts--their soil and climatic requirements, and their range
adaptability.


Selection of Planting Sites

At first the selection of the planting sites was left entirely to the
judgment of the cooperators, and most of them assumed that the Asiatic
chestnuts have site requirements similar to those of the native American
chestnut. Because the American chestnut often occurs on dry ridges and
upper slopes, especially where soil is thin and rock outcrops are
frequent, the cooperators proceeded to plant the Asiatic chestnuts on
similar "tough" sites. They believed that the planting of forest-tree
species is justified only on defrosted areas that have reverted to
grassland, or worn-out, unproductive agricultural land, or on
wastelands--sites that we now know are better suited to the growing of
conifers rather than hardwoods. As a result of this unfortunate choice
of site selection, together with the several severe drought periods
recurring in the early thirties, the cooperators lost most of their
trees during the first and second years after planting.

Inspections of some of these planted areas after a lapse of from 10 to
15 years indicated that the sites still support only a scant herbaceous
cover, with broomsedge and povertygrass predominating, and with no
evidence of native woody species encroaching on the areas. The few
surviving Asiatic chestnut seedlings were sickly looking, multi-stemmed,
misshapen trees, heavily infected with twig blight and chestnut blight,
and severely damaged by winter injury. But despite these heavy losses, a
few plantations succeeded at least in part, and from these limited
areas, together with an appraisal of the situations where some of the
earlier planted chestnuts grew well, valuable information as to the site
requirements of the Asiatic chestnut species was obtained.


Site Requirements

These field studies clearly showed that the site requirements of the
Asiatic chestnuts, particularly with reference to soil moisture, are
more nearly like these of yellow poplar, northern red oak, and white
ash, than like the American chestnut or the native chinkapin species. On
fertile, fresh soils that support the more mesophytic native species,
Asiatic chestnuts remained relatively disease-free, developed straight
boles, made satisfactory growth, and were able to maintain themselves in
the stands in competition with the other rapid-growing associated
hardwood species.

The indicator plants that suggest good sites for Asiatic chestnuts are:
(a) Tree species--yellowpoplar, northern red oak, white ash, sugar
maple, and yellow birch; (b) shrub species--spicebush; (c) herbaceous
species--maiden hair fern, bloodroot, jack-in-the-pulpit, squirrelcorn
and/or Dutchman's breeches. Plants that indicate sites too dry for
forest-tree growth of Asiatic chestnuts are: (a) Tree species--the
"hard" pines, black oak and scrub oak; (b) shrub species--dwarf sumac,
and low blueberry; and (c) herbaceous species--broomsedge, wild
strawberry, and povertygrass. Plants that indicate sites too wet are:
(a) Tree species--black ash, red maple, and willows; (b) shrub
species--alder; (c) herbaceous species--sedges and skunkcabbage.


Climatic Test Plots

On the basis of the experience gained from the earlier, extensive
distribution of Asiatic chestnut planting stock, the Division of Forest
Pathology, during the years of 1936, 1938, and 1939, established 21
Asiatic chestnut climatic test plots on cleared forest lands in eight
eastern States on the most favorable sites obtainable. These plots, with
their isolation borders, aggregating slightly less than 32 acres, and
accommodating nearly 22,000 trees spaced 8 by 8 feet, occur from
northern Massachusetts, along the Alleghenies southward to the southern
Appalachians in southwestern North Carolina, and from the Atlantic
seaboard, in southeastern South Carolina through the Middle West to
southeastern Iowa. More than 20 strains are being tested at each place,
including Chinese, Japanese, Seguin, and Henry species, as well as
hybrids, and progeny of some of the oldest introduced chestnuts. Most of
the plots are fenced against livestock and deer.

Although the results from these plots are as yet entirely preliminary,
during the 8- to 11-year period of testing, valuable information has
already been obtained: (1) The range of the Asiatic chestnuts tested
does not coincide entirely with the range of the American chestnut or
the native chinkapins. All Asiatic chestnut species that have been
tested have failed at Orange, Massachusetts, where the American chestnut
grew in abundance. In southeastern South Carolina, where the several
species of native chinkapin thrive, some of them attaining a height of
20 feet, the Asiatic species have largely failed. On the other hand in
northern Indiana and southeastern Iowa, entirely outside the botanical
range of the American chestnut, a few Chinese strains have done
remarkably well. (2) The Chinese chestnuts have a much wider range
adaptability to site than the Japanese chestnuts; the latter are more
restricted to mild climate and appear to require somewhat better site
conditions. Of ten Chinese strains tested, only four can thus far be
recommended for future planting in the Middle West. One Chinese strain
that has thus far proven far superior to the others, in all the climatic
plots, was introduced by the Department of Agriculture as seed from
Nanking, China in 1924. (3) Poorly aerated soil is an important limiting
factor in all regions where the chestnuts were tested.


Establishment by Underplanting and Girdling

On the basis of the field experience gained from the wide distribution
of Asiatic chestnut planting stock and the information thus far obtained
from the climatic test plots, a new method of establishing Asiatic
chestnut under forest conditions was initiated in the spring of 1946,
and is now being tried on a limited scale. It consists of underplanting,
with chestnut seedlings, a fully stocked stand of hardwoods ranging from
4 to 8 inches in diameter breast height in which the predominant species
are yellow poplar, northern red oak, white ash, and sugar maples. All
overstory growth 5 feet and over in height is then girdled. As the
girdled overstory trees die, they gradually yield the site to the
planted chestnuts in transition that does not greatly disturb the
ecological conditions, particularly of the forest floor. Rapid
disintegration of the mantle of leafmold is prevented by the partial
shading, which the dead or dying overstory, girdled trees cast. At the
same time, the partial shading hinders the encroachment of the sprout
hardwoods and the other plant invaders (which would normally become
established if the planted area had been clear cut) until the chestnuts
have become fully established. Not only does this system provide the
best site conditions conducive to the development of forest-tree form in
the Asiatic chestnuts, in limited areas, but also under establishment
conditions that require a minimum amount of maintenance.


Summary

In general, Asiatic chestnuts, when grown for timber purposes, are best
adapted to northern slopes, above frost pockets on cool protected sites,
on deep, fertile soils having a covering of leaf litter and humus in the
top soil, a soil that is permeable to both roots and water, and that has
a good water-holding capacity. The plant association, above mentioned as
indicating ideal sites for Asiatic chestnuts for best timber
development, occur in rich soils of slight hollows in moist hilly woods
and on the mountains in cove sites.



Improved Methods of Storing Chestnuts

By H. L. Crane and J. W. McKay Plant Industry Station, Beltsville,
Maryland


Trees of the Chinese chestnut, Castanea mollissima, are quite resistant
to the chestnut bark or blight disease. The heavy bearing of the trees
together with the good quality of the nuts produced has stimulated
planting of trees to replace those of the American species largely
killed by that disease. Although a few horticultural varieties of
Chinese chestnuts have been introduced and propagated, the great
majority of the bearing trees are seedlings. In seedling plantings
seldom do two trees produce nuts of the same size, color, and shape. All
of these nuts when properly harvested, treated, and stored are sweet and
edible and nourishing as food either raw, boiled, roasted, or combined
with other foods in poultry dressing, salads, or pancakes. Then too,
there is a big demand for Chinese chestnuts as seed for the purpose of
growing seedling trees to be planted in orchards or to be used as
rootstocks in propagating horticultural varieties. In either case, it is
often desirable to store the nuts for several months before using them.

Chestnuts are not like the oily nuts, such as pecans, walnuts, almonds,
filberts, or peanuts, that must be dried to a moisture content of 5 to 8
per cent to store well. Chestnuts are starchy nuts, containing about 50%
moisture when first harvested, and on drying they become very hard. In
experiments conducted at the U. S. Horticultural Field Station,
Meridian, Miss., it was found that the loss in weight of chestnuts
ranged from 16.2 to 30.5% when stored for 4 months in open containers at
32°F., and 80% relative humidity. In an experiment in which chestnuts
were stored 4-1/2 months at 32°F., they lost 18.8% in weight when stored
in burlap sacks, 3.7% when stored in waxed paper cartons with
tight-fitting lids, and 2.0% when stored in friction-top cans.
Furthermore, chestnuts on drying lose their viability and become
worthless. Chestnuts lose moisture rapidly and become subject to
spoilage due to molds and other fungi and therefore must be considered
as highly perishable and handled accordingly.

There is a great difference in the keeping quality of the nuts produced
by different trees in that some are very susceptible to infection by
molds and bacteria and spoil quickly while others keep quite well. At
Meridian, Miss., nuts from 5 different seedling trees ranged from 2 to
34% mold infection at harvest. Studies made by John R. Large at U. S.
Pecan Field Station, Albany, Ga., showed that much of the infection of
the nuts by molds occurred after they had fallen from the burs and while
the nuts were in contact with the soil. It is, therefore, essential that
the nuts be harvested promptly after they are mature.

As a general practice the nuts should be gathered every other day during
the ripening season. Burs that have split open and exposed the brown
nuts should be knocked from the trees, and all of the nuts on the ground
should be gathered up cleanly. It would be difficult to emphasize too
strongly the importance of harvesting the nuts promptly as soon as they
are mature. Prompt and careful attention must then be given to the
conditions under which they are stored if they are to remain for long in
an edible and viable condition.

After the nuts have been gathered[10] they should be held in a layer not
exceeding 1 or 2 inches deep for 3 or 4 days. It is important that they
be kept in a well-ventilated building and that the sun does not strike
the nuts during curing. After the preliminary curing, the nuts should be
placed in friction-top metal cans (slip-top cans) and the lids should
not be tight for the first month of storage. The nuts contain enough
moisture after the short curing process that the lids will "sweat", or
surplus moisture will accumulate on the under side. This will disappear
slowly by evaporation during the first month or 6 weeks of storage and
the lids may then be pushed firmly into place, making the can nearly
airtight. The containers of nuts should be held in cold storage at
temperatures of 32° to 36°F. While some nuts have kept quite well at
temperatures as high as 45°F., the tests indicate that the nearer the
storage temperature is to 32°F., the less is the mold development.
Placing the cans in an ordinary home refrigerator should prove fairly
satisfactory with nuts that have good keeping quality.

[Footnote 10: If the nuts are infected with weevils, they should
immediately be treated after harvesting with the hot water or methyl
bromide treatment as recommended by the United States Department of
Agriculture, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine.]

It is essential that the nuts be placed in storage immediately after
they have had the preliminary curing. Any delay may increase the
possibility of mold development.

In the winter of 1945-46, nuts from 6 seedling Chinese chestnut trees
were stored separately in five-gallon friction-top cans at the Plant
Industry Station, Beltsville, Md., at 32°F. for approximately 6 months.
The results are given in Table 1. It will be noted that there was some
variation in the percentage of spoiled nuts in the different lots, but
the loss was small when compared with results obtained by other methods.
All of the sound nuts in these lots were planted in a rodent-proof
coldframe immediately after they were removed from storage, and from 90
to 95% germination of the seed was obtained throughout.

It is almost impossible to keep some varieties satisfactorily with even
the best of care. Because of the great difference in keeping quality of
the nuts of different varieties and from different seedling trees, each
chestnut grower should study the keeping performance of the nuts from
the different trees in his own orchard. He should save for permanent
trees those producing nuts that keep well.

The method of storing chestnuts that perhaps has been more widely used
than any other is to pack the nuts in slightly moist sphagnum moss or
fresh hardwood sawdust in boxes and place them in cold storage at 32°F.
to 34°F. A little less volume of packing material than of nuts is
customarily used. The correct amount of moisture may be attained by
adding 4 fluid ounces of water to 1 pound of dry sphagnum moss. There is
great danger of getting too much moisture, which will tend to cause
spoilage. If the cold storage compartment is one that has a tendency to
dry the stored material, it may be necessary at some time during the
year to open up the boxes and add a little moisture to the sphagnum, but
in most storage houses this is not necessary.

Based upon results obtained during the last 2 or 3 years, it seems
probable that the method of storing chestnuts in friction-top cans will
prove to be more efficient than other methods now in use. Tests are
under way to determine the most desirable moisture content of nuts at
the time of storage. If this can be determined the present period of
preliminary curing will become a matter of reducing the moisture
content of the nuts to a known amount before they are stored. It is
likely that other refinements of the method will be made in the near
future, but the procedure here described has given results that merit
further trial by those concerned with chestnut storage problems.

   TABLE I--Record of Keeping Quality of Nuts from 6 Seedling
   Chinese Chestnut Trees Stored In Friction-Top Cans At 32°F.
   for Approximately 6 Months At Beltsville, Winter--1945-46[11]

   ======================================================================
                Total Weight    Weight of    Weight of
   Tree Number    of Nuts       Sound Nuts  Spoiled Nuts  Percent Spoiled
                4-24-46--Lbs.      Lbs.         Lbs.
   ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      7861         23.69          23.08          .61            2.57
      7881         25.20          24.63          .57            2.26
      7930         26.85          26.48          .37            1.37
      7932         24.29          23.80          .49            2.02
      7938         29.00          27.48         1.52            5.24
      8174         15.82          14.80         1.02            6.45
   ======================================================================
    ALL LOTS      144.85         140.27         4.58            3.16

[Footnote 11: Weighed and examined 4/24/46.]



Essential Elements in Tree Nutrition

(Paper presented before the Northern Nut Growers Association Convention,
September 3-5, 1946, Wooster, Ohio.)

By J. F. Wischhusen Manganese Research & Development Foundation,
Cleveland 10, Ohio


Mankind has harbored an age-old grudge against insects and fungi, so
that under the heading of crop protection from these pests there has
developed a large insecticide and fungicide industry.

Relatively little attention has been paid to the effects of a
nutritional character that can be obtained from simultaneous
applications of essential elements. Insects will probably always
constitute a problem of destruction, either of them or by them. But
fungi, bacteriae, viruses, can be made to combat, control and balance
each other; depending on the conditions under which their propagation is
either facilitated or inhibited.

There is evidence that so-called essential nutrients, also variously
referred to as "minor", "trace", "rare", or "micro" elements play a
direct as well as indirect role of considerable importance in this
matter, and that trees can be fertilized, sprayed, injected or treated
with them in other ways to insure their growth, health, crop bearing
ability, longevity, disease--frost--and drought--resistance. There still
exists a paucity of scientific explanations on these subjects, but there
is already a good deal of scattered information, which it is my purpose
to draw to your attention. People do not care about scientific facts if
they can obtain results without them, and then scientific concepts too
may undergo changes. The manner in which trees obtain their nutrients
from soil, air and water, however, will forever remain unchanged,
whether we understand it or not, and it behooves every grower to observe
effects from causes, and to reflect upon them, and report his
observations to his association for the benefit of all.


Physical Soil Characteristics

That the primary requisites for tree growing are the physical
characteristics of all soils favorable for that purpose requires no
discussion. The successful nut tree planting starts with the soil,
whether it be on the scale of an orchard, grove, or just a few trees
around the farm or garden.

The better soils for general crop production are on limestone, basalt,
dolemite, dolerite, diorite and gabbro formations, whereas sandstones,
aplites, granites, pierre shale, cretacious rocks and volcanic
formations weather into inferior soils. Gneiss can be sometimes good,
sometimes unfavorable for building of fertile soil.

It is well to bear in mind that geology and botany are our two
fundamental sciences, and that all our other sciences are in reality
departments of these. Chemistry can be either a branch of botany if it
deals with organic chemistry, or else a branch of geology, if it deals
with inorganic chemistry, and it would appear that the modern scientific
grower of nut trees or any other crops is wittingly or unwittingly
concerned with both. Biology and zoology both are branches of botany.


The Essential Elements

In the past, economics have governed any crop production, whether of
trees, grains, fruits or vegetables; not nutrition and health. The
future in all likelihood will demand improved crops from the standpoint
of nutritional purposes as foods. It is gradually being realized that
the production of better crops can be brought about by greater
application of essential nutrients to soils or as nutritional sprays
direct to trees, and that such practices also reflect true economics.
The same principle should govern wood production.

According to our today's knowledge, there are at least nineteen elements
invariably essential to life, viz:

Primary: Hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus.

Secondary: Calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, iron, sulphur,
chlorine.

Micro: Manganese, copper, boron, silicon, aluminum, fluorine, iodine.


Then there are another eighteen elements at least variably necessary to
life, viz:

(1) Variable Secondary Elements: Zinc, titanium, vanadium and bromine.

(2) Variable Micro-Elements: Lithium, rubidium, caesium, silver,
beryllium, strontium, cadmium, germanium, tin, lead, arsenic, chromium,
cobalt and nickel.


Elements in Soils Essential for Plant Growth

It is furthermore safe to state at the present time that fertile soils
should contain at least the following twenty elements: Nitrogen,
phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium, sulphur, hydrogen, carbon,
oxygen, iron, sodium, chlorine, aluminum, silicon, manganese, copper,
zinc, boron, iodine, and fluorine.

Until quite recently many scientists believed that only the first ten
elements were necessary for growth and maturing of crops; that only the
first three should be considered as fertilizer ingredients, and that the
others were supplied by soil, air and water, or were present as natural
fillers in manures and fertilizer raw materials.

The modern agronomist, however, takes all these twenty essential
elements into consideration, and many so-called "complete" fertilizers
contain at least sixteen to eighteen, if not all of the elements
mentioned above. Cobalt, essential to animal nutrition, can also most
economically be supplied through the soil, even though crops grow
without it.

As long as we have sufficient experimental research data that at least
nineteen elements are invariably essential to all life, it stands to
reason, that they at least must also be present in one way or another
for the normal, or better the optimum growth of nut trees, and a crop of
more nutritious nuts. Therefore, every time one of them is considered,
all the others must also be borne in mind. It will neither prove
difficult nor costly to experiment with them. It is a matter of finding
the proper balance of everything essential for optimum nut tree growing.

Indeed, to ascertain the true balance of all elements that are
invariably essential to life, and their relationship to the elements
which are variably essential, would quite naturally appear to constitute
the quintessence of research still to be performed. We cannot control
such essential factors as climate, weather, sunshine, but man can
control the supply and adjustment of nutrients to trees, and it rests
entirely with him to do so.

There is one advantage a nut crop has over some other crops; it does not
have to be harvested before fully mature. Nut crops obtain the benefit
from elements that may be slowly assimilated during the season.

The following experimental and historical evidence and opinions have
come to my attention, and I record them for what interest they may have.
Past experience is often discarded as too old, but many a time an
experimenter was ahead of his time, and his work remained unrecognized,
so that now some old references can be revived and presented as
novelties. What the past ignored may indeed be due to the ignorance of
those who did the ignoring.


1) The Chestnut Blight

The chestnut blight, for instance, of a generation ago, may be
re-examined in the light of the proceedings before a chestnut blight
conference, held at Harrisburg, Penna., February 20-21, 1912. A chestnut
extract manufacturer, a Mr. W. M. Benson[3], stated at the time that in
his experience the best extracts were made from trees high in lime. "A
blighted tree," he stated, "is simply a tree in the process of starving
to death for lack of lime." Maps showed that the blight was worst where
there was least lime, and that the chestnut trees died last in
Tennessee, where soils are high in lime. Analysis showed that chestnuts
contained 40% lime, an unheard of amount. That this high test may
reflect a faulty condition is pointed out later.

All I can add to this is that there is an English Walnut Tree, Alpine
variety, on the farm of Mr. Deknatel, on Route 202, Chalfont, Penna.,
which is remarkable for its virility and crops of large nuts. This tree
grows in a place protected by house and barn near a well, in limestone
soil. It resisted the severe winters of 1935 and 1936, when many other
English Walnuts in the vicinity died. My opinion is that any tree in
that location would be an outstanding tree; and vice versa, had that
particular tree been planted in another location, it would have done no
better than any trees there located. Nuts from that tree might well be
tested and compared with nuts from other trees.


2) The Banana Blight

The banana blight in Central America threatened for a while to be as
destructive as the chestnut blight in this country. It was due
admittedly to an attack by soil fungi, but no fungicide to foliage or to
the soil served its purpose. However, the proper restoration of
bacterial life in soils to keep the soil fungi in check proved
effective. This was a matter not of the presence or absence of any one
inorganic nutrient, but of restoring to soils the balance of fertility,
an abundance of organic matter as food for bacteriae. Dr. George D.
Scarseth, West Lafayette, Ind.[4], is one of those largely responsible
for correcting this epidemic. His experience may prove useful to nut
growers, so that they may not live in constant fear of another blight
epidemic such as the one that exterminated our chestnuts only a
generation ago.


3) Tree Nutrition, Microbial

From England comes interesting information about "Tree Nutrition"[5].
Evidence shows that the healthy growth of trees such as pines and
spruces is intimately bound up with an association between their roots
and fungi present in woodland soil. Poverty in mineral nutrients is no
longer regarded as a necessarily critical factor in the failure of
growth of trees of this kind, since the associated fungi have at their
disposal sources of supply inaccessible to the roots of higher plants.

Experiments carried out during the past ten years at Wareham in England
fully confirm the opinion expressed long ago by Professor Elias Melin,
Upsala, Sweden, that the growth of trees and other plants on poor soils
of the raw humus type is greatly influenced by the root-fungus
association. By fostering the appropriate combination it has been
possible to carry out successful afforestation of heathland so poor that
ordinary cultural methods prove inadequate for the least exacting tree
species. Satisfying the mineral requirements of the trees by direct
application of fertilizers is not in itself sufficient treatment to
ensure continued healthy growth; biological factors also play an
essential role in promoting soil fertility. The experiments have shown
that failure of the trees to establish a satisfactory biological
equilibrium with the necessary fungi is due in this case, not to the
absence of these fungi in the soil, but to their inactivation by toxic
products of biological origin. The factors inhibiting the activity of
the fungi can be removed by the application of comparatively small
amounts of organic composts which produce dramatic and lasting effects
on the growth of roots and shoots.

The special composts used are prepared from organic materials such as
straw, hop waste and sawdust. The mechanism by which they stimulate
growth is still obscure. All of them contain small amounts of directly
available plant foods such as phosphates and potash, but careful
investigation both in laboratory pot cultures and in the field, has
shown that these can account for only a relatively temporary effect on
growth. It is suggested that the composts act mainly by modifying the
course of humus decomposition, thus bringing about drastic changes in
the biological activities of the organic substrate of the soil.

This demonstration of the profound influence of biological factors on
the nutrition of trees challenges the attention of foresters and has
important practical applications. By making use of suitable composts, it
will be possible to carry out the successful afforestation of land
formerly regarded as wholly unproductive.

For further information see "Problems of Tree Nutrition"[5].

From the two foregoing examples it is seen that in the case of banana
blight, fungi had to be suppressed by bacteriae, but that for pine trees
on poor English soils fungi had to be activated for proper tree
nutrition.


4) Inorganic Tree Nutrients

Other information also from England concerns the use of so-called
"minerals" which I prefer to call "essential inorganic nutrients," and
name by the element or the compound in which the element is contained.
"Minerals", strictly speaking, refers to compounds formed by nature as
rocks, ores, brines, salt deposits, etc.

Professor Wallace, Director of Britain's Long Ashton Research
Station[6], has laid the foundation for diagnosing mineral deficiencies
by leaf symptoms. These are reliable indicators of what nutrients to
furnish plants when they are distinct and easily recognized. But for
subacute deficiencies, plant analysis and injections are resorted to.
Injections of manganese sulphate as pellets into holes drilled in trunks
of cherry trees caused orchards that had been barren, to bear heavy
crops a few months later.

Manganese, boron, zinc, copper, iron, magnesium also lend themselves
quite readily for applications as nutritional sprays, when applied as
suitable compounds such as the sulphates. Both spray applications and
tree injections have great diagnostic values, because a response to
them, if needed is relatively quick. When trees are deficient their
foliage will show marked improvement from a spray application within a
few days, so that a test can be made on a few trees before an entire
orchard is treated. Trunk injections should of course be made during the
dormant season for results to show the following summer.


5) Nutritional Sprays

Florida and California lead in the application of nutritional sprays on
citrus and other fruit[7]. Vegetables, too, respond remarkably
thereto[8]. I see no reason why nut trees likewise should not benefit
from them, especially when other spray materials are used. Copper
sulphate, zinc sulphate, manganese sulphate, magnesium sulphate, iron
sulphate, cobalt sulphate and borax are all compatible with each other
and with most other spray materials. Combination sprays seem to perform
better, anyway, than single sprays, and the only objection would seem to
be that some element is applied that is not deficient. It can be taken
for granted, however, that nothing is wasted, even though the benefits
may be invisible. Soils benefit in the long run from sprays. One
element, even though not noticeably needed, may make another available
or it may antidote toxicity of some element present to excess. Indirect
results in all likelihood are always obtained.

In Florida, recommendations for spray applications to citrus are made
annually[9]. They can be obtained from the Florida Citrus Commission,
Lakeland, Fla. A typical formulae is as follows:

                                   _
   3-5 lbs. zinc sulphate           |
   3-5 lbs. manganese sulphate      | per 100 gallons of water or
   2-5 lbs. copper sulphate with    | other spray material
       equal amounts of lime.      _|

   1 gallon of lime sulphur or 1-1/2 lbs. of lime is used for every 3 lbs.
   of sulphate of manganese or zinc.

Cherries, apples, plums are quite responsive to such applications, and I
have seen the defoliation of prune trees in New York State corrected
with a mixture containing:

                 _
   Manganese 10%  | All as metallic, in the form of hydrated oxides,
   Copper    10%  | and applied at the rate of 4 lbs, for the combination
   Zinc       5%  | material per 100 gallons.
   Boron      1% _| The addition of 2 lbs. lime is optional.

In California a manganese deficiency has been observed on English
Walnuts[10], and 5-15 lbs. commercial manganese sulphate was used per
100 gallons of water during late May, through June, to correct this.

Sprays should be applied at ten day intervals until the deficiency
symptoms no longer persist.

Plausible reasons for the somewhat quicker action of sprays than
fertilizers may be furnished by two prominent authorities:

McCollum[11], one of our foremost nutritionists, first noted the
discovery that the leaf of the plant is a complete food, and that none
of the storage organs of plants, seeds, tubers, roots, fruits enjoy that
distinction. In the leaf, biological processes are most active. It is
the site of synthesis of proteins, carbohydrates and fats. The leaf is
rich in actively functioning cells which contain everything necessary
for the metabolic processes, and they supply all the nutrients which an
animal requires. ("All flesh is grass").

Hoagland[12], another authority, writes on this subject thus:

     "It is now certain that soils are not invariably capable of
     supplying enough boron, zinc, copper and manganese to maintain
     healthy growth of plants. This knowledge has come mainly during the
     past ten years. Within this period thousands of cases from many
     parts of the world have been reported of crop failure, of plant
     disease, resulting from deficiencies of micro nutrient elements....
     The statements do not imply that most soils are deficient in any of
     these elements, but the areas involved are large and important
     enough to warrant the view that the recognition of micro nutrient
     deficiencies constitutes a development in applied plant nutrition
     of major significance.

     "When I refer to deficiencies of boron, copper, manganese, or zinc,
     it is not a question of absolute deficiency in total quantity of
     the element present in the soil, but rather a physiological
     deficiency arising from the insufficient availability of the
     element in the plant; in other words, not enough of the element
     can be absorbed and distributed in the plant for its physiological
     needs at each successive phase of growth."

Nutritional sprays under such circumstances may prove the remedy, and we
have experimental evidence to support this. Nut trees as is shown by the
above mentioned experiment, may respond to spray applications equally as
well as citrus, other fruit and vegetables, and effects, too may possess
special diagnostic values, showing the need of trees, and therefore also
the need of soils on which they are grown.

Investigators are constantly confronted with determining whether foliage
shows symptoms of disease or starvation, and whether this is due to a
deficiency or an excess of any particular nutrient; whether fungicides
inhibit the generation of fungi from the spore state, or whether the
plant is fortified from sprays or dusts to become disease resistant, or
repellent.

Fungicides are valueless where plant disease is caused by bacteriae
which invade the water conducting tubes, (roughly corresponding to the
blood vessels of mammals), of plants, tree trunks, etc. and prevent the
flow of water and nutrient solutions from roots to leaves. Deprived of
water and nourishment, the plants or trees will wilt and die. Where,
however, soils furnish these plants with protective inorganic nutrients,
such as manganese, copper, iron, zinc, borax, etc. these bacterial
diseases are prevented. Similar actions may take place in leaves.


Deficiency Symptoms. Kodachrome Slides.

Many acute deficiency symptoms have been identified by authorities and
photographed, and I am able to show Kodachrome slides of the following:


     Manganese starvation on Swiss chard, spinach (five illustrations),
     courtesy of Dr. Robert E. Young, Waltham, Massachusetts.

     Apricot, sweet cherry, lemon, onions, peanut, soybean (two
     illustrations), tobacco (4 illustrations), sugarbeets, walnuts,
     wheat, all by different authors.

     Manganese deficiencies in Indiana on soyabeans, hemp, corn, by
     courtesy of George H. Enfield, Purdue University.

     Manganese on beets (mangels), (4 illustrations), and Romaine
     lettuce, Nassau County, Long Island. Courtesy of Dr. H. C.
     Thompson, Cornell University.

Many more are published in "Hunger Signs of Crops," an illustrated
reference book popular with scientific farmers and growers[13].

Other deficiencies that have been observed on nut trees are the
so-called "little leaf" or "rosette" of pecans and black walnuts[14],
which is due to a lack of zinc. Strangely enough, healthy orchards in
this case contained a preponderance of fungi, whereas in affected
orchards the soil microflora was predominantly bacterial[15].

We now have definite experimental evidence that lime, manganese and zinc
are required in appreciable quantities for the growth, health and
bearing quality of nut trees. It is well to make sure of these elements
in the soils devoted to nut tree planting, but it cannot be emphasized
too often that all essential elements and factors should be taken care
of; anyone of them may be the limiting factor in crop failure; the one
that is absent is always the most important.

In regard to inorganic nutrients, more attention has probably been
devoted to citrus trees than to any other tree species, largely because
the soils of Florida and California require additions thereof. It would
be unfair to say that such main fruit crops as apples, cherries,
peaches, plums have been neglected; we merely possess more information
on the nutrients of citrus trees than on other tree crops, as far as the
micro essential nutrients are concerned. Most orchards and groves are
fertilized only with nitrogen, phosphorus and potash, and limed when
necessary. Nitrogen can stimulate size of fruit at the expense of
quality.

A paper by P. W. Rohrbaugh[16], Plant Physiologist of the California
Fruit Growers Exchange, Ontario, California, deals with eleven mineral
nutrient deficiencies and their causes, viz: calcium, magnesium, potash,
phosphorus, sulphur, nitrogen, iron, boron, zinc, manganese, copper, and
this might well be used as a guide for nut trees.


6) Miscellaneous

A few oddities may also be mentioned for anyone inclined to experiment:

From Holland it is reported that an avenue of large handsome shade trees
close to a century old, all died in one year, except where a junk dealer
had stacked a pile of old metals. The trees had exhausted the inorganic
nutrients within reach of their roots in the soil, but the junkpile had
replenished them sufficiently, so that those within reach of it kept
alive to this day, twenty years later.

A rock mulch is reported to have improved the growth of lime and lemon
trees considerably[17], and it would seem that similar experiments
should be made on young nut trees, just before bearing age in a
comparative test with a check planting. Stones can be selected for the
nutrients they contain, and a geologist can easily point out those
containing the greatest number of elements. No one could go wrong in
placing a few rocks of limestone or dolomite near the base of a tree,
and let rain and sunshine, heat and frost attend to the fertilizing in a
slow but perpetual manner.

Maple sugar contains manganese[18], showing this as a distinct quality
over cane sugar. Manganese and other essential nutrients are known to
facilitate the production of proteins[19], and the question of better
quality nut production may well be examined from the viewpoint of the
indirect effect from activities of soil microbiology by manganese,
copper, cobalt and zinc. Some of these elements have also been classed
as inorganic plant hormones[20]. "Chlorosis," the yellowing of leaves,
may not only be a deficiency symptom of manganese, but also one of iron,
copper and magnesium. Lack of manganese can cause a decrease in
photosynthesis[21], so much so that in manganese deficient leaves the
CO2 assimilation may be reduced to half of normal. Herein, too, may lie
the cause of low yields, smaller roots and lowered resistance of those
roots to invading detrimental organism.

Contemporary work on soil microbiology may show that manganese and other
essential nutrients are perhaps most important in their functions for
the preservation and balancing of microbial life and actions in soils.
There is where tree nutrition must begin; whatever is neglected in soils
can at best only temporarily be adjusted afterwards. After all,
deficiency symptoms on foliage show lack of soil fertility, and while we
should welcome them for their diagnostic value, our corrective measures
to be most economical must be taken on soils.


Transmission of Inorganic Nutrients from Soils to Plants to Animals

Soil analysis and plant tissue tests both have their value, but also
their limitations. Many laboratories and experiment stations are
equipped to make rapid soil tests, and some engage in leaf analysis. It
is important that they be correctly interpreted. For instance, at the
Citrus Experiment Station, Riverside, California[22], bark and leaves
were collected from healthy and diseased Persian Walnuts. They were
analyzed for calcium, magnesium, inorganic phosphate, manganese and
iron. A higher percentage of ash was found in the diseased than in the
healthy bark, and calcium, magnesium, manganese and inorganic phosphates
were also generally higher.

It would be a fallacy I think to conclude therefrom that these elements
were not necessary, or were present to excess. They were probably
present because they had failed to function properly, due to changes in
weather, excessive rains or droughts, and could not eliminate
themselves.

We must consider the results from the functions of the essential
elements, and discard the popular belief that inorganic nutrients in
soils are transmitted from soils to plants, and therein contained for
the express purpose of satisfying the need of animals and humans[23].

The plant has only one purpose to perform which is to grow and to
reproduce itself, and such is the case with all other forms of life.

Plants contain very often inorganic elements in a form in which they
cannot be utilized. It is therefore quite easy to mistake their presence
either as a toxicity symptom or as a high requirement, when as a matter
of fact these elements are present due to conditions unfavorable to
metabolism, and they remained in bark and leaves as end products, in an
inert form. Rather than being transmitted from soils to plant, their
functions may consist of the formation of enzymes, proteins, hormones,
chlorophyll, antibodies, vitamins, in carbon assimilation. When they
have served such purposes they are not likely to be present in plants in
anything like the amounts or forms as present in soils. They may come
into question as catalysts or bio-catalysts, as sources of energy for
microorganism, from which their optimum effects have been secured when
they are not transmitted at all, causing changes, but remaining
themselves unchanged. They are essential in the sense that the elements
composing soils, sea, atmosphere are constantly energized, changed and
used over and over again to create plant, animal and human life. In this
cycle nothing is lost, only changed from old to new generations.


Summary

Soil factors for tree growth are physical, chemical and biological. To
control the organisms of soils and plants is probably the most difficult
problem in microbiology. It is not wise to alternate neglect with
feverish attention when blights or other pests become epidemic or
threatening. They may be of a nutritional, preventable rather than
curable nature. Pathology and tree nutrition may as well become a
constant part of your activities.


References to the Literature

1. BEESON, K. C. The Mineral Composition of Crops U.S.D.A. Bulletin No.
369. March, 1941

2. FEARON, W. R. A Classification of the Biological Elements Sci. Proc.
Royal Dublin Soc. Vol. 20 No. 35. February, 1933

3. WISCHHUSEN, J. F. Minerals in Agricultural and in Animal Husbandry
Manganese Research & Development Foundation Cleveland 10, Ohio

4. RODALE, J. I. The Organic Forest--Editorial Organic Gardening,
Emmaus, Pa. April, 1945, pp. 4-9

5. SCARSETH, GEORGE D. Growing Bananas on Acid SoilsAgriculture in the
Americas, Vol. IV. October, 1944, No. 10

6. RAYNER, M. C. and NEILSON-JONES, W. Problems of Tree Nutrition Faber
and Faber, Lt. London

7. ROACH, W. A. Soil Fertility and Trace Elements Soil Conservation,
Washington. October, 1945 Condensed in Farmer's Digest, Ambler, Pa.
January, 1946

8. CAMP, A. F. The Minor Elements in Citrus Fertilization Commercial
Fertilizer, Atlanta, Ga. January, 1945

9. CHAPMAN, H. D.; BROWN, S. M.; and RAYNER, D. S. Nutrient Deficiencies
in Citrus California Citrograph, May, 1945

10. McLEAN, F. T. Feeding Plants Manganese through the Stomata Science
66 (1927). Exp. Sta. Rec No. 58

11. SPRAY AND DUST SCHEDULES, Published Annually Florida Citrus
Commission, Lakeland, Fla.

12. BRAUCHER, O. L. and SOUTHWICK, B. W. Correction of Manganese
Deficiency Symptoms of Walnut Trees Proc. Horticultural Science 39.
133--6. 1941

13. McCOLLUM, E. V. ORENT-KEILES The Newer Knowledge of Nutrition. Fifth
Edition The MacMillan Company, pp. 661-2

14. HOAGLAND, D. R. Inorganic Nutrition of Plants Chronic Botanica,
1944, pp. 32-3

15. HUNGER SIGNS OF CROPS--A Symposium National Fertilizer Assn.
Washington, D. C. 1941 Judd & Detwiler, Baltimore, Md.

16. BLACKMON, G. H. Variety and Stock Tests of Pecan and Walnut Trees
Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Annual Report 1936, 75 (1937)

17. BLACKMON, G. H. Pecan Variety Response to Different Soil Types,
Localities: Zinc Treatments Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Ann. Rep. 1935, 74-5,
(1936)

18. ARK, P. A. Little Leaf or Rosette of Fruit Trees VII. Soil
Microflora and Little Leaf or Rosette Disease Proc. Amer. Soc. of
Horticultural Sci. 34, 218-21. 1937

19. ROHRBAUGH, P. W. Mineral Nutrient Deficiencies in California Citrus
Trees and their Causes California Citrograph, April-May, 1946

20. WHITE, CLARENCE Decorative Rock Mulches Organic Gardening, November,
1945--Emmaus, Pa.

21. RIOU, PAUL and DELORME, JOACHIM Manganese in Maple and Cane Sugars
Comptes Rendues 200 1132-3 (1935) C.A. 294617

22. DELORME, JOACHIM Manganese in Maple and Cane Sugars Contrib. Lab.
del'Ecole Hautes Etûdes Comm. Montreal No. 7, page 32 1937

23. BAUDISCH, OSKAR Biological Functions of Minor Elements Soil Sci.
Vol. 60 No. 2 August, 1945

24. ELLIS, CARLETON; SWANEY, MILLER. W. Soilless Growth of Plants
Reinhold Publishing Co. 1938

24. WILLIS, L. G. and PILAND, J. R. Minor Elements and Major Soil
Problems Jour. Amer. Soc. Agronomy. 30--385--874 (1938)

26. HAAS, A. R. C. Walnut Yellow in Relation to Ash Composition,
Manganese, Iron and Ash Constituents Bot. Gazette 94 (1933) E.S.R. 69,
511

27. WISCHHUSEN, J. F. Recommendations for Feeding Manganese Manganese
Research & Development Foundation, Cleveland 10, Ohio



Nut Tree Propagation As a Hobby for a Chemist

By Dr. E. M. Shelton, Cleveland, Ohio


Not so long ago we saw a movie by the title of "Cluny Brown." The
heroine was possessed with a passion for repairing plumbing, but was
continually inhibited by well-meaning relatives who told her that she
"didn't know her place." A scene early in the story shows Cluny on the
floor under a stopped-up kitchen sink explaining her problem to a
sympathetic professor who states a philosophy something like this. "To
be happy, one should not have to be bound by what is appropriate. If it
is customary to throw nuts to the squirrels and you prefer to throw
squirrels to the nuts, it should be all right to throw squirrels to the
nuts."

It is obviously not always advisable to be so unconventional, but it
seems to me that in matters pertaining to one's hobby it should be
permissable to throw "squirrels to the nuts."

A hobby, like a shadow, is necessarily a very personal thing. Without
the person with which it is associated it could not exist. Therefore, I
feel that it is appropriate to present throughout this paper a liberal
use of the pronoun in the first person.

Years ago, as a boy on an Ohio farm, I tried repeatedly, without
success, to graft on small hickory trees along the river bank scions
from one especially good tree that stood out in a cultivated field. Time
that followed was too crowded for further attempts at nut tree
propagation until about fifteen years ago, when, living in Connecticut,
I bought a grafted walnut, a Thomas, and set out to produce more like
it. Before we left Connecticut, I had been able to present grafted
walnut trees to many of my neighbors who had persisted, hitherto, in
calling hickory-nuts "walnuts." They would listen with some show of
interest while I expounded on my enthusiasm for black walnuts, but
sooner or later would inevitably ask, "Do you mean the shagbark kind?"

Last summer we drove back to Connecticut for a brief visit, and, on
calling at the home of one of these friends, we found that the first nut
borne on their Thomas tree had been carefully saved. Forthwith there was
a solemn nut-cracking ceremony, and all present tasted the meat and
pronounced it good. We hope that that tree and many others will thrive
for years to come to add to the bonds of friendship with these neighbors
we have known.

Lately I have arranged my work so that we may once again live in Ohio
not too far from my boyhood home. Last year I tried once again to graft
along the hillside scions from that prized hickory, and this time six
out of seven grafts have grown.

My field of work has been that of a chemist, engaged in industrial
problems related to animal and plant products. Hence, my hobby and my
day's work are productive of mutually helpful ideas. The literature
which I review frequently contains suggestions applicable to the various
phases of tree propagation. Though a few references are quoted in the
bibliography at the end of this paper, these are for illustration only
and comprise a very small number of those which have appeared.

My experiments in nut tree propagation have been reported from time to
time in the yearbooks of the N.N.G.A. and I intend in the remainder of
this paper only to outline problems under a number of general headings
in which I am particularly interested, and give some indication of
procedures which seem worth while investigating.

An important phase of nut growing to which I have given little attention
is the search for new varieties. I find my interest in this aspect
growing as I associate with the group of nut growers in Ohio, who
through prize contests and active personal work are trying to discover
superior nut trees in nature, yet I do not find in this the opportunity
I seek for experimentation unless it may be in the matter of
hybridization.


Rootstock Propagation

Rootstocks for walnuts and hickories are very easily grown from seed.
Chestnuts are grown with variable success, and it would seem that
particular care in drainage of the seed bed, and possibly the use of one
of the seed fungicides, should improve chestnut germination.

The present trend in the propagation of fruit trees is toward selection
of particularly suitable rootstocks. Do some nut tree seedlings accept
grafts more readily than others? We do not know. Numerous writers have
discussed the idea of varying degrees of compatibility of rootstocks
with scions and Jones[1] has brought together considerable evidence to
relate incompatibility among plants with something parallel to allergy
in animals. Initial growth of the scion leads to a flow of foreign
bodies into the stock. The theory is advanced that the stock develops
antitoxins to these foreign bodies which succeed in killing the scion a
few weeks later.

If a particular strain of nut tree stock is some day found to be of
particular value for grafting, or for propagation of a disease resistant
type, as in the chestnut, the propagation of such stock vegetatively
would be essential. A present illustration is the series of Malling
apple rootstocks which are grown from cuttings.

I have tried many times to grow chestnuts from cuttings with no success.
A few experiments now in progress are limited to Malling IX apple stocks
which I assume are not especially difficult to root. I am trying several
modifications of a principle of making the cuttings at some time after
girdling the stem. The hope is that in this way there will be
accumulated at the base of the cutting more than the usual reserve of
nutritive elements together with whatever plant wound hormones and plant
growth substances the twig is capable of synthesizing.


Scion Storage

In earlier papers I described the use of sodium sulfate crystals
(Glauber's salt) for controlling the humidity in scion storage. This
season I have adapted the practice to the shipping of fresh walnut bud
sticks. A sack of Glauber's salt in the bottom of the mailing tube keeps
the cuttings moist, and if, in addition, the container is kept in a
refrigerator when not actually in transit, the buds have been kept in
condition for use up to twenty-five days.

A low temperature is essential in storage of any scions. Variations in
this factor may have been the cause of some of the objections which have
been raised to the practice of coating scions with wax when they go into
storage. If wax is to be applied over a scion, it can be done more
uniformly and in a thinner coating by immersion of the scion in melted
wax. The scion so coated seems to be in better condition than an
uncoated scion when it comes out of storage provided the storage
temperature has been low. However, if the wood has not been kept dormant
by low temperature, gases are evolved which form blisters under the wax
and injure the scion. It is quite probable that a wax coating then
aggravates this damage.


Grafting and Budding

Until this year I had not tried budding, and have gotten into it first
of all to learn whether an ordinary laboratory cork borer is not a
usable substitute for a patch bud cutter. It seems to do very well. The
patches are small, but as an aid in tieing them in I prepared short
strips of painter's masking tape with a thin coat of a plastic grafting
wax on one side. In the center of each piece of tape is a hole just
large enough for the bud to show through. The tape is pressed on over
the bud patch, after which the usual binding with rubber strips is
applied.

The whole technic of budding is fascinating and I plan to experiment as
extensively next season as time and stock permit.


Wax and Tape

In 1937, Shear[2] published a report on a number of wound dressings for
trees in which he observed that lanolin exerts a marked action in
stimulating cambial growth. This led me to try various wax combinations
in which lanolin was incorporated, and a mixture of equal parts of
lanolin and beeswax has become the base for most of my experimental
grafting wax mixtures. I have commented already on the importance of
incorporating an opaque ingredient to exclude light. Experiments in
progress this season have had to do with introduction of green vs. red
dye and with the incorporation of a wax soluble pyrridyl mercuric
stearate[3] as a fungicide.

I have recommended painter's masking tape for tying in scions in all
cases in which moderate tension is sufficient. A winding of such a tape
of course excludes the grafting wax from contact with the line of
cambial contact, so any favorable action which any ingredient in the wax
might have must be largely interfered with. If a tape is prepared with a
thin coating of plastic grafting wax on one side to serve as the
adhesive, it should be possible to bring the wax into contact with the
cut cambial surface without, however, introducing such a mass of wax as
would make its way between stock and scion and interfere with contact.


Nutrition

My own field of work has recently changed to nutrition, infant feeding,
and I shall undoubtedly come to have more of an understanding of plant
nutrition as well as of babies as I study longer on this subject.

Our recollections of the "good old days" are often mistaken, but I think
there is no doubt that the nut trees bore more and better nuts when I
was a boy than we can find now. Can it be a matter of nutritional
failure?

The first consideration in plant nutrition seems to be the water supply,
and perhaps in many localities the water table has fallen sufficiently
to threaten our trees with malnutrition.

The supply of the common mineral elements may or may not be adequate.
These elements should not be difficult to supply. The matter of the
trace elements and their significance catches our fancy at present and
many of us will undoubtedly begin to explore the effect of this or that
panacea for restoring a favorite old tree to a second youth.


Medication

It is only a step from the consideration of nutrition of a plant or
animal to that of medication. Remedial agents are readily introduced
into plants, either through the roots, or by spray on the foliage, or by
direct injection into the trees. Going a little further, such methods
become means of killing trees.

A few years ago, I became interested in killing trees in a way which
would prevent sprouting and also protect the wood to some extent from
insect attack and decay organisms. More recently my interest has turned
toward the use of hygroscopic chemicals injected in the living tree for
the purpose, not only of killing the tree, but of preventing the wood
from cracking radially or drying. A number of government
publications[4-10] have contributed information along this line.

To inject enough chemical to accomplish this purpose it seems necessary
to introduce the chemical solution through a cut the depth of the sap
wood and extending entirely around the tree. A collar of water-proof
paper cemented to the tree provides a means of supplying the chemical
solution to the cut. All this is described in the literature cited. The
only contribution I have made is the use of urea in the solutions.

Many salts are more soluble in a water solution of urea than in water
alone, and many such mixtures are very hygroscopic. Moreover, it seems
that in the presence of urea higher concentrations of salt may be
introduced into the sap stream of trees, though I do not as yet have
experimental data to confirm this statement quantitatively.

An example of a solution injected into a small ash tree is as follows:

   90 grams urea

   120 grams copper sulfate crystals

   300 cubic centimeters water

I hope in another year to cure a number of varieties of woods on the
stump and later to compare their qualities in the shop with lumber cured
in the usual way.


By-Products

Any object as juicy and colorful as a black walnut hull may well become
a subject for search in recovery of by-products. The thermally active
carbon made from the shells has actuated laboratory thermostats for me
for several years.

But more real and immediate by-products have been the personal
associations which have arisen from this hobby. Physicians, engineers,
teachers, farmers, persons from every calling are among those whom I
have met through a common interest in nut tree propagation. I can
recommend this hobby to anyone mature enough to take an interest in the
future, and to chemists in particular.


Bibliography

1. W. NEILSON JONES Plant Chimaeras and Graft Hybrids Methuen and
Company, London

2. SHEAR-LANOLIN As a Wound Dressing for Trees Proc. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci.
34, 286-8 (1937)

3. HORNER, KOPPA and HERBST--Mercurial Fungicide Wax Problems Ind. Eng.
Chem, 37 1069-73 (1945)

4. U. S. BUREAU OF ENTOMOLOGY AND PLANT QUARANTINE--E-409--June 1937. A
method for preventing insect injury to material used for posts, poles,
and rustic construction.

5. E-434--May 1938, An efficient method for introducing liquid chemicals
into living trees.

6. E-467--February 1939, Chemicals and methods used in treatments of
trees by injections, with annotated bibliography.

7. Conn. Agr. Expt. Sta.--Cir. No. 123--July, 1938 The use of water
soluble preservatives in preventing decay in fence posts and similar
materials.

8. U. S. D. A.--Cir. No. 605--June, 1941 The internal application of
chemicals to kill elm trees and prevent bark-beetle attack.

9. FOREST PRODUCTS LABORATORY--November, 1938 A primer on the chemical
seasoning of Douglas fir.

10. REPRINT FROM JOURNAL OF FORESTRY--Vol. 35--March, 1937 (Procured
from Forest Products Laboratory) Seasoning transverse tree sections
without checking.



Notes on Propagation and Transplanting in Western Tennessee

By Joseph C. McDaniel, State Horticulturist

Tennessee Department of Agriculture

Nashville 3, Tennessee


These observations are presented as a preliminary report of the results
obtained by three enterprising amateurs of nut growing in the western
counties of Tennessee, whose work points the way toward overcoming some
of the weaknesses previously encountered in nut culture in the northern
part of the cotton belt states. These growers are the "three R's" of our
Association in west Tennessee: Dr. Aubrey Richards of Whiteville, Mr.
George Rhodes of Covington, and Mr. W. F. Roark of Malesus. I am giving
this brief account of some of their experiences, with the hope that it
will stimulate others to try their methods under various conditions, and
to report their results at later N.N.G.A. meetings. We do not expect
these methods to work equally well in all parts of the United States and
Canada represented here today, but they are giving promising results in
the mid-South territory, and perhaps will have value in a wider area. As
Mr. Davidson has so ably done at this meeting in the case of his Ohio
plantings, we expect to give you a follow-up report on this work in west
Tennessee at the Toronto meeting or later.


"Twin-T" Budding in Chestnut Propagation

Of the nut trees grown in this area, the chestnut has been the most
difficult to propagate by budding. Nurseries in the upper South have
propagated their pecan and walnut trees mostly by patch-budding or the
similar ring-budding method, with very good success. When applied to
chestnuts, patch-buds have seldom grown. The common T-bud, likewise, has
been a general failure on chestnuts in America, though reported
successful in Japan. Chip-buds have not been much-better.

Several years ago, Dr. Max B. Hardy told me that the inlay bark-graft
had been used successfully with Chinese chestnuts at the U.S.D.A,
laboratory in Albany, Ga., following Dr. B. G. Sitton's use of this
method with pecans in Louisiana. (It is described in a bulletin from
Michigan State College, East Lansing, Mich.) I tried it in a small way,
and had some success using it on chestnuts in July and August. This
spring I suggested it to Mr. Roark and Dr. Richards, both of whom tried
it out, using Castanea mollissima stocks and various scion varieties.

Mr. Roark used the inlay bark-graft in the spring, topworking a C.
mollissima seedling with scions of the Colossal, a hybrid variety from
California. About 50 per cent of these have grown this year. Dr.
Richards tried it during July, on C. mollissima seedlings from a
different source. None of the Colossal would grow on his trees, but he
was partially successful with scions of the C. mollissima varieties,
Hobson, Carr and Zimmerman. He then devised a variation in the method
which was highly successful with C. mollissima varieties. This I shall
call the Richards "Twin-T" bud.

In "Twin-T" budding, a vertical slit is made in the bark of the stock.
Then horizontal cuts are made through the bark at both top and bottom of
the vertical cut. The bud piece is cut from the well matured part of a
current season's twig, leaving a rather thick slice of wood beneath the
bud. (It may be as thick as half the diameter of the twig.) The bud is
inserted in the stock as in ordinary T-budding, then wrapped with a
large sized rubber budding strip. (Westinghouse electrician's tape and
Curity adhesive tape have also been used. Some other brands poisoned the
buds.) The "take" of Chinese chestnut buds by this method has run from
60 to 90 per cent on Dr. Richards' trees of various sizes this year. In
a short nursery row, buds were placed under first or second year bark,
while larger trees were topworked by placing the buds mostly under the
bark of second year limbs.

The Colossal failed again on Dr. Richards' trees when budded by the
"Twin-T" method, but Carr and other Chinese varieties were budded
successfully. The graft-compatibility problem in chestnuts is one of
considerable complexity. Thus Carr, which has presented incompatibility
with certain stocks of C. mollissima at other places, grew on these
trees, and Colossal, compatible on another C. mollissima tree, failed on
trees which are apparently compatible with Carr. The Chinese chestnut
species varies in its graft-compatibilities possibly as much as in other
characteristics (growth, productivity, size and quality of nuts, etc.)
so that nut nurserymen should begin to select their seed for chestnut
understocks with a view toward getting strains with a greater degree of
compatibility to the leading scion varieties.

Mr. Roark has been able to propagate the Colossal upon its own roots by
layering a small tree in his orchard. Two limbs pegged into the ground
in the spring of 1945 had produced roots a year later, and were then
detached from the parent tree. This is a slow but sure method of
propagating nut tree varieties that are not congenial with the stocks
available for grafting or budding. He has also layered sweet cherries
and prune trees by this method which is described in U.S.D.A. Farmers
Bulletin 1501 with reference to filberts.


A Heartnut Variety Compatible with Black Walnut Stocks

Seedling black walnuts are common on farms of west Tennessee. Dr.
Richards and Mr. Rhodes have been most active in showing that these can
be topworked readily to improved black walnut varieties under the
conditions prevailing there. Mr. Rhodes has also fruited such older
Persian walnut varieties as Lancaster, Mayette, and Franquette on black
walnut stocks, but finds them generally unproductive in his climate.
Newer varieties, including some selections of the Carpathian strains are
now being tried and should be of fruiting age soon. Mr. Rhodes has also
found, at Covington, a heartnut that is vigorous and productive under
west Tennessee conditions. He finds that it buds readily on the native
black walnut. Some budded trees of it are over a dozen years old. They
have medium sized nuts, smooth shelled (with fairly thick shells for a
heartnut) and kernels of good flavor, coming out whole when the nuts are
cracked carefully. I am giving this variety the name Rhodes, and
suggesting it for use in west Tennessee because of its adaptability and
the fact that it can be budded upon black walnut. Others have reported
Japanese walnut (including heartnut) varieties incompatible with black
walnut at other locations. Dr. Richards has propagated some other
heartnut varieties on black walnut, but finds them more variable than
the Rhodes, in obtaining a good union.


Paper Wrap Gives Summer-Long Protection to Transplanted Trees

Too commonly, transplanted nut trees suffer from sunscald injury on
their southwest sides during the first summer in the orchard. This
injury is particularly common on pecans, which suffer a severe shock
from transplanting and are slow in re-establishing vigorous growth. In
west Tennessee, as one grower puts it, "A pecan is doing well if it
holds one green leaf its first year." Pecans have been known to remain
dormant in their tops until the second spring after planting, and then
start growth. During this initial period of establishment in the
orchard, it is beneficial to give some kind of shade to the tree trunk,
to keep the bark from "cooking" and dying on part of the most exposed
side. Waxing of the trunks before planting helps reduce drying out of
the tops before the roots are partially regenerated and top growth
begins, but waxing alone, under our conditions, is not sufficient to
prevent the frequent occurrence of a dead area starting on the southwest
side of the trunk during the summer following tree setting.

Dr. Richards has found that a heavy wallpaper of a cheap grade, cut in
strips and wrapped spirally to cover the tree trunk from the ground up,
lasts through the season and eliminates nearly all of the sunscald
injury on pecans which he has moved from his farm nursery row to the
orchard. With trees that are shipped long distances, and allowed to dry
out too much before resetting, the results are not so uniform. We are
still in favor of the use of wax coatings on trees that must be shipped,
but would recommend that they be given additional protection by some
means, to shade the trunks throughout the first growing season. This
paper wrap of Dr. Richards seems as efficient as any method, and is the
most economical I have observed. It should be beneficial on most species
of nut trees under summer conditions in the mid-south region.



Propagating Nut Trees Under Glass

By Stephen Bernath, Poughkeepsie, New York


About ten years ago I decided to try a few nut grafts in my small
propagating house. The results were so satisfactory that since that time
I have grafted from a few hundred to several thousand each year.

I found by experiment that I could not graft nut trees exactly as I did
ornamental trees and shrubs, due to their extra sap content. Nut trees
bleed excessively and I had to overcome this or my losses were heavy. I
use no wax on grafts. My method is as follows: I take a strong light
string and wax it with beeswax and parafin mixed fifty-fifty. I use a
modified side graft, tying with this waxed string.

Late in December or early in January, I pot the understock, using black
walnut seedlings for four varieties (Persian walnut, butternut, black
walnut and heartnut). I make sure the understock has had its rest period
by not digging and storing them until they have been really hit by frost
and left for a period, to be sure the wood has matured for the season.
The mature understock is then stored in moist sand in a cool cellar.

In late-December, as I have stated, I place the understock in benches
using 3-1/2 to 4 inch pots, wetting them thoroughly after imbedding them
in peat moss. Keep the moss damp and at a temperature of 55 degrees at
night. After two or three weeks examine the roots by knocking several
loose from the pots. If root action has started, the roots will show
white thread-like fibers and are ready for grafting. This is important,
because if grafting is done too soon the loss is heavy. If delayed too
long the top starts growing. So I caution, do grafting when the
understock is ready.

Place newly made grafts on their side, imbedded in moss, and refrain
from watering until the union has formed. Open grafting case after third
day and daily thereafter, until union is complete. Each day wipe glass
off with cloth to prevent moisture from dripping on grafts. Increase
bottom heat after grafts are laid in benches from 68 to 75 degrees. In
about three to four weeks, if union has formed, place grafts in up right
position, then watering is resumed and heat is reduced to around 60
degrees at night. When graft shows two inches or more growth, cut
understock off close above the union, and then give house plenty of
ventilation to avoid soft growth.

I find nut trees very tender subjects and delay planting these
under-glass grown grafts out in nursery rows until every vestige of
frost has passed. Also be sure to sever the waxed string as this is
tougher than the green graft.

If this method sounds like a great deal of work and trouble generally,
remember the reward will be heavy rooted, easy to transplant, healthy,
named varieties of nut trees. Who can say that, at the present, there is
an abundance of such trees in this country.



The Economic, Ecological and Horticultural Aspects of Intercropping Nut
Plantings

By F. L. O'Rourke Michigan State College, East Lansing, Michigan


Mature nut trees are usually large trees, and large trees demand space.
Young nut trees, therefore, must be planted relatively far apart from
each other and for the first few years, at least, there is an abundance
of unused land between the trees, which may be used for intercropping.
The choice of just what crop or plants to use is often perplexing and
should be considered for several aspects.

The economic factors are of prime importance. The cost of growing the
crop, the specialized farm machinery and equipment needed, the
availability of labor, the distribution of the seasonal labor demand,
the time of the critical cultural practices or of harvesting, the
potential market, and the expected price of the saleable product must
all be considered.

The staple farm crops of the region are often preferable to specialty
crops, particularly from the labor standpoint. Corn, wheat, oats,
potatoes, and legumes can all be grown with a minimum of labor and the
use of power machinery. There is less risk involved with farm crops than
with specialities, both in securing an adequate crop and in the price
received for the product. Fruit, vegetables and ornamentals often have
very critical requirements. They must be sprayed, harvested, and shipped
at exactly the right time or all the proceeds will be lost. Staple crops
are not so demanding in either culture or harvesting.

The labor distribution throughout the season or even throughout the year
must be considered and well planned in advance. No two crops should
require exact and demanding attention at the same time. They should be
chosen and planted so that a regular, even distribution of labor can be
maintained with as little of a rush period as possible and yet with a
minimum of idle time.

The general agricultural pattern of the region must be considered. In a
sparsely settled grain and livestock region it would be quite
inadvisable to grow strawberries or other crops which require a maximum
of hand labor during a very brief period. Berries, however, may be
perfectly well suited to sections where either transient workers or city
children can be secured with little effort.

The crop should suit from the ecological viewpoint. It must not compete
with the young, growing trees for mineral food and water, particularly
during spring and early summer when the trees make most of their annual
growth. On the other hand, if planted too close to the trees, some
intercrops may be shaded too severely to produce a normal yield.

Success in intercropping is usually found between plants which are quite
dissimilar in form and habit. Black walnuts and pasture grasses furnish
a typical example. The long taproots of the walnuts penetrate deeply
into the soil, while the grass roots are shallow and fibrous and feed
in the soil surface layer. The aerial portions of these plants are
likewise quite different, the walnuts tower high in the air, while the
grasses form their crowns on the very surface of the ground. The light
shade cast by the walnuts does not interfere with the photosynthetic
activity of the grasses, but it is sufficient to discourage growth of
broad-leaved weeds which have a higher light requirement than that of
grass. This light shade also tends to provide a greater supply of
available moisture for the grass, in that it reduces temperature and,
consequently, water loss from the grass and soil by keeping down both
transpiration and evaporation.

Experiments in both Tennessee and Ohio have shown that the quantity of
grass produced from beneath walnut trees is greater than on equal areas
in the open and that the quality, as represented by a larger protein
content, is also higher. For this reason, one may well consider
livestock as the income-producing portion of a walnut-pasture planting.
Over one fourth of the agricultural land of the United States is devoted
to pasture and much of the land is suitable for interplanting to
walnuts, butternuts, and other pasture trees, as honey locusts and black
locusts, all of which are known to improve the pasture grasses to some
extent. The potential income which may be derived from such plantings
over this vast acreage is enormous and is the more striking in that
these pasture trees occupy a plane that is now idle and unproductive,
that is, the area lying above the grass tops. The nuts produced on this
"upper story" will represent almost all "clear profit" in that very
little care need be given these walnut trees after they have been
properly planted. Livestock guards will need to be placed about the
trees at planting time and kept there until the trees have grown to the
point where they may no longer be harmed by straddling and browsing.

Pastures are excellent sites from another angle. The closely grazed sod
furnishes an ideal place to rake the nuts together at harvest time.
Anyone who has hunted for nuts in a dense ground cover will appreciate
this factor.

While the walnut responds best to the deep, fertile soil of the river
bottoms and flood plains, it will grow well on the lower portions of
slopes if water is available and the site is not too exposed to the
force of drying winds. Contour strips should be prepared by plowing
several furrows downhill, each a little less in depth than the
preceding, and the walnuts planted thereon. The walnut is a spreading
tree and plenty of space should be allowed. Perhaps it may be wise to
plant the walnuts at extended intervals and fill up the contour row with
black locusts, for post wood, and honey locusts to produce succulent
pods for cattle feed. In any event, it is better to allow too much,
rather than too little space, as walnuts are long-lived trees and will
thrive best where there is least competition. In Iowa, black walnuts are
responding well to "basin culture" in sites which were prepared by
"scalping" the sod from the upper portion of a slope and depositing it
on a lower portion in order to catch and retain more water.

Nut trees are like all other trees in that they react favorably to good
horticultural practice. Fertilizer, particularly nitrogen, is usually
always helpful. The addition of lime when the soil is acid and of
organic matter when humus becomes depleted will aid in better soil
aeration and an increased moisture supply. This, in turn, will be
reflected in more vigorous tree growth and greater nut production.
Occasional spraying may be necessary to control the Datana caterpillar
in the summer.

Chinese chestnuts seem to be admirably adapted for interplanting with
mulberries, cherries, pears, and the like in poultry runs and hog lots
where the pigs and chickens will control the weevils by gleaning the
prematurely dropped and overlooked chestnuts which contain the grubs of
the weevil. The fruit portion of the integrated planting will maintain a
high carbohydrate ration during the season for the use of the livestock.
Here, again, plenty of space should be allowed between trees to allow
each its full measure of water, food, air and sunlight.

Careful and thorough research is needed to determine the full
requirements of nut trees and to work out the interplanting
relationships. In view of the vast potentialities for their use,
investigational programs may soon be under way and much more definite
information be made available to the farmer and landowner.


References

AIKMAN, J. M.--A Basin Method of Nut Tree Culture. Proc. Iowa. Acad.
Sci. 50:241-246. 1943

NEEL, L. R.--The Effect of Shade on Pasture. Tenn. Exp. Sta. Cir. 65,
1939

SMITH, R. M.--Some Effects of Black Locusts and Black Walnuts on
Southeastern Ohio Pastures Soil Sci. 53:385-398, 1942



Nut Work At the Mahoning County Experiment Farm, Canfield, Ohio

By L. Walter Sherman, Superintendent


My interest in nuts dates back to the turn of the century when, as a boy
in high school, I delighted in gathering wild nuts for my own use. I
knew of several black walnut trees bearing very fine nuts and also one
excellent hickory. These were near my home in northern Ohio.

After my school days were over, I married and went to Oklahoma, where I
found the most miserable wild nuts imaginable. However, I stayed but a
short time and returned to my native state where the wild nuts were
reasonably good. In 1935, I made a trip to California and visited the
Persian walnut orchards at harvest time. As if that were not enough to
convince me that it would be worth my while to do what I could in behalf
of the nut industry, the Agricultural press of the time published
several intriguing accounts of Persian walnuts growing in and near
Toronto, Ontario which had been brought there by Rev. Paul C. Crath from
the Carpathian Mountains of Poland.

My constant talk about hardy strains of Persian walnut prompted friends
to tell me of several plantings already growing in northern Ohio with
more or less success. I promptly obtained scions and undertook to graft
a number of these, but I had the usual ill-success of a beginner. I
failed in attempts to top work trees and had no better results with
bench grafting although I began early in the season and continued my
efforts till the time arrived for planting the trees. I stored the
grafted material in a cool apple storage house from the time they were
grafted until they were planted. Then somehow I learned that walnut
wounds would not callous over except at relatively high temperatures.
Accordingly, I placed my next bench-grafted trees in a warm greenhouse,
where growth started at once. This marked my first successful grafting
of black walnut. Later, Mr. W. R. Fickes of Wooster, explained to me his
technique of "boxing off" or "bleeding." By following his instructions,
I was able successfully to top work some of the seedlings I had grown
for the purpose. My next steps were to procure some of the nuts from
Rev. Crath which he had brought from Poland and to make a personal
importation of seed from an experiment station in Russia. With these two
lots I started out to raise Persian walnut seedlings.

The first grafted trees set out at the Farm were obtained from Homer C.
Jacobs of Kent, Ohio, in 1937. That year we began planting a three-acre
tract. The trees were grown with scions cut from prize winning seedlings
brought out as a result of the Ohio nut contest held in 1934. The trees
were set 25 feet each way in order to conserve room. This distance
allowed for but 69 trees to the acre and available space was quickly
occupied. By 1944, it became necessary to add two more acres. The new
land was from an abandoned berry ground. It was plowed, limed heavily
and fertilized. The alternate rows were used for peach trees as fillers.
The main rows were mostly filled with new varieties of Persian walnut
from northern Ohio which had been grafted on black walnut stocks. Some
of the room was used for growing black walnut seedlings for use in
grafting with scions of prize winners in the next Ohio contest, plans
for which were already under way.

In 1944, four plantings of Persian walnut trees located some distance
from each other in northern Ohio, all had good crops and all produced
superior nuts. A half bushel of the nuts were planted at the Farm during
the following spring. All lots grew remarkably well. The resulting
seedlings, together with grafted trees, which by then were growing in
the Farm nursery, made it necessary to further add to the orchard room.
The increase this time was eight acres, of which five were planted to
trees during the spring of 1946. In all plantings, the distance between
trees has remained the same as at first, not that 25 feet is enough for
bearing trees but because it is expected to do a large amount of
thinning out as bearing begins and many trees prove their inferiority.

The problem of propagating desirable varieties has been our greatest
difficulty. The kinds we wanted were not to be had from nursery sources
as they were entirely new. Commercial nurserymen would not even
undertake the task of grafting. We were forced to rely upon our own
ingenuity. Not only did we have to master the art of grafting but we had
to drive hundreds of miles in order to obtain scions of the various
kinds. We still know too little about grafting. We often raise the
question as to how it happens that surgeons can do almost anything they
wish in the way of cutting and splicing parts of the human body, yet
with nut trees, 75 per cent of success is rarely attained.

Last spring I began a rather elaborate comparison of paraffin with
beeswax--lanolin for use in grafting. Dr. Shelton had demonstrated that
the latter was a good dressing for wounds and I assumed that in
grafting, it would promote callousing. My experiment was partially
frustrated by the loss of my melting pot which burned at about the time
the work was half done. The grafting had to be finished without wax of
any kind. Out of 60 grafts so set, only five grew. The five survivors
had been merely "boxed off" or "bled," none grew which had been treated
with hot wax of any kind.

Research with nuts has but barely begun at the Farm. We feel, however,
much encouraged and that the worst is over. We have a total of 725 trees
in the planting, many of which have already borne a few nuts. Production
should increase rapidly and we will soon have considerable quantities of
nuts and other material with which to work. We have the following
genera, species, varieties, and hybrid forms: Butternut--Craxezy and
Vincamp; Chestnut--Carr, Hobson, Yankee (Syn., Connecticut Yankee), and
Zimmerman; Hickory, including hybrids--Bixby, Bogne, Boor Nos. 1 and 2,
Bowen, Cranz Nos. 1 and 2, Fairbanks, Frank, Haskell, Leach, Lozsdon,
McConkey, Nething, Reynolds, Ridiker, Russell, Stratford, Weschcke, and
Wright; Pecan--Busseron, Greenriver, and Posey; Black Walnut--Barnhart,
Brown, Cowle, Fulton (Syn. Miller of Ohio), Hare, Havice, Horton,
Jansen, Krause, Lisbon, Mintle, Mohican, Murphey, Ohio, Rohwer, Snyder,
Sparrow, Stabler, Stambaugh, Thomas, Tritten, Twin Lakes, and Wanda;
Persian Walnut--Alliance, Baxter, Blosser, Broadview, Diller, Elmore,
Gligor Nos. 1 and 2, Graber, Hall, Lieber, Lopeman, Oehn, and Schafer;
Heartnut--Bellevue, Canoka, Fish, and Keck. In addition there are 55
black walnut seedlings of Brown and Lisbon varieties; 65 seedling black
walnuts of unknown parentage; 280 Persian walnut seedlings of known
percentage; 37 heartnut seedlings; 30 Chinese chestnut seedlings; and 22
seedling filberts.



The Ohio Black Walnut Contest of 1946


The contest was sponsored by the Ohio chapter of the N.N.G.A., Inc., and
was publicised through the cooperation of the Ohio Forestry Association
and the Ohio Farmer magazine. There were 692 separate black walnut
entries, showing the great interest aroused.

The nuts that won first place were grown by Mr. Duke Hughes, of Coal
Run, Noble County, O. He states the tree is about 50 years old and
stands in well-limed permanent pasture near the crest of a ridge, in
Muskingum silt loam.

The system of judging was that set up by the TVA at Norris, Tenn. The
judges were Oliver D. Diller, Secretary of the Ohio Forestry
Association; L. Walter Sherman, Superintendent of the Mahoning County
Experiment Farm; and C. W. Ellenwood, Associate Horticulturist at the
Wooster Experiment Station. They were assisted by William H. Cummings,
Spencer B. Chase and Thomas G. Zarger, all of T.V.A., and several
members of the Ohio chapter of NNGA. The prize winners are listed in
order of awards.

[Illustration: Mr. Duke Hughes, Coal Run, Washington County, Ohio, and
the tree producing the first prize--Duke black walnut.]

                                       Name   Weight, First  Final  Percent
                                      Applied  Grams  Pick,  Pick,    of
                                                      Grams  Grams  Kernel

 1. Duke Hughes, Coal Run,             Duke      27.2   6.8    6.9    25.3
    Washington County, Ohio

 2. J. C. Burson, Rt. 5, Athens,       Burson    21.5   4.9    6.2    28.8
    Athens County, Ohio

 3. Mrs. C. E. Campbell, Lowellsville, Kuhn      19.0   5.5    5.8    30.5
    Mahoning County Ohio

 4. Ed. Smith, Rt. 3, Athens,          Athens    23.5   4.9    6.5    27.6
    Athens County, Ohio

 5. Mrs. O. Shaffer, Lucasville,       Oliver    22.6   5.3    5.8    25.5
    Scioto County, Ohio

 6. Wm. J. Davidson, Xenia,            Davidson  13.5   4.6    4.8    35.5
    Green County, Ohio

 7. A. C. Orth, Rt. 5, Dayton,         Orth
    Montgomery County, Ohio

 8. H. C. Williamson, Southside,       Williamson
    Mason County, West Virginia

 9. Herbert Penn, Otway,               Penn
    Scioto County, Ohio

10. Mrs. A. L. Jackson, Little         Jackson
    Hocking, Washington County, Ohio

[Illustration: The Judges At Work]



1946 Iowa Black Walnut Contest

By C. C. Lounsberry, Secretary I.N.G.A.


The 1946 black walnut contest sponsored by the Iowa Nut Growers'
Association was held at the Hoyt Sherman Place, Des Moines, Iowa, on
November 14 and 15, 1946. The judges were Prof. H. E. Nichols, Dr. H. H.
Plagge, and Dr. J. M. Aikman.

Following the policy set in the 1942 contest, the Iowa State
Horticultural Society put up cash and ribbons with special reference to
standard and previously shown varieties, while the Iowa Nut Growers'
Association was interested in new varieties. The following are the
premiums awarded:

   Standard Varieties:

   Prize                 Name                    Variety

    1      Schlagenbusch Bros., Ft. Madison      Thomas
    2      Russell Krouse, Toddville             Krouse
    3      Schlagenbusch Bros., Ft. Madison      Stambaugh
    4      E. F. Huen, Eldora                    Thomas
    5      Seward Berhow, Huxley                 Ohio
    6      Seward Berhow, Huxley                 Myers
    7      R. S. Herrick, Prole                  Thomas
    8      Schlagenbusch Bros., Ft. Madison      Hepler
    9      E. F. Huen, Eldora                    Ohio
   10      E. F. Huen, Eldora                    Rohwer

   New Varieties:

   Prize                 Name                    Variety

    1      Schlagenbusch Bros., Ft. Madison      Schlagenbusch
    2      F. J. Wagner, Danville                Wagner
    3      Tom Bandfield, Shell Rock             Shepard
    4      Roy A. Wood, Castana                  Wood
    5      Mrs. Minnie Waldo, Grand Junction     Waldo
    6      E. F. Huen, Eldora                    Huen
    7      Ira M. Kyhl, Sabula                   Tinker
    8      Schlagenbusch Bros., Ft. Madison      Kramer
    9      Sam Moncrief, Center Junction         Acme
   10      C. E. Brockway, Grundy Center         Birchwood

There were only 22 entries in standard varieties and 22 entries in new
varieties so we did not make much of a showing as compared with the 1946
Ohio contest. However, very good walnuts came in. They were all sampled
with a mechanical cracker. An interesting development to me was the fact
that machine cracking left the center of several of the best varieties
of walnuts looking much like the core of an apple, instead of being
broken in two as in hand cracking.



Grafting Methods Adapted to Nut Trees

By H. F. Stoke, Virginia


(The notes I contributed to the 1945 Report under the title "Experiences
With Nut Grafting" were so fragmentary as to be of little value. In an
effort to correct the error I am offering the following supplementary
notes in the hope that amateurs like myself may find them of some
practical use.)

My best success with the propagation of nut trees has been with the
following methods. For budding, I use the plate bud exclusively. For
grafting on stocks up to one inch I use either the splice graft or the
modified cleft graft. For larger stocks I use either the simple bark
graft or the slot bark graft. Each will be discussed in order.

In making the plate bud, it is cut from the scion or bud stick the same
as for the familiar T bud. Usually a bit of wood is cut away with the
bud, which should not be removed. A bud, or a bit of bark, should
similarly be cut from the stock at the desired point, and discarded. The
area of exposed cambium on the stock should correspond as closely as
possible with the cambium area exposed on the bud. The bud is then laid
on the exposed cambium of the stock, and bound in place, preferably with
rubber budding strips. The point of the bud should be left exposed.

[Illustration: SIMPLE BARK GRAFT Useful with thin-barked species.]

Choice of time when conditions are right is quite as necessary for
success as the proper procedure. There are two separate periods when the
plate bud may be used on walnut with the greatest success. The first
period, in Virginia, is the latter half of May, when the black walnut
stock is in almost full leaf. If done earlier the bud is likely to be
drowned by the excessive bleeding of this species. Dormant buds cut the
previous winter are used.

The follow-up care is vitally important. The stock should be cut off
above the bud within five to seven days after budding. If successful,
the bud will start into growth within another week or ten days, and may
be a foot long within 30 days.

[Illustration: 1. Slot bark graft; useful in top-working.

2. Splice graft; unexcelled when scion and stock are of equal diameter.

3. Modified cleft graft; for all general purposes.

4. Plate bud; for small and medium stocks.]

The tying material should be cut and removed within a few days after the
bud starts, to prevent strangulation of the tender shoot. Be sure to
keep native growth of the stock trimmed off until midsummer to force
growth of the bud.

The second period for successful plate budding of the walnut centers
around August first, varying somewhat with the weather conditions. Buds
of the current season's growth are used. The time must be late enough
for these buds to be well matured, and early enough so that the stock is
still growing and the bark slipping. If the buds are immature, or the
bark tight, the operation will be a failure.

The buds remain dormant during the following winter, and are forced into
growth by cutting off the stock above the bud early in the spring. The
tying material, if durable, should be removed about 30 days after
budding.

If conditions are right and the work is properly done, a high percentage
of "takes" may be expected. In summer I preferably place the bud on the
shady side of the stock, or shade it with a little skirt of white paper
tied just above the bud.

Chestnuts can be budded by the same method, but the spring budding
should be done earlier, while the stocks are in bud, and the summer
budding should be done two or three weeks later than with the walnut.

I have not tried the plate bud on hickory or pecan, but it is the only
budding method I use on walnut and chestnut, and I have tried them all.

When it comes to grafting, the simple splice graft, as illustrated, is
very successful, but it should only be used when scion and stock are of
the same size. It works splendidly on chestnut, filbert and hickory, and
can also be used on walnut; however, I prefer the modified cleft graft
for the latter, because of the bleeding problem.

In making the splice graft, the diagonal cut should be about four times
as long as the diameter of the scion, to prevent slippage in tying.

For the modified cleft graft I cut the stock off at the selected point
at an angle of from 45 to 60 degrees. This greatly facilitates the
healing of the entire wound.

The cleft is made not by splitting, but by making a cut with a sharp
knife, beginning at the apex of the stock and cutting diagonally
downward and inward toward the center of the stock.

Before making the cut, the scion should be selected, and the wedge cut,
with one face slightly longer than the other. This enables one to
properly judge the depth and angle of the cleft, thus securing a fit on
all four cambial lines. The longer face goes toward the main body of the
stock, and is left slightly above the top of the stock. The apex of the
stock is squared off slightly before the cleft is cut, and the knife is
set very slightly on the wood at the starting point, rather than between
the bark and the wood. Care at this point guarantees very rapid healing,
with no dead tissues or "heel" on the stock, sometimes called "dieback."

Remember to watch all ties in grafting to prevent strangulation of the
tender new growth. This, with removal of sprouts or suckers from the
stock below the graft are two very important features of after-care, and
neglect can nullify the most expert work in the grafting operation.

In grafting the black walnut I prefer to use the side graft because of
the bleeding problem. This is precisely the same as the modified cleft
graft except that the cleft is made about three-fourths of an inch below
the apex of the stock. By making the graft a little below the top of the
stock one can tie and wax it, without waxing the top of the stock, which
is permitted to bleed at will. This freedom to bleed relieves the
pressure of the sap at the graft, where healing takes place without
flooding.

For stocks under an inch in diameter, I use the splice and modified
cleft grafts exclusively. For larger stocks, such as are encountered in
top working, other methods are preferred.

One can cut the main stock off just above a small limb, and graft one or
more of the limbs. Again, one may cut the large stock off a year in
advance, and bud or graft one or more of the suckers that are thrown
out.

If neither of the above methods are applicable, one can use either the
simple bark graft, or the slot bark graft.

In making the simple bark graft, I cut the stock off at a 45 degree
angle as for the modified cleft graft. The scion is prepared by making
one long wedge face, and on the other side make two short faces so that
the point is triangular.

To insert the scion make a cut through the bark downward from the apex
of the stock. Insert the scion between the bark and the stock, with the
long face next to the wood, and force gently down until just a little of
the face of the wedge shows above the top of the scion. It is well, in
case the stock is large, to place three or four scions around the stock,
removing all but the strongest after a year of two.

This graft is satisfactory for thin-barked species, but for the hickory,
the slot bark graft is preferable.

For this graft, the scion should be trimmed as a wedge, with one face
about twice as long as the other. Two parallel cuts are made through the
bark at the top of the stock a distance apart equal to the width of the
scion wedge. This strip of bark, or "tongue" is loosened at the top, and
the wedge is forced between it and the wood, with the long face next to
the stock, as in the simple bark graft.

Secure tying and waxing should be practiced in all grafting. Small nails
or tacks driven into the top of the stock will help in anchoring the
tying material to the sloping surface.

Inexperienced propagators should get it clearly in mind that union takes
place only in the new growth. This new growth builds up from the cambium
layer, which is the outside layer of wood cells that lies just beneath
and in contact with the bark.

This is why it is so vitally necessary that the lines between the bark
and cambium be placed in parallel contact as closely as possible, in the
splice and cleft grafts. Never mind if the outside of the bark of scion
and do not match perfectly, due to differences in the thickness of the
bark. It is the inside line of the bark that must match.

Actual union takes place along this cambial line. The old wood of the
wedge and cleft cannot, and never does, unite.

A word about scions. I seldom use a scion with more than two buds. The
best scion wood is of the previous season's growth, if it is of good
diameter and well ripened. Thin, slender twigs give poor results. On
old, slow-growing, bearing trees it is sometimes not possible to get
good scion wood one year old. In this case it is best to take some of
the older wood in cutting the scion. When used, the wedge should be cut
from the two-year wood, just below the one-year wood, with the top of
the scion carrying two or three buds on the new wood. The tip of the
scion should be waxed, if cut.

Scions should be cut when perfectly dormant and kept in cold storage
until used. If kept too warm and wet the buds may swell, making the
scions worthless.

It is quite possible to cut the scions about three weeks before the buds
begin to swell and get good results by grafting immediately. The chief
danger from this practice is that late frosts may nip the buds after
starting, which is fatal to the new scion.

Waxing all cut surfaces, including the tip of the scion, should be
practiced except as explained when the side graft is used for walnuts.
Some advocate waxing the entire scion, also. If this is done I think it
better to leave the buds unwaxed.

Have your knife very sharp. A broad blade is desirable in a grafting
knife, as it helps in making smooth, flat surfaces in wedges and clefts.
For budding, use a knife with a narrow blade, but also very sharp.
Develop skill in making the scion wedge, and in cutting the cleft just
the right depth and width for the scion selected. Experiment on
worthless material until you get the knack. If you are a good,
natural-born whittler you will find it a greater asset than a college
degree.



Beginnings in Walnut Grafting

By C. C. Lounsberry, Iowa


Anyone who has studied propagation manuals from ancient to modern times
cannot help but see how methods are carried down from older books to
modern ones. However, in walnut grafting one suspects there were trade
secrets not permitted publication. How different this was from friendly
and helpful cultural and propagation directions given by Mr. J. F.
Jones, Dr. W. C. Deming, Dr. Robert T. Morris, and others of the
Northern Nut Growers' Association.


Beginning with Ancient Times

Greeks: Theophrastus mentions hazel nuts but nothing about walnuts.

Romans: Pliny, Cato, etc. have little to say about walnuts. Pliny refers
to planting seeds of walnuts but no other method of propagation.
However, he states oaks and walnuts are poisonous to soil, and walnuts
are only used in a few cases for human remedies.

English: Loudon, Evelyn, Knight, etc. Loudon sticks to propagation of
walnuts by seed. Knight[8] followed the French practice of grafting
walnuts by approach up to the time of his discoveries in 1832, which
were similar to Dr. Morris's "immediate" grafting.

French: The French used grafting by approach (inarching) early in the
19th century. Mortillet[11], 1863, states only one-third to one-half of
walnut grafts are successful. These were probably Persian walnuts. We
are not sure what other methods the French used. Mr. C. E. Parsons of
the Felix Gillet Co. in 1940, sent us a picture showing Felix Gillet in
his greenhouse at Barren Hill Nursery, Nevada City, California. This
picture he states was taken in 1900-1902. It shows one year grafted
walnut trees, and bench grafted walnut trees covered by tumblers six
inches high, grafted by the "Treyve" process.


Beginnings in the United States

The first grafting of black walnuts thus comes down to the beginning of
the 20th century.

William P. Corsa[3] with the USDA gave much information from replies to
a questionnaire sent out in 1890, on nut culture and grafting, including
bench grafting, in 1896. Mr. G. W. Oliver[13] in 1901, describes a
method followed by Corsa in bench grafting walnuts and hickories. He
used an incubator. Mr. Jackson Dawson[15] previously, working with
hickories, had success in the greenhouse.

Andrew S. Fuller[4] in his Nut Culturist, published in 1896, advises
that the South had not yet perfected pecan grafting. This seems to have
been a challenge to Mr. J. F. Jones[1 & 7], for we find he moved from
Missouri to Monticello, Fla., about 1899, and specialized in pecan
grafting. He developed the slanting cut he later advocated in walnut
grafting. However, again showing "there is nothing new under the sun"
the author's uncle, Owen Albright, is credited by Corsa[3] with
suggesting it in 1894, and it is also suggested by Mortillet[11] in
1863.


Grafting Wax

The necessity to protect graft unions by excluding air and moisture from
cut plant tissue led to the use of balls of mud in ancient times. Later,
various kinds of waxes were used.

In 1879, Prof. J. L. Budd[2], head of the Horticultural Department at
Iowa State College, using resin and linseed oil, side grafted 150
varieties of Russian apples received from the interior of Russia in the
winter of 1878. A boy swabbed hot wax on the grafts, using a lantern
heater not too different from those used nowadays.

Mr. F. O. Harrington and Mr. S. W. Snyder, Iowa nurserymen were teaching
grafting to members of the Iowa Horticultural Society in 1900, 1901 and
1902, at their annual meetings. Mr. J. B. McLaughlin[9], College
Springs, Iowa, speaks of successfully grafting walnuts in 1900 in a
discussion of the horticultural society led by Van Houton, Edwards, etc.

In 1909, Mr. E. A. Riehl[14] gave a talk before the Iowa State
Horticultural Society in which he advocated covering the whole walnut
scion, buds and all, with liquid wax. His first Thomas grafted tree is
in a ravine back at his barn at Godfrey, Illinois. It was planted about
1902[12].

In 1910, the Northern Nut Growers' Association was organized by Prof.
John Craig of Cornell University, Dr. Robert T. Morris, Dr. W. C.
Deming, Mr. T. P. Littlepage and others. Craig had previously been at
Iowa State College where he and Budd had shown much interest in nut
trees.

In 1912, Mr. J. F. Jones [1][7], came up from the South where he had
been successful in pecan grafting and started a black walnut nursery at
Lancaster, Penna. He had been in Florida up to 1907. While in Florida he
became acquainted with Mr. John G. Rush, of Willow Run, Penna., and did
some walnut grafting for him. It was Mr. Rush who advised him to go to
Lancaster and start a nursery for northern black walnuts. Jones patented
his patch budder in 1912, and using the hot wax method developed by Mr.
E. A. Riehl was very successful in walnut grafting.

In 1914, Dr. W. C. Deming and President T. P. Littlepage of the N.N.G.A.
and Messrs. C. A. Reed and C. P. Close of the USDA had a conference in
Washington which resulted in the publication of the American Nut
Journal.


Paraffin In Grafting

Dr. Robert T. Morris[10], writing in the American Nut Journal in 1929,
advocates the use of paraffin to cover walnut grafts instead of wax.
Both he and Dr. J. Russell Smith[15] credit Mr. J. Ford Wilkinson with
first using paraffin instead of wax on walnut grafts. Mr. Wilkinson
wrote that he got the idea from seeing a careless workman splash
paraffin on the buds as well as on the union in fruit tree grafting at
the McCoy Nursery about 1914. The author bought apple and plum grafts
about 1922 from the Gurney Nursery which were all covered with paraffin.
It was at conventions of the Northern Nut Growers' Association that new
methods like this were passed along to members.


Bench Grafting

In 1932, on account of the difficulties in outdoor grafting of the
walnut, the author became interested in bench grafting of walnuts in the
greenhouse as a means of supplementing outdoor grafting. However, like
many other so-called new methods, it was discovered when we looked up
the literature in 1937 that William P. Corsa[3] had used methods that
were similar about 1896. He cut off the seedling above the crown instead
of below the crown as we did. The completed graft was packed in layers
of sphagnum and placed in an incubator instead of using a greenhouse.

Notwithstanding all that has been done in black walnut grafting, the
straight grained and brittle wood, the heavy sap flow, the almost
instant oxidation of cut tissues, the liability to frost injury in the
North in short seasons lowering vitality of scions, all combine to make
walnut grafting with best methods available, a seasonal gamble.


Literature Cited

   1. AMERICAN NUT JOURNAL
   Life of J. F. Jones. Am. Nut Jour. 28:35, 1928

   2. BUDD, J. L.
   Hot Waxing of Apple Grafts. Trans. Iowa Hort. Soc. 14:421. 1879

   3. CORSA, WILLIAM P.
   USDA, Div. of Pom., Nut Culture of the United States. pp. 13-16,
     58. 1896

   4. FULLER, ANDREW S.
   Nut Culturist. 1896

   5. HERSHEY, JOHN W.
   Life of J. F. Jones. The Nut Grower. 4:22, 1928

   6. INSTITUT FUR OBSTBAU, BERLIN
   Die Walnusz verediung. (Vegetative Propagation of Walnuts.)
   Merkbl. Inst. Obstb. Berlin 5, pp. 15, 1936

   7. JONES, J. F.
   Propagation of Nut Trees. About 1927

   8. KNIGHT, THOMAS ANDREW
   New methods of Grafting Walnuts. Trans. Hort. Soc. of London.
   2nd series. Vol. I, 1831-1835. pp 214-216

   9. McLAUGHLIN, J. B.
   Grafting Black Walnuts. Trans. Iowa Hort. Soc. 35:534, 1900

   10. MORRIS, DR. ROBERT T.
   Paraffin Coating Solves Difficult Grafting. Am. Nut Jour. 30:70,85. 1929

   11. MORTILLET, PAUL D.
   Le Noyer sa Culture ses Varieties. (Propagation of the Walnut.) Rev.
     Hort. 136:499. 1863

   12. NNGA CONVENTION, St. Louis
   Trip to Riehl Nut Orchard. Am. Nut Journ. 23:59, 1925

   13. OLIVER, G. W.
   Grafting Walnuts and Hickories. Amer. Gard. 22:307-308. 1901

   14. RIEHL, E. A.
   Nut Growing for Pleasure and Profit. Trans. Iowa State Hort. Soc.
     44:84, 1909

   15. SMITH, J. RUSSELL
   Tree Crops. 1929

   16. STANDARD CYC. OF HORT.
   Hickory Propagation, p. 1489, 1925

   17. WITT, A. W. and HOWARD SPENCE
   Vegetative Propagation of Walnuts. Ann. Rep. East Malling Res. Sta.
     1926-7,
   Supl. A 10, 1928, pp. 60-64



Forest Background

By John Davidson, Xenia, Ohio

(Read at the Ohio Nut Growers Annual Meeting, Ohio Agricultural
Experiment Station, August 16, 1946.)


Where did the Persian, or so-called "English" walnut come from? Why is
it a good commercial nut? The Pecan? How far can it be carried north
beyond its natural, or original, environment? The Pawpaw? Why is it not
a good commercial fruit? Why don't most people like it? What is the
matter with the mulberry in America? In China and Japan it has a score
of uses and great popularity.

These questions need an answer, and the answer almost invariably is that
the poorer varieties and species have had but little attention and
development by human beings while the better ones, Persian walnuts,
grapes, melons, apples, dates, figs--all have had much attention and
painstaking selection--in some cases for centuries. Upon the other hand,
to cite a contrasting case the black walnut has no such history. It is
the baby among nuts--a pure American baby--waiting for some
nursemaid--for many nursemaids--to tend and develop it as a prince among
trees should be developed.

Let us look back into the story behind a few--a very few--of our better
known fruits and nuts and see, if we can, how they happened.

In America once lived a man nicknamed "Johnny Appleseed." His neighbors
called him a "crackpate." He had a mania for planting tree seeds
wherever he went. As a rule they were haphazardly selected seeds, but
usually appleseeds.

What started him upon this crazy journey through the wilderness?
Whatever it was, it would be worth while to isolate the germ and with it
inoculate our present-day soil wasters.

But he was not the first one of his kind. Hundreds of pre-historic
planters had gone before him. For years, now, explorers have been
searching out and sending back to America certain valuable discoveries.
Tremendously interesting, all of them. As one reads, it becomes
increasingly evident that a considerable amount of scientific plant and
animal breeding, selection, perhaps even grafting and artificial cross
fertilization, budding and slip propagating may have been practiced by
pre-historic, intelligent, forgotten men long before our modern times.

We usually find, today, that the best plants and animals have had their
start in some center of old civilization. China, Manchuria, Japan,
Indo-China, India, Persia, Asia Minor, Central America, Oceania--these
places, the nurseries of all existing races of men are today the bonanza
spots for these explorers. Such a coincidence could hardly have been due
to chance. It must surely occur to the mind of anyone who cares to put
two and two together that, in each of these centers, other ancient
gatherers and planters had been busy in their day, just as our own
explorers and experiment station scientists are carrying on today--our
modern, scientific Johnny Appleseeds.

It is hardly possible, here, to follow to the ends of the earth all of
the trails of the tribe of Johnny Appleseed. One little section will do
well enough for purposes of illustration. Let us consider Iran, or, as
our fathers knew it, Persia. Here is a field that, possibly because of
previous plunderings, is not now the most fruitful of our sources of
plant and animal discovery, yet it is an eye-opener, and will do very
well as a type of similar test-plots throughout the world.

Here is a short list of only a few of the plants which have been
developed for centuries, and were reported in the last century as
growing in Persia--many, no doubt, descended from stocks which once grew
in the famous hanging gardens of Babylon: apples, pears, filberts
muskmelons, watermelons, grapes, peaches, plums, nectarines. And of
flowers, these: marigold, chrysanthemum, hollyhock, narcissus, tulip,
tuberose, aster, wallflower, dalia, white lily, hyacinth, violet,
larkspur, pink and finally, the famous rose of Persia, from whence comes
the attar of roses for which Persia is still famous. It would seem that
someone must have possessed a knowledge of plant propagation in Persia
centuries ago.

Several of these products have had their influence upon the history and
poetry of the world. It will be remembered by most high school students
that when the Caesars and big shots of Rome and Greece wished to create
a big splash in the social ponds of their day, they sent, at enormous
expense, for melons and dates from Persia. Melons, in particular, seemed
to be the high spot in those Lucullan feasts, and, in this connection it
is well to remember that Lucullus, himself, as commanding general of a
Roman legion, had long lived in Persia and had, no doubt, acquired a
taste for Persian delicacies. His princely estates near Rome, no doubt,
grew rare plants from Asia Minor and were very likely tended by the
skilled Aryan, early Accadian or Semitic gardeners of Persia. These
slaves were probably descended from and were heir to the trade secrets
of some of the very builders of that seventh wonder of the world, the
hanging gardens of Babylon. Except for those forgotten workers from
Persia, one may well wonder whether, today, our Rocky Ford, Ohio Sugar,
or Hearts-of-Gold muskmelon delicacies would exist at all.

An interesting side-light may be found in the history of the peach.
Originally this fruit was in all probability a poisonous variety of
almond. What wizard, or succession of wizards, was it who created a
peach from a pest--an asset from a liability? Persian, probably. Whoever
did it, it constitutes one of the outstanding miracles of plant
breeding, whether natural or artificial. The poison was sealed within
the seed (where it remains to this day) and the nectar of the gods was
bred into the pulp around it.

Consider also the Persian walnut, now, for some strange reason,
popularly called "English" walnut. This delicacy, too, was unlikely to
have happened merely by chance. It was, no doubt, bred by a race of men
trained in observation and experiment such as the Persians preeminently
were. Having first been nomads, domesticators and breeders of animals;
they eventually became husbandmen, breeders of trees and plants, and
they undoubtedly found that the principles which were so usefully
employed in producing animal variations could also be used in producing
and fixing plant varieties. The pollen or germ of an outstanding good
male individual, when brought into contact with the pistil or ovum of an
outstanding female individual of the same species will produce a scion
that is more likely than any other to have good qualities. Here was the
secret of most of the progress which has been made in both animal and
plant breeding, a secret of immense value--so valuable, in fact, that it
was guarded for generation after generation by a close-mouthed
priesthood.

Just as, in the middle ages, the monasteries of Europe and Asia kept
alive the tiny flame of Greek and Roman culture throughout the foggy
ignorance of the Dark Ages, so did the priests of Baal, of Ashtoreth, of
Marduk and of Ormuzd pass on the torch of their day to their successors
who were Greeks and Romans. The Eleusinian mysteries, which at a later
time were associated with a considerable amount of sensual, closely
guarded ritual, were, in the Greek period, celebrated in the temple of
Ceres in Eleusis. The origin of these sacred mysteries is lost in the
shadow of profound antiquity. We know, only, that they were in the
safekeeping of many generations of priests who jealously guarded them
from thieving and ignorant conquerors. These mysteries were probably, at
bottom, a body of scientific truths. They undoubtedly had to do with a
store of information, painfully gleaned for generations, about those
facts of reproduction, selection and beneficient fertility which are so
close to the Holy of Holies of creation itself. Probably these precious
mysteries could be simmered down to a few fundamentals and such as are
now generally practiced by all plant and animal breeders. And they are
not fully understood today, any more than they were fully understood
three thousand years ago.

By the practice of these simple arts, hedged in with taboos and
religious inhibitions, Persia, Assyria, and all Mesopotamia became the
garden spot of the world where things seemed to grow as they grew no
place else. Here, in fact, was said to have been located the only
genuine and original Garden of Eden, pointed out to this day by the
faithful as the veritable spot where the father and mother of the race
lived in a laborless, exhaustless Paradise.

Mention has been made of the probability that the Persians, who
originally were nomadic and therefore were chiefly interested in the
domestication of animals--which means, really, selective breeding--used
this knowledge in plant breeding when they finally settled down. The big
leap from nomadic to settled life must have caused the old timers of
that day plenty of headaches. It was a new deal to top all New Deals.
Was it, perhaps, some Johnny Appleseed who engineered the New Deal of
that day?

Let us guess at the method he used. As the nomad tribe passed from place
to place with its goats, its sheep, its camels, Johnny with his sons and
grandsons would take to prettying up the camp sites a bit. He
particularly like the dates from one palm that grew upon an oasis far
down the desert. He carried the seeds from this tree and planted them at
various stopping places. He did the same thing with some especially
sweet nuts from a walnut tree which he had found, let us say, in the
Caucasus Mountains. He set out many bright-blossomed desert weeds in
order to attract the wild honey bees. Bees! Wherever there were bees, he
had found flowers that reproduced themselves, trees that bore fruit.
Some of these bees he found to be good workers and others he found lazy,
quarrelsome and inefficient. He killed out the quarrelsome colonies and
built hiding places for the better ones. In short, he did so much to
make the camping places cozy, comfortable and in every way desirable
that finally it became more and more difficult for the tribe to tear
itself away on moving day. By reason of the small irrigation
arrangements which Johnny had found desirable for his plantings and his
bees, grass became more abundant and the flocks did not need to be
moved so often. In time, the whole tribe wakened to the fact that a
revolution had taken place. They did not need to move at all, ever!
There was plenty of grumbling from the die-hards, but here the tribe
stuck. It refused to budge.

In time, a certain phrase, current throughout that part of the world,
was used to describe this pleasant country: "A land flowing with milk
and honey!"

Unfortunately, it was a land, also, which could not fail, in the flower
of its wealth and luxury, to attract the attention of those savage
northerners who lived beyond this favored land. They came, they saw, and
eventually they conquered. When Rome had definitely destroyed the flower
of Asia Minor's civilization, the Roman proconsuls and merchants
"rescued" and carried back to Italy many of the rarest of Mesopotamia's
possessions. Among these, perhaps, were those indispensable
wonder-workers among the flowers, the better bees of Persia. And this
may be the reason why, these many centuries later, our bee experts still
recommend that, if we wish to increase the strength and productivity of
a backward hive of bees, we buy and introduce into the hive an Italian
queen. Her ancient and still prepotent virility can almost invariable be
relied upon to transfuse the colony with new and fruitful vigor. An
"Italian" queen, is it? We wonder, as we think of that venerable land of
Eden which once flowed with milk and honey, whether this so-called
Italian queen might not more correctly be named Persian.

You see, in this story we are traveling backwards into history like Ally
Oop in his time machine. But beyond Persia one can go only in
imagination. For the Persians, too, were a conquering nation and, no
doubt, gathered their booty of gold and sheep and camels, of flowers and
bees, from all the then known world which was subject to them. So
perhaps Persia, too, has no more right to label her treasures Persian
than has Italy with her presumably mislabeled Italian bees, nor England
with her undoubtedly mislabeled English walnuts. However, the work of
Johnny Appleseed has always belonged, not to his tribe nor to his
locality, but to the world. These same Persian walnuts take rank among
the better clues by which migrations of the Aryans may be traced over
the face of the earth. For instance, not only do they take root easily
in the mild, friendly climate of California, but much hardier strains
are found to have climbed the Carpathians and the steppes of Russia
almost to the very doors of Moscow. Scions of these hardier strains have
very recently been made to grow and yield their nuts in America as far
north as Toronto and are being set out in numbers in the northern part
of the United States. How well they will prosper in this new, more
variable and chilly climate remains to be seen, but the start is made.
No doubt it will be by Johnny's old method of patient and repeated
selection, first for hardiness then for quality, that the planned result
will be accomplished.

The contributions of Persia and the plantings of its forgotten
scientists have here merely been touched on. Nothing, for instance, has
been said about her great groves of mulberry trees, which led to
silk-worms, which led to silk, which led to the production of
jewel-bright vegetable dyes, which led to the development of a
decorative art in fabrics that is rivaled by China, alone, in all the
world. And of course, Aryan Persia is only one of the many treasure
centers of ancient civilization. In scores of racial settlements
elsewhere our lives today are being changed and enriched in innumerable
ways by the hands of those old miracle-workers whose names were writ in
water and whose works are immortal. The accomplishments of China are of
such magnitude that even now we are only beginning to discover our debt
to her. India, Indo-China, Mongolia, Manchuria, Japan--all have similar
backgrounds. Even in the United States, young as it is, the migrations
of pre-historic races have left their trails in the gardens and forests
around us. Pecans from the South, for example, have been carried North
and are gradually developing hardy strains that survived in Indiana and
Illinois groves.

Enough has been said to blaze the way to the end at which I have been
driving. It may begin to look as though modern plant explorers have now
followed the plant-spoor of human migrations to their final limits. It
may look, too, as though the ends of these converging trails will find
civilization at last firmly established. Or will they?

The future race, let us admit, may eventually be able, by means of an
almost unthinkable development of food, clothing, building and medical
supplies of a synthetic or semi-synthetic nature, to dispense with some
of the agriculture we know. This is the prediction of some scientists.
Let it stand. What then is to be done with the land upon which our food
crops had formerly been raised? Manifestly, it must again be covered
with hurricane-control, flood-control, and erosion-control vegetation,
chiefly trees, perhaps. Trees for safety's sake, trees for beauty's
sake, for recreation's sake, trees for food's--yes, food's sake, for
flavor and health, trees and vegetation as sources for the very
synthetic that are supposed to supplant them; and last but not least,
trees and vegetation for the protection and perpetuation of animal life,
of bird life, and insect life. All these are inseparably bound up with
human life.

Come what may at the hands of a short-sighted human race, no matter what
surface changes may come about in human eating habits, housing styles,
farming or factory practice, still the winds will sweep the earth in
hurricanes where there is nothing to impede them; the waters and ice of
the heavens will still tear apart and level the hills, will gash the
valleys and will carry off the earth and dump it into the sea. Following
this, the sun will burn the unprotected earth into a cinder. Nothing can
change these facts. From the beginning of life upon the earth, trees and
vegetation have been the chief means by which a balance has been
maintained between the antagonistically destructive and creative natures
of the elements.

Do we realize fully, I wonder, how important is the work of this group
and the parent NNGA? The interest of its members is chiefly in "wild"
trees that produce food crops--mainly, but not exclusively, nut crops.
And they are interested not merely in planting and testing names and
known varieties, but in finding and testing the best individuals among
the wild trees, planting selected seed, enjoying the exciting gamble
which is always sealed up in the magic, unknown potentialities of a
hybrid.

As, centuries ago, the Persian walnut was rescued from the forest and
developed into the splendid nut we know today, so the American black
walnut can be rescued; its nut can be improved and developed by
selection and cross-breeding. It is a grand mahogany-like timber tree
which is becoming far too scarce. Each war takes its toll for gun
stocks. Its nuts are the only nuts within my knowledge, not even
excepting our lost American chestnuts, that retain their full
distinctive flavor through cooking. Nothing can replace its flavor in
candy or cake making. The tree is indigenous to America and, in contrast
to the Persian, has only decades, rather than centuries of selective
breeding behind it. No one can tell what even one short century of
intelligent selection may make of this great tree.

We Americans, in fact, have barely started on the Appleseed trail, a
trail which tends toward the development of a permanent perennial,
rather than annual, type of agriculture, with trees, shrubs, vines and
perennial grasses its chief interest. For, no matter what chemistry has
in store for us in the way of plastics for construction and of
synthetics for foods and drugs, the good earth is still our sole source
of supply. The chestnut, the mulberry, persimmon, pawpaw, pecan,
hickory, wild cherry, the grape, the elderberry in fact the whole tribe
of fruits and nuts with flavors found nowhere else on earth--all are
growing along this ancient trail. They offer an infinite variety of
opportunity for exploration and discovery. To work with them gives one a
sense of sharing in the work of creation.



Graft the Persian Walnut High in Michigan

By Gilbert Becker, Climax, Michigan


The rule to plant the Persian walnut where peaches and sweet cherries do
well is a good one; but not infallible and certainly can't be too
closely relied upon here in southwestern Michigan. Since 1933, I have
placed several hundred grafts of the Persian walnut upon black stocks.
Many of these are top worked trees, but there were 68 grafted seedlings
in nursery rows, grafted in 1936. These were planted out two years
later. Some are now about ten feet tall with a well branched head. Of
this lot I have only harvested one ripe nut and that was four years ago.
Two of these same trees were planted near some buildings and shrubbery
at a neighbor's home, and they are now bearing well.

Before going further I must say that Persian walnut trees and peach
trees are quite different. First, the Persian walnut cannot stand having
its female flowers frosted when they are out or nearly so. Second, the
peach can stand frost at, or shortly after, full bloom, and they will
set a bumper crop of peaches. We have had two years of late spring
frosts at the time nut trees were in bloom, and we have had bumper crops
of peaches each year. Apples were badly hit, so many have failed to
bear. Lilac blossoms failed to come out and be showy because of these
severe frosts. However, I know of a peach tree heavily loaded right now
growing between two Persian walnuts that haven't had a single nut either
year, though they have borne nuts previously. Thus, peaches will bear in
frosty springs when Persian walnuts are damaged. Further, good-air
drainage, such as a high hill, with a deep valley below will save the
Persian nut crop in a frosty spring. I have a small Persian walnut
grafted in such a location, and it is the heaviest loaded nut tree I
have. It has so many large nuts on its limbs that its lower limbs are
actually resting upon the ground. This was grafted upon an established
black seedling four years ago.

What I have so far told would lead one to think that there is no nut
crop on my Persian grafts this year. This is not so, for I have one of
the largest crops in the 13 years I have had grafted Persian walnuts.
These are on top-worked trees high above the ground! Most of the
top-worked trees are over 12 feet at the graft, or higher, and it is
best to have them this high, because almost all lower limbs are simply
minus nuts, due to our unfavorable spring. As for proof, I noticed that
the lower limbs had blackened leaves, while the entire tops were
undamaged a few days after the frosty weather. The lower branches leaved
out the second time in late May. It seems as if the Persian walnut
produces two nuts to every one that a grafted black walnut will on a top
of equal size. We are troubled with walnut curculio as well as
considerably by squirrels, and by a leaf disorder that often blackens
the leaves and causes them to fall in early September, followed by
premature dropping of the nuts. Even then, there should be a good crop
this year.

Now, comes the question, should we graft the Persian walnut high, here
in Michigan? It certainly saves time, because a middle-aged walnut tree
produces, in terms of pecks and bushels, in eight to 15 years. Being
well established it saves patience and disappointment. And I know it is
far more profitable.

This writing of my experience is not intended to hurt the established
nut tree nurseryman in any way. Any of you who may live in Michigan are
certainly devoted to your hobby and have doubtless learned the skills
and pleasures of top-working a good sized seedling black walnut. You
will surely find it profitable. First, purchase the grafted Persian tree
from your nurseryman, and later, from this, work your established
seedling blacks at your convenience. Graft them at least 12 feet up and
see if what I say isn't quite true.



Pecan Growing in Western Illinois

By R. B. Best, Eldred, Illinois


We need a consistent philosophy in this troubled world of ours. Working
with nature and especially with nut trees helps us to develop this
philosophy and to realize that there are no panaceas for our present day
problems except as we work them out ourselves. After all our wishful
thinking with panaceas and doctrines, we come back to the same
conclusion. Those people with the best foundations built on reason and
truth are those who are nearest the soil and growing things. Those who
work with trees and other living things in nature possess the philosophy
which acts as a breastwork against the forces which would destroy our
society.

We started our propagation of nut trees in 1930 under the guiding hand
of Mr. Wilkinson, Mr. Sawyer and Professor Ray Marsh of the University
of Illinois, and later have had help from Dr. Colby of the University.
We have at present about 2500 grafted pecan trees, a few varieties of
hickories, black walnuts, chestnuts, filberts, persimmons, butternuts,
heartnuts, pawpaws, etc. When people ask me what we expect from our
trees, I tell them that the trees have already paid me in satisfaction
if not in filling my purse. I do expect our nut tree project to give us
a good financial return. The pecan is our leader in Western Illinois as
a popular nut. Much of our Illinois river bottom land, if deserted by
man, would immediately pass back to nature and exist as pecan groves. I
have been working with pecan trees since 1930 and today find myself with
more questions than answers. We are growing at present about 37
varieties of pecans. We are reaching certain notions which we hope are
right. The hybrids are fine and make wonderful trees but I doubt if
they are the answer to our problem. With these remarks I dispose of
further discussion of the Burlington, Rockville, McCallister and Gerardi
varieties.

The Major and Greenriver are excellent performers but are a little late
maturing for us. The Posey nut is slightly earlier and makes an
excellent quality but is not to be compared with Major and Greenriver
for bearing. Our Butterick trees are excellent growers but bear few
nuts. This variety is the poorest bearer that we have. Our earliest
pecans of the better known varieties are Indiana and Busseron, of the
newer varieties, Stephens and Gildig No. 2.

The Giles pecan which Mr. Wilkinson discovered in Kansas is our
outstanding nut for yield, size and early bearing but it should also be
earlier maturing. Although the Giles has been late when grafted on some
of our native trees, it has been early on others. In 1945, which will
always be known by the Illinois weather man as the year without a
summer, we found a great difference in our Major, Greenriver, and Giles
nuts from tree to tree as to size and maturity. This question of
compatibility between stock and scion is of the utmost importance and it
impedes investigational work, complicating comparisons we are trying to
make. Some of our new varieties which we are trying out might be checked
immediately if we knew the effect of the under stocks of our trees.

Our farms are about 50 miles north of St. Louis, Mo. Our first problem
with pecans is maturity. The old named varieties are a little late for
us. I personally feel that we should get grafts from no farther north
than New Haven, Ill., or Rockport, Ind. I am interested in Mr. Gerardi's
varieties at O'Fallon, Ill., because they should be early. Dr. Colby has
brought to light three new ones from Cass County, Ill. which should make
excellent maturity in central Illinois.

We are blessed in our community with large numbers of native pecan
seedlings. The behavior of different nuts on different stocks is not the
same. Before any nut should be condemned we feel it should have an
opportunity to perform on different stocks over a period of years. For
this reason we always try to graft a number of trees to each variety.

Most things taken from nature are subject to improvement and can be
better adapted to the use of man. I would like to see some new varieties
of pecans developed for our northern zone. I would like to see large
plantings of nuts from all our leading varieties of pecans. From these
seedling studies, great good would come and possibly a good variety. I
would like to see Major, Greenriver, Giles, Posey, Busseron, Indiana,
the Gildigs crossed with some early prolific nuts. I would like to see
every nut that had any good quality crossed with every other good nut in
a mass planting so that genetics could operate and have these trees
planted where they might be permitted to reach maturity and the "get" of
each union studied. We might get an early heavy bearer which would
revolutionize the pecan industry. I would like to see some of our good
Southern varieties like Stuart crossed with early northern varieties.
This search for new nuts should be accelerated.

Let us rededicate ourselves to the problem of getting the "super-nut."
Let us explore these new fields of nut germ plasm which lie all about
us, pull these old nuts apart genetically and recombine their good with
the good of other nuts into new varieties. If we should fail 10,000
times and succeed once, success would be cheap.



Random Notes from Eastern New York

By Gilbert L. Smith, Wassaic, New York


During the past few years I have found it increasingly difficult to keep
up my nut tree work. However, three years hence, I expect to retire from
my job as Farm Manager at Wassaic State School and then to devote much
of my time to nut work. Mr. Benton now has even less time than I do for
the nut work. Our work of previous years is now beginning to show
results, especially our variety tests which should become more
significant each year as more varieties come into bearing and repeat
crops bear out or disprove our earlier opinions. Following are some of
our findings on such varieties as have borne enough for us to form an
opinion.


Black Walnuts

THOMAS, no doubt, is still entitled to first place. We made a poor start
with Thomas as our first graft was placed on a stock growing at the edge
of low swampy ground and the nuts of this graft have never matured
properly, while those from two younger grafts, on higher ground, have
matured their nuts well. This shows that black walnuts should not be
planted in low wet ground, that is, land that is actually swampy; low
ground which is well-drained is all right.

We have found Thomas to be a fast growing and very good type tree. The
nut is large, thin-shelled and cracks excellently, giving light-colored
fine appearing kernels, largely in whole quarters. We do not consider
the flavor of Thomas to be one of the best. I have tested this many
times by cracking nuts of Benton, Snyder, Sparrow and Thomas, and then,
without revealing which is which, have had various people try them and
pick out the ones they like best; Benton and Sparrow in all cases were
liked best, Snyder second and Thomas always least in favor. Thomas is a
consistent bearer here.

SPARROW is a little known variety which has a good many good points in
its favor. In my opinion, it surpasses Thomas in everything except size
of nut and cracking quality. In cracking quality I consider them to be
about equal. Sparrow originated near Lomax, Ill. Wood of it was sent to
us by C. A. Reed in the Spring of 1938. It has never been entered in any
contest so is little known. The tree may not be quite as fast growing as
Thomas, but it retains its foliage in the fall until cut by hard frost,
long after its nuts have ripened, while Thomas will be nearly bare of
leaves for some time before frost or its nuts are ripe. Sparrow ripens
its nuts a full two weeks ahead of Thomas.

The nuts of Sparrow are medium in size, being about 27 to the pound
while Thomas will run about 19 or 20 to the pound. The nuts of Sparrow
look small while on the tree because it has a thin husk. Yet it husks
easily, coming out of the husk cleaner than any other black walnut I
know of. Also I have never seen a husk maggot in this variety while some
varieties with thick husks were badly infested. As the nut ripens, the
husk turns yellow. The nut yields practically 30% kernel (29.94%) with
96% unbroken quarters. Color of kernel is bright and the flavor is
excellent. Sparrow has borne consistently.

SNYDER is a fairly well-known variety, having won first prize in the New
York and New England contest of 1934. The tree is a little slower in
growing than most varieties, yet it bears young and consistently Like
Sparrow, it retains its foliage well until cut by frost. The nut is
large, being about 21 per pound, with a very thick husk, on which
account it should be husked as soon as gathered, as the husk will turn
dark and stain the kernel. It ripens at the same time as Sparrow, last
of September here. The nut cracks well, yielding about 25% kernel of
good quality, about 95% in unbroken quarters. The color of the kernel
tends to be a little dark.

Certainly Snyder should prove to be a valuable variety for short season
locations and possibly as a pollinizer for Sparrow. Also the retention
of foliage in fall, until cut by frost, make this and Sparrow of
considerable ornamental value. Early dropping of the foliage in the fall
is a serious fault of some varieties as an ornamental.

BENTON originated with us, the original tree growing in Mr. Benton's
dooryard. It won second prize in the New York and New England contest of
1934. The nut is rather small, running about 34 to the pound. However,
it yields about 29% kernel of excellent quality, light in color and
about 86% quarters. It ripens about a week later than Snyder and
Sparrow. It is a consistent bearer, a fairly fast growing tree, but only
fair as to retention of foliage in the fall.

STAMBAUGH is a well known variety, but we are a little too far north for
it, 41°45' N. Lat. It matures well here only in our most favorable
seasons. It appears to be an excellent nut, large, good cracking quality
and good flavor. It appears to be a little capricious as to bearing, two
years ago our one graft was heavily loaded, but there was no crop last
year and a light one only this year. In spite of the lateness in
maturing the nut, the tree sheds its foliage early.


Hickories

WILCOX is the outstanding variety of hickory of those which have borne
in our test orchard, so far. This originated near Geneva, Ohio. It. won
second prize in the Ohio contest of 1934. It appears to be a consistent,
alternate bearer. The nut is only medium in size for a shagbark, about
90 to the pound. It cracks almost perfectly, yielding about 38% kernel,
mostly in whole halves. Color of kernel bright and of very good flavor.

MINNIE has also appeared very good. It is a trifle larger than Wilcox,
being 85 to the pound. It cracks excellently and is of good quality. But
so far it has not yielded as well as has Wilcox.

DAVIS has shown up quite well. Our oldest graft is on a bitternut stock;
it has borne well but the nuts have not cracked as well as those from
the original tree or the ones grown at Cornell. In size the nut is
between Minnie and Wilcox, kernel bright, plump and of good quality.

FOX has been rather disappointing as produced on grafts so far. Not that
it is a poor nut, in fact it is a good nut, but because it has fallen so
far short of what was expected of it. Fox is the mystery variety of the
hickories. How it could unanimously win first prize in the Northern Nut
Growers Association contest of 1934, with a sample of nuts so excellent
in every way and then for the grafts to bear only fair nuts, is a
mystery. Some have advanced the idea of bud variation in the parent
tree. To prove or disprove this, I made a trip to the original tree in
the spring of 1943 and gathered grafting wood from various parts of the
tree. This wood was grafted on various stocks in our test orchard, so
that we now have living grafts from 13 different parts of the original
tree. If there is a bud variation, we should certainly have some of the
good ones and are anxiously waiting the time when these grafts begin to
bear. To lend a little credence to the bud variation theory, I found
that at some time in the past the Fox tree had been broken off in a
storm and had since formed a new top, largely from a single leader. Mr.
Fox stated that he had naturally taken wood from the lower portions of
the tree as it was much easier to do so. (The late Dr. Zimmerman made a
similar study of this tree and its nuts from different branches. He was
firmly convinced that there were differences.--Ed.)


Heartnuts

We have really tested only two varieties so far, these are the
Fodermaier and Wright. Both are very good, but we now consider Wright to
be by far the better of the two. It is somewhat hardier than Fodermaier,
nuts ripen earlier, and bears better with us. Fodermaier is also more
severely affected by the butternut curculio than is the Wright, some
years nearly all of the Fodermaier nuts have been destroyed by the
curculio.

GELLATLY has borne only one year with us, so we cannot form much of an
opinion on it. It appears to be a very good nut.


Crath Carpathian Persian Walnuts

Several of our seedling Crath trees have nuts this year. In all cases,
there are only a few nuts on each as our trees are still quite small. I
had to hand-pollinate the blossoms this spring; this resulted in a
rather small percentage of sets; then the curculio took a rather severe
toll, so we will have only a few of each variety.

In 1944 one of our seedlings bore 12 nuts. These were so good that we
have named the variety "Littlepage" in honor of the late Thomas
Littlepage, and are having it patented. We have published a little
booklet on this variety, and upon request, we will be glad to mail a
copy to anyone interested.

This is about all we have to offer at this time in regard to our variety
tests.

We have a problem which I wish to bring before the members of the
Association. It is that of controlling the butternut curculio. This
insect is very bad on butternut, heartnut and Persian walnuts, with us
it does not attack black walnuts or hickories. I fear that it is going
to prove hard to control, as the larva is of the boring type, being
found inside the green nuts, inside the new growth of the terminals and
in the fleshy part of the leaf stems. In these places it cannot be
reached by poisons. It appears that we will have to work entirely on the
adult beetles. These eat very little and seem to make puncture-like
holes, eating little outside tissue but mostly deeper tissues, thus
poison will probably have to be applied heavily in order for it to get
enough to kill it. D.D.T. is not effective against the apple and plum
curculio so probably will not be so against the butternut curculio. It
might be effective to apply a heavy coating of D.D.T. bearing dust under
the trees so that as the larva drop to the ground to pupate, they will
be killed while the adult beetle may be immune to D.D.T., it is not
likely that the pupa could survive in heavily impregnated soil.

The adult beetles are present from the time the first leaves appear
until late summer. A spray of 4 to 5 pounds of arsenate of lead and 12
to 15 pounds of hydrated lime to 100 gallons of water, applied once a
week throughout the early part of the season might prove effective but
it will certainly prove expensive.

Planting of the affected varieties at some distance from woodlands and
wild butternut trees is helpful in avoiding this insect, but as the
trees grow older the pests may build up a population of their own. Some
sections of the county may not be affected; I hope so.

Maybe we can get some of our entomologists to work on this insect. Let's
put a little pressure on our State Experiment Stations and the U. S.
Department of Agriculture. Maybe Mr. Reed can help us.

Another subject I wish to mention is that of hardiness in nut trees. In
reading the NNGA reports and in some of the letters I have received, I
have found that many people confuse killing of the young leaves in the
spring by late frosts, with winter hardiness. In my opinion there is no
connection at all. I have seen many trees that were not hurt at all by
-34°F. in mid-winter yet had all of their leaves killed by a late frost
in the spring. In fact all species and varieties of hickory and walnut
will have their leaves killed by a hard frost if the leaves have opened
out of the buds; this includes our native wild trees as well as the
grafted varieties.

The only hardiness against late spring frosts is the characteristic of
leafing out late, thus escaping most of such frosts. Of the different
species, the black walnuts seem to be best protected in this way, with
the hickories next and the heartnuts and Persian walnuts least
protected. Of course there is a considerable varietal variation within
each species.

Then the protection we can provide, is to plant nut trees on side hills
or other high ground where there is good air drainage, thus avoiding the
frost pockets. Of course many want to plant nut trees and have no place
except in low frosty sites. To these I say that they can expect to lose
an occasional nut crop by these late spring frosts, but that only in
exceptional cases will the trees suffer permanent injury. In years when
the crops are lost the trees will still be good ornamentals and shade
trees. My door yard is quite a frost pocket, yet I have lost only one
crop of heartnuts out of four or five crops, no permanent injury to the
tree.



Yield and Nut Quality of the Common Black Walnut In the Tennessee
Valley[12]

By Thomas G. Zarger, Tennessee Valley Authority


Black walnut occurs on open, non-crop land in the Tennessee Valley
region. Trees grow around the farmstead, along fence rows, and in
pastures on most farms. In recent years harvesting of walnuts for market
from these trees has increased significantly. Looking forward to a
fuller utilization of the wild black walnut crop, knowledge on the
bearing habits of these open-grown black walnut trees was required. To
supply this information a study of tree growth, nut yield, and nut
quality was undertaken in 1940. Results on nut yield available from this
study after six years are summarized in this report.

[Footnote 12: Contribution from TVA Forestry Relations Department,
Forestry Investigations Division on a project conducted in the Forest
Products Section.]

This study was initiated with the selection of representative open-grown
walnut trees throughout the Tennessee Valley. In 1940, 96 sample trees
were selected and 36 trees were added to the study in 1942. These 132
trees are located in 42 counties and afford a good representation of
age, size, and growth quality of open-grown black walnut. Each sample
tree has been visited annually. Entire crops were collected, carefully
weighed and sampled: tree diameters and other measurements were taken
for the tree growth phase of the study. When convenient, nuts were
hulled in the field with a corn sheller, but more often they were
brought to Norris and run through a hulling machine. After hulling, the
nuts were dried until cured, then a sample for each tree was tested for
percentage of filled nuts, nut weight, and cracking quality.


Yield

Results on nut yield and nut quality for the 132 sample trees have been
condensed to the presentation in Table 1. For the six-year period the
average tree in this study had a diameter of 13.3 inches and yielded 33
pounds of hulled, dry nuts a year. The yield of common black walnut
trees in the Tennessee Valley is characterized by extreme variation.
Tree size, of course, influences nut yield. One-half of the yields from
a 6-inch diameter tree ranged from no crop to 4 pounds of hulled, dry
nuts; whereas half the yields from a 22-inch tree ranged from 40 to 100
pounds. A yield of less than one-half pound of hulled, dry walnuts was
considered "no crop". Some individual trees had unusually high or low
yields. The outstanding bearer was tree 117. It had the highest average
yield for the six-year period, and the heaviest crop of hulled, dry nuts
for any single year. During the six years this tree yielded 953 pounds
of dry, hulled nuts and 194 pounds of kernels--truly outstanding
production for a common black walnut tree. Another notable bearer, tree
100, yielded 916 pounds of nuts and 189 pounds of kernels. However, this
tree was almost 11 inches larger in diameter than tree 117. The
exceptional bearers in each diameter class also had the highest single
nut crops. The other extreme is characterized by low yields. Crops were
lacking or insignificant for trees 60, 63, 211, and 221. Tree 37, with
a 19.7-inch diameter, bore only one crop of 31 pounds during the entire
six-year period. This tree has no value for nut production but would
yield a good sawlog.

Variation of yield by seasons and locality was examined by grouping the
132 sample trees into six localities of 22 trees each. Greater variation
in averages by crop years existed than averages by tree location groups.
However, some variation was found between the eastern and western
portions of the Tennessee Valley.

Indications on bearing habits were obtained for a six-year period on 96
trees, Nos. 1 through 140 (Table 1). Crop records for each of these
trees were examined for relatively high and low yield by seasons.
Convincing evidence on the alternation of bearing has accumulated during
this six-year period with 46 percent of the trees having lighter crops
every other year. Of these, 28 trees bore lighter crops in the odd years
and 16 trees bore lighter crops in the even years. Tree 117, previously
mentioned as outstanding in regard to yield, produced lighter crops in
1940, 1942, and 1944. This tree is located in west Tennessee.

Walnut trees bearing lighter crops in 1941, 1943, and 1945 are more
abundant in the eastern than in the western portion of the Tennessee
Valley. This occurrence undoubtedly accounts for much of the variation
found between the eastern and western portions.

Four other yield patterns were recognized in 30 per cent of the trees.
These indicate the existence of uniform annual crops and three-year
cyclic bearing of black walnut. The bearing habits of the remaining 24
per cent of the trees is considered merely irregular, since definite
patterns cannot be recognized until bearing records cover a longer
period of years.


Nut Quality

The cracking quality of the nuts from the trees in this study was tested
on a random sample of nuts from each crop that was collected and brought
back to Norris. The nuts of each sample were weighed and the average nut
weight computed. The nuts were then cracked in a hand-cracking machine,
and kernels that could be extracted with the fingers were removed and
weighed.[13] From this weight was computed the first-crack marketable
kernel percentage. The nuts that still contained kernels were recracked
and the remaining kernel removed. All kernels, including crumbs, were
then weighed in order to compute the total kernel weight and kernel
percentage. Finally, all of the quarters extracted were counted, and the
average number of quarters was computed. Kernels recovered at first
crack and the average number of quarters extracted indicate the relative
ease of extraction of kernels.

Cracking quality of walnuts for individual sample trees averaged by crop
years are presented in Table 1. Nuts of all crops collected from four
trees, 57, 58, 60, and 139, were shriveled or abnormal, and afforded no
test of nut quality during the six-year period. Thus, nut quality data,
based on 440 nut crop samples, are complete for 128 of the 132 sample
trees. From this study, the average common black walnut in the Tennessee
Valley has a nut weight of 17 grams, a kernel weight of 3.3 grams, a
total kernel content of 20 per cent, a marketable kernel recovery at
first crack of 17 per cent, and a quarter recovery of unbroken quarters
averaging 1.8.

[Footnote 13: The kernels were extracted over a 6-mesh wire screen. In
commercial cracking, kernel pieces passing through this type of screen
are not marketable as kernels.]

Table I--Yield of Nuts and Kernels, and Cracking Quality of Nuts from
132 Sample Trees of Common Black Walnut in the Tennessee Valley

   _________________________________________________________________________

         Tree
   _____________________

           Diameter
           at 4-1/2   ______________________________________________________
   Sample     ft.
   number   av. yr.   1940    1941    1942    1943    1944    1945   Av. yr.
   _________________________________________________________________________

            inches   pounds  pounds  pounds  pounds  pounds  pounds  pounds
      1      20.4      27      16       2      95       5       3      25
      2      14.9      43      43      26      45      42      23      38
      3       9.3      22      12       8      22       6      29      17
      5      11.2      54       0      61       0      33       7      26
      6      13.6      28       1      72       0      16       1      20
      8      13.2      50      28      23      41      76      45      44

      9      13.2      36      50      40      28      33       7      32
     10      22.9      29      25       0       0       6      15      12
     11       6.1       2       4      12       2       4       1       4
     12      17.4     110      18     128      40     100      49      74
     13      14.5      98       5      83      50      46     128      68
     14      12.2       1       0      12       3       2      98      19

     15      11.6      38      46      44     106       0      63      50
     16      15.7     130       0     106      25     135      33      72
     17      12.0       1      66       4     100       2      61      39
     18       7.8      20       0      40      21      33       4      20
     25       8.6      13       0      82       0       0       0      16
     26      20.7       0      36      46      90       0      67      46

     27       8.4       0       1      26       2       0      22       8
     28       8.0       0      11       1      19       0      12       7
     29       9.2       0      17      22      21       2      19      14
     30      15.2     150      25     200       0     102      15      82
     31      18.0      33     194      14     259       0     135     106
     34      16.4       0     108       0      25       0     129      44

     37      19.7       0       0      31       0       0       0       5
     38       9.1       2       0      14       0      47       0      10
     39      17.7     151       0      80       0      56       0      48
     40      16.5      88       0      50       5      37       6      31
     41       9.5      60       0      74       0      67       0      34
     42      14.5     123       0     170       0     119       0      69

   ______________________________________________________________________________

             Av.         Filled nuts                   Complete crack
           Kernel    _________________            ________________________
           yield                        First-
          bearing   In terms            crack                               Crops
           yrs.     of total Average  marketable  Kernel                   tested
   number  only      weight   weight    kernel    weight  Kernel  Quarters  basis
______________________________________________________________________________

        pounds   percent   grams     percent   grams   percent  number  number
   1      2.2       6        17         21      3.7       22     2.9       2
   2      4.9      50        14         17      2.6       19     1.3       5
   3      2.2      63        16         18      3.3       21     2.0       7
   5      7.9      67        16         23      4.5       27     1.1       3
   6      4.9      92        14         22      3.2       23     2.8       4
   8      5.6      59        24         17      5.0       21     3.0       7

   9      6.1      56        16         20      3.6       23     1.3       5
  10      1.6      36        13         15      2.6       19     0.6       2
  11      0.8      99        14         16      2.7       19     1.4       7
  12     16.3      95        18         17      4.2       23     1.5       7
  13     17.9      92        19         25      5.2       28     2.9       7
  14      4.9      91        19         18      4.3       22     2.4       3

  15     11.8      96        17         19      3.4       20     2.1       6
  16     20.0      94        24         19      6.0       25     2.3       6
  17      8.4      97        13         17      2.7       20     2.5       7
  18      5.3      85        15         24      4.0       26     2.5       4
  25      9.6      93        18         16      3.8       21     2.5       4
  26      5.5      42        16         14      3.1       18     0.6       4

  27      2.7      95        17         19      3.7       21     1.2       3
  28      1.7      99         9         14      1.6       18     1.6       4
  29      3.4     100        11         15      2.2       21     1.2       4
  30     19.9      77        19         17      4.3       23     2.3       3
  31     25.1      90        20         15      4.5       23     1.3       4
  34     16.8      73        20         17      4.0       20     2.5       2

  37      6.2     100        16         16      2.8       18     3.4       2
  38      4.5      63        18         14      2.8       15     2.3       2
  39     15.0      87        19         14      3.5       18     2.2       3
  40      4.9      82        20         13      3.1       15     2.3       3
  41      9.1      73        16         17      3.0       19     2.5       3
  42     28.4      86        19         21      4.5       24     3.3       3
  46     13.8      14        18         15     36         12    12        18
  47      9.8      15         0         39      0         20     2        13
  48     13.6      25        34         50     52         17    96        46
  49      6.6      14         9         16      4         19     0        10
  50      9.5      29         0         13     25          0    57        20
  51     11.2      11        13         11      0         24     0        10

  52     13.3      25         8          0     84          0    14        22
  56     13.4      15         8          0     12          4     6         8
  57     16.7     162         5        103     17         74     4        59
  58     12.0      42         2         30      6         20     2        17
  59      9.4       2         8          4      8          2     8         5
  60      9.6       1         1          3      0          2     0         1

  61     10.6       2         2         20      1         10     0         6
  62     12.4      27         6         23      7         13     0        13
  63     12.1       2         0          0      0          0     0         0
  64     11.8      18         2         37      0         21     0        13
  65     17.8     130        53        101      9        107     0        67
  66      9.6      31         0         25      1         13     5        12
  67      9.4      89         0          7      7         10    11        21
  69     13.7      70         2        104      4         30     2        35
  70     16.1      72         2         11     95          0    68        41
  71     15.2       7         1         43      1          0     1         9
  76      8.1       7         0          6      0          9     0         4
  77     11.2      40         0         21      6          4    23        16

  78     11.4      34         0         40      0         31     2        18
  79     16.4      28         0         24      0         11    22        14
  80     11.4     132        44        110      8        189    42        88
  86     24.9     191         0        282      0         64   110       108
  87     14.0      45         0        107      0         31     9        32
  89      8.4       1         8          2     39          0    44        16

  90     13.2      11         6         72      8         13     7        20
  91     12.4      68         5        200      3         54    22        59
  92     17.6      18        74        138     76          2   126        72
  93     10.9      30         0         48      3         26     0        18
  94      7.2       0        36          0     21          0    53        18


  46      1.7      51        17         16      2.8       17     2.8       4
  47      3.8      97        11         17      2.2       20     1.0       3
  48      8.2      83        13         16      2.6       20     1.3       4
  49      2.0      80        18         16      3.7       20     2.0       3
  50      3.7      72        17         19      3.6       21     3.4       3
  51      1.9      49        18         19      4.2       23     1.6       3
  52      6.0      80        18         16      3.2       18     1.3       2
  56      0.6      13        22         20      4.8       22     3.0       1
  57                4                                                      0
  58                9                                                      0
  59      0.4      20        27         19      5.6       21     3.0       2
  60      0.0       0        22         15      3.4       15     3.9       1

  61      0.2      48        14          9      2.0       14     1.5       2
  62      0.4      15        25         19      4.6       19     3.8       2
  63      0.5      94        13         21      3.2       24     3.1       2
  64      3.1      70        21         20      5.1       24     3.2       3
  65      7.9      58        23         15      3.7       16     3.4       3
  66      1.6      34        24         18      4.6       19     3.7       3

  67      2.2      31        20         18      3.7       18     3.6       3
  69      8.6      92        21         21      5.4       25     1.9       3
  70      9.2      87        18         16      3.4       20     1.5       3
  71      2.0      88        14         16      2.6       19     1.9       3
  76      1.4      94        13         16      2.6       20     2.2       4
  77      2.6      89        21         16      3.5       17     3.6       3

  78      4.2      80        20         14      3.6       18     3.0       3
  79      5.0      97        21         20      5.0       24     2.8       3
  80     19.3      94        18         22      4.3       23     3.2       3
  86     32.0      96        13         19      2.8       20     1.8       4
  87     11.3     100        11         19      2.7       22     0.5       3
  89      3.2      91        13         18      2.6       21     1.1       6

  90      3.4      87        18         19      3.5       20     2.6       3
  91     13.4      96        16         22      3.8       23     2.4       7
  92     15.5      93        16         20      3.4       21     2.2       7
  93      5.1      97        12         14      2.4       18     1.7       3
  94      3.6      52        19         24      4.7       24     2.1       3

Table I----Yield of Nuts and Kernels, and Cracking Quality of Nuts from
132 Sample Trees of Common Black Walnut in the Tennessee Valley (continued)

_________________________________________________________________________

      Tree
_____________________

        Diameter
        at 4-1/2   ______________________________________________________
Sample     ft.
number   av. yr.   1940    1941    1942    1943    1944    1945   Av. yr.
_________________________________________________________________________

         inches   pounds  pounds  pounds  pounds  pounds  pounds  pounds
  96      16.5      23      31      93      51      29     103      55
  97       9.8       2       8       9       7       4       6       6
  98      21.3      44      20      66      35      26       4      32
 100      27.8     159     272      65     334       6      80     153
 101      21.2       0     294     120     206      30     239     148
 102      13.1      38       2      44       4      12       3      17

 103       7.5      20      15      25      30       9     119      36
 104      12.3      40      17      52      17      16       0      24
 106      11.4      50      16      66      29      46      66      46
 107      13.2      29       0       5       8       0       1       7
 108       9.0      34      11      12      25      12       7      17
 109      12.6      11      12      30      69       0      14      23

 110      14.9      65     104      29      61      54      32      58
 111      11.3       8      55       5      65       0      54      31
 116      11.8       0      16       6       7       4       9       7
 117      17.0      10     285      13     142     116     387     159
 118      13.3       3      78       6     170       4     263      87
 119      14.6       0      34     148       0      40     145      61

 121      17.6      67       9      41      15       0      64      33
 129      13.3      13      70       8     157       0     149      66
 130      15.3      47       1      50      10       0      24      22
 131      16.2      78       1      33      89       0      69      45
 132      14.2       6       8      22      10       0      17      10
 134      13.3       9      20      11      17      24       3      14

 135      14.1      12      55       0      15       0      94      29
 136      15.1       7       1      18      14       0       2       7
 137       9.4      27       0      38      13       5      28      18
 138      14.5      36      18      28      35      69       8      32
 139      10.2      14       9      19      64      51       0      26
 140      11.1       0      18      62      53      28      34      32

______________________________________________________________________________

          Av.         Filled nuts                   Complete crack
        Kernel    _________________            ________________________
        yield                        First-
       bearing   In terms            crack                               Crops
        yrs.     of total Average  marketable  Kernel                   tested
number  only      weight   weight    kernel    weight  Kernel  Quarters  basis
______________________________________________________________________________

        pounds   percent   grams     percent   grams   percent  number  number

  96      9.6     100        12         15      2.1      17      0.7       3
  97      0.6      51        11         13      1.7      15      2.0       3
  98      2.7      44        18         10      2.4      13      0.4       7
 100     31.4      97        22         17      4.6      21      2.8       7
 101     31.7      94        25         15      4.8      19      1.5       3
 102      3.4      49        18         19      3.6      20      2.5       3

 103      5.9      94        19         16      3.7      20      0.9       3
 104      4.4      84        15         15      2.5      17      0.8       3
 106      6.2      81        18         15      3.1      17      1.4       3
 107      2.1      78        13         14      2.1      16      0.7       4
 108      3.4      99        16         17      3.4      15      0.9       3
 109      5.0      98        14         14      2.6      18      0.6       3

 110      9.1      77        23         14      4.8      20      1.1       3
 111      7.7     100        15         17      3.0      21      0.6       3
 116      1.4     100        15         16      2.7      18      0.7       3
 117     32.2      86        29         15      5.7      20      1.5       7
 118     15.2      96        19         12      3.3      18      0.2       3
 119     12.2      72        20         18      4.0      20      1.6       3

 121      7.1      92        16         17      3.0      19      0.7       3
 129     14.2      98        16         15      3.0      18      0.8       3
 130      4.4      97        13         14      2.2      16      1.3       4
 131     10.2      95        19         17      3.8      20      1.7       3
 132      2.7      98        17         16      3.5      21      1.0       3
 134      1.7      75        16         14      2.6      16      0.7       3

 135      3.4      58        20         15      3.3      16      1.5       3
 136      1.8      41        10         13      1.7      17      0.1       3
 137      2.7      66        15         17      3.0      20      0.7       3
 138      2.7      49        16         15      2.6      19      0.6       4
 139                8
 140      7.6      92        13         19      2.9      22      0.8       3
 199      13.3                          15       4       2        2        6
 200      10.4                          18      17       1        1        9
 201      13.1                          30      28       23     117       50
 202      15.1                           2       4       14       0        5
 203      13.7                          13      30        8      21       18
 205      22.6                          56      34       33      77       50

 206       9.3                          46      26       39       4       29
 207       5.8                           1       0        9       1        3
 208      10.4                           2       8        4      19        8
 210       6.6                          35       0       15       0       12
 211      12.6                           2       4        3       1        2
 214      13.1                          32      11       19      24       22

 215       6.9                           3       5        6       0        4
 216      10.8                           0       6        2       5        3
 217      19.1                         111      12       62      25       48
 218       7.1                          18       0        1       0        5
 219      12.0                           5      13       26      14       14
 220      10.7                          13       0        8       6        7

 221       6.4                           0       0        0       3        1
 222      15.3                          29       6        6       7       12
 223      19.2                          22       3        6       0        8
 224      13.9                          53      11       16      29       27
 225      16.8                          16      57       27      48       37
 226      15.6                         119      26      101      13       65

 227       6.6                           9      12        0      33       14
 228       7.3                           4       9        0       2        4
 231      18.4                          74      41        0     184       75
 232      21.1                          47       0        0     180       57
 236      22.3                           8     204        0     120       83
 237      20.3                         121      29       86      95       83

 240       6.6                           5       7        3      13        7
 241      13.0                          50      24       44       2       30
 242       6.4                          11       8       10       1        8
 243      22.0                          82       0       13      11       26
 246      21.1                          93     220       52     216      145
 247      19.1                           2      57       17       1       21


 199      1.8      49        19         22      4.8       25     3.0       4
 200      1.7      24        17         16      3.3       19     2.0       3
 201     10.9     100        17         19      3.8       22     2.2       3
 202      0.4      46        21         14      4.1       20     1.0       3
 203      4.3      97        18         23      4.4       25     3.1       3
 205      6.4      19        11         22      2.6       23     4.0       1

 206      4.2      98        19         12      2.7       15     2.2       3
 207      0.7      21        17         15      2.8       16     2.0       2
 208      1.1      66        16         22      3.8       24     2.4       3
 210      4.8      98        17         14      3.2       19     0.7       3
 211      0.3      83        11         11      1.6       15     0.2       3
 214      3.0      87        18         16      3.1       17     2.7       3

 215      0.9     100        13         18      2.7       20     0.7       3
 216      0.7      97        11         13      1.7       16     0.6       4
 217     12.1      93        18         21      4.4       25     0.8       3
 218      1.7     100        18         17      3.0       17     2.6       2
 219      2.5      94        11         17      2.0       18     0.8       3
 220      0.8      61        20         13      3.2       16     1.9       3

 221      0.4      53        16         20      3.4       21     3.2       2
 222      1.3      72        16         16      3.0       18     1.9       3
 223      0.8      55        12         19      2.6       20     0.5       3
 224      4.9      93        17         16      3.5       20     1.1       3
 225      7.8      94        15         18      3.4       22     1.0       3
 226      9.8      96        12         12      1.9       16     0.2       3

 227      4.2      99        16         19      3.6       23     0.7       3
 228      1.1      99        15         21      3.3       22     2.3       3
 231      7.3      52        10         17      2.3       19     1.1       3
 232     26.6      98        19         17      4.5       24     2.0       3
 236     10.5      26        15         17      3.0       19     0.5       2
 237     16.1     100        18         14      3.5       19     1.5       3

 240      1.2     100        14         15      2.5       17     0.9       3
 241      4.6      96        14         15      2.3       16     1.2       3
 242      1.4      98        13         17      2.5       20     0.7       3
 243      4.9      98        14         12      2.0       14     1.3       3
 246     29.6      98        14         16      2.9       21     0.7       3
 247      1.2      23        15         12      1.7       15     0.2       3

Results of cracking tests show that, in general, cracking quality of nut
samples from the trees in this study is poor. When cracked, the kernels
crumble badly, making extraction difficult and quarter recovery low.
Variation in cracking quality can be seen by studying the values in
Table 1. Nuts from trees 28 and 136 were extremely small, averaging 9
and 10 grams, respectively. Nuts from trees 61 and 98 had generally poor
characteristics. Trees bearing walnuts of better-than-average quality
are trees 5 and 18 with high total kernel per cent, and trees 8, 16, and
59 with high nut weight and an unusually high kernel weight. Other
trees, of interest as exceptional bearers, include tree 101 with large
nut weight, and tree 117 with both exceptional nut and kernel weight.
The outstanding tree in the study from the standpoint of cracking
quality of the nuts is tree 13, which has exhibited those
characteristics of thinness of shell and high kernel content sought for
in improved varieties. This black walnut selection is being propagated
at the Norris Nursery under the appropriate name of Norris.[14]

[Footnote 14: Kline, L. V. A method of evaluating the nuts of black
walnut varieties. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 41:136-144. 1942.]

Results from this study on the common black walnut have application in
the evaluation of the relative yield and nut quality of improved
selections suitable for use in the Tennessee Valley. This summary should
also prove of value to other workers dealing with black walnut in other
regions. It provides a basis for comparison, brings out the
possibilities for making selections, and emphasizes the importance of
nut production from improved varieties.



The 1946 Field Tour

By C. A. Reed


Attending the indoor sessions of the meeting for two days in Wooster,
visiting the Station orchards and plantings near town and contacting
personally some of the big men of the Staff together with the wives of
some, called for intensive attention on the part of everybody. It was
time exceedingly well spent and created a feeling in everybody that they
would like soon to return for another convention of the same kind. But
the good things that had been planned were not over when the delegates
left on the morning of the third day in the general direction of their
homes. No matter in what direction they went, hardly a route could be
found which did not lead near or through the home town of some nut man.

A few took opportunity to visit the planting near Wooster of the late W.
R. Fickes. A letter is before my eyes as these lines are being written
which was directed to Dr. W. C. Deming by Mr. Fickes on January 9, 1924,
in which he asked for information regarding certain kinds of nut trees
which he did not have. He mentioned having Beaver, Fairbanks, and Siers
hickory hybrids and asked about Weiker. He wanted to know about
Barcelona and White Aveline filberts. He said he had procured seven
varieties of filbert of European origin which were then being featured
by Conrad Vollertsen of Rochester, N. Y. He was concerned over the
chestnut weevil as he had about 125 trees of the Reihl varieties from
Illinois and already weevils were troublesome.

Those who had the privilege of keeping in touch with Mr. Fickes during
his later years know that he assembled together a good many varieties
of other kinds of nuts. His was an excellent collection of black walnut
varieties. Persons who knew him well still mourn his passing. He was the
type of man who made others feel better to be in his presence.

It was 24 years ago last February that the American Nut Journal, then
edited and published by R. T. Olcott of Rochester, N. Y., told of "x x
the 57-acre farm of O. F. Witte near Amherst (in northern Ohio), on
which Mr. Witte, who was then 72 years old, had been growing nuts for 52
years." The dispatch went on to say that the "x x farm was devoted
exclusively" to nut trees. What a pity such men can't live on
indefinitely! However, the spirits of Fickes and Witte live on. No one
need go far in Ohio to see the evidence.

Going east from Wooster on the morning of the third day, a group of 50
or more persons stopped first at Kidron where they were shown the nut
plantings of Mr. E. P. Gerber and his family of that small hamlet. A
half mile north of town, Mr. Gerber led the party through his largest
planting of nut trees mostly of bearing age. Of black walnuts he showed
such varieties as Deming (purple foliage, especially in early spring),
Lamb (the original tree had a figured grain), Ohio, Stabler, Ten Eyck,
and Thomas. Of pecan, there were five varieties, Busseron, Butterick,
Greenriver, Indiana and Posey. In the group of heartnuts, there were two
named varieties, Bates and Faust, and one of which Mr. Gerber appeared
not to have the name. He simply called it a "sport." There were filberts
of various kinds, Barcelona, DuChilly and Jones Hybrids, being the ones
bearing variety designations. Also there were Persian (English) walnut
trees, principally Broadview and Crath. Mr. Gerber had more Chinese
chestnut seedlings than trees of any other one kind. There was but one
butternut and that appeared to have been unnamed. Altogether 40 black
walnut trees, 20 pecan, 30 filbert, 20 Persian walnut, one butternut,
and 140 Chinese chestnut trees were seen.

Upon finishing with the first block of trees, the party was taken into
town where a large business house of Gerber and Sons was passed and a
short visit paid to a second planting in the rear of various Gerber
buildings, including the residence of Mr. Gerber. Here were some two or
three dozen fine appearing trees of various species and hybrid forms.

Lastly at Kidron, the party, was piloted a half mile west to a small
park which Mr. Gerber had developed as a public picnic ground and a
source of water for the village. It was well planted with nut trees and
it was here that the Gerber family had provided tables and various food
delicacies, including fresh milk, peaches and ice cream for everybody. A
great part of the work of preparation had been taken care of by Mrs.
Gerber and her two youngest children.

The next stop on the tour was at the Mahoning County Experiment Farm, a
half-mile south of Canfield, some 70 odd miles east and north of
Wooster. Here transportation was provided and the entire group was taken
in charge by L. Walter Sherman, Superintendent. The first impression one
gained here was that of good buildings, excellent land, able management,
and a lot of things under way. All is comparatively new. From a
mimeographed list of species, varieties, hybrids, and strains which was
prepared in June for another occasion, one gathered that there were
perhaps more seedling nut trees here than grafted kinds. Mr. Sherman has
reported fully elsewhere in these Proceedings regarding the nut work
that is under way at this Station.



Report of the Resolutions Committee


The Northern Nut Growers Association in its annual meeting assembled at
Wooster, Ohio, September 3rd to 5th, 1946, adopted the following
resolutions:

     That our sincere thanks be extended to Dr. Edmund Secrest, Director
     of the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station and other members of
     his staff for the courtesies extended, and for the facilities
     provided in the use of the auditorium and exhibit room of the
     Station.

     That we extend thanks to the speakers who unitedly made a
     successful meeting.

     That we appreciate the fine work of our Secretary, Miss Mildred M.
     Jones, in formulating the program and that we are mindful of the
     valuable assistance rendered by Dr. Oliver Diller, Mr. Clarence A.
     Reed, and Mr. A. A. Bungart.

     That we acknowledge appreciation to the estate of the late Zenas H.
     Ellis for providing in his will a gift of one thousand dollars to a
     special fund of the Association and that we thank Mr. Sargent H.
     Wellman for his legal efforts therewith.

     That the members of the Northern Nut Growers Association fully
     appreciate and extend sincere thanks to our officers for their hard
     work and enthusiastic efforts in maintaining the Association during
     the past five years when war conditions precluded annual meetings.

   RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE
   C. F. Walker, Chairman
   J. L. Smith
   Albert B. Ferguson



Obituaries

DR. J. H. GOURLEY


Members of this Association who attended the Wooster meeting in 1946
will not soon forget the cheery, witty and resourceful toastmaster who
presided at their annual banquet, Dr. Joseph Gourley. Soon after this
meeting, on October 19th, to be exact, Dr. Gourley was stricken with
coronary thrombosis, and the field of horticulture lost a nationally
known leader.

Dr. Gourley's passing came at a time of high tide in his work. "Less
than an hour before he was stricken," said an associate, "he was engaged
in planning a project that he knew would continue long after his active
career must end. This is the spirit of the true research man."

He was a graduate of Ohio State University, had served as head of the
Department of Horticulture in the University of New Hampshire and later
in a like position with the University of West Virginia. In 1921, he was
appointed chief of the Department of Horticulture at the Ohio
Experiment Station and, from 1929, he concurrently held the position of
Chairman of the Department of Horticulture at Ohio State University. He
served both of these offices until the day of his death. He was the
author of many bulletins and technical articles as well as of some
better known text books which have had wide use in American
Universities. He had acted as president of The American Society for
Horticultural Science, President of The American Promological Society,
and as president and member of numerous similar organizations to which
he gave continued and enthusiastic service.

It is as a good teacher, companion and warm friend, however, that Dr.
Gourley will best be remembered by those who knew him well. His life and
fire have sparked many another teacher, research worker and common man
to greater effort and better achievement. A close associate closed a
press notice of Dr. Gourley's passing with these words:

"His consideration for his associates, both those equal and below in
rank, marked his every contact through his long years of service. He was
indeed, a truly great Chief.

His family and close associates in the two departments he headed for so
many years will miss him most of all, but life for them and for
countless others who called him friend has been made richer, fuller and
deeper because he passed this way.

Teacher, scientist, Christian gentleman, friend and chief, we salute
you."

       *       *       *       *       *

MRS. I. E. BIXBY

Mrs. Ida Elise Bixby, wife of the late Willard G. Bixby, died at her
home at Baldwin, New York, April 29, 1945.

Mrs. Bixby was a life member of the Northern Nut Growers Association, of
which her late husband was a past president. Following Mr. Bixby's death
in August, 1933, Mrs. Bixby interested the United States Department of
Agriculture in taking over much of their large experimental planting of
nut trees. Many specimens were moved to experiment stations under
Government control, while other institutions as well as individuals
benefitted by their collection.

Mrs. Bixby is survived by three children: Willard F., of Cleveland,
Ohio; and Katherine Elise and Ida Tielke, of Baldwin.



Letters to the Secretary; Notes; Extracts

EXCERPT FROM LETTER TO SECRETARY FROM G. S. JONES

July 4, 1946. From G. S. Jones, R 1, Box 140, Phenix City, Lee County,
Alabama.

My trees (Chinese chestnuts) appear to be healthy and grow vigorously.
(They were given me by the Bureau of Plant Industry in 1934.) They began
bearing in 5 or 6 years and have now been bearing quite large crops for
3 or 4 years. There are 22 trees in the orchard, and the approximate
yields have been: 1943--550 pounds; 1944--450 pounds, and 1945--950
pounds. The enormous increase in 1945 was due partly, I am quite sure,
to mineralized fertilizer (Es Min. El.) which I began using in 1944.

As my trees are seedlings they vary considerably in productivity and in
size of nuts. Most of the nuts are of good size and quality when first
gathered. This is where the trouble begins. The keeping quality is very
poor, sometimes half of them spoil during the first month after being
harvested. Since this is the case, you can see that germination may be
very poor, unless they are handled in a special way. Refrigeration helps
for a short while only. During the last two years, I have had good
results in germination by stratifying the nuts under the trees, just as
soon as they fall. In this way, the nuts are not allowed to become too
dry as they are not exposed to the hot sun but are kept in the shade.
Our falls are usually dry and our soil is sandy so there is little
danger of the nuts becoming too wet during the winter. The danger of
spoilage does not seem to be so great by the time winter rains set in.
By this plan, I have had from 60 to 90 per cent germination during the
last two years. I dig the nuts just as soon as they begin to sprout in
late winter and line them out in nursery rows where they are to grow
during the first year. Sometimes the sprouts become from 4 to 6 inches
in length before I get to do the moving, but they transplant easily. I
believe the micorrhiza from the soil of the old trees helps the young
ones to grow better.

December 11, 1946--My chestnut trees this fall produced slightly over
1,722 pounds. The nuts seemed to keep better than usual which I
attribute to the cool rainy weather which we had during the ripening
period. Hot, dry weather causes the nuts to begin spoiling quickly. My
records show August 7th as the beginning of the ripening period and
October 3rd as the ending. So one can see that this is often a hot and
dry period in our section.

       *       *       *       *       *

EXCERPT FROM LETTER TO SECRETARY FROM MRS. W. D. POUNDEN

   Dairy Department--Ohio Agric. Expt. Sta.        Wooster, Ohio
   October 14, 1946

I am glad to give you the method I used in canning pecan kernels.

Spread the shelled pecans in a shallow pan and place in a warm oven just
long enough to heat the kernels through. Have clean jars--preferably
pints so that the heat will penetrate more easily in processing--which
have been warmed in the oven to be sure they are thoroughly dry inside
before adding the pecans. Fill the jars with the pecans (do not add any
liquid), place the lid on the jar (I prefer the Kerr self-sealing type),
and process the nut-filled jars in a 250° oven for 30 minutes.

I have kept pecan meats for over a year using this method and they are
as crisp and good as when they came out of the shell.



HYBRIDS


At an informal meeting at Dr. Diller's cabin the evening before the
Convention, Mr. Slate was asked to say something about hybrids.

Mr. G. L. Slate: Hybrids between black and Persian walnuts were made at
Geneva about 1916 by Professor W. H. Alderman, now of the Minnesota
Experiment Station. After these trees had fruited all but five were
removed to permit the remaining trees to attain full size. The trees
have produced very few nuts and have been absolutely no good. Various
persons have attempted to raise second-generation seedlings from these
trees, but from my observation no one has succeeded.

From what I know of these hybrids and what Reed has published about
those with which he is familiar I am convinced it a waste of time and
effort to attempt to produce hybrids between black and Persian walnuts
with the hope of getting desirable nuts. The trees themselves are very
rapid growing, handsome and well worth while as shade trees. But the
walnut breeder will have more to show for his efforts if he confines his
labor for the time being to improving the black and Persian walnuts by
crossing among themselves the many clones within each species.

However, the unsatisfactory hybrids between black and Persian walnuts,
of between butternuts and Persian walnuts should not blind us to the
fact that there are many species-hybrids of great pomological value. The
hybrids between the Rush variety of Corylus americana and various
varieties of C. avellana produced by the late J. F. Jones are very much
worth while. Some of our finest red raspberry varieties are hybrids of
the European and American species.

The purple raspberry resulted from crossing the red and black
raspberries. All our cultivated strawberries are descended from crosses
between the native Virginia strawberry and the Chilean strawberry. The
valuable new plums from the Minnesota Experiment Station resulted from
crossing the native American plum, Prunus americana with the Japanese
plum, P. salicina. Many of our best grapes, the Boysenberry, the Kieffer
pear, and various citrus varieties are species hybrids.

We must not generalize too much as to the merit or lack of merit of
species-hybrids. Some are very good and of great economic importance.
Many others of which we never hear are without merit, often being
discarded, leaving only a few lines in a notebook to record their
characteristics.

       *       *       *       *       *

Mr. Stoke: Would you consider chestnut hybrids worth while?

Mr. Slate: If you can get everything you need from the Chinese chestnut
I see no reason for hybrids with any other.

Mr. Stoke: Dr. Arthur S. Colby has made a number of hybrids between
Fuller and Chinese. I consider his hybrid No. 2 as promising; the nut is
large, beautiful and of good quality. So far I have found no weevils in
this hybrid. The bur is very thick and fleshy, with close-set spines.
Possibly the curculio is not able to penetrate the thick husk in laying
its eggs. Colby No. 2 is the most rapid grower of all my chestnuts.



PECANS WITH COMPANION EVERGREENS[15]


Twenty years of experimenting with pecan trees at the Iowa Park station
have revealed that pecans in the Wichita irrigated valley of Texas do
very poorly in buffalo grass or Bermuda sod, much better when given
clean cultivation, but best of all when planted with or near evergreens,
particularly conifers.

[Footnote 15: Forty-Eighth Annual Report, Texas Agricultural Experiment
Station. P. 42. 1945.]

In 1926 some pecan trees were set along the west line of the farmstead.
Most of these died soon after setting and the few that survived did not
grow satisfactorily. Later, a general farmstead improvement program
called for Arizona cypress along this line. In 1933, when these pecan
trees were seven years old, they had made little growth and were in such
poor condition that it was decided to ignore them and set the cypress on
equal spacings. Some of the cypress trees were placed very near pecan
trees while others were farther away. None of the pecans were removed,
however.

As the cypress trees grew, the pecan trees near them began to take on
new life, while the isolated pecan trees continued in their unthrifty
state. As the years passed the pecans with companion cypress trees
continued to increase in health and vigor until there was no doubt about
the favorable influence of this companionship. At the time the cypress
trees were set close to the older pecans, other pecan trees were being
set in various locations on the farmstead; some in open sod and others
with or near evergreens of various types. The behavior of these trees
also confirms the value of companion evergreens for pecans in the
Wichita irrigated valley.

At the age of seven years the pecan trees were about the same size and
in equally poor condition. The treatment as far as cultivation and
irrigation is concerned has been the same. Hence, the great contrast in
size of the pecan trees is attributed to the favorable influence of the
companion conifers.

[NOTE BY EDITOR--Heavy shade can reduce soil temperature, on summer
afternoons, more than 20°F six inches underground. This may largely
explain the benefits of companion trees.]

       *       *       *       *       *

SAWDUST MAKES GOOD FRUIT TREE MULCH

Many kinds of material ranging from paper to glass wool have been used
as mulches for fruit trees, discloses J. H. Gourley, of the Department
of Horticulture at The Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station. Straw, hay,
and orchard mowings have been most commonly used.

In some areas, sawdust and shavings are available in quantity and have
been used to some extent for mulches which raises the questions of
whether they make the soil acid.

The Experiment Station has used both hardwood and pine sawdust and also
shavings for a number of years in contrast with wheat straw, alfalfa,
timothy, and others. No difference in appearance or behavior of the
trees can be noted. Sawdust packs and gives poorer aeration than straw
and it requires a large amount to mulch a tree. This mass also absorbs a
large amount of rainfall before passing through to the soil but no
injurious effects have been noted.

The chief question has been about soil acidity and it may be stated that
after 12 years of treatment the soil is little or no more acid than it
is under bluegrass sod. The soil under the latter has a pH of 5.22, the
hardwood sawdust 5.07, the softwood sawdust 5.07, hardwood shavings
5.20, and wheat straw 5.35. Contrary to the common conception, no
objection to sawdust from the standpoint of soil acidity is justified
from Station experience.

       *       *       *       *       *

TWO FAMOUS TREES

(Taken from "Bruce Every Month," December, 1938, page 17. Published by
E. L. Bruce Company, Memphis, Tennessee.) Living monuments to a great
governor of Texas are two nut bearing trees, a pecan and an old
fashioned walnut. The last wish of Governor James S. Hogg was that "no
monument of stone or marble" be placed at his grave, but instead there
should be planted--"at my head a pecan tree and at my feet an old
fashioned walnut; and when these trees shall bear, let the pecans and
walnuts be given out among the plains people of Texas so that they may
plant them and make Texas a land of trees." His wish has been fulfilled
in its entirety, many trees from these two parent ones adorning the
lawns of schools and court houses throughout the State of Texas.

       *       *       *       *       *

OHIO TREES SERIES

No. 1.--Black walnut (Juglans nigra):--Black walnut is one of the most
valuable of the forest trees native to the United States. It is regarded
as the country's premier tree for high grade cabinet wood; it produces
valuable nut crops; and under certain conditions is highly effective as
an ornamental shade and pasture tree.

~Lumber~--As lumber, black walnut is used principally for furniture,
radio cabinets, caskets, interior finish, sewing machines, and gun
stocks. It is used either in the form of solid wood cut from lumber or
in the form of plywood made by gluing sheets of plain or figured veneer
to both sides of a core. Black walnut veneer is made by the slicing
method and to a limited extent by the rotary-cut method.

~Nuts~--In recent years the black walnut has gained an important
position in the kernel industry. There has never been a market surplus
of black walnut kernels. The demand, mostly from confectioners and ice
cream manufacturers, has steadily increased while the supply has been
limited largely by the labor of cracking and extracting the kernels. The
process of cracking the nuts and separating the kernels from the shells
has been mechanized by a farmer in Adams County, Ohio, to the extent
that he uses over 4,000 bushels of walnuts per year. He sends the
kernels to markets in New York, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Columbus, and
Chicago. The facts all emphasize the economic importance of the black
walnut in a market that is still far from saturated.

~Ornamental Value~--There are few trees whose utility is as great as the
black walnut, that can rival it in beauty as a lawn tree. Its long
graceful leaves provide a light dappled shade and grass will grow
luxuriantly up to the very base of the tree. In its pleasing form and
majestic size the black walnut can be a great addition to any landscape.
Any tree yielding such fine timber and nuts, yet possessing beauty and
utility for yard and pasture, can be nothing but a sound investment.

~Soil Requirements~--Black walnut grows best in valleys and bottom lands
where there is a rich, moist soil but well drained. It does not
generally grow on the higher elevations nor on wet bottom lands. It
usually occurs as a scattered tree in hardwood stands and along
roadsides, fence rows, and fence corners.

~Distribution and Growth~--The botanical range of this tree covers most
of the eastern half of the United States. It is among the more rapid
growing hardwoods. On good sites trees 10 years old will be about 20
feet high and in 40 years will reach 60 feet in height and 12 inches in
diameter at breast height. According to Forest Survey figures, the
estimated merchantable stand of walnut in Ohio in 1941 was 112,275,000
board feet while the cut during the same year was slightly over 3
million board feet.

~Pests~--The most serious pest is the walnut datana whose larvae eat the
leaves. Other leaf-eating insects include the fall web worm and the
hickory-horned devil. Several leaf spot diseases have attacked the
leaves, also causing early defoliation. Leaf eating insects and leaf
spot disease can be controlled by the application of one spray in June.
This is composed of three pounds of arsenate of lead, ten pounds of
powered Bordeaux mixture, and a good sticker in one hundred gallons of
water.

~Selected Varieties~--Walnut trees vary greatly in the type of nut they
produce. The most popular strains have been selected for propagation.
The varieties which have been propagated by nurserymen are the Thomas,
Ohio, Stabler, Ten Eyck, and Elmer Myers. Since the cost of grafted nut
trees is rather high, many people are interested in planting the nuts of
the better varieties for large scale planting. Seedling trees may be
raised easily by anyone, whereas much skill and practice are required to
produce grafted and budded trees. The degree to which the desirable
characteristics of selected varieties are transmitted through seed is
now being studied by the Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station.

A list of commercial nut nurseries may be obtained by writing to Miss
Mildred Jones, Secretary, Northern Nut Growers Association, Lancaster,
Pennsylvania.

~References~--A few of the most outstanding publications on black walnut
are listed below.

1. Black walnut for timber and nuts. Farmers' Bulletin No. 1392, U. S.
Dept. of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.

2. Nut Growing in New York. Bulletin 573, College of Agriculture,
Ithaca, New York.

3. Top-working and Bench Grafting of Walnut Trees. Special Circular 69,
Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, Wooster, Ohio.

4. Growing walnut for profit. The American Walnut Manufacturers
Association, 616 South Michigan Avenue, Chicago 5, Illinois.



Exhibits


Gilbert Becker, Climax, Michigan.

Crath strains of J. regia, hickory, black walnut kernels.


Hebden H. Corsan, Hillsdale, Michigan.

Cases of nuts, folders on nut planting for success.


H. F. Stoke, Roanoke, Virginia.

Chinese chestnuts, hybrid chestnuts, tree hazel hybrid, Jones hybrid
filberts, hazelberts, black walnuts, E. Golden persimmons, J. regia,
hickories, nut ornaments.


Edwin W. Lemke, Washington, Michigan.

Heartnuts, black walnuts, filberts, tree hazels, black walnut wood, a
vacuum nut cracker.


Jay L. Smith, Chester, New York. Books, black walnuts, hickories,
chestnuts, hacksaws, grafts.


E. J. Korn, Kalamazoo, Michigan.

J. nigra, hickories, filberts.


S. H. Burton, Indiana.

Petrified nuts, wild hazels.


Harry R. Weber, Cincinnati, Ohio.

Breslau Persian walnuts, filberts.


E. P. Gerber, Kidron, Ohio.

Photos, hickories, chestnuts, hicans, black walnuts.


U. S. D. A., Beltsville, Maryland.

Green hickory nuts of several varieties.


A. G. Hirschi, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Heartnuts, J. regia, persimmons, chestnuts.


U. S. D. A., Beltsville, Maryland.

35 large pictures of famous nut and other trees fully described; many
other smaller photos of famous trees remarkable for clearness.


John Davidson, Xenia, Ohio.

Cross-sections of seedling black walnut. A very remarkable exhibit of
thin-shelled black walnuts.


Dr. A. S. Colby, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois.

A very desirable Crath (seedling I believe) Persian walnut.


Fayette Etter, Lemasters, Pennsylvania.

Large number of filbert varieties.



Attendance


   Dr. and Mrs. Truman A. Jones, Farkesburg, Penna.
   Geoffrey A. Gray, Cincinnati, O.
   John W. Hershey, Downingtown, Penna.
   Mr. and Mrs. C. A. Reed and Miss Betty Reed, Washington, D. C.
   Mrs. G. A. Zimmerman, Linglestown, R. I, Penna.
   S. B. Chase, Norris, Tenn.
   Thomas G. Zarger, Norris, Tenn.
   W. A. Cummings, Norris, Tenn.
   Mr. and Mrs. John Davidson, Xenia, O.
   H. C. Cook, Leetonia, O.
   Mr. and Mrs. H. F. Stoke, Roanoke, Va.
   Mr. and Mrs. Raymond E. Silvis, Massillon, O.
   Victor Brook, Rochester, N. Y.
   D. Ed. Seas, Orrville, O.
   L. H. MacDaniels, Ithaca, N. Y.
   C. F. Walker, Cleveland, O.
   Mr. and Mrs. J. F. Wischhusen, Cleveland, O.
   Mr. and Mrs. S. H. Graham, Ithaca, N. Y.
   Dr. R. H. Waite, Perrysburg, N. Y.
   Kenneth W. Hunt, Yellow Springs, O.
   J. F. Wilkinson, Rockport, Ind.
   William S. Clarke, Jr., State College, Penna.
   Ira M. Kyhl, Sabula, Io.
   Edwin W. Lemke, Detroit, Mich.
   William C. Hodgson, White Hall, Md.
   J. H. Gourley, Wooster, O.
   H. R. Gibbs, McLean, Va.
   Mr. and Mrs. S. Bernath, Poughkeepsie, N. Y.
   Mr. and Mrs. Carl Weschcke, St. Paul, Minn.
   Joseph M. Masters, Wooster, O.
   George L. Slate, Geneva, N. Y.
   George H. Corsan, Toronto, Ont.
   Mrs. Katherine Cinadr, 13514 Coath Ave., Cleveland 20, O.
   O. D. Diller, Wooster, O.
   Emmet Yoder, Smithville, O.
   F. L. O'Rourke, E. Lansing, Mich.
   R. E. McAlpin, E. Lansing, Mich.
   G. J. Korn, Kalamazoo, Mich.
   L. W. Sherman, Canfield, O.
   H. H. Corsan, Hillsdale, Mich.
   J. L. Smith, and daughter, Chester, N. Y.
   A. J. Metzger, Toledo, O.
   A. W. Weaver, Toledo, O.
   S. Shessler, Genoa, O.
   A. A. Bungart, Avon, O.
   Sterling A. Smith, Vermilion, O.
   C. P. Stocker, Lorain, O.
   Dr. and Mrs. John E. Cannaday, Charleston, W. Va.
   Andres Cross
   Mr. and Mrs. R. B. Best, Eldred, Ill.
   G. M. Brand, Lincoln, Nebr.
   Wm. M. Rohrbacher, Iowa City, Io.
   D. C. Snyder, Center Point, Io.
   Wm. N. Neff, Martel, O.
   E. P. Gerber, Kidron, O.
   Geo. Kratzer, Dalton, O.
   A. G. Hirschi, Oklahoma City, Okla.
   Mr. and Mrs. Harry R. Weber, Cincinnati, O.
   Mr. Ford Wallick, Peru, Ind.
   Carl Prell, S. Bend, Ind.
   Albert B. Ferguson, Center Point, Io.
   E. F. Huen, Eldora, Io.
   John B. Longnecker, Orrville, O.
   Percy Schaible, Upper Black Eddy, Penna.
   Ruth Schaible, Upper Black Eddy, Penna.
   Mr. and Mrs. Blaine McCollum, White Hall, Md.
   Mrs. H. Negus, Mt. Ranier, Md.
   Dr. Elbert M. Shelton, Lakewood, O.
   H. M. Oesterling, Harrisburg, Penna.
   Frank M. Kintzel, Cincinnati, O.
   Dr. J. W. McKay, Plant Industry Station, Beltsville, Md.
   Dr. A. S. Colby, University of Illinois, Urbana, Ill.
   E. C. Soliday, Lancaster, O.
   L. E. Gauly, Cleveland, O.
   Mrs. Reuben Bixler, Apple Creek, O.





*** End of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Northern Nut Growers Association Report of the Proceedings at the Thirty-Seventh  Annual Report - Wooster, Ohio, September 3, 4, 5, 1946" ***

Doctrine Publishing Corporation provides digitized public domain materials.
Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians.
This effort is time consuming and expensive, so in order to keep providing
this resource, we have taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties,
including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Doctrine Publishing
Corporation's ISYS search for use by individuals, and we request that you
use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort
to Doctrine Publishing's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a
large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of
public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Keep it legal -  Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for
ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because
we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States,
that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries.
Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we
can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is
allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Doctrine Publishing
ISYS search  means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world.
Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About ISYS® Search Software
Established in 1988, ISYS Search Software is a global supplier of enterprise
search solutions for business and government.  The company's award-winning
software suite offers a broad range of search, navigation and discovery
solutions for desktop search, intranet search, SharePoint search and embedded
search applications.  ISYS has been deployed by thousands of organizations
operating in a variety of industries, including government, legal, law
enforcement, financial services, healthcare and recruitment.



Home