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 Thirty-Fourth Annual Report 1943
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 Thirty-Fourth Annual Report 1943" ***

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



Northern Nut Growers

Association

_INCORPORATED_

Affiliated with

The American Horticultural Society

Thirty-fourth Annual Report

1943



CONTENTS

Officers and committees                                                 3

State Vice-Presidents                                                   4

List of members                                                         5

Constitution                                                           18

By-Laws                                                                19

Foreword--W. C. Deming                                                 20

Report of the Secretary for 1942-43                                    20

Report of the Treasurer for 1942-43                                    21

The Status of Nut Growing in 1943. Survey Report                       22
John Davidson, Chairman of Committee.

Side-lights on the 1943-44 Survey                                      47

Seasonal Zone Map of United States                                     51

Juglone: The active Agent in Walnut Toxicity--George A. Gries          52

Possible Black Walnut Toxicity on Tomato and Cabbage--Otto
Reinking                                                               56

Preliminary Studies on Catkin Forcing and Pollen Storage of Corylus
and Juglans--L. G. Cox                                                 58

Storage and Germination of Nuts of Several Species of Juglans--W.
C. Muenscher and Babette I. Brown                                      61

A Key to Some Seedlings of Walnuts (Juglans)--W. C. Muenscher
and Babette I. Brown                                                   62

Further Tests with Black Walnut Varieties--L. H. MacDaniels and
J. E. Wilde                                                            64

Shelling Black Walnuts--G. J. Korn                                     83

Better Butternuts, Please--S. H. Graham                                85

The Use of Fertilizer in a Walnut Orchard--L. K. Hostetter             88

Lime and Fertilizers for our Black Walnut Trees--Seward Berhow         89

The Propagation of Black Walnuts through Budding--Sterling
Smith                                                                  89

Northern Nut Growing--Joseph Gerardi                                   91

Nut Puttering in an Off Year--W. C. Deming                             94

Nut Nursery Notes--H. F. Stoke                                         96

Report from the Tennessee Valley--Thomas G. Zarger                     98

Report from Minnesota--Carl Weschcke                                   99

Be Thrifty with Nut Trees--Carl Weschcke                              104

Report of Season 1943--George Hebden Corsan                           105

American Walnut Manufacturers Association Carries out Industrial
Forestry Program--W. C. Finley                                        106

The Crath Carpathian Walnut in Illinois--A. S. Colby                  107

Ohio Nut Growers' Meeting--G. J. Korn                                 110

Walnut and Heartnut Varieties; Notes and Remarks--J. U. Gellatly      112

Letters                                                               116

Experiment Station Investigates Tree Believed to be the Oldest
Chestnut in Connecticut                                               120

Report of Committee of Ohio Nut Growers--A. A. Bungart                122

Dr. John Harvey Kellogg--Obituary                                     126



OFFICERS OF THE ASSOCIATION

_President_--CARL WESCHCKE, 96 SOUTH WABASHA ST., ST. PAUL, MINN.

_Vice-President_--DR. L. H. MACDANIELS, CORNELL UNIVERSITY,
ITHACA, N.Y.

_Secretary_--GEORGE L. SLATE, EXPERIMENT STATION, GENEVA, N.Y.

_Treasurer_--D. C. SNYDER, CENTER POINT, IOWA.


_DIRECTORS_

THE OFFICERS--and J. F. WILKINSON, ROCKPORT, INDIANA, and DR. A. S.
COLBY, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, URBANA, ILLINOIS.


_COMMITTEES_

_Auditing_--DR. WILLIAM ROHRBACHER, CHAIRMAN.

_Finance_--CARL F. WALKER, CHAIRMAN, ZENAS H. ELLIS, HARRY R. WEBER.

_Press and Publication_--DR. W. C. DEMING, CHAIRMAN, MRS. ALAN
BUCKWALTER, CLARENCE A. REED, GEORGE L. SLATE, DR. L. E. THEISS.

_Varieties and Contest_--ALAN R. BUCKWALTER, CHAIRMAN, JOHN W. HERSHEY,
C. A. REED, D. C. SNYDER, H. F. STOKE.

_Survey_--JOHN DAVIDSON, CHAIRMAN.

_Exhibits_--G. H. CORSAN, CHAIRMAN, GILBERT BECKER, PAUL C. CRATH, S. H.
GRAHAM, HOMER L. JACOBS, G. J. KORN, O. C. LOUNSBERRY, SARGENT H.
WELLMAN.

_Program_--GILBERT BECKER, CHAIRMAN, JOHN BREGGER, SPENCER B. CHASE, DR.
H. L. CRANE, G. J. KORN, J. W. MCKAY, CLARENCE REED, G. H. CORSAN, PROF.
R. B. THOMSON, W. J. STRONG, DR. CONELLY, PROF. WHITE, PROF. DWIGHT.

_Membership_--DR. J. RUSSELL SMITH, CHAIRMAN, L. V. KLINE, SPENCER B.
CHASE, MISS MILDRED JONES, J. F. WILKINSON, MISS AMELIA RIEHL, H. F.
STOKE, S. H. GRAHAM, D. C. SNYDER, CARL WESCHCKE, JOHN W. HERSHEY,
GILBERT BECKER, HARRY R. WEBER.


_DEAN OF THE ASSOCIATION_

DR. ROBERT T. MORRIS, STAMFORD, CONNECTICUT.


_FIELD SECRETARY_

ZENAS H. ELLIS, FAIRHAVEN, VERMONT.


_EDITOR OF PUBLICATIONS_

DR. W. C. DEMING, LITCHFIELD, CONN.


_OFFICIAL JOURNAL_

AMERICAN FRUIT GROWER, 1770 ONTARIO STREET, CLEVELAND, OHIO.



State Vice Presidents


Arkansas                          Prof. N. F. Drake
Alberta, Canada                   A. L. Young
British Columbia, Canada          J. U. Gellatly
California                        Will J. Thorpe
Canal Zone                        L. C. Leighton
Connecticut                       George D. Pratt, Jr.
District of Columbia              L. H. Mitchell
Georgia                           Walter P. Pike
Illinois                          Dr. A. S. Colby
Indiana                           Hon. Hugh D. Wickens
Iowa                              D. C. Snyder
Kansas                            Frank E. Borst
Kentucky                          E. C. Rice
Maine                             Herman G. Perkins
Maryland                          Dr. H. L. Crane
Massachusetts                     Sargent H. Wellman
Mexico                            Julio Grandjean
Michigan                          Harry Burgart
Minnesota                         Carl Weschcke
Missouri                          Victor H. Schmidt
Nebraska                          William Caha
New Hampshire                     Prof. L. P. Latimer
New Jersey                        A. R. Buckwalter
New York                          Dr. L. H. MacDaniels
North Carolina                    D. R. Dunstan
Ohio                              Harry R. Weber
Ontario, Canada                   Rev. Paul C. Crath
Oregon                            C. E. Schuster
Pennsylvania                      John Rick
Quebec, Canada                    Dr. R. H. McKibben
Rhode Island                      Phillip Allen
South America                     Celedonio V. Pereda
South Carolina                    John T. Bregger
Tennessee                         L. V. Kline
Texas                             Y. D. Carroll
Vermont                           Zenas H. Ellis
Virginia                          Dr. J. Russell Smith
Washington                        Major H. B. Ferris
West Virginia                     Dr. John E. Cannaday
Wisconsin                         Marvin Dopkins



Northern Nut Growers Association

Members as of May 19, 1944


ALABAMA

McDaniel, John, McDaniel Nursery Specialties Co., Hartselle
Orr, Lovie, Penn-Orr-McDaniel Orchards, R. No. 1, Danville
Richards, Paul N., R. No. 1, Box 308, Birmingham


ARKANSAS

*Drake, Prof. N. F., Fayetteville.
Johnson, Searles, Japton
Williams, Jerry F., R. No. 1, Viola


CALIFORNIA

Armstrong Nurseries, 408 No. Euclid Ave., Ontario
Gray, G. A., 1507 11th St., Santa Monica
Haig, Dr. Thomas R., 3344 H. St., Sacramento
Kemple, W. H., 222 West Ralston St., Ontario
Meyer, James R., Guayale Research Project, Box 1708, Salinas
Parsons, Chas. E., Felix Gillet Nursery, Nevada City
Thorpe, William J., 3203 Anna St., San Francisco
Welby, Harry S., 500 Buchanan St., Taft


CANADA

Cook, C., 6226 Vine St., Vancouver, B. C.
Corsan, George H., Echo Valley, Islington, Ontario
Crath, Rev. Paul C., R. No. 2, Connington, Ontario
Creed, Fred H., 276 Sandwich St. W., Windsor, Ontario
Filman, O., Aldershot, Ontario
Gellatly, J. U., Westbank, B. C.
Giegerich, H. C., Con-Mine, Yellow Knife, N W T
Housser, Levi, Beamsville, Ontario
* Neilson, Mrs. Ellen, Box 852, Guelph, Ontario
Papple, Elton E., R. No. 3, Gainesville, Ontario
Porter, Gordon, Y.M.C.A., Windsor, Ontario
Somers, Gordon L., 37 London St., Sherbrooke, Quebec
Stephenson, Mrs. J. H., North Bend, B. C.
Trayling, E. J., 509 Richards St., Vancouver, B. C.
Troup, Alex, R. No. 1, Jordon Station, Ontario
Wagner, A. S., Delhi, Ontario
Wood, C. F., c/o Hobbs Glass Limited, 689 Notre Dame St., West
 Montreal, P. Q.
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
Williams, Erasmus W., P. O. Box 966, Durango


CONNECTICUT

Biology Department, Avon Old Farms, Avon
Coote, Albert W., 1104 Farmington Ave., West Hartford.
David, Alexander M., 480 So. Main St., West Hartford
Dawley, Arthur E., R. No. 1, Norwich
Deming, Dr. W. C., Litchfield
Frueh, Alfred J., West Cornwall or (34 Perry St., N.Y., N.Y.)
* Huntington, A. M., Stanerigg Farms, Bethel
Jennings, Clyde, 30 West Main St., Waterbury
Lehr, Frederick L., 45 Elihu St., Hamden
Lobdell, Mrs. Frank C., 225 Verna Hill Rd., Fairfield
Milde, Karl F., Town Farm Rd., Litchfield
* Morris, Dr. Robert T., RFD., Stamford
* Newmaker, Adolph, R. No. 1, Rockville
Page, Donald T., Box 228, R. No. 1, Danielson
Pratt, George D., Jr., Bridgewater
Rourke, Robert U., R. 1, Pomfret Center, Conn.
Senior, Sam P., R. No. 1, Bridgeport
Walsh, James A., c/o Armstrong Rubber Co., West Haven
White, Heath E., Box 630, Westport
White, George E., R. No. 2, Andover


DELAWARE

Lake, Edward C., Sharpless Rd., Hockessin


DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

American Potash Inst., Inc., Librarian, 1155 16th St., N. W., Washington
Bush, Dr. Vannevar, 4901 Hillbrook Lane, Washington
Littlepage, Thomas P., Union Trust Bldg., Washington
Mitchell, Col. Lennard H., 2657 Woodley Rd. N. W., Washington


FLORIDA

Cook, Dr. Ernest A., c/o County Health Dept., Quincy
McDaniel, J. C., Box 1111, Haines City


GEORGIA

Eidson, G. Clyde, 1700 Westwood Ave. S. W., Atlanta
Hunter, H. Reid, 561 Lakeshore Dr. N. E., Atlanta
Skyland Farms, S. C. Noland & C. H. Crawford, Prop., 161 Spring
  St. N. W., Atlanta


IDAHO

Dryden, Lynn, Peck
Swayne, Samuel F., Orofino


ILLINOIS

Achenbach, W. N., 410 N. Michigan Ave., Chicago
Adams, James S., R. 1, Hinsdale
Allen, Theodore R., Delavan
Anthony, A. B., R. No. 3, Sterling
Baber, Adin, Kansas
Best, R. B., Eldred
Bolle, Dr. A. C., 324 E. State St., Jacksonville
Bontz, Mrs. Lillian, 161 W. Mass. Ave., Peoria
Bronson, Earl 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
Dintelman, L. F., Belleville
Duis, J. G., Shattuc
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, O'Fallon
Gott, Lawrence E., P. O. Box No. 104, Enfield
Gusler, Carl, 213 N. Taylor Ave., Oak Park
Haeseler, L. M., 1959 W. Madison St., Chicago
Helmle, Herman C., 123 N. Walnut St., Springfield
Jungk, Adolph, 817 Washington Ave., Alton
Kilner, F. R., c/o American Nurseryman, 508 So. Dearborn St., Chicago
Kinsel, Dr. O. A., Box 53, Morrison
Knobloch, Miss Margaret, Arthur
Kreider, Ralph, Jr., Hammond
Livermore, Ogden, 801 Forest Ave., Evanston
Logan, George F., Dallas City
Love, W. Wray, 601 E. Boone St., Salem
Maxwell, Leroy O., 312 W. Avondale St., Champaign
Oakes, Royal, Bluffs
Peterson, Dr. Joel A., 602 University Ave., Urbana
Powell, Charles A., Hickory St., Jerseyville
Remaly, Howard A., 1120 E. Maple St., Kankakee
Riehl, Miss Amelia, Evergreen Heights, Godfrey
Trobaugh, Frank E., West Frankfort
Valley Landscape Co., Box 688, Elgin
Van Cleave, Bruce, 1049 Chatfield Rd., Winnetka
Walantas, John, 3464 Lituanica Ave., Chicago
Werner, Edward H., 282 Ridgeland Ave., Elmhurst
Whitford, A. M., Farina


INDIANA

Behr, J. E., Laconia
Boyer, Clyde C., Nabb
Gentry, Herbert M., R. No. 2, Noblesville
Minton, Charles F., R. No. 5, Huntington
Morey, B. F., 453 S. 5th St., Clinton
Olson, Albert L., 1230 Nuttman Ave., Fort Wayne
Prell, Carl F., 803 West Colfax Ave., South Bend
Skinner, Dr. Chas. H., Indiana University, Bloomington
Sly, Donald R., R. No. 3, Rockport
Tormohlen, Willard, 321 Cleveland St., Gary
Wallick, Ford, R. No. 4, Peru
Warren, E. L., New Richmond
Wilkinson, J. F., Indiana Nut Nursery, Rockport


IOWA

Andrew, Dr. Earl V., Maquoketa
Beeghly, Dale, Pierson
Berhow, S., Berhow Nurseries, Huxley
Boice, R. H., R. 1, Nashua
Cerveny, Frank L., R. No. 4, Cedar Rapids
Christensen, Everett G., Gilmore City
Crumley, Joe F., 221 Park Rd., Iowa City
Ferris, Wayne, Hampton
Gardner, Clark, c/o Gardner Nurseries, Osage
Harrison, L. E., Nashua
Hill, Clarence S., Hilburn Stock Farm, Minburn
Huen, E. F., Eldora
Iowa State Horticultural Society, State House, Des Moines
Kivell, Ivan E., R. No. 3, Greene
Lehmann, F. W., Jr., 3220 John Lynde Rd., Des Moines
Lounsberry, C. C., 209 Howard Ave., Ames
Mahon, Milton, Blakesburg
McLeran, Harold F., Mt. Pleasant
Rohrbacher, Dr. Wm., 811 East College St., Iowa City
Schlagenbusch Bros., R. No. 3, Ft. Madison
Schlanbusch, Dr. O. E., 350 Magowan Ave., Iowa City
Snyder, D. C., Center Point
Steffen, R. F., Box 62, Sioux City
Van Meter, W. L., Adel
Wade, Miss Ida May, 1410 Avalon Ave., Waterloo
Wingert, John O., Dallas Center
Wood, Roy A., Castana


KANSAS

Borst, Frank E., 1704 Shawnee St., Leavenworth
Boyd, Elmer, R. No. 1, Box 95, Oskaloosa
Funk, M. D., 1501 N. Tyler St., Topeka
Hofman, Rayburn, R. No. 5, Manhattan
Leavenworth Nurseries, R. No. 3, Leavenworth
Schroeder, Emmett H., 800 W. 17th, Hutchinson
Wise, H. S., 579 W. Douglas Ave., Wichita


KENTUCKY

Alves, Robert H., c/o Nehi Bottling Co., Henderson
Baughn, Cullie, R. No. 6, Box 1, Franklin
Bureau of School Service, University of Kentucky, Lexington
Cornett, Lester, Box 566, Lynch
Gooch, Perry, R. No. 1, Oakville
Moss, Dr. C. A., Williamsburg
Rice, E. C., Absher
Tatum, W. G., No. R. 4, Lebanon
Watt, R. M., R. No. 1, Lexington
Whittinghill, Lonnie M., Box 10, Love


LOUISIANA

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


MAINE

Pike, Radcliffe B., Lubec


MARYLAND

Crane, Dr. H. L., Bureau of Plant Industry Station, Beltsville
Gravatt, Dr. G. F., Forest Pathology, Plant Industry, USDA, Beltsville
Hodgson, Wm. C., R. No. 1, White Hall
Hoopes, Wilmer, Forest Hill
Kemp, Homer S., Bountiful Ridge Nurseries, Princess Anne
Kingsville Nurseries, Kingsville
Lewis, Dean, Bel Air
McCollum, Blaine, White Hall
McKay, J. W., Bureau of Plant Industry Station, Beltsville
Nogus, Mrs. Herbert, 4514 32nd St., Mt. Rainier
Porter, John J., 1199 The Terrace, Hagerstown
Purnell, J. Edgar, Spring Hill Rd., Salisbury
Reed, C. A., Bureau of Plant Industry Station, Beltsville
Shamer, Dr. Maurice E., 3300 W. North Ave., Baltimore


MASSACHUSETTS

Allen, Edward E., Hotel Ambassador, Cambridge
Beauchamp, A. A., 603 Boylston St., Boston
Booson, Campbell, 30 State St., Boston
Brown, Daniel L., 60 State St., Boston
Chatterton, R. M., 44 Cedar St., Malden
Fitts, Walter H., 39 Baker St., Foxboro
Fritze, E., Osterville
Garlock, Mott A., 17 Arlington Rd., Longmeadow
Gauthier, Louis R., Wood Hill Rd., Monson
Groff, George H., 46 Chestnut St., Brookline
Kaan, Dr. Helen W., Wellesley College, Wellesley
Kendall, Henry P., Moose Hill Farm, Sharon
Kibrick, I. S., 106 Main St., Brockton
LaBeau, Henry A., 1556 Massachusetts Ave., North Adams
McTavish, W. C., 50 Congress St., Boston
Perells, Walter J., North-Falmouth
Rice, Horace J., 5 Elm St., Springfield
*Russell, Mrs. Newton H., 12 Burnett Ave., South Hadley
Swartz, H. P., 206 Checopee St., Checopee
Short, I. W., 299 Washington St., Taunton
Stewart, O. W., 75 Milton Ave., Hyde Park
Trudeau, Dr. A. E., 14 Railroad St., Holyoke
Van Meter, Dr. R. A., French Hall, M. S. C., Amherst
Wellman, Sargent H., 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, P. O. Box 748, Mexico, D. F.


MICHIGAN

Andersen, Charles, Andersen Evergreen Nurseries, Scottville
Aylesworth, C. F., 920 Pinecrest Dr., Ferndale
Barlow, Alfred L., 13079 Flanders Ave., Detroit, 5
Becker, Gilbert, Climax
Binder, Charles, 34 E. Michigan Ave., Battle Creek
Boylan, P. B., Cloverdale
Bradley, L. J., R. No. 1, Springport
Buell, Dr. M. F., Dept. of Health & Recreation, Dearborn
Bumler, Malcolm R., 1089 Lakeview, Detroit
Burgart, Harry, Michigan Nut Nursery, R. No. 2, Union City
Burgess, E. H., Burgess Seed & Plant Co., Galesburg
Cardinell, H. A., Michigan State College, E. Lansing
Corsan, H. H., R. No. 1, Hillsdale
Daubenmeyer, H., 7647 Sylvester, Detroit
Emerson, Ralph, 161 Cortland Ave., Highland Park, 3
Farrington, Robert A., Chittenden Nursery, U. S. F. A., Wellston
Gage, Nina M., 6440 Kensington Rd., Wixom
Hay, Francis H., Ivanhoe Place, Lawrence
Healey, Scott, R. No. 2, Otsego
Hewetson, Prof. F. N., Michigan State College, East Lansing
**Kellogg, W. K., Battle Creek
Korn, G. J., R. No. 1, Richland
Lee, Michael, Lapeer
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
McShane, Gerald, 1320 Franklin St. S. E., Grand Rapids
McMillan, Vincent U., 17926 Woodward Ave., Detroit, 3
Miller, Louis, 1300 O'Keefe, Cassopolis
Ricker, John E., 14642 Marlowe Ave., Detroit
Scofield, Mr. and Mrs., Box 215, Woodland
Stocking, Frederick N., Harrisville
Stotz, Raleigh R., 1546 Franklin S. E., Grand Rapids, 6
Tate, D. L., 959 Westchester Way, Birmingham
Wise, C. E., R. No. 3, Milford


MINNESOTA

Andrews, Miss Frances E., 48 Park View Terrace, Minneapolis
Cothran, John C., 512 N. 19th Ave. E., Duluth
Grosch, Robert H., 2732 Drew Ave. S., Minneapolis
Hodgson, R. E., Dept. of Agriculture, S. E. Exp. Station, Waseca
Skrukrud, Baldwin, Sacred Heart
Vaux, Harold C., R. No. 4, Faribault
Weschcke, Carl, 96 So. Wabasha St., St. Paul


MISSOURI

Barnes, Dr. F. M., Jr., 4952 Maryland Ave., St. Louis
Bucksath, Charles E., Dalton
Fisher, J. B., R. R. H. 1, Pacific
Hay, Leander, Gilliam
Johns, Jeannette F., R. No. 1, Festus
Ochs, C. T., Box 291, Salem
Owen, Dr. Lyle, Branson
Richterkessing, Ralph, R. No. 1, St. Charles
Schmidt, Victor H., 5821 Virginia, Kansas City
Stevenson, Hugh, Elsberry
Thompson, J. D., 600 West 3rd St., Kansas City


NEBRASKA

Brand, George, R. No. 5, Box 60, Lincoln
Caha, William, Wahoo
Clark, Ivan E., Concord
DeLong, F. S., 1510 2nd Corso, Nebraska City
Ferguson, Albert B., Dunbar
Hess, Harvey W., The Arrowhead Garden, Box 209, Hebron
Hoyer, L. B., 7554 Maple St., Omaha
Lydick, J. J., Craig
Wever, Francis E., Box 312, Sutherland
White, Bertha G., 7615 Leighton Ave., Lincoln


NEW HAMPSHIRE

Lahti, Matthew, Locust Lane Farm, Wolfeboro
Latimer, Prof. L. P., Department of Horticulture, Durham
Ryan, Miss Agnes, Mill Rd., Durham
Vannevar, Dr. Bush, E. Jaffrey or (4901 Hillbrook Lane, Washington, D. C.)


NEW JERSEY

Blake, Harold, Box 93, Saddle River
Brewer, J. L., 10 Allen Place, Fair Lawn
Bottom, R. J., 41 Robertson Rd., West Orange
Buch, Philip O., 106 Rockaway Ave., Rockaway
Buckwalter, Alan R., Flemington
Buckwalter, Mrs. Alan R., Flemington
Case, Lynn B., Mountain Ave. & Piedmont Dr., Bound Brook
Collins, Joseph N., 769 First St., Westfield
Cumberland Nursery, R. No. 1, Millville
Donnelly, John H., Mountain Ice Co., 51 Newark St., Hoboken
Dougherty, Wm. H., Broadacres-on-Bedens, Box 425, Princeton
Fuhlbruegge, Edward, R. No. 1, Box 21, Pittstown
Gardenier, Dr. Harold C., Westwood
Gottein, Louis, 1081 So. Clinton Ave., Trenton
*Jacques, Lee W., 74 Waverly Place, Jersey City
Jewett, Edmund Gale, R. No. 1, Port Murray
McCulloch, J. D., 73 George St., Freehold
Mueller, R., R. 1, Box 81, Westwood
Ritchie, Walter M., 402 St. George St., Rahway
Rocker, Louis P., The Rocker Farm, Andover
Szalay, Dr. S., 931 Garrison Ave., Teaneck
Terhune, Gilbert V. P., Apple Acres, Newfoundland
Todd, E. Murray, R. No. 2, Matawan
Tolley, Fred C., 223 Berkeley Ave., Bloomfield
Van Doren, Durand H., 310 Redmond Rd., South Orange
White, Co. J. H., Jr., Picatinny Arsenal, Dover
Williams, Harold G., Box 344, Ramsey
Youngberg, Harry W., 304 Hillside Ave., Nutley


NEW MEXICO

Bryan, Lawrence, P. O. Box 1053, Artesia
Williams, Erasmus D., Box No. 6, Wagon Mound


NEW YORK

Benton, William A., Wassaic
Bernath's Nursery, R. No. 1, Poughkeepsie
Bixby, Henry D., East Drive, Halesite, L. I.
Bixby, Mrs. Willard G., 32 Grand Ave., Baldwin
Black, Mrs. William A., 450 W. 24th St., New York
Brinckeroff, John H., 150-09 Hillside Ave., Jamaica
Brook, Victor, 171 Rockingham St., Rochester
Brooks, William G., Monroe
Collins, James F., Cold Spring Rd., Stanfordville
Cowan, Harold, 643 Southern Bldg., The Bronx, New York
Davis, Clair, 140 Broadway, Lynbrook
De Schauensee, 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
Garcia, M., 62 Rugby Rd., Brooklyn
Graham, S. H., R. No. 5, Ithaca
Graves, Dr. Arthur H., Botanic Garden, Brooklyn
Gressel, Henry, R. No. 2, Mohawk
Guillaume, Ronald P., 5210 Maine St., Wmsville
Gwinn, Ralph W., 522 5th Ave., New York
Hasbrouck, Walter, Jr., New Paltz
Heckelman, Edward, 245 S. Franklin St., Hempstead
Hubbell, James F., Mayro Bldg., Utica
Iddings, William, 165 Ludlow St., New York
Kelly, Mortimer B., 17 Battery Place, New York
Kirstein, Edward K., 89 Westminster Rd., Rochester
*Lewis, Clarence, 1000 Park Ave., New York
Little, George, Ripley
*MacDaniels, Dr. L. H., Cornell University, Ithaca
Maloney Bros. Nursery Co., Inc., Danville
Mevius, William E., East Church St., Eden
Miller, J. E., R. No. 1, Naples
*Montgomery, Robert H., 1 E. 44th St., New York
Newell, P. F., 53 Elm St., Nassau
Oeder, Dr. Lambert R., 551 Fifth Ave., New York
Ohligor, Louis H., R. No. 2, New City
Phillips, Clyde F., 11 Olive Ave., Batavia
Pickhardt, Dr. Otto C., 117 East 80th St., New York
Pomeroy, Robert Watson, Wassaic
Potter, Wilson, Jr., Pomona Country Club, Suffern
Price, J., 385 Arbuckle Ave., Cedarhurst, L. I.
Rebillard, Frederick, 164 Lark St., Albany
Salzer, George, 169 Garford Rd., Rochester
Schlegel, Charles P., 990 South Ave., Rochester
Schmidt, Carl W., 180 Linwood Ave., Buffalo
Schwartz, Mortimer L., 1243 Boynton Ave., Bronx, New York
Slate, Prof. George L., State Agricultural Experiment Sta., Geneva
Smith, Gilbert L., State School, Wassaic
Smith, Jay L., Chester
Steiger, Harwood, Red Hook
Stern-Montegny, Hubert, Erbonia Farm, Gardiner
Sucsy, Emil J., West Nyack
Warren, Herbert E., P. O. Box 109, Norwich
Wilson, Mrs. Ida J., Candor, New York
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, R. T., Greenboro College, Greenboro
Malcolm, Van R., Celo P. O., Yancey County
Parks, C. H., R. No. 2, Asheville


OKLAHOMA

Billups, Richard A., Hales Bldg., Oklahoma City
Clifton, Edward C., 1325 East 66th St., R. No. 2, Tulsa
Hirschi's Nursery, 414 N. Robinson, Oklahoma City
Hughes, C. V., 5600 N. W. 16, R. No. 5, Oklahoma City
Jarrett, C. F., 2208 W. 40th St., Tulsa
Meek, E. B., R. No. 2, Wynnewood
Swan, Oscar E., Jr., 1431 E. 35th St., Tulsa


OHIO

Bungart, A. A., Avon
Cinadr, Mrs. Katherine, 13514 Coath Ave., Cleveland, 20
Cole, Mrs. J. R., 163 Woodland Ave., Columbus
Cook, H. C., R. No. 1, Box 125, Leetonia
Cranz, Eugene F., Mount Tom Farm, Ira
Crooks, John L., 4600 Chester, Cleveland
Davidson, John, 234 E. 2nd St., Xenia
Diller, Oliver D., Dept. of Forestry, Experiment Sta., Wooster
Dubois, Wilber, & Son, Madisonville, Cincinnati, 27
Emeh, Frank, Genoa
Fickes, W. R., R. No. 1, Wooster
Franks, M. L., R. No. 1, Montpelier
Garden Center of Greater Cleveland, 1190 East Blvd., Cleveland
Gauly, Dr. Edward, 1110 Euclid Ave., Cleveland
Gerber, E. P., Kidron
Gerhardt, Gustave A., 13125 Jefferson Ave., Cincinnati
Gerstenmafer, John A., 18 Pond S. W., Massillon
Hoch, Gordon F., 6292 Glade Ave., Cincinnati
Hill, Dr. Albert A., 4187 Pearl Rd., Cleveland
Irish, Charles F., 418 105th St., Cleveland
Jacobs, Homer L., c/o Davey Tree Expert Co., Kent
Jacobs, Mason, 3003 Jacobs Rd., Youngstown
Kappel, Owen, Bolivar
Kintzel, Frank M., 2506 Briarcliffe Ave., Cincinnati, 13
Kirby, R. L., Box 131, R. No. 1, Sharonville
Kratzer, George, Kidron
Lacknett, G. S., 510 E. Main St., Newark
Lehmann, Carl, Union Trust Bldg., Cincinnati
Madison, Arthur E., 13608 5th Ave. E., Cleveland
McBride, William B., 2398 Brandon Rd., Columbus, 8
Meikle, William J., 730 Thornhill Dr., Cleveland
Metzger, A. J., 724 Euclid Ave., Toledo
Ochs, C. T., Box 291, Salem
Ochs, Norman M., R. No. 2, Brunswick
Osborn, Frank C., 4040 W. 160th St., Cleveland
Ransbottom, Earl A., 1057 W. Market St., Lima
Scarff's Sons, W. N., New Carlisle
Shelton, E. M., 1468 W. Clifton Blvd., Lakewood, 7
Shessler, Sylvester M., Genoa
Silvis, Raymond E., 1725 Lindberg Ave. N. E., Massillon
Smith, Sterling A., 630 W. South St., Vermillion
Spring Hill Nurseries Co., Tipp City
Toops, Herbert A., 1430 Cambridge Blvd., Columbus
Van Voorhis, J. F., 215 Hudson Ave., Apt. B-1, Newark
Walker, Carl F., 2351 E. Overlook Rd., Cleveland
*Weber, Harry R., 123 East 6th St., Cincinnati
Weber, Martha R., R. No. 1, Morgan Rd., Cloves
Willett, Dr. G. P., Elmore
Wischhusen, J. F., 15031 Shore Acres Dr. N. E., Cleveland


OREGON

Carlton Nursery Co., Carlton
Doharian, S. H., P. O. Box 346, Eugene
Flanagan, George C., 909 Terminal Sales Bldg., Portland
Miller, John E., R. No. 1, Box 312-A, Oswego
Russ, E., R. No. 1, Halsey
Schuster, C. E., Horticulturist, Corvallis


PENNSYLVANIA

Allaman, R. P., R. No. 1, Harrisburg
Allen, Lt. Col. Thomas H., St. Thomas
Banks, H. C., R. No. 1, Hollortown
Barnhart, Emmert M., R. No. 4, Waynesboro
Baum, Dr. F. L., Boyertown
Beard, H. K., R. No. 1, Sheridan
Blair, Dr. G. D., 702 N. Homewood Ave., Pittsburgh
Bowen, John C., R. No. 1, Macungie
Brenneman, John E., R. No. 6, Lancaster
Brown, Morrison, Carson Long Military Academy, New Bloomfleld
Creasy, Luther P., Catawissa
Dewey, Richard, Box 41, Peckville
Driver, Warren M., R. No. 4, Bethlehem
Diefenderfer, C. E., 918 3rd St., Fullerton
Duckham, William C., R. No. 2, Allison Park
Ebling, Aaron L., R. No. 2, Reading
Ellenberger, Herman A., 333 S. Burrows St., State College
Etter, Fayette, P. O. Box 57, Lemasters
Gebhardt, F. C., 140 East 29th St., Erie
Heckler, George Snyder, Hatfield
Heilman, R. H., 2303 Beechwood Blvd., Pittsburgh
Hershey, John W., Nut Tree Nurseries, Downingtown
High Tor Nursery, R. No. 6, Pittsburgh
Hostetter, C. F., Bird-In-Hand
Hostetter, L. K., R. No. 3, Lancaster
Jackson, Schuyler, New Hope
Johnson, Robert F., R. No. 5, Box 56, Crafton
Jones, Dr. Truman W., Coatesville
Jones, Miss Mildred, P. O. Box 356, Lancaster
Kaufman, M. M., Clarion
Kirk, DeNard B., Forest Grove
Kline, Dr. Florence M., 909 Arlington Apts., Corner Acken and Center
 Aves., Pittsburgh
Leach, Will, Court House, Scranton
Long, Carleton C., 141 Walnut St., Beaver
Losch, Walter, 133 E. High St., Topston
Lutz, Stanley W., Egypt
Mattoon, H. Gleason, 1008 Commercial Trust Bldg., Philadelphia
McCartney, T. Lupton, Room 1, Horticultural Bldg., State College
Miller, Robert O., 3rd and Ridge St., Emmaus
Moyer, Philip S., Union Trust Bldg., Harrisburg
Owens, G. F., 700 E. Line Ave., Ellwood City
Reidler, Paul G., Ashland
Rial, John, 528 Harrison Ave., Greensburg
*Rick, John, 439 Pennsylvania Sq., Reading
Ruch, George, Huntingdon Valley
Rupp, Edward E., Jr., 57 W. Pomfret St., Carlisle
Sameth, Sigmund, Grandeval Farm, R. No. 3, Kutztown
Schaible, Percy, Upper Black Eddy
Schmidt, Albert J., 534 Smithfield St., Pittsburgh
Siebley, J. W., Star Route, Landisburg
Shelly, David B., R. No. 2, Elizabethtown
Silin, I. J., Echo Mountain, Fairview
Smith, Dr. J. Russell, 550 Elm Ave., Swarthmore
Southampton Nurseries, Southampton
Stoebener, Harry W., 6227 Penn. Ave., Pittsburgh
Theiss, Dr. Lewis E., Bucknell University, Lewisburg
Waggoner, Charles W., 432 Harmony Ave., Rochester
*Wister, John C., Clarkson Ave. and Wister St., Germantown
Wood, Wayne, R. No. 1, Newville
Wright, Ross Pier, 235 West 6th St., Eric


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

Chase, Capt. Spencer B., Hqs. Det. Sta. Camp, Camp Tyson
Kirk, Charles H., Oak Ridge
Howell Nurseries, Sweetwater
McDaniel, J. C., P. O. Box 331, Brownsville
Rhodes, G. B., R. 2, Covington
Zarger, Thomas G., Norris


TEXAS

Carroll, Y. D., 2093 McFadden St., Beaumont
Florida, Kaufman, Box 154, Rotan
Price, W. S., Jr., Gustine


UTAH

Oleson, Granville, 1210 Laird Ave., Salt Lake City, 5
Petterson, Harlan D., 2164 Jefferson Ave., Ogden


VERMONT

Aldrich, A. W., R. No. 3, Springfield
*Ellis, Zenas H., Fair Haven
Foster, Forest K., West Topsham


VIRGINIA

Acker, E. D., Co., Broadway
Brewster, Stanley II., "Cerro Cordo," Gainesville
Burton, Geo. L., 728 College St., Bedford
Carey, Graham, Fair Haven
Dickerson, T. C., 316 56th St., Newport News
Gibbs, H. R., McLean
Johnson, Dr. Walt R., 2602 B. Monument Ave., Richmond
Landess, S. S., 2103 N. Quantico St., Arlington
Lewis, Pvt. Hewlett W., H. & H. Co., 938 Engr. Avn. Cam. Bn.,
 A. A. B., Richmond
Morse, Chandler, Valross, R. No. 5, Alexandria
Nix, Robert W., Jr., Lucketts
Peters, John Rogers, P. O. Box 37, McLean
Pertzoff, Dr. V. A., Carter's Bridge
Stoke, H. F., 1420 Watts Ave., Roanoke
Stoke, Dr. John H., 408-10 Boxley Bldg., Roanoke
Varcity Products Co., 5 Middlebrook Ave., Staunton
Webb, John, Hillsville
Zimmerman, Ruth, Bridgewater


WASHINGTON

Altman, Mrs. H. E., Cedarbrook Nut Farm, Nooksack
Barth, J. H., Box 1827, R. No. 3, Spokane
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
Kling, William L., R. No. 2, Box 230, Clarkston
Linkletter, F. D., 8034 35th Ave. N. E., Seattle
Lynn Tuttle Nursery, The Heights, Clarkston
Martin, Fred A., Star Route, Chelan
Naderman, G. W., R. No. 1, Box 370, Olympia
Shane Bros., Vashon
Wilson, John A., East 1517 16th Ave., Spokane


WEST VIRGINIA

Cannaday, Dr. John E., Charleston General Hospital, Charleston
Hoover, Wendell W., Webster Springs
Slotkin, Meyer S., 1671 6th Ave., Huntington, 1


WISCONSIN

Aoppler, C W., Box 239, Oconomowoc
Bassett, W. S., 1522 Main St., La Crosse
Dopkins, Marvin, R. No. 1, River Falls
Downs, M. L., 1024 N. Leminwah St., Appleton
Koelsch, Norman, Jackson
Zinn, Walter G., P. O. Box 747, Milwaukee

*Life Member **Contributing 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 elected 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.



ANNUAL REPORT OF THE NORTHERN NUT GROWERS ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED


For the third time in the forty-four years of our existence our annual
convention has been omitted. Each time this has been due to war
conditions. The first was in 1918, the others in 1942 and 1943. No
report was issued for 1918 but one was compiled for last year, and this
present little volume will show that your members and officers are still
functioning. We have great hope for the future.

An important part of this report is the result of the work of the
Chairman of the Survey Committee, Mr. John Davidson, a good job well
done. Considering the still elementary state of nut growing it is
remarkable--a really immense undertaking. The responses to this survey
show enthusiasm that is encouraging. The war and its emphasis on food
seems to have increased interest in nut culture.

W. C. DEMING.



REPORT OF THE SECRETARY FOR 1942-43


The Association has had a successful year in spite of the war and the
cessation of our annual meetings because of the restrictions on wartime
travel. Interest in the Association and nut culture appears to be
well-maintained. The program committee assembled a report for 1942 and
is already working on one for 1943.

During the past year the membership increased from 400 as of August 10,
1942 to 466 as of July 1, 1943. If this rate of increase continues, we
shall pass the 500 mark before the end of 1944. In the 1932 report 134
members were listed and each year since then has shown a substantial
increase.

Accompanying this letter is a questionnaire from the survey committee
which is designed to extract as much information as possible from the
members. The secretary is especially interested in the section on
personal information as it should give some idea as to the interests of
the members and indicate how they may best be served by the officers and
committees. The program committee can also use this information in
preparing programs.

President Weschcke announces that the committees and state
vice-presidents for 1942 will continue for another year.

The membership circulars which contain the list of nut nurseries and a
list of publications on nut culture may be had from the secretary by all
who wish to distribute it.

The sets of reports as now sold lack the report for 1935. The few
remaining copies are being reserved for agricultural libraries. If
members have copies of this report for which they no longer have any use
their return to the secretary's office will be appreciated as it may
make possible the supplying of complete sets to libraries.



Treasurer's Report


REPORT OF THE TREASURER--AUG. 15, 1942 to SEPT. 1, 1943

       _Receipts:_

Memberships                                        $774.15
   (Philip Allen $10.00)

   (Exchange .15)
Sale of Reports                                     102.85
Sale of Index                                          .75
Sale of Advertising (1941 Report)                     5.00
Carl Weschcke Contribution                           50.00
                                                   -------
                                                   $932.75   $932.75

       _Disbursements:_

Fruit Grower Subscriptions                           71.20
Printing and Mailing 1942 Report                    328.37
Reporting 1941 Convention                            32.50
Expense of President                                  None
Expense of Secretary                                 74.02
Expense of Treasurer                                 26.38
Supplies and Miscellaneous                           26.71
                                                   -------
                                                   $559.18   $559.18
                                                   -------   -------

Excess of Receipts over Expenditures                          373.57
Balance on Hand Aug. 15, 1942                                 216.05
                                                             -------
Balance on Hand Sept. 1, 1943 in North Linn Savings Bank     $589.62

D. C. SNYDER, Treasurer



The Status of Nut Growing in 1943

SURVEY REPORT

JOHN DAVIDSON, _Chairman of Committee_


This survey of nut tree growing in the United States and Canada is a
cross section of the industry and has been conducted through the
membership of our Association. Questionnaires were submitted to all
members, of whom a very satisfactory percentage responded with reports
which usually were as complete as the age of the planted trees made
possible. Our thanks are due to all who had the patience to reply to so
searching a questionnaire. Their reward, we hope, will be increased by
nuggets of information from others. The survey committee is indebted to
the officers of the Association, to Mr. Slate particularly, who took
care of the multigraphing and mailing drudgery, and to the experienced
men who lent invaluable aid in formulating and revising the exhaustive
and detailed questions.

The results are here set forth in three sections: Northern United
States, Southern United States and Canadian. It is evident that trees
which do well in the south may act very differently in the north; yet,
to a certain and very important extent, the experience of the south has
a bearing upon conditions in the north. For example, the pawpaw, though
not a nut tree, has seemed to edge itself into the affections and
interest of many nut tree men. It is in reality a tropical fruit which
has adapted itself to northern latitudes. The pecan seems to be trying
to do the same thing. Both illustrate a way of working that nature
practices more or less with all species. By cross pollination and
selection, human hands are having a part in speeding up this process of
adaptation in pecans, Persian walnuts and other tender species. In fact,
this is one of the jobs to which the Association is dedicated.

We wish here to pay tribute to the nurserymen of this Association. Most
nurserymen are intelligent and honest but sometimes they have a tough
time of it. Their worst competitor is a nurseryman who sells seedlings
for named varieties, who advertises widely and prospers upon the work of
others. When we think of the painstaking care of the honest nurseryman,
of his days of drudgery, of the thousands of failed experimental trees
and plants that he destroys, of the service he renders his fellows, we
know that we should make slow progress without his help.

The conscientious worker in the experiment stations is in the same
category. He does his best work largely for love of it.

In addition to many letters and other valuable sources of information
this survey covers reports from more than 150 planters of named
varieties of nut trees. Many are also planters of seedlings from
selected and named varieties with which they are experimenting and from
which they are making selections for future tests. Some are
experimenting with cross pollination. As one example of careful work, we
have now on file blue prints from the New Jersey Department of
Conservation and Development, from Gerald A. Miller, of Trenton, showing
exact locations by name and number of one of the largest variety
collections of hybrid walnut trees in the world. From the Brooklyn
Botanic Gardens, Arthur H. Graves, Curator, we have valuable records of
the breeding of chestnut trees, with selections made primarily for tree
growth and timber production. There is also hope for some good nuts from
the trees. The timber, in money value, is of course more important than
the nuts. If successful, we shall again have both.

It is difficult to interest "hurry-up" Americans in planting trees for
future generations. They want results now. But the sooner we develop
reliable and adaptable fruiting trees for general planting, the sooner
will thousands of people begin to plant trees. The late rapid growth of
membership in this Association shows an awakened interest that could be
swollen into a mighty flood of tree planters if good trees were
available. If there were more agencies like the Tennessee Valley
Authority, more trees of the better sort would be developed. Its tree
crop activities have now been transferred to a "Forest Resources
Division" under the supervision of Mr. W. H. Cummings, and its testing
and selection work is going ahead steadily. Thomas G. Zarger, Jr.,
Botanist, is handling the black walnut work in connection with other
investigations of "Minor Forest Products." The headquarters is at
Norris, Tennessee. Charles V. Kline, now Assistant Chief of the
Watershed Protection Division, still keeps his old interest in the black
walnut and tree crop program. Definite and important results are bound
to follow from so sustained and well organized a project. Most state
agencies complain of lack of appropriations and help. The real trouble
lies in lack of vision and knowledge upon the part of legislators. The
President has proposed an immense program of communications and highway
development as a post-war project. We suggest that fruitful land is
still more important, and that highways through desert countries are
almost unknown except as means for getting from one fruitful land to
another. Perhaps this Association could do more than it has done toward
spreading the gospel among legislatures.

The largest source of contribution to the survey is, of course, from the
Northern United States. For purposes of tabulation, we have included
everything north of Central Tennessee in this class. Nearly one hundred
planters of nut trees contribute their experiences in this section. Of
the lot, only fourteen of them plant trees for sale as nurserymen. Today
we could keep more of them with stocks sold out. Seventy-six are
interested in planting primarily for the production of nuts;
fifty-seven, in grafting and budding trees from named varieties;
forty-five in planting seed from the better varieties, either for
production of stocks upon which to graft or, in large quantities, for
observation and selection. As many as twenty-six are doing important
work in hybridizing. Fifty-one are top-working young trees to better
varieties. Only twenty-one count upon the growth of timber for a part of
their profit. But certainly the growth of timber, especially black
walnut, is not an item to be left out of consideration. Much, here,
depends upon the manner of planting, whether in orchard or forest
formation. However, even in orchard plantings, the stumps alone are
valuable for beautifully patterned veneers.

Fifty-seven correspondents tell us that they are testing standard
varieties, while forty-two are interested in discovering and developing
new varieties, certainly an index to the pioneering and creative urge
which dominates many of our members. As is to be expected, most of our
newer members are thus far feeling their way by growing a few of the
better varieties for home use. Only nine of the whole number say that
they are working with nut trees at an experiment station.

As to the species of trees being planted, black walnut heads the list
with eighty-nine planters. Persian walnuts are next with seventy-three,
including five who specify Carpathians or Circassians. Sixty-eight are
planting Chinese chestnuts, and sixty-four hickories. Filberts and
pecans are tied with fifty planters each; forty-eight say they are
planting hazels; forty-three heartnuts; and forty-two persimmons--if we
may include these trees for the time being among the nuts. Thirty-eight
are planting butternuts; thirty-two, Japanese Walnuts; twenty-eight,
pawpaws; twenty-seven, mulberries; twenty-four, Japanese chestnuts.
After these, in order, come almonds along the southern borders, beech
toward the north, hicans, tree hazels, oaks, Japanese persimmons,
honey-locust, jujube, black locust (the correspondent explains, "for
bees and chickens"), Manchurian walnuts, and finally, coral and service
berries.

As an indication of the adaptation of species and varieties to the
climates in which these men, and several women, are working, they listed
at out request the following native trees found most plentifully in
their sections. Black walnuts and hickories stand at the head of the
list, as reported by seventy-five correspondents each. Then follow in
order, butternuts, hazel, beech, oaks (probably overlooked by many),
pecans and chestnuts.

Of nut trees found sparingly in these sections, butternut trees,
surprisingly, take first place, indicating broad adaptation but a
certain weakness, perhaps a slow susceptibility to blight or fungi,
which prevents this tree from being found plentifully. It is significant
that it is found most plentifully in the more rigorous areas of New
England where fungous ravages are discouraged by cold. Add chinquapins
to the number of scarce trees, and the list is complete.

As a further gauge of climatic conditions, fifty reported that peaches
are reliably hardy in their sections, while fifty said they are not.
This, according to the late Thomas P. Littlepage, is a fairly reliable
index to the climatic adaptability of present varieties of northern
grown pecans. Ninety-two planters reported that their seasons are long
enough to mature Concord grapes. Only four said "no." For Catawba
grapes? "Yes," said forty-two; "No," fourteen. For field corn? "Yes,"
ninety-three; "No," four. This question was improperly asked. Field corn
varies too widely in length of maturity for accuracy in this respect.

Lowest temperatures expected range from 8°F above to 30°F below zero,
with the usual lower range in the greater portion of the northern
states, from zero to 12° below. Lowest known temperatures range all the
way from 10° to 52° below, but in most portions from 15° to 35° below.

Returns indicate that winter injury is not always, nor even usually, the
result of low temperatures but, rather, to the condition in which the
trees enter the winter. If late excessive growth leaves them with wood
not wholly dormant, they suffer. If not, they will stand extraordinary
low temperatures with little or no damage. One way to guard against this
damage is by preventing late growth. A means of doing this will be found
in an important contribution by Mr. H. P. Burgart, of Union City,
Michigan. Mr. Burgart says:

"After 21 years of experience with growing, selling and planting nut
trees, I have had to have a neighbor show me the best way to care
successfully for them. I have studied and practiced Mr. Baad's methods,
and in comparing them with my former practice, and with the practice of
others who have failed with their trees, I will suggest the following
cultural procedure to be given all plantings when possible, and to be
continued for at least three years, or even longer for best nut
production.

"Nut trees should be given clean cultivation right after being planted
(in the spring) and until August 1st. This encourages root growth and
conserves moisture. Then sow a cover crop of rye, cow peas or soy beans
to take up moisture, slow up growth and prevent the late sappy condition
that is often responsible for winter injury. Leave the cover crop over
winter and turn it under in the spring for humus. Before turning under,
a light application of some kind of manure, along with some
superphosphate and potash, should be sprinkled around each tree. Then
thorough cultivation again until August, and repeat.

"Soil for nut trees should be tested for acidity, nitrogen, phosphate
and potash. It has been determined that most nut trees prefer a pH range
of 6.0 to 8.0; but I have frequently found people planting trees on
soils of 4.0 and 5.0, where nothing but sickly growth could be expected.

"Where it is not possible to work all of the ground between nut trees,
cultivation should begin with a three or four foot circle around each
tree, annually increasing this space with the growth of the branches.
Cultivation, with attention to humus and fertility, are necessary to
proper tree growth and nut production. Sod culture will never do."

Mr. Burgart's method has the advantage not only of guarding the trees
from excessive winter injury but at the same time adds an almost
immediately available source of humus and nutrients to the soil for
spring growth. If followed, it should greatly reduce the number of
reports of winter injury, failure to start, and of weak growth
afterward.

Excessive summer heat is not so great a problem in most portions of the
northern states. The highest expected temperatures range, in our
reports, from 86° to 110°; mostly from 90° to 100°. The highest known
are reported to be all the way from 95° to 120°, but mostly from 100° to
110°. A method of guarding against heat damage will be found in a
communication from Mr. H. F. Stoke, of Roanoke, Va., which appears later
in this report.

Drouth and hot, dry winds are more dangerous enemies than either cold or
heat. It is somewhat ominous that, out of eighty-three reports,
forty-two, originating all the way from Maine to Oregon and from Canada
to Tennessee, report the occurrence today of frequent drouths, while
forty report hot, dry winds. Surely the need for tree planting is
immediate and urgent. Mulching, and the protection of recently planted
trees by wrapping their trunks, are preventives of some damage, but can
not stand up forever against the longer and longer periods of drouth now
being reported, during which the water table is gradually being lowered
beyond the reach of tree roots.

The length of the frost-free season has an important bearing upon the
production of nuts after the trees are matured. This is true in the
south as well as in the north. One of the most frequently reported
causes of loss of nut production in southern sections is an early
spring, inducing growth of buds and blossoms, followed by a frost. No
protection seems to have been found against this damage except by use of
heavy smudges. Large orchardists protect themselves, but planters of
small groves rarely do so. This explains the autumn scramble, reported
by many members, in search of early fallen nuts. We should continue our
search for trees which produce nuts of early maturity. Thus far the
search has not been too successful among most species, but some progress
has been made and the future is more encouraging in this respect than it
was a decade or two ago. Some early maturing nuts have been found and
pollen from the trees is being used for cross-pollination with better
known nut producers. In the northern states, dates of the latest spring
frosts range from April 1 to June 1, with the average around May 15. The
earliest fall frosts come from Sept. 5 to Oct. 15, with the average
about Sept. 15 to 20. Where the frosts fall much outside these
limits--too late in the spring or too early in the fall--protective
measures will help but will not always prevent damage.

_Soil Conditions._ There is a slight preponderance of clay soils over
loam among the returns from planters. Loams and sandy loams are tied for
second place. A smaller number report that these top soils lie shallow
over hard-pan or rock. Fewer still report a soil underlaid with sand or
gravel.

By far the best growth for most kinds of nut trees, as well as the best
production of nuts, is to be found where trees are planted in deep loam.
Next come the trees in clay loam; then come trees in sandy loam and in
clay over sand or gravel. Numerous complaints of poor growth come from
members who have trees set in a soil which is shallow over rock or
hard-pan. Some of the hazels and butternuts are reported as able, for a
time at least, to establish themselves in such soils, but their fight
for survival seems precarious and is apparently short-lived. Black
walnuts, particularly, require deep, rich soils into which their long
taproots can easily penetrate. This is one of the few nut tree facts so
definitely established that there can no longer be any doubt about it.
The reports show that the planting of black walnuts in any but good deep
soil should be discouraged. It leads only to disappointment and often to
loss of interest.

A somewhat sandy soil, particularly if loamy, seems adapted to the
planting of chestnuts and to such trees as do well on ground that will
successfully grow peach trees. If such soil is found upon a hillside or
hill top, so much the better. All such soils, of course, require more
attention to fertility maintenance, for they leach out more quickly than
soils with more of a clay constituent.

Do any of the nut tree species prefer an acid to an alkaline soil? This
is a question our questionnaire does not answer. Thirty correspondents
say their trees are set in a lime soil, fourteen in an alkaline soil
(which may or may not, in the commonly accepted usage of that term, have
lime as a source of alkalinity). Sixty-one report an acid soil. Only
eight of this group report the use of lime, two the use of bone meal,
and one of wood ash as acid correctives. Unfortunately, we did not ask
definitely about the reaction of trees to the use or non-use of lime.
Puzzled by this comparative neglect of lime as a corrective on acid
soils, we asked Mr. H. F. Stoke, of Roanoke, Va., a very accurate and
acute observer, who had reported plantings in both kinds of soils, what
his experience had been. Also we asked Miss Mildred Jones, whose
experience with nut trees is second to none, the same question. Their
replies follow:

Mr. Stoke says: "In response to your inquiry, 'What nut trees, if any,
do best in acid soils?' I should reply that the chestnut leads the list,
followed closely by the mockernut hickory.

"Throughout its native habitat the heaviest stands of the native
chestnuts are to be found on acid soils over granitic and sandstone
formations, rather than on limestone ridges. The best stands are on
granite ridges, partly due, no doubt, to the poverty of sandstone soils.

"The mockernut hickory occurs about anywhere on the poor, acid, clay
soils of the south, its vigor depending on fertility. Shagbark does not
occur on the acid (granitic) Blue Ridge mountains, but is found on the
limestone Alleghanies running parallel only a few miles away. I have
never seen a shagbark hickory between Roanoke and the coast, more than
200 miles away, but it occurs freely to within two or three miles on the
west. The difference is not in elevation or rainfall, but in the soil.

"On the other hand, black walnut occurs on both acid and limestone
soils, but seems to prefer the latter. Part of its preference may be due
to the generally greater fertility and better drainage to be found in
limestone soil. Persian walnut, I believe, when on its own roots, is
more or less allergic to acid soil. Wild hazels grow here on both
limestone and granite soils.

"Frankly, I believe the matter of soil acidity, as such, is rather
over-emphasized. There are other factors entering into the problem that
are of as great or greater importance. I doubt if there was actually any
really alkaline soil, in its native state, in the humid region lying
east of the Mississippi River. In the glaciated region lying to the
north, the soil seems to have been more nearly neutral (pH 7). Such was
the case in Iowa and in Minnesota where I homesteaded many years ago.

"Throughout the south the soil averages much more acid, even much
limestone soil being greatly benefitted by liming. North or south, soil
acidity is greatly affected by drainage and by the resulting native
vegetation.

"Peat or muck soils are notably acid; also they are notably deficient in
potash. The addition of wood ashes greatly benefits such soils in two
ways. On the other hand, the addition of wood ashes to a soil already
alkaline might be harmful even though in need of potash.

"In the last several years I have been making some soil experiments that
I may write up when I am sure I know what I am talking about. In
general, I may say I should prefer a soil slightly on the acid side for
any and all tree and farm crops if I had an eye to future fertility.
Lime breaks down vegetable matter and makes its constituent plant foods
quickly available, but prevents a build-up of humus in the soil. The
effect is very pronounced in times of drought, the alkaline soil crops
drying up much more quickly than do those on acid soil. On the other
hand, such soil elements as phosphorus seem to require the lime as a
flux to prevent the phosphates from becoming fixed and unavailable to
crops.

"In regard to peat moss, it is undoubtedly acid, but it is beneficial in
its water-holding properties and in the comparatively slow release of
its nutritive elements. Lime added to the peat will break it down
rapidly and make it more available as a fertilizer, but until the
decomposition reaches a certain point; its effect is to impoverish
rather than to enrich the mixture. This seeming paradox can perhaps best
be explained by some experiments I have been making with sawdust. A
number of plots were prepared and given various treatments, including
mixing one surface-inch of sawdust with the soil, and wheat was sown on
the area.

"Wheat sown on the test plot without any treatment or fertilizer was
normal for the poor clay soil on which the experiments were made. Where
sawdust, only, was added, the wheat came up but sickened and produced no
filled heads. The same was true where lime was added to the sawdust.
Where heavy applications of nitrate of soda were added to the sawdust
treated plots, both with and without lime, the 'sickness' disappeared
and wheat was matured.

"My analysis of this, coupled with experiments in composting, leads to
the following conclusion: During the period of decomposition of the
sawdust (hastened, no doubt, by the lime), the bacteria of decomposition
fed so heavily on the nitrates in the soil that the plants were starved.
When the material had reached the condition of humus, the bacterial
activity decreased to the point where fertility was restored.

"The above analysis accounts for the fact that coarse vegetable
material, injures crops, when plowed under, for the current season.
Fresh succulent material decays so quickly that it becomes almost
immediately available, releasing its constituent plant food.

"With proper conditions of moisture and aeration, sawdust, when mixed
with quickly decaying material like kitchen garbage, can be reduced to
an excellent, usable humus in three summer months. In fact, it is then
better material than if permitted to lie out in the weather for fifteen
years.

"There is another factor I think important in tree growth, especially
where summers are hot, and that is soil temperature.

"For any of our nut trees I should say that an acidity test of pH 6 to 7
would be entirely satisfactory. If the soil is infertile, some form of
humus should be worked in at the time of planting. If much such material
is used, some lime may be added. Better yet, wood ashes and bone meal
will furnish potash, phosphorus, and the lime necessary to correct
acidity and maintain the phosphorus in an available condition. Add to
this, proper drainage and cool soil achieved by, first, cultivation, and
later by heavy mulching, artificial shading, or shrubby undergrowth
extended outside the root area, and your tree should 'go to town.' When
the tree is large enough to shade its own root area it will take care of
its own soil refrigeration. Nature knew what she was about when she
planted trees in forests. Trees require warm heads (sunshine) and cool
feet (shade), just the opposite from us humans."

Mr. Stoke's letter recalls a very ancient Arabian proverb connected with
the date palm. "The date palm tree must have his head in hell and his
feet in water." We are indebted both to Mr. Stoke and to the Arab
scientists for many things.

Miss Mildred Jones' reply, fortunately, goes into other and equally
important phases of the same subject. She says: "Anyone who is going to
lime and fertilize nut trees should take at least a five year period for
his work, using lime and fertilizer each year, and not dump it all in
one year, then wait for results. He should study the return on a five
year basis. One year is too short a term. Weather conditions can upset
a program to the extent that both lime and fertilizer may not have their
effect until the following year. Let those who really want to know, make
graphs of growth in young trees and of nut production from older trees,
in pounds, for five years, as against five of the same years during
which trees similarly situated received no fertilizer or lime.

"I shouldn't be at all surprised if those who state in reports to you
that they have an acid soil, merely have a top acid soil. They may be
growing their trees in basic limestone soils. Walnut trees grow in this
environment very well, because they are found growing wild in woods
where laurel and other types of plants loving an acid condition grow.
This is true here in our county, but these soils are not seriously acid.
They grow good garden crops.

"Ground, or pulverized, limestone is the safest type of lime to apply to
trees or crops, in my estimation. Some of it is ground so fine that it
looks like hydrated lime and is used for medicinal purposes. I am
inclined to think that any reports you received that noted injury from
the use of lime may have been due to the use of burned lime (calcium
oxide) which is caustic when wet. This type of lime may be used in
winter, but during the growing season, or too close to the growing
season, may injure trees. I believe such injury depends entirely upon
weather conditions, but it is a good thing to be on the safe side and
use a lime which will not have the hot reaction that burned lime has.

"Your reports will serve an excellent purpose if they lead to getting a
yearly record by planters on bearing and tree growth of their varieties.
Few people know enough to go into the matter of soils and treatments
intelligently. One can hardly blame them. It is a baffling subject. An
unbalance in one element will lock up another element until one has
quite a time unlocking them again. It seems that a conservative middle
course is about the best to advise."

Upon reflection, it seems likely that if our questionnaire had asked
specifically about the use of lime, many more reports would have been
received of its use.

In response to an inquiry as to how weed competition near young trees is
controlled, the replies are encouraging. Forty-seven practiced mulching;
forty-five, mowing; thirty-four, occasional cultivation; twenty, regular
cultivation, and a few others, slag or cinders around the trees. As is
evident, some used several of the above methods. A few used none and
suffered losses. Their honesty is admired, and their experience,
disappointing as it is, is useful information.

As to fertilizing, forty-three reported the use of manure in some form
as the principal material; twenty-eight used nitrogenous fertilizer;
twenty-one, a complete fertilizer. Other materials were, in order, lime,
compost, bone meal, ammonium sulphate, wood ash, tankage. One used a
mixture of muck and manure and got results in excellent growth where the
use of muck alone produced unsatisfactory growth. Several reported
injury from too much fertilizer or from too late an application. Tree
growth was thus pushed on into late fall; the trees were too sappy to
stand the winter freezes and suffered from winter killing. The same
result was reported from "over-cultivation." In this connection, we
refer back to the letter from Mr. H. P. Burgart, of Michigan, whose
suggestions on cultivation and fertilizing are well worth careful study
and practice by all who have had this trouble. It is possible that some
planters, especially those whose trees are set on hillsides, where
erosion is a robber of fertility, would modify Mr. Burgart's practice of
turning under the green crop in the spring. They might prefer, as indeed
might others who would like to see their green manure nearer the top of
the soil, to disk in the green crop rather than bury it deeply with
mouldboard plows. They would of course follow it up with repeated
diskings until the time came for sowing another cover crop. This is,
however, entirely in line with Mr. Burgart's recommendations.

Pursuing this subject to its conclusion, we next asked: "_When young
trees failed to grow with you, what percentage of these failures was due
to_ ..." (various causes enumerated below)? The question was
misunderstood. Many evidently gave percentages of all trees planted.
Others, correctly, gave percentages merely of the trees which failed to
grow. As nearly as could be arrived at, about 30 percent of losses were
among trees that failed even to start; 40 percent failed from weak
growth the first year or two; 10 percent from failure to maintain later
growth; 16 percent were winter killed, and 3 or 4 percent died from
rodent or similar (mole, gopher, deer, bear) injury. It is evident that
by far the greatest losses were suffered within the first two years--not
less than seventy percent. Probably more. It would seem that two years
of intensive care should not be too burdensome a stint for a reward
which lasts a lifetime.

Rodent and similar injuries were no doubt kept low because of extra
protective care. Hardware cloth (galvanized wire 1/4" mesh, 24" high,
preferred) around each tree proved the most common and effective
preventive. Following this, in order of use, were: wrapping the trunks
(including wrappings of tar paper); mounding with earth or ashes; poison
bait, dogs and cats, clean cultivation; resinous paint; spray (with
Purdue formula mentioned); and, finally, hogs, against mice.

Anti-rodent treatments which proved injurious to trees were reported to
be; tar paper wrappings; coal tar washes; close-set creosoted posts; oil
sprays; "any paint"; any chemical to smear on trunks; rooting cement.
For those who are located in regions where deer are a source of injury,
Mr. J. U. Gellatly, of West Bank, B. C., reports the successful use of
an old and heroic Russian formula. Spray or paint all branches with
manure water, using hog or human offal. Deer will stay away. Naturally.

Next come answers to some personal questions as to experiences from
which the reader may glean a wide variety of suggestions. The first of
these questions is:

"_What is your ONE greatest source of success?_" The answers seem to
show many royal roads, each of which was the one road for someone. The
answers: Mulching young trees; watering care; planting seeds; planting
one-year seedlings; wrapping-with paper; 50% moist peat mixed with earth
in transplanting; manure; sod in bottom of planting hole and use of
nitrogen later; setting trees at bottom of slopes; clean cultivation
until August then sowing rye, soy beans or cow peas as cover crops to
turn under in spring; topworking hickories; grafting in cool, moist
spring weather; pigs in orchard; chickens in orchard; planting
12-14-foot trees severely cut back, burlap wrapped, heavily mulched.

It seems a pity that limitations of space do not permit the telling of
the various stories connected with the above glimpses of successful
solutions. Each represents a little or a big success story connected
with an individual problem. It is sufficient, perhaps, to know that
someone somewhere found that each was the answer to his own
difficulties.

The next question brings out the reverse side of the planters' work:
"_What is your chief source of failure?_" The answer most often given
was the honest one, lack of attention. We can all convict ourselves
here, either involuntarily or otherwise. Especially during this period
of warfare, when so many have been taken away from their plantings and
have been unable to get help, there is no question but that our trees
have suffered. The next in frequency is "unsuitable soil." Following
this come: lack of water; poor planting; planting too big a tree; spring
planting of nut trees; buying 5 to 7 year-old trees; climate;
transplanting failures; grafting; grafting in dry, hot, springs;
top-working old trees; stink bugs on filberts (nuts); lack of drainage;
forcing with nitrogenous fertilizer; fertilizing young trees too much;
birds breaking off top growth. It had been the intention to confine this
question to young trees, but it was not so phrased, so we shall let the
answers stand as they are. It is a bit ironical that some found their
chief source of failure exactly where others had made their best
success. The explanation must lie in differences in technique, in soil
or in some other local condition. Skill, knowledge, and persistence must
always play a great part in any success.

We next asked, "_What have been your chief difficulties with
established, bearing trees?_" The difficulties here shift from matters
of soil, rodent protection and the like to other types; caterpillars,
neglect, winter injury, limited crops, failure of nuts to fill,
disappointing quality of nuts, bag and tent worms, blight, "blight" due
to drought, too early leaf fall, insects in early spring, trees drowned
out in flooded bottom lands. It is probable that this last disaster
happened to younger trees.

As to the species of trees chiefly damaged by these causes, black walnut
comes first (possibly because more of these trees have been planted),
then hickories, Persian walnuts, chestnuts (blight), heartnuts, pecans,
filberts, butternuts, and finally butternuts in the south areas from
fungus troubles.

Trees reported to have been least damaged were, first, butternuts, then
hazels and filberts, black walnuts, hickories, Manchurian walnuts, Jap.
walnuts, heartnuts, chestnuts, pecans, Persian walnuts.

In response to the specific question, "_What insects damaged the
trees?_", we found that walnut caterpillars were more common than any
others, followed closely by web or "tent" worms. The Japanese beetle is
a close second and is broadening its entrenched positions steadily.
Others are flat-headed apple borers, lace-wing fly, aphis, leaf hoppers.
To this list two reporters added sapsuckers among the insects. These
birds would almost girdle some of the branches with punctures.

Insect damage was reported as serious by eight reporters, as slight or
occasional by six, and of yearly occurrence by nearly all. Others
reported damage as serious if not controlled.

"_What do you do to control the insects?_" was then asked. Most of the
answers referred to clustering types of insects and involved removal of
the clusters by burning, by cutting off the infested twigs, or by
scraping off the clusters from the trunks in the early morning or late
evening. Others sprayed with lead arsenate, "sprayed in late summer with
lead arsenate", sprayed with nicotine sulphate for aphis and lice. Other
methods mentioned were early cultivation, shaking the tree with a pole
early and often, and chickens in the grove. Some of these means are
adapted manifestly, to small plantings and others to larger groves. None
mentioned the attracting of birds by plantings of trees or shrubs that
bear berries or small seeds. When trees are tall enough to be beyond
reach of poles or sprays, the birds become more essential as insect
destroyers.

"_What insects damage the nuts?_" Weevil, by long odds. Next come husk
maggots or "shock worms", codling moth larvae, borers, stink bugs on
filberts, butternut curculio. No cure is given for this trouble except
the very valuable one of keeping chickens, or, better still, turkeys
running freely in the plantation. Clean cultivation will, of course,
destroy many larvae that hibernate under trash.

"_What species are most injured by disease?_" None are immune,
apparently, though three reporters in favored regions answer "none" are
injured. Black walnuts suffer from leaf-spot, blight, or canker,
especially in seasons when the trees have been weakened by drought.
Hazels and filberts are next, then Persian walnuts, butternuts, native
chestnuts, Chinese chestnuts, pecans.

Blight in chestnuts, nectria canker and blight in black walnuts, blight
in filberts (Cryptosporella), scab in pecans, and die-back Melanconium
oblongum in butternuts. These are the kinds of diseases most to be
feared among nut trees. Sprays, chiefly with Bordeaux mixture and copper
base solutions, are recommended. If nut orchards were generally as well
sprayed as apple and peach orchards, we should hear less of disease
among nut trees. As it is, nut trees are in general far more resistant
by nature to disease than fruit trees, but it will not do to take
unlimited resistance for granted. As progress is gradually made in the
selection of varieties for better nut production, it is very likely that
there will be a weakening of this resistance to disease. Better cultural
methods, resulting in more robust growth, will build up resistance.
Better sprays and more spraying will act as a barrier not only to
disease but to most insect enemies as well.

"_What disease, if any, affects the nuts?_" Fortunately, very few
diseases are reported. "None," say most of our reporters. A scab is
reported for the first time this year in some sections on pecans.
"Galls" are reported on some hickories. A husk blight appears to affect
Persian walnuts in some places, and nut production is very seriously
affected among black walnuts by defoliation prematurely, either because
of drought or leaf-spot. The cure is undoubtedly the same as for disease
affecting the trees, namely spraying.

"_What proportion of nuts are taken by the squirrels?_" The answers to
this question range all the way from "all if allowed" to "none if
prevented." If the nut trees are located near a forest, the proportion
will be large; if not, much smaller. Most correspondents say that the
proportion is very small, but nearly a third of those who make any
report on this at all, say such losses are rather heavy. In the extreme
north, there seem to be no squirrels to bother. Several report thefts,
particularly of filberts, by chipmunks, while one complains about both
mice and jaybirds as filbert lovers.

The most effective squirrel control is the rifle or shotgun. Rat traps,
using black walnuts as bait, are second choice and said to be effective.
The banding of isolated trees with tin (one says cotton batting) will
prevent squirrels from climbing. A good cat or several of them will be
useful, say several reporters. One judicious correspondent says that, in
general, there are two popular ways of handling the situation; one by
shooting, the other by cussing--most practiced, least effective. One
grower, not to be outdone by the patient Chinaman or Japanese, in
September ties up each chestnut burr in a cloth sack. Take your choice;
but it will be well, if you wish to remain in good standing with the
law, either to do your shooting during the open hunting season or, if at
other times, catch your thief in the act and, wastefully, let him lie
where he falls when shot. So says the law, at least in some states. On
the other hand, there are many who will say, with one reporter: "I do
nothing about it. I like squirrels." [This note by chairman--not W. C.
D.!]

_The Marketing of Nuts!_ The purpose of this section was not to inquire
into methods of marketing but merely to determine, if possible, what
marketing of nuts is now being done. It is little enough. Chestnut
lovers have all but forgotten the taste of good chestnuts. Black walnut
buyers, confectioners, bakers, report that it is next to impossible, at
least for the duration of the war, to get deliveries of nuts, especially
shelled nuts. The market for a good product is best only when the
product is easily and plentifully obtainable.

Forty-one growers reported that they sell nuts commercially. The others
do not because they have no surplus to sell. Only six sell kernels. The
others sell whole nuts.

Owing to a misreading of the question, few reported on profitable
varieties. Those who did, reported Thomas as first, then Stabler and
Ohio. Of pecans, Major first, then Greenriver, Busseron, Indiana,
Niblack. Of chestnuts, Hobson is the only one mentioned, and of filberts
only the Jones hybrid. Most growers reported on species instead of
varieties. Of these, black walnuts stand first, then pecans, chestnuts
and filberts. In the far northwest, filberts stand first. Most growers
have the feeling that the hybrid chestnut, _mollissima x dentata_, is
coming fast and offers one of the best chances for profitable commercial
planting. At present only three reporters who specifically commit
themselves on the subject say they count upon the sale of nuts as an
important item in their income. Fifty-one do not. Fifteen definitely
expect, and sixteen others have hopes, that nuts may some day become, at
least to an extent, good income producers for them. Practically all
express themselves as willing to sell or exchange either nuts or cions
for propagation purposes.

_Discovery of Promising Nut Trees._ Some thirty-odd "wild" trees which
bear nuts of unusual promise have been reported by discoverers in their
answers to this survey. It is more than likely that some of them have
been previously reported. The committee has no means of knowing.
However, it is hoped that, out of the lot, one or two may be good enough
for propagating or for contributions of pollen for cross-pollination.
The names and locations of the owners of these trees have been turned
over to Mr. C. A. Reed, Associate Pomologist, U. S. D. A., Beltsville,
Md., for further investigation. It has been found that such information
should not be prematurely published, since it leads to trouble for the
owners and to possible undue valuations being placed upon the trees in
question.

_RATING OF VARIETIES._ First, it will be best to state how the committee
arrived at a rating. Certain well-known varieties were printed by name,
and blanks were left to be filled, if desired, with names of special
favorites of the reporter. Those listed by name were not all good, but
were widely planted. We wished to know exactly what the planters'
experience had been not only with the better varieties but with other
old stand-bys which were suspected of being below standard.

We asked reporters to mark their sheets with the following scale
symbols: XXXX for best; XXX, very good; XX, good; X, average. O, poor;
OO, failure. In tabulating final summaries, the committee valued the
XXXX symbol at 100%; XXX, 75%; XX, 50%; X, 25%; O, O%; OO, minus 20%.
Twenty percent was arbitrarily deducted from any 100% rating, and 10%
from any lesser rating, in case no other reports on the same tree were
received from other reporters.

Qualities upon which ratings were made were hardiness, average yield
(rating), yield in pounds per tree or acre, age of oldest trees, age at
first crop, percentage filled nuts, husking quality, cracking quality,
size of nuts, weight of kernels, quality of kernel.

Naturally, not all reporters were able to evaluate all of these
qualities, so many spaces were left blank. For instance, hardiness could
be rated for a very young tree, but not yield. In any future survey, we
should advocate including a rating on early maturity of nuts, since this
is a quality essential in trees planted farthest north.

_Black Walnuts._ Six names of well-known varieties were printed upon our
sheets and, of course, most of the reports are centered around these
trees. Twenty-four varieties were voluntarily written in and reported on
by correspondents. No doubt some of these varieties will in time replace
some of the older ones. Reports on them are now too scattered and too
much uncorroborated to enable us to do them justice here. For the
present we shall have to content ourselves with those which have
sufficient evidence.

Of the printed list, Thomas takes first place with rating of 80.1%,
which is a cumulative percentage of all percentages earned on the most
desirable black walnut qualities. The method of obtaining this Thomas
overall percentage is as follows: Add all the Thomas percentages in the
paragraph below. Their average will be found to be 78%. Reports from
Canada and the southern area bring this average up to 80.1%, as stated.
Stambaugh is second with a rating of 72%. Rohwer rates 76%; Ohio, 57%;
Stabler, 49%, and Ten Eycke, 45%. The last three seem to stand in
jeopardy of replacement by other varieties.

Breaking these percentages down according to their qualities, the trees
in the northern U. S. area were rated as follows, using the valuations
noted in the second paragraph at this section entitled _Rating of
Varieties_: In hardiness Thomas rates 80; Stambaugh, 70; Rohwer, 75;
Ohio, 70; Stabler, 60; Ten Eycke, 65. In yield, Thomas rates 61%;
Stambaugh, 39; Ten Eycke, 38; Rohwer, 37; Ohio, 36; Stabler, 13. Yield
per tree or per acre was not well enough reported to warrant reliable
ratings. In percentage of filled nuts, Thomas rated 82%; Stambaugh, 88;
Rohwer, 91; Ohio, 87; Stabler, 67; Ten Eycke, 68. In husking quality,
Thomas, 71%; Stambaugh, 67; Rohwer, 66; Ohio, 7; Stabler, 21; Ten Eycke,
13. In cracking quality, Thomas rated 81%; Stambaugh, 79; Rohwer, 57;
Ohio, 57; Stabler, 61; Ten Eycke, 50. In size of nuts, Thomas rated 92%;
Stambaugh rated 57%; Rohwer, 58; Ohio, 55; Stabler, 39; Ten Eycke, 42%.
In weight of kernels, Thomas rated 79%; Stambaugh, 87; Rohwer, 62; Ohio,
55; Stabler, 50; Ten Eycke, 31. In quality of kernels, Thomas rated 77%;
Stambaugh, 58; Rohwer, 60; Ohio, 68; Stabler, 44; Ten Eyck, 47.

It would have been more accurate, of course, to have again divided these
returns according to the warmer and cooler regions from which they came,
but the report has certain limits which can not be over-stepped. All
these varieties are represented by some trees twenty years old or older.
Thomas was reported to be the youngest to bear. Its average age at first
crop was exactly five years; Stambaugh, 6 years; Rohwer, 5.57 years;
Ohio, 5.17; Stabler, 5.7; and Ten Eyck, 5.17 years.

Other varieties, the names of which were written in, are each sponsored
by one or more correspondents who were attracted by their outstanding
excellence with respect to the following qualities:

=Hardiness:= Creitz, Homeland, Mintle, Elmer Myers, Tasteright,
Pinecrest, Patterson, Horton, Vandersloot, Lamb, Deming Purple, Brown,
Tritton, Cole, Sifford and Korn.

=Yield:= Creitz, Homeland, Mintle, Cozad, Vandersloot, Brown.

=Filled Nuts:= Homeland, Mintle, Cornell, Niederhauser, Cozad,
Vandersloot, Brown, Tritton, Cole, Sifford.

=Husking Quality:= Creitz, Homeland, Mintle, Patterson, Todd, Snyder,
Cozad, Horton, Vandersloot, Lamb, Deming Purple, Brown, Tritton, Cole,
Sifford.

=Cracking Quality:= Eureka, Snyder, Mintle, Patterson, Brown, Tritton.

=Size of Nuts:= Homeland, Todd.

=Weight of Kernels:= Mintle, Todd, Snyder, Cornell, Niederhauser.

=Kernel Quality:= Creitz, Homeland, Mintle, Korn, Snyder, Cornell.

This, of course, cannot be a complete list, but we give it as reported
to us. It will be well to keep an eye on several of them.

Mr. L. K. Hostetter, Lancaster, Pa., sends us the only report which
gives a year-by-year record of nut production from black walnut trees.
He says:

"I am especially interested in persimmons, service-berries, wild cherry,
mulberry and elderberry. Of about 15 varieties of persimmon here I
consider Early Golden and Josephine the best. Of 20 or more varieties of
mulberries I consider Downing and Paradise the best. Paradise is a large
purple mulberry I found near here. It has an exceptionally good flavor.

"Following is a record of my crops of black walnuts, grafted varieties:
1931, 2 bu.; 1932, 3 bu.; 1933, 4 bu.; 1934, 8 bu.; 1935, 12 bu.; 1936,
18 bu.; 1937, 37 bu.; 1938, 54 bu.; 1939, 52 bu.; 1940, 300 bu.; 1941,
20 bu.; 1942, 125 bu.; 1943, 70 bu."

Mr. Hostetter sells his nuts both as kernels and in the shell. He says
that he can now count upon this crop for a substantial contribution to
his annual income.

_Seedling Chestnuts._ None but Chinese and Japanese varieties were
reported on. More of the Chinese seedlings have been planted than of the
Japs. The latter excel in hardiness, yield, size of nuts, but the
Chinese have a better percentage of filled nuts, have better husking
quality and much better quality of kernel, according to growers. Of
course, being seedlings, neither is entirely dependable in any of these
qualities. The best that can be said is that the planter of a Chinese
seedling has a better chance than the planter of a Jap seedling if he is
after nut quality.

_Named Chestnuts._ Outside of the report on hardiness, the returns on
these varieties are too meagre to enable one to arrive at a corroborated
conclusion. In hardiness, the Hobson stands first with a rating of 95%.
Zimmerman and Carr are tied at 60%; Yankee rates 50%. Reliable seems to
be little planted but also seems to rate well in hardiness. Hobson again
stands first in yield, with Carr and Zimmerman second. The ratings are
80% and 60% respectively. Reliable comes next, then Yankee. In early
bearing, Hobson stands first, Carr next. All seem to fill well, also
have good husking quality. Carr is said to bear the largest nut, with
Hobson and Zimmerman next. In quality of kernel, Hobson and Reliable
stand out from the others. Hobson, on the returns, has much the best of
it in general excellence. However, the last word has by no means been
said in connection with hybrid chestnuts. In no field of nut culture is
so much hybridizing being done. We expect to see many contenders for
preeminence in this most promising branch of the industry.

_Pecans._ The returns on pecans are also very incomplete after we go
beyond the young tree age. Perhaps one reason for this is that young
orchards of pecans require a longer time for growth than many other
species before they begin to bear. The reports confirm this view.
Records of crops from present plantings are none too numerous.

In the reports on hardiness among the pecans, Major stands first with a
percentage score of 85; Greenriver 83; Busseron, Indiana and Giles are
tied at 80; Posey 75; Butterick 40.

Records of yields are not numerous enough to be conclusive, but Major,
Busseron and Butterick lead. This is in the absence of reports on
Greenriver, Posey, Niblack, and other important varieties.

_Hybrid Pecans._ The records for hardiness here, as with other pecans,
are marred by lack of good reporting. So far as the record shows,
Pleas--Hican var. (hickory x pecan) is the outstanding variety for
hardiness in regions north of its origin. It scores 85%; Norton and
Rockville, 80% each; Gerardi, 75; Burlington, 60; Bixby, Des Moines and
McCallister, 50% each.

Records of yields are not forthcoming. Such records as we have of filled
nuts show them to be in general, unsatisfactory. In fact, however, no
reliable conclusion can be reached from a study of the pecan reports
unless it should be--a sad one--that the questionnaire or the
questionees fell down here.

_Filberts._ The story brightens. Many are working with filberts. In the
northwest, the growing of filberts is developing into a commercial
enterprise of good proportions. Our records are correspondingly more
complete though they show that there is plenty of room for improvement
in the development of varieties of desirable quality.

In hardiness, Winkler leads in the reports with a score of 71.46%, with
Jones hybrid a very close second at 71.15%. Bixby is next, then
Buchanan. Of the "written-in" varieties, excellent hardiness is reported
for Cosford, Hazelbert, Kentish Cob, Early Globe, Burkhardt's Zeller,
Comet, Gellatly No. 1, Chinese Corylus, Brixnut and Longfellow.

Yields rule best with Rush and Jones hybrid. Winkler, Bixby and Buchanan
follow closely. Failures in this respect are noted for Barcelona,
DuChilly, Italian Red and White Aveline. Cosford has a good report.

Rush and Jones hybrid fill well, as do Cosford, Hazelbert, Buchanan and,
usually, Winkler. Husking qualities are quite good for all varieties
named except Winkler and, in some places, Rush. Cracking qualities are
fairly uniform in all varieties reported.

In size of nuts, Jones hybrid and Winkler have a more uniformly good
record, with Hazelbert, DuChilly, White Aveline, Barcelona, Brixnut and
Longfellow following closely. In kernel quality, Rush, Winkler, Cosford,
DuChilly, Bixby, Buchanan and Longfellow are named as among the best.

_Butternuts._ The record is very scant. Weschcke, Sherwood and Buckley,
according to these reports, are hardy. Weschcke and Craxezy yield well.
Sherwood is the most precocious in early bearing with Weschcke close up.
Sherwood, Craxezy and Weschcke fill well and the latter two crack well.
Buckley leads in size of nuts, with Sherwood close, and all have good
kernel quality. We have no reports on Aiken, Deming or Devon.

_Persian Walnuts._ In most portions of the north, the reports show that
Franquette, Mayette, Pomeroy and Rush are not adapted to our
climate--too tender. Broadview has the best record for hardiness,
followed by one or two of the Crath Carpathian numbers, and with
Breslau, Lancaster and Bedford showing up well.

In yields, Broadview and Payne have the best reports, followed by
Breslau, Lancaster and Bedford. In size of nuts, Breslau, Lancaster and
Franquette are first; Broadview and Payne next. In quality of kernel,
Bedford, Franquette, Lancaster and Payne, in that order, are claimed as
best, with Mayette, Breslau, Crath, Pomeroy and Broadview following.
Since kernel quality is a matter of taste, it seems unlikely that any
rating on it will prove satisfactory to everybody.

_Hickories._ Returns are numerous and well distributed. In hardiness,
Stratford leads with a rating of 84%; Glover rates 83; Fairbanks, 79;
Romig, 75; Weiker, 71; Kentucky, 65. Others, written in, with best
ratings by their growers, are, in the following order; Beaver, Hales,
Barnes, Clark, Caldwell, Taylor, Weschcke, Beemen, Bridgewater.
Schinnerling, Hagen and Abscota are close up.

Best yields are reporting for Stratford and Fairbanks. Close up are
Barnes, Glover and Schinnerling.

Weschcke, Glover, Weiker, Beeman and Bridgewater are most precocious in
early bearing. Best filled nuts are reported, in order of precedence,
for Stratford, Fairbanks, Walters, Beaver, Hagen, Weschcke, Beeman and
Bridgewater.

=Husking quality:= Reports were inadequate. Cracking quality, in order
or rank, Glover, Stratford, Hagen, Beeman, Weschcke, Schinnerling,
Kirtland, Weiker, Bridgewater.

=Size of nuts:= In order of rating, Weiker, Bridgewatar, Fairbanks,
Weschcke, Stratford, Beeman, Schinnerling, Hagen. In weight of kernel:
first, Abscota, then Barnes, Glover, Fairbanks, Kentucky, Kirtland.

=Quality of kernel:= In order of preference, Kirtland, Glover,
Weschcke, Hagen, Stratford, Bridgewater, Weiker, Abscota, Schinnerling,
Kentucky, Beeman, Stratford, Beaver.

Too much dependence should not be placed upon the order of precedence in
the above lists after the first two or three, since, in many instances,
there is not sufficient corroboration from separate sources to warrant
more than a tentative position, especially for some of the varieties
listed at the ends of the classes.

_Heartnuts._ The hardiest, in the order reported, are Walters,
Fodermaier, Gellatly, Faust, Bates. Lancaster, does not bear well and is
not hardy in the northern areas. Best yields reported are from Walters
and Bates. Other reports are inadequate or absent. Most precocious,
Bates and Gellatly.

Best filled heartnuts, with best husking and cracking qualities as well
as best quality of kernels; returns are about equally divided between
Gellatly, Walters and Bates, with Walters and Gellatly somewhat larger
in size.

It is to be regretted that reports are incomplete or absent in
connection with many varieties of nuts. We feel, however, that, in the
main, the above ratings, especially when arrived at from cumulative
evidence, reflect with fair accuracy, the present status of nut tree
conditions in northern United States.

_CANADA._ In all its chief characteristics, the Canadian nut growing
experience follows the pattern of northern United States. The reports
received from Canada numbered about one-tenth those received from the
northern states--upon the whole, a satisfactory cross section.

In summarizing these reports it will be necessary only to call attention
to such practices and experiences in Canada as are at variance with
those already reported from the northern states. For example, in
response to the question, "What species are you planting experimentally
or commercially?" we find, surprisingly, that Persian walnuts displace
black walnuts from first place, at least in these reports, and that
filberts and heartnuts come next. Then come black walnuts, butternuts,
hickories, hazels, Chinese chestnuts, persimmons, Jap walnuts, almonds
and a scattering of other species. Leading native wild trees are, first
hazels, then black walnuts, hickories and butternuts.

Winter climate is widely varied, being temperate along Puget Sound and
close to the southern tier of the Great Lakes, but subject to great
extremes in the prairie provinces. Lower winter temperatures in these
provinces average from zero to 45° below, while the lowest recorded is
reported to have been 62° below. It is evident that Canadians have
widely variable problems, in spite of which three Canadians, exactly the
number reported from the northern states, tell us that the sale of nuts
is an important item in their annual incomes. It looks as though, in
comparison, northern U. S. growers could do better. With an average
frost-free season of less than five months (from May 7 to Oct. 2),
Canadians do this. The normal dates of latest spring frosts average from
April 20 to May 24, and of earliest fall frosts, from Sept. 10 to Oct.
12. Extremes at either end often shorten the season somewhat.

Soil conditions are generally good, with plenty of loam and sandy-loam,
half lime, half acid; but drought is serious in places, necessitating
irrigation. One wonders whether, if more of us were pushed to it, we
might not find irrigation so profitable that we would never again be
without it. Cultural and soil corrective practices are, in general,
similar to those previously reported. Less trouble is experienced from
rodents--mice, rabbits, squirrels--but more from deer. Wrapping the
trunks of young trees is more generally practiced than with us of more
southern latitudes, and disk cultivation is more generally favored.

In reply to the question, "What was your one greatest source of
success?", the answers include, pollination by hand, the use of good
trees, disking, planting hardy seed, and budding Persians on black
walnut stocks. Failures were due mostly to the inevitable causes, cold,
drought, weak growth. Alkaline soil is mentioned in one report as a
chief difficulty. Bud worms, June beetle, leaf hoppers and walnut
caterpillars are also enemies, but Canada seems free from some of the
other pests that have invaded the United States.

The most profitable species reported by Canadians are filberts, black
walnuts, with "soft-shelled" walnuts mentioned by Mr. Gellatly, of West
Bank, B. C. From Ontario, Mr. A. S. Wagner, of Delhi, writes, "We are
collecting (nuts) now to make tests of various types of black walnuts
this winter. There are one or two plantations of 1000 trees which will
soon be bearing, and the future looks interesting."

_Black Walnuts._ Four varieties appear in Canadian reports which have
not been mentioned previously: Impit, Troup, Gifford and Neilson.
Gifford and Neilson are said by Mr. Corsan, of Ontario, to be heavy
croppers in Canada, Neilson "Very heavy." Impit is a splendid,
upright-growing tree which should do well for timber production as well
as for nuts. All trees printed in the questionnaire, Ohio, Rohwer,
Stabler, Stambaugh, Ten Eyck and Thomas, are given "good" ratings for
hardiness except Thomas which is fair. Gibson bears large nuts of good
cracking quality.

Neither Japanese chestnuts nor pecans are reported on from Canada.
Chinese chestnuts and hybrid chestnuts are reported as planted and
hardy, thus far, but have yet to bear.

_Filberts._ Holden, Craig, Firstola, Comet and Brag show up as hardy and
bear good crops of nuts of good quality. Other promising varieties are
Petoka (new variety, small, thin shell,) Daviana,
Churchvelt--significant name! Barcelona, DuChilly, Italian Red, Rush,
White Aveline and Bixby are reported to be not hardy. Winkler is hardy.
Mr. J. U. Gellatly, of West Bank, is working with a number of tree
hazels, Chinese, Indian, Turkish and a cork-barked variety. All are
rated by him as hardy in his area. They are young trees, not yet
reported in bearing.

_Butternuts._ In addition to previously named varieties, Edge is added
and is given a foremost rating in all departments, The rating on others
is not conclusive.

_Persian Walnuts._ No new light is thrown on the performance of
varieties already listed. Broadview is one of the hardiest, a good
producer of fair nuts. Watt produces a large nut of finest flavor.
Geloka is a good nut, and Corsan is hardy but bears a smaller nut of
lesser kernel quality.

_Hickories_ do not seem to interest Canadians. Stratford, first, and
Weiker, second, are leaders. Stratford bears heavily but its quality in
Canada is not up to par.

_Heartnuts_ are a Canadian specialty. Gellatly, of all varieties in the
printed list, is reported as best in all departments. Of the twelve
varieties written in by reporters as worthy of special mention, it is
difficult to make a just appraisal. Okanda, O. K., and Crofter are
reported perfectly hardy through minus 20° of cold. Others, hardy and
good in all departments, are, Mackenzie, Canoka, Walters, Rover,
Calendar and Smyth. Stranger seems not quite so hardy, but Mr. Corsan
calls it "the best heartnut grown", splendid in flavor, thin shelled, a
little small but with a better than usual percentage of kernel.

If heartnuts have a future, which seems almost inevitable, it looks as
though Canada, if it continues as it has started, will be one of the
main sources of supply for varieties. The Canadians are doing a creative
job.

_THE SOUTHERN AREA._ There are no nurserymen who report from the
southern area. Practically all are interested in the production of nuts,
but they are more alive than their northern neighbors to the value of
timber, and more of them count upon it for a part of their profit from
the planting of nut trees.

Interest is about equally divided between methods of propagation,
grafting, budding, top-working, planting seed of better varieties,
artificial cross-pollination, and searching their neighborhoods for wild
trees that show promise of superiority.

The species being planted experimentally or commercially are, in order
of precedence, black walnut, persimmon, pecan, Persian walnut, Chinese
chestnut, hickories, filberts, hazels, heartnuts, Jap chestnuts,
almonds, mulberry, native chestnuts, Jap walnuts, pawpaws and beech.
Species of wild trees found locally follow closely the pattern of
planting mentioned above, which is as it should be.

Climatic conditions are, in-general, favorable. Peaches are in most
places reliably hardy. Lowest temperatures normally expected range from
22° above to 20° below zero; and the highest normal summer temperatures
range from 90° to 115°. Dates of normal late spring frosts have a very
wide spread, being all the way from March 1 to May 12. Normal early
frost expectancy is from Oct. 10 to Nov. 15. All long-season crops
mature well. The chief climatic enemies are drought and hot, dry winds.

As to growth conditions, clay soils predominate, but with plenty of
loamy bottom land for nut planting. Acid soils predominate somewhat over
lime soils, growing more unfavorably alkaline in the south-west.

Cultural practices are generally the same as in the north, but with a
greater proportionate use of mowing and mulching, no doubt induced by
the need for protection against greater heat, as well as for
conservative of moisture. A greater proportionate failure of young trees
to start first year's growth is also probably due to heat injury in the
spring and summer following planting. Tree wrapping seems to be the
corrective chiefly indicated.

The difficulties principally mentioned with matured trees are again
mostly climatic; drought, sun-scald, early advent of spring followed by
late frosts, delayed dormancy in the fall, poor filling in dry seasons,
and biennial fruiting.

Insect enemies which damage both trees and nuts are practically the same
as in the north only there are more of them. Rodent damage and squirrel
theft seem less troublesome there owing, perhaps, to protective measures
and to the well developed hunting instinct among southern farm boys.

A larger proportion of growers than are reported in the north sell nuts
commercially, with pecans, walnuts, and chestnuts listed as the most
profitable species. The practice is still limited as an important source
of income, but a much greater proportion of planters look confidently
forward toward profitable operations in the future.

_Black Walnuts._ It is evident that in some of the warmer parts of the
United States, California, for instance, the word "hardiness" takes on a
certain connotation that we should understand better in the north. Its
meaning there is "resistance to delayed dormancy", as one California
report states it. As a matter of fact, it might be advisable for us all
everywhere to think of hardiness in these terms. Delayed dormancy is
hazardous in any tree, whether natural to it or induced artificially by
late summer or early fall cultivation and fertilizing, and whether the
tree is located in the north or in the south. When a tree goes into the
winter with sappy wood, it is injured, and we say it is not hardy.

That this is true in the south as well as in the north is well attested
by the returns on black walnut trees of the south. There, the tree gives
us a picture surprisingly similar to that of the north. In the south, if
the tree's dormancy is delayed, it does not get its proper rest between
crops and it dies or is stunted, in one way or another, for some time
thereafter. In the north, if the following winter is severe, it simply
dies. Perhaps the winter killed it. Or perhaps we killed it with
unseasonable pampering.

Reports show that in the south, Rohwer, Stambaugh, and Ten Eyck lead in
hardiness in the printed list of black walnuts, with a score of 80%
each. Ohio, Stabler and Thomas each average 75%. Of the written-in
names, Sifford and Beck are reported hardy, followed by Creitz. Elmer
Myers has only one report, which is rather unfavorable in this respect.

In yield, Creitz has the best rating, then Thomas, Stambaugh, Sifford,
Stabler and Beck, in that order.

Thomas is the most precocious in early bearing. One report has it that
Thomas kills itself, sometimes, by overdoing it in this respect.
Stabler, Sifford, Creitz and Beck come next. All of these varieties are
reported as having well filled nuts, with Stabler in the lead, which may
come as a surprise to many. Other qualities, such as husking and
cracking, size, and quality of kernel, are reported to be the same as in
the north except that Stabler leads in cracking quality, with Thomas a
rather poor second, owing, perhaps, to a shell too well filled for
cracking without shattering the kernels.

_Seedling Chestnuts._ More Chinese chestnuts are planted than Japs. They
are hardier, yield better crops, are more precocious, and have a far
better quality of kernel. The Japs excel only in size.

_Named Chestnuts._ Hobson is hardy and an extremely precocious bearer of
finest quality. Carr follows. Reports on these varieties, however, are
not numerous enough to enable one to reach a satisfactory appraisal. Two
Marron strains are mentioned as producers of very large nuts; otherwise
this variety's record is not impressive.

_Pecans._ Posey and Greenriver are given top mention for hardiness, with
Busseron, Major, and Niblack next. In the more southern areas, of
course, the more tender varieties are favored, such as Mahan, Success,
Burchett, Schley and Stuart. Mahan seems to be the one most favored for
general excellence in yield, flavor, and cracking qualities. It must be
said, however, that, in flavor, these larger pecans are inferior to the
best pecans of the indigenous northern varieties which are now being
propagated. But because of their size, beauty, and productiveness, they
will probably maintain their present leadership commercially.

_Hybrid Pecans, Filberts, Butternuts._ Reports from the south are
inadequate for appraisal. The inference one must draw is that they are
not being planted extensively there.

_Persian Walnuts._ The object of the inquiry, of course, was primarily
to get information about varieties which might be capable of expanding
their range toward the north. In this, so far as the southern reports
are concerned, we have not been successful. Placentia and Eureka are
mentioned in one report but their records, as reported, are not
particularly good. Corroborative evidence is needed. Upon the whole, the
south, strangely enough, seems not to be the place to look for Persian
walnuts for the north. In California, the varieties of Persians, Juglans
regia L., are well rooted to the ground. They object to more northern
locations. This may not be entirely true of another species, J. hindsii,
which in the past has shown a tendency to cross with other members of
the juglans tribe. Crossed with the native black walnut, the hybrid
known as "Royal" was developed, a robust grower which bears little.
Crossed with the Persian, "Paradox" was produced. We are indebted to Mr.
Harry S. Welby, of Taft, Calif., for some interesting J. hindsii
varieties of good size and rather large, well filled kernel capacity.
Upon their exterior, the nuts resemble the Persians, and the kernel has
the Persian flavor. Inside the shell, the structure is that of the
American black, with a substantial woody cross-brace, and the shell
itself calls for a hammer for cracking. Neither Paradox nor Royal have
proved of value except for stocks upon which the growers graft or bud
their commercial cions. Much experimenting has been done in hybridizing
J. hindsii, thus far without producing more than comparatively sterile
"mules", but, the tendency to cross having been demonstrated, this work
should be continued. Mr. Welby's samples have been sent to Mr. C. A.
Reed, at the Beltsville Experiment Station, for evaluation. "Perhaps
someone will know," says Mr. Welby, "the limit of cold J. hindsii will
stand."

Mr. Welby's comments accompanying his report are too interesting to
omit. He says: "On the grounds of an oilfield camp, I have carried on
collaboration with the U. S. D. A. Bureau of Plant Introduction for
twenty years. The importation of graftwood of eastern soft shell black
walnuts has been "on my own." Of black walnuts we have bearing trees
among ornamental plantings. There has been a marked change of attitude
from the early days when I was more or less looked upon as a freak for
working with them. The nuts are valued today. The original objective has
been attained.

"In the meantime, I have purchased, 450 miles north of here, a twenty;
have fenced and planted it to a brand of permanent pasture grasses known
as "Evergreen", furnished by a grass specialist, Dale Butler, of Fresno.
Prior to the grass, black walnuts, grafted and ungrafted had gone in. A
strip bordering the highway was reserved for trees, we hope pistachio.
There are now thirty of that variety, bearing, in an interior block.

"We have for years purchased black walnut meats in the Chico area. That
would be a paradise for a black walnut man. And years ago I visited
Teharna, a deserted village from the storybook, a former pony express
station--wonderful black walnuts! Upon placing my camera upon a stump of
a tree that grew in the street-parking, which had been logged, I braced
the camera with a chip of this four-foot stump and discovered that the
tree had been a curly walnut. The trees there are not _J. hindsii_, but
Missouri blacks planted by forty-niners.

"Concerning pistachio: I doubt, considering the percentage of members
who would be interested, whether I should bring this up, but there is
need for just such an organization as the N. N. G. A. behind this tree.
It does not lend itself to common nursery practice. It should be raised
from seed, potted or in cans, reared without babying for several years,
a horticulturist brought in, and your pistachio vera male and female
blossoms worked to _P. atlantica_ or _chinensis_. Lots of work but it is
worth the trouble. It is deciduous with a hickory-like foliage; clusters
of nuts clothed in pink-cheeked hulls. Bailey reports best nuts come
from Sicily. Perhaps knowledge of them will be more widely disseminated
when the boys return."

_Hickories._ This species seems not to be of great interest to the
south. The old varieties are not mentioned in the reports. Nugget is
mentioned by Mr. W. D. Dockery, of Steele, Ala., as one of the best. It
grows well, yields well, its kernels have a good size and their quality
is unusually good.

Of _heartnuts_, only one is mentioned, the Lancaster, which leaves much
to be desired in performance in the south.

_Suggestions and Requests._ In response to the questions, "Is there any
service that N. N. G. A. could render you not now being met?" and "Have
you any suggestions for future work?", a number of responses were
received which are worth noting.

Dr. O. D. Diller, State Exper. Sta., Wooster, O., "We are thinking in
terms of another state wide nut contest in the fall of 1944." It will be
remembered that the last Ohio contest brought the Brown and Tritton
trees to light. Both are making friends by good production of good nuts.
This is a suggestion for promotion in other states.

Sylvester Shessler, Genoa, O.: "Planted 10 nuts from Tritton parent tree
in 1935. One seedling bore a larger nut than the parent tree. Several
others bore very small nuts but all well filled."

J. Russell Smith, Swarthmore, Pa., "Urge the members to run local
contests for good nuts. It may bring members if not nuts, and you may
find some good new neighbors you didn't know about." (One easily worked
plan is to see the secretary of your county fair board, offer to pay
half or all prize money for best nuts from a single tree in your own and
surrounding counties. See that judging is done by someone who knows how
or do it yourself.)

Alfred J. Frueh, W. Cornwall, Conn., "Have had quite a lot of winter
injury on the south-west side of black walnut trunks grafted near the
ground. Note that seedling walnuts have a ridged, corky bark on the
trunk already the second year, whereas a grafted trunk maintains its
smooth bark for 6 to 8 years. Am now grafting on seedling stock 5 to 6
feet above the ground and much of the winter injury is thus eliminated."

A. B. Anthony, Sterling, Ill., "If they can be had disease free, promote
the planting of a few of the most choice chestnuts in widely scattered
regions where no one grows such trees. Possibly our children can get
back to chestnut growing."

Seward Berhow, Huxley, Ia., "In a separate (pamphlet) or included in an
early report, give a complete list of all named varieties, especially
black walnuts, name of nut, name and address of originator, location of
original tree, north latitude, year discovered, nuts per pound, score
for cracking, kernel, prizes won. This would be very valuable for quick
reference." The T. V. A. has issued a pamphlet giving much of this
information. Also, we believe, Mr. C. A. Reed is at work on a book which
will be worth waiting for.

J. U. Gellatly, Westbank, B. C.: "Could not the Association supply
samples of recommended nuts or perhaps give lists of those who would
sell small (3 or 4) nut samples. I have sent out such samples of 2 or 3
each of varieties I have on hand up to 9 or 12 kinds, at 50 cents per
package, post paid. This is not enough to pay for the time consumed but
is a good advertising practice."

Harry S. Welby, Taft, Calif.: "The ground squirrel is a pest here. Black
walnut as bait will attract them in winter when fruits are scarce. At
that time I have had some success with a box trap treadled by an
electric contrivance instead of figure 4. Can anyone tell me any
experience with scent baits which I believe Biological Survey trappers
sometimes use? It may be a delicate question, but I should be interested
in knowing more if the information is available."

R. T. Dunstan, Greensboro College, Greensboro, N. C.: "I would be happy
if this survey brings to light information on the behavior of the best
and more recently discovered hickories. (If not,) I believe an article
on performance of such varieties as Whitney, Grainger, Bergor, Davis,
Wilcox, Schinnerling, etc., perhaps similar to that by Reed in 1938
Proceedings, would be highly valuable and welcome. Perhaps a report on
T. V. A.'s nut tree work in recent years would also be worth while."

C. H. Parks, Asheville, N. C.: "Would be interested in a chestnut that
will grow in southern Appalachian regions." (See Mr. H. F. Stoke's
report above. Chairman.)

Harold G. Williams, Ramsey, N. J.: "I believe that most useful trees,
both fruit and nut, that are now commercially important, were developed
from selected seedlings grown in the area in which they are being used.
I have a suggestion. How about a concerted breeding program for nut
trees with full membership participation? The best parent trees should
be selected from present plantings of grafted, named varieties. Ship
these seeds, or one or two year old seedlings from them, to each member
on a subscription basis. Let each member make a trial planting of as
many trees as he can. When these trees come into bearing there will be a
better chance of finding superior strains that are adapted to their
environment. Hybridizing by cross pollination requires more time and
skill than many of our members possess. There are, however, members who
now own orchards containing some of the best varieties, such, for
instance (among the black walnuts) as Thomas, Stabler, Stambaugh, and
perhaps Elmer Myers, planted in such close proximity as to allow for
cross pollination. Seed could be purchased from them and resold to
members for their planting; costs to be kept fairly low, with annual
reports required as to care, cultivation, fertilizing and growth.

"An alternate plan would be to turn over such seed to Hershey, Smith,
and other member nurserymen to plant, grow the young seedlings under
best conditions, and furnish to member cooperators whose pledged
subscriptions are to take care of the cost. This would give the
cooperating nurseries a piece of business that could be depended upon
(of a kind that would take comparatively little time as compared with
that required for grafted trees), in return for their support. These
trees could be planted fairly close, since most of them would prove to
be useless as nut producers. If an outstanding variety is found,
everything around it should be chopped down to give it room for
development. I personally would raise and report upon some two dozen
trees of this kind, and if a large group joined in the work, hundreds of
tree could be tested."

Comment: That the chairman of this committee thinks the above suggestion
a good one, and the project a good gamble, is evidenced by the fact that
he has about a thousand of such trees now growing. Seed was bought from
Mr. Harry Weber's, Rockport, Ind., and Mr. C. F. Hostetter's
Bird-in-Hand, Pa., plantations in the fall of 1937 and planted at once.
Most of the seed was from Thomas trees which had been flanked in the
plantations with Stablers and other named trees, and from Stablers
similarly flanked. The trees have now had six years' growth. He hopes
for first nuts in 1944 _from seedlings planted in deep loam only_.
Growth elsewhere has been negligible. If no outstanding nut producers
are found, there will at least be some splendid timber, already assured.

It should be stated at once, however, that those whose object is the
assured production of nuts, rather than the discovery or development of
a new variety, should never plant anything but the best grafted trees
bought from reliable nurserymen. Your decision should be governed by
your interest. If you wish to be sure of nuts of a certain quality for
home use, buy grafted trees of that quality. If, on the other hand, you
have the urge to probe into the unknown and possibly create a new type,
the above project will appeal to you, especially if you should lack
training and time for more painstaking work. The following account is an
example of the latter kind.

Arthur H. Graves, Curator, Brooklyn Botanic Garden, says: "We are
breeding chestnuts for the purpose of obtaining a disease-resistant
timber tree stock similar to the old chestnut tree which has now nearly
disappeared on account of the blight. We started breeding chestnuts here
at the Botanic Garden in 1930, and now after thirteen years of work,
have on our plantation at Hamden, Conn., Litchfield, Conn., where the
White Memorial Foundation is cooperating with us, and Redding Ridge,
Conn., where Mr. Archer M. Huntington and the Connecticut Agr. Exp't
Station are cooperating, about 1000 hybrids, a large number of
combinations of Chinese, Japanese and American chestnuts, many of them
now in the third generation from the beginning of the breeding period in
1930.

"We are carrying out our breeding program in the following way:

"We have selected the Chinese and Japanese species to cross with the
American because the Asiatic species are disease-resistant, and we hope
to incorporate this quality of disease-resistance with the tall timber
growth of the American. We find that the Chinese are in general more
disease-resistant than the Japanese. Other stocks which have been
incorporated in our hybrids are the European _C. sativa_, the southern
chinquapins _C. pumilia_, _C. ozarkensis_, _C. floridana_, and Dr. Van
Fleet's old hybrid, presumably of _C. crenata_ and _C. pumila_, which
goes under the name of S8, and _C. seguinii_. After the hybrids become
old enough, we inoculate the tallest of them with the blight fungus in
order to get an index of their disease resistance. The most
disease-resistant are bred together and of their offspring the tallest
are selected, inoculated, and the most disease-resistant are bred
together again. For example, this year we had 350 hybrids from last
year's breeding experiments set out in a special nursery at Hamden and
carefully tended during the season. Of these 350 we have selected 50
which are the tallest and straightest, that is, 20 inches and over. The
others were sent to Washington, D. C., where the Division of Forest
Pathology, Department of Agriculture, is working along a similar line,
but with more attention to the nut phase of the problem.

"Our ultimate aim, of course, is to establish a race of chestnut trees
which shall replace our now practically extinct American chestnut. The
loss in money value from this timber tree has amounted to millions of
dollars in comparison with which the value of its nut crops is very
small indeed.

"However, we are interested in the nut problem, and whenever any
particularly fine nuts appear we note the fact. We have now a strain of
Chinese chestnut which has not yet come into bearing which we believe
will have nuts as sweet as the old American chestnut, but much larger."

With this forward-looking note we close our report. We have a foundation
upon which to build that is substantial and tried. The pioneering work
of a patient, far-sighted, and distinguished group of workers has shown
us much of what to do and what not to do. It is now up to us, the
farmers, the planters, to multiply their work and continue it.



Side-lights on the 1943-4 Survey


Very many interesting bits of information have been included in the
survey reports; so many that the committee has regretfully omitted some
that hardly seemed properly to belong with the material of a survey,
which after all must have some limits. One such item is from J. C.
McDaniel, of Haines City, Fla., and has a special interest for members
of this Association. He says:

"Perhaps you will be interested in data on one of America's largest
Chinese chestnut trees, even if it does grow in Florida, at Monticello.
It stands adjacent to a lot in which the late J. F. Jones had a nursery
for a short time in the early years of this century, and apparently was
planted at that time, around forty years ago. The trunk is now more than
25 inches in diameter below where it divides 6 feet above the ground.
From this level, the tree branches profusely and has a symmetrical,
rounded crown. It is healthy, not having a sign of the bark disease,
although a native chinkapin 100 feet away is badly infested. It has
abundant bloom and sets heavy crops of burrs but, lacking another
variety for pollination, the number of nuts matured is small. Nuts are
about average size for the species, of typical sweet flavor, and
separate readily from the pellicle. Many of them become infested, before
ripening, with a fungus which rots the kernel, apparently the same one
which infests chestnuts and chinkapins at Savannah and Albany, Georgia.
Mr. Paul Goldberg, of Monticello, the present owner, states that the
tree has been bearing annually during the twenty years his family has
owned it."

This nut-rot among the oriental chestnuts is one of the diseases that
have become troublesome elsewhere. It is being studied and efforts are
being made to combat it. Thus far, so far as we know, no effective cure
has been found. A report upon present progress would be worth while.

Oscar E. Swan, Jr., Tulsa, Okla., reports an enviable situation. He
says: "My nut trees are growing on a farm where more than 30 years of
cultivation have failed to kill the native pecan sprouts. They come up
year after year from the top roots. Since acquiring the place in 1936, I
have allowed the pecan sprouts and the few native walnuts to grow
unchecked except where necessary to cut them out to avoid crowding. The
growth of these sprouts is quite vigorous, and they are ideal for
top-working. I have top-worked a few trees every spring and now have
about 300 grafted trees all the way from 6 to 30 feet tall. Many are too
close together for full grown trees and I plan to thin them. My
problems, so far, are the mechanical ones of top-working. I have settled
upon a modification of the Biederman bark graft, which gives very good
results. After the grafts are well established, the trees get very
little attention except for cutting out the crowding trees. They are
literally growing 'wild', yet the growth has been better than
transplanted trees would have made with the best of care, because the
root systems are well established in a situation which suits them.

"This system of neglect probably explains why I have failed with some
species and varieties such as the butternut and some of the hickories.
Occasionally I am pleasantly surprised, as in the case of some seedling
Carpathian walnuts which, grafted upon some established black walnut
sprouts, came through the severe 1943 drouth in fine shape without
benefit of mulch, cultivation, fertilizer, or watering. The same applies
to the Helmick hybrid. (A two year old tree, a hybrid walnut, grafted
and growing well on black walnut stock, and which Mr. Swan says will
bloom next year.) I have pampered my Chinese chestnut trees with
cultivation, mulch and manure, as they are located in poorer, drier
soil. They were badly hit by the drouth. Some died in spite of the
attention.

"As to varieties, I am far enough south to grow all the standard
southern pecan varieties, although several do not have a long enough
season to mature their nuts. I am trying the northern varieties and, so
far, am well pleased with their growth as compared with the southern
kinds. It will be a few years before I can report on the size and
quality of their nuts."

J. C. McDaniel again: "Source and variety of seed in Chinese chestnuts
have a great influence on the performance of seedlings. Numerous
seedlings from the original Hobson tree began fruiting in their second
season of growth, and half of the ones I have are fruiting during their
fourth season. On the other hand, I have a tree from imported seed which
grew nine seasons before setting and ripening its first burr. The above
data refer to my planting near Hartselle, Morgan County, Ala., and that
vicinity. I have several black walnut trees under observation, native
trees, on which data are not yet complete enough for evaluation."

If any man deserves a bright N. N. G. A. medal, it is A. L. Young, of
Brooks, Alberta. Lowest temperature expected in winter, 45° below;
lowest known, 62° below. Highest expected in summer, 101°. Frequent
drouths? Yes. Hot, dry winds? Yes. Native nuts found plentifully? None.
Sparingly? None. Yet Mr. Young plants nut trees. It is men like that who
have made Canada what it is. It takes more than mere weather to stop
them. The never-say-die spirit of pioneers speaks throughout his report:

"Black walnuts, butternuts, some oaks, hazels and American chestnuts
(Ohio buckeyes) all came through last winter well. However, late frosts
reduced the nut crop. Of these species, filberts are not getting
anywhere. Winkler, I believe, will eventually make a go of it. Heartnuts
got a rough deal last winter, and European buckeye chestnuts were hurt a
little by late spring frosts. Some Manchurian walnuts also got a setback
with spring frosts, and some did not. Carpathian walnuts killed back
quite a lot, so did most of my hybrid walnuts. Hybrid hazels seem
perfectly hardy. Pecans, beechnuts and sweet chestnuts almost passed out
of the picture last winter. Giant hickory from Ontario seems hardy but
particular about the kind of soil and conditions. When irrigated, too
much water will kill them. And this is true also of walnut and butternut
seedlings. I have no acreage of nut trees. I grow seedlings and plant
them wherever I find a place protected from the stock and within reach
of moisture from the irrigation ditch, as this is a desert, cactus
country.

"I always have a stock of seedling trees on hand, and whenever visitors
show any interest, I give or send them fruit or nut trees and a few
perennial flowers. So there are sure to be a few nut trees, some day,
growing successfully throughout Alberta.

"There is more benefit from this northern seed, especially as I am using
a commercial pollen with the hope of getting a hardy white walnut with
possibly a coarse bark like the black to ward off sun-scald in this
climate. They are on their way. I don't know when we'll be eating these
imaginary nuts. However, it is not so long ago that fruit growing on the
cattle range was a dream. I grew the first pears in Alberta, so far as
we know. Now we are insulted if there is not a crop of fruit every year.
I have many seedlings of standard apples, unnamed, that are really
choice fruit, and, of course, a few named varieties that are doing
fairly well. Minnesota has done great work in apple and plum breeding
for the north. We are enjoying some of them right here.

"I am sorry that I have no data on husking, cracking, etc. Really even
the hardiest, best trees bear nuts that, while of fair size, do not have
fleshy kernels, and some have three sections instead of two. Butternuts
are very sweet with fair size kernels. I was surprised, after a long
hard winter, to find the Ginkgo trees still alive and gaining growth.
Credit some or all this result to J. U. Gellatly and Paul Crath for
supplying me with seed, seedlings, and pollen to carry on with. I am
greatly obliged to them and also to George Corsan of Echo Valley,
Islington, who has a wealth of nut interest.

"We have had a mighty dry year here, so, between irrigating and tending
the largest herd of Ayrshire cattle in the prairie provinces, I have
been busy. The town of Brooks is probably the only town in Canada on
straight Ayrshire milk; and the change in Brooks from a box-car on a
siding years ago to the Brooks of today, with its hundreds of healthy
children now on the streets, is the marvel of a man's lifetime."

George H. Corsan, Echo Valley, Islington, Ont.: "Last winter, 1942-43,
was by far the coldest ever recorded. No damage to filberts. A few
inches of twigs were hurt on certain English walnuts. The Stranger
heartnut, a tender variety, passed through unscathed. Persimmons and
pawpaws passed without a bud killed. These are perfectly hardy
varieties. Jujubes passed O. K., but that may be due to the very deep
snows."

Dr. Oliver D. Diller, Associate Forester, Ohio Experiment Sta., Wooster,
Ohio: "You will be glad to know that the experiment station has set
aside some land for improved varieties of nut trees. If you find some
promising walnuts which might be tested in this part of the state, we
should be glad to have you keep us in mind." This is indeed welcome news
and will be appreciated by all growers in this area.

J. G. Duis, Shattuc, Ill.: "A chicken yard is one of the best places to
grow nut trees."

J. U. Gellatly: "I do not believe in selling nuts for seed purposes
except on a very large scale."

J. C. McDaniel: "A neighbor lost some 5 year old Chinese chestnut trees
following a summer drouth on silty loam soil, rather shallow to
hard-pan. It is my observation that deeper, sandier soils (not too
extremely sandy) are best for chestnuts in the coastal plain and other
regions subject to summer drouths. In the mountains where summer
rainfall is more uniform, they thrive also in clay soils."

G. H. Corsan: "Best success in grafting (hickories) has been in juicy,
wet springs. Heartnuts must not be budded until late August (in
Islington, Ontario). Heartnuts must not be pruned."

A. L. Young, Alberta: "There is a demand for young walnuts for
pickling." (Does anyone know the details--when to pick, how to pickle?)
(Note by Ed. Several recipes and methods in Am. Nut Journal now out of
print but indexed by Ed. Copies of this index in his hands and those of
Mr. C. A. Reed at Washington. Also recipes in 33rd Ann. Report p. 95).

Sterling A. Smith, Vermillon, O.: "With me, summer budding is the most
successful means of propagating black walnuts."

J. Russell Smith: "Chinese chestnuts will blight some if
under-nourished." Which includes the wrong kinds of soil, if
uncorrected.

"Does anyone know for sure how to get pawpaw seed to germinate?" Several
have asked this question. The chairman has had the same trouble, so can
not answer. (Note by Ed. See "Nut Puttering in an Offyear" in this
report.)

So far as the correspondence shows, no state or federal department buys
seed on a large scale (with the exception, now, of chestnut seed) from
trees of the better named varieties with which to grow seedlings for
distribution by state nurseries for forest planting. All nut seed seems
to be gathered haphazardly.

W. G. Tatum, Lebanon, Ky.: "A nut tree with plenty of root, top cut back
one third, promptly set, roots protected, stem wrapped, 4 inches, mulch
applied, set either spring or fall, grows for me 99% of the time.
Failures are not worth mentioning if the above conditions are met."

Carl Weschcke, St. Paul, has a dozen or so extra hardy Persian walnuts
by selection from some 12,000 seedlings. Also is introducing the hardy
"Hazelbert," result of crosses between wild varieties and filberts.

"Dip wire screen guards in red lead and they will be good for twenty
years."

Thomas and Stambaugh, among the black walnuts, are, with justice,
entrenched leaders, but it will be well to watch Patterson, Mintle,
Elmer Myers, Eureka, Creitz, Todd, and other promising new ones less
well known. Thomas is more prolific in the south (generally) than in the
north, which indicates that its bloom may possibly be out nearly enough
to suffer in the north from late frosts.

Among chestnuts, the weight of evidence favors Hobson, Carr and
Reliable, though J. Russell Smith says he has something he likes better
than the first two.

Among pecans, Major, Greenriver, Pleas; among filberts and hazels,
Winkler, Jones hybrid, Cosford, Gellatly, Brixnut; among Persian
walnuts, Broadview, one or two Crath varieties, Payne, Breslau; among
hickories, Stratford, Fairbanks, Barnes, Glover, Weschcke. These seem,
so far as the returns show, to have outstanding points of superiority.
In any such survey, injustice is bound to be done to some not fully
reported.

Outside of filberts in the northwest, no northern grown nut can yet be
said to have reached the status of a profitable commercial crop.
(Exception: The narrow pecan belt along the southern terminus of the
Ohio river valley; mostly wild trees.) Dr. A. S. Colby, University of
Illinois says, "The report from the State Statistician at Springfield
indicated a crop of 575,000 pounds of pecans for Illinois in 1943. I
don't know just where they came from." Short crops were reported in
Calhoun and Gallatin, leading nut producing counties. No reports have
been received as to the size of pecan crops in the Kentucky and southern
Indiana portions of the same belt.

The search for better varieties must continue, but it is also altogether
likely that with an orchardist's attention, with cultivation, mulching,
fertilizing, spraying one to three times yearly with Bordeaux and lead
sprays, we might approach the commercial goal more closely with what we
have today. Is anyone treating a bearing nut orchard as well as he would
treat an apple orchard? That's the test.

S. H. Graham of Ithaca, N.Y. says: "The Ohio is commonly regarded as
hard to hull. With a chained tire husker it hulls as well as any." He
rates it for hardiness and a percentage of 90 to 100 for filled nuts,
while Thomas yields only 0 to 90%.

[Illustration: Seasonal Zones Compiled from the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Records, Based on the Average Date of the Last Killing Frost
in Spring]



Juglone--The Active Agent in Walnut Toxicity

_By GEORGE A. GRIES, Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station_


The problem of walnut toxicity dates back at least to the writings of
Pliny. In his "Natural History," this Roman philosopher stated that "the
shadow of walnut trees is poison to all plants within its compass" and
that it kills whatever it touches.

The first rebuttal to the existence of such a toxicity was forwarded by
Evelyn in the 17th century. This author discussed the high regard in
which walnuts were held in Burgundy as field trees. The roots of these
trees were below the plow sole and thus did not affect either
cultivation nor the growth, of grasses and cereals beneath them.

The pros and cons of the problem have been reviewed several times in the
recent proceedings of the Northern Nut Growers Association. (Greene,
1930; MacDaniels and Muenscher, 1942; Brown, 1943.) That the roots of
walnut trees are toxic to the roots of certain crop plants in direct
contact with them is widely accepted. In nature this toxicity seems to
be limited to plants with tap root systems such as tomato and alfalfa
(Davis, 1923) and those with other types of deep root systems such as
apple trees (Schneiderhan, 1927), rhododendrons (Pirone, 1938), and
privet. This toxicity is exhibited only when there is a direct contact
between the roots of the two plants involved. (Jones, 1903; Massey,
1925). That the wilting observed under walnuts is due to a toxic product
from the bark of the walnut, and does not result from a lack of water,
is substantiated by the fact that the vascular or water conducting
system is discolored for several inches above the point of contact with
the walnut root. This symptom is very similar to that produced by
vascular disease fungi. No such discoloration results from wilting due
to competition for water. This symptom of toxicity has been overlooked
by many workers in the field.

Massey (1925) suggested that the toxic component of walnuts might be
juglone. This idea was further supported by Davis (1928). Today this
concept is widely held. Chemically this substance is known as 5,
hydroxy-1, 4, naphtho-quinone and belongs to a group of strong oxidizing
agents with commercial uses, including tanning agents, medicinals,
poisons, etc.

A knowledge of the physiology of juglone in the walnut is essential to
an understanding of the divergent results obtained by various
experimenters. Juglone, as such, occurs probably only in minute
quantities in the inner root bark, and in the green husks of the nuts.
These regions are, however, rich in a substance known as hydrojuglone.
This compound, the colorless, non-toxic, reduced form of juglone is
immediately oxidized to its toxic form upon exposure to the air or some
oxidizing substance from the roots of other plants. Upon standing in the
air juglone again disappears, being either changed back to hydrojuglone
or broken down into other non-toxic substances.

This sequence of events may be noted in a fresh green husk of a black
walnut. When the fresh husk is cut, the interior is white but
immediately turns yellow as the colorless hydrojuglone is transformed
into the yellow juglone. Upon standing or drying the husk becomes black
as further chemical changes occur. It is impossible to extract juglone
from these dried husks without first reoxidizing them.

It now becomes possible for us to understand some of the discrepancies
in the studies on walnut toxicity. If walnut bark or other plant parts
are allowed to become desiccated, no toxicity may be found. If the roots
of plants do not contact plant parts containing juglone or hydrojuglone,
their oxidizing ability can not produce the toxin. Further the relative
amounts of juglone in various species of _Juglans_ has not been
completely investigated. It does occur definitely in _J. nigra_ and _J.
cinerea_ and has been reported as being in _J. regia_. Other species
need investigation before being included as sources of juglone.

It is known that many plants are not adversely affected when grown under
or near walnut trees. Some of these have root systems too shallow to
contact the roots of the walnuts, especially in plowed ground. Some
plants may send out sufficient surface roots to keep the plant alive in
spite of injury to the deeper roots. The possibility that the roots of
some plants are capable of withstanding the oxidizing power of the
juglone is currently under study.

In early American folklore, the inner bark and the husks of the nuts
were used as a source of a yellow dye for cloth. This yellow dye is
juglone. The ancients also used this method of dying both cloth and
hair.

Another property of juglone is its toxicity to fish. A few years ago it
was a common practice in the South to cut the husks from young nuts and
throw them immediately into a still pond of water. The fish, stunned by
the juglone, would rise to the surface and were collected and eaten. No
one seemed to worry about the effects of such poisoned food on the
consumers.

Juglone is toxic to fungi and bacteria. Of all the medicinal powers
attributed to walnuts by the Greeks and Romans, its use in curing
certain skin diseases including ringworm has held up through the ages
until many today can recall the use of the green husks for control of
ringworms. Brissemoret and Michaud (1917) reported the use of juglone in
clinical cases for the cure of eczema, psoriasis, impetigo and other
skin diseases and concluded that juglone deserves extensive use in
dermatology. To our knowledge the medical profession has not followed up
the possibilities which this substance offers. The author is familiar
with one case in which pure juglone was applied to a persistent ringworm
infection. The infection disappeared within a month after treatment was
begun. Though conclusions can not be drawn on a single case, certainly
this observation lends credence to the medicinal lore of the ancients
and the American pioneers.

During the fall and winter of 1942-43, investigations on juglone were
started at the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station in
conjunction with studies of the effect of other plant toxins on the
roots of higher plants. When the toxicity of this oxidizing compound was
established, it was produced in some quantity both by extraction from
walnuts after the method of Combes (1907) and by synthesis after the
method of Bernthsen and Semper (1887). Working on the assumption that
the killing of germinating fungus spores and root hairs are similar
phenomena, juglone was subjected to standardized laboratory tests for
fungicidal value. In a series of experiments, this compound proved to be
equally toxic with the copper in Bordeaux mixture. Such a high degree of
toxicity was deemed worth further investigation, so juglone was tested
as a seed protectant and as a spray in field trials for the control of
black spot of roses.

As a seed protectant, juglone failed miserably. It's toxicity to the
noncutinized surfaces of root tissues was so great that germination was
abnormal and greatly impaired. The injury noted here was apparently the
same as that discussed by Brown (1943) and that which occurs normally in
the field.

In field tests on the control of black spot of roses juglone stood up
well. No phytotoxic activity could be noted on the cutinized stem and
leaf surfaces. On the variety George Ahrens, juglone gave equal control
with 2-1/2 times as much 325 mesh sulfur, the standard control for this
disease.


SUMMARY

1. Under certain conditions walnut trees exhibit toxicity to those
plants whose roots are in intimate contact with the roots of the walnut.

2. This toxicity is due to the action of juglone, the oxidized form of
hydrojuglone, a non-toxic substance occurring in the inner bark and
green husk of walnuts.

3. Juglone has been used in dermatology to cure various skin disorders
including both bacterial and fungus diseases.

4. As a seed protectant, juglone is unsuitable because of its inherent
toxicity to the non-cutinzed root surfaces.

5. Laboratory and field tests have shown juglone to be an excellent
fungicide


LITERATURE CITED

     1. Bernthsen, A. and A. Semper Ueber die Constitution des Juglons
     und seine Synthese aus Naphtalin. Ber. d. deutsch. Chem. Gesellsch.
     20: 934-941. 1887.

     2. Brissemoret et Michaud Sur une nouvelle classe de médicaments de
     la peau; les quinones peroxydes. Jour. pharm. et chim. 7e ser.
     16:283-285. 1917.

     3. Brown, Babette I. Injurious influence of bark of black walnut on
     seedlings of tomato and alfalfa. Northern Nut Growers' Assn., Proc.
     1942:97-102. 1943,

     4. Combes, R. Sur un procéde de preparation et de purification des
     dérivés oxyanthraquinoniques et oxynapthoquinoniques en genéral, du
     juglon et de l'émodine en particulier. Bull. soc. chim. 4c ser. 1:
     800-816. 1907.

     5. Cook, Mel T. Wilting caused by walnut trees. Phytopathology
     11:346. 1921.

     6. Davis, Everett. The toxic principle of _Juglans nigra_ as
     identified with synthetic juglone, and its toxic effects on tomato
     and alfalfa plants. Amer. Jour. Bot. 15: 620. 1928.

     7. Greene, K.W. The toxic (?) effect of the black walnut: Northern
     Nut Growers' Assn., Proc. 1929: 152-156. 1930.

     8. Jones, L. R. and W. J. Morse The shrubby cinquefoil as a weed.
     16th Ann. Rpt, Vt, Agr. Expt. Sta. 188-190. 1902-03.

     9. MacDaniels, L. H. and W. C. Muenscher Black walnut toxicity.
     Northern Nut Growers' Assn., Proc. 1940 172-179. 1941.

     10. Massey, A. B. Antagonism of the walnuts (_Juglans nigra I._ and
     _J. cinerea_.) in certain plant associations. Phytopathology 15:
     773-784. 1925.

     11. Pirone, P. P. The detrimental effect of walnut to Rhododendrons
     and other ornamentals. Nursery Disease Notes 11; 1-4. 1938.

     12. Plinius Secundus, C. The historie of the world. English
     translation by P. Holland, A. Islip, London. 1601.

     13. Schneiderhan, F. J. The black walnut (_Juglans nigra L._) as a
     cause of death to apple trees. Phytopathology 17: 529-540. 1927.



Possible Black Walnut Toxicity on Tomato and Cabbage

_By OTTO A. REINKING

New York State Agricultural Experiment Station_


The toxicity or antagonism of black walnut roots and those of certain
other plants has been a controversial question. L. H. MacDaniels and W.
C. Muenscher in a report on page 172 of the Thirty-first Annual Meeting
of the Nut Growers' Association held in 1940 cited evidence pro and con
relative to the toxic effect of black walnut on various crops. They
concluded that because of conflicting evidence, the problem of walnut
toxicity was still unsolved and needed further investigation. In 1942,
Babette I. Brown reported on page 97 of the Thirty-third Annual Report
of the Northern Nut Growers' Association, on the injurious influence of
bark of black walnut roots on seedlings of tomato and alfalfa. It was
concluded, from carefully conducted tests, that walnut roots produce a
substance that may be injurious to certain other plants. Experimentation
showed that the walnut root bark produces a substance that is injurious
to alfalfa and tomato seedlings.

During the past years, a number of instances of stunting and wilting of
tomato plants in the vicinity of black walnut trees has been observed.
In 1942, a very definite case of wilting and stunting was noted in
cabbage plants growing in the vicinity of a black walnut tree.

Severely wilted tomato plants were observed on July 30, 1943, in a field
of tomatoes near Egypt, New York. This case was typical of others
observed in tomato fields in recent years. The wilting and stunting were
all located in one corner of the field, on both sides of which large
black walnut trees were growing, and extended out in the field for a
distance somewhat greater than the height of the trees. The rest of the
field planted with the same stock of tomatoes was entirely healthy. The
field had been planted to beans in 1942 and prior to that had been in
grass for at least 7 years. The vascular bundles of affected plants were
browned as in Verticillium or Fusarium wilt and in some bacterial
diseases. No cankers or discolorations were observed on the external
parts of the plants. In order to determine whether or not the wilting
was caused by a fungus or bacterium, plants were collected for
microscopic examination and for culturing to show possible presence of
pathogens. The microscopic examinations showed the absence of fungi or
bacteria in the vascular system or other plant tissues. The browning in
the vascular bundles appeared to be confined to the phloem tissue. All
attempts to culture a pathogenic fungus or bacterium from affected
tissue was negative. Portions of diseased plants with discolored
vascular bundles were placed in a damp chamber and no fungus or
bacterial growth developed from the vascular system. From these field
and laboratory studies, it was concluded that the wilting and stunting
were not produced by a plant pathogen. Since the affected plants in the
field were all confined to the area adjacent to black walnut trees, and
the fact that it had been shown that the bark of this tree does produce
a substance that is toxic to certain plants, it was concluded by
circumstantial evidence alone that the wilting possibly was due to black
walnut toxicity or antagonism of some sort.

In August of 1942, studies were made on wilted and stunted cabbage
plants growing in a semicircle on one side of a field adjacent to a
walnut tree (Fig. 1). The field was located near Hall, New York, in a
region known to be infested with cabbage yellows. From a distance, the
affected plants appeared to have yellows, but upon close study, it was
found that they were merely wilted and stunted and did not show the
other typical symptoms of the yellows disease. The root systems of
wilted plants did not show the presence of club root or black rot
infection. The plants in the field were all of one variety and came from
the same seed bed. Microscopic studies and attempts to culture a fungus
from the vascular bundles of affected plants showed the absence of any
fungus that might have caused, the disease. Since the affected plants
showed no symptoms of known cabbage diseases and as they were growing
in a semicircle adjacent to a walnut tree, it was concluded that the
presence of the root system of this tree might have been the cause of
the trouble.

[Illustration: Fig. 1. Wilted and stunted cabbage plants growing in a
semicircle adjacent to a black walnut tree. Note large, healthy plants
in foreground, side and background about a semicircle of smaller, wilted
plants, growing in an area affected by the root system of the black
walnut tree.]

These two instances of wilting and stunting of plants in the vicinity of
walnut trees give further circumstantial evidence that the trouble might
have been caused by the toxicity or antagonism of black walnut roots.
Detailed experiments with the plants in question would have to be run to
prove this assumption.



Preliminary Studies on Catkin Forcing and Pollen Storage of Corylus and
Juglans

L. G. COX, _Cornell University_


Methods of collecting and storing pollen are of great interest to those
engaged in plant breeding. Very little reliable information is available
for the various nut species compared with many other horticultural
plants. The following preliminary experiments were conducted to obtain
data on germination media, forcing methods, and storage conditions for
Corylus and Juglans Sieboldiana pollen. The former was mostly from
hybrid plants produced by crossing the Rush filbert (Corylus americana)
with European varieties.


_The optimum temperature and sugar concentration for germination of
Corylus pollen._

The cut ends of Corylus branches with mature catkins collected March 1,
1942 were immersed in water and forced into shedding pollen in a room at
a temperature of approximately 20° centigrade. The collected pollen was
sifted upon the surface of a thin layer of sugar-agar in petri dishes.

Commercial cane sugar was used in preference to purified sucrose,
because other studies have shown it to contain impurities which
stimulate pollen germination. A range in sugar concentration from 5% to
55% by weight in 5% intervals was made up in distilled water containing
1.5% agar, heated to boiling and poured into the petri dishes.

The pollen was incubated at 10° C. and at 25° C. on the agar medium for
48 and 24 hours respectively prior to making the germination counts.
Pollen was assumed to have germinated if the length of the pollen tube
exceeded the diameter of the pollen grain.

At 25° C. germination was prompt and uniform with a maximum of 19.5% at
25% sugar concentration. At 10° C. the rate of germination was very slow
and incomplete at the end of 48 hours with a maximum of 9% germination
at 35% sugar concentration. For subsequent work a temperature of 25° C.
and a sugar concentration of 25% by weight was taken as a standard.


_The effect of temperature and humidity during forcing on the viability
of the pollen_

Pollen shed from catkins forced in a warm, dry room (about 75° F.), and
in a cool, humid greenhouse (60° F.) gave pollen germinating 36% and 69%
respectively, which indicated that the air temperature and humidity
surrounding the developing catkins may have considerable effect on the
viability of the maturing pollen.

The experiment was repeated by forcing the catkins at 10° C., 18-20° C.,
and 24-26° C., at two humidity levels. The low humidity level
corresponded to the natural room humidity, about 25% and the higher
level of nearly 100% was achieved by enclosing the branches with catkins
in large sealed cans over a water surface. As soon as a majority of the
catkins began to shed their pollen or to absciss their full developed
anthers, the catkins were removed and dried on a sheet of smooth paper
at room temperature until the pollen was shed. The pollen was then
collected and stored at 4° C. until used. The results obtained are given
in table 1.

Table 1. Percentage germination after 24 hours of Filbert pollen
forced at different temperatures and humidities.

--------------------------------------------------------------
                                         Temperature

                                10° C.   18-20° C.   24-26° C.

     Low humidity                 80        31           7

     High humidity                96        60          12
--------------------------------------------------------------

Later experiments indicate that the pollen viability is greatly lowered
if the catkins are removed from the higher humidities prior to the
maturity of the anthers as indicated by their tendency to shed their
pollen. Apparently the high humidity hinders the dehiscence of anthers
and shedding of the pollen grains.


_Effect of catkins extracts on pollen germination_

The failure of pollen to germinate in the catkins at 100% humidity
suggested the possibility that the catkin tissue might contain some
substance which prevented germination of the mature pollen grains until
after it was shed.

Two mature catkins plus remnants of their unshed pollen were ground in a
mortar with a small amount of water in clear quartz sand. One cubic
centimeter of the resulting turbid suspension was added to 10 cc. of
warm fluid agar and mixed by rotating the petri dish.

Pollen which gave a 91% germination on the standard medium showed only
50% germination on this catkin extract. Germination was distinctly
abnormal with short stubby pollen tubes, often with numerous nodular
swellings. In general the pollen tube grew up into the air away from the
surface of the agar, rather than down into it or parallel with the
surface as in normal germination.


_Storage of Corylus and Juglans Sieboldiana pollen_

Sulphuric acid solutions to give humidities from 10% to 100% in 10%
intervals were made up. The storage chambers consisted of Atlas
one-pint, wide-mouth fruit jars. In the bottom of each was placed a
small 1-oz. bottle containing 20 cc. of the sulphuric acid solution. The
pollen was placed in small glass vials loosely stoppered with cotton.

Two lots of Corylus pollen of 80-1/2 and 96-1/2 initial viability
respectively, and one lot of Juglans Sieboldiana pollen of well over 50%
viability were used in the experiment. Storage temperatures of 0° 40°
and 10° were used.

The Corylus pollen was placed in storage March 20, 1942, and the Juglans
April 12, 1942. The pollen was taken out of storage November 28, 1942
and germinated on the standard agar-sugar medium at 25° C. for 24 hours.
Results are given in table II.

Table II. The effect of storage temperature and humidity on
percentage germination of Corylus and Juglans pollen

------------------------------------------------------------------
Kind of  Temperature Degrees      Per cent relative humidity
Pollen       Centigrade      10   20   30   40   50   60   70   80
------------------------------------------------------------------
Corylus          10°          0    0    0    0    0    0    0   --
Juglans                      --    0   --    0    3    0    0   --
Corylus           4°          0    0    0    0  9.0    0   --    0
Juglans                      --    0   --    0   --    0    0    0
Corylus           0°        3.0  1.0  4.5  8.5    0    0    0    0
Juglans                      --   0    -- 12.0   -- 12.0    0    0
------------------------------------------------------------------

This preliminary work indicates that Corylus pollen can best be stored
at 0° C. at 30 to 40% relative humidity and Juglans pollen at 0° C. at
40 to 60% relative humidity.


_Summary_

1. The optimum sugar concentration for germination of Corylus pollen is
around 25% by weight in 1.5 per cent agar at 25° C.

2. Forcing the catkins at a low temperature (4° C.) and at high relative
humidity (80%) favors the development of a high percentage of viable
pollen.

3. The catkins contain some substance which when added to the
germination media inhibits pollen germination and causes abnormal types
of germination.

4. Preliminary results on pollen storage indicate that Corylus americana
pollen can be stored for eight months or more in a viable condition at
0° C. with a range of 30 to 40% relative humidity. Juglans Sieboldiana
pollen can be stored at 0° C. at 40 to 60% relative humidity. Whether or
not pollen stored for this length of time would be effective in plant
breeding should be tested by actual trial. The supposition based upon
studies with other pollens is that germination tests are a reliable
indication of the effectiveness of pollen in fertilization.



Storage and Germination of Nuts of Several Species of Juglans

W. C. MUENSCHER AND BABETTE I. BROWN

_Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y._


While working on the general problem of the possible toxic effect of the
roots of species of Walnut (_Juglans_) upon other plants we have had
occasion to germinate the nuts to produce seedlings for experimental
use.[1] The storage treatment employed previous to planting the nuts
provided a successful method of supplying viable nuts. The simple
treatment used, a modification of that suggested by Barton,(2) is
briefly described and the results that may be obtained are indicated in
a report of some germination data from the plantings of 1943.

The nuts were harvested after they had fallen from the trees and were
stored in a cool place as soon as possible thereafter until the time
when the husks were removed. Those harvested at Ithaca were put in cold
storage at once; those harvested in California or Texas were delayed a
few weeks during shipment. The husked nuts were stratified between
layers of moist peat 2 cm. thick in two-or five-gallon crocks. The
uppermost layer of nuts was covered with peat to a depth of about 10 cm.
The nuts were placed in a cold room at 1 to 3° C. in late autumn and
left until they were planted, between April 15 and June 2. Nearly all
species used germinated well after about five to six months of cold
storage.

Table 1 shows the results obtained from treated nuts of ten species of
_Juglans_ when they were planted in the open field, in soil in the
greenhouse or in moist sphagnum in the greenhouse. While some variation
in germination is observed, most of the species gave a good germination
under all treatments. The field planted seeds were somewhat slower in
appearing above the soil surface than those planted in the greenhouse.
This delay may have been caused by the cold rainy weather soon after
planting. The firmness of the soil, a clay loam, may also have retarded
the emergence of the seedlings.

The germination percentages are based upon lots of 100 nuts except in a
few species in which only 50 nuts were used. Differences in the
percentage of germination obtained from various plantings of the same
species are slight in most species. Even the larger differences in
germination obtained in a few species cannot be considered significant
but probably indicate variations in the quality of the original lots
used.


Summary

Walnuts husked soon after harvest, before they are completely air-dried,
and stored in moist peat at 1 to 3° C. for five to six months have their
dormancy broken and remain viable for at least three months thereafter.
This treatment is effective for all ten species tested. It is probably
effective for all species of _Juglans_. This method of handling the nuts
has the advantage over outdoor stratifying or autumn planting which
often result in much damage or loss of nuts from the activities of
rodents.

Table 1. Germination of nuts of _Juglans_ spp. after stratifying in
peat over winter, at 1-3°C.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Per cent germination
                                   -------------------------------------
                                   |Date   |Planted in|        |Planted
Kind          Source               |entered|soil in   |Planted |in
                                   |in     |greenhouse|in field|sphagnum
                                   |storage|April 15  |April 24|June 2
-----------------------------------+-------+----------+--------+--------
nigra (Cornell) Ithaca, N.Y.       |Oct. 1 |    70    |   80   |   68
nigra (Cayuga) Ithaca, N.Y.        |Oct. 1 |   100    |   --   |   80
cinerea--Ithaca, N.Y.              |Oct. 1 |    60    |   44   |    8
regia (Sorrentina) Chico, Calif.   |Nov. 9 |    66    |   48   |    8
regia (Franquette) Chico, Calif.   |Nov. 9 |    80    |   36   |   --
regia--Chico, Calif.               |Nov. 9 |    75    |   46   |   --
Sieboldiana--Ithaca, N.Y.          |Oct. 1 |   100    |   40   |   --
honorei--Chico, Calif.             |Dec. 18|    60    |   55   |   46
pyriformis--Riverside, Calif.      |Nov. 9 |    10    |   54   |   31
rupestris--Alpine, Texas           |Oct. 1 |    40    |   83   |   50
major--Riverside, Calif.           |Nov. 9 |    90    |   92   |   66
californica--Pomona, Calif.        |Nov. 9 |    62    |   84   |   91
californica quercina--Chico, Calif.|Dec. 18|    --    |   18   |   25
hindsii--Riverside, Calif.         |Nov. 9 |    50    |   56   |   52
------------------------------------------------------------------------


References--

1. Brown, Babette I. Injurious Influence of Bark of Black Walnut Roots
on Seedlings of Tomato and Alfalfa. Northern Nut Growers Association,
1942: 97-101. 1943.

2. Barton, Lela V. Seedling Production in _Carya ovata_. _Juglans
cinerea_ and _Juglans nigra_. Contr. Boyce Thompson Inst. 8: (1) 1-5.
1936



A Key to Some Seedlings of Walnuts

W. C. MUENSCHER AND BABETTE I. BROWN

_Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y._


While working with the seedlings of several species of walnuts certain
diagnostic characters, by which the common species can be separated,
became evident. These characters have been used to make a key to
seedlings from one to three months of age. This key has been found
helpful to us and it is here presented in the hope that it may prove
useful to others who need to handle and determine walnuts in the
seedling stage.

The key has two main divisions based upon the types of leaves on the
main axis. The first division includes three species, _Juglans
sieboldiana_, Japanese butternut, _J. cinerea_, American butternut, and
_J. regia_, Persian or English walnut, all of which have only compound
green leaves. In addition, one or more pairs of minute simple scales or
buds occur on the lower part of the stem but above the cotyledons. The
second main division includes species in which the seedlings have
several simple, alternate, scale-like leaves followed successively by
serrate, lobed and finally compound leaves forming a gradual series.
This group includes _Juglans rupestris_, Texas black walnut, _J. nigra_,
eastern black walnut, _J. honorei_, Ecuador walnut, _J. pyriformis_,
Mexican walnut, _J. major_, Arizona black walnut, _J. californica_,
California black walnut, and _J. hindsii_, Hind's black walnut.

It is important that the leaves on the primary axis arising from the
plumule are examined. If the primary axis is injured secondary shoots
may arise from the axils of the cotyledons. These may develop various
types of leaves not necessarily like those of the primary axis. The key
is based upon seedlings grown in the field and in the greenhouse at
Ithaca, New York.


_A Key to seedlings of some species of Juglans_

1. Leaves on the primary axis all compound; 1 to 4 pairs of opposite or
subopposite reduced scales or buds sometimes present on the lower
axis but above the cotyledons.

2. Scales or buds wanting between the lowest compound leaves and the
leaves and the cotyledons       _J. sieboldiana_

2. Scales or buds in pairs on 1 to 4 nodes below the compound leaves.

3. Stem with 1 pair of opposite scales or buds near the base; leaflets
hairy, serrate      _J. cinerea_

3. Stem with 2 to 4 pairs of opposite scales or buds below the compound
leaves; leaflets glabrous, entire or denticulate       _J. regia_

1. Leaves on the primary axis alternate, forming a gradual series from
simple, entire scales to compound leaves; the lower 3 to 8 leaves simple.

4. Lateral veins of leaflets all or mostly all terminating in the notches
between marginal teeth      _J. rupestris_

4. Lateral veins of leaflets or their main branches all or mostly all
terminating in the apex of marginal teeth.

5. Midrib of leaflets glandular hairy.

6. Glandular hairs on midrib of young leaflets interspersed with
stellate clusters of gray glandless hairs; lateral leaflets ovate
to broadly lanceolate, rugose       _J. nigra_

6. Glandular hairs on midrib of young leaflets interspersed with
sessile, usually yellow glands; lateral leaflets lanceolate, not
rugose        _J. honorei_

5. Midrib of leaflets glabrous or nearly so, sometimes with scattered,
sessile glands.

7. Leaflets lanceolate, with acuminate apex; rhachis glabrous.

8. Leaflets widest near middle;  vein-islets prominently
raised; free ends of veins wanting or if present distinct
to the apex and mostly unbranched       _J. pyriformis_

8. Leaflets mostly widest below the middle; vein-islets not
prominently raised; free ends of veins slender, terminating
in indistinct branches        _J. major_

7. Leaflets ovate or nearly so, with obtuse or acute apex;
rhachis somewhat pubescent.

9. Petioles of the 3 lower compound leaves less than 1 cm.
long; leaves crowded on a short axis       _J. californica_

9. Petioles of the lower compound leaves from 1+ to 3 cm.
long; leaves more distant on an elongated axis      _J. hindsii_



Further Tests with Black Walnut Varieties

L. H. MACDANIELS _and_ J. E. WILDE, _Cornell University_


In 1937 the Northern Nut Growers Association committee on varieties and
judging standards proposed a tentative schedule for the judging and
evaluation of black walnut varieties(1). It was pointed out at that time
that for one reason or another none of the schedules which had been used
in judging walnuts were satisfactory and usable in giving an accurate
estimate of the cracking quality and value of a variety. It was
recognized also that the schedule proposed was only tentative and that
it would need to be modified in the light of future testing and
experience. In 1939 the question was again considered(2) and on the
basis of tests which had been made, changes were proposed which would
make the schedule more realistic. Since then many tests have been made
using the modified schedule. The purpose of this paper[A] is to give the
data secured in these tests and to consider again the value of the
schedule and possibilities of improvement.

[Footnote A: The authors are indebted to many persons for furnishing
samples for testing and for making duplicate tests. This cooperation is
gratefully acknowledged with thanks.]

Recently a number of papers have been published dealing with the
evaluation of black walnut varieties. In 1941 Kline and Chase(3)
compiled the available published data and additional tests made by the
Tennessee Valley Authority on nut weight and kernel percentage of black
walnut selections. Two hundred and twelve clones and 335 tests are
reported. As would be expected the samples of the same variety from
different localities show variation in weight per nut and in total per
cent kernel. For example, in 12 samples of the variety Ohio the weight
per nut varies from 14.8 grams to 18.7 and the per cent kernel from 16.6
to 32.9. Twenty-one tests of Thomas show variations in single nut weight
from 16.7 to 25.0 grams and in per cent kernel from 19.0 to 30.0. In
general the samples grown in the north were made up of smaller nuts with
less per cent kernel, indicating that the varieties were not suited to
that latitude.

In 1942 Kline(4) worked out a somewhat technical method of evaluating
walnut varieties on the basis of cash return per hour of labor spent in
cracking with a hand operated cracker. A formula is proposed in which
the variables of price and other factors may be substituted. The
approach is on a commercial basis and the method is not intended for use
in evaluating small samples. The paper represents many tests and
establishes or affirms by statistically treated data several points of
general interest in walnut testing, namely, (1) that a 25 nut sample is
large enough to show varietal or other differences of a gram in total
weight or 1 per cent of kernel weight, (2) that unless extreme accuracy
is desired, moisture content may be ignored in making tests of 25 nut
samples if the nuts have been hulled and air dried for about two months
and (3) that the mean weight per nut and per cent kernel of nuts from
the same tree may vary appreciably from year to year, for example a
variation of 4.9 grams per nut and 3.3 per cent in kernel weight is
reported for Snyder. Such variation is recognized and emphasizes the
necessity of testing a variety in any locality for a number of years if
correct valuation is to be made.

In Kline's paper earnings per hour for fifteen black walnut selections
are given showing a maximum of $0.279 for the variety Norris, $0.245 for
Ohio down to $0.12 for an unnamed seedling.

Lounsberry(5) published kernel cavity measurements for 64 clonal
selections and related these to kernel weight per nut. Measurements of
the thickness of the partition separating the halves of the kernel are
also given. He does not relate these characters to scoring or cracking
quality.

The purpose of the scoring system under discussion in this paper is to
provide a realistic method of judging the relative merit of different
clones of black walnuts that can be used mostly by members of the
Northern Nut Growers Association or others having some skill in cracking
technique. At the present time the Association has little reliable
information either as to the performance of different varieties under
different conditions in any one locality, from year to year on the same
tree, or the suitability of any one variety growing in far different
parts of the United States. It is important that such information be
available and a workable basis of evaluation would be of the greatest
value in obtaining it. Much of our information at the present time is
from the many tests made by N. F. Drake(6, 7, 8) which are of great
value in rating varieties. His schedule is an improvement over any
previously proposed but fails to provide standard sampling and cracking
procedure and includes the items of flavor and color which are in no way
objective characters. The use of a point score based on the concept of a
"perfect nut" is cumbersome and considered undesirable by the committee.

It is recognized that the value of a variety depends also upon the
bearing habit of the tree, the nature of the husk, disease resistance
and other characters.

It has been five years since the present schedule was proposed and
enough tests have been made to give a basis for judgment as to the
merits and weaknesses of the schedule. As stated in the original
committee report it is generally agreed that the best measure of the
value of a nut of any clone is the amount of usable or marketable
kernels that can be obtained from a given weight of shucked nuts with
the least labor. The characteristics of the nuts that contribute to this
value are recognized as follows:

1. The size of the individual nut.

2. The per cent of kernel of total sample weight recovered
without recracking and without the use of a pick.

3. The total per cent of kernel of total weight of sample.

4. The number of quarters.

5. The plumpness of the kernels.

6. The number of empty nuts or nuts with shrivelled kernels in the sample.

Flavor and color may be important but are so dependent upon personal
preference and on the treatment of the samples before testing that they
cannot be rated numerically.

In considering the value of any schedule the following questions are
pertinent:

     1. Is it possible for one operator testing one lot of nuts to
     obtain the same score with replicate random samples?

     2. Is it possible for different operators to obtain approximately
     the same score on replicate samples?

     3. Does the score give an accurate evaluation of the variation of a
     variety from year to year in one locality or in the same year in
     different localities? The latter is very important in determining
     the regions to which the variety is best adapted and the
     performance of the variety in any one locality.

     4. What are the causes of variation in the scores obtained? Which
     of these reflect the inherent worth of the sample and which are
     related to technique, personal equation and methods of handling the
     sample?

     5. What changes may be made in the schedule to weight the various
     factors to give a more realistic score of what changes in procedure
     will make the schedule more realistic?

Table 1 gives data on replicate samples tested by the same operator. In
the samples of Spear, numbers 1-6 the variation is as follows: weight of
single nut 1.3 grams, per cent kernel first crack 2.9, total per cent
kernel 2.6, number of quarters 3, penalties 4.5 points, score 9.2
points. In scores figured without penalty the variation is 5.4 points.
Sample No. 7 was cracked November 4 before the nuts were dry and hence
is not comparable with others.

Analysis of these differences indicates that the variation in nut weight
is closely related to the number of shrunken and empty nuts in the
sample. This is a difficult factor to evaluate in a practical way. At
the time of the 1939 report it was suggested that the score should be
figured on the basis of filled nuts. This cannot be arranged easily in
testing because if the operator cracks the nuts before weighing there is
almost sure to be loss of fragments of shell. Trying to correct the
original weight in any way is necessarily inaccurate. Deciding whether
or not the kernel of a nut is sufficiently shrivelled to deserve a
penalty is a matter of judgment which is a personal matter.

The variation in per cent kernel first crack and total per cent kernel
probably represents fairly the difference in the samples. The total per
cent is a wholly objective value and varies practically as much as the
per cent first crack. Uniformity in the number of quarters is striking.
This large number is undoubtedly related to the fact that many of the
kernels were shrunken enough to be penalized and others were perhaps
shrunken enough so that they did not tightly fill the shell cavity. In
general it may be said that the more tightly the kernels fill the shell
the more difficult it is to extract large pieces. Thus having the
kernels a little shrunken but not enough to seriously reduce their
weight favors a higher score. Of course, in some varieties the kernels
may he plump and still not fill the shell tight enough to make cracking
difficult. This is a desirable condition.

Variability in penalties is more important (i. e. 4.5 points) than any
other factor in influencing the final score. Without the penalties the
scores of samples 1 to 6 would be 87.5, 84.0, 83.6, 83.7, 82.1 and 82.8
respectively which is fairly uniform. Statistically the presence of
empty or shrivelled nuts in a lot from which samples are taken increases
the number required to make a satisfactory sample by greatly increasing
the individual variation of the single nut.


TABLE 1

Variation in the score of tests of duplicate samples made by the same
operators. Twenty-five nut samples. Nuts grown at Ithaca, N.Y.

1942. Black Walnuts.

KEY:
A: Wt. 1 nut grams
B: % kernel 1st crack
C: % kernel total
D: Quarters number
E: Penalty
F: Score

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Variety       Treatment    A      B     C    D    E     F     Remarks
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spear No. 1  S 18 hours   14.6   24.9  28.0  91  -3.5  84.0  1 empty, 5 shr.
             D 15 hours
Spear No. 2  D 15 hours   15.7   24.0  26.8  94  -6.1  77.9  3 empty, 6 shr.
Spear No. 3  D 15 hours   15.9   22.9  25.4  92  -3.5  80.1  1 empty, 5 shr.
Spear No. 4  Dry          15.0   23.3  25.4  94  -5.0  78.7  1 empty, 8 shr.
Spear No. 5  Dry          15.4   22.0  26.8  93  -4.5  77.6  1 empty, 7 shr.,
                                                               20 bnd. qtrs.
Spear No. 6  Dry          14.7   22.7  26.6  94  -8.0  74.8  4 empty, 8 shr.,
                                                               16 bnd. qtrs.
Spear No. 7  Nov. 4       16.7   27.9  28.8  98        96.7    only partly
                                                             dried, 16 halves
Snyder No. 1 Dry          16.8   23.1  26.0  87  -4.0  80.7  8 shr., 9 bnd.
                                                               qtrs.
Snyder No. 2 Dry          16.0   24.0  26.3  74  -3.5  81.0  1 empty, 5 shr.,
                                                               13 bnd. qtrs.
Snyder No. 3 Soaked       15.8   24.1  25.8  86  -4.0  77.5  1 empty, 6 shr.,
                                                               8 bnd. qtrs.
Snyder No. 4 Soaked       16.2   23.1  25.6  78  -7.5  75.5  3 empty, 9 shr.,
                                                               8 bnd. qtrs.
Snyder No. 5 Dry          18.2   19.9  26.4  90  -3.5  76.7  7 shr., bnd.
Snyder No. 6 Nov. 4       21.2   27.6  29.8  95       100.8    qtrs.
Eldridge     Dry          20.8   19.3  23.1  98        80.7  13 halves, not
  Geneva, N.Y.                                                well dried out
    "        Dry          20.6   20.0  22.6  92        81.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

With the variety Snyder a difference of 2.4 grams in weight per nut in
samples 1 to 5 suggests poor sampling technique as this is an objective
value. A difference of 4.2 per cent in first crack suggests carelessness
on the part of the operator in cracking or difference in soaking as this
is quite out of line with the variation of .8 per cent in per cent
weight of total kernel. The difference of 16 quarters is considerable
but represents only 1.6 score points. As with the Spear the variation in
penalty of 4 points is greater than other factors except per cent first
crack (i.e. 4.2% points). The difference in score of 5.5 points is
obviously greater than desirable, but probably indicates the relative
value of the samples. Without penalties the difference is 4.5 points.

Sample 7 of Spear and number 6 of Snyder were cracked November 4th when
only partly cured and show the importance of curing in obtaining an
accurate rating for a sample. The score of each variety was increased
materially in all characteristics and no shrivelling was apparent. As a
practical means of recovering the kernels in large pieces, cracking
before the nuts are dried out is a decided advantage provided the
kernels are cured before they are stored.

The duplicate samples of Eldridge check very closely and show no
significant differences.

In Table 2 are given the results of ten tests on carefully replicated
random samples of Snyder black walnuts. In making these samples the nuts
were spread in a single layer on the floor and lots of 25 cut off the
edges of this layer without selection of any kind. Even with such
selection there is a variation of 1.2 grams in the average weight of
single nuts from different samples. Per cent kernel first crack shows a
minimum of 21.8 and a maximum of 26.9 in the ten samples. This
difference is related mostly to the presence of 3 empty nuts in the low
scoring sample as compared with none in the high scoring sample. The
high score is also in part due to soaking. This variability is about the
same as with total per cent kernel indicating that cracking technique
was uniform. Comparing samples 1 and 2 in more detail it is found that
the difference of 11.6 points in the score is caused by the presence of
empty nuts in the sample. The average weight of kernels per single nut
in sample 1 is 4.9 grams. The difference in the weights of the kernels
of the two samples is 15 grams or about the weight of the kernels of 3
nuts. These empties also reduce the score by reducing the number of
quarters recovered. Where empty nuts are involved, it is doubtful if
random sampling will reduce variation unless the size of the sample is
greatly increased, a practice which is not a practical solution in that
a 25 nut sample is about as large as can be handled with any facility.
It would seem that this difference in scores was a fair indication of
the merit of the two samples. The scores of the other samples show a
fair degree of uniformity. The high score of sample 4 is probably
related to the soaking treatment though the scores of sample 3 also
soaked is lower than that of sample 6 which was not soaked. It seems
that when these conditions and with this variety stored in a fairly high
humidity, soaking had little effect except to increase the number of
halves recovered.


TABLE 2

Cracking tests by single operator with 10 random replicate samples of
Snyder black walnuts. 1942 crop. 25 nut samples.


KEY:
A: Wt. 1 nut grams
B: % kernel 1st crack
C: % kernel total
D: Quarters number
E: Penalty
F: Score

Sample  Treatment           A     B     C    D   E      F   Remarks
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  Dry as received        18.1  21.8  23.1  85  -9.0  72.7  3 empty, 12 shr.
2  Dry as received        18.5  24.0  25.8  99  -5.0  84.3  10 shr.
3  Soaked 9 hrs.,
     dried 14 hrs.        18.6  25.7  28.0  94  -6.0  87.4  1 empty, 10 shr.,
                                                             8 bnd. qtrs.,
                                                             16 hvs.
4  Soaked as above        18.3  26.9  28.4  99  -4.5  91.7  9 shr., 5 bnd.
                                                             qtrs., 19 hvs.
5  Held in cellar 4 days  18.0  24.4  25.7  90  -6.5  82.1  1 empty, 11 shr.,
     (high humidity)                                         8 bnd. qtrs.
6  Held in cellar 7 days  19.0  25.6  27.2  99  -5.0  88.7  10 shr., 7 bnd.
                                                             qtrs., 3 hvs.
7  Held in cellar 7 days  18.4  23.9  26.1  96  -6.5  82.3  1 empty, 11 shr.,
                                                             9 bnd. qtrs.
8  Held in cellar 4 days  19.2  24.8  26.6  98  -5.5  86.4  11 shr., 4 bnd.
                                                             qtrs.
9  Held in cellar 4 days  18.4  23.7  26.7  92  -7.5  81.6  2 black counted
                                                             as empty, 11
                                                             shr., 12 bnd.
                                                             qtrs.
10 Held in cellar 4 days  18.6  23.5  25.9  94  -5.5  83.4  1 empty, 9 shr.,
                                                             10 bnd. qtrs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another lot of 24 random replicate 25 nut samples of Ohio black walnut
from the original tree was made by scooping the nuts out of a bag with a
quart berry box which held about 25 nuts. Care was used not to select
the samples in any way. The lightest sample 3 weighed 385 grams, the
heaviest 22 weighed 434 grams or a difference of 2 grams per nut. The
score of these two samples was 85.0 and 85.4 respectively apparently
because there were no empty nuts in either sample.

The results of tests on 18 of these replicate samples of Ohio are given
in Table 3. The nuts were apparently a uniform lot. The kernels while of
good quality were in most cases not quite plump and did not fill the
cavities of the shell tightly. This doubtless accounts for the large
number of quarters recovered. The kernels on the whole were plumper than
with the variety Snyder reported in Table 2 and there were fewer empty
nuts. Of the samples that were not soaked the variation of 4.3 per cent
in the per cent first crack is of the same order as variation of 3.6 per
cent for total per cent kernel and indicates uniform cracking technique.

The data in Table 3 gives evidence of the effect of treatments before
cracking. The first nine samples marked with an asterisk were held for
several weeks in a damp cellar and have an average test score of 86.6.
The last seven samples were held in a dry but unheated room for a week
before cracking and show an average test score of 83.7. The average
score for the two soaked samples was 93.9. Soaking also increased the
number of halves and quarters recovered in the same way as shown with
variety Snyder in Table 2. None of these samples was excessively dry. In
this table the lowest score (sample 19) is directly related to the
presence of 3 empty nuts in the sample. The low score of sample 21 is
mostly related to low per cent first crack which is caused by large
number of bound quarters and the high penalty related to empty nuts and
shrivelled kernels. These scores seem to indicate the value of the
samples but bring out the difficulty of obtaining equal scores from such
replicate samples. The other scores in the table are probably as close
to each other as can be expected with samples of this sort.

In this and the preceding tables the number of bound quarters is given
as an indication of cracking technique. With the Hershey cracker the
nuts of many varieties will split into four quarters without releasing
the kernels. The number of such bound quarters is increased if the
operator does not put sufficient pressure on the anvils to crush the
shoulders of the nut and free the kernel. On the other hand if too much
pressure is used and the anvils brought too close together the kernels
will be crushed and the score affected adversely. With some varieties,
for example, the Adams as shown in samples 1 and 2 in table 5, the nuts
are so pointed at each end that the standard anvils do not strike the
shoulders of the nut and many bound quarters result. With such varieties
cracking with a hammer would probably give a better score. Anvils with
deeper cavities in the ends would be an advantage for such nuts.


TABLE 3

Tests by the same operator of duplicate samples of Ohio black walnuts,
treated in various ways before cracking. 25 nut samples. 1942 crop.

KEY:
A: Wt. 1 nut grams
B: % kernel 1st crack
C: % kernel total
D: Quarters number
E: Penalty
F: Score

Sample  Treatment     A     B      C    D     E      F   Remarks
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9      *Dry       16.9  25.8   27.1   98  -0.5  91.3   1 shr., 5 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 7 halves
10      *Dry       16.8  23.8   25.2   95  -3.0  83.5   1 empty, 4 shr., 7
                                                         bnd. qtrs.
12      *Dry       16.2  24.5   26.5   97  -2.0  86.1   4 shr., 8 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 13 halves
24      *Dry       16.2  24.8   25.7   86  -3.0  84.2   2 empty, 2 shr., 4
                                                         bnd. qtrs., 8
                                                         halves
17      *Dry       17.3  24.8   27.3   97  -0.5  89.7   1 shr., 9 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 12 halves
21      *Dry       15.9  22.0   25.5   96  -4.0  78.2   1 empty, 6 shr., 14
                                                         bnd. qtrs., 17
                                                         halves
 8      *Dry       16.6  25.2   26.9   99  -1.5  88.8   3 shr., 6 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 10 halves
15      *Dry       16.6  25.5   26.7   99  -1.5  89.8   3 shr., 5 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 12 halves
23      *Dry       16.4  25.2   26.2   96  -3.0  87.0   6 shr., 4 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 10 halves
11       Soaked    16.9  27.0   28.2  100  -1.5  93.5   Soaked 1 hr., moist
                                                         18, dried 12 hrs.,
                                                         3 shr., 5 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 25 halves
16       Soaked    16.8  27.1   28.2  100  -0.8  94.3   Soaked as above, 1
                                                         shr., 5 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 16 halves
 4       Dry       16.2  23.6   26.4   98  -3.5  82.9   7 shr., 10 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 15 halves
 5       Dry       17.1  23.6   25.0   93  -3.0  83.1   1 empty, 6 shr., 5
                                                         bnd. qtrs., 10
                                                         halves
18       Dry       17.0  25.3   26.6   97  -2.0  88.6   4 shr., 6 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 8 halves
19       Dry       16.3  21.5   23.7   85  -4.5  75.1   3 empty, 3 shr., 9
                                                         bnd. qtrs., 8
                                                         halves
 3       Dry       15.4  24.7   27.0   97  -3.0  85.0   6 shr., 8 bnd.
                                                         qtrs., 5 halves
 7       Dry       16.0  25.7   25.7   94  -3.5  86.1   7 shr., 6 halves,
                                                         end reversed in
                                                         cracking
22       Dry       17.4  24.1   25.8   94  -2.5  85.4   5 shr., 8 bnd.
                                                         qtrs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


TABLE 4

Variation in score of replicate samples of 3 varieties of Black Walnuts
tested by different operators and of same varieties from different
sources

                          Wt. 1    % kernel    %
                          nut        1st     kernel    Quarters
Variety   Source          grams     crack     total     number    Score
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operator 1
Thomas--Weber, Ind.        20.4      20.8      24.2      75        81.6
Thomas--Jones, Pa.         14.6      28.8      30.3      95        96.8
Thomas--Baum, Pa.          14.3      25.6      27.0     100        89.0
Thomas--Worton, Md.        16.4      28.2      30.8      94        97.6
Average                    16.4      25.8      28.1      91.0      91.2

Operator 2
Thomas--Weber, Ind.        22.0      22.2      23.8      47        83.0
Thomas--Jones, Pa.         17.5      26.7      31.4      55        92.1
Thomas--Baum, Pa.          17.0      24.0      26.5      72        85.5
Thomas--Worton, Md.        16.7      19.5      26.4      64        75.3
Average                    18.3      23.1      27.0      59.5      83.9

Operator 3
Thomas--Jones, Pa.         18.1      16.2      27.1      52        69.2
Thomas--Baum, Pa.          16.1      19.1      26.6      68        74.4
Thomas--Worton, Md.        18.0      17.8      27.2      61        73.3
Average                    17.4      17.7      27.0      60.3      72.3

Operator 1
Ten Eyck--Weber, Ind.      18.0      20.5      27.5      57        78.5
Ten Eyck--Jones, Pa.       15.4      21.1      23.2      99        79.1
Ten Eyck--Baum, Pa.        14.3      26.3      30.2      93        91.3
Ten Eyck--Worton, Md.      15.0      28.0      31.0      83        94.8
Average                    15.7      24.0      28.0      83.0      85.9

Operator 2
Ten Eyck--Weber, Ind.      19.1      24.4      26.5      38        84.8
Ten Eyck--Jones, Pa.       16.4      24.6      24.6      64        84.3
Ten Eyck--Baum, Pa.        15.8      25.7      26.5      54        86.0
Ten Eyck--Worton, Md.      15.4      25.5      28.7      55        86.2
Average                    16.7      25.0      26.6      52.7      85.3

Operator 3
Ten Eyck--Weber, Ind.      16.8      17.3      24.6      57        69.4
Ten Eyck--Jones, Pa.       15.2      21.1      23.3      84        77.4
Ten Eyck--Baum, Pa.        15.0      18.3      19.7      69        68.4
Ten Eyck--Worton, Md.      15.7      25.2      30.1      76        88.5
Average                    15.7      20.5      24.4      71.5      75.9

Operator 1
Ohio--Weber, Ind.          17.2      28.5      29.7      89        98.0
Ohio--Jones, Pa.           16.4      28.7      29.9      96        99.2
Ohio--Baum, Pa.            14.2      31.1      31.1      99        101.9
Ohio--Worton, Md.          13.7      30.8      30.8      88        99.5
Average                    15.4      29.8      30.4      93.0      99.6

Operator 2
Ohio--Weber, Ind.          19.1      25.1      28.3      59        89.3
Ohio--Jones, Pa.           17.2      27.3      27.5      64        91.9
Ohio--Baum, Pa.            15.0      27.4      28.1      63        90.1
Ohio--Worton, Md.          14.9      26.1      29.1      58        87.4
Average                    16.5      26.5      28.2      61.0      89.7

Operator 3
Ohio--Weber, Ind.          17.7      21.4      27.7      65        80.8
Ohio--Jones, Pa.           17.2      22.9      28.2      74        84.5
Ohio--Baum, Pa.            15.0      24.9      29.3      81        87.5
Ohio--Worton, Md.          14.6      22.4      28.7      66        80.3
Average                    16.1      22.9      28.5      71.5      83.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 4 gives the results of tests of similar samples of three varieties
from four different sources by three different operators. The tests are
not satisfactory because pretreatment was not uniform and there is
insufficient data on penalties which are omitted. Some samples of the
varieties Ten Eyck and Thomas contained empty nuts and shrivelled
kernels which would preclude equal scores. The variety Ohio was
uniformly filled from all sources. In the variety Ten Eyck there is a
difference of 10.5 per cent in total per cent kernel in samples from the
Baum orchard. This was related to 6 empty nuts in the sample cracked by
operator 3. In the variety Ohio in which the kernels were plump the
greatest variation between duplicate samples in total per cent kernel is
3 or only about 10 per cent of average total per cent kernel.

An examination of these data show the following points of interest: (1)
that the duplicate samples showed considerable variation in weight of
single nut and total per cent kernel, characters not dependent on
personal skill or judgment. Operator 2 did not crack the whole sample of
25 and may have selected the larger nuts, thus securing a greater weight
per nut with all varieties. The superior filling of the nuts of Ohio
appears to be related to the fact that in the orchards in question this
variety was observed to hold its leaves longer than the others which
lost their leaves in late summer before harvest by leaf blight. Shrunken
kernels are a logical result of early defoliation.

In the per cent of kernel obtained in first crack operator 1 recovered a
higher per cent than operator 3 in all of the eleven possible
comparisons and higher than operator 2 in 9 out of 12 possible
comparisons. This probably is the result of soaking the samples by
operator 1 and not by the others or possibly due to greater skill or
care in cracking. The number of quarters recovered by operator 1 is
greater in all cases than that obtained by either operator 2 or 3. This
is also a result of soaking or skill or both. The score of operator 1
was in all tests of duplicate samples higher than that obtained by
operator 3 and higher than the scores of operator 2 in 9 out of 12
comparisons.

The scores of the different samples are apparently mainly determined by
the per cent recovered at first crack and the number of quarters, at
least the only cases where the scores of operator 2 exceed those of
operator 1 are where the per cent first crack and the number of quarters
are greater for operator 2. This is related to the presence of empty
nuts.

The data obtained for the variety Thomas by operator 1 and 2 show for
the most part the same relative scoring of samples from different
sources. For example with both operators the score of the samples from
the Weber orchard was lower than that from the Jones and Baum orchards
and the sample from the Jones orchard scored higher than that from the
Baum orchard. In the samples from the Worton orchard the relative scores
are reversed. The scores o£ operator 3 are quite out of line. With the
variety Ten Eyck the differences between scores of samples from
different sources are not consistent. Operator 2 obtained scores that
were essentially alike for all four samples whereas the scores of
operator 1 show differences of more than 10 points. This is related to
empty nuts in the sample. With the variety Ohio there is reasonable
uniformity in the scores obtained by all operators. This was the only
variety with well filled nuts and for that reason alone the score would
be less variable.


TABLE 5

Tests by different operators on duplicate samples of black walnuts, soaked
and unsoaked. 25 nut samples. 1942 crop.

KEY:
A: Treatment
B: Wt. 1 nut grams
C: % kernel 1st crack
D: % kernel total
E: Quarters number
F: Penalty
G: Score

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sample         A       B     C     D     E   F     G      Remarks
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operator 1

Ohio No. 1    Dry     16.8  26.1  27.6  97  -4.   88.5  5 bnd. qtrs., 18 shr.,
                                                          8 halves
Ohio No. 2    Soaked  16.7  27.3  27.8  99  -1.5  93.5  2 bnd. qtrs., 1 shr.,
                                                          1 empty

Operator 2

Ohio No. 6    Dry     15.9  26.3  26.7  93  -1.   90.2  1 empty
Ohio No. 13   Soaked  15.9  25.8  26.4  93  -1.   89.0  1 empty
Ohio No. 14   Soaked  15.7  25.2  26.3  96  - .5  88.4  1 shriveled
Ohio No. 20   Dry     16.7  25.3  26.4  94  -1.   88.9  1 empty

Operator 1

Grundy No. 1  Dry     23.8  24.1  24.6  99  - .5  93.7  1 shriveled, 2 bnd.
                                                          quarters
Grundy No. 2  Soaked  23.2  24.2  24.2 100  - .5  97.2  All out 1st crack,
                                                          5 halves

Operator 2

Grundy No. 3          22.4  24.0  24.0  88  -2.   89.2  Empty
Grundy No. 4  Dry     23.5  24.7  25.5  98  - .5  95.0  1 shriveled

Operator 1

Adams No. 1   Dry     14.2  18.3  24.5  70   0.   70.0  35 bnd. qtrs., well
                                                          filled, good quality
Adams No. 2   Soaked  14.4  17.3  23.7  78  -2.5  67.1  2 empty, 20 bund.
                                                          qtrs., 1 shr.

Operator 2

Adams No. 3   Dry     14.6  18.1  24.0  77  -3.   67.5  3 empty
Adams No. 4           14.3  19.6  25.4  78  -2.   72.3  2 empty
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The average scores of all samples of each variety are Ohio 90.0, Thomas
83.4, and Ten Eyck 82.4. These are not out of line either with the
scores obtained for these varieties elsewhere or the relative merit of
the varieties.

Because of the variability obtained in the tests shown in Table 4,
another series of tests of similar samples by different operators was
arranged in the summer of 1943. The samples of Ohio were some of the
same lot reported in Table 3. The varieties Grundy and Adams grown in
Michigan were carefully sampled to give comparable lots. The results of
these tests given in Table 5 show no greater variability between the
scores of the two operators for any one variety than between tests by
the same operator and indicate that it is possible for different
operators to obtain comparable scores on duplicate samples provided
great care is used in treating and cracking the samples.

The differences in average score between the different varieties is
consistent and apparently gives a correct indication of their relative
merit. Grundy shows an average score of 93.7, Ohio 89.7 and Adams 69.2.
The high score of Grundy is related to the large size of nut and high
per cent first crack. The low score of Adams is related to small size of
nut and low per cent first crack resulting from a large number of bound
quarters. The kernels of this variety were plump, filling the cavity of
the shell full and shattered on cracking.

In Table 6 are given the results of 54 tests of 38 selections or clones.
In general it appears that the score is a fair indication of the worth
of the sample. Low scores are related mostly to low per cent first crack
and to the presence of empty nuts or shrivelled kernels in the sample.
It is evident also that if a sample is too dry with many varieties a low
score will result. Just what soaking treatment is most expedient is not
too clear. Soaking 12 hours and drying 24 proved to be a satisfactory
practice. The method followed by Mr. Stoke of soaking for 5 minutes and
keeping the sample in a wet burlap sack for 24 hours is all right but is
cumbersome if many samples are to be tested. Soaking one hour and
holding 24 hours in a closed container like a coffee can give good
results but percentage should be figured on dry weight and kernels
should be air dried for 24 hours before weighing.

One weakness in the schedule is that it tends to give a small nut an
advantage if the per cent kernel obtained in first crack is high. Thus a
sample of the Mintle grown in Iowa which weighed but 13.6 grams per nut
and total per cent kernel of 32 scored 101.1 points chiefly because the
per cent first crack was 31.5. The same variety grown at Ithaca weighing
13.7 grams per nut but with 23.9 per cent first crack and 24.3 total
scored 83.8. Possibly a penalty could be taken for nuts weighing less
than 18 grams. On the other hand a large nut like the Grundy weighing
about 23 grams would have a 10 point score advantage over Mintle and
this may be enough for this character.

The six samples of Thomas grown on different trees in Ithaca, N.Y. in
1942 show great variation in score as has been the case in other years.
Poor scores are related to shrunken kernels and such samples come from
trees that are making poor growth because of poor soil conditions and
competition with weeds. Also shriveled kernels are the result of
defoliation by early frosts which may be very local and affect some
trees and not others.


TABLE 6

Tests and Scores of Black Walnut Varieties from Various Sources. 25 nut
samples unless otherwise indicated. All scores figured on basis of 25 nuts.

KEY: A - *Treatment
            D--Dry
            S--Soaked
            No.--Hours dried or soaked
     B - Wt. 1 nut grams
     C - % kernel 1st crack
     D - % kernel total
     E - Quarters number
     F - Penalty
     G - Score

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Variety     Source            A     B     C     D     E    F    G      Remarks
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adams       Becker, Mich.    D     14.7  11.3  21.4  44        52.4  Poor; 62 bound quarters
              '42
Benton      Smith, Wassaic,  S-5   13.2  26.8  28.2  94  -2.0  88.5  Plump kernels, good flavor,
              N.Y.                                                    2 empty
Sample No.    '42            D-8                                       nuts
  1 (23)
Sample No.      "            D     12.9  23.1  23.6  74  -3.0  75.3  3 empty nuts
  2 (24)
Bontz       Snyder, Iowa     S-12  18.7  20.3  22.0  85 -10.0  68.8  Nut long like Ohio. Shell
              '40            D-12                                      chamber smooth. Nearly all
                                                                       kernels shrunken.
                                                                       Prominent spur; oily; poor
                                                                       to med. extr.; few shrunken
Boothe      Stoke, Va.       S-16  15.3  24.5  29.2  87  -2.5  85.1  Good quality; flavor good, 28
              '40            D-10                                      blind qtrs.; ext. poor
Burrows     Snyder, Iowa     S-12  17.5  13.5  24.4  35  -0.3  59.9  No data
              '40            D-4
Calhoun     Becker, Mich.    D     15.4  26.0  28.5  94        90.6  End cracks, 2 empty nuts,
              '42                                                      3 shr.
Cayuga      Ithaca, N.Y.    S-12  13.8  26.1  26.7 100  -3.5   85.9  kernels, good extr.
  middle      '42            D-24
  tree
Climax      Becker, Mich.    D     17.2  25.3  27.3  90        90.8  Some shrunken kernels
              '42
Cornell     Ithaca, N.Y.    S-12  16.5  24.9  25.1  80         89.0
  (20)        '42            D-24                   100%             No empty nuts, kernels full,
Creitz      Stoke, Va.       S-15  18.8  22.0  23.8 100  -1.3  83.4    very good extr., good color
              '40            4-4                                     Excellent cracker. Shell thin;
Cresco      Ithaca, N.Y.    S     16.7  15.9  21.0  80        67.0    thin; good nut; flavor mild
  (6)         '42
Eldridge    Geneva, N.Y.    S-12                                     Not promising at Ithaca
  (15)        '42            D-24  21.1  24.0  24.5  96 -10.   80.0  Dried in husk; kernels
                                                                       shrunken
Finney      Snyder, Iowa     S-12  19.5  18.0  22.4  82 -12.5  62.4  Shell thick;  kernels shr.,
              '40            D-48                                      spurs prominent. Tough to
                                                                       crack
Freel       Ithaca, N.Y.    S     12.1  17.9  19.6  80         65.7  Shell thick, kernel thin. Not
  (6)         '42                                                      a good nut
Galloway    Snyder, Iowa     S-12  16.4  22.3  23.2  94  -0.3  81.7  Kernel smooth, flavor good.
              '40            D-24                                      Extraction good
Harris      Snyder, Iowa     S-12  18.5  23.8  25.6 100 -12.5  76.4  Dark color.  All kernels
              '40            D-12                                      withered. Flavor poor.
                                                                       Extraction very good
Homeland    Stoke, Va.       S- 5  19.1  20.4  25.8  89        81.7  Smooth kernels; flavor good;
  (19)        '40            D-16                                      closed suture
Karnes      Stoke, Va.       S-16  20.3  25.6  29.4  56        91.8  Tight in shell. Kernels oily,
              '40            D- 7                                      shatter. Flavor good.
                                                                       Shining pellicle
Korn        Korn, Mich.      D     16.8  19.0  27.9  62        74.9  Kernels fill cavity very full.
              '39                                                      Shatter
McCoy       Snyder, Iowa     S-12  19.4  20.7  21.2  90  -0.8  79.6  Smooth kernel; some slight
              '40            D-4                                       shrinking. Thick shell
McGee       Becker, Mich.    D     13.7  16.2  26.8  83        67.8  Bound qtrs., hard pointed
              '42                                                      nuts, hard cracking
Michigan    Korn, Mich. '39  D     20.0  23.0  30.3  90        90.1  Kernels plump, very good nut
Mintle      Snyder, Iowa     S-12  13.6  31.5  32.0  95  -1.0 101.1  Flavor mild, extr. very good.
              '40            D-12                                      Very good nut, smooth shell
Mintle      Ithaca, N.Y.    S-12  13.7  23.9  24.3 100        83.8   No empty nuts, kernels plump,
              '42            D-24                                      good extraction
Ohio        Snyder, Iowa     S-12  18.5  24.0  27.4  79  -1.3  86.8  Shell chamber smooth. Flavor
              '40            D-24                                      sharp. Extraction fair.
Rohwer      Snyder, Iowa     S-12  21.5  24.0  28.2  84        92.0  Kernel smooth, extr. fair.
              '40            D-48                                      Kernels plump.

Rohwer      Stoke, Va.       S-15  18.5  18.0  22.4  79  - .3  73.3  Fair extraction; flavor fair.
              '40            D- 3                                      Spur prominent.  11 blind
                                                                       qtrs.
Schwartz    Snyder, Iowa     S- 6  20.3  21.8  25.6  86  -3.0  82.2  End cracked. Spurs prominent.
              '40            D-14                                    Some shrinking. Not too good.
                                                                       11 blind qtr.
Sifford     Stokes, Va.      S-16  23.6  23.7  25.6 100 -11.0  82.8  Large nut. Good extr. Kernels
              '40            D-7                                       shrunken
Snyder      Jacobs, Ohio     D     19.6  26.1  28.0  94        95.4  Not entirely cured
  (4)         '42
Snyder      Smith, Wassaic,  D     21.9  22.0  26.4  91        88.2  11 bound qtrs. Kernels lg.
 (14)         N.  Y. '42                                               rather dark, a good nut
Sparrow     Ithaca, N.Y.    S-12  15.5  20.7  22.4  42 -14.5  63.2   1 empty, all shrunken, end
 (11)         '42            D-24                    96%               cracks; poor quality
Sparrow     Smith, Wassaic,  D     16.5  21.6  28.2  85        82.3  Well filled, kernels bright,
 (10)         N.Y. '42                                                 good flavor, good nut
Sparrow     Snyder, Iowa     S- 6  16.1  25.1  31.2  84        90.3  Flavor good; smooth nut, spur
              '40            D-19                                      medium prominent. 13 blind
                                                                       qtrs.
Sper        Becker, Mich.
              '42            D     16.2  20.0  25.6  90        78.0  Kernels somewhat shrunken
               "             D     16.7  27.9  28.7  98        96.6  No. 4, 1942 not completely
Sper                                                                   dried. Not recleaned
Stabler     Stoke, Va.       S- 5  14.5  20.2  22.8  80  -9.0  65.3  Flavor mild. Easy extr. 12
              '40            D-20                                      blind qtrs. Many shrunken
Stabler     Wilkinson, Ind.  S-12  14.9  25.7  27.2  77  -3.0  84.6  End cracks; 6 bound qtrs. 2
              '40            D-24                                      empty nuts, 2 shr. kernels
Stambaugh   Graham, Ithaca,
  (7)         N.Y.      recleaned 19.3  24.0  24.0  28  -12.5 61.3   All kernels shrunken. Poor
                         S-12 D-24                  100%               quality
Sterling    Korn, Mich.      D     19.8  25.2  25.9  97        92.8  Kernels plump. Very good nut
              '39
Tasterite   Graham, Ithaca, N.Y.
  (4)         N. Y .    recleaned  13.5  25.0  25.0 100%       86.0  All kernels plump; quality
              '42       S-12 D-24                                      fair
Thomas      Snyder, Iowa     S-12  17.2  22.9  25.6  91  -1.0  83.9  Good extraction. Some
              '40            D-12                                      shrunken
Thomas      Wilkinson, Ind.  S-12  18.5  21.5  27.1  26        77.7  End cracks; 21 bound qtrs.,
              '40            D-24                                      Kernels plump; oily,
                                                                       clinging
Thomas No.  Ithaca, N.Y.    D     20.6  19.1  22.1  96        79.4   Some shrunken
  1           '42  Tree 1
Thomas No.  Ithaca, N.Y.  S-1-1/2 20.6  14.4  18.2  91  -1.0  67.6   1 empty nut; some shrunken
  2           No. 2 '42      D-6
Thomas No.  Ithaca, N.Y.    D     20.4  19.1  22.1  96        79.2
  3           No. 3 '42
Thomas No.  Ithaca, N.Y.    D     20.1  15.5  16.8  82 -16.0  36.2   4 empty nuts; all shrunken
  4           '42 No. 4
Thomas No.  Ithaca, N.Y.    S-12  20.5  23.4  24.0  90  -8.0  80.5   4 empty nuts; 8 shr. kernels;
  5 (24)                                                                2 blind qtrs.
Thomas      Ithaca, N.Y.    S-12  19.8  17.6  18.4  94 -10.0  63.7   2 empty nuts; 16 shr. kernels
  (20)        No. 6 '42      D-24
Thomas      Wilkinson, Ind.  S-12  20.5  21.1  25.4  69  -7.0  75.3  3 empty nuts; 4 shr. kernels,
              '40            D-24                                       23 bound qtrs.
Troup       Graham, Ithaca,  S-12  16.0  16.0  18.0  16 -20.0  51.0   All kernels shr., 2 empty
 (4)          N.Y. '42      D-24                   100%                nuts, quality poor
Vail        Ithaca, N.Y.    S-12  15.3  20.8  21.8  30               4 empty nuts, 6 shr. kern.,
  (8)         '42            D-24                    94%-17.0  60.2     2 blind qtrs., end cracks
Vandersloot    "             S-12  27.5  13.4  16.6  58  -3.0  64.4   1 empty nut, 4 shr. kern.,
                             D-24                                       11 bound qtrs., ext. poor
Wiard       Snyder, Iowa     S-12  18.8  26.8  29.4  83        95.4   One of best, well filled.
             '40             D-12                                       Smooth kernel, good flavor,
                                                                        good extraction


DISCUSSION

In the light of the data presented some conclusions can be drawn on the
various questions raised at the beginning of this paper. It is evident
that if approximately the same score is to be obtained by one operator
on duplicate or replicate random samples, great care must be used in
sampling. There is a tendency in taking samples to pick out the larger
nuts or in some other way fail to take a good random sample. Selections
submitted for contests are likely to be quite misleading as to the value
of the variety and reflect in considerable part the contestant's skill
in selection rather than the merit of the clone. The Freel walnut seems
to be an example of this. At least as grown at Ithaca it is very
disappointing.

It is evident that if comparable scores are to be obtained the samples
receive the same treatment particularly as regards moisture content.
Samples should be dried sufficiently to show the shrinkage of poorly
developed kernels but in no case be allowed to dry to the point of
checking the shells. Uniform soaking practice is a step in the right
direction. A green or partially dried nut will test much higher than one
properly cured as evidenced by Snyder, sample 6 and Spear, sample 7 in
Table 1.

It seems probable that no schedule can be devised that will eliminate
the necessity for skill on the part of the operator. To obtain
satisfactory uniformity in scores, it is essential that the operator be
skilled in the use of the cracking machine and use continuous care in
applying the necessary pressure and in holding the nut in the anvils.
Undercracking or overcracking, reversing the ends of the nut in the
anvil or failure to hold the nut vertical may affect the score.

The presence of empty or poorly filled nuts in a lot of nuts from which
samples are taken at random introduces greater variability in the
samples than that found in lots with all nuts filled. This is true
because the chances of getting an equal number of empty nuts in 25 nut
samples are small and the presence of each empty nut decreases the per
cent kernel and also the numbers of quarters possible. Variations due to
empty nuts could be eliminated by greatly increasing the number of nuts
in the sample but this is not practical for the purposes this schedule
is intended to serve.

The question of whether or not it is possible for different operators to
obtain equal scores on duplicate samples is not satisfactorily answered
by the data in table 4. As the data stand the scores are far from equal.
There is, however, a consistency in the scoring of each operator and it
is quite probable that with more uniform treatment of nuts before
cracking and more careful sampling better agreement would be achieved.
This is borne out in the data given in table 5 in which the variation in
scores between the two operators was no greater than that obtained by
the same operator.

From a study of the data secured it appears that the causes of variation
in the scores of duplicate or replicate samples are the result of (1)
lack of care in making replicate random samples, (2) differences in
treatment of samples before cracking, particularly as regards moisture
content, (3) differences in the skill or care of the operator making the
tests, (4) presence of empty nuts or shrivelled kernels in the sample
which introduces variation not compensated for in a 25 nut sample and
further complicates the matter because assigning penalties for
shrivelled kernels involves personal judgment.

The first three of these can be minimized or eliminated by care and
skill. The fourth item is not so easy but procedure can at least be
standardized. Increasing the size of the sample is not practical if much
testing is to be done.

All things considered it would seem that the scores indicate fairly well
but not accurately the relative merit of the samples and thus can be
relied upon to determine the relative merit of a variety or clone, the
suitability of the variety for growing in a given locality and the
variability of a variety grown in the same region but under different
conditions. To determine the merit of a variety as compared to another
both must be grown under the same conditions. The over-all value of a
variety can only be determined from samples of well filled nuts. In any
case the more samples tested the better.

The following suggestions are made as to procedure:

1. In taking a random sample no selection as to size, uniformity, or any
other quality should be made. Suggested procedure would be to scoop up
about 25 nuts in a berry basket or with the hands from the main supply
and reduce the sample to 25 without conscious selection. What we in the
Northern Nut Growers' Association want is a measure of the merit of the
crop of the tree or variety in question and not the value of a highly
selected sample.

2. It is not practical to bring samples to a uniform moisture content
before cracking is done. The following precautions, however, may be
followed: (a) Take care to see that nuts are reasonably well cleaned and
free from fragments of husk. Scrubbing or beating the nuts together in a
sack will usually remove most of the loose material. Of course the best
practice is to wash the nuts immediately after shucking. (b) Cure
samples until they are dry enough not to lose more weight preferably in
an unheated room. This takes at least a month or 6 weeks. (c) Avoid
storing the samples in a heated room where they will become so dry that
the shells will check or crack. If this occurs the normal cracking
fracture of the shell is destroyed and a satisfactory test cannot be
made. (d) Nuts that have become so dry that the kernels shatter may be
moistened by soaking about 2 hours in cold or lukewarm water then
holding them in a moist condition for 18-24 hours, followed by drying
for 10-12 hours before cracking. Nuts that are to be soaked should be
weighed before soaking and the dry weight used in figuring percentages.
The kernels of soaked nuts should be dried for 24 hours before weighing,
preferably under the same conditions in which the samples were stored
before weighing.

3. Care and skill on the part of the operator are of the greatest
importance, particularly in the thoroughness of cracking. The most
important variable in the score is the per cent kernel recovered at
first cracking. The score is reduced by undercracking the nut so as to
leave the quarters bound or by overcracking to the point of smashing the
kernels. If the nuts have a long point so that the rims of the anvils do
not contact the shoulders of the nut, poor cracking will result. At the
present time a cracker with interchangeable anvils is not available.
Using different sized iron pipe couplings in a vise may help solve the
problem. Some varieties will crack better with a hammer than with a
cracker of the Hershey type with standard anvils. In cracking a sample
for test the operator should try to recover the most possible out of
the first crack without using a pick or recracking.

4. The empty nut problem is probably the most difficult and is not
satisfactorily solved by cracking nuts in excess of 25 until 26 filled
nuts are secured. This necessitates weighing the sample after the nuts
are cracked which is usually impracticable because of loss of parts of
shells in cracking and because additional nuts are not available. Empty
or shrivelled nuts in a sample are a serious defect which should count
heavily against it. On the basis of experience it seems that a better
method is to crack the random sample of 25 nuts and let the empty nuts
and shrivelled kernels affect the score as reduced weight per nut,
reduced per cent kernel and the penalty as well. Shrivelling that is
obvious and which adversely affects the appearance of the kernels should
be penalized. Possibly further experience will suggest a better way of
handling this problem.

The proposed score of a sample is made up as follows:

1. The weight of a single nut in grams.

2. The per cent kernel of total weight of sample recovered after first
crack x 2.

3. The total per cent kernel of total weight of sample divided by 2.

4. One tenth point for each whole quarter recovered.

5. Penalty of one score point for each empty nut in the sample.

6. Penalty of 1/2 point for every nut with shrivelled kernel.

The makeup of this score does not differ from that previously used
except in the matter of procedure with empty nuts. It is felt that the
items included are weighed in a realistic manner and that difficulties
in scoring have been due to methods of handling the samples rather than
in the scoring schedule itself. It does not seem likely that this
schedule or any schedule will be valuable unless used by experienced
operators who are willing to take the precautions indicated. Also it is
apparent that wherever possible more than one sample of a lot to be
scored should be tested and the average score used.


REFERENCES CITED

1. MacDaniels, L. H. Report of committee on varieties and judging
standards. No. Nut Growers Assn. Proc. 28: 20-23. 1937.

2. MacDaniels, L. H. Is it possible to devise a satisfactory judging
schedule for black walnuts? No. Nut Growers Assn. Proc. 30: 24-27. 1939.

3. Kline, L. V., and S. B. Chase. Compilation of data on nut weight and
kernel percentage of black walnut selections. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. Proc.
38: 166-174. 1941.

4. Kline, L. V. A method of evaluating the nuts of black walnut
varieties. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. Proc. 41: 136-144. 1942.

5. Lounsberry, C. C. Measurements of walnuts of United States. No. Nut
Growers Assn. Proc. 31: 162-167. 1940.

6. Drake, N. F. Judging black walnuts. No. Nut Growers Assn. Proc. 22:
130-137. 1931.

7. Drake, N. F. Black walnut varieties. No. Nut Growers' Assn. Proc. 26:
66-71. 1935. Nut Growers Assn. Proc. 30: 81-83. 1939.



Shelling Black Walnuts

_By G. J. KORN, Berrien Springs, Michigan_


The methods used in the shelling of black walnuts by one of the
commercial growers in southeastern Pennsylvania may be of interest to
some of our NNGA members. For the last three seasons I have helped this
grower with the harvesting and shelling of his crop. The Thomas variety
predominated in his 40-acre nut orchard. This variety is truly a very
outstanding nut when properly grown. The Thomas is large, cracks well,
its kernels may be readily removed in large pieces, mostly quarters, and
they are of excellent flavor and color.

Care in selecting the orchard site, soils, methods of cultivation,
fertilizing and spraying appear to be of prime importance in the
production of high quality nuts. The matters I shall speak of in this
article, however, will have to do mostly with the harvesting, husking,
curing and cracking of the walnuts and picking their kernels.

When the walnut husks may be easily dented with the thumb they are ready
to gather. This is usually about October 5 in that locality. The
harvesting is begun immediately, as the kernels will become somewhat
damaged as to flavor and color if the husks are allowed to darken and
decompose. When the nuts have ripened they do not remain in prime
condition for harvesting for more than about 10 to 15 days. By this time
the husks will have begun to decompose and darken the kernels. Just as
soon as the nuts are ripe they are shaken from the trees. The nuts are
gathered into bushel baskets and hauled in a pick-up truck to the
husker. One of the old cannon type corn shellers, once quite common in
Pennsylvania, is used to husk the nuts. A farm tractor furnishes the
power to run the husker. The nuts are run through the husker a couple of
times to assure a clean job of husking. The cleanly husked nuts drop
into a basket at the end of the husker. Only 3 minutes or slightly more
time is required to turn out a bushel of husked nuts. The freshly husked
nuts are washed in a large copper kettle of water by vigorously stirring
them a few minutes with a common garden hoe. About 1-1/2 bushels of nuts
are washed in each batch. All nuts that float lightly on the water are
skimmed off and discarded. The nuts are then spread out about 2 or 3
nuts deep on trays to dry. The frames of the trays are made of 1x3 inch
lumber and are 1-1/2 feet wide and 3-1/2 feet long; 3/4 inch mesh
galvanized chicken wire netting forms the bottoms of the trays. Walnuts
dried indoors in the shade produce lighter colored and finer flavored
kernels than do those dried outdoors in the sun and rain. When nuts are
being dried indoors, care should be taken to see that they have a good
circulation of air or the nuts may start molding in the early stages of
their curing. Although the outside of the walnut shells may dry off
quite rapidly, it takes considerable more time for the inside of the nut
to cure properly for storing. The nuts should be left on the trays for a
few weeks to insure thorough curing.

[Illustration]

The cracking of the nuts is done with one of the small mechanical
crackers that is to be found on the market. The more care exercised in
the cracking at the nuts, the less work and time will be required in
separating the kernels. After cracking the nuts they are sifted through
a series of screens. This helps very materially in preparing them for
rapidly picking their kernels. It is quite important that this
operation be done properly if the kernel picking is to be made simple
and rapid. The cracked nuts are first sifted through a screen made of
1-inch mesh chicken wire netting. Next the nuts are sifted through a
screen made of 1/2-inch mesh hardware cloth. All material which will not
pass through this screen should be kept separate. Some of these pieces
will require recracking and kernel picking with the fingers. The
material which has passed through the 1/2-inch mesh screen is now sifted
on a hardware cloth screen with 5 meshes to the inch. Only the very fine
material will pass through this screen which is not suitable for further
kernel recovery. The material which remains on the 1/2-inch mesh screen
is now placed on the table especially made for kernel picking. This
table is shown in the accompanying sketch. The table is of suitable size
to allow two people to use it at the same time. The operators sit on
stools about 20 inches in height, and work from the low side of the
table. A small amount of the material is brought forward and spread out
very thinly before the operator. A piece of 1/2-inch softwood dowel
about 5 inches long with 4 No. 9 sewing needles imbedded in one end is
used to pick up the kernels. The needles are placed in the form of a
square and should be only about 3/32 of an inch apart to do the best
work. The picks should not be used to pry kernels from the shell, as the
needles would soon become bent and worthless. The picks are meant to be
used only to pick up the kernels from _among_ the shells. As soon as the
operator has removed all the kernels from the small amount of material
he has brought forward from the rear of the table, he shoves the shells
into the hole at the edge of the table and they drop into a receptacle.
The pick is used with the right hand, and the kernels are removed from
the pick with and into the left hand. As soon as a convenient handful of
kernels has been obtained, they are dropped into a small pan which sets
on the table near the operator's left hand. The rapidity with which
kernels may be picked by using these methods is surprising. It is
sometimes necessary to moisten the nuts and hold them in this condition
for 2 or 3 days before cracking them, to keep the kernels from
shattering unduly. After the kernels are picked out they are dried very
thoroughly. Trays whose bottoms are lined with screening somewhat finer
in mesh than that used for windows, are used to dry the kernels. Care
should be taken to not overheat the kernels, or their flavor and color
will be impaired. Good clean lard or similar cans with tight fitting
covers are used for storing the kernels. The kernels are stored in a
cool dry place. Any kernels which are to be kept over the summer months,
are placed in cold storage.



Better Butternuts, Please

_S. H. GRAHAM, Ithaca, N. Y._


"As to palatability, there are many persons who would be disposed to
place the butternut at the very head of edible nuts." This is the
opinion of Luther Burbank in Vol. XI, page 32, of "Luther Burbank, His
Methods and Discoveries."

The butternut tree is noteworthy as being at home in a greater variety
of soils than the blackwalnut as well as being hardier than the black
walnut or the hickory. It ripens so early that the nuts always have
plenty of time to mature while the richly flavored kernels are rarely
shrunken and never astringent. Despite these good qualities, a search
through the publications of the Northern Nut Growers' Association for
the past thirty years proves that comparatively little interest has been
manifested in it. It would seem quite in order to inquire into the
reasons for this neglect. Five of them come to mind: 1. Too early
blooming. 2. Difficulty of propagation. 3. Curculios. 4. Melanconis
disease. 5. Lack of sufficiently good varieties.

The butternut too often blooms so early that its blossoms are caught by
frost. The filbert has the same fault and so, to a less extent, has the
Persian walnut. Late blooming varieties of each have already been
selected. It does not seem too much to hope that late blooming varieties
of butternut may also be found. I know of one butternut that has had
good crops every year but one for the last ten years but have never
visited it at the right time to observe its blooming habit. President
Weschcke reports that butternuts on black walnut stocks have their
blooming retarded for a few days.

Many experienced nut tree propagators have little success in grafting
the butternut. But Mr. Harry Burgart of Michigan, has found that nursery
trees may be successfully grafted if the operation is performed at a
point three or four feet from the ground, while the late Dr. G. A.
Zimmerman of Pennsylvania, found that very early grafting gave him the
best results. He reported that his best catch was from grafts set March
tenth. Some moderately successful propagators do not pay careful
attention to outside temperatures when they cut their scions. In
contrast to this let us see what Mr. J. F. Jones thought about it. He
was undoubtedly the most successful nut tree propagator in the East and
he was always as generous in sharing his hard earned knowledge as he was
skillful in its application in his own commercial nursery. Note this
from his paper in the 1920 annual report. "In the case of trees that
bleed freely when cut, we must guard against taking scions after hard
freezing weather and before the tree has fully recuperated. This
semi-sappy conditions following low temperatures that freeze the wood
seems to be a provision of nature to restore the sap lost by
evaporation. We always try to avoid taking scions of any kind soon after
hard freezing weather. I have found scions of English and Japanese
walnuts, cut from trees in this condition, to be practically worthless
for propagation, although they may have been cut in late winter long
before the sap gets up in the tree naturally." This warning would
undoubtedly apply to the butternut as it bleeds freely when cut. Another
pitfall for the inexperienced propagator lies in storing scions in
packing material that is too moist. Sphagnum is commonly used. It should
be no more than slightly moist to the touch.

If left to run wild, the butternut curculios are a serious menace to the
butternut, the Japanese walnut and the Persian walnut. Their life
history as described at length in U.S.D.A. bulletin 1066, is briefly as
follows: The beetles (called elephant bugs by some because the side view
resembles the elephant) spend the winter in the ground. As soon as new
growth appears on the host tree they begin feeding on the tender leaves
and stems. Soon they begin laying their eggs in crescent shaped
punctures which they cut in the new shoots and nutlets. The larvae hatch
in a few days and tunnel through the pith of the shoots seriously
injuring and stunting their growth while the infested nuts soon fall
from the tree. The eggs may be laid from late May to early August. They
hatch in a few days. The larvae complete their growth in four or five
weeks when they enter the ground to pupate. In about a month they emerge
as adult beetles and begin feeding on leaves and leaf stems as their
parents did in the spring, but they will do no egg laying until the
following spring. Poison spray applied in early spring and again in late
August and September should so reduce their numbers that they will not
become a serious pest. Our State Experiment Station suggests the use of
a cryolite spray as it is more effective against curculios than
arsenical sprays and less likely to injure tender walnut foliage. The
Mitchell hybrid, (butternut x heartnut) with us, appears to have natural
immunity to the curculio. This brings to mind a secondary but very
important reason for finding better butternuts,--namely that they may be
used as a starting point for the super variety that someone should give
the world from his long rows of crosses between the best butternuts and
the best heartnuts.

The nut growers of this country are indebted to Dr. Arthur H. Graves of
the Brooklyn Botanic Garden for a complete study of the Melanconis
disease of the butternut. This study was begun in New York City but has
since been widely extended. He thinks that the disease is probably
present throughout the entire range of the butternut and is usually
responsible for the dead limbs that are so often seen in butternut
trees. The Japanese walnut is also susceptible. The disease usually
enters the tree through twigs that have been injured in some way. His
conclusions, after thorough scientific laboratory and field work
covering a period of over twenty years, is that it is caused by a weak
parasitic fungus attacking rapidly only when the host tree is in a
weakened condition; that it may lie practically dormant in vigorous
trees and that it may be successfully combatted by fertilizing,
mulching, providing necessary water in time of drought and avoidance of
any condition that might weaken the tree. All dead twigs and all twigs
showing fruiting bodies of the fungus should be pruned off some distance
below the apparent infection as soon as discovered and the pruning
wounds painted. Dr. Graves thinks it possible that butternuts grafted on
black walnut stocks may have their vigor increased sufficiently to help
in warding off the disease. Mr. Weschcke says that, although the
Melanconis disease is prevalent in his locality, there has never been
the slightest indication of it on the butternut trees which he has
growing on black walnut stocks. If kept free of disease the butternut
may reach great size. Dr. Robert T. Morris has stated that when he was a
boy there were magnificent butternut trees over the greater part of
Connecticut.

There still remains the stumbling block of lack of really outstanding
varieties bearing nuts of good size, large percentage of kernel and
perfect shelling quality with heavy and regular bearing. This is a large
order to fill but it is a fair guess that somewhere there are wild trees
better than any thus far brought to light. Trying to locate them should
be an exciting assignment for a nut tree enthusiast. Do not think
lightly of a butternut tree just because it looks small and unthrifty.
It may be that the fault lies in an unfavorable location. Only an
appraisal of the nut will establish its value.

The butternut is fairly abundant throughout its range which extends well
up into Canada. In central New York there are uncounted thousands of
butternut trees along fence rows, in the large and small valleys and
along little streams. One person with limited time can hardly hope to
examine more than a small proportion of them during the period when the
nuts are ripe. The scout for better nuts should lose no opportunity to
tell his errand to the people that he meets. I have found the average
stranger interested and cooperative. He may direct you to a superior
tree that you would never otherwise find. For this work one must be
able, like the successful inventor, to hold his enthusiasm after many
disappointments. If the coveted variety is not found, one at least has
been out in the woods and fields during a wonderful time of year.



The Use of Fertilizer in a Walnut Orchard

_By L. K. HOSTETTER, Pennsylvania_

Sometime in the fall of 1941 Professor Fagan of Pennsylvania State
College, and Mr. Graham of Cornell University, called on me and proposed
to make some fertilizer tests in my walnut orchard. The following spring
Professor Fagan sent me 16 bags of fertilizer, one bag for each tree.

These tests were divided into three parts and each part had one tree
that received nitrogen, superphosphate and potash, one that received
nitrogen and superphosphate, one nitrogen and potash, one superphosphate
only and one potash only and a sixth tree that received no fertilizer.

In the first group all the trees received a liberal amount of mulch. In
the second group they received no mulch but the same fertilizer as the
first group and in the third group they received the same fertilizer, no
mulch but raw lime was added to the fertilizer. One tree received lime
only.

There was a heavy sod in the part of the field where these tests were to
be made. This sod was torn up with a springtooth harrow (weed hog) about
March 15th and the fertilizer was applied on May 6th.

That year was a very poor one in which to make these tests, for during
all of July and August we had continuous rainy and cloudy weather and by
the first of September all of the leaves had turned yellow and dropped.

Most of the trees had a big crop of walnuts which were gathered about
October 10th, the nuts from each tree being kept separate. After they
were cracked the kernels were weighed and graded and believe it or not,
the tree that received lime only had the best grade of kernels, and
second best were one that received lime and potash and another lime,
nitrogen and potash. The tree that received mulch and potash also had a
very good grade of kernels.

In 1943 the same tests were repeated. This was again a poor year for we
had very little rain during all of August and September just when the
trees needed it most. The tree that received nothing had the best
quality of kernels and again all the trees that received potash had good
kernels.

In 1941 I grew two acres of tobacco and the following spring the stalks
were cut in one-inch pieces and put on about twenty-five trees. The
first year I could not see that it did any good but this past summer all
the kernels from these trees were just perfect. It surely is a pleasure
to crack walnuts when at least 98% of the kernels are perfect.



Lime and Fertilizers for Our Black Walnut Trees

_By SEWARD BERHOW, Iowa_


In 1941-1942-1943 black walnut crops from trees growing in timberland in
competition with other trees were nearly a total failure. The nuts were
fair in number but not filled, the kernels badly shriveled, tough,
lacking greatly in flavor and discolored. Some of these black walnut
trees have been bearing for 50 years. Are they through, due to having
used up all the soil fertility?

Wild or native black walnut trees, growing on good soil and not crowded
have done better. It looks to me as if it is time our experiment
stations, particularly those having black walnut trees on or near their
grounds should start studying the cultural requirements of nut trees in
the way of lime and fertilizer for better nuts. I have experimented by
applying lime and fertilizer to a few bearing trees with very good
results. But we need to know the proper amounts to be used for all sizes
of trees from the transplants to the bearing trees of different sizes.
Such investigations can best be conducted by our experiment stations.

There is a very substantial increased demand for grafted nut trees each
year. This is evidence that we should make a study of our nut tree
culture and care.



The Propagation of Black Walnuts Through Budding

_By STERLING SMITH, Ohio_


The propagation of black walnuts by budding has proven a highly
successful experience. By following this method over a period of several
years, under normal weather conditions, the results have been fairly
uniform.

Stocks, upon which to bud, may either be secured from private nurseries,
state forestry departments, or by planting the seed of vigorous native
nut trees. If one desires to produce his own stock, the nut seeds should
be planted soon after they are gathered. A garden nursery row makes a
desirable place for small plantings. If a large scale increase is
contemplated it is best to plant the seeds where the trees may be left
to grow to maturity. Plant two or three seeds a few inches apart (within
a hill) and space these hills as the land available will warrant,
anywhere from twenty-five to fifty feet apart. Should all the nuts
sprout there will be a three-to-one chance for a healthy tree, and if
more than one good tree is produced in each hill the excess stock may be
transplanted. After the stock has grown for one year it should be cut
back to within four inches from the ground. Such stock makes good
material for experimental grafting. By pruning the stock in the spring
it forces new growth upon which to place buds later in the season. In
the budding process the Jones patch budder has been very successfully
used.

Along the southern shore of Lake Erie the first week in July is a
favorable time to begin this procedure. Due to the fact that the
northeast side of the tree is the coolest and shadiest the greater part
of the day, there the buds should be set. With the budding tool cut
through the bark of the stock, several inches above the start of the new
growth. Do not remove the bark. This produces a gathering of
callus-forming material at this point and aids in the healing in of the
bud which is to be later placed there. My experience shows successful
results in many instances where I had failed to make this previous cut.

Bud wood should be new and vigorous growth, the first five or six buds
nearest the spot from which the growth started being the best. When the
bud wood is available cut off the first four or five leaf stalks close
to the buds. By the time the buds are ready for use the remainder of the
leaf stalk will have ripened or dried and fallen off, and the bark
underneath hardened off. If this is not the case the bark is apt to rot
at this point, which is directly beneath the bud itself. Bud wood,
procured from any source, should be trimmed with the stub of the leaf
stalk cut as closely as possible to the bark. If the budding is not done
immediately those cuttings may be wrapped and stored in a cool place
(about 40° F.) for several days before using. In a hot, dry season the
actual budding should be started soon after the middle of July. Due to
the excessive amount of rainfall during 1943, buds which were set on
July 24th yielded poor results, while those applied later in the summer,
about August 12th, healed in one hundred per cent.

Procedure: Cut the patch bud from the bud stick with the bud in the
center of the patch. Place this patch bud between the lips, as this is a
clean and convenient place to hold it. Next, cut the patch, which has
been previously marked out, and quickly place the new patch in the
opening, tying in place. As many as three or four buds may be similarly
set before they are coated with wax. Parapin wax (a paraffin and pine
gum mixture) is an excellent substance for coating the buds, due to its
rubber-like, non-cracking qualities. A convenient homemade contrivance
for melting the wax may be made by soldering a small can into the top of
a railroad lantern. Rubber bands of good quality have been made
especially for budding by several large rubber companies. These are
ideal for tying the buds in place and may be reused several seasons.
Treekote, an asphalt emulsion, has proven a successful substance for
coating the new work. After the buds have set for two weeks remove the
rubber bands and examine. Where buds have failed to heal in properly,
and room remains on the stock, new buds may be applied just below the
scar.

When the trees show signs of growth, the following spring, cut them back
to the top of the bud patch, cover the cut with Treekote and prevent all
growth on the original stock from developing. The placed buds are
frequently slower in starting than the natural buds. A stake driven
beside the young stock makes a convenient support for the rapid new
growth, which should be tied to prevent breaking by strong winds.

Trees started in the nursery may be transplanted to permanent locations
the following spring, inasmuch as the spring of the year has proven a
more satisfactory time for transplanting than the fall. To attain
success in transplanting the newly dug tree, roots should be exposed as
little as possible to the air. Prepare the holes before digging the
trees, moving one tree at a time for best results. Move as much of the
root stock as possible, usually about 18 to 24 inches. Trim roots with a
sharp knife, making a clean cut facing downward. Remove at least half of
the top growth of the tree and plant at once, tamping the loose dirt
firmly about the roots. Water generously and slowly around the loose
soil to aid in washing the dirt thoroughly around the newly disturbed
roots. With severe pruning, trees may be transplanted after new growth
has started. During periods of drought the soil around the trees should
be thoroughly soaked from time to time.

In conclusion, it may be said that due to varying conditions of soil,
climate and locality, for best results the proper time to bud may be
either earlier or later in localities other than northern Ohio. Various
factors may alter the procedure in those localities due to the
individual operator's experimentation, from which he has devised methods
giving him the best results.

       *       *       *       *       *

Note: The trade-name items mentioned in this article may be obtained
from any reliable nursery supply house.



Northern Nut Growing

_By JOSEPH GERARDI, Illinois_


Judging from the demand for nut trees the public is fast becoming aware
of the possibilities of growing its own nuts. Heretofore nut growing has
been confined to two favorable sections of the United States, the west
coast and the southern pecan groves. But, now we can safely plant the
pecan as far north as Springfield, Illinois, and from all indications
some trees found in Cass County will extend the northern limit another
one hundred miles.

The pecan is the favorite nut of nearly everyone, in fact it is
preferred to any other nut for its pleasing flavor and easy cracking.
Wild nuts used to be gathered from native trees without consulting the
owner, but since they are selling at good prices the owners of trees
gather them themselves. Fortunately, through efforts of far-seeing
individuals some very good pecans have been found that can be grown
successfully much farther north than the southern pecan belt. Our nut
enthusiast, Dr. A. S. Colby, has drawn the attention of the writer to
three promising pecans that he located in Cass County, Illinois. This
extends the northern pecan limit much farther north than we formally
considered them adaptable.

For this locality we can now boast of quite a list of pecans that have
been doing well. Of the older introductions Greenriver and Busseron can
safely be recommended, and of course, the local finds are all good here,
at least the parent trees are doing so well that the public is planting
them in preference to the older introductions. West of the Mississippi
River Giles, Clarkville and Norton can be recommended.

Prospective pecan planters should bear the following remarks in mind.
Environment has a decided influence on the behavior of plants and the
nut tree is no exception. As they are taken farther north of their
original habitat the nuts become smaller and do not fill as well. The
black walnut may be considered an exception to this statement. Many
local finds and some southern pecans are perfectly hardy as far north as
Chicago and Ontario, but can not be expected to ripen any of their nuts.
Many southern pecan trees in this locality are wonderful lawn trees but
as bearers they are worthless.


The Black Walnut

The list of black walnuts is altogether too long. Of the numerous
introductions only a few are retaining their popularity. In this section
I would still plant Stambaugh for its cracking and bearing qualities and
its thin shell, but its flavor does not equal that of Thomas and Mintle.
The Mintle is smaller but a much better cracker than Thomas. It is also
a young and heavy bearer, grows fast and straight as a candle and grafts
easily. The Elmer Myers will become the most popular black walnut in
sections where it does well, provided its thin shell will withstand
machinery hulling without injury to the nuts. We have not fruited the
Myers as yet. The black walnut is fast rivaling the pecan, and for
confection surpasses it because it retains its flavor after being cooked
or baked.


Persian Walnuts

The Persian walnut in spite of its popularity does not appeal to me. Its
flavor can not compare with that of the pecan, hickory, or black walnut.
Besides, it is too exacting as to climate and soil. We have tried all
the supposedly hardy ones but so far only one will withstand our
changeable climate. This one came from a New York nursery and the name
was lost. We list it as the Schmidt for the man who owns the tree. This
tree is now some twenty years old and bearing well. So far it is
remaining healthy as also are the trees grafted from it. Our trouble
with all other varieties of this species is that they make a second
growth in fall and then succumb to frost. Of all the Broadviews,
Shafers, Pekins and Crath seedlings we have grafted in the last ten
years not one is now alive in this locality. Something puzzling to me is
that two Broadview seedlings we now have growing from seed I obtained
from Mr. Corsan of Islington, Ontario, are growing slowly but are still
healthy after the '40 and '41 seasons. All the rest of the trees from
this same seed succumbed.


Filberts, Hazels and Their Hybrids

The Winkler hazel failed to bear the past season the first time in 15
years. All pure filberts we have tried in this locality are a failure.
Of the hybrids, Bixby and Buchanan are promising.


Chestnuts

The Mollissima chestnut is very promising in southern Illinois. The tree
requires protection in this locality as it sun scalds badly if not
protected. No doubt many orchards will be planted in the future.


Propagating Nut Trees

This is a fascinating subject full of disappointments. We have our ups
and downs as does everyone else who attempts it. I get numerous letters
telling of their experience and troubles asking for details just how to
go about it. What makes it so fascinating is that in certain seasons we
have fabulous success and them again in others almost complete failure.
Fall of '41 and spring of '42 we averaged 75% catches in budding
chestnuts. Fall of '42 and spring of '43 our chestnut budding was just
about nil, only 3 or 4% catches, and I am at a loss how to account for
this variance.

A budded chestnut tree is much superior to a grafted one as far as the
union is concerned. Grafted trees usually do not knit well the first
season while at two years the union is good. So we also must learn our
chestnut propagation all over again.

I have a letter before me from Brother Borst asking why his walnut buds
took so well and not one of them vegetated in spring. This happened to
us a number of times on both walnuts and hickories. Also, in the same
season, we have had one or two varieties, of which we did not set many
buds or grafts, to show 100% catches, while other varieties set the same
day would be 100% failure. Apparently all scions used were in prime
condition. Why then this great variance? While we used the double-bladed
knife for budding and the side graft for grafting, other methods are
just as successful under skilled hands. The skill of the operator has
much to do with it.

=Fall budding of persimmons.= The persimmon has only about ten days in
which it will fall bud. Before or after this period budding will not
succeed. It also is important that the scions be taken from thrifty
trees a number of years old. The ordinary "T" shield budding gives good
success on the persimmon either spring or fall. The spring bud sticks
should be perfectly dormant.


Butternut and Japanese Walnuts and Their Hybrids

None of these are worth the space they occupy in this locality. 1-18 on
which I reported last year didn't set a nut this season. Of all the
heartnuts I am acquainted with none are satisfactory. There is a siebold
tree in St. Louis that so far we have been unable to graft that promises
to be adapted to this vicinity. It is good bearer, good cracker and
pleasant flavor. This class of nuts is adopted to the north where the
pecan is unsatisfactory.


The Hicans and Hickories

The hicans are numerous in this and adjacent counties. While a number of
them are good, I have located none that can compare favorably with
Bixby, Gerardi, and Pleas for this locality. The Pleas is a bitternut
hybrid and has some bitterness in the kernel, but no more than the
English walnut and people like it. Of the twenty hicans we have tried
the above three only are satisfactory.

In this latitude the hicans are unquestionably the most satisfactory nut
trees to plant. They grow fast, bear young, have a high flavor, crack
well and are unsurpassed as shade or lawn trees. Here the Gerardi and
Bixby are the best so far fruited. The Pleas is very ornamental but
lacks flavor. The Burlington and Fairbanks are adapted to the north but
here are not satisfactory bearers.

I have reports on about 25 Gerardi hican seedlings. They are all
worthless, smaller in nut than either pecans or hickories. The peculiar
thing is that some of the pecans are decidedly bitter in flavor as also
are some of the hickories. Two of the seedlings show shellbark blood.

=Handling the nut weevil and plum curculio.= Two years ago the few nuts
the Gerardi hican had were all wormy. Last spring I cultivated the
ground with a one-horse cultivator and gave our chickens free access to
the feast. They made so good a job of it that not a single nut was stung
this season. Where the ground can be flooded for several days this will
also exterminate the weevil. The same treatment applies to plum
curculio. Cultivation should be done before growth starts in spring, or
quite late in fall.

If anyone ever got a Pleas hybrid nut to grow I would appreciate ever so
much to hear from him. So far all my trials to germinate the nuts have
failed.

I may add that in my estimation no land on this globe is blessed with a
nut flora that equals that of the United States.



Nut Puttering in an Off Year

_By W. C. DEMING, Connecticut_


I did manage to get over to Avon Old Farms, the boys' school, and
topwork a few hickory trees. All grew, about a dozen, except three
scions of one kind that I put in one tree. This is the third year that I
have grafted hickories on the grounds of this school, some three
thousand acres. The school was planned and built by Mrs. Theodate Pope
Riddle, and I was told there that it cost seven million dollars. It is a
beautiful and original group of buildings in the lovely Farmington River
Valley, well worth visiting.

Mr. Sperry the science teacher, is deeply interested in the nut trees.
Dr. Arthur Harmount Graves and I have both given him a number of
chestnut trees, and I have added a variety of others, walnuts,
persimmons, papaws, pecans, filberts and others as well as the topworked
seedling hickories. The trees have been given reasonably good and
intelligent care. Many trees were badly winter killed or injured last
winter when the temperature dropped to twenty-four below zero in
Hartford, official, and is said to have reached forty below in
Litchfield county. Japanese chestnuts were especially badly injured. But
hybrids having an American strain seemed generally to be little injured.
Filberts also showed bad injury. Pecans, persimmons and a papaw seemed
to have weathered the winter, though they should be further observed
before deciding. The nut trees have been set out in orchard form over
tracts of a number of acres and well fertilized. The land is good.

Incidentally Mr. Sperry expressed the thanks of the school with more
than one bottle--of fine maple syrup which he and the boys make every
spring.

The mollissima chestnut tree in my yard at Litchfield, which Dr. Graves
considers remarkable because it bears a moderate crop of fertile nuts
every year without apparent benefit of outside pollination, was stripped
almost bare of branches by an ice storm. It had reached thirty five feet
in height, mainly, perhaps because pretty well surrounded by taller
trees. Now it has to start over again from a much lower height. It bore
a few nuts on the remaining branches this year.

On account of the restrictions on driving I did not visit Mr. Beeman at
New Preston, but he wrote me that he had a few quarts of hickory nuts,
chiefly Glover from one of his large topworked trees. He has a couple of
acres set out to grafted hickories, some of which have been bearing for
several years. Pretty good for a man now 86 who began nut growing less
than ten years ago and who has serious physical handicaps. He is the
man, as many of you do not know, who, when he began with nut trees,
built scaffolds 40 feet high about each of two hickory trees in his
yard, and topworked them almost to the last branch by a method of his
own One reason for his success is that he is a violin maker with a
record of perhaps fifty violins, violas and 'cellos, and he makes his
own tools. He is a modest man whom it is a privilege to know.

I have had some interesting experiences with papaws this year. For the
first time I have succeeded in growing the seed intentionally. The only
other time when I have had seedlings was when a bunch of them came up by
themselves in the yard as thick as hair on a dog. Last year (1942) in
the fall, I scattered a lot o£ seed in a perennial bed and poked them in
with a cane and also in a reentrant angle of a house looking to the
northeast, behind some rather luxuriant Christmas roses (helleborus
niger) where there wore also lilies-of-the-valley and
jack-in-the-pulpits and the soil had been rather heavily enriched. In
both places the papaws came up quite freely, especially in the angle of
the house where the sun struck only a short time each day. The chief
reason, however, was probably the rich, deep soil. These seedlings with
taproots 6 to 8 inches long were easily transplanted with their leaves
on. I brought four of them to St. Petersburg, Florida. They are said to
be native in upper Florida.

Dr. Zimmerman, who was our authority on papaws, said that he thought
hand pollination was necessary for good crops. I have been making
observations on this for several years and in 1942 obtained confirmatory
results. Last spring (1943) I hand-pollinated a tree about 18 feet high
using pollen from a number of other trees. This was the same tree on
which I had had good results in 1942 over the limited part of the tree
that I had been able to reach from the ground. This year I used a
stepladder. Also, because the tree was close to a tool house, on the
grounds of the park superintendent, I was able to reach the top of the
tree from the roof of the tool house. From this tree I gathered about
100 fruits, all but two perfect, weighing together 23 pounds. There were
several bunches of three and four and one of six. The quality I did not
think as good as some. But it seemed a pretty good demonstration of the
value of hand pollinating.

In the yard of a house in Hartford, belonging to the widow of a high
school classmate of mine, I found a number of papaw trees, some of them
as big as they often grow, perhaps forty feet high and up to a foot in
diameter. The lady told me that they used to bear abundantly when her
neighbor just over the fence kept bees. Since these are gone she has had
very few or no fruit at all and the squirrels got them, if there were
any. I pollinated a lot of blossoms that I could reach from the ground
and in the fall they were quite loaded with clusters of fruit, but much
smaller than those on the first tree described. They were, however, of
better quality. There was also a small number of fruit in the high
branches of the trees and some of these the squirrels cut off, but
apparently just for fun as I did not see any sign of their eating them.

I am writing this in St. Petersburg, Florida. I boarded first with a man
who describes himself on his card as a tree surgeon doing grafting and
budding, spraying, fertilizing and pruning. This year he took the agency
for the Mahan pecan and has sold quite a number at $5 each, with one
order for twenty trees. These are put out by the Monticello, Florida
nursery. The history of their buying the Mahan pecan tree, and a picture
of the parent tree in its original home, is given in the files of the
American Nut Journal, an index of the seventeen volumes of which I
completed this year. Mr. Stewart sets out all the trees he sells and is
meticulous in doing so. Nearby is a good sized Mahan tree with still
quite a crop of nuts (in November) after a good many have been gathered.
Mr. Stewart speaks well of this pecan tree as a good bearer, with nuts
well-filled and of good quality. I haven't cracked enough of them to
verify these statements but they are offered by the Monticello Nursery
in fifty-pound lots. They sell at Webb's in this city for 65 cents a
pound. Schleys I believe sell for 45 cents at the same place. The Mahan
is, I think, the largest pure pecan, about a third larger than the
Schley and those I have seen were equally thin-shelled. I mention this
because I had supposed that pecans did not do well as far south as this.
Yet I see many trees about the city, some with fair crops on them and
some in good foliage, though many, or all of them I have observed, are
partially defoliated by the fall web worm. I saw one fine tree that I
was told was a Stuart. The Moneymaker also is said to do well here. I
speak particularly of the Mahan because it has not, so far as I know,
had the unqualified approval of the experts. But what has? And I don't
know that it deserves it.

It is a joy to be among the many citrus fruit trees, the guavas,
papayas, avocadoes, loquats, surinam cherries, new and strange fruits
and flowers of many kinds in Florida. The Australian or Queensland nut,
Macadamia ternifolia, grow and bear well here, I am told--but the
squirrels got all the nuts! But the greatest joy of all is the freedom
from ice and snow.



Nut Nursery Notes

_By H. F. STOKE, Roanoke, Va._


The present season has seen an increase of interest in nut tree planting
that is new in my experience. This interest is apparent not only in
retail orders, but is reflected in inquiries received from large general
nurseries, many of which have not been listing nut trees. I do not
believe that this interest in food-producing trees is a passing phase of
the war, but that it will continue if honestly catered to and wisely
directed.

With apologies for personal reference, the demands of my small
commercial nursery on my time and attention have become so heavy that I
am faced with the necessity of either building a permanent organization
of skilled workers or dropping out altogether. Due to advancing years
and other considerations I am choosing the latter course. Because of
this I feel free to make certain remarks as to the future of nut tree
production that I would hesitate to make if I were still in the
business.

Without doubt many of the large commercial general nurseries will take
up the growing and selling of nut trees. We who have pioneered in this
work, should welcome the increased public interest that will result from
the more extensive advertising and cataloging of nut trees. The
specialist who has worked out propagation, pollination and variety
problems should be more than able to hold his own against the
competition of newcomers in his field, however large.

As all old-timers know, there are certain factors in the growing of nut
nursery stock that do not lend themselves to the mass-production methods
of the large general nurseries. Stocks, generally, take longer to
produce. It may take as much as six years to produce a saleable hickory
tree from the time the seed is planted. Failures in grafting and budding
walnuts run high, especially with beginners. A catch of twenty-five per
cent means either selective hand digging must be resorted to or
seventy-five per cent of the seedling stock must be sacrificed if power
digging is used.

Suitable grafting stock for chestnuts is still a matter of controversy.
Good authorities claim that Chinese chestnut is unreliable as a root
stock while others, including myself, as stoutly maintain that the main
need is for proper technique in grafting and budding. These and other
considerations, including the training of workers in improved technique,
offer certain obstacles to the newcomer which, in turn, offer certain
temptations that may result in harm to the whole movement toward nut
tree planting.

To be specific, the difficulty of producing good grafted or budded trees
of named varieties may readily tempt the less scrupulous to sell any
kind of nondescript seedling, while at the same time giving the public
the impression that superior stock is being offered. This is, in fact,
already being done. I have before me the catalogues of three large
general nurseries. One of them offers what are obviously seedling
Chinese chestnuts in these words: "Only two years from now, right on
your own grounds, you can pick up big, fat, tasty chestnuts from the
trees you plant this year."

Of English walnuts--no variety name given and quite obviously
seedlings--the following description is given: "Thin-shelled, large,
delicious nuts, producing heavy crops and demanding good prices". In
both these cases the prices asked are as high or higher than good,
grafted, named varieties can be bought for elsewhere.

The second catalogue offers seedling black walnuts, not so designated,
and also "Thomas Improved" black walnuts at a higher price. Seedling
English walnuts, not stated as such, are offered as having commercial
possibilities and being as good in quality as those grown elsewhere. The
third catalogue is entirely ethical and legitimate. It lists a limited
assortment of well-selected varieties under their true names.

When misguided buyers purchase a seedling chestnut tree with the
expectation of "picking up big, fat, tasty chestnuts in two years from
planting" and realize a handful of nuts after ten years of waiting, or
nothing but empty burrs because of lack of pollination, nut tree
planting gets a black eye. The same is true when the buyer tenderly
nurses a weak-rooted English walnut seedling for fifteen years before he
gets a few small, thick-shelled, astringent nuts.

When nurseries that show honesty in their advertising write me for
information I give them the best I have. When their advertising is
otherwise I do not trouble to answer. One party, after asking many
questions, wound up by saying he wanted "to get in on this nut game." My
impression was that if he had said "shell game" he would have more
accurately stated his case.

Buyers should be on their guard not to be deceived by flowery, but vague
descriptions. If catalogues list nut trees by recognized variety names
it is pretty safe to assume that the trees are as represented. If
recognized variety names are omitted the trees may safely be considered
to be seedlings and that they will produce a wholly unknown quantity,
no matter how alluring the advertising. Of course, this is not intended
to discourage the planting of new varieties offered by nurseries of
known reputation for integrity, nor of such strains as the Crath
Carpathian walnut importations, from which new varieties are emerging.

As a practical note I wish to state that the black walnut is by far the
most satisfactory stock on which to graft walnuts of any species. Not
infrequently seedling English walnut trees take from ten to fifteen or
more years to come into bearing. I have fruited fifteen or more
varieties by grafting on black stocks, and in no case has it required
more than five years for the trees to bear. Frequently they have borne
in two or three years. The English walnut is also a more vigorous grower
on black walnut roots than on its own.

The Sherwood butternut grafted five or six years ago on butternut stocks
has not borne yet; grafted on a small black walnut in the nursery row in
1942 it bore one nut in 1943 and has many staminate buds for 1944
visible at the present time. Walters heartnut bears the second or third
year on black walnut; it has not borne for me on butternut after seven
years. The same holds good for the other heartnuts.

In the grafting of chestnuts, defective (incompatible?) unions can
generally be spotted the first year. They develop with a transverse
fissure into which the bark ingrows. Good unions show new tissue
entirely around the closing wound; the final scar as healing approaches
completion being vertical, i. e. longitudinal with the stock. This
result can be obtained by proper technique.

The members of the Association can do much to further the cause of nut
tree planting by discrimination in recognizing the ear-marks of honest
advertising and encouraging their friends to make their purchases from
conscientious, responsible nurserymen. Our Association nursery list is a
valuable help in this direction.



Report from the Tennessee Valley

_By THOMAS G. ZARGER, TVA, Norris, Tennessee_


_Black Walnut Industry_--in the early fall of 1943, a survey was made of
the black walnut industry in the Tennessee Valley and Nashville Basin.
Four commercial cracking plants had shelled 10 million pounds of nuts
purchased in 1942. This year, cracking plants have offered to buy
unlimited quantities of nuts in the shell at the relatively good price
of $4.50 per 100 pounds. Because of the manpower shortage, especially on
the farm, the collection of nuts has not exceeded the preceding year.
Pasteurizing plants had processed a quarter of a million pounds of
kernels purchased in 1942. This year only three pasteurizing plants will
operate, and a smaller quantity of kernels will be processed. The kernel
supply from the home-cracking industry has decreased because the
sanitation requirements of the Federal Food and Drug Administration are
difficult to meet in the homes.

_Bearing Habits of Wild Black Walnut_--Looking forward to a fuller
utilization of the wild black walnut crop, the bearing habits of the
black walnut tree is being investigated. Four-year records are now
available on tree growth, nut yield, and nut quality of sample trees
located throughout the Tennessee Valley. For 121 trees, with a range in
diameter from 4 to 28 inches total dry nut yield, in pounds, averaged as
follows: 1940, 31; 1941, 24; 1942, 38; 1943, 29. There is some evidence
of alternate bearing, with a heavy crop followed by a very light crop.
How much larger nut crop a larger tree is expected to bear was found to
increase on an average trend from 0 pounds of filled nuts for a tree of
4-inch diameter to 65 pounds for a 24-inch tree. Judged on the basis of
nut quality, only one of the sample trees compared favorably with
standard propagated varieties of black walnut. Filled nuts on the
average, amounted to 83 percent of total nut crop weight, and had a
total kernel percentage of 21. Recovery of marketable kernels averaged
17 percent of total nut weight. In order to learn still more about the
bearing habits of the black walnut, records on all sample trees will be
carried on for two more years.

_Macedonia Black Walnut_--A sample of black walnuts from a tree growing
on the home place of Mr. N. U. Turpen at the Macedonia Community at
Clarksville, Georgia, were sent to us for evaluation in 1939. The nuts
were thought to be two years old--from the 1937 crop. When tested, the
kernel content averaged about 40 percent--the highest on record for a
black walnut. The tree, supposed to be the one which bore the nuts we
tested, had not borne any appreciable amount since 1937. Since the tree
yielded good crops in 1942 and 1943, we are now in a position to report
further on the Macedonia walnut. Based on cracking tests of nut samples,
the average nut weight and kernel percentage were 16.8 grams and 28
percent in 1942; and 16.4 grams and 29 percent in 1943. It is apparent
that the Macedonia black walnut has not exhibited those exceptional
characteristics of thinness of shell and high kernel percent which were
found in the original sample tested.



Report from Minnesota--Letter from Carl Weschcke to Miss Mildred Jones


The winter of 1942-43 was the most damaging on fruit and nut trees
within my experience of 25 years in River Falls, Wisconsin. The main
reason was that we had a long wet fall and all vegetation was in a
succulent green condition when our first snow storm of September 25th
hit us. For other details of this winter and the Armistice Day storm of
1941, the second in its deleterious effect on horticultural varieties,
please write Mr. C. G. Stratton, Coop. Observer, of River Falls,
Wisconsin, who is in charge of the U. S. Government weather bureau
there. Mr. Stratton furnished me with an affidavit showing one of our
very coldest winters in which the temperature went down, in February, to
47° below zero. This was in 1936. This winter of extreme cold did very
little damage to trees, and an apricot on which I had taken out a plant
patent, subsequently called the Harriet apricot, went through this
winter without any damage and bore fruit the next year. This gave me
such confidence in its hardiness that I began to propagate it for sale.
The winter of 1942-43 wiped out practically all of the apricot trees of
this variety and all of the early Richmond cherries that had been
growing on my farm for nearly twenty years. It killed more than half of
the catalpa trees which were nearly as old. It also killed outright a
large Stabler black walnut which had been grafted on a Minnesota
seedling nearly twenty years previous. This was a fine large
flourishing tree that bore each year and I had thought because of this
behavior that Stabler was to be considered one of the hardiest of the
black walnuts. It had stood up better than Thomas many winters. I could
go on enumerating failures of many other varieties and species but it is
a long story and a sad one.

To make this report more concise I will now give you my opinion as to
what is hardy under these severe tests. To begin with, one of your
father's hazel hybrids, of which I have two bushes, stood all of this
very well. These bushes, which are perhaps fifteen years old, are still
flourishing, although the main trunks are decaying rapidly. Several of
the sprouts are blossoming freely. These two bushes have borne only one
crop of nuts, although they blossom freely, and the catkins are about as
hardy as anything in the filbert line that I have seen. The reason for
their not bearing is lack of pollination. I never did find out what was
satisfactory, even at the time that I hand-pollinated them to get a crop
of nuts. The nuts are much more satisfactory than Winkler or Rush
hazels. The Rush is absolutely worthless here; is subject to blight and
is very tender to our winters. The Winkler is a very hardy variety,
bears something every year. The trouble with the Winkler is that it
matures its nuts so late, much later than the Jones' hybrid. I never
have propagated your father's hybrid for sale as I did not know a hardy
pollinizer for it. I have sold a few Winklers, recommending them for
proper locations. I have one Winkler planted by a small lake cottage up
at Delta, Wisconsin. This is about thirty miles west of Ashland,
Wisconsin. This territory is very uncertain for successful corn raising
so the Winkler is quite a hardy bush.

Four hybrid plants that bear worthwhile nuts, which grew from seed
planted in 1933 and 1934, are perfectly hardy, almost as hardy as the
native wild hazel and hardier than any other worthwhile filbert or
hybrid that we have. This hardiness is no doubt due to the fact that the
mother plant was an ordinary wild Wisconsin hazel. These hybrids, from
the native hazels, we call "Hazilberts," and have obtained a United
States trademark on all plants produced after this manner. Here again I
have not recommended nor sold any of these because of my lack of
knowledge as to the correct pollinizer; this has yet to be developed.
They do not pollinize themselves nor do they pollinize each other
satisfactorily. They have all the finest characteristics that you could
ask for except prolificacy which may be due to the lack of a proper
pollinizer. They are the most resistant to the hazel blight of anything
that I have worked with so far in 25 years. Hard winters, such as we
have had recently, have no deleterious effect on them. They blossom and
do not lose any of their wood and apparently there is no injury. They
are very vigorous plants and can be trained to a single tree standard or
they make very tall-growing vigorous bushes. I have placed these
filberts and their hybrids first on my list of recommended trees because
they are going to be the backbone of nut tree production.

I have nearly one hundred experimental European filberts, mostly of wild
varieties, of which about a dozen are hardy both in pistillate and
staminate bloom, even in our most severe winters, although of this dozen
only about two or three have nuts which could possibly be considered
commercial. Practically all of these are being injured in one way or
another by the blight. Many have passed out of existence and only two or
three have been able to resist the blight so that it doesn't seem to
make any headway. I do not do anything for a blighted filbert--it must
take care of itself. I have experimented along these lines, however,
using chemicals and other means of protection. I do not know of anything
adequate except to build resistance in the plant itself through
cross-breeding.

The next really successful plant is the Weschcke butternut. This is a
native butternut which I discovered on my own farm. Every local woods
has butternut trees in it. We must have at least five hundred butternut
trees in our woods; they are subject to some kind of a bark disease but
this seems to encroach on the life of the tree very slowly since trees
that I remember showing signs of this disease nearly twenty years ago
are still living. They are awful looking sights, however, by this time.
Such large trees that have developed this blight are possibly in the
neighborhood of fifty years old. The Weschcke butternut is a medium size
to small butternut. Its great value lies in the fact that it splits
exactly in half and the shell structure is so shallow that by merely
turning the nut upside down the kernel falls out--nothing to hold it in
the shell. Very frequently the kernel stays absolutely intact, its wings
being held together by the little tender neck joining them at the point
of the nut. The nut kernel is tender and light colored. The difficulty
here is grafting them on black walnut roots; after they are grafted they
grow very rapidly and bear at once. I have had them bear the first year
grafted.

Next in line of hardiness and reliability is the Weschcke hickory. This
is now an old-timer; since its successful grafting in 1934 it has borne
an ever-increasing crop every year. This is not to be measured in
bushels, however, but in pounds. No other hickory nut has begun to touch
it, in its regularity, reliability and its quality: that is, no hickory
so far north. It is the thinnest shelled hickory of any that I have ever
tested out, and releases its kernels about the best of any. It has one
fault, however; the staminate blossom is abortive, never produces any
pollen. It needs a pollinizer and we have been recommending the
Bridgewater and the Kirtland which we know by actual experiments have
produced pollen in large amounts, sufficient for pollinization of this
tree. Even before Kirtland and Bridgewater pollens were available those
trees, grafted to the Weschcke, bore hickory nuts every year, but in
very small quantities. I am now quite sure that they borrowed pollen
from the wild bitternut trees which are in abundance nearby. There is
also the other possibility, which has not been conclusively proved, that
this variety is a parthenogen. Innumerable hard frosts in early springs
have destroyed butternut crops and walnut crops, but these hickory nuts
invariably come through such seasons and escape the early fall frosts,
which come in September, for the reason that the nuts are matured
usually the second week in September. We therefore can recommend the
Weschcke hickory freely. We have not determined how far north it can
live, but I believe the 45th parallel is very safe, and as far west as
the Dakota line. It originated at Fayette, Iowa, and probably would
thrive far into the south. It grafts extremely well on the wild
bitternut hickory root which is about the hardiest known. Your father
was very partial toward it as a stock. This root system does not handle
all hickories by any means. In all my trials using pecan scions the only
pecan which grafts well on it and survives indefinitely, is the Hope.
This is also a very hardy tree but we cannot recommend it as a nut tree
because we have never seen the parent tree bear any nuts. The parent
tree is now twenty years old. Quite a large tree but no nuts. It is
growing in an unfavorable location for bearing since it is shaded by
much larger trees. It is growing right here in St. Paul.

The Bridgewater and the Beeman are two more hickories which are very
hardy and which come into bearing quickly, also are successfully grafted
on bitternut root. They do not mature their nuts so reliably nor so
early by any means as the Weschcke. For a little further south they
might be very reliable. They are fully as hardy and satisfactory in
every other respect. The hickories that have proved to be fairly hardy
but have produced very few nuts are the Cedarapids and the Kirtland. The
Beaver hybrid hickory is probably next for nut production satisfaction,
grafts well on bitternut root but does not seem to have a long life. The
trees that I bought from your father nearly twenty years ago are now
dead although they lived to become large fine trees and bore in some
seasons very nice crops of nuts. The Fairbanks hickories, grafted some
seventeen or eighteen years ago, are still surviving, but bear very few
nuts, some seasons practically nothing at all. They very seldom ripen as
they mature very much later than the natives or the other varieties
mentioned above. I do not consider the Fairbanks a very edible nut
anyway as they become very rancid after a couple of months. The Beaver
is not a good keeper either. This is rather an important characteristic
in a nut and one in which the Weschcke excels, as in ordinary office
temperature it usually keeps two or three years. I believe that this is
partly due to the thin shell. My theory is that the thin shell expands
and contracts with heat and moisture conditions without cracking. This
prevents air from getting at the kernel, and since it is the oxygen
which is mostly responsible for rancidity, this exclusion of air
probably accounts for the fresh state that these nuts maintain for a
long time. I have noticed that thick-shelled shellbarks and, to a lesser
degree the shagbarks, crack open, in minute hairline cracks, and these
nuts which split like this invariably soon become rancid.

Now the black walnuts are next in order. For many years I considered the
Ohio a worthless variety. They would seldom mature any of the nuts, and
although they were regular bearers the thick hull was a nuisance. I have
had twenty years' experience with this variety and they are the hardiest
of all the old ones. They stand up very well and each year the nuts
become a little more satisfactory. Evidently the trees have the ability
to acclimatize themselves and they stand up better than Thomas, Stabler
or Ten Eyck of the old varieties that I have tested.

More recent varieties which I have tested and have proved satisfactory,
are the Paterson and the Rohwer; I recommend these two above all other
black walnuts. I have two seedlings which I am watching with a great
deal of interest. One is from Minnesota and the other is a failed
grafted tree which sprang up from the root and so far is beginning to
bear prolifically a medium sized nut with a rather thick shell which
does not crack out very well but the quality is superb. It has a thin
hull which you can pop off by merely pressing your thumb against it
after it is thoroughly dry, coming off very clean leaving a good looking
nut. The kernel is very light straw-colored and you can generally get
them out in good pieces, about one-quarter of the whole kernel. Above
all it matures very early, about the middle of September or sooner, and
this is the deciding factor for any nut, because, no matter how well It
cracks, how prolific it may be, or hardy, if you do not get a ripe nut
you have nothing for here in the north. I feel quite certain that this
is going to be the standard black walnut for the north. For want of a
better name I have been calling it the "Ruffy" because the hull, when
green, has a pimply surface and a rough appearance.

The other black walnut that I am watching is a seedling resulting from
ten bushels planted nearly twenty years ago, the only tree to bear
because of the crowded condition of all these walnuts planted so close
together. I have been watching it for six or seven years and was never
able to get a mature nut until this year. Reason was that in most of the
seasons the nuts were empty; other times I did not wait until they were
fully ripe, being too anxious to find out what was inside. This tree I
have named the "Walbut" because it seemed to me it might be a cross
between a butternut and a walnut. The kernel is very light colored. It
cracks out the best of any walnut I have ever tested. It is difficult to
graft, so far in my experience. I have no living grafts from it although
I have tried again and again to graft it on other large isolated stocks
in the orchard. It has a square shape, with deep indentations near the
point. It is something to watch, and work with although it does not seem
to be extra hardy in spite of the fact that it is a native tree. At
present it is merely an interesting variety to experiment with and it
may possibly be of some use later on. The branches have shown curious
little birdseye markings--it has a habit of developing buds which die
and form little brown structures in the wood and it is possible that the
tree may be a fancy timber tree. The shell has only one structure down
the center, thereby insuring that the halves come out whole.

An ornamental known as the lace-leaf walnut is very hardy here, doesn't
winter kill at all but so far has not borne any nuts. The Deming Purple
is not hardy; the Stabler is very unreliable considering the last few
years; the Thomas is still one of the best except it suffers from winter
injury occasionally; the Ten Eyck very seldom bears any nuts although we
have several very large trees now. The Elmer Myers possibly has a
chance; it is still living. The Snyder has survived the last few winters
and in my opinion it is one of the best nuts I have ever seen. The
grafts have borne a few nuts already in the second year of grafting.
They set a couple of nuts even after a severe winter last year, but they
fell off during the summer, much the same as the Thomas and many of the
Ohio did. The same thing happened to practically all of my hybrid
hazels, also the Winkler and even the wild hazel kept continually
dropping the nuts until there was practically nothing left. No doubt
this effect was produced by a peculiar season. We should not hold it
against the nut trees since it was a universal condition.

Last summer about one-half dozen of the pecan trees which I had been
playing around with for twenty years, started to blossom but only had
staminate bloom, There might possibly be a crop of pecans this coming
year--I do not have any hopes that any of these seedlings will be able
to mature their nuts, but there is always a possibility and they are
certainly hardy. None of them that I have tried to graft will live on
bitternut roots.

Chestnuts are difficult to get started but once they are started they
grow very well although there are only a few surviving out of many
thousands of seeds planted. Every year one or more comes into
bearing--they generally do not mature their nuts, and what I have tasted
of them are not anything to brag about except that they are sweet; the
size is insignificant and they evidently have much of the native
chestnut blood. I am still testing such varieties as the Carr,
Zimmerman, and Connecticut Yankee. So far these have shown themselves to
be quite tender varieties. I do not consider the chestnut worthwhile
because of the constant threat that if a grove should be started it
might soon have the blight in it.

I have several Chinese chestnut seedlings which are making a fairly good
growth and in time may become productive trees.

We have one hybrid white oak which has an edible kernel but out of about
one hundred nuts you might get one wholesome one free from weevils. The
tree is very old and is rapidly declining. The nut is small but the tree
is quite prolific. I merely mention it to show that there are
possibilities in developing the oak. I think our mutual friend, J.
Russell Smith, would probably like to hear this as he advocates the use
of oaks, and I agree with him that there are possibilities for human
food to be used first-hand. I am all out of sympathy with second-hand
food production as pork or beef or any meat products, as you know. One
reason is that it is economically wrong as it takes many times more
acreage to produce meat than vegetables for the same amount of food
energy to be derived. My authority, the Encyclopedia Brittanica, which
says it takes 64 pounds of dry fodder to produce 1 pound of dry beef,
and 32 pounds of dry fodder to produce 1 pound of dry mutton, etc., etc.



Be Thrifty with Nut Trees

_By CARL WESCHCKE, Minnesota_


There has been too much accent put on the profit to be made on nut
production. No matter how much income a man may receive, if he has not
learned to save out of that income he will never be better off for
having received it. Now, nut trees offer a particularly practical way of
saving out of income. If one has a large family to feed the saving may
amount to a hundred dollars or more a year. When this fine food,
contained in the kernels of nuts, is used right in your own family, and
supplies the family's entire requirements of nuts, you will find that
you have made very substantial savings in your family food budget.

First of all, it is different from income from the sale of nuts because
when you sell nuts they must be sold in the competitive market, and
usually to the wholesaler if you have a considerable amount to dispose
of. Therefore you save the profit made by the wholesaler and the
retailer by using your nut crop rather than selling it. This is really
being thrifty. If you have a large crop of nuts you will find that you
can easily increase the uses in combination with other foods so that
less other food has to be purchased in order to meet the family needs.
And with the higher prices of ordinary foods you can easily visualize
what a tremendous saving this might be.

Nuts are a fine luxury food, but in a way they can quickly become a
necessary food by being used as a replacement for meat. I don't like to
use the term "substitute for meat" as it implies that nuts are inferior
to meat, and nothing could be further from the truth. Nuts are more
_NUTricious_ than any meat, pound for pound, and what meat can you store
away that will keep as sweet and edible as a nut for so long a time!

Plant nut trees to save your income not to increase it. You will never
have to pay a tax on that saving.



Report of Season 1943

_By GEORGE HEBDEN, Corsan, Canada_


The winter of 1942-43 was one of the coldest ever known here. One day it
was 33° below zero and another it was 38° below. Filberts did not seem
to take any notice of the severe cold and my Stranger Jap heartnuts that
are said to be tender went through with flying colors. One or two
varieties of Russian walnuts (J. regia) froze to the ground as did all
the Pomeroys. Some of the Crath walnuts froze from a few inches to a
yard, but the majority did not lose a bud. Strange to say all the
extremely large varieties of J. regia came through unscathed as did my
Chinese. Asiatic tree hazels missed cropping but came through unscathed.
Winkler and Rush hazels were not harmed, though the Rush is a bit tender
and succumbed the winter of 1933-34. In fact 1933-34 was a harder winter
on trees than 1942-43 as that winter all but my Daviana filberts were
hit more or less.

Last fall (1943) all trees went into their winter's sleep in most
excellent condition and the twigs are hard to the top buds. Signs on
twig terminals indicate a large crop of nuts for the fall of 1944. Thus
I hope to be able to have on display for the convention-to-be a most
interesting show. Besides nuts of all the hardy varieties I always have
a real big show of hardy and tropical water lilies and lotus, a complete
collection. Also a complete collection of grapes and many other
horticultural curios rarely seen.

I was many years finding persimmons hardy enough to survive our winters,
but at last I have at least 2 and maybe 3 varieties that passed last
winter in perfect condition. I am north of Lake Ontario and just a mile
west of Toronto. I doubt that northern pecans, big western shellbarks
and hicans will have a long enough season to ripen. The Weiker hickory,
which is a cross between shagbark (Carya ovata) and shellbark (C.
laciniosa) hickories, ripens completely each season. Catawba grapes
won't ripen except in a rather long summer. Just across the lake the
golden muscatel grapes have ripened two or three times in my memory.

Barcelona and Kentish cob seem to be the only two filberts that are
tender with me. Du Chilly and Italian red live and crop regularly. I
have several very large new varieties of seedling filberts. I like to
grow seedling filberts, they show wonderful variations in fruiting. The
same with heartnuts. I never lose a seedling heartnut for if the tree
yields an unsatisfactory nut I promptly bud it to a Stranger which is
the most regular and heaviest cropping heartnut I know of. Yes, every
year a monster crop of nuts whose meats come out whole.

Our hybrid Jap heartnut × native butternut crosses are of three types
and all excellent and will hold their own with any nut that grows. No
nut can beat our butternut for eating. But the shells are too thick, the
trees crop only about every 4 years, are unhealthy and shed their leaves
soon after September 1st. On the other hand, the hybrid outlooks it,
outcrops it and outlives it and our friendly neighbor Russia is very
greatly intrigued with these new nuts developed here at Echo Valley.
They are thin-shelled, very easy to crack, meats come out easily, trees
have a tropical look, crop early, grow fast and very large, leaves hang
on green almost to November and the crop ripens early, just after the
filberts which are the first nuts to ripen with me, while the Winkler
hazels are the last, though the hybrid filbert-hazels are almost as
late.

A very beautiful sight here are the many different nut trees growing on
black walnut stock to be seen all over the 20 acres. They are heartnuts,
Jap walnuts, hybrids, English walnuts and butternuts, as well as
superior named black walnuts.

People don't want beautiful trees nearly as much as they do trees that
grow nuts. For instance, they don't buy pecans from me, because though
they are quite hardy and beautiful, yet the northern pecans don't mature
their crop sufficiently in our short season. Down in extreme
southwestern Ontario the pecan has cropped and ripened.

One mistake we must not make is not to be too sure of the value of a nut
because it is large, thin-shelled and has a fine flavor but is a poor
cropper. The nut that produces a very heavy crop is the valuable nut.
Thus McAllister hican and the Stabler black are worthless because of
their extremely thin crop.

Another nut that looks large and excellent on the tree is the Ohio black
walnut, whose huge dirty hull and small nut condemns it. I like
thin-hulled nuts that come out clean.



American Walnut Manufacturers Association Carries Out Industrial
Forestry Program

_By W. C. FINLEY, Forester_


The forestry program now in operation is ambitious in scope, and has as
its objectives the promotion of forest practices which will encourage
growing and harvesting American Walnut as a permanent crop.

One of the greatest evils which we are attempting to eradicate is the
cutting of small diameter trees. The Walnut Industry has expressed a
desire to conserve small diameter fast growing walnut trees for future
use and is advocating that farmers, timberland owners and log producers
leave these trees in the woodlots to grow into high quality timber. We
are trying to educate the farmer, timber owner and log producer in
forestry practices which will serve not only their best interests, but
which in the final analysis, will serve the lumber industry as a whole.
Trees less than 14 inches d.b.h. if cut constitute a real loss in
potential high quality and more valuable logs because the logs they
produce are too small to be used advantageously. On the other hand,
trees of 14 inch d. b. h. and up are in demand and are playing a
patriotic role in furnishing material for use by the armed forces,
namely gunstocks. The public in general, and tree farmers and timber
owners in particular, must be made aware of the fact that while the
present walnut timber supply is adequate, conservation of immature trees
must be practiced to the full to assure the industry with sufficient raw
materials for future use.

Success in this particular phase of our program is being enhanced
greatly through the excellent cooperation of Extension Foresters, State
Foresters, U. S. Forest Service, Timber Production War Project
Foresters, Foresters of the Soil Conservation Service and Tennessee
Valley Authority Foresters. These various agencies are working hand in
hand with us on those objectives of our program which, in a measure,
dovetail with various phases of their own programs. One of the most
interesting aspects of our program is our work with 4-H Clubs. We are
sponsoring a contest among those members who are interested in forestry.
Each contestant is required to plant 25 seedlings, record certain data
and write a story about his woodlot giving specific information. Two
winners will be chosen from each county participating. Winners will be
chosen on the basis of the best story submitted; judges will be 4-H
officials and the Extension Forester from each state. The reward to be
presented winners will be one week's vacation at 4-H Summer Camp with
all expenses paid by the American Walnut Manufacturers Association. This
contest is open to all 4-H Club members in the States of Indiana,
Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio and
Tennessee.

In addition to this, the Association Forester will conduct a one day
forestry program at the summer camps at which time he will present the
winners with special certificates.

The program was planned by the Association's Forestry Committee,
consisting of Chester B. Stem, C. B. Stem, Inc., New Albany, Indiana,
Chairman; B. F. Swain, National Veneer and Lumber Company, Indianapolis,
and Seymour, Indiana; Clarence A. Swords, Sword-Morton Veneer Company,
Indianapolis, Indiana and Burdett Green, Secretary-Manager of the
American Walnut Manufacturers Association, Chicago, Illinois. The
committee worked in close cooperation with Harris Collingwood,
Washington, D. C., Forester for the lumber industry. Of especial help
were several of the Midwest's outstanding foresters from regional and
state offices of the various governmental forestry agencies--men who
have had years of woods experience in the areas where most of the Walnut
Association's forestry activities will be carried on.



The Crath Carpathian Walnut in Illinois

_By A. S. COLBY_


The Persian walnut (_Juglans regia_), usually and incorrectly called the
English walnut, has been highly prized both for the beauty of the tree
and the quality of its nuts since ancient times. The species flourishes
in Southern Asia and Europe and in our Southwestern and Pacific Coast
States, but most of the attempts that have been made to fruit it in
Northern and Eastern sections have failed. The varieties or strains
tried there were for the most part native to sections of the Old World
where the winters are comparatively mild and they were therefore not
able to survive our colder and more changeable climate. The late E. A.
Riehl, of Alton, Illinois, tried repeatedly to grow named varieties of
this nut which are successful in California, but often stated that the
species had no future in Illinois. In extreme southern Illinois, at
Robert Endicott's place, in Villa Ridge, several Persian walnut trees
are growing but their bearing habits are disappointing.

One of the most promising recent developments in Northern nut culture is
the introduction into America of hardier strains of the Persian walnut,
through the efforts of Rev. Paul C. Crath, of Toronto, Canada, a native
of Poland, and whose father was the head of the Agricultural College in
the Ukraine. He went back to his own country as a missionary in the
early 1930's, and there noticed the hardiness of the Persian walnuts
growing in that severe climate. Realizing the possibilities of these
strains for fruiting in North America, he combed that rich Russian
agricultural region in the Carpathian Mountains for seed for
experimental planting over here, harvesting it from trees uninjured at
temperatures of -40° F. These parent trees were carefully selected for
regular production of good crops of thin-shelled, easily-cracked nuts of
good quality. The trees were growing at such distances from others that
cross-pollination was avoided. Rev. Crath had observed that seedlings
from such self-pollinated trees usually bore nuts that closely resembled
those of the parent.

Each tree from which nuts were saved was given a number in order to keep
future records straight. The nuts were planted in a nursery established
by Rev. Crath near Toronto. Wishing some point in this country where his
trees could be distributed without the difficulty and delay incurred in
moving small shipments across the border, Rev. Crath arranged with Mr.
Samuel H. Graham, of Ithaca, New York, to take sole charge of their
distribution in the United States. Considerable interest has been
aroused in the possibilities of these strains and their distribution has
been wide-spread, with over 2,000 seedlings sent to many Northern States
since 1937. In a few more years, after a considerable proportion of
these numbered seedlings have come into bearing, we shall have some
valuable information regarding their possibilities in sections of the
country where previously it had not been considered possible to grow
Persian walnuts.

Several Illinois horticulturists have planted seedlings of these strains
and have already brought one or more of them into bearing. Others have
used scion wood of the Crath types in top-working black walnut trees.
The sample Crath Carpathian walnut No. 1 on display at the 1942 meeting
of the Illinois Horticultural Society at Quincy was grown by Mr. Royal
Oakes, of Bluffs, Illinois. Mr. Oakes topworked a black walnut with
Crath Seedling No. 1 scions in 1938 and harvested six nuts in 1942. At
the Illinois Agricultural Experiment Station at Urbana, we have over 20
Crath seedlings under number, planted in 1937 and 1939. They are all
healthy and vigorous, and several bore pistillate flowers in 1942.

Comparatively little is known about the bearing habits of the Crath
walnut strains. Several growers have noted that their trees began to
bear pistillate flowers within a few years after planting but set no
nuts. Evidently the staminate catkins necessary for pollen production
are somewhat slower in appearing. Other strains of Persian walnuts are
said to be slow in this regard, usually beginning to bear female flowers
from 3 to 5 years before male flowers are produced. It is thought
possible that Persian walnut pistils will accept black walnut pollen.
Mr. Oakes reports that there were no staminate flowers on the Crath
(from which he picked the nuts he exhibited at Quincy), but black walnut
pollen was abundant nearby at that time and for good measure he also
brought in butternut bouquets. As he states, "something worked."

The prospective planter should understand that these new walnut strains
are as yet only in the experimental stage. It is believed that some of
them have considerable promise, at least in the southern and the
central, and possibly in the northern, parts of this state. However,
they must be properly planted and cared for if one expects them to grow
and bear. Too close planting should be avoided and some attention must
be given to forming the head when the tree is young. No one knows
exactly when they will bear, how much, and how long. In their native
country, trees have been observed estimated to be over 300 years old.
Most of us can expect to enjoy nuts from trees we plant, with more for
our grandchildren and great-grandchildren. One might ask also in this
connection, as does one nut nurseryman, "How soon will a Chinese elm or
soft maple bear nuts?"

[Illustration: Parent tree of Ohio black walnut, on the farm of Charles
Arbogast, 1-1/2 miles northwest of McCutchenville, Ohio. The tree is
2-1/2 feet in diameter and very vigorous. It is said to bear heavy crops
in alternate years.

Photograph by O. D. Diller, Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, Oct.
8, 1943.]

[Illustration]



Ohio Nut Growers' Meeting

_By G. J. KORN, BERRIEN SPRINGS, MICH._


A meeting of Ohio nut growers was held at the Wooster, Ohio, Experiment
Station on September 5, 1943. A very pleasant and profitable afternoon
was had in the exchange of ideas and reports on the growing of nut
trees. Most of those present were members of the Northern Nut Growers'
Association. As the annual meeting of that organization had been
cancelled for the duration of the war, the Ohio members decided to hold
a meeting of their own at Wooster. The growers presented reports on the
varieties with which they are working and evaluated their merits and
performance. As an example, Mr. A. A. Bungart of Avon, said he had spent
a good share of his spare time for two summers in examination of several
hundred native black walnut trees, and has never found a nut as good as
the varieties Todd or Thomas. He still feels, however, that there are
superior walnuts growing wild and that continued search for them is well
warranted. Several other kinds of nut trees are being grown by Mr.
Bungart, such as filberts, Chinese chestnuts, and Crath Persian walnuts.
In a summary of his report he said, "In viewing the growing of nut
trees, I am convinced that it is a wonderful hobby, and that the
contributions of various individuals and groups will eventually
establish nut growing in the northern states on a commercial basis."

Mr. Eugene Cranz of Ira also gave a very interesting report. This past
summer Mr. Cranz passed his eighty-first birthday, and for many years
has been keenly interested in general forestry practices. One of his
particular interests is nut culture; a very superior hickory tree grows
on his place, which bears a very high quality nut. During the course of
his remarks, he expressed great optimism in the matter of developing the
Chinese chestnut into a valuable commercial nut crop.

Mr. J. Lester Hawk & Son of Beach City, concurred in Mr. Cranz's opinion
on this matter, and cited as an example the 2 Hobson Chinese chestnuts
which they planted on their property in 1917. These two trees have been
bearing crops of well-formed tasty nuts for a period of 20 years. Mr.
Hawk reports that he had sold several hundred seedling trees from these
trees last year, and reports that he has about 2,500 one-year seedling
trees in his nursery at the present time.

Many other interesting reports were given on cultural practices and on
the merits of various types of nut trees adaptable to northern
conditions. Mention should be made of the especially fine illustrated
talk given by L. Walter Sherman, superintendent of the Mahoning County
Experiment Farm at Canfield. Colored slides were shown by Mr. Sherman,
of his grafting technique and of individual trees throughout the state
from which he has collected scions. Three acres of the Mahoning County
Farm are being devoted to nut growing and research at the present time.
This planting includes 21 different varieties of black walnut. Mr.
Sherman is keeping an accurate record of the trees as they develop,
their source of scions, and other items that may be of interest. Besides
recording this data, he is also making color slides of his cultural
methods and progressive stages of the trees' growth.

In spite of unavoidable interruptions to their individual efforts
occasioned by the war, those in attendance expressed the belief that
real progress is being made in this particular field. A committee was
chosen to draft tentative plans for a 20-year research program on nut
culture in Ohio. The great enthusiasm shown at this initial meeting
indicates that a meeting of Ohio nut growers is likely to become an
annual event.

On my return home to Michigan from attending the Ohio meeting, I stopped
off near McCutchenville, Ohio, to visit the parent "Ohio" black walnut
tree. The accompanying photos taken by Mr. O. D. Diller, Dept. of
Forestry, Experiment Station, Wooster, Ohio, show the majesty and beauty
of this great tree.



Walnut and Heartnut Varieties Notes and Remarks

_By J. U. GELLATLY, Westbrook, B. C._


     BARLEE BLACK WALNUT--1935 crop grown in Kelowna, B. C.--1 nut--44.0
     per lb., 1 kernel--206.1 per lb., 21.36% kernel.

     BROADVIEW NUTS--1941 crop, 5 nuts--29.5 per lb., 68.7 kernels per
     lb., 1 best kernel 64.8 per lb., 51.5 shells per lb., 42.85%
     kernel.

     CALLANDER HEART NUT--20 Nuts--124.8 per lb., 20 kernels--392.7
     kernels per lb.--31.8% kernel.

     CANOKA HEART NUT--1941 crop--1 nut--79.6 per lb., 24-1/2% kernel,
     105.5 shells per lb., 324.0 kernels per lb.

     CANOKA HEART--1941 crop--5 nuts average--90.4 per lb., 123.3 shells
     per lb., 338.5 kernels per lb., 26.7% kernel.

     CHINESE OR MANCHURIAN WALNUTS 1941 crop grown O. K. Valley--5
     nuts--27.1 per lb., 5 kernels--62.0 per lb., 5 shells--48.1 per
     lb., 43.73% kernel. Kernels very fine flavour.

     COGLAN WALNUT--from Coglan, B. C.--1 nut--47.7 per lb., 1
     kernel--113.4 per lb., 1 shell--82.5 per lb., 42.1% kernel. A very
     good thin shell nut of Franquette type.

     FRANQUETTE WALNUTS 1941 crop--outside dry storage or unheated shed.
     5 nuts--30.0 per lb., 1 largest nut--26.4 per lb., kernel of this
     nut 78.2 per lb., 1 small kernel 141.75 per lb., 1 medium
     kernel--79.6 per lb., 5 kernels--94.1 per lb., 5 shells--45.3 per
     lb. 32.48% kernels. Kernels best of flavour.

     GELLATLY HEART NUT--1939 crop--20 nuts--64.2 per lb., 252.0 kernels
     per lb., 25.5% kernel. Shell heavy--cracking only fair.

     HEART NUT--from R. P. Wright, Erie, Pennsylvania, U. S. A.--1
     nut--84.0 per lb., 266.8 kernels per lb., 122.6 shells per lb.,
     31.48% kernel.

     IMPIT BLACK WALNUT--1941 crop--1 nut--25.2 per lb., 1 kernel--141.8
     per lb., 17.78% kernel. 2 nuts--25.6 per lb.,--2 kernels--137.5 per
     lb., 18.64% kernel.

     IMPIT BLACK WALNUT--1941 crop--10 nuts--25.2 per lb., 10
     kernels--110.4 per lb., 28.8% kernel. Cracking time 12 minutes to
     crack with hammer.

     MACKENZIE HEART NUT--20 nuts--48.3 per lb., 20 kernels--193.0
     kernels per lb., 25% kernel--extracting and opening with knife--4
     minutes.

     NORTH STAR WALNUT--1941 crop grown in O. K. Valley--5 nuts--28.8
     per lb., 5 kernels--76.9 per lb., 5 shells--46.1 per lb., 37.48%
     kernel.

     NURSOKA HEART NUT--1940 crop grown at Peachland, B. C.--1 nut--72.0
     per lb., 103.1 shells per lb., 238.7 kernels per lb., 30.2% kernel.
     Extracting time 6 minutes.

     [Illustration]

     [Illustration]

     O. K. HEART NUT--1933 crop grown at Kelowna, B. C--20 nuts--103.1
     per lb., 382.8 kernels per lb., 26.9% kernel. 3.5 minutes to open
     and extract with small penknife.

     PENOKA HEART NUT--1939 crop--1 nut--96.5 per lb., 412.4 kernels per
     lb., 23.4% kernel.

     ROVER HEART NUT--1941 crop--10 nuts, average--79.4 per lb., 98.6
     shells per lb., 408.6 kernels per lb., 19.4% kernel.

     ROVER HEART NUT--1939 crop--1 nut--96.6 per lb, 378.0 kernels per
     lb., 25.53% kernel.

     ROVER HEART NUT--1935 crop--20 nuts--90.7 per lb., 302.4 kernels
     per lb., 30% kernel.

     SMYTHE HEART NUT--5 nuts--95.7 per lb., 5 kernels--276.6 per lb.,
     34.6% kernel. Well sealed but easy to open.

     SPREADOKA WALNUT "J. REGIA"--5 nuts--49.3 per lb., 5 kernels--105.0
     per lb., 5 shells--92.95 per lb., 46.95% kernel.

     THACKER HEART NUT--1942 crop--10 nuts--103.1 per lb., 324 kernels
     per lb., 31.8% kernel.

     VAUX ENGLISH WALNUT--1940 crop--a new seedling on J. U. Gellatly's
     lot. Large nuts--heavy shell. 1 nut--36.3 per lb., 1 kernel--90.7
     per lb., 69.8 shells per lb., 40% kernel.

     WALSH WALNUTS--1941 crop grown in O. K. Valley--5 nuts 24.3 per
     lb., 5 kernels--57.7 per lb., 5 shells--42.2 per lb., 42.26%
     kernels. Kernels bland flavour.

     WALTERS HEART NUT--1934 crop--20 nuts--47.2 per lb., 180.4 kernels
     per lb., 26.2% kernel. 13 minutes to open and extract with
     penknife.

     WALTERS HEART NUT--1940 crop--1 nut--58.2 per lb., 226.8 kernels
     per lb., 78.2 shells per. lb., 25.64% kernel.

     NO. E. 16--From Ross Pier Wright--235 West 6th St., Erie,
     Pennsylvania, U. S. A. 1 nut--61.3 per lb., 232.6 kernels per lb.,
     83.2 shells per lb., 26.35% kernel.

     WATT WALNUT--from Himalayan Mts., India, B. C.--grown 1940. 1 large
     nut--35.4 per lb., 1 kernel--75.6 per lb., 1 shell--66.7. per lb.,
     46.876% kernel.



Letters


_Abstract of letter from Thomas Mitchell, 259 W. 29th St., New York, N.
Y., to Julio P. Grandjean, Box 748, Mexico, D. F._ I am a tree breeder
interested in creating hybrid crop trees, oaks and, if possible,
bi-generic hybrids of carob with honey locust and with mesquite. I have,
in the past seven years, made over a thousand crosses of poplars and
about 600 inter-specific oak crosses. This spring I made 250 oak crosses
at the Arnold Arboretum, of which about 20% seem to be ripening viable
acorns. I have a list of 90 varieties of hybrid oaks and about 60
varieties of American Asiatic and European species which are available
here or at the Arboretum. I will send this list to any one who is
interested in trying to graft them on native oak seedlings, and will
send scions to any one willing to send me acorns, scions or pollen.

I believe the oak tree to be, potentially, more valuable than any other
crop tree.


_Abstract of letter from W. G. Tatum, Lebanon, Kentucky, to the Chairman
of the Survey Committee._ We have had reports from E. C. Rice of Absher,
Ky., but his work with trees and his wonderful personality are not well
enough known to us. Besides his large plantings of nut and fruit trees
he does general farming. He has almost all of the finer varieties of nut
trees, many of them large, in bearing and doing well.

Lewis Edmunds of Glasgow, Ky., discoverer of the Edmunds black walnut,
is a general farmer whose plantings of nut tree, while not large,
include many of the older and better known sorts, as well as later
discoveries of his own, including a very thin shelled walnut, shagbark
hickories, a seedless persimmon; and he is planning a large planting of
chestnuts. He has a Stuart pecan that bears well-filled nuts every year,
apparently without benefit of pollen from another tree.

Our experiment station has issued a new leaflet on nut growing in
Kentucky and our State Forester, Mr. Jackson has given radio talks on
the subject.

I am planning and planting all the time and have at least a small start
of most of the better strains of all varieties. I have a little nursery
where I grow and graft my own trees. I consider Edmunds a very fine
black walnut. I think that more free exchange of graftwood should be
encouraged among our members, and we should encourage and help newcomers
in learning the art of grafting. I got 90% of my Stambaugh grafts to
grow this season, in a row of stocks running from the size of a lead
pencil to that of the average man's little finger, using scions near to
the size of the stocks, grafted by the "whip and tongue" splice method.


_Letter from H. F. Stoke to Miss Mildred Jones:_ I am pleased to comply
with your request to report on those varieties that have given me the
best results in this locality. It is perhaps unfortunate that some of
them are unknown or obscure varieties that are not generally in the
hands of the nursery trade. (As an aside, I am quitting the nursery
business, so what I say is without prejudice or any personal bias.)

I am listing the varieties in order of my estimate of them for this
locality based on my own personal experience. I am becoming increasingly
hard boiled in my judgments based on two considerations: first, that a
nut tree should bear within a reasonable time and that the crops should
be regular and reasonably abundant; second, that the nuts should be fit
to eat after they have been grown. These two considerations knock out
many varieties that have been highly touted.

_Filberts._ The Buchanan and its second generation seedlings have been
better filled and more productive than any of the European hazels.
Italian red comes next. Brixnut and Longfellow are strong, healthy
growers, but the former does not fill well and the latter bears
sparsely. Barcelona is out.

_Chinese chestnut._ Hobson, Carr, Zimmerman, Reliable. Hobson heads the
list as most precocious and productive. It requires a pollenizer. Carr
will bear partial crops without cross-pollination. Zimmerman is almost
as productive as Carr, but its need of cross-pollination is unknown to
me. Reliable is the smallest of the four, of high quality and a steady
bearer of moderate crops. Pollination requirements not known. (The
original Zimmerman sent me by Dr. Zimmerman was worthless. The present
Zimmerman, furnished me by Dr. Smith, is a satisfactory nut.)

_Japanese chestnut._ Austin is the best of the lot.

_Hybrid chestnut._ One of Dr. Colby's hybrids is promising but has not
been released and should not be listed without his permission. The
hybrid I have been selling as Stoke is a better nut than any of the
Japs, including Austin. A moderate producer of moderate crops of
beautiful, high quality nuts ripening the first of September. The
Government's S8 Van Fleet hybrid is a very prolific hybrid of rather
poor quality. It should be satisfactory for people who cook their
chestnuts. Mr. C. A. Reed should be consulted before listing. S8 will
outyield any chestnut I know of. Tree is less vigorous than Stoke and
more subject to blight.

_Black walnut._ Homeland, Creitz, Mintle, Thomas. Homeland is a local
nut and is unknown to the trade. It makes a poor test score, partly
because of its pointed shape, partly because of the plumpness and
tenderness of the kernel. It fills out much better than Thomas growing
beside it: bears moderate crops every year, both on the parent and on
grafted trees. It is a nice, upright, healthy grower; new growth tinged
with purple. I consider quality first class. Creitz bears regularly and
well; nuts very like Ohio but husks thin and it cleans much better.
Kernels apt to be shrivelled somewhat. Mintle good bearer, plumper than
Creitz, pellicle somewhat off color. Thomas does not fill so well,
especially if given much nitrogen, which Homeland will stand. Stabler
worthless here.

_English walnut._ Bedford, Lancaster, Payne, Franquette. Bedford is a
local nut found on an abandoned farm in Bedford County, Va. A regular
bearer of high quality nuts of the Mayette type. Blossoms late, a little
before Mayette and Franquette. The only one of fifteen varieties that I
have fruited that can be depended on to pollinize itself; medium size,
well sealed, cures well, no bitterness to pellicle, no "sticktite" nor
moldy nuts. Lancaster, very large, very vigorous tree, precocious,
prolific, quality of nuts good but not best; staminate blossoms early,
pistillate late. Requires a pollinizer. Franquette, Mayette and Bedford
should answer. Payne will not stand winter temperatures much below zero;
requires cross-pollination; needs seemingly met by Crath and Broadview.
Good nut of good size and quality, precocious and very prolific.
Moderate grower. Worst fault starts too early in spring. Good for south
and upper south. I forgot to mention that one of the worst faults of
Lancaster is that the nuts must be dried promptly on ripening; sometimes
the kernels mold before the nuts fall from the tree. Franquette should
rank with Bedford except that it usually bears poorly, although rarely
it bears a good crop. Always blossoms freely. Trouble seems to be
pollination. Bedford may be the answer; Mayette is not, and also bears
very poorly. King and Chambers, recommended by Carroll Bush as
pollinizers for Franquette, produce their staminates too early here.
Broadview is vigorous, precocious, prolific, large with a pellicle too
bitter for human consumption. Nuts sometimes spoil on the tree, like
Lancaster.

_Heartnut._ Like most English walnuts heartnuts blossom too early in the
spring and are usually killed back by late frosts here. Walters is the
only one that blossoms late enough to produce usually a crop.

I still think that a well-filled Sifford is the best black walnut I have
seen, but the parent tree generally produces poorly-filled nuts, and the
young trees have been very slow to come into bearing, so I have left it
off the list. Early defoliation appears to be the cause of poor filling
in wet seasons. When well filled it runs 32% kernel.

Any and all of the nuts listed, of all species, are perfectly
winter-hardy here, except that Payne English walnut was injured by a
temperature of 10 below zero some years ago. All English walnuts, except
Franquette and most seedling Chinese chestnuts lost their crops last
spring by a freeze May 5th. Hobson, Carr, Zimmerman and Reliable came
through with crops.

It will be most unfortunate if the many nurseries that, in my opinion,
will go into nut tree production should boost seedling trees just
because they do not have or cannot produce the named varieties. If the
public can be at this time educated to demand select varieties it will
influence the planting of nut trees favorably for the next hundred
years. If they get shunted off on to seedlings it will take another
twenty-five years to awaken the present interest. One might as well
expect an apple growing industry to spring from the indiscriminate
planting of seedling apple orchards. This goes especially for the
English walnut and the Chinese chestnut.


_Abstract of letter from Rev. P. C. Crath, Cannington, Ontario._ Only a
limited report is possible this year. In Toronto there are four
Carpathian walnut trees 20 to 25 feet high which bear nuts regularly.
One of these bears nuts of huge size, another smaller nuts with very
thin shell and with the flavor of the Cashew nut. The other two trees
produce regularly medium sized nuts with thin shells. In Islington, near
Toronto, Carpathian No. 34 belonging to Mr. J. Robson continues bearing.
Mr. Robson died last spring and I am naming this tree No. 34 the
"Robson" in his memory. The eight Carpathians along the Welland Canal
are doing well and bear every year. The tree in the yard of the Rev.
Foster at Welland is a nice big tree and bears every season but
squirrels carry off all the crop. In Ontario until the present time the
curculio has not attacked Carpathian walnuts. Prof. C. T. Currelly of
Canton has some nice big trees of his own grafting. One of these is of
the Landyga type that in its seventh year now has never shown any cold
injury. We can feel assured that the Landyga type is the best for the
cold regions of Ontario. A tall and beautiful No. 46 that had a
bacteriological canker near the root has thoroughly healed. Other No. 46
trees on the same estate are doing fine. The original No. 34 (now
Robson) on Prof. Currelly's farm is doing exceptionally well. It is the
type of a good market walnut. The Harbey Carpathians, belonging to J.
regia maxima, with very thin shells are also doing well.

My Ukrainian and Turkish filberts on Currelly's estate have now become
small bushes, 40 in number bearing abundantly.


_Abstract of letter from Sylvester M. Schessler, Genoa, Ohio._ To keep
scionwood I place sticks, such as elder, on a cement floor, lay the
scions crosswise on these, cover them with sawdust and throw an oilcloth
over this. In May I graft by the slotbark method nailing the scion and
tying with string or rubber bands and wax with Acme Grafting Compound
put on cold. I cover with a two pound paper sack and later stake up the
new growth. I like fair sized scion wood cut from near the base of the
new growth and often graft with two year old wood carrying some one year
wood. I will exchange graft wood and have several varieties of Ohio
prize winners bearing nuts. I also do budding by the patch method.



Experiment Station Investigates Tree Believed to be the Oldest Chestnut
in Connecticut

Progress Report from Connecticut Experiment Station, Dated November 15,
1943


Many years ago, at a time when the American chestnut was still the king
of the woods, a farmer set out a small orchard of nut trees on the bank
of the Connecticut River flood plain north of Hartford. Now, some 60
years later, one lone Japanese chestnut survives. Dr. Donald F. Jones of
the Agricultural Station in New Haven, who recently investigated the
tree, believes it is by far the oldest living chestnut in the State. And
the most interesting thing about the tree is that it shows no signs of
blight, the disease that destroyed all the native chestnuts.

Dr. Jones' attention was called to the tree late last fall by a hunter
who noticed a deposit of chestnut hulls in the river bank. On
investigation, the man discovered the tree and was impressed by its
size. This fall the tree was visited in search of nuts. There, rising
above the brush and brambles of what is now a tobacco field, stood the
chestnut, 30 foot high and 18 inches in diameter. The men were able to
rescue only six nuts, their visit being a little late for the main
harvest. The nuts were among the largest Dr. Jones has seen. They have
been planted at the Experiment Station farm in Mount Carmel.

Inquiry in the neighborhood of the chestnut revealed that two or three
people knew about the tree and had gathered the nuts that are produced
profusely every other year. One of the neighbors recalled that 60 years
or more ago, when he was but 12 years old, a man named John P. Jones had
set out the nut trees. But the original source of the trees is unknown
and it remains a question whether the planter got the trees from a
nursery in this country or directly from the Orient.

Though the lone survivor is somewhat neglected, with several dead
branches that have been left untrimmed, a neighbor was interested enough
in its possibilities to plant some of the nuts. This resulted in one
six-year-old seedling tree. Unfortunately, this already shows blight and
is apparently the result of pollination by some blighted American
seedling or sprout in the neighborhood. The nuts collected this fall may
also give disappointing results but should transmit to later generations
the blight-resistance of this Japanese parent. In addition to planting
the nuts, Dr. Jones will take scions from the tree for grafting on young
trees at the Station's Mount Carmel farm. Those should produce results
more quickly than the seeds. Next summer pollen will be collected from
the tree for use in hybridizing some of the young trees already growing
here.

Dr. Jones has for many years been interested in the development of a
useful chestnut for Connecticut conditions. Some of the young trees,
crosses between American and Asiatic types, show promise but will take
several years of testing to prove their value. The new "find" may be of
considerable help in shortening the length of time necessary to get a
tree that is blight resistant, of large fruiting habit and of good
timber quality.

(Note by Editor--This tree has been known to me for probably fifteen
years. It was brought to my attention by Mr. Charles Vibert of East
Hartford and named by me the "Vibbert," [with two b's to insure the
right pronounciation]. The name has been published and I have sent
scions to a number of people and grafted trees myself. The tree bears a
very large nut, twelve selected ones weighing over a pound. I have
gathered a good many quarts of them and exhibited them in Hartford and
Litchfield. So far as my observation goes this large size is at least
partly due to the fact that there is only one filled nut in a burr, the
other two being aborted. This fact, and the fact that the crops are
small, I have attributed to the partial inefficiency of
self-pollination, there being no evident outside source of pollen. One
year I grafted several other varieties into the top of the tree. Most of
those grew a year or two but then died. I have believed that this was
due to blight. There has been much dead wood in the tree ever since I
have known it and I had supposed that this was blight.)



Report of Committee of Ohio Nut Growers

_A. A. BUNGART, Chairman_


On September 5, 1943, members of the Northern Nut Growers' Association
living in Northern Ohio met at the Wooster Experiment Farm to discuss
nut growing in the State. At this meeting a committee was formed to work
out plans and suggestions for a twenty-year nut growing program. It was
felt that greater progress would result if something more definite were
done by way of coordinating the work of the Forestry Department with the
effort of individuals. The committee, meeting here on October 31, 1943,
submits the following report. The chairman has attempted to incorporate
most of the material submitted by members of the committee and by
others.

The committee recommends the appointment of a full time research man in
nut culture, or two part-time workers. This man, or men, would form the
hub around which the 20 year program would be built. There should be a
division of labor: certain individuals already embarked on a program of
their own should continue their work and coordinate it with a specialist
at Wooster, or whatever place is designated as headquarters. For
example, Mr. Silvis favors the hickory over all other nut trees. As a
young man he can reasonably look forward to many years of
experimentation with various varieties and under different conditions.
Mr. Davidson is following a plan of planting large numbers of black
walnut seed from blocks of trees in which natural crossing might combine
the desirable characteristics of several better-than-average named
varieties. Mr. Sherman has collected English walnuts from trees in the
northern part of the state. Already he has seedlings of many varieties
growing at Canfield.

Now, each of these projects is excellent and should be encouraged in
every way. Whenever members of our organization find new and better nuts
of those species, they should send nuts, or scions or data about the
trees, to these gentlemen.

As time goes on there should be opportunities to farm out projects to
individual growers. Mr. Fickes, for example, by experience and because
of his favorable location could well carry out experiment suggested by a
specialist, (or as a research worker to help with one of his own.)

It would seem, apart from large scale operations to be mentioned later,
that the specialist or expert should make his headquarters a clearing
house for information sent by members. It should be his job to study
some of the scientific phases of nut culture, such as artificial
crossing, pollenizing data on various species and varieties of nut
trees, genetic investigations, value of the proper root stocks, and, as
time and information would warrant, the publishing of monographs on
phases of nut growing. Finally such specialist might consider broadly
the problems of securing an increased food supply from Ohio forests.

2. Devote the 9 acres at Apple Creek to nut tree planting. Plant two or
three trees of each variety that has especially good traits. Also set
out numbers of seedling stock upon which to graft scions of promising
trees. By having the main planting near the Experiment Farm, the plant
breeder at Wooster should also attend to nut trees.

3. The Forestry Department should procure seed of hardy English walnuts
and of other nut trees; grow one-year seedlings and distribute these in
small numbers (not over five or six) to people who will plant them in
good locations. Such action should be started at once; in twenty years
or less something good might result.

4. Continue the planting of all promising varieties of the different
species of nut trees at Mahoning so that the bearing habits, production,
etc., could be under strict observation and study, and so that a supply
of scion wood might be available for other plantings and for commercial
propagation.

5. Establish a similar project in some other section of Ohio; the
southeastern section would seem to be the logical place when nut growing
becomes a commercial industry in Ohio.

6. a. Graft promising hickories in the tops of established hickory
seedling trees. There is a volunteer stand of such hickories on the
lands of the Mahoning Valley Sanitary District that would be ideal for
such top-working. No doubt many other such places could be located.

b. Same as "a" but using black walnuts.

c. Same as "a" but using English walnuts.

Suitable black walnut seedlings are now growing on the Mahoning Valley
Sanitary District for projects 6b and c.

7. Encourage the planting by the Forestry Department of better seed from
the best named varieties. While this would be a long-range program it
would be preeminently worth while. The forests of Ohio have all but
disappeared. Organizations with vision and unselfishness must begin to
replace them.

8. Urge a program of education. Nut trees require good soil and proper
care. It would be folly for an organization to sponsor a program for nut
tree planting, unless the growers are provided with proper cultural
directions. The tendency in the past has been to plant nut trees in
out-of-the-way places, and let nature take her course. Nature took her
course; the result, scrubby trees and disgruntled planters.

9. Initiate future nut contests for the purpose of arousing public
interests in nut growing and for bringing to light new varieties. Four-H
clubs, county agents, boy scout troops, sport clubs, all might be urged
to co-operate with the Forestry Department, or with our own
organizations, in making a state-wide survey for better nuts. One member
of the committee thinks that the Ohio Farmer contest did not bring to
light all the good wild trees, although every nut grower is indebted to
that splendid paper for its cooperation in the past.

10. Favor a moderate amount of publicity. Any plans, developments, or
discoveries should be put before the public in scientific journals, farm
papers, and the daily press. But propaganda of a sensational of
exaggerated nature ought to be discouraged. In other words, the
committee thinks that false claims and high pressure publicity on new
varieties would do more harm than good.

11. Study the pollenizing problems of all the better varieties of nut
trees, especially the black walnut, chestnut and hickory species, and
test the better varieties to find those best suited to Ohio conditions.

12. Develop and perfect a simplified means of propagating nut trees and
incorporate this information in a bulletin for all who are interested in
nut trees. Many farmers and fruit growers shy from nursery prices for
nut trees. If they could propagate their own they would be more likely
to plant them.

13. a. Urge a means of developing better kinds of nut trees and nut
hybrids for Ohio. Specifically, embark upon a program of artificial
crossing and hybridizing. While some might object to the length of time
required to check results, the committee thinks it possible to check
three generations within a 20 year program. This could be expedited by
budding or grafting the crossed seedling upon the stock of a bearing
tree. The original seedling should be saved to check its growth, shape
and other characteristics not apparent in the grafted branch. A
Thomas-Elmer Myers cross might possibly combine the desirable traits of
both parents, or a McAllister-shagbark cross might increase the
productivity of the former. A nut, for example, having the cracking
qualities of the English walnut, and the hardiness and retention of
flavor when cooked or baked of a black walnut, would be a worthy
achievement. Also, securing pollen from a hybrid English black walnut
and back crossing with either species might produce the dream tree.

N. B. Hybrid vigor might be a blessing for the quicker growth of all
forest trees. Experiments in nut trees might be applied to other
species.

13. b. Establish in the same tree two varieties suitable for crossing.
This seed should be distributed for propagation by the Forestry
Department to public institutions and to others for reforestation on
waste lands or water-shed project or private grounds.

By selecting isolated trees for this mating, the nuts would either be
self-pollinated or a cross of the desirable varieties. This it would
seem would yield better nuts than the hit-an-miss methods of nature.

14. Use a new yard stick for measuring the value of nut trees for
commercial production. Size of nut, thickness of shell, cracking
qualities are desirable traits but they might not be deciding factors in
evaluating a tree. Other factors equally important perhaps even more so,
are size of nut clusters, rate of growth, consistency in bearing annual
cross, yield per tree of shucked nuts, resistance to blights and insect
nests.

15. Compile a list of the best articles that have appeared in the
N.N.G.A. reports and print them in pamphlet form for distribution to
Ohio growers. All the articles on black walnuts would be found in the
one booklet, and so on for all other trees in which Ohioans would be
interested.

16. Check carefully the experiences and observations of all the members
so as to assemble data on the behavior of nut trees. This information
would be more useful in determining what crosses would be desirable. The
Thomas nut, for example, has been both praised and condemned. What would
be the concensus of opinion on the merits of this much debated variety?

17. Make northern Ohio the nucleus of the N.N.G.A. Geographically and
climatically, this section of the state represents an ideal spot for nut
tree experimentation, in the northern states. The experiment farms at
Wooster and Canfield, the Findley State Forest, the various state
properties, all could be brought into a closely knit functioning
project.


CONCLUSION

The committee thinks that a 20 year program along these 17 lines, or a
modification of them, will eventually prove successful. If such an
organization can offer farmers and all others interested in nuts and
conservation a better walnut, filbert, hickory or chestnut suitable for
Ohio soils and Ohio climate the effort would seem worth while.

So far people interested in nut culture have been called "nuts."
Practical-minded people are apt to smile at such nut experiments, but a
glimpse at our state proves that nut enthusiasts have vision, and a
faith in the future; that they are modern Johnny Appleseeds with more of
Johnny's methods but less of his madness.

The history of our state is a history of squandered natural resources,
of get-rich-quick methods, of wanton destruction of all forms of plant
and animal life. If this organization can in a small way stop the
erosion of gullied hillsides, check the rampage of swollen rivers,
arrest the fertility of Ohio farms from floating to the Gulf or the
Ocean, if it can find some substitute for the magnificent chestnut trees
now gone forever, if it can make better nuts grow where none or poor
ones grow now, if it can sell conservation and a love of trees to every
farmer in Ohio, this organization or any other will be conferring a rich
legacy upon future Ohioans.


OBITUARY

_Dr. John Harvey Kellogg_ died at the age of 91 at his home in Battle
Creek, Michigan, on December 14, 1943, from pneumonia. Until his death
he was one of our two honorary members, the other being his brother, W.
K. Kellogg. Our only other honorary members have been Henry Hales, H. E.
Van Deman, and Dr. Walter Van Fleet. The Kelloggs were thus honored
because of their large gifts to the association, their entertainment of
the association twice at Battle Creek, and the numerous papers on nuts
as food sent to the association by Dr. Kellogg. He once gave us $500 as
prizes for a nut contest. He was present at our Stamford meeting and at
those in Battle Creek. A full account of his life and works was printed
in the N.Y. Times for December 16, 1943; and from a medical standpoint,
in the Journal of the American Medical Association for December 25,
1943, p. 1132. Other accounts may be found in the Michigan newspapers
and elsewhere. He was certainly one of our most eminent members. He was
resolute and sincere in his beliefs, forceful and persistent in
advocating them though they differed quite radically from the beliefs of
most of the medical profession. He would not permit his patients to use
alcohol, tobacco, meat in any form, or tea and coffee. Those who had
been excessive users of these things were often immensely benefitted by
a stay in a Kellogg sanitorium. He joined our association on account of
his advocacy of nuts as food to replace in part the absence of meat. Of
late years he had laid more emphasis on soy beans. Whatever may be
thought of his radical views on food there can be no doubt that he did
an immense amount of good not only by his treatment of individual
patients but also by the wide dissemination of his teaching and his
invention of many useful forms of so-called "health foods."



Printed by

THE CORSE PRESS, Inc.,

Sandy Creek, N.Y.





*** End of this Doctrine Publishing Corporation Digital Book "Northern Nut Growers Association Thirty-Fourth Annual Report 1943" ***

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