From: krogers@javelin.sim.es.com (K. Rogers)
Subject: Re: Dwarf apple trees
Reply-To: krogers@javelin.sim.es.com
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corp., Salt Lake City, Utah
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 16:00:55 GMT

langston@langston.cs.utk.edu (Mike Langston) writes:
>> Avoid M101 and M111
>
>surely he meant mm106, not mm101 -- anyway, this advise is merely
>his opinion, not any sort of statement of fact or even particularly
>good advise in general

Yes, I was confusing the larger number stocks.  I was going from
memory and it's been a while since I did my research on the topic.
You know, standard Net practice...

However, you are missing the point of why I said to avoid the above.
There is nothing inherently wrong with them but you forgot the part
from the original posting that they were *specifically* looking for
dwarf trees.  MM106 will give you a large tree by urban back yard
standards.

>for many sites, mm106 is preferred because it is thought to induce 
>early bearing (i'm not so sure on that from my experience) -- for 
>others sites, mm111 is preferred because of its superior anchoring 
>ability (i'm pretty convinced on this point) -- ask around and see
>how many folks have bought from homeowner-oriented catalogs such as 
>starks (who don't like to say more than something like "semi-dwarf" 
>or "dwarf"), and unknowingly get m7a rootstocks, which are good in 
>many respects but susceptable to wind damage -- but i digress

Yes, they root better.  They also give you a big tree.

>> Go for M9 and M27...
>> If you want to try a fence, trellis or espalier setup
>
>IMHO, it's likely that you'll *have to* set up some sort of support 
>system for these -- commercial growers are nearing the 1000-trees-per-acre 
>mark (often because of fast, high yields and because of reduced liability
>insurance when pyo operations don't use ladders) -- but the trellis
>systems required due to pittiful rootstock anchoring can cost a bundle

I should have mentioned that either of my named rootstocks definitely
need support of some kind or another throughout the life of the tree.
A sturdy post for trunk attachment is sufficient for a central leader
type tree.

Again you are forgetting the poster was asking about a few trees in a
back yard.  (S)He isn't looking for 1000 trees/acer and cost is mostly
irrelevant for trellising - mine was perhaps all of $40; I spent more
on the trees than supports.

>anyway this is really a fairly complex subject -- bottom line: if you 
>want the facts, read read read

Always good advice.

> -- i also suggest asking the advise of 
>commercial orchardists (not backyard enthusiasts) in your area 

Here I differ again.  You keep forgetting this is a suburban back yard
poster and our concerns are very different from commercial operations.
What commercial orchardists are concerned with is what makes for
(IMHO) inferior fruit.  They have to turn a profit.  In order to do so
they have to have trees which bear fruit which will ripen all at the
same time, be virtually indestructable during picking, handling,
transporting (thick skinned, rock hard, picked too early and not
stored long enough for full ripening).  The fruit has to match some
absurd concept of what an apple has to look like: red, red, red
(except granny smith greens are ok) not a worm hole in it, shiny,
shiny, shiny (pour on the wax) big, big, big, (spray on those
hormones and water the daylights out of the trees) etc.

What home gardening gets you is first rate fruit.  For example, I find
that the russets are possibly the most satisfying desert fruit apple
around.  You'll never find a russet in a supermarket (nor in our local
farmer markets) since they tend to be small, don't shine and have a
warty looking brownish skin.  I also eat *gasp*, *horror*, *gag*
apples which have worm holes in them.  I eat around the bad part.  I
tend to not spray much - usually only one 1/2 strength dose of
malathion right after fruit set.  This knocks out only 50% of the
codling moth damage.  I can live with it, commercial growers can't.

I also eat apples which birds have pecked at.  I feel the birds should
get their share.  I even leave fruit on the trees all fall and winter
for them.

I should point out I've nothing against commercial fruit growers and
their practices but back yard fruit growing is a very different
occupation than commercial growing and plenty of what they'll tell you
is not relevent for us.

>this is in no way entended as a flame -- really -- it is just good to 
>bear in mind that the stuff that pops up on usenet is free, and you 
>frequently get what you pay for, especially IMHO when "IMHO" is omitted 

Ditto.

>mike langston <langston@cs.utk.edu>


-- 
Keith Rogers
krogers@javelin.sim.es.com
Newsgroups: rec.gardens