The Marion daily mirror. (Marion, Ohio) 1892-1912, 1908-09-24
THINNING OUT THE FRUIT
Cost is Slight and Benefit to the
Harvest Very Large

the custom is among tru1t growers.
1t has always seemed to the writer
that there are two principal reasons
for this general neglect Of what he
firmly believes to be a practical and
useful operation, says Prof. Sears in
the Country Gentleman. The first
and most important reason is that Il
is one of the things which can be
neglected and still have fairly salts
factory results. And the second one
is that orchardists imagine 1t much
more expensive operation than it
really is, or make 1t a more expen-
sive one than it should be. Now, the
principal reasons urged for adopting
the practice are, roughly, in the Or
der of their Importance:
!. That there is more No. / fruit
where it is thinned. Sometimes there
is actually more fruit in bulk, but al
ways in the available records of ex-
periments, and in the reports of prac-
tical growers, there has been a mark
ed increase in the percentage OF No.
l fruit. Beach reported some expert
ments in thinning in 1896, in which
the increase of No. 1 fruit ranged
from 10 per cent to % per cent on
thinned trees, as compared with un-
thinned trees of the same variety.
2. There is less drain on the ener-
gies of the tree where fruit is thin
ned, and this means a greater prob
ability of consecutive crops. 1t may
seem peculiar that where there is
little or no increase in the amount OF
fruit produced, there is a decided de-
crease in the extent to which the tree
is exhausted. But the explanation is
that the greatest drain on the tree
comes from developing the seeds,
and, of course, II there are half as
many fruits there will be half as
many seeds TO bring to maturity.
3. In most fruits, but especially in
peaches and plums, there is less
danger from the ravages of disease
where fruit is thinned. When fruits
touch each other there is much great
er danger from the brown rot, with
those fruits which are attacked by
It, as the moisture is held between
them, allowing the pores to germi-
nate, when they would not upon sep
arate fruits. And Of course. the dis
ease, once started, spreads more rap
idly from fruit to fruit.
1t is also urged in favor OF the
practice that since all fruits must be
handled in picking it cost little more
to make two operations Of it and take
part of them off in thinning. With
all these advantages, why is II that
the practice does not become more
general? l have already given my
notion of the reasons, and, as help
ing to clear up one of these, the mis-
apprehension that it is an expensive
operation, l should like to give some
recent experiences in thinning row
of Burbank plum trees. They are
full-sized, set some eight years ago,
and should yield an average crop Of
two or three bushels, and the time
required for the Is trees in the row
was IS hours and 55 minutes. This
labor cost 17lk cents per hour, so that
the cost per tree was less than 20
cents If we admit the contention
that good part of this labor would
have been required to harvest the
plums had they been allowed TO ma
ture, we certainly have very trifiing
cost for all the advantages enumer-
ated.
The low cost of this thinning is
certainly due in part to the way in
which 1t was done. The instructions
were that the plums should be thin
ned so that they would not touch
when mature. The branches were
first given quick shake to remove
what fruit would fall readily, and the
rest required were then picked off,
taking the small and defective speci-
mems as far as possible, but not
spending any time in debating which
of two adjoining plums should be
taken. This, believe, is one of the
crucial points in the matter, to get
men who will move quickly and yet
who have sufficient judgment TO do
the operation properly, IL certainly
tends to facilitate matters when each
man is timed for each tree thins.
The writer believes emphatically in
| the value of thinning, and that this
| Is one Of several western practices
which ought to be more generally
adopted here in the east.