Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1914-02-12

Is t!.s:sss sss
jects Of all true pruning and to present
one or two of the principles underly-
ing pruning operations. incidentally
the inevitable results of too much and
of too little pruning have been men.
toned. 1t hardly need be added that
the unpruned tree is not necessarily the
best pruned tree; the much-pruned tree
is not necessarily the best-pruned tree;
neither extreme is apt to give the best
results. In fact the contrary is most
apt to be the case. The practical ques-
tion at once arises, chow much are we
to pruneP From the very nature OF
the question, or rather of the subject
with which it deals, no answer can be
given which can be taken as a rule to
be always followed 1t is the principles
that have been discussed which underly
tree growth and fruit production that
determine amount of pruning. Only as
these principles are applied to each in.
dividual problem as it arises--in other
words, to each individual tree-can the
right amount of pruning be done. From
what has been said it is evident that
proper pruning consists in the removal
of just enough wood to afford the
largest possible number Of fruit spurs,
good supply of light and food, and
consequently keep them growing vigor-
ously and ruiting regularly. A tendency
on the part of the tree to produce
watersprouts and other wood growth at
the expense of fruit spurs indicates
that too heavy pruning has already been
done. Irregular bearing and dying out
of fruit spurs indicates that too little
pruning or pruning in the wrong part
of the tree, or both, have been faults
of recent years. Lighter pruning in the
first instance and heavier pruning in
the second instance are the correctives,
The person who prunes should glance
quickly over the tree, judge quickly
and accurately of the balance Cor lack
of it) that exists between vegetative
growth and fruit bearing surface, and
then proceed to restore or maintain this
balance. In its last analysis the ques-
ton of amount of pruning becomes a
question of Judgment. Rules cannot be
given, or if given they are almost worse
than useless. They mislead as often,
or more often, than they lead Alright
Principles governing amount can he
more or less thoroughly understood and
then applied to individual eases, Prin-
ciples are always the same,
Question of Kind.
Pruning is not only problem of de-
gree, Of amount, it is question of kind
as we'll. That is to say, the fruitgrower
not only needs to know the principles
underlying the amount of pruning to
do, but of equal Importance is the ques-
tiou of how that amount shall be done,
Having determined upon the right
amount of pruning, shall the grower
thin out or head backs If he heads
back, shall he head many branches a
little or shall he head back q few Sc.
verelyl IL he thins out, shall he take
out few large limbs or many smaller
ones9 These questions cannot be con
sidered entirely apart from the ques'
ton Of the number of fruit spurs that
we desire, or their relative strength,
srart from the question OF
training. Manifestly the thickness and
density Of growth which is modified
by thinning Of one kind or another,
bears an important relation to the
health and vigor of the fruit spurs,
especially those in the lower and cen.
trail parts Of the rec. In general it
may be stated that heading in tends to
thicken the top, while thinning out, as
the term indicates, thius it. Thinning,
Of course, in addition TO reducing the
number Of actual or potential fruit
spurs, let's in sunlight and thus tends
further to keep the remaining ones
healthy and vigorous heading in, on
the other hand, while reducing the
number Of actual aud potential fruit
spurs much like thinning out, really
tends to afford less light to the spurs
on the inner and lower limbs, and thus
is apt to reduce rather than to increase
their vigor and longevity. Though head
ing In acts as a stimulus to the devel-
opment OF buds that are left aud thus