The Hood River glacier. (Hood River, Or.) 1889-1933, 1916-03-02

FEOH TIC pttCcuibk UDetINdIl0ns an0
statements in connection with the esti-
mates of fungus in relation to the
number Of sprays applied and materials
used, and the omission of certain
sprays, it is evident to me, and think
will be clear tony fellow:apple grow
ers, that any omission of any of the
important sprays means more scab.
The following indicates the increasing
quantity Of fungus in the various ex-
hibits in accordance with the different
spraying programs as already explained
specifically in each individual case.
Exhibit A, 5 per cent.
Exhibit b, 10 per cent, insufficient
quantity OF spray increases perceptage
in this exhibit.
Exhibit c, 5 per cent.
Exhibit d, Ia per cent.
Exhibit E, Is per cent.
Exhibit F. "A per cent.
Note: Small per centage exhibit
F due to using extremely early pink as
already stated in exhibit FL.
Exhibit G, 20 per cent.
Exhibit n. 26i per cent.
Exhibit l, 22a per cent.
Exhibit J, 32A per cent.
Exhibit X, Is per cent. Note: Ex.
ceptional.
Exhibit L. 37a per cent.
Exhibit M. so per cent.
Exhibit N. 48 l-3 per cent.
Exhibit D, rs per cent
Exhibit p, 80 per cent.
Exhibits Q-l, Q-2, Q-3 and o. stand
in class by themselves for compari-
son, for the reason that these four
growers had 43a per cent of scab last
year and therefore their results this
year. even though large number Of
sprays we're applied, could not be ex-
pected to show quite as clean crop as
are shown in other exhibits where the
same number Of sprays and similar
fungicides were used where growers
only had small percentage of scab in
the year 1914.
However. want to call particular
attention to exhibit Ga, l2 per cent
fungus, as compared with so per cent
fungus in the year 1914. Without ques-
ton, upon careful observation, it is my
opinion that this excellent result in
this particular instance is due to the
excellent spraying program followed
and very thorough work. 1t seems
proper to state in connection with the
u per cent Of fungus obtained, that in
all probability even better percentage
could have been shown bad Ga applied
a semi-dormant fungicide.
One seems justified in assuming from
these observations that even better re-
suits could have been obtained.
Exhibits RI. re-, R.3, R.4. RS and
Re seem worthy of attention.
All six of the growers in exhibit r
used sprays as follows: Fall Bor-
deaux. delayed dormant, pink, calyx
and 10 days, showing an average of 37a
per cent fungus. Five of the grow
ers in this exhibit used atomic sulphur
in pink or caiyx or both. but it must
be noted that these growers had an av-
erage of 22A per cent fungus in their
orchards in the year 1914. Following
is a comparison of fungus in 1914 and
1915 for exhibits @ and r: Exhibit Q,
fungus 1916, 40a per cent; 1914, 43a pei
cent. Exhibit K. fungus 1915, S7A pei
cent: 1914, 22A per cent.
Attention is called to comparison OF
exhibits @ and r, showing percentages
of fungus; in exhibit R there were a and
5 sprays used, atomic sulphur being
used in the calyx and pink. There was
q per cent more scab than in exhibit
@, where the same number of sprays
were used, lime.sulphur being used in.
stead of atomic sulphur. The percent.
age of scab in 1914 for exhibit Q was 43s
per cent, while the percentage OF scat
in 1914 for exhibit X was only 22s pei
cent. To put it more clearly. exhibit
r using atomic sulphur in 2 sprays,
pink and calyx, got "a more scab, bul
it must be noted that exhibit @ had 43;
of scab in 1914, while exhibit K haC
only 22A per cent. Therefore in this
instance, according to note, Atomic sui
phur got less favorable results thar
lime-sulphur
Exhibit S, / to 8, shows results tina
are extremely peculiar IN accordanc'
with the number of sprays and materi
ais used, leading one to believe that il
some cases where the program wal
poor and the result good. it was due t.
the locality being comparatively fret
from scab, and where the program wa
good and the result poor. it was proba
bly, due to a lack of thoroughness o
omissions of sprays are responsible
There seems something 80 unusual II
exhibit S, | to 8, that it does not seen
best to include it in this summary.
Conclusion: With the data alread.
presented it seems that every grove
should be able to plan a sprayinl
schedule which il applied at the righ
time and in the right way, will give
crop with all extremely small precent
age of fungus. The evidences and re
suits already given are especially con
vining and Justify one in the statemen
that any grower can produce crop o
apples in Hood River valley with finn
gus not to exceed to 10 per cent.
The cleanest crops were produced
1915, where the greatest number
sprays were applied.
The omission of the pink or caly
sprays or both of them, cause the mos
severe loss.
The use of lime-sulphur in the pin
and calyx generally give better result
and less fungus. .
Bodeaux In 1914 and 1915 applied
the pink or calyx have caused more
less damage by russeting, in some case
very severe.
1t does not appear to be established
nor is it stated by patbologists, ths
Bordeaux in the fall is an importar
factor In fungus contol.
Bordeaux in the fall is a necessar
protection IN this valley for anthra'
nose.
AS many growers think it has iuI
picidsl value when applied in the fal
il seems advisable to recommend u
application, particularly on account
anthracnose.
Spring and Summer Spraying.
Recommendations for fungus)
lst. DELAYED DORMANT: Ju'
as buds are swelling, lime.sulphur III
I'll or LIP, particularly II orchard
infested with San Jose scale; II 7
scale. bordeaux may be used for !