A few days ago I called on a man in New Jersey who said he would have twenty bushels of hickory nuts and two or three bushels of English walnuts if the squirrels did not take them. He is up against a state law which protects the squirrels but does not protect him.
I wish we could send out word with you to the states to get at least a few people interested in nut culture, and have them write to the agricultural colleges and the experiment stations and arouse some interest along this line at those institutions, not only among the fruit extension men and the teachers, but also among the landscape men as well. There ought to be more interest taken in this work at our colleges and universities, and nut culture courses ought to be organized. The foresters ought to be induced to use nut trees wherever possible.
That is all of the time I care to take at present, Mr. President, but I wish to say that if there is any way of arousing interest in the states, I would be glad to carry the word from Washington and to push it just as hard as possible.
Hon. W. S. Linton, Saginaw, Michigan, spoke on "Roadside Planting vs.
Reforestation," as follows:
As a delegate to the National Tax Association convention at White Sulphur Springs, it has been my lot to have been named on both federal and state committees, with the idea of exempting from taxation those who would produce trees for the future. My experience has been that exemption from taxation for the purpose of producing our future forests is a wrong one. The sentiment of the people is against exemption from taxation, and I do not know how it may be practically applied to the growing of the forests that our country must have in the future. But the individual will not carry out the work, and the corporations will not undertake it, so it devolves upon the government of the state to reproduce those forests. The government lives for a long period in between many life-times, and ours should live as long as the earth. It is therefore up to us to reproduce those forests which we once had and, as all things come back to the state, then the state should reforest.
Next the roadways are to be considered. Roadways will grow a better class of timber and trees; they are rich in soil, generally, because they pass through the most fertile regions of the country and, up to this time, they have been waste land. I believe that the farmer is right in his wish that trees which shut in the roadsides should be cut away, that the sunlight should be let in and the roads hard-surfaced. We saw in our trip that where the trees shaded the roads they were almost impassable at times, while in the open places, they were fine.
In Michigan we took up the question of roadside planting, and Senator Penny fathered the bill, the pioneer measure, that caused our state to plant roadways. We have a very competent landscape engineer in charge of one of the departments, and he is planning to grow roadside trees, using nut-bearing trees, so that the next generation will profit largely by the work of today. And this is just because of this association.
When I was honored with your presidency, one of the features of the work we carried on was in getting nut trees from historic places, especially from Mt. Vernon. The Superintendent of Mt. Vernon very kindly told us that we could have the walnut crop from trees that were started there during Washington's time, and the only stipulation was that we should not commercialize the idea; that those nuts were priceless, and that we should not receive any money for them, but should distribute them in the schools and in a public way cause interest in the planting of nut trees. That very movement brought about wonderful results, and today there are from five to ten thousand walnut trees growing in our state, about the height of a man, all of them having come from Mt. Vernon.
On our way through from White Sulphur Springs, we passed through the home of Thomas Jefferson, Monticello, and we found some magnificent nut trees planted by Jefferson. Some of our best trees today are from those given to Washington by Thomas Jefferson; and I arranged at Mt. Vernon to secure some of the nuts from the trees Jefferson planted there.
Just yesterday Mr. Dodge, the superintendent at Mt. Vernon, again said that we could have the crop for this year. We will have a number of bushels from there, although the trees have not been as fruitful this year as usual, and I leave it to you to judge as to what we should do with those nuts this year. Some of you have ideas about this, and I would be glad to adopt them. But when the fact is known that the walnuts can be secured in that way the entire country will want them. At present I have letters from Texas and other places asking for some of Mt. Vernon's nuts. It is a movement that will cause more people, in my opinion, to have nut trees than any other, and we should push it to the limit.
I had a letter from Henry Ford's secretary, asking for a dozen trees which might be planted at Mr. Ford's place in Michigan. Mr. Ford is doing great good, so far as the saving of the forests is concerned. He has immense tracts of land where he is caring for every root and branch.
Letter from C. F. Bobler, Landscape Engineer in Michigan:
The laws of Michigan, as you are well aware, encourage the planting of trees and shrubs by the highway authorities, and protect existing roadside trees from injury or destruction. Under those laws considerable planting has already been done, and in such planting a liberal use has been made of the nut-bearing varieties of trees, especially the black walnut, which is indigenous to much of Michigan.
Besides the economic value of nut trees, on account of their food products while growing and their timber products when mature, they are generally very attractive in appearance, and, therefore, very well adapted to roadside planting.
Roadside development presents a field for considerable study to produce plantings which afford a variety of effects in trees and shrubs, by using varieties best adapted to the soil and climatic conditions, which best harmonize with the local topography and which to a considerable extent have an economic value in addition to their ornamental value. Nut trees admirably fulfill these requirements for roadside planting and while I believe that such other desirable varieties of trees as the American elm, the sugar maple, and others, should be used in proper proportions, I am fully convinced that the varieties of nut trees adapted to our soil and climate should be used liberally in the planting of the roadsides of Michigan.
The plans for the future development of the state trunk line highways in this state, contemplate the planting of the black walnut, butternut, sweet chestnut, hickory, beech, and other varieties of nut bearing trees in considerable quantities, and I am confident that their use will add to man's enjoyment of the highways and that these trees will become an economic asset to the regions where they are planted.
THE PRESIDENT: There is one thing Mr. Linton mentioned that I wish to put special emphasis upon; the distribution of trees grown from Washington's home. Last year Mr. Jones sent out a lot of seedling walnuts and there are quite a few in Rochester. It was delightful to see the interest manifested by the people receiving those seedlings and to hear how the people were succeeding. Some of them have written me.
MR. REED: Possibly it would help if, when any of us here present should chance to visit historic spots, we would get nuts from such places and send them to Mr. Linton; from Gettysburg or any of those places. We should each consider ourselves committees of one to get those nuts and to deliver them to Mr. Linton.
MR. BIXBY: I will see what I can do about it, and will get some of the nuts today.
MR. O'CONNOR: I do not know how Mr. Linton would feel about sending to different schools some of the nuts that were given him by the superintendent at Monticello, and in letting the children have a little nursery, and the means to beautify their home towns, but I will say that if you get the children started in a thing like this, you will have the parents following up.
MR. LINTON: There is another point I wish to mention. Mr. Dodge sent one bushel of the walnuts which he said were taken from a particular tree that he admired. He thought it was the best variety of all of them. That tree, a year ago, was struck by lightning; so he requests that some of the trees produced from the nuts of that particular tree, be sent back to Mt. Vernon, in order that he may have some seedlings from the original tree. It is a fact that those nuts produced the best yields of any that we planted in Michigan, showing that the seeds from the best tree will bring the best results.
Dr. G. A. Zimmerman, Piketown, Pa.
After improving from an illness of several years, and feeling tired, impatient and at times discouraged with progress in my physical condition, last spring I secured a few bunches of scion wood and turned to my old boyhood hobby for diversion; this time, however, by working on nut trees instead of fruit. In presenting the following at the request of others, I do not claim any originality, but simply draw the attention of interested parties to some possibilities and probabilities. My results have been very variable and many of them show as successful a failure as any one could possibly obtain. The scions referred to in the following tabulated record were put in from May 20th to July 20th and were well "mixed together" in the hope of giving better opportunity for cross pollenization, a few of every variety except the Hales being put in every day. The Hales were all put in late in July. I have grafted many other varieties of fruits and nuts but a record of the hickory only is shown below:
No. Growing Died % Growing % Died
Weiker 46 0 46 0 100 One graft to tree
5 3 2 60 40 T.W.T 1-1/4" diameter
5 1 4 20 80 U.W.T.
23 1 22 4.2 95.8 U.W.T.
Taylor 5 2 3 40 60 U.W.T. 10" diameter
27 7 20 25.9 74.1
Fairbanks 15 11 4 73.3 26.7
Vest 27 1 26 3.7 96.3
Manahan 22 7 15 31.8 68.2
7 0 7 0 100 U.W.T. 3" diameter
Laney 13 6 7 46.1 53.9
15 1 14 6.6 93.4 U.W.T. 6" diameter
Beaver 5 2 3 40 60 Scions poor. But one
grew 7 ft. 4 in.
Kentucky 19 7 12 36.8 67.2
10 1 9 10 90 U.W.T. 5" diameter
Kirtland 12 5 7 41.6 58.4
16 5 11 31.3 68.7 U.W.T. 5" diameter
7 1 6 14.2 85.8 U.W.T. Put on late
as also the Hales
Hales a 6 1 5 16.6 83.4 U.W.T. 3" diameter
b 35 0 35 0 100 U.W.T. 10" diameter
c 2 2 0 100 0 T.W.T. 1-1/2%" diameter
d 4 4 0 100 0 T.W.T. 2" diameter
e 3 3 0 100 0 T.W.T.
f 3 2 1 66.6 33.3 T.W.T.
g 6 4 2 66.6 33.3 T.W.T.
—— — —- ——- ——-
Total 338 75 263 22.2 77.8
The last two series of the Hales made 100% start also but bugs
killed three grafts.
U. W. T. means a tree from which all the lower limbs were cut back
to about a foot or eighteen inches and grafted, a few top limbs
having been left intact.
T. W. T. means a tree from which the top had been cut, the lower limbs and stub having been grafted, although a few of the lower limbs were not sawed off.
A study of the above record is interesting. All of my stocks are of the mockernut type, varying from three-fourths to two inches in diameter, except a few trees to which I refer specially as T.W.T. and U.W.T. It will be noted that the Weiker and the Vest made the poorest catches. It could not have been due entirely to weather conditions or the condition of the scions, for the scions of these two varieties were equal to anything I had. In view of the fact that they are both very desirable nuts, I always carried a few scions and kept placing them frequently as I placed other varieties. Many Vests were placed at the same time as the Fairbanks, which shows 73.3% catches. The one Vest that did catch, however, made a very thrifty growth, showing that it is possible apparently to do well on the mockernut.
With the Weiker, about the 15th of July, I put five scions on the limbs and trunk of a tree about 1-1/4 inches in diameter, the top having been cut out, with three catches, 60%, against another lot of 46 with 100% failure and 23 more with 4.2% success. Such antics are difficult to understand.
Many of the scions were put in the trunks of the trees; others were put on the small branches with the splice graft. The scions placed on the trunks, or the larger limbs near the trunk, apparently did somewhat better than the splice grafts further out on the limbs. In the walnut and other sappy trees, however, the splice graft out on the small limbs did better.
It is of peculiar interest that all of the large trees from which the lower limbs were sawed and the stubs grafted, the topmost limbs having been left, designated as U.W.T., did badly. While in the case of the five Hales, three had 100% and two had 66.6% catches. These two also had 100% catches but bugs ate the tender shoots and killed three of them. These trees had the tops cut off last fall leaving only a few lower limbs. They were put in on July 20th after the sprouts had well started on the trees. The sprouts were not taken off but their tops were pinched out. These grafts made a growth of from one to two feet or more. At the same time a tree was trimmed (Hales b in the record) and all the lower limbs grafted with Hales, leaving a few top branches only. Thirty-five were set and not a single one grew. The location of this tree was better than any of the five above referred to, because a couple of those trees were standing on the top of a rock where one would wonder how they could exist, and it was so hot when I placed the grafts that I had to quit and get out of the sun. In spite of that 100% grew.
A study of the above record leads to the conclusion that there is very little difference in plant and animal cells and it seems clear that certain old, underlying principles must be dealt with. I need not refer to heredity because, while it is undoubtedly quite possible, perhaps, to influence heredity tendencies so as to get stocks to accept scions more readily, it is not the major issue for most of us just now. Next spring we will take what heredity has given us and be satisfied. However, it appears certain that our results in grafting the various stocks we now have will depend largely on our ability to:
1. Regulate plant circulation. 2. Stimulate cellular activity to a point compatible with wound repair, defensive and growing processes. 3. Control plant cell nutrition.
One of the very first things we physicians do upon seeing a patient is to investigate his circulation. If the pressure is too low or too high, for any reason, we immediately take measures to correct it, because we know that disastrous results will quickly follow if that is not looked after. Plant circulation, or sap flow, is no less important. Mr. Riehl, Mr. Jones and Dr. Morris made great strides when they advanced the ideas of covering the wound and the scion completely to prevent evaporation, thereby also controlling the sap pressure. With the exception of shading, pruning and defoliating, this is about the only method we have of preventing evaporation. Defoliation, of course, interferes with the tree's power of growth. Controlling the humidity is probably not practical on a large scale.
A proper and careful cutting of the tree beforehand is important. It appears that to cut the top completely out while the tree is dormant, so disrupts the routine circulation that the few lower branches which are left intact, are well taken care of and, it seems to me, that this, together with the stimulation of WOUND REPAIR by cutting and allowing time enough for the cells to get into action, was the prime reason for the 100% success in the three Hales and the cause of the 100% failure in the other Hales tree.
Other methods of controlling the circulation are of course drainage, irrigation, mulching, location of the orchard, placing of condensers of moisture, such as stones and other hard substances beneath the trees, and many other contrivances which are in use, and which I shall not discuss.
With reference to stimulation of cellular activity we are considerably concerned. In medicine I have found the subject of wound repair and immunity most interesting, the two subjects seeming to be more or less related. Some animals will repair wounds and immunize readily, while others will not. In a general way young healthy animals and human beings immunize most readily, while older ones frequently fail almost entirely. Interestingly enough plants seem to be strangely similar in this respect, and the thing that stimulates cellular activity for defensive purposes (immunity) apparently stimulates growth and wound repair. The thing that stimulates most actively for a special purpose is the thing itself, the best stimulant for wound repair being the simple injury. To illustrate briefly: In my work last summer I came in contact with two enemies, yellow jackets and copperheads. The copperhead stimulated me to carry a club in defense, while for the yellow jacket the club was of little value and I rather preferred carbon bisulphide. Had I ignored my senses and allowed nature full sway, as a tree does, the snake would have injected his venom and the yellow jacket his toxin, and my cells would have accepted their only alternative and proceeded at once to build up a specific defense, after which they would have been in better shape for development, providing the poison would not have been so great as to prove fatal. Injury to a tree certainly does stimulate wound repair, defense and growth. It is well known that trees with many transplantings, root injuries, transplant much more readily, and the nurserymen use this method of stimulation as a routine procedure. I learn in Florida that in order to transplant a good size palmetto, they are in the habit of digging down on one side and cutting the roots the year before removal. It will then transplant more readily. Pruning has the same cell stimulating effect if done at a time that will retain the stored nutrition. An attack of disease just as surely stimulates cellular activity and growth but it is too frequently followed by disaster.
We have all heard of driving rusty nails into trees (thinking the iron produced the beneficial results), cutting a slit in the bark of the limbs and trunk for "bark bound" so called, etc., all of which have stimulating effects with more or less permanent injury to the tree. Who knows but what the sap sucker, with his ability to dig into the bark and extract a piece of cambium, was not sent to us to aid in preserving our trees by stimulating new growth?
In my work last summer trees that were subjected to slight injury before hand apparently accepted a larger proportion of grafts. I will briefly cite two specific illustrations. A little butternut tree located near the house was the object of my efforts for over two years. During my illness I frequently went out and pruned a few branches or put on a few buds. Something would happen to me and possibly I would not see it again for months, and in the meantime the buds would be strangled or knocked off. Another little hickory tree stood in the roadway. Harrows, plows, wagons and even logs were dragged over it. Grafts on both these trees caught rather readily last spring. In fact two black walnut grafts on this little butternut were two of the very few that I got to grow at all last year. My walnut grafting was almost a total failure. I have this to say, however, that I had no dormant walnut scions, my scions all being cut in May or June.
Mr. Jones, by marking the site of his patch bud several days in advance, admirably carries out this idea by locally stimulating the cambium cells. Dr. Morris's scheme of using white wax, besides regulating sap pressure, allows the actinic rays of the sun to stimulate cellular activity. Cutting the top out of the tree, which disrupts the normal circulation and throws it into the few lower limbs, besides stimulating the cells into activity, has apparently in a large measure accounted for the slight success that I have had. Other methods such as injecting some substance under the bark, applying antiseptics, or some stimulating chemical in a similar way, as "Scarlet Red" is used in skin grafting to increase epithelial growth, may aid materially. Certain chemicals applied to the tree and leaves, as used in sprays, seems sometimes to stimulate growth in a way that can hardly always be accounted for by the checking of the disease for which it was placed.
Much more could be written on cellular stimulation but enough has been said to encourage others to make observation in this connection, for it is highly probable that the lack of proper stimulation of the cambium accounts for more failures in top working trees than we are aware of.
With this topic we are probably less concerned in its relation to grafting than when the growing and bearing stages come. However, certain nutritional disturbances appear early and the more vigorously the stock is growing beforehand the better progress, of course, the grafts will make when they are started. Whether or not they will start more readily have I been unable to ascertain, but I have a bunch of little fellows with a growth of only an inch or so, and so puny that I cannot account for it in any other way than a lack of proper nutrition. Many of these little trees, used as stock, are very old in comparison with their size and they will probably be dwarfs all their lives. It is a question whether many such trees should be grafted at all. Further observations will have to be made to decide that point. Perhaps proper preparation for a year or two would be beneficial.
This topic will largely be left for future discussion under another subject, but it occurs to me that much might be accomplished by proper attention to nutrition, especially when setting out trees for grafting, selection of proper site, fertility of soil, cultivation to aid absorption, etc. I have observed limbs of animals much smaller than normal due to prohibited movements or lack of proper circulation, one side of a tree developed out of proportion, eggs without hard shell due to lack of calcium in the hen's diet, and I know of an old English walnut tree that bears nuts with shells so thin as to be almost negligible. I am told that at one time this tree bore a nut with a much thicker shell. It has never had any attention and it is quite probable that the lack of proper shell building elements causes the trouble. I have grafted a few of these and I want to see what happens by furnishing better nutrition.
Concerning scion wood, I have "ringed" some limbs, similar to the method used sometimes in producing extra large fruit, in an effort to have the scion store up a large amount of nutrition. This experiment I shall continue in the spring.
This article is based entirely on my own ideas, observations and conclusions in connection with old standing principles. As previously stated, I claim nothing new and my only desire is to stimulate others to make like observations.
Carrying out my conclusions in my work next spring I propose to cut the tops out of all my trees, leaving a few lower limbs instead of the top ones, allow them to start growth a little before grafting, pinch the tip from that growth, and, in addition to covering with paraffin or some combination of it, shade the scions on the south-west side, either by tipping branches over them or some other way. Paper bags seem to absorb the paraffin. Double grafting in the case of the Vest and the Weiker will be tried. Whitewashing the stock to prevent sun burn will be used where necessary. Several other experiments based on the idea of cellular stimulation before the scions are placed in position will be tried.
Dr. M. B. Waite, of the Federal Insecticide and Fungicide Board, U. S.
Department of Agriculture, spoke as follows:
DR. WAITE: Some of you may recall that several years ago, when you were meeting here in this hall, I gave you a paper on the nut diseases of the northeastern part of the United States, and it would not be desirable to go over that same ground again. At that time, we took up the bacteriosis of the Persian Walnut, and filbert blight, and I outlined a program of proposed treatment for the filbert blight. It might be interesting to note here that Dr. Morris, and I believe also Mr. Bean, put that treatment into practice with success. The situation still remains, however, that we do not know of diseased plantings of any size. If we find a real plantation of filberts we will be glad to attempt control measures ourselves. I have planted about two dozen filberts and they still remain free from the disease. There are very few local hazel nuts, wild or cultivated, around Washington; but we understand that the few hazel nuts are free from this disease.
There are two or three things I wish to mention. One is the repeated inquiries reaching my office with regard to the non-filling of nuts, mostly the cultivated nuts, sometimes the pecan, sometimes the black walnut, and frequently the English walnut. The subject is a complicated one and the disease is not one that we can put under the microscope and diagnose at once. The trouble is due to a complex of varietal and environmental conditions, the effect of the conditions of growth, of soil fertility, temperature, soil, water and humidity, sunshine, etc., on that plant. Very often it is because people get the wrong variety and do not know what they have. They may have an unproductive seedling.
On the other hand a good variety may fail to bear in a locality where it is not suited. Very frequently the real lack is in soil fertility. Of course the success of the pecan trees down South around pig pens is an old joke to you gentlemen, but there is truth in that. For good nuts there is often need for a little extra manure or fertilizer, or perhaps both. Sometimes there are rich pockets in the earth where those trees would like to grow, or rich bottom lands which will produce without manure. I think one of the best ways is to fertilize with manure, if possible. Pollination troubles in connection with the non-filling and dropping of the nuts should be thought of.
Then there is another angle to be considered, and perhaps I can express it most definitely to you by citing the example of the June drop of peaches. Whenever a tree, like the peach tree or the pecan or the black walnut, sets its fruit in the spring, you will find that there are cross-pollinated and self-pollinated fruits. These will begin to drop their nuts or their fruit at definite stages. Furthermore we will find the abortive seeds are not one size. This means that there were definite stages of the pollination and of the fertilization. I should like to work that up and find what the stages are.
The last big step in the dropping of the peach tree is the shedding of the fruit just as the pits are hardening. When they are hard the fruit does not fall. So this June-drop question ties in with the complications of pollination and nutrition. We know from experiments on the sterility of the pear tree, if highly fed and cultivated, such as those I worked on in the city of Rochester, that those highly fed trees will have some self-fertilized pears. In all of the pears we got no pears resulted when pollinized with the pollen of the same variety, except on those well fed trees. We learned this in the East, and have since found the same type of self-fertilized pear occurring naturally in California and other places in the West. In nut production that whole question of setting and filling is tied up in a complicated way with pollination and nutrition.
Aside from nutrition the other thing to be considered is that of disease. The common black walnut around Washington is generally poor from fungus leaf diseases. Those of us familiar with it around here know that they do not fruit well. This is not a good place for the common black walnut. The wild ones are nearly all poor. I was raised in the Mississippi Valley, where there were large nuts and fine ones, and we gathered those which fell from the specially good trees. They do not grow so well here, except the Stabler and a few others.
Leaving that subject, there is another I wish to take up. That is, the great number of complaints about winter-killing of the English walnut. Wherever we have been able to trace that down, as we frequently have, we find that the English walnut suffers more from winter-killing right around Washington, D. C., and in Pennsylvania, than up in Rochester; and we also have complaints of winter-killing as far south as Georgia. A common cause is the variation of moisture. After a dry spring and early summer soaking rains come in August and September, and the trees, brought suddenly into growth at the close of the season, when they should be drying out, the walnut tree in particular, show winter-killing. So I think one of the main troubles with the English walnut in the Eastern United States is the winter-killing. Even in Georgia we may have this trouble with the pecan, young trees two and three years old, and I have photographed them.
As to false stimulation, in the woods, where these trees grow native and under the conditions to which they are necessarily adapted, they are mulched and crowded when young by their competitors. In cultivation we do not get the crowding and the mulching that makes steady growth and proper ripening. So you should, by some process, growing corn, cover crops, or other trees, keep your delicate nut trees a little crowded and, if possible, mulched while young; and then later, cut out the undesirable things and let the trees have room.
I am not fully prepared to speak about the nut work of the Bureau of Plant Industry, because that should be handled by the chief of the bureau. I have charge only of the diseases of fruits and nuts. We have had $8,200 allotted to the project and will have $2,000 more this year, making $10,200. Originally that was $3,000 for nut diseases all over the United States. We started to work mainly on the southern pecan diseases, and partly on the bacteriosis of the walnuts of the United States. But the Southern Pecan Growers' Association got some additional money for the bureau, $5,000 of which was given to the fruit disease investigations, and was tied up with the other $3,000. But the wording of the bill said, "All for pecan diseases." So we transferred more to the project and made it $8,200 for the nut diseases. That means we have done very little work for the nut diseases except on Southern pecans, and I have been warned that one must not stress southern pecans with the Northern Nut Growers' Association.
We have had, however, one man, and will have two men, on the southern pecan diseases in Georgia, on pecan scab and pecan leaf diseases, who are winning out beautifully, and have nearly solved many of the problems, including the pecan scab. One of the difficulties is the occasional late summer rainy spell, bringing diseases and bad conditions. But in general we have solved the problem pretty well.
Then we have the more permanently dangerous disease, pecan rosette, which has taken about half of the pecans in some sections of the South, especially in south Georgia and in Florida. That disease is being experimented upon in the most extensive way of any of our projects. There is only one word to say about pecan rosette, and that is—humus—the disease is cured by the application of humus.
MR. REED: How far north is the walnut rosette disease?
DR. WAITE: As far as Falls Church, Va., but not much in the North.
MR. REED: The question was asked yesterday as to whether it could not be overcome in this latitude.
DR. WAITE: That nobody knows. The soils east and south of Washington are all acid, and the conditions are wrong for rosette. The soils have no tendency to chlorosis. They are, in fact, antichlorotic. Theoretically you could get the rosette conditions in the Piedmont region, but you are almost certain not to find them over this way.
Now in the organization of the Bureau of Plant Industry there are at least two main offices where nut problems would be studied; in the Division of Horticultural and Pomological Investigations and in my office, where the diseases are studied. Remember, also, that the insect pests are studied in the Bureau of Entomology; they have experimented quite extensively with pecan insect pests, and have the organization to handle such pests. Of course there is a Bureau of Markets and the Office of Soil Fertility in the Bureau of Plant Industry, which handle the pecan, incidental to the other studies.
MR. BIXBY: I would like to ask Dr. Waite a question. The association has spent a good deal of time in developing exact methods of measuring quantitatively the various characteristics of nuts which are considered valuable, and that study has given us methods of comparing notes from year to year, comparing the same nut, and I have noticed that it is quite frequent that the kind of nut that is good one year, will not be so good the next year. To take an example, the Clark hickory, which took the prize one year, the next year fell so far down that it would not take any prize. But after a good deal of trouble I found that by careful examination I could pick out from the nuts a few which tested up as they did before. It occurred to me that a condition of that kind would be more likely to be due to difference in the soil than in the fertility of the pollen. Dr. Waite has had more or less experience in noting the effect of the pollen, and I would like to ask if he thought this the cause of the difference in the nuts.
DR. WAITE: I think it might be the cause for a little difference, but we could account for the difference by entirely different things. By environment and other conditions. Take the apples grown in this vicinity; I have observed that certain seasons fit certain varieties. This year it was favorable for Ben Davis, and yet we have had a poor crop of most varieties; the conditions were bad for the Winesap to set, but yet the fruit is good. Every year and every day is different; and plants are subjected to these complications, and the yield, or the result in fruit, is a response to environment. They are so very susceptible to these things. I came here this morning after picking some cross pollenated pears on the Arlington Farm. We have a lot of crosses there where we study the hybrid seedlings. Some will be almost too poor, in certain years, to deserve further attention, and good another season. In other words, these nuts probably do not vary any more from year to year than many of our fruits and vegetables do, and the main factor is probably response to environment, namely, temperature, air humidity, soil moisture and sunshine.
THE PRESIDENT: I might mention that we have had a filbert orchard at Rochester for eleven years, and there has not been the slightest indication of blight there yet.
MR. REED: I would like to ask Senator Penny how the Roadside Bill is taken in Michigan.
SENATOR PENNY: According to the Michigan law, the people along the roadside consider that their property is subject to the right of transportation on the highway; just as a stream is owned by individuals in Michigan, subject to the right of individuals to use it. This bill says, "Give the right to plant trees on the highway," and I think the planting is done with the consent of the owner. The agricultural college has a landscape gardener connected with the landscape department; he will have charge of planting along the roadside, and I think it will be done in a scientific manner; but I believe it is necessary to get the consent of the owners first.
MR. BIXBY: Last evening Mr. Franklin Weims, of Washington, was with me on the state highway of Maryland, coming south from Baltimore. The highway is being constructed at the rate of about eight miles a year, and funds have been provided. Mr. Weims feels that something should be done to see that the new highway is properly planted with trees, preferably nut-bearing trees. I was thinking that the association might, by some resolution, bring that matter to the attention of proper authorities. I would like suggestions.
MR. CLOSE: It might not be out of order to adopt a resolution and address it to the Governor of the state, Governor Richie; and also to the State Forester, Dr. Besly, suggesting that perhaps some of the trees and seedlings might be presented to the state, some of the trees that Professor Linton spoke of this morning. Trees of that sort might carry some weight.
THE PRESIDENT: Suppose we adopt a resolution and name Professor Close to take up this matter with the proper state authorities, speaking particularly of our ability to furnish seedlings from the Mt. Vernon trees.
MR. CLOSE: If it is the wish of the association, I would be glad to do that. (Motion made, seconded and adopted).
Gentlemen:
First of all I congratulate you most heartily on being members of an organization which means so much to the public, as consumption of nuts is largely increasing and I much fear that the present day production is not in line with the demand.
Although only a nut culturist by proxy I have manifested a deep interest in this for many years, which is exemplified by the fact that on my different hunting trips, in which I have indulged for over thirty-five years, in the past twenty-five years I have also made it a point in the fall of the year, to have with me a large pocket full of such nuts as I thought would more easily come up and benefit some one in the future. I usually carried with me black walnuts, hickory nuts, pecans and acorns, and in my rambles through the woods and along the highways, I would plant these where I thought there would be less chance of their being molested if they developed.
In going over the same ground quail shooting, last fall, ground that I had covered more or less for a good many years, I began to see the fruit of my efforts, and felt repaid many fold for what I had accomplished.
Unfortunately we are a nation of destruction, rather than of construction, so far as our timber is concerned, and this is more noticeable in fruit and nut trees than in other varieties; although, being interested chiefly in these I possibly am biased.
When we stop to consider that a country such as Norway began to replant and reclaim their forests before Columbus discovered America, it strikes me that it should be a lesson for everyone in this country. Consider too, if you please, that before the war Germany paid her entire road taxes from nothing but the production of nut trees along the public roads. We also know, although a very small country in area, that it produced enough timber each year to satisfy the need for building and commercial purposes in the form of packing cases, casks, etc. And here we are, a country forty times larger than Germany, and forced to depend on countries such as Canada and Norway for wood pulp out of which we manufacture a great many grades of paper.
Some twenty years ago I had a political friend introduce a bill during a meeting of the state legislature, which made it mandatory for the road overseer to plant nut trees along the right of way all over the state; but like many meritorious bills, it was pigeon-holed until the next meeting of the legislature. It seemed an impossibility to resurrect this and an exceptionally fine forestry bill.
Unfortunately I promised to preside at a meeting of conservationists and it is for that reason that I am unable to meet and be with your honorable body, for I would like so much to be permitted in a humble capacity to assist in carrying on the work which you gentlemen are doing, as it is going to mean so much to future generations. I am sure that each of you feels as I do in this matter and that is that "He who serves others, best serves himself."
When the matter comes up for consideration I would like very much to have your next convention here in the Middle West, either in St. Louis or Alton, Ill., which is only a few miles north of St. Louis and in the vicinity of a splendid nut-producing section, particularly the pecan.
C. A. Reed, U. S. Department of Agriculture
No discussion of the nut industry in the North at this time would be complete without a brief review of the chestnut situation. The destruction wrought by blight in wiping out practically all of the native chestnut trees within its path, with almost equally fatal results to the European species has for the time being all but eliminated the chestnut from the consideration of planters in the eastern part of the country.
The chestnut bark disease has cost the country untold millions of dollars, and no wonder the public pauses for a second thought before investing in eastern-grown chestnut trees. Nevertheless, it is not to be supposed that chestnut growing has disappeared from this country for all time. No plague has ever been known to wipe a race completely out of existence, and it is unthinkable that the blight will do so with the genus Castanea.
The native range of the American sweet chestnut centers largely in the Appalachian region from Portland, Maine, south to Atlanta, Georgia. The species becomes more sparsely represented as the distance increases in any direction from this central area, practically disappearing on the west; in the region of the Mississippi above Memphis. Its northern boundary might roughly be described as extending from lower Illinois through northern Indiana, southwestern Michigan, southern Ontario, central New York and middle New England. As was to have been expected, the blight has wrought its greatest destruction in places of densest representation of the chestnut species. It is in the outlying districts of scant frequency that the danger of infection from chestnut trees from the forest is least to planted trees, and likewise, there it is that combative measures should be most successful. Obviously, the farther from the center of the native range trees can be planted, the less is the likelihood of infection.
Well outside the native range of the chestnut species, there are a number of districts in the United States within which it should be possible to build up a new chestnut-orchard industry. In proof of this, there are many profitable trees and small orchards in the mid-west and on the Pacific Coast, particularly in western Michigan, northern Indiana, southwestern Illinois, in the eastern foot-hill region of northern California and in the Willamette Valley of Oregon. Probably the most outstanding instance of successful chestnut orcharding now existing in the entire country is a planting of Mr. E. A. Riehl, of Godfrey, Illinois, situated on the bluff of the Mississippi River eight miles west of Alton. Here Mr. Riehl has produced half a dozen or more hybrid varieties which are paying very satisfactory dividends on fertile hillside land which is mainly too steep for cultivation. A number of these varieties have been taken to northern California where they are proving highly successful.
In the Willamette Valley of Oregon, two species are represented with about equal frequency. These are the native chestnut from the eastern states and that from Japan. Neither has performed in such a way as to be particularly encouraging. The former has not been productive and the latter has produced nuts of quality so inferior as to prejudice the planters against the entire genus. It is a difficult matter, therefore, to induce prospective planters in that section to consider any species of chestnut.
In the East, it is well known that the native species does not come into bearing until 12 or 15 years of age at best, and that to induce pollination and a set of nuts, it is necessary to inter-plant a number of varieties together. Had groups of varieties of American or European origin been planted on the Coast, instead of single trees of the former or varieties from Asia, it is not improbable that the present attitude toward the chestnut in the Pacific Northwest would have been quite different.
The work of the late Dr. Van Fleet, in hybridizing various chestnut species and in testing out Chinese and Japanese species with a view to determining their value as nut producers and their resistance to the bark disease, is familiar to most members of the Northern Nut Growers' Association. Since the death of Dr. Van Fleet, the work has been taken over by other hands in the Bureau of Plant Industry; but apparently, all of the hybrids now growing in the vicinity of Washington, D. C., are destined to succumb to blight. At present, practically every tree of the Chinese chestnut Castanea molissima, planted by Dr. Van Fleet at Bell Station, Maryland, where his work was mainly centered, likewise shows large blight cankers. But despite the gravity of the infections, it does not appear wholly improbable that many of these trees can be preserved. However, the wisdom of continuing propagation of the Japanese species is very doubtful, as the quality of nuts is usually of low order. Chestnut trees from China are generally light producers; but out of the total of several hundred at Bell, several this year have borne good crops. The flavor of the nuts is sometimes sweet, but oftener, otherwise; yet the average is superior to that of the Japanese chestnuts produced in the same orchard. Fortunately, it happens that the nuts from some of the trees of Chinese species which have been most prolific during the past season, have proved to be of high quality, comparing favorably in this respect with the native sweet chestnut. In size, the Chinese chestnuts average much above those of the American species, and while perhaps a shade smaller than those from Europe, they are of a size and quality which should readily appeal to market demands.
An early planting of Chinese chestnut trees at Lancaster, Pa., put out by Mr. J. F. Jones, Vice-President of the Northern Nut Growers' Association, proved so susceptible to blight that all were subsequently destroyed. On the other hand, not infrequent reports are reaching the Federal Department of Agriculture of instances in which the species is shown to be highly resistant, even when grown within blight-affected districts. Secretary Deming is one of those from whom reports of this kind have been received. His planting, consisting of 12 trees put out in 1915 near Georgetown, Conn., has recently borne some nuts. Other cases, some reporting one way and others the other, might be cited; but let it suffice to say that the chestnut industry, although temporarily set back seriously, is not necessarily doomed.
C. A. Reed, Chairman
While no new names of varieties appear to need consideration at this time, it may be well for the Association to refresh its memory regarding a few of the outstanding rules of the standard code of nomenclature by which the Society is guided in the recognition of names. In common with practically all other leading horticultural organizations of the country, including the National Pecan Growers' Association of the South, the Northern Nut Growers' Association follows the code of nomenclature of the American Pomological Society. Some of the provisions of this code are substantially as follows:
1. A name shall consist, preferably, of but one word, although under specified circumstances, two words may be permitted.
2. In selecting a name, "The paramount right of the originator, discoverer or introducer of a new variety within the limitations of this code, is recognized and established."
3. A name shall be recognized as fixed and shall have the right of priority over any others subsequently applied, after having appeared in print in such a way as to be definitely tied to a variety, or established.
These references call attention to the fact that the code does not define the meaning of the term "variety," and as it does not appear that a clear cut definition has appeared elsewhere in recent literature, in modern application, it may be well to state how it is being interpreted by this committee.
In horticultural practice a plant is not regarded as acquiring varietal status until it becomes distinctive among seedlings, because of superiority of product, unusual history, or other similar reason. Few tree varieties are recognized as such until after having been propagated by at least one asexual method, such as budding, grafting, layering or dividing.
The Committee calls special attention to a recent report on nomenclature, appearing in a bound volume of 546 pages, under the title "Standardized Plant Names." This report was prepared and published by the American Joint Committee on Nomenclature, which was duly appointed by the leading horticultural societies of the country. It represents the latest authority on matters of horticultural nomenclature, and is indorsed by the leading horticultural authorities of the present time. Of immediate interest to this Association is the fact that Hicoria replaces Carya as being the proper generic name of the hickory group.
Willard G. Bixby, Baldwin, N. Y.
For several years the association has been advocating the planting of experimental nut orchards, and ever since I heard of this suggestion I have been desirous of having one and being able to contribute information to our knowledge of nut growing. Therefore since 1917 I have been assembling at Baldwin material which I hoped would aid in this. At the Rochester meeting some of the results were noted, and this year, I trust, something presented will prove of interest.
CHESTNUTS—Last year I expressed the belief that by carefully watching chestnut trees and cutting out the blight as soon as it appeared it should be possible to grow and fruit almost any variety in the blight area. This I have done with every variety that I have, but that is about all, apparently, that it is possible to do, for nearly all of my trees have been badly attacked by the blight at the crown; that is at the junction of the root and trunk, and to cut out the blight means to cut down the tree. The most resistant variety noticed so far is the Boone, which has some Japanese chestnut parentage, but probably the Boone trees will not last over a year longer.
Apparently it is going to be necessary to get some resistant stock and do the grafting high enough to prevent fatal attack of the blight at the crown. Mr. P. W. Wang sent some Chinese chestnuts in the fall of 1921, and I have now several hundred seedlings of what I suppose are Castanea mollissima, of which I plan to grow a number to rather large size, set them out where the next planting of chestnut trees is to stand, and graft the branches to fine varieties. It will take at least two or three years, however, before this can be done.
HAZELS—For some four years I have been assembling, for hybridizing purposes, selected American hazels from various sections of the United States as well as the various European cultivated varieties that gave promise of being hardy. This year both blossomed rather freely, but the only variety of which I had enough pollen to work with was the Italian Red. The staminate flowers were picked from some six or eight American hazels which were blooming well and the pistillate flowers were pollinated with Italian Red pollen, in the hope that some hybrid nuts would result. Although the pollination was repeated twice I was much disappointed to find only an occasional nut as a result.
It is to be said in this connection, however, that there were practically no nuts on these American hazels which had not been pollinated with strange pollen; so the lack of nuts could not be laid to the artificial treatment given the flowers of those plants where it had been planned to make hybrids. Apparently it was due to climatic conditions that nuts were almost lacking on all hazels here this year; but I do not recall any severe cold spells when the hazels were in flower. Still, on one or two branches which I had tagged, as being particularly full of pistillate flowers, there were noticed an almost equal number of dead pistillate flowers a little later. It is seemingly going to be well to carefully study the development of the hazel flowers into nuts. They grow differently from the walnuts and the hickories. The hazel flowers apparently, after being fertilized, develop into stems on which the existence of nuts escapes the attention, at least of the casual observer, until about August, while the nuts on the walnuts and the hickories even though small at first, are plainly visible from the time they are formed by fertilized flowers until they are matured.
HICKORIES—The bearing age of the transplanted hickory so far has been almost an unknown quantity, and what we did know has been such that the association has hesitated to say much about planting hickories, its recommendations on the hickory being confined to that of topworking existing hickories. These are known to begin bearing soon after topworking, records of bearing in two or three years not being unusual.
On transplanted hickories, however, about all the information of which I know is as follows: The late Mr. J. W. Kerr, of Denton, Md., many years ago bought a number of shagbark hickories from a nursery, set them out and noted that the time that elapsed before they bore was about 25 years. Mr. Rush's Weiker tree, which bore in 11 years after being set out, cut down this time materially.
A Kentucky hickory on my place set out in the fall of 1917, flowered this year, but I had no pollen with which to fertilize the blossoms, and the nutlets dropped off. A young shagbark seedling set in its present location in the fall of 1919 and grafted to Barnes this spring, also set a nut, but this dropped off like those on the Kentucky and apparently for the same reason. It would certainly seem as if under favorable conditions, the transplanted hickory is not going to be anywhere near as slow as feared in coming into bearing.
WALNUTS—A Royal and a Paradox walnut each supposed to be grafted trees with scions from Burbank's original trees, bloomed this year, and the Royal has a number of nuts on it. The Paradox has been here a very much shorter time, not over two or three years; so perhaps it is too soon to be expecting nuts. The Paradox is said to be a very shy bearer, setting nuts only occasionally, and then but few; still, one of my Paradox trees which is not over three feet high, blossomed full. It would seem as if it might pay to study this tree and see if the sterility or fancied sterility of this tree could not be overcome by seeing that proper pollen is at hand at the right time. A Cording walnut, a hybrid between the English walnut and the Japan walnut not quite 3 feet high, is bearing a nut this year.
Grafting—Perhaps the most interesting thing to be related is the result of attempts to determine the species of hickories best suited as stock for the fine varieties of hickories that we have. In preparation for this and through the kindness of Mr. Henry Hicks of Westbury, L. I., over 100 each of hickory trees of several species were obtained and set out in the fall of 1919. They were in fine condition for grafting this spring. There are some fifteen species of hickories native in the United States. The fine varieties of hickories that we have which are generally supposed to be largely shagbarks may prove to be much better adapted for grafting on some stocks than on others. A knowledge of this will prove to be of great value in top working. The grafting was done by Dr. Deming, on May 29, 30,31 and June 1 of this year, 31 grafts being set on shagbark stock, 52 on mockernut, 53 on pignut, 47 on pecan and 91 on bitternut, a total of 274. There were also 343 walnut grafts set on walnuts of four species. The results of this work are summarized in the tables following:
Stocks, Number of Grafts and Per Cent of Catches
Bitternut Mockernut[1] Pecan Pignut Shagbark Total
Variety No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Barnes, scions
Dr. Deming's trees 3 100.0 3 100.0 3 100.0 3 100.0 6 100.0 18 100.0
Gobble, scions
Dr. Deming's trees 1 100.0 1 100.0 1 100.0 1 100.0 1 0.0 5 80.0
Griffin, scions
Dr. Deming's trees 1 100.0 1 0.0 1 0.0 1 100.0 1 100.0 5 60.0
Hales, scions
W. G. Bixby's trees 5 100.0 5 60.0 5 80.0 4 25.0 19 68.4
Kirtland, scions
Dr. Deming's trees 3 66.7 3 33.3 3 66.7 3 66.7 12 58.3
Laney, scions
Dr. Deming's trees 6 66.7 6 66.7
Long Beach, scions
Parent Tree 3 33.3 3 66.7 4 50.0 4 25.0 3 100.0 17 53.0
Siers, scions
Dr. Deming's trees 5 100.0 5 100.0
Stanley, scions
Dr. Deming's trees 3 66.7 3 66.7 3 66.7 9 66.7
Taylor, scions
Dr. Deming's trees 4 75.0 5 60.0 5 80.0 3 100.0 17 86.5
Total 34 80.8 24 60.8 22 68.1 22 72.9 11 75.0 113 74.0
[Footnote 1: The mockernuts were larger than any other hickories grafted excepting some bitternuts referred to in the next footnote. They were grafted mostly on branches.]
Stocks, Number of Grafts and Per Cent of Catches
Bitternut Mockernut[2] Pecan Pignut Shagbark Total
Variety No. % No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Brooks, scions from parent tree,
poor condition 5 40.0 5 0.0 5 20.0 5 40.0 20 20.0
Clark, scions from parent tree,
poor condition 5 40.0 5 0.0 5 20.0 5 40.0 5 20.0 25 20.0
[3]Fairbanks, scions from
parent tree (?), dry but
otherwise good 27 57.8 27 57.8
Kentucky, from parent tree,
poor condition 5 20.0 3 33.3 5 80.0 5 80.0 5 80.0 23 60.8
Manahan, scions from parent
tree, poor condition 5 20.0 5 0.0 5 20.0 6 33.3 5 20.0 26 24.6
Vest, scions from parent tree,
poor condition 5 20.0 5 0.0 5 40.0 5 60.0 5 20.0 25 20.8
Weiker, scions from parent
tree 5 20.0 5 0.0 5 60.0 15 26.8
— —— — —- — —— — —— — —— —- ——
Total 57 45.0 28 5.5 25 36.0 31 45.6 20 35.0 161 32.9
[Footnote 2: The mockernuts were larger than any other hickories grafted excepting some bitternuts referred to in the next footnote. They were grafted mostly on branches.]
[Footnote 3: Of these scions 5 were set in branches on two trees 1-1/4 or so in diameter and showed 100% catches; balance were set in the top on small trees 1/2 diameter or less, and showed 54.5% catches.]
Stocks, Number of Grafts and Per Cent of Catches
Black Walnut Butternut Japan Walnut Persian Walnut
Variety No. % No. % No. % No. %
Adams Black Walnut, scions
parent tree 13 15.4
Alley Black Walnut, scions
parent tree 9 0.0
O'Connor Hybrid Walnut, Persian
Walnut and Black Walnut (?)
scions parent tree 9 22.2
—- ——
31 12.9
Ohio Black Walnut, scions W. G.
Bixby's trees 17 64.7
McCoy Black Walnut, scions W. G.
Bixby's trees 9 77.0
Stabler Black Walnut, scions some
W. G. Bixby's trees, and some Dr.
Deming's trees 85 51.2
[4]Ten Eyck Black Walnut, scions
W. G. Bixby's trees 32 97.0
Thomas Black Walnut, scions W.
G. Bixby's trees 23 100.0
Wasson Black Walnut, scions W.
G. Bixby's trees 8 75.0
—- ——
174 69.5
Persian Walnuts 4 varieties, scions
about 2-3 from parent trees, all
of which were quite vigorous
growers 46 0.0
Aiken Butternut, scions W. G.
Bixby's trees 39 38.5
Lancaster Heartnut, scions W. G.
Bixby's trees 53 3.8
[Footnote 4: One scion was overlooked in tying and waxing, otherwise apparently we would have had 100% catches.]
* * * * *
In the above two groups of hickories the one where scions were cut from young, rapidly growing trees, contrasts unmistakably with those where scions were cut from old bearing trees. The same is shown in the table of black walnut grafts, where the Alley, Adams, and O'Connor scions were cut from old bearing trees, and the others from young, rapidly growing trees.
The poor success with the heartnuts is quite in line with previous attempts at propagating this species by grafting. Results shown here with the butternut are deemed reasonably satisfactory, in view of the well known difficulty of grafting this species. It should be noted here that, in the case of every graft that took and grew, it was the small buds that were successful, not the large ones. The total lack of success with the Persian walnut is inexplicable to the writer, but he knows of no previous attempts to graft Persian walnut on Persian walnut root.
Black walnuts show a very high percentage of catches, in the case of the Thomas and Ten Eyck varieties 100%, but in the case of the Stabler this is reduced to 51.2%. I would say in this connection that neither of my two Stabler trees are vigorous growers, and so the trees grafted with scions from these are really cases where we have not been using scions from vigorous growing trees, and we know that this does not give a high percentage of catches.
The proper species to be used as a stock for the various varieties of hickories has not been shown conclusively for the number of grafts of each kind set was too few to be conclusive, and these experiments should be repeated. In the case of most of these varieties where results are poor, it was particularly noted when the grafts were set that the scions were in poor condition, a number of scions being thrown away because the cambium layer was dead. It is to be hoped that a species will be found to which will be well adapted the Vest hickory, which the writer regards, everything considered, as the best hickory that we have. Seemingly the pecan is the stock that gets the greatest number of catches; but the difficulty the writer has had in making Vest hickories on pecan root live, leads him to question as to whether another stock might not prove better. Another thing disappointing so far is in the seeming poorness of the mockernut as a stock. Over quite a large section of the United States the mockernut is the prevailing hickory, and in that section the mockernut will be most generally available for top working; moreover it will grow well in sandy soils where the shagbark is not found. In Petersburg, Va., the writer has seen it seemingly outgrow the black walnut.
The adaptability of the Barnes hickory on all stocks is notable, for it is the only one of the 10 fine hickories tested in the 1919 contest, of which this is true. If these grafts continue to flourish, and especially if future experiments check the results this year, the Barnes will have a peculiar value for top working. It is one of our best hickories, and, apparently is our surest variety for top working.
MR. CLOSE: I would suggest that we extend our thanks to the Smithsonian
Institute for the use of this room for the meeting.
THE PRESIDENT: Will you vote for that? (Motion voted upon favorably). I believe then, that brings to a close the Fourteenth Annual Convention, to meet in New York for the Fifteenth Convention in 1924, on September 3,4 and 5.
This meeting is now adjourned.
Time—2:30 p. m.
* * * * *
Notes of this convention by Mrs. B. W. Gahn, U. S. Dept. of Agr.,
Washington, D. C.