Pes
a es

a
j HORT.

Piste
Mae Notes

re
ce SNe}
y

EE OFM.

a
=
a=
—

et
Pacers)
Cao
vu pte

Ne
Sa

eats

a
wy
LS

nas a

Has
y

ms

THOMAS HUBBARD MC HATTON

THESIS FOR DEGR

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Petia a a att eR ards ol ne ett ee
meiaiacitiataelen Ti pS te Bead ESR aon FRED AP icici i A ae hi ; .

 
  
( Ree -~fra dy

 
THE PEACH INDUSTRY
of

GEORGIA

A

THESIS
by

Thomas Eubbard MoHatton
of the Class of 1907
PRESENTED
to
THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
of

THE MICHIGAN AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE

for

THE DEGREE
of
MASTER OF HORTICULTURE

June 1921
THESIS
Int reduction------------------------------ Page- 1
History ----------------------------------- - 3
Distribution of the Industry-------------- | - 6
Piantings, Yields and Returns------------- -~ 8
Varieties--------------------------------- ~ ill
Seils-—---------,- ----~---------+-~---+---.-- ~ 14
Trees and Planting--~---------------------- - 16
Cultivation, Orepping & Cover Crepping---- - 18
Fertilization--------- ee we = ee ee ee - 30
Pruning and Thinning---------------------- -~ 24
Insgeoc t@ --- --- -- -=- —- -~ - - - =~ -- ~~ --- +--+ --- == - 26
Diseases x----------------- ---------------a - 29
Sprays ark Spraying------------~ ma moe ae - 31.
Picking and Packing----------------------- - 35
Car Loading and Shipp ing------------------ ~ 39
The Georgia Fruit Exohange------ Swen ae ~ 40
The Ecenomic Status ef the Industry--~----- - 45
The Estimated Value of a Peach ----------- - 49
- |
PLATES
No. 1. A Fort Valley Orchard in Bleon--~--- -~ 1
" 2. Map of State-------~---------------- - 6
* 3. A North Georgia Orchard------------ - 9
" 4. A Well Cared-for Free-------------- - 16
" 5. Overloaded but a Good Tree--------- - 18
" 6. A Well Cultivated Orchard---------- - 19
: Winter Cover of Small Grains- Notice
Pruning of Trees —----~----------~--

" 7. Peas for Summer Cover Crop--------- - 21
" 8. Fertilizing a Young Tree----------- - 23
" 9. A Low~headed Tree is Easy to Pick-- ~ 26
rf 10. A Spray Scene----~-----------—------- - 28
" 11. A Fort Valley Picking Gang---------~ - 34
® 18. Unleading at Packing House--------- - 368
e 43.4 Packing Hou s@----=- -------------- - - 38
*" 14. Packing Peaches-------------------- «~ 39
* 15. Leading into the Car--------------- ~ 41
" 16. A Part. of Georgia's Peach Army----- ~ 45
® 17. Easily worth $300.00 per Acre-~---- - 49

402594
 

ahs

 

 

Nei. AFeRT ALLEY PEACH QReHARD IN BLOM,
INTRODUCTION

The Georgia Peach Industry is a vast and ex-
tensive business; so great, in fact, that to write a
complete commentary thereon is practically impossible.
The peach has been intimately connected with the rise
and fall of many sections of the state; the names and
experiences of the men of national and local importance
who have been interested in the game Would in themselves
fan quite a volume. The stories of varieties and the
histories of the problems, scientific, practical and fi-
nancial, that have been met and overcome Would all make
interesting reading, but are considered without the pro-
vince of this paper.

The information presented has been collected
from various sources. A great deal of it comes from per-
sonal observation and experience, some from letters of
growers, some from books of references and articles and
some from the Reports of the Georgia Fruit Exchange and
its various and numerous personel. The illustrations
have been collected from time to time; some of them have
been used before in other papers by the writer, others
have been used by their owners in advertising matter and
in articles and. some of them are new.

It gives the writer partioular pleasure to ex-
press appreciation and thanks to all of those numerous
individuals who have, whether knowingly or not, contri-
buted to the making of this paper. Especially are thanke
-2—

given to those who have responded gladly when directly
asked for their pictures, information and experience.

It is not the intention of the author to go
into any lengthy dissertation on the history or the
evolutionary development of the Georgia Peach Industry,
but simply to place a milestone from Which progress may
be reckoned. From small beginnings the peach business
now stands as a monument to the sagacity and foresight~
edness of its founders; it is, however, at this time
going through a serious period of its existence. Hot
only must it withstand the conditions of depression
following the crazy inflation after the Great War, but
it must also combat at the same time the acoumilated
evils of several years of most unfavorable climatic con-
ditions. Should the growers succeed in going through
1921 with a safe margin of profit, the expansion of the
industry within the state will be unprecedented, but
should the season of 1931 be a failure, then the indus-
try will find itself in the hands of those who can take
their losses without losing their faith in the glory of
the Georgia peach, those who are willing to stop and
build again.

This paper is Simply an exposition of condi-
tions as they exist with just enough history and tech-
nical information to establish oertain points. It is
by no means a full and comprehensive commentary on the

Georgia Peach Industry.
 

— oe

-———_

ey

—d
HISTORY

The introduction of the peach, Prunus persica,
into the various colonies throughout the new world was
unquestionably the work of the early settlers. Gould,
in his "Peach Growing", attributes the introduction of
the peach into Georgia to Oglethorpe and his band of
Colonists. It is interesting to note, however, that
William Bartram, in his "Travels through North America",
which was published in 1791, first mentions the peach

as one of the fruits of the country when he visited
S@int Marys, a small town on the border line between
Georgia and Florida. In his travels through the moun-
tainous sections of North Georgia, North and South Caro-
lina he does not mention the peach, and We may readily
suppose that a man of his keen observation and loyalty
to truth would certainly have listed this fruit had it
been commonly produced.

P. J. Berckmans, the Dean of Georgia Hortiocul-
turists, attributed the introduction of the peach into
Georgia mainly to the Spaniards, for many of the old
original Indian seedlings seem to belong to the Spanish
race of peaches.

Mr. Berckman's observations coincide with those
of William Bartram, for the latter author mentions the
peach mainly in the districts inhabitated by the Semi-
noles, which nation of Indians were in league with the
Spaniards. He fails to note much concerning the peach
~4,

in the territory of the Creekg and Cherokees, which na-
tions of Indians Were in league with the English and
antagonistic to the Seminole nation.

The first real effort to obtain a superior
peach for Georgia and the South Was made by P. J. Berok-
mans when he intorduced the Honey into his nurseries
near Augusta. The seed of this peach Was sent original-
ly to Charles Downing. He feared the rigors of his na-
tive olimate and forwarded them to Mr. Henry Lyons of
Columbia, South Carolina. Mr. Lyons fruited them in
1856. <A few were propagated at Fruitland Nurseries by
Berckmans in 1857 and Berckmans purchased the trees with
full rights from Lyons in 1858. The Honey did not prove
adapted to Georgia, but this variety with many of its
Close kin are still grown in Florida. It is such an
early bloomer that in Georgia it suffers from frost
practically every year.

Between 1870 and 1875 several early varieties,
like the Alexander, were introduced. In 1885 P. J.
Berckmans introduced the Peen-to, but, like the Honey,
this did not prove adapted to the state. During the
middle seventies Mr. Samuel H. Rumph of Marshallville
introduced the Elberta, and about the same time the
Belle made its appearance. From then on new varieties
of peaches Were constantly appearing. Names become so
mixed that to get a complete list of the peaches having
been grown in Georgia is impossible. It is also next

to impossible to obtain definite information on the

 
~5 =

number of varieties having originated within the state.
A list made in 1910 had from twenty-five to thirty va-
rieties and many of these are not now cultivated.

The firet definite date of peaches being ship-
ped from Georgia is found in the notes of P. J. Berck-
mans. The earliest shipments were made in 1858 to the
city of New York. Many varieties Were shipped; the
boxes Were ungraded and the varieties mixed in the con-
tainers. The average price in New York at that time
was $5.00 per bushel. The fruit was shipped to Charles-
ton from Augusta, packed in small refrigerators and
Carried by steamer to New York. Some shipments of
seventy-five bushels netted $400.00 that year, but
Berckmans states the next shipment was a dead loss. The
variety, Columbia, Which is not now grown in the state
seemed to stand the shipment best.

The development of the refrigerator car made
the present huge commercial peach industry of Georgia
possible. Also the origin of the Elberta and other va-
rieties of shipping peaches aided in the development.
The first commercial season Was in 1889. Such men as
Samuel H. Rumph of Marshallville and J. H. Hale of Fort
Valley were the founders and first large commercial
operators. In 1898, just ten years after the first
commercial shipments, 3,500 car loads were shipped out
of Georgia, or something more than a million bushels.
The industry has inoreased by leaps and bounds. There

have, of course, been fluctuations, notably the appear-
 
  
    
   
     

Map
of
Georgia

CARROLL

BULLOCH

 
  
    
  
  
  

re

~te APPuNG

 

    
 
  
 
   

ouuenentr @AcDN

 
   

 

woRtH

corree

Ya

CHANLTON

Noe.
6

ance of the San José scale, which insect killed mil-
lions of trees before methods of control were found.
Recovering from that, the industry suffered a most se-
vere set back in 1908 when a crop of 8,000 car loads
was produced and the marketing end of the game fell
down under the pressure. Millions of trees were dug
up and destroyed following this orop, but out of the
maelstrom there arose the Georgia Fruit Exchange. At
the present time the industry is going through another
serious condition, due to the ravages of the curoulio
and brown rot whioh troubles have been so serious for
the past two years that, unless better methods are found
and applied, the destruction of millions more of peach

trees seems inevitable.
THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE INDUSTRY

The original commeroial plantings in Georgia
clustered about Marshallville in Macon County and Fort
Valley in Houston County. There was also a large center
around Cuthbert in Randolph County, in the middle south-
western section of the state. The industry in Randolph
Was wiped out soon after the advent of the San José soale.
The growers in the central and main peach regions over-
came the scale and survived. In the early days extensive
Plantings were made in the counties immediately surround-
ing and south of Houston and Macon.

A jump was then made into the northwestern

section of Georgia from Marietta in Cobb County north to
<7 =

the Tennessee line near Chattanooga. A large industry
developed in this particular region but, through lack
of proper production methods and because of poor mar-
keting, the northwestern section has almost disappeared.
In the Fort Valley section, extending grad-
ually north of the city of Macon, developments took
place along the railroads radiating out of the city.
The plantings along the Central of Georgia Railroad
toward Forsyth and Griffin did not mature nor take place
as rapidly, nor have they survived as well as plantings
along another branch of the Central Railroad, from Macon
to Gray and Monticello. There are other developments
in various directions from Macon, but none of them have
yet attained much importance.

One of the newest centers is found in Haber-
sham County in the northeastern section of the state,
the main plantings being around Cornelia. This section
also extends into Hall and Bank Counties.

The Georgia State Horticultural Society sub-
divides Georgia into four horticultural regions. These
regions are shown on the accompanying map. The peach
sections of Georgia are likewise shown on the map. fhe
northern seotion is in no manner as large as the central
section. There are other developments taking place that
bid fair to increase rapidly now that the farmers are
looking for another money crop. The gection around
Randolph County is again becoming prominent. The north-

Western region is being resuscitated and brought again
~8~

into profitable bearing.

A letter in 1919 from one of the prominent
peach men in the state says, "One of the great lessons
from this year's crop is that no longer can the Fort Val-
ley section consider itself the only peach producing re-
gion within the state, for the crop of 1919 has demonstra-—
ted that peaches are grown commercially in Georgia from
the Florida line to the mountains, and from the Chatta-
hoochee River almost to the sea". The student of the
peach game, however, must still recognise that the Fort
Valley-Marshallville section, shipping more than half the

peaches, is really the home of the commercial Georgia peach.
PLANTINGS, YIELDS AND RETURNS

At the present time Georgia leads the other
eleven southern states, if West Virginia is included as
such, in the production of peaches. The estimated value
of the southern fruit crop Was approximately $30,000,000
in 1920. The total crop of the whole south is just about
equal to the crop of California, but in 1919 when a great
demand for fresh fruit Was developed, California shipped
about 8,000 carloads or a little more fresh fruit than Was
shipped from Georgia the same season.

The census of 1910 gave Georgia 10,609,119
bearing peach trees with a production of 3,555,499 bushels.
This is one quarter of a bushel per bearing tree. The
census figures for 1920 are not yet available. From the
Year Books of the United States Department of Agriculture
‘WHYHOYO YWIDHO") HLUEN Y pon

 

 

 
~9~

and Reports of the Georgia Fruit Exchange the following
statistics are obtained:

 

Ye : Pr 1
: 3
1916 : 3,510,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The estimated figures for bearing trees in 1919
were 18,000,000, or an average yield for that year, in ocon-
mercial peaches, of .33 bushels. The record yield of
peaches in Georgia is seven carloads of 500 crates each
from five acres. This crop was produced and handled by
Mr. E. J. Willingham and was grown in the early stages
of the peach game. An exceedingly good crop is from two
to three crates per tree. The well cared for commercial

orchards will produce annually a crate per tree. This
7?
~10-

“May be considered a profitable crop. It must be under-
stood that the six basket crate that is shipped from
Georgia carries only three-fourths of a bushel of peaches.

The returns from a peach orchard are problen-
atical, much more so than with other orops. The well
Gared for planting can reasonably be expected to make a
return of $100.00 net per acre per year. During the
years of 1916-17-18 profits were enormous, even from
large orchards, the dividends being at the rate of from
five to ten percent on @ valuation of $1,000 per acre.
The uncared for and neglected orchard, on the other hand,
is an expense to its owner. The men who stuck to the
peach business through losses and frosts, through poor
Seasons and good, have practically all made money, many
of them having accumulated large fortunes.

It is interesting to note that the leading
fruit spirits around Fort Valley, in the early days of
the peach boom, were men from Ohio, Connectiout and other
states north of the Ohio River. There is today only one
large peach grower in Fort Valley who came there origi-
nally to go into the peach business. All of the enor=
mous orchards and huge plantings that were once estab-
lished with out-of-the-state capital are now owned by
local men. The boom and speculating spirit that is so
often seen in western fruit communities does not exist
in the Georgia peach sections. Practically none of the
orchards are for gale. They are owned and managed by
men who make the growing of peaches their primary busi-

ness.
VARIETIES

Within the forty odd years since the discovery
of the Elberta there have been many varieties tried and
tested by the growers. Some of these have come in, carry-
ing with them all the promise of a great success: many of
them have disappeared and are no longer to be found with-
in the orchards of the state. It is easy to realize that
varieties, to be of commercial importance, must be those
that can carry Well, for it is 1,000 miles or more to the
centers of consumption from the Georgia peach areas.

To give some idea of the distribution of va-
rieties, the Fort Valley section in 1919 shipped 1,000
Carloads of Mayflower, Arp Beauty, Uneeda and other in=
Cidental early sorts. There were 600 carloads of Carmen
shipped from that immediate vicinity, 1,300 carloads of
Hiley, 1,800 carloads of Belle and 3,600 carloads of £1l-
berta. It is the concensus of opinion that the early
fruit game is being overdone, and by this is meant the
production of varieties that move before the Carmen. The
biggest peach grower in Georgia says that there are only
four varieties to grow and he names the Carmen, which he
considers the best early peach, to be followed by the
Hiley then the Belle and the season to end with the El-
berta.

The main early peaches are the Mayflower, the
Uneeda, the Arp Beauty and the Early Rose; the Greensboro,
which at one time Was very prominent, is disappearing

as it does not ripen evenly.
-12~

The distribution of varieties can well be seen
from the answers to an inquiry forwarded to growers in
Various digtricts.

A grower from Cohutta, Georgia, which is within a few
miles of the Tennessee-Georgia line, states that his plant-
ings are 80 percent Elberta as it is the main market va-
riety. He has about 10 percent of early varieties of
Greensboro, Carmen and Hiley and 10 percent of late varie-
ties as Solway, Smock and Heath. These latter are plant-
ed to extend the season and the looal supply. He states
tHat he makes practically no profit on anything except
the Elberta.

A Baldwin, Georgia, grower, in the Northeastern section,
says that he has 15,000 Elberta trees and 3,000 Belles.

Another letter from the same locality shows an orchard
of 21,000 trees, all Elberta, with a normal crop of forty
carloads.

A reply from a grower at Bradley, Georgia, north of Ma-
con states that he has 3,500 Carmen, 4,000 Hiley, 9,000
Belle and 6,500 Elberta.

Another grower from the same place has 1,000 Arp Beauty,
3,500 Carmen, 1,500 Hiley, 3,500 Belle and 3,000 Elberta.

Another Bradley man has 2,500 Elberta, 3,500 Belle, 3,500
Hiley, 3,400 Arp Beauty, 2,500 Carmen and 32,200 Mayflower.

And likewise another one has an orchard of 1,000 Carmen,
1,000 Belle, 3,000 Hiley, 32,000 Elberta, 1,000 Arp Beauty,
1,250 Uneeda and 500 Solway.

While still another says he has 32,500 trees divided as
follows: Oarmen 35,000, Hiley 4,000, Belle 9,000 and El~

A reply from an owner at Gray, Georgia, was that he
nad 4,000 Carmen, 5,000 Hiley, 4,000 Belle and 4,000
needa.

Another grower in the same locality has 32,500 Belle,
2,500 Cargen, 3,000 Uneeda and 1,500 Arp Beauty.

It oan be seen that. the growers in and around Bradley
and Gray are going pretty heavily to the early fruit.

A grower at Haddock, Georgia, which is near Macon, has
7,000 Elberta, 3,700 Carmen, 3,000 Belle, 4,000 Arp
Beauty and 750 Mayflower.

Replies from growers in Fort Valley show that one gen-
-13—

tleman who has 57,000 peach trees has his varieties di-
vided as follows: 7,000 Mayflower, 7,000 Red Beauty,
7,000 Uneeda, 4,000 Arp Beauty, 5,000 Carmen, 3,000 Wad-
dell (this variety ripens practically with the Carmen),
14,000 Hiley, 5,000 Belle and 8,000 Elberta. A great
many of these trees are young and it is expected that
when the large number of early varieties come into bear-
ing, this grower will take them up and replace with some-
thing which ripens with or later than the Carmen. He
states further in his letter that his season begins with
the Mayflower, which ripens with them from the fifteenth
to the twentieth of May, and that the Fort Valley season
ends with the finishing of the Elberta something after
the fourth of July.

Another Fort Valley grower divides his 10,000 trees
into the following varieties: 500 Mayflower, 5,000 Queen
of Dixie, 2,000 Arp Beauty, 1,500 Belle and 1,000 Elberta.

Another 15,000 acre orchard is divided as follows:
4,000 Belle, 3,000 Hiley and 8,000 Elberta.

Mr. R. A. Hiley of Fort Valley in answering the inquiry,
states that his 6,000 trees are divided into 2,000 Hiley,
3,000 Uneeda and 3,000 Early Rose. Hie letter is of in-
terest as it contains the following information regarding
the origin of the Hiley: "The Hiley Belle or Hiley was
produced from a seedling planted by us about 1893 or 1894.
It being one tree out of about one hundred trees that we
expurimented with, but decided that the others were worth-
less. We planted seed from our orchard of Elberta, Belle,

Tillotson and Early Crawford which we had at that time,
and we believe the parent varieties were the Belle of

Georgia and the Tillotson, as it shows distinct kinship

to these varieties, having the size and flesh of the

ae of Georgia and the beautiful rich color of the Til-
tson".

Another Fort Valley grower has 31,000 trees: 7 percent
Greensboro, 20 percent Uneeda, 8 percent Carmen, 55 per-
cent Hiley and 30 percent Elberta.

Another grower has 4,000 Hiley, 4,000 Elberta and
3,060 Belle.

A grower from Winchester, just south of Fort Valley, has
the following distribution of varieties: Red Bird 3,000,
Gordon 3,000, Carmen 8,000, Hiley 8,000, Belle 10,000
and Elberta 9,000.

The Berokmans Brothers, sons of P. J. Berckmans, in
their orchards at Mayfield, Georgia, located east of Ma-
con on the Georgia Railroad and in the southwestern sec-
tion of Warren County, had the following arrangement of
Varieties a few years ago: Carmen 4,000, Hiley 8,000,

Belle 9,000, Elberta 11,000 and Bracket 350.
The above statistics on varieties may be ac-
cepted as typifying the general distribution through-
out the state. The main pivotal varieties, around which
the Georgia industry is now developed, are the Carmen,
Hiley, Belle and Elberta. Late peaches are little grown
because the Warm and moiet summer climate requires con-
etant attention to spraying and renders the late crop
practically worthless except for local consumption.

All of the growers realize that no peach going on the
market prior to the Carmen ig right up to the standard
in quality and the recent great development in early
plantings has been brought about through large profits
having been made by a few growers, whom We may say,
speculated in early fruit. It is well recognized, at
this time, that the early fruit business has been over-
done, and those who are familiar with the industry do
not expect the early peaoh to develope beyond its pres-
ent state. The larger and more up-to-date growers are
actually discouraging the further planting of these

earlier maturing sorts.
SOILS

Practically all soils in Georgia seem to be
well adapted to the production of peaches. The Orange-
burg olays and olay loams around Fort Valley were the
primary peach soils within the state. In the more
southern sections the Tifton sandy loams and Norfolk
sandy soils have been used for the production of peaches.
These lighter soils, however, are badly infested with
-15-

the nematode Worm and produce trees that are compara-
tively short lived. The Greenville clay loams and peb-
bly Greenville soils, which are found in some sections
of South Georgia, are also excellent peach lands.

Practically all of the peaches, north of Ma-
con, are set on the Cecil olay. This is a strong,
heavy, red clay loam and produces excellent trees and
fine fruit. This Cecil type of land might be said to
be the predominating 8011 in the Piedmont section;

Phases of the Cecil are also found in the lower sections
of the mountains.

There are certain soils around Cedartown, in
the northwestern section of the state, which run re-

‘ markably high in iron and at one time they were exten-
sively used for peach lands.

The longer lived trees are found on the Orange-
burg and Cecil soils; but, generally speaking, one does
not consider the life of a peach tree in Georgia ag long.
Some four or five years ago, there were removed some of
J. H. Hale's original plantings which were set thirteen
feet apart each Way. These were on the Orangeburg land
near Fort Valley and had been profitably bearing around
twenty years. The well cared for orchard in Georgia,
however, does not exceed ten or twelve years in length
of life; and when one takes all trees into consideration,
it is generally accepted that the average life of a peach

tree in this state is seven years, though, of course, the
better growers expect their trees to be profitable for

ten or twelve, after which time they are removed to be
‘Jaul Yes-gauyo-maM Y +on

 

i

Te ret

 

 
-~16-
followed, within a few years, by a new planting.
TREES AND PLANTING

The trees usually purchased by the Georgia
grower are June buds from a foot to eighteen inches
tall. Occasionally June budded trees of larger size
are used, provided the prices are attractive. The
Planting of one year peach trees is practically never
done.

Mr. J. H. Hale set his early orchards 13 x 13
feet. It was soon learned that this was too close and
for a long time the average distance was 16 x 16 feet.
This Was gradually increased to 16 x 18 and 18 x 18
feet. The approved distance now is 30 x 20 feet which
gives 108 trees to the acre, and there are some growers
who maintain that the larger growing varieties, like
the Elberta, can well be set at greater distances. The
advent of the tractor has had a tendency to increase
the distance of planting.

The general method of planting trees, where
the land is level, is to first plow the whole area.

The roWs are then laid off and checked with a one-horse
plowstock fitted with either a middle-buster or scooter
point. Following this a two-horse plow is used to open
a Water-furrow along the line of trees. The bottom of
this is sometimes broken with the scooter; where this
does not sufficiently deepen the furrow for the recep-
tion of the trees, it becomes necessary to inorease the

depth , at the check, through the use of a mattock.

 
17 —

There is one large grower, whose main plantings are on
the Ceoil clay lands, who prepares his land as above
mentioned. He then puts two negroes on parallel tree-
roWs With mattocks. These Walk from check to check
and deepen the furrow at the check. Following imme-
diately behind them is a man, with a bundle of trees,
who prunes the roots and drope a tree at each check.
Back of him are two other negroes who set the trees,
raking sufficient soil around their roots with the feet
to hold them upright. The final covering is done by
plowing a furrow, with a two-horse plow, to the trees.
Sometimes a pound of cottonseed meal, raw bone meal or
& fork full of well rotted manure is thrown about the
young trees before this furrow is plowed. The next
operation is to send a man down each row and let him
tramp in the tree and prune to a whip from eight in-~
ches to one foot high. It is then customary to plow
@ second furrow around each tree row. This grower
tells me that with a gang of six negroes and two plows
he can set 3,500 trees a day.

This method of setting by plows is followed
throughout the state, wherever the land is level enough
to permit it. In some of the Piedmont orchards and in
the foot-hill orchards, it becomes necessary to terrace
the land and to plant the trees by the ordinary method
of laying out the orchard and digging holes. This is,
of course, more expensive as it takes a good deal more

time and labor to set an orchard in this manner.
WaeveTHINO Lag *aaYL dook) Y oon

rn re

 

 
Naturally the plow methed of planting could
not be followed should the groWers use trees that were
one year old and larger. It is only feasible and suc-

cessful where gmall June budded trees are set.
CULTIVATION, CROPPING AND COVER CROPPING

For a great many years the cultivation of

Georgia peach orchards was conspicuous by its absence.
The young peach orchard wag planted to cotton for its
first three years of life and it is probably true that
the cotton received greater attention than the peaches.
Corn Was not considered a good intercrop for young or-
chards: this grew out of the fact that when corn Was
planted, the grower seemed to forget the presence of
the trees and they had the same chance for growth as a
corn stalk and usually developed in about the same Way,
therefore, corn grew in disfavor ag an orchard crop.
After the trees came into bearing, cultivation depended
entirely upon whether a crop Was set or not. When a
crop Was lost in an orchard, the trees were forgotten
until the next year. If, however, a crop happened to
be set the trees would be plowed and the soil stirred,
in some Way, once or twice before harvesting; after
the fruit Was gathered the orohard Was turned over to
the weeds.

| The past decade has geen a marked improve-
ment in handling Georgia orchards. In the more up-to-
date sections, the orchards are plowed in the fall or
during the winter; particularly is this the practice
 

WINTER CoVER oF SMALL GRAIN.
WELL-PRUNED [eW-HEARED -REES.
 

 

~]9—

where the land does not wash. In the hilly and Pied-
mont sections plowing is postponed until the last of
February or March. Following the plowing, the orchards
are then harrowed, and where tractors can be used, this
harrowing is most excellently done. In some of the or-
chards the tractor and the heavy diso harrow are used
instead of a plow; this is generally so in orchards on
the lighter phases of solls.

- Surface cultivation is practised until about
harvest time. In some orchards cultivation is stopped
before the harvest and the soil sowed to cow peas. In
others the sowing of cow peas is postponed until after
the harvesting of the crop. The usual time for plant-
ing cow peas ie during the first of June; and the va-
rieties of cow peas used are Iron and Brabham. These
are the most favored and practical ones as they are re~
sistant to the nematode, and the growers have learned
that every possible effort must be made to prevent these
little pests getting on the tree roots.

These peas are allowed to grow until fall.
Sometimes the matured peas are picked. It is very sel-
dom that e crop of hay is made in a peach orchard. On
the level lands these peas are plowed in during the
fall and winter.

The growers around Fort Valley have been grow-

ing peas so extensively in their orchards that they are

‘now suffering from an excessive leaf growth, which has

rendered spraying very difficult for the past few years.

They are now seriously considering the use of some other
~20~

cover crop in lieu of the peas. There are a few or-
chardists in the Piedmont regions who plant a crop of
peas for a summer catch orop, work these into the soil
and plant a small grain for a winter cover crop, this
emall grain crop being plowed in the following spring
before it heads. Such a system is followed, however,
only on hilly lands that wash and where fall and winter
plowing is not advisable.

After the first two or three years no money
crop is raised in the peach orchard by the up-to-date
grower. There are still scattering instances of men
who do not plow, oultivate, prune and care for their
orchards at all, but these men are becoming fewer an-
mally. The growers have even learned to give their
orchards just as good care during poor crop years as

during the season of heavy fruiting.
FERTILIZATION

The general practices of fertilization are
not yet established. The growere in the Fort Valley
section have applied a great deal of nitrogen, large
quantities of it being in the form of legumes. They
think now that they have too much nitrogen in their
soil. One said recently, in speaking of a spray conm-
pound, that he liked to use it because it knocked the
leaves off of his trees and he had found it necessary
to get rid of some of his foliage every year.

There Was a time When large quantities of
'do9-WINe) YIWWAS Yod Gyad ‘2 °N

x
”

ae Cag Or
Divcey RE om

=

 

 
~31-

potash were used, but with the advent of the war the
use of this material had to be reduced considerably.
There are today, however, men in the main districts
who believe that the use of potash and acid phosphate
will go a long Way toward giving fruit better carrying
qualities.

There are no definite results yet to be had
on fertilizing peach trees in Georgia. There are at
present several experiments under Way, but these ex-
periments are only two or three years old and no con-
clusions have yet been reached. The College of Agri-
culture has fertiliser experimental plats in most of the
main peach regions of the state, and it is hoped that
within the next four or five years some valuable infor-
mation will be at hand. |

The common custom is to apply one pound of
cottonseed meal and acid phosphate mixed together, a
fork full of barnyard manure or a pound of bone meal
at planting time. Some idea of the methods of ferti-
lization practised by the growers may be had from the
following letters.

One man states that he does not use fertilizer. An-
other says, "I use mixed fertilizer made of raw bone
meal, nitrate of soda and sulphate of potash, running
about 10-2-10. I vary the amount of ammonia and potash
to suit different soils. I am not using potash this
year as $500.00 per ton is too steep for me. I am using
some lime."

It is to be noted that 10-3-10 means 10% phosphorus
acid, 3% nitrogen and 10%; potash. It is the custom in
Georgia, when speaking of fertilisers, to always call

the phosphoric acid first, the nitrogen second and pot-
ash last.
-33-

One of the up-to-date growers in northeast Georgia says,
"We have used a 12-3-5 fertilizer, about 500 pounds per

acre. At present We are supplementing the fertilizer with
cow peas as a cover crop and are experimenting with clo-
ver ag a winter crop. Our stable manure is put on as fast
as it is made. I think we have not used enough nitrogen
but think that the clover and manure, deep cultivation in
the fall and more frequent cultivation in the spring will
remedy this."

A grower on the Cecil clay in central Georgia says, "I
use about 300 pounds of 10-2-0 to the acre or around two
pounds to the tree".

Another one in the same neighborhood says, "I use a 10-3-
2 guano and put about faur pounds to the tree on my old
trees, and about three pounds on my young trees with sat-
isfactory results".

Another grower answers by stating, "We use common guano,
two pounds to the tree". I presume this "common guano”
referred to is the general 10-3-3 fertiliser so commonly
sold throughout Georgia.

Another grower says, “I use lot manure principally, about
three tons to the acre and about every other year 1 use
two pounds of 10-2-0 corn fertilizer to a tree".

Another grower in that section answers, "I use 16% acid
and cottonseed meal, half and half, about two pounds to
the tree". This half and half mixture of acid and cotton-
seed meal has been very commonly in use since the War.

One of the growers in the Fort Valley district states,
"I fertilize with stable manure and one and one-half pounds
of commercial fertilizer per tree. I am using 9-3-1
guano this season. Before I have been using a larger per-
cent of potash".

Another Fort Valley man writing in detail of the ferti-
liszer practices in that section says, "Growers use various
amounts of fertilizers. In planting out trees last spring
I dynamited them and also fertilized them by mixing top
e011 and manure when planting. Then later I put about
two double handfuls of cottonseed and later on I put a
pound of raw bone meal to each tree. The second year
these trees can be fertilized with two pounds to the tree
of raw bone meal and a third year they should have at
least two pounds and a little potash would not be amiss
that season, as these early varieties sometimes have quite
a crop the third year. I intend to fertilize them after
they grow older to the extent of five or six pounds of a
Well balanced fertilizer per tree, analysing around a
8-2-4. Of course at the present time, the growers are
not using potash as they cannot get it",
Jaul onnek y snizmitya ‘@on

 

 

 
~33-

Another grower says, “This year I used as fertilizer
stable manure to the amount of six pounds to the tree.
I would have used more if it could have been obtained."

One grower answers, "I use five pounds of fertilizer
per tree and use a $36, 0O per ton quality". It is hard
to understand just what he means by this.

A prominent Fort Valley man states, "The best fertili-
zer for trees should contain 40% by weight ground bone
meal, 40% dissolved bone meal and 30% sulphate of potash.
Use three to five pounds to the tree".

One prominent peach grower says, "The best bought fer-
tilizer I have ever used on my orchard is Baugh & Sons
fruit and berry guano which runs about 8% phosphorus
acid, 3% nitrogen and 10% potash. As to the amount, it
is only a question of how much one's pocket-book can
stand, the more used the better results. I believe an
orchard should be limed occasionally. I also believe
that stable manure, used in moderate quantities is help-
ful and that Brabham or Iron peas are beneficial planted
in rows and cultivated".

. A prominent grower in eastern Georgia writes, "On hear-
sng trees we use the following mixture: raw bone meal
1,400 pounds and sulphate of potash 600 pounds, using
from two to five pounds per tree. For fertilizer on

young trees I use stable manure as far as procurable

and then the following mixture: bone meal and cotton-

seed meal mixed in equal parts, using about one and one-

half pounds to the tree".
The fertilizer is generally applied in the
early spring, in March, just after plowing. Some of

the growers at one time used a top-dressing of nitrate
of soda, but peaches produced on trees so treated did
not seem to carry well, so the nitrate of soda top-
dressings have been abandoned. Practically all of the
fertilizer is applied in concentric circles around the
trees. Some may be used broadcast where intercrops are
planted; but generally speaking, the crops are fertilized
aside from the trees. The quotations from the above

letters give a pretty good general idea of peach orchard
-~24-
fertilization in this state.

PRUNING AND THINNING

The average Georgia peach grower does not thin
his fruit. Occasionally in heavy crop years, certain
varieties require the remval of the fruit after it has
eet, and some of the advanced growers occasionally prac-
tiee thinning. For example, one states, "I cannot give
you the cost of thinning the fruit as this varies quite
a lot. Some trees and varieties need thinning while
others do not".

A great many of them in answering letters re-
garding the question of thinning, state that they have
never thinned and that they fear the cost. An occasional
grower will practise thinning on the early varieties as
they have a tendency to overbear and be small.

One grower says, "I thin the Mayflower and
Queen of Dixie, none of the others".

One advanced grower remarks, "I have no acou-
rate figures on the cost of thinning, but the quality of
the fruit where this operation is performed makes the
cost of doing the work small by comparison".

The pruning of the Georgia peach orchard is
comparatively simple. The trees are all headed low. It
is natural where certain practices prevail that individ-
uals will go to an extreme, and there are some orchards
in Georgia where the trees branch so close to the ground

that an ordinary furrow thrown to them will cover the head
-25-

of the tree. This is not considered advisable by the
best growers. The ideal Georgia tree is headed some
eight inches to a foot above the ground. The usual
number of main limbs is three, but sometimes four or
five are found.

The pruning at the end of the first season
consists in choosing the scaffold limbs, some three or
four in number, and removal of everything else. These
scaffold limbs are cut back to from one foot to two feet
in length; this, of course, being determined by the
amount of growth that a tree makes.

The third year's pruning consists in the re-
moval of the majority of the main shoots in the center
of the tree, the general thinning out of the scaffold
limbs and cutting them back to approximately the height
of the shoulder. Naturally the amount of cutting back is
determined by the growth of the tree. It is not uncommon
for a young tree, in its third year on good land, to make
seven or more feet of growth. By judicious pruning at
the beginning of the third season, a small crop may be
had that year. Particularly is this true for the early
varieties like Mayflower, Uneeda and Carmen. The Elberta
is not expected to produce much of a crop until its
fourth season.

The Georgia peach tree is established by the
end of the third season, and in the properly pruned or-
chards trees are never permitted to get so large as to

prevent the picking of all the fruit from the ground. No
 

 

No9. [oW-HEADED TREE, FASY Te pick.
se Ke - - . = Te - —_—

 

~36-

ladders are used inGeorgia peach orchards, nor are the
trees climbed into. The effort of the grower is to keep
the tree low and to keep fruiting wood constantly grow-
ing from the head of the tree to the tips of the main
limbs. This is done through severe heading back.

The pruning is done at convenient times during
the winter. Last year, 1920, after a very severe infest-
ation of curculio and brown rot in the Fort Valley section
where the foliage was so thick that it seriously inter-
fered with spray applications, some of the growers prac-
tised late summer pruning, that is, thinning out. This,
however, is not a general practice and was only done under

stress of circumstances.
INSECTS

A peach tree in this state is subject to all
of the ordinary peach insects. The three, however, that
head the list are the San José scale, the Curoulio and
the peach tree Borer.

The San José scale, Aspidiotus perniciosus, is
no different in Georgia than elsewhere. It only has the
advantage of @ long summer season, for it may start its
activities in March and they need not be curtailed until
the last of October. Soon after its advent into this
state, it completely wiped out the industry in certain
sections, but now it is controlled by the ordinary means.

The Curculio, Conotrachelus nenuphas, has long
been the serious enemy of the Georgia peach. Years ago

Mr. J. H. Hale was jarring thousands of trees at Fort
37 —

Valley in an effort to control this pest. A development
of the arsenical sprays was a great boon to the Georgia
peach and for years the ourculio seemed to be under com-
plete control, but during the seasons of 1919 and 1920
the curculio so attacked the crops that they were rendered
practically worthless and these two seasons instead of
being highly profitable were money losers for the growers.
Not only did they lose their money but they likewise lost
their reputation. As a consequence this season, 1921,
finds the United States government in cooperation with
the state authorities making extensive investigations on
this insect at Fort Valley. So many of the insects devel-
oped during the past two peach crops that many are ques-
tioning the life history of this pest. Up to the present
time only one generation has been acknowledged, but indi-
Cations in 1930 were such that it was thought advisable to
make a much closer study of thie insect. This past year
the growers have thoroughly cleaned up their orchards,
raked up and burned and cleaned out all the hedge rows
and patches of woods in which the curculio could hibernate,
and even with that, the 19th of March, 1921, something over
3,000 curculio were collected on 400 trees, and at that date
the trees were just in condition to receive their first
areenical application.

| Temperature conditions during the past two win-
tere have all been in favor of the curculio. As a matter

of fact, there has not been a very cold winter in Georgia
“INaPEG AyYdS ‘olen

Fhe wR

—
~~ : soy

 

 
~28-

since 1917, and during the winter of 1920-21 the coldest
temperature recorded on the College thermometer was 25° F.
and there is every reason to expect a very large carry-
over of this insect. Coupling this with the fact that

the past two fruit seasons have been very humid and the
spray naturally ineffective due to too much rain, the cur-
culio have had a grand opportunity to increase and live
through. The Fort Valley section has not had a complete
fruit failure in over seven years and this pest has grad-
ually increased with everything in its favor, including a
certain amount of careless spraying on the part of the
growers.

The peach tree Borer, Sanninoidea exitiosa, is
considered by many our most serious insect, due to the
fact that it ise very hard to control. There is only one
generation of this insect and the moth is laying her eggs
in Georgia during the last of July and from then on until
frost. The eggs hatch and the larvae leave the tree dur-
ing the last of June, and early in July they enter the
ground and in about three weeks appear again as moths.
Their egg laying starts around the firet of August. The
general method of fighting this insect is mounding in
July and August. This mound is then removed from the
trees in the fall and winter and a search is made for the
worms, they being removed with a knife.

All kinds of mechanical protectors and contri-
vances have been tried to control this pest, but they have

all proved unsuccessful. Last year the use of paradichlo-
39 ~

robenzene was followed in Fort Valley and from the re-
sults obtained it is probable that this material will
increase in use as it is most effective. Prior to the
season 1920-21 the United States government had been ex-
perimenting with this material in the control of borers,
and they recommend the application of one ounce of para-
dichlorobenzene to each peach tree in a circle from four
to five inches from the trunk, scattering the ounce com-
pletely around the tree. This is then worked into the
ground with a light hoe, the application being made in
October, and in three weeks to a month afterwards the
ground should be again stirred so as to eliminate the
gas that was accumulated. Applications made to trees
lees than five years old result in the death of the tree,
but on older trees paradichlorobenzene destroys the bor-

ers without injury to the plant.
DISEASES

The important peach diseases in Georgia are
Brown Rot, Leaf Curl, Crown Gall, Rosette and a disease
known as the Phoney disease. Our industry as yet does
not suffer from the Little Peach, which is so common in
Michigan, nor the Yellows, which has taken such heavy
tolls from the industry in other sections. Neither one
of these diseases is known within the state of Georgia.

Brown rot, Sclerotinia fructighia, is the bane
of the Georgia peach grower's life. It rots his fruit on

the trees, in the packing house and on the way to market.
~30-

The discovery of self-boiled lime sulphur by Mr. Scott,
which fungicide was developed within the Fort Valley
section, seemed to be the salvation of the Georgia fruit
producer and where careful spraying was practiced the
brown rot was held incheck. The growers had been so
lucky for some five or six years that they no longer
feared the rot, but the seasons of 1919-20 have again
given them a great respect for this dreaded disease.
These seasons were very moist, the rainfall in the peach
region being several inches above that of normal during
the growing and harvesting season. Coupled with this the
curculio so predominated that practically every peach was
etung, and wherever the insect injured the peach the rot
followed immediately. The control of the curculio seems to
be a great factor in the control of the brown rot, and the
experiments being conducted thie season at Fort Valley
have in mind the control of this disease as well as that
of the curoulio.

The peach leaf curl, Exoascus deformans, during
the early etages of the industry was very serious, but
due to the universal spraying against scale, this disease
does little harm in well cared for orchards.

Crown gall, Pseudomonas tumefaciens, severely
attacks the peach in this state and where orchards become
badly infested, they rapidly die out.

Rosette is a physiological condition and is the
trouble that at one time was confounded with yellows by
Mr. J. H. Hale. It, however, is a totally different dis-
-3]-

ease. Wo causal organism has been found and no remedy
yet suggested except the elimination of the diseased
trees. Casual observation seems to show the condition

te be more prevalent in the Piedmont regions of the state
than on the coastal plains.

Phoney disease is another physiological condi-
tion of recent appearance. It seems to be more prevalent
in the fertile sections where orchards have been highly
fertilized, and the Elberta seems to be more susceptible
than others. Practically nothing is known of this trouble
as it has been noticed only for the past few years. Mr.
McClintock of the Georgia Experiment Station has been
making observations on this disease for the past two or
three Seasons, but has no thing definite to recommend.
There is no remedy as yet for the same. The leaves on
the infected tree become very black green and large; the

‘plant bears no fruit and after a season or two is worthless.
SPRAYS AND SPRAYING

During the early life of the peach industry,
there Was no need, nor Was there any system of spraying.
The appearance of the San José scale in the orchards cre-
ated a great disturbance and thousands upon thousands of
trees Were killed. I can well remember the discussion
that took place in the eighteen nineties concerning the
application of spray materials to peach trees. At that
time the growers’ only idea of spraying Was with an or-
dinary garden hose and it Was readily seen that applica-
tions of material by this means would be impracticable,
33 =

and a great many of them let their orchards go to ruin.
Randolph County was at this early date one of the- largest
peach producing counties in the state and practically
every orchard in it was wiped out.

The first experiments that were conducted for
the control of the scale in the Fort Valley section were
carried on by the United States Government, and kerosene
011 was used. This early spraying with kerosene was very
detrimental to the trees. The injury that the peach grow-
ers suffered at this time, not only from the scale but
likewise from experimentation, shook their confidence in
up-to-date methods and scientific procedure. As a matter
of fact, their confidence was not reestablished until
after the discovery of the self-boiled lime sulphur about
1908, and the demonstration of ite effectiveness in combi-
nation with arsenate of lead in 1909.

During the first decade following 1900, spray-
ing was practiced by some orchardists and neglected by the
majority. A great many of them used the winter strength
lime sulphur to control the scale, and thereby controlled
to a certain extent the curl leaf. After the demonstra-
tion of the use of self-boiled lime sulphur against the
brown rot as well as the use of arsenate of lead against
curculio, spraying has gradually become more prevalent,
and we might say, since 1910 all of the orchardists have
sprayed. Their first work was done with barrel outfits.
The Hale orchards were practically the first to be equipped

with air pressure tanks and to practice spraying on a large

scale. Most of the large growers soon began to use gaso-
-33=—

line power spray outfits of various types. Some of them
etill use these and others are using air pressure out-
fits. The largest peach grower in Georgia thinks that
‘the spraying with air pressure is the most economical and
surest way to get over large areas with the least trouble.

" Within the past few years dusting has attained
prominence. More dusting was done in 1919 and 1920 than
in any previous years and some large growers have given
up the use of liquid sprays, except for the application
of the winter strength lime and sulphur. Dusting came
rapidly into favor because larger areas could be handled
with a fewer number of machines, and the possibility of
dusting extensive plantings rapidly brought this type of
insect and disease control to the fore. The experiments
on dusting were conducted by the State Board of Entomol-
ogy and the results obtained experimentally were excellent.
The commercial results are also good, provided the work is
carefully done.

The great trouble with spraying in Georgia in
the last two or three years has been that the enormous
size of the individual holdings required a great outlay
for machinery, equipment and material, and the element of
time became so important that a number of the larger grow-
ers went through their plantings so rapidly that they did
not do a thorough job. Coupling this with the extremely
warm winter and humid summer of the past two years, the
curculio and brown rot practically took charge of the

orchards.

Some large growers were not satisfied with dust-
ONY ONIMAId LOTIWA pu0ed YW ien

 

 

 

 
-j4—

ing at an ordinary speed, but were contemplating the ad-
visability of putting a dusting machine ona Ford auto-
mobile so that a greater amount of territory could be
covered. It is easy to understand that such desire for
speed militated against the proper application of spray
dust and material.

The old schedule for sprays on peaches in this
state was approximately as follows:

l. Winter strength concentrated lime sulphur was applied
between the first of November and the middle of February.
Some growers used scalecide and where the scale infesta-
tion was serious an early and a late application of lime
Sulphur was made and, occasionally, a grower applied
scalecide in the fall and lime sulphur during February.

2. About ten days after the petals dropped, or as common-
ly expressed, when the shucks were falling, self-boiled
lime sulphur and arsenate of lead were applied.

3. A second application of the self-boiled lime sulphur
and arsenate of lead was made two to three weeks later.

4. On the Elbertas and peaches ripening about that time
an application of self-boiled lime sulphur was sometimes
made three to four weeks before the peaches ripen.

The schedule of spraying that is being followed
this year and which has the recommendation of the Govern-
ment, the State Department of Entomology and the Horti-
cultural Division of the College is as follows:

1. The ordinary winter spray of concentrated lime sulphur,
winter strength, 5 degrees Baumé, or scalecide is to be
applied.

2. As the little shucks begin to split on the peaches,
from five to etgnt days after the fruit has set, one pound
of arsenate of lead powder and one pound of quick lime to
fifty gallons of water is to be used.

3. Two to three weeks after this the application of self-
boiled lime sulphur 8-8-50 with one pound of arsenate of
lead powder to 50 gallons is to be applied.

4. Repeat this application in two to three weeks.
= 35m

5. Where brown rot is feared, from two to three weeks
before the ripening of the peaches, an application of
self-boiled lime sulphur alone is recommended.

Where dusting is to be used instead of liquid sprays
the formula recommended for application is five pounds
of arsenate of lead, 10 pounds of sulphur and 85 pounds
of lime. The dusting follows exactly the same schedule
as the liquid spray.

These recomendations may be changed after the
scientific study this season and a study of the commer-

cial crop.

The Fort Valley section of Georgia has contri-
buted largely to the spraying knowledge of this country.
Not only was the use of concentrated lime sulphur against
scale well demonstrated in this section but the first use
of the self-boiled lime sulphur was made in Fort Valley,
and the demonstration of the use of arsenate of lead as a
control for the curoulio was made in this section by the
Georgia State Board of Entomology.

Georgia peach areas are getting to be such pro-
gressive spraying sections that the manufacturers of all
kinds of new fangled sprays all make strenuous efforts to
get them introduced. You will find growers trying and
advocating all types and species of new remedies. They
are all looking for a more efficient and economic material
for the control of insects and diseases of the peach. Some
of their experiments along these lines lead to sad results
but once in a while something new develops that is worthy

of further investigation and use,

PICKING AND PACKING

The harvesting season starts with the early
———

a

EEE
_
—————

——S—
— —— ae
St = =a

 

 

 
-36-

varieties about the middle of May and ends with the
Elbertas in July. The last peaches shipped from the state
come from the Cornelia or northeastern section during the
last of July or very early in August.
In the main peach regions, practically all of
the picking is done by negro labor. The gang of pickers
are under the direction of a white foreman and the fruit
is picked into round bottom baskets, holding five-eighths
of a bushel. Under normal crop conditions it takes about
three pickings to clean up a variety, the pickings being from
two to four days apart, depending upon the variety and the
season. Some varieties come in with a rush and it occasion-
ally happens in special seasons that one and sometimes two
pickings will clean up the given variety in an orchard,
Every effort is made to make the pickers handle
the fruit carefully. They are cautioned not to mash it
and not to drop it. It is, however, a rather hard matter
to impress upon the uneducated negro the importance of
-careful picking. However, in the main fruit districts
the pickers have been handling peaches for so many years
that they are gradually improving in their work.
thé five-cighths bushel baskets of peaches are
then placed on low, broad wagons and are carried to the
packing house. In many instances growers sell their pro-
duct delivered at the packing house in these five-eighths
bushel baskets, guaranteeing that a certain percent of the
fruit in the baskets will go into the crates for sale. Some-
times growers are fortunate enough to sell their crop on

the trees. This, however, is not as common a method of
-37-

disposing of the orop as selling them delivered at the
packing house.

The packing houses in this state are long, low
buildings, open usually on three sides and sometimes on
four. Under the old system, there were one or two lines
of packing tables in eaoh house, and the fruit was de-
livered from the wagons on both sides of the house. It
was then placed on one side of the packing table and hand
graded into containers in the center of the packing table,
the packer standing on the opposite side of the table from
the grader and packing the fruit into the ordinary six
basket Georgia peach carrier.

The packs commonly used with the small peaches
were the 3-3 and 4-3, with larger fruit the 3-3 and the
2-3. The extra large Elbertas were packed in 32-1 and 1-2.
The finished orate was then carried to the inspector,
passed upon, nailed up and, in many instances, put imme-
diately into the waiting car as a good many of the packing
houses are equipped with spur tracks.

The packing house labor is practically all white.
The Florida packers come up from Florida to catch the peach
season and then work up through the state and on into other
sections. A great deal of packing is done by young girls
in the immediate neighborhood. A day's work for a good
packer is from seventy-five to one mundred and fifty crates
depending upon the size of the peaches. When Elvoertas are
running large and packing the 3-1 or the 2-3 pack men often-

times turn out as much as 200 crates per day. The wages
“agnoH SNiMovd ‘Elon

,
ee ee Pt al ee | TT

Riss ~~

ae SRR

 

 

 

 
-3 Gu

for packing fluctuate but are determined by the general
wage of the season. Of course during the war period they
were mich higher than before. What they will be during
the season of 1921 is not yet known.

During the past four or five years some new
machinery has come into Georgia peach packing houses. In
the most up-to-date plantings, hand grading has been
stopped and the use of peach grading machinery has taken
yte place. The type generally used is the Skinner grader.
This grader sizes the peach through diverging slats. The
rotted and specked fruit is removed by hand. The sized
peaches are then delivered by belts to the packers.

There is another type of peach grader not in
very common use, which grades by diverging rollers, the
difference between the slate and the rollers comtituting
the main difference between the machines.

During the past two seasons the use of the
bushel basket has been gaining favor. The growers still
recognize that their first class fruit had best be sold in
the normal six basket crate. They, however, all go into a
season with a good supply of bushel baskets on hand as
these bushel baskets do not require so mich skill in pack-
ing. They can, therefore, use ordinary labor incase of a
packing house strike or in case the season so develops
that more fruit ripens at a time than has been anticipated.
The man, however, who is shipping only first class stuff
and trying to hold his reputation uses the crate in pre-
ference to the basket. The basket is finding its place in

the packing house, but it is to be hoped that the Georgia
 

Nel4. PACKING PEACHES.
~39—

peach will continue in the crate with the basket only

being used under special conditions.
CAR LOADING AND SHIPPING

A carload of Georgia peaches runs from 448 crates
to 533: the minimun load upon which freight is paid is now
476. It used to be 525, but as large loads did not carry
well, the minimum has been reduced. A oar with seven crates
across and four high packs 448 crates; fivé high brings it
to 538. The last crop went forward at about $300 per car
for freight and icing but the new freight rates increase
this to around $367 per car for the same service, or from
seventy-five to eighty cents per crate.

In packing a car of crates, the first layer is
put in and braced from the ends; these crates are then
etripped before the next layer is put on top. If the load
does not come out even in the center the two gides of the
load are braced at the doors. An air space is left around
each crate so there Will be a good circulation in transit.
The bushel baskets are packed three tiers high in the car
and a load is four hundred.

The refrigerator cars receive their initial icing
before being delivered to the shipping point. After load-
ing, the car is given another icing and is re-iced again
in transit. The normal time in traneit runs around seventy-
two hours.

There have been some experiments on precooling

conducted at Fort Valley by the Government with marked
~40-—

success but precooling is not practised at all in the ship-
ping of the crop. Some few growers have ice houses in which
they hold their fruit for a night before loading it in the
cars, but orchards so equipped can be counted on the fin-
gers of one hand. It is to be hoped that in time precool-
ing stations will be established at some main centers by
either the railroads or individual companies, for it is
certain that the juioy Georgia fruit will then carry to
market in & much better condition.

The Georgia Fruit Exchange, as well as the car-
riers and growers, are constantly experimenting on Ways
and means of loading and bracing care so they will carry
in better condition and arrive on the markets with the fruit
in better shape. The old type of car, loaded with 532 crates,
is never geen now as the upper tier of crates alWays was in
poor condition upon arrival. It is permissable to pack
five tiers high near the ice bunkers, but the middle of the
car should not be over four in height.

The carriers gather up the care from the packing
shede during the late afternoon and early evening and be=
fore midnight the long trains are leaving the main centers
on their way to market. The Fruit Exchange takes charge
of its cars as soon as they begin to roll, keeping in close

touch with them until sold.
THE GEORGIA FRUIT EXCHANGE

The Georgia Fruit Exchange was organized follow-
ing the disastrous crop of 1908. The largest output with-

in the history of the State was forwarded to market during
et ee ny, ene
“MYO OLNI DNIGVel ‘SI-oN

 
—41-

that year. The transportation companies were taxed to

the utmost. There was no distribution of fruit. Every-
body was shipping to New York and Philadelphia and the
result was that, though & wonderful crop was produced

and forwarded to market in good shape, everybody interest-
ed in the peach game lost money. Particularly Was this
true of the producer who Was shipping his own stuff, and
at that time every grower in Georgia did his own market-
ing.

The lessons of this season brought together men
financially interested into the organization of the Georgia
Fruit Exchange. This was a stock company at that time with
$10,000 capital stock to be sold only to bonafide peach
growers. The Organization made its appearance in the field
as a distributing agency in 1909. It accepted the cars of
fruit as packed in the individual packing houses and under-
took their distribution. As in all organizations of this
kind, it met with some opposition.

The Georgia Fruit Exchange differs from the Cal-
ifornia Organization in that it has no supervision over
the picking and packing of the fruit. At this time it has
men who go from packing house to packing house instruct-
ing and Watching the pack of the individual growers; but
as an organization the Exchange accepts every carload that
ig sent out from large packing houses on the statement of
the grower and packer. Where there are quite a number of
emall growers, the Exchange loads cars at the main peach
shipping points, these cars being composite; that is being
-42-

made up of the fruit of several growers. This fruit, how-
ever , is packed by the individual grower and delivered

to the car in the package. Little by little the Exchange
obtained a stronghold in the distribution of the Georgia
peach crop, and through its influence f.o.bs buyers have
made their appearance in the state.

The history of the crop for 1915 as is found in
report of the Exchange for that year is as follows: the
shipments from the state for that season were 4,468 cars,
of which the Exchange handled 3,997 or 67.1%.

Shipments from Georgia in 1916 were 3,199 cars.
The Exchange handled 3,378 cars or 78.2%. In speaking of
distribution that year,. the report says that 875 were sold
in the cities of the East, 12% in the cities of the West
and 1% in the cities of the South.

Shipments for the year 1917 were 3, 869 cars. The
Exchange handled 3,789 oars or 72%. Through the agencies
of the Exchange this crop Was distributed to one hundred
and thirty-four towns. During this year 38% of the crop
went to the West snd 72% to the East.

Shipments from the state in 1918 were 8,053 care.
The Exchange handled 6,615 or 82% of the total crop. For
the five year period prior to 1918 the average portion of
the crop handled by the Exchange was 61%. There were one
hundred and ninety-one markets used during this year and
76% of the Georgia crop was sold f.o.b. Georgia.

Shipments from the state in 1919 were 7,403 cars
of which the Exchange hamdled 5,429 or 73%. This was 10%
43-

less than handled the previous year.

Shipments from the state in 1920 were 6,087 cars
of which the Exchange handled 4,553 or 75%. The f.o.b.
sales during 1920 were 65%. This is the last report from
the Exchange. In practically ten years of existence the
Organization has handled the distribution of three-fourths
of the peach crop raised in Georgia. It has greatly in-
creased the markets in which th Georgia fruit is sold,
and through its agencies around 65% of the Georgia orop
is sold f.o.b. The Exchange gets a small percentum from
these f.0.b. gales.

Other activities of the Georgia Frnit Exchange
consist of having market reports sent to the different
peach centers daily. No selling of peaches takes place
in any of the main centers of peach production until after
the reports of the Exchange have been listed. This report
ig made public about nine o'clock. It gives a statement
of the sale of every car of Georgia fruit anywhere in the
United States and the prices obtained. It likewise gives
a statement of all cars of Georgia fruit enroute with their
destinations. This information gives the grower a knowl-
edge of the value of his product and he is then in position
to make a reasonable sale to the buyer. The day's busi-
ness starts in the peach centers as soon as this report is
put up on the bulletin board in the office of the Exchange,
the Exchange maintaining an office in every large shipping
place. If the grower fails to make an f.o.b. sale, he

routes his car to any point that seems desirable to hin,
~44—

notifies the Exchange the number of the car, its contents
and ite destination. They then take charge of it and if
for any reason the chosen market of the grower does not
maintain ite strength, the car is diverted by the Exchange
and sold elsewhere.

The Exchange has inspectors who are present at
the opening and unloading of every oar of fruit. It han-
dles all of the claims for its membere, no matter against

whom they may be. Within recent years it has assisted its
members in the purchase of spray materials, machinery, fer-
tilizer and any other orchard material that they need.

The members do not hawe to be stockhélders. The
Exchange gets its support by charging a percentage on each
crate sold. It has representatives in each market and sells
through these representatives, paying them a commigsion.
The commission to the merchant comes out of the commission
that the Exchange charges the grower. At the end of the
season the Exchange pays all of its debts, pays its stook
dividend, which ise limited to 10%, and then makes a rebate
to the shippers of anything that is left.

The original issuance of stook was $10,000. This
has been increased to $50,000. To give some idea of the
financial dealings of the Exchange I quote from the report
of 1920 which says, "The number of outstanding shares of
stock are 3,763. The Exchange holds for resale, under a
revolving fund constituted for that purpose, thirty-nine
shares; there are in the treasury 1198 shares. The closing
of the 1920 books shows 413 stockholders. This is a re-

duction from 445 in 1919. The loss is accounted for by the
‘AWHY Ho¥ad S.wi9ver) 4o Lubcl ‘910N

= Ren oe

 

 
~45-

effort of the Exchange to secure the stock of individuals
who have retired from the industry". In regard to finan-
ces the report says, "The gross income for the year was
$98,675.45. The expenses were $93,837.09, leaving a net
income of $4,438.36. There were still uncollected by the
Exchange at the issuance of the report $18,000 of commis-
Sions due in 1920. These collections were not pressed due
to the unfavorable financial conditions. Had these collec-—
tions been made, a rebate of approximately $16,000 would
have been made to the shippers".

THE ECONOMIC STATUS OF THE INDUSTRY

The number of individuals actually engaged in
growing peaches in the state ¢ Georgia is estimated between
850 and 900. To-give some idea of the size of the Georgia
peach industry, I will quote from Mr. B. W. Hunter, who is
President of the Georgia Fruit Exchange. This statement
is taken from a paper which he presented before the Georgia
State Horticultural Society in 1919: "The Georgia peach
orchards cover, at a conservative estimate, 140,000 acres
of land and number.: 18,000,000 trees. Ata fair valuation
these orchards are worth $42,000,000. The buildings neoces-
sary for conducting the business are worth approximately
$7,000,000. The machinery can be considered to be worth
$1,500,000 and the work stock and other accessories at least
$3,100,000. This represents a total value of the Georgia
peach industry of $53,000, 000.

"These orchards employ year in and year out about
7,000 men whose wages aggregate $2,100,000. In years like
 

46-

1918-19 the wage expense at harvest time will be one-half
million dollars, the spraying material bill a million dol-
lars, the fertilizer bill two million dollars and the crate
bill over a million dollars, making a total of twelve months
period around $7,000, 000.

"A crop of 7,800 cars like in 1918, if harvested
in a single day would require 117,600 pickers and helpers
and 54,600 packing house employees, an army Se 171,600 men.
It would require for transportation 3123 trains,which if
placed end to end would cover the rails for a distance of
seventy miles. There would be 1,005,000,000 peaches, ten
for every individual in the United States. Transportation
companies received for handling the 1918 crop $2,500,000,
the commission men $1,002,000, the retailers in round num-
bers $8,000,000 and the ultimate consumers paid for it not
less than $30,000,000. One day in 1918 Georgia shipped
591 cars or 395,500 crates. In the fields were 15,366 men
harvesting the fruit, placing it in crates md loading it
in cars. Two hundred men were running the trains which
transported it. At least 1,000 wholesalers and retailers
were engaged in the final distribution and not less than
1,800,000 purchases took it from the stores and stands."

This gives some idea of the magnitude of the
peach industry in Georgia. It has been the making of cer-
tain sections of this state. It is on the increase be-
Cause as the Georgia farmer seeks new crops to take the
place of cotton, and as he learns more about the production,

grading, packing and distribution of this crop, a greater
~47-

number of individuals go into the business. It ia going
to be one of the salvations in the fight against the boll
weevil.

There are of course ups and downs in the indus-
try. The years of 1919-20 will go down in its history as
being ones of great trial. The crop of 1918 was large.

It was harvested and disposed of at war prices. The grow-
ers were prosperous. An Arkansas visitor was standing on
a corner in Fort Valley in the spring of 1919 watching

the business of that thriving little city. It was just
before the beginning of the harvest and the trees were
laden with wonderful fruit. He stood and watched sometime,
e&8id nothing but looked. “After serious contemplation and
considerable thought, he turned and remarked, "The peach
business is awful on 'Flivers'. I have not seen one go by
in a half hour". This is about as graphic a description
of the prosperity in the peach region at the end of 1918
and the beginning of 1919 as it is possible to make.

But the season of 1919 did not fulfill the pro-
mise of the spring. The rains came and staid . The ourcu-
lio and brown rot got in their work. The growers sold their
fruit f.0o.b. in large quantities but it did not carry and
the speculators and buyers lost money, and lost heavily.
The growers lost, that is they lost their anticipated games
but not the aotual cash.

The ourtain rolled up on the season of 1920.

The buyers had been the heavy losers the year before. They
wrote into their contracts that the fruit must carry. The

winter had been warm and the rains came again. The growers
 

 

 

 

48 —

dusted and sprayed with speed. Their early fruit went for-
ward fairly well, but their main crop Was so full of worms
and brown rot that it could hardly get out of Georgia be-
fore it was unsalable. During this season the growers lost
money, not anticipated money, but the cash. .
This is the condition at the beginning of 1921.

Everybody connected with the peach industry recognizes that
the past two seasons have given the Georgia product a very
unsavory reputation on the market, and if this magnificent
industry 18 again to come back into its own, it can only be
done through the development and improvement of productive
methods and the groWing again of a fruit that will carry
and hold up on the market. The Georgia peach industry is
going through in 1921 the sero hour of its existence. If
this season, with its low prices and its debts being car-
ried over from the economic depression of 1920, does not
Spell SUCCESS to the peach grower, millions of trees will
be uprooted to be replanted by - God knows what. There
will be some individuals who recognize the possibility of
this industry and who will cleave to it as they have done
in former times, and possibly within another decade we will
see the Georgia peach revived. If this season is a success,
then the peach business in Georgia will inorease and in-
Crease rapidly as there are still hundreds of thousands

of acres capable of producing this wonderful fruit in all
of its perfection.
‘quol/ usd oo'008% HLYoM sieyd 2I0N

 

 
 

49 -
THE ESTIMATED VALUE OF A PEACH TREE

The Georgia Fruit Exchange, to facilitate its
members and stockholders in making out their income re-
turns, had an expert accountant investigate the cost of
the production of peaches and the value of a peach orchard
in Georgia. These figures are probably a little high as
they wére to be used as an estimate for taxes, neverthe-
less, they give an exceedingly good idea of the cost of
operations in an up-to-date peach venture. The following

is part of this report which was presented to the Commis-

sioner of Internel Revenue of the United States of America.

" Cost of Peach Trees at the End of Third Year
Or in February 1913
When Planted Novenber 1909 - February 1910.
Cost Per Acre. 108 Treeg Per Acre.

Firgt Year 1910,

Land Value, $60 per acre @10%, including taxes___ _ $6.00
Buildings, $3,100 for 300 acres @10% per annum___ _ 1.00
Harrowing land, double cutting before breaking,
four acres per day @ $5.00. | 1.25
Breaking land, disc plow and four mules,
14 acres per dty @ $8.75.  —.__ _ 5.83
Roads, drainage, terraces, ditches and upkeep... _ _ 1,00
Harrowing land after breaking three times, _— =. _ _ 1.88
Marking rows, staking and laying off, 1 mule and
2 men @ $4.37, four acres per day___ 1.09
Barring off, middle busting and sub-soiling,
four mules, _—§. . _ _ _ 1.40
Peach trees, 108 @4¢ =. _ 2... oooLw LLL 4.32
Setting trees, 108 per day, 1 man and mule and
Wagon part’ time... = _ 1.50
Fertilizer, 3 lbs. per tree, 216 lbs. @ $40 per ton_ _ 4.32
Distributing fertilizer, men, mules and Wagon... _§ = 96
Plowing two furrows to trees,  .§§..._.._ = __ 026
Cultivating 5 times, 4 furrows to trees_ .=§-= =_s—i—di— _—_«d¥idrc_—sw 3.80
Hoeing tWice, 3 single acres per day per man, _§=«—ss— 1.25
Worming,.  ... =. so NN NNN Nw 1.25
Pruning, _......_ ~~. ee ee NN Nk 1.00
Whitewashing with fungicide @ 24¢ per tree sss 3.43

Superintendent, supervises 300 acres. Salary $730.00

 
~5O0-

house, wood and water $360.00, meat,
corn meal, flour, vegetables, chickens,
eggs, milk and butter $480.00, horse and

feed and oare $240.00. = ss lt $6.00
Breakage, losses, lost time, bad weather and inci-
dentals, 10% of cost, $45.34. _ 4.53

Management, direction, horticultural knowledge,

buying, bookkeeping and office expense 3-00

Interest on investment , $52.87 @8% for 6 months _ _ 2.11

Total cost per acre at end of first year $54.98
Cost per tree at end of first year 50.9 cents.

Second Year 1911.

Land value, $60 per acre @10%, including taxes_ ___—~_—sSX$6, 00
Buildings, $3,100 for 300 acres @ 10% per annum___—__—:i1.00
Roads, drainage, terraces, ditches and upkeep | 1.00
Dead trees, 15% of planting, 16.3 trees @ 50.9¢ _ _ _ 8.25
Replants, 16.2 trees @ 4¢,. sss cc wl wl lw «65

Replants, digging holes and set ting trees @ 4¢  _——— 65
Plowing, winter, ls acres per day @ $5.00 per day_ ___ 3.33
Boree plowing, 4 acres per day @ $3.00 per day__s ss] 075
Plowing dirt back to trees_ =... _—i_. 1,00

Fertilizer, 3 lbs. per tree, 334 lbs. © $40 per ton__ 6.48

Distributing fertilizer, men mules and Wagon_._. _=—_—i. 1.05
Worming, spring, _—§._.§ ss se sr el lw 1.25
Cultivating 5 times, 4 furrowe to tree_ . §._+ —=s=—r=s«“—d'ds=ad¥ws“é“als 8.60
Hoeing twice, we eee eae ea ei ae a ee ee eel el el eel ee el eT eC 1.35
Pruning, .§.. ~~ oe ee _Le LL LL LN 3.00
Gathering, piling and hauling prunings and burning _ 2.25
Spraying, material 3 gallon per tree__ _ === sisi ics” 1.20
Spraying, tank, engine, gas, oil and water supply, 3.40
Spraying, team and 3 men, 10 acres per day @ $8.50_._—s—«. 85
Worming, winter, =... 2.22.22 WL TLL C8 BO
Superintendent,  .=§.._.. 2. oC NL Nk 6.00
Breakage, losses, lost time, bad weather and inci-

dentals, 10% of cost $53.46. ss ss | 5.34

Management, direction, horticultural knowledge,

buying, bookeeping and office expense_ _._ __-—sq3«. 00
Interest on investment, lst. year $54.98 @ 8% «ss | 4.40
Interest on investment, 2nd. year $61.80 @ 8%

for six months 2.47

 

Total cost per acre for second year _ $68.67
Cost per tree for second year 63.6 cents.

Third Year 1912.

Land value, $60 per acre @10% including taxes__ _ _ _ $6.00
Buildings, $3100 for 30 acres @ 10% per annum____ __~=awi12.00
Roads, drainage, terraces, ditches and upkeep__§_ _ _ 1.00
Dead trees, 10 trees @ cost of two previous years__§_ 11.45
Replants, 10 trees @ 4¢ #+= 2... ii LT LL ~40

Replants, dynamiting, digging holes and setting trees_ 1.00
-~51-

Plowing, winter 14 acres per day @ $5.00 per day_ _—__‘ $3.33
Boree plowing, 4 acres per day @ $3.00 per day_ __—=—é«‘«@ 7S
Plowing dirt back to trees__._. _ _ = sss Sw ll 1,00

Fertilizer, 4 lbs. per tree, 433 lbs.@ $40 per ton. __—s-—‘«8.. 64

Distributing fertilizer, men, mules oat wagon __ . _ 1.25
Cultivating 5 times, 4 furrows to tree_._.. ._ sl 2.60
Hoeing, _—.§ = ss sr rw wl NN NNN NN Nk 1.25
Pruning _._§._. wwe ee NNN eC CB.
Gathering, piling, hauling prunings and burning. _ _ _ 3.50
Spraying, material one gallon per tree _§.§._-._= = s_ss_ 8.40

Spraying, tank, engine, gas, oil and Water supply_ 6.40
Spraying, team and three men, 8 acres per day @$8.50__ 1.06

Worming _~._._._2._ LN NN NNN 3.24
Superintendsnt_  ....._._._ NN 6.00
Breakage, losses, lost time, bad weather and

incidentals, 10% of cost $64.27. == = | 6.42
Management, direction, horticultural knowledge, muy

ing, book-keeping and office expenses_ ___ —__—s«a3.00
Interest on investment, lst. year, $54.98 @ 8% — _—s 4,.40
Interest on investment, 2nd. year, $68.67 @ 8% _—«=_—s_—«sédS , 49
Interest on investment, 3rd. year, $73.70 @ 8% _ ._ . 8.95

Total cost per acre for third year. _—_—s—__—sd4 86. 54

Cost per tree for third year, 80.1 cents.

thin

Total Cost at End of Third Year or in Februay 1913.

First year coat per acre, $54. 98 per tree, 50.9 cents.
Second " " 68. 67 * n 63.6 "
Third " R " 86 54 " W 80 i "
Total cost in February

1913, per acre $210.19 +" " $1,946

As an illustration of the ability of a Georgia peach or-
Chard to make profits on a large valuation per acre, I sub-
mit the following condensed estimate of income and expense
for a crop year, under conditions prevailing before the War
prices:-—

 

Yield 216 crates selling @ $1.00 f.o.b.. ss $216.00
Deduct: -

Upkeep of orchard___ =s—_s—— sic silt $60.00

Picking and packing fruit @25¢ 54.00

Commission on sales @ .03¢.  —_ 6.48

Depletion @ 30¢ per tree_._. sss i CC 33240 153 .88
Profit per acre equal to 194% on $334.00 $63. 12

From this profit would have to be deducted overhead and
general expenses, and abnormal losses."

— FELIS. —
e
*
o
4

a

°

«

°

.
 

<
wv

¢

 
 

‘
anwell
wn
co
Lat
~“
ooo
iis
fo
eon
te
‘Let ew

 

 
 
  

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

NU