"I shouldn't be at all surprised if those who state in reports to you that they have an acid soil, merely have a top acid soil. They may be growing their trees in basic limestone soils. Walnut trees grow in this environment very well, because they are found growing wild in woods where laurel and other types of plants loving an acid condition grow. This is true here in our county, but these soils are not seriously acid. They grow good garden crops.
"Ground, or pulverized, limestone is the safest type of lime to apply to trees or crops, in my estimation. Some of it is ground so fine that it looks like hydrated lime and is used for medicinal purposes. I am inclined to think that any reports you received that noted injury from the use of lime may have been due to the use of burned lime (calcium oxide) which is caustic when wet. This type of lime may be used in winter, but during the growing season, or too close to the growing season, may injure trees. I believe such injury depends entirely upon weather conditions, but it is a good thing to be on the safe side and use a lime which will not have the hot reaction that burned lime has.
"Your reports will serve an excellent purpose if they lead to getting a yearly record by planters on bearing and tree growth of their varieties. Few people know enough to go into the matter of soils and treatments intelligently. One can hardly blame them. It is a baffling subject. An unbalance in one element will lock up another element until one has quite a time unlocking them again. It seems that a conservative middle course is about the best to advise."
Upon reflection, it seems likely that if our questionnaire had asked specifically about the use of lime, many more reports would have been received of its use.
In response to an inquiry as to how weed competition near young trees is controlled, the replies are encouraging. Forty-seven practiced mulching; forty-five, mowing; thirty-four, occasional cultivation; twenty, regular cultivation, and a few others, slag or cinders around the trees. As is evident, some used several of the above methods. A few used none and suffered losses. Their honesty is admired, and their experience, disappointing as it is, is useful information.
As to fertilizing, forty-three reported the use of manure in some form as the principal material; twenty-eight used nitrogenous fertilizer; twenty-one, a complete fertilizer. Other materials were, in order, lime, compost, bone meal, ammonium sulphate, wood ash, tankage. One used a mixture of muck and manure and got results in excellent growth where the use of muck alone produced unsatisfactory growth. Several reported injury from too much fertilizer or from too late an application. Tree growth was thus pushed on into late fall; the trees were too sappy to stand the winter freezes and suffered from winter killing. The same result was reported from "over-cultivation." In this connection, we refer back to the letter from Mr. H. P. Burgart, of Michigan, whose suggestions on cultivation and fertilizing are well worth careful study and practice by all who have had this trouble. It is possible that some planters, especially those whose trees are set on hillsides, where erosion is a robber of fertility, would modify Mr. Burgart's practice of turning under the green crop in the spring. They might prefer, as indeed might others who would like to see their green manure nearer the top of the soil, to disk in the green crop rather than bury it deeply with mouldboard plows. They would of course follow it up with repeated diskings until the time came for sowing another cover crop. This is, however, entirely in line with Mr. Burgart's recommendations.
Pursuing this subject to its conclusion, we next asked: "When young trees failed to grow with you, what percentage of these failures was due to ..." (various causes enumerated below)? The question was misunderstood. Many evidently gave percentages of all trees planted. Others, correctly, gave percentages merely of the trees which failed to grow. As nearly as could be arrived at, about 30 percent of losses were among trees that failed even to start; 40 percent failed from weak growth the first year or two; 10 percent from failure to maintain later growth; 16 percent were winter killed, and 3 or 4 percent died from rodent or similar (mole, gopher, deer, bear) injury. It is evident that by far the greatest losses were suffered within the first two years—not less than seventy percent. Probably more. It would seem that two years of intensive care should not be too burdensome a stint for a reward which lasts a lifetime.
Rodent and similar injuries were no doubt kept low because of extra protective care. Hardware cloth (galvanized wire ¼" mesh, 24" high, preferred) around each tree proved the most common and effective preventive. Following this, in order of use, were: wrapping the trunks (including wrappings of tar paper); mounding with earth or ashes; poison bait, dogs and cats, clean cultivation; resinous paint; spray (with Purdue formula mentioned); and, finally, hogs, against mice.
Anti-rodent treatments which proved injurious to trees were reported to be; tar paper wrappings; coal tar washes; close-set creosoted posts; oil sprays; "any paint"; any chemical to smear on trunks; rooting cement. For those who are located in regions where deer are a source of injury, Mr. J. U. Gellatly, of West Bank, B. C., reports the successful use of an old and heroic Russian formula. Spray or paint all branches with manure water, using hog or human offal. Deer will stay away. Naturally.
Next come answers to some personal questions as to experiences from which the reader may glean a wide variety of suggestions. The first of these questions is: