Handling Raspberries.—In 1911 the Government investigators made comparative tests of the keeping qualities of carefully handled raspberries and commercially handled raspberries. Several lots of each kind were held in an ice car for varying periods and then examined for the percentage of decay. Other lots were held a day after being withdrawn from the refrigerator car and then examined. The results are most significant.
After 4 days in the ice car it was found that the carefully handled berries showed only 0.4 per cent. decay, while the commercially handled fruit had 4.6 per cent. After 8 days in the car the difference was vastly greater. The carefully handled fruit showed only 2.2 per cent. decay, but with the commercially handled this percentage had risen to 26.7, or more than one-quarter of the entire shipment. When the fruit was examined a day after it had been taken out of the ice car, the evidence was equally strong in favor of careful handling. Carefully handled fruit that had remained 4 days in the car was found a day after its withdrawal to show only 1 per cent. of decay against 17.5 per cent. in commercially handled berries. Carefully handled fruit left in the car 8 days, and then held one day, showed only 8.1 per cent. of decay as against 47.6 per cent. in commercially handled fruit.
The following year experiments were made with actual shipments instead of with the stationary refrigerator car, and the results confirmed previous conclusions. It was found, for example, that there was less decay in the carefully handled berries at the end of 8 days than in the commercially handled berries at the end of 4. Carefully handled fruit that was 4 days in transit, and had then been held one day after withdrawal from the refrigerator car showed less than 1 per cent of decay, whereas commercially handled berries subjected to the same test showed nearly 10 per cent.
Orcharding in Minnesota.
RICHARD WELLINGTON, ASST. HORTICULTURIST, UNIVERSITY FARM, ST. PAUL.
This paper is purposely given a broad title so that it may cover any questions which come under the head of orcharding. Many of you who have been pestered with an "Orchard Survey Blank" can easily guess what subjects are to be taken up. Thanks to many of the members of this society and other fruit growers for their hearty co-operation, a large amount of data has been collected from fifty-three counties, representing most of the districts within the state. As would be expected certain counties have contributed much more information than others, probably owing to their greater interest in orcharding. For example: Thirty-one replies have already been received from Hennepin County, seven from Goodhue, six from Renville, five each from Houston, Meeker and Rice, four each from Chippewa, Dakota, Mower, Polk and Wabasha, three each from Blue Earth, Nicollet, Ottertail, Pine, Ramsey, Steele, Washington and Watonwan and one or two each from the remaining counties. Perhaps if the right parties had been reached the low-standing counties would have a higher ranking.
The best way to present the data is an enigma. If all the information was given at one time we would need a whole day instead of fifteen minutes. Of course much of the material is a repetition, and a general summary will cover the main facts in most cases. Nevertheless it is not feasible to take up all of the subject matter in this short period, and therefore the first two topics on the survey blank have been selected, namely, orchard sites and protective agencies. At a later date, if you are sufficiently interested in dry facts other subjects, as soils, dynamiting, orchard management, stock of fruit trees, methods of planting and pruning, varieties for various localities, etc., will be taken up. Some of the subjects, like sites and soils, will be treated as state problems, while others must be considered as sectional.