Fruitgrowers’ Losses

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXVI, Issue 282, 12 November 1936, Page 6

Fruitgrowers’ Losses

(To the Editor.) Sir,—ln reference to “Taxpayer’s” letter in last night’s “Tribune,” I may state that I am the owner of about two acres of orchard, half being Sturmers and the other half Delicious apple and that the frost nipped every bud, although m.y orchard was very well protected on all sides by high trees, so I am at a complete loss to understand why “Taxpayer” states that the damage was not unpreventable. The frost was a most penetrating one, and it was impossible to save the fruit by even having coal fires going. Of course, some parts of the district suffered less damage, and those with the later varieties came off best.

I am not a squealer, but last year’s gale and this year’s frost have put an idea in my head, that I should put my .axe to work and make better use of my two acres, which cost £4OO. The position is this, “Mr Taxpayer”: there are far too many able-bodied men on sustenance at the present time, and it would be improper to enrol the orchardists when they are prepared to work their orchards.

Orchardists are not rail-sitters expecting something for nothing; they are hard workers, and in return they only get a living—never a fortune; more often a set-back through no fault of their own. I trust that whatever the Government may grant in the way of assistance will be properly shared according to the loss suffered.

I fail to see, Sir, where you have given undue publicity to this cause. The position is serious and you realised that from the beginning and I, for one, wish to thank vou.—Yours, etc., “STILL HOPEFUL.” Hastings, Nov. 11, 1936.