HAWTHORN VERSUS ORCHARDS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIII, 12 June 1929, Page 2

HAWTHORN VERSUS ORCHARDS

DANGER OF FIREBLIGHT A NORTHERN ORCIiARDISTS AD-YIC-1; Mr J. 11. Kidd, of Cireytovvn, a wellknown orehardist who recently visited Nelson A writes to "The Mail" : —As the prosperity of Nelson is so largely dependent ou fruitgrowing it is obvious that any serious set back to the industry now would be nothing less than a disaster. With this in mind, it seems to me an astonishing fact that no really practical effort;-- are being made by Nelson growers Inwards meeting a very grave danger. 1 refer to thci probability of an outbreak of fireblight in the near future. When the. opinion was generally held that fireblight could not possibly jump the Strait, nn attitude of apathy was understandable, but as this view has been, knocked to pieces by fireblight making its appearance in Marlborough—just next dour to Nelson—does it not seem time that the position shoul.d be faced and the question of 'dealing with hawthorn tackled ahead of the advent of the disease'! 1

One does not have to do much travelling in the Nelson district to realise that there is a big problem ahead, if hawthorn is to be. successfully dealt with. Giant hedges are to bo seen in every direction, but as this plant is the chief agency for spreading the disease it will be impossible to control fireblight it' the hedges remain as a con. tinual source of re-infection.

1 have noticed several letters appearing in some of the papers lately dealing with the hawthorn and fireblight. One writer says they take no notice of the disease in some of the infected districts now and they have plenty of fruit despite it. It would take a lot of that kind of talk to convince some Ilawkes Bay growers, who could prove in their caso that the disease has caused incalculable loss, and in some cases has caused almost an entire loss of crop and damaged prospects for the following season into the bargain. Since the disease appeared in the Masterton borough two years ago it has rpuead right 'throughout the district and this last spring it has appeared in Greytown orchards and has given us a tremendous lot of extra work, and just a hint of what it would mean if no steps were taken to deal with, it in its early stages. Personally, 1 have a very profound respect for the spreading capabilities of this deadly disease.

Mr A'damson, district orchard instructor for Ilawkes Bay, in an article appearing in the "Agricultural Journal" of 20th February. 1929, says: ."Particularly important in connection with firoblight control is the necessity of having hawthorn hedges in commercial fruit areas removed; otherwise in the event of fireblight reaching a district an orchardist is fighting against impossible odds."

Again: "In districts where fireblight does not already exist growers should be specially vigilant and organise for the purpose of dealing with the hawthorn question if or when the time comes." In referring to orchards infested and to the chances of getting rid of the disease, he says: "In the absence of hawtorn near at hand there is a good chance; if hawthorn hedges abound, none."

In another place Mr Adamson says: "We .still find people who are sceptical and are inclined to the opinion that an unnecessary scare has been raised by the Horticultural Division."

I see very little use, in arguing against such authoritative statements as thoso quoted, but 1 would here like to say, that where fireblig'ht is established and while at the same time it is claimed it is rloing little harm, it will, I think, bo found that the orchards are not in the best condition for giving satisfactory re; turns and are probably making very little wood growth. t It is on the young growth .that the disease . makes the greatest progress. On the poorer lands in Nelson I understand the successful growing of fruit is only made possible by heavy fertilisation and careful culture. The trees which under such treatment respond by good wood growth and heavy crops are at the same time making the most favourable kind of growth for the spreading of the disease. Are orcliardists then, to discontinue their up-to-date methods in order to produce a tree- growth less susceptible to firoblight? The question of course ix absurd, and it will pay Nelson growers to bo guided by the experience of other districts which are suffering by early neglect of fireblig'ht. The programme for keeping the disease in check in infected districts is a very exacting one, even when hawthorn is not present and careful and reliable labour is required. What with dealing with holdover cankers in the winter, cutting out infected fruit spurs in the spring, and searching for infected shoots in summer, sometimes as late as February, there is a big call on one's time at a busy period of the year and it all makes a further heavy charge on the already high cost of production. With, all the best authorities agreed that the cost of controlling fireblight is prohibitive in orchards where Ijawthorn is near at hand, what is Nelson going to do about it, with its miles and miles of giant hedges?