Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

The economic structure of tree fruit farms in the South Okanagan Valley, British Columbia Ware, Dennis William 1952

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1952_A4 W2 E2.pdf [ 9.88MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0106797.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0106797-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0106797-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0106797-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0106797-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0106797-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0106797-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0106797-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0106797.ris

Full Text

THE ECONOMIC STRUCTURE OF TREE FRUIT FARMS IN THE SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY, BRITISH COLUMBIA by DENNIS WILLIAM WARE A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR. THE DEGREE'OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE i n the Department of AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the standard required from candidates f o r the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN AGRICULTURE THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1952. ABSTRACT Tree f r u i t f arms i n the south Okanagan Vall e y are characterized by a high degree of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . Over 95 per cent of the i r r i g a t e d land of these farms i s i n orchard. The farms are small i n area and few li v e s t o c k are kept. Depending on t h e i r l o c a t i o n , the orchards may be c l a s s i f i e d into three main "types, namely, apple, stone f r u i t and combination f r u i t farms. To provide an ins i g h t into the structure, produc-t i o n techniques, and problems of the orchardists, 165 farm business records which had been obtained from the growers i n the years 19*+9 and 1 9 5 0 , were studied and analysed. Also an endeavour was made to answer the question, do the majority of the orchards supply f u l l employment and an adequate i n -come f o r the operators?. The average c a p i t a l investment on these farms was over $ 2 1 , 0 0 0 . On each type of farm, orchard land accounted f o r more than 6 5 per cent of the t o t a l farm investment. Excluding the value of the farm dwelling, machinery and equipment made up the second largest c a p i t a l investment. Apple farms i n the south Okanagan V a l l e y averaged 17 acres i n area, of which 15 acres were i n orchard; stone f r u i t farms averaged 11 acres, of which 9 acres were i n ( 1 ) orchard; and combination f r u i t farms had an average t o t a l acreage of V+ acres, of which approximately 12 acres were i n orchard. The average t o t a l cash receipts f o r these years were $7,276 f o r the apple farmers; $5,551 f o r the stone f r u i t farmer; and $6,95*3 f o r the combination f r u i t farmer. Gn the apple farms 69 per cent of the t o t a l cash receipts were derived from the sale of apples; on the stone f r u i t farms 75 per cent derived from the sale of stone f r u i t s ; and on the combination f r u i t farms, stone f r u i t s provided per cent, and apples 3^ per cent of the t o t a l cash receipts. Labour was the largest single item of expense on each type of orchard, varying from ^9 per cent to 5^ per. cent of the t o t a l current expenses. The average net income on the apple farms was $ 2 , 3 ^ ; on the stone f r u i t farms, $2,783; and on the com-bination f r u i t farms, $2,720. The factors determining the t o t a l output of f r u i t i n any one year include the number of trees, t h e i r age d i s -t r i b u t i o n , the v a r i e t y of f r u i t grown, the amount of c u l t u r a l care, the prevalence of disease and pests, and the weather. Although the year to year production of a l l f r u i t s i n the v a l l e y i s e r r a t i c , the trend i n t o t a l production has been upward. The average output of apricots f o r the three year period, 19^7^ 19^-9, w a s 110 per cent greater than the average (2) output f o r the three year period, 1 9 3 9 - 1 9 1 + 1 . Comparing the same periods, the t o t a l y i e l d of cherries increased by 1 1 0 per cent, peaches by 1^1 per cent, pears by " 8 9 per cent, and apples by M+ per cent. Since 1 9 3 0 the average y i e l d per acre of apple, pear, plum and prune trees.has shown a steady increase, whereas the y i e l d per acre of apricot, cherry and peach trees has varied widely from year to year. The tree population of the south Okanagan has been stea d i l y increasing, but the r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n of the various kinds of tree f r u i t s has changed. In 1 9 2 5 apple trees made up 66 per cent of the t o t a l number of trees; i n 1 9 5 0 they accounted f o r 33 per cent of the t o t a l tree inventory. On the farms studied, the majority of the apple trees were over 2 0 years of age. Most of the apricot, peach, plum, prune, and pear trees were less than 1 5 years of age. On 9 ^ orchards 16 per cent of the apricot, 1 5 per cent of the cherry, 3 1 per cent of the peach, 1 0 per cent of the plum and prune, and *f per cent of the pears were k i l l e d i n the winter of 1 9 ^ 9 - 5 0 . Considering acreage trends, the number of non-bearing trees, and the number of trees to be removed, as well as the average y i e l d , i t would appear that f o r the next few years the general trend i n south Okanagan V a l l e y apple, apricot, plum, prune, and pear production w i l l be upward, while the trend of peach and cherry production w i l l be down-ward. ( 3 ) In general the domestic market takes the Okanagan stone f r u i t and pear crop but the apple grower i s dependent to a large extent upon the export market. Present d e t e r i o r -ation of the apple market presages a trend to further increases i n the plantings of stone f r u i t and pear trees. Volume of production, y i e l d , and the degree of diver-s i f i c a t i o n appear to influence the size of labour earnings. The average t o t a l amount of labour required to pro-duce an acre of apples was 253 hours, an acre of apricots h69 hours, an acre of cherries 608 hours, an acre of peaches 386 hours, an acre of prunes 222 hours, and an acre of pears 350 hours per annum. Although the labour p r i o r to harvest was spread over many months, the t o t a l pre-harvest time was les s than that required f o r harvesting the f r u i t , except i n the cases of peach, apple and pear trees. On studying the influence of y i e l d on labour r e-quirements, i t was found that a doubling of the y i e l d per acre of peaches resulted i n an increase of the harvesting time required by 57 per cent. For pear trees doubling of the y i e l d increased the harvest requirements by 75 per cent. From an economic and s o c i a l viewpoint, i t i s sug-gested that a desireable farm organization f o r the area would be the two family farm. Such a uni t , under long run y i e l d expectations and 19*+9 cost-price relationships, would f u l l y employ two men and provide them with labour earnings of over $3,000 per man, yearly. '00 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The writer wishes to acknowledge his indebtedness to the many persons who with friendly helpfulness aided him in the preparation of this thesis. In particular, I wish to thank: Professor W. J. Anderson, Department of Agricultural Economics, for his courtesy, patient guidance and criticismsj Mr. E. D. Woodward, Canada Department of Agriculture, for making available data and f a c i l i t i e s of the Economics Divis-ion; my wife, Mary Ware, for her loyal and untiring help. Ap r i l , 1952 Dennis W. Ware, i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v LIST OF FIGURES. . . . . . . ." v i i i Chapter I. INTRODUCTION 1 Source of Data I I . THE AREA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Location S o i l Climate Type of Farm Apple Farm Stone F r u i t Farm Combination F r u i t Farm I I I . THE STRUCTURE OF THE PRODUCING UNITS. . . . . 10 Farm C a p i t a l Land u t i l i z a t i o n Buildings Orchard Equipment General Equipment Tractors, Trucks and Autos. IV. THE FINANCIAL SITUATION, 19^8 AND 19^9. . . . 16 Receipts Cash Receipts C a p i t a l Receipts Increase i n Inventory Expenses Current Expenses C a p i t a l Expenses Income V. MAJOR PRODUCTION PROBLEMS. . . . . . . . . . . 23 Trends i n Production Y i e l d per Tree and Per Acre On the Orchards studied In the Okanagan Vall e y 1930-M-9 • i i i Chapter Page Trend i n Plantings Age of Trees P r i n c i p a l V a r i e t i e s of F r u i t Grown Climatic Hazards Future Production Trends Markets Prices Costs per Acre 19kQ and 19^9 Labour Material General Overhead Net Returns per Acre 19^8 and 19^9 V a r i a t i o n i n Labour Earnings VI. LABOUR PROGRAM 63 F e r t i l i z i n g Pruning C u l t i v a t i n g and Mowing Spraying I r r i g a t i n g Thinning Picking Hours of Labour Required Influence of Y i e l d on Labour Requirements VII. SUGGESTED FARM PLANS. . . 73 The Two Family Farm Budgeting Procedure Farm Acreage Plan A—Apple Farm The Orchard C a p i t a l Investment Labour Operating Statement Plan B—Stone F r u i t Farm Plan C—Combination F r u i t Farm VIII. CONCLUSION 98 APPENDICES I* TERMINOLOGY 102 I I . VARIATION IN YIELD. lOh I I I . ACRES IRRIGATED, SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY. . . . 106 IV. ORCHARD ACRES HANDLED BY ONE MAN ;. 10? BIBLIOGRAPHY. . . HO i v LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. D i s t r i b u t i o n of South Okanagan V a l l e y Orchards by Type and Size i n Acres, 19^9 9 2 . Value of Land, Buildings, Equipment, Livestock and Supplies per Farm 11 3 . Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n of Farm C a p i t a l . . . . . 12 Land U t i l i z a t i o n , Acres and Trees per Farm. . . 13 5. Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n of Orchard Acreage. . . Ih 6. Sources and Amount of Cash Income per Farm. . . 17 7. D i s t r i b u t i o n of Current Expenses per Farm. . . 19 8 . F i n a n c i a l Summary, Average per Farm 9. Annual Production of Apples, Stone F r u i t s and Pears, Okanagan Va l l e y 1930-1951 . . . . . . . . . 27 10. Annual Production of Tree F r u i t s , Penticton D i s t r i c t , 19^5-1950. I . . . . . . . 33 11. Average Y i e l d Per Bearing Tree and Per Acre. . 3h 12. Average Y i e l d i n Tons per Bearing Acre Okanagan Vall e y 1930-19^9 35 13. Number of Apple, Stone F r u i t , and Pear Trees Westbank to Osoyoos, 1925-1950 37 l*f. D i s t r i b u t i o n of Apple, Stone F r u i t and Pear Trees by Age Groups. 38 15. Number of Apricot and Cherry Trees Winter K i l l e d . . h2 16. Number of Peach, Plum and Prune, and Pear Trees Winter K i l l e d hZ 17. Age D i s t r i b u t i o n of Apricot and Peach Trees as of December 3 1 , 19*+9 and December 31 , 1 9 5 ^ . . . . 18. Average Prices of Okanagan F r u i t s i n Cents per Pound, f.o.b. Okanagan Points 1920-1950. . . . M-9 19. Total Expense i n Producing an Acre of Apples, Apricots and Cherries. 56 v Table Page 20. Total Expense i n Producing an Acre of Peaches, Prunes and Pears. . . 57 21. Average Y i e l d , Gross Returns, Total Expenses, and Net Returns per acre of Apples, Stone F r u i t s , and Pears 59 22. Frequency D i s t r i b u t i o n of Labour Earnings . . . 59 23. Relation of Size of Farm, Y i e l d , D i v e r s i t y and Net Production per Man to Labour Earnings . . . 62 2h. Months i n Which Various Orchard Operations are Performed on South Okanagan V a l l e y Orchards . . 68 25. Labour Requirements per Bearing Acre, Apples, Stone F r u i t s , and Pears . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 26. The E f f e c t of Y i e l d on Man Hours of Labour Required per Acre of Peaches and Pears 71 27. Estimated Labour Requirements per Acre of Appley, Stone F r u i t and Pear Trees on one Farm 80 28. Postulated Monthly D i s t r i b u t i o n of Labour per Acre of Tree F r u i t s on One Farm 81 29. Anticipated Yields and Price per Acre f o r Various Tree F r u i t s 82 30. Proposed Composition of the Orchard, 32 Acre Apple Farm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 31. Estimated C a p i t a l Investment 85 32. Anticipated Labour Requirements, 32 Acre Apple Farm 86 33. Monthly Labour Requirements, 32 Acre Apple Farm 87 3^. Proposed Composition of the Orchard, 27 Acre Stone F r u i t Farm 90 35. Anticipated Labour Requirements, 27 Acre Stone F r u i t Farm 91 36. Monthly Labour Requirements, 27 Acre Stone F r u i t Farm 92 37. Anticipated Labour Requirements, 32 Acre Combination F r u i t Farm 95 v i Table Page 38. Monthly Labour Requirements, 32 Acre Combination F r u i t Farm 96 39. Variations i n Y i e l d per Acre. . 10h ho. Acres of Orchard Land, Number of Users of I r r i g a t i o n , Westbank-Osoyoos, 19*+9 106 v i i LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Map of the South Okanagan Valley, B.C. . . . . . *f 2. Production of Apples, 7 Year Moving Average, 1930-1951 • • • 28 3. Production of Aprictos and Cherries, 7 Year Moving Average, 1930-1951. . . . 29 h. Production of Peaches, 7 Year Moving Average, 1930-1951 30 5. Production of Plums and Prunes, 7 Year Moving Average, 1930-1951. . • • 31 6. Production of Pears, 7 Year Moving Average, 1930-1951 32 7. Average Price of Cherries, Apricots, Peaches and Apples, 7 Year Moving Average, 1920-1950. . 50 8. Average Price of Plums, Prunes and Pears, 7 Year Moving Average, 1920-1950 . 51 y i i i CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Tree f r u i t farming i n the Okanagan V a l l e y i s a specialized business. I t i s exacting and intensive. Success requires managerial a b i l i t y , adequate c a p i t a l , suitable land, and a knowledge of b i o l o g i c a l processes involved. In the past, economic studies of the orchards of t h i s region have dealt with f r u i t farms s p e c i a l i z i n g i n the production of apples; l i t t l e attention, from an economic viewpoint, has been given to farms s p e c i a l i z i n g i n the production of other tree f r u i t s . 1 However, i f the environmental factors are favourable, most Okanagan Vall e y orchardists produce some of each f r u i t grown i n t h e i r l o c a l i t y . The orchardist looks upon each enterprise (apple growing, peach growing, etc.) as being i n t e r - r e l a t e d , and thinks of h i s farm business as a u n i t , not as a series of separate enterprises. In order to describe the organization ISee- - B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Agriculture, Y i e l d s . Grades, Prices and Returns f o r Apple V a r i e t i e s i n the  Okanagan Valley. V i c t o r i a , B.C. B u l l e t i n No. 90, "n.d." B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Agriculture, Tree  F r u i t Farming i n B.C.. B u l l e t i n No. 13, 1929. Canada, Department of Agriculture, Costs and Returns i n Production of Apples i n the Okanagan Va l l e y . B.C.. Ottawa, : ; Canada, Department of Agricultrue, A Study of Apple  Production i n the Okanagan V a l l e y of B.C.T Ottawa, 1952. - 1 -- 2 -and management of these farms, therefore, the whole u n i t must he studied as well as each separate enterprise. I t i s reasonable to suppose that the goal of most orchardists i s to support t h e i r f a m i l i e s s o l e l y from t h e i r commercial farming a c t i v i t y . I f t h i s i s to be attained, then the orchard business must supply f u l l employment, a suitable income, and be so organized as to be able to with-stand cl i m a t i c hazards and unfavourable p r i c e s . Do the majority of south Okanagan V a l l e y orchards f u l f i l these requirements? In an attempt to answer t h i s question the present structure, expenses, returns, trends and production problems of the industry have been described and analysed. From the findings budgets have been developed which may serve as a guide f o r the orchardists i n planning or making adjustments to t h e i r businesses. Because of differences i n climate and cropping pra c t i c e s , the Okanagan V a l l e y may be divided i n t o three f a i r l y d i s t i n c t regions, namely, the north Okanagan, ex-tending from Salmon Arm to Vernon; the c e n t r a l Okanagan, extending from Vernon to Kelowna; and the south Okanagan, extending from Westbank to Osoyoos. In order to r e s t r i c t the analysis to one f a i r l y homogeneous region, and to l i m i t the d e t a i l involved, t h i s study deals only with or-chards located i n the south Okanagan Va l l e y . Figure 1, following page 3, indicates the l o c a t i o n of the various d i s t r i c t s and centres of population i n the south Okanagan - 3 -V a l l e y . Source of Data The farm business records of 165 orchardists located i n the south Okanagan Vall e y make up the basic data f o r t h i s study. These records were obtained from the in d i v i d u a l growers by members of the Economics D i v i s i o n , Canada Department of Agriculture. Seventy-one of the 165 records were obtained i n the year 19*+9 and 9h i n the year 1950. . They provide data f o r the two calendar years 19k8 and 19*+9« The farm records obtained included a complete statement of the farm business f o r one year, an inventory of farm assets and other factors r e l a t i n g to farm production. These o r i g i n a l data, supplemented by information obtained from D i s t r i c t H o r t i c u l t u r i s t s , o f f i c i a l s of B. C. Tree F r u i t s Ltd., members of the Summerland Experimental Station, and others concerned with the welfare of the whole Okanagan Valley, comprise the material upon which t h i s study i s based. - If -Figure 1.—Map of the South Okanagan Valley, B.C. CHAPTER II THE. AREA Location The Okanagan Depression i s located i n southern, central B r i t i s h Columbia, forming the most important part of what i s known as the Central I n t e r i o r Plateaux Region. In Canada, the v a l l e y extends i n a northerly d i r e c t i o n from the h?th p a r a l l e l to 50° *f5f North, longitude 119° 30* West. It s f l o o r i s r a r e l y higher than 800 f e e t but lake l e v e l s range from 905 feet above sea l e v e l at Osoyoos Lake, at the southern extremity of the Canadian section of the v a l l e y , to 1,121.7 f e e t above sea l e v e l at Okanagan Lake.-1- The Depression contains the many-armed Shuswap Lake i n the north; long, narrow Okanagan Lake; and the Okanagan River flowing through Skaha, Vasseaux and Osoyoos Lakes i n the south. The northern section i s drained into the Fraser River basin while Lake Okanagan i s drained i n t o the Columbia River, south of the border. Sixty per cent of the Depression i s covered by water and the v a l l e y slopes up moderately to rounded, r o l l i n g -topped uplands of *f,000 to 6,000 f e e t . 2 Lakes and bogs found K e l l y , C. C , and Spilsbury, R. H., S o i l Survey of  The Okanagan and Slmilkameen Valleys. B r i t i s h Columbia^ Ottawa, King's P r i n t e r , Report No. 3 of B.C. Survey, 19^9, p.8 Brink, V. C., and Farstad, L., "The Physiography of - 6 -i n these wooded uplands are dammed back and used to supply i r r i g a t i o n water f o r the f e r t i l e "bench lands" of the v a l l e y . The v a l l e y proper i s narrow, p a r t i c u l a r l y south of the approximate h a l f way point of Lake Okanagan. Here, on the west side of the lake, the town of Westbank i s situated, and the v a l l e y south of t h i s point i s the part with which the study deals. The section i s a single, narrow trough ran-ging from 3 to 6 miles wide f o r a distance of approximately 90 miles from Westbank to the Canadian-American Boundary. S o i l A l l s o i l of the v a l l e y i s of g l a c i a l o r i g i n and the chemical c o n s t i t u t i o n varies l i t t l e , and then only as a r e s u l t of water sorting. I t i s c h i e f l y d e f i c i e n t i n boron and re-quires some nitrogen, since p r i o r to i t s present use, the v a l l e y was an a r i d area supporting but sparse vegetation. The g l a c i a l t i l l was l a i d down i n "bench", or terrace formations as the water receded to present lake l e v e l s . These terraces of laminated s i l t which flank the v a l l e y sides and f i l l the bottom, are of feldspathic rock f l o u r , a creamy white colour which may sometimes be over l a i d by sands and gravels.1 The benches are often narrow with rock outcroppings. At lakeside the terraces are sharply c l i f f e d but above are separated by moderate slopes. Although the depth of t h i s s o i l the A g r i c u l t r u a l Areas of B r i t i s h Columbia", S c i e n t i f i c  A griculture. Ottawa, A g r i c u l t u r a l I n s t i t u t e of Canada, June, 19^9, V o l . 29, pp. 282-286. i l b i d j . , p. 285. - 7 -varies from terrace to terrace, a l l benches are several hundred feet thick. In the drier and lower elevations, especially i n the extreme southern portion of the valley, brown soils have developed. Climate The climate of the south Okanagan Valley i s semi-arid. The r a i n f a l l varies from 8 to 12 inches per annum, with 3 to 5 inches f a l l i n g during the growing season, which i s approximately 220 days. The yearly average temperature i s 50° F, with a summer temperature of 70° to 80° F. Extremes of temperature as low as -22° F and as high as 106° F, have been recorded. 2 The s o i l and climate and other environmental fac-tors of the area largely determine the kind of f r u i t grown. As Palmer states: The limiting factors determining the areas where f r u i t can be grown are minimum winter temperatures and avail a b i l i t y of irri g a t i o n water at reasonable cost. Such f r u i t s as sweet cherries, apricots and peaches can be grown to advantage where minimum temperatures remain above minus 12° F. Apples thrive where tem-peratures as low as 20° below zero are encountered. Winter temperatures are moderated by proximity to lakes and rivers, with the result that production of 1 I b i d i , p. 285. 2See—Connor, A. J., The Frost-Free Season i n Brit i s h  Columbia. Toronto, Department of Transport, Meteorological Division, 19^9. B r i t i s h Columbia, Climate of British Columbia'^  Report for 1950. Victoria, B.C., King's Printer, 1951. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, The Okanagan Valley, Circular No. hO, 19*+5* P.7. - 8 -stone f r u i t s i s r e s t r i c t e d to lands l y i n g adjacent to the water, whereas apples can be grown i n areas several miles d i s t a n t . * Type of Farm Thus, because of c l i m a t i c v a r i a t i o n s within the region i t s e l f and because of the various combinations of land, labour, c a p i t a l and management, the orchards of the south Okanagan Valley f a l l i n t o three main types: (1) apple, (2) stone f r u i t , and (3) combination f r u i t farms. Following are d e f i n i t i o n s of each type of farm, as used throughout t h i s study:-Apple farms.-*Those farms i n which 70 per cent or more of the t o t a l orchard acreage consists of apple trees. Stone F r u i t farms.—-Those farms i n which 70 per cent or more of the t o t a l orchard acreage consists of stone f r u i t trees. Combination F r u i t farms.—-Those farms i n which no one kind of f r u i t tree makes up as much as 70 per cent of the t o t a l orchard acreage. On t h i s basis 50 of the 165 farm records studied were apple farms, 66 were stone f r u i t farms, and *+9 were com-bination f r u i t farms. In the whole region h2 per cent of the 1,501 orchards may be described as combination f r u i t farms, 27 per cent as apple farms and 27 per cent as stone f r u i t farms. (Table 1). IPalraer, R. C , " F r u i t Growing Under I r r i g a t i o n i n B.C.", The F r u i t Year Book. London, Royal H o r t i c u l t u r a l Society 19>+9, No. 3 , P. 86. " ; - 9 -TABLE 1 DISTRIBUTION OF SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLY ORCHARDS BY TYPE AND BY SIZE IN ACRES, 19*+9 Acres Type of Farm Apple Stone F r u i t Combination F r u i t No. Per Cent of T o t a l No. Per Cent of T o t a l No. Per Cent of T o t a l 1- h.9 5- 9 . 9 . . . . . . 10-11+.9 15-19.9 20-2M-.9 25 and over.. T o t a l . . . 61+ 152 132 18 30 8 15.8 37.6 32.7 2.0 199 116 68 16 9 h 1+8.3 28.2 16 .5 3.9 2.2 0.9 125 235 228 5^ 28 15 18.2 3^.3 33.3 7.9 i+.l • 2.2 \oi+ 100.0 1+12 100.0 685 100.0 Source: Compiled from data supplied by B. C. Tree F r u i t Board, Kelowna, B. C , 19^9. CHAPTER II I THE STRUCTURE OF THE PRODUCING UNITS Farm C a p i t a l The c a p i t a l structure of the three types of tree f r u i t farms i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n Table 2. Apple and combination f r u i t farms had an average t o t a l investment of approximately $30,000, whereas the stone f r u i t growers had an average c a p i t a l investment of approximately $21,000. On each type of farm orchard land accounted f o r more than 65 per cent of the t o t a l farm investment. The average value of an acre of orchard land was ftlj^ll on the apple farms, $1,620 on the stone f r u i t farms, and $1,600 on the combination f r u i t farms. On each type of farm almost 21 per cent of the aver-age t o t a l farm c a p i t a l was i n buildings, while 9 to 11 per cent was invested i n machinery and equipment. However, i f the value of theiarm dwelling were subtracted from "buildings", machinery and equipment would have comprised the second lar g e s t amount of farm c a p i t a l . Livestock made up but a small part of the c a p i t a l structure of these specialized f r u i t farms. About one-half of the growers kept a small poultry f l o c k , 11 per cent kept one or two c a t t l e , and 10 per cent raised a few hogs f o r home consumption. The c u l t u r a l p r a c t i c e s , labour requirements and - 10 -- 11 -r e l a t i v e l y high expected returns from f r u i t production have deterred development of liv e s t o c k , or poultry, with f r u i t combinations i n the area. 1 TABLE 2 VALUE OF LAND, BUILDINGS, EQUIPMENT, LIVESTOCK, AND SUPPLIES PER FARM; 165 S3UTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS—19^8 and 19^9 Type of Farm Item Apple Stone F r u i t Combination Value % of Tota l Value % of Total Value % of Tot a l Orchard Land.... $19,868 65.9 U S 138 65.3 $19,325 65.9 529 1.8 563 2.6 536 1.8 16 A 3,97^ 18. k h9 96k 16 .9 Other 1,^2 h.Q 860 k.O 1,^37 *K9 Total Real Estate... $26,781 88.9 $19,535 90.3 $26,262 89.5 Orchard Equip. . 1,095 3.6 383 1.8 6^ -2 2.2 Gene r a l Equip. . 56h 1.9 3^3 1.6 •^98 1.7 Tractor, Truck, Automobile.... 1,601 5.3 1,309 6.0 l ,8*f9 6.k Livestock and 93 0.3 65 0.3 60 0.2 $30,13^ 100.0 $21,635 100.0 $29,311 100.0 Some orchardists own or lease non-irrigated range land and raise beef c a t t l e . However, spray material i s a hazard f o r animal or bi r d l i f e i n the orchard. See Benson, W.A., "The E f f e c t of Orchard Spraying on Pheasants i n the Okanagan Valley", Unpublished Masters' thesis, Department of Zoology, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1950. - 12 -The v a r i a t i o n i n the amount of c a p i t a l u t i l i z e d by these orchardists i s l i s t e d i n Table 3 . The modal group f o r the 165 farms was. between $15,000 and $ 2 5 , 0 0 0 . Thirty-seven per cent of the farms were i n thi s range. TABLE 3 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF FARM CAPITAL, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1948 and 194-9 Farm C a p i t a l NO. of Orchards Per Cent of Total Orchards 36 21.8 62 37.7 37 22.4-8 4v8 22 13.3 165 100.0 Land U t i l i z a t i o n . — T h e land use pattern of the three types of f r u i t farms i s shown i n Table 4-. Apple farms i n the s outh Okanagan averaged 17 acres i n area, of which 15 acres were i n orchard; stone f r u i t farms averaged 11 acres i n area, of which 9 acres were i n orchard; and combination f r u i t farms had an average t o t a l acreage of 14 acres, of which approxim-ately 12 acres were i n orchard. On a l l farms the majority of the cherry and apple trees were planted 3 0 1 x 3 0 T apart, while the other kinds of - ^ -f r u i t trees were planted 20' x 20* apart. In Table 5 the frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of a l l the farms by orchard acres i s i l l u s t r a t e d . Most of the orchards were i n the 5-9.9 acres group. TABLE if LAND UTILIZATION, ACBES AND TREES PER FARM, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY FARMS, 19*+8 and 194-9 Item Type of Farm Apple Stone F r u i t Combination Average No. of Acres per Farm Land Use 11.5 1.0 5.0 2.5 6 .5 5.7 1.0 1.5 1.5 T o t a l Orchard.. 15.0 9.0 12.2 2.0 2.0 1.8 17 .0 11 .0 14.0 Average No. of Trees per Farm Use of Orchard Land . 556 54- 315 36 161 100 22 53 106 3if0 208 Prunes and Plums.. 58 74 - 55 100 155 167 - Ik- -TABLE 5 ' . FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF ORCHARD ACREAGE, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19*+8 and 19^9 Group Number of Orchards Percentage of T o t a l Less than 5 acres... 18 11 67 •»fl »+7 28 12 7 20 acres and over... 21 13 165 100 Buildings.—The f r u i t enterprise required few b u i l -dings. In the majority of cases the only buildings, other than the farm house, were inexpensive shelters f o r seasonal" help and f o r machinery and equipment. , Orchard Equipment.—Orchard equipment included those items used only i n connection with the orchard; f o r example, sprayers, spraying costumes, picking bags, pruning shears and saws, ladders, and props. This type of equipment made up a considerable portion of the c a p i t a l u t i l i z e d by the orchardist. The average value of t h i s equipment on the apple farms was $1,095, on the stone f r u i t farms $383, and on the combination f r u i t farms $61+2. The main reason why the apple farmers showed larger investment than the others i n orchard equipment was that 71* per cent of the apple growers owned sprayers and did t h e i r - 15 -own spraying, whereas only 39 per cent of the stone f r u i t farmers had sprayers and the remainder hired t h e i r spraying done. In addition, the apple growers had more money inves-ted i n ladders and props than did the other two types of orchardists. General Equipment.—General equipment included such items as plows, d i s c s , c u l t i v a t o r s , harrows, and small to o l s . The average value of such equipment varied from $3^3 on the stone f r u i t farms to $564- on the apple farms. (See Table 2.) Tractors. Trucks and Automobiles.—The majority of the orchardists had a t r a c t o r . Eighty per cent of the apple and combination f r u i t growers and 68 per cent of the stone f r u i t growers owned one or more. Trucks were found on one-third of the farms while over 75 per cent of the farmers owned automobiles. As would be expected increase of farm size was associated with the degree of mechanization. CHAPTER IV THE FINANCIAL SITUATION, 1948 AND 194-9 Receipts Cash Receipts,—The average t o t a l cash receipts f o r the apple farms was 17,276; f o r the stone f r u i t farms, $5,551; and f o r the combination f r u i t farms, $6,953. On the apple farms 69 per cent of the t o t a l cash receipts were derived from the sale of apples; on the stone f r u i t farms 75 per cent from the sale of stone f r u i t s ; and on the com-bination f r u i t farms, stone f r u i t s provided 4^  per cent, and apples 34- per cent of the t o t a l cash receipts. (Table 6.) Ground crops such as tomatoes and cantaloupes provided 3 and 4- per cent of the t o t a l cash re c e i p t s . Other sources of receipts were custom work and other off-the-farm work. Although these percentages w i l l change from year to year with changes i n y i e l d and price of the various f r u i t s , i t i s c l e a r that these farms depend upon tree f r u i t s f o r the major part of t h e i r incomes. C a p i t a l Receipts.—The revenue derived from the sale of machinery, equipment and land was c l a s s i f i e d as c a p i t a l receipts. Apple farms received an average of $56, stone f r u i t farms $330, and combination f r u i t farms $104, from these sources. The differences were l a r g e l y due to the differences i n the amounts spent f o r c a p i t a l goods on each - 16 -type of farm TABLE 6 SOURCES AND AMOUNT OF CASH INCOME PER FARM, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19^ -8 and 19*4-9 Source Type of Farm Apple Stone F r u i t Combination Value Per Cent Value Per Cent Value Per Cent $ 17k 2.k $ 791 lk.2 $ 65^ 327 k.k 1,133 20,k 962 13.8 556 7.6 2,050 36.9 1,196 17.2 Plums and Prunes. 20k 2.9 225 k.l 263 3.8 T o t a l Stone F r u i t s . . . . $1,261 17.3 $ M 9 9 75.6 $3,075 kk.2 721 9.9 610 11.0 93k 13.5 5,006 68.8 398 7.2 2,385 3^.3 Total Tree F r u i t s . . . . $6,988 96.0 $5,207 93.8 $6,39^ 92.0 51 0.7 189 3.k 308 k.k k2 0.6 22 O.k 80 1.2 195 2.7 133 2.k 171 2.k T o t a l $7,276 100.0 $5,551 100.0 $6,953 100.0 - 18 -Increase i n Inventory.—There was an average net increase i n inventory of $24-5 on the apple farms, 194-5 on the stone f r u i t farms, and $653 on the combination f r u i t farms. These increases i n inventory were the r e s u l t of expenditures f o r new machinery and equipment, and additions to the farm buildings. Expenses Current Expenses.—The current operating expenses of these orchards varied greatly, depending upon the l o c a t i o n , e f f i c i e n c y of management, y i e l d s , type and size of farm. The average t o t a l current expenses on the apple farms were $4-,512$ on the stone f r u i t farms, $2,718; and on the combination f r u i t farms, $4-,036. (Table 7.) Hired labour was the largest single item of expense oh each type of orchard. This was due to the f a c t that i n f r u i t farming a large part of the yearly work i s concentrated i n t o the r e l a t i v e l y short harvest season. Much hand labour Is required and most of i t must be hired. The v a r i a t i o n i n the t o t a l amount spent f o r labour between the d i f f e r e n t types of farms i s caused by differences i n y i e l d which a f f e c t s the labour requirements f o r the d i f f e r e n t f r u i t s . Also, due to the difference i n time of harvest, the available labour supply may be a f a c t o r . Other major items of expense were the operating expenses of the equipment used, f e r t i l i z e r s , spray material, i r r i g a t i o n and land taxes, and custom work. - 19 -TABLE 7 DISTRIBUTION OF CURRENT EXPENSES PER FARM, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19^8 and 19^9 Item of Expense Type of Farm Apple Stone F r u i t Combination Value Per Cent Value Per Cent Value Per Cent $2,2?>k 50.0 $1,072 39.5 $1,877 h6.5 169 3.7 262 9.6 278 6.9 Operation of Equip. 386 8.6 322 11.8 h25 10.5 252 5.6 233 8.6 210 5.2 2h2 5.*+ l H 6 r 5.h 196 if. 8 Spray Material.... 387 8.6 102 3.9 222 5.5 292 6.5 213 7.8 278 6.9 138 3.0 118 h.3 163 h.O h3 0.9 V3 1.6 HQ 1.2' ¥f 0.9 2h 0.9 hi 1.0 25 0.5 29 1.1 30 0.7 9h 2.0 12 O.k hO 1.0 73 1.5 61 2.2 95 2.h 7 0.1 17 0.6 9 0.2 Building: 1 Repairs h5 1.0 11 o.k 23 0.6 Short Term Interest \\ 0.3 Ih 0.5 32 0.8 60 1.3 31 1.1 59 1.5 7 0.1 8 0.3 10 0.3 $^,512 100.0 $2,718 100.0 $^,036 100.0 - 20 -C a p i t a l Expenses.—Expenditures made f o r machinery and equipment, land or major improvements, are c a p i t a l ex-penses. The largest c a p i t a l expenditures where made on the stone f r u i t farms. This could be an i n d i c a t i o n of the re-l a t i v e prosperity of each type of farm. The average value expended was $888 on the apple farms, $1,588 on the stone f r u i t farms, and $1,232 on the combination f r u i t farms. Income Net farm income i s the difference between t o t a l receipts and t o t a l expenses. This i s the amount the operator receives f o r h i s managerial e f f o r t s , h i s labour, and i n t e r e s t on the farm c a p i t a l . From h i s net farm income he must pay the family l i v i n g expenses and any debts on h i s property; or he may use i t f o r savings. The average net farm income on the apple farms was $2,31+6; on the stone f r u i t farms, $2,783; and on the combination f r u i t farms, $2,720. In order to obtain the figure representing the re-turn to the operator f o r h i s labour and to introduce a correc-t i o n f o r differences i n size of farms, i n t e r e s t at h per cent per annum and the imputed value of family labour was deducted from the net farm income.^ Thus, on the average, the operators received a labour income of $972, $1,656, and $1,270 from work ^Four per cent i s mid way between i n t e r e s t paid by Government bonds and rate of interesli charged by the Farm Improvement Loan Board. - 21 -on apple, stone f r u i t , and combination f r u i t farms, respec-t i v e l y . In addition to labour income, the operator received the use of the farm house and: the products raised and con-sumed on the farm. These perquisites, when added to labour income, give the measure known as operator's "labour earnings". The operator's labour earnings represent the t o t a l returns to the operator f o r h i s labour and management, a f t e r a l l cash and non-cash expenses are deducted. The average value of perquisites on the apple farms was $683; on stone f r u i t farms, $563; and on the combination f r u i t farms, $695. When added to labour income, t h i s gave labour earnings of $1,655, $2,219, and $1,965 f o r each of the three types, respectively. - 22 -TABLE 8 FINANCIAL SUMMARY, AVERAGE PER FARM, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19*+8 and 19^9 Item Type of Farm Apple Stone F r u i t Combination $7,276 $5,551 $6,953 56 330 10*f Net Inventory Increase. 2h5 9^5 653 Total Receipts.... 7,577 6,826 7,710 2,^55 3,758 888 1,588 1,232 Total Expenses.... 5,231 S990 2,3l+6 2,783 2,720 h% Interest on Ca p i t a l . 1,205 865 1,172 Operator's and Family l , l * f l 1,918 1,5^8 Unpaid Family Labour... 169 262 278 Operator's Labour 972 1,656 1,270 683- 563 695 Operator's Labour 1,655 2,219 1,965 CHAPTER V MAJOR PRODUCTION PROBLEMS Tree f r u i t farming involves long term commitments. These commitments are quickly made but are quite permanent. After the trees are set out, i t i s 3 to 10 years before they begin to bear, l i g h t l y at f i r s t , g radually reaching t h e i r maximum and then gradually d e c l i n i n g . 1 Thus, because of t h e i r l i f e cycle, the orchardist, i n setting out h i s trees, i s pro-jecting h i s business several decades in t o the future. Every stage i n the l i f e cycle of the trees presents him with a d i f f e r e n t problem. As the trees grow older and l a r g e r , more labour i s required f o r such tasks as spraying, pruning, t h i n -ning, and picking. In deciding what v a r i e t i e s he should plant, the operator must not only decide on the v a r i e t y suited to h i s l o c a l i t y but must also take i n t o account the marketability and the harves ting periods of the f r u i t s . 2 The tree charac-t e r i s t i c s to be considered a r e , — y i e l d , age of bearing, shape x L a Mont, T. E., and De Graff, H. F., Making F r u i t  Farms Pay. C o r n e l l Extension B u l l e t i n 554, 1943, pp. 30-32 2 F o r v a r i e t i e s recommended f o r the South Okanagan see "Tree F r u i t V a r i e t i e s Recommended f o r 1952, Commercial Planting from Lytton to Creston", Country L i f e , Vernon, B.C., January, 1952, p. 8. - 23 -- 2h -and size of tree, vigor, and p o l l i n a t i o n requirements. The f r u i t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s to he considered a r e , — p r i c e , size and shape of f r u i t , colour, f l e s h texture, cooking and desert q u a l i t y . 1 The grower should also attempt to have those var-i e t i e s which enable him to have a continuous and extended harvesting season. By so doing, the peaks i n the demand f o r labour can be l e v e l l e d off and a proper balance between the labour supply and labour requirements can be maintained. A f t e r deciding on the kinds and v a r i e t i e s of trees to be grown, the operator must determine what planting plan he w i l l use, since the tree spacing w i l l a f f e c t the y i e l d and labour requirements of the orchard. The Okanagan A g r i c u l -t u r a l Club (composed of members of various government organ-izations) recommends two planting p l a n s , — t h e ^O1 x hO1 and the 50' x 50' plans—and make the f o l l o w i n g general recom-mend at! ons:-(1) A l l plans should be based on square planting. (2) There should be, no mixing of stone f r u i t s with apples or pears except i n the case of cherries which may be interplanted with pears. (3) F i l l e r s should be used only with apples and sweet cherries. (h) Apples or pears may be used as f i l l e r s f o r apples; whereas peaches, prunes or pears may" be used as f i l l e r s f o r cherries. (5) F i l l e r s should be of early bearing kinds and v a r i e t i e s of f r u i t which when planted with late bearing -LSmock, R. M., and Neubert, A. M., Annies and Apple  Products. New York, Interscience Publishers, 1950, V o l . I I , pp. 9-22. - 25 v a r i e t i e s w i l l provide additional income while the l a t e r bearing kinds of f r u i t , are coming into bearing.1 The orchardist i s also faced with many problems with which he cannot deal directly—problems of o v e r a l l production, markets and p r i c e s — a l l of which have t h e i r o r i g i n beyond h i s p a r t i c u l a r region. These influences a f f e c t him greatly. He cannot adjust h i s production plans as quickly as the changes i n the market demand or price l e v e l occur. A l l the matters of plantings, production, marketing, prices, c l i m a t i c hazards, y i e l d s , labour, and income are related, and the orchardist must take them into account i n planning h i s operations. The more r e l i a b l e his estimates of the s i t u a t i o n are, the more nearly w i l l he maximize h i s p r o f i t s over a period of time. . Trends i n Production The factors determining the t o t a l output of f r u i t i n any one year include the number of trees, t h e i r age d i s -t r i b u t i o n , the v a r i e t y of f r u i t grown, the amount of c u l t u r a l ^ care, the prevalence of disease and pests, and the weather. In addition, l o c a t i o n and management w i l l cause v a r i a t i o n i n the y i e l d pattern between d i f f e r e n t orchards. Since separate figures are not obtainable f o r the south Okanagan Valley, the annual production of a l l tree f r u i t s i n the Okanagan Val l e y from 1930 to 1951 i s l i s t e d i n -'•Okanagan A g r i c u l t u r a l Club, "1951 Recommendations on Tree Planting distances f o r B. C. Growers", Country L i f e Vernon, B.C., March 1951, P. 3 . - 26 -Table 9. The year 194-9 was the peak production year f o r a p r i -cots, cherries, peaches, plums and prunes. The greatest y i e l d of pears and apples occurred i n 1946. On a percentage basis the average output of apricots f o r the three year period, 194-7-49, was 110 per cent greater than the average output f o r the three year period, 1939-41. Comparing the same periods, the t o t a l y i e l d of cherries increased by 110 per cent, peaches by l 4 l per cent, pears by 89 per cent and apples by 44- per cent. This increase i s l a r g e l y due to an increase i n the age of the trees and the number of bearing trees. Also better spacing and other c u l t u r a l methods undoubtedly have aided i n i n -creasing t o t a l y i e l d s . The year to year v a r i a t i o n s i n the t o t a l output of f r u i t i n the v a l l e y i s l a r g e l y due to the fluctuations i n the weather i n the growing and harvesting seasons. The e f f e c t of this c l i m a t i c f a c t o r i s brought out i n Table 9. There was an extremely low output of apricots i n the year 1936. In the year 1950 the extremely cold weather reduced the production of a l l f r u i t s except apples. Even with apples, i f i t had not been f o r the severe winter, 1950 would have witnessed one of the largest crops to date. 1 Although the year to year production of a l l f r u i t s i n the v a l l e y i s very e r r a t i c , the trend i n t o t a l production has been upward, as i l l u s t r a t e d by the 7 year moving averages i n Figures 2-6, following Table 9. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, Forty- f i f t h Annual Report. 1950. King's Pr i n t e r , V i c t o r i a , B.C., 1951, p. BB103. - 27 -TABLE 9 ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF APPLES, STONE FRUITS AND PEARS, OKANAGAN VALLEY, 1930 - 1951 Apples Apricots Cherries Peaches Plums-Prunes a- Pears Year (M-2 l b . (201b. (20 l b . (20 l b . (15 l b . {h2 l b . boxes) crates) crates) crates) Crates) ;rates) t h o u s a n d s 1930 31 32 33 3^ 35 36 37 38 ? 9 19^0 hi h2 & h7 hQ h9 1950,, 3,886 2,9^9 if, 092 if 6l*f if, 289 3,99^ 5,0^0 5 ii»f 5,38H-5,061 3,753 5,270 if, 088 7,596 if, 887 8 ,33* 6,590 6,228 7,502 7,820 if,700 33 99 163 226 139 121 85 125 178 153 136 lif5 2if6 27* 130 102 120 219 222 225 301 160 316 33if 218 99 102 132 325 226 if 128 81 209 228 158 11* ifl5 288 268 187 132 388 325 33 -^176 177 526 363 30* 168 lif6 571 31* 285 189 177 691 587 331 2if3 182 952 382 322 62 218 i f8l 537 31if 363 255 1,302 863 if97 216 390 1,626 1,028 5*3 367 278 1 ,660 1,008 666 290 222 1,880 1,008 571 279 269 1 ,81* 932 58if if5l k L 9 1,923 1,112 580 if6 lifO 206 515 3*5 122 122 1,036 7if8 636 Source: B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, A g r i c u l t u r a l S t a t i s t i c s Report. V i c t o r i a , B.C., 1930-1950 4 lum and prune s t a t i s t i c s reported together u n t i l 1938. b l Preliminary estimates as at November 1st , 1951, B r i t i s h Columbia Department of Agriculture. - 28 - 29 -- 30 -ee-i (1 ) o r r ) -J T3 V3 4-> e i r r i r— 1 c -1—1 f\ c J c ) u 1 2 > T (1 1 r-C ) r p-Y" i I t J f T c — c T 4- > c / • i C c n" r-a 4-c i FT ) < s 1C c ) - c L| c ) I) c - > > f F I 1 t 1 'C -i :c X :t • — -G It i i r— f T t ! I •c L ST C E >orx 4 I - r » f £ r l rH ii A i >-j .-] A L-3 - r V j .c I •C J -c L ! t •I i *€ — A. -| Y •j u ;e d i LC J d II T L_ _c »1 i X x JE K > • € re T L •r h lc l \ 1 T -A € a \ L J P C to .c U L V c J J ' j I i . C > fl J • > c T J J - 31 -an V f| o •> 4J 7 CC f-r • i n i— •\ / A J \ r — r rn ^- ~\ J t r U J / C — ~M i | "4 • -U •p ^ •\ 3 j fl t-i —W n rv "\ 1 A j. t •\ \ ) q 3 :: 3 0 ,1 1 5 5 1 • • y ft i r 0 R • A ft r 1 r n i I- r a 1 (. •it a t i R t. i s H p. n r t i -c t< 3 T 1? e P a r t m e n t o jf A-ft] rt c u 1 ta air I 9 b 1 t> • t> P r 0 a ac i t i 0 n ~c Df P 1 a ra s a n P r u n e s i K ur B •— e 1 -9! r Me I g k e p a g a -0 k a n a* n a +• 1-e y h B 3-• r 9 3 -T T t 3, P f, ro mc.1 n 1 T P 1 1 a n 1 ;> I ^ < a o J. < c ) c P Q i-j r •> j r s; \ r W H c j c c > r •> C a > c c > c > r •> c ft c N > > > c !> P Hi <J V (P « hi Fl w u <-> 1- o TO fl < D fl P l-i •1 Hi ° i I cjt- d o 1 B • \ p? ON CD P • 1 3 1 I, 1 T V $ *V Q ffi H • f t y g o T P. i f fl i J< era f - i P •H i- fc r fp k r D n fl w f d I ( —p»-1 o fl rr 3) tVi H , rt fl) ( ••I rt H hj h r 1 H Nf) rt V <A f Np * i o V CP 1! 7/1 <P CP t H 1 Q N< tn «3 VJ N 0 iU CD P V • p 1 • rt > » P N I 1 | "HESOWENS 315B 10X10 - 33 -In order -to show how f r u i t production varies i n one p a r t i c u l a r d i s t r i c t of the south Okanagan Valley, Table 10 i s presented. Here are l i s t e d the amount of stone f r u i t s , pears and apples produced i n the Penticton D i s t r i c t f o r the years 19*5-50 i n c l u s i v e . From the data, i t appears that the production of plums and prunes i s more stable In t h i s area than the production of other f r u i t s . A high y i e l d of apricots and cherries i n one year i s followed by a smaller crop i n the next year. Apple, pear, and peach y i e l d would seem to follow no regular pattern. TABLE 10 ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF TREE FRUITS;, PENTICTON DISTRICT, .. 19*5 - 1950 Year Apples (*2 l b . boxes) Apricots (20 l b . crates) Cherries (20 l b . crates) Peaches (20 l b . crates] Plums [prunes (15 l b . crates) Pears (*2 l b . crates) t h o u s a n d s -19*5 *92 17 32 197 10 36 8* 19*6 630 22 16 21* 10 *3 9* 19*7 520 16 30 220 12 *2 85 19*8 * 8 l 26 17 206 10 3* 79 19*9 618 38 *3 257 19 55 99 1950 853 2 2k 57 11 *6 78 Source: Data provided by R. P. Murray, Supervising H o r t i c u l t u r i s t , B.C. Department of Agriculture, Kelowna, B.C. - 3* -Y i e l d per Tree and per Acre On the Orchards Studied.—On the 165 orchards studied, y i e l d s varied widely between the d i f f e r e n t orchards, (see ap-pendix). The average y i e l d i n pounds packed per tree and i n tons per acre on these farms was as indicated i n Table 11. TABLE 11 AVERAGE YIELD PER BEARING TREEa)AND PER ACRE, b ) 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19*8 and 19*9 Type of F r u i t Tree Average Y i e l d Per Tree (Pounds) Per Acre (Tons) 368 9.7 153 7.6 220 5.5 1*4-0 7.0 119 6.0 177 8.8 1** 7.0 A l l trees under 5 years were considered non-bearing; peach trees over 5 years were considered f u l l bearing; other trees between 5 and 10 years were counted as h a l f bearing. b) The H o r t i c u l t u r a l Branch of the P r o v i n c i a l Department of Agriculture estimates that each-100 apricot, peach, plum, prune, or pear trees Z 1 acre; while 50 apple, or cherry trees = 1 acre. In the Okanagan V a l l e y 1930-*9.—The average y i e l d of - 35 -the various f r u i t s i n tons per acre f o r * d i f f e r e n t periods, between 1930 and 19*9, i s l i s t e d i n Table 12. The average yi e l d - o f apple, pear, plum and prune trees on a per acre bas i s has shown a steady increase, whereas the y i e l d per acre of apricot, cherry and peach trees has varied from period to period. TABLE 12 AVERAGE YIELD OF APPLE, STONE FRUIT, AND PEAR TREES IN TONS PER BEARING ACRE, ^ OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1930 - 19*9 Kind of Tree Period 1930-193* 1935-1939 19*0-19** 19*5-19*9 1930-19*9 Tons per Acre Apple... * . 8 5.6 6.0 7.0 6.0 Apricot 5.2 3.8 7.2 9.0 6 . * Cherry.. 3.2 2.3 2.9 * . 2 3.3. Peach... 7.1 7.* 6.8 10.1 8.5 Plum b).. - - 6.8 8.0 7.* Prune*5) - 8.0 11.6 10.1 Pear.... 7.1 8.8 8.8 10.5 9.1 Source: A g r i c u l t u r a l S t a t i s t i c s Reports. 1930-19*9; and Orchard Survey of the Okanagan H o r t i c u l t u r a l D i s t r i c t s . 1930-19*5. a - ) A l l trees under 5 years were considered non-bearing; peach trees over 5 years were considered f u l l bearing; other trees between 5 and 10 years were counted as h a l f bearing. 50 apple, or cherry trees = 1 acre; 100 apricot, peach, pear, plum, or prune trees = 1 acre. ^Separate y i e l d s of plums and prunes not available f o r the years 1930-1939. - 36 -Trend i n Plantings In Table 13 the tree population of the south Okanagan Va l l e y f o r the years 1925, 1930, 1935, 19*0, 19*5, and 1950 i s shown. During t h i s 25 year period there has been an increase i n the proportion of stone f r u i t and pear trees to the t o t a l number of trees. In 1925 apple trees made up 66 per cent of the t o t a l number of trees, but i n 1950 they made up 33 per cent of the t o t a l . While the o v e r a l l number of cherry trees has increased, t h e i r r e l a t i v e proportion has remained constant. This i s also true i n the case of plum trees. Prune trees have increased from 1 per cent to 6 per cent of the t o t a l , and peach and pear trees have shown the greatest increase, from 10 and 8 per cent to 26 and 18 per cent, respectively. In terms of acreage there were 8,610 acres of f r u i t trees i n 1925 i n the area extending from Westbank to Osoyoos. 1 In 1950, there were 15,7*8 acres of f r u i t trees i n t h i s region. This i s an average increase of 286 acres per year f o r .the l a s t 25 years; and accounts, i n large measure, f o r the increased output of f r u i t in' the area. Age of Trees The d i s t r i b u t i o n of the apple, stone f r u i t and pear trees by age groups on the farms studied i s shown i n Table 1*. From data such as thi s i t i s possible to estimate the number of trees on these 165 farms which can be considered as non-bearing, bearing, or due f o r possible replacement. -kJomputed on the basis of 50 apple, and cherry trees to the acre and l 0 0 other types of tree to the acre. TABLE 13 NUMBER OF APPLE, STONE FRUIT, AND PEAR TREES, WESTBANK TO OSOYOOS, 1925 - 1950 Year Kind of 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 a ) Tree 1 No. % of Total No. fo Of r o t a l No. % Of Total No. fo Of Total No. fo Of rota] No. % of Total Apple... 335,455 . 66 341,741 66 352,973 54 347,98C 4-9 327,383! 36 377,81? 33 Apricot. 47,655 9 39,877 8 51,879 8 41,923 6 73,873 8 144,065 12 Cherry.. 18,885 4 19,721 4 27,809 4- 29,810 4 40 ,625 4 47,815 4 Peach... 48,387 10 44 ,053 9 124,191 19 168,318 23 269,589 29 296,201 26 Plum.... 8,775 2 8,4-50 2 8,858 1 7,871 1 8,782 1 7,867 - 1 Prune... • 8,382 2 6,891 1 18,008 3 33,131 4 52,995 6 75,482 6 Pear.... 39,114 8 50,577 10 67,986 11 94,345 13 14-3,540 16 199,996 18 T o t a l . 506,653 100 511,310 100 651,704 100 723,378 100 916,787 100 1,149 ,243 100 Source: Orchard Survey of the Okanagan H o r t i c u l t u r a l D i s t r i c t . Department of Agriculture, V i c t o r i a , B.C., 1925-1950. a) 'Owing to winter injury, the 1950 figures must be used with caution. A new sur-vey i s being undertaken. - 38 -TABLE 1* DISTRIBUTION OF A P P L E , STONE F R U I T , AND PEAR TREES BY AGE GROUPS, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19*8 and 19*9 K i n d o f T r e e Age Group 1- 5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21-25 26-30 o v e r 30 No. o f T r e e s *,375 *,922 6,562 10,391 13,673 12,031 2,73* A p r i c o t . . . 5,352 5,52* 3,107 1,899 3*5 3*5 690 C h e r r y . . . . 751 1,366 1,*3* 5*+6. 1,298 683 752 *,201 16,820 10,309 *,961 760 360 7*6 90 *35 *80 75 75 *5 300 1,358 3 ,686 2,910 582 97 97 970 H635 9,51* 6 ,099 2,197 732 732 1+88 The m a j o r i t y o f t h e a p p l e t r e e s were o v e r 20 y e a r s o f age. S e v e n t e e n p e r c e n t were l e s s t h a n 10 y e a r s o f a g e , 31 p e r c e n t were aged 11-20 y e a r s , and 52 p e r c e n t were 21 y e a r s o r o l d e r . S i x t y - t h r e e p e r c e n t o f t h e a p r i c o t t r e e s on the 165 o r c h a r d s , were u n d e r 10 y e a r s o f age, 18 p e r c e n t were between 11-15 y e a r s o f age, 11 p e r c e n t were between 16-20 y e a r s , and 10 p e r c e n t were o v e r 20 y e a r s o f age. C h e r r i e s were f a i r l y e v e n l y d i s t r i b u t e d i n a l l ajge groups e x c e p t i n t h e 16-20 y e a r i n t e r v a l , few c h e r r y t r e e s h a v i n g b e e n p l a n t e d d u r i n g t h e d e p r e s s i o n . I t i s a common p r a c t i c e among t h e o r c h a r d i s t s t o p l a n t a few new t r e e s e a c h - 39 -year. This practice of replacement tends to perpetuate the orchards. Eleven per cent of the peach trees can be considered as non-bearing since they were between 1-5 years, M+ per cent were between 6-10 years, 27 per cent were between 11-15 years, 13 per cent of the trees were at, or neafing, t h e i r maximum bearing, 16-20 years of age. Most of the plum and prune trees were between 6-15 years of age. Thirty-eight per cent of the prune trees i n th i s age group were 6-10 years. Fourteen per cent of the prunes had been planted since 19*5 and were not yet bearing. During the l a s t 15 years there has been a considerable planting of pear trees. Eighty-three per cent of the t o t a l num-ber of pear trees were 15 years.old, or l e s s ; 19 per cent of these trees were non-bearing, having been planted since 19*5» P r i n c i p a l V a r i e t i e s of F r u i t Grown The main v a r i e t i e s of apples grown on the south Okan-agan V a l l e y orchards were Delicious, Winesap, Newtown, and Macintosh. P r i n c i p a l v a r i e t i e s of apricots were Moorpark, Blenheim and T i l t o n . Bings and Lamberts accounted f o r most of the cherry plantings. The-main v a r i e t i e s of peaches were Elberta, Veteran and J. Hale. B a r t l e t t pears predominated i n a l l d i s t r i c t s , followed by D'Anjou. The chief kinds of plums were Bradshaw, Peach plums and Green Gage. The I t a l i a n prune was the only commercial prune grown. - 4-0 -Climatic Hazards Winter injury, of k i l l i n g , of the buds and trees, f r o s t k i l l i n g of the blossoms, h a i l , wind, drought, and r a i n are the main cli m a t i c hazards faced by the growers. Weather forecasts, h a i l insurance, hardier v a r i e t i e s , and a r t i f i c i a l p o l l i n a t i o n , are some of the means by which these r i s k s are * lessened. The following quotation points out the occurrence and damage of h a i l i n t h i s area:-H a i l was reported i n Salmon Arm, Kelowna, Naramata, Penticton and Cawston. In the Salmon Arm and Kelowna area, damage was very s l i g h t . In the ha i l e d area of Naramata and Penticton, damage ranged from a few apples on the exposed side of the tree to almost complete l o s s . This was the t h i r d successive year that h a i l had dam-aged the crop i n t h i s area. However, t h i s year's dam-age was considerably less than l a s t year's and most growers were covered with h a i l insurance. There was a comparatively heavy f a l l of snow during the winter of 1948-4-9 and the cold weather prevailed u n t i l March. The spring was dry and there was even less than usual summer r a i n f a l l . This dry weather cut down on losses from disease and made excellent harvesting conditions. The following winter of 1949-50, was considered to be the coldest the Okanagan V a l l e y has had f o r many years. In the month of January a low of -18° F was recorded at Oliv e r and a low of -22 F at Summerland.2 The cold was prolonged ^ B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, Forty- f i f t h Annual Report. 1950. V i c t o r i a , 1951, p. BB102. 2 I b i d . p. BB101 - *1 -and accompanied by heavy snowfalls, which d r i f t e d i n many places leaving the ground bare. Due to the sustained cold, many f r u i t trees, e s p e c i a l l y apricot, peach and cherry trees, were k i l l e d i n the south Okanagan Valley, Although, i n some d i s t r i c t s , there i s a c e r t a i n amount of winter k i l l i n g every year, the damage i s not usually spread over such an extensive area. The 9* growers who were interviewed i n 1950 were asked to estimate the number of t h e i r stone f r u i t and pear trees that were k i l l e d by the severe winter. Table 15 and 16, following, l i s t the number of trees they estimated to have been k i l l e d . 1 On the 9* orchards from which records were secured, 16 per cent of the apricot, 15 per cent of the,cherry, 31 per cent of the peach, 10 per cent of the prune and plum, and * per cent of the pear trees suffered winter damage. The t o t a l number k i l l e d was 13,51*, or 19 per cent of the t o t a l of 71,228 stone f r u i t and pear trees on these 9* farms. From examination of Table 15 and 16, i t would appear that the youngest and oldest trees suffered the most severely. As the enumerators were primarily interested i n stone f r u i t and pear trees, the damage to apple trees was not ascertained. From s t a t i s t i c s published by the H o r t i c u l -t u r a l Branch of the Department of Agriculture, i t -would appear that about 5 per cent of the apple trees i n the south Okanagan V a l l e y were k i l l e d or damaged. - 1+2 -TABLE 15 NUMBER OF APRICOT AND CHERRY TREES3^ WINTER KILLED, 9* SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1950 Age Apricot Cherry Group % of % of fo Of fo Of No. Total Age Group No. Total Age Group 1- 5 933 6.7 21.6 *2 0.9 6.0 6-10 878 6.3 19.8 320 6.7 35.0 11-15 283 2.0 11.8 206 • * . 3 19.3 16-20 31 0.2 2.0 38 0.7 6.5 21-25 12 0.1 * . 0 37 0.7 3.6 26-30 7 0.1 2.0 e — — Over 3 0 . . 1+1+ 0.3 7.9 10* 2.1 23.1 Total 2,188 15.6 • • • • 7*7 15.* • • • a ;The 9* orchards had a t o t a l of 13,892 apricot and *,83*+ cherry trees; 29,1+71 peach, 7,676 plum and prune, and 15,355 pear trees. TABLE 16 NUMBER OF PEACH, PLUM AND PRUNE, AND PEAR TREESa> WINTER KILLED, 9* SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1950 Peach. Plum t and Prune Pear Age fo Of fo Of fo of % of % of % Of Group No. Tot a l Age Total Age No. Total Age Group No. Group Group 1- 5 . . . 1,1** 3.9 35.0 301 3.9 32.0 112 0.73 3.9 6-10 . . . *,066 13.8 31.5 250 3.2 10.0 *36 2.81+ 7.* 11-15... 2,63* 8.9 33.3 130 1.7 5.2 70 0.*6 1.9 16-20... 898 3.0 22.2 60 0.8 11.2 11+ 0.09 0.1 21-25. . . 1*6 0.5 21.3 1 0.01 1.0 * 0.02 1.0 26-30... 9 0.03 5.3 5 0.06 3.8 11 0.07 2.1 Over 30. 280 1.0 62.2 12 0.20 1.2 0 — — Total 9,177 31.13 • • • • • 759 9.87 • • • • 6*3 *.21 • • • • - *3 -Future Production Trends Future production w i l l be determined by, (1) acreage trends, influenced by the number of non-bearing trees coming into bearing, and the number of dead or d e v i t a l i z e d trees re-moved; (2) average y i e l d , influenced by age d i s t r i b u t i o n , changes i n v a r i e t i e s , the weather, and c u l t u r a l p r a c t i c e s ! and (3) the market demand f o r the various kinds of f r u i t s . Thus, i n order to make an estimate of the probable future production of south Okanagan V a l l e y tree f r u i t s , each of the aforementioned factors must be considered and related to each other. The present bearing acreage consists of the trees aged 6 years or more. By 195* the present non-bearing trees, i . e . , those under f i v e years of age, w i l l be reaching bearing age. The present 5-10 year group w i l l have shifted i n t o the 11-15 year group, and the present 11-15 year group w i l l have shifted into the 16-20 year age group, and so on. However, a c e r t a i n number of these trees w i l l die or have to be re-moved. These trees must be subtracted from the t o t a l number of trees i n order that a proper estimate of the bearing trees can be made. The exact number of trees to be removed i n any one year i s of course, hard to determine, but the number which were winter k i l l e d i n 19*9-50 i s known, and they w i l l have to be removed. Therefore, i f the rate of t r e e removal i s equal to the number estimated to have been winter k i l l e d , then an estimate of the number of trees which w i l l be bearing i n 195* - H-S+ -can be made. Fo l l o w i n g i s the age d i s t r i b u t i o n of the a p r i c o t and peach trees on the 9* farms, surveyed i n 1950, as of Decem-ber31, 19*9, and the probable age d i s t r i b u t i o n of these t r e e s as of December 31, 195*. (Table 17.) Since the rat e of r e p l a n t i n g i s unknown, the number of a p r i c o t and peach tr e e s i n the age group 1-5 years f o r the year 195* has not been estimated and i s shown as unknown i n Table 17. TABLE 17 AGE DISTRIBUTION OF APRICOT AND PEACH TREES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 19*9 AND DECEMBER 31, 195*+, 9*+ SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS Age A p r i c o t Trees Peach Trees Group (Years) No.as of Dec. 31, 19*9 Trees to be Removed No. as of Dec. 31, 195* Na as of Dec. 31, 19*9 Trees to be Removed No. as of Dec. 31, 195* 1- 5 . . . *,308 933 unknown 3,291 1,1** unknown 6 - 1 0 . . . * , * 3 * 878 v 3,375 12,910 *,066 2,1*7 11-15... 2,398 283 3,556 7,913 2,63* 8 ,8** 16 - 2 0 . . . 1,59* 31 2,115 *,05B 898 5,279 21-25. . . 293 12 1,563 68*+ 1*6 3,155 26 - 3 0 . . . 310 7 281 170 9 538 Over 30. 555 ** 81* *50 280 331 T o t a l 9,58* - 11,70* 26,180 - 20,29* As i l l u s t r a t e d i n Table 17, i n 19*9 there were 9,58* a p r i c o t trees aged s i x years or o l d e r on these 9* orchards. - *5 -By 195*, under the conditions stated, there w i l l be 11,70* apricot trees aged 6 years or older on these farms, an i n -crease of 22 per cent i n the number of bearing trees. There-fore, i f c u l t u r a l practices remain the same, and the average y i e l d remains about the same during the next few years, then the trend of apricot production i n the south Okanagan Val l e y should continue upward. In the case of peaches, the opposite i s true. In 19*9 there were 26 ,180 peach trees aged 6 years or older. By 195* there w i l l be 20,29* peach trees aged 6 years or more, a decrease of 22.5 per cent. Thus the output of peaches w i l l be low f o r the next 3 years. Afte r that, the new plantings made i n 1950-51 should be coming into bearing. The same method of analysis was used to determine the number of cherry, plum and prune, pear, and apple trees N -1 which would be bearing on these orchards i n 195*» The f o l -lowing conclusions were reached: on these 9* orchards i n 19*9 there were *,137 cherry trees, aged 6 years or older; by 195* there w i l l be 3,313 cherry trees i n t h i s age group, a decrease of 20 per cent; the number of bearing plum and prune trees w i l l increase by 2.6 per cent, pear trees by 18 per cent, and apple trees by 3 per.cent. From the foregoing analysis, and i n conjunction with the average y i e l d s presented i n Table 12., i t appears that i n Five per cent was taken as an estimate of the number of apple trees winter k i l l e d i n the south Okanagan Valley.. - 1+6 -the next few years the general trend of south Okanagan V a l l e y apple, apricot, plum and prune, and pear production w i l l be upward, while peach and cherry production w i l l decline. With a knowledge of the age d i s t r i b u t i o n of the trees, the average y i e l d , the rate of tree removal and the l e v e l of c u l t u r a l practices, reasonable estimates of the expected output of f r u i t could be made which would aid the industry i n formulating i t s marketing plans and p o l i c i e s more accurately. Markets As the Okanagan Valley is ; the only place i n Canada where apricots are grown commercially, the grower has the domestic market f o r his product. The supply has not yet ex-ceeded domestic requirements; over 500,000 lugs were imported from the United States i n 1 9 5 0 . 1 Seventy per cent of the Okanagan apricot crop i s taken by the f r e s h f r u i t market from V i c t o r i a to Winnipeg and the processing plants i n B r i t i s h Columbia take the remaining 30 per cent. Okanagan Vall e y cherries go to three main markets, (1) the fresh f r u i t market from V i c t o r i a to Winnipeg, (2) the fresh f r u i t market i n Eastern Canada, and (3) processors i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The fresh f r u i t market from V i c t o r i a to Winnipeg takes 75 per cent, Eastern Canada's fresh f r u i t trade •'•British Columbia F r u i t Growers' Association, Report  of J. B. Lander, Sales Manager. 63rd Annual B.C.F.G.A. Conven- tion., Pentictoh, B.C.. Kelownaj 1952T p. 2. _ k 7 -takes 5 per cent and the processors i n B.C. take 20 per cent. As yet there has been no marketing problem; the domestic market has taken a l l the f r u i t produced. In normal times Western Canada takes approximately 63 per cent of the Okanagan peach crop as f r e s h f r u i t , while Eastern Canada takes 2 per cent. The remainder, 35 per cent, i s sold to processors i n B r i t i s h Columbia. There i s some competition from Ontario and the United States peaches, but to date, the Okanagan product has commanded a premium over the others. F i f t e e n per cent of the Okanagan prune crop goes to B r i t i s h Columbia processors; 8* per cent i s taken by the fresh f r u i t trade from V i c t o r i a to Winnipeg; Eastern Canada takes 1 per cent as fresh f r u i t . About 25 per cent of the plums produced go to ,the processors, and the remainder are taken by the fresh f r u i t trade, ^he geographical p o s i t i o n of the Okanagan V a l l e y does not permit the production of plums comparable to those grown i n C a l i f o r n i a , which are superior i n uniformity, quality, and grade. 1 Thus the marketing agency, B.C. Tree F r u i t s Ltd., experiences great d i f f i c u l t y i n marketing the Okanagan V a l l e y plum crop. Eastern Canada takes 30 per cent of the Okanagan pear crop as fresh f r u i t , while Western Canada takes I+-5 per Ibid.. p. 3 . - 1+8 -cent. Processing plants i n B r i t i s h Columbia take the remain-ing 25 per cent. One v a r i e t y of pear which has become d i f -f i c u l t to market i s the Flemish Beauty, thus i t i s no longer recommended f o r planting. Normally over 50 per cent of the Okanagan V a l l e y apple crop goes on the export market. Of the remaining 50 per cent, approximately 1* per cent i s processed. B r i t i s h Columbia takes about 17 per cent of the f r e s h f r u i t , the p r a i r i e provinces about 50 per cent, Eastern Canada 29 per cent, and the Maritimes h per cent. In summary, the domestic market takes care of the Okanagan stone f r u i t and pear production while the apple grower i s dependent, to a large extent, upon the export market. Present d e t e r i o r a t i o n of the market presages a trend to further increases i n the plantings of stone f r u i t , and pear trees. Prices The f l u c t u a t i o n i n prices over the years i s shown i n Table 18. These prices are average f o r f r u i t , f'.d.b. the Okanagan Vall e y f o r the years 1920 to 1950 i n c l u s i v e . They are not the prices the growers received; one would have to know the margin between the s e l l i n g agency and the grower to enable such a figure to be computed. To make them com-parable, prices are a l l on the basis "per pound packed". On the whole, prices received per pound f o r apricots and - 1+9 -cherries have remained constantly higher throughout than those paid f o r the other f r u i t s . TABLE 18 AVERAGE PRICES OF OKANAGAN FRUITS IN CENTS PER POUND PACKED, F.O.B. OKANAGAN POINTS,- 1920-1950 Year Apples Apricots Cherries Peaches Plums Prunes Pears Cents per Pound 1920 0 . 0 * 0.1* 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.07 0.05 1921 .03 .08 .09 .06 .06 .06 . 0 * 1922 .02 .08 .07 . 0 * .03 .03 .03 1923 .03 .07 .07 .01+ . 0 * . 0 * . 0 * 192* .03 .10 .10 .06 .05 .05 .05 1925 .03 .09 .11 .06 .05 .05 .05 1926 .03 .06 .07 . 0 * .03 .03 .03 1927 . 0 * .10 .13 .07 . 0 * .02 .05 1928 .03 .06 .10 .0* .06 .03 . 0 * 1929 .03 .08 .12 .05 .08 .03 •°? 1930 .03 .08 .11 . .06 .05 . 0 * . 0 * 1931 .02 .06 .08 .05 .01+ . 0 * .03 1932 .02 .06 .06 .05 .02 . 0 * .02 1933 .02 .08 .09 .06 .05 . 0 * .03 193* .02 .07 .07 .05 .03 . 0 * .03 1935 .02 .07 .08 .06 .05 .01+ .03 1936 .02 .07 .06 . 0 * .11 .10 .03 1937 .02 .05 .09 .01+ . 0 * . 0 * .03 1938 .02 .06 .08 . 0 * .05 .03 .02 1939 .02 .06 .06 . 0 * . 0 * .02 .03 19*0 .02 .06 .08 . 0 * . 0 * .03 .03 19*1 .03 .06 .10 .05 .05 .01+ . 0 * 19*2 .03 .06 .11+ .05 .06 .05 .06 19*3 .05 .12 .21 .,08 .09 .08 .06 19*1+ .01+ .10 .18 .07 .07 .06 .06 19*5 .05 .10 .18 .06 .06 .03 .06 19*6 .05 .06 .16 .06 .06 .05 .06 19*7 .05 .08 .17 .06 .05 .05- .06 19*8 .05 .08 .15 .07 .07 .06 .07 19*9 .01+ .10 .15 .07 .08 . 0 * .07 1950 .01+ .11 .20 .10 .09 .07 .07 Source: Okanagan Federated Shippers' Association, Kelowna, B.C. - 50 -- 52 -Costs per Acre 19*8 and 19*9 The average t o t a l cost of producing an acre of apples i n 19*8, and an acre of the other tree f r u i t s i n 19*9, i s shown i n Tables 19 and 20. A l l expenses have been taken into account except a wage f o r the operator. The various items of expense are l i s t e d under four headings—Labour, Material, General, and Overhead. The expenditures f o r such items as labour, f e r t i l i z e r , spray material, and custom work, are amounts which the farm operators spent on the p a r t i c u l a r f r u i t ; other expenses, such as taxes and in t e r e s t on c a p i t a l have been apportioned on the basis of the s p e c i f i c tree acreage to t o t a l crop acreage. Since the records were secured from d i f f e r e n t l o c a l -i t i e s which have d i f f e r e n t land and water tax rates, and because the various tree f r u i t s d i f f e r i n t h e i r bearing age, labour requirements, and productivity, the expenditures :£or each kind of f r u i t d i f f e r . One would expect that charges f o r use of land, buildings, u t i l i t i e s , insurance^ and i r r i g a t i o n , and land taxes would be the same f o r each kind of f r u i t grown on one i n d i v i d u a l farm; however, because Tables 19 and 20 are averages of a number of separate u n i t s , these f i x e d costs vary f o r each kind of f r u i t tree. These Tables, as well as the descriptive material given above, i s presented as a framework from which judgements, or decisions, can be made. Also they are a means of securing necessary physical and cost data needed to derive budgets for any p a r t i c u l a r farm organization. A discussion of the various expense items - 53 -follows below. Labour.—Labour made up h2 per cent of the t o t a l cost per acre of apples, *3 per cent of the t o t a l cost per acre of apricots, 55 per cent of the t o t a l cost per acre of cherries, h2 per cent of the t o t a l cost per acre of peaches, *3 per cent of the t o t a l cost per acre of prunes, and 28 per cent of the t o t a l cost of producing an acre of pears. The variations are due to differences i n y i e l d and labour re-quirements f o r the p a r t i c u l a r f r u i t s . Wages paid per hour d i f f e r e d between jobs and between sexes. Women were paid 55 to 65 cents per hour f o r picking and thinning, while men were paid 70 to 75 cents per hour f o r s i m i l a r tasks. For some f r u i t s , the pickers were paid by the box. The most common rates paid were 8 or 9 cents per box of apples, 20 cents per box of apricots, *+5 cents per box of cherries, 18 cents per box of prunes, and 10 cents per box of pears. In addition, many growers gave a bonus i f the pickers stayed with them a l l the harvest period. Under average conditions, 9 loose boxes of apples, 3 loose boxes of apricots, 2 loose boxes of cherries, h loose boxes of peaches, h loose boxes of prunes, 6 loose boxes of plums, or 8 loose boxes of pears, respectively can be picked by one man i n an hour. M a t e r i a l . — M a t e r i a l expenses made up of f e r t i l i z e r s and spray materials, d i f f e r with the kind of tree grown. Cherry trees were f e r t i l i z e d more heavily than the other kinds of f r u i t trees. On the farms studied, approximately 950 l b s . of commercial f e r t i l i z e r s were applied per acre of cherry trees, and 500 to 700 l b s . per acre of the other tree f r u i t s . The most common f e r t i l i z e r s used were 16 - 2 0 - 0 , Sulphate of ammonia, and ammonium n i t r a t e . Many of the growers also applied boron. Although manure i s scarce i n the v a l l e y , about 25 per cent of the orchardists purchased i t at an average cost of $ 5 . 0 0 per ton. Taken together, a l l f e r t i l i z e r s made up 3 to 9 per cent of the t o t a l spent per acre of f r u i t trees. Spray costs were more per acre of apples and pears due to the extra spraying they received. With the other f r u i t s , spray material accounted f o r only 1 to 3 per cent of the t o t a l cost, whereas with the apple and pear trees t h i s was about 7 per cent of the t o t a l cost. General.—Use of equipment, including f u e l and repairs f o r the tractors and trucks was the second largest item or expense per acre of f r u i t . Trucking the f r u i t to the packing houses at 2-§- cents per box made up a large portion of the charge f o r custom work. As with other types of farming, the orchardist faces the usual r i s k s of f r o s t , f i r e , h a i l , and occupational hazards. Some of these r i s k s can be insured against, some cannot. The majority of the growers insured t h e i r buildings against f i r e ; a good percentage took out h a i l insurance; and quite a number had some form of employee l i a b i l i t y to protect both themselves and t h e i r workers. Compared to some of the - 55 other cost items, insurance was of a very minor nature. Other expenses were charges f o r such items as c u l l s , f a u l t y box estimation, short-term i n t e r e s t , bee re n t a l , and trees. Overhead.—The orchard land and buildings con-s t i t u t e an operating u n i t . Such expenses as depreciation, inter e s t on investment, and taxes on land and f o r water cannot be r e a d i l y s h i f t e d . These items were designated as overhead expenses and they made up from 12 to 26 per cent of the t o t a l expenses shown i n Tables 19 and 20. The majority of the orchardists 1 expenses are f i x e d . Even though they have no crop, i f they wish to keep the orchards i n condition f o r future production, they must prune, spray, i r r i g a t e , and pay land taxes. The; main variable i s hired labour, that i s labour f o r thinning and harvesting. - 56 -TABLE 19 TOTAL EXPENSE IN PRODUCING AN ACRE a) OF APPLES, APRICOTS AND CHERRIES, 6VSOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1948 and 1949 Kind of F r u i t Item of Expense Apple Apricot Cherry % % $ % $ % Labour 197.18 40 .1 234.79 39.7 398.16 53.1 11.44 2.3 20.15 3.4 15.71 2.1 Material 21.98 4.5 32.73 5.5 63.73 8.6 3^.71 7.1 8.28 1.4 12.26 1.6 General Use of Equipment.. 74.58 15.2 101.57 17.2 92.4-3 12.3 24.47 5.0 30.04 5.1 37.11 4.9 2.26 0.4- 1.57 0.3 1.69 0.2 3.14 0.6 1.40 0.2 3.27 0.4 I r r i g a t i o n Repairs 2.33 0.5 2.05 0.3 14.72 2.0 15.67 3 ' 2 15.98 '2.7 14.32 1.9 Overhead 12.08 2.4 15.57 2.6 10.. 05 1.3 Interest on Land.. 67.61 13.8 95.96 16 .2 70.52 9.4-17.54 3.6 20.77 3.5 10.83 1.4 Use of Building... 6.47 1.3 11.12 1.9 5.87 0.8 491.46 100.0 591.98 100.0 750.67 100.0 ; Y i e l d — A p p l e s , 8.5 tons, Apricots, 9.1 tons, Cherries, 7.2 tons per acre. TABLE 20 TOTAL EXPENSE IN PRODUCING AN ACRE a ) OF PEACHES, PRUNES AND PEARS, 55 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19*9 Kind of F r u i t Item of Expense Peach Prune Pear $ % $ % $ % Labour 1*2.98 35.6 150.38 35.0 153.83 26 .9 26 .9* 6.7 3*. 23 8 .0 11.03 1.9 Material -28.30 7.1 1*.03 3.3 25.09 *.* 9;88 2 .* 12.39 2.9 3*. 99 6.2 General Use of Equipment. 65.12 16.2 78.10 18.2 11*. 0i+ 20.0 28.33 7.0 20.73 * . 8 35.89 6.3 . 3.55 0.9 1.76 0 . * *.18 0.7 I r r i g a t i o n Repair 3.17 0.8 1.53 0 . * l . * 8 0.2 1.30 0.3 3.35 0.8 * . 0 0 0.7 6.1+7 1.6 0.*6 0.1 15.80 2.8 Overhead 13.0* 3.3 15.79 3.6 28.11 * . 9 Interest on Land. 56.36 1*.0 68.02 15.8 111.56 19.5 12. *2 3.1 2*+.*9 5.7 25.03 *.* Use of Building.. *.01 l . o . *.17 1.0 6.1+2 1.1 *01.87 100.0 *29.*3 100.0 571.*5 100.0 ;Yield—Peaches, 7.2 tons, Prunes, 7.9 tons, Pears, 9.6 tons per acre. Net Returns Per Acre 1948 and 194-9 Net returns are the difference between t o t a l receipts and t o t a l expenses. Table 21 l i s t s the average y i e l d , gross returns, t o t a l expenses and net returns per bearing as re f o r the various f r u i t s . These are the averages of the 119 orchards whose operators had given d e t a i l e d information pertaining to one s p e c i f i c tree f r u i t . (Table 19 and 20.) The average net return from an acre of apples was $65.00, from an acre of apricots $635.00, from an acre of cherries $1,399.00, from an acre of peaches $292.00, from and acre of prunes -$70.00, and from an acre of pears $327.00. The order of p r o f i t a b i l i t y was, therefore, cherries, apricots, pears, peaches, apples, and prunes. I t must be. remembered that 1949 was an exceptionally good year f o r cherries, while In the case of prunes the crop on the whole was of poor quality and part of i t was dumped. Under the conditions p r e v a i l i n g , i t was necessary to have a y i e l d per acre of approximately 7.5 tons of apples, 4-.4 tons of apricots, 2.5 tons of cherries, 4-.2 tons of peaches, 9.4- tons of prunes, and 6.7 tons of pears to equal the average t o t a l costs per acre. V a r i a t i o n i n Labour Earnings The labour earnings of the 165 orchardists varied widely. I t w i l l be noted that the majority of the orchardists had^  labour earnings i n the range of $1,000-$1,999.. There was approximately the same v a r i a t i o n within each type of orchard. - 59 -TABLE 21 AVERAGE YIELD', GROSS,RETURNS, TOTAL EXPENSE, AND NET RETURNS PER BEARING ACRE a' OF APPLES, STONE FRUITS, AND PEARS, 119 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1948 and 194-9 Item & Kind of F r u i t Apple Apricot Cherry Peach Prune Pear Average per Bearing Acre 8.5 tons 9.1 tons 7.2 tons 7.2 tons 7.9 tons 9.6 tons Gross Return.. $556 $1,227 $2,150 $694 $359 $898 Total Expense. $491 . $ 592 $ 751 $402 $429 $571 Net Return.... . $ 65 $ 635 $1,399 $292 - $ 70 $327 a ^ A l l trees under 5 years considered non-bearing. Peach trees 6 years and older considered bearing; other trees 6-10 years considered bearing. TABLE 22 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF LABOUR EARNINGS, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1948 and 194-9 Labour Type of Farm A l l Farms % of To t a l Earnings Apple Stone F r u i t Combination Number of Orchards Plus $ 5 , 0 0 0 or more 2 8 ; 1 11 7 4 , 0 0 0 - $ 4 , 9 9 9 6 2 5 13 8 3,000-<;.3,999 3 4 4 11 6 2 , 0 0 0 - 2,999 8 16 6 30 18 1 , 0 0 0 - 1,999 14- 17 16 47 29 1- 999 5 11 10 26 16 Minus $ 1-$ 999 9 •• 5 4 18 11 1,000 or more 3 3 3 9 5 Total 50 66 4-9 165 100 - 60 -The question arises, why i s there such a wide v a r i a t i o n i n the labour earnings of these orchardists? A few of the many reasons are, differences i n y i e l d , size of farm, kind and grade of f r u i t produced, e f f i c i e n c y of labour and management, lo c a t i o n and degree of d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n . A l l of these factors have a d i r e c t bearing on the size of the producer's earnings. Because i t has been demonstrated i n many farm management studies that above mentioned factors do influence the size of the operator's earnings, only one table w i l l be used to i l l u s t r a t e these f a c t s , and not a separate sorting f o r each fa c t o r under consideration. 1 In Table 23 the influence of these factors i s demonstrated. The 165 orchard records were sorted into 3 groups on the basis of t h e i r labour earnings. Group 1 i n -cluded one-third of the records which had the lowest labour earnings, group 2 included the t h i r d having middle labour earnings, and group 3 had the t h i r d of the records having the. largest labour earnings. The r e s u l t s of t h i s table show that on the average, the operators who had the highest labour ear-nings, had the largest farms, averaging over 13 crop acres per farm, or having a volume of production of over $9,000 per S e e — B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, Tree F r u i t Farming i n B.C.. B u l l e t i n No. 13, 1929, p. 29. Canada, Department of Agriculture, Costs and  Returns i n Production of Apples i n the Okanagan Valley, B.C.. Ottawa, 194-5, P. 25. Canada, Department of Agriculture, A Study of Apple  Production i n the Okanagan Valley of B.C.. Ottawa, 1952, P.26. farm. They also had the highest average y i e l d s , as measured by a crop index, and were the most d i v e r s i f i e d farms. This group of farmers used t h e i r labour most e f f i c i e n t l y , having a net production per man of $3>4-ll+. This was the only group i n which the operator's labour earnings exceeded the average net productivity per man. In other words, i n the other two groups the returns to hired and family labour were greater than those received by the operators. Another f a c t o r influencing the size of the oper-ator's labour earnings i s the age of the operator. The i n -d i v i d u a l farm operators vary from young men, who are working under the necessity of meeting.current expenses and paying f o r t h e i r farms, to older men.of 65 years or more, who own t h e i r farms and are seeking to make a l i v i n g from f r u i t farming without too strenuous a l i f e . Six per cent of the operators were under 3 1 years of age; 36 per cent were between 31 and 4-5 years of age; the largest group, 4-0 per cent, were between 46 and 60 years of age; and 18 per cent were aged 61 or more. This difference i n age probably accounts to some extent, f o r differences i n farm organization and scale of operations. - 62 -TABLE 23 RELATION OF SIZE OF FARM, YIELD, DIVERSITY AND NET PRODUCTION PER MAN TO LABOUR EARNINGS, 165 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1948 and 194-9 Item Unit Lowest Labour Earnings Middle Labour Earnings Highest Labour Earnings Number 55 55 55 C a p i t a l per Farm.... Dollars 2 6,317 24 , 8 0 2 27,74-7 Crop Acres per Farm. Acres 1 0 . 7 9 . 9 1 3 . 1 Volume of Production Dollars 4 , 9 8 1 5,701 9 , 0 6 8 Per Cent 89 106 119 Number of Sources of $ 1 , 0 0 0 income Number ' 1.2 1.8 2 . 5 Net Production per Dollars 1,015 2,010 3 , 4 1 4 Operator's Labour Dollars• -122 1,651 4,142 CHAPTER VI LABOUR PROGRAM For purposes of analysis, the labour required to produce any of the f r u i t s may be divided i n t o three main . p a r t s , — (1) Pre-Harvest (2) Harvesting. (3) Grading, packing, storing, and marketing As few growers take part i n the actual marketing of t h e i r product, t h i s study w i l l only be concerned with the tasks i n the f i r s t two c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s . In the f i r s t group of operations, termed "pre-harvest", are such jobs as f e r t i l i z i n g , c u l t i v a t i n g , pruning and removing brush, mowing, spraying, propping, i r r i g a t i n g , and thinning. In the second group, termed "harvesting", are such operations as d i s t r i b u t i n g boxes, picking, loading and hauling, and cleaning up a f t e r the harvest. A short discussion of some of these tasks follows; and i n Table 2h the usual seasonal d i s t r i b u t i o n of the various orchard tasks i s shown. F e r t i l i z i n g The growers must f e r t i l i z e i n order to maintain a - '63 -6* -high humus and nitrogen content i n t h e i r s o i l s . Seventy-f i v e per cent of them f e r t i l i z e t h e i r orchards i n the f a l l , u sually i n the month of November. Twenty-five per cent f e r t i l i z e i n the spring, mainly because of a labour c o n f l i c t i n the f a l l . Experimental evidence, from tests conducted by Ben Hoy before 1930, showed that better r e s u l t s were ob-tained from f a l l f e r t i l i z a t i o n . 1 Pruning The majority of the growers do t h e i r pruning i n the months of January, February or March. I t has been found that i t i s best to prune i n these months because, as Childers sayss-I t i s more hazardous to prune i n November and December than l a t e r i n the dormant season because evidence has shown that extremely cold temperatures following the pruning operation are l i k e l y to r e s u l t i n serious freezing i n j u r y to the trees.2 The t o t a l time required to prune w i l l depend on the kind, v a r i e t y , age, and number of trees. Pruning i s a s k i l l e d operation. I t must be remembered also that a considerable amount of.time i s required i n hauling away and disposing of the prunings. Much of t h i s l a t t e r work i s done i n A p r i l . Repairing Repairing consists of mending the damage done by -'•Statement by Dr. J . C. Wilcox, Summerland Experi-mental Station, to the author. 2 C h i l d e r s , N. F., F r u i t Science. J . B. Lippincott and Co^, New York, 19*9, p. 61. - 65 -winter i n j u r y or by mice, or other rodents. Mice constitute a problem i n the orchards, e s p e c i a l l y when cover crops are used. This job i s usually done i n A p r i l or May. Mice control measures are carried out i n November and December. C u l t i v a t i n g and Mowing C u l t i v a t i o n of the orchards i s c a r r i e d on i n A p r i l , May October and November. Too much c u l t i v a t i o n i n the spring increases the amount of erosion, expecially with furrow i r r i g a t i o n . Mowing i s customarily done p r i o r to harvest to enable the t r a c t o r s , t r a i l e r s and sprayers to move f r e e l y about i n the orchards. Spraying Depending upon the kind of f r u i t grown, and the pest or disease f o r which the spraying i s done, some spraying w i l l be c a r r i e d on each month from March to September. The general practice i s to begin the spray schedule with an ap-p l i c a t i o n of lime sulphur and o i l to the dormant trees i n March or early A p r i l . The grower then continues h i s spray program throughout the season by applying two or three cover sprays of D.D.T., Parathion, or other materials, as conditions may require-. The important thing i s the timeliness of the operation. The use of one man sprayers i s becoming more common throughout the v a l l e y with the r e s u l t that less labour i s required f o r t h i s task. - 66 -I r r i g a t i n g Water i s usually applied to the orchards from the month of May u n t i l the middle of September. The amount of water to be applied w i l l depend upon how wet or dry the season i s and the type of s o i l to be i r r i g a t e d . The various jobs with spr i n k l e r i r r i g a t i o n are moving the l a t e r a l s and making minor repairs; with furrow i r r i g a t i o n , the furrows must be made and maintained, mole holes plugged, and the flow of water continually checked. Thinning In order to secure f r u i t of desirable size and grade, a l l f r u i t trees, except cherry and prune trees are thinned. This operation i s conducted i n the months of May, June, and July. Chemical thinning i s being practiced more and more throughout the v a l l e y . The results of t h i s l a t t e r procedure have been quite variable to date."1" I f successful, i t reduces materially the labour required f o r t h i s task. Picking This operation i s one of the greatest users of labour. Cherries are picked i n l a t e June and i n July; peaches, apricots, and plums i n August; pears i n September; and apples i n August, September, and October. D i f f e r e n t v a r i e t i e s mature at d i f f e r e n t times, thus extending the picking season. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, Forty- f i f t h Annual Report 1950. V i c t o r i a , B.C., p. BB119. - 67 -The usual picking pattern f o r the d i f f e r e n t v a r i e t i e s of f r u i t grown a r e , — Cherr i e s — B i n g s and Lamberts Apricots—Moorpark, Blenheim, and T i l t o n Peaches—Elberta, Veteran, and J. H. Hale P e a r s — B a r t l e t t , and D'Anjou Apples—Mcintosh, Delicious, Winesap, and Newtown. Fro greatest e f f i c i e n c y i n harvesting, the plantings should be divided between a number of v a r i e t i e s which mature successively. By such means the harvest season can be ex-tended and labour requirements spread over a longer period. However, i n actual p r a c t i c e , the varying y i e l d s of the d i f f e r e n t v a r i e t i e s make the harvest labour requirements uneven, no matter how well the orchard i s planned. In addition to the various orchard tasks mentioned, considerable time i s required to repair and maintain the farm buildings, machinery, and other equipment. These chores are usually done i n the slack periods during the winter months. Hours of Labour Required In Table 25 the number of man hours required to pro-duce an acre of the various f r u i t s i s shown. The t o t a l amount of labour required to produce an acre of apples was 253 hours, an acre of apricots 469 hours, a n t . acre of cherries 608 hours, an acre of peaches 386 hours, and an acre of prunes 222 hours, an acre of pears 350 hours. Although the labour p r i o r to har-vest i s spread over many months, the t o t a l pre-harvest time was less than that required f o r harvesting the f r u i t , except i n the cases of peaches, apples and pears. TABLE 2h MONTHS IN WHICH VARIOUS ORCHARD OPERATIONS ARE PERFORMED ON SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS Tasks Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. F e r t i l i z i n g Pruning?... Repairing.. C u l t i v a t i n g Spraying. I r r i g a t i n g . Thinning... Picking Cherries. Peaches.. Apricots. Plums.... Pears.... Prunes... Apples... - ---i Sources Discussions with D i s t r i c t H o r t i c u l t u r a l i s t s and Growers. Includes removing brush. - 69 -TABLE 25. LABOUR REQUIREMENTS PER BEARING ACRE,a) APPLES, STONE FRUITS, AND PEARS, 119 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19*8 and 191+9 Operation Apple Apricot Cherry Peach Prune Pear Average Hours per Acre Pre-Harvest F e r t i l i z i n g 2 5 7 3 *. 5 Pruning.... 63 62 3* 73 29 76 Repairing.. 2 1 2 1 1 2 Cu l t i v a t i n g 3 8 2 3 7 7 Spraying... 16 7 8 5 7 13 Propping... h 3 - 3 6 6 I r r i g a t i n g . 20 56 22 *1 31 38 Thinning... 67 73 - 9* - 77 T o t a l . . . 177 215 75 223 85 22* Harvest D i s t r i b u t i n T 10 15 16 11 5 10 Picking.... 58 230 507 IhO 126 108 Loading & Hauling.... 6 . 6 9 H 5 7 C o l l e c t i n g 2 3 1 1 1 1 Total... 76 25* 533 163 137 126 A l l Labour... 253 *69 608 386 222 350 a ^ Y i e l d per acre—Apples 8.5 tons,, Apricots 9.1 tons Cherries 7.2 tons, Peaches 7.2 tons, Prunes 7.9 tons, Pear 9.6 tons. - 70 -Influence of Y i e l d on Labour Requirements One would expect that as the y i e l d per acre of the various f r u i t s increased, the time required f o r the harvest operations would increase, whereas the time required f o r most of the pre-harvest operations would be r e l a t i v e l y the same. To t e s t t h i s hypothesis 30 records which gave a break-down of the labour requirements to the peach enterprise, and 23 records dealing with the pear enterprise, were divided into two groups on the basis of y i e l d per acre. In the case of the peach enterprise these two groups were:-1. . Those orchards with y i e l d s below the average y i e l d of the whole group, i . e . , below 7 tons per acre. 2. Those orchards with y i e l d s above the average y i e l d of 7 tons per acre. The records dealing with the pear enterprise were s i m i l a r l y divided into two groups on the basis of above or below an average y i e l d of 9.6 tons per acre.. In Table 26 the average time spent i n producing an acre of peaches and pears at 'the two l e v e l s of y i e l d s i s i l l u s t r a t e d . The average y i e l d of peaches per acre i n the high y i e l d group of orchards was twice that of the low group. This doubling of the y i e l d resulted i n an average increase of 57 per cent i n the harvesting time. In the pear group of orchards, the average harvesting time required i n -creased by 75 per cent with almost a 100 per cent Increase i n y i e l d . - 71 -TABLE 26 THE EFFECT OF YIELD ON MAN HOURS REQUIRED PER ACRE OF PEACHES AND PEARS, 53 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 1949 Peaches Pears Item H e l d below Y i e l d above Y i e l d below Y i e l d above average (14 average (16 average (12 average (11 orchards) orchards) orchards) orchards) Average Y i e l d i n Tons per Acre 4 . 3 1 0 . 4 6 . 7 13.1 Average Hours per Acre Pre-Harvest F e r t i l i z i n g 2.3 3.7 3 .2 2.6 Pruning.... 6 9 . 0 7 8 . 3 6 0 . 3 91.8 Spraying... 4 . 2 6 . 0 5.1 1 4 . 9 Propping... 2.3 3 . 3 2 . 2 3 . 0 C u l t i v a t i n g 3 . 2 3 .3 8 . 0 8 . 1 I r r i g a t i n g . 4 1 . 8 3 9 . 3 3 8 . 0 4 6 . 6 Thinning... 7 5 . 9 116.9 6 1 . 9 7 4 . 4 T o t a l . . . 198.7 250.8 178.7 24-1.4 Harvest Distributing 9 . 6 12.2 8 . 8 11.1 Picking.... 111.6 175.8 >86.4 .' 154.4 Loading & Hauling.... 7.7 15.3 4 . 9 1 0 . 2 T o t a l . . . 128.9 203.3 1 0 0 . 1 175.8 A l l Labour... 327.6 4 5 4 . 1 2 7 8 . 8 417.2 I f there had been a s u f f i c i e n t number of records, the data could be further refined by selecting orchards with the same topography, same type of i r r i g a t i o n and spraying equipment, but with high and low.yields. However, the data as presented does indicate that as the y i e l d per acre i n -creases, harvesting time increases, but not i n d i r e c t proportion. In the pre-harvest operations, although the labour requirements increased as the y i e l d increased, i t i s d i f -f i c u l t to say which i s the cause or the r e s u l t . C e r t a i n l y the c u l t u r a l practices such as f e r t i l i z i n g , pruning and thinning do influence the r e s u l t i n g y i e l d . CHASTER VII SUGGESTED FARM PLANS -Tree f r u i t farms i n the south Okanagan Valley are characterized hy a high degree of s p e c i a l i z a t i o n . Over 95 per cent of the i r r i g a t e d land of the farms i s i n orchard. The farms are small i n area and there i s l i t t l e crop produc-t i o n other than fruit.. Few livestock": are kept. The high expected incomes and the desirable surroundings have been c a p i t a l i z e d into the value of the land. Alternatives f o r d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n , other than to d i f f e r e n t tree f r u i t s , are limited as long as the trees stand. The production of f r u i t i n any one year may be reduced by winter k i l l i n g of trees or-buds, f r o s t k i l l i n g . of the blossoms, incomplete p o l l i n a t i o n , h a i l , and drought. Thus, while the acreage i s r e l a t i v e l y stable from year to .' year, production of f r u i t fluctuates, widely. The r e s u l t i s widely f l u c t u a t i n g incomes f o r the growers. The loss of . export markets has appreciably reduced the apple grower's income. Many of these men are now planting stone f r u i t s and pear trees i n place of apple trees. The results of such changes i n emphasis w i l l not show up. f u l l y f o r another 5 to 10 years because of the l i f e cycle of the trees. At the - 73 -- 7 * -same time, there i s increasing competition from other regions i n Canada f o r the domestic pear market. The preceding analysis also indicates a highly variable s i t u a t i o n e x i s t i n g amongst i n d i v i d u a l farms as to prices received f o r the f r u i t , the cost s i t u a t i o n , size of orchard, and combination of various f r u i t enterprises. I t should be c l e a r from the study so f a r , that only with favour-able cost-price re l a t i o n s h i p s , sizeable y i e l d s , and close attention to orchard management, can the f r u i t grower earn an adequate income. Many growers have made and are making a good l i v i n g from f r u i t farming. But i n 19*8 and 19*9, 60 per cent of the farmers had labour earnings of less than $2,000 per annum., Other studies made i n the area have reported s i m i l a r f i n dings. In the short run, the only al t e r n a t i v e f o r these men i s to s e l l out. In the long run, t h e i r alternatives would be to f i n d some other employment or to increase the volume of t h e i r business, or to change the type of farm. . A few growers f i n d part-time employment at other jobs, but part-time farming i s not possible f o r a l l i n an area which i s a g r i c u l t u r a l . I t i s therefore suggested that many of the growers should attempt to enlarge t h e i r holdings and i t should be the p o l i c y of the various groups concerned to encourage such a program. The hypothesis i s offered that from an economic and s o c i a l viewpoint a desirable goal f o r the orchardists would be the two family farm. ^.C. Dent, of A g r i c , Tree F r u i t Farming i n B.C.. B u l l e t i n No. 13, 1929, p. 35. Canada, Dept. of A g r i c , op. c i t . . p. 6 - 75 -The Two Family Farm The term as used here, refers to a farm of s u f f i c i -ent area and volume of business to provide f u l l employment* for two men and suff i c i e n t r net income f o r the support of these men and t h e i r f a m i l i e s . The two men may be father and son, two partners, or a working owner-operator and a year round hired man. This size of unit i s often c a l l e d a two man farm but the term—two family farm— w i l l be used here because of the permanency which i t implies. 1 Such a farm organization would o f f e r many economic and s o c i a l advantages. The farm would be of s u f f i c i e n t size to permit the ownership and economical use of such c o s t l y equipment as tra c t o r s , sprayers and tr u c k s . On a per acre basis., the annual overhead cost of such equipment i s less on a larger u n i t than on a smaller one. The equipment on the larger orchard i s u t i l i z e d at a point closer to the maximum than i t i s on the smaller orchard. • Underemployment on farms i s as serious a problem as unemployment i n industry. The two family farm would permit a desirable degree of d i v e r s i f i c a t i o n to be planned. This would aid i n providing f u l l employment of the men and machines. There would always be two s k i l l e d men on the farm and operations which require two men would be f a c i l i t a t e d . -'•Shultis, A. E., Extension Economist, University of C a l i f o r n i a , seems to have introduced t h i s term. - 76 -V a c a t i o n s c o u l d be t a k e n , and r o t a t i o n s o f work c o u l d be made. These f a c t o r s would a i d and i m p r o v e t h e w e l l b e i n g o f t h e o p e r a t o r s and s h o u l d i n t u r n improve the e f f i c i e n c y o f t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n . A s e r i o u s p r o b l e m c o n f r o n t i n g a g r i c u l t u r e t o d a y i s g e t t i n g young men s t a r t e d i n f a r m i n g . Few have the n e c e s s a r y c a p i t a l . The two f a m i l y f a r m would be o f s u f f i c i e n t s i z e t o e n a b l e a f a t h e r and s o n t o work t o g e t h e r , and f o r t h e f a t h e r t o t r a n s f e r t h e o w n e r s h i p t o h i s s o n as a g o i n g c o n c e r n when i t came t i m e f o r r e t i r e m e n t . The c a p a c i t y o f the f a r m t o p r o d u c e would t h e n r e m a i n u n i m p a i r e d ; and t h e l i f e t i m e s a v i n g s o f t h e f a t h e r c o u l d be r e t u r n e d more s u r e l y t o h i m as t h e s o n took o v e r o w n e r s h i p . I n o t h e r w o r d s , the f a t h e r would a c t u a l l y be c r e a t i n g a n o p p o r t u n i t y f o r t h e s o n . A f t e r t h e son o b t a i n e d o w n e r s h i p , he c o u l d t h e n employ a n o t h e r man f u l l - t i m e , o r t a k e h i s b r o t h e r , o r some o t h e r p e r s o n i n t o p a r t n e r s h i p . I t has been d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t farms r u n down as t h e f a r m o p e r a t o r a g e s . 1 W i t h two men o f d i f f e r e n t ages o n t h e f a r m , , t h i s would n o t be t h e c a s e b e c a u s e one o p e r a t o r w o u l d be maturing w h i l e the o t h e r was d e c l i n i n g . Thus t h e s i z e o f u n i t , as v i s u a l i z e d , would i n t e g r a t e t h e l a b o u r f o r c e , p r o v i d e employment and adequate income f o r t h e two g e n e r a t i o n s L o n g , E . J . , and P a r s o n s , K . B Y . How F a m i l y L a b o u r  A f f e c t s W i s c o n s i n F a r m i n g . M a d i s o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f W i s c o n s i n , B u l l e t i n 167, 1950. - 77 -as they overlap. This would apply i n the case of father and son, or r e t i r i n g landlord, and tenant. Most farm families wish to stay together and keep the farm i n the family, ^he two family farm would be a means of achieving t h i s end. This s t a b i l i t y would permit the plan-ning of better cropping programs and would aid i n conservation. Therefore, considering a l l these f a c t o r s , i t i s suggested that a two family farm would provide f o r a better use of resources and would aid i n s t a b i l i z i n g the tree f r u i t industry of the south Okanagan Valley. In order to i l l u s t r a t e the structure of a two family tree f r u i t farm, examples of an apple, stone f r u i t , and combination f r u i t farm have been prepared. However, before presenting them the procedure by which they were de-rived must be explained. •> Budgeting Procedure The analysis so f a r has presented a picture of the structure, costs, and returns of each of the three farming types i n the area. I t has also revealed the y i e l d , p r i c e and market trends of the industry. The p h y s i c a l resources used have been described. This knowledge of the value and p h y s i c a l data has been used as the source of input-output relationships on which the a l t e r n a t i v e two family farming systems are based. In the budgets presented the long run y i e l d expec-tations are derived from the data shown i n Tables 11 and 12. Physical inputs are those from the farms studied, supplemented - 78 -by further research. Income, costs and other value figures have been computed on the basis of 19*9 p r i c e s . This step was taken to f a c i l i t a t e comparisons of the suggested farm plans with the ex i s t i n g structure of the industry. The labour requirements f o r these al t e r n a t i v e farms' were obtained by the use of the averages given i n Table 26 f o r such operations as pruning and harvesting. However, i n the case of such tasks as repairing tree damage, c u l t i v a t i o n , spraying, propping, and i r r i g a t i o n , a constant per acre figure f o r each kind of f r u i t was used. These figures were derived from a general knowledge of the industry, a study of the modal groups f o r each f r u i t , and from the l a t e s t a v a i l -able figures pertaining to the a r e a . 1 The estimates are shown i n Table 27. Farm Acreage In terms of acreage, how large should the two family apple, stone f r u i t and combination f r u i t farms be? This w i l l depend upon a number of fa c t o r s , including the a b i l i t i e s of the operators, l o c a t i o n , and s o i l . However, the farm should be of such a size to u t i l i z e e f f i c i e n t l y the labour of the two men. According to Schultzs The labour resources of a family farm are deemed to be employed e f f i c i e n t l y when the rewards f o r t h e i r e f f o r t s are equal to rewards f o r comparable human Economics D i v i s i o n , Canada, Department of Agriculture, "A Study of Furrow and Sprinkler I r r i g a t i o n i n the Okanagan Valley, 1951", Unpublished data, Vancouver, B.C. - 79 -e f f o r t s i n other occupations i n the economy. Rewards i n t h i s context are i n r e a l terms i n contrast to monetary rewards and include the value that members of the farm family place on l e i s u r e . . . and other non-monetary values ascribed to farming. 1 The d i s t r i b u t i o n of man labour requirements through-out the year are also fundamental i n determining the acreage required. From the data presented i n Tables 2k and 27 was derived the possible monthly labour requirements of eaeh kind of tree on one i n d i v i d u a l farm. This i s shown i n Table 28. The available labour force on these alternative farming systems i s at l e a s t ^,800 hours. (300 working days x 8 hours per day x 2 men.) Using the d i s t r i b u t i o n of labour as shown i n Table 2*+, and bearing i n mind the d e f i n i -tions of an apple, stone f r u i t , and combination f r u i t farm, a uni t of 32 acres was decided upon as a s a t i s f a c t o r y acreage f o r the apple or combination f r u i t farms, and 27 acres f o r the stone f r u i t farm. Such acreages would allow f o r the farmstead, non-bearing orchard, and bearing orchard. One re a l i z e s that two men may operate e f f i c i e n t l y a larger or smaller acreage than those given. These a r b i t r a r y figures have been given because of the e x i s t i n g structure of the industry and the data l i s t e d . i S c h u l t z , T. W., Production and Welfare of A g r i c u l - ture. New York MacMillan Co., 1950, p. 33. - 80 -TABLE 27 ESTIMATED LABOUR REQUIRED PER ACREa^ OF APPLE, STONE FRUIT AND PEAR TREES ON ONE FARM F r u i t Trees Operation Apple Apricot Cherry Peach Prune Pear Hours per Acre Pre-Harvest F e r t i l i z i n g 3 4 7 4 4 4 Pruning.... 63 62 34- 73 30 76 Repairing.. 2 2 2 2 2 2 C u l t i v a t i n g 3 3 3 3 3 3 Spraying... 6 i+ 4 4 6 Propping... 3 3 - 3 3 3 I r r i g a t i n g . 15 15 15 15 15 Thinning... 67 52 - 110 72 T o t a l . . . 162 . 145 65 214 61 181-Harvesting Picking.... 58 195 289 150 135 108 Other Harvest... 17 17 16 19 13 17 T o t a l . . . 75 212 305 169 14-8 125 Total Labour 237 357 i 370 383 209 306 'Y i e l d per acre—Apples 8.5 tons, apricots 6.5 tons, cherries 3.5 tons, peaches 8.5 tons, prunes 9 tons, pears 9 tons. - 81 -TABLE 28 POSTULATED MONTHLY*) DISTRIBUTION OF LABOUR PER ACREb) OF TREE FRUITS ON ONE FARM Months Kind of F r u i t Apple Apricot Cherry Peach Prune Pear Hours per Acre January.... 10 10 10 10 10 10 February. 10 10 10 10 10 10 2k 2* , 12 25 11 27 26 2k 8 3* 6 30 2k 16 6 , l+l 6 29 2k 2k 103 kO l+ 28 31 29 208 . 1+6 3 28 8 215 k 172 7 8 September.. k7 1 1 1 li+8 126 October.. 30 k l+ 1+ ,1+ November... 3 - - - - .' . December... - - - - -Total 237 357 370 383 209 306 'Based on monthly d i s t r i b u t i o n as shown i n Table 2k. b) Yi e l d per acre—Apples 8 . 5 tons, apricots 6 . 5 tons, cherries 3*5 tons, peaches 8 . 5 tons, prunes 9 tons, pears 9 tons. - 82 -Plan A—Apple Farm This plan i s devised f o r a farm which i s so located that a majority of the f r u i t trees must he apple trees but a few apricot, cherry, peach, prune, and pear trees can be grown successfully. Ninety per cent of a l l the trees are of bearing age. In Table 29 the long run expected y i e l d and the anticipated prices f o r the f r u i t s are l i s t e d . TABLE 29 ANTICIPATED YIELD a^ AND PRICE b) PER ACRE FOR THE VARIOUS TREE FRUITS Kind of F r u i t Y i e l d Price (Tons per Acre) (Dollars per Ton) 8.5 $ 62 6 .5 179 3.5 317 8.5 118 9.0 81 9.0 115 a ;Based on y i e l d data shown i n Tables*11 and 12. Canada, Quarterly B u l l e t i n of A g r i c u l t u r a l  S t a t i s t i c s . Ottawa, King's P r i n t e r , Jan.-Mar., 1951, p. 80. The Orchard.—Table 30 i l l u s t r a t e s the proposed com-po s i t i o n of the orchard. The v a r i e t i e s l i s t e d are grown i n the area and are recommended f o r planting i n the south Okanagan Valley. The plantings are on the square and the d i f f e r e n t kinds of f r u i t are planted i n blocks. The t o t a l farm acreage i s 32 acres of which the non-bearing trees take up 3 acres, the bearing trees 27 acres and the farmstead 2 acres. TABLE 30 PROPOSED COMPOSITION OF THE ORCHARD, 32 ACRE SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY APPLE FARM Kind"of F r u i t Variety Distance Trees Apart . No. of Trees Per Acre Ac Bearing re Non-Bearing Apple.... Apricot.. Cherry... Peach.... Prune..... Total Red Delicious Golden Delicious Winesap 30»x30' 30'x30' 30'x30» 48 48 48 1 8 . 2.0 Moorpark T i l t o n 25'x25'. 25'x25' 70 70 1.8 0.2 Bing Lambert Deacon Van* 30'x30« 30"x30« 3 0 , x 3 0 ' 30'x30« 48 48 48 48 1.8 0.2 V a l i a n t Vedette Veteran 25'x25' 25'x25 f 25'x25' 70 70 70 1.8 0.2 I t a l i a n 25'x25' 70 1.8 0.2 B a r t l e t t D1 An j ou 25»x25' 25'x25' 70 70 1.8 0.2 • • • • • • • • • • • • 27.0 3.0 K F o r commercial t r i a l only. - 8* -C a p i t a l Investment.—The c a p i t a l structure of t h i s two family farm i s shown i n Table 31. A c a p i t a l investment of 1 7 2 , 2 6 5 i s required. The land and building values are reasonable estimates based on figures given by the growers i n 1950. The values l i s t e d f o r the sprayer, t r a c t o r , sprinkler system, and other equipment were those l i s t e d by equipment firms which service the south Okanagan Valley. The f i g u r e given f o r orchard supplies i s an estimate of what the operators have on hand. Labour.—The.anticipated labour requirements of the farm are shown i n Table 32. A t o t a l of 7,*31 hours are re-quired. Table 33 shows the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the labour require-ments throughout the year. From i t can te determined how much labour i s required, i n addition to that provided by the two men and t h e i r f a m i l i e s . An allowance i s made f o r extra family help i n the summer months. -^ 1 though there i s a t o t a l of 5,160 available operator and family labour hours, an additional 2,965 hours of labour must be hired. Operating Statement.—The operating statement of this farm business i s presented on page 88. Such a u n i t would have a t o t a l gross cash income of $18,557, t o t a l cash expenses of $6,968 and non cash expenses of $3,92*. The expected labour earnings f o r each family i s $*,582. - 85 -TABLE 31 ESTIMATED CAPITAL INVESTMENT, 32 ACRE APPLE FARM, 'SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY Item Value Land—32 acres at $1,400 per acre. . $44,800 Buildings Houses ( 2 ) . . . . .' 15,000 Machine Shed 1,000 Pickers Camp . 1,500 T o t a l Real: Estate......... ..... $62,300 Machinery and Equipment Sprayer (Turbo Mist) 2,200 Tractor. ..... 2,050 Sprinkler System...................... 2,315 Truck ( i Ton). 1,900 T r a i l e r . 400 Ladders 120 Picking Bags .................. 90 Pruning Shears and Saws .«.••• 65 Props.*...... 200 Mower, discs and harrow.............. 525 T o t a l Machinery and Equipment..... $ 9,865 Orchard Supplies . . . . . . . . 100 Total C a p i t a l Investment.......... |72,265 - 86 -TABLE 32 ANTICIPATED LABOUR REQUIREMENTS, 32 ACRE SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY APPLE FARM Kind of F r u i t Task Apple Apricot Cherry Peach Prune Pear Tot a l Hours of Labour F e r t i l i z i n g 60 8 1* 8 8 8 106 Pruning and Removing 1,260 12* 68 1*6 60 152 1,810 Repairing... *0 * 1+ if '* 60 Cu l t i v a t i n g and Mowing 60 6 6 6 6 6 90 Spraying.... 120 8 8 8 8 12 16* Propping.... 5* 5 - 5 5 5 7* I r r i g a t i n g . . 300 30 30 30 30 30 *50 Thinning.... 1,206 9* - 198 - 130 1,628 1,0** 351 520 270 2*3 19* 2,622 Other Harvest 288 29 27 32 22 29 *27 T o t a l . . *,*32 659 677 707 386 570 7,*31 TABLE 33 MONTHLY LABOUR REQUIREMENTS, 32 ACRE SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY APPLE FARM Months Tasks Performed Total Hours Required Available Labour (Hours) Labour to be Hired (Hours) Pr .. *68 1+00 68, February.... Pr 518 *00 118 Pr S 638 1+00 - 238 C S I R Pr 350 *00 ... -1 S T 662 hOO • 262 I S T Ch 681 \ 1+00 281 I S T Ch P 1,197 520 677 I C S P Ap Pe 881 520 361 September... I A Pw Pa 1,21* 520 69* A 666 *00 266 November.... F 106 *00 - • December.... •- 1+00 -Total.. 7,*31 5,160 2,965 Legend: Pr = pruning. S = spraying. C = c u l t i v a t i n g or mowing. I » i r r i g a t i n g . R » repair* T = thinning. Ch = pick cherries. P = propping. Ap = pick apricots. Pe = pick peaches. Pw = pick prunes. Pa = pick pears. A • pick apples. F - f e r t i l i z i n g . - 88 -Operating Statement—Apple Farm Receipts Apples 153.0. tons at f 62/ton $ 9 ,486 Apricots 11.7 tons at $179/ton 2,094-Cherries 6.3 tons at $317/ton. 1,997 Peaches 15.3 tons at $ l l 8 / t o n 1,805 Prunes 16 .2 tons at $ 8 l/ton. 1,312 Pears 16 .2 tons at $115/ton........ . 1,863 Total Cash Receipts............... $18,557 Expenses (Cash) Land Taxes ($8 per acre).......... $ 256 I r r i g a t i o n Taxes ($17 per acre)........ 510 Hired labour (75^ per hour) 2 ,224 Operation of equipment 1,960 F e r t i l i z e r (5.5 tons ammonium n i t r a t e ) . 352 - (60 tons manure)... * ,300 Spray material (lime su^hur. Dormant o i l , D.D.T. ) 776 Other ( u t i l i t i e s , short term i n t e r e s t , insurance, bee r e n t a l , c u l l charges, i r r i g a t i o n r e p a i r s ) . . . . 590. Total C ash Expenses $.6,968 Non Cash Expenses Depreciation on buildings (2%%)........ 4-25 Depreciation on equipment ( 1 2 $ ) . . . . . . . . 1,160 Interest on investment (4$ x value. of building and equipment, and land) 2,339 T o t a l Non Cash Expenses.... $3,924-. T o t a l Farm Expenses . $10,892 Family Labour Income 7,665 Perquisites {10% value of house)....... 1,500 Family Labour Earnings 9,165 Labour Earnings of Each Family.............. $ 4,582 - 89 -Plan B—Stone F r u i t Farm Following i s the farm plan of a two family stone f r u i t farm. In t h i s case the l o c a t i o n i s such that stone f r u i t s , pear and apple trees can be grown successfully. Yields per acre and prices f o r each kind of f r u i t are the same as i n Plan A. Table 3* i l l u s t r a t e s the proposed composition of the orchard. The largest acreage (9 acres) i s planted to peach trees. Apricot and cherry trees occupy 5 acres each and there are 6 acres of prune, pear and apple trees. The t o t a l c a p i t a l i s $68,250. Although the land i s valued higher ($1,600 per-acre) than was the case with the apple farm, there i s less t o t a l acreage and less i r r i g a t i o n equipment required. In Table 35 the anticipated labour requirements f o r the stone f r u i t farm are given. Table 36, following, i l l u s -trates the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the labour requirements throughout the year. On t h i s farm the labour peak comes i n July and August because the demands of the cherry,, peach and apricot trees are greatest i n these months. More labour must be hired than was the case with the apple farm. However, since the labour requirements are more concentrated, there are 6 months i n the year when no extra help, i s needed. The operating statement of t h i s orchard shows volume of sales greater than on the apple farm. TJiis i s due to the greater amounts of higher priced stone f r u i t s sold. Under the conditions given, the labour earnings per family are $6,550. - 90 -TABLE 3*f PROPOSED COMPOSITION OF THE ORCHARD, 27 ACRE STONE FRUIT FARM, SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY Kind Variety Planting No. of Acre of Fruit Distance of Trees Trees Per Acre Bearing Non-Bearing Peaches Val i a n t 25'x25' 70 Vedette 25'x25' 70 8.1 0.9 Veteran 25'x25« 70 Apricots Moorpark T i l t o n 25'x25' 25'x25' 70 70 * . 5 0.5 Cherries Bing 30'x30« 1+8 Lambert Deacon 30'x30« 30'x30' 1+8 1+8 0.5 Van* 30'x30« 1+8 Prunes.. I t a l i a n 25'x25' 70 1.8 0.2 Pears... B a r t l e t t D 1An j ou 25'x25' 25'x25' 70 70 1.8 0.2 Apples... Red Delicious 30'x30« 1+8 Golden Delicious 30'x30' *8 1.8 0.2 winesap 30'x30' 1+8 " Total 22.5 2.5 H F o r commercial t r i a l only. -SUI-TABLE 35 ANTICIPATED LABOUR REQUIREMENTS, 27 ACRE SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY STONE FRUIT FARM Kind of F r u i t Task Apple A p r i c o t Cherry Peach Prune | Pear T o t a l Hours of Labour F e r t i l i z i n g 6 20 35 36 .8 8 113 Pruning and Removing 126 310 10 170 10 657 18 60 152 4 1,475 50 R e p a i r i n g . . . 4 4 C u l t i v a t i n g and Mowing 6 15 15 27 6 6 75 Spraying.. 12 20 20 36 8 12 108 Propping.... 5 14 6 25 5 5 5^ I r r i g a t i n g . . 30 75 75 135 30 30 375 Thinning.... 121 234 - 902 130 1,387 P i c k i n g and Other Har-ves t tasks 135 95V 1,372 1,386 266 225 >+,338 T o t a l . . 445 1,652 1,697 3,222 387 572 7,975 - 92 -TABLE 36 MONTHLY LABOUR REQUIREMENTS, 2? ACRE SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY STONE FRUIT FARM Months Tasks Performed Total Hours Required Available . Labour (Hours) Labour to be hired (Hours) Pr 368 *00 -February.... Pr 369 *00 -Pr S 387 *00 Pr R C S I 1*75 hOO 75 . S I T R C 517 hOO 117 S I T Ch 670 *00 270 S P I T Ch 1,9*0 520 1,*20 C P I Pe Ap S 2,6*8 520 i , 5 2 8 September... I A Pa Pw 928 520 *08 . C A 160 *00 -November.... F 113 *00 - . December.... - *00 -T o t a l . . 7,975 5,160 3,818 Legend: Pr = pruning. S = spraying. C = c u l t i v a t i n g or mowing. I = i r r i g a t i o n . R = repair. T = thinning. Ch = pick cherries. P = propping. Ap = pick apricots. Pe = pick peaches. Pw = pick prunes. Pa = pick pears. A =• pick apples. F = f e r t i l i z i n g . - 93 -Operating Statement—Stone F r u i t Farm Receipts Apricots 29.2 tons at $179/ton $ 5,227 Cherries 15.0 tons at $317/ton 4,755 Peaches 70.0 tons at $ll8/ton... 8,260 Prune's 16.2 tons at $ 8l/ton 1,312 Pears 16.2 tons at $ l l 5/ton 1,863 Apples 15.3 tons at $62/ton 948 Total Cash Receipts.. $22,365 Expenses (Cash) Land taxes ($10 per acre) $ 270 I r r i g a t i o n taxes ($17 per acre) 425 Hired labour (75/* per hour) 2,864 Operation of Equipment 1,625 F e r t i l i z e r (7.4 tons Ammonium n i t r a t e ) 473 (50 tons manure) 250 Soray M a t e r i a l * 555 Other* 500 Total Cash Expenses $ 6,962 Non Cash Expenses Depreciation on buildings (2^%) 425 Depreciation on equipment (12%) 1,113 Interest oh investment*.. ...... 2,265 Total Non Cash Expenses $ 3,803 Total Farm Expenses... $10,765 Family Labour Income....... 11,600 Perquisites 1,500 Family Labour Earnings 13,100 Labour Earnings of each Family.. $ 6,550 *See: Operating Statement—Apple Farm - 94 -Plan C—Combination F r u i t Farm The bearing orchard of the 32 acre combination f r u i t farm consists of 8.1 acres of apples, 5.4 acres of peaches, 3.6 acres of apricots, 3.6 acres of cherries, 4 . 5 acres of pears, and 1.8 acres of prune trees. Y i e l d per acre f o r each type of f r u i t , and prices are the same as i n the other two plans. Although the acreage i s the same as that given f o r the apple farm, the higher value of land ($1,600 per acre) r e s u l t s i n a larger t o t a l investment, namely, $64-,882. A t o t a l of 8,629 hours of labour are required f o r the operation of t h i s u n i t per annum. The peak demands f o r labour come i n the months of July, August and September. As would be expected i n terms of labour required and labour earnings, t h i s farm l i e s between the s p e c i a l i z e d apple and stone f r u i t organizations. Under the conditions given, each of these three farms provides f o r f u l l employment of the operators, """hey also provide an income comparable with the top 15 per cent of the 165 orchardists whose farm business records were studied. - 95 -TABLE 37 ANTICIPATED LABOUR REQUIREMENTS, 32 ACRE SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY COMBINATION FRUIT FARM Kind of F r u i t Task Apple Apricot Cherry Peach Prune Pear Tot a l Hours of Labour F e r t i l i z i n g 27 16 28 2* 8 2* 127 Pruning and Removing 567 18 2M-8 136 8 *38 12 60 380 10 1,829 60 Repairing... 8 * C u l t i v a t i n g and Mowing 27 12 12 18 6 15 90 Spraying.,... 5* 16 16 2l+ 8 2* ll+2 Propping.... 27 11 - 16 5 1* 73 I r r i g a t i n g . . 135 60 60 90 30 75 *50 Thinning.... 5*3 187 • - 59* - 32* 1,6*8 Picking *70 702 1,0*0 810 2*3 *86 3,751 Other Harvest 138 61 58 103 2 3 76 *59 Total 2,006 1,321 1,358 2,129 387 1,1+28 8,629 - 96 -TABLE 38 MONTHLY LABOUR REQUIREMENTS, 32 ACRE SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY COMBINATION FRUIT FARM Months Tasks Performed T o t a l Hours Required Available Labour (Hours) Labour to be Hired (Hours) Pr *57 *00 57 February.... Pr *57 *00 57 Pr M-87 *00 87 Pr R C.S I 607 *00 207 S I T 665 *00 265 S I T Ch 825 >00 *25 S I Ch P T 1,637 520 1,117 C P S I Ap Pe 1,856 520 1,336 September.. • I A Pw Pa 1,3*3 520 823 October C A 168 *00 -November.... F 127 *00 -December.... - *00 -T o t a l . . 8,629 5,160 * ,37* Legend: Pr = pruning. S = spraying C = C u l t i v a t i n g or mowing. I = i r r i g a t i o n . R = repair. T = thinning. Ch = pick cherries. P = propping. Ap = pick apricots, Pe = pick peaches. Pw = pick prunes, Pa - pick pears. A » pick apples. F = f e r t i l i z i n g . - 97 -Operating Statement—Combination F r u i t Farm Receipts Apples 68.8 tons at $62/ton $ 4-, 266 Apricots 23.4- tons at $179/ton 4,189 Cherries 12.6 tons at $317/ton 3,994 Peaches 4-5.9 tons at $ l l 8/ton 5,4-16 Prunes 16.2 tons at $ 8 l/ton 1,312 Pears 40 .5 tons at $ l l 5/ton 4,658 T o t a l Cash Receipts $23,835 Expenses (Cash) Land taxes ($15 per acre) $ 4-80 I r r i g a t i o n taxes ($18 per acre) 54-0 Hired labour (75/* per hour) 3,280 Operation of equipment 1,960 F e r t i l i z e r (7.8 tons ammonium n i t r a t e ) 499 (60 tons manure) 300 Spray material* 675 Other* 590 Total Cash Expenses.... $ 8,324-Non Cash Expenses*.... ; 3,717 Total Farm Expenses $12,04-1 Family Labour Income.... 11,794-Perquisites (10% value of house)..... 1,500 Family Labour Earnings 13,294 Labour earnings of each Family $ 6,647 KSee Operating Statement—Apple Farm CHAPTER VIII CONCLUSION The objectives of t h i s study were: (1) to present an insight into the structure of the tree f r u i t farms, production techniques, and problems of the growers i n the south Okanagan Valley; (2) to determine i f the orchards provided t h e i r operators with f u l l employment and adequate incomes. One of the fundamental weaknesses of tree f r u i t farming i s the poor d i s t r i b u t i o n of the labour requirements throughout the year. Each kind of f r u i t has a period of low labour requirements, followed by a period of extremely high demands f o r labour. To meet t h i s s i t u a t i o n , the orchardists, whenever possible, produce some of each tree f r u i t adaptable to t h e i r d i s t r i c t . This aids i n spreading the labour requirements more evenly throughout the year. The orchard does not lend i t s e l f to a crop r o t a t i o n plan or contribute materially to a li v e s t o c k production program. Because of t h i s , even with the favourable demand fo r meat products, few li v e s t o c k are raised on these farms. From the evidence presented i t appears that as presently organized, many of the farms operators are working - 98 -- 99 -with i n s u f f i c i e n t c a p i t a l (land and equipment) to u t i l i z e t h e i r labour to the best advantage. This f a c t i s re f l e c t e d i n the low labour earnings of many of the orchardists. I t seems from the study that depending upon the type of farm, one man should be able to handle 10-15 acres of orchard. Yet the majority of the orchards are between 5 and 9.9 acres i n area. One of the reasons f o r this i s the r i s k and uncertainty which characterizes f r u i t production. A good crop year i s often followed by a poor one. Since h i s costs are l a r g e l y f i x e d , and because of the l i f e cycle of, the trees, the grower hesitates to increase h i s holdings, and thus h i s r i s k s . Better estimates of y i e l d , market demand, rate of planting, and tree removal would aid i n improving th i s s i t u a t i o n . Also any means which would increase the c a p i t a l per man, or the a v a i l a b i l i t y of c a p i t a l , or reduce the labour requirements, would be a step toward increasing the net returns per man. A type of farm organization which would enable a favourable capital-man r a t i o to be obtained i s the two family farm. Such a unit would also be the means by which many young men could stay i n , or enter, f r u i t farming. Such a farm organization would permit the transfer of a going concern from one generation to the other and aid i n s t a b i l i z i n g the industry. Under long run y i e l d expectations, and 194-9 cost-price r e l a t i o n -ships such a farm would provide f u l l employment f o r two men and adequate income f o r the support of t h e i r f a m i l i e s . A tree - 100 -f r u i t farm which f u l f i l l s these c r i t e r i a would be approximately 27-32 acres i n area. Labour earnings of over $3>000 per man could be obtained. I f t h i s whole area were to be composed of farms of the acreage proposed, many of the exi s t i n g farm units would have to be consolidated. If the exi s t i n g orchards were con-solidated, either by buying or renting, t h i s process would i n turn create the problem of finding a l t e r n a t i v e employment f o r a number of persons. The magnitude of t h i s problem i s i l l u s t r a t e d by the following. In 19*9 there were approximately 13,637 acres of land occupied by f r u i t trees i n the south Okanagan Valley. The operators of t h i s acreage numbered almost 2 , 0 0 0 . 1 . In terms of two family farms (30 acre units) 13,637 acres would provide f o r *55 l o t s or 910 f u l l - t i m e producers. I f , there-fore, the two family farming units were introduced, i t could mean the displacement of approximately one-half of the orchardists . 2 "'"Regional Development D i v i s i o n , Facts About I r r i g a t i o n  and I r r i g a b l e Lands i n the Tree F r u i t Areas of the Okanagan  and Similkameen Valleys. V i c t o r i a , Department of Trade and Industry, 1950, pp. 23-35. (Two thousand and f i v e are the number of members of the i r r i g a t i o n schemes; they are not necessarily a l l orchardists. The f i g u r e was used f o r i l l u s -t r a t i v e purposes only.) 2 In 19*+1 there were 39.23 per cent g a i n f u l l y employed i n agriculture i n t h i s region; i n 19*9 there were 27.0 per cent. Thus a movement out of agriculture i s taking place i n the Okanagan Valley. See: Regional Development D i v i s i o n , - 101 -There are many l i m i t i n g factors to the adoption of the farm plans suggested. The topographical features of the south Okanagan Valley maybe a disadvantage. As the population continues to increase, the land may be bid away from agriculture, &lso a n y adjustment which means that people have to move from one industry to another means that there must be an alternative industry to absorb them. Industry and Markets i n the Okanagan, Similkameen and Kettle  V a l l e y s , V i c t o r i a , Department of Trade and Industry, 195l» P. 15. APPENDIX I TERMINOLOGY To c l a r i f y and aid i n the in t e r p r e t a t i o n of thi s study the d e f i n i t i o n s of c e r t a i n terms used are given below. CapitaLr—The average of the beginning and ending inventory values of the farm buildings, land, machinery and equipment, l i v e s t o c k and feed, and supplies. Gash Receipts.—The amount of cash received during the calendar year from the sales of a l l crops, l i v e s t o c k and lives t o c k products or from custom work. Ca p i t a l Receipts.—Returns from the sale of farm machinery, equipment, buildings, or land; i . e . , from any good which i s part of the c a p i t a l investment of the farm. C a p i t a l Expenses.—Money spent f o r the purchase of goods which add to the c a p i t a l resources of the farm. Crop Index.—The y i e l d per tree expressed as a percentage of the average y i e l d per tree. For example, a crop index of 110 would mean a y i e l d of 10 per cent greater than average f o r the group. Current Expenses.—The t o t a l cash paid during the year f o r commodities and services used i n farm production. A charge f o r the use of unpaid family labour i s also In-cluded i n current expenses. - 102 -- 103 -Net Farm Income.—The gross cash income plus c a p i t a l receipts, plus increases i n inventory, plus unpaid family labour, l e s s cash expenses and c a p i t a l expenses. Operator's Labour Income.—This i s Net Farm Income less unpaid family labour, l e s s i n t e r e s t on the average t o t a l farm c a p i t a l . P e r q u i s i t e s . — A representation of the value of a l l products raised and consumed on the farm, plus an annual r e n t a l f o r the use of the farm house. Operator's Labour Earnings.—Labour Income plus perquisites. This represents the t o t a l return to the oper-ator f o r his year's work a f t e r a l l cash and non-cash expenses have been deducted. Man E q u i v a l e n t . — T h i s i s one man on the farm f o r one year. Net Production Per Man.—Expenditures f o r hired labour plus unpaid family labour, plus labour earnings. I t i s a measure of the net pr o d u c t i v i t y of the labour employed on the farm. Volume of Production.—A measure of farm s i z e . I t includes the value of a l l crops, l i v e s t o c k , l i v e s t o c k products, and other farm products sold , and the farm products used i n the household. APPENDIX I I To i l l u s t r a t e the v a r i a t i o n i n the y i e l d s obtained on the orchards, Table 39 i s presented. Here are l i s t e d i n des-cending order the yields, per acre from a sub-sample of 35 orchards. TABLE 39 YIELD PER ACRE, APPLE, STONE FRUIT AND PEAR TREES, 35 SOUTH OKANAGAN VALLEY ORCHARDS, 19*8 and 19*9 Apple Apricot Cherry Peach Prune Pear Y i e l d i n Tons Packed per Acre 15.0 22.* 1*.9 19.8 22.0 21.* 1*.0 17.3 . 12.* 16.0 21.0 17.* 13.7 . 16.0 12.0 . 15.* 19.0 16.6 13.2 15.7 11.6 15.1 17.0 16.* 12.9 15.5 10.5 15.0 16.8 1*.5 12.6 15.1 10.3 13.6 16.3 13.3 12.3 13.7 9.2 13.2 16.1 12.9 11.8 13.6 8.6 12.* i5.7 12.* 10.9 13.5 8.0 11.5 15.6 12.2 10.8 13.2 7.6 11.fe- 15.5 11.1 10.8 13.1 7.6 l l - . 3 l * . 5 10.8 10.5 12.1 7.3 10.2 13'.$. 10.0 10.* 12.0 .7.0 10.2 13.8 9.9 10.3 11.7 6.9 9.6 13.7 9.7 10.3 11.6 6.7 9.5. 13.3 9.6 9.9 10.2 6.* 9.* 12.5 9.3 9.8 9.8 6.0 9.3 12.3 9.2 9.* 8.* 5.9 9.1 12.2 9.2 9.3 .8.1 5.0 9.0 12.1 • 8.9 9.0 8.0 *.2 8.9 10.8 8.8 8.7 7.9 3.9 8.2 10.6 8.6 Q.h 7.6 3.8 8.0 10.5 8.3 8.3 7.* 3.* 7.6 10.3 8.0 8.2 7.1 3.2 7.5 !9v8 7.9 8.0 6.9 3.0 7.2 • f ; 2 . 7.8: 7.6 6.8 2.6 H-.6 . 9.3 7.5 6.7 6.2 2.* h.2 9.2 7.3 6.3 5.3 2.2 * . l 8.3 7.0 - 10* -- 105 -TABLE 39 (continued) Apple Apricot | Cherry | Peach | Prune { Pear Y i e l d i n Tons Packed per Acre 6.0 5.0 1.8 3.8 8.1 6.4-5.8 4.4 1.7 3.6 . 3.4 4.7 5.6 3.0 1.7 3.4- 3.6 3.4 5.2 2.8 1.5 3.2 3.3 2.5 5.0 2.1 1.1+ 3.0 2.4 2.0 4.8 1.8 0.8 3.0 1.7 1.6 3.0 1.5 0.5 1.2 1.1 1.1 APPENDIX I I I TABLE 1+0 ACRES IRRIGATED, NUMBER OF USERS IN VARIOUS DISTRICTS OF THE SOUTH OKANAGAN V A L L E Y , 19*9 D i s t r i c t A c r e sa ) No. o f Average I r r i g a t e d U s e r s A c r e s p e r U s e r 765 86 8.9 650 123 5.2 3,091 5*2 5.7 9X6 135 6.8 2,232 381 5.8 530 61 8.7 O l i v e r — O s o y o o s . . . 5,*53 677 8.0 13,637 2,005 6.8 • 'Orchard A c r e s O n l y . S o u r c e : R e g i o n a l Development D i v i s i o n , F a c t s  a b o u t I r r i g a t i o n and I r r i g a b l e Lands i n t h e T r e e - F r u i t s A r e a  o f t h e Okanagan and S i m i l k a m e e n V a l l e y s . V i c t o r i a , D e p a r t -ment o f T r a d e and I n d u s t r y , 1950, p p . 22-35. - 106 -APPENDIX IV ORCHARD ACRES HANDLED BY ONE MAN The following i s an explanation of how the es-timated number of acres which can be handled by one man, was calculated. As stated previously, there are many orchard tasks which must be done i f the grower wishes to maintain his trees i n t h e i r proper condition. The tasks i n t h i s group which require the most labour are pruning, spraying, i r r i g a t i n g , and repairing tree damage. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of these f i x e d chores throughout the year w i l l l a r g e l y determine the number of acres which one man can look a f t e r . In Table 2h i t was shown that, generally speaking, pruning operations are done i n the months of January, Feb-ruary and March. Disposal of the prunings i s carried over into A p r i l . Some spraying, depending on the pest or d i s -ease f o r which spraying i s done, w i l l be done from March to September Inclusive. I r r i g a t i n g i s ca r r i e d on from May to September. P r i o r to May p r e - i r r i g a t i o n chores are done. Of course, practices d i f f e r between d i f f e r e n t orchards. Some trees require more pruning or spraying than do others, but as the majority of orchards are made up of - 107 -- 108 -more than one kind of f r u i t a composite average figu r e f o r a l l was calculated. On th i s basis pruning and brush d i s -posal took an average of 56 hours, i r r i g a t i n g an average of 30 hours, and spraying an average of 9 hours per acre per annum. The hours required f o r these tasks were then di s t r i b u t e d throughout the months i n which they are generally done. (Table 24.) For example with pruning, the 56 hours were divided into four parts, i . e . , 15 hours i n January, 16 hours i n February, 18 hours i n March, and i n A p r i l 7 hours f o r the disposal of prunings. The other chore hours were s i m i l a r l y divided by the number of months i n which they may be c a r r i e d out. The largest number of hours were re-quired i n the month of March—20 hours—made up of 18 hours f o r pruning and 2 hours f o r spraying. There are- at le a s t 200 man hours available per month.(25 days x 8 hours per day). Dividing 200 by 20 gives 10 as the number of acres which one man could handle without h i r i n g any addit i o n a l labour. However with the use of im-proved equipment'such as pneumatic pruners and newer methods of brush removal t h i s f i g u r e could be increased, and since these figures were f o r the years 1948 and 1949, i t can be expected that the output per man w i l l have increased by possibly 6 per cent. 1 Thus the average man could handle Black, J . D M Farm Management, New York, MacMillan Co., 1947, p. 522. - 109 -approximately 10.6 acres. This figure i s i n keeping with the d i v i s i o n s of the land i n the past. Bearing i n mind the l i m i t a t i o n s of the data 15 acres was taken as the upper l i m i t which one man can handle. On t h i s basis a two family farm would have approximately 30 acres of orchard. BIBLIOGRAPHY* 1. Black, J.D., Farm Management. New York, MacMillan & Co., 194-7. 2. Brink, V.C. and Farstad, L., "The Physiography of the A g r i c u l t u r a l Areas of B r i t i s h Columbia", S c i e n t i f i c  Agriculture. Ottawa, Agricultural' I n s t i t u t e of Canada, Vol. 29, June 194-9, p. 273. 3. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, A g r i c u l t r u a l  S t a t i s t i c s Report. V i c t o r i a , B.C., King's P r i n t e r , 1934 -1950. 4. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, Climate of  B r i t i s h Columbia. V i c t o r i a , B.C., King's P r i n t e r , 1950. 5. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agr i c u l t u r e , Forty-fourth  Annual Report. 1949. V i c t o r i a , B.C., King's P r i n t e r , 1950. 6. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Trade and Industry, Industry  and Markets i n the Okanagan. Similkameen and Kettle V a l l e y s . V i c t o r i a , B.C., King's P r i n t e r , 1951. 7. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, Okanagan  Valley. The. V i c t o r i a , B.C., King's P r i n t e r , C i r c u l a r No. *+0, 19»+5. 8. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, Orchard Survey  of the Okanagan H o r t i c u l t u r a l D i s t r i c t . V i c t o r i a , B.C., 1925 -1950. 9. B r i t i s h Columbia, Recommendations of the B r i t i s h Columbia F e r t i l i z e r Board. V i c t o r i a , King's P r i n t e r , 1940. ~~ 10. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Ag r i c u l t u r e . Tree F r u i t  Farming i n B r i t i s h Columbia. V i c t o r i a , King's P r i n t e r , B u l l e t i n No. 105, 1929. 11. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, V a r i e t i e s of  F r u i t Recommended f o r Planting i n B r i t i s h Columbia. V i c t o r i a , B.C., King's P r i n t e r , H o r t i c u l t u r a l C i r c u l a r No. 64. 12. B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Agriculture, Y i e l d s . Grades. Prices and Returns f o r Apple V a r i e t i e s i n the Okanagan  Valley, College of Agriculture. C i r c u l a r No. 4-, B u l l e t i n No. 90. 13. Canada, Department of Agriculture, A Study of Apple Produc- t i o n i n the Okanagan V a l l e y of B.C.. Ottawa, King's P r i n t e r , 1952: ^Material consulted - 110 -- I l l -14. Canada, Department of Ag r i c u l t u r e , Apple Harvesting and  Storage i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Ottawa, King's P r i n t e r , 19M-1. 15. Canada, Department of Agriculture, Costs and Returns i n  Production of Apples i n the Okanagan Valley. B.C.. Ottawa, King's P r i n t e r , 194-5. 16. Canada, Department of Agriculture, S o i l Maintenance and Pruning Methods f o r Peaches and Apricots, Ottawa, King's Printer, Technical B u l l e t i n 34, 19M-1. 17. Canada, Department of Agriculture, S o i l Survey of the  Okanagan and Similkameen V a l l e y s ? Ottawa, King's P r i n t e r , 19^9, Report No. 3 . , 18. Canada, Department of Agriculture, The Case Method and  Budget Analysis Technique of Research i n Farm Economics, Ottawa, Economies D i v i s i o n , A g r i c u l t u r a l Economics Reference, page No. I, 1951. 19. Chandler, W. H., Deciduous Orchards. Philadelphia, Lea and Febiger, 1951. 20. Childers, N. F.. F r u i t Science. New York, J.B.Lippincott and Co., 1949. 21. F o l l e y , R. R. ¥., Economics of a F r u i t Farm, London, Oxford University Press, 19*+9. 22. New Hampshire A g r i c u l t u r a l Experiment Station, Studies  i n the Economics of Apple Orcharding. Durham, N. H., B u l l e t i n 323, 19M-0. 23. Okanagan A g r i c u l t u r a l Club, "1951 Recommendations on Tree Planting Distances f o r B. C. Growers", Country L i f e . Vernon, March 1951, p. 2. 24-. Okanagan A g r i c u l t u r a l Club, "Tree F r u i t V a r i e t i e s Recom-mended f o r 1952", Country L i f e . Vernon, January, 1952, p.8. 25. Ormsby, M. A., A Study of the Okanagan Val l e y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Master's Thesis, The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1931. 26. Palmer, R. C , " F r u i t Growing Under I r r i g a t i o n i n B r i t i s h Columbia", The F r u i t Year Book. 1949. Rochester, Staples Press Ltd., 19^9, p. 86. 27. Regional Development D i v i s i o n , Facts About I r r i g a t i o n and  Irr i g a b l e Lands i n the Tree F r u i t Area of the Okanagan  and Similkameen Valleys« V i c t o r i a , Department of Trade and Industry, 1950. - 112 28. Schultz, T. W., Production and Welfare of Agriculture. New York, MacMillan Co., 1950. : 29. Smock, R. M., and Neubert, A. M., Apples and Apple  Products. New York, Interscience Publishers, Vol. I I , 19^0. 30. Washington A g r i c u l t u r a l Experiment Station, Economic  Conditions and Problems of Agriculture i n the Yakima  Valley. Washington. Pullman. B u l l e t i n No. 409. 19*+!. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0106797/manifest

Comment

Related Items