Believing that our failures are often of far more value, in the line of education, than our successes, I shall not hesitate to place my own on record as guideposts to those who may be seeking the most direct road to success in nut culture. Having had a rather extended and expensive experience in the cultivation of filberts, I propose giving a brief account of it here, with the hope that it may save some other enthusiast from losing time and money.

My attention was first specially drawn to these nuts in 1858,—while a resident of the city of Brooklyn, N. Y.,—by a neighbor who had a moderately large garden, on three sides of which he had planted a row of English filberts. These trees, at the time, had attained a hight of about fifteen feet, with broad, open heads, and they rarely failed to produce a heavy crop of nuts, which sold readily at very remunerative prices, for as they were always gathered in the husks and sold by the pound, the amount obtained from these few trees seemed to be enormous, considering the small space they occupied in this garden. The owner of these filbert trees, being an Englishman by birth, never tired of showing his English filberts to visitors, and of descanting upon their value, as well as upon the stupid indifference of the Yankees in neglecting the cultivation of these valuable nuts. I imbibed enough of my neighbor's enthusiasm to secure a good stock of his plants, a few years later, for cultivation in my grounds here. The third year after planting, quite a number of the bushes produced a fair crop of nuts, but I noticed that an occasional shoot was affected with blight, and these were immediately cut out and burned. The next season more of the branches were affected, and from these the blight extended downward on the main stems, and when these were cut away the sprouts from below made a very vigorous and apparently healthy growth, some reaching a hight of six feet the first season, but a year or two later these were also attacked and destroyed by blight.

Finding that the filberts in my grounds were doomed, I visited my old neighbor in Brooklyn, hoping to learn something of the origin or cause of the disease; but the blight had invaded his garden, and not a tree remained. On my return from this visit I had every filbert and hazel plant on my place dug up and burned, thinking by such means to stamp out the disease. After waiting ten years, I thought it time to try filberts again, and to be certain of securing pure and healthy plants, I concluded to raise them from the nuts, and sent an order for a few pounds of the largest and best variety to be found in the celebrated filbert orchards of Kent, Eng. In due time the nuts arrived, and they were very large, and all of one variety, as ordered. They were mixed with sand and buried in the garden until the following spring, then sown thinly in shallow drills and covered with about two inches of rich soil.

At the close of the first season the plants were from one to two feet high and quite stocky, with a mass of small fibrous roots. The next spring they were transplanted into nursery rows, and set about one foot apart. The third spring I laid out about one acre for a specimen filbert orchard, and after the ground had been thoroughly prepared, the plants were set ten feet apart in the row, and twelve between the rows. No crop was planted among the trees, but the ground was kept clean and free from weeds during the summer, with cultivator and harrow. All suckers springing from the base of the[134]
[135] stems were removed as soon as they appeared, and under such treatment the plants made a vigorous growth. Two years later quite a number of the trees came into bearing, these showing that I was likely to have nearly as many varieties in my orchard as there were trees. Some of the varieties might be better than the parent, but the greater part were certain to be inferior in size. The fourth year after planting in the orchard the trees gave me a heavy crop of nuts, and they made a fine appearance as one looked down between the long rows, as shown in Fig. 40. But this season my old enemy, the filbert blight, appeared again, and branches and main stems began to blacken and the leaves to wither. But I had bushels of nuts and in great variety, and by sending specimen baskets of the long-husk varieties to dealers in New York, learned that there was an almost unlimited demand for such nuts, at prices ranging from[136]
[137]
[138] thirty to seventy-five cents per pound, if sent to market in their fresh, half-ripened husk; but later on, when the nuts have fallen out and become thoroughly ripened, as when imported, ten cents a pound may be considered an average price for the larger varieties. Several of these are shown in Fig. 41, of natural size and form. Another extra-large hazel is shown in Fig. 42. The fifth year after planting, my specimen filbert orchard had suffered so much from blight that it appeared as shown in Fig. 43; but a few dozen trees have been reserved, the rest being removed and reduced to ashes.

Name and Nature of the Filbert Blight.—The reader must not suppose that one who has spent as much time and money as the writer in experimenting with these nuts, would make no effort to discover the origin and name of such a virulent disease, and means of destroying it if these were known. For many years I had been well aware of its presence in nearly all of the nurseries of the older States, as well as in the public parks and private gardens. In the meantime I had diligently examined the reports of the Division of Vegetable Pathology of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, as well as the hundreds of bulletins of the various State experiment stations, treating of the fungous diseases of plants, all without finding a hint or reference to this widely distributed and destructive blight of the filbert. I also sent many specimens of the diseased twigs and branches to professional mycologists, with no better results. With the nature of the disease, its mode of multiplication and distribution, I had become somewhat familiar, but the information sought was: Had it ever been described and given a scientific name, and if so, where, and by whom? This much of its history had somehow escaped me, and, as it would appear from the following correspondence, the chances were none too good of finding it.

In reply to an inquiry directed to the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Vegetable Pathology, I received the following:

Washington, D. C., Aug. 4, 1894.

Dear Sir:

Your letter of Aug. 2, relating to the disease of the filbert, is at hand. In reply I have to say that we have not investigated this trouble, and are therefore unable to furnish you with any definite information upon it. Specimens of the disease, as you describe it, have never been, so far as I know, referred to the Division, nor am I able to find any record of any such disease in foreign or domestic literature. If you will send us specimens we shall be pleased to examine them and furnish you a report. We should also be pleased to have any information from you in regard to the manner in which the disease works. Very truly,

B. T. GALLOWAY, Chief of Division.

The specimens requested were forwarded promptly by mail, and in the absence of the Chief of Division, they fell into the hands of one of his assistants, who reported as follows:

Washington, D. C., Aug. 14, 1894.

Dear Sir:

Your letter of Aug. 7 is received, together with the specimens. The stems of the Corylus are affected with one of the Pyrenomycetes. Cryptospora anomala, Pk. The fungus is described in "North American Pyrenomycetes," by Ellis and Everhart, p. 531. It attacks Corylus Americana, but appears to be worst on the European varieties, as you say. The pustules appear first on the young branches, and later on the older ones and on the trunk. The roots are not killed.

The only remedy known is to cut out and burn the diseased stems. Whether Bordeaux mixture or any other copper solution will protect the shrub from attack, is not known. So far as I know, it has not been tried. It is probable, however, that if the stems were thoroughly sprayed with the Bordeaux mixture they would be protected from attack. The mycelium of the fungus grows into the cambium and practically girdles the stems. The black pustules contain the spores.

Very truly yours,
ALBERT F. WOODS, Acting Chief.

On the receipt of this note of Prof. Woods, I looked up Ellis and Everhart's work, a voluminous one of over 800 octavo pages, published by the authors at Newfield, N. J. This filbert blight is briefly described under the scientific name of Cryptospora anomala, Pk., but Prof. Peck writes me that "the description was made from specimens discovered near Albany, N. Y., in May, 1874. In 1882 this description was republished by Saccardo, in his "Syllage Fungorum," Vol. I, p. 470, under the name of Cryptosporella anomala. The original name in Report 28, p. 72, was Diatrype anomala. In 1892 Ellis and Everhart, in "Pyrenomycetes of North America," p. 531, changed the name again, making it Cryptospora anomala." So at present we have the names of this fungus in the following order:

Diatrypes anomal, Peck, 1876.
Cryptosporella anomala, Sacc., 1882.
Cryptospora anomala, E. and E., 1892.

Ellis and Everhart, after giving scientific description, add,

"On living stems of Corylus Americana, Albany, N. Y. (Peck), Iowa (Holoway), on Corylus Avellana, Newfield, N. J. The pustules appear first on the smaller branches, and are serrately arranged along one side of the branch; afterwards they appear also on the larger branches and on the trunk itself, and in the course of two or three years the part of tree above ground is entirely killed. The roots, however, still retain their vitality, and continue to send up each year a luxuriant growth of new shoots, destined to be destroyed the succeeding year by the inexorable pest. The imported trees seem to be more injuriously affected than the native species."

The observations of Ellis and Everhart and Prof. Woods accord with my own, but I may say that the infested branches often show the presence of the mycelium in the bark and alburnum,—by a slight shrinking,— weeks or months before the pustules appear, for these are merely indications of the last stage in the life of the fungus, and with the throwing off the spores from these pustules the old parasite perishes.

The pustules, when fully open, are from one-sixteenth to one-eighth of an inch in diameter, usually round, but sometimes slightly oval in form, and placed mainly in almost straight rows lengthways of the branch, as shown in Fig. 44. These pustules appear on wood of all ages, from two years upward, and in what may be termed patches, ranging from a few inches to a foot or more in length, and more frequently on the upper side than the underside of the branches.

This fungus is undoubtedly indigenous, and its host plant is the common American hazel (C. Americana). From a very careful search, I have not been able to find any clump of these bushes of any considerable size that was entirely free from pustulous stems. But on these wild plants it seems to do but little harm, for if a stem is killed, another soon springs up from the roots to take its place; but when this fungus invades our orchards and gardens and attacks filbert trees, we recognize it as an implacable enemy. How far the spores of this fungus are likely to be carried by the wind, transported on the clothes of a person, or the hair of domestic animals, I do not know, but it certainly is not safe to plant the susceptible species and varieties within a mile of the wild hazel bushes, unless the planter is prepared to use fungicides freely on his trees. There are certain phases of this filbert blight that are rather obscure and scarcely explainable; as, for instance, its virulence among some species and varieties, and almost if not total absence among others. So far as my observation extends, I have never found it attacking the native beaked hazel (Corylus rostrata), and my correspondents in the Northwest and in the Pacific States assure me that no blight on the hazel has, as yet, been found there, and its absence is probably due to the fact that the common hazel (C. Americana) is not an inhabitant of these regions.

In a neighbor's garden just across the highway from my own, there are, at this time, four old European hazelnut trees, fully twenty feet high and as many years old. They are of two varieties: one a small round nut, the other a long, slender nut, but neither of much value, because of their small size. The trees, however, are perfectly healthy, never having suffered from the blight, although these four are all that remain of a long row of choice European varieties all planted at the same time. Blight destroyed the better varieties, while these inferior ones continue to thrive and are exceedingly productive.

This native fungus that causes blight in the hazels is but one of a large number of similar maladies which have appeared and often worsted the horticulturist, in his endeavor to introduce and cultivate foreign species and varieties of plants, and like the tropical fevers, they may pass unnoticed among the natives, but are terribly fatal to immigrants from cooler climates. The disease so well known as the black knot (Otthia morbosa, Schu.), and widely destructive to the European varieties of the plum, and Morello cherries, has existed for ages among our native plums and black cherries, doing comparatively little harm; but it seems to protest, by its virulence, against the introduction of some foreign species. The same is true with various blights and rusts which attack the exotic pear, apple, quince, peach, and other of the larger fruits, and we have only to ascend the scale a few degrees from the microscopic fungi to the microscopic insects, to meet on the very threshold of this realm the minute but unconquerable grape louse (Phylloxera vastatrix), which for more than two centuries has prevented the successful cultivation of the European varieties of the grape in the open air everywhere east of the Rocky mountains in North America; although this minute insect has ever been present and a constant parasite of the indigenous species of the grape, but scarcely affecting the health of its host. The plum curculio, chestnut and hickory weevils, bean weevil, and many other similar species of insects appear to be ever protesting against the introduction of exotic plants, as well as the improvement of our indigenous kinds.

It is this blight, and nothing else, that has prevented the extensive cultivation of the improved varieties of the European filbert and hazelnut in this country, and not the uncongenial soil and climate, as has been so often "officially" proclaimed by men whose theories are far greater than their practical knowledge of such subjects. Men whose experience with these nuts has been limited to a few isolated bushes or trees in gardens or nurseries, where they were protected, or beyond the reach of the spores of the blight fungus, as has already been noted in the experience of Prince, Downing, Barry, and my neighbor Butler, of Brooklyn, could scarcely understand why others should remain so indifferent to such a promising industry, or why the demand for the trees remained so limited, with scarcely an attempt to plant filbert orchards anywhere in this country. Nurserymen have continued to offer the choice varieties at low prices per plant, and to advise their customers to cultivate filberts extensively, even to setting them in hedgerows; and yet home-grown filberts remain as rare in our markets as they were a hundred years ago, and all due to the simple reason that the insidious filbert blight still scatters its spores unrestrained.

With the present almost universal employment of various fungicides for the destruction of blights, mildews and rusts on cultivated fruits and vegetables, we may confidently assert that the diseases of the filbert may be readily controlled by the same means. The spraying of the trees with Bordeaux mixture and other copper solutions will certainly destroy the fungus spores, and with these out of the way filbert culture may become of as much importance and as popular here as it is in certain countries of Europe. In my own experience I have found no other nut tree (barring always the blight) that has been more satisfactory. The plants come forward rapidly, fruiting freely and abundantly when young, and if properly trained, the crop can be gathered with little labor, and as it is ready for use a month or more in advance of the arrival of fresh nuts from abroad, the home market during the time is at our command.

The number of applications of the fungicides that will be necessary during the season to rid the trees of blight, or the strength of the copper solution used, will depend somewhat upon circumstances and the condition of the subjects operated upon. If the trees are growing near hedges of wild hazels, where there is a constant or annual influx of the fungus spores, then greater care will be required to suppress them than if the trees are some distance from such sources of contagion; and it may be well for those contemplating planting filbert orchards, to examine their surroundings carefully in advance, in order to avoid local blight-breeding plants, and have these destroyed if any are found. I would also warn the cultivator against collecting branches of the wild hazel in the spring, carrying pollen-bearing catkins to be employed in fertilizing the pistillate flowers of the cultivated varieties, for by such means blight spores may be readily introduced into orchard and garden.

It will seldom be necessary to practice artificial fertilization, where any considerable number of trees are grown near together, because if ninety per cent. of the male catkins are winterkilled, the few remaining will be sufficient to supply pollen for the pistillate flowers. In my grounds filberts have never failed to produce annual crops after reaching a bearing age, although they have been subjected to great extremes of temperature in winter. One year the trees were in full bloom the last week in February, and although cold weather followed, the protected pistillate flowers were not injured. The winters of 1894 and 1895 were among the severest, in the way of continuous low temperature, I have ever experienced here, and while the filberts did not bloom until the first week in April, the crop proved to be abundant.

Insects Injurious to Filberts.—My personal observations lead me to believe that the filberts and hazels are, in this country, remarkably free from the depredations of noxious insects. Two species of nut weevils have been reported as breeding in the wild hazelnuts, viz., Balaninus obtusus, and B. nasicus, but among the many bushels of the European varieties of the filbert produced in my grounds I have never found one infested by a weevil or other insect. In Europe a nut weevil (B. nucum) is said to be very destructive to the wild hazel, often invading the filbert orchards, and this we can readily believe, because they are not at all uncommon in the imported nuts, but fortunately have not, as yet, become naturalized in this country.

The great hazel-leaf beetle, or as more generally known, elm-leaf beetle (Monocesta coryli), has been known in a few instances to attack and defoliate large patches of the wild hazel bushes, but this insect seems to prefer the elm, hence is rarely found on the hazels. But should it ever invade our filbert orchards, it can be readily destroyed by dusting or spraying the trees with Paris green, London purple, or other well-known insecticides. There may be an occasional invasion of caterpillars, like the tent worms, spanworms, leaf rollers of various species, and what are called leaf miners, but as these infest almost all kinds of deciduous trees and shrubs, we cannot consider them specially injurious to the filberts and hazels.