Planning a new Orchard in North West Kent - Apples

[yummersetter]

But Blenheim takes about twenty years to reach its prime, so will be ready for Loudbarker1 when he has time to enjoy it.

[Loudbarker1]

Two predictions - you'll be thinking about this a lot longer than a weekend and you'll end up with (a lot ) more than 40 apple trees

And I haven't even got on to the pears, cherries, plums, and apricots yet........

[yummersetter]

Get working on them now before the Agroforestry bug hits and you start planning the understories
Guess how I know . . . ?

[FB.]

This is a bit problematic.

The farm is on the northdowns. In some places topsoil is pretty thin - just a few inches with solid chalk beneath. But I wouldn't look to plant any tree there - thats for the sheep.

Otherwise there is valley silt/loam overlaying flinty gravel perhaps 3 feet below. The chalk is under this. Alternatively on the top of the Downs there is thick, loamy topsoil topsoil on chalk, again perhaps 3 feet thick. (This where the bramleys were).

My mother's garden (right by the river in the valley) has successful apples and pears.

pH varies accross the farm but is surprisingly low (but not acid) given the chalk: we find we have to lime from time to time.

But very good advice to check pH and I will do that.

Chalky subsoils are worst when the topsoil is thin - say less than a foot and a half. Most fruit tree roots will not want to go deeper than 2-3ft unless forced to do so in a desperate search for water or nutrients. Take a look at an uprooted tree in the autumn storms to see how shallow its big roots are, and how those roots get much smaller only a small distance from the trunk.

You'll probably find a fruit tree has a cartwheel effect of several big roots, several inches thick and about 1ft below the surface, spreading in most directions and going beyond the canopy.
These big structural roots will then send out small fibrous roots in their vicinity to pick up water and nutrients.
If water is scarce and the rootstock is vigorous, the radiating structural roots will produce "sinkers" which are roots which grow straight down and go as deep as is necessary to find the water; they will go down several yards below the surface if necessary and if the rootstock is vigorous enough.

Apples ideally want 2-3ft deep topsoil.
I suspect that whoever planted the Bramleys in the deeper soil in the valley knew exactly what they were doing. The soil in the valley is probably perfect.
Don't underestimate our great grandfather's knowledge and skill.

Your mother's garden being near to a river probably means quite a lot of fertile, silty soil on top of the eroded chalk base. A friend of ours has an enormous Bramley growing not too far from a small river which sometimes bursts its banks for a few hours after heavy rain; no doubt adequate water and fertile silty soil.

[FB.]

But Blenheim takes about twenty years to reach its prime, so will be ready for Loudbarker1 when he has time to enjoy it.

True.
It's also somewhat "lost" its disease resistance (mainly scab) in the same way as Bramley.
I prefer Blenheim to Bramley, although I prefer other varieties even more!

In my soil, though, I can make anything crop at a young age due to the stress of dry shallow infertile soil.

[Loudbarker1]

I suspect that whoever planted the Bramleys in the deeper soil in the valley knew exactly what they were doing. The soil in the valley is probably perfect.
Don't underestimate our great grandfather's knowledge and skill.

The bramleys weren't in the valley: they were on the thicker soil on the top of the downs (not the thin stuff on the slopes) - and planted by my great-grandfather who was a renowed commercial fruit grower in his time . Our hop gardens are in the valley.

[orangepippin]

Generally speaking, these factors make for a low-care, healthy tree:


High-vigour rootstock.
High vigour scion.
Triploid.
Rare varieties.
Part-tip-bearers.

I would extend the rare varieties by saying: rare in your area. It just means the local disease and pest populations are less likely to "know" how to crack the defences. However in my opinion this is not as significant as the other factors, and there are plenty of rare varieties that are not low-care or healthy.

[FB.]

there are plenty of rare varieties that are not low-care or healthy.

Which ones do you have in mind, and what are the problems?

Most of the time when I've tried an old (pre-1900, preferably pre-1800) rare variety, I've been impressed by its health and its tolerance of my less-than-ideal soil conditions.

From my experiences, I'd rather have a lucky dip of really old and really rare varieties than a lucky dip of the modern varieties.

Ye olde varieties didn't have chemicals to keep them healthy, nor a detailed analysis of the soil to ensure the ideal balance of nutrients. I think the best word to describe most pre-1800 varieties that I've encountered is "rugged". More like a Landrover than a Ferrari; they'll go anywhere and take a beating but still keep going, but they don't have the looks and speed - or fragility - of the Ferrari.

[orangepippin]

I think you are mixing old with rare. They are not necessarily the same thing. Take Rubinette for example, hardly a widely-grown variety, yet quite prone to scab ... but not an old variety of course. Similarly Golden Delicious, which would count as rare in the UK, and is also pre-1900, is quite prone to scab.

It comes down to what your objectives are. If it is maximising production in a no-spray orchard, then I would suggest the well-known "problem free" varieties, many of which are actually quite widely-planted, and grow them them on semi-vigorous or vigorous rootstocks.

Unfortunately if flavour is your goal, some of the best-flavoured apple varieties do not fall into the "easy to grow in a no-spray orchard" category. In my case I would rather grow 5 problematic Rubinette trees than 1 ancient / rare / low-maintenance variety with a less distinguished flavour. Another thing you might find if flavour is your primary goal, is that you may end up planting modern rather than old varieties ...

[yummersetter]

I guess the pretty, rose covered Georgian cottages weren't the majority, but the shacks fell down. A poxy apple tree made good firewood.

[FB.]

In my case I would rather grow 5 problematic Rubinette trees than 1 ancient / rare / low-maintenance variety with a less distinguished flavour. Another thing you might find if flavour is your primary goal, is that you may end up planting modern rather than old varieties ...

In my case - partly driven by difficut soil and partly be a refusal to spray - I put easy-care above fruit flavour.
Even with "average" flavour home-grown varieties, the flavour is at least as good as shop-bought, if not better - and chemical-free as a bonus, and probably more nutritious , having not been pumped full of water and synthetic fertiliser (synthetic tends to lack certain trace nutrients).
Even the "premium" Pink Lady apples in shops appear to be getting greener and more sour as the growers rush to be first to market; sacrificing quality for earliness and therefore a higher market price for being first to market.

[orangepippin]

I don't spray either, but I reckon I lose 90% of the apples on my Rubinette trees as a result. It's worth it though!

The key point is that when starting out on an orchard project, it is a good idea to decide on your objectives first. You can then choose the varieties that will work best within the goals you have set.

[Loudbarker1]

The key point is that when starting out on an orchard project, it is a good idea to decide on your objectives first. You can then choose the varieties that will work best within the goals you have set.

Of course if I decide on a no spray policy to start with and select trees accordingly I can easily change it.......

Very many thanks to all for thoughts and suggestions - very helpful indeed. I have of course ended up with a much longer list of varieties than first thought of and lots more to think about.

[FB.]

I don't spray either, but I reckon I lose 90% of the apples on my Rubinette trees as a result.

Out of interest, what are the main causes of loss of the spray-free Rubinette fruits?

My aim is to produce a good quantity of clean fruit, which is a class above shop apples in flavour (although probably a flavour class below your Rubinettes), and with only the mimimum attention even in less-than-ideal growing conditions.
In other words: I give the trees somewhere to live, and the trees pay me back by fruiting.

I also like to have some old varieties because I wonder whether apples will get into such a genetic bottleneck that they become impossible to grow. Rubinette is a Cox x Golden Delicious, so is again using the same old stale gene pool which will lead to the demise of the domestic apple in time.

If we don't stop this narrowing of the gene pool, we may one day have the evolution of a highly virulent and chemical-resistant strain of disease which literally wipes out millions of apples trees in orchards because all the trees were so closely related that there was no genetic variation from which one or two varieties could find resistance.

If such a day comes, I am confident that my genetically-diverse collection which includes some very old and very rare varieties will hold up very well. If they can't resist a disease, their generally high vigour of some of the triploids which I grow, may allow the trees to outgrow it.

Someone needs to think about leaving something worthwhile for the next generation, rather than the selfish, instant gratification culture prevalent today. No offence intended.

So by all means grow some modern varieties bred from the usual common Cox, Golden Delicious etc parents, but if there is space for just one really rare ancient variety, people may be doing themselves and the next generation a favour by giving a home to the rare and ancient variety.

[orangepippin]

I grow plenty of apples, not just modern ones, but my focus is flavour and I do not discriminate on the basis of modern or old or rare or widely-grown. I don't think it matters what your specific purpose is, but when planning an orchard it is useful to have some kind of focus, to help structure the initial planting.

The main problem with Rubinette in my area is scab, on the leaves and then the fruit. It can be quite severe, and seems to weaken the tree. I started with M9 but am finding better results with MM106, the extra vigour helps (as you have suggested).

Golden Delicious and Delicious, two of the most widely planted of all apple varieties internationally, are by any definition "rare" in the UK, and they could arguably also qualify as old, having been discovered more than a century ago. If there was suddenly a new virulent strain of an apple disease in the UK, it is quite possible that they would survive it, because their all-American origin means they are not as interbred with the rest of the UK apple varieties.

Incidentally, if you are into the "sentimental" aspect of choosing apple varieties, the story of the discovery of Delicious is fascinating.

There is also an interesting contradiction in the Diversity article. Alkmene, the offspring of two disease-prone parents, one of which is the widely-planted Cox, is nevertheless quite disease free. Perhaps some latent qualities from further back in the ancestry suddenly came through. I think we have to remember that all apple varieties are unique, regardless of whether their parents were unfashionable Cox or fashionable old rare varieties.