Documents about ancient fruits orchards grown from seeds

[ogfor]

Did you know that in the early American colonies many peoples planted fruits and nut trees from seed because they believed God forbidden them to fuss with his purposes by grafting trees? For sure grafting makes havoc in natural sap flow, as does pruning and transplanting. So no grafting and transplanting was used. A lot of the apples went to cider or to feed pigs and poultry. Many cider apple trees have been cut during the alcohol prohibition years in the States (1920). In the U.S. at the start of the colony to until 1800, large orchards where made by planting nuts, fruits, vegetables and herbs seeds together in the same field. There as been very large seed grown orchards in the States, but also nearly everywhere else civilization attained sufficient development. Nuts, apricots and plums where very popular because they seem to nearly always give good tasting fruits. Since grafting was forbidden in many community of the early U.S., much everything must have been seeded then from cherry to apples, currants to strawberries, etc.

A farmer would wander in his newly cleared and still smoking lot, a garden rake and a bag of seeds, pips, nuts, pits, kernels with him. You would not believe how fast these peoples worked. With the rake they swiftly cleared a small spot, then throwing a handful of seeds (it can be a mix of compost and seeds by the way) and in one stroke, very rapidly they covered them seeds under a thin layer of soil. Moving swiftly to the next spot. They had to plant their seeds as fast as possible because a vigorous wild vegetation was going to invade the very hardly won new field. Direct seeding of fruit and nut trees is an easy old method that works.

[ogfor]

Semi-wilds cider orchards where common sight in colonial America: apple fed horses and cows where taking care of mowing, pruning and planting. These before 1800 semi-wild orchards produced a lot of apples for fresh use and juice or cider and where also used to feed poultry, pigs, horses, cows and other farm animals. The early colonists also planted a lot of different varieties of fruit and nut trees since it was more easy to carry a seed-bag than a potted tree back then in 1600. A lot of these peoples also believed that it was much better not to graft and where strong proponent of growing fruit and nut trees from seeds. Apple seedlings give very good apples for cider and to feed animals. They are very easy and cheap to grow.

Apple seedlings generally give smaller fruits than their parents and it's make them perfect for making cider:

What if some of these wildings are acrid and puckery, genuine verjuice, do they not still belong to the Pomaceae, which are uniformly innocent and kind to our race? I still begrudge them to the cider-mill. Perhaps they are not fairly ripe yet. No wonder that these small and high-colored apples are thought to make the best cider. Loudon quotes from the18 Wild Apples Herefordshire Report that “apples of a small size are always, if equal in quality, to be preferred to those of a larger size, in order that the rind and kernel may bear the greatest proportion to the pulp, which affords the weakest and most watery juice.”

Apple seedlings give fruit that are a lot more perfumed than commercial varieties:

Though somewhat small, it may prove equal, if not superior, in flavor to that which has grown in a garden,—will perchance be all the sweeter and more palatable for the very difficulties it has had to contend with...Apples for grafting appear to have been selected commonly, not so much for their spirited flavor, as for their mildness, their size, and bearing qualities,—not so much for their beauty, as for their fairness and soundness

Henry David Thoreau book "Wild Apples": http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/thoreau/Wild-Apples.pdf

seedling orchards were still prevalent as late as the mid 1800’s (and later?). It wasn’t until the temperance movement garnered strength (reducing the call for cider), that named varieties increased in value and popularity. http://www.heirloomorchardist.com/the_heirloom_orchardist/2008/03/while-providing.html

Even seedling apple trees grown from seeds rather then grafted can be excellent to eat and very productive. We have studies from New Zealand that show that out of 100 var of apples the one with most antioxidants were the seedling and the cider apples. http://www.seedsavers.net

[ogfor]

Understanding how the ancient grew their fruit and nut trees from seeds is needed to make possible low cost growing of organic fruits and nuts (and their companion herbs and mushrooms). I remember it was done in large orchards in France for plums, America for cider apples, Turkey for almonds, all over the world for nuts. Interesting documentation can also come from large scale planting of fruit tree seeds in government experimental farms, especially around or before 1900.

There is not a lot of serious information about growing fruit and nut trees from seed on the internet currently. There is a lot of information about growing fruit and nut trees from seeds in books about breeding and this information need to be summarized and put in a form that is easy to read and understand for everyone. If you have some know-how about the lost gardening art of breeding fruits and nuts from seeds, this knowledge is important and may be needed in a near future, so let us know about it!

If you have any documents about growing fruit and nut trees and bushes from seeds, please let us know, and even better post it in the forum!

[ogfor]

The Standard Temperate Fruit tree and bushes seed sowing management:

Many other methods and information can be found in this nice free pdf book available at:http://www.forestry.gov.uk/pdf/fcpg018.pdf/$FILE/fcpg018.pdf

[ogfor]

A video on the natural farm of Mr Kailash Murthy in India. This former bank worker established a food forest following the 4 principles of Natural Farming: No cultivation, No chemical fertilizers, No weeding by tillage or weedicides, No dependency on chemicals.
Four Principles of Natural Farming

Using a long handled scythe to cut the weeds is a very efficient way of controlling weeds in this medium scale Food Forest farm in India

[kwjp66]

What is this Zero Budget Natural Farming ?

by Mr.Subhash Palekar

Zero Budget Natural Farming means for all the crops, the production cost will be zero. In the Zero Budget Natural Farming nothing has to be purchased from the outside. All things required for the growth of the plant are available around the root zone of the plants. There is no need to add anything from outside. Our soil is prosperous-full of nutrients. How much nutrients the crops takes from the soil? Only 1.5 to 2.0 % Remaining 98 to 98.5% nutrients are taken from air, water & solar energy. Agriculture Universities says false that we have to add fertilizers from outside. If science says, that 98% crop body is constituted by air and water, then where is the need to add the fertilizers from the outside? Every green leaf produces the food throughout the day. These green leafs are food producing factories. What is used the leaves for producing the food? It takes carbon dioxide & nitrogen from the air, water from the canal, river or well given by the monsoon clouds, and solar energy from the sun for producing the food. Every green leaf of any plant produces 4.5 gram carbohydrates per square feet surface, from which we get 1.5 gram grains or 2.25 gram fruits. For preparing this food, the plants take necessary elements like air, water and solar energy from the nature, not from us. Monsoon clouds do not send any bill for the water that he supplied. Neither air sends bill for the nitrogen it supplied or the sun for the solar energy. All these are available free of cost. Green leaves do not use the technology of the Agriculture University for taking CO2 from the air or solar energy from the sun. Whether monsoon clouds use the technology of Agriculture University for giving rainwater? No! All these elements constituting 98% body of the plant are available free of cost. Remaining 1.5% nutrients taken from the soil are also available free of cost as it is taken from the prosperous soil which is enriched with these nutrients. Moreover, for this it does not use the technology of the Agriculture University.

If this is the ultimate truth, then where is the role of Agriculture University and their technology? Where are the Government and their subsidy? Where are these Krishi Pandits? Friends, none of them are existed here, they fool us. Agriculture University says that there is nothing in the soil and we have to add fertilizers from outside. Then my question to them is why it is not necessary in the forest? In the forest or on the bunds of our farm, there are huge trees of Mango, Tamarind or Plum with uncountable export quality fruits in famine also without any application of chemical or organic fertilizers, insecticides, without any cultivation by tractor, without irrigation. There is no existence of any technology of the Agriculture University, no fertilizers, insecticides, cultivation and irrigation. Even though these trees are giving enormous export quality fruits every year in famine also. That means, for the plants to grow and to give the production there is no necessity of adding from outside.

If it the ultimate truth that without adding from outside, the plants grows and give the production. It means that, all the nutrients needed for the growth and production are available around the root zone. There is no need to add it from outside. In the forest, there is no human existence, but, even though the trees are having enormous fruits. That means nature had supplied all the nutrients needed for the plant. Our soil is prosperous-enriched with the nutrients! When I say that our soil is enriched with the nutrients, then I have to prove it scientifically. Now we will see the scientific evidences for it. In year 1924, Dr. Clark and Dr Washington, the world famous soil scientists came to India in search of crude oil. Barmashell Company sends them in search of petroleum products in India. They taken the samples of the thousand feet deep soil and tested it at the American laboratory. The result shows that as we go deeper in the soil, the nutrients needed for the growth and production of the plant are in the increasing quantity. Our soil is prosperous-enriched with the nutrients.

If the scientific evidences say that the soil is enriched with the nutrients, then why Agriculture University says for soil testing? It is also another fraud. The soil testing report says that there is enough amount of Potash in the soil but it is in unavailable form. So, add it from outside. Actually, they are not saying false. They say true but half true. Our soil is enriched with nutrients, but these nutrients are not in the form, which the roots want. These nutrients are available in the form of grains not in the form of Chapati or Roti. If there is enough amount of grains in your house, but nobody (your wife, mother) to cook it. And you do not know cooking, then either you have to be hungry or go to hotel. You will definitely go to the hotel. If we do not want to go to hotel, then you have to bring back your mother or wife. These chemical or organic fertilizers are the teefins of the hotel.

The nutrients in the soil are in the unavailable form. They are in the form of grains not Chapati or Roti. The roots cannot take it in this form. Therefore, the soil testing report says that it is in the unavailable form. This non-available form is converted to available form by the millions of micro-organisms. In the forest, these micro-organisms are present in tremendous amount (One crore or lack per gram soil) that convert these non-available form nutrients into available form and make available to the plants. That is why there is no need to add any fertilizers from outside in the forest.

However, in our farm these nutrients are not available because the micro-organisms which convert these non-available from nutrients into available from are destroyed by means of poisonous chemical and organic fertilizers, insecticides, weedicides and cultivation by the tractor. If these cooks are destroyed them how the roots will get the nutrients? That means if we want to stop the teefins from the hotel, then we have to re-establish these micro-organisms in the soil. How it can be done? By applying the cow dung of our local cow. The cow dung of the local cow is a miraculous culture. As our mother or wife add a spoon curd (culture) to the pot full of milk and whole milk is converted into curd. Likewise, the local cow dung is a culture. One gram of cow dung contains about 300 to 500 crore beneficial effective microbes.

How much cow dung is needed for one-acre land? I had done research on this for six years. I had studied all Indian cow breeds like Gaulao, Lal Kandhari, Khilar, Deoni, Dangi, Nimari from Maharashtra; Gir, Tharparkar, Sahiwal, Redsindhi from West India; Amrutmahal, Krishna kathi, from South India and Hariyana from North India. I have tested the cow dung and urine of all these breeds on every crop, in each Naxatra, in each Charana of each Naxatra. After six years of research, I found some conclusions.

First conclusion is that only cow dung of our local cow is effective not of Jersey or Holstein. We can mix half cow dung and half the dung of bullock or buffalo, but not of Jersey or Holstein at any cost. Secondly, the cow dung and urine of black colored Kapila cow is most effective. Thirdly, the cow dung should be used as fresh as possible and the urine as old as possible. It is more effective. Fourthly, only one cow is needed for thirty acres of land. You need not have to purchase the F.Y.M., chemical or organic fertilizers like compost, vermi-compost etc. My six years experimental result says that for one acre land, only ten kilogram of local cow dung is sufficient per month. One local cow gives on an average about 11 Kg of cow dung, one bullock about 13 Kg of dung and one buffalo about 15 Kg dung per day. For one acre one day’s cow dung is enough. That means thirty days cow dung for thirty acres. There is no need to purchase the F.Y.M. in bulk quantity. I started thinking, what should be added in the cow dung? I examined the forest. I found there the excreta of the animals, birds, earthworms, insects and their urine around that huge tree with uncountable export quality fruits. I thought there must be definitely some relation between the excreta of the animals, birds, insects, earthworms with the production and growth of the plant. One gram of local cow dung contains 300 to 500 crore beneficial effective microbes. These micro-organisms decompose the dried biomass on the soil and get available the nutrients to the plants. Nature uses the dung and urine of the various animals, birds, insects and earthworms in his self-developing, self-nourishing system. That means the use of cow dung and urine is very natural and hence scientific.

I found in the shadow of that huge tree in the forest, few insects like ants working there. But in the shadow only, not outside the shadow. I examined and studied this nature’s self-developing, self-nourishing system for six years. I saw that some sweeteners are secreted from the roots to attract the micro-organisms. In addition, these micro-organisms get available the nutrients from the soil to the root zone. There is symbiosis in the nature. Science had proved this. If nature uses the sweeteners to attract the microbes, then why not we use it? I thought why not to add some sweeteners with cow dung? I started adding Jaggery with the cow dung and urine and examined its effects on each crop in each Naxatra. The results were fantastic.

[ogfor]

Jaggery is a is a traditional unrefined non-centrifugal whole cane sugar consumed in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Caribbean. Adding it to the cow dung could be a good idea: it would probably activate the microorganism and make them reproduce faster and inoculate the soil, so that very little amounts of dung would be needed. The sugar may also help mushroom spores to germinate and mushrooms are one of the basis of soil fertility as they build humus.