[NAFEX] Apple Identification
deankreutzer at hotmail.com
Tue Oct 19 11:59:38 EDT 2004
>Since Battleford was introduced about 1930 and this tree was planted in
>about 1910, I doubt it could be Battleford. Also the apple is very sweet.
>Battleford is so tart in my opinion a person can arely even finish one
>apple. Usually after one bite a person doesn't take another with
>Battleford. pples of that size were extremely rare on the prairies,
>especially at that time.
Your right Bernie, 1910 is too early for Battleford, but my experience with
Battleford is that if eaten perfectly ripe, before going soft it is a good
eating apple, not that tart. Of course, taste is relative isn't it?
I know from my discussions with the breeders at the U of S and the U of
Minn, open pollinated seeds are tossed as garbage because 99% of the time,
they seedlings usually are. As you say, apples of that size were extremely
rare, and in 1910 there was pretty much only the Siberian Crab which was
completely hardy. This is why I have my doubts that it was a complete
hardy, OP seedling of an apple such as McIntosh. Apple breeding began at
the U of S in the 1920's, so I'd wager that it is something that came out of
that early work. It's only a guess however.
It would be very interesting to get a sample of leaf and fruit to try to
discover it's identity.
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada
USDA zone 3
More information about the nafex