Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

nafex - Re: [NAFEX] Apple Identification

nafex@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: North American Fruit Explorers mailing list at ibiblio

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Dean Kreutzer" <deankreutzer@hotmail.com>
  • To: nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [NAFEX] Apple Identification
  • Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:59:38 -0600

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.

Dean Kreutzer
Regina, Saskatchewan Canada
USDA zone 3






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page