I don't really know, but here's why I'm suspicious. Assuming we're talking about commercial orchards that are selling to at least hundreds (if not thousands or more) of end consumers, I can't see consumers placing any real value on these kind of nuanced differences. For one thing, I think these kinds of nuances are too difficult for consumers to understand accurately and judge. Unless consumers are buying huge dollar amounts of fruit, they would probably be better off spending twice as much for organic as they would spending all the time it would take to figure out what the real differences are between orchards. And since "low-spray" is an unregulated, subjective, and relative term, it's surely highly susceptible to distortion. It seems to me that someone that really cares about organic is either going to buy fully organic or do without. Other people might say they prefer organic, but I suspect most of them don't care enough to actually pay any extra or buy apples that aren't as nice looking or buy a more disease resistant apple instead of their favorite variety, etc.

If my generalizations about consumers are fairly accurate, what options do orchardists really have? I suspect the sprays that orchardists use are being used because they make real differences, differences that translate into real costs and gains. Could orchardists stay in business spraying sprays that didn't pay? If low-spray orchards aren't able to sell their apples for any more money than if they weren't low-spray, and if they're not able to sell apples that wouldn't be sellable without the low-spray label (which they can use without meeting any real standards anyways), then it seems to me that these orchardists really don't have a choice about what they're going to spray. It seems the only choice they'd have would be to absorb all the costs/losses out of their own pockets, and given how many local orchards are going out of business already, it's really hard to imagine that there's room for substantial sacrifices in profitability.

By the way, when I suggested commercial low-spray might be a myth, I meant low-spray as in significantly lower-spray than other local growers. I would consider it a completely separate question the degree to which growers are generally low-spray nowadays, particularly in the context of the other thread.

As an aside, I think you exaggerate the need for sprays in places that aren't like California. Just because every fruit can't be grown to particular standards without sprays in every region doesn't mean that it's impossible to grow fruit organically in a given location. It may be prohibitively expensive to grow worm-free peaches, and you and most of your customers may prefer peaches to other options, but there are still plenty of other options. Here in very-un-California North Carolina no-spray peaches seem similarly practically impossible, but I've seen lots of no-spray fruits sold at the farmers' market in my modest-sized county seat: strawberries, blueberries, figs, native persimmons, sour cherries, Asian pears, watermelons, cantaloupes, muscadine grapes, blackberries, raspberries, mulberries... even some not-so-great-looking apples. I've also seen people in this area successfully growing marketable no-spray Asian persimmons, pomegranates, pawpaws, fuzzy kiwis, hardy kiwis... I expect I'll see all these fruits on the local market sooner or later, too. Of course, one would have to build specialty markets for a lot of these fruits, especially in order to sell them in larger quantities, but I think it's certainly doable from a production standpoint.

Olpea I'll work on that mositure loving strawberry for you that will taste so good it will blow away your supermarket berries. A good example of what could make money.
It's not perfect here, but I get good crops, It took a year to figure it out. I still have 7 jars of pineberry jam. Pineberries are a cross from South America, you know damp, warm, etc. They might be the key to a better red. Of all my strawberries, they seem the best adapted to moist conditions My reds get gray mold from time to time. Not the pineberries. Never seen it on them. Thanks for the tip!!
Hey in 10 years look for the Drewberry! :)

Cousin,

After re-reading my two posts above, I've decided to delete them. They are probably a little too passionate for my own tastes. Not impolite, just too passionate. I think you've also been polite in your responses.

One thing I've learned from the recent global warming thread is that, as human beings, there is a surprising amount of opinions/ideas fixed in our thought process. I'm not sure why that is.

Nevertheless, it seems to me organic culture, or spray/no-spray, falls in that category. In that regard, I'm probably not going to be able to contribute much, so I think I'll pull back in this discussion.

Sustainable fruit didn't go after the pristine look and, for the most part, that is what the public expects.

Some small farmers in the state do sell low spray fruit at farm stands where customers are willing to pay for fruit that looks imperfect but wasn't sprayed after spring.

I would say that IPM is a term that means many things to many people and is often an advertising ploy, but it is important to the university gurus that dispense spray recommendations and advice. The least harmful environmental impact and lowest residue levels on saleable fruit is the goal in this pursuit.

I think the organic movement brought a lot of good idea out there. For me I never really considered the whole ecosystem. I think they are incorrect in many conclusions, but the premise of talking care of the ecosystem is an excellent one.
An eye opener for me was the comments on the thread that inspired this one. Living next to an orchard. As the biggest critics to living next to an orchard were orchardists themselves! That was eye opening and makes me rethink the growing of stone fruit in my own backyard as it may be very dangerous to my health. I really don't want to, but logic is dictating to me not to add anymore stone fruit and go the organic route. Grow paw paws, service berries and mulberrierrs if you have to grow trees.
So those comments for me were a huge advocacy for organic growing. I don't need to meet deadlines or pad the bottomline, so low production is very acceptable. It's not income for me. Makes little sense to risk myself and not get at least income in return. Still not sure why you guys do it as you obviously have little confidence in it's safety.
Dont eat where you hit with an S was loud and clear!
Organic farmers have no problems advocating the method, but when non organic people admit it's unsafe, that's a huge red flag to me. I don't even want to eat stone fruit anymore.

Regarding SWD, I was only aware of it affecting bramble fruit (and as little as I know about it, I'm not 100% sure about that.) What other fruits that I listed does SWD affect?

Another thought on fruit marketed as "low spray" and particularly examples like in the other thread where an orchardist said he only sprays 8 times per year was to question the number of times someone sprayed as a measure of the weight of an orchard's chemical footprint. Olpea you talked about using relatively less concerning chemicals. I wonder if that ever means you have to use them more often? Along those lines, here's a quote from a cooperative extension agent in NC involved with organic apples: "The majority of consumers think 'organic' means we don't spray with anything, but in fact, we actually spray twice as often, but we spray with USDA-approved materials...That's one of the reasons it's three to four times more expensive to grow organic apples than it is conventional apples. An acre of conventionally grown apples would cost $700 a season for pesticides and fungicides; an identical organic crop's price tag for organic crop protectants is about $3,400." Maybe I'm just overly cynical when it comes to people making claims like "low spray" (definitely not with you, Olpea, and not really with anyone in discussions like this, but especially in the marketplace where there are so many exploitable consumers just begging to be misled), but it seems like there are lots of ways "low spray" marketing claims could correlate very poorly with the orchards that actually are meaningfully low spray/IPM.

Olpea, I hope you won't give up on persimmons. The seeds are a major drawback in a relatively small fruit, and there are definitely superior and inferior trees, and there are further issues with appearance and shelf life and marketability (especially having to do with waiting for the fruit to drop and sometimes splat a little and then picking it up off the ground), but at the same time I think the best trees produce fruit with flavor as desirable as about any fruit. Perhaps you could find a variety that will yield good fruit in your location without pollination -- I'm assuming you don't have wild trees -- and thereby give you seedless fruit. Persimmon pudding is also a first rate baked fruit dessert. I'd also encourage you to try a Rosseyanka, the Asian-native cross, that has some of the great flavor of native persimmons without most of the drawbacks. I'll admit that I come at persimmons (and other fruits) from an unusual perspective, however, in that I gave up several years ago on fruits that I couldn't grow, scavenge, or buy local-organically. Peaches were previously a favorite fruit, but I basically don't eat peaches any more. Maybe the absence of peaches has made persimmons look better to me, but at the same time, I just finished some incredibly sweet and delicious homegrown strawberries out of the freezer, and even before I gave up eating conventional local peaches I thought figs (with some differences between varieties) were a truly great fruit, and I'd say the same about hardy kiwis, which I thought (as I still do) were just amazing the first time I tried them. I'm definitely eager to see my new things reach fruiting age, and I'm interested in trying different things, but even in my very insect and fungus and fireblight and late spring freeze prone location, I feel like I eat a full assortment of delicious no-spray fruits.

Thank you for all your kind words. I'll try to answer some of your questions.

I suppose I am a bit sensitive about the organic, or no-spray debate.

I've heard through the years so much rhetoric about organic (not from your posts above) that it's made me numb to the topic.

To wit, if you just do the right management you can be organic; if you just companion plant, just spray neem oil, work with nature not against her, use compost tea, use foliar nutrient sprays, etc., etc., blah, blah blah.

There is one apple orchard in my area whose owners purchased it a few years ago. About a couple years ago, they made the decision to go organic. They tell everyone they can how they are "healing this land" from the terrible chemicals used. They dis chemicals every chance they get.

What am I then, a devil, who uses chemicals? The whole attitude is a bit offensive to me, but my take is they have to keep their customers scared in order to charge them high prices, which I hate to say seems to be somewhat of a common theme I've seen from other organic sellers. I'm getting too passionate here again, so I'll move on.

I started selling fruit 6 years ago part-time. Really it was in response to too much fruit for my family to consume, or give away. Plus I like producing food for people.

Four years ago my wife and I decided to try to go back into full-time farming, so we bought a small amount of acreage on the MO side and planted mostly peach trees there. Those trees have just finished their third year. They did not produce this year because a severe hail storm during bloom tore off all the flowers. So no, the farm has been no where near profitable yet. All the incidental expenses and start-up costs are a big deal.

I have about 8K in a sprayer and lots of my own time rebuilding it. Figure 15K for a decent tractor. Mower another 2K.

Then there is always something. The hydrant at the farm needed to be replaced this summer. By the time I bought a good stainless steel hydrant and stainless fittings (for underground) a pack joint, a couple curb stop valves, cement, sand, rock for pouring a pad around it, it was 500 bucks. I need to replace fuel injectors on the tractor-they are $200 a piece. I could go on and on, but I'm sure you see the point.

Using reduced risk pesticides is quite a bit more expensive compared to conventional pesticides. Take the conventional pesticide permethrin (Perm-Up). It currently sells for $62.50 per gallon which breaks down to 48 cents per ounce. Applied at a max rate in a peach orchard (10 ounces per acre) that calculates to $4.80 per acre.

Consider the reduced-risk pesticide Delegate. It sells for $241.75 a bottle (26 oz.) or $9.30 per ounce. The max rate for peaches is 7 oz./acre, or $65 per acre.

You can see where the financial incentive lies. I've used Delegate on my small home orchard and have a plan to try to ease the cost of it for the large orchard. I pretty much only plan to use it for peaches closer to harvest to control SWD. I feel better about using a soft compound like Delegate closer to harvest.

I could go through the same exercise with fungicides but I'm sure you understand the economics of it.

SWD does prefer bramble fruit for egg laying, but pretty much all stone fruit are susc. as well. Fortunately, hard fruits like pomes aren't susc.

I've know of people who live in warm humid climates and have grown lots of uncommon fruits no spray fruits to the point they've been able to harvest something all season long. So Cousin, I expect you will be able to do the same thing.

I suppose that is what we are all after, to harvest the fruits of our labor. It does promote a common bond among us.

Thanks,

Mark