SU0014565 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

APRICOTS Background The apricot, originally from China, came to Europe via trade routes. The Royal variety from France and the Blenheim from England, now indistinguishable, were test grown in the United States in colonial days. Attempts at commercial production continued through several of the U.S. Agricultural Experiment Stations, but the disease -prone apricot with its climatic sensitivity, including its early blooming habit, precluded successful cultiva- tion in most areas of the United States. The northern parts of the country were too cold during the blooming period; the southern parts, too hot during the fruit -maturing stage The apricot is also very susceptible to fruit and limb diseases in humid areas. Com- mercial acreage today is confined to three states: Utah and Washington together account for from 2 to 5 percent of total U.S. tonnage, depending on the year, the remainder is produced in California. California's Apricot Production The Utah and Washington crops are marketed fresh, so all U.S. apricot processing --canning, drying, freezing --takes place in California. Apricots are an early crop 'mid May, June, July) arriving at pro- cessing facilities before the bulk of other fruits and vegetables. The portion allocated to each of the four outlets varies from year to year, depending in part on the size of the crop. Fresh marketings account only for 5 to 15 percent of the California crop. Approxi- mately one-half of the fresh crop is consumed in the state; one half is shipped to eastern markets. From 1910 up through World War Il, two thirds of the crop was dried; from the 1950s on, a little over one-fourth was dried Canning, including baby food, puree, and juice, increased to about 60 percent of the total through the 1950e, 1960s, and most of the 1970s. The postwar shift from drying to canning can be attributed to changes in con- sumer demand, the high labor cost of drying, 25 loss of export markets for dried apricots, and more strict sanitary and quality regulations for dried fruit. Recently, consumer demand for canned apricots and for all canned fruit has shifted down as fresh fruit marketing seasons have been extended, alternative forms have gained favor, and fresh fruit imports are increasingly available. The share to canning dropped to about 50 percent in the early 19805. The demand for dried apricots in the domestic market has increased lately due to factors such as health food consciousness and camping interests. About 30 percent of the crop was dried in the early 1980s and about 10 percent frozen. In 1983, 48 percent was canned, 32 percent dried, and 13 percent frozen. Location of Production Because of ideal climatic conditions, the traditional apricot production area in the state was the Central Coast district (specifically the Santa Clara Valley, south to the Hollister district in San Benito County). The apricot, an early bloomer, is subject to severe spring frost damage and to quality loss where summer temperatures are high. Cold locations or areas with frequent spring and summer fog are also unsuitable. Areas near San Francisco Bay, particularly sheltered val- leys in Santa Clara, Contra Costa, San Benito, and Monterey counties, were ideally suited to this sensitive fruit. In the 1950s, one-half the state's apricot acreage was located there. But higher valued alternative uses of the land took their toll in apricot acreage as can be seen in Figure 11. The greatest part of the reduction took place in Santa Clara County, where the proportion of the state's bearing acreage declined from 34 percent in 1950 to less than 5 percent (of a much reduced acreage base)in 1981. Urban growth displaced orchards there and in other coun- ties of the northern Central Coast region. Considerable apricot acreage further south in the Central Coast region has also been dis placed by more profitable vegetable produc- tion. The San Joaquin Valley area rose to major importance in the early 19309 and then declined steadily until the late 1950x. The last years of this acreage decline can be seen in Figure 11. Lack of knowledge concerning