Skip to content
CiderHQ
Search

History · c. 1950–present

The shift from standard to bush orchards

Why are modern cider orchards planted with small trees?

In short

Because a small tree on a dwarfing or semi-dwarfing rootstock crops within a few years instead of ten, can be planted at many times the density, and can be pruned, sprayed and harvested by machine. The economics are decisively better for anyone growing fruit to sell.

What is given up is longevity, the grazed understorey, and the ecological structure that made traditional orchards a habitat. Both systems remain in use, and increasingly for different purposes.

Two systems, side by side

A standard orchard is a small number of large trees on vigorous rootstocks, widely spaced, with a grazed or mown sward beneath and a clear trunk high enough to keep stock away from the fruiting wood. Tens of trees to the hectare, decades to maturity, and a productive life that can exceed a century.

A bush orchard is hundreds or more than a thousand small trees to the hectare on dwarfing or semi-dwarfing stocks, in rows set for machinery, with a managed alleyway rather than pasture. Bearing begins within a few years and the block is expected to be replaced within a few decades rather than inherited.

The difference is not size for its own sake. It is that the rootstock controls vigour, and controlling vigour is what allows everything else: the density, the early cropping, the machine access, the shortened cycle of replanting to newer varieties.

Standard and bush orchards compared
Standard orchardBush orchard
RootstockVigorous or seedlingDwarfing to semi-dwarfing
DensityTens of trees per hectareHundreds to over a thousand per hectare
First useful cropMost of a decadeA few years
UnderstoreyGrazed or mown swardManaged alleyway, unsuited to grazing
Working lifeMany decades, sometimes a century or moreCommonly two to three decades
HarvestHand gathering and ladders, or shaking to a grazed floorMechanical shaking and sweeping
Habitat valueHigh, rising with tree ageLow, and the cycle is too short for it to develop

Why the change happened when it did

The rootstock work that made it possible was done at English research stations across the first half of the twentieth century, and the systematic case for close-planted cider orchards was made from the 1960s onwards, with Long Ashton among the bodies advising growers to plant that way.

The pressure came from labour. Once ladder work and hand gathering had to be paid at rising wages, the standard orchard’s cost structure stopped working, and the same calculation that made grubbing attractive made bush planting attractive as the replacement.

Contract growing sharpened it further. A factory that needs a predictable tonnage of named varieties has every reason to prefer blocks that come into bearing quickly and can be replaced when the buyer’s variety requirements change. Bush orchards suit an industry that plans in decades; standards suit one that plans in generations.

What the change cost

The habitat loss is the clearest cost, and it is structural rather than incidental. The features that make a traditional orchard valuable — veteran trees with deadwood and rot cavities, unimproved grassland, a mosaic of ages — take fifty years or more to develop, and a block replanted every twenty-five never gets there.

Grazing goes too. The combination of fruit above and stock below was the economic logic of the standard orchard, and it is not available in a close-planted block. That removes an income stream and a management method at the same time.

The fruit itself is a more contested question. Bush orchards can produce excellent fruit, and the widespread assumption that old trees make better cider is not well supported. What is better supported is that the varieties planted have narrowed, and that a system built around machine harvest selects for cultivars that tolerate it.

A claim to treat carefullyThe assertion that fruit from old standard trees makes better cider than fruit from bush orchards is widely repeated and rests largely on association rather than on controlled comparison. Tree age, cultivar, site and how the fruit is handled are all confounded in the usual comparison.

Where it stands now

Commercial cider fruit in Britain comes predominantly from bush orchards, and that is unlikely to reverse: the labour that standards require does not exist at a price the fruit can bear. New commercial planting is close-planted and mechanised.

Standard orchards survive in two forms — as remnants, ageing and often unmanaged, and as deliberate plantings by conservation bodies, community groups and producers who want the landscape, the habitat or the association. The second category is small but is no longer negligible.

The two systems have accordingly stopped competing for the same purpose. Bush orchards grow fruit; standard orchards, increasingly, are maintained for what grows in and around them as much as for what hangs on them.

How this developed

Certainty is marked on each entry. Where the popular account runs ahead of the evidence, that is said rather than smoothed over.

  1. First half of the twentieth century

    Rootstock science

    Systematic rootstock work at English research stations establishes reliable control of tree vigour by rootstock choice.

  2. 1960s–1970s· probable

    The case for close planting

    Research and advisory bodies, Long Ashton among them, promote bush orchards on dwarfing stocks for cider fruit.

  3. 1970s–1990s

    Commercial conversion

    New commercial cider orchards are planted almost entirely as bush blocks; standards are not replaced as they fail.

  4. From the 1990s

    Divergence of purpose

    Traditional orchards gain recognition as habitat while commercial supply consolidates on mechanised bush planting.

  5. Late twentieth century onwards· contested

    ‘Old trees make better cider’

    A widely repeated claim that fruit from old standard trees is superior. It rests on association rather than on controlled comparison, and confounds tree age with cultivar, site and fruit handling.

Also answered on this page

Questions this page covers, so you can tell at a glance whether it is the one you want.

Related

Places

What people ask next

Questions readers ask about the things this page mentions. Each one goes to the section that answers it rather than to a page written to receive the question.

Sources

What this page rests on. Where a source is marked as registered rather than read, CiderHQ is recording that the body is authoritative on the subject without claiming to have worked through the document itself. See our evidence policy for what each state means.

Where to go next