Great article, Mike, thanks for posting.
As a child of a commercial apple grower (albeit a relatively small family farm), this is particularly interesting. Before going into that, however, from a strictly consumer standpoint, this experience of deteriorating quality in Honeycrisp is absolutely real. Unfortunately, I also seem to see it creeping into my current favorite: Cosmic Crisp. But that’s another story.
I like that the article talks about the challenges in growing Honeycrisp in WA State. They’re awful to grow commercially, and we too pulled out dozens of acres. Bitter pit was particularly bad and, while the apples were still edible, the fickle consumer wouldn’t buy them because they were ugly. It was brutal for many growers in the area.
I really take issue with the author for writing, “…Despite the challenges, growers in Washington—enticed by the profits the Honeycrisp could potentially bring and ignoring their initial bad experiences with it—eventually ended up planting acres and acres of Honeycrisp trees.” Similarly to grapes, growers can’t snap their fingers when there’s an interesting new variety (or rootstock, etc.) and always make an accurate decision of a variety’s viability. You have to remove old trees and prepare a fallow field, add new irrigation, find and source saplings, plant them, and THEN wait for 2-3 years before there is a crop. The article makes it sound like growers in Washington were like, “Yeah, these apples clearly suck, but let’s keep going anyway!” Nobody knew about the challenges until years down the road.
Unfortunately, this is going to continue with other varieties too. It’s like a grape grower planting Pinot Noir in Napa Valley…sure, it’s easy to say with hindsight that it was the wrong grape in the wrong region, but those early farmers weren’t chasing the money necessarily.
Anyway, I’m actually not sure where I was going with all of this other than to hope that readers go beyond the article crapping on Washington growers and realize that some apples are better for some regions than others…just like wine grapes (and so many other ag products). It makes the researchers at U of M seem like saints in that all they supposedly wanted to do was, “…[create] a truly delicious apple with excellent eating quality. The Honeycrisp is a victim of its own success, and has become exactly what Bedford and Luby despised about the variety’s predecessors: a boring commodity apple.” BS. Any research program homes to create a variety with large-scale commercial success.