Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.

After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!

OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!

BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J

Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.

Lenona.

On 8/2/2014 11:30 AM, wrote:
>
> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
> After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
> when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
> condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
> OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
> less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
> the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
> little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!

> Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.

If they were having trouble selling them at that price, it would
come down, that's my guess.

nancy

On Sat, 02 Aug 2014 11:32:28 -0400, Nancy Young
> wrote:

>On 8/2/2014 11:30 AM, wrote:
>>
>> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>>
>> After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
>> when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
>> condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>>
>> OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
>> less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
>> the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
>> little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
>> Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>
>If they were having trouble selling them at that price, it would
>come down, that's my guess.
>
>nancy

Without researhing I'll guess a walnut tree disease. Crop failures
lead to high prices. Limes are expensive now because a disease has
infected the trees. Right now I'm treating my plum trees for black
knot disease.
http://nysipm.cornell.edu/factsheets...ases/bk/bk.asp

On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>
> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
> After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
> when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
> condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
> OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
> less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
> the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
> little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
> BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>
> Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>

I guess it all boils down to supply and demand.
http://www.wga.com/magazine/2014/04/...mall-bump-road

--
I take life with a grain of salt, a slice of lemon and a shot of tequila

Cultivate friendship with someone who has a tree or three, and you will likely be able to pick up
as many as you want. Owners get awfully annoyed by the huge nuts getting all over their driveways
and lawn that needs to be mowed....kinda like pine cones in nuisance value.

N.

"Nancy2" > wrote in message
...
> Cultivate friendship with someone who has a tree or three, and you will
> likely be able to pick up
> as many as you want. Owners get awfully annoyed by the huge nuts getting
> all over their driveways
> and lawn that needs to be mowed....kinda like pine cones in nuisance
> value.
>
> N.

True. We don't have a cherry orchard anymore, but my SIL does have a walnut
orchard so we can easily get walnuts. I am amazed at how high the prices are
now in CA.

Cheri

In article >,
"Cheri" > wrote:

> "Nancy2" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Cultivate friendship with someone who has a tree or three, and you will
> > likely be able to pick up
> > as many as you want. Owners get awfully annoyed by the huge nuts getting
> > all over their driveways
> > and lawn that needs to be mowed....kinda like pine cones in nuisance
> > value.
> >
> > N.
>
> True. We don't have a cherry orchard anymore, but my SIL does have a walnut
> orchard so we can easily get walnuts. I am amazed at how high the prices are
> now in CA.
>
> Cheri

haven't heard about the drought or the walnut thieves?

On Saturday, August 2, 2014 11:58:07 AM UTC-5, Nancy2 wrote:
> Cultivate friendship with someone who has a tree or three, and you will likely be able to pick up
>
> as many as you want. Owners get awfully annoyed by the huge nuts getting all over their driveways
>
> and lawn that needs to be mowed....kinda like pine cones in nuisance value.
>
Around here the squirrels would get every single last one.
>
> N.

--Bryan

Just a simple Google search says that 99% of all the commercial
English walnuts grown in the U.S. are grown in California. California
is in the second or third year of a terrible drought. I suspect that
a further search would turn up statistics about how few will be
produced this year.

On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

>
>Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
>After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
>when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
>condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
>OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
>less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
>the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
>little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
>BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>
>https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>
>Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>
>Lenona.

On Saturday, August 2, 2014 8:28:59 PM UTC-5, B. Server wrote:
> Just a simple Google search says that 99% of all the commercial
>
> English walnuts grown in the U.S. are grown in California. California
>
> is in the second or third year of a terrible drought. I suspect that
>
> a further search would turn up statistics about how few will be
>
> produced this year.
>
>
>
> On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
> >Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
> >
>
> >After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
>
> >when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
>
> >condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
> >
>
> >OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
>
> >less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
>
> >the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
>
> >little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
> >
>
> >BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>
> >
>
> >https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>
> >
>
> >Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>
You are better off avoiding walnuts, as they are super high in omega-6.
http://chriskresser.com/how-much-ome...nds-on-omega-6

Pecans are a much, much better choice. One should only eat walnuts if one
enjoys them a lot. Thinking they are healthful is fallacious.

This dumb**** author doesn't have a clue.
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/waln...tion-1576.html
For optimum health, one should limit both walnuts and Brazils, while
consuming more of the pecans, almonds and hazelnuts.
>
> >Lenona.

--Bryan

"Bryan-TGWWW" > wrote in message
...
> On Saturday, August 2, 2014 8:28:59 PM UTC-5, B. Server wrote:
>> Just a simple Google search says that 99% of all the commercial
>>
>> English walnuts grown in the U.S. are grown in California. California
>>
>> is in the second or third year of a terrible drought. I suspect that
>>
>> a further search would turn up statistics about how few will be
>>
>> produced this year.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:51 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
>>
>> >when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
>>
>> >condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>>
>> >
>>
>> >OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
>>
>> >less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
>>
>> >the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
>>
>> >little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>>
>> >
>>
>> >BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>>
> You are better off avoiding walnuts, as they are super high in omega-6.
> http://chriskresser.com/how-much-ome...nds-on-omega-6
>
> Pecans are a much, much better choice. One should only eat walnuts if one
> enjoys them a lot. Thinking they are healthful is fallacious.
>
> This dumb**** author doesn't have a clue.
> http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/waln...tion-1576.html
> For optimum health, one should limit both walnuts and Brazils, while
> consuming more of the pecans, almonds and hazelnuts.

I can't almonds, pistachios, pecans or macadamias. Shame because I love
them all. I do limit the Brazil nuts because they are high in selenium and
too much of that can cause trouble.

On Saturday, August 2, 2014 10:08:36 PM UTC-4, Bryan-TGWWW wrote:

>
> Pecans are a much, much better choice.

So the next question is, why are pecans-in-the-shell even MORE
expensive than walnuts?

Granted, shelling pecans is much more difficult than shelling walnuts -
but again, I wasn't talking about shelled nuts.

Lenona.

> wrote in message
...
>
> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>
> After all, cherries are far more delicate, you'd think - and yet,
> when they're in season, it's easy enough to buy THOSE in good
> condition for under $4 a pound, if you shop around!
>
> OK, so you're buying the pits and stems as well, but those make up far
> less than 25% of the total weight, I'm guessing. Whereas with walnuts,
> the shell is 50% of the weight - and IIRC, you're lucky if you pay as
> little as $4 a pound - so that's $8 a pound WITHOUT the shell!
>
> BTW, here's a thread I started in 2012 about WHERE to buy them:
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rec.food.cooking/walnuts$20lenona/rec.food.cooking/fdypRjPYGT8/sA1HQk8vkS0J
>
> Even so, I'm curious as to the WHY of the matter, this time.
>
> Lenona.

Nuts in general aren't cheap. I guess it has to do with how much it costs
to grow them. I never have so I don't know how long it takes to produce
them or what the yield is per tree.

"Julie Bove" wrote:
>
>Nuts in general aren't cheap. I guess it has to do with how much it costs
>to grow them. I never have so I don't know how long it takes to produce
>them or what the yield is per tree.

I have several shagbark hickory trees, they are some 50-60 feet tall,
gorgeous trees. I used to check but never found any nuts, just husks
on the ground, squirrels... I was not about to compete with squirrels
climbing trees. Nuts are also very perishable, they contain
substantial oil so go rancid quickly. Nut trees can have more value
as lumber... walnut wood is very expensive. It takes a long time to
grow nut trees, if as a young woman you planted a stand of walnut
trees figure only your grand children would benefit.

On 8/3/2014 9:05 PM, Brooklyn1 wrote:

>
> I have several shagbark hickory trees, they are some 50-60 feet tall,
> gorgeous trees. I used to check but never found any nuts, just husks
> on the ground, squirrels... I was not about to compete with squirrels
> climbing trees.

I have a few hickory trees too. On a good year I may be able to collect
a half dozen nuts that fell to the ground. Not worth the effort.

On Sunday, August 3, 2014 8:05:22 PM UTC-5, Brooklyn1 wrote:
>
>
> I have several shagbark hickory trees, they are some 50-60 feet tall,
>
> gorgeous trees. I used to check but never found any nuts, just husks
>
> on the ground, squirrels... I was not about to compete with squirrels
>
> climbing trees.

Shagbark nuts are delicious. The squirrels that eat them taste pretty
good too.

--Bryan

On Saturday, August 2, 2014 5:30:51 PM UTC+2, wrote:
> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>


Maybe they are heavilly taxed in your region as they are in denmark? nuts and almonds have one of the highest taxes of goods in DK (around 100%), second to cars (180%). Simple sugar and gelatine candies have very little more than the 25% VAT that also vegestables enjoy. But nuts and almonds are apparently horrible snacks for the population.

Then there's the good old supply and demand, which is rapidly changing. An almond grower told that they could sell everything thats produced to china nowadays due to the new wealth there, and they are willing to pay even more.. It is only due to friendly deals from importers in the western world that the producers still sell to those.

Could be a similar status for other nuts.

Wonder how long the importers can keep it up until the prices will explode to fight with these new chinese buyers.

On 2014-08-04 11:21 AM, Michael Nielsen wrote:
> On Saturday, August 2, 2014 5:30:51 PM UTC+2,
> wrote:
>> Bags of walnuts in the shell, I mean.
>>
>
>
> Maybe they are heavilly taxed in your region as they are in denmark?
> nuts and almonds have one of the highest taxes of goods in DK (around
> 100%), second to cars (180%).


I don't think I have ever met a Dane who has not told me about that 180%
sales tax. When I friend picked me up at the airport in Copenhagen in
his new car he said that he had paid for three cars but he only got one.

>
> I don't think I have ever met a Dane who has not told me about that 180%
>
> sales tax. When I friend picked me up at the airport in Copenhagen in
>
> his new car he said that he had paid for three cars but he only got one.

A funnier version of it is when a guy at a conference tour in california talked about the new dodge Challenger HellCat with 6.2liter engine and 700 horse powers , and the list price was 60.000$ he exclamed ( as if thats expensive). and then I said "oh well, I can get a 2 liter Ford Focus or maybe a top model Chevrolet Cruze for that amount!". And he had a funny look on his face.