— 8 — 
The showing against the late planting is very decided. It pro- 
duced less than half as much sugar as either of the others. It is 
evident that the small weight of crop is due, primarily, to the poor 
stand, since, even planting the middle of June, the beets average 
larger than those planted earlier. But, with only a third of a stand 
and tlie beets eighteen inches apart, the extra size did not compensate 
for the smaller number of beets. The poor stand is due to hot, dry 
weather, and, as will be noticed more at length in another place, 
even irrigating at the time of planting did not much increase the 
germination. 
The difference between the crops of the May 10 planting and 
that of May 27, is not large, indicating that profitable- crops may be 
raised, even though the seed is not planted until the last week in 
May. The difference in the stand in this case is, undoubtedly, due 
to the drying out of the ground, rather than to the greater heat. 
Though differences in sugar and purity are not large, yet these differ- 
ences are in favor of the earlier planting. The analyses of the beets 
from the June 15 planting, show that the crop did not reach nearly 
to the degree of ripeness attained by the earlier plantings. 
There is nothing in these experiments to show whether still 
better returns would be obtained by planting in April, and, unfor- 
tunately, the test of this point, made at the Rocky Ford sub-station, 
was so injured by a severe hailstorm as to offer little light on this 
point. 
The beets at Rocky Ford were planted at four different dates, 
April 18, May 2, May 16 and June 1. As the season there is about 
two weeks earlier than at Fort Collins, these dates are about the 
same, so far as the season is concerned, as those used at Fort Collins, 
with the addition of one earlier date. The beets were planted in 
good mellow garden soil, in rows eighteen inches apart and 
thinned to nine inches apart in the row. 
As noted above, a severe hailstorm, on June 6, interfered seriously 
with the experiment. The plantings of April 18, May 2 and May 
16, were well up at the time and were cut even with the ground, 
allowing the later planting to approach them in growth. When 
the present writer visited the field, the middle of Jul}^, the eye could 
scarcely tell any difference between the first three plantings. 
Two sets of samples were taken of each of these plantings, the 
first October 8 and the second October 29. The crop was harvested 
during the next week and the beets counted from several rows of 
each planting, so as to get the stand and the average size : 
