i 2 The Colorado Experiment Station 
enough to justify full and detailed consideration, and second, that 
it cannot be answered by any ex cathedra statements. 
In the preceding paragraphs I have given some facts which 
show that the beet can tolerate large quantities of our ordinary alkali 
and a high water-plane, which are the two causes probably most 
generally assigned for this deterioration of the beet. In our experi¬ 
ments of 1897, 1898 and 1899 to which we have referred we ob¬ 
tained as good beets on what we considered seeped, alkali land as 
were grown on land which we considered well fitted for the produc¬ 
tion of this crop, and further the beets were quite up to the standard 
of sugar content for that time—about 15.2 percent. In 1897, the 
first year that the land was cropped, they fell somewhat below the 
standard, but so did our beets on land entirely free from these objec¬ 
tions. In the next two years they were quite up to the standard, 
our final samples for the seasons giving 15.2, 15.4, 14.8 and 15.3 for 
1898, and 15.8 and 15.9 percent for 1899. The other field of alkali 
land, which we have described, yielded beets with 15.9 percent sugar 
in 1906 and 16.0 percent in 1907. The average standard according 
to the authorities cited at this time was about 17.85. In these cases 
we have such effects as we believe can justly be attributed to the 
alkali and the high water plane, and they do not account for the 
deterioration observed, despite the fact that the producers of beet 
seed had effected a general increase in the quantity of sugar con¬ 
tained in the beet. We may further add that the deterioration 
affects large areas, which are not involved in the questions of seep¬ 
age and alkalization. 
A second question raised is relative to the plant food furnished 
by our soils and the ratio of the various nutrients to one another. 
It is a fact, I think, that our beets do not ripen early; the ready an¬ 
swer of the expert is, add phosphoric acid, this will correct the trou¬ 
ble. The advice is good but the results are as a rule wholly nega¬ 
tive. In making this statement I am fully aware that but few if 
any will be quite willing to accept it, because it appears to contra¬ 
dict the observations of many experimenters whose results, obtained 
with much painstaking labor, have come to be held as fixed and fund¬ 
amental facts and which are known to the veriest novice. I regret 
the facts, but I shall endeavor to record them as we find them 
though I know them to be sadly out of joint with results with which 
they should articulate in order to be quite proper. 
AY e can only present a partial view of this very interesting sub¬ 
ject in this place, the biggest features of the problem and these en 
masse. We cannot enter into the questions pertaining to the effects 
of the individual elements of plant food or the determination of the 
effects of definite ratios, we will not even question which element of 
plant food' is really the determining factor, but state our results. I 
