OCR Text |
Show Utah Dry-Farm Soil Superior In United States In the recent issue of the Journal of the Society of Agronomy, is printed print-ed an article by Dr. Stewart and Mr. Hirst of the Utah Agricultural College, Col-lege, in which they show that the dry-farm dry-farm soils of Utah, unlike the soils of other regions does not depreciate in crop producing power even when used for as long as fifty years. The gentlemen referred to prove their statements by malting scientific tests of the soil content of nitrogen and humus - the two elements of plant food which are said to decrease (lie longer the soil is used. Heretofore tests have been made by scientists at the experiment stations in Minnesota and North Dakota. These men used soil from the Great Plain regions and found that a material decrease of the above elements took place each year that the soil was used. Jt was naturally nat-urally thought that the same would prove true of the Utah soils. Dr. Stewart began his tesls early in 1DU7 and has continued them ever since, in connection with Mr. Hirst, he has used soils taken from all the principle dry-farms in Utah. The result of his tests were practically the same in every instance, and may be summed in the following quotation quota-tion from the article referred to: "The results are just opposite those found by earlier investigators (referring (refer-ring to Ladd and Snyder who worked with soils from the Great Plains region). re-gion). The cropping of dry-farm soil in Utah is not accompanied by a marked decrease in the nitrogen and humus content of' the surface foot of cultivated soil." "This is probably due," say the investigators, in-vestigators, "to the deep-rooted character of the wheat plant when grown under conditions as in Utah, and also to the fact that very little erosion takes place by wind or water." wa-ter." No matter how it comes about the fact remains that the soil of the Utah dry-farm is the superior of any dry-farm soil in the United States. Farm demonstrators are a demonstrated demon-strated success judging by requests which the Extension Division of the Utah Agricultural College is receiving receiv-ing from counties of the State for assistance as-sistance in placing such a man in their locality. So many requests have been received, says Dr. E. G. Peterson, that the College has not enough means at its disposal to satisfy sat-isfy them. This year the institution receives $10,000 from the Federal Government for the extension of its work among the farmers. Many county demonstrators will be added, but not all that are needed, for the simple reason that there is not enough money available for that purpose. pur-pose. Next year however the fund will be increased and will continue to do so until 1922 when the College will be receiving $26,000 from this source. The problem before President Widsoe and Dr. Peterson is to place the few men which they can supply this year in such positions that they can do the greatest amount of good to the whole Stats. In addition to die regular county demonstrators who have definite fields, the authorities authori-ties have outlined a method whereby the whole State will have at its command com-mand agricultural experts whom they may call upon at any time. These men are to be known as State Wide Demonstrators and may be called upon up-on at any time to assist any particular particu-lar part of the State in need of expert ex-pert agricultural advice. The men and the positions for which they are appointed are as follows: fol-lows: John T. Caine III, State Dem-onstrater Dem-onstrater in Animal Husbandry; R. J. Evans, Demonstrator in Seed Breeding and General Agronomy; Ben R. Eldredge, State Dairy. Demonstrator: Demon-strator: L. M. Winsor State Demonstrator Demon-strator in Irrigation Problems; Gertrude Ger-trude McCheyne, Home Demonstrator Demonstra-tor for the State; the demonstrator for Dry-farm problems has not as yet been appointed. The State Wide Demonstrators will enter upon their duties July 1st of this year. |