From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
“One of the exciting things we are finding is that we can fallow land and not be penalized,” Jim Valliant, coordinator of the study, told the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District on Wednesday. “Now we are looking at the economics: What does the farmer have to have to make it worthwhile to fallow the land.” Valliant explained that fertilization is typically best done in the fall for two reasons:
– Fertilizer is generally cheaper at that time of year.
– It allows the fertilizer to blend with the soil. “If you get a little moisture in the fall, it mellows the land for planting,” Valliant said.
A study began in 2007 at the Arkansas Valley Ag Research Center, operated by Colorado State University, to look at what is needed to bring land back into production after it has been fallow for one to three years. Four plots were cultivated, with corn planted each year on one, three years on a second, two years on a third and one year on the fourth. The harvests from the fourth year were just completed, so the final results aren’t known. However, the nitrogen levels for all four years show the soil retained sufficient levels of nutrients to produce a crop without fertilization up to three years after first being fallowed. Fertilization was considered sufficient if at least 200 bushels of corn per acre were harvested. In each of the first three years, each plot yielded more than 200 bushels, except the initial year when just one of the four was planted and harvested. In other words, the plots that had been fallowed still produced adequately in the first or second year after replanting. That reduces the input cost to farmers during the fallow years, although there are still labor and fuel costs to maintain fallowed land.
Valliant said the next step is to analyze the relative cost of taking land out of production to determine how much farmers should reasonably charge for water when land is taken The Lower Ark district initiated and funded the study — about $50,000 over four years — as part of its efforts to establish the Super Ditch. At the time, there were few reports on the cost of bringing land back into production, or the financial risk farmers take by breaking cropping cycles.
More coverage from Chris Woodka writing for the The Pueblo Chieftain:
A survey by the U.S. Geological Survey and other partners began sampling fish in Fountain Creek in April and collected 20,000 fish at 10 sites, Pat Edelmann, head of the USGS office in Pueblo, told the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District Wednesday. In the 10 areas, reaches of just 150-500 feet were studied, raising the possibility of many more fish in the creek, Edelmann said.
Of special interest is the flathead chub, a plains fish that is abundant in many places, but listed as a species of special concern in Colorado, and threatened or imperiled in several other states. In Colorado, the fish is found primarily in the Arkansas River basin below Florence and in the Rio Grande basin. “Some people say it is a trash fish, but our data collectors had a discussion with the blue herons and they think the chub are an excellent source of food,” Edelmann quipped…
The study is important to Colorado Springs Utilities, which is considering a fish ladder that would allow the chub to swim upstream. The project is part of the Army Corps of Engineers Fountain Creek Watershed Study and Pueblo County requirements for the Southern Delivery System. An earlier study found the flathead chub are poor jumpers, but persistent in finding their way around obstacles like rocks. Surprisingly, 15 of the tagged fish were found upstream of the Clear Springs Ranch site, presumably during the brief time once a week when a gate is opened to flush sediment. Some fish moved as much as 18 miles upstream.