POULTRY

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIV, Issue 306, 23 November 1934, Page 10

POULTRY

EGG-LAYING. MASSEY COLLEGE CONTESTS. The following are the results of tho thirty-fourth week of the ■ Massey College egg-laying contest: — SINGLE PENS.

NOTES:

(By “Brooder.”)

Will the-Poultry Board be able to justify its existence seems to be the topic which is engaging the minds of poultrymen just now. Already one hears the question, What can it do? What is it doing? That it will have to do something more than identify every poultry keeper throughout the country and compel him to pay a registration fee goes without saying; and it is believed that something really - worth while will sooner or later come from the board instituted as it has been for tlse benefit of poultrymen generally. But Rome was not built in a day, and it will take time and a great deal of concentrated effort to bring about reforms and to offer to poultrymen permanent benefits. Meanwhile, the board, we are told, is busy organising up and down the land, bringing poultrymen into line, so that it may have a backing strong enough to make its presence felt. It is pleasing to learn that this organising effort is meeting with suc-

cess. There ie weight in numbers, and the growing total should encourage the Poultry Board to get on with the task before it.

As a result of the visit to Australia of Japanese experts in sexing day old chickens, it is hoped that bv 1936, with the help of instructional classes, Australia will have quite a number of, if not enough, trained men to do the sexing for the whole of the Commonwealth. This has led the New Zealand Poultry Journal to say: “We in New Zealand need also to look ahead, and it is not too soon to consider the feasibility and advisability of bringing an expert here for the 1935 chick season to instruct New Zealand pupils in the art of chick sexing.” Tho journal urges the Poultry Board to take up the matter.

Certainly one deplores the losses which follow the hatching out of numberless unwanted male chickens throughout the country. The cost of rearing these chickens to an age when it can be ascertained that they are cockerels must be considerable. Add to this labour costs, extra brooder space, larger houses, etc., and it will be seen that if these cockerels can be removed on tho - day of hatching much saving can be effected. It is well, then, that there should he some effort to have for New Zealand skilled men who can eliminate these male birds as soon as they emerge from the incubator.

Pullets which for some reason stop growing are w’orse than no pullets at all. Rapid changes of food will retard growth, and in some cases will give such a setback that they will not recover in time to do much good during their first season. Recognising the value of some chick starters on the market, a lot of poultry raisers use this in order to get the chickens over the first week or two, after which they think that any food is good_ enough. More often than not it is just “fill up,” having little value for promoting growth. After being-started so well, it stands to reason that this sudden change will cause trouble with the

chicks. It is not that these poultrymen have not had warning, as the makers of almost every formula on the market try to impress upon users—sudden changes to other foods will be harmful. And so they are. Any change made must come gradually and even then it is only reasonable that

when there is a change over it should be to something of equal value, only more suitable to the age of the birds. Early hatched pullets should be given less food of an animal nature if there is danger that they are coming on too rapidly. It certainly is convenient and helpful to have pul-

lets coming into lay when the hen are slackening off, as a regular mcom -is maintained. However, it does no pay in the end if these pullets are not fully grown and developed. -A. little extra protein matter to the backward pullet is alright, but care should be used otherwise.

Section A. J. A. Annan, W.L (6) 165 C. H. Barker, W.L . 1 (6) 136 2 (3) 117 W. H. Barker, W.L . 1 (0) 92 2 (0) 107 3 (6) 143 Mrs R. R. Cannon, W.L. (6) 192x Emery Bros., W.L (5) 138 E. M. Galvin, W.L 1 (0) 88d 2 (4) 128 3 (0) 58d H. Hutchinson, W.L , ' (5) 152 0. W. L. King, W.L (3) 131 A. G. Mitmby, W.L 1 (6) 165 2 (5) 143 5 (0) 18d . 4 (6) 174 H. Moreland, W.L (6) 125 W. J. McAloon, W.L. (6) 109 A. J. Shailcr, W.L (6) 140 H. Williams, W.L 1 (3) 149x 2 (5) 132x Whonuapai P.F., W.L (5) 173 Mrs E. Youngson, Bk. L. 1 (3) 91 2 (6) 143 D. Kruse, Ane 1 (2) 111 2 (5) 115 F. Lang, A no. 1 (6) 118 2 (6) 130 J. Smith, Ane 1 (6) 150 2 (6) 159 H. Williams, W.L 3 (5) 152 A. Straw-bridge, W.L. .. (5) 160 A. R. Watson, Br. L (5) 138 Section B. Miss E. T. Somer, R.I.R. (0) 85 W. A. Larsen, B.O 3 (4) 106 Iv. Mouldey, R.I.R (5) 93 T. Dowthwaite, W.W 3 (0) 143 W. A. Larson, B.O 1 (6) 146x 2 (6) 166 Mrs Waddell, B.O. ........ (1) 147x T. Dowthwaite, W.W. ..... 1 (0) 72 2 (4) 139 TEAM RESULTS. Section C. S. D. Morris, W.L. 120 163 49d 142 161 183 (27) 828 A. J. Davoy, W.L. 154 127 145 148 114 131 (30) 819 C. W. L. King, W.L. 119 154 139 110 116 157 (31) 795 J. Graham, W.L. 130x 120x 129 117 117x 140 (26) 753 Mrs D. A. Stewart. W.L. 124 70 145x 100 151x 141x (21) 731 M. Stephenson, W.L. 97 78 161 113 127 151 (34 727 Mrs Geo. Hillman, W.L. 164 116 147 132 30 136 (21) 725 Emerv Bros., W.L. 72d 148 .165 85 103 151 (24) 724 H. Poison. W.L, 132 71 llld 129 135 144 (20) 722 J. T. Hazelwood, W.L. 154 166 9x 137x 128 124x (23) 718 P. B. Harrison, W.L. 157 87 126 102 139 101 (29) 732 H. A. Lucas, W.L. 119 101 68 146 67 122 (17) 623 A. Straw-bridge, W.L. 103 122 124 19d 116 135 (26) 619 E. B. Wainseott, W.L. 115 69 65 97 106 164 (30) 616 E. D. Wilkinson, W.L. 104 113 88 107 110 93 (30) 615 W. N. Laws. W.L. 109 110 88 72 84 112 (19) 575 J. Smith. Anc. 99 79 96 25 111 85 (19) 495 P. Lang. A lie. 89 96 55x 60 72 43x (20) 415 Section D. Miss E. T. Somer, R.I.R. 162 183 178 80 178x 125 (33) 906 F. A. Dewhurst, R.I.R. (31) 838 109 131x 84 157 159 198 W. A. Larsen, B.O. 106 196 63 158x 166 68d (26) 757 W. E. Jones. R.I.R. 120 139 35d 146 138 120x (26) 698 “x” Disqualified egg weight clause. “d” Bird dead.