POULTRY ROTES

Manawatu Standard, Volume LV, Issue 43, 18 January 1935, Page 10

POULTRY ROTES

(By “Brooder.”) Continuing the discussion on table poultry, it is interesting to have Miss Marion Stewart’s conclusions as recorded in Smallholder. She says: The successful marketing of table poultry is an art very well worth acquiring by anyone who hopes to make a profit from his birds. There seems to be no more valuable market, even at this time of the year. There is no doubt at all that, as the Royal Commission’s report tells us in the brief review of the possibilities of poultrykeeping as a dairy farm side-line, the housewife looks on poultry as a luxury. \ 7 et many thousands of unwanted cockerels are sold for next to nothing, showing a dead loss to tho poultry-keeper. The blame for both these facts is generally laid on the high price of grain. But table poultry need not be fattened on grain. Grain makes good frame and plenty of hard muscular flesh, splendid for stud birds; but the soft white flesh it is desirable to produce for table birds is developed by soft feeding such as curd, pollard, food refuse from hotels, or, if large birds are wanted, a balanced ration of barley meal, pollard and meat meal or skim milk. Later, in discussing marketing of surplus cockerels and the wastage in this respect to poultrymen generally, she says; It ma.y interest readers to know that an exceedingly attractive article has been' placed on the English market —chicken canned in Russia. The tins bear English-printed labels, the country of origin being very little in evidence, and ilb of boneless flesh sells for Is Bd. Evidently there are countries which can turn to profit these thousands of young birls which annually are a big loss to poultrymen. 'Whilst prices were good and profits considerable, few pothered about these leakages; now the position is materially altered. Leakages must be stopped if the business is to pay. Sooner or la.ter a demand for those young birds will come. “Utility” in' Smallholder says: It is very desirable that recognised judges who are on the list of the North Island Association should meet within tlie near future t-o discuss the standard and arrive at a definite viewpoint on the interpretation of the various matters and thereby reach unanimity. This would be the nucleus ot what might ultimately grow into a body fit to undertake', m conjunction with specialist hrecdeis and associated controlling bodies, the revision of the standard when it again becomes necessary. A considerable amount of data would be obtained bv them and r€cor<lcd lor the benefit or breeders. This is a topic that is likely to be aired very much. This year’s shows will be watched very carefully by all exhibitors and comparisons of the awards with the standard to which all judges are expected to adhere will be everywhere expected. Exhibitors everywhere are at tlie mercy of the likes and wlums ot judges. It would be gratifying to many if it could bo broadcast that a.ll judges have one end in view that ot kving awards to the birds most nearly approaching the type as depicted in the recently published standard work.

EGG-LAYING. MASSEY COLLEGE CONTEST. The following arc the results of the forty-second week of the Massey College egg-laying contest: SINGLE PENS.

Section A. J. A. Annan, W.L (4) 176 C H. Barker W.L 1 (0) 154d 2 (U) 125 W. H. Barker, W.L 1 (0) 97 2 115d 3 (6) 184 Mrs R. R. Cannon, W.L. ... (5) 239x Emery Bros. W.L (3) 180 1 88 cl 2 (0) 140 3 58d II. Hutchinson W.L (2) 188 C. W. L. King, W.L (5) 174 A. G. Mumby, W.L i (4) 205 2 (5) 188 3 (U) 18d 4 (5) 218 H Moreland, W.L (4) 159 W. J. MeAloon, W.L (4) 151 A. J. Shailer, W.L (4) 177 II Williams, W.L 1 (5) 183x 2 (4 173x Whonuapni P.F. W.L (5) 215 Mrs E. Youngson, 13k. L. 1 99 d 2 (0) 172 D. Kruse, Anc. 1 (0) 118 2 (1) 139 F. Lang, Anc 1 (4) 153 2 (3) 163 J. Smith Anc 1 (4) 183 2 (3) 195 II. Williams, W.L 3 (4) 193 A. Strawbridge, W.L (2) 195 A. R. Watson, Br. L (5) 169 Section B. Miss E. T. Somer, lt.I.R. . (0) 114 K. Mouldey, ll.I.R (3) 129’ W A. Larsen, B.O 3 (6) 150 T. Dowthwaite, W.W 3 (5) 177 W. A. Larsen, B.O 1 (5) 185 2 (5) 208 Mrs Waddell, B.U (0) 180x T. Dowthwaite, W.W 1 (0) 88 2 (0) 161 TEAM RESULTS. Section C. C. W. L. King, W.L. 160 198 181 152 159 196 (32) 1046 A. J. Davey, W.L. 198 156 184 184 157 155 (28) 1034 S. D. Morris, W.L. 171 192 49d 190 207 223 (28) 1032 M. Stephenson, W.L. 132 121 213 160 155 196 (26) 977 J. Graham, W.L. 152x 138x 169 151 147x 179 (16) 936 P. B. Harrison, W.L. 192 118 165 129 170 140 (19) 914 Mrs D. A. Stewart, W.L. 159 70d 184x 117 195x 167x (17) 892 Emery Bros., W.L. 72d 181 206 97 141 194 (25) 891 H. Poison, W.L. 161 96 llld 163 160 186 (20) 877 J. T. Hazelwood, W.L. 182 203 9d 158x 165 148x (18) 870 Mrs Geo. Hillman, W.L. 177 127 177 173 30 172 (13) . 856 A. Strawbridge, W.L. "138 147 166 19d 154 178 (26) 802 E. 15. Wainscott, W.L. 138 92 91 137 138 206 (21) 802 W. N. Laws, W.L. 148 156 115 74 131 148 (26) 770 II. A Lucas, W.L. 146 101c! 85 169 106 162 (17) 769 E. D. Wilkinson. W.L. 133 113 96 139 148 137 (18) 766 J. Smith, Anc. 133 111 128 26 140 116 (13) 654 F Lang, Anc. 121 134 77x 87 108 69x (21) 596 Section D. Miss E. T. Somer. R.I.R. 203 216 204 112 210x 153 (32) 1103 F. A. Dewhurst. ll.I.R. 146 159x 87 200 201 244 (21) 1057 W. A. Larsen, B.O. 118 245 80 200x 204 68d (22) 915 W. E. Jones, R.I.R. 161 180 35d 182 176 158x (23) 892 “x” Disqualified egg weig lit clause. “d” Bird dead.