Notes for the Poultry Keeper

Manawatu Times, Volume 60, Issue 175, 27 July 1935, Page 13

Notes for the Poultry Keeper

(By J. H. Ivissling, Massey College.) Egg Quality Tho margin of profit from commercial egg production is small, iu fact many have found that no such margin of proJit exists at ail, but then that is a matter of personal management, experience ancl the full development of any suitalilc sidelines. Thus the quality of the egg produced is a most important factor and if additional expense is involved in producing a superior product, such as a slightly larger egg or one of better internal quality, then Ihc producer should obtain a better price. Under present marketing conditions lie does not, unless he has a direct to consumer ' trade. For some years now producers, backed by the Grocers’ Association, have attempted to establish somo form of egg grading aud although some ot the larger egg agents havo installed egg-grading machines there is still little uniformity iu grading, and certainly one seldom sees graded eggs offered for retail sale under their proper grades. Eggs vary in quality considerably, as most consumers know to their discomfort. The fault does not always arise from the producer who, in. niusu cases, markets his eggs twice a week and takes care to see that only perfectly fresh eggs arc scut in to tho agents. But eggs are highly perishable, aud if stored next to any strong-smelling articles will absorb, such odours. An egg left in a shop window in the direct rays of a summer’s day sunshine will quickly deteriorate and many of the eggs sold in some of the larger towns are from a fortnight to a month old when consumed. The producer may market only once weekly and it may take a week for the agent to distribute his eggs to the retailer. Then tho retailer and the consumer may hold the egg for another week each, which makes the "new-laid" egg a month old when it is presented for breakfast. Undoubtedly there is a difference in quality between such an egg aud one taken right from the n.est. It is the producer who cun control sonic af tlic troubles arising out of marketing his produce, and until such Jilno as a uniform grading system is evolved, and until some marketing reforms arc made, those producers who themselves market direct to consumers are to be commended. Not only are they helping to increase consumption by producing a fresher article, but they should obtain higher returns provided they do not undercut the top retail price for fresh eggs. Management Management of the laying flock will affect egg quality. Breeding and feeding methods aro involved as well as general management. It. is generally acknowledged that eggs from birds on free range arc infinitely more 'wholesome than those from intensively housed birds, and certainly shell quality is ■ better. It has also been proved that management will affect egg size. A poodly balanced ration will so aJlect the the layers that egg size will vary considerably. Good breeding practice is the most important point affecting egg quality, provided that management is uniformly sound. Tho breeding seasou ■ is now at hand and all producers who incubate their own eggs can assist iu improving egg quality by more care iu the selection, of the eggs to be incubated. Size is important, in that it should lie up to standard and uniform, and the best eggs for incubation purposes arc ■ those that weigh just a fraction over two ounces. Eggs weighing over 2j ounces arc really 100 large unless it is desired to lift the standard size of the eggs from the whole flock for one sea- ■ son. Certainly no eggs under two ounces should be incubated, unless one is breeding from a special pullet, when ' a small margin may lie allowed, though pullet breeding is not lo bo commended except under certain conditions. Egg shape is inherited, so that care should be used to select only the bestshaped eggs, avoiding iu particular those that are too oblong and not pointed at one end. Never incubate any eggs that have ridges on them as this denotes not only a lack ot' vitality, but a sure sigu that some oviduct trouble may result sooner or later. Shell quality is equally important and only those eggs with firm, smooth shells should be set. Thin shells, or those with a dry, rough surface should be avoided; watching the two ends oi the eggs, as this is where the wer.rrr rr. usually shows first.

Slieli colour is also hereditary and in White Leghorns only pure white shelled eggs should be set. Alost consumers would say that every Leghorn egg is white, but the producer who win separate the eggs of individual birds will quickly note a decided difference in the tint of the shells of each bird. With the dual purpose breeds, such as Australorps, Rhode Island Reds, Light Sussex and Wyandottes, a rich brown egg should be aimed at since the public do prefer a brown shelled egg, though research has shown that such eggs are not of better internal quality. Some years ago the dark brown eggs were disliked by pedigi'Oc breeders owing to the difficulty in testing these for'fcrtility during incubation, but with the introduction of electric testing devices, this objection has Ijccn overcome. Other finer points exist such as nutritive value, quality of the egg white, weak flaccid yolks and keeping quality, but for the present these are matters which cannot be controlled under pres ent breeding systems.

Cleanliness. First impressions go a long way and every care should bo taken to keep the eggs as clean as possible. This is very difficult, especially when tho fowls have free range during winter weather. It has been shown quite definitely that a washed egg will deteriorate much quicker than an egg that is marketed clean from the nest. It is not usually known that a perfectly fresh egg, collected clean from t.hc nest and kept under sanitary conditions, will remain fresh indefinitely. Oi ! course evaporation will take place and iu time only dry dust will remain in tho egg shell, but still all the nutritive value of a fresh egg will lie there. If any ctirt or bacteria arc allowed to impregnate the shell, decay will commence aud the egg will go bad.

If the floor of the fowl house is well covered with scratching litter, if plenty of nests of uniform size arc provided, and if free range fowls are kept shut up until mid-day, the resulting eggs will be much cleaner. Again, the eggs should bo collected at least twice daily and immediately cleaned and packed. Dirt spots will be far more easily removed and no stain will remain. Plenty of clean wiping towels should be provided and these should be boiled every day after use. Dirty eggs should not bo immersed iu water if this can be avoided, but should just lie wiped with a. slightly dampened rag. Those that are really dirty should be culled out and sold to pastry cooks at a slightly lower rate. But above all it is egg size that counts most, and if only the commercial aspect is under consideration then undoubtedly to-day the producer of the medium-sized egg is on a better paying proposition than the man who produces large eggs. IVith cut rate seiliug and a lack of uniform grading, producers ot good quality eggs are not getting full vaaluc and it is hoped that the Poultry Board will bring down some recommendations to improve these conditions. .Several remits were carried at the last Federation conference dealing with the subject, but it is one thing to pass remits and quite another to bring them into practice. By uot incubating small or too largo eggs the breeder will promote a more uniform product and so help tho industry. Whilst many may prefer an oversize egg and take pride in tho fact that the hen is only an egg inaeliiue and if she is asked to produce a larger egg, then she can only do so value and it is hoped that the Poultrl ] by producing fewer eggs. j

EGG LAYING CONTEST Single Pens Section B. T. Dowtliwaitc, B.O. 3 (G) 97 1 (0.) so E. Hausen, E.O. (31 78 Mrs 1). M. Waddell, L.S W 70 W. A. Larsen, B.O. 1 (G) 75 V. J. Billiugtou, B.O. (6) 04 W. A. Larsen, B.O. 2 (6) 00 Miss L\ T. Somer, 11.1.11 a (G) 57 T. Dowtlnvaitc, B.O. 2 (0) 54 Miss L. T. Somer, 11.1.H 2 (G) 49 Iv. Alouldey, 11.1.11. (■1) 47 Miss L’. T. Bonier, 11.1.11 .1. (0) 45 F. Seymour, B.O. Section A. (0) 2S H. Poison, W.L. 2 (0) 93 H. Alorclaud, 1V.L. (01 SS Whenuapai P.F., W.L. (0) 88 -J. T. Hazelwood, IV.L. 2 (01 so H. Poison, W.L. i (5) SI A. J. Dud.son, W.L. (3) SO A. G. Alum by, W.L. i (61 so 2 (0) so F. Lang, Auc. 2 (1) 75 A. J. Davcy, W.L. 2 (3) 74 J. A. Annan, W.L. t (5) (3) 72 61) E. B. Wainscott, W.L. (11 00 Miss E. Ladd, W.L. (3) OilEmery Bros., W.L. 2 (0) 03 J. lleilly, W.L. (-1) 02 P. Lang, Auc. I (5) 0.1 H. Poison, W.L. 3 (3) 5S A. Ci. Mumbv, W.L. 4 (0) 53 3 (0) 47 A. J. Davcy, W.L. 1 (0) 56 Etnerv Bros., W.L. I (04 23 Team Results Section D. 11. H. Alorrison, B.O. AMIj-w AMD He(mvA auuobr Jict'B 09 SI 7S 71 82 59 (20) 443 Airs 11. Willers, B.O. SS 01 71 51 73 00 (28) 407 J. B. Duthic; 11,1.11. 40 72 SS lid 51 03 (20) 3S0 F. A. Dcwliurst, ll.I.E. SI 41- 77 71 51 50 (27) 374 Al. L. Boyce, B.O. S7 31r S3 44 74 47 (IS) 366 G. A. Edge, Pi.1.11. 49 41 41 73 59 02 (22) 325 Airs X. H. Short, B.O. 54 27 47 50r 74 64 (19) 316 W. A. Larsen, B.O. 00 23 72 3S 30 40 (24) 209 A. Wood, Lang. 52 Sir 58 30 58 24 (11) 262 W. E. Jones, 11.1.11. 21 42 41 10 39 34 (27) 193

Section C. Mrs M. L. Williams, W.L. 59 40 SO 51 S. D. Morris, W.L. 71 S3 (21) 399 50 48 til 87 A. J. Davcy, W.L. 81 12 (31) 3S5 57 S5 47 79 M. Stephenson, W.L. 62 52 (21) 3S2 54 70 37r SI II. A. Lucas, W.L. 70 61 (30) 379 70 59 01 70 E. B. Wainscott, W.L. •16 29 (26) 343 41 57 61 42 Miss H. Kcddcll, W.L. Si 50 (20) 338 45 S6 2S 51 J. T. Hazelwood, W.L. 0 Z 79 (16) 321 S2 79 4Sr 21 40 H. Poison, W.L. (i\ T o. 2) 33 (IS) 300

65 71 3S 69 20 IS (25) 2S1 O'. tT. Hubbard, IV.L. (No. 1) 58 IS 49 43 65 ■1-1 (21) 277 Miss Moreskead, W.L. 3 27 S3 67 SI 8 (24) 269 C. J. Hubbard, W.L. (No. 2) 59 95 27 16 32 36 (29) 265 J. Graham, IV.L. 76 22 26 50 21 52 (19) 247 Sirs K. 11. Cannon, W.L. 31 1 26 40 39 2Sr (10) 165 II. Poison, W.L. (No. .1) 20 9 25 25 35 50 (12) 164 “k” llcplaccr.icnt.