POULTRY-KEEPING AS A BUSINESS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1732, 10 May 1905, Page 66 (Supplement)

POULTRY-KEEPING AS A BUSINESS.

“There is no subject upon which, more! nonsense has been talked and written j than poultry-keeping,” says the writer, of a vigorous and well-informed article in the “Quarterly Review.” “The management of poultry looks simple enough, j The rations needed are well known and j scientifically calculated in cheap books; the necessary houses are supplied by a number of respectable firms; thoj methods of hatching, rearing, fattening, i and preparing for market can be learnt ; and the stock is small in size, conveniently handled, conies quickly to maturity, and soon reproduces itself. If the I cost of feeding a fowl need be no more! than a lid a week, and she may lay j in a year two hundred eggs—some of j which within twelve months will be; turned into ‘layers,’ ‘prime chickens,’ i ‘fat capons/ or ‘pedigree cockerels’ —' how can a poultry-farm fail ? . . . | When it is positively declared —as wo are able to declare —that poultry-farms do not pay, the invariable rejoinder is* that there are hosts of them in exist- ■ ence, that they are to be seen in almost! every parish, and that the ‘immense business’ done by the

GREAT AMERICAX POULTRYFARMS

is well known. If there is no money in poultry-keeping, it is asked indignant-1 ly how can all the manufacturers of j poultry requisites get a living? How i • the poultry papers keep going? and where do the countless advertisers of sittings of eggs and stock-birds obtain tho means to carry on their business? . . . Surely tho fact that Groat Bri- J tain annually imports nearly £-7,000,000 worth of eggs—a large proportion from the other end of Europe, from Canada, ; and from Morocco and Egypt—to say nothing of £1,200,000 worth of dead poultry, shows that there is an opening ; for people in this country who have the i advantage of producing eggs on the spot. That there is a future before poultry-keeping in this country wc thoroughly believe. The production of eggs and table-poultry, like that of honey, can he immensely extended But this is passible on certain lines j only. “ As a class, the most profitable hens j in this country are the half-dozen kept j by a cottager who has at his door a | common or field where he i.s at liberty ! to let the birds run. . . . The next j most profitable liens wo know of are, I first, the half-dozen birds in a reason- j ably large pen at the bottom of a suburban kitchen-garden, which, again, are under close observation, arc largely fed, but not-overfed, on house scraps and garden waste, and produce manure of great value for vegetable and fruitgrowing; secondly, the poultry kept by a farmer which subsist on what they can pick up in the fields, supplemented by cheap ‘ off ’ or ‘ tail ’ corn and soft food made of meal ground on the premises or bought under the favourable conditions in which a farmer is able to make such purchases. . . . The

LEAST PROFITABLE POULTRY

in this country—if, indeed, they are profitable at all —'are the birds on what is popularly understood by a poultry farm. When novices speak of a poultry farm they usually have in mind a grass field, most of which is divided up into wire-netting pens in which a large quantity of poultry is kept. Tho owner is .supposed by townsmen—'but not by his friends or neighbouring farmers, all of whom know better—to make a living by selling eggs, stockbirds, and dead table poultry. However much one poultry farm may differ from another in magnitude—in some the acreage is large enough for the birds to be put out in ‘ colony ’ houses instead of in pens—there are, in tho case of a large number of them, certain common features. The birds are practically hand-fed; that is to say, they are not sufficiently at liberty to gather seeds, insects, and a variety of green

stuff; and all their food, except a little grass, and even their grit, have to ho bought. The keeping of such hens involves heavy expenditure, not only on labour and rent, but on wire-netting, scratching-isheds, shelters, straw, car-, riage, advertising, correspondence, etc., while the return from manure is largely lost.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF POLL TRY-

KEEP IN G. on farms largely depends on agriculturists recognising that the successful management of poultry, like that of sheep, dairy cattle, horses, and arable land, calls for knowledge and experience. The farmer has the great advantage of being able to provide much of the food at small expense. Potatoes, swedes, mangolds, and clover play a larger part in the profitable feeding ol poultry than is generally understood. The farmer has also constantly small quantities of second-rate or injured grain which can be advantageously utilised, and sometimes, perhaps, dead stock that can be boiled up to supply the animal food which poultry need if they are to do their best, while many incidentals of poultry-keeping cost him nothing that he need take account of. The manure deposited during the daytime on the fields, if the houses are frequently shifted, will also balance any rent that could be fairly charged against poultry, for it is unquestionable that, on arable and grass land alike, hens in reasonable numbers do nothing but good. The manure from the poultry-houses is also profitable. Each bird will drop in the night-time from a quarter to half a hundred-weight in a year; and this manure is valued by the consulting chemist of the Royal Agricultural Society at £2 a ton. Every year, too, enough grain is left on the stubbles to maintain the birds in perfect . health and condition for two months.”

Among the many valuable suggestions thrown out by this ‘‘Quarterly” reviewer is one to the effect that ‘‘the future of poultry-keeping in this country is to the intelligent farmer’s intelligent daughter.” Tho hint is one which the indulgent father, who is also a farmer nob overladen with capital, might well take in educating his daughter.