The practical bearing of the subject of ventilation in the small incubator is almost wholly one of evaporation. The majority of such machines are probably too much ventilated. In a large and properly constructed hatchery, such as is discussed in the last section of this chapter, the entire composition of the air, as well as its movement, is entirely under control. Nothing has yet been brought to light that indicates any particular attention need be given to the composition of such air save in regard to its moisture content, but as the control of this factor renders it necessary that the air be in a closed circuit, and not open to all out-doors, it will be very easy to subject the air to further changes such as the increasing oxygen, if such can be demonstrated to be desirable.

Turning Eggs.

The subject of turning eggs is another source of rather meaningless controversy. Of course, the hen moves her eggs around and in doing so turns them. Doubtless the reader, were he setting on a pile of door knobs as big as his head, would do the same thing. As proof that eggs need turning, we are referred to the fact that yolks stick to the shell if the eggs are not turned. I have candled thousands of eggs and have yet to see a yolk stuck to the shell unless the egg contained foreign organism or was several months old. However, I have seen hundreds of blood rings stuck to the shell. Whether the chick died because the blood rings stuck or whether the blood rings stuck because the chicken died I know not, but I have a strong presumption that the latter explanation is correct, for I see no reason if the live blood ring was in the habit of sticking to the shell, why this would not occur in a few hours as well as in a few days.

In the year 1901 I saw plenty of chicks hatched out in Kansas in egg cases, kitchen cupboards and other places where regular turning was entirely overlooked.

Mr. J.P. Collins, head of the Produce Department of Swift & Co., says that he was one time cruelly deserted in a Pullman smoker for telling the same story. The statement is true, however, in spite of Mr. Collins' unpleasant experience. Texas egg dealers frequently find hatched chickens in cases of eggs.

Upon the subject of turning eggs the writer will admit that he is doing what poultry writers as a class do on a great many occasions, i.e.: expressing an opinion rather than giving the proven facts. In incubation practice it is highly desirable to change the position of eggs so that unevenness in temperature and evaporation will be balanced. When doing this it is easier to turn the eggs than not to turn them, and for this reason the writer has never gone to the trouble of thoroughly investigating the matter. But it has been abundantly proven that any particular pains in egg turning is a waste of time.

Cooling Eggs.

The belief in the necessity of cooling eggs undoubtedly arose from the effort to follow closely and blindly in the footsteps of the hen. With this idea in mind the fact that the hen cooled her eggs occasionally led us to discover a theory which proved such cooling to be necessary. A more reasonable theory is that the hen cools the eggs from necessity, not from choice. In some species of birds the male relieves the female while the latter goes foraging.

But there is no need to argue the question. Eggs will hatch if cooled according to custom, but that they will hatch as well or better without the cooling is abundantly proven by the results in Egyptian incubators where no cooling whatever is practiced.

Searching for the "Open Sesame" of Incubation.

The experiment station workers have, the last few years, gone a hunting for the weak spot in artificial incubation. Some reference to this work has already been made in the sections on moisture and ventilation. Before leaving the subject I want to refer to two more efforts to find this key to the mystery of incubation and in the one case at least correct an erroneous impression that has been given out.

At the Ontario Station a patent disinfectant wash called "Zenoleum" was incidentally used to deodorize incubators. Now, for some reason, perhaps due to the belief that white diarrhoea was caused by a germ in the egg, this idea of washing with Zenoleum was conceived to be a possible solution of the incubator problem. In the numerous experiments at that station in 1907 Zenoleum applied to the machine in various ways was combined with various other incipient panaceas and at the end of the season the results of the various combinations were duly tabulated. The machine with buttermilk and Zenoleum headed the list for livable chicks.

For reasons explained in the chapter on "Experiment Station Work," the idea of contrasting the results of one hatch with one sort with the average results of many hatches of another sort is very poor science. Feeling that the Station men would hardly be guilty of expressing as they did in favor of such a method without better reason, I very carefully went over the results and compared all machines using Zenoleum with all machines without it. The results in favor of Zenoleum were less marked but still perceptible. I was somewhat puzzled, as I could see no rational explanation of the relation between disinfecting incubator walls and the hatchability of the chick in its germ-proof cage. Finally I hit upon the scheme of arranging the hatches by dates and the explanation became at once apparent. The hatching experiments had extended from March to July, but the Zenoleum hatches were grouped in April and early in May, when, as one would expect from weather conditions, all hatches were running good. After allowing for this error Zenoleum appeared as harmless and meaningless as would the Attar of Roses.

The second link after the missing link of incubation to which I wish to call your attention also occurred at the Ontario Station. The latter case, however, is happier in that no unwarranted conclusions were drawn and that an interesting bit of scientific knowledge was added to the world's store. The conception to be tested was an offshoot from the carbon dioxide theory. You will remember at the Utah Station the idea was that carbon dioxide was to dissolve the shell so the chick could break out easier.

At the Guelph Station the conception was that the carbon dioxide might dissolve the lime of the shell for the chick to use in "makin' hisself." As an egg could not be analyzed fresh and then hatched, a number were analyzed from the same hens and others from those hens were then incubated with the various amounts of carbon dioxide, buttermilk, Zenoleum, and other factors. The lime content of the contents of the fresh egg averaged about .04 grams. At hatching time the lime in the chick's body averaged about .20 grams and was always several times as great as the maximum of the eggs.

Clearly calcium phosphate of the chick's bones is made by the digestion of the calcium carbonate from the shell and its combination with the phosphorus of the yolk. Certainly a remarkable and hitherto unexplained fact. The amount of lime required is not great enough, however, to materially weaken the shell, but, of course, the process is vital to the chick as bones are quite essential to his welfare, but it is an "inside affair" of which the three-tenths of one per cent of carbon dioxide incidentally present under the hen is entirely irrelevant.

A further observation made by the investigator is that the chicks which obtained the lowest amount of lime were abnormally weak. As long as we are powerless to aid the chick in digesting lime this fact, like the other, belongs in the field of pure, rather than applied science. I think that we are safe in saying that the weakness caused the shortage of lime rather than vice versa; if the writer remembers runts in other animals are usually a little short of bone material.

The chemist of the station is to be given special credit for not jumping at conclusions. In the summary of this work he states: "There is apparently no connection between the amount of lime absorbed by the chick and the amount of carbon dioxide present during incubation."

The Box Type of Incubator In Actual Use.

Although the fact is not so advertised and frequently not recognized even by the makers, the success of existing incubators is directly proportional to the extent with which they control evaporation. In order to show this I have only to call attention briefly to two or three of the most successful types of incubators on the market.

Let me first repeat that evaporation increases with increased air currents and with decreased vapor pressure. Now, the vapor pressure undergoes all manner of changes with the passing of storm centers and the changes of prevailing winds. But there is a general tendency for vapor pressure to increase with increase in outside temperature. Now, the movement of air in all common incubators depends upon the draft principle and the greater the difference in machine temperature and outside temperature the greater will be this draft. Thus, we have two factors combining to cause variation in the rate of evaporation. The tendency for the rate of airflow to vary is diminished when a cellar is used for an incubator room, but the cellar does not materially remedy the climatic variation in vapor pressure.

The general tendency of incubators as ordinarily constructed, is to dry out the eggs too rapidly. With a view of counteracting this, water is placed in pans in the egg room. A surface of water exposed to quiet air does not evaporate as fast as one might think, as is easily shown by the fact that air above rivers, lakes and even seas is frequently far from the saturation point. The result of the moisture pan with a given current of air is that the vapor pressure is increased a definite amount, but by no means is it regulated or made uniform. Inasmuch as too much shrinking is the most prevalent fault in box incubators, the use of moisture is on the whole beneficial, but in hot, murky weather, with less circulation and higher outside vapor pressure, the moisture is overdone and the operator condemns the system.

The subject not being clearly understood and no means being available for vapor pressure determinations, the system results in confusion and disputes. When the felt diaphragm machine was brought into the market it was advertised as a no-moisture machine. The result of the diaphragm is that of choking off air movement and consequently reducing evaporation. This gives exactly the same results as the use of moisture, but the machine is easier to operate and seemed to do away with the vexatious moisture problem which, together perhaps, with some fancied resemblance of felt diaphragms to hen feathers, has resulted in the widespread use of this type of machine.

The latest effort along the lines of reducing evaporation is the sand tray machine that followed in the wake of the Ontario investigation. This device simply gives a greater evaporating surface to the water and hence a greater addition to the vapor pressure. The results in practice I had given me by a man who last year hatched sixty-five thousand chicks and as many more ducklings.

He said: "The sand tray early in the season gave the best hatches and most vigorous chicks we had, but later on things got too wet and the chickens drowned." No nicer demonstration of science in practice could be desired.

In the present-day incubator of either type we are wholly at the mercy of sudden climatic changes of vapor pressure. For the slower changes from season to season some control by greater and less amounts of supplied moisture, or by ventilator slides is available, but little understood and seldom practiced.

It will certainly be of interest to my readers to know the actual hatches obtained with the prevailing type of box incubator. By actual hatches we mean the per cent. of live chicks taken out of the machine to the per cent. of eggs put in. The ordinary published hatches, based on one per cent. of fertile hatches, are a delusion and a snare. When eggs are tested out many dead germs come out with them and the separation of microscopic dead germs from the infertile egg is, of course, impossible. Such padded and show hatching records do not interest us.

Where incubators are run on top of the ground I have found the results to be poor and to improve, the bigger and deeper and damper and warmer and less ventilated the cellar is made. The reason for this is plain. In such a cellar the vapor pressure of the air is not only greater but is less influenced by the shifting vapor pressure of the outside air. In a good cellar the operator, though his knowledge of the factors with which he deals is grievously deficient, learns, through long and costly experience, about what addition of moisture or about what rate of ventilation will give him the best results. In the room more subject to outside influences, the conditions are so constantly changing that uniformity of practice never gives uniform results, and hence the operator is without guidance, either intelligent or blind, and the results are wholly a product of chance.

As proof of my contention I may give results of a series of full season hatches for 1908, each involving several thousand eggs.

First, a state experiment station, the name of which I do not care to publish. Incubators kept in a cement basement which has flues in which fires were built to secure "ample ventilation." This caused a strong draft of cold, dry air, making the worst possible condition for incubation. The hatch for the season averaged 25 per cent. and was explained by lack of vitality in the stock.

Second, Ontario Agricultural College. A room above ground, moisture used in most machines and various other efforts being made to improve the hatches by a staff of half a dozen scientists. Results: Hatch 48 per cent.—incubator manufacturers call the experimenters names and say they are ignorant and prejudiced.

Third, Cornell University: dry ventilated basement representing typical conditions of common incubator practice of the country. Results: Hatch 52 per cent., results when given out commonly based on fertile eggs and every one generally pleased.

Fourth: One of the most successful poultrymen in New York State, who has, without knowing why, hit upon the plan of using a no-moisture type of incubator in a basement which is heated with steam pipes, which maintains temperature at 70 degrees and has a cement floor which is kept covered with water. Results: Hatch 59 per cent.

Fifth: As a fifth in such a series I might mention again the Egyptian machine with the uniform vapor pressure of the climate and the three chicks exchanged for four eggs.

While an official in the United States Department of Agriculture, I gathered data from original records of private plants covering the incubation of several hundred thousand eggs. Such information was furnished me in confidence as a public official and as a private citizen I have no right to publish that which would mean financial profit or loss to those concerned.

Of records where there were ten thousand or more eggs involved, the lowest I found was 44 per cent. and the highest, that mentioned as the fourth case above, or 59 per cent. The great majority of these records hung very closely around the 50 per cent. mark.

The following is a fair sample of such data. It is the record of hatching hen eggs for the first six months of 1908, at one of the largest poultry plants in America:

Eggs Chicks Per Cent. Month Set Hatched Hatched

January 4,213 1,585 37 2-3 February 6,275 2,339 33 3-4 March 17,990 6,993 38 1-3 April 18,819 10,265 54 1-2 May 24,458 14,438 59 June 13,100 6,614 55 ——— ——— ——— Total 84,855 42,234 50 p.c.

The Future Method of Incubation.

The idea of the mammoth incubator which would hatch eggs by the hundred thousand and a minimum of expense is the dream of the American incubator inventor. We have long had available such methods of insulation and regulating the supply of heat as would point to the practicability of such a dream.

The past efforts in this direction have fallen down for the following simple reason: All eggs were placed in a single big room with a view of the man's entering the room to take care of them. Contact with cold walls, the opening of doors, the hatching of chicks or introduction of fresh eggs set up air currents, the hot air rising and the cold air settling until great differences in temperature would be found in the room. No systematic regulation of evaporation was contemplated, as the principles at stake or the means of such regulation were unknown.

The attempt just referred to was made several years ago by one of the most successful of incubator manufacturers and because of his failure other inventors were inclined to steer clear of the proposition. Meanwhile the need of such an incubator has grown enormously. At the time that above effort was made no duck ranch existed whose annual production ran over thirty or forty thousand ducklings, whereas we now have several in the one hundred thousand class.

Much more remarkable has been the growth of the day-old chick business. The discovery that newly hatched chicks could be successfully shipped hundreds of miles with less loss than shipping eggs for hatching, has resulted in a few years' time in the growth of hatcheries of considerable size where chicks are hatched by means of common incubators. Still another opportunity for the use of large hatcheries has been by the growth of poultry communities. There are other communities besides those mentioned in this book which would amply support public hatcheries. If half the poultry growers of Lancaster County, Pa., were to be prevailed upon to patronize a public hatchery, the county would support between fifteen and twenty 100,000 egg incubators. Any of the numerous trolley centers in Indiana, Ohio and Southern Michigan would likewise be profitable locations for the establishment of public hatcheries.

The demand for the incubator of large capacity has, within the last year or so, brought two or three "mammoth" incubators into the market. The devices I now refer to consist of a row of box incubators which, instead of being heated by single lamps, are heated by continuous hot water pipes. This scheme effects a considerable saving in fuel cost and labor, but the bulkiness of construction and the woeful lack of evaporation control are still to be dealt with.

The writer now wishes briefly to describe the plan of construction and operation of a new type of hatchery, the success of which has recently been made feasible by inventions and technical knowledge hitherto unavailable. The plan of the hatchery is on that of a cold storage plant as far as insulation and general construction go. The eggs are kept in bulk in special cases which are turned as a whole and may rest on either of four sides. At hatching time the eggs are spread out in trays in a special hatching room, which is only large enough to accommodate chicks to the amount of one-sixth of the incubator capacity, for twice a week deliverings, or one-third if weekly deliveries are desired.

There are no pipes or other sources of heat in the egg chambers. All temperature regulation is by means of air heated (or cooled as the case may be) outside of the egg rooms and forced into the egg rooms by a motor driven cone fan, maintaining a steady current of air, the rate of movement of which may be varied at will. The air movement maintained will always be sufficiently brisk, however, to prevent an unevenness of temperature in different parts of the room.

So simple is this that the reader will doubtless wonder why it was not developed earlier. The reason is that air subject to the climatic influences will, with any forced draft sufficient to equalize temperature, result in a fatal rate of evaporation. Sprinkling the air has not generally been thought practical because of the notion that air must not be used in the egg chamber but once, which involved quite a waste of heat necessary in warming a large bulk of air and evaporating sufficient water. Moreover, no means has, in the past, been available for making a sufficiently accurate measurement of the evaporating power of the air.

The hair hygrometers commonly sold to incubator operators are known by scientists to be absolutely unreliable. The range between the wet and dry bulb thermometers was found in the Ontario experiments to give readings with and without fanning that varied 15 to 20 per cent. in relative humidity which, at the temperature of an egg chamber, would amount to a variation of three to four hundred of vapor pressure units, which, with the forced draught plan, would ruin a hatch of eggs in a few hours. The sling psychrometer as used by the U.S. Weather Bureau should, in the hands of an expert, give results making possible measurements accurate to two or three per cent. of relative humidity or forty to sixty units of vapor pressure. In contrast with these blundering instruments we now have available an instrument with which the writer has frequently determined vapor pressure accurately to within a range of two or three vapor pressure units and the instrument is capable of being constructed for even finer work.

As it is only by means of air with the moisture content absolutely controlled that the use of a large room becomes possible, we can now see why this type of hatching remained so long undeveloped. By means of such vapor pressure control the large egg chamber is not only feasible but the rate of evaporation at once becomes subject to the control of the operator and we achieve a perfection in artificial incubation hitherto unattained.

The means by which the air moisture is regulated is similar to that used in up-to-date cold storage plants where the air is made moist by sprinkling and dried with deliquescent salts. The regulation of vapor pressure, like that of temperature, may be by electrically moved dampers which switch a greater or less proportion of the incoming current to the sprinkler or dryer as the case may be. The ordinary incubator thermostat gives the necessary impulse for the control of the temperature dampers, while the instrument above referred to is used for the vapor pressure control.

As the entire air circuit is closed, the chemical composition of the air may also be regulated at will. This results in a reduction of the quantity of heat required to a minimum; in fact, with the incubator in full swing, the air will, at times, need cooling rather than warming.

The question of the cost of incubation by this method, or of profit of such a hatchery operated for the public is almost wholly one of the size of operations. Where sufficient eggs may be obtained and sufficient demand exists for the chicks to make it profitable to operate, the additional cost of hatching extra chicks will be insignificant compared with the present system.

The Egyptian poultryman gives four eggs for three chicks, but the American poultryman would be willing to give four eggs for one chick, as is shown by the fact that he sells eggs for from 1 to 3 cents apiece and buys day-old chicks for ten to fifteen cents. A plant with a seasonable capacity of 100,000 eggs has a basis to work upon something as follows:

With a fifty per cent. hatch and chicks at 10 cents each there would be a gross income of $5,000 annually. From this we must subtract for eggs at 2 cents each, $2,000. Salary for operator $1,000, wages for helper $300. Fuel, supplies and repairs $500. Cost of delivery and sales of chicks $200. This leaves a residue of $1,000, which would pay a 20 per cent. interest on the necessary investment of $5,000. Personally, I think this is about the minimum unit of hatching that would prove worth while as independent institutions.

Any increase in the percentage of the hatch would, of course, reduce the unit of size necessary for profitable operation. Upon a single poultry plant as a duck farm the cost of operation would be materially reduced, as the operator himself would take the place of the intelligent manager and the cost of gathering eggs and the delivery of the product would be eliminated.

The most profitable method of hatchery operation undoubtedly will be upon a plan analogous to what, in creamery operation, is called centralization. The success of this scheme depends upon the fact that transportation and agencies at country stores are relatively less important items of expense than plant construction and high salaries for skilled labor. A hatchery with a million capacity can be built and run at not more than twice the cost of one hundred-thousand plant and better men can be kept in charge of it. A portion of the saving will of course be expended in maintaining a system of buying eggs and selling chicks.

The material advantage of operating a hatchery in connection with a high-class egg handling and poultry packing establishment, or as one feature of a poultry community, is at once apparent, for the system of collecting the market produce will be utilized for gathering eggs and distributing chicks, each business helping the other.

The public hatchery also gives an excellent opportunity for the introduction of good stock among farmers who would be too shiftless to acquire it by ordinary methods.



CHAPTER VII

FEEDING

The old adage that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing is nowhere better illustrated than in the scientific phases of poultry feeding. The attempted application of the common theoretical feeding standards to poultry has caused not only a great waste of time but has also resulted in expenditures for high-priced feeds when cheaper feeds would have given as good or better results.

The so-called science of food chemistry is really a rough approximation of things about which the actual facts are unknown. Such knowledge bears the same relation to accurate science as the maps of America drawn by the early explorers do to a modern atlas. Like these early efforts of geography the present science of food chemistry is all right if we realize its incompleteness. In practice, the poultryman, after a general glance at the "map," will find a more reliable guide in simpler things.

I am writing this book for the poultryman, not the professor, and because I state that the particular kind of science wherein the professor has taken the most pains to teach the poultryman is comparatively useless, I fear it may arouse a mistrust of the value of science as a whole. I know of no way to prevent this except to point out the distinction between scientific facts and guesses couched in scientific language.

When a scientist states that a hen cannot lay egg shells containing calcium without having calcium in her food, that is a fact, and it works out in practice, for calcium is an element, and the hen cannot create elementary substances. When the same scientist, finding that an egg contains protein, says that wheat is a better egg food than corn because it has the largest amount of protein, that is a guess and does not work in practice because protein is not a definite substance, but the name of a group of substances of which the scientist does not know the composition, and which may or may not be of equal use to the hen in the formation of eggs.

All substances of which the world is made are composed of elements which cannot be changed. When these elements are combined they form definite substances with definite proportions entirely independent of the original elements. The pure diamond is carbon. Gasoline is carbon and hydrogen. Several hundred other things are also carbon and hydrogen. Sugar is carbon combined with hydrogen and oxygen. These three elements make several thousand different substances, including fats, alcohol and formaldehyde. Hydrocyanic acid is carbon combined with hydrogen and nitrogen, and is the most deadly poison known.

The failure of food science is partly because we do not know the composition of many of the substances of food and partly because these substances are changed in the animal body in a manner which we do not understand and cannot control.

Conventional Food Chemistry

The conventional analysis of feeding stuff divides the food substances in water, carbohydrates, fat, protein and ash. The amount of water in the body is all-important, but, with the exception of eggs during incubation, I confess I prefer to rely upon the chicken's judgment as to the amount required.

The carbohydrate group contains starch, sugar, cellulose and a number of other things. Carbohydrates constitute two-thirds to three-fourths of all common rations and nine-tenths of that amount is starch. The proposition of how much carbohydrates the hen eats is chiefly determined by the quantity of grain she consumes.

Of fats there are many kinds of which the composition is definitely known. The amount of fats the hen eats is unimportant because she makes starch into fat. The protein or nitrogen containing substances of the diet is the group of food substances over which most of the theories are expounded. The hen can make egg fat from corn starch or cabbage leaves because they contain the same elements. She cannot make egg white from starch or fat because the element of nitrogen which is in the egg white is lacking in the starch and fats.

The substances that have nitrogen in them are called protein. They are very complex and difficult to analyze. In digestion these proteins are all torn to pieces and built up into other kinds of protein. Just as in tearing down an old house, only a portion of the material can be used in a new house, so it is with protein and laboratory analysis cannot tell us how much of the old house can be utilized in building the new one.

In practice the whole subject simmers down to the proposition of finding out by direct experiment whether the hen will do the work best on this or that food, irregardless of its nitrogen content as determined in the laboratory.

The results of many experiments and much experience has shown that lean meat protein will make egg protein and chicken flesh protein and that vegetable protein pound for pound is not its equal. I know of no results that have proven that the high priced vegetable foods such as linseed meal, gluten feed, etc., have proven a more valuable chicken food than the cheapest grains.

With cows and pigeons this is not the case, but the hen is not a vegetarian by nature and high priced vegetable protein doesn't seem to be in her line. Of the three standard grains there is some indication of the value of the proteids for chickens and of the following ranks, 1st oats, 2d corn, 3d wheat.

The false conceptions of the value of wheat proteids has been specially the cause of much waste of money. Digestive trials and direct experiments both show that, as chicken foods, wheat is worth less, pound for pound, than corn and yet, though much higher in price, it is still used not only as a variety grain, but by many poultrymen as the chief article of diet. Wheat contains only 3 per cent. more proteid than corn. The man who substitutes wheat at one and one-half cents a pound for corn worth one cent a pound pays 17 cents a pound for his added protein. In beef scrap he could get the protein for 5 cents a pound and have a very superior article besides.

Milk as a source of protein ranks between the vegetable proteids and those of meat. It is preferably fed clabbered. The dried casein recently put on the market is a valuable food but is not worth as much as meat food and will not be extensively utilized until the demand for meat scrap forces up the price to a point where the casein can be sold more cheaply. Meat scrap, to be relished by the chickens, must not be a fine meal, but should consist of particles the size of wheat kernels or larger. The fine scrap gives the manufacturer a chance to utilize dried blood and tankage which is cheaper in quality and price than particles of real meat.

The last and least understood of the groups of food substances is mineral substance or ash. Now, the chemist determines mineral substance by burning the food and analyzing the residue. In the intense heat numerous chemical changes take place and the substances that come out of the furnace are entirely different from those contained in the fresh food.

The lay reader will probably ask why the chemist does not analyze the substances of the fresh material. The answer is that he doesn't know how. Progress is made every year but the whole subject is yet too much clouded in obscurity to be of any practical application. At present the feeding of mineral substance, like the feeding of protein, can best be learned by experimenting directly with the foods rather than by attempting to go by their chemical composition.

In practice it is found that green feed supplies something which grain lacks, presumably mineral salts. Moreover we know that such food fed fresh is superior to the same substance dried. This may be because of chemical changes that occur in curing or simply because of greater palatability.

The other chief source of mineral matter is meat preparations with or without ground bone. Recent experiments at Rhode Island have attempted to show the relative value of the mineral constituents of meat by adding bone ash to vegetable proteids, as linseed and gluten meal. The results clearly indicate that mineral matter of animal origin greatly improves the value of the vegetable diet, but that the latter is still sadly deficient. Of course the burning process used in preparing the bone ash may have destroyed some of the valuable qualities of the mineral salts. Practically, we do not care whether the value of animal meal be due to protein, mineral salts or both.

In time the world will become so thickly populated that we cannot afford to rear cattle and condemn a portion of the carcass to go through another life cycle before human consumption. By that time the necessary food salts will doubtless be known and we will be able to medicate our corn and alfalfa and do away with the beef scrap. The poultrymen will do well, however, not to count on the chemistry of the future, for the chemist that makes the "tissue salts" for the hen may manufacture human food with Niagara power and fresh eggs will come in tin cans.

How the Hen Unbalances Balanced Rations.

Let the poultryman who figures the nutritious ratio of chicken feed try this simple experiment. Place before a half dozen newly hatched chicks a feed of one of the commercial chick feeds. When they have had their fill, sacrifice these innocents on the altar of science and open their crops. He will find that one chick has eaten almost exclusively of millet seed, another has preferred cracked corn, another has filled up heavily on bits of beef scrap and mica crystal grit, while a fourth fancied oats and granulated bone. In short the chick has, in three minutes, unbalanced the balanced ration that it took a week to figure out. This experiment can be varied by placing hens in individual coops and setting before each weighed portions of every food in the poultryman supply man's catalogue.

There is only one kind of feeding that will balance rations and that is to feed exclusively on wet mash. This is successfully done in the duck business, but the duck is a Chinese animal and his ways are not the ways of the more fastidious hen.

In dairy work the individual preferences of the cows are given attention and their whimsy catered to by the herdsman. I know of nothing that makes a man more feel his kinship to the beast than to hear a good dairyman talk of the personalities and preferences of his feminine co-operators.

With commercial chicken work, humanly guided individual feedings is out of the question, though, if used, it might hasten the coming of the two-egg-per-day hen. Individual feeding with the hen as sole judge as to what she shall eat, which means each food in separate hoppers and free range, is the best system of chicken feeding yet evolved.

The duty of the poultryman is to supply the food, giving enough variety to permit of the hens having a fair selection. In practice this means that every hen must have access to water, grit (preferably oyster shell), one kind of grain, one kind of meat, and one kind of green food. In practice it will pay to add granulated bone for growing stock. One or two extra grains for variety and as many green foods as conveniences will permit to increase palatability—hence increase the amount of food consumed, for a heavy food consumption is necessary for egg production.

As corn is the cheapest food known, let it be the bread at the boarding house and other grains the rotating series of hash, beans and bacon. The grain hopper may have two divisions. The corn never changes but the other should have a change of grain occasionally. The extent of the use made of the various grains will be determined by their price per pound.

The proportions of food of the various classes that will be consumed is about as follows:

Of 100 lbs. of dry matter: 8 to 12 lbs. meat; 66 to 75 lbs. grain; 15 to 25 lbs. green food.

The profits of the business will be increased by supplying the green food in such tempting forms as to increase the amount consumed and cut down the use of grains.

The methods we have been describing in which various dry unground grains, beef scrap and oyster shell, each in a separate compartment, are exposed before the hen at all times, together with the abundant use of green food, either as pasture or a soiling crop, is the method of feeding assumed throughout this book.

The hopper feeding of so-called dry mash or ground grain mixture has been quite a fad in the last few years. The tendency of the hens to waste such food has occasioned considerable trouble. They are picking it over for their favorite foods and trying to avoid disagreeable foods. This difficulty is relieved when the food be separated into its various components and the hen offered each separately. As a matter of fact, there is no occasion for feeding ground feed except in fattening rations and here the wet mash is desirable.

The use of the products of wheat milling has been the chief excuse for such practices, but unless these get considerably lower in price per pound than corn they may be left off the bill-of-fare to advantage. The great use made of these products in poultry feeding was chiefly a result of the attempted application of the balanced ration idea, but as has already been shown the efforts to raise the protein ratio with grain foods is generally false economy.

The old-fashioned wet mash which the writer does not recommend because of the labor involved, is, nevertheless, a fairly profitable method of poultry feeding. It is used in the Little Compton district of Rhode Island and was also used in the famous Australian egg laying contests elsewhere described. Personally I would prefer feeding ground grain wet, especially wheat bran and middlings, to feeding it dry.

The scattering of grain in litter so generally recommended in poultry literature is all right and proper, but is rather out of place in commercial poultry farming. It is used on the large poultry plants with the yards and long houses, but is not used on colony farms or in any of the poultry growing communities. I should recommend littered houses for Section 6 and the northern half of Section 3 (see Chapter IV), but with warmer soils and climate where the snow does not lie on the ground it would add a labor expense that would very seriously handicap the business.

The systems of poultry feeding that are commonly advertised are based either on some patent nostrum or a recommendation of green food in novel form, such as sprouted oats. The joke about poultry feed at 10 cents a bushel, absurd though it may seem, has caught lots of dollars. To take a bushel of oats worth 50 cents, add water, let them sprout and have five bushels costing 10 cents, is certainly a wonderful achievement in wealth getting. The only reason a man couldn't run a soup kitchen on the same principle is that he can't do a soup business by mail. Sprouted oats are a good green food, however, though somewhat laborious to prepare. I should certainly recommend them if for any reason the regular green food supply should run out.

The points already mentioned are about all the practical suggestions that the science of animal nutrition has to offer the poultryman. The discussion of feeding from its technical viewpoint is sufficiently covered in the chapter on "Farm Poultry" and the discussion of the management and economics of various types of poultry production.



CHAPTER VIII

DISEASES

For the study of the classification and description of the numerous ailments by which individual fowls pass to their untimely end, I recommend any of the numerous books written upon the subject. Some of these works are more accurate than others, but that I consider immaterial. The study of these diseases is good for the poultryman, it gives his mind exercise. When a boy in high school I studied Latin for the same purpose.

Don't Doctor Chickens.

For the cure of all poultry diseases when they have passed a point when the fowl does not eat or for other reasons recovery is improbable, I recommend a blow on the head—the hatchet spills the blood which is unwise.

The usual formula of "burn or bury deeply" is somewhat troublesome, unless you have a furnace running. A covered pit is more convenient if far enough removed from the house that the odor is not prohibitive. A post with a tally card may be planted near by. This part of the poultry farm may be marked "Exhibit A," and shown first to the visitor during the busy season. If he is one of those prospective pleasure and profit poultrymen who propose to disregard all facts of biology and economics of production, you may save yourself the trouble of showing him the rest of the plant. Unfortunately, this scheme is not open to the poultryman who has breeding stock for sale.

I have frequently had the question put to me in the smoker of a Pullman car, "Do not epidemic diseases make the poultry business precarious?" Such questions came from farm-raised men, but not from poultry farmers. Poultrymen should figure a certain loss of birds just as insurance companies figure on the human death rate, but to all practical intents and purposes the epidemic disease has been banished from the poultry farms and seldom if ever enters the records in answer to the question, "Why do poultry farms fail?"

Some of my readers may take exception to me either in regard to roup or white diarrhoea. Roup is a disease of the wrong system and careless management. White diarrhoea, so-called, is a matter of wrong incubation.

The high mortality of young chicks, though not an epidemic disease, shares with excessive cost of production, very much of the responsibility for poultry farm failures. At the present writing the poultry editors of the country are having much discussion over the conclusion of Dr. Morse of the Bureau of Animal Industry to the effect that white diarrhoea is caused by an intestinal parasite similar to the germ that causes human dysentery. Dr. Morse's opportunities for investigation have been somewhat limited and as the intestines of any animal are always swarming with various organisms, it will take very conclusive evidence to prove that the doctor is right. Practically the naming of the germs that attend the funeral is not particularly important for the reason that it has been thoroughly demonstrated that with good parentage, good incubation and good brooder conditions, white diarrhoea is unknown.

The Causes of Poultry Diseases.

Poultry ailments are assignable to one of the three following causes, or a combination of these: First, hereditary or inborn weakness; second, unfavorable conditions of food, surroundings, etc.; third, bacteria or animal parasites.

A great many chickens die while yet within the shell, or during the growing process, there being no assignable reason save that of inherited weakness. To this class of troubles the only remedy is to breed from better stock. It is as much the trait of some birds to produce infertile eggs or chicks of low vitality as it is for others to produce vigorous offspring.

The second class of ailments needs no discussion save that accorded it under the general discussions of the method of conducting the business.

The third class of ailments includes the contagious diseases. It is now believed that most common diseases are caused by microscopic germs known as bacteria. These germs in some manner gain entrance to the body of an animal, and, growing within the tissues, give off poisonous substances known as toxins, which produce the symptoms of the disease. The ability to withstand disease germs varies with the particular animal and the kind of disease. As a general rule it may be stated that disease germs cannot live in the body of a perfectly vigorous and healthy animal. It is only when the vitality is at a low ebb, owing to unfavorable conditions or inherited weakness, that disease germs enter the body and produce disease.

The bacteria which cause disease, like other living organisms, may be killed by poisoning. Such poisons are known as disinfectants. If it were possible to kill the bacteria within the animal, the curing of disease would be a simple matter, but unfortunately the common chemical poisons that kill germs kill the animal also. The only thing that can be relied upon to kill disease germs within the animal, is a counter-poison developed by the animal itself and known as anti-toxin. Such anti-toxins can be produced artificially and are used to combat certain diseases, as diphtheria and small-pox in human beings and blackleg in cattle. Such methods of combating poultry diseases have not been developed, and due to the small value of an individual fowl would probably not be commercially useful even if successful from a scientific standpoint. The only available method of fighting contagious diseases of poultry is to destroy the disease germs before they enter the fowls and to remove the causes which make the fowl susceptible to the disease.

Contagious diseases of poultry may be grouped into two general classes: First, those highly contagious; second, those contracted only by fowls that are in a weakened condition. To the first class belong the severe epidemics, of which chicken-cholera is the most destructive.

Chicken-Cholera.

The European fowl-cholera has only been rarely identified in this country. Other diseases similar in symptoms and effect are confused with this. As the treatment should be similar the identification of the diseases is not essential.

Yellow or greenish-colored droppings, listless attitude, refusal of food and great thirst are the more readily observed symptoms. The disease runs a rapid course, death resulting in about three days. The death rate is very high. The disease is spread by droppings and dead birds, and through feed and water. To stamp out the disease kill or burn or bury all sick chickens, and disinfect the premises frequently and thoroughly. A spray made of one-half gallon carbolic acid, one-half gallon of phenol and twenty gallons of water may be used. Corrosive sublimate, 1 part in 5000 parts of water, should be used as drinking water. This is not to cure sick birds, but to prevent the disease from spreading by means of the drinking vessels. Food should be given in troughs arranged so that the chickens cannot infect the food with the feet. All this work must be done thoroughly, and even then considerable loss can be expected before the disease is stamped out. If cholera has a good start in a flock of chickens it will often be better to dispose of the entire flock than to combat the disease. Fortunately cholera epidemics are rare and in many localities have never been known.

Roup.

This disease is a representative of that class of diseases which, while being caused by bacteria, can be considered more of a disease of conditions than of contagion. Roup may be caused by a number of different bacteria which are commonly found in the air and soil. When chickens catch cold these germs find lodgment in the nasal passages and roup ensues. The first symptoms of roup are those of an ordinary cold, but as the disease progresses a cheesy secretion appears in the head and throat. A wheezing or rattling sound is often produced by the breathing. The face and eyes swell, and in severe cases the chicken becomes blind. The most certain way of identifying roup is a characteristic sickening odor. The disease may last a week or a year. Birds occasionally recover, but are generally useless after having had roup.

Sick birds should be removed and destroyed, but the time usually spent in doctoring sick birds and disinfecting houses can in this case be better employed in finding and remedying the cause of the disease. Such causes may be looked for as dampness, exposure to cold winds, or to a sudden change in temperature as is experienced by chickens roosting in a tight house. Fall and winter are the seasons of roup, while it is poorly housed and poorly fed flocks that most commonly suffer from this disease. Flocks that have become thoroughly roupy should be disposed of and more vigorous birds secured. The open front house has proved to be the most practical scheme for the reduction of this disease.

Chicken-Pox, Gapes, Limber Neck.

Chicken-pox or sore-head is a disease peculiar to the South. It attacks growing chickens late in the summer. Southern poultrymen who give reasonable attention to their stock, find that, while this disease is a source of some annoyance, the losses are not severe and that it may be readily controlled. In the first place, the animal epidemic of pox can be practically avoided by bringing the chicks out early in the season. If the disease does develop in the flock, the birds are taken from the coops at night and their heads dipped in a proper strength of one of the coal tar disinfectants. Such treatment once a week has generally been effective. This disease is an exception to the general rule that disinfectants which kill germs also kill the chicken. The explanation is that chicken-pox is an external disease.

Gapes is given in every poultry book as one of the prominent poultry diseases, but are not common in the Northern and Western States. Gapes are caused by a parasitic worm in the windpipe. Growing chicks are affected. The remedy is to move the chicks to fresh ground and cultivate the old.

Limber neck is not a disease, but is the result of the fowl's eating maggots from dead carcasses. It can be prevented by not allowing dead carcasses to remain where the chickens will find them. No practical cure is known.

Lice and Mites.

The parasites referred to as chicken-lice include many different species, but in habit they may be classed as body-lice and roost-mites. The first, or true bird-lice, live on the body of the chicken and eat the feathers and skin. The roost-mite is similar to a spider and differs in habits from the body-louse in that it sucks the blood of the chicken and does not remain on the body of the fowl except at night.

Body-lice are to be found upon almost all chickens, as well as on many other kinds of birds. Their presence in small numbers on matured fowls is not a serious matter. When body-lice are abundant on sitting hens they go from the hen to the newly hatched chickens, and may cause the death of the chicks. The successful methods of destroying body-lice are three in number: First, dust or earth wallows in which the active hens will get rid of lice. Such dust baths should be especially provided for yarded chickens and during the winter. Dry earth can be stored for this purpose. Sitting hens should have access to dust baths. Second: The second method by which body-lice may be destroyed is the use of insect powder. The pyrethrum powder is considered the best for this purpose, but is expensive and difficult to procure in the pure state. Tobacco dust is also used. Insect powder is applied by holding the hen by the feet and working the dust thoroughly into the feathers, especially the fluff. The use of insect powder should be confined to sitting hens and fancy stock, as the cost and labor of applying is too great for use upon the common chicken. The third method is suitable for young chickens, and consists of applying some oil and grease on the head and under the wings. Do not grease the chick all over. With vigorous chickens and correct management the natural dust bath is all that is needed to combat the lice.

The roost-mite is probably the cause of more loss to farm poultry raisers than any other pest or disease. The great difficulty in destroying mites on many farms is that chickens are allowed to roost in too many places. If the chicken-house proper is the only building infected with mites the difficulty of destroying them is not great. Plainness in the interior furnishings of the chicken-house is also a great advantage when it comes to fighting mites. The mites in the daytime are to be found lodged in the cracks near the roosting-place of the chickens.

Mites can be killed with various liquids, the best in point of cheapness is boiling water. Give the chicken-house a thorough cleaning and scald by throwing dippers of hot water in all places where the mites can find lodgment. Hot water destroys the eggs as well as the mites. Whitewash is a good remedy, as it buries both mites and eggs beneath a coating of lime from which they cannot emerge. Pure kerosene or a solution of carbolic acid in kerosene, at the rate of a pint of acid to a gallon of oil, is an effective lice-paint. Another substance much used for destroying insects or similar pests is carbon bisulphide. This is a liquid which evaporates readily, the vapor destroying the insects or mites. Carbon bisulphide or other fumigating agents are not effective in the average chicken-house because the house cannot be tightly closed. The liquid lice-killers on the market are very effective. They are usually composed of the remedies just mentioned, or of something of similar properties.



CHAPTER IX

POULTRY FLESH AND POULTRY FATTENING

The poultry flesh which is used for food may be grouped into three divisions.

First: Poultry carcasses grown especially for market.

Second: Poultry carcasses consisting of hens and young male birds that are sold from the general farms where the pullets are kept for egg production.

Third: The cockerels and old hens sold as a by-product from egg farms.

The third class hardly needs our consideration in the present chapter. This stock, usually Leghorns, like Jersey veal, is to be disposed of at whatever price the market offers.

The cockerel will, if growing nicely, be fairly plump and the hens, if on hopper rations of corn and beef scrap, will be about as fat as they can be profitably made, and to waste further effort upon them would not pay. Leghorn cockerels and hens are a wholesome enough meat, but will never command fancy prices nor warrant extra pains.

In class two we find the great mass of the poultry flesh of the country. This stock consisting chiefly, as it does, of Plymouth Rocks and Wyandottes, is well worth some extra pains toward increasing its quantity and quality.

Within the last ten or fifteen years several changes have been brought about in the general methods of handling farm poultry. Formerly it was thought desirable to market all stock not kept as layers while in the broiler stage of from 1-1/2 to 2 pounds. Since the introduction of the custom of holding fall broilers over in cold storage, the price has fallen until it is now more profitable to market the surplus cockerels from the farm at three or four months of age. At this period the flesh has cost less per pound to produce than at either an earlier or later stage. For such purposes only the well fleshed type of American breeds has been found desirable. The Leghorns and similar breeds are too small and become staggy too soon.

Contrary to a common belief and to the custom in the poultry books of classifying the Asiatics as meat breeds, the Brahmas and Cochins are among the very poorest fowls that can be used for farm production of poultry meat. At the age spoken of these breeds are lanky and unsightly and not wanted by poultry packers.

Consecutively with and perhaps responsible for change of sentiment that demands that broilers be allowed to grow into four pound chickens, we find the development of the crate fattening industry.

Crate-Fattening.

The introduction of crate-fattening into the Central West occurred about 1900. The credit of this introduction belongs to the large meat packing firms. At the present time the business is not confined to the meat packers, but is shared by independent plants throughout the country.

The plants of the West range from a few hundred to as high as 20,000 capacity. They are constructed for convenience and a saving of labor, and in this respect are decidedly in advance of the European establishments where fattening has been long practiced.

The room used for fattening is well built and sanitary. A good system of ventilation is essential, as murky, damp air breeds colds and roup. The coops are built back to back, and two or more coops in height. Each coop is high and wide enough to comfortably accommodate the chickens, and long enough to contain from five to twelve chickens. The chickens stand on slats, beneath which are dropping-boards that may be drawn out for cleaning. The dropping-boards and feeding-troughs are often made of metal. Strict cleanliness is enforced. No droppings or feed are allowed to accumulate and decompose.

As is a general rule in meat production, young animals give much better returns for food consumed than do mature individuals. With the young chicken the weight is added as flesh, while the hen has a tendency, which increases with age, to turn the same food into useless fat. For this reason the general practice is to fatten only the best of the young chickens. The head feeder at a large and successful poultry plant gave the following information on the selection of birds for the fattening-crates:

"The younger the stock the more profitable the gain. All specimens showing the slightest indication of disease are discarded. The Plymouth Rock is the favorite breed, and the Wyandotte is second. Leghorns are comparatively fat when received, and, while they do well under feed and 'yellow up' nicely, they do not gain as much as the American breeds. Black chickens are not fed at all. Brahmas and Cochins are not considered good feeders at the age when they are commonly sold. Chickens in fair flesh at the start make better gains than those that are extremely lean or very fat. But, contrary to what the amateur might assume, the moderately fat chicken will continue to make fair gains, while the very lean chicken seldom returns a profit."

The idea has been somewhat prevalent that there is some guarded secret about the rations used in crate-fattening. This is a mistaken notion. The rations used contain no new or wonderful constituent, and although individual feeders may have their own formulas, the general composition of the feed is common knowledge. The feed most commonly used consists of finely ground grain, mixed to a batter with buttermilk or sour skim-milk. The favorite grain for the purpose is oats finely ground and the hulls removed. Oats may be used as the sole grain, and is the only grain recommended as suitable to be fed alone. Corn is used, but not by itself. Shorts, ground barley or ground buckwheat are sometimes used. Beans, peas, linseed and gluten meals may be used in small quantities. When milk products are obtainable they are a great aid to successful fattening. Tallow is often used in small quantities toward the finish of the feeding period. The assumption is that it causes the deposit of fat-globules throughout the muscular tissues, thus adding to the quality of the meat. The following simple rations show that there is nothing complex about the crate-fed chicken's bill of fare:

No. 1.—Ground oats, 2 parts; ground barley, 1 part; ground corn, 1 part; mixed with skim-milk.

No. 2.—Ground corn, 4 parts; ground peas, 1 part; ground oats, 1 part; meat-meal, 1 part; mixed with water.

A ration used by some fatters with great success is composed of simply oatmeal and buttermilk.

The feed is given as a soft batter and is left in the troughs for about thirty minutes, when the residue is removed. Chickens are generally fed three times per day. Water may or may not be given, according to the weather and the amount of liquid used in the food.

The chicken that has been crate-fattened has practically the same amount of skeleton and offal as the unfattened specimen, but carries one or two pounds more of edible meat upon its carcass. Not only is the weight of the chicken and amount of edible meat increased, but the quality of the meat is greatly improved, consisting of juicy, tender flesh. For this reason the crate-feeding process is often spoken of as fleshing rather than as fattening.

The enforced idleness causes the muscular tissue to become tender and filled with stored nutriment. The fatness of a young chicken, crate-fed on buttermilk and oatmeal, is a radically different thing from the fatness of an old hen that has been ranging around the corn-crib.

The crate-fattening industry while deserving credit for great improvement in the quality of chicken flesh in the regions where it has been introduced, cannot on the whole be considered a great success. It is commonly reported that some of the firms instrumental in its introduction lost money on the deal. The crate-fattening plant has come to stay in the communities where careful methods of poultry raising are practiced, and where the stock is of the best, but when a plant is located in a newly settled region where the poultry stock is small and feed scarce, the venture is pretty apt to prove a fiasco.

While poultryman at the Kansas Experiment Station, the writer made a large number of individual weighings of fowls in the crates of one of the large fattening plants of the state.

These weighings pointed out very clearly why the expected profits had not been realized. The birds selected for weighing were all fine, uniform looking Barred Rock Cockerels. At the end of the first week they were found to still appear much the same, but when handled a difference was easily noticed. By the end of the second week a few birds had died and many others were in a bad way. The individual changes of weight ran from 2-1/2 pounds gain to 3/4 pound loss, and many of the lighter birds were of very poor appearance. It is simply a matter of forced feeding being a process that makes trouble with the health of the chicken if all is not just right.

It is probable that in the future more fattening will be done on the farm, or by the farmer operating in a small way among his neighbors. The reason for this is that the saving of labor in the large plant is hardly as great as the added loss from the shrinkage of the birds due to the excitement of shipping and crowding, and the introduction of disease by the mingling of chickens from so many different sources.

The Canadians especially have encouraged fattening on the farm. The following is a hand-bill gotten out by an enterprising Canadian dealer for distribution among the farmers of his locality:



HOW TO FATTEN CHICKENS FOR THE EXPORT TRADE.

To fatten birds for the export trade, it is necessary to have proper coops to put them in. These should be two feet long, twenty inches high and twenty inches deep, the top, bottom and front made of slats. This size will hold four birds, but the cheapest plan is to build the coops ten feet long and divide them into five sections.

What to feed.

Oats chopped fine, the coarse hulls sifted out, two parts; ground buckwheat, one part; mix with skim-milk to a good soft batter, and feed three times a day. Or, black barley and oats, two parts oats to one part barley. Give clean drinking water twice a day, grit twice a week, and charcoal once a week. During the first week the birds are in the coops they should be fed sparingly—only about one-half of what they will eat. After that gradually increase the amount until you find out just how much they will eat up clean each time. Never leave any food in the troughs, as it will sour and cause trouble. Mix the food always one feed ahead. Birds fed in this way will be ready for the export trade in from four to five weeks. Chickens make the best gain put in the coop weighing three to four pounds.

We Supply the Coops.

We have on hand a number of coops for fattening chicks, which we will loan to any person, "free of charge", who will sign an agreement to bring all chicks fattened in them to us. Every farmer should have at least one of these coops, as this is the only way to fatten chicks properly. In this way you can get the highest market price. We can handle any quantity of chicks properly fatted. ARMSTRONG BROS.

The farmer who does not think it worth while to construct fattening-crates for his own crop of chickens, may get very fair results by simply enclosing the chickens in some vacant shed. To these may feed a ration of two-thirds corn meal and one-third shorts, or some of the more complicated rations used at the fattening plants may be fed.

In the East, poultry fattening on the general farm is not dissimilar from the practices in the Central West, but we find a larger use of cramming machines, caponizing, and the growing of chickens for meat as an industry independent of keeping hens for egg production.

The cramming machine is a device by means of which food in a semi-liquid state is pumped into the bird's crop, through a tube inserted in the mouth. This means of feeding is much more used in Europe than in this country. It requires good stock and careful workmen. The method will probably slowly gain ground in this country. The feed used in cramming is similar to that used in ordinary crate feeding, except that it is mixed as a thin batter.

Caponizing.

Caponizing is the castration of male chickens. Capons hold the same place in the poultry market as do steers in the beef market.

Caponizing is practiced to quite an extent in France, and to a less degree in England and the United States.

Much the larger part of the industry is confined to that portion of the United States east of Philadelphia, though increasing numbers of capons are being raised in the North Central States. During the winter months capon is regularly quoted in the markets of the larger eastern cities. Massachusetts and New Jersey are the great centers for the growing of capons, while Boston, New York, and Philadelphia are the great markets. In many eastern markets the prices paid for dressed capons range from 20 to 30 cents a pound. The highest prices usually prevail from January to May, and the larger the birds the more they bring a pound.

The purpose of caponizing is not, as is sometimes stated, to increase the size of the chicken, but to improve the quality of the meat. The capon fattens more readily and economically than other birds. As they do not interfere with or worry one another, large flocks may be kept together.

The breeds suitable for caponizing are the Asiatics and Americans. Brahmas will produce, with proper care and sufficient time, the largest and finest capons. On the ordinary farm, where capons would be allowed to run loose, Plymouth Rocks would prove more profitable. Plymouth Rocks, Brahmas, Langshans, Wyandottes, Indian Games, may all be used for capons. Leghorns are not to be considered for this purpose.

Capons should be operated upon when they are about ten weeks or three months old and weigh about two pounds.

The operation of caponizing is performed by cutting in between the last two ribs. Both testicles may be removed from one side or both sides may be opened. The cockerel should be starved for twenty-four hours in order to empty the intestines. Asiatics are more difficult to operate on than Americans, the testicles being larger and less firm. There is always some danger of causing death by tearing blood vessels, but the per cent. of loss with an experienced operator is very small. Loss by inflammation is still more rare. The testicle of a bird is not as highly developed as in a mammal, and if the organ is broken and a small fragment remains attached it will produce birds known as slips. Some growers advise looking over the capons and puncturing the wind puffs that gather beneath the skin. This, however, is not necessary.

A good set of tools is indispensable and can be purchased for from $2 to $3. As a complete set of instructions is furnished with each set it is unnecessary to go into details here. The beginner should, however, operate on several dead cockerels before attempting to operate on a live one.

After caponizing the bird should be given plenty of soft feed and water. The capon begins to eat almost immediately after the operation is performed, and no one would suppose that a radical change had taken place in his nature.

The feeding of capons differs little from the feeding of other growing chickens. Corn, wheat, barley and Kaffir-corn would be suitable grain, while beef-scrap would be necessary to produce the best growth.

About three weeks before marketing place the capons in small yards and feed them three or four times a day, giving plenty of corn and other feed, or fatten them in one of the ways indicated in the section on fattening poultry. Corn meal and ground oats, equal parts by weight, moistened with water or milk, make a good mash for fattening capons.

In dressing capons leave the head and hackle feathers, the feathers on the wings to the second joint, the tail feathers, including those a little way up the back, and the feathers on the legs halfway up to the thigh. These feathers serve to distinguish capons from other fowls in the market. Do not cut the head off, for this is also a distinguishing feature of the capon, on account of the undeveloped comb and wattles.

The price received for capons is greater than any other kind of poultry meat except early broilers. There may be trouble in some localities in getting dealers to recognize capons as such and pay an advanced price.

On several farms in Massachusetts, 500 to 1,000 capons are raised annually, and on one farm 5,000 cockerels are held for caponizing. The industry is growing rapidly year by year and the supply does not equal the demand.

It is to be expected that the amount of caponizing done in the West will gradually increase. Those wishing to try the growing of capons will do well to secure an experienced operator. Good men at this work receive five cents per bird. Poor operators are dear at any price, as they produce a large number of worthless slips.



CHAPTER X

MARKETING POULTRY CARCASSES

In the marketing of poultry carcasses as in other phases of the industry, we really have two systems to discuss. The one is used for the marketing of the product of the farm of the Central West, and the other the product of the poultryman or eastern farmer, who is near a large market and who will be repaid for taking special pains in preparing his poultry for market.

Farm-Grown Chickens.

At the present time almost the entire poultry crop of the Central West is sold from the farm as live poultry. This farm stock is purchased by produce buyers or general merchants and shipped to the nearest county seat or other important town, where there are usually one or more poultry-killing establishments. These establishments may vary from a simple shed, where the chickens are picked and packed in barrels, to the more modern poultry-packing establishment, with its accommodations for fattening, dressing, packing, freezing, and storing.

The poultry-buying stations may be branches of the larger packing establishments, branch houses of large produce firms, or small firms operating independently and selling in the open market.

The chickens as purchased are grouped into the following classes: Springs, hens, old roosters and (at certain seasons) young roosters or staggy cockerels. Early in the season small springs are quoted as broilers, while capons form a separate item where such are grown.

Chickens are starved before killing, for the purpose of emptying the crop, and, to some degree, the intestines. If this is not done the carcass presents an unsightly appearance and spoils more readily in storage.

The method of picking is not always the same, even in the same plant. Scalding is frequently used for local trade, in the summer season, or with cheap-grade stuff. The greater portion of the stock is picked dry. The pickers are generally paid so much per bird. In some plants men do the roughing while girls are employed as pinners. Pickers work either with the chickens suspended by a cord or fastened upon a bench adopted to this purpose. The killing is done by bleeding and sticking. The last thrust reaches the brain and paralyzes the bird. The manner of making these cuts must be learned by practical instruction. The feathers are saved, and amount to a considerable item. White feathers are worth more than others. The head and feet are left on the chicken and the entrails are not removed.

The bird, after being chilled in ice-water or in the cooling room, is ready for grading and packing. This, from the producer's standpoint, is the most interesting stage in the process, for it is here that the quality of the stock is to be observed. The grading is made on three considerations: (1) The general division of cocks, springs, hens and capons is kept separate from the killing-room; (2) the grading for quality; (3) the assortment according to size.

The grading for quality depends on the general shape of the chicken, the plumpness or covering of meat, the neatness of picking, the color of skin and legs, and the appearance of the feet and head, which latter points indicate the age and condition of health. The culls consist of deformed and scrawny chickens. The seconds are poor in flesh, or they may be, in the case of hens, unsightly from overfatness. They are packed in barrels and go to the cheapest trade. Those carcasses slightly bruised or torn in dressing also go in this class. Although a preference is generally stated for yellow-skinned poultry, the white-skinned birds, if equal in other points, are not underranked in this score. The skin color that is decidedly objectionable is the purplish tinge, which is a sign of diseased stock. Black pin-feathers and dark-colored legs are a source of objection. Especially is this true with young birds which show the pin-feathers. Feathered legs are slightly more objectionable than smooth legs. Small combs and the absence of spurs give better appearance to the carcass.

The following is the nomenclature and corresponding weights of the farm marketed chickens. In each class there will be seconds and culls. The seconds of each group are kept separate, but not graded so strictly or perhaps not graded at all for size. The culls are packed in barrels and all kinds of chickens from fryers to old roosters here sojourn together until they reach their final destination, as potted chicken or chicken soup.

Broilers—Packed in two weights. 1st: Less than two pounds; 2d: between 2 and 2-1/2 pounds.

Chickens—Packed in three weights. 1st: between 2-1/2 and 3 pounds; 2d: between 3 and 3-1/2 pounds; 3d: between 3-1/2 and 4 pounds.

Roasters—Packed in two weights. 1st: between 4 and 5 pounds; 2d: above 5 pounds.

Stag Roosters—Cockerels, showing spurs and hard blue meat, packed in two weights. 1st: under 4 pounds; 2d: above 4 pounds.

Fowls, are hens. They are packed in three sizes. 1st: under 3-1/4 pounds; 2d: between 3-1/4 and 4-1/2 pounds; 3d: over 4-1/2 pounds.

Old Roosters—Packed in barrels. One grade only.

After packing, chickens may be shipped to market immediately, or they may be frozen and stored in the local plant. Shipments of any importance are made in refrigerator cars.

The poultry that is shipped to the final market alive is gradually diminishing in quantity, as poultry killing plants are built up throughout the country. The live poultry shipments are chiefly made in the Live Poultry Transportation Cars. The following figures give the number of such cars that moved out of the States named in a recent year:

Iowa 645 Tennessee 169 Missouri 630 Michigan 165 Illinois 624 S. Dakota 103 Kentucky 472 Oklahoma 101 Nebraska 395 Indiana 100 Kansas 370 Wisconsin 93 Minnesota 174 Texas 91 Ohio 173 Arkansas 47

The most of this live poultry goes to New York and other eastern cities and is consumed largely by the Hebrew trade.

The Special Poultry Plant.

The special egg farmer of the East should sell his poultry alive to the regular dealer. The exception to this advice may be taken in the case of squab broilers for which some local dealers will not pay as fancy a price as may be obtained by dressing and shipping to the hotel trade.

The grower of roasters and capons will probably want to market his own product. As to whether it will pay him to do so will depend upon whether his dealer will pay what the quality of the goods really demands. The dealer can afford to do this all right, if he will hustle around and find an outlet for the particular grade of goods, for he is in position to kill and dress the fowls more economically than the producer.

I have never been able to study out why the average writer upon agricultural subjects is always advising the farmer to attempt to do difficult work for which special firms already exist. In the case of fattening just referred to, there is reason why the farmer may be able to do the work more successfully than the special establishment, but why any one should urge the farmer to turn the woodshed into a temporary poultry packing establishment I can hardly see. If the farmer has nothing to do he had better get a job at the poultry killing house where they have ice water and barrels in which to put the feathers.

I do not think it worth while in this book for me to attempt to describe in detail the various methods of killing and packing poultry for the various retail markets. The grower who contemplates killing his own stuff had better spend a day visiting the produce houses and market stalls and inquire which methods are locally in demand.

Suggestions from Other Countries.

In European countries generally, and especially in France and England, great pains is taken in the production of market poultry. Each farmer and each neighborhood become known in the market for the quality of their poultry, and the prices they receive vary accordingly. In these countries more poultry is fattened and dressed by the growers than in the United States where we have greater specialization of labor.

In countries that have an export trade different systems have originated. In Denmark and Ireland co-operative societies are organized to handle perishable farm products. These, however, deal more with eggs than with poultry. In portions of England the fattening is done by private fatteners. The country being thickly settled, the chickens are collected directly from the farms by wagons making regular trips. This allows the rejection of the poor and immature specimens, whereas a premium may be paid on better stock.

The greatest fault of poultry buying as conducted in this country is the evil of a uniform price. After chickens are dressed the difference of quality is readily discerned, and the price varies from fancy quotations to almost nothing for culls. The packer pays a given rate per pound for live hens or for spring chickens. The price is paid alike for the best poultry received or for the scrawniest chickens that can be coaxed to stand up and be weighed. The prices paid is the average worth of all chickens purchased at that market. All farmers who market an article better than the average are unjust losers, while those who sell inferior stock receive unearned profits. The producer of good stock receives pay for the extra quantity of his chickens, but for the extra quality no recognition whatever is given. To the deserving producer, if quality was recognized, it would result in a greatly increased stimulation of the production of good poultry. Any packer, if questioned, will state that he would be willing to grade chickens and pay for them according to quality, but that he does not do so because his competitor would pay a uniform price and drive him out of business. The man who receives an increased price would say little of it, while the man who sells poor chickens, if he failed to receive the full amount to which he is accustomed, would think himself unjustly treated and use his influence against the dealer. A recognition of quality in buying is for the interest of both the farmer and the poultry dealer, and a mutual effort on the part of those interested to put in practice this reform would result in a great improvement of the poultry industry.

Cold Storage of Poultry.

The growth of the cold storage of poultry has been phenomenal. Poultry is packed in thin boxes that will readily lose their heat and these are stacked in a freezer with a temperature near the zero point. The temperature used for holding poultry are anywhere from 0 degree up to 20 degrees. Poultry is held for periods of one to six weeks at temperature above the freezing point.

Frozen poultry will keep almost indefinitely save for the drying out, which is due to the fact that evaporation will proceed slowly even from a frozen body. The time frozen poultry is stored varies from a few weeks to eight or ten months.

The usual rule is that any crop is highest in price when it first comes on the market and cheapest just after the point of its greatest production. Thus, broilers are high in May and cheap in September. In such cases the goods are carried from the season of plenty to the following season of scarcity. This period is always less than a year. The idea circulated by wild writers, that cold storage poultry was kept several years is an economic impossibility. The interest on the investment alone would make the holding of storage goods into the second season of plenty, quite unprofitable, but when the costs of storage, insurance and shrinkage are to be paid, storing poultry for more than one season becomes absurd. The fowl that has been once frozen cannot be made to look "fresh killed" again. For that reason packers like to get a monopoly on a particular market so that the two classes of goods will not have to compete side by side. The quality of the frozen fowl when served is very fair, practically as good as and some say better than the fresh killed.

Cold storage poultry is best thawed out by being placed over night in a tank of water. Poultry prejudice prevents the practice of retailing the goods frozen, though this method would be highly desirable.

Drawn or Undrawn Fowls.

Within the last two or three years there has been a great hue and cry about the marketing of poultry without drawing the entrails.

The objection to the custom rests upon the general prejudice to allowing the entrails of animals to remain in the carcass. If a little thought is given the subject, however, it is seen that human prejudice is very inconsistent in such matters. We draw beef and mutton carcasses, to be sure, but fish and game are stored undrawn, and as for oysters and lobsters we not only store them undrawn but we eat them so.

The facts about the undrawn poultry proposition are as follows: The intestines of the fowl at death contain numerous species of bacteria, whereas the flesh is quite free from germs. If the carcass is not drawn, but immediately frozen hard, the bacteria remain inactive and no essential change occurs. If the carcass is stored without freezing, or remains for even a short time at a high temperature, the bacteria will begin to grow through the intestinal walls and contaminate the flesh.

Now, if the fowl is drawn, the unprotected flesh is exposed to bacterial contamination, which results in decomposition more rapidly than through the intestinal walls. The opening of the carcass also allows a greater drying out and shrinkage.

If poultry carcasses were split wide open as with beef or mutton, drawing might not prove as satisfactory as the present method, but since this is not desirable, and since ordinary laborers will break the intestines and spill their contents over the flesh, and otherwise mutilate the fowl, all those who have had actual experience in the matter agree that drawing poultry is unpractical and undesirable.