Montour American. (Danville, Pa.) 1866-1920, 1901-10-03
LONG AND SHORT.
Views of the Advocates of the Large
House and the Small House.

Views of the Advocates of the Large
House and the Small House.
NJ. Sumner Perkins writes to The
Poultry Monthly:
81 believe in poultry colonization-
that is TO say, many small coops and
houses scattered over large areas and
occupied by few fowls rather than O
few very large houses occupied by
many fowls. Better put 1000 fowls
into 80 different houses than into only
two or three large houses, even II the
IdLIeI ieany contains the same area as
the former We don't want too many
under the same roof. 1t is the same
case as 1t IS with the human habita.
tions in cOngested city quarters, the SO
called tenements or rookeries where
men, women and children are SO hud.
died together that they arrive at nei'
ther physical nor mental standards OF
proper development. So with poultry.
1t won't do to crowd them. They need
abundant air space and TO be so sep
arated into small numbers as to avoid
cOntagion from disease. The small iso-
lated house IS the ideal plan at all
times and especially as summer comes
on foraging room is needed and lib.
eral area for each colony of birds. I'm
der such conditions strong breeding
stock and vigorous laying stock may
be maintained. 1t Is very good policy
to have light coops and fencing built
in sections so as to be taken apart and
put together at will"
The editor Of The Monthly responds
as follows:
I'VE publish the above not because
we believe it or indOrSe II in toto, but
because we wish to give all sides Of
such questions. The colony house has
its place, especially for breeding stock,
Its greatest advantage being that it al
lows the use of larger yards in connec-
tion herewith than are possible In
connection with long house cut into
comparatively narrow pens. But for
houses for laying stock, especially
where hens are kept by the thousand.
and more especially for winter laying,
these colony houses come well nigh be
ing impractiCable,
THE assumption IN the above that
the fowls are crowded or suffer from
impure air or disease simply because
they are in large houses in large num-
bers Is entirely wrong. Some of the
worst cases Of overcrowding and filth
and disease we have ever seen or heard
of were in small houses. The compari-
son between the crowded city tene-
mentS and large poultry houses would
have had more force a quarter Of a
century ago. Today some Of the most
sanitary dwellings in the wIrld are
some of these modern city tenements
and apartment houses. The average
pOultryman will keep a large house
cleaner than he will a lot of small
houses Of equal capacity, simply be
cause he can do 1t easier. On the score
of economy Of material, of time and of
labor the long house IS ahead. 1t is
cheaper to build and cheaper to care
for and keep in repair. 1t is less ex-
posed to storms in winter and every
thing can bc better kept under the eye
of the oyersecr. Let some of the advO-
cats OF colony houses Try 10 care LOT
1000 hens each kept in 30 colony
houses in separate yards during some
of our northern winters. Let them
visit these houses several times daily
to feed water and clean platforms and
replcnish grit and shell boxes and sup
ply new litter and spray the roosts and
gather eggs and a few other details,
and some one would be looking for an
other job before many weeks had pass
ed 1t is well to have some colony
houses. They are good for the breed
ing stock during spring and summer
They are good for the young stock
during the growing season. But when
It comes to keeping hens by the thou
sands in houses accommodating only
20 each they are not what are wanted. |
The long house is the only one to econ
omlze labor allow the use of labor saw
Ing devices and reduce cost Of care TO |
the minimum"