The Monmouth inquirer., 1925-04-16
SMALLEST BIRDS PROVEN
BEST IN EGG PRODUCTION
Revising Of Standards to Satisfy Vii.
lty Breeder and FancIes an
I~ncreasIna Need.

lily Breeder and FancIes an
Increasing Need.
a question that is receiving consid-
cradle thought and discussion among
pouitrymen Is that Of standard weights
of the various breeds and varieties.
There L. d belief in some quarters that
some OF the weights are too high, 80
far as laying ability Is concerned. A
pouItryman OF national prominence
has stated that 80 per cent of the
proven best layers as shown by trap
nesting are the smallest birds. Rec
ords kept at state experiment stations
as well as the large egg laying con-
tests seem to bear out this statement.
EVERY winner of first place at the con
tests held at Mountain Grove the last
few years has been under weight for
her variety OF breed. Most Of the 9TH
or birds that made exceptionally good
records also were under standard
weight, some OF them being as much
No two pounds off.
To further strengthen this conten-
tion, the birds which have made the
poorest egg records at the contests
have been up to standard weight, or
considerably above 1t. This condi-
zion has been found to hold true in
the case OF all breeds and varieties.
There lis nothing really surprising
about this, however. as every poultry
raiser knows It is not the bird that Is
heavy and plump that will lay the
most eggs.
There are two types in poultry, Just
as there r two types in cows. The
dairy type of COW turns the maximum
amount OF feed consumed into milk.
The beef type turns her feed largely
into meat. The same conditions arc
true as regards chickens. One bird
win manufacture eggs out Of what she
eats. while another puts on added
weight. Az a result, the heavy layer
sis not q good bird to look at. just as
the dairy COW that makes a big milk
and butter fat record is not an attract
I've animal:
Poultry raisers not familiar with
these facts frequently make serious
mistakes. They like the looks Of the
plump hens and so choose that kind
In making up their laying flock. Thus
they get the beef birds instead of the
laying kinds and In the fall and win
ter they wonder why they are not get
ting more eggs. No fowl should be
kept as a layer that is not healthy and
vigorous, but the fact that she may
seem somewhat small and perhaps a
pound or two under weight, is not a
good reason for discarding a bird as
q layer.
All Of which brings us back to the
old problem OF getting the utility
breeder and the fancy breeder close
together. It is unfortunate that the
birds that lay the most eggs cannot
also be the most attractive. but this
would not be in accord with natures
laws. Visitors attend poultry shows
to see plump birds with fine feathers.
The fact OF whether they are good lay
ers or not Is never considered. Neither
does the judge pay attention to their
laying abilities in making the awards.
A PEN OF birds at a poultry show. such
as have won the contests at Mountain
Grove in recent years, would bring
some very uncomplimentary remarks
from the visitors, II their performance
as layers was not known.
There is an Increasingly felt need
OF revising standards SC that both the
utility breeder and the fancfer viii be
satisfied. and that probably viii mean
two distinct standards.
---~