The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. TUESDAY, JULY 30, 1907.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2145, 30 July 1907, Page 2

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. TUESDAY, JULY 30, 1907.

does poultry farming pay?

re +i lo question wore asked of the avorago householder in tlio summer niontlis, when tlio basket » daih lUlod with fresh eggs laid by a ttlo Hock of rod-combed, contented, chuck-liu-r lions, tlio reply would usually bo in’tlio affirmative. lut tlio samo query, howover, in tlio winter time, when fowl feed is dear .the liens shirk their duty, and oxoibitant puces have to bo paid to supply the deficiency, and a very different response will bo forthcoming. On the wholo it is difficult for the average housewife to tell precisely whether or not her few fowls really show a profit on the expense and trouble spent upon them. Similarly, it is by no moans an easy matter for a farmer with huger flocks of poultry to gauge the financial result with accuracy. During tho past few weeks the ‘’Weekly Press” of Christchurch has started a violent controversy on the matter, and some useful facts are being elicited. The agricultural editor of that journal, while 'admitting that poul-try-keeping might be useful as ail adjunct to otlior branches of farm work, contondod that as a sole means of livelihood it is not a profitable occupation. His statement was challenged by several poultry enthusiasts, and some of tho correspondence that has appeared on the subject is reproduced in another portion of this issue. Decently an expert, “On the Land,” wrote ill the Sydney Morning Herald of February Bth: —“In the farm competitions the returns of the profits forwarded to the judges have been very interesting. . . . Dairying generally, and particularly on the North Coast, was naturally a big money winner. Without doubt the poorest returns for the labor and capital expended were furnished by the poultry, which, although not a feature of the competition, was seriously prosecuted by a number of entrants. One or two competitors were buying feed for their birds, and their profits wore miserable as contrasted with those of other farm pursuits. Where the feed was grown on the —it was vory evident that to make £SO a. year required a heap of skilled labor and considerable outlay. The samo amount of feed and bestowed on pigs would probably give much better results, and without the risks and disappointments associated with incubation and successful egg production.”' To this the “Weekly Press” writer says:—“The above emphasises all I have said. Other issues of the farm show bigger profits, with less risks and disappointments. At tho samo time, a certain number of fowls can bo regularly kept- on most agricultural farms, but when tlio numbers are such as to involve the purchasing of food and tho employment of labor, then, as ‘On tho Land’ says, the profits are miserable. The above is exactly what we have contended all along, i.e., that poultry farming as an undertaking in itself will not pay, but that there is a place for poultry on every farm in small numbers. It is rather refreshing to seo a man like Mr. Brad§liaw thus speaking out boldly, and it would be well if some of our own enthusiasts and exports would use a like amount of common sense, instead of letting their imagination run away with them and making absurd and foolish statements that will not bear investigation. There is no doubt that' many uninitiated men have been led away by the wild assertions made by responsible experts as to the money to be got out of poultry, and have lost their money, and curse the day they saw or heard of such misleading matter.” Thero is a good deal to be said for the attitude here taken up, but there are evidently two sides to the question, and as it is one of considerable importance we should be glad to hear of any local experiences in the poultry* industry.