CIRCULAR NO. 116 MY15

SINGLE-DECK CAGES

LAYING HENS

.4

I:F

A G RI CU LTU RA L

"7j Ihe ALABAMA P

E. V. Smih, Director

E XP ER IM E NT ST AT I ON

O LY TE C HN IC IN ST IT UT E

Auburn, Alabama

C

MAY 1954

f. .

s..

- .- 1

CONTENTS

H ISTORY ..................... .......... ......... 3

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES....................... 3

CAGES AND CLIMATE ................................. 6

STARTING THE CAGE SYSTEM............................ 7

CAGE HOUSE AND EQUIPMENT......................... 7

House Plans........................ ......... 8

Laying Cages........... ........... .......... 9

M ANAGEMENT ................. ........... ........ 11

Feeding................ ........... .......... ii

W ater Supply...................................14

Breed to Use...................... .......... 16

Record System ..................... .......... 18

C u lling ................. .......... ...... ... 18

Lights for Caged Layers..........................19

Fly Control ....................... .......... 20

REPLACEMENT PROGRAM ............................... 21

Range- or Confinement-Raised Pullets .............. 22

Equipment.....................................23

Vaccination ........................................ 25

PRODUCING HATCHING EGGS ........................... 27

POSSIBLE PROFITS FROM MARKET EGGS . . . . . . . . .. . . . 28

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ...... .............. .......... 31

Toe COVER . Aisle view of typical cage house. Theoperator is filling feed trough directlyfrom a 50-pound paper bag. Thismethod requires less labor than supply-ing mash from feed carts or buckets.

ORIGINAL REPORT, CIRCULAR 110, 8M OCTOBER 1952REVISION, CIRCULAR 116, 8M MAY 1954

SINGLE-DECK CAGES/04

LAYING HENSDALE F. KING, Poultry Husbandman*

DURING the past few years there has been a great deal of interestin the use of single-deck individual laying cages in the Southeast.The cage system described here should not be confused with thethree- or four-deck system that has been used to a limited extentfor many years in the South and East. The single-deck cage hasseveral advantages over the multideck cages. (1) It is simple tobuild and is less expensive. (2) The manure falls to the floor andtherefore requires less labor for manure removal. (3) The singledeck of cages eliminates over-crowding the house, resulting inevery bird having plenty of fresh air without forced ventilation.

HISTORY

Single-deck cages were perhaps first used in Hawaii. However,the greatest advances actually have been made in southern Cali-fornia where the cages have been in use commercially since 1935.It is estimated that in Los Angeles and Orange counties, the mostdensely populated poultry areas in America, 90 per cent of allpoultry farms starting market egg production since 1945 have beenof the individual wire-cage type. In 1946 the author visited manyof these plants, and upon return to Alabama constructed the firstcages of this type in the Southeast in 1947. Since that time theAgricultural Experiment Station has pioneered research withcages, and in 1953 there were over a half million hens in cages inAlabama, Florida, and Georgia. This number will probably dou-ble in 1954.

ADVANTAGES a,.u DISADVANTAGES

The single-deck cage method has many advantages over othersystems of producing market eggs. In general, production of 60 to

*Acknowledgment is given J. C. Belcher, poultry farm foreman, for valued assist-ance in collecting records, building equipment, and supervising tests reported herein.

MONTHLY RATE of LAY of 550 HENS in CAGES MANAGED as aCOMMERCIAL FLOCK-60 hens culled, 60 pullets added each month

Per cent Production100

90

80

7060

30

20

0 N D J F M A M J J A S

FIGURE 1. Because of regular replacements, rate of lay of cage-managed birds is quiteconstant throughout the year.

70 per cent throughout the year is obtainable because of extensiveuse of young birds and accurate, heavy culling. Not only is highaverage production obtainable with this system but the rate of layis quite constant during all seasons. This fact is illustrated by theactual production of a 550-hen cage flock at the Agricultural Ex-periment Station during 1951-52, Figure 1.

These hens averaged 62 per cent production for the year. Theirlowest production was 52 per cent in May and the highest produc-tion was 70 per cent in October. Uniform production of fresheggs throughout the year is very desirable in planning a marketingprogram.

Very few hens show signs of broodiness because of the use ofwire-floored pens. A high percentage of the eggs is gathered cleanif the egg baskets are kept brushed free of dust. The hens cannotdevelop the habit of eating eggs if the cages are correctly con-structed. Less exposure to organisms and weekly culling greatlyreduce death losses, while losses from roundworms, lice, mites, andcoccidiosis are easily prevented. Individual cages prevent birdsfrom developing cannibalistic and pick-out habits. The amountof labor used is uniform throughout the year, and all work is doneunder clean conditions inside a well-ventilated house.

Regular replacement enables the poultryman to keep his housecompletely full of laying hens every day of the year. This is quite

[4]

different from the average floor-operated poultry farm where theplant usually operates at full capacity for only about 1 month dur-ing the year. Culling and death losses usually result in the plantbeing about 50 per cent idle during the late summer months.

In Figure 2 is shown the percentage of idle plant throughout theyear with floor layers. Cage houses should always be full of layingbirds.

Perhaps the greatest advantage is the positive egg record of eachhen, which makes culling easy and accurate. This enables a poul-tryman to obtain a large number of eggs per bird fed. The re-lationship between costs and profits from layers at various rates ofproduction is shown in Figure 3. Since cage operators averageabout 225 eggs per hen fed and floor operators average about 180eggs per hen fed, it is easy to see the advantages of keeping hens incages for the production of market eggs.

The disadvantages most commonly cited include rather heavyinvestment per hen, labor requirements, fly problem, and replace-ments. Investment per hen varies considerably depending uponthe amount of mechanical devices used and elaborateness of build-ings. The cage house is about the same as that used for a floorflock. The cage, including feed hoppers and waterers, costs about$1.25. The extra investment per hen can thus be estimated to be

PER CENT of IDLE PLANT with FLOOR-MANAGED LAYERS

Per cent Per cent

900IDLE PLANT

70 30

LAYING FLOCK30 70

20 80

10 90

O0 N D J F M A M J J A S

FIGURE 2. A typical floor-managed flock is operated at full capacity only for a shortperiod because of culls and mortality. Thus, under such management the plant is 30 to 60per cent idle four months of the year.

[5]

vv I vvv 1.v &- V V . ,v ,vv[ Number of Eggs per Hen per Yeor

FIGURE 3. As the rate of lay increases, the margin of profit above feed and other costsgoes up rapidly. Other costs include labor, housing, interest on investment, taxes, andinsurance. Operators who use their own labor to a large extent realize a labor income inaddition to the profit shown.

about $1. Results at this Station indicate that the cage system re-quires a little more labor than the floor method. Sometimes fliesbecome quite a problem around cage plants due largely to im-proper management. Growing replacements, which requires start-ing chicks every other month throughout the year, may also be adisadvantage under some conditions.

CAGES ard CLIMATE

Until the introduction of cages into the Southeast, single-deckcages had been used only in mild climates where only a roof was

[6 1

necessary. Those being operated in the Southeast, with the excep-tion of Florida, are placed in more or less standard poultry houses.This, of course, adds to the starting cost. However, the cost of thehouse for cage birds is no greater than that for hens under floor-type management. It is not necessary to heat houses for cagedlayers unless they are located where the outside temperature goesbelow 15 degrees F. rather often. When cages are located in a wellconstructed house, the cage system may be found satisfactory for allof the southern half of the United States; if supplementary heat isprovided, or insulated buildings are used, the cage system might beused to an advantage in any section of the country.

STARTING /Ae CAGE SYSTEM

The best plan to follow in starting the cage-laying system is forthe poultryman to decide on the number of layers to be kept andthen build the house to accommodate that number of cages. Nexthe should order enough chicks to fill the house at one time, some-time between January and April. The chicks are brooded on thefloor in one end of the cage house, using heatlamps as brooders.Under normal weather conditions, one 250-watt heat lamp willprovide heat for 100 chicks. Cages can be assembled in one endof the cage house while the chicks are being brooded in the otherend. When the pullets are 8 to 10 weeks old, they may be allowedto range outside the house while cages are being assembled in theremainder of the house. If this is not desirable, 2 three-month-oldpullets may be placed in each cage already completed so the brood-ing end of the house may be cleaned and cages hung. About 4months after the chicks are started, the operator should start hisregular replacement stock, following the plan described under"Replacement Program", page 21.

CAGE HOUSE ad EQUIPMENT

The house described here is suitable for central Alabama. Op-erators in Florida may find it desirable to use no side walls of anykind, while operators in northern Alabama should consider build-ing their cage houses so they can be opened in warm weather andclosed rather tightly during the winter. Most cage houses are ra-ther narrow compared to the modern types of laying houses. Widehouses do not have any particular advantages for hens in cages. In

[7]

FIGURE 4. Above is one of the 1,000-hen capacity cage houses at the AgriculturalExperiment Station of the Alabama Polytechnic Institute, Auburn, where cage-houseresearch was pioneered in the Southeast.

(IuX ', wshil Ic tIhci s arc lo aitid inl thei (cuter( O1 thet h. uise. I his

light. I lenls ili the cet.ier ol the hioutse olteni uccd~ nuue air and(

light, wXhile those near the window)Xs iuav be Ioo sul andI hiae adic-flalc light. lin inarrow houses there is less thilleieiit t tXctr ihiecet alild utside (ages. I hlcit is easier to vetilate itIA

supp)1) l ightl in all o1 thle cages.\Viwi) girouint cx ititu pci litS, it is hest itohiuildth le cage houseXth riii d~ge hole riiit cast mid( Xmsi. I hiese ]rouses aiic

uiolei ini t ie stumblier sinO e the late aultc lion stlm does ilni sluime"dii t IN on(i)i i th ca(t'5. Ili' he can het madie ts i ii inl winter ti

closing all ol the noth i side and potssil)lX soimu oI the suith sidle.Hoiutses i lunning orth andt soth ared t IIii cIsy stistr if shiadeis proided aloiig the wXest side oh the hbuilding.

\'lcil possi hle thle tosol of a cage hsuise sho sod he ol alutiiiti i.

Ihis miateriaul mia~kes ihe hottse couolei duinitg the stunnuci iuuniulu\ lien lemp~eiraiiie is imiiota nt, sint c uagch lav cis aic usualy A-;ulecteti imue byx hot weathier than liens kept on the Flouos. T his isbet ansc thit liens ate ahotut :) Icet above Ilhe Iloni X hicie it is hlci

than at i loor lex el. ienrs in cages are also haindit appsd (m Iuig lintwXeathleur bet hiig tillble 1t coiIu ini iontatI t% is1thIle I lotr hi ch t

is iistiv conler than the air.

House Plans

A b)1uepi t (ii N o. \lI1:5) shio~uitig the tiettis o)1 1 nlstrI li ir n tiay tog cage house anti e(jIienu nuas he iii tat nedt 11r11 the VV~

acntic 1 Sillic I. (d4 1h l ab i(4' aa s u 1 .141 41 111. 14ttuc 411(,lu1 ,tLuI t (1 blueprnI1 t\ Ite pre are 11o.' 4.1plan114 I s dN 111.' I b44. 4 h1 (( ll 11114)1

4.liii1). (4111.\ 1b4444 Nu t ,atisf III tese 1111, (a1b)44..i I) n

It d ais II 14.4 . i)4 n 111 4 ~ l1 thetl Irm i o .1(15i th 11 tI, o41 114, 14. 444

1d354t . (4444 teit (a '355 tend 4o keel. 1)he maimic(1 ( dhs in 114 i 444\11 14

(4) 144.141. It t 4.1( 5li(1Is arei to he ( n o l iid 4.41 Ncck o14441 Is em-114.11 14

j)4'1 \i 4. (Nj(ct 11)4 a114 4a1( 1). I(N d 9141)111, I 4511 111 1.1 NI

11yin Cage(1 sIIlN 1 41]I11IuS1\144.1I . 11l4 14i(l

FIGURE 5. End view of back-to-back cage unit, showing width and floor slope Note.location of water supply, feed troughs, and egg baskets. Factory-built cages are usually54" wide.

The egg tray should be easily cleaned and extend far enough be-yond the cage front to keep the hen from picking the egg and allowthe operator to gather the egg quickly. The cage should have asimple, fast, and accurate method of recording the production perhen. The cages should be hung securely in straight level rowswith rust-proof wire.

The plan of building cages shown in the mentioned blueprinthas proved satisfactory. However, minor changes may be made tosuit particular conditions without reducing the efficiency of thecage. The cost of the cage is a major item in this type of poultrybusiness. Therefore, any savings that can be made are important.The complete cage includes the feeding hoppers and watering sys-tem. Hence, in comparing the investment in cages, it must bekept in mind that for floor-managed birds roosts, nests, feeders, andwater fountains must be added to the cost of the house. Theseequipment items for floor-managed hens usually cost about 40 percent as much as the complete laying cage.

Results of tests conducted for a 2-year period on three differentwidths of cages for Leghorns are given in Table 1.

It will be noted that production by months was almost the samein each of the different width cages. This indicates that 8- X 18-inch cages would be the most profitable for White Leghorns con-sidering cage, housing, and labor costs. Mortality was 3 per centfor each of the groups in the 12-month period in 1950-51 and 5, 8,and 9 per cent in 12-, 10-, and 8-inch cages, in 1951-52. Cullingpercentage was 57 per cent for the 8-inch group, 58 per cent for

TABLE 1. EFFECT OF CAGE SIZE ON EGG PRODUCTION OF LEGHORNS, 1950-51, AND 1951-52

Production obtained by months in

Month 12- X 18-inch 10- X 18-inch 8- X 18-inchcage cage cage

Per cent Per cent Per cent

October .......................... 43 40 38November ........................ . 51 45 48Decem ber ........................ 63 64 60January .......................... . 65 66 64February ......................... . 63 64 , 62M arch..................... ........ 66 67 65April .................... ........ . 64 66 66May 62 64 66June ............................ 60 60 62July.......................... ... 57 58 60August ............................ 56 55 56September ......................... 59 59 61

AVERAGE...................... .. 59 59 59

[10 ]

FIGURE 6. Side views h o . ,thn i cae which may be 10 or 12 inces rjenu

upon operator's preferencec Above the cage doors are the record cards for each individualhen.

;I a1nsI 8 f. 1; antI 11)2 per) cetn i(exl)(ftix.v' ill 1ill -2. It is

ilLat tc v ilix all right. lllmX-\c i Ii ilth Ita vi

cat api isi IoilaI)IN. \\lsen this is fisme Ilt sage 'sIssild be 1218~ ins sex in xi/e. lt 'all (itll i)0 is IHIlie (li ill \lie iiic til

xx xieil is iieedl. lillexx5 oneS L eghi~rn and Lut 1(il I-es arc pla)"etd in eachI

ige; xii tat clillxlttl (n ) i s i lax bet nscd to iii (lsli e litXsIs1 lie isi5\ jn). lii, x'rxtsii xs)1tlctlittx I (tnplis alex tse kl(eil" xl littll.Caniiblism i ai d cuil(mii'. ittli a11e alsois elixatixulligex x\he ti~iIxm li-

iug hitds ate pulatesd iii cth c age and thle Ili b)1e esliii iS liii liisl-

In silt itI)) 1 1)1tt. I 11mtI iii Its ll' 111d 111)11 IIlx s ts rc sirctlx

MANAGEMENT

FeedingI lie I(dilig- xe Iitlilii cixed Imi laxtix iii t anes is xlilt\liii dul-

It till boom iti at nscd itlIUr lax t x kept oti the hoIsuin. Fh lssi uii dlit-

ference is in the amount of grain fed. A hen in a cage does notget much-exercise; therefore, she does not require as much energyfeed as a hen kept on the floor. In general, caged hens shouldreceive only about one-half as much grain each day as birds on thefloor. When a 20 per cent protein mash is fed, about 5 pounds ofgrain per 100 hens per day is considered adequate. The hens maybecome too fat if more than this amount is fed for a considerablelength of time.

To determine the best feeding method for layers in cages, theAgricultural Experiment Station in a preliminary test comparedthe following: (1) commercial pellets; (2) commercial all-mash;(3) commercial all-mash with added B vitamins; (4) home-mixedall-mash ration with high analysis of vitamin D, calcium, and vita-min B; (5) commercial mash with grain fed separately; and (6) 26per cent supplement and grain mixed together. The proteincontent of all rations was approximately 18 per cent. The egg-laying records of caged layers fed the foregoing rations in the 255-day test are given in Table 2.

These results should not be taken as final until additional testshave been completed. It does appear that hens in cages fed onlypelleted mash did not maintain satisfactory egg production. Thecommercial mash used gave higher production when supplementedwith other nutrients. All-mash gave the same results as mash andgrain fed separately. The all-mash ration, however, was easier tofeed from the standpoint of labor. All-mash rations can be usedfor caged layers. The ration should be made special for this typeof operation, since a common all-mash ration similar to that usedfor floor birds will quite likely be too low in protein, vitamin D,and possibly other nutrients. Twenty-six per cent supplementmixed with grain also gave good results, but care must be usedwith this method to keep the ration properly balanced.

In selecting the brand of feed to use for cages, the poultryman isfaced with the same problems as in selecting a feed for floor man-

TABLE 2. RATIONS FOR CAGED LAYERS, 1950

Ration Egg production

Per cent

Com m ercial pellets, hen size ............................................ 52Commercial all-mash ............................................ 59Commercial all-mash plus vitamin B .................................... 63H om e-m ixed, high analysis ............................................. 63Commercial mash with grain fed separately (80:20).....................5926% supplement, corn, wheat, and oats mixed together................64

[ 12 ]

TABLE 3. COMPARISON OF FIVE COMMERCIAL FEEDS FOR CAGED LAYERS

(51/2 MONTHS), 1950

Price Feed cost Income perMash Culled Production Cracked per per cage above

eggs dozen dozen feed cost

Per cent Per cent Per cent Cents Cents Dollars

A 43 70.6 2.0 49.4 22.50 2.58B 39 72.4 4.1 48.9 21.22 2.74C 34 69.6 2.3 49.1 24.27 2.35D 36 72.5 1.9 48.8 23.94 2.46E 25 76.2 2.2 50.0 26.12 2.65

agement. There is always some question as to which brand of feedwill give the best results. The poultryman can determine this forhis particular conditions only by making the comparisons on hisfarm. The Agricultural Experiment Station conducted tests withcaged layers using five common commercial brands of laying mashwith limited amounts of grain. Each brand of feed was fed to 100layers. The results are given in Table 3.

The birds on this test were handled as recommended for cagedlayers. Theywere culled each week and the cull birds were re-placed with nearly mature pullets. In the case of four of the feeds,the percentage culled was about the same, whereas with feed E itwas quite low. The percentage of production also was higherfrom feed E than from any of the other feeds. Feed D had thefewest cracked eggs, which is an indication of shell quality.

All of the eggs laid by each flock each day were graded intolarge, medium, and small, and were sold according to the dailyprices for those particular grades. The price per dozen shown inTable 3 is the price received for all of the eggs laid by each feed

group, and, therefore, is a guide to egg size. In this test, there wasvery little difference in egg size, which is considered usually notaffected much by feed. The cost of feed per dozen is based on theprice of the feed and, of course, the rate of lay. Feed E had a veryhigh cost per dozen even though hens on this feed laid at the high-est rate. Feeds A, C, and D had about the same feed cost per dozen,while feed B was quite low in this respect. The income above feedcost for the 5 -month period is, of course, the item of interest tomost poultrymen. It will be noted that the feed that gave thehighest rate of lay and largest eggs did not return as much incomeover feed costs as feed B. All of the feeds used were quite satisfac-tory. This test indicates that regular commercial laying mashesthat give good results with floor-managed layers will also performwell when the hens are kept in laying cages.

[13 ]

FI((Iioil t , '4444, 1 wiI'( t III,( III4 l HM 1'4II1l 41 i ii .11144

54)4114 grIit. 1 his~ is Itti usual ix at the rate of 2 p (Ind 41145pe U lulleson1 14p 4j4i t ltc iiashi ab)out ()1t1(, ea(. It XX ck. ( )swr shell m i11c

s 4)) t''s ftI AsI (41)it14(1 tr ()f the t1 as lit 4 an l ad e i()n-c OI (.1] 11t111

(t i4411 m mixed ith St 14a(1 an( Icd1 daX i ( 11, 55lc el cau(111 istll

(notch1k IIX 1)14 Ii ll XXr dut t1 use5 i 15ntn eo11141( s Som I Iiinii ii t 11

I 4 - eash 41e4d. co tI n ;tuI l 1 e cen 1444 44 I l ( al '4'..' c (4444444 II

at io he cr ss ~ titosoffu cas p n erv s fur h rens. ssc t s(lt

hig , tissubec. tereor. soud b giencarltl (unsdcatII)

that they are accessible for four hens. Hen-size cups will morenearly prevent water waste than will chick-size cups.

The supply tank should be about 4 feet above the drinkingfountains to give the correct pressure. The cups will not operatesatisfactorily if the pressure is too high or too low. Leaking cupsshould be removed and cleaned to prevent excess moisture on thefloor, which makes it difficult to control breeding of flies. Thesupply tank and the cup fountains should be checked daily to besure that the hens are getting water. It is advisable to drain thepipes once or twice daily during extremely hot weather to providethe hens with cooler water. Care should be taken to prevent awater system of this type from freezing, since the system is easilydamaged and repairs are costly. It may be drained those nightswhen freezing temperatures are expected, provided the cage rowsare hung at a slight slope to allow the water to drain freely. Thewater should not be turned on until the temperature in the cagehouse is above freezing. There are several methods of heating thewater that may be used if the cages are to be operated in climateswhere a considerable amount of freezing weather might be ex-pected.

Insulated nichrome wire, like that used in soil-heating cable,may be threaded through the water pipe containing the cups toserve as a heating element. At each end of the pipe the wire isthrust through a rubber cork. One end of the element is con-nected to the electrical system and the other end is grounded. Awire 105 feet long with .41 ohms per foot will make a 310-wattheater that will raise the water temperature about 15 degrees.Longer wire gives less heat and a shorter wire provides more heat.Consult an electrical concern for advice before attempting to heatthe cage water supply by this method.

Another method of preventing a frozen water system is to heatthe water in the supply tank. The warmed water is circulatedthrough the cage supply pipe and back to the tank by a centrifugalpump installed in the water system.

Still another method for supplying water is a continuous opentrough extending the length of the cages. The troughs are V or Utype with 1 -inch sides. They are made of galvanized sheet metalin sections and cemented or clamped together as they are put intothe cage unit. The water tank with a float valve is connected tothe trough with a rubber hose. The tank is elevated just enoughto supply 1/2 inch of water in the trough. The trough must beleveled to prevent some cages being without water. Another way

[15

L7,. ,, r,. ,y_ rho pipe cup system.

ii 'I I4~ 4 4, (4 4 ,X ,44 Ili I, 11),11(m 4 \\ 1544 ( I I 111 .4 .I4X . ( Ia l

44 u1n4 ((,1114444444,k 1 .44 it 4 ()nc 4 rn 144 4444l at4 Iht (4 I IhI( i I\ p4. )I 55a4(4 '.44 I)I 15 4, 14'.' c4 1i lsi c(4.X 4 4, tha I I( 44144.41 w, iii' 1)4'

t14( 1144III (444. <454 IcI'I1. 4444I14I 4144 in,44 44 X 4/i44 \54 I. 1444\4414.'

a4 5 ,4 4 44.4r11 jI.44I 4 1I c,1 4 11(14 11II 1114 .11hl55' 4)t 11(.4 h( 1' V t'. 4 h 111

a4 I I 4 Illc ( 4\Ic 4(5v X5.4111 11( 4.44 Ic.444 '4II '.44 LX 4n.44I ' . 144 44414 lim In

4. in 114)44 4 .4 '..4 In c( 1 44 41( 444441', 1 .~ . I1I4 44'.F 4h '. 444 '4

G,1 tFe 4. 1 ,h~Z ISa hF ~ I'.c F 14,4 lea Ilw 1I()u 11 414 c4. h 54

thFuu4,1 th 1 )144. n< t~''~ 1il44 IFS mcl4 1144 441u 4F I.l 4tniX 444.141

4.4444'. IF 4144. (5,4444 4'. 14444(4 44FF (II 144 I 14441 44.444414 IcashI I

41.45. 1144 h44.1 vv ill 4(111. a444 414c4t (elin k((1444.4 the 1444444I4 44.4 FIXcal] , F tl(I ()I 11c 554.4 I4(41 ill th F 4 55 1 1()u,,11i4 ;I '. ~11'.F

Breed to Use

F F 4 \ 44 1 l na I4 44c in c i .t F t,4 44 44 i n FI (('. 44 F 4444F '

I4'. 444 1 1444 hl c p hI14444,44 4 4444. u44.44 444 41 .44.44. u~TI 4 4 I a.i 1 I c

te.4, 444444144 irt hI 145 14445 444.4 )II (.4( L,4 4 144 . 14 411114ln 1111 I4,4 14(4 4,.

1a,145444. 414444 4444444144. 111411 414(5 '.4.44444 1.45444. ;nld 4141441 k4.4.14414t

4114 4m ill 4,44' 1w4 .1~ 4444-41411 c j4i 444. 1111(rc 44 :1( 4444 '. 444544. 4..l4.44 I ca in an .4444.4 t t()4 4 4 1114 444444 444.441 IFar 44t '.44i,44' 41 4,

1 lF ('.4. th4 114.14('1'. u44'.4 41.I14(4ct.54 1 .4444.4441 4454 ,(1'.4,444' 1 4,44 144ct w4,41 5544. 4.544. it 4'. (5 44444' 4114 4c(4441' u41)4.44444 4144 444 pi 4X 41

r_

TABLE 4. COMPARISON OF BREEDS FOR EGG PRODUCTION IN CAGES, 1950 AND 1951

Six-month record per 100 hens starting test

Pullet Feed ValueBreed cost cost eggs Culled Mortality

Dollars Dollars Dollars Per cent Per cent

WhitePlymouth Rock..... 130.50 136.51 246.65 37 24

NewHampshire......... 127.50 168.56 309.32 39 7

WhiteLeghorn............ 130.00 157.28 294.41 48 15

Rhode IslandRed................ 129.00 163.41 350.42 35 6

Leghorn XNew Hampshire.... 126.00 186.23 430.28 37 6

a very accurate measure of the respective breeds. The results aregiven in Table 4.

The cost of the mature pullet was determined by deducting theincome of the fryers sold at 10 weeks of age from the feed andchick cost. Since fryers were a good price at the time these weresold, the heavy breeds had some advantage over the Leghorns.There was practically no difference in the cost of producing pul-lets of the various breeds under these conditions.

In general, the breed that had the highest feed cost produced thegreatest number of eggs as indicated by the value of eggs. Breedswith a low feed cost produced the least number of eggs. TheLeghorn-Red cross produced eggs at the lowest feed cost per dozenfollowed by Rhode Island Reds, White Leghorns, New Hamp-shire, and White Plymouth Rocks. The strain of Leghorns usedin 1950 performed very poorly and it is believed from other testsand field trials that Leghorns rate higher for use in laying cagesthan the results of this test indicate. The performance of thecross-bred birds was very good.

There was not a great deal of difference in the percentageculled, and the relatively low culling rate for cages accounts forhigher than usual mortality and also the rather low income perhen above feed costs. The mortality among the White PlymouthRocks and White Leghorns was especially high, due mostly to fowlleucosis.

These tests seem to indicate that any breed or strain that will dowell in, the production of eggs under floor management will alsodo well when kept in cages.

[ 17]

Record System

()1(~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ II 111 lnXl a(I14111.(. O 1( a . vt u h t(I 1 ((II'Ill,~~'I al Iw pII I(. .u 1( Ii lllr~ lIll 44 li l t' 1 ( 1 1111a

d '-0 1l~ 1 '1!II i I ( l ll . nI'4jui kli t11( m Ol 4td 111,

aIl a l<1 I t i IX (('It' Ii ha1lvlIn 144141(.Ia( 111144111 ,1114 ( )II l~t'

pl 1 I. 11( ' II Il InuXI v1 ue1 i t1141 ( Ii t 414 (. Iii i l1' IX Ithat

11 t i I n 44') Id all 441 ~ ' 114 ((X

4)144 441( 1 h .4t it ) 11 4 11n\ hei so{ :.. 4\11 tX. 44l,1It4,4 1 I It ll( i' II".'I

N4

't 441 h . ( Ii i llt' lljl ()t' .

} 1144 I t'Xhe ,[ 1 II t X 1114 I 1 , tc 44 444

records ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ fl oal hen Ih I (. (lo L4 114 14 11411.,111 n,1 (llt a,-Ic

XI~~~~~~l1~~~ ItMI14 lx 441 4' ((I. 114411 .. . 11c,, ' 111 i l c :11r11111 411

411lt 1. \ 4,1141 44 111.kiiI (.( r I at .11,1 Ii' I 4t1 day 1,1444. 4

11.1 4(1 41 i i''t' IX44 '.XXlt~l'. l i ll .1 " 4 144 LI tI Ia n l it ' (tIx i'i. 42

4(114 1441 44 414 I~,I li' k'j~ 411 ( 114.'1

. I lt ') Iliit lI m 44(11as

lit iii444i il i 4 lxii .1 Xi 1 ('.(,:4 i 1l 4441 tIv iiil 11(. 1111

11.111X 41 1111ii' 1. l~ 41 14144'441 t,2,. w(il4 1 44' 441a~ 11(.11 )u 44

F IGUR 9t~ I. ITo41111 I operato N414 1(1i1 IXh ( 'IXe 111 144 1.1111 ha Ied

order to justify the rather high investment per bird and to makethe operation profitable. Culling is one way of keeping the rateof lay high. However, under certain conditions culling may haveto be kept to a minimum, while under other situations there ispractically no limit to the number that may be culled profitably.To answer this question, the operator must know the cost of grow-ing a replacement pullet and the average value received for eachcull hen. When these two figures are about the same, the cullingprogram should be very strict. As a guide, the operator shouldeach week remove any hen that has failed to lay 7 eggs in the past14 days. When the cost of growing a new pullet is considerablygreater than the amount received for a cull hen, the operatorshould be a little more lenient in culling the slower producers, es-pecially if eggs are bringing a high price per dozen. The cullingrate may vary from 5 to 10 per cent of the flock each month. Whenthe operator is a good manager and breeding, feeding, and diseaseare properly looked after, an average of 240 eggs per cage per yearcan be maintained by culling, about 8 per cent each month.

Lights Jo Caged Layers

Hens in cages will respond to artificial light about the same ashens kept on the floor. It is best perhaps to use both morningand evening lights in cage houses, since no dimming system isnecessary. By so doing the operator can control the end of theworking day. He will not have to keep changing the turn-on timeof morning lights to prevent the daylight period from gettingshorter due to the sun setting earlier each day during the fall ofthe year. A 14-hour day is desirable. It is usually necessary tostart using light sometime in August to maintain this length of dayand to continue using light during the fall, winter, and until aboutApril. During the winter months if the rate of lay goes unusuallylow, a longer working day may be used with the correspondingincrease in production. However, when more light is used, it ismore difficult to discontinue light in the spring without a drop inthe rate of lay. One light bulb every 10 feet down a row of back-to-back cages supplies adequate light for the hens. If 3 rows ofcages are placed in the house, the center row of lights should bestaggered so that the bulbs in this row will be located midway be-tween the bulbs on the two outside rows of cages. One 25-wattbulb per socket will provide enough intensity of light; however,if winter production lags, the hens may be further stimulated by

[ 19 ]

increasing the intensity with 40-watt bulbs. The more nervousLeghorns seem unable to stand light of greater intensity for anygreat length of time. All-night lights may be used throughout theyear instead of morning and evening lights. Under this systemthe rate of lay is usually very high, but the rate of replacementsalso may be greater.

Fly Control

If a cage-type poultry unit is located in a suburban area close toother dwellings and town property, flies must be controlled be-cause of public health. There are two ways to attack the problem:killing adults and controlling breeding. Both are necessary inorder to obtain satisfactory control.

Adult flies in and around the cage house may be killed by sev-eral different methods. The walls and doors may be sprayed witha DDT or a BHC spray. These sprays have fairly long life andthe areas treated will continue to kill flies and mosquitoes forseveral weeks. Since flies become resistant to either of these prod-ucts, it is best to alternate between the two. Little danger is in-volved as far as the chickens are concerned. Other sprays usuallyof the pyrethium type are good adult fly killers, but they do nothave any great lasting effect. Many flies also can be killed byelectrically baited fly traps, common home-made fly screen traps,or poison bait. All of these systems are of little value unless ef-forts are made to prevent flies from breeding in the manure underthe cages.

Flies do not breed freely in dry manure. Therefore, excessmoisture in the manure should be prevented. The watering sys-tem should be checked regularly in this respect. Adequate floorventilation is helpful. The area directly underneath the cagesshould consist of coarse sand or gravel that will drain well so thatexcess moisture will drain quickly. Manure piles that resemble acone under each hen dry much more quickly than piles that areflat. Therefore, every effort should be made to assist in the for-mation of cones by (1) allowing manure to accumulate before startof fly season, (2) maintaining dryness, and (3) spraying to killlarvae. Lime and phosphate may be added to the manure weeklyto control odors, keep the manure drier, and add to the fertilizervalue of the manure.

If fly breeding cannot be controlled by dryness, larval poisonsmay be used. Usually these are applied in liquid form with agarden sprinkling can. One or two applications per week are

[20]

necessary. Aldrin or dieldrin may be used at the rate of 51/ and7 ounces of 18 or 23 per cent emulsion per 100 square feet; orpolybor may be used at the rate of 2 pounds per 100 square feetper week. As a word of caution, this amount of borax will makethe manure unusable as a fertilizer for crops having a low-borontolerance. Another warning is that aldrin and dieldrin are quitepoisonous in the concentrated solutions. Therefore, they shouldnot be allowed to remain in contact with the skin. Fuel oil sprin-kled under the cages also will control fly breeding, but the manureis not satisfactory for crops after much of this product has beenused. The oil also increases the danger of fire.

No one particular control measure will solve the fly problem.It will require a combination of measures, putting most effort onthe conditions that are most troublesome. When the cage houseis located close to dwelling houses, it may be necessary to cleanunder the cages once or twice a week during the fly season to at-tain absolute control of fly breeding. This can be done withoutexcessive amounts of labor if a V- or U-shaped drag is pulled theentire length of each back-to-back row of cages. The manure isthen picked up at the end of the house and hauled to distantfields or spread very thinly over adjacent areas. Sawdust sprinkledunder the cages after each cleaning allows the drag to be moreeasily and effectively used.

REPLACEMENT PROGRAM

After the cage system is underway, a few chicks are started every2 months to keep the cages full of laying hens at all times. Thismeans that the growing equipment is used continuously through-out the year. Therefore, only about one-fifth as much equipmentis required as is usually needed. There is some variation in thenumber of replacement pullets each month. The rates at whichthe hens were culled by months over a 1-year period to maintaina 60 per cent or better production are as follows:

AVERAGE CULLING

MONTHS RATE PER MONTH

Per cent

January, February, March 6April, May, June 7July, August, September 10October, November, December 6

The foregoing rates show that the heaviest culling was doneduring summer months when weather was hot and normal molt-

[21]

ing tendency was greatest. The largest number of replacementpullets should be started in the early spring to take care of thishigh culling rate. It is advisable to have plenty of replacementpullets available. The extra pullets usually can be sold at a profitto back-yard poultry keepers. It is pointed out that cage operationsare never as profitable as they should be when there is a shortageof ready-to-lay pullets. When this is the case, culling is neglected,rate of lay declines, mortality increases, and income is materiallylowered.

Range- or Confinement-Raised Pullets

In the spring of 1950, the Agricultural Experiment Stationbought 300 chicks of each of five different breeds. The chicks ofeach breed were brooded on the floor of a colony brooder houseuntil 2 months old. The pullets were then divided; half of themwere raised to maturity in wire-floored outdoor growing pens andthe other half was allowed free range on a clover-grass area. Allpullets were given the same management in laying cages afterreaching maturity at about 5 months. Results of this test are givenin Table 5.

The range-raised pullets showed their superiority over pulletsraised in confinement. The range pullets in this test cost less toraise, laid more eggs, and had lower mortality and fewer culls.The exception was with the New Hampshire breed. It is possiblethat this breed, used so much for confinement-broiler production,may excell all other breeds under close confinement.

It must be kept in mind that providing range for small flocks ofreplacement pullets of different ages throughout the entire year ismuch more difficult than raising a flock of about the same age on

TABLE 5. COMPARISON OF CONFINEMENT- WITH RANGE-RAISED PULLETS

Cost Eggs laid Mortality CulledBreed Con- Con- Con- Con-

Range fined Range fined Range fined Range fined

Dol. Dol. No. No. Pct. Pct. Pct. Pct.

White Rock ........ 1.15 1.22 94.3 90.0 4 4 42 44

New Hampshire.. . 1.15 1.20 91.6 113.0 2 0 52 32Leghorn........... 1.30 1.34 85.1 70.4 4 6 66 62

Rhode Island Red 1.18 1.26 118.4 71.6 0 4 32 70

New HampshireX Leghorn....... 1.19 1.24 106.9 97.9 4 2 42 52AVERAGE......... . .. 1.10 1.25 99.3 88.6 2.4 4.0 46.8 52.0

[221

sc) ~ titi li h Ii it I tcu tlht lii tttrs lii .tttd quit it istami c a1lj t o

I1 C\ tt I tit~ g \ii d sc~sdcih oter~s ~ er ( c

I lust Itilt s titlst lit 1)11 Cid urt~ itt it . t e It t iit it ~ pIIt Ic11(1 h

c(ltt 1 1 hI~Ic tI it lo 11( itc Ist Ii( tilts opl i r t u( ta g ti!, (tt1 11ltts.n

\ it \z-I 1t tilt uiiiaI l i I ttlw i i c t I iii itt liii It, s ii i si'ed ini it i-

(iiiI it ii iii

EquipmentI II ( u( Il I I xit s ii l t h I tIt ' l it I I lIi t!I I I c15 itI ill ct li j t I ii l i

44

t

FGURE IU A satisfactory miethod of starting replacements is to use steel batteries forthe first 2 months. The room in which such equipment is used should have some sup-plementary heat.

.w

--R.rs~, ettc+r~

~'Y fl~l~$~

a.

months old. When mature the pullets are

r

usda nde to rplace culled hens.

,##~e tW<~

12'

NI

F tGUE 1s£' Ans slienate ss t ni or growin sq lacements consists of using small range.shelters for both brooding chicks and developing pullets.

40,_ .* %-. .4.

-. ~A~j'. 4.

"Wtath, Conditions are favorable.

IiI IIh) 4111 c fiX loc is4(11 Itx ,14 1 ccn "I))( and 1.111 h .1t' thcicii c ( .

ttlitiit i4Xm iX 11 4444o1t( Mll l (LIXv ot1i12 muth. Iehp iglltII.4) 1

(t ii 'tu . i4 ii ii ill ',tqu1144 I', 4 lit I . lit Iwth11 ' (asc the I i) 45 44 icillti thi r t',et mii e toi 14 lir I l uor,4 X 112,11 dc eo Iu Itt , 44 i gul (' it 411.14 r tok

',lot ,hllhtc s 11 , 1 ta h 144 1 ho iXt il tti (It ill(. ~ li

T'

in Iag' (ou toI the 454',jII4g, 1) 111 41(11 14 is (1i n lckk p oS(5 ith isr li

Ini 11a4. 1 se) t 1 n, t' j4)S ).(114.44 l AX ise (1 11s 1 k ie 1414.5 I Ii rds r

toi pics t (b sses 11n4 e4111.t 511i4111(1 I))) to5141 4 1i4l d i IIs. it41 i s 1114-

114)h14( to ;(14.51 pall(ets(1 1) All the Ich\i) metod us4115 ing a4. i44 44.

141114ake certa.in5 o ill , 141 i 11 )14t i in u M Si I t I is aI 'fi t g1 nera l )

spea (.14114 kl} Io 144 u h1,14 (hicks o1 hells. Wh114h In ight 1aus) high)

444111A4 41)4 4411iill 1p(IIIX 1 I Sp cilsts Io fu4 th1 111 1 III 1)11111411n.

4W4

FIGURE 14. Shown here is the wing-type method of vaccinating 2- to 3-month-old pulletsagainst fowl pox and Newcastle diseases.

PRODUCING HATCHING EGGS

The cage system was developed primarily for use in the pro-duction of commercial market eggs; however, the success of thissystem has interested many poultrymen in keeping breeding flocksin cages. This program requires artificial insemination of thehens to obtain fertile eggs.

A technique of artificial insemination for poultry was de-veloped in 1937. Since that date a great deal of research on thesubject has shown that fertility between 85 and 95 per cent can bemaintained by inseminating hens once each week. The methodgenerally used requires two experienced operators; however, theprocedure is not difficult to learn, and after a few hours of prac-tice, two operators should be able to inseminate 200 or more birdsper hour. Semen is collected from the males, also kept in individ-ual cages, by the following method: The male is stimulated toprotrude his copulatory apparatus, and the semen is squeezed or"milked" from the bulbous ducts by pressure of the thumb andforefinger around the vent.

The amounts of semen collected from male chickens averagebetween 0.5 and 1.0 cubic centimeters per collection. Except inthe case of pedigree breeding, the semen from several males maybe collected and pooled before inseminating the females; however,one should not collect a larger volume of semen at one time thancan be used in 20 or 30 minutes. For maximum semen produc-tion, males should be worked either every day or every other day.

Since it is very difficult to collect semen from males runningwith females, it is necessary to segregate the males from all females.Best results will be obtained when males also are separated fromeach other. Some cage operators practicing artificial inseminationkeep their males in the regular laying cages. In this case, carefulobservations should be made to see that the male's large comb andwattles do not prevent him from drinking freely from the watersystem used.

For artificial insemination of a female, the oviduct must be ex-truded through the vent so that a syringe containing semen canbe inserted directly into the vagina. This is done by sudden pres-sure above and below the vent, which causes the oviduct to pro-trude. There are two main openings or tubes inside the hen'svent, the oviduct being the one on the left side. The protrudedoviduct, in general, resembles a small red tube that has had itssides folded back on itself.

[ 27 1

After the oviduct is extruded, a 1 cc. tuberculin syringe (grad-uated in hundredths and without needle) containing semen isinserted about 11/2 inches into the oviduct's opening, and the semenis injected. All pressure should be released from the hen's bodybefore the plunger of the syringe is forced. The semen and thesyringe is manipulated by the second operator.

Each female should be inseminated once each week, in the after-noon, with .05 cc. of semen. A small percentage of the eggs pro-duced the first day after insemination will be fertile; however,hatching eggs should not be saved until the second or third dayafter the first insemination.

A male yielding 1 cc. of semen per collection could possiblykeep 20 hens per day or a total of 140 hens per week inseminated,assuming that birds are worked 7 days per week. In a practicalprogram, however, one should depend only on a minimum averageyield of semen per male (0.5 cc.), and probably should count on in-seminating only 5 or 6 days per week. The number of femalesthat can be inseminated per male per week under these conditionsis between 50 and 60.

When rearing males to be used in artificial insemination, oneshould produce about twice as many mature males as will actuallybe used to produce the necessary amount of semen for the flock.This will permit culling for physical defects and also will enablethe operator to select those males that produce an abundance ofsemen. Several males also should be kept in reserve to replacethose lost to disease and other causes.

Although the technique of artificial insemination is not diffi-cult to learn, it is much easier to master after having witnessed theoperation performed by experienced operators. It is suggestedthat those persons interested should contact the poultry depart-ment of the agricultural college of their state for a demonstration.

Field results in producing hatching eggs by this system are solimited that the author cannot recommend this plan for generaluse over the standard floor system at this time. It does seem tobe efficient and practical for the use of poultry breeders and pos-sibly some broiler hatching egg producers.

POSSIBLE PROFITS fm MARKET EGGS

The question of how much profit can be made from productionof market eggs in single-deck cages is one that is impossible toanswer. There are many factors to be taken into account, none

[ 2 8]

of which can be forecast with any degree of accuracy. Any kindof estimate depends upon normal conditions that, according tomany, never exist.

First, the cage system is not a substitute for good business judg-ment and poultry knowledge. It might be easier for the beginnerto start with cages rather than with the floor system. However,over a period of time, success will depend more on the operatorthan on the method. There are so many different systems ofmanaging hens on the floor or in cages and the two systems are sodifferent that it is almost impossible to actually compare the twosystems under similar conditions.

Perhaps the best reason to consider hens in cages more profitablefor production of market eggs than hens on the floor is that, wherethis system has been used for any length of time, practically all ofthe new houses are of the cage type. This is true for those startingin business or for old-time poultrymen who are remodeling orotherwise increasing their laying flocks. L. P. Sharp and A. D.Reed, University of California, in 1950 made a survey of 25 dif-ferent flocks involving 31,000 layers. Their results show that cageflocks returned to labor and investment $2.68 per bird, whereas,floor-managed flocks returned $2.22 per layer. The cage flocksreturned above labor and investment 78 cents per bird as com-pared to 34 cents per floor-managed bird. Cage flocks had ahigher income per hen from eggs-$8.72 compared to $7.47. Cageflocks laid an average of 230 eggs, or 24 more eggs per hen thanthe average of the floor flocks. Cage flocks laid 2 per cent morelarge eggs, 2 per cent more fall eggs, and 17 per cent more pulleteggs. The floor-managed flocks had a lower feed cost per henthan cage birds, $5.41 as compared to $6.27. Cage flocks used 17pounds more feed per hen. Culls from cages brought 9 centsmore per hen than from floor flocks.

At the Agricultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Leghorn hensmanaged on the floor averaged about 200 eggs per year, with an18 per cent mortality. Similarly managed hens in cages laid about236 eggs per year per hen fed, with about 3 to 5 per cent mortality.This means that the culling system used resulted in about 3 dozenmore eggs per year per hen fed, and in reduced death losses ofabout 14 hens out of each 100 kept. The 3 dozen extra eggs hada value (August, 1953) of about $1.50. This together with thelower mortality amounted to about $1.75 more labor income perhen, since other costs were about the same. In other words, if an

[29]

operator realized a labor income of $2.00 per hen from a floor-managed flock, he should realize a $3.75 labor income per birdfrom hens managed in cages.

The cage plant is really a factory where routine schedules can beadopted and factory methods of efficiency can be applied. Sincelittle land is necessary, it can be located near attractive markets forpoultry and eggs. While this system is not likely to supersede floorand range plants as a whole, it will supplement production of highquality eggs or compete for the market. No one can advise anypoultryman off-hand whether he should adopt the cage system inpreference to the floor system or vice versa. However, a study ofconditions in the area where the poultryman intends to build hisbusiness, an examination of available capital and other assets, andan evaluation of his own inclinations and abilities should make itreasonably easy to determine whether he should continue to usethe old standard floor system or adopt the newer cage system.

[ o30]

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Credit is given to Lawrence W. Todd of the Progressive Farmer staff forphotographs appearing on the cover page and on page 16.

[ 31]

°" °¢