IIa. Sub-Department of Poultry Husbandry. 57 



carry out investigations requiring close application. Persons en- 

 gaged in instruction and in student investigation have absolutely 

 nothing to do with regular experiments in progress, and the per- 

 sons responsible for the latter, have nothing to do with instruction 

 or student investigation. 



An attempt has been made to bring about uniformity, complete- 

 ness, and accuracy in all experiment work and instructional work. 

 To this end a blank form has been devised and adopted which is used 

 alike by all persons in pen practice, student investigation, or regular 

 experiment. It will be seen that this system provides for once a 

 week reports and continuous posting of results on a single sheet. 

 Posting and reports are rigidly required of all persons. By this 

 system, the instructor, the students, or a visitor can tell at a glance 

 the results accomplished at any particular time. As a necessary 

 accompaniment of the above system, zinc plates are being prepared 

 to be placed on each of the 49 pens, each giving the number of the 

 pen, kind of fowl, nature of experiment, and person in charge. For 

 example : 



Pen No. 3. 



Student investigation No. 29 C. 



" Forcing versus Retarding Pullets." 

 This pen forced. Wet mash. 



In charge of Clara Nixon. 



By this means any person will be enabled to know the nature of 

 the experiment in progress. The person in charge will have the 

 added incentive to greater neatness and accuracy owing to the fact 

 that either responsibility for carelessness or credit for good work 

 will be publicly and specifically placed on the person in charge. 



III. CORRE.SPONDENCE. 



The correspondence is large and rapidly increasing. A record of 

 the letters answered from this office from April 12, 1905, to April 

 12, 1906, shows that 2.336 letters were received and answered, an 

 average of 6.4 letters per day for the year. A record kept for five 

 weeks from April 7th to May 12, 1906, shows that 29S letters were 

 received and answered, an average of 8.5 per day. The relative 

 average increase per day for the five weeks above as compared with 

 the daily average per year would be 2.1 letters per day. The cor- 

 respondence from October 29. 1906, to November 22, TO06. shows 

 245 letters written, or an average of 11 letters per day, an increase 

 of 2J/2 letters per day since May 12, 1906. 43^ of all the corre- 

 spondence is with persons outside of the State and 41^/ of the 



