12 



Failure to Remove Reactors 



By comparing the testing re])ort!5 of 192G-27 with those of 1927-28, and by 

 comparing the several reports of testing done within tiie season, tlie data 

 summarized in Table VII were compiled. These data are not representative 

 of all flocks tested, since they were compiled only from reports on flocks 

 tested two or more times. 



Table VII. Number of Flock Owners Known to Have Left Reactors from Previous 



Tests in Their Flocks. 



This table is included for the purpose of emphasizing the need for more 

 careful observation of the control measures advised. There is no doubt but 

 that carelessness on the part of the flock owner is responsible in most cases 

 for the failure to remove reactors. 



One man informed us that he retained five reactors from one test to another 

 to determine wiietiier or not they would be detected on retest. We did de- 

 tect thein and he congrattilated us, not realizing the risk of re-infection to 

 which he was subjecting iiis flock by such a procedure. It is useless for any 

 man to try to eradicate bacillary white diarrhea by merely having his flock 

 tested, lie is wasting his money if lie fails to practice the simple control 

 measures given iiim with his testing report. 



Another poultryman wiiose flock was tested three times during the year, 

 very carefully removed the reactors after the first test, but after the second 

 test decided to experiment and kept tiiree. If tliese three reactors had been 

 removed, a non-reacting rejiort could have lieen issued since they were the 

 only ones detected by the third test. 



One poultryman left fifteen reactors in liis flock and when notified of it 

 reported that his assistant iiad left tiiem in "for spite work". Whatever the 

 reason may be, keeping reactors on tiie premises is a dangerous procedure 

 and is not reconuuended. 



Keeping Reactors for Egg-Laying Purposes 



Tlie practice of keeping diseased birds for egg-laying purposes is quite 

 common, as indicated by replies to a questionnaire sent to flock owners for 

 whom testing was done in 1927-28. Out of 170 replies from flock owners 

 having infection in their flocks, 16 (27.06 per cent) reported that they kept 

 reactors for egg-laying purposes. 



