ERADICATION OF PULLORUM DISEASE 1930-31 13 



Table 5. — Non-reacting and positive flocks classified by counties. 



Countv 



100% Tested Partially Tested 



Birds 



Total 



Flocks Birds 



Non-reacting Flocks 



Barnstable 7 6,208 2 436 9 6,644 



Berkshire 8 6.108 3 364 11 6,472 



Bristol 19 16,268 21 13.049 40 29,317 



Dukes 



Essex 18 14.689 15 10.767 U 25,456 



Franklin 12 12,841 .. .... 12 12,841 



Hampden 9 3.742 2 1.042 11 4.784 



Hampshire 19 10.364 9 5.354 28 15.718 



Middlesex 26 36,740 20 18.209 4«) 54,949 



Norfolk 29 25,586 11 9..365 40 34.951 



Plymouth 36 30.140 24 12.879 60 43.019 



Worcester 27 27,918 1 1 5.160 38 33,078 



TOTAL 210 190,604 118 76,625 328 267.229 



Positive Flocks 



Barnstable 1 175 . . .... 1 175 



Berkshire 2 1,678 1 176 3 1,854 



Bristol 7 8.714 13 7,136 20 15,850 



Dukes 1 51 1 51 



Essex 3 730 5 4.407 8 5,137 



Franklin .... 1 255 1 255 



Hampden 5 2.476 3 1,363 8 3,839 



Hampshire 2 1,256 1 179 3 1,435' 



Middlesex 6 3.775 16 10.362 22 14,137 



Norfolk 7 5.456 7 ■ 12.319 14 17,775 



Plymouth 11 6,180 12 9,157 23 15,337 



Worcester 5 5,306 10 8.430 15 13,736 



TOTAL 49 35.746 70 53,835 119 89,581 



According to flock information submitted by tiie owner through the blood 

 collector, 61 flock owners introduced stock from non-reacting sources, 30 from 

 positive sources, and 20 from untested sources. 



1929-30 Non-Reacting Flocks Which Revealed Infection in 1930-31 



In Table 6 is given the number of flocks that were non-reacting in 1929-30 

 but revealed infection in 1930-31. According to the information submitted by 

 the blood collectors and owners, the most common sources of infection were 

 the introduction of new stock from untested or infected flocks, and the hatch- 

 ing of eggs at poultry plants where infected birds were maintained. In nine 

 flocks a combination of sources was responsible. In three flocks, the source 

 of infection was unknown except that all three flocks showed infection during 

 the 1928-29 season. This suggests that it is not safe to consider a flock free 

 of disease when the testing results for one year have been negative. 



Without a doubt the re-infection in the majority of these flocks might have 

 been prevented if the owners had consulted the testing laboratory or their 

 local county agent for information about the sources that were responsible 

 for the infection. 



