IMPORTANCE OF SIZE — SHAPE OF BODY. 117 



Apart from any possible or fancieil relation lietween size and autual quality anJ productive 

 caijauity, the matter of size is sometimes of great importance. Certuiri sizes of fowls are in 

 more general demand for certain purposes than others. Thus in our markets generally con- 

 turners call for fowls dressing foUr to five pounds each. This size is what is most In demand 

 for ordinary roasters and for fowls. The demand for larger fowls is more limited, and many 

 times the large fowl has to be sold at less per pound thati the smaller one. Except in localities 

 where there is a special demand for extra large roasters, it is no advantage to a poultryman 

 producing for market to have his stock run larger than five pounds each. From the point of 

 view of the fancier breeding Asiatics, or l)reeding fowls of the American class generally up to 

 st^mdard weights, fowls dressing five to four pounds each are medium to small in size. Com- 

 pared with the bulk of poultry marketed they are good sized to large fowls. Breeders of 

 thoroughbred fowls divide quite sharply on the question of size, especially as to the desirability 

 of maintaining full standard weights, or, perhaps, exceeding them. In the hands of most 

 poultrymen all breeds deteriorate in size. Hence there is a very widespread demand for large 

 fowls for breeding purposes to counteract this tendency. But this demand is not merely a 

 tlemand for size. It calls for good size vpith general excellence and vigor. 1 think it may be 

 truthfully said that great or excessive size In fowls that have no other claims to attention is 

 not especially valued by one poultri man in a hundred. 



Taking five to six pounds live weight as the most desirable weights for the poultry farmer, 

 and therefore his standard weights, we may say that above these weights size is desirable some- 

 times In special markets, and quite generally in breeding birds, counteract the tendency the 

 other way; while everything below these weights falls short of the standard for general 

 demands. Is a little less satisfactory for market, and to be used in breeding only with mates 

 large enough to offset its deficiency. 



Shape of Body. 



Not as much now as some years ago, but yet a great deal, is said of the shape of the body 

 of a fowl as an index of laying capacity. Like many other theories, the Idea that a fowl 

 with a long, deep, wedge shaped body is the best" machine " for the production of eggs, looks 

 very plausible. But it has not stood either close observation or practical tests. Still there is a 

 certain correlation between shape of body and producing cap.icity. There must be an appre- 

 ciable fullness in the lines of the body to give suitable accommodation to well developed Internal 

 organs. The proportions may not be ideal. They may seem objectionable according to 

 accepted standards ol shape for the breed to which a fowl belongs, but if there is nothing in 

 the shape suggestive of weakness or deformity, one type is as good as another for egg produc- 

 tion as far as the evidence goes. 



In table quality shape counts for a great deal. The most desirable carcass is that which 

 carries the largest proportion of white meat. This meat is on the breast, body, and wings. 

 It constitutes the muscular system for the wings, and there is therefore a very necessary cor- 

 relation between good breast development and power of flight, (or perhaps I bad better say 

 capacity lor flight). With power of flight, as a rule, we also find associated greater general 

 activitv. This is as true when we compare specimens of the same breeds as when we compare 

 ditl'erent breeds. I have often had occasion to note in handling Light Brahmas that those with 

 well developed breasts were more energetic and active than the others, and consequently less 

 liable to the ills which result so quickly from inactivity in heavy fowls. In such comparisons 

 as this we must of course make allowances for the effects of condition and habit, but I think 

 it will be found generally true that under the same conditions fowls with well developed 

 breasts not only look more robust than those deficient in that section, but are inclined to he 

 more alert and, as a class, are more free from disease, and have a longer productive lite. 



The apparent size of the breast does not, however, depend exclusively on wing power or 

 cajiacity. Sometimes we find fowls wliich, when carved, yield more breast meat than their 

 appearance indicated, because the bones of that region are contracted, reducing the space 

 occupied by the heijrt and lungs, thus compressing those organs within the space they 

 normally occupy, or by crowding them on others. Such specimens are usually those which a 

 pnulti-ym^n with an eye for good shap^ discards on general principles even before they have 

 had time to show what exoeilence they might develop. 



