2 BULLETIN 1086, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
acreage and hog production increased rapidly, thus constantly 
increasing the supply of soft and oily pork. 
This kind of pork has not been a satisfactory product from the 
standpoint of the packer or retailer, and this fact has been one of the 
most disturbing elements in the southern live-stock markets for 
several years, because of the price penalties imposed on hogs that 
are alleged to be soft or oily. The development and importance of 
the hog industry in the South may be realized by comparing the 
figures of the Department of Agriculture, which show that about 
20,000,000 hogs were on farms in the Southern States January 1, 
1921, with the slaughter records of some of the southern packing 
plants, which show that 30 to 50 per cent of the total number of hogs 
killed during heavy marketing seasons are soft and oily. 
Oily pork differs from firm pork in that it remains soft and flabby 
when chilled. The fat has a yellowish tinge and a glossy appearance. 
The pork known as "soft" resembles a blending of the characteristics 
of both the firm and oily. It is whiter than the oily and not so glossy 
or flabby. It is also much softer than firm meat. Soft or oily meat 
is more difficult to handle than firm meat and is unattractive in 
appearance, especially to those accustomed to white, firm meat. 
Packers object to handling hogs which produce such pork except 
at heavy discounts, claiming that the product is more difficult to 
sell and that it shrinks more than firm pork. 
CAUSES OF SOFT AND OILY PORK. 
All of the factors that cause soft and oily pork have probably not 
been discovered, but most of the scientific investigators who have 
made careful studies of the problem are unanimous in their opinion 
that feed is the principal factor. It has been demonstrated by care- 
ful experiments that hogs fattened almost exclusively on corn or 
feed of a similar composition chill firm, while hogs fattened exclusively 
on peanuts invariably chill soft or oily. The increased numbers of 
peanut-fattened hogs, together with the objectionable features in 
their products, resulted in a reduction in their market prices that 
was alleged to be discriminatory. This created much dissatis- 
faction among southern swine producers, who protested vigorously 
against such practices. 
Before the hog is slaughtered it is impossible to determine the kind 
of carcass or meat product it will produce, and many shippers fail 
to understand how live hogs that to all outward appearances are 
alike in finish, size, and quality should be so radically different after 
slaughtering and chilling. Admitting a possible difference in the 
condition of the flesh caused by feed, they can not believe it should 
justify a price discrimination varying from 2 to 7 cents a pound live 
weight from that paid for firm hogs. The situation, especially during 
