f frx^rrxn ?<k 
ny.w^iv? j 5f t i n >c? 
I»« RURAL NEW-YORKER 
1371 
A Defense of the Cross-Bred Hen 
OPULAR OPINION.—It is quite a comfortable 
situation to drift along with the tide, whether 
you are sailing out on the ocean blue or along dry 
land with popular opinion. The man who advo¬ 
cates whatever is in style or generally believed has 
an easy time convincing his fellows. P>ut to come 
out and advocate something directly opposite to pop¬ 
ular belief and one’s own former views is a task 
most people prefer to avoid. Most people would 
rather let mistaken theories and practices prevail 
than to run the risk of making laughing-stocks of 
themselves in bucking up against the popular tide. 
If years of experience in poultry breeding and the 
experience of many others I have consulted did not 
convince me thoroughly of the superior utility value 
of certain if not all strains of hybrid poultry over 
purebred strains and breeds, I certainly would not 
have the brass to come out openly in favor of them. 
For a full decade I have studied poultry breeding 
and management, and for more than half that time I 
have been engaged in trap-nest breeding of pure¬ 
bred Rhode Island Reds. Having high¬ 
bred stock for sale, quite naturally I 
was very glad to believe that pure 
breeds were the only logical thing for 
profit. The more people thought so, the 
better would be my business. All the 
agricultural colleges and all the poul¬ 
try papers advocated and do advocate 
purebred poultry. Never yet have I 
seen an authorized article in any poul¬ 
try or agricultural magazine advocating 
anything but purebred poultry. And 
yet I have never yet had record of a 
lot of pure cross hens that did not beat 
their parents as egg layers. 
SURPRISING RESULTS.—Since I 
have been breeding Rhode Island Reds 
I have sold baby chicks to my neigh¬ 
bors that grew up into flocks that laid 
so well as to astonish their owners. I 
was against cross-breeding and refused * 
to consider the stories I heard about 
their laying ability. Then a few years 
ago I raised a few Ancona chicks for 
the novelty. Having only a few of 
them, and not wishing to breed from 
them. I put them in a pen with Rhode 
Island Reds and kept their egg-laying 
records. I had heard that Aneonas 
were naturally big layers, but they 
made a very poor showing against 
Reds. In the Spring there were male 
Reds in the pen, and the eggs of the 
Red hens were used for hatching. I 
also put a few of the Ancona eggs into 
the incubator for the novelty of it, from 
which I raised half a dozen pullets. 
These also I housed with some Rhode 
Island Red pullets of the same age, in 
the Fall, and trap-nest records were 
kept. It was simply astonishing how 
much better those cross-bred hens laid 
than the Red pullets. They 
ahead of the Reds all Winter, and in 
the Spring I put the six crosses in a 
little coop by themselves, where they continued their 
marvelous laying. They would lay six eggs a day 
for several consecutive days, drop down to five or 
four a day, then lay six eggs a day for several more 
days in a row. Now this is a specific case, and in 
itself I would pass it by, for accidents will happen. 
But it caused me to sit up and take notice when I 
heard other i>eople tell how much better crosses laid 
for them than pure breeds. I could wear you out 
if I should set out to tell you in detail of all the 
well-crossed flocks I have heard of that beat their 
parents as layers. But the sum total of it is this: 
I have heard of many flocks of hens, products of 
crossing one pure strain with another pure strain, 
that made better layers than any pure strain in the 
experience of the owners. 
EXISTING DATA.—I have not statistics of the 
whole country to go by, nor even the whole State. 
In fact, there are no statistics in written form that I 
know of on the laying values of cross-bred hens, but 
what I am able to gather informally convinces me: 
1. That the man who has a flock of purebred hens 
and buys a male of another breed to mate them to 
stands a far better chance of getting profitable layers 
titan one who mates his hens to a male of the same 
breed. 
2. That it is better to mate a heavy breed with a 
light breed than to mate two unrelated breeds of the 
same size. 
8. That it is better to have the sire of the heavy 
breed and the dams of the light breed. 
4. A cross-bred flock of sightly appearance may 
be had by carefully selecting colors of parents. A 
cross between a white breed and a very dark breed 
is likely to produce speckled and unsightly offspring. 
If both parents are as dark as Rhode Island Reds or 
B. Rocks, the offspring will be uniform in color and 
darker than either parent. If both parents are 
white the offspring will be white. 
Assuming that I am right, that cross-breds are 
better utility birds than purebreds, why is it that 
the agricultural colleges and poultry papers all are 
solid for purebred hens? First of all, I will allow 
that my own experience, that of my mother’s peo¬ 
ple, my father’s people, my in-laws, my cousins, my 
neighbors, and the strangers in my gate, do not 
check up with the experience of the poultry world 
in general. I think that the agricultural colleges 
advocate purebreds because there is no standardiza¬ 
tion of crosses. They live but for a generation. 
There can be no crosses without the pure stock, and 
the standard of the agricultural colleges is what con¬ 
tinues. Cross-breds do. not transmit their qualities 
well to the next generation, as repeated experiences 
have shown. The mongrel hen has no consideration 
in this article. I have tried her and found her want¬ 
ing. The poultry papers are largely trade journals, 
catering to their advertisers. Their poultry adver¬ 
tisements are all for pure stock. These advertisers 
demand that the journals stand by them, and they 
do not dare do otherwise. The public is so well 
trained to trust in pure stock that the man who 
should venture to advertise hybrid chicks would 
bring a big laugh on himself. And yet I maintain 
that crosses do beat pures. But I say it with an 
open mind. I want to know the truth. I ask you to 
put this question before your readers and let the 
subject have a proper airing: Which have laid best 
for you, purebred hens or cross-bred hens? The 
proof of the pudding is in the eating of it. 
Rhode Island. . david l. stiixman. 
R. N.-Y.—We are quite willing to print such an 
article for the sake of the discussion it will start. 
Of course there can be no “cross-bred” hens unless 
purebred stock is kept up. 
Possibilities of Alfalfa 
I HAVE been testing out some varieties of Alfalfa. 
Last Spring a friend brought me three samples 
of common Alfalfa seed, from three different dealers, 
who are supposed to procure the best possible seed, 
and note the difference, if any, in their germination 
and growth. I planted these three rows in the gar¬ 
den, each 55 ft. long and 15 in. apart, and alongside, 
as a check, one row of Grimm. The former was all 
new seed, but the Grimm was grown in 1915 or pre¬ 
vious. This.all received the same cultivation as the 
rest of the garden. The remarkable thing to me is 
that I cut it three times this first season. The seed 
u as sown May 2, and the Alfalfa was cut each time 
just as it was beginning to blossom, on June 10, Au¬ 
gust 11, and October 6, with the following results: 
Wt. of Roots 
No. 1, three cuttings. 44 lbs. 12 lbs. 
No. 2, three cuttings. 3714 lbs. 10 lbs. 
No. 3, three cuttings. 421/2 lbs. 12 lbs. 
Grimm, three cuttings . 38% lbs. 19 lbs. 
It occurred to me that it would be well to dig up 
and weigh the roots from these five-months-old 
plants. This proved to be rather a man's job; the 
spade had to be used the same as in digging parsnips. 
This cut off the roots on one side, and also the tap¬ 
roots. I conclude that in this way about two-thirds 
of the roots were secured. Common 
proved so strenuous a job that I ex¬ 
pected the row of Grimm to dig easier; 
but the reverse was the case, for the 
Grimm had so many more roots, and 
some of them grew as deeply as did the 
common. One root of the common that 
I managed to dig and pull up measured 
just 30 in. from the crown of the plant. 
This all appeared to me as a rather re¬ 
markable performance for five-months- 
okl plants. The whole thing was very 
interesting until I came to the job of 
digging up those roots, and I am not 
calculating on further garden experi¬ 
ments with Alfalfa. The weighing was 
all done when in the green state, and 
as one who is good at figures tells me 
that a strip of ground 15 in. wide and 
55 ft. long is the 631st part of an acre, 
the acre yield could be obtained. Even 
this first-year Grimm, all told, came 
out the leader, even when such old seed 
was used. When Alfalfa seed is scat¬ 
tered over the surface of a wheatfield 
in May, and left uncovered to “catch as 
catch can,” the resulting crop, if any, 
is quite a different story. h. e. cox. 
Monroe Co., N. Y. 
Another New Pest—The 
Oriental Peach Moth 
CJRING the past season we have 
received several communications 
from different parts of the eastern 
United States telling of injury to the 
tips of the new growths on peach trees. 
The injury is variously described as af¬ 
fecting the terminal growth of young 
peach trees, or in severe cases as caus¬ 
ing the wilting and dying of the tips 
of practically all the new growth on 
bearing trees. This is undoubtedly the 
work of the oriental peach moth, a rel¬ 
atively new insect which came to the shores of 
America about 1914 from Japan, and which has been 
causing no little concern in New Jersey and sur¬ 
rounding sections. In fact, it has spread from the 
vicinity of Washington, the scene of its first appear¬ 
ance, until it is now reported both from Connecticut 
to the north and east, and Alabama to the south. 
-This insect is closely related to the codling moth, 
and the work is not unlike that of its relative, 
though it differs in the fact that it does not confine 
its activities to the fruit alone, attacking the twigs 
as well. The larvae, or worms, prefer to enter at 
the stem end of the fruit, working in towards the 
stone and eating about it much as the codling moth 
burrows about the core of an apple, and leaving a 
small amount of frass at the entry, likewise. “Side 
worms” are also observed, accompanied by a gummy 
mass, so that the appellation, “the codling moth of 
the peach,” is no misnomer. 
So far, New Jersey has borne the brunt of the 
fight, for this is a new pest, it must be repeated, and 
energetic work has been done by that State in trying 
to find means of control. The difficulty lies in the 
fact that the larvre, though feeding upon the new 
growth to some extent, seem not to relish the first 
few mouthfuls that they acquire, and so discard them. 
Stomach poisons are therefore not so effective as 
they might be. Again, the several broods so overlap 
that a measure directed against one form will find 
Cauliflower set first week in July just beginning to head, September 25. Ninety- 
eight dollars worth of head lettuce sold off of this plot, which is 24 by 150 ft., before 
cauliflower was set. 
kept waj Celery planted the first week in July ready for market September 15. Row boarded 
up is Newark Market; next row, Golden Self-blanching; rows on left, Emperor. 
D 
