Poultry and egg situation

f 56, 6


THE __ _

si-r UATION
BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
PES- 164 MAR.-APR 1953



Measures of

EGG PRODUCTION EFFICIENCY
By Flock Size, Indiana, 1950


Under 100-199 200 & over
10- oo

FLOCK
SIZE


ii i~i=~i


$OF AVFOR ALL FLOCKS*


,9.

150

100

:50


0


EGGS LAID LAYERS TENDED EGGS
PER PER 100 MAN- PROD. PER
BIRD HOURS 100 MAN-HOURS
ADAPTED FROM "LABOR AND POWER USED FOR FARM ENTERPRISES: INDIANA, 1950." USDA, BAE.
IN STA TEWIDE SAMPLE.


NEG. 49076-XX BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS


U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


Small laying flocks do not provide as efficient
use of labor as do larger flocks. Further, because
small side-line enterprises do not yield enough in-
come to merit the specialized attention to feeding,
disease control, and management which is justified
by larger flocks, they often are inefficient in other


factors as well. For these reasons, many midwestern
poultry advisors are recommending that farmers have
either only a small flock of layers to provide their
families' needs for eggs and chicken, or else to have
a flock of at least 400 to 500 layers which can be
profitably managed on a commercial basis.


-- -


. /LP


FOR RELEASE
APR. 10, A. M.


f







MARCH-AP.RI 1953


-2-

W P *LIMM AM MG 812JSW AT A SICAW


Its tdt I ar """
3 m ian .1962-1s
s : date :92-51

I I
1 1

Fa-- proiotio ........: Nil. dog. : Jan. 370.7

Awareg member of :
layer an Em .......- MIta : Jan. 398.3
Monthly egg production
per layer ..............: regg n Ja. 11.2

Afta t elvillan pae r
capits isaeppearme .. r Jan. 32.2

frose egg praj aetl ..: E1. lb. : Jan. 10.3.

tled sgg preiatiae ...: 1. lb. : Jan. 8.0

Prime eselved y :
Itor ............... Ot.er dos.: Feb. 35.8

hi.o m oeelwt 1W 3 :
las Ma'a pagmt- :
ag of arity ......... Pemrsit : Feb. 96

lteal prim (MI) .....sOt.pr 40s. Feb. kg9.k

-fb prioe a eo ...a Lb. ft : Feb. 11.6
3 3


sel ................athon.s u: Feb. 1 306,

emr n ............... Wl. Ib. Feb. 1 79.9

Chlk hbathad by eam- 6
alawal Bathar .... niLo : Jan. 63.6

Hens and pullets of a
laying age an fans ...; NUme : Feb. 1

Tanm ri ofat poultry
ratla ................ :Dol.par et Feb. 3.22




Price received by farm- :
ere for chickens, live I
Broiler ............. lt. per lb. Feb. 27.46
Faz chicokene ........ .Ct. per lb.: Feb. 26.8
All chickens ......... ICL. per lb.: Feb. 26.1

Price received by farm- :
ere for all chickens as:
a percentage of parity. i Percent : Feb. 106

Betail price of hsah.a
drease (BAM) .........0Ct. per lb.: Feb. h6.-3

Price reaved y : :
hI n fa r tu :
1l .................. Ct. p lb.: Feb. 32.p

Btoote: :

Poaltry, eoalatn :
t-tbaIs ............. s Ni1. lb. Feb. 1 162.1

Tatihr. ..............: N1l. lb. Feb. 1 88.1

Chlabn-red prim I
ftio .................: .Lb. f :d Feb. 8.3

Tafey-r efe price ratio : Lb. feed Feb. 10.2

AVMege weekly plane-
agt of cbabh s in
11 roller a ...... : Mlae : Feb. --


: : 33 I I I 3
S 3 II 3 Moth II 1
' 1952 s 1953 or "aw : 1952 a 1953 : C et
3 3 :i isat :19k2-51, euinet etrtic
3-* 3 3 I3


1m

Uk6.3 h53. :: Feb.


396.6 375.9 :: Feb.


16.0 16.5 :: Feb.


37.0 37.1 :: Feb.

17.9 18.1 Feb.

1.1 0.6 :: Feb.
3:
36.7 62.0 :1 Mar.

3:

79 103 :: Mar.

53.0 j/ :: Mtr.
8.1 10.6 Mar.



238 120 : Mar. 1

53.1 35.0 :: Mar. 1


121.9 127.3 :: Feb.

380.3 370.5 Mar. 1


k.25 3.96 Ma r.




:I

29.3 27.9 :: Mar.
26.8 26.0 :: Mar.
27.7 26.6 :: Mar.


90 86 Mar.

56.1 i: Mar.



36.1 33.3 Har.



183.6 118.2 :: Mar. 1

116.h1 162.9 :ar. I


6.5 6.7 Mar.

8.5 8. :: Mar.



14.2 22.6 :: Mar.


L07.1 4'72.3 6h6.O :)
:)
3)
391.0 375.3 366.2 3)
:)
3)
12.5 15.1 14.6 3)


31.5 35.6 36.0 :
I
30.1 38.1 38-h :)

11.3 1.9 1.2 3)
I
I
35.1 3h.0 44.7
I
i


98 77 109

1h9.6 51.5 L/

11.0 8.0 11.3


722 962 268


28-day month a factor
in the January-
February comparioans
of production and.
di appearance





Deterred by high prices
for breaking took


s)Tn the past, comparable In-
.)creAesB over previoDl year
:)have Induced Increases in
bchlcken raised

1


79.1 60.6 42.1
:) More recent, but unofficial,
125.8 190.4 172.9 1) reports suggest current
:) activity exceeds 1952

--- 369.7 357.9


3.29 6.23 3.97
I


29.2 28.0 28.2 :)
25.8 26.9 26.3 :)
27.5 27.1 27.5 )


110 81 89


46.8 53.1 1/



32.1 34.5 33.6




141.5 163.9 100.0

80.8 106.5 117.0


Price effects of larger
beef supplies offeet by
leas pork?















On basis of 35-a ty re-
ports, March ou tovebr t
about equaled February


6.4 6.9

8.1 8.5 a


14.0 ) At and of March, weekly
14.0 3 placements were e--eeding
-I arr.,,I,


I/ latest available data are for December 1952, and were reported in the Jan.-Feb. 1953 Poultry and g Situation.


. ;






PES-164


THE POULTRY AND EGG SITUATION
*' ,- - - -- -

Approved by the Outlook and Situation Board April 6, 1953


SUMMARY

Egg production, near its season peak, is running below a year
..i' .earlier, roughly in proportion to the 3 percent reduction in the number
of layers on farms larch 1. The reduced supplies, continued good demand
for eggs for immediate consumption, and a small early-season accumulation
of frozen egg, have held prices roughly 10 cents per dozen above .a year
earlier. After mid-year, both egg production and egg prices are likely
to be much nearer to year-ago levels.

With the rise in egg prices and the reduction in the price, of
poultry ration, egg-feed price ratios in January, February, and L.iarch were
19, 31, and 41 percent higher than in the same months of .1952. In past
,hatching seasons, such increases in the egg-feed price ratio have. been
followed by some increase in the number of chickens raised for laying
flock replacement.

S Turkey hatchings through March were reduced from a year earlier.
However, the sharp cuts in early-season operations do not necessarily
indicate similar cuts for the year as a whole. A Turkey Industry Con-
%..r'terenoe held in Wlashington on March 5 and 6 recommended a 12 to 15
percent-out from 1952 in the production of heavy turkeys.



REVIEW AND OUTLOOK


'~gg Prices to Hid-Summer to
Continue Higher than in 9 52

-Egg prices through l'arch this year continued sharply higher than
during the same period in 1952, with the prospect that they will continue
so through the first half of this year. In the summer and fall, however,
the seasonal price rise is likely to be less pronounced than in 1952,
and prices probably will be much closer to a year earlier than they have
been so far.

Main reasons for the relatively high current level of egg prices
. L..E.ar.: (a). .the. re.ductidn in egg production from last year, (b) the small
amount stored so far relative to the "requirements" for frozen and stored
&hel1 -6ggs, and"(c) the continued high level of demand.


- 3 -





MARCH-APRIL 1953 -.4-

Table I1.- Eggs: Monthly.commercial supply from farm production,
and average prices, January 1951 to.date 1/


: :. Net commer- :
: Egg : cial cold :
Year : pro- :storage move-:
and : duction:ments, shell :
month : on : and frozen :1


farms

1,000
cases


14,083
14,369
17,100
16,778
16,336
14,056
12,619
11,422
10,953
11,778
12,069
13,314


15,019
15,875
17,892
17,200
16,619
13,978
12,397
11,542
11,411i
12,228
12,528
14, 064


15,800114
14,800


: equivalent :
: Out : In :


1,000 .1,000
cases cases


381




105
938
1,214
1,232
1,015
760


210





659
996
934
1,474
1,152
810


429


108
892
1,810
2,371
1,007








886
1,148
1,238
1,797
791


Eggs ;
for :
atch.in


1,000.
cases


672
1,127 .
1,322
1,129
595
437
371
320
346.
348
363
508


793
1,219
1,208
900
486
3541
327
333
360
366
395
530


government: Effective
purchases: supply in
for sur- : commercial *
plus : channels
removal g/:(including U.S.
r Armed Forces).
1,000 1,000
cases- cases


13,792
13,134
14,886
13,839
13,370
12,612
12,353
12,040
11,821
12,662
12,721
13,566


1951
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June.
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.

1952
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.


720
293 2/1,179


14,436
13,770
15,536
15,062
14,336
12,833
12,729
12,205
S11,860
13,253
13,268
14,343


:14,823
13,337


U.S.
average:
farm
price,
per
dozen


U. S.
average
retail
price,
(BAE)
per
dozen


CeML. .-Cents


42.6
41.4
43.7
43.2
45.2
44.7.
46.6
49.6
55.0
55.6,
56.5
51.1


40.5
34.7
34.0
35.2
34.2
35.7
43.3
48.2
48.7
50.3
51.9
46.6


45.8
42. 0
44.7


61.4
57.8
.63.7
62.1
64.5
.. 65.5
. 67.3
..71.9
75.9
78.8
78.0
69.6


S58.8
53.0
51.5
53.0
52.2
54.0
66.3
68.8
69.5
'74.2
72.3
64.2


/ Corresponding data for prior months


are given in The Poultry


and EggSituation-


.June 1951, table 5, page 12 and Mar.-Apr. 1952, table 1, page 5.
g/ Surplus removal purchases for 1952 entered according to m9nth of scheduled
delivery.
3/ Estimated on basis of eggs in incubators March 1.


9
U
q


125
83
.17
1


Feb.
Mar. :


I


---


IIIIIIIII I I mlll


I I B I I





PES-164


Egg Production Below Last Year

Egg production on farms for the next few *onths will continue below
last year, in line with the 3 percent reduction from last year in the
number of layers on hand Larch la Almost until mid-year, changes from
last year in the rate of lay per bird are unlikely to be large enough to
substantially affect the total egg output, and supplies will be below the
1952 level.

Although egg supplies are smaller then in 1952, they are near the
high point of this year, and prices of fresh eggs for the 4 or 5 months
after June are virtually certain to be higher than in the months preceding0
These expectations are based on normal seasonal developrmenLs that have
occurred in every past year,


Table 2.- Layers on farms March 1 as a percentage of potential
layers en farms January 1, by regions, 1949-53

: 'March 1 layers as a percentage of
Region January 1 potential layers
Region ^ -- ; --- ---- -
1949 1950 1951 1952 1953
: Percent Percent Perccnt Percent- Percent

N. Atlantio 6 88 86 88 87 88
E. No. Central 90 90 91 89 89
W. N. Central 92 90 91 92 92
So Atlantie s 84 65 84 84 84
So Central t 84 84 87 86 84
Western : 91 87 87 86 87
United States : 89 87 89 88 88


Shell Eggs in Storage
Fewer than Last Year

Storage stocks of shell eggs this year are likely to be considerably
below the July 1, 1952, holdings of 3,4 million cases. This prospect is
based mainly on the continuing trend toward a seasonal leveling-out of egg
production on farnis, and on the current level of egg prices, which in March,
at-44.7 cents (Uo So. average farm price) was more than 10 cents per dozen
higher than a year earlier, With production of fresh eggs in the fall likely
to be closer to the level of a year ago than this spring, the seasonal price
rise is expected to be smaller this year than last. Consequently, the oppor-
tunities for profit from shell egg storage will be narrowed.

Although a smaller seasonal egg price rise than last year is in pro-
spect, a nearly average relationship has existed in the last month or two
between fresh egg prices and egg futures contracts in Chicago. With both
September and October contracts holding near 51 and 50 cents per dozen
respectively in late March, the futures were on most days from 3 to 5 cents
above the lowest-quoted packs of Extras in the spot markets. The course of
egg future prices for the 1952 deliveries is shown in table h.


- 6 -





MARCH-A FRIL 1953


Table 3-- Shell and frozen eggs in refrigerated storage,
March 1953, with comparisons
SShell and frozen
Shell.eggs Frozen eggs combined
Date, .. _.. .. combined
1951 1952' 1953 -1951 : 1952 1953 : 1951 '1952 1953
house TThous. Thous, Mil; Mil. Mil. Thous. Thous. Thous.
:eses cases cases lbs. .bs, lbs, cases cases cases

Total U. S. stocks

January 1 : 34 141 153 47 67 50 1,263 1,886 1,456
February 1 : 75 238 120 31 53 35 884 1,616 1,029
March 1 : 159 942 248 33 61 42 1,009 2,515 1,342
April 1 : 309 1,596 62 84 1,927 3,785
May 1 973 2,184 109 111 3,811 5,072
June 1 :2,083 3,184 163 146 6,308 6,973
July. :2,427 .3,357 190 166 7,362 7,680
August 1 :2,270 2,728 191 163 7,226 6,971
September 1 :1,615 2,169 176 144 6,194 5,918
October 1 : 958 1,709 151 124 4.888 4,921
November 1 : 527 1,000 122. 95 3,685 3,476
December 1 : 230 393 95 72 2,701 2,275

: Stocks in 35 principal cities g/

March 21 : 135 1,019 176 25 44 32. 796 2,161 999
March 28 : 175 1,107 201 30 48 34.' 948 2,352 1,079
April 4 : 249 1,189 222 36 51 38 1,190 2,518 1,201
April 11 : 337 1,243 41 56 1,413 2,694

/ Frozen egg converted at 38.5 pounds,equivalent to 1 case.
/ Given dates are for 1953; for other years, corresponding Saturdays.

Prodution of iguid and
Frozen EW Lags

Production and storage of liquid, frozen,and dried egg are influenced
by somewhat different factors than those affecting storage of shell eggs.
Net costs of storage for frozen egg are considerably lower than for shell
eggs. This is partly because normally there is no grade loss in the
holding of frozen egg as there is for shell. In the winter, spring-packed
frozen egg may even command a premium over the currently-produced commod-
ity. As a result, storage costs for frozen egg are offset by a much
smaller seasonal price rise than that which is necessary to justify the
storage of shell eggs. '


- 6 -






PES-164


Ordinarily: production of the processed egg products during each
spring's flush season is large enough so that the price during the out-of-
storage season is usually related to spring-time production cost plus accu-
mulated storage charges. Thus frozen egg prices during the late swumer and
fall do not reflect current production costs to any great extent. The price
for stored shell eggs, on the other hand, usually is based on the current
price for fresh eggs minus a discount to offset the real or presumed quality
changes that occurred during storage.

The above situation applies to frozen egg prices when supplies are
liberal, as is usually the case. But when supplies are so short as to drive
prices above accustomed levels, it is more difficult to foresee the extent
to which the price might rise.

The processed eggs which are used in pastries, noodles, salad dress-
ings, and the dry cake mixes which have recently become popular, are anong
the most expensive ingredients in those end-products. Manufacturers have
probably explored most of the opportunities for economics in the use of eggs
in those products, and they can reduce the amount of eggs used only by re-
ducing the quantity or quality of the output, However, eggs make up only a
relatively small proportion of the total retail cost of these end-products.
A rise in egg prices, therefore, has relatively little effect on the retail
prices and thus on the quantity taken by consumers. For these reasons, the
quantity of egg products demanded may not decline in proportion to a rise in
price.

Table 4.- Egg futures contracts, Chicago Fercantile Txchenge: monthly highs,
cents per dozen, 1952, and 1953 oontzacts to date


Highest daily closing :_
price (per dozen) during: Sept. :
the month of: : 1952 :
: Cents
1951
October : 45.25
November : 46,70
December : 46.25


1952
January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
Decembo r
1953
January
February
March


45,95
43.90
43,90
43.65
43.50
45,45
50,05
49.45
45.95


Oct. :
1952 :
Cents


46.50
46.25

45,90
44.15
44,00
43.80
43.95
46,25
50,40
50.30
47.00
43.90


Contract
1ov. : Dec3 a
1952 : 1952:
Cents Cents


43.85
44.10
46 85
50.65
50.70
47.85
44,35
44.65


49.00
49.00
46.00
44.20
'15.05
47.55


aJn. :
1953 :
Cents


39.75
42.050
43.00


Sept.:
1953 :
Cents


45.06
44.50
45.75


Oct.
1953
Cents


45.75

47.60
49.65
51.75


46.20 47.55
49.65
52.75


I


- ----------;---------


- 7 -






MARCH-APRIL 1953


An. individual supplier, of. processed egg., of course, may find his
sales fluctuating considerably with changes :inl pricesoa For the products
.:.* ..of the egg-break.ing industry as .a whole, however, the quantity of pro-
S cessed egg products sold is not likely to be, 4harply.reduced if prices
S increase from accustomed levels..

,. Uhiess production (breaking) is up sharply from rates earlier in
the season, and continues at an accelerated rate until mid-year, the
season peak storage stocks will be lower than in 1952* With users un-
likely to reduce their takings proportionately, stocks will be inadequate
'ari"d considerable out-of-season egg breaking is -likelyi In that case,
the cost of replacer, ent from out-of-season production will be a strong
influence on prices for frozen egg. This'indicates that prices in the
next 6 or 8 months may rise by considerably more than accumulated storage
charges, if springtime accumulations of frozen (and dried) egg in storage
do not at least equal those of a year agoe



Table 5.- January 1 stocks of frozen egg, and liquid egg
production, 1951 to date'


-- r .." ** -' ,."* **s'


Item


. January" stocks'of- frozen
egg .

S reduction of'liquid egg,.
January ..
February
March
April
May
June
July
August-December total

Annual total


1951


I


1~.....


PNil. lb.,


47.


23
35.
77
84,
87
50
23S
31


1952


Mil. lb,


67


23
48
63
64
71
48
22
43


409 382


: .1953

Til. lbo


50


21
45


I :


- 8 -


--





PES-164


Economic Factors Suggest Change from
January Intentions for Fewer Chikens
The hatchery report released March 16 did not indicate a sub-
stantial departure from farmers' February intentions to raise 4 percent
fewer chickens than in 1952 for laying flock replacement. However, if
the February intentions are carried through this would be the first
time since 1925, when records first became available, that an increase
in the egg-feed price ratio failed to induce an increase in the number
of chickens raised.
Egg-feed price ratios in January, February, and March were 19,
51, and 41 percent respectively above a year earlier. The ratios in
the remaining months of the hatching season are likely to show similar
gains over a year earlier. As a result, farmers are likely to reconsider
their plans to reduce ohick numbers. The usual close relationship be-
tween the weighted springtime egg-feed price ratio and the number of
chickens raised is illustrated below.






EGG-FEED PRICE RATIO AND
CHICKENS RAISED
% OF PRECEDING YEAR E
L Egg-feed
price ratio** 0 j
120





80 V- -

Chickens raised

1930 1940 1950
WEIGHTED 7-MONTH AVERAGE
0 BASED ON INDICATIONS THROUGH MARCH
U.S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE N EG. 46894A-X X BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS



L: ik'.. .


- 9 -





MARCR-APRIL 1953
Table 6.-


10 -
Egg-feed price ratio, chickens raised, and pullets on
farms, January 1, United States, 1925 to date


SEgg-feed Pullete :Percentage of preceding year
Egg-feed Pulets : .Pullets
Year : price ratio :Chickens: on farm :Intentions. Egg-feed
Ynrrtt : s :Chickens: on farms
(weighted. raised January 1 to raise price :Chicken: on fa- s
Averagee) : following chickens ratio* rae : folong
: avrag~l : lou~ng cn: following3


S Pounds Millions


Millions Percent Percent Percent


1925
1926
1927
1928
1929

1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939

1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949

1950
1951
1952
1953


Revised.
Preliminary.
For 1953, November through March;


comparable 1952 in parentheses.


Weights are as follows: Preceding November, 1; preceding December, 2;
January, 3; February, 4; March, 5; April, 3; May, 1.


679
718
750
700
751


Percent


12.9
13.5
13.4
12.2
13.1

13.8
10.6
11.6
14.3
10.9
11.4
13.1
9.4
11.4
12.6

10.4
11.5
13.2
14.7
11.2
12.8
11.9
11.3
9.8
12.7

9.6
11.4
9.0(9.3)
3/(11.2)


777
709
736
750
644
658
715
601
651
697

634
745
844
1,001
832
1/890
1/738

1/615
1/705

1/635
1/663
2j617


244
230
237
238
212
226
249
215
242
254

240
278
319
350
301
322
281
278
258
287

264
276
255


103
106
104
93
107

104
91
104
102
86
102
109
84
108
107

91
118
113
119
83
107
83
97
86
115

90
104
93


105
77
109
123
76
105
115
72
121
111

83
111
115
111
76
114
93
95
87
130

76
119
79


94
103
100
89
107
110
86
113
105

94
116
115
110
86
107
87
99
93
111

92
105
92


96
109
112
116
83
96
86
94
80
107

88
96
90
96





P..S-164


Past experience has been that the percentage change from one year
to the next in chickens raised has averaged about half the percentage change
in the rei hted egg-feed nrice ratio. This year the change in the rqtio
is so extreme that a fully corresponding change in the number of chickens
raised is unlikely. However, if the increase irere to be only one-third or
half of that ordinarily expected to follow eg;.-feed ratios as favorable as
those of recent months, the resulting number of mullets available for egg
production in the spring of 1954 would produce considerably nore eggs than
were available this spring.

Since other factorsbesites supply influence ef-g prices, it is too
early to estimnt. whit egg prices mifht be a year from now. However,
springtime prices have in the vast been sensitive to small changes in supply,
on account of the delicate balance usually existing at that season when
consumer channels are liberally supplied, and the storage demand responds
to small rice changes.

The report of hatchery production for February showed a 9 percent
decline in output from February 1952. About a third of this decline is
accounted for by the shorter month this year than in 1952, a leap year.
The remaining 5 or 6 percent of this difference between 1952 and 1953 chick
production may not have extended to chick sales, since in February 1952
there were reported to have been many unsold chicks which hatcherymen had
to destroy. Demand in February 1953 was reported to be good.

The next indication of the trend in numbers of replacement chicks
will be the estimate of chicks and young chickens on farms "pril 1, in the
April 10 report of Crop Production. Table 7 and the accompanying chart
show the extent to which this report, and others later in the season,
indicate of the number of laying pullets finally to be housed from the
year's hatch.

Table 6a.- Turkeys: First-of-month holdings in refrigerated
warehouses, total U. S., 1945 to date


Year : Jan.: Feb.: Mar.: Apr.: iay : June: July: aug.: Sept.: Oct.: Ifov.: Dec.

Mil. Mil. Nil. Mil. Mil. Mil. Nil. Lil. 11il. Hil. Nil. l11l.
lbs. lbsbs. s. lbsI lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs. lbs.

1945 :73 74 63 46 33 29 27 21 18 27 43 78
1946 : 108 135 135 124 107 97 79 63 55 45 84 117
1947 : 128 140 126 109 95 86 72 59 45 39 65 86
1948 :83 83 70 55 41 33 27 19 13 15 34 47
1949 : 51 55 51 44 36 33 29 21 21 35 76 107
1950 127 138 129 113 93 77 64 47 37 43 77 108
1951 :110 117 101 80 60 48 39 30 25 42 83 109
1952 :107 116 107 93 72 63 56 46 44 71 142 158
1953 : 147 143 117


- 11 -





- 12 -


YOUNG CHICKENS ON FARMS
IN THE SPRING, AND NUMBERS OF

PULLETS FOR LAYtNG PURPOSES
AT END OF YEAR, 1932-52
.-Percentages of.Preceding Year
ON FARMS DEC.31 (%OF PREC.YR.) .,


80 100 120
ON FARMS IN SPRING


U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


'.. : 41 '38 "42
: '49
47. -*'43
'40.8


'34 '50 .
-'S2 44
'37
MAY 1



'41 '42
-4-
'38 '- -'49
'3 5 ", .'o 4 3
'47 *, .45
.50 ...r .,--
'48. 1932
| g "33 '
' '44--- '"40 "
"44" % ".'52
,7 '46 I JU 34
'37 '46

JULY 1
l I ''


60 80 100 120 140
JG (% OF PREC. YR.)
8588-X BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS


1 20


S'41. '38

'38




-34
'45'39 ,' '42

'4 JU '49
'48 *" ". ', :
I --'52 '33 932 3
'50 *34
---"- -r --

JUNE 1
i- ,-


120






80


60
6


0


11


"'~"'


--


I








Downward Adjustment Desirable
for Size of 19.3 Turkey gr ,

Price trends since the new year have been different for small turkeys
and large ones. Beltsville Small Whites, typical of the small turkeys, have
sold at prices well above the 1952 average. In the East, the price oiitlnok
for producers of small turkeys for the next few months is good, since egg
settings and hatchings have been sharply reduced-in the Shenandoah Valley,
a principal producing area. Growers' January intentions were to grow 23 per-
cent fewer birds of this type in 1953 than in 1952.

Current prices for toms of the heavy breeds are slightly below the
levels of early January. Until after mid-year, major supplies of these birds
will come from storage stocks, rather than from current slaughter as is the
case for small birds. Although smaller than 4 months ago, these stocks are
quite large. Growers' January intentions were to cut the 1953 output of
this class of turkey by only 3 percent. The reduction would be only half
as large as the quantity bought by the Department of Agriculture from the
1952 crop for surplus removal.


Table 7.- Springtime numbers rof young chickens on farms and numbers
of pullets for laying purposes at end of year, 1931 to date


.- Numbers,


1931 :
1932 :
1933 :
1934 :
1935 :
1936
1937
1938 :
1939

1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945:
1946
1947
1948
1949

1950 :
1951
1952


April:
Mill.

140
149
122
99
114
110
126
158
167

126
155
185
227
231
206
218
206
155
203

216
201
219


ME
M_


Chicks and young chickens on farms : Pullets on farms
f: As a percentage of : December 31
first of month
_3s : "preceding year : : Percentage
: : : : Number :of preced-
Iy : June July April: May June July :f p rea
1. M. .. P : eat.
il. Mil. Mil. Pet. Pct. PC t. Pc t. M5_1. Pct.


333
330
350
298
325
345
324
364
387

323
354
420
472
471
460
46o
429
353
4o09

384
406
384


502
520
542
491
481
541
465
509
531

477
513
589
679
616
625
575
563
476
537


516
550
559
503
504
570
464
513
534

499
550
611
732
595
660
559
557
479
533


106
82
81
115
96
115
125
lo06

75
123
119
123
102
89
106
94
75
131


99
lo06
85
109
106
94
112
106

83
110
119
112
100
98
100
93
82
116


483 470 101 94
523 508 93 106
489 467 109 9.5


1o4
1014
91
98
112
86
109
104

90
108
115
115
91
101
92
98
85
113

90
108
93Z


107
102
90
100
113-
81
111
104

93
110
111
120
81
111
85
100
86
111

88
. 108'
* .*.ta.


230
237
238
212
226
249
215
242
254

.2h 0
273
.319
.350
301
*322
281
278
258
287

264
276
'255


103
100
69
107
110
*. 86
113
105

94
116
115
110
86
.107
87
99
93
111

92
105
A 92


___


__


II~ ___ _


PES -164


- 13 -






MARCH-APRIL 1953 14 -

On December 1, 1952, holdings of frozen turkey were record large
(table 6a), even after allowing for the fact that they included a con-
siderable number of birds intended for later delivery to the Department
of Agriculture. Since that date they have declined steadily, contrary
to the usual seasonal increase which in previous years had brought stocks
to the season peak about February 1. On March 1, 1953, the total hold-
ings were 117 million pounds; during the month they declined further. By
April 1 turkeys owned by USDA or intended for delivery to USDA were no
longer a significant part of the storage holdings.

The amount of the month-to-month decline in turkey storage holdings
this spring is significant because if large holdings remain when substan--
'tial marketing begin from.the 1953 crop, they will be a-price-depressing
.influence. An Advisory Committee which met-in Wiashingtoni on March 5 and
6 recommended that the 1953'production of heavy turkeys be reduced 12 to
15 percent from the record-high level of-1952. / "

The extent of the likely downward trend in the 1953 production of
large turkeys is not yet clear. The monthly report of hatchery production
shows the percentage change in operations from last year for a matched
sample of hatcheries. These data, with 1952 comparisons, are:

Year Percentage change from a year earlier
Sand month to : Poult output : Turkey eggs in in- : Turkeys
which report : In previous : Cumulative : cubators at begin- : raised for
_.app2_ :es month : for season : aig of _given month: the year :
S .. Percent Percen* : Fe-rcnt Percent

1953 : '
March : -34 -19

1952 : 13
March : 58 30 -
April : .27 34 40 '
May 12 '22' 10
June 6 16 2
July :. 0 13 12 .

1951 19
March : 10 16
April : 5 6 0
..ay 6 6 16-
..'June : 7 6 48
*'July : 32 10 38

The table indicates that early-season hatchery output data are an inade-
quate basds for predicting full-season changes in turkey output. The
table is based on reports which do not segregate poults of the large and
small breeds.


I/ USDA press release 553, March 6, 1953.





PES-164


- 15 -


In order to give the turkey industry a better basis for judging its
position, and to provide infonratlon early cn:'ugh for the industry to make
appropriate adjastiments, the Bureau .f Agricultural .conom'.ics is making
a special turkey survey this spring. The survey, covering 13 States, will
report (a) 1953 pTult production, oiu ulative through Al-ril, as a percent-
age of corresponding 1952, (b) puilt production in the last week of Apriil
1953 as a percentage of corresponding 1952, and (c) eggs in incubators
May 1. Since the incubation period for turkeys is 28 days, a I4ey 1 re-
port on numbers of eggs in incubators vill indicate production through
late May.

The data are to he separate far light -breed turl-eys and heavy.
breed turkeys. The 13 states, chosen as representative of the heavy-
producing sections in various regi,'ns of the country, are Nev Ycrk,
Virginia, South Carolina, Ohio, Michigan, 14innesota, Iowa, Nebrasko,
Hissouri, Texas, California, Oregon, and l'ashinjvton.

Table 8.- Turkeys: Frices per pound for various types,
January 1953 t:, date


: Data 17
Item : Jan. : Jan. : Feb. : Feb. : Mar,

: Cents '..cnts Cents Cents Cent/s
*


U. S. average received by
famnners at mid-month (live) :

Small turkeys:
,Shenandoah Valley, Va. and
W. Va., at farm, live

San Joaquin Valley, Calif.,
at ranch, live


33.3


: Mar., ; Apr.

Cert s Cents


:33.6


24 42 L 41. -42 42-43 2-43


33-3'1


New York City,
New York dressed 2/
Eviscerated :/

Large turkeys-toms
San Joaquari Valley, Calif.,
at ranch, live

New York City,
New York dressed
under 20 pounds
26 pounds and up


Eviscerated
under 20 pounds
24 pounds and up


S53-54 53-54
63-65 64-1.5



:281-29.; 2?--30


*403-4'1.
43-41-,


44-041
44--5


52 -53
6 6.


40 -41
45-46


53-56 52-54 52-54
53-55 53-56 55-56i


53A-554
'64-67


401-41W
45-4 6


52-54
54-56k


554-56
64-67


5/4-67
614' 6?


40ai-41 400-41-
44-21 5 43 A-44i-


53-55.
53-55


50-53
53-55


1/ Or first available quotation thereafter. 2/ Ice packed. 2/ Eviscerated
(rbady-to cook)..


51-52
64-68


402-41'
43-44

50-52
52-55





MARCH-APII, 1993


UIt1a Apil Jrollers J0 Compoeg r
SAByrroduct Cookerel2

Reported February and. Iawch placements of broilers in s~esial i4
rpeas were short of the records set iU those months In 1952, &at te piemmwt
outlook does not suggeet a repetition of the marketing glute which oluowre
last May, Nowever, recent settings of egge in incubators in roller sm!e
have been rising, and early April placements are likely to be higher than In
195.

Broiler chicks placed in early April will 'be ready for marketing
before moat byproduct cockerels reared with pullet replacements are sold.
But later broiler placemepte will have to sell ip competition with byproduct
ookere1s.


Table 9.- boilers and fryeras
selected areas, selected


f.o.b. farm prices, per pound, live, In
dates, November 14, 1952 to date


Area
t
-. ,__,, ___ fl


3 1952
Weight :_ _
or cla Nov. 14 Dee,


1953


15 Jan. 15 Feb. 16,Nar. 2 Aftr. 16 Apr. 1


I I
IDel-Mar-Va u Under :
: 3 lbs, 33"-35
Zostoo area t 3j-k4 s
t lbs, t 31-35
Shea*mAoa Valley a Broilers :
:and fryers: 33-34
North Georgia t Under t
; 3 lbe, 30-3$1
Arkpanas : All I
: weight : 32
Ts9 : Srollerp i
tor fryers : 331"32
San Joaquin Valle. r Fryers 1 29-31

leoa / 2 lbs.
Sand up 30-31
U.S. average 5fas
prioe g/ s : 31.3


Cents Cents CIts Cnts CAB Cnt


27*-28a


28 27--26


25-28 25-27

28 26-27

26+.29 26-28

30 26

31-32 26-27
28-29 31-33


27-28 26-28

29.6 28.2


27-271 26-26 864-27


24-30 25-27 23-24 FII-s96

27 27 26-27 96S %


26-27 27-28


q7 97*-28


26 25-26 27-06 27-28


96
28-30


26-28
08-30


29-30
29-31


26829
*-30


26 27 27-M


27.9


3A.2


!

Average weekly
o0h4ak place
mrnts 2/ ___


V Friday of given wevk.
V/ At mid-month.
V/ 9-12 weeks previous in


: Mil, l. Mi Mi1.


9.0


M1i,. wi... MiU.


,9.6 10.8


1 epeciali ed areas.


i 1 m U


, l m I ,, u


I I I I .


II


| ..- li- -


- .. -_ ;


- 16 -


11.6 11.7 18.0 12.1





PES-164


Price Control Pe-ulations End

Egg price controls administered by the Office of Price Stabiliza-
tion were terminated on February 12, 1953. Since egg prices were below
parity levels except during months when egg prices were seasonally lower
than the base prices of the freeze period (December 19, 1950-January 25,
1951), the controls did not directly bear apon farmers' egg prices.

Controls on dressed chickens and turkeys were terminated on the
same day. During the control period, the price of chickens had never
risen above 93 percent of parity. Turkeys were 98 percent of parity in
mid-December 1951, but prices declined after Christmas and no dollars-
and-cents price order was issued.

The price of ducks, for which no parity equivalent is computed,
was controlled by a separate order, independent of the General Ceiling
Price Regulation, The duck order was #79, effective from November 9,
1951 to September 25, 1952.

Table 10.- Broilers: Monthly averages of weekly placements, specified
reporting areas, January-March 1953 with comparisons

:___~~Averageof weekly lacrements during month
Area :-- 2-9.52-
Jan, : Feb. : Mar. : Oct. : Nov. : Dec., Jan. Feb. : Mar.
: Thous. Thous. Thus. Thous. Thous, Thous. Thous. Thous. Thous.


E. Connecticut
Del-Mar-Va.
Shenandoah Valley
N. Car.-Cent-West
Georgia
Arkansas
Texas
Alabama
Mississippi
Florida
Indiana


270 452
2,881 3,671
751 956
874 984
: 2,357 2,792
1,300 1,344
1,447 1,611
477 554
621 741
: 213 249
: 717 798


360 255
3,162 2,551
1,023 654
1,023 626
2,813 2,166
1,283 818
1,587 1,211
569 460
842 593
224 212
887 626


328 309
2,786 3,280
859 867
814 845
2,093 2,101
..836 1,046
1,372 1,279
519 529
658 632
226 237
736 687


337 403 1/ 478
3,296 2,812 3,072
815 872 1,013
970 1,008 1,070
2,315 2,554 2,743
998 1,007 1,060
1,238 1,390 1,441
513 586 698
709 780 846
222 236 228
719 769 862


Total, 11 areas :11.908 14,13, 13,?73 10,172 11 227 11i812 12.132 12.4171/13N.511


Oregon
W. Connecticut
Maine
California


96 121 126
: --- --- 119
466


75
79
537


86
70
414


75
72
511


1/ Beginning March 1, includes West Connecticut.
2/ Two weeks only.


92
124
544
987


101
96
499
1,188


2/10
---B
523
1,219


- 17 -






MARCH-APRIL 1953


18-

Table f. Turkeys: Average live weight, sales, farm conumption, and value,
available data. 1930 to date


Year .
: 1


1930
1931
1932
1933
1934

1935
1936
1937
1938
1939 :
1940 : 3
1941 : 3
1942
1943 :
1944 :

1945 : 3
1946 : 3
1947 :
1948 : 2
1949 :

1950 :
1951 2/
2Inaluding fr
/ vised.
3/ Preliminary.


Average live wig


Average live weig
par tur-keAy sold

lens Tom :

A- a


14.5
14.7
14.8
14.9
L1.9 17.9 14.9
12.1 18.1 15.1
12.7 19.1 15.9
L3.0 19.6 16.3
12.9 19.5 16.2
13.2 20.4 16.8

13.5 21.4 17..4
63.9 22.2 18.0
13.8 22.5 18.1
.4.0 22.6 18.3
4.2 23.3 18.8

L.4 23.0 18.6
3.6 22.2 17.9
1.3 23.8 1/16.7
rsre at an average weglht


hit Total consumed
.Total sold,: on farm, where
All :live weight: produced, live
; : night

13.4
13.6
13.8
14.0
14.1


509 17
h96 15
527 13
490 12
589 10
715 12
710 12
631 12
549 11
718 12

797 11
911 11.
of 7.5 pos da which wight w


f wl


as reported.


for the first tim for 1952.


Table 12. Turkeys: Numbers on farm January 1, numbers raised, sold, consumed on farm where produced,
and total slaughter, available data 1930 to date

Numbers on farm January 1 : Conesumd on
Year : Haimed Sol : farm wheze : Total
: Breeders others : produd slaughter
: Thoo d 'ousaaoa thooun d Thousands Thousanda Thousands

1930 17,41.9 15,999 1,704 17,703
1931 : 18,2k9 15,716 1,519 17,295
1932 : 22,333 19,393 1,665 21,058
1933 23,241 21,733 1,623 23,356
1934 : 21,702 20,615 1,505 22,120
1935 : 20,821 18,827 1,428 20,255
1936 27,981 25,530 1,"85 27,015
1937 : 3,L81 2,877 25,755 24,227 1,h25 25,652
1938 3,222 2,8714 26,887 24,861 1,291 26,152
1939 : 3,914 2,575 33,587 29,821 1,297 31,118
19o0 : ,607 3,962 34,047 33,778 1,170 34,908
194 : 3,86k 3,329 32,902 31,209 996 32,205
191. : k,003 3,h82 32,805 32,420 824 33,2k4
1913 : 3,98 2,616 32,309 30,278 747 31,085
1944 k,29k 3,135 35,616 31,749 617 35,396
1945 : ,606 2,597 .2,900 40,999 691 11,690
1946 : I,8,1 3,021 k0,12 1 ,o030 699 11,729
197 : 3,779 2,100 33,975 34,938 675 35,613
1948 2,537 1,122 31.5. 30,017 666 30,683
1949 3,148 1,471. 41,266 39,841 676 t0,517
1950 : 3,270 1,851 43,792 42,918 6h8 43,566
1951 : 3,301 1,790 52,76 50,853 64h 51,497
1952 / : 3,828 1,994 60,1h6 59,996 715 60,711
1953 V3/ 3,446 1,893
1/ Slaughter la the sum of sales and consumption am thw here produced. The difference between raised and slaughter-
ed Is accounted for by (a) difference in January 1 inventories, and (b) death losses.
2 Reailed..
3/ Preliminary.


E


Value of:
W weighted annual.
: Total ;WlahUl Sales
: slaughter, : average price :plus hom
:11ie weight : received per Sales : con-
pound : ctlon
Cnts Mil.dol. Mlldol.

16 51
42 46
38 hl
36 38
42 15
52 56
62 65
63 67
66 69
71 74

526 15.4 78 81
511 19.9 98 101
530 27.5 115 148
502 32.6 165 161
595 34.0 199 202
727 33.7 2k1 05
752 36.3 269 273
606 36.5 232 236
561 k6.8 257 263
760 35.2 263 267
808 32.8 262 266
922 37.A 311 345








Table 13.- Turkeys: Production, disposltlon, an related data, by
States and divisions, 195?


:Sales : Coneaud on Valu of
: umber : Average live : : farms whe re : Avrag' : Number
State on : iht per brd : : produced Ara sales : on
and :farm, : Number : l atu: l : price, : plus farms,
division January: raed and light: All Number Weight per Sale : ha : December
:: Spber oWeight pound'
: 1, 1952: vight : turkeys: : : con- : 31, 1952
: :tarkeysa 1 : gumption:


ThoUT. hMOU.
Maine 18 '161.
New Hampshire : 11 151
Vermont 114 138
Masesachuatte 5 653
Rhodae Island 5 55
Connecticut : 31 370
ow York : 122 94.3
Nev Jersey : 60 384
Pennsylvania : 231 2,180
North Atlantic : 549 5,3411
hio, : 1il 1,878
IDtisa : 50 1,795
Illinole : 79 999
Michigan : 120 1,097
Wisconsin : 57 1,349
Emat North Central : L50 7,118
Minnesota : 281 5,201
Ioa : 161 3,115
Mieourl : 319 1,572
North Dkota : 34 526
South Dakota : 9 370
Hebraska : 1 862
Kanss : 140 742

West Worth Central : 1,025 12,688

Delaware : 15 360
Marylad : 72 529
Virginia : 319 5,762
West Virginia : 66 1,800
north Carolina : 57 1,018
South Carolina : 103 1,252
Georgia 51 620
Florda : 27 181
South Atlantic : 710 11,522

eatuky : 66 412
Tennesee : 25 211
Alaba : 35 308
Mimslmsippi : 31 131
Arkansas : 3 550
Loulaslm : 21 122
Okl ham : 89 690
Texas : 519 3,703

South Central : 859 6,127 .
ontaem : 16 140
Idaho 30 183
Wycmng : 18 150
Colorado : 60 723
Now IMaloo : 12 68
Arinma : 17 98
Utah 83 1,971
Nevada 3 27
Washington : 1 1,223
Oregon : 352 2,1341
Californe : 1,494 10,933
Western : 2,229 17,650

United States 5,822 60,446


Thoua. Thous. Thone. Thone.
Lb Thoos lb. ThouA. lb. Cents dol. dol. nous.


7.0 9.9 465 1,601 1
7.5 17.1 150 2,565 2
7.5 18.5 136 2,516 3
8.0 14.7 642 9,437 5
8.0 16.3 54 880 1
8.0 16.4 367 6,019 Is
9.0 16.9 914 15,447 20
8.0 15.6 365 5,694 7
8.0 14.0 2,142 29,988 37

7.9 14.7 5,235 77,150 80
7.8 17.6 1,830 32,208 2h.
7.5 16.0 1,782 28,512 14
6.9 17.0 979 16,643 17
9.6 17.7 1,066 18,866 14
8.0 18.2 1,338 24,352 10

7.7 17.2 6,995 120,583 79
7.7 17.8 5,201 92,578 22
7.5 19.5 3,402 66,339 11
6.8 17.8 1,592 28,338 11
6.0 16.6 510 8,466 15
--- 17.2 360 6,192 10
7.5 18.3 858 15,701 6
6.0 17.0 719 12,733 12

7.1 18.2 12,672 230,347 87
8.0 14.2 353 5,013 3
7.0 15.1 518 7,822 15
7.0 10.7 5,834 62,424 25
8.0 13.0 1,778 23,114 8
7.4 16.6 999 16,583 14
7.9 16.8 1,248 20,966 12
8.0 14.8 595 8,806 20
8.4 15.9 165 2,624 11

7.3 12.8 11,490 147,352 108
8.0 17.3 409 7,076 10
7.0 16.3 195 3,178 14
9.0 14.2 286 4,061 25
8.5 13.2 113 1,492 23
7.4 15.5 532 8,246 12
7.0 13.2 104 1,373 17
8.0 15.8 685 10,823 17
8.0 17.4 3,511 61,091 100
8.0 16.7 5,835 97,340 218

8.8 16.3 131 2,135 12
7.0 17.3 182 3,149 6
--- 16.7 1.8 2,472 7
6.0 11.6 721 12,690 13
7.0 17.1 60 1,026 8
8.0 17.8 94 1,673 8
8.0 19.4 1,995 38,703 9
--- 20.0 25 500 3
7.5 18.8 1,194 22,447 11
6.8 18.6 2,171 40,381 11
7.8 18.7 11,048 206,598 55

7.6 18.7 17,769 331,774 143

7.5 16.7 59,996 1,004,546 715


10 38.7 1,782 1,786 15
3h 41.8 1,072 1,086 16
56 42.7 1,074 1,098 13
74 43.6 h,115 h,1h7 59
16 44.7 393 00oo 5
66 44.7 2,690 2,720 29
338 43.6 6,735 6,882 128
109 15.7 2,602 6,652 70
518 41.7 12,505 12,721 224
1,221 42.7 32,968 33,492 559
h22 34.6 11,11J. 11,290 161
224 35.0 9,979 10,057 46
289 36.8 6,125 6,231 79
248 35.5 6,698 6,786 132
182 36.5 8,888 8,95" 57

1,365 35.5 42,834 h3,318 475
392 31.9 29,532 29,657 244
214 32.5 21,560 21,630 15)
196 33.0 9,352 9,417 271
249 32.8 2,777 2,859 34
172 32.3 2,000 2,056 48
110 33.9 5,323 5,360 31
204 31.5 4,011 4,075 115

1,537 32.4 74,555 75,051- 907
43 41.3 2,070 2,088 18
226 42.2 3,301 3,396 65
268 33.8 21,099 21,190 207
104 36.1 8,344 8,382 79
232 36.4 6,036 6,120 60
202 36.8 7,715 7,789 90
296 38.1 3,355 3,468 5h
175 41.6 1,092 1,165 31
1,546 36.0 53,012 53,598 604

173 34.8 2,462 2,522 56
228 32.1 1,020 1,093 26
355 38.2 1,551 1,687 30
304 35.4 528 636 24
186 32.3 2,663 2,723 47
224 44.8 615 715 21
269 31.0 3,355 3,438 72
1,740 30.6 18,694 19,226 615

3,479 31.7 30,888 32,040 891
196 34.7 741 809 13
104 35.4 1,115 1,152 24
117 33.4 826 865 13
229 35.9 4,556 4,638 48
137 35.0 359 407 11
142 35.1 587 637 12
175 30.0 11,611 11,663 48
60 31.1 157 176 2
207 30.5 6,846 6,909 158
205 29.7 11,993 12,054 289
1,028 31.0 64,045 64,364 1,285
2,600 31.0 102,836 103,674 1,903

11,748 33.6 337,093 341,176 5,339


/ InluAine BsltBT lle aall Whites aat other breeds.




UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
II I IIl I Il II llll Ill Il I 111 llllllll l ll
U. S. Department of Agriculture Penalty for private us' 3 1262 08904 0256
Washington, D. C. of postage W300

OFFICIAL BUIIIHESS

BAE-PES-164-4-53- 4400
Permit No. 1001


LIBRARY -
-!.'.':'? DEPT.
5-16-49
FN-6 GAI:.', LLE. S''.: .

- --- -- --- ---- 20 ------------ -- -

Table 14. Measures of e Tg production efficiency by flock size, Indiana, 1950

SData for cover chart)
: Flock size, layers :Average
Item : Under : : 200 and : in
100 :100-199 : over :sample
(A) Raw data from source 1/

Number of flocks in sample : 15 46 24

Average number of layers per flock : 60 129 272 157

Average annual production per layer, eggs 116 139 165 142

Man-hours:
Per layer : 2.93 2.38 1.51 2.21

Per 100 eggs : 2.53 1.71 .92 1.56

(B) Conversions of data

(1) Productivity per 100 man-hours :
Number of layers tended : 34.1 42,0 66.2 45.2

Number of eggs produced :3,953 5,848 10,870 6,410

(2) Conversion of data to percentage of :
average

Annual production, eggs per layers: 82 98 116 100

Number of layers tended per
100 man-hours : 75 93 146 100

Number of eggs produced per
100 man-hours : 62 91 170 100

1i/ Hecht, Reuben W., "Labor and Power Used for Farm Enterprises, Indiana, 1950",
F. M. 100 BAE, USDA, December 1952, p. 30.