- Email: [email protected]
Limited Range for Growing Turkeys
Limited Range for Growing Turkeys T. T. MILBY AND R. B. THOMPSON Oklahoma Agricultural Experiment Station, Stillwater (Received for publication September 2, 1941)
I
EXPERIMENTAL
The same general plan was followed through the five years of the experiment. At the end of the brooding period (eight or nine weeks) poults that had been reared under uniform feeding and management conditions were weighed and distributed at random into the experimental pens. The ration fed was the same for all pens each year but was changed slightly from year to year. It consisted of a growing mash containing approximately 20 percent crude protein and a grain mixture of three or more grains. The grain mixture was not fed until the poults were 16 weeks of age. The grain, mash, water, and granite grit were fed ad libitum. The range consisted of a heavy Bermuda grass sod. During the first three years of the experiment, pen 1 was allowed 10 to 15 square feet per turkey, pen 2 was allowed 50 to 75 square feet, and pen 3 was given 300 to 500 square feet per bird. Pen 1 was moved to fresh range each week and was not on the same ground twice during the season. Pen 2 was moved once each week and covered the same plot of ground twice during the season with 10 weeks' rest intervening. Pen 3 was moved at weekly intervals and was on the same ground once every four weeks. In 1936 the poults used were Bronze, Narragansetts, White Hollands, Bourbon Reds, and Blacks, mostly Bronze. If only the available Bronze poults had been used, pen 1 would not have been large enough to contain the equipment and allow the turkeys freedom of movement around it. The results of this experiment are sum-
[243]
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Michigan State University on March 29, 2015
N THE early days of . turkey production it was the common opinion of growers that turkeys must have free range in order to express their wild nature and do well. One of the earliest investigators to discover that turkeys would do well on limited range was Brown (1924). He raised about 100 turkeys annually on 3}4 acres of waste woodland, confining the breeding flock to houses and small runs. One of the early attempts in this country to use limited range was by Brooks (1927) who in 1922 and 1923 grew some turkeys in a brooder house and small orchard range. The mortality was heavy and growth poor, probably because of the inadequate ration that was used. Some time later Alp (1930), Berry (1933), and Thompson, Schnetzler, and Albright (1932) demonstrated that turkeys could be raised on limited areas of ground and Funk and Margolf (1930) were successful in complete confinement rearing. Barrett and co-workers (1936, 1937, 1939) reported a series of experiments with turkey rations in which complete confinement methods were followed. None of these workers compared different methods of growing turkeys during the same season. Kennard and Chamberlin (1940) reported an experiment in which they used (1) free range, (2) colony house and sun porch, and (3) confinement indoors. They reported that growth of the surviving turkeys was the same in the three groups, that feed consumption was less on the range, but that excessive losses through accidents and predators were experienced with the range birds.
244
T. T. MILBY AND R. B.
THOMPSON
TABLE 1.—Statistics of yarding experiments
1936 and 1937 Mean wt. lbs. Pen no.
F values
No. of birds
1936 1
67
Males
Females
14.80
9.70
Mortality (percent)
8.8 3.710" cf*
2
71
15.66
9.63
3.3 3.399 9 *
68
14.39
9.76
1937 1
24
13.49
9.80
2
26
13.72
9.42
6.6
\.n
47.9 45.2
1.539 9 28
3
14.89
10.00
41.1
* Significant.
marized in Table 1. Only the Bronze and Narragansetts were considered because their adult weights were known to be about the same and somewhat larger than those of the other varieties. The differences in mean weight were significant but exactly
opposite in the two sexes. Mortality was low. Feed records were not calculated because of the mixture of varieties. In 1937, Bronze, Bourbon Red, and Black varieties were used. They were placed on range at eight weeks of age and shortly
TABLE 2.—Statistics of yarding experiments
1938, 1939, 1940
Mean wt. lbs.
Pen no.
No. of birds
Males
Females
1938 1
99
16.97
10.58
F values
Mortality (percent)
Lbs. feed per lb. of gain
11.6
5.87
13.4
5.63
21.4
5.73
21.4
5.90
31.0
6.10
28.6
5.78
31.7
5.76
38.3
6.27
33.3
5.96
47.2
5.27
63.3
5.22
l ^ o V 2
97
17.57
11.29 10.09 9 t
3
88
17.21
10.96
1939 1
55
18.76
12.11
lM^tf 2
69
18.97
11.72
3
157
18.68
11.77 1.519 9
4
150
18.34
12.08
1940 1
74
18.85
11.78 l ^ a V
2
80
18.94
11.96
3
95
19.64
11.56 1.479 9
4
66
t Highly significant.
19.68
11.71
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Michigan State University on March 29, 2015
3
LIMITED RANGE FOR GROWING TURKEYS
in Table 2. The growth was equally good in all pens but some feather picking occurred in pens 1 and 2 which reduced the market grade of the birds. These pens also required more feed per pound of gain than the pens on range. The difference in mortality was not significant, X 2 = 2.89, P > 30 percent. In the 1940 trial a severe outbreak of blackhead occurred in the two pens on range. These same Bermuda grass plots had been used each year for the previous four years but exceptionally wet weather prevailed for several weeks after the poults were placed on range. After the weather turned dry, little additional mortality occurred. Pen 4 had significantly heavier mortality than pen 3 and both were significantly higher than pens 1 and 2. Some blackhead also occurred in the latter pens. The differences in growth were not significant and feed consumption agreed with the results of the previous year's trials. SUMMARY Range management studies of growing turkeys on Bermuda grass range over a period of five years have given the following results: 1. When growing turkeys were confined to a limited area and moved to fresh range once weekly there were no significant differences in growth or finish between groups allowed 300-400 square feet, 50-75 square feet, and 25-40 square feet per bird. 2. One year (1938) the small yard allowed only 10-15 square feet per turkey. In this trial growth was retarded significantly and feather pulling became prevalent toward the end of the experiment so that market quality of the turkeys was reduced. 3. In no case was there any marked difference in the amount of feed required to produce a unit of gain. 4. In two trials (1939 and 1940) turkeys were grown in complete confinement al-
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Michigan State University on March 29, 2015
thereafter a rain and windstorm caused heavy losses in all pens from drowning and piling up. Since corner posts for the pens had already been placed, the size of the yards was not changed, allowing nearly twice as much area per turkey as was intended. Results of the experiment for the Bronze only are given in Table 1. None of the differences were significant. Arrangements were made in 1938 to secure a larger number of poults for the experiment, and the Bronze variety only was used. Results are given in Table 2. The difference in'mean weight at 28 weeks was highly significant for the females. Though the males were not significantly different in weight, the trend was in the same direction as the females. During the last four weeks of the experiment, feather picking became prevalent in pen 1, the small yard; and this not only affected the growth but seriously reduced the market grade of many of the birds. The mortality was not greatly different in the three pens. A storm on July 7-8 was responsible for most of the heavier mortality in pen 3. Feed consumption per pound of gain was not greatly different, the best record being made by pen 2, the mediumsized yard. The birds in this pen were also the heaviest. In 1939 and 1940, the small yard (pen 1) was discontinued and two additional groups were added. Pen 1 was grown in complete confinement, pen 2 was reared in a 16 foot by 20 foot open-front house plus a small bare yard (10-14 square feet per bird). Two yards were used and alternated weekly. Pen 3 was reared on the Bermuda grass range, allowing 50-75 square feet per bird; and pen 4 was allowed to range at will on a 2 ^ -acre Bermuda grass range with the roosts, feed, and water containers moved weekly. Bronze and White Holland turkeys were used. The results of the 1939 trial are given
245
246
T. T. MILBY AND R. B. THOMPSON
REFERENCES
Alp, H. H., 1930. Rearing turkeys in confinement. 111. Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 357 :l-4. Barrett, F. N., C. G. Card, and Ashley Berridge, 1936. Summary of feeding and confinement rear-
ing experiments with turkeys in 1935. Mich. Quart. Bui. 19:24-29. , 1937. Summary of feeding and confinement rearing experiments with turkeys during 1937. Mich. Quart. Bui. 20:3-11. —, 1939. Feeding and confinement rearing experiment with turkeys during 1938. Mich. Quart. Bui. 22 :79-87. Berry, L. N., 1933. Turkey raising under conditions of semi-confinement. N. Mex. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 208:1-15. Brooks, F. D., 1927. Raising turkeys in partial confinement. Poult. Sci. 6:232-238. Brown, E. T., 1924. Turkey raising on limited areas. J. Ministry of Agr. 30:941-945. Funk, E. M., and P. H. Margolf, 1930. Feed consumption and costs in raising turkeys. Pa. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 250:1-11. Kennard, D. C , and V. D. Chamberlin, 1930. Experiments on growing turkeys. Ohio Bimonthly Bui. 203 :50-53. Thompson, R. B., E. E. Schnetzler, and W. P. Albright, 1931 Growing turkeys in confinement. Okla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 202:1-16.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Michigan State University on March 29, 2015
lowing 6-8 square feet per bird and in a house plus a small bare yard, allowing 1015 square feet per bird. There was no significant difference in the rate of growth between these birds and those grown on Bermuda grass range. 5. In the confined groups, feed consumption was slightly greater per unit of gain than in the range groups. 6. Some feather picking occurred in the confined groups, reducing the market quality of some of the turkeys. 7. No differences in mortality occurred which could be attributed to the method of range management followed.
I
EXPERIMENTAL
The same general plan was followed through the five years of the experiment. At the end of the brooding period (eight or nine weeks) poults that had been reared under uniform feeding and management conditions were weighed and distributed at random into the experimental pens. The ration fed was the same for all pens each year but was changed slightly from year to year. It consisted of a growing mash containing approximately 20 percent crude protein and a grain mixture of three or more grains. The grain mixture was not fed until the poults were 16 weeks of age. The grain, mash, water, and granite grit were fed ad libitum. The range consisted of a heavy Bermuda grass sod. During the first three years of the experiment, pen 1 was allowed 10 to 15 square feet per turkey, pen 2 was allowed 50 to 75 square feet, and pen 3 was given 300 to 500 square feet per bird. Pen 1 was moved to fresh range each week and was not on the same ground twice during the season. Pen 2 was moved once each week and covered the same plot of ground twice during the season with 10 weeks' rest intervening. Pen 3 was moved at weekly intervals and was on the same ground once every four weeks. In 1936 the poults used were Bronze, Narragansetts, White Hollands, Bourbon Reds, and Blacks, mostly Bronze. If only the available Bronze poults had been used, pen 1 would not have been large enough to contain the equipment and allow the turkeys freedom of movement around it. The results of this experiment are sum-
[243]
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Michigan State University on March 29, 2015
N THE early days of . turkey production it was the common opinion of growers that turkeys must have free range in order to express their wild nature and do well. One of the earliest investigators to discover that turkeys would do well on limited range was Brown (1924). He raised about 100 turkeys annually on 3}4 acres of waste woodland, confining the breeding flock to houses and small runs. One of the early attempts in this country to use limited range was by Brooks (1927) who in 1922 and 1923 grew some turkeys in a brooder house and small orchard range. The mortality was heavy and growth poor, probably because of the inadequate ration that was used. Some time later Alp (1930), Berry (1933), and Thompson, Schnetzler, and Albright (1932) demonstrated that turkeys could be raised on limited areas of ground and Funk and Margolf (1930) were successful in complete confinement rearing. Barrett and co-workers (1936, 1937, 1939) reported a series of experiments with turkey rations in which complete confinement methods were followed. None of these workers compared different methods of growing turkeys during the same season. Kennard and Chamberlin (1940) reported an experiment in which they used (1) free range, (2) colony house and sun porch, and (3) confinement indoors. They reported that growth of the surviving turkeys was the same in the three groups, that feed consumption was less on the range, but that excessive losses through accidents and predators were experienced with the range birds.
244
T. T. MILBY AND R. B.
THOMPSON
TABLE 1.—Statistics of yarding experiments
1936 and 1937 Mean wt. lbs. Pen no.
F values
No. of birds
1936 1
67
Males
Females
14.80
9.70
Mortality (percent)
8.8 3.710" cf*
2
71
15.66
9.63
3.3 3.399 9 *
68
14.39
9.76
1937 1
24
13.49
9.80
2
26
13.72
9.42
6.6
\.n
47.9 45.2
1.539 9 28
3
14.89
10.00
41.1
* Significant.
marized in Table 1. Only the Bronze and Narragansetts were considered because their adult weights were known to be about the same and somewhat larger than those of the other varieties. The differences in mean weight were significant but exactly
opposite in the two sexes. Mortality was low. Feed records were not calculated because of the mixture of varieties. In 1937, Bronze, Bourbon Red, and Black varieties were used. They were placed on range at eight weeks of age and shortly
TABLE 2.—Statistics of yarding experiments
1938, 1939, 1940
Mean wt. lbs.
Pen no.
No. of birds
Males
Females
1938 1
99
16.97
10.58
F values
Mortality (percent)
Lbs. feed per lb. of gain
11.6
5.87
13.4
5.63
21.4
5.73
21.4
5.90
31.0
6.10
28.6
5.78
31.7
5.76
38.3
6.27
33.3
5.96
47.2
5.27
63.3
5.22
l ^ o V 2
97
17.57
11.29 10.09 9 t
3
88
17.21
10.96
1939 1
55
18.76
12.11
lM^tf 2
69
18.97
11.72
3
157
18.68
11.77 1.519 9
4
150
18.34
12.08
1940 1
74
18.85
11.78 l ^ a V
2
80
18.94
11.96
3
95
19.64
11.56 1.479 9
4
66
t Highly significant.
19.68
11.71
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Michigan State University on March 29, 2015
3
LIMITED RANGE FOR GROWING TURKEYS
in Table 2. The growth was equally good in all pens but some feather picking occurred in pens 1 and 2 which reduced the market grade of the birds. These pens also required more feed per pound of gain than the pens on range. The difference in mortality was not significant, X 2 = 2.89, P > 30 percent. In the 1940 trial a severe outbreak of blackhead occurred in the two pens on range. These same Bermuda grass plots had been used each year for the previous four years but exceptionally wet weather prevailed for several weeks after the poults were placed on range. After the weather turned dry, little additional mortality occurred. Pen 4 had significantly heavier mortality than pen 3 and both were significantly higher than pens 1 and 2. Some blackhead also occurred in the latter pens. The differences in growth were not significant and feed consumption agreed with the results of the previous year's trials. SUMMARY Range management studies of growing turkeys on Bermuda grass range over a period of five years have given the following results: 1. When growing turkeys were confined to a limited area and moved to fresh range once weekly there were no significant differences in growth or finish between groups allowed 300-400 square feet, 50-75 square feet, and 25-40 square feet per bird. 2. One year (1938) the small yard allowed only 10-15 square feet per turkey. In this trial growth was retarded significantly and feather pulling became prevalent toward the end of the experiment so that market quality of the turkeys was reduced. 3. In no case was there any marked difference in the amount of feed required to produce a unit of gain. 4. In two trials (1939 and 1940) turkeys were grown in complete confinement al-
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Michigan State University on March 29, 2015
thereafter a rain and windstorm caused heavy losses in all pens from drowning and piling up. Since corner posts for the pens had already been placed, the size of the yards was not changed, allowing nearly twice as much area per turkey as was intended. Results of the experiment for the Bronze only are given in Table 1. None of the differences were significant. Arrangements were made in 1938 to secure a larger number of poults for the experiment, and the Bronze variety only was used. Results are given in Table 2. The difference in'mean weight at 28 weeks was highly significant for the females. Though the males were not significantly different in weight, the trend was in the same direction as the females. During the last four weeks of the experiment, feather picking became prevalent in pen 1, the small yard; and this not only affected the growth but seriously reduced the market grade of many of the birds. The mortality was not greatly different in the three pens. A storm on July 7-8 was responsible for most of the heavier mortality in pen 3. Feed consumption per pound of gain was not greatly different, the best record being made by pen 2, the mediumsized yard. The birds in this pen were also the heaviest. In 1939 and 1940, the small yard (pen 1) was discontinued and two additional groups were added. Pen 1 was grown in complete confinement, pen 2 was reared in a 16 foot by 20 foot open-front house plus a small bare yard (10-14 square feet per bird). Two yards were used and alternated weekly. Pen 3 was reared on the Bermuda grass range, allowing 50-75 square feet per bird; and pen 4 was allowed to range at will on a 2 ^ -acre Bermuda grass range with the roosts, feed, and water containers moved weekly. Bronze and White Holland turkeys were used. The results of the 1939 trial are given
245
246
T. T. MILBY AND R. B. THOMPSON
REFERENCES
Alp, H. H., 1930. Rearing turkeys in confinement. 111. Agr. Exp. Sta. Circ. 357 :l-4. Barrett, F. N., C. G. Card, and Ashley Berridge, 1936. Summary of feeding and confinement rear-
ing experiments with turkeys in 1935. Mich. Quart. Bui. 19:24-29. , 1937. Summary of feeding and confinement rearing experiments with turkeys during 1937. Mich. Quart. Bui. 20:3-11. —, 1939. Feeding and confinement rearing experiment with turkeys during 1938. Mich. Quart. Bui. 22 :79-87. Berry, L. N., 1933. Turkey raising under conditions of semi-confinement. N. Mex. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 208:1-15. Brooks, F. D., 1927. Raising turkeys in partial confinement. Poult. Sci. 6:232-238. Brown, E. T., 1924. Turkey raising on limited areas. J. Ministry of Agr. 30:941-945. Funk, E. M., and P. H. Margolf, 1930. Feed consumption and costs in raising turkeys. Pa. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 250:1-11. Kennard, D. C , and V. D. Chamberlin, 1930. Experiments on growing turkeys. Ohio Bimonthly Bui. 203 :50-53. Thompson, R. B., E. E. Schnetzler, and W. P. Albright, 1931 Growing turkeys in confinement. Okla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 202:1-16.
Downloaded from http://ps.oxfordjournals.org/ at Michigan State University on March 29, 2015
lowing 6-8 square feet per bird and in a house plus a small bare yard, allowing 1015 square feet per bird. There was no significant difference in the rate of growth between these birds and those grown on Bermuda grass range. 5. In the confined groups, feed consumption was slightly greater per unit of gain than in the range groups. 6. Some feather picking occurred in the confined groups, reducing the market quality of some of the turkeys. 7. No differences in mortality occurred which could be attributed to the method of range management followed.