0UL-RY EGG COST S~UDY

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "0UL-RY EGG COST S~UDY"

Osborne Watts
5 years ago
Views:

1 /" -; UL-RY EGG COST S~UDY 953 REPOl<T - SRn DEGO county Agricultural Extension Service University of California Prepared in Cooperation with the San Diego County Poultry ndustry

2 --_..,./ Bldg., 4005 Rosecrans St. San Diego 0, California , 700 Copies Poultry Egg Cost Study, 953 Report, San Diego County i Compiled by Robert H. Adolph, Farm Advisor and A. D. Reed, Farm Management Specialist The 953 Poultry Egg Cost Study is comprised of records from 35 poultrymen in San Diego County. The Study is conducted by the University of California Agricultural Extension Service in cooperation with the poµltry industry of San Diego County. Particular reference has been made to compa~ative results with one bird to a cage, two birds to a cage, and wire floor pen housing. Records reported are not presented as representative of the industry in the county. The purpose of the Study is to provide opportunity for participating potiltrymen to obtain a detailed analysis of their poultry operation and to improve efficiency by comparing results with others in the Study. Poultrymen interested in participating in the Study may contact the Farm Advisor. PRODUCTON AND MANAGEM.ENT PRACTCES. Flock size aver~ge 380 layers-range of '680 to 3, One and one-tenth hours labor per hen. Bulk deli very and labor saving equipment for feeding and handling of eggs made this possible. 3. Pullet performance--05% replacement--76% culled- year around purchase of sexed baby pullets for replacement eggs per hen--chicks purchased from stock bred to lay and year around replacement and culling. 5. 5% mortality average for layers, 7% chick mortality pounds feed per dozen eggs produced. All mash rations used. All except two growers had white leghorns for laying flock. 7. Quality egg production--pullet flocks---- eggs gathered frequently, cooled rapidly, and handled carefully. 8. Live virus vaccination programs used, proper debeaking, and other disease control practices used to minimize mortality and losses in egg production. 9. Care and management varied according to type of housing and equipment. 0. Records of production and cost accounts maintained by cooperating poultrymen.

3 TABLE. ' NCOME AND COSTS - WRE FLOOR PENS TOTAL NCOME LESS CASH AND DEPRECATON COSTS S FARM NCOME - TOTAL NCOME LESS ALL COSTS S MANAGEMENT NCOME CASH COSTS PER DOZEN NCLUDES ONLY FEED,.CHCKS Al\TD MSCELLANEOUS AND HRED LABOR COSTS! Rank No. & Flock Size -E 2-C 4-C -E 5-A 7-B 9-D Egg_ ncome Other Poul tr. cash-and Depreciation Costs!' -)>fc)n.:.cash Costs ' Total! f-fanage-j ---C:asn Total ' Chix & Hired! i Total Farm Family! nt. on all ment Costs, Feed\ Misc. Laborl Depr-_e_c. ncome ' Labor nvest. Costs' ncome PerDoz; Dollars per Hen Dollars pe~ Hen!i Doll~rs per H~~ l Dollars[., 0.08, ' i.5 ' 5.57 ' ii 6.5! ! i 9~ ' ~.75! ! '.so '.27 i , , \ ll ! i ! 4.65 i i.2, , , : ,97.50 l , ,65 ' ' ' 20-B 9.76!.03! l /.96 - ',24! 6.58!' 4.2! l.4o.7 s i 2-B , \ ~,59 f,82.9 ' A 9.27 i.28 ' i' _, ! ! 23-c 9, s ,J E , ' 3,47!.74.2 \ i 26-E 8,55 '.34 ' ' ' ' l 32-A 8.83 i, , Q. 5,90! , ;.22,35 i 35-B lq.05 J_ ~ ' \.66 8,80 ii 2.63.! 2,07 '.29 ~ Av. Wire r - l i i i , ,60.87 c i 6, '.9 '7:29 : 2,9 :.33 l :Av.35 Rec , _L.37!.70 Ll, _J 2.84,34 Posts and ncome are based on totals for year divided by average number birds, over 5! months old on a hen day basis, i Cash costs per dozen based on total cash costs divided by.dozens laid,. _!Rank identifies cooperator~ record arranged according to management income--size of flock:!.-under 2000; ] ; ~.Q ; ] ; ]]!-over 5000 layers,. ~: Hired labor at cost. Family labor at $.50 per hour,. nterest: Based on average investment at 5%. ~: Egg ncome~-total receipts divided by average number layers. ~: Other ncome (Poultry)-.:.ncludes Total poultry-and manure sales and stock inventory credit or debit divided by average number layers, ~

4 TABLE. NCOME find COSTS: CAGES--ONE AND TWO LAYERS TO A CAGE TOTAL NCOEE LE0S CASH AND DEPRECATON COSTS S FAHM NCOME-TOTAL NCOME LESS ALL COSTS S MANAGEMENT NCOME CASH COST PER DOZEN NCLUDES ONLY FEED, CHCKS AND MSCELLANEOUS AND HRED LABOR COSTS. Total Hanage-\ Cash all ment Costs J Egg (Poultry) : Feed Zis2: Labor J_!2'P.r~.c. ncome Labor nvest. Costs ncome f PerDoz. Dollars per Hen! Dollar Ran.{ No. & income ' Ca$-an:f D Flock Size Other Total '. c!lixs Hired. c,.i at ion Costs Non-caRh _costs Total Farm. Familyj nt. on r H.en i l Dollars per Heh ii i ONE BRD TO_~ CAGE \!!. 'i, 2-C " ! 5.34: i, ' 4.09 \ [ 3.70, , D '0.4~.. L59\5.76! ' i l.03i.28 i8.~3i C! 0.) !.29 i.40 ' 6.90 ' ' B! : '.5.4 ; l.30! 9.29! 3.0 i 6-~! ':J, i.95.73,48 ' 6.88 i ,48 i J!j J i , i! ' Av.Cage t! _. \ l j l l j_.87,5, ;. ~ u 8.30 l _! 5-E 6-D 9-D 0-A 2-C 4-E 8-E : TWO BRDS TO A CAGE i! i ii ' , ! 3.50! !!60., :.7! 7.39 l 3, i -! !f ' 8.oo i.4.8? l i, ! , 0.92 f i.5:.26! !.3.7 7,35 i ,4.6,, l: 3,6.54 '.6 7.2! l\ i 7,44! 3.89 ' ~ i ' l '.! i...!. 25-D ' 3.67 i A ' ! , B, !, , ,50 i ~ i 2".;3 if 6.73 : i , ' A 9,47.88 i 0.,,5 '4, , ! 4, J i.9 9, A ii 9.7 [.09 l?o~o i\~-39,8? JLll :, , B. i lq,~o i,j.66 i ~,O/ l.02_, _,, ilv, Cage 2!' ' if! l '. ' :.08 =b0.~{6.. 5.~J--~,..9~. i.37;, jl J_ itv.35 Rec, 9.64,.96 Cl.c0..Jl4 96,9"',,46., Ji 3"90,85 J_.2 7, ndividual cages mostly 8"xl8 Two birds to a cage 2 xl8 Explanation of Te!!!l~ Y..'3'ed ~~. Table ,37

5 TABLE. NPUTS AND OUTPUTS - WRE FLOOR PENS El3GS CHCKENS FEED jllabor Original Costj Rank Doz. Price Price T Lbs. _])er He_n Cost! Bldg. and llno.&., Sold % Rec'd Rec q % of La.xirig_Flock % Lay- --Laying! per Hours Equip. per, Flock! % Per per Large PerDoz PerCull! Re- Chix ers and Cwt, per l Hen!Size...iJ Prod. Hen Hen sold Cents Dollars Diedl Culled _placed Mort. Onlx Growing Dollars. Bird Dollars i!! l-e! ? ll 99 loo i.7 l.65! 2-C! i.83 ll 90 lll 3 88 ll6 3.84, C ! l.2 3,45 -E 58 '22! , i ! 3.88, A!l l ' B , ' ,32. 9-D , , ; ' 20-B i! / , B l 6 222! ' ! !22-A : 6 j 22.3, e [ i.o C :: j so ' 84 lll 4.05, i24-e j JJ l 4,53 26-E : A ' 55 99, 6.l ' l5-b JL & ' j_ J.:40 ~re~ l 56 ' l l.o 3.20 Av.35 ; 6,, Rec. ' lt.7 bo b fire Floor Pens mostly 4 x 2' and 6 x 6 pens. Housed at slightly less than one bird to square foot. ~gs ])_er Hen: Total eggs laid divided by average number layers. % died, culled, and replaced based on year totals divided by average number layers, Feed: Net cost after sacks and potential refunds considered. ncludes all feed for layers and gro~~ng of replacement pullets. Layers only based on total feed for layers and growing ~ estimated amount used for growing replacement pullets. ~: ncludes hired and family labor. Price per cull: ncludes refund tfilere applicable. Original Cost Buildings and Equipment is determined by total costs divided by average number of layers. Total cost of buildin~s and equipment includes a consideration for labor costs of construction.

6 TABLE V NPUTS AND OUTPUTS: CAGES - ONE AND TWO LAYERS TO CAGE / EGGS CHCKENS ii FEED LABOR [Original j. l) Lbs. per Hen! Cost ; Cost Bldg~ /Rank i Doz. Price,. Pricf l l 'No.& Sold % Rec'd. Rec'd % Laying Flock %.![ Lay-! Layer! per Hours '& Equip. Flock % Per per Large PerDoz PerCull T Re- Chl.X / ers and cwt. per l.e_er Hen Size Prod. Hen Hen!Sold Cents Dollars Diedj Culled placed Mort. o;tlyj Growine: Dollars Bird Dollars,!, One Bird to a Cage. ~ T ', ' 2-C ' ! 94 09! 4 04! Dl ~ 4.64 j 7-D l 40 i ' C 6 ' ii '.3! , B ' ! i 65 3 : i.3 ii 7.82 '!, 6-C [ J' 5 ii 92 i 4 4,27.0 ii E i _i ' j 4.88 Av. T - ' T Cagel ii 76 9 / t l 3758, j \i l ' Two Birds to a Cage i!! i i f/, 5-E i ' 7., ~ 7 ii D ! ' , D ,l 79 2 i 83 ' 97 2 i 86! 0! 4,5.2! A d fl C 6 ' ii 7 2 i 55' ' ,3 4-E 62, ! ii.67 6 i /j '' E i ' l 45 0 ' '... lf r! 25-D 6 22lf \.57 6 i ' i 4.09 ' A , ' B ' A ' ' '!' 28 ' ,07 3-A , A , J i.4, B _A_.23 ~ Av ' r \ S~g~ J6 5.2 i.74 7 l 82 8 ' ' 3,65 Av.35 j i Rec / _: Explanation of terms see Table

7 Ho us -ir:!,g_ No. Rec icage 6 2!Cage i!wire!pens!ave TABLE V. SUMMARY STUDY Orig. l Cost Eggs Feed Hours' Tot. i and Farm! i Cash j ' Bldg.& Ave. % %! Price Feed Cost Labor n- J Depre n~ Equip_. Flock Hens Hens Peri_ Dozen _Lbs. cwt. per come Costs come Do la's Size Died Cull Hen Cents Doz. Dol. Hen Dol. Dol. Dol. l" l i ! ' ' ' i , , ; _J_ ! ' _ l ~ Labor Dol i. - nt. Manageon J ment nv. ncome Dol 0 Dollars l 2.94!.2j 2.~ Conclusions:. No great difference is showi:i between the average net earnings in favor of any one type of housing. 2. Factors of care and management other than type of housing are shown to be of as much, or more, importance. Average cost of production and net earnings per bird varies in a wider range than the group averages for the three types of housing. 3. Advantages of slightly lower mortality and higher egg production per hen are shown for the one-bird-to-a-cage group, h~ich served to offset the higher cost per bird for housing and related equipment. 4. Mortality attributable to cimnibalism appears to be highest in the two-birds-per cage group; however, not significantly different from that of the wire floor pen group. t was noted that the operators who followed a good debeaking progra.~ reduced the mortality due to "pick outs and other forms of cannibalism.

8 TABLE V. SUMMARY - FVE YEARS \ i Orig. -!! Cash \ - T : Cost J J E s Feed Hours Tot.! and Farm, No. - Bldg,& Ave. % % Price j Feed Cost Labor n-_ Depre n- Rec- '. E ui Flock Hens Hens Per Dozen Lbs._ Cwt. per come! Costs come Year ords Del. Size Died Cull Hen Cents Dozen Del. Hen Del. Del. Del.! ), ' JO ,0 l !95! 27 ' 4, i ,8 6,89 :_ _ J , )J,9_42 _'2 J_ ! 5 77 ' 23 52,0 s.o J , ' 4, J.08!Ave. ', L l 9-:'iJ , J ].Li, 7;;_ - _'222 _49,'] j 7. 4, ' ,22.05 Family Labor Del, nt. on nv. Del &.23 Manage ment ncome Dollar; ,94 A su.'nmary of the averages for th,e five years of San Diego County Poultry ~fanagement Studies show increased efficiency of egg production:, Culling rate has increased, 2, Number of eggs per layer has increased. 3. Fewer pounds of feed required per dozen eggs produced. 4. Fewer hours of labor required per layer.

COST STUJY EGG. Jnl. 1- i)y I 9 5Li- CCU n TY )LI \ I I I. l~eport. i Agricultural Extension Service I I. i '

$COST STUJY EGG. Jnl. 1- i)y I 9 5Li- CCU n TY )LI \ I I I. l~eport. i Agricultural Extension Service I I. i '$ ~, ----- - ------------ Jnl. - )y tj ' )L \ EGG! COST STUJY -! S Fl 9 5L- D E G fj l~eport CCU n TY! Agrcultural Extenson Servce j Unversty of Calforna l [ ; Prepared n Cooperaton wth the San Dego County