New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Java Thread - Page 122

post #1211 of 1824

That's great, Thank You! 

 

“Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me... Anything can happen, child. Anything can be.” 

 

~ Shel Silverstein
 

Reply

 

“Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me... Anything can happen, child. Anything can be.” 

 

~ Shel Silverstein
 

Reply
post #1212 of 1824
Quote:
Originally Posted by bnjrob View Post

They may not meet the SOP for Javas in the US, but we have no idea if there is a standard/what the SOP is, for these birds in Europe.  It could be that these were Javas that someone imported to Europe, but did not keep up with the SOP set forth by the APA, thus the birds don't look like US Javas.  Or they could be bred to someone's idea over there in Europe, of what they should be -  just like the Auburn Javas that Lyle Behl has - he has bred them to what he thinks they should look like.  Since I don't know what is going on in the Java chicken world outside of this country, difficult to tell someone that they don't have Javas just because they don't conform to what someone in the US decided that Javas should look like. 

 

But that is only a color change. The body type is still all Java. And even if in Europe they breed them to be something else, that is no longer a Java. Even if we have Old World breeds in North America, if we then bred them to look different and have a different body type it would no longer be that breed.

 

You could maybe call them European Javas, but they would not be Javas. Just like the situation with the Devon cow. They use to look like this:

 

 

700

Bull

 

700

Cow

 

Then people started breeding them to be for meat instead of the tri- purpose they use to be. Now they look like this:

700

Bull 

 

700

Cow

 

They no longer have horns and have a different build. They are also much larger. So the older breed is now renamed American Milking Devon to show that they are different, even though they are all genetically related. The one style is out of the other. No other blood was added. But they are not the same.

 

If a Java in Europe does not conform to SOP, it needs a different name. It is not the same.

 

A change in color is one thing if it is from a mutation, a complete change in body type and function is another.

Proud mom of 7 Archie Kehr Kelso and Hatches. Holiday and Wyatt (cocks) and their ladies, Clemintine, Rosemary, Norma Jean (spangle), Calamity Jane, and Betty Sue (pea comb); as well as 5 Dominique Hens and One Dominique Roo (Basil).

Reply

Proud mom of 7 Archie Kehr Kelso and Hatches. Holiday and Wyatt (cocks) and their ladies, Clemintine, Rosemary, Norma Jean (spangle), Calamity Jane, and Betty Sue (pea comb); as well as 5 Dominique Hens and One Dominique Roo (Basil).

Reply
post #1213 of 1824
Quote:
Originally Posted by sumi View Post

Would it be possible for one of you to give me a list of requirements or the standards of the US Java's? Or a good body shot and head of one, so I can see how they compare? I've read things like they have black beaks, white earlobes etc. 

Sorry, the pics I posted weren't the greatest and they weren't standing up. DH snapped them as I took them out of the box they came home in. I can try and get more "natural" shots for you if you want?

 

http://www.javabreedersofamerica.com/2011/08/culling-of-black-java-chickens.html is good as well.

Proud mom of 7 Archie Kehr Kelso and Hatches. Holiday and Wyatt (cocks) and their ladies, Clemintine, Rosemary, Norma Jean (spangle), Calamity Jane, and Betty Sue (pea comb); as well as 5 Dominique Hens and One Dominique Roo (Basil).

Reply

Proud mom of 7 Archie Kehr Kelso and Hatches. Holiday and Wyatt (cocks) and their ladies, Clemintine, Rosemary, Norma Jean (spangle), Calamity Jane, and Betty Sue (pea comb); as well as 5 Dominique Hens and One Dominique Roo (Basil).

Reply
post #1214 of 1824

Thank you, that's very interesting.

 

“Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me... Anything can happen, child. Anything can be.” 

 

~ Shel Silverstein
 

Reply

 

“Listen to the mustn'ts, child. Listen to the don'ts. Listen to the shouldn'ts, the impossibles, the won'ts. Listen to the never haves, then listen close to me... Anything can happen, child. Anything can be.” 

 

~ Shel Silverstein
 

Reply
post #1215 of 1824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poultry Friend View Post

 

But that is only a color change. The body type is still all Java. And even if in Europe they breed them to be something else, that is no longer a Java. Even if we have Old World breeds in North America, if we then bred them to look different and have a different body type it would no longer be that breed.

 

You could maybe call them European Javas, but they would not be Javas.

 

If a Java in Europe does not conform to SOP, it needs a different name. It is not the same.

 

A change in color is one thing if it is from a mutation, a complete change in body type and function is another.

 

I understand where you are coming from.  However, I also know that chickens with the same name really can and do look different outside of the US.  Following discussions from old breeders of heritage breeds, things like Orpingtons, Australorps, New Hampshires, Marans, and other chickens  have the same name but have been bred to what people in Europe - Great Britain, Germany, Ireland, etc. as well as even Australia and New Zealand, want to see in their birds. 

 

It is even similar with birds here in the US.  Birds coming from Ideal, Mt Healthy, and all those other commercial hatcheries look significantly different from birds that come from small breeders that breed to the APA's SOP and ONLY sell SOP chickens that have few APA defects/disqualifications.   If you have not seen side by side photos of hatchery stock versus SOP breeder stock of the same type of birds - seek out some photos to see the differences. 

 

I look at it the way some of these "old" breeders who have been breeding since before I was born do - there is "production" birds that carry the name but may not necessarily resemble SOP, and then there are Heritage birds that more closely resemble the APA SOP with fewer defects/disqualifications.

 

So these Irish Javas may not look like our SOP birds and may be more along the lines of what I would consider Production Javas from backyard pet breeders and hatcheries here in the US - but that doesn't mean they can't be called Javas.  They just aren't up to the standards for true APA SOP HERITAGE fowl.

 

And as you well know, back in the day, even the Cochins, some jungle fowl, and the early Javas were all called Javas and were somewhat interchangeable anyway.

 

There are even reputable Heritage fowl breeders that frequent BYC who breed to an older SOP for their birds because they don't like the newer SOP for their chickens.  Just as we have discussed breeding to the late 1800s and early 1900s SOP for our Javas in addition to bringing out more of the non-recognized colors.  Doesn't mean that their Javas aren't Javas, just that they breed their fowl to what they like to see rather than what the APA officers in more recent times have decided to vote in as the SOP.  And some of these people have discussed that they breed to an older standard not just for color, but also for weight and body type.  And some get irritated that even APA judges are choosing show winning birds that go against the written SOP simply because they have a personal bias and idea of what the chickens should look like.

 

The US may be the world's policemen and we send our military all over - but that doesn't mean that some chicken loving people who made up a group here in the US and called themselves the American Poultry Association has turned into the Chicken God and can dictate what people outside the US can call their chickens or how those chickens look and force them to make their chickens look like the chickens in the US.  Were these chickens in question here in the US, if after studying side/back/front/top views of them against the SOP, if they didn't meet the SOP, then I would say that they may be called Javas, but they are likely Production Javas and don't meet the SOP.  However, they are NOT in the US, and it is doubtful that someone outside the US would breed to the SOP in the US - so who am I to judge that they shouldn't be called Javas if the person that exported them from the US (if that is what happened) bred these from original US SOP Javas.

 

I am very interested in these Irish via Belgium Javas because it is part of history and a way to see what other people call Javas outside of the US.  While they may not be up to the APA SOP, that doesn't necessarily diminish their value or their interest or the fact that perhaps we could learn something from our European Java breeding friends.

post #1216 of 1824
Quote:
Originally Posted by bnjrob View Post

 

I understand where you are coming from.  However, I also know that chickens with the same name really can and do look different outside of the US.  Following discussions from old breeders of heritage breeds, things like Orpingtons, Australorps, New Hampshires, Marans, and other chickens  have the same name but have been bred to what people in Europe - Great Britain, Germany, Ireland, etc. as well as even Australia and New Zealand, want to see in their birds. 

 

It is even similar with birds here in the US.  Birds coming from Ideal, Mt Healthy, and all those other commercial hatcheries look significantly different from birds that come from small breeders that breed to the APA's SOP and ONLY sell SOP chickens that have few APA defects/disqualifications.   If you have not seen side by side photos of hatchery stock versus SOP breeder stock of the same type of birds - seek out some photos to see the differences. 

 

I look at it the way some of these "old" breeders who have been breeding since before I was born do - there is "production" birds that carry the name but may not necessarily resemble SOP, and then there are Heritage birds that more closely resemble the APA SOP with fewer defects/disqualifications.

 

So these Irish Javas may not look like our SOP birds and may be more along the lines of what I would consider Production Javas from backyard pet breeders and hatcheries here in the US - but that doesn't mean they can't be called Javas.  They just aren't up to the standards for true APA SOP HERITAGE fowl.

 

And as you well know, back in the day, even the Cochins, some jungle fowl, and the early Javas were all called Javas and were somewhat interchangeable anyway.

 

There are even reputable Heritage fowl breeders that frequent BYC who breed to an older SOP for their birds because they don't like the newer SOP for their chickens.  Just as we have discussed breeding to the late 1800s and early 1900s SOP for our Javas in addition to bringing out more of the non-recognized colors.  Doesn't mean that their Javas aren't Javas, just that they breed their fowl to what they like to see rather than what the APA officers in more recent times have decided to vote in as the SOP.  And some of these people have discussed that they breed to an older standard not just for color, but also for weight and body type.  And some get irritated that even APA judges are choosing show winning birds that go against the written SOP simply because they have a personal bias and idea of what the chickens should look like.

 

The US may be the world's policemen and we send our military all over - but that doesn't mean that some chicken loving people who made up a group here in the US and called themselves the American Poultry Association has turned into the Chicken God and can dictate what people outside the US can call their chickens or how those chickens look and force them to make their chickens look like the chickens in the US.  Were these chickens in question here in the US, if after studying side/back/front/top views of them against the SOP, if they didn't meet the SOP, then I would say that they may be called Javas, but they are likely Production Javas and don't meet the SOP.  However, they are NOT in the US, and it is doubtful that someone outside the US would breed to the SOP in the US - so who am I to judge that they shouldn't be called Javas if the person that exported them from the US (if that is what happened) bred these from original US SOP Javas.

 

I am very interested in these Irish via Belgium Javas because it is part of history and a way to see what other people call Javas outside of the US.  While they may not be up to the APA SOP, that doesn't necessarily diminish their value or their interest or the fact that perhaps we could learn something from our European Java breeding friends.


Wow, I am impressed. Very well said!

So many breeds, so little time....so little space.

 

I have converted to an all Plymouth Rock flock. ;)

Reply

So many breeds, so little time....so little space.

 

I have converted to an all Plymouth Rock flock. ;)

Reply
post #1217 of 1824

I guess, to me, there are such minimal differences between chickens to begin with, that once it changes too much, it really needs a new name, or at least some variation of the name to identify it (like how you use Belgium Java or Irish Java)

 

I mean, what happens when you take a breed (like Javas) and breed them to look just like another one (like a silkie)? At that point, which breed is it?

 

I am not saying that one country cannot call something by one name unless it meets certain standards from another country (although it is an American breed, and it really should be!) but I cannot see how you could breed a Dorking to look like a Red Rock and continue to call it a Dorking. Neither could you take a Sebright and make it standard sizes and remove all henny feathering and lacing and still call it a Sebright.

 

Chickens are all very closely related and the only differences between breeds are physical differences. If something met the SOP perfectly of a Java (even if it did not have an ounce of Java blood in it) you would have no idea and would call it a Java.

 

We can only define breeds based on how they look (and believing the people we get them from to keep good breeding practices and records)

 

The silver Javas I breed are from a closed Black Java flock with good records kept. Not only that, but the body type is still SOP.

 

I do know that backyard birds and production birds are not going to be show birds. But at the same time, you can see the basics of body type in either. Regardless of how they were bred (assuming it was Java to Java) there would still be some traits that would identify it as a Java. You can still ID a RIR or Sebright even if it is not a good show bird.

 

I also know about breeding to historic standards. I plan to have a line of historic Javas using the oldest SOP and written records I can find. They will have shorted backs (then modern Javas) and have plum faces. At the same time, I will not call those birds Javas (even though I will only use Javas to breed them) I will call them Historic Javas, and I will not breed them into any modern Java lines. Those birds will be different. I do want to help save those traits that were in the Javas to begin with, but I also want to respect breeders and not introduce anything that would set back their breeding efforts.

 

And while it is true that Black Cochins were called Black Javas, the historic documents can tell the two apart (in most cases) by the legs of the birds. And really, that more then anything supports my idea the different birds should NOT share the same name. It is very confusing. If you have a bird that is different, give it a name to show that fact. Irish Java would be great! Then people would know that the bird is distinct from the American Java (or Java) I see nothing wrong with that at all. It is similar to how there are English Labrador Retrievers, which are used in shows and American (or Hunting) Labs. They have a different body type and temperament and there are terms to show that. (Granted, those are not official terms, but are used in the industry since they do look very different!)

 

I do agree with you that the APA is not the end all of what should be what, but let's be frank here: If there are no standards at all, nothing will look like it did for more then a few years. If you do not know that a Basset has short legs, long ears, and long back. That it is a hound and hunts rabbits, then in 10-20 years you could have a Basset with short ears, long legs and short back. (we call them puppy mill dogs) Without some sort of standard, or record, or what a certain breed is, there is nothing at all. What is the point of breeds at all, if you get to decide what that breed looks like, the size it is, the color it is, ect, ect?

 

Historically, if a person kept and bred a line long enough that it looked nothing like the neighbors birds, then they named that lines something else. Those birds were unique. They were different. They got a name to show that fact.

 

I hope that makes sense. I get the feeling we are really on the same page, but coming from it at different angles. It can be hard only reading text to really understand what is being said.

Proud mom of 7 Archie Kehr Kelso and Hatches. Holiday and Wyatt (cocks) and their ladies, Clemintine, Rosemary, Norma Jean (spangle), Calamity Jane, and Betty Sue (pea comb); as well as 5 Dominique Hens and One Dominique Roo (Basil).

Reply

Proud mom of 7 Archie Kehr Kelso and Hatches. Holiday and Wyatt (cocks) and their ladies, Clemintine, Rosemary, Norma Jean (spangle), Calamity Jane, and Betty Sue (pea comb); as well as 5 Dominique Hens and One Dominique Roo (Basil).

Reply
post #1218 of 1824
Quote:
Originally Posted by bnjrob View Post

 

I understand where you are coming from.  However, I also know that chickens with the same name really can and do look different outside of the US.  Following discussions from old breeders of heritage breeds, things like Orpingtons, Australorps, New Hampshires, Marans, and other chickens  have the same name but have been bred to what people in Europe - Great Britain, Germany, Ireland, etc. as well as even Australia and New Zealand, want to see in their birds. 

 

It is even similar with birds here in the US.  Birds coming from Ideal, Mt Healthy, and all those other commercial hatcheries look significantly different from birds that come from small breeders that breed to the APA's SOP and ONLY sell SOP chickens that have few APA defects/disqualifications.   If you have not seen side by side photos of hatchery stock versus SOP breeder stock of the same type of birds - seek out some photos to see the differences. 

 

I look at it the way some of these "old" breeders who have been breeding since before I was born do - there is "production" birds that carry the name but may not necessarily resemble SOP, and then there are Heritage birds that more closely resemble the APA SOP with fewer defects/disqualifications.

 

So these Irish Javas may not look like our SOP birds and may be more along the lines of what I would consider Production Javas from backyard pet breeders and hatcheries here in the US - but that doesn't mean they can't be called Javas.  They just aren't up to the standards for true APA SOP HERITAGE fowl.

 

And as you well know, back in the day, even the Cochins, some jungle fowl, and the early Javas were all called Javas and were somewhat interchangeable anyway.

 

There are even reputable Heritage fowl breeders that frequent BYC who breed to an older SOP for their birds because they don't like the newer SOP for their chickens.  Just as we have discussed breeding to the late 1800s and early 1900s SOP for our Javas in addition to bringing out more of the non-recognized colors.  Doesn't mean that their Javas aren't Javas, just that they breed their fowl to what they like to see rather than what the APA officers in more recent times have decided to vote in as the SOP.  And some of these people have discussed that they breed to an older standard not just for color, but also for weight and body type.  And some get irritated that even APA judges are choosing show winning birds that go against the written SOP simply because they have a personal bias and idea of what the chickens should look like.

 

The US may be the world's policemen and we send our military all over - but that doesn't mean that some chicken loving people who made up a group here in the US and called themselves the American Poultry Association has turned into the Chicken God and can dictate what people outside the US can call their chickens or how those chickens look and force them to make their chickens look like the chickens in the US.  Were these chickens in question here in the US, if after studying side/back/front/top views of them against the SOP, if they didn't meet the SOP, then I would say that they may be called Javas, but they are likely Production Javas and don't meet the SOP.  However, they are NOT in the US, and it is doubtful that someone outside the US would breed to the SOP in the US - so who am I to judge that they shouldn't be called Javas if the person that exported them from the US (if that is what happened) bred these from original US SOP Javas.

 

I am very interested in these Irish via Belgium Javas because it is part of history and a way to see what other people call Javas outside of the US.  While they may not be up to the APA SOP, that doesn't necessarily diminish their value or their interest or the fact that perhaps we could learn something from our European Java breeding friends.

There are a couple of  thing in this post with which I disagree:

 

1. The SOP for the Java has changed very little through the years.

2. Breeding to an old SOP to try and get non-recognized colors is hilarious.

NPIP 56-378, AI tested Clean, Farm Inspected by Clemson Poultry
Breeding Orientals,Games and Ducks;
With a large selection of Asil
And the largest flock of Cubalayas east of the Mississippi
Reply
NPIP 56-378, AI tested Clean, Farm Inspected by Clemson Poultry
Breeding Orientals,Games and Ducks;
With a large selection of Asil
And the largest flock of Cubalayas east of the Mississippi
Reply
post #1219 of 1824

As to Java Standards in other countries:

 

Any country has the right to have their Standard read as they like. To argue otherwise is ridiculous especially since Americans/Canadians have done this very thing for years with our own Standard. Though it may seem to make sense that the country of origin should be the reference guide there is more to it than that.  Life is never as simple as some would like to make it.

 

The problem with American judges is not that they choose based on personal preferences (though they do). The problem is they don't know the Standard very well for  the rarer breeds found in the Standard. Simple as that.

NPIP 56-378, AI tested Clean, Farm Inspected by Clemson Poultry
Breeding Orientals,Games and Ducks;
With a large selection of Asil
And the largest flock of Cubalayas east of the Mississippi
Reply
NPIP 56-378, AI tested Clean, Farm Inspected by Clemson Poultry
Breeding Orientals,Games and Ducks;
With a large selection of Asil
And the largest flock of Cubalayas east of the Mississippi
Reply
post #1220 of 1824

As to the Auburns:

 

It is just as likely that the Auburns resulted from infusions of RIR or some production breed as to long latent recessive genes. As a matter of fact it is MORE LIKELY that they came from RIRs or Production Reds than those long latent recessive genes!!!

 

Call them what they are and don't make up some good chicken story. They are a new coloration on an old breed.

 

Monte has been breeding lots of Javas for years now and never has such a bird appeared.

I bred them a long time too as did Mary Ann and no such thing happened.

MA and I aren't breeding them any longer but Monte still is.

 

As recent as 3 years ago Monte was having to send Garfield Farm birds because theirs had deteritotated so.

NPIP 56-378, AI tested Clean, Farm Inspected by Clemson Poultry
Breeding Orientals,Games and Ducks;
With a large selection of Asil
And the largest flock of Cubalayas east of the Mississippi
Reply
NPIP 56-378, AI tested Clean, Farm Inspected by Clemson Poultry
Breeding Orientals,Games and Ducks;
With a large selection of Asil
And the largest flock of Cubalayas east of the Mississippi
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General breed discussions & FAQ