Belgian Watermaal Bantams - a cousin fo d'Anvers/d'Uccles!(pic heavy)

Ok, for all those folks out there who are a fan of the Belgian tribe, this is the third main member of this bantam tribe that is a bit overshadowed by the d'Uccle and the d'Anver. There was a post on here titled "Watermaalsche Bantams" but I thought I would restart the thread with the Americanized name as it has been written in the American Bantam Associations Standard of Perfection. I would like to post some information on this breed for everybody to familiarize themselves with it.

But first some background information! I have been a long time admirer of Belgian bantams myself and have had the d'Uccle and d'Anver both. There is a third member that everybody seems to leave out, and that is the Watermaal. There are rumpless varieties of each of these - namely the d'Everberge (rumpless d'Uccle), d'Grubbe (rumpless d'Anver) and lastly and most rare of all the Bosvoorde (rumpless Watermaal). I have never actually obtained purebred Watermaal stock - the breed is fairly elusive in the states and I just don't have the money or desire to do a major importation, particularly when the genetics are all in the palm of my hand.

Since I loved both the d'Uccle and the d'Anver, naturally I wanted to give the Watermaal a try, and that is how I undertook project Watermaal.
Here are some pictures of what I have started, they are not perfect! But they are making leaps and bounds in the right direction every generation. Perhaps there are other members on this forum from outside the US who have pictures of their Watermaal bantams that they could share for an example of higher quality stock?

At any rate, I am having a blast working on mine and am excited to share my progress:
My favorites are as follows - a Blue Quail pullet, a Blue pullet and the triple spiked rosecomb on my blue male



The following are links because I understand how tedius it can be waiting around for pictures to load:
The splash pullet (a little dirty on the tail, but oh well...)
http://belgiandanver.webs.com/photos/Watermaal-Project/chickenpics%20080.JPG
Blue Quail cockerel - crest is a bit scant and he has black skin like a silkie, but I think he will be valuable to keep on hand anyway
http://belgiandanver.webs.com/photos/Watermaal-Project/chickenpics%20049.JPG

Would like to mention that the Watermaal standard is not published in the ABA because it is listed as an inactive breed. HOWEVER, it IS recognized and it does have a standard here in the United States. The recognized varieties of the breed here are as follows: Black, Blue, Buff, Mottled, Quail and White
Because this is such a rare breed in the US that is not commonly sought out and because there are few people who know a significant amount about this bantam and also because the standard is not actively published in the ABA standard of perfection, I am adding it here so those who are interested can better familairize themselves:
ABA d’Watermael Written Standards
Translated from German Standard

Watermaal Bantam
Origin: Belgium. American Status: Rare, if at all.
Note: Should be preserved because of unique three-spiked rose comb.

Weights
Cock: 26 ounces Hen: 22 ounces
Cockerel: 22 ounces Pullet: 20 ounces

Shape of Male

COMB: Rose -– broad, rather short, nearly square in front, sitting firmly and evenly on head, top level, covered with fine points, free from hollows, with three spikes that are round at the base to their tips, each tapering to a fine point, the middle spike being longer than the two outer spikes that press down on the tassel.
TASSEL: A tuft or crest of feathers rising from the rear of head at rear of comb, falling gracefully over back neck.
BEAK: Short, strong, well curved.
FACE: Fine in quality, nearly concealed by relatively long muff feathers.
BROW: Heavily feathered.
EYES: Bold, prominent.
WATTLES: Rudimentary only.
EAR LOBES: Very small, inconspicuous, and hidden by muffs.
BEARD & MUFFS: Abundant, very fully developed, the whole forming a collar of three barely separated ovals, giving muffed effect.
HEAD: Appearing to be large because of tassel.
NECK: Medium length, feathers abundant, convexly arched on the order of what is termed “bull necked”.
HACKLE: Entirely covering shoulders and most of back, forming a closely joined cape in front of neck.
BACK: Moderately broad and short, slanting noticeably from shoulders to tail, rather abrupt angle at juncture with tail.
SADDLE: Profuse, medium length lower saddle feathers.
TAIL: Main Tail -– feathers strong, of medium width, moderately spread at all times, carried a little short of the perpendicular, not hidden by sickle feathers.
Sickle -- two main sickles slightly curved, ending in a point at their extremities.
Lesser Sickles -- rising above one another fan-like, ending in point at their extremities.
Coverts -- broad, filling in space between sickles and saddle.
WINGS: Moderately large, carried well back and down below the tail, lower edge slightly above hocks.
Shoulders & Fronts -- well concealed by hackle.
Primaries -- moderately long, concealed by secondaries.
Secondaries -- moderately long and broad.
BREAST: Very broad and deep, upper part well developed and carried well forward.
BODY & STERN: Body -- deep, short, stubby. Stern -- fluff, short.
LEGS & TOES: Legs -- set well apart when viewed from front.
Lower Thighs -- short, stout at top, tapering neatly to hocks, heavily feathered.
Shanks -- medium length, smooth, round, stocky.
Spurs -- short, fine, set low.
Toes -- four, straight, well and evenly spread.
APPEARANCE: Proud, noticeably erect.

Shape of Female

COMB: Rose -– broad, rather short, nearly square in front, sitting firmly and evenly on head, top level, covered with fine points, free from hollows, with three spikes that are round at the base to their tips, each tapering to a fine point, the middle spike being longer than the two outer spikes that press down on the tassel.
TASSEL: A small, half globular crest of feathers, rising from rear of head at rear of comb, falling gracefully over back of neck.
BEAK: Short, strong, well curved.
FACE: Fine in quality, concealed muffs.
BROW: Heavily feathered.
EYES: Bold, prominent.
WATTLES: Rudimentary only.
EAR LOBES: Very small, inconspicuous, and hidden by muffs.
BEARD & MUFFS: Abundant, very fully developed, the whole forming a collar of three barely separated ovals, giving muffed effect.
HEAD: Appearing to be rather large due to heavy feathering, reminding one of an owl, carried well back on a parallel line with tip of tail.
NECK: Short, convexly arched, feathers forming a ruffle behind neck, feathers broad and covering shoulders, but not front of neck.
BACK: Moderately broad, short, slanting noticeably from shoulders to tail.
CUSHION: Profuse, feathers broad.
TAIL: Main Tail -- feathers strong, medium width, top feather slightly curved in a convex manner, not too widely spread at a little short of the perpendicular.
Coverts -- abundant, flowing well up tail.
WINGS: Moderately large, carried well up back, lower edges slightly above hocks.
Shoulders & Fronts -- concealed by hackle.
Bows & Coverts -- prominent, well rounded.
Primaries -- medium width, concealed by secondaries.
Secondaries -- medium length, broad.
BREAST: Very broad and deep, upper part well developed and carried well forward.
BODY & STERN: Body -- deep, short, stubby. STERN -- fluff, short.
LEGS & TOES: Legs -- set well apart, straight when viewed from front.
Lower Thighs -- short, stout at top, tapering neatly to hocks, heavily feathered.
Shanks -- medium length, smooth, nicely scaled.
Toes -- four, well and evenly spread.
APPEARANCE: small, plump, sedate.

DISQUALIFICATIONS
Absence of beard or muffs -- Wattles severed or removed -- More or less than three spikes on comb.

DEFECTS
Head carried too far forward -- Comb with concave or hollow center -- Large or conspicuous ear lobes -- Underdeveloped beard or muffs -- Back too nearly level and too long -- Excessive flow of sickles in males -- Excessive length of legs.

Was just looking over this old post and realized I forgot to add the rest of the standard information for each of the recognized varieties under the ABA. Here it is:

COLOR OF MALE AND FEMALE BY VARIETY

BLACK WATERMAAL BANTAM
COMB, FACE, WATTLES AND EAR LOBES: Bright red. BEAK: Swarthy horn. EYES: Black BEARD & MUFF: Black SHANKS & TOES: Bluish Black.
PLUMAGE: Refer to black color description.

BLUE WATERMAAL BANTAM
COMB, FACE, WATTLES AND EAR LOBES: Bright red. BEAK: Swarthy horn. EYES: Reddish bay. BEARD & MUFF: Blue. SHANKS & TOES: Light slaty blue.
PLUMAGE: Refer to blue color description

BUFF WATERMALL BANTAM
COMB, FACE, WATTLES AND EAR LOBES: Bright red. BEAK: Horn. EYES: Reddish bay.
BEARD & MUFF: Buff. SHANKS & TOES: Slaty white.
PLUMAGE: Refer to buff color description.

MOTTLED WATERMAAL BANTAM
COMB, FACE, WATTLES AND EAR LOBES: Bright red. BEAK: Swarthy horn. EYES: Dark brown. BEARD & MUFF: Same as breast. SHANKS & TOES: Bluish slate.
PLUMAGE: Refer to mottled color description.

QUAIL WATERMAAL BANTAM
COMB, FACE, WATTLES AND EAR LOBES: Bright red. BEAK: Horn, streaked with grey.
EYES: Dark brown. BEARD & MUFF: Same as breast. SHANKS & TOES: Slaty blue.
PLUMAGE: Refer to quail color description.

WHITE WATERMAAL BANTAM
COMB, FACE, WATTLES AND EAR LOBES: Bright red. BEAK: Light horn. EYES: Reddish bay. BEARD & MUFF: Same as breast. SHANKS & TOES: Slaty blue.
PLUMAGE: Refer to white color description.

This was the original logo I made for the Watermaal club of America. Notice the name actually reflects the overseas name of the bird. Watermaal is the spelling in the ABA. At any rate, this logo gives a good example of the Watermaal type in one person's interpretation of the standard:

Good looking birds and a wealth of info. Thanks. All I have seen is show pictures from Europe (couldn't read none of the text). I didn't know they had a three spiked comb. Any tips on how to get the combs right.

jj

Best tip is find a d'Anver rooster or hen with a double spiked comb and when using single combed bantams show favoritism towards single combs with side sprigs near the blade. The triple spiked gene seems to be linked to side sprigs and show tight affiliation with crests. Good luck!

I will be on the look out for side sprigs. I know some one with oegb's who has that problem.

jj

Mind me asking what you used in addition to d'anvers to get these? I have a friend who crossed a polish bantam with a d'anver and got similar looking birds, even with the spiked comb because her polish had too many points. She just kept the hens around as broodies but knowing now what I know, I should have persued them

Ask and you shall receive. I will answer your questions to the best of my knowledge.

Basically you can use anything with a crest and breed it to a d'Anver and eventually get what you want. Depending on what you start with will determine how long that road is going to be. Polish have a special advantage because not only are they clean legged (and many of them have slate shanks), but their v-shaped comb lends itself quite nicely to adding spikes on the back of a rose comb. I am not sure how the genes interact exactly, I just know that some people have used Polish and it worked out nicely for them with the triple spiked rose comb. The Polish do have a very large crest - too big for the Watermaals, but the F1 generation will not have the domed skull, which is a good thing. Watermaals are not supposed to have domed skulls. They are supposed to have something in between being a tassel/tuft and a crest. It is easier to downsize the crest, in my experience. As I said, I was aware of another breeder who opted for the Polish route who made good progress the first few generations. They were affiliated with the Watermaal club and since that went dormant I haven't heard from them really.

I personally used silkies and silkie mixes. Not today's silkies - the oldschool silkies that came from way back when the standard actually called for a triple spike rose comb. We are talking way back here. In fact, I don't even know which set of standards I read that out of - whether an old American or an old European standard. Yes, silkies used to have a standard that called for a triple spiked rose comb instead of a walnut comb (if I remember correctly there was a transitionary period where you could choose one or the other). At some point the triple spiked comb became undesirable in the eyes of the silkie breeders and was lost in favor of the walnut comb. However, many lines still carry this triple spike, especially hobby breeders with backyard silkies and silkie mixes. The drawbacks to using the silkies are numerous: black skin, polydactyl feet, big blocky type, feathered feet to name a few. It takes many, many backcrosses to d'Anvers if you choose to use the silkies - in the meantime that has a way of eliminating crests and even causing several birds to pop up with single spiked combs (unless you can find a double-spiked d'Anver comb). I was a bit fortunate in having a couple of d'Anvers with double spiked combs to help me along the way.

Alternatively you could use birds like the pyncheon, and probably even something like an Appenzeller Spitzhauben if that is what you have available to you. I have even heard of somebody wanting to use brabanters, although they are quite large so I imagine that individual really had their work cut out for them. So there you have it.

I am always surprised at how the birds that prove to be most useful seem to pop up in the strangest places.

I was out looking at my pyncheons today. They are not very good pyncheons, domed skulls, white legs and way to much white overall. But I did notice that the back of their comb is thickening up like there will be side sprigs on a few of them. They a young yet so it is hard to say. But I plan on having some F1's next year and go from there.