Originally Posted by DylansMom
I do not think I consider it a higher standard, just a different standard. I am thinking the bird FBC calls a "Loud Pied" is the same bird I call a "Pied White Eye" and to me a "Pied White Eye" could be just that or if marked correctly it could be a "Loud Pied White Eye" But whether or not it is loud for me has nothing to do with the white eyes, and that is where our opinions differ.
Exactly! It's different, not "higher" necessarily. And it seems confusing things unnecessarily to me... and aggregating things which other folks hadn't been. But that's why I asked where it came from, because I could always have picked it up incorrectly when I first heard it.
Without standard definitions or a strong consensus, anyone can (in reality) call birds whatever they like... Common usage just gets us a little more understanding when we talk to each other (you say "rose," Penelope says "cabbage," I say "cottage rose"), but no guarantee anyone will adhere to it, and there's not anyone who can define things for all... Regional differences develop in terminology and among different breeders and hobbyists... it's hard to have a "common" language.
The particular problem here is that the leucistic genes, especially pied and white eye, can express differently in different birds, even with the same genes, and in the case of white eye, differently from year to year even in the same bird.
We always run up against the difference between genotype and phenotype... and what we "call" or "name" a bird. Are we trying to "name" the bird based on its appearance? Based on its genes and genetic potential? Based on both? When we say to someone, this bird is an "xyz," are we referring to its outward appearance, or to what we believe to be its genetic makeup, or some combination of the two?
As far as I know, the UPA has never defined different levels of pied, other than adding pied, silver pied and white eye to the variety list. The variety list doesn't distinguish birds which are pied from loud pied, from reverse pied, from dark pied... I don't know what their discussions have been, but I can imagine that trying to do so would be a nightmare.
So we are left with folks attempting to apply various adjectives to attempt to describe the bird's appearance, which relate more or less visibly to the bird's genetic makeup, to the extent that we understand how those genes express and interact... collectively, not sure that leucistic genes are completely understood in our birds yet, much less whether a consensus has been reached.
I guess discussions like this may help build consensus, but I'm still curious where the white eye addition to loud pied came from, and whether there are other folks using it like this. I'm also curious what our Australian friends are calling their various pied birds these days? Can anyone tell us?
Edited by Garden Peas - 1/25/15 at 9:53am