Cream Legbar Pictures

[ChicKat]

They are so adorable that first week...

so true!

That one really thinks you are her mama. That loving look! or is it for the camera only?

It's for the camera only....lol!

 

[DoubleMM]

Adonis and Orion

Bob





Bob again

Zeus

Any thought on how they are developing?

 

[ChicKat]

Wow--- looks like you have the 45-degree tail angle down to a T.

 

[DoubleMM]

Hoping the tail angle holds as they grow. Their combs and crests are nice. Zeus may end up with some red in his lobes. Backs are long and breasts are prominent.

How do I go about checking the breast bone?

 

[ChicKat]

Hoping the tail angle holds as they grow. Their combs and crests are nice. Zeus may end up with some red in his lobes. Backs are long and breasts are prominent.

How do I go about checking the breast bone?

Good question for GaryDean26 -- or get this 100-year old book -- Free on Google Reads..a friend from BYC alerted me to it -- it is 'The Call of the Hen" by Walter Hogan -- I think he's the guy who figured out in the first place the number of fingers between the pelvic - etc. He is the author-- anyway that is his method. -- and I'm not anyway near done reading it may take me a few years... -- so I'm not sure it is in there -- but lots of down-to-earth poultry stuff...

Here's a link on Google Books

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Call_of_the_Hen.html?id=PCkuAAAAYAAJ

which incidentally, one of my pullets-- just now coming into laying age for a CL -- but started earlier...and is doing a good job as a layer -- has the correct finger width between her pelvic bones..I was holding her today - and thought -- naw -- she's too young to measure up---- She only weighs in at 4.5 pounds too--- so she still has some growing ahead of her....

 

[KPenley]

Hoping the tail angle holds as they grow.  Their combs and crests are nice.  Zeus may end up with some red in his lobes.  Backs are long and breasts are prominent. 

How do I go about checking the breast bone?

Length or straightness? I hold the chicken with their back to my chest/ stomach, feet sticking straight out away from me. You will feel the keel sticking out about where the breast meets the underside. You can use your fingers to feel for straightness, dips, or bends.I use my thumb at the start if the bone and my pointer or middle finger to measure the keel's length.

This video doesn't show how to measure keel length but it does show how to hold a bird to check it, about 3 minutes in.

 

[Junibutt]

Good question for GaryDean26 -- or get this 100-year old book -- Free on Google Reads..a friend from BYC alerted me to it -- it is 'The Call of the Hen" by Walter Hogan -- I think he's the guy who figured out in the first place the number of fingers between the pelvic - etc. He is the author-- anyway that is his method. -- and I'm not anyway near done reading it may take me a few years... -- so I'm not sure it is in there -- but lots of down-to-earth poultry stuff...

Here's a link on Google Books

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Call_of_the_Hen.html?id=PCkuAAAAYAAJ

which incidentally, one of my pullets-- just now coming into laying age for a CL -- but started earlier...and is doing a good job as a layer -- has the correct finger width between her pelvic bones..I was holding her today - and thought -- naw -- she's too young to measure up---- She only weighs in at 4.5 pounds too--- so she still has some growing ahead of her....

Wow that book is a great read. I have only skimmed through it and was reading about pre-potency. Is his method still valid? If yes, does anyone of you use it to for selection and breeding?

 

[GaryDean26]

I have read the section in The Call of the Hen on pre-potency but never have used it, and really don't understand it well enough for it to be any use to me. While it takes a lot more time and resources the progeny test makes more sense to me. Rather than putting your cockerel in a gunny sack to measure the back lobe of his skull (which I think would be complicated with a crested breed). You pair a cockerel with a few hens that have know 1st year laying records. Then you track the laying records of a few pullets from each pairing and average the daughter's 1st year laying records with her mother's laying record to determine the contribution from the cockerel. An index number is assigned to the cockerel so you know if you have a 270 egg/year cockerel or a 130 egg/year cockerel.

Another method that I find easier to use is from a paper called Breading and Culling by Head Points. It also looks at the head of the bird to identify those that are proponent for high production. You don't have to bag a cockerel and measure his back lobe though. It looks at the curvature, depth, length of the head and the positions of the eyes. I assume that it identifies the same birds as the Hogan pre-potency test would. Dual purpose breeders also don't like the head points method because it again moves towards narrow body light weight birds.

I use to the best of my ability the Hogan method, head points, and this paper on Culling Farm Poultry which focuses on monthly evaluation from August to September to see who is laying as well as identifying which hens take the least time off to molt. All of the methods take practice and I am still in the learning curve.

 

[Junibutt]

I have read the section in The Call of the Hen on pre-potency but never have used it, and really don't understand it well enough for it to be any use to me. While it takes a lot more time and resources the progeny test makes more sense to me. Rather than putting your cockerel in a gunny sack to measure the back lobe of his skull (which I think would be complicated with a crested breed). You pair a cockerel with a few hens that have know 1st year laying records. Then you track the laying records of a few pullets from each pairing and average the daughter's 1st year laying records with her mother's laying record to determine the contribution from the cockerel. An index number is assigned to the cockerel so you know if you have a 270 egg/year cockerel or a 130 egg/year cockerel.

Another method that I find easier to use is from a paper called Breading and Culling by Head Points. It also looks at the head of the bird to identify those that are proponent for high production. You don't have to bag a cockerel and measure his back lobe though. It looks at the curvature, depth, length of the head and the positions of the eyes. I assume that it identifies the same birds as the Hogan pre-potency test would. Dual purpose breeders also don't like the head points method because it again moves towards narrow body light weight birds.

I use to the best of my ability the Hogan method, head points, and this paper on Culling Farm Poultry which focuses on monthly evaluation from August to September to see who is laying as well as identifying which hens take the least time off to molt. All of the methods take practice and I am still in the learning curve.

While the progeny test is more definitive but as you said takes a very long period of time and resources. And you are right, Hogan and head points methods may not be very good for dual purpose breeds. I bet it would take hundreds of birds of practice in a short period of time to even learn how to do it. Hopefully, one of these days someone will produce a software where you will feed an image of the head and the software will do the job. I bet that programmer/researcher/publisher will make a lot of money.

 

[GaryDean26]

When I first tried the Hogan method I got pop sickle sticks taped them together for 1/8", 1/4", 3/8", 1/2" to get the feel of what a 1/4" in pelvic bone felt like compared to a 1/2". Forget trying to use caliper on the hens pelvic bones. The hens won't like it and you won't be able to tell if you have it in the right place or not.

I used the Hogan method on about Qty (15) one-year-old Cream Legbars my first time I used it. Judging condition and width of pelvic bones was difficult for me. I was happy with the 4 hens I kept to breed though. They breeding pens has out laid the laying hens almost every month. I can't say that they are anywhere close to the number I predicted for each bird though.