The Buckeye Thread

[007medic]

slfarms,

With respect, I read and considered your thought process about wings, saddles, volume and mass displacement and came to a conclusion that were there actual flesh and bone displacing feathers it would be a valid concern but we're talking feathers. And not just feathers, but the tips and ends of feathers that we all know have very little mass.

I also asked myself some questions as to what is my own personal vision and about how Buckeye truly is supposed to look. This 'poofieness' you speak of, this is something you've observed in your own birds? in other peoples birds (having seen them live and in person and not via the treacherous online photo)? really, this is a problem facing the breed?

 

[cgmccary]

nevermind

 

[slfarms]

slfarms, 

With respect, I read and considered your thought process about wings, saddles, volume and mass displacement and came to a conclusion that were there actual flesh and bone displacing feathers it would be a valid concern but we're talking feathers.  And not just feathers, but the tips and ends of feathers that we all know have very little mass.

I also asked myself some questions as to what is my own personal vision and about how Buckeye truly is supposed to look. This 'poofieness' you speak of, this is something you've observed in your own birds? in other peoples birds (having seen them live and in person and not via the treacherous online photo)? really, this is a problem facing the breed?

Thank you for a respectful response. . I don't have the issue in the birds I am breeding. I have seen it in birds I have observed at shows and also in some back yards. And yes the dreaded internet pictures.

What I find I interesting is that a breed like the old English game bantam should have a well folded wing tucked under the saddle feathers yet they don't have the poofiness I have observed in some buckeyes. I raise these as well and see wings to low and to high not only in mine but in other breeders. It's a known issue that all breeders are working on together.

I agree that the tip of the wing may not have much mass but if sitting to high couldn't it displace the saddle feathers? Kind of like putting your hand in your armpit which makes your arm stick out farther than intended? Lol gross analogy but easy way to describe what I'm thinking. My fingers don't have much mass but displace my arm. Idk

 

[slfarms]

Chris Who or what breeders are trying to endorse birds with lower wing carriage? As I stated to Medic I've not observed this in my flock or the poof in the saddle feathers. My cockerels have a nice well folded wing per SOP without poof of feathers in the saddle (which the SOP doesn't endorse)

What lines are producing the fluffiness in the thigh feathers, cushion/poof on the hens backs and poof of feathers on the males saddles?

 

[PA Farmer24]

I think at times some of the photos that have been shown on social media of birds having what would be considered low wing carriage,may result in heat issues. It seems that at times when these where being shown by others that it was during the summer months and the birds were not holding their natural position. I know that there were some comments about my roo and well I can say that yes it was during the summer and the temps were very hot. I have been watching them since them and can say that his wings don't always stay low but most times will be back in their normal position. I also have seen this in person at recent shows during the summer on buckeyes and other breeds. Post to the owners and they agreed that it was due to high heat temps and that normally the wings would not be that low. One even showed me pictures of the same birds when temps were not so high and well the wings were not showing to be low. All this fuss is just that fuss I believe and I think that some in here respond with what I think is an attitude towards others and that needs to stop. Everyone is going to agree on some points that the SoP states while on other characteristics they will just agree to disagree. Again it is in the eye of the beholder and is open to interpretation. Same goes with the judges. They will read it one way and you will read it another. No one will ever read it the same and agree. For this reason I don't and won't show birds as people are just to darn hostile towards others and it shows. But I do want to help better the breed. I can do that without showing and continue to breed, hatch, raise and help educate others on the breed.

 

[buffalogal]

Quote:

Thanks Melody. I learn something new every day on here.

LOL I should have added that those males that are all fired up to breed without first displaying the necessary courtship behaviors have the shortest lifespan of all. Not because they wear out, but because once I observe a cockerel hanging out near the roosts in the evening, trying to run down hens and breed them without attempting to win over any hens of their own, they are caught and sold as soon as possible.

This is a rather large free range flock, and as much as possible I want the birds to be able to engage in whatever fascinating behaviors they choose. If this were a more natural setting, the younger cockerels would be driven out to the border of the cock's territory where they would try to 'steal' pullets and older hens away from the resident cock and eventually move off with them to start their own flock. If an area is full of predators, those young males are the first ones to get picked off, which I suspect is the real reason non monogamous flocking birds are born in a 50/50 male to female ratio. All those extra boys were born to be lunch, allowing the more valuable females and the dominant male to reproduce.

But this is not a natural setting. Here, the birds are drawn back to one area because they love me. (Ah ha ha ha) No, really, it's the food. The attraction of a steady food supply means the young males aren't as inclined to strike out on their own and the protection of the guard dogs means they will be more likely to return if they do. Anyway, it's too disruptive to have all that worthless testosterone running around. Left to their own devices, they quickly pick up bad habits, so if they aren't an exceptional looking bird that I will use for breeding I periodically play Coyote and remove them from the flock myself.

 

[cgmccary]

nevermind

 

[HappyBuckeye]

I keep seeing this reference to the wings being carried lower. I believe it is some deliberate attempt for folks to somehow get their bird's wing carriage (which is too low) accepted as the standard.

However, on this topic, the SOP could not be more clear for the Buckeye: Wings: medium in size; well folded, fronts covered by breast feathers, points by saddle feathers. I specifically cull birds who do not meet this criteria because I think it may point to other problems in the body. I also have not had the problem except in my first male Buckeye who I bred one time because he was all I had (and I was very proud of the scrawny thing).

It is a complete fabrication to suggest that the tips of the feathers are somehow causing fluff to show up (or pushing up) somewhere more or less. This is an invented problem which simply does not exist.

I have the problem of wings too low in my La Fleche. In my opinion and others who have looked at this, the La Fleche wing carriage might be improved if the width of the body was what it was supposed to be and that the wings would have a proper body to sit up on. In some of the Buckeyes where I have seen the wings pointed down or too low, it appeared they looked rangy to me meaning they were narrow in the body. The ones I have handle were not as substantial as I would have liked. They may have been of proper weight and size but their frames were somehow lacking. This would be a difficult problem to solve as it is in my La Fleche.

If the wings are not well folded with the tips hidden by the saddle feathers, then you are not breeding by the SOP description -- I do not think there is any other way to look at it.

In regard to tail angle, I have some who tails are too high, some are too low and some are about right. From my observation, a nice wide back will sometimes result in a lower tail angle. I am a stickler for wide backs as the SOP for a Buckeye says the back should be broad throughout its length . . . this balance of wide back and broad with a tail angle of exactly 40 degrees is hard to achieve for me. I will not punt the better bodies for a tail angle a few degrees here or there. Also, I look at those main tail feathers when looking at tail angle. I do not use a protractor and I look at the bird at different times as they have the ability to raise or lower their tail angle.

Fluff in the saddle area & too much in the thigh area, is something I have been battling in my Buckeyes since I got them & I suspect I will battle it from here on out.

On what is "well arched" {e.g Buckeyes Jersey Giants, Wyandottes, Dominiques, New Hampshire}, "arched" {Javas, Rocks} or "slightly arched" {e.g. Chantecler} or not arched at all {e.g. Rhode Island Red}, you will admit it does not get any more arched than "well arched?" I believe this is another instance of a fabricated problem where one does not exist.

FWIW, I did enter the offspring in a show. Out of 13 Buckeyes (2 breeders & show with 1600-1700 birds), he was Reserve Breed, but I had my big rooster (from another of my groups & not related) in the show who won LF Champion twice (as a cockerel and as a cock) & who always got Best of Breed in every show I entered him; however, the judge put a large exclamation point on offspring's show card and told me afterward that he was a really nice bird too. I know it is just one judge's opinion, but if his neck was so off the SOP, I think that he would not have been even selected RB -- just my opinion.

The Sire bird I used only once for breeding. The offspring I will be using again this next season. Here is a picture of an offspring's progeny (not quite 7 months, weighing at about 7.5 lbs so three generations (and he would not be still for the photo) here:

Ok, I'm going to make this short and sweet, because quite frankly I'm exhausted from gathering and selling chickens and turkeys all day for customer's Thanksgiving dinners.

I mentioned the wing carriage because in my opinion that high of a wing carriage draws the eye to the fluff in the legs. Simply an aesthetic thing. To me, it looks like an unnatural wing angle. I am certainly not suggesting the wing carriage causes the fluff in the legs or in the saddle. I think it is an over all fluff problem as you said.

No doubt you have the ability to build a large bodied bird and I am not suggesting your Buckeyes are junk. Clearly they are show quality and close to the SoP. However, IMO, under your current method of selection, you are building a bird that is so wide with a back so long that it can't carry it's tail properly. It seems to me you are aiming for all long horizontal lines. The back is horizontal and parallel to the ground and you are breeding to get the wings to do the same thing based on your interpretation of the SoP. If you keep moving in this direction you may begin to having wings that have a higher angle than the tails. My question is at what point do you say the body is where it needs to be and start working on the other traits that make an impressive Buckeye?

If I were faced with the same collection of traits, which I am not and mine are no where near show quality, my steps to move my line further towards the SoP would be to select for a back that "slopes slightly downward to the base of the tail" which would help improve the tail angle as it somewhat has in the progeny above (unless that is an optical illusion from the camera angle) and I would keep working on the fluff. I would be looking for a more streamlined and flowing neck with longer hackle feathers so the curvature is more readily visible and the same in the saddle, aiming for more flowing and longer feathering with less fluff, so that they cover the wing bows and wing tips as they should. My guess is that slight tilt of the back would also tilt the wings and would get rid of the horizontal parallel.

I don't imagine these comments will be well received, but thank you anyway for your time and the discussion.

 

[slfarms]

HappyBuckeye suggested my bird's wings were too high. You suggested that high wing carriage was the reason for fluff under the one cockerel's saddle area. Both suggestions were wrong as I explained.

In previous posts on this thread, a couple of people have shown photos of birds with wrong wing carriage (i.e. way too low, pointed downward, tips showing -- not kidding). Those wings were not per SOP. That fact was pointed out which caused quite an outcry from several posters who continued to say the wing carriage was correct. Maybe you were not posting then so did not read thoseposts. If interested, you can go back and read them.

If your wing carriage is like the photos of the cockerels I have posted, then you do not have a problem. If you are interested in knowing "Who or what breeders are trying to endorse birds with lower wing carriage," then you will have to go back and look through the thread -- I do not know who everybody is on this thread and it does not matter "who" but only that those wings were wrong in their carriage. You could ask whose birds they are -- whoever the posters were? It was as recent as this current Buckeye thread.

Cushions are not specific to anyone's lines. Fluffiness in the thighs is not specific to any one line. They appear in individual birds.  Some people seem to always be talking about color problems and comb problems. Those are not problems I have. I guess we all want to discuss our own problems. That is what we are here for.

I have read back through the posts and the only person that stuck out that people insisted had low wing carriage was Joe. I've been to his farm several times and let me tell you those statements are wrong. It is of poor form to suggest he breeds birds with low wing carriage. The man has unofficially accomplished the first ever grand master for the breed which further illustrates anyones comments about the wings on his birds to be poor taste. He's done what those who came before him couldn't in a very short amount of time. Instead of disagreeing or discredit in maybe we should all be asking him for his assistance in our programs?
No breeder that I know of breeds low wings. One thing that I can tell you is that Joe doesn't have problems with poofy thighs and saddles; so to say every line of buckeyes has this problem is incorrect. I myself have a cock bird and three hens from his line that I am using to reestablish my flock after the fox kill. The cock bird is a breeder only yet has medium saddle, well tucked wings and no saddle poof. Hens don't have cushion nor do they have fluffiness in the thighs and bum area.

You had mentioned previously having an issue getting to the correct tail angle...just a suggestion if you will take the assistance. If you breed a cock or cockerel with a little less width to the back it should correct the tail angle. Trying to help a fellow breeder as I feel we need to help each other for the betterment of the breed.

 

[cgmccary]

nevermind