Barnevelder breeders lets work together and improve the breed

[tls_ranch]

Ok, here's my last rant about the lacing issue.


I was attracted to barnevelders because the hens were so beautiful with their intricate double lacing. I thought amazing....I can have a whole flock of stunning hens and a pretty rooster too. Most other breeds have gorgeous fancy roosters, but rather plain hens. The Barnevelder hen is the STAR of this breed....she is amazingly beautiful with intricate lacing, lays well and produces a beautiful rich brown egg. Most people keep chickens for the hens...not the pretty roosters that are illegal in many areas due to noise issues.


Now a lot of research has proven that breeding for laced breasted males will result in poor female lacing. I do not want to keep a flock of 12 -20 poorly laced hens that I can't show in order to keep 2-3 laced breasted roosters for show. I would rather breed for stunningly, laced hens that amaze everyone that sees them. Hens with intricate lacing that can be enjoyed, admired and kept as pets by people who can't even keep roosters.


Trisha


PS,


Notice that the Barnevelder club logo has a picture of a hen...not a rooster. They have decided that the hen is more important...after all hens lay the eggs right?

Short comments; 

Good to see all the recent posts.

Breast color male
I know you did not exactly propose it Trisha but it sounds like you would be in favor of changing the APA standard for the breast color of the roosters.  I am inclined to agree with that position.    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I happen to think the black breasted males look sharp and I recall reading the justification for establishing males with laced breasts in USA was sort of arbitrary and not based on a good population laced breasted males.  

We would be much further ahead as breeders would be doing the breed a greater service by changing the breast to black.   I would just add a me too to all the reasons Trisha gave on her recent post.   I am not sure how to go about changing the standard and doubt if I will lead the charge since I am not too concerned with showing, but for the long term good of the breed I would help with the effort.   I have not seen many males in feather or pictures with the breast as stated in the SOP.  

Silvers
I agree with Donna, that silver hen of yours look very good for lacing Trisha.  She has nice silver too.  Mine are not looking well as juvies and have too much red coming through, ho hum. 

As far as yellow legs go, I like them screaming bright yellow on my Barnevelders.  I guess I took Pickledchicken's comment about toning down the yellow legs as a tongue-in-cheek compliment to Trisha about her birds leg color.  Maybe  maybe not hard to tell on here sometimes when people are kidding or serious. 

Marigolds and yellow corn
try any garden center Royce, or grow your own from seed.  I never heard about using marigolds for yellowing, I will try it.   I agree that yellow corn and pasture or any green feed helps with leg yellow and yolk dark yellow.  Yellow corn gets a bad rap from some corners, but I feed it all the time in my scratch mix part yellow corn, part whole wheat and part whole oat as a base and now and then with other seeds.  If you want to increase the yellow in their legs and put yellow fat on your eating birds then feed yellow corn, if you want to put white fat on them then feed them oats.   When I am fattening my birds I feed corn to the yellow skinned birds and oats to the white skinned birds and I think it makes a better looking carcass.  Those that buy the eggs from me for the table are more impressed with dark yolk color than dark shell color, or so they say.

Nice to see all the new people coming to this thread.  Seems like the Barnevelders are doing well and gaining in popularity. 

I am done hatching for the summer but still have one pen together and have been selling eggs to people who's hens are going  broody.  We are just having our first hot weather (90's this week)  and I feel lucky when I hear the high temps some of you experience in CA, TX and AZ.  My birds are still on lush green pasture here in Western Oregon, a great climate for poultry I think.  Frozen combs? Not here.  Birds that die from heat waves? Not here.  Too much rain in the winter? Yep, Too muddy, Yep.  Well no where I have lived is perfect. .

Mink and pests
Are these wild mink or mink farm escapees?  I think a mink or a weasel can squeeze through a hole if their head can squeeze through.  They are tough customers on chickens and the weasels I have seen are smaller than mink.  I have seen both mink and weasel active in the daytime and used to see mink hunting in the cattails down at the lake when we would go fishing during the day.   I would try trapping them with a kill snare if I were you.  Put it in a tube leading into the coop, that way you will only kill a guilty one and you won't have to bait it. 

Speaking of pests, recently I opened the egg box after dark and in the dark I saw something move quickly with a bright white line and I don't have any chickens with white stripes and even if I did they wouldn't spend the night in the nest box.  Since then I am more careful about checking for eggs after dark.  I am not sure how the skunk got in the pen since I couldn't find any holes.  He was eating eggs after dark, so I baited a live trap with a couple tiny pullet eggs and caught him two days later.  He didn't kill my chickens luckily, but they roost a little higher than he can reach I think.   In BC you could also have pine martens and fishers, they are bigger than mink and weasels.   We were plagued with a bobcat several times, they can rip through a flock pretty fast too.  I have had some luck live trapping them too.  Around here possums often will kill young chickens if they can catch them huddled near the side of the pen at night.  So far this spring I have trapped coon, possum and skunk all relocated far away.  I am tempted to eat a possum one of these days, someone told me they taste like chicken. 

Andy

I have not seen said research but must admit that I don't have the time to research like I would like to.  I will say that with the RC's, that hasn't been my experience.  The lacing on the gals are just as good as my Standards.  So I guess I'll find out as I go along.  I also happen to think that the Barnie male is every bit as much a STAR of the breed as the females.  Just my personal opinion.  When the birds were accepted, as it is for every breed, there is a requirement to have males and females, young and old.  There's a reason for that.

I am totally opposed to changing the SOP just for the sake of going to an all black breast because it's "easier".  It's called the Standard of PERFECTION for a reason!  It ain't supposed to be easy.  I also do not see how we "would be much further ahead" by going back and destroying the foundation that has already been laid.  There was a LOT of effort undertaken by those who got the breed accepted into the APA in the first place.  To go back and try and reinvent the wheel at this point is not only going backwards but it also is doing a disservice to those who went thru the time, effort, and expense to get them accepted in the first place.  And I do not think it is doing the breed any disservice whatsoever to keep the SOP as it is right now.  Nor does it do the breed a greater service by changing to all black breasts in the males.  That is simply a personal preference and one that was not accepted when the breed was.

I would venture to guess that two of the reasons, Andy, that you haven't seen males with lacing in their breasts is because #1 - there aren't that many folks breeding and showing Barnies and #2 - there are likely even fewer who have made any attempt at all to get lacing in the breasts of the males.

I certainly respect you as a breeder and you're doing a fine job with your birds.  A very fine job.  But if you don't plan to show then why worry at all about what the SOP says?  Just breed your birds to whatever you want them to be.  Trisha, same thing.  If it turns out that double mating is required for nicely laced males and females, then so be it.  If you don't want to double mate, then just keep breeding and showing the females.  No problem.  The SOP for Barnies has been established for 22 years.  And now there's talk about changing it because it's easier to breed males without the lacing?  If we start down that road, why not let every green legged bird with a beard and muffs be called an Ameraucana?

Thanks for the heads up on the marigold.

God Bless,

Ok, not a rant just facts.

1) When first introduced to the poultry world Barnevelder males had solid black breasts.
2) The British later changed their standard to include laced breasts in the males to suit their needs and preferences.
3) The males used in the the APA qualifying meet had solid black breasts or near solid ( to look solid black).
4) Dr Netland who helped get Barnevelders accepted said that (22 years ago) the APA laced breast description was a mistake and should be corrected ASAP.
5). Just about all purebred Barnevelder males in the US already have solid black breasts or near solid. No where near as laced like your RC project or a Wyandotte.
6). The Dutch Barnevelder Club ( country of origin) researched this issue from 2009-2012 and now agree that the standard should be solid black breasts.
7) Genetically it makes sense to breed compatible sexes to meet the same standard.

I am not trying to change the standard because it would be easier for me to meet the standard to show. But, I do want to show someday...maybe when my kids are grown as i don't have much time for myself. I will continue to breed toward the Dutch standard even if that means having a pullet breeding line. Royce, maybe if you do go to that show in Holland you'll change your mind about the Dutch standard.

Trisha

 

[Outlier]

Ok, not a rant just facts.

1) When first introduced to the poultry world Barnevelder males had solid black breasts.
2) The British later changed their standard to include laced breasts in the males to suit their needs and preferences.
3) The males used in the the APA qualifying meet had solid black breasts.
4) Dr Netland who helped get Barnevelders accepted said that the (22 years ago) the APA laced breast description was a mistake and should be corrected ASAP.
5). Just about all purebred Barnevelder males in the US already have solid black breasts.
6). The Dutch Barnevelder Club ( country of origin) researched this issue from 2009-2012 and now agree that the standard should be solid black breasts.
7) Genetically it makes sense to breed compatible sexes to meet the same standard.

I am not trying to change the standard because it would be easier for me to meet the standard to show. But, I do want to show someday.

Trisha

Walt over on the Heritage Large Fowl thread mentioned a while back what it takes to have the standard changed as he is on that committee for the APA. He gets calls and emails from people wanting to have the standard changed, but it is usually just so that it matches what they have in their backyard. For example getting the New Hampshire standard changed to match the German New Hampshire imports which isn't going to happen. To get the standard changed you need a good story, and you seem to have one. The standard as it is now was admitted with a mistake made by those who worked to get the breed into the standard, and those original breeders have stated so.

I do see Tailfeathers' point however. It seems to me that you can make the standard say whatever you like, and from that point on, that's the way it is. Any further changes really are arbitrary. The British didn't care that the Dutch (breed origin) had male birds with black breasts; they made their standard the way they wanted. So why should the APA care if the British didn't? Many color patterns must be double matted, and the Barnevelder color pattern as it stands now is on that list. I'm sure at one point double mating wasn't necessary, but over time the desired aesthetic changed causing it to be necessary to win at shows. The brown leghorns had to be separated into light and dark due to this. Does it make sense to have a standard that makes the breeding of "ideal" males and females together incompatible due to the desired aesthetics? No, it is ridiculously counterintuitive and like having two separate breeds and calling them one, but common sense and aesthetics don't always seem compatible. Especially when you look at the kind of breeding being done. I've seen white leghorns double mated to get the type the judges want in each gender. It's arbitrary preference that has nothing to do with the standard, productivity or functionality of the breed. I doubt anyone will ever be able to justify double mating with anything other than a pure, arbitrary aesthetics.

So from what I've seen, what you've got going for you regarding getting the standard changed is that there was a mistake from the beginning. Other arguments really are just arbitrary due to aesthetics. History and common sense be d***ned.

 

[Tailfeathers]

Ok, not a rant just facts.

1) When first introduced to the poultry world Barnevelder males had solid black breasts.
2) The British later changed their standard to include laced breasts in the males to suit their needs and preferences.
3) The males used in the the APA qualifying meet had solid black breasts or near solid ( to look solid black).
4) Dr Netland who helped get Barnevelders accepted said that (22 years ago) the APA laced breast description was a mistake and should be corrected ASAP.
5). Just about all purebred Barnevelder males in the US already have solid black breasts or near solid. No where near as laced like your RC project or a Wyandotte.
6). The Dutch Barnevelder Club ( country of origin) researched this issue from 2009-2012 and now agree that the standard should be solid black breasts.
7) Genetically it makes sense to breed compatible sexes to meet the same standard.

I am not trying to change the standard because it would be easier for me to meet the standard to show. But, I do want to show someday...maybe when my kids are grown as i don't have much time for myself. I will continue to breed toward the Dutch standard even if that means having a pullet breeding line. Royce, maybe if you do go to that show in Holland you'll change your mind about the Dutch standard.

Trisha

1) Trisha, would you mind sharing where you got that fact from? Granted, I have not invested a ton of time researching the origins of the Barnies but I've done a fair amount reading on the breed and never came across that. The closest I've ever seen was some commentary written by Hans Schippers who is often referred to as the "Dutch Authority" on Barnevelders but I've never actually read anything by the folks who "introduced" them (developed them).

3) I don't know where you got that info but it's just plain wrong. I know Bjorn and he was one of the original folks at the 1991 show that got them accepted. I've talked with him. Several times. I am also good friends with one of the other five breeders. Lowell Barber and Horst Grecmiel both now deceased were the other two. The birds may have had the "appearance" of being solid black but the lacing was there. Otherwise they would have never been approved. They had to meet the SOP. Even my best cockbird now may look like he has a black breast from a distance but if you pick him up and look at him, it's not hard to see he doesn't.

4) I know what Bjorn thinks and has said about the current SOP. I certainly respect Bjorn a lot but we just happen to disagree here. And I'm pretty sure Bjorn would be the first to tell you that there was a LOT of "discussion" about what the SOP should say when it was written and accepted.

5) You keep saying "just about all" and "or near solid". That should tell you something right there. Folks aren't breeding to the SOP. "Just about all" the so-called "Ameraucanas" in this country have green legs "or near" green. That don't make them Ameraucanas. And for that matter, "just about all purebred Barnevelders in the US" that I've seen have the wrong leg color too. Should we then change that as well because of the majority? Or is that also because folks aren't breeding to the SOP?

7) Good for the Dutch. They have their Standard. We have ours.

I don't have a problem with the Dutch Standard. I just have a problem with folks who don't want to accept the American SOP. As I've said before, there was a LOT of time, effort, and expense put into getting the Barnies accepted into the APA. The SOP has stood since 1991 and it should continue to stand. The decision as to what to include or not include in the SOP did not come easily. I would wager a pretty hefty sum of money that my friend, who was one of the original breeders, has probably been breeding Barnevelders and Welsummers longer than anyone on this country. Certainly Welsummers but I think Barnies too. He had Welsummers as a boy in Germany before he ever came here. Maybe when we've acquired the years of experience that they have individually, let alone combined, then we can start talking about what should be changed or not. And for what it's worth, Bjorn can also tell you that the same exact "discussions" went on with the Welsummers as well. The American SOP doesn't conform to the Dutch SOP for Welsummers either.

God Bless,

 

[Tailfeathers]

The standard as it is now was admitted with a mistake made by those who worked to get the breed into the standard, and those original breeders have stated so.

I do see Tailfeathers' point however. It seems to me that you can make the standard say whatever you like, and from that point on, that's the way it is. Any further changes really are arbitrary. The British didn't care that the Dutch (breed origin) had male birds with black breasts; they made their standard the way they wanted. So why should the APA care if the British didn't? Many color patterns must be double matted, and the Barnevelder color pattern as it stands now is on that list. I'm sure at one point double mating wasn't necessary, but over time the desired aesthetic changed causing it to be necessary to win at shows. The brown leghorns had to be separated into light and dark due to this. Does it make sense to have a standard that makes the breeding of "ideal" males and females together incompatible due to the desired aesthetics? No, it is ridiculously counterintuitive and like having two separate breeds and calling them one, but common sense and aesthetics don't always seem compatible. Especially when you look at the kind of breeding being done. I've seen white leghorns double mated to get the type the judges want in each gender. It's arbitrary preference that has nothing to do with the standard, productivity or functionality of the breed. I doubt anyone will ever be able to justify double mating with anything other than a pure, arbitrary aesthetics.

So from what I've seen, what you've got going for you regarding getting the standard changed is that there was a mistake from the beginning. Other arguments really are just arbitrary due to aesthetics. History and common sense be d***ned.

There was no "mistake" made by those who worked to get the breed into the standard. And just what original breeders are you referring to that have stated such? Bjorn is the only one I know that has said so. I know for a fact that at least one of those breeders has never said such a thing. We've talked about getting more lacing into the breasts many times and not one single time has he ever said it shouldn't be laced. Lowell Barber has been dead for years. I'll have to ask my friend if he ever talked about that with Lowell. Horst has been dead for years. And it's my understanding that Horst is the one who had the MOST influence when it came to the final decision on what the SOP would be.

So when I see a statement like that, I'd really like to know where it comes from. People see those kind of statements, run with them, and then start repeating it. The next thing you know a lie has become the supposed truth.

My understanding from talking with Bjorn and my friend is that a compromise was made amongst numerous different traits accepted by the Dutch, Germans, and British. And it was NO mistake.

God Bless,

 

[Outlier]

There was no "mistake" made by those who worked to get the breed into the standard. And just what original breeders are you referring to that have stated such? Bjorn is the only one I know that has said so. I know for a fact that at least one of those breeders has never said such a thing. We've talked about getting more lacing into the breasts many times and not one single time has he ever said it shouldn't be laced. Lowell Barber has been dead for years. I'll have to ask my friend if he ever talked about that with Lowell. Horst has been dead for years. And it's my understanding that Horst is the one who had the MOST influence when it came to the final decision on what the SOP would be.

So when I see a statement like that, I'd really like to know where it comes from. People see those kind of statements, run with them, and then start repeating it. The next thing you know a lie has become the supposed truth.

My understanding from talking with Bjorn and my friend is that a compromise was made amongst numerous different traits accepted by the Dutch, Germans, and British. And it was NO mistake.

God Bless,

Well, you may want to speak with Bjorn and reconfirm what his opinion is. He stated on this thread that he was not in agreement with the proposed standard when it was accepted, and when he brought it up with one of his colleagues (I don't remember the name), he was told not to worry about the wording because the lacing on the male's breast was so wide that it made it seem black anyway. I'm just bringing up what was already said. Don't kill the messenger. But yes I agree that there is always disagreement on proposed standards. The Ameraucana breeders had problems and apparently settled them through voting. Due to the arbitrary nature of these arguments, standards are rarely changed. They may be clarified, but rarely changed. If you can't get coloring or type right without double mating, join the club. There are female lines and male lines of all kinds of breeds. I wouldn't be surprised if it were more the rule than the exception from what I've seen. And honestly, even if the standard were changed to a black breast on the male, there could very well come a day when double mating may become necessary for some other arbitrary reason invented by judge or breeder preference.

 

[tls_ranch]

There was no "mistake" made by those who worked to get the breed into the standard.  And just what original breeders are you referring to that have stated such?  Bjorn is the only one I know that has said so.  I know for a fact that at least one of those breeders has never said such a thing.  We've talked about getting more lacing into the breasts many times and not one single time has he ever said it shouldn't be laced.  Lowell Barber has been dead for years.  I'll have to ask my friend if he ever talked about that with Lowell.  Horst has been dead for years.  And it's my understanding that Horst is the one who had the MOST influence when it came to the final decision on what the SOP would be. 

So when I see a statement like that, I'd really like to know where it comes from.  People see those kind of statements, run with them, and then start repeating it.  The next thing you know a lie has become the supposed truth.

My understanding from talking with Bjorn and my friend is that a compromise was made amongst numerous different traits accepted by the Dutch, Germans, and British.  And it was NO mistake.

God Bless,

Well, you may want to speak with Bjorn and reconfirm what his opinion is.  He stated on this thread that he was not in agreement with the proposed standard when it was accepted, and when he brought it up with one of  his colleagues (I don't remember the name), he was told not to worry about the wording because the lacing on the male's breast was so wide that it made it seem black anyway.  I'm just bringing up what was already said.  Don't kill the messenger.  But yes I agree that there is always disagreement on proposed standards.  The Ameraucana breeders had problems and apparently settled them through voting.  Due to the arbitrary nature of these arguments, standards are rarely changed.  They may be clarified, but rarely changed.  If you can't get coloring or type right without double mating, join the club.  There are female lines and male lines of all kinds of breeds.  I wouldn't be surprised if it were more the rule than the exception from what I've seen.  And honestly, even if the standard were changed to a black breast on the male, there could very well come a day when double mating may become necessary for some other arbitrary reason invented by judge or breeder preference.

I don't have time right now to address all Royce's questions. But, here's the heart of the issue. Even Royce says " his best cock appears to have a black breast from a distance". So heavily laced so as to appear black, not laced like a Wyandotte.

So, in compromise maybe the SOP standard could say something like....black or heavily laced so as to appear black? That would agree with the original breeders statements and allow some flexibility in the male description. Yes, it could make it "easier" t o meet the SOP, but it could help to settle this debate.

Ok, I am out of time....I will try to get back later today.


Trisha

 

[Tailfeathers]

Quote:
I don't need to reconfirm what his opinion is because you just stated it. What he stated on this thread was what he told me long before he stated it here. As I said above, Bjorn was not and is not in agreement with the proposed standard and we just happen to disagree on this issue. However, your own wording above is evidence there was an intent to have lacing by some of the others from the very beginning because he was told don't " worry about the wording because the lacing on the male's breast was so wide that it made it SEEM black anyway."

Ironically, in the SOP, under the coloring of the female, it states that the outer lacing must be a sharp, crisp black with a green luster BUT not so wide as to give the bird an overall black appearance in the show cage.

Bjorn is an extremely smart man and I have no doubt he fully understood the consequences of what would happen once the writing was on paper and accepted as the "Standard". I would also add that if lacing in the males breast was such an impossibility as it is being made out to be (which obviously is NOT the case because the others had it in their birds, I have it in mine, and many others do too), then the others would have gone along with Bjorn.

Not trying to kill any messenger, Outier. Just replying to what all was said.

God Bless,

 

[fowlman01]

I won't address each point yet but here are the facts as I know them.

1. There was no mistake in the Standard description. These things are well thought out and checked and double checked. The APA does not just automatically put things in their Standard based on descriptions they are given. The APA description does not agree with the Standard description of the country of origin.....but that is not unusual. The Barnie description in the APA does agrees with the Australian, German and British Standards. .I don't think those Standards were in error either.

2. Not all countries agree on plumage or body type descriptions. The British take liberties with our American breeds and we don't have the same description of their Orps ether. There are many breeds that don't agree with the country of origin's descriptions. I'm not sure why, but that is the way it is...it is not a mistake. Someone might think it is...but it isn't.

3. Anything in the APA SOP can be changed, but it would have to have a compelling reason. I have been contacted by an interested party, but she has not given me enough reason to even do any research.......yet.
Our Committee will not act on hearsay or speculation, you would have to have lots of documentation that can be verified. No "he says" stuff.

4. A qualifying meeet was held as it always is and there have to be fifty (50) good specimens in C,H,K,P classes, divided into equal classes, so obviously there were cock birds judged in the qualifying meet. If the chest color was not correct the breed would not have been admitted.....it's not a mistake. The breed has to breed true to be accepted.

5 The APA has never changed anything in the SOP because it was easier to breed. Double mating is just a quick way to get there.....kind of the lazy man's route you might say. I have used it, but it was ever for the long haul. Descriptions are based on the finished product.....not on how you got there or not for an easier way to meet a Standard.

6. 99% of my interaction with Standard changes is to have the change meet someones existing birds rather than what the SOP actually says

Walt Leonard
Chairman of the APA Standard Committee.

 

[Outlier]

I won't address each point yet but here are the facts as I know them.

1. There was no mistake in the Standard description. These things are well thought out and checked and double checked. The APA does not just automatically put things in their Standard based on descriptions they are given. The APA description does not agree with the Standard description of the country of origin.....but that is not unusual. The Barnie description in the APA does agrees with the Australian, German and British Standards. .I don't think those Standards were in error either.

2. Not all countries agree on plumage or body type descriptions. The British take liberties with our American breeds and we don't have the same description of their Orps ether. There are many breeds that don't agree with the country of origin's descriptions. I'm not sure why, but that is the way it is...it is not a mistake. Someone might think it is...but it isn't.

3. Anything in the APA SOP can be changed, but it would have to have a compelling reason. I have been contacted by an interested party, but she has not given me enough reason to even do any research.......yet.
Our Committee will not act on hearsay or speculation, you would have to have lots of documentation that can be verified. No "he says" stuff.

4. A qualifying meeet was held as it always is and there have to be fifty (50) good specimens in C,H,K,P classes, divided into equal classes, so obviously there were cock birds judged in the qualifying meet. If the chest color was not correct the breed would not have been admitted.....it's not a mistake. The breed has to breed true to be accepted.

5 The APA has never changed anything in the SOP because it was easier to breed. Double mating is just a quick way to get there.....kind of the lazy man's route you might say. I have used it, but it was ever for the long haul. Descriptions are based on the finished product.....not on how you got there or not for an easier way to meet a Standard.

6. 99% of my interaction with Standard changes is to have the change meet someones existing birds rather than what the SOP actually says

Walt Leonard
Chairman of the APA Standard Committee.

Cool, thanks for the clarification. I wasn't too far off at least.

 

[Tncowgirl1903]

I am looking for a good cochin hen or 2 that likes to lay on her eggs all the time. One that's not to old but old enough to be laying and likes to lay on eggs. I know this int the breed on this thread but I thought you guys might have some?