Black Copper Marans discussion thread

[geebs]

Wow... ad some green and I will get my stocking.. that ought to do it!! Lots of red there... You can probably use that on all black presentation (overmelanised) with good result...

I could give proper critique with a better photo...

 

[Wynette]

Quote:
I will comment on this as I think after over 50 year as a breeder I am qualified. The SOP is not in any way supposed to be watered down to make it easier to produce a show quality bird. The Standard of perfection should always be something that can sometime be accomplished but not easily. The SOP is something to work towards in your breeding program. What good would it be to make all Marans acceptable in the SOP ? The only thing I want is a standard and then we know what we have to breed for in the future. Don

I completely agree, Don! After all, it's called the Standard of Perfection....not the Standard of Commonality.

It is the same for ANY critter shown - I have experience with showing dogs, and mostly, horses - there are drawings of what a perfect stock horse should look like in conformation - why are they drawings? Because rarely, if ever, is one seen. We need to know what to breed TOWARD for that "perfect" critter.

 

[onthespot]

snowbird, I'm not saying to lower the bar so far you can walk over it. I'm saying let it reflect true genetic realities is all.

my point to Bev is, why, if it is so "doable" to produce a bird to fit the standard, she shows on her CBM page a roo with light shanks, way too many points, and white showing in the tail, after working on it for umpteen years. I am NOT putting her down, just saying... write the standard to reflect the genetic realities with regards to the shank color. White can be bred out, and so can too many points on the comb, much easier than creating dark slate shanked roos in a breed not prone to them.

http://www.bevsmarans.com/black_copper.htm

 

[PrettyPoultry]

Quote:

What do you think of the shade of red? Is is too dark? I like the darker red but the marans I see out there have a lighter red to them. I will see if I can get some better shots.

 

[geebs]

I also agree Don that there should be a SOP that does separate the creme...... This thread is breeding strategies... Feel free to share yours at length (everyone)....not just culling practice.. In order for it to work.... It has to work.. What is the breeding strategy you have for producing the ideal birds??? ...

Please ppl.. I started this thread as a friendly spot for newbies and enthusiast...Please don't chase em off again... THANKS. Most of us can only see the top of the mountain.. but don't we appreciate it just the same... Do we have to climb it??? That's all. Some of us don't even own mountain gear...

 

[onthespot]

the ideal bird must first be defined in a genetically truthful description. all high aspirations are for naught if the ground rules, for whatever reason, are stacked for failure. For Everyone.

 

[onthespot]

last week I spoke with a poodle breeder who has been breeding parti colored poodles for over thirty years. She brought me out a chocolate parti mama dog and said, "Take her for example. I bred her to a chocolate and I got all chocolate babies. I bred her to a black, and every single puppy was black! She is not a strong chocolate producer. She throws whatever she is crossed with."
It just floored me that after thirty years, she did not understand that chocolate is simple recessive to black. If the black dog does not carry a hidden chocolate gene, he cannot possibly produce chocolate, ever. The mama dog was not a 'weak chocolate producer. The father dog was simply homozygous for black.

My point is, just because someone has been breeding for three, thirty, fifty, eighty years, doesn't mean they understand the genetic ground rules for the variety/breed they are working on.

My I re-emphasize, I am NOT bashing anyone, or insulting them. I'm just saying, years spent doing the same thing, does not always mean years spent improving your understanding of all the genetics that affect the breed you are working on. Most breed by look-see method. They pick the most phenotypically pleasing thing in front of them that season. That's how I breed, to be honest, unless I know some genetic hidden trait I'm working on. If genetic info comes to light that bears HEAVILY on the breeding choices and outcomes of hundreds of people you are imploring to support the breed by showing, it would behoove the people in power to write a standard that reflects genetic realities is all I'm saying. Not knowing is nto a crime. Hearing important info laid out for you, and then ignoring it is just Emperor's New Clothes in my opinion.

 

[snowbird]

Just a couple for the posters that are not showing chickens and do not plan on showing. These SOP are set up as a point that you can ascend with a great breeding plan, no matter how hard we try we may never achieve even a very good specimen. I know very little about genetics and even less about poultry breeding, I have always been just a keeper of poultry.

What is important is pick the type of fowl you like and breed it like you want. When it come to showing poultry the more diverse your entry is the more likely you are to have a winner.

I will breed to the USA standard as that is where I will be showing when I think my stock is good enough, Soon as I replenish my male BC will be satisfied with what I have. Don

 

[onthespot]

genetics is like math. It adds up or it doesn't.

You can't write a standard that says two plus two equals three.

oops, a poodle hit my enter button.

My point is, just saying "I don't know a lot about genetics" doesn't relieve you of the consequenses of not knowing. That goes for all of us, me most of all. "Not knowing" and blindly aspiring to a standard written by others "not knowing" will cause a lot of wasted feed and effort, if you are in it for more than just nice brown eggs.

 

[Casey76]

As requested: copper black Marans boy at approximately 26 weeks (I've just checked my records and he hatched on 13 May 2010, the photo was taken on 14 Nov 2010):