Bob Blosl's Heritage Large Fowl Thread

[HallFamilyFarm]

Quote:

Quote:

 

[3riverschick]

Judges are required to use the latest version of the SOP for a reason. There is more than a slight difference in some cases. You are reading 100 year old documents. There are breeds now that are not even in those old SOP's.

Walt

Hi Walt,
I recently got my new SOP. Love it. I study the old lit too. I find the current SOP invaluable in showing me which of the old lit is helpful and which is obsolete. What doesn't match up or contradicts the current SOP gets severely criticized and discarded.
That said, I've found the old lit extremely helpful in augmenting the meaning of wording in the current SOP in the face of studying the history of various breeds. For instance, I had questions about what "close feathering" actually meant in Sussex. Found a 1921 exposition on Sussex by William White Broomhead. Explained it very clearly. Have also found it is important to know the authors and how much of an expert they really are. Some of my favs are the legends like Dr. Olney Kent Brown, Judge W.H. Card, the Broomhead brothers, Robinson, Jull, Falkenstein and others. One of my fav things to do is surf Google Books using the advanced search . It doesn't come up on the main Google Books page anymore. One has to keyword search for it in a search
engine : Google Books advanced search : . For instance, (breed name) (exact phrase of topic).
I haven't found any imsurmountable differences between the old lit and the new SOP in Light Sussex. Reading the old lit helps to understand the nuances in the new SOP. For instance, in Light Sussex, the UK Standard read the male hackle is a white feather with a black stripe down the center which doesn't bleed thru the white to the end of the feather. But the APA SOP reads that the male hackle feather is black , laced with white around the edge. At first, that looks like a contradiction in genetics,..a laced feather vs a striped feather.... until we read the old lit and see that at the era the Light Sussex standard was being accepted by the APA, the folks in England were having a fad for super hackles. Thus the birds the APA judges were seeing looked like a laced feather instead of a white feather striped in black. So that's how they wrote the APA Standard. But both the APA and UK Standards really say the same thing because the APA Standard doesn't define the width of the white lacing.
I guess wat I am trying to say is that studying the old lit is very valuable, however the info concerning breed type should be filtered thru the new SOP for best results.
Best,
Karen

 

[3riverschick]

Hi Walt,
I am thinking a discussion of capability and capacity might solve some of the new Java breeders' questions. I admit, it's an area I have just recently discovered I can research by keyword. Have found many of my questions about the differences in function between the "old dual style" birds and the modern "less than their heyday" birds are answered when keyword searching these 2 subjects.
Best,
Karen

 

[fowlman01]

Hi Walt,
I recently got my new SOP. Love it. I study the old lit too. I find the current SOP invaluable in showing me which of the old lit is helpful and which is obsolete. What doesn't match up or contradicts the current SOP gets severely criticized and discarded.
That said, I've found the old lit extremely helpful in augmenting the meaning of wording in the current SOP in the face of studying the history of various breeds. For instance, I had questions about what "close feathering" actually meant in Sussex. Found a 1921 exposition on Sussex by William White Broomhead. Explained it very clearly. Have also found it is important to know the authors and how much of an expert they really are. Some of my favs are the legends like Dr. Olney Kent Brown, Judge W.H. Card, the Broomhead brothers, Robinson, Jull, Falkenstein and others. One of my fav things to do is surf Google Books using the advanced search . It doesn't come up on the main Google Books page anymore. One has to keyword search for it in a search
engine : Google Books advanced search : . For instance, (breed name) (exact phrase of topic).
I haven't found any imsurmountable differences between the old lit and the new SOP in Light Sussex. Reading the old lit helps to understand the nuances in the new SOP. For instance, in Light Sussex, the UK Standard read the male hackle is a white feather with a black stripe down the center which doesn't bleed thru the white to the end of the feather. But the APA SOP reads that the male hackle feather is black , laced with white around the edge. At first, that looks like a contradiction in genetics,..a laced feather vs a striped feather.... until we read the old lit and see that at the era the Light Sussex standard was being accepted by the APA, the folks in England were having a fad for super hackles. Thus the birds the APA judges were seeing looked like a laced feather instead of a white feather striped in black. So that's how they wrote the APA Standard. But both the APA and UK Standards really say the same thing because the APA Standard doesn't define the width of the white lacing.
I guess wat I am trying to say is that studying the old lit is very valuable, however the info concerning breed type should be filtered thru the new SOP for best results.
Best,
Karen

Thorough as usual Karen. Check page #10 of any of the current SOP's. It defines lacing. It should be very distinct, uniform in width and usually moderately narrow. The SOP tries to be as precise as possible, but there has to be a little leeway thus "moderately narrow". We can't say 1/8" or anything that would describe it more accurately. With the new interest in the heritage breeds we are finding that folks are finding things in the SOP that have not been questioned in 50+ years that really should be looked at to make the description easier to understand.The SOP is constantly being reviewed.

Walt

 

[3riverschick]

Thank you, Walt!
Karen

 

[Robert Blosl]

Boy I go to work and you guys are having a great discussion. I tell you I got Standards gong back to the 1890s The one I use is my 1964 issue I bought from the APA President at the Oregon State Fair at the APA convention I attended that year. The words are pretty much the same as today. The black and white pictures is what I focus on. So in my minds eye I try to breed to that picture. Today I was riding my riding lawn mower back from my pens in the woods and had to stop and look at this one year old Rhode Island Red Cock bird standing in a wire cage I had under a pecan tree off the ground. His brick shape and length of body is like the picture in the standard and his breast is extended perfectly. His under line and top line is perfect flat like a brick.

That's how I see a bird. That's what I breed to that picture. I have read poultry magazines from 1912 to the present I have seen pictures of the old chickens from 1915 to 1930 and there is no pictures I have seen of that time period I want to look at and try to breed my chickens to. I have a strain of White Rock Bantams. I have a hen and her daughter that I kept and breed from this year
I raised about 25 chicks from these two hens. I got females that I can see who are four months old that is going to look like their mothers. If I get two.. that are equal or maybe better by a half a point I will be happy. Their top lines are like the standard not of 1905 but 1964 or even today. A breeder is what he interups to the standard of perfection. I have seen guys who breed for 20 years and their Plymouth Rock males have no breasts. I have seen Rhode Island Reds with tales way to long or not symmetrical to the whole bird. But that's their impression of the standard. I had a good breeder of New Hampshire's tell me one judge wants a light colored New Hampshire not the same shade that Schilling painted yet four judges from the mid west and Walt wouldalso say his New Hampshire Females have the correct shade of ground color. Should he chage the shade of color for one judge or to the standard and the majorty of the judges who will judge his birds.

Breed to what ever standard you want. Your strain will be judged by your pears and if they like your strain your phone will be busy for orders.

Great discussion at least you got a standard a lot of people don't have one and try to breed from their birds what they want. bob

 

[kathyinmo]

I love the google books! Like this one on Barred Rocks (1911).

 

[catdaddyfro]

It's hard enough with one strain. Many strains just add to the length of time to get good birds. Some of the sources mentioned don't have birds that I would consider good enough to be much help anyway. Each strain has it's problems..

Walt

I presume the strains you referred to here are some of the ones mentioned in cubalays post or IF it were any of the 4 Mrs. Kathy mentioned, could you elaborate please as this would surely be some serious need to know info for at least a couple of us here, Walt. Thanks for your input on this matter.

Jeff

 

[fowlman01]

I presume the strains you referred to here are some of the ones mentioned in cubalays post or IF it were any of the 4 Mrs. Kathy mentioned, could you elaborate please as this would surely be some serious need to know info for at least a couple of us here, Walt. Thanks for your input on this matter.

Jeff

I quoted cubalaya's post. I was referring to the hatcheries mentioned. I haven't seen anything noteworthy from them and they would not be my choice for obtaining Dels....but I'm a poultry snob. If I were looking for Dels I would be talking to Kathy B.

Walt

 

[fowlman01]

I love the google books! Like this one on Barred Rocks (1911).

This is a very interesting book. Note the tail angle on the males in the color print. That is way too high. Back then they had dark and light barred Rocks.....two separate varieties. That was a significant change yet it did not alter the viability of the BR as a dual purpose bird....it just made it harder to get the color of the barring right.

EDIT: this is not the book I thought it was, but it is good too. The one I was talking about Is the Plymouth Rock Standard breed book. Published in 1919 by the APA. It has over 400 pages and has a hard cover.

You need to have this book Kathy. There is also one on Wyandotte's.

Walt