Bob Blosl's Heritage Large Fowl Thread

[FOGELLY]

These last 10-15 pages have been very helpful with my "Heritage Large Fowl" breeding endeavors.
Thanks Y'all.

Ron

 

[thedragonlady]

Judges are representatives of the ABA/APA, but they don't run the shows and neither does the ABA/APA. The ABA and APA have their rules, but the show committee makes up the rest and bulk of the rules at a poultry show.

Walt

Now Walt, you're not going to get off that easily. When you are judging at APA sanctioned , or ABA sanctioned shows, you are judging by the rules, and the standard of those organizations. Correct ? Never mind WHO runs the shows, they are sanctioned, and judged by either one, or both, of those clubs' rules.If not, the judges are breaking those clubs' rules . So why are we having the problems with undersize, or oversize?

Because the judges are not judging by either standard, and applying SOP weights pertaining to the breeds. Weights are as much a part of the standards as anything else.

My feeling is that we either judge by the weights, or change the standards to reflect what is being bred. It's been done before as you know...hence the change in the Orp standard after WW1.

 

[bnjrob]

And this is the kind of thing that makes me nuts. It seems that people who remember or owned these large chickens "back in the day" (and now) think that these larger birds are better representations of their breeds. Yet as discussed, these larger birds are technically over the SOP weight.

So why in the world is the SOP weight for these standard bred fowl so low if the chickens look better when they are larger?

And are these technically overweight birds really more representative of the chickens from a hundred + years ago - especially the multi-purpose farmstead chickens?

 

[mschlumb]

And this is the kind of thing that makes me nuts. It seems that people who remember or owned these large chickens "back in the day" (and now) think that these larger birds are better representations of their breeds. Yet as discussed, these larger birds are technically over the SOP weight.

So why in the world is the SOP weight for these standard bred fowl so low if the chickens look better when they are larger?

And are these technically overweight birds really more representative of the chickens from a hundred + years ago - especially the multi-purpose farmstead chickens?

Good point. Like every show animal showing tends to change them. How many AKC registered Irish Setters are still good bird dogs? Look at show sheep, how many of them can you still throw out on pasture all summer and expect to live with out being fed grain? Draft horses are another good example, look at old pictures of horses from the twenties and thirties and compare them to today, look how much they've changed.
With any animal that loses its original purpose or whose purpose has changed, the animal will change with it. In the above cases to look more attractive in the show ring.
It is kind of the same thing with poultry. With their functions of meat and egg production replaced by commercial birds ( I do NOT mean to be hateful toward the commercial industry here) they have shifted toward a more attractive and impressive show chicken( at least to some). But some are still fast growers and good egg producers but maybe not as effecient in production, as our purpose for them has shifted.
I still think we need to breed as close to SOP weights as possible

 

[buffalogal]

I don't know, politics has something to do with it. logistics of weighing all the birds at a show.

But you wouldn't have to weigh them all, just the class champions and reserve. Trust me, if breeders knew they were going to have to pass a scale to advance beyond BoV, they'd get those weights down.

 

[buffalogal]

It is kind of the same thing with poultry. With their functions of meat and egg production replaced by commercial birds ( I do NOT mean to be hateful toward the commercial industry here) they have shifted toward a more attractive and impressive show chicken( at least to some). But some are still fast growers and good egg producers but maybe not as effecient in production, as our purpose for them has shifted.
I still think we need to breed as close to SOP weights as possible

Absolutely. On a breed list I'm on, someone brought up the idea that since so many breeds are oversize per the Sop, that perhaps all breeds should have their SoP weights upped by at least a half pound due to the better feed available. It was a good point, but my take is that isn't not so much better feed, as less exercise that accounts for the overall increase in weight. A coop potato isn't going to be active and lively and a good forager, which happen to be the very thing that draws people to these old breeds. Raise more of those old breeds the way great grandma did and you won't have to worry about them being oversize.

 

[3riverschick]

I know that. If my bird was weighed because its weight was questioned but was found to be within the scope of 20% it would have points deducted. I found this information on page 32 of the 2010 edition of The Standard of Perfection "In any case where evidence is doubtful the bird shall be presumed to be acceptable". There is no evidence that a judge is accurate in feeling a bird and guessing its weight, because it is just a guess, unless it is something really obvious.

Perhaps the statement by Prof. Bramwell was missed that Michael is a phenom with exhibition poultry? Maybe we should be picking his brain instead squabbling about details readily available in the SOP
Just saying,.
Karen

 

[3riverschick]

My new avatar is "May" , the younger of my 2 foundation pullets.
Karen

 

[punk-a-doodle]

I just found out that dorkings actually seem to do fairly well in high heat (Climate, not oven temperature. Although...). Can anyone recommend a quality dorking breeder with single combed birds? I am aware of one beeder who has lovely looking white dorkings, but they have rose combs.

 

[Pozees]

Good point. Like every show animal showing tends to change them.

What changes them is winning. When judges select for specific traits, including size, those breeding to win, breed to what judges select. Being rewarded for breeding outside standard is well known among AKC dog show competitors.

An Irish Setter can go to a field trial, a Greyhound can participate in a lure coursing trial, a Collie can compete in herding trials, and when someone wants a dog that can actually fulfill its intended purpose, they can look for offspring of dam and sire who compete and win at those events. They may or may not have AKC Championships, fads come and go in the breed competition world, but if a Shepherd can herd, and you need a dog that can herd, you should not care about seeing that Ch before the names of the parents.

Judges in the AKC world who consistently call for wickets to measure height get entries from those whose dogs are within standard. It takes forever to measure a large class of 13" Beagles - but you know the winner meets standard. Some show secretaries avoid hiring them because it messes up the schedule, and if the APA show world is at all similar, unless the APA begins requiring weighing all entrants or all winners, it will probably not become common. If bigger birds are the preference and it isn't just a fad, the breed clubs probably need to modify their standards.

Back on topic, I would like to hear more about Red Sussex I'm conflicted about whether it is intelligent, reasonable, or possible to take a flock of Speckled Sussex, breed to that standard, but also use some of the flock to try and create Red Sussex - my simplistic take on this suggestion is that one would use those flock members with the least speckling, especially after a molt. How far off am I?