Bob Blosl's Heritage Large Fowl Thread

[mschlumb]

T

...

But the heritage taste SO MUCH BETTER! 
[/quote

True! They are tasty!!!

 

[3riverschick]

A dual purpose bird that is too heavy becomes a less efficient egg producer.
Each breed was assigned a weight based what is most efficient and most productive for each breed. On page 3 of the SOP it says "that in each breed, the most useful type should be made standard type"
=============================
Yes, what he said! What he said!

 

[3riverschick]

Originally Posted by mschlumb


A dual purpose bird that is too heavy becomes a less efficient egg producer.
Each breed was assigned a weight based what is most efficient and most productive for each breed. On page 3 of the SOP it says "that in each breed, the most useful type should be made standard type"
=============================

The Light Sussex.
By Broomhead, William White (1921)
" Length of breast-bone (or keel) is desirable in a table fowj, but not in a layer. Too long a keel leaves little capacity for egg-production; hence the novice will be well advised not to take length into consideration to much extent. Ths length is better in the back, on top so to speak, than in the actual keel bone.
As to " size," in my opinion too much importance is given to this matter in the Standard. Admittedly, one does not desire to see Sussex fowls—which belong to the general-purpose class—resembling the light or non-sitting breeds; but it is somewhat rare to find a 71b. hen, no matter of what breed, ranking high as a layer. Breed for type, since, often enough, size—or weight, to be correct—can be obtained by feeding."

 

[Cedarknob]

Bob, your whites are too small, this is what a good white cockerel should look like at just under 6 months. as compared to a 7 month old Speckled Sussex. [You sure can't use a 5 gal bucket to weigh one in.]




I'm joking. I have raised commercial white broilers [like that cockerel] to eat and even used them to improve my blue egg laying flock's meat qualities. I'm not really a preservationist; I chose true Cornish as a self-sustaining meat flock after first looking for some to breed into my blue eggers. They came from show breeders, and I found them by searching at APA sanctioned shows. I breed them towards the current SOP of Cornish partly because they dress out to a beautiful looking and very well flavored table bird, partly because their appearance trips my trigger, and partly because I want to show them. [Their SOP has changed a great deal since first being recognized by the APA; they've even been moved from the Games class to the English class.] I'm not really a purist, but crossing them with another breed, or even a hatchery sourced Cornish, ruins their type, and then takes several generations to recover back to the point of the birds I started with, so it's counter productive. [I know this because I've made and kept some crosses for my blue eggers, and tested crossing hatchery Cornish hens to a good cockerel.] I would guess that out-crossing would be counter productive in most breeds....................... look how many generations have now gone into the making of lavender Orpingtons.

My only point in this is that there is nothing wrong with buying chicks from a hatchery, and may be the easiest and thus best way to go for many wanting to raise some for eggs or meat. However,I do believe that heritage breeds should be preserved, birds that really look like the breed is supposed to look can't be bought from a hatchery , and one breed or another well work for nearly anyone as a utility flock whether you choose to breed for a show winner or not.

 

[galanie]

T

But the heritage taste SO MUCH BETTER! 

True! They are tasty!!!

They truly are. I love the taste of Orps though I don't get to dine on them often. Butchered a mutt last week and he ended up feeding some animals. Tasted awful.

 

[thedragonlady]

Since Dual Purpose birds are supposed to, within limits, fulfill both requirements, is it really that pointless? Especially in view of the way the hatcheries have everyone brainwashed for egg producing and that only. Just trying to further the discussion.

From the SOP :" Orpington ".."A general purpose fowl for heavy meat production and for eggs." The breed was developed to produce a good layer for a few years, and when culled to produce a large roasting bird . The English birds have more breast meat than the SOP birds , but are not as good layers as a rule . The trick is to keep the laying ability while producing a good, big , meaty Orp. The hatchery Orps that I have seen have little more meat on them than a Leghorn , and might be turned into chicken broth , but not Sunday dinner .

 

[aveca]

Originally Posted by mschlumb


A dual purpose bird that is too heavy becomes a less efficient egg producer.
Each breed was assigned a weight based what is most efficient and most productive for each breed. On page 3 of the SOP it says "that in each breed, the most useful type should be made standard type"
=============================

The Light Sussex.
By Broomhead, William White (1921)
" Length of breast-bone (or keel) is desirable in a table fowj, but not in a layer. Too long a keel leaves little capacity for egg-production; hence the novice will be well advised not to take length into consideration to much extent. Ths length is better in the back, on top so to speak, than in the actual keel bone.
As to " size," in my opinion too much importance is given to this matter in the Standard. Admittedly, one does not desire to see Sussex fowls—which belong to the general-purpose class—resembling the light or non-sitting breeds; but it is somewhat rare to find a 71b. hen, no matter of what breed, ranking high as a layer. Breed for type, since, often enough, size—or weight, to be correct—can be obtained by feeding."

excellent info on egg laying low numbers and size..Ive found it has a lot to do with fat..say orps that get fat , production goes way down..I have one hen that is such an "easy keeper" I have to seperate her from the others feed her seperatly..yet she gains weight out in winter pasture , not sure what she finds out there but she is a handful when you pick her up..quite heavy.. she went into molt mid sept, has not laid an egg since..just finishing up her molt now....As breeders couldnt you think about this in a breeding program, outcross into other orps strain not black on buff but different strain of blk? ? orps have long been used to create other breeds or add substance to other breeds for meat production , they have never had rep as top egg layer ..todays breeders might use a little thought on increasing egg production without too much sacrifice of orp type..sometimes we get focused on an SOP tail and not egg production..

..orps tend to be a bit grizzle fat..avoiding that helps..more gizzle around thighs less eggs..when talking to australorp breeders in australia, they told me they try very hard to avoid grizzley leg areas, they associate that with lower egg production..Im not sure exactly how that might play a part but they think that way from past experience..thier birds can be quite round and orp in type large legs , good meat there with required tighter feather and that gizzle is the bain of that breed..thier judges actually feel around for it..it is expected to find some in orps..it comes with them.

 

[galanie]

Since Dual Purpose birds are supposed to, within limits, fulfill both requirements, is it really that pointless? Especially in view of the way the hatcheries have everyone brainwashed for egg producing and that only. Just trying to further the discussion.

From the SOP :" Orpington ".."A general purpose fowl for heavy meat production and for eggs." The breed was developed to produce a good layer for a few years, and when culled to produce a large roasting bird . The English birds have more breast meat than the SOP birds , but are not as good layers as a rule . The trick is to keep the laying ability while producing a good, big , meaty Orp. The hatchery Orps that I have seen have little more meat on them than a Leghorn , and might be turned into chicken broth , but not Sunday dinner .

I guess I'm usually talking about Orps rather than all breeds in general and didn't specify. But you "got" what I was talking about. Thank you! Been packing for a move and can't find my copy of the SOP right now! Grrr!

 

[thedragonlady]

As long as breeders tolerate 3 or 4 eggs a week from show birds , that's all they'll get . That's the sort of bird that develops FAT , around it's organs , instead of producing eggs and meat .

excellent info on egg laying low numbers and size..Ive found it has a lot to do with fat..say orps that get fat , production goes way down..I have one hen that is such an "easy keeper" I have to seperate her from the others feed her seperatly..yet she gains weight out in winter pasture , not sure what she finds out there but she is a handful when you pick her up..quite heavy.. she went into molt mid sept, has not laid an egg since..just finishing up her molt now....As breeders couldnt you think about this in a breeding program, outcross into other orps strain ? orps have long been used to create other breeds or add substance to other breeds for meat production , they have never had rep as top egg layer ..todays breeders might use a little thought on increasing egg production without too much sacrifice of orp type..

 

[HallFamilyFarm]

J. Ralph Brazelton - master Orpington breeder, would trapnest his Orpingtons. Had a line of exhibition Orpingtons that laid 200+ eggs a year. Walt, Vickie and Bob can tell you more than I about Ralph. They knew him longer than I did. But his Orpingtons were huge and laid well. That Buff Orpington in Walt's avatar is a Brazelton Orp.