Brabanters and Spitzhaubens--The Differences PIC HEAVY!

[alisar]

Super duper sweet. Easy to handle and likes to be a shoulder chicken.

She was the best one out of the pullets gotten on a whim last January from Ideal Poultry. Three died from fowlpox/cocci/weather, the rest were given away for not having the correct crest or not having a beard and here she is, the best and hearty too! And I think she has the correct half moon spangles.

 

[fowlman01]

How do I find the Standard of Perfection for brabanters? Is it the U.K.'s version? So far, I'm just going by Dutch sites I found online...

It is not in the British or American Standard.

Walt

 

[LaylaFlora]

It is not in the British or American Standard.

Walt

So if there is no Standard of Perfection for brabanters then how do we do this besides based on our own personal preferences and what we read online.

As of today, I can't find what their bodies/tail angles are supposed to look like. Is it similar to a Spitzhauben but lower tail?

 

[Percheron chick]

Here is an Adult Description I was sent from April at H and H Poultry in Texas:
Adult Description
The most recognizable characteristics of Brabanters are the flat-sided upright crest with front feathers that are bent a little forward and their well developed muffs and beard, which form three lobes that cover the cheek and chin. The crest should not be as large of globular as the Polish varieties. The plumage is fairly hard and right, similar to Polish varieties. They have very large bodies: although, they are not heavy in bone. They have the appearance of strong, hardy birds. The shape of the body, which thickens considerably from the breast to stern, helps to determine that it is evidently a good layer since there is ample space in the region of the egg organs. The posterior part of the body is carried low, without the legs being short, and in the case of the hens, it almost touches the ground. The males have a moderately upright carriage of their body which is moderately narrower at the tail. The head is medium sized, rather broad between the eyes without a protuberance. They have a V-shaped comb consisting of two small, separated, rounded spikes placed in front of the crest. They have beaks that are medium in size, powerful and slightly curved. If wattles are present, they are very small and covered by the beard. The white ear lobes are small and concealed by the muffs. They eyes, which are prominent and alert, Are orange to red brown. The neck, which is fairly long, slightly curved and carried erect, has an abundance of hackle plumage. The back, which slopes downward, is fairly long. The breast that is carried a little forward is broad, full and rounded. The tail, which is carried at a 60-degree to 70-degree angle above horizontal, is large and well spread. The well-developed thighs are of medium length and set well apart. They have four toes on each foot that are well spread. The general characteristics of the female are similar to those of the mail, allowing for the natural sexual differences. All of the fairly tight, hard plumage of the Cream Brabanter is cream with each feather ending with a half-moon black spangle; however, the color of the tail may be entirely black. They have a horn beak and lead blue legs and feet.

So this is April's standard from 5 years ago. It's probably more refined now but this is a place to start. It would also help to have pictures to go along with the text.

 

[fowlman01]

So if there is no Standard of Perfection for brabanters then how do we do this besides based on our own personal preferences and what we read online.

As of today, I can't find what their bodies/tail angles are supposed to look like. Is it similar to a Spitzhauben but lower tail?

It would be smartest to use the country of origin's Standard. If you started today, it would take at least 6 years to get these into the APA Standard....although it will probably take longer.

Walt

 

[LaylaFlora]

So this is April's standard from 5 years ago. It's probably more refined now but this is a place to start. It would also help to have pictures to go along with the text.

This is VERY helpful! Thank you!!!

 

[Percheron chick]

It would be smartest to use the country of origin's Standard. If you started today, it would take at least 6 years to get these into the APA Standard....although it will probably take longer.

Walt

I think we all agree. I have yet to find a comprehensive Dutch breed standard. If someone has one, please post it. What I have found (Dutch) is less than 6 points for the breed. Some of the points are lost in translation and need pictures to cement what they are trying to convey. The British standard is along the lines of what I have found in Dutch but it has holes in it. They don't even mention body shape or feathering.

http://www.bkuclub.nl/downloads/Brochure_Brabanter_Engels.pdf

It doesn't address 1/2 of what it needs to.

You need to be able to methodically go top to bottom and front to back in your evaluation process. Don't leave anything open to interpretation. If everyone is using one set of standards and are all trying to breed to that ideal, the breed will advance much faster than if we are all out there doing our own thing. I would also like to see traits that are faults (minor and major) that need to be corrected. What can we live with to increase the gene pool and what needs to be culled immediately. The thing I like about April's approach is it's like she is looking at a bird and judging it right in front of you. She also addresses points that the British and Dutch do not (shanks and feet and tail angle off the top of my head). Again, pictures would help.

 

[fowlman01]

I think we all agree. I have yet to find a comprehensive Dutch breed standard. If someone has one, please post it. What I have found (Dutch) is less than 6 points for the breed. Some of the points are lost in translation and need pictures to cement what they are trying to convey. The British standard is along the lines of what I have found in Dutch but it has holes as well;

http://www.bkuclub.nl/downloads/Brochure_Brabanter_Engels.pdf

It doesn't address 1/2 of what it needs to.

You need to be able to methodically go top to bottom and front to back in your evaluation process. Don't leave anything open to interpretation. If everyone is using one set of standards and are all trying to breed to that ideal, the breed will advance much faster than if we are all out there doing our own thing. I would also like to see traits that are faults (minor and major) that need to be corrected. What can we live with to increase the gene pool and what needs to be culled immediately. The thing I like about April's approach is it's like she is looking at a bird and judging it right in front of you. She also addresses points that the British and Dutch do not (shanks and feet and tail angle off the top of my head). Again, pictures would help.

I have some suggestions. The British Standard does not seem ot be in the British Poultry Standards. There is the Standard from the BKU Club but it is very vague and personally I can't see how it will help much. I can give you a Dutch contact if you want help in translation etc. Most other countries do not have the comprehensive Standards that the APA has.

You are correct.....you all have to breed to the same goal/Standard. You have to be looking at a good example of the Standard to make any progress...so that means that you need to know what a good bird is. The Cream Legbar folks are a good example of a breed that wants to be recognized by the APA. They are being very thoughtful in their approach and have asked for help from the APA.
They have been working on their Standard for about two years now.

Walt Leonard
Chairman of the APA Standard Committee.

 

[ChicKat]

I think we all agree. I have yet to find a comprehensive Dutch breed standard. If someone has one, please post it. What I have found (Dutch) is less than 6 points for the breed. Some of the points are lost in translation and need pictures to cement what they are trying to convey. The British standard is along the lines of what I have found in Dutch but it has holes in it. They don't even mention body shape or feathering.

http://www.bkuclub.nl/downloads/Brochure_Brabanter_Engels.pdf

It doesn't address 1/2 of what it needs to.

You need to be able to methodically go top to bottom and front to back in your evaluation process. Don't leave anything open to interpretation. If everyone is using one set of standards and are all trying to breed to that ideal, the breed will advance much faster than if we are all out there doing our own thing. I would also like to see traits that are faults (minor and major) that need to be corrected. What can we live with to increase the gene pool and what needs to be culled immediately. The thing I like about April's approach is it's like she is looking at a bird and judging it right in front of you. She also addresses points that the British and Dutch do not (shanks and feet and tail angle off the top of my head). Again, pictures would help.

Hi Percheron chick,

May I borrow the observations that you made about how important a standard is for a developing breed? You made some excellent points as Walt has noted. This approach needs a wider audience. ;O)

 

[LaylaFlora]

I think we all agree. I have yet to find a comprehensive Dutch breed standard. If someone has one, please post it. What I have found (Dutch) is less than 6 points for the breed. Some of the points are lost in translation and need pictures to cement what they are trying to convey. The British standard is along the lines of what I have found in Dutch but it has holes in it. They don't even mention body shape or feathering.

http://www.bkuclub.nl/downloads/Brochure_Brabanter_Engels.pdf

It doesn't address 1/2 of what it needs to.

You need to be able to methodically go top to bottom and front to back in your evaluation process. Don't leave anything open to interpretation. If everyone is using one set of standards and are all trying to breed to that ideal, the breed will advance much faster than if we are all out there doing our own thing. I would also like to see traits that are faults (minor and major) that need to be corrected. What can we live with to increase the gene pool and what needs to be culled immediately. The thing I like about April's approach is it's like she is looking at a bird and judging it right in front of you. She also addresses points that the British and Dutch do not (shanks and feet and tail angle off the top of my head). Again, pictures would help.

Funny you posted that link...I just found that last night...Though only half, I think it's the best "standard" we have to work from. Here is another description I found online...