BREEDING FOR PRODUCTION...EGGS AND OR MEAT.

[DesertChic]

I think the question is too broad. I would have an opinion per breed.

For example all of the American breeds are dual purpose birds. None are purely meat birds. We have general dual purpose birds, dual purpose birds that emphasize the production of poultry meat, and dual purpose birds that were bred to emphasize the production of eggs. The NH and Delaware were intentionally developed to emphasize the production of poultry meat. Therefore, my expectations for these two breeds would be higher than for some others. Some like the Buckeye have a conformation that is better suited for the carcass than it is for egg laying capacity. Jersey Giants were meant to be good and large capons. Dominiques were more by chance originally, more refined later. The emphasis for Reds was more on the production of eggs. Their long backs, and deep bodies (brick shape) equipped them to be good layers.

I believe that it is important to consider that before the mass movement to the cities, industrialization, and the specialization of the production of poultry products; meat was a by product of egg production. Dual purpose meant hens that were salvageable, and extra cockerels had some value.

The first chicken of tomorrow contest featured the NH winning. The second year it was a NH x Cornish. Cross breeds, outside of the small family farm, dominated the production of poultry meat. Even early on. The NH x Rock was a common cross.

I do not think that it is helpful to evaluate a pullet by per week or month numbers. It seams more effective to judge her by her pullet year. That is from point of lay up until she molts in her second year. Then when she molts, and how long it takes her to molt is a big deal to me.

If I had my ideal NH she would lay 200 larger than large eggs in her puller year, and the color would be a rich brown. The flock's eggs would be uniform and of good quality. She would come into lay around 20 wks, molt late in the season, and molt out in 8wks.

He would be a meaty fryer by 14 wks. weighing 3.5-4lbs dressed and ready for the pot. He would be a broiler with good weight by 18-20wks.

If you've already answered this previously then I apologize for asking again, but do you trap nest?

 

[ronott1]

You like that chart don't you. LOL.

I hate that chart. LOL.

JK

I hate it too, because it lets me know when I will get less eggs.

I do not have a close source of egg like what my flock lays so I have to keep them going. I hate to see people cry when I can't get eggs to them.

I found a different chart:

http://ptaff.ca/soleil/?l1pays=USA&...&month=01&day=29&lang=en_CA&go=Show+the+graph!

 

[LindaB220]

The German strain is variable. Some better than other now. Most have been crossed at some point. Over all they are the best that we have. They are not a utility strain, but for an exhibition strain they are pretty good. I have enjoyed mine, and have been very pleased. The lay rate has been pretty good. They are reliable layers. I wish their egg size was larger, but they do lay a 2oz egg. If you push them, you can get a fryer at 16 wks. They are better as a bigger bird a little later.

They are beautiful birds in person, and very easy to manage. They are a joy to look at, to own, and produce well enough for most. They are a great choice, and a great only choice.

Again, they are not a utility strain. They are however worth the effort. They are not at the point of no return.

The cockerel that is my avatar is 28-30 wks. He is about 9 lbs in the photo. I have emphasized depth of keel, width of back, and bigger thighs. The pullets came into lay between 24-28wks, and I tried to emphasize the pullets that came into lay earlier. My birds have run to large, and were trending larger. Mine have been larger than most. That is not necessarily a good thing.

Luanne is doing well with her Delaware, and they are productive. She has come a long ways compared with what she started with. The other ladies are doing great with Kathy's line which are beautiful. They mature slower, but very nice birds. I would only get Delaware from one of these two lines.

I would not get hatchery birds in either breed. I would not even consider it. I have tried most hatchery NHs before the importation of the German strain. I killed them all.

What are your thoughts on Sandhill. He seems to be pushing his Delawares to be big and productive. I only asked because I have a credit there. ha. On his NH he mentions that they are nice birds with a good orange color. What does that say?

 

[gjensen]

If you've already answered this previously then I apologize for asking again, but do you trap nest?

No. I only keep track by the pen.

Trap nesting is only practical where you can check every hour or two. Especially in the summer time. You could cook a bird pretty quick in the summer. This doesn't mean that no one can do it. It only means why I do not do it.

I think tracking them by the pen is good enough. If I have 4-8 birds in the pen, I can give their average. I can also identify the poorest layers. Often you can drastically improve the average, just by removing the poorest producer(s).

I picked up on a couple Catalanas that is the same strain, but long removed. Where the ones I had were laying 6 per week (at that time), they were laying 4 per week. In a pen of 8 that really hurt the average. Removing one helped. Their eggs were easy to identify because they were smaller and rounder. I had to keep one, because I needed a shot of vigor. The one I got rid of was for other reasons. The point is how the lowest producers, even though few, hurt the overall numbers to a large degree.

 

[gjensen]

What are your thoughts on Sandhill. He seems to be pushing his Delawares to be big and productive. I only asked because I have a credit there. ha. On his NH he mentions that they are nice birds with a good orange color. What does that say?

I wouldn't, but that does not mean that you should not. "When we all go the same way, we all go the wrong way".

You may be happy with their Delaware. They are better than some that I have seen. They are supposed to be good layers.

I cannot say about their NH. When I was trying NHs, I did not know about Sandhills. "nice birds, with good orange color" doesn't say a lot does it? If you do try them, I would like to see them.

I do like Glenn, so I would never try to steer anyone from purchasing from them. Some of what they have is pretty good. Comparatively speaking.

 

[ocap]

If I had my ideal NH she would lay 200 larger than large eggs in her puller year, and the color would be a rich brown. The flock's eggs would be uniform and of good quality. She would come into lay around 20 wks, molt late in the season, and molt out in 8wks.

He would be a meaty fryer by 14 wks. weighing 3.5-4lbs dressed and ready for the pot. He would be a broiler with good weight by 18-20wks.

this is what I needed, actual numbers

My one brahma hen is "Standard" and has a molt that is almost six months without an egg (no lights)

if my australorp or brahma can't match your NH then I understand why they become extinct, no sympathy. I want productive dual purpose!

I might redefine my brahma as decoration but as far as today goes she is not dual purpose, might not even be single purpose. (unless I can find a strain that I can breed to her to increase her line's potential.)

I raised hatchery partridge rocks several years ago and five months pullets dressed out at 2 3/4 lbs., cockerels at five months 3 1/2 lbs. six or eight weeks older than yours for the same weight.

 

[gjensen]

this is what I needed, actual numbers

My one brahma hen is "Standard" and has a molt that is almost six months without an egg (no lights)

if my australorp or brahma can't match your NH then I understand why they become extinct, no sympathy. I want productive dual purpose!

I might redefine my brahma as decoration but as far as today goes she is not dual purpose, might not even be single purpose. (unless I can find a strain that I can breed to her to increase her line's potential.)

I raised hatchery partridge rocks several years ago and five months pullets dressed out at 2 3/4 lbs., cockerels at five months 3 1/2 lbs. six or eight weeks older than yours for the same weight.

Brahmas were considered dual purpose birds back when 140 eggs was a good layer. Mostly they were valued as large roasters, particularly in the NE market for a time. Over time they were replaced because of their slow growth and inefficiency. Truthfully today, they are largely ornamentals. That does not mean there is anything wrong with them. It is just the way it is. Things change. They are wonderful and beautiful birds for those that admire them. Hopefully there will always be admirers. They contributed greatly to later breeds.

Brahmas are Asiatic fowl. Back in the day, though soft feathered birds, they were slow to feather. With their combs, size, and style, they remind me of Oriental Games with soft feather and larger size. Oriental Games are painfully slow to mature. It can take two years for one to fully develop.

The NHs I described were an ideal. Not what I actually have. Mine have not performed that well. A later post describes my experience with my birds. On the other hand a strain cross that Jeremy (Jwhip) did perform that well for me. He gifted me a batch, and they reminded me that it was still possible. I have to concede that there was some hybrid vigor involved, but good selection could get these birds right. It would take hatching in numbers, and absolutely ruthless selection over time.

The Australorps should perform about as well as the NHs. They were developed similarly. One exclusively bred from the Orpington, and the other the RIR. Both were intentionally selected by similar criteria. Faster growth, early POL etc. They are actually similar birds with similar types.

The reality is that most of us do not and will not have an ideal. It does not mean that we cannot (or should not) work towards an ideal. The fun is in the getting there.

 

[bnjrob]

Brahmas were considered dual purpose birds back when 140 eggs was a good layer. Mostly they were valued as large roasters, particularly in the NE market for a time. Over time they were replaced because of their slow growth and inefficiency. Truthfully today, they are largely ornamentals. That does not mean there is anything wrong with them. It is just the way it is. Things change. They are wonderful and beautiful birds for those that admire them. Hopefully there will always be admirers. They contributed greatly to later breeds.

Brahmas are Asiatic fowl. Back in the day, though soft feathered birds, they were slow to feather. With their combs, size, and style, they remind me of Oriental Games with soft feather and larger size. Oriental Games are painfully slow to mature. It can take two years for one to fully develop.

The NHs I described were an ideal. Not what I actually have. Mine have not performed that well. A later post describes my experience with my birds. On the other hand a strain cross that Jeremy (Jwhip) did perform that well for me. He gifted me a batch, and they reminded me that it was still possible. I have to concede that there was some hybrid vigor involved, but good selection could get these birds right. It would take hatching in numbers, and absolutely ruthless selection over time.

The Australorps should perform about as well as the NHs. They were developed similarly. One exclusively bred from the Orpington, and the other the RIR. Both were intentionally selected by similar criteria. Faster growth, early POL etc. They are actually similar birds with similar types.

The reality is that most of us do not and will not have an ideal. It does not mean that we cannot (or should not) work towards an ideal. The fun is in the getting there.

Roughly what time period was 140/year considered *good*? Is there someone that has put together any lists of what the average numbers for eggs/year was for time periods? Terms like *good* and *poor* are so subjective and relative. It would be nice to have real numbers to see where people were coming from at different time periods when they say a breed was a good layer.

 

[gjensen]

Roughly what time period was 140/year considered *good*? Is there someone that has put together any lists of what the average numbers for eggs/year was for time periods? Terms like *good* and *poor* are so subjective and relative. It would be nice to have real numbers to see where people were coming from at different time periods when they say a breed was a good layer.

You can find this by skimming through old articles and literature. You can compare the numbers with remarks on their ability to lay. These kinds of numbers were common before the turn of the century. It wasn't like poultry nutrition was an advanced science either. No lights. Broody hens etc. Some would do better than that, but many would not. Poultry was not a farm priority early on. The south in the 1850s would have had more games and game mixes than anything else.

Everything changed as the century turned. Before that, poultry keeping was rather crude compared to what our birds get today.

I do not think there is a one stop shop for numbers like this. There is more and more numbers available later. Into the 1930s and 40s when there was a more broad effort to improve the fowl. The laying trials supply a lot of numbers, but the remarks are more centered around the exceptional individuals. They do not represent a whole.
The Call of the Hen refers to numbers. The time the book was written can be taken into account. A couple old genetics books speak of numbers, but they only represent the strains they are working with, and this is later still.

The advertisements that came on later were attempts at sales, so that might be questionable. They do claim a lot of numbers, but they are later.

The most I have been able to gather 1900-1920 is passing comments, and remarks on different breeds.

 

[bnjrob]

You can find this by skimming through old articles and literature. You can compare the numbers with remarks on their ability to lay. These kinds of numbers were common before the turn of the century. It wasn't like poultry nutrition was an advanced science either. No lights. Broody hens etc. Some would do better than that, but many would not. Poultry was not a farm priority early on. The south in the 1850s would have had more games and game mixes than anything else.

Everything changed as the century turned. Before that, poultry keeping was rather crude compared to what our birds get today.

I do not think there is a one stop shop for numbers like this. There is more and more numbers available later. Into the 1930s and 40s when there was a more broad effort to improve the fowl. The laying trials supply a lot of numbers, but the remarks are more centered around the exceptional individuals. They do not represent a whole.
The Call of the Hen refers to numbers. The time the book was written can be taken into account. A couple old genetics books speak of numbers, but they only represent the strains they are working with, and this is later still.

The advertisements that came on later were attempts at sales, so that might be questionable. They do claim a lot of numbers, but they are later.

The most I have been able to gather 1900-1920 is passing comments, and remarks on different breeds.

That's what drives me crazy. I haven't found actual egg numbers corresponding to comments of *good*, *poor*, or *excellent* for the 1890s to about 1910. The actual numbers don't seem to come until later. The time period that I am most interested in is the 10 years on either side of the century mark. That was the time that Javas were most often being hailed as *excellent* layers. Well I know that their idea of *excellent* would not be what today's idea is, but trying to figure out what they thought *excellent* meant is frustrating. If I had a more definite point of reference, then it would be easier to see how far Javas have fallen in egg production, or if they have fallen in egg production at all. To me, I think they can still stand some improvement. But it would be nice to have more specifics than such a subjective and relative term as *excellent*.