BREEDING FOR PRODUCTION...EGGS AND OR MEAT.

[DesertChic]

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.

This is the date range I've come across also for the change in thought for preference towards 200+ per year layers. I think it was most clearly obvious in the book, "Poultry Husbandry" by Morley A. Jull. The book was published in 1938 and reflects back frequently to the late 1800s up through publication time, indicating the shift in mindset through that date progression. "The Call of the Hen", as mentioned above, was the other book that really showed emphasis on this quest. That was written in 1914, I believe. It seems the industrialization of our society was limited to factories, but also our agricultural animal accomplices.

 

[Arielle]

Nice conversations all!!

Here is my 2 cents. Flocks morph to fit the farm they are living on. WHile breed info is a good starting p lace for comparison, it is important to get the details which is flock by flock.

I had a flock of sheep that were good grazers, Out every day, moving over section of pasture day by day. THen we moved. TO a wooded set up. Hay tossed to the flock everyday.THe years passed and the generations turned over. THen I needed a new ram.While watching the new boy to see how he was settling in, he was trying to graze!! He covered the whole pen searching for graze.Then I realized, dang, I had turned my grazers into pen pigs. So while this is sheep. My point is that each flock represents the management style of the farm and caretakers.

ANother point is laying ability like good fair poor layers, don't tell you survivability, or health, etc. Nor does it tell egg size. The silver spangled hamburg is a smaller , quicker bird, and lays lots of smaller eggs. THis is based on reading, seeing one rooster at a show and having one tiny hatchery rooster. THis bird has a place in the right situation.

 

[Arielle]

Quote:
I have also wondered if production could be increased because of how feed was made more available with improved varieties of grains, harvesting methods, etc. I'm not up on ag history, but I do wonder if the increase is needed at a commercial level that is not required on a family farm. I can only wonder . . no firm answers . . .

 

[bnjrob]

Nice conversations all!!

Here is my 2 cents. Flocks morph to fit the farm they are living on. WHile breed info is a good starting p lace for comparison, it is important to get the details which is flock by flock.

I had a flock of sheep that were good grazers, Out every day, moving over section of pasture day by day. THen we moved. TO a wooded set up. Hay tossed to the flock everyday.THe years passed and the generations turned over. THen I needed a new ram.While watching the new boy to see how he was settling in, he was trying to graze!! He covered the whole pen searching for graze.Then I realized, dang, I had turned my grazers into pen pigs. So while this is sheep. My point is that each flock represents the management style of the farm and caretakers.

ANother point is laying ability like good fair poor layers, don't tell you survivability, or health, etc. Nor does it tell egg size. The silver spangled hamburg is a smaller , quicker bird, and lays lots of smaller eggs. THis is based on reading, seeing one rooster at a show and having one tiny hatchery rooster. THis bird has a place in the right situation.

This is true. What's difficult is trying to convey all of these things to people when they come to you asking questions. I've had folks contacting me more often than usual about Javas and have had comments and questions on egg production. Having a tangible frame of reference to help them visualize the differences in Javas and other birds as well as differences in time periods and situations would make things easier for them to understand. Shoot, it might make things easier for me too, to see where we were, where we are, and where we need to be with the breed.

Granted, you can't always have specifics for every variable to completely map things out for folks, but when you're dealing with a breed that has not had new observations taken and new info written about it in modern times, it makes it more difficult for some folks to comprehend. The articles that have been written about Javas in recent history are essentially just referencing antique information. There isn't good info to compare and contrast Javas then and now with anecdotes about how things are working for Javas and their keepers with modern food and husbandry methods. I know what I have observed and experienced, and can give folks that info when they come asking questions, but I still feel like there is information missing somewhere between the antique literature anecdotal info and observations of Javas today. I may never find that puzzle piece that seems to be missing.

 

[ronott1]

I have also wondered if production could be increased because of how feed was made more available with improved varieties of grains, harvesting methods, etc. I'm not up on ag history, but I do wonder if the increase is needed at a commercial level that is not required on a family farm. I can only wonder . . no firm answers . . .

Lots of things changed. Breeding out broodiness by crossing with non broody breeds and selecting for removing broodiness. The addition of lights in the winter up North and etc. The feed does make a big difference as well as keeping laying hens over the winter.

Without lights, some breeds far enough North will lose three to four months of laying. When you read about Leghorns laying 280plus eggs a year, it should say with light in the winter.

It is not a stretch to say a breed is an excellant layer if it lays, on average, 140 egg over 8 months. That would be a bit less than 5 eggs a week.

 

[bnjrob]

I have also wondered if production could be increased because of how feed was made more available with improved varieties of grains, harvesting methods, etc. I'm not up on ag history, but I do wonder if the increase is needed at a commercial level that is not required on a family farm. I can only wonder . . no firm answers . . .

This is something that I've thought about too and it could play a key part in things.

 

[DesertChic]

I have also wondered if production could be increased because of how feed was made more available with improved varieties of grains, harvesting methods, etc. I'm not up on ag history, but I do wonder if the increase is needed at a commercial level that is not required on a family farm. I can only wonder . . no firm answers . . .

Actually, this has been presented as one of the methods used by the production mills for putting out meat and eggs so quickly. I don't recall having encountered any specific studies, but I've repeatedly seen mention that the constant availability of food contributed to both the increased weight of chicken at an early age (meat!) to greater egg production. And the nutritional quality of the feed is a huge variable.

 

[bnjrob]

Lots of things changed. Breeding out broodiness by crossing with non broody breeds and selecting for removing broodiness. The addition of lights in the winter up North and etc. The feed does make a big difference as well as keeping laying hens over the winter.

Without lights, some breeds far enough North will lose three to four months of laying. When you read about Leghorns laying 280plus eggs a year, it should say with light in the winter.

It is not a stretch to say a breed is an excellant layer if it lays, on average, 140 egg over 8 months. That would be a bit less than 5 eggs a week.

Thinking about it that way helps to give me some insight into our old fashioned birds that would most likely not have had supplemental light in winter. And most of them were being bred and shown from folks in the northern part of the country.

Makes it come back again to a person's expectations of what they're looking for in their birds and how their husbandry will affect the birds.

 

[gjensen]

This is the date range I've come across also for the change in thought for preference towards 200+ per year layers. I think it was most clearly obvious in the book, "Poultry Husbandry" by Morley A. Jull. The book was published in 1938 and reflects back frequently to the late 1800s up through publication time, indicating the shift in mindset through that date progression. "The Call of the Hen", as mentioned above, was the other book that really showed emphasis on this quest. That was written in 1914, I believe. It seems the industrialization of our society was limited to factories, but also our agricultural animal accomplices.

A lot of things changed during that time. There was an exodus of sorts to the cities. Industrialization brought jobs, and the jobs were in the cities. As the populations within the cities grew, so did the amount of people that needed to be fed. A lot of people that like to criticize modern agriculture forget that there is an entire world out there that cannot feed themselves. Many of us prefer a better way, but we have not demonstrated that we are capable of feeding the masses either. We realize the most efficient food production system that the world has ever known. Only in Western society are we spoiled enough to complain about our surplus.

This is also the time period where the production of grain became more mechanized. The Great Plains was largely settled and "tamed". The Railroad system was able to deliver. The Midwest was more and more big Ag., and even the Draft drawn harvesters were quite impressive. The Midwest became the largest producer of food in the world. This meant a surplus of grain to feed poultry which by nature are seed eaters needing a lot of energy to maintain their high metabolisms.

These huge changes naturally changed our view of the world. The world in fact did become a much different place.

Our understanding of genetics was evolving to. Great advancements in breeding livestock was taking place. If we do a survey a livestock breeds to include poultry, it is interesting to see when the majority of these breeds were developed. Not to mention that advancements in transportation meant an exchange of genetic resources not seen before. It was not long ago that our view of genetics was in terms like "percentage of blood". We still use these percentages to illustrate though it does not accurately account for actual inheritance.

A lot was changing, and changing fast.

 

[gjensen]

I have also wondered if production could be increased because of how feed was made more available with improved varieties of grains, harvesting methods, etc. I'm not up on ag history, but I do wonder if the increase is needed at a commercial level that is not required on a family farm. I can only wonder . . no firm answers . . .

Feed quality, quantity, and type certainly played a roll. Poultry on the family farm was emphasized more and more later. The availability of grain benefited the birds. In particular corn, where before they were often left to scratch for scraps that the more "important" livestock left behind. Scientific advancement's in livestock nutrition was evolving fast. Our birds eat better now than they ever have in history. The birds in the 1880s could only wish that their owners could debate the best feeds, and feed methods online as we do.