Yet the SOP outlines how productive a breed should be. The measurements listed in the SOP for a breed, is in turn directly related to production. The breed will produce the best, provided the genetic production material is there, to fit the form.
Chickens are chickens, only type and production really separate one breed form another imo. All we have to go off of is the SOP of the breed. If a chicken looks like a crevecoeur but has large bones, stringy meat, and blue eggs, is it a crevecoeur?
A breed should look as it should, and do as it should. A leghorn that looks perfect and lays brown eggs is not a leghorn. I will agree with that.
The Standard defines a breed type, and historically, we understood the role of that type. The Standard is unable to define specifically what a bird should do. I wish that it did, or at least provided minimums. It does describe production characteristics generally under "Economic Qualities".
I believe in a form/function relationship. IMO neither follow neither, and there is an inter relationship of sorts. Equipped to perform does not equal performance. Some will perform well in spite of equipment, but usually lack durability and longevity. Commercially, livability is measured in %, they do have good rates, but are never evaluated after two years. They are dog food by then.
It is a mistake to imply that good type necessarily equals good performance. The genetics concerning performance is varied. There is a lot that comes together to make a good bird good. It is also a mistake to say that type does not matter. It does. Anyone that has spent any amount of time handling commercial layers notices a uniformity of type even in between strains. There is an actual ideal laying type.
So I would disagree when it is said that the SOP outlines how productive a breed should be. All it does (and all it intends to do) is define breed type and character. It was and always has been up to the breeders to select for utility. And they did. These breeds were very commercial in their own time.
"Chickens are chickens". Of course they are all chickens. Much separates the breeds though, and it is not just "production". Some were never considered utility, and always have been ornamental. Then performance for some breeds was very competitive. The English Games, Aseels, Shamos etc. Each with their own type for their own style. They each thrived in their own arena, but not outside. Poultry was kept and raised for thousands of years for reasons (religion etc.) before it was first intentionally selected for egg laying in the Middle East. They have been kept for other than productive reasons for a lot longer than they have for meat and eggs. The Aseel is at least 4,000 years old, and the New Hampshire is confined to a single century.
