That would lead me to beleive that she liked the hens to be darker in color. Chris, what are your thoughts? I've only been breeding these "things" for roughly 4 years now. What knowledge I do have has come from Mr. Brown.
I've bred American Game and Aseels for the last 15 years. Nearly 100% of the time. The cockerels take after their mothers and the pullets take after the cock bird.
I think the cockerels are the primary "show bird" and the pullets, if you get them dark & even, then show them. I think the Buckeye needs to be a "Buckeye" in body & the color will be in some and not in others. As long as the female is uniform as much as possible whether a shade darker or a shade lighter, the color is fine with me. I still want to see my hen as red and not just brown.
I've bred American Game and Aseels for the last 15 years. Nearly 100% of the time. The cockerels take after their mothers and the pullets take after the cock bird.
I think the cockerels are the primary "show bird" and the pullets, if you get them dark & even, then show them. I think the Buckeye needs to be a "Buckeye" in body & the color will be in some and not in others. As long as the female is uniform as much as possible whether a shade darker or a shade lighter, the color is fine with me. I still want to see my hen as red and not just brown.
It's interesting when you search the color Rich/Dark Mahogany bay on the net. The color itself seems very dark, nearly brown. In fact, most sites give the buckeye nut the color of chestnut brown. Seems to me that we are very nearly splitting hairs. I was at the crossroads on Friday morning and spoke with Mr. Brown on Saturday afterward he got back in town.......I thought the birds all looked nice, good and healthy. There seemed to be sufficiant variations in type, size and heads, but I'm not expert. Mr. Brown told me that he thought the colors were not dark enough in the majority. And if the breeders are going back and forth on the color, how are the judges going to know what is correct? One judge speaks to one breeder and another judge speaks to a different breeder with differing views.....I guess what I'm getting at is......Will there ever be uniformity in judging for this breed amongst judges? That goes a long way in how a person selects brood stock.
I have spent time talking to John Brown. I disagree with Mr. Brown on two points (and I am not saying I am right and he is wrong but this is just my interpretation): First, I disagree with him that most of the birds are not dark enough. Mr. Brown has always made this point. I disagree with what I call a muddy brown appearance that he seems to like. The more you breed it in, it comes with its on set of problems (black splotching, slate underneath all over instead of just in the back, white in the undercolor in places). IMHO, many of the birds in the show were too dark. The male I got from Schrider is approaching a black/ brown. I got him to experiment over my light hens but I would never breed him to one of the darker hens. The "garnet red" or "mahogany bay" should have a red shine to it. The more "brown" you get it (and generally that means "darker"), the more RIR it looks in color and the less red glow of the Buckeye -- it takes on a dead brown color and loses its redness. Mahogany Bay is a brown that glows red. I have likewise seen a few Buckeye males that were too light -- not many & don't think I really saw any of those in the show though. Your "garnet red" quote seems to me to be spot on. We all know what that looks like.
The main problems with color on the males seem to have to do with them being too dark or the wing is not right (many times the wing is shaded black on the wrong side, the RIR way -- on a Buckeye, it is the opposite, the back side {unexposed side}). Also, people seem to be distressing about the black splotching on the breast. I say just watch it and do not let it get out-of- control. It was on my first Urch male. I see it in about half but it can be bred out over a couple of generations.
Second, a number of the birds had legs that were too short. I would not want those legs in my birds. The Buckeye is an active fowl, a great forager and needs every bit of its medium shank. Mr. Brown always looks at my birds and says my legs are too long but I disagree with him. I think the short legs look wrong to me. The Buckeye is a big active fowl. Functionally, it needs a longer shank than advocated by Mr. Brown. Technically( SOP), it is a medium shank. To my eye, that means a shank that is propotionately "medium" to the bird's body. A Cornish has short shanks. This is my humble opinion. You may disagree with me. It is alright with me if you do -- this is just how I interpret the SOP.
You are correct in the way you see the judging. I am not trying to be critical because after all, Buckeyes were missing at the shows for many years. The ones out there were not up to par. Most judges do not know the Buckeye like those of us who breed them. There are a few judges who are breeding Buckeyes (Bob Gilbert; Jim Adkins, another one who works with Schrider (can't think of his name)). The Crossroads switched the judge on us at the last minute. We initially were assigned Mike Wasylkowski who knows them pretty good (btw, Mike judged the Buckeyes for the SPPA contest) but the Crossroads switched the judge to Don Nelson who is a RIR breeder and he does not particualrly like Buckeyes (he said so). I think it is important that we breed the Buckeye properly so judges get used to seeing what they look like. As time goes on and more Buckeyes are shown, the judging will improve. I agree the judging is all over the place right now but that is OK and expected. What is most important is that they are being shown. The color and shank size will work itself out. The thing you can do is make sure you have the Buckeye body underneath the feathers.
About the Buckeye hens: some of the lighter hens I have are true Buckeyes through and through. They have the wide hips, the big skulls and their lighter color doesn't bother me. I still have an old hen I got from Duane Urch in 2006. She is lighter and without good color but in form and type, she is built correctly. You want to avoid the narrow hips, the narrow heart girth, the long rectangular body. I am not trying to be controversial; I have bred them only since 2006 (so 5 years). Mr. Brown has bred them since 2000 (so 11 years). Duane Urch has had them since 1959 (so 52 years). I asked Mr. Urch about my color a couple of years ago and he called it "correct" (he's a man of few words). Mr. Urch also got a nice cockerel from me in 2009. I let him pick & Schrider had already picked that one out as a good bird as well (so Urch and Schrider were seeing the same thing).
Schrider has mentored me, and I trust him. I ask him why he likes one bird over another, etc. and that is how I have learned. Bob Gilbert has also been very helpful. I respect those of you who are so religious about color -- I just don't want you to lose sight of the proper body type ("build the barn & keep it intact before and while you paint it"). I want to help and teach as many people what I have learned (and is why I post here where the audience is probably the greatest) -- isn't that the real thing here -- interpreting the SOP's description? I agree we are splitting hairs over what is "mahogany bay," like the buckeye nut, I think it is OK for it to vary a shade here or there.
The Buckeye breed is in good shape, and we have some avid breeders. I liked what I saw and heard from the different breeders at the show. We are seeing the same thing (other than the two points of contention I have with Mr. Brown as discussed above). Sorry this is so long.
I have spent time talking to John Brown. I disagree with Mr. Brown on two points (and I am not saying I am right and he is wrong but this is just my interpretation): First, I disagree with him that most of the birds are not dark enough. Mr. Brown has always made this point. I disagree with what I call a muddy brown appearance that he seems to like. The more you breed it in, it comes with its on set of problems (black splotching, slate underneath all over instead of just in the back, white in the undercolor in places). IMHO, many of the birds in the show were too dark. The male I got from Schrider is approaching a black/ brown. I got him to experiment over my light hens but I would never breed him to one of the darker hens. The "garnet red" or "mahogany bay" should have a red shine to it. The more "brown" you get it (and generally that means "darker"), the more RIR it looks in color and the less red glow of the Buckeye -- it takes on a dead brown color and loses its redness. Mahogany Bay is a brown that glows red. I have likewise seen a few Buckeye males that were too light -- not many & don't think I really saw any of those in the show though. Your "garnet red" quote seems to me to be spot on. We all know what that looks like.
The main problems with color on the males seem to have to do with them being too dark or the wing is not right (many times the wing is shaded black on the wrong side, the RIR way -- on a Buckeye, it is the opposite, the back side {unexposed side}). Also, people seem to be distressing about the black splotching on the breast. I say just watch it and do not let it get out-of- control. It was on my first Urch male. I see it in about half but it can be bred out over a couple of generations.
Second, a number of the birds had legs that were too short. I would not want those legs in my birds. The Buckeye is an active fowl, a great forager and needs every bit of its medium shank. Mr. Brown always looks at my birds and says my legs are too long but I disagree with him. I think the short legs look wrong to me. The Buckeye is a big active fowl. Functionally, it needs a longer shank than advocated by Mr. Brown. Technically( SOP), it is a medium shank. To my eye, that means a shank that is propotionately "medium" to the bird's body. A Cornish has short shanks. This is my humble opinion. You may disagree with me. It is alright with me if you do -- this is just how I interpret the SOP.
You are correct in the way you see the judging. I am not trying to be critical because after all, Buckeyes were missing at the shows for many years. The ones out there were not up to par. Most judges do not know the Buckeye like those of us who breed them. There are a few judges who are breeding Buckeyes (Bob Gilbert; Jim Adkins, another one who works with Schrider (can't think of his name)). The Crossroads switched the judge on us at the last minute. We initially were assigned Mike Wasylkowski who knows them pretty good (btw, Mike judged the Buckeyes for the SPPA contest) but the Crossroads switched the judge to Don Nelson who is a RIR breeder and he does not particualrly like Buckeyes (he said so). I think it is important that we breed the Buckeye properly so judges get used to seeing what they look like. As time goes on and more Buckeyes are shown, the judging will improve. I agree the judging is all over the place right now but that is OK and expected. What is most important is that they are being shown. The color and shank size will work itself out. The thing you can do is make sure you have the Buckeye body underneath the feathers.
About the Buckeye hens: some of the lighter hens I have are true Buckeyes through and through. They have the wide hips, the big skulls and their lighter color doesn't bother me. I still have an old hen I got from Duane Urch in 2006. She is lighter and without good color but in form and type, she is built correctly. You want to avoid the narrow hips, the narrow heart girth, the long rectangular body. I am not trying to be controversial; I have bred them only since 2006 (so 5 years). Mr. Brown has bred them since 2000 (so 11 years). Duane Urch has had them since 1959 (so 52 years). I asked Mr. Urch about my color a couple of years ago and he called it "correct" (he's a man of few words). Mr. Urch also got a nice cockerel from me in 2009. I let him pick & Schrider had already picked that one out as a good bird as well (so Urch and Schrider were seeing the same thing).
Schrider has mentored me, and I trust him. I ask him why he likes one bird over another, etc. and that is how I have learned. Bob Gilbert has also been very helpful. I respect those of you who are so religious about color -- I just don't want you to lose sight of the proper body type ("build the barn & keep it intact before and while you paint it"). I want to help and teach as many people what I have learned (and is why I post here where the audience is probably the greatest) -- isn't that the real thing here -- interpreting the SOP's description? I agree we are splitting hairs over what is "mahogany bay," like the buckeye nut, I think it is OK for it to vary a shade here or there.
The Buckeye breed is in good shape, and we have some avid breeders. I liked what I saw and heard from the different breeders at the show. We are seeing the same thing (other than the two points of contention I have with Mr. Brown as discussed above). Sorry this is so long.
