Chantecler Thread!

[Chantecler7]

Quote:
Originally Posted by CanuckBock




Uh, no Mike...the Standard most certainly DOES tell us "width of the penciling" because the feather while broad and firm, is suppose to adhere to these general variety requirements:

Interesting, neither Matt Lahmon (president of American Bantam Association and a licensed APA & ABA judge) nor my standard say the requirements call for any particular width of the penciling.

I

 

[TCFarm]

Hi Again,

Though this may not seem to have much to do with Chanteclers as a breed...I had previously reported that my one rooster (of seven) was quite aggressive. I do NOT think this is common and I acquired him from another farm, last year, as a young bird (8 weeks)...all my others were raised here, by me and are very sweet.

{read on, please...}
I employed the methods I read of on this web forum (under 'aggressive roosters').

I just wanted to let you all know that I have been fairly successful thus far in taming my 'bad guy' (one attack per week as opposed to seven)!! The article helped me realize it was not my fault and helped me modify MY behavior to him; rather than his behavior (which is only normal, after-all), so my prime roo did not end up 'in the soup'! My hubby was 'ready to kill' when he saw the bruises on my legs from this rooster....

I will send a link to the helpful article in next post!

Meantime, Thanks Friend!

Best regards,
Kathy, TCFarm

 

[skookumchuck]

Hi Again,

Though this may not seem to have much to do with Chanteclers as a breed...I had previously reported that my one rooster (of seven) was quite aggressive. I do NOT think this is common and I acquired him from another farm, last year, as a young bird (8 weeks)...all my others were raised here, by me and are very sweet.

{read on, please...}
I employed the methods I read of on this web forum (under 'aggressive roosters').

I just wanted to let you all know that I have been fairly successful thus far in taming my 'bad guy' (one attack per week as opposed to seven)!! The article helped me realize it was not my fault and helped me modify MY behavior to him; rather than his behavior (which is only normal, after-all), so my prime roo did not end up 'in the soup'! My hubby was 'ready to kill' when he saw the bruises on my legs from this rooster....

I will send a link to the helpful article in next post!

Meantime, Thanks Friend!

Best regards,
Kathy, TCFarm

that sounds great congrats. I am hopefully raising at least two new roosters but time will tell.

 

[CanuckBock]

Heel low:

This will be tedious and I apologize for this but it is what it is...tedious...

Quote:

And I repeat once again...the Standard most certainly DOES tell us "width of the penciling." Not sure what "standard" you are referring to but the copies of the Standard of Perfections that I am referring to are the American Poultry Association (APA) and the American Bantam Association (ABA). Both used at sanctioned shows here in North America to judge exhibition poultry.

Here is the deduction process I have concluded regarding the "width of the pencilling"...my "take" as it is founded word by word, quote by quote off the Standard of Perfections (SOP's) which are supposedly where anyone may use them from sanctioned judges, members of a club or executive position--to Fanciers, Breeders, and even a mere child reading the words for the very first time without all the clutter of politics and interpretation. Who said what and when does not matter...what birds won does not even matter so much...what matters are these word found in the SOP's that are our guide.

So we must go to the words for guidance and what do they say?


Oh sorry...wrong GOOD BOOK...

Words in the Standard of Perfection (SOP) are our literal gospel Mike. All interpretations of the SOP fall back upon the words...very simple. The words in the SOP are our guide because...

APA SOP 2010, page 1:

"the written text is the description of the ideal bird"​

So based on the above, no matter how much I love Arthur O. Schillings portrayal of the Chantecler (retouched photographs he took of what he considered near perfect birds just needing a few air brushes to become perfection...his opinion of course)...the WORDS found in the SOP are our guide.

Don't give a hoot or holler, tiny bit of care regarding other people's opinions and interpretations of the SOP unless quoted sections supporting their interpretations are provided. This IS tedious, you betcha, thorough and meticulous...you betcha. All the judges in the world could line up and show us their opinion as they perceive them to be but only the words in the SOP are our law...

On a side note, I truly wish we had colour swatches in the SOPs...truly I do and realize how expensive it would be to issues SOP's like that. There are historic books that do...that have the definition of the colour with the matching colour swatch example to show what it is suppose to be.

At exhibition, at that moment in time and if I chose to show a bird under a judge for their perception of the SOP...only then is their opinion of the SOP's law at that moment in regards to the placement of my bird. Ten seconds later, another judge or the same one could change their opinions, meaning that they wanted to switch the standings of a judged class...that is the wild card, the humanness in the hobby. The fun in the Fancy for sure!

But to think we are given no guidance on the "width of the pencilling" shows ignorance of the SOP's that govern poultry exhibited at sanctioned shows.

Here goes...this will be tedious, this will be lengthy but this is necessary to show the words are our law for the good of the Newbies and Oldsters alike...



APA SOP 2010, Page 3:

So "useful type" is the objective...sounds good, Chants are very useful IMHO. To me, useful is productive so meat and eggs combined with great beauty.

ABA SOP, page 228:

Was there a typo here...did ABA miss out the word "deep" in the beginning introduction of the colour of the female plumage then...because it goes on to mention deep reddish bay throughout the "Partridge Plumage" description for the rest of the female colour?



ABA SOP, page 228:

Worth noting...the ABA SOP is much more strict about showing pullet breeder males than the APA SOP... labels the "not clean" black chest a "defect."



APA SOP 2010, Page 10:

Since I doubt people will know what "equidistant from each other" will mean...equidistant is an adjective that means "equally distant" so basically, we are suppose to have "narrow concentric linear markings" inside the feather that are "narrow, uniform in width, sharply defined," follow the contour (shape) of the feather and when "multiple" as in Partridge...an equal distance from each other (meaning the ground colour is an equal width from each section of ground colour).



ABA SOP 2010, page 250:

There is going to be a larger area of deep reddish bay ground colour on the female Chantecler Partridge. The ground colour will be the "leading element" on the bird...so the majority of the colour is the deep reddish bay. This means there is more deep reddish bay and less beetle green black in comparison to each other...makes sense and fits the description of "narrow" uniform in width markings of equal distance from each other for the pencillings.

<<'pretty tedious but trudge along!>>>

APA SOP 2010, page 28:


Realize that NO, the pencillings and the ground colour do not have to be of equal widths to each other (pencillings are stated to be "characteristically narrow") but the pencillings are equal widths to other pencillings (narrower than the ground colour sections) AND the ground colour is equal widths to other sections of ground colour but larger in width (wider) than the pencillings. Pencillings are narrow and not as wide as ground colour. This is listening to the SOP worded instructions that these terms of narrow are to be used comparatively....pencil to ground colour.

If this explanation sounds tedious it sure is...but you need to grasp that the deep reddish bay ground colour sections are all the same width but larger (wider) than the beetle green black pencillings (which are all the same width to other pencillings and narrower than the ground colour).

In a perfectly executed Chantecler Partridge, on one feather, all the pencilings are one width and all the sections of ground colour are one width which is wider than the pencillings.


You will need at least three pencillings of equal width to fit the feather and follow the contour/shape of the feather for the back, breast, body, wing bows and thighs. I am not sure how more concise and detailed the wording needs to be from the SOP's for someone to "get this" concept of equal width of pencllings.

Now as far as width of feathers to begin with...the SOP is quite descriptive here also, not just in a general poultry sense, but also for the Chantecler breed of chicken.

APA SOP 2010, page 29:
Encouraged to have broad feathers and the American Class of which the Chantecler breed is, is to have moderately broad and long feathers. Since any breed may be of any variety...do note that the Partridge variety is pretty strictly told to have feathers broad enough to have equal width of pencillings on certain feathers with the corresponding wider equal width of ground colour between the black markings.

A good suit of protective and insulative feathers would allow a Chantecler to focus its energies on making meat and eggs instead of wasting precious resources on staying cool or keeping warm. A general purpose chicken that easily does what is expected of it; be productive and thrive in extremes of climatic conditions.

APA SOP 2010, page 53:

The Chantecler requires very decent feathers to "resist the climatic conditions of Canada" which at my home is a temperature spread ranging from +35C (+95F) to -53C (-63F). Yes, the Chantecler is as capable at withstanding very cold conditions as well as very HOT conditions. Bro W exported Chants to first France, then other countries like the USA, South Africa, Italy, Spain, South America, Belgium, Sweden and England.



I will also add the quotes I have already posted...

APA SOP 2010, page 36 as it applies to Partridge variety specifically listed for CHANTECLER:


APA SOP 2010, page 36 on Female Parti Chant:



So in a nutshell, you have markings that are narrow but all the same width that are an equal distance from each other and there must be at least THREE of these pencils inside a feather. Simple spacial math that a feather of a certain size is going to have to have a specific WIDTH of the pencillings to meet all these particular criterion.

The minimum of three distinct crescent-like markings of beetle green black of the same width on the deep reddish bay ground colour is all evenly spaced, so perfectly balanced and in harmony for whatever type of feather (back, breast, body, wing bows or thighs) that is being judged. The width of the pencillings will not be the same size as the distance of the spacing of the width of the ground colour but whatever width the "narrow" pencilngs are and whatever width the ground colour is...all same width for both items.

This simply states all the parameters required for the particular width of pencilling in the Partridge variety of the female Chantecler chicken breed including the complimentary ground colour width.


Was this a fun post to do...was the typing of all the quotes tedious...but did we learn something? If yes, then very much worth it.

Doggone & Chicken UP!

Tara Lee Higgins
Higgins Rat Ranch Conservation Farm, Alberta, Canada

 

[Chantecler7]

I'll stand by my previous comments. "Narrow" or "wide" are relative terms, subject to one's own interpretations and preferences. No licensed APA or ABA poultry judge worth his or her salt is going to mark a bird up or down based solely on the width of the penciling. Yes, there should be three or more pencilings, but two is not going to disqualify any partridge female, especially in bantams. A lot of folks feel we pay way too much attention to the intricate details of feather color at the expense of more important aspects of chickens, productivity for one.
My birds will always be selected for size, temperament, disease resistance, reasonably fast growth, egg production, and egg size - ahead of exact coloring. I think most poultry keepers feel the same. I believe Brother Wilfrid chose the color white to enable him to focus on the same priorities.

 

[toofarout]

How bad is it having some amount of smut in a buff chantecler's tail? Can it be bred out? Is *any* amount a bad thing? What if there is smut in tail of pullet, but it molts out?
How can it be gotten rid of?
I had thought that the smut was *all* gone once the girls molted that first time, but I'm pretty sure I'm seeing some still in a few of them.
Honestly, it doesn't bother *me*, (winter hardiness, health, and egg production and temperament are more important to me), but if it is bad according to the standard I need to know this.
Thanks,
from Sue

 

[Chantecler7]

Sue, a little smut in the tail of a buff is not a big deal. Sure, you would rather it were not there, but I would not cull a bird based solely on that. I have seen birds on champion row that had a bit of smut in the tail. I would, however, shy away from solid black if possible. It really depends on what you have to breed from. White in the tail probably means the bird is carrying at least one copy of dominant white, and the area that is white would be black if it were not for the dominant white being present. In mating your birds you don't want off-color in the tail of both the male and the females, just tolerate it in one gender or the other. Eventually you want clear buff of one nice even shade, but poultry breeding is not a race. We all have to accept less than perfection, because there are no perfect birds. Or humans.

 

[toofarout]

Sue, a little smut in the tail of a buff is not a big deal. Sure, you would rather it were not there, but I would not cull a bird based solely on that. I have seen birds on champion row that had a bit of smut in the tail. I would, however, shy away from solid black if possible. It really depends on what you have to breed from. White in the tail probably means the bird is carrying at least one copy of dominant white, and the area that is white would be black if it were not for the dominant white being present. In mating your birds you don't want off-color in the tail of both the male and the females, just tolerate it in one gender or the other. Eventually you want clear buff of one nice even shade, but poultry breeding is not a race. We all have to accept less than perfection, because there are no perfect birds. Or humans.

Thank you,
Does this mean that I should (if possible) use a buff male who has no smut in the tail?
I have no buff male but if I were to find one ....
Most of the hens have only a little smut or none at all.
They are however, quite fluffy, but we just officially reached the end of winter so that is to be expected.
(but this morning it was in the 20's, so rude, I wanted to see it in the 40's.)

 

[Chantecler7]

Does this mean that I should (if possible) use a buff male who has no smut in the tail?
I have no buff male but if I were to find one ....
Most of the hens have only a little smut or none at all.

Yes, if you want to eventually eliminate the smut. The fluffiness issue is another one to try to breed away from. Some of us are working on that.

 

[CanuckBock]

I'll stand by my previous comments. "Narrow" or "wide" are relative terms, subject to one's own interpretations and preferences.

Narrow and wide in relations to the groundcolour and number of pencillings displayed upon a feather are not subject to one's own interpretations. The SOP's are very concise about the required parameters for perfection (as I will show documented in a visual example below) but obviously we may select for what we prefer! You do not have to breed to the SOP's to have the real McCoy in the Chantecler breed.

If the pencilling is wider than the ground colour, the penciling is not correct and the bird can expect to be mark down for this--it HAS to be marked down especially when one WITH better pencillings is presented for exhibition and judgment...to be evaluated against its nearness to perfection, too. If the groundcolour is not wider than the pencillings AND is not the same size across the feather, it is not correct. The Standard is called the "Standard of Perfection" simply because it describes PERFECTION...the ideal bird is described by words. Certainly you have no obligation in your breeding program to seek the same worded perfection. But these are the rooles and woe be it to someone who thinks otherwise entering a sanctioned show presided over by a decent, competent, and professional sanctioned judge(s). The show has rules, rules to be followed.

APA SOP 2010, page 3:

No licensed APA or ABA poultry judge worth his or her salt is going to mark a bird up or down based solely on the width of the penciling.

I could not disagree more. Of course the judge MUST mark the bird up or down based on the width of the pencillings. These are fully explained in regards to the ideal expression expected and the judge needs to be judging the bird as per the words in the SOP's. I would not present a bird for any judge that did not judge as per the "General Scale of Points" as outlined by the SOP's. Their integrity as a professional and sanctioned judge is only as good as their integrity to the adherence of what the SOP was intended to do...guide the judge to select the most ideal specimens that mirrored the SOP words.

Why would one bother to produce a variety like the Partridge if the judge would not JUDGE the width of the pencilings? This is part and parcel as a duty in executing the judging procedures...to judge the specimen bird against the worded description of the SOP's ideal bird and reward those birds that closest match the ideal specimen described. While the judge is entitled to a personal opinion...say would they want this bird themselves, quite frankly they must adhere to the point system outlined by the SOP's when judging poultry.


In the APA SOP, the General Scale of Points for judging "other than white" allots 63 of the 100 points to shape and 37 points out of 100 to colour.

White birds are allotted 73 points for shape and 27 points for colour.


If a judge chooses not to use the point system to judge breed and variety, so be it. Not my accountability, integrity and conduct on the line here. They would be a judge I would not consider entering my poultry for opinions on because of their unprofessional conduct.

The reason many of us choose the more difficult varieties is to challenge ourselves with the birds to meet the exacting worded descriptions. It is in the challenge of getting all of the aspects of beauty combined with production, amiable temperaments and healthfulness that keeps many of us interested for our entire lifetimes. I spent my first 30 years learning how to produce healthy, useful, productive, happy birds...now in the past 15+ years, I have spent this time studying the genetics of getting poultry to comply to the ideals in the SOP's. Yes, nothing easy or quick in any of this and it is not suppose to be simple...that would be tres boring! My last genetics book cost $200 and I had to wait six weeks for it to arrive...nothing cheap, nothing quick about any of this, and indeed nothing simple as I continue to study and apply theory in practise to compliment my years of experience working and learning from the birds.


Whilst a judge is to give every reasonable consideration to the productive production aspect of poultry...they are being hired to JUDGE the breed and JUDGE the variety as per the SOP's words. To judge how closely the bird comes to the ideals stated in the words of the SOP of which I have posted and stated in my previous lengthy and tedious post.

Any judge not willing to abide by these rules is not judging and should be called on it...brought up on charges of "conduct unbecoming a judge!" And from what lil' birdies tell me, many have been called out for exactly this.

They are not judging by the rules that govern what bird best comes closest to the ideals.

While many of us do not have to play by these rules and certainly, we do not have to enter our birds to be judged. This does not mean I am at liberty to go about imagining that maybe only TWO pencillings are the ideal in the SOP's...sure would make life easier in some cases and then harder in others.

Rules are rules are rules and as an exhibitor, I expect a judge to use the Standards of Perfections' worded descriptions and the allotted point systems to "judge my bird" fairly and professionally to the best of their abilities and understanding of the words in the SOP's. And to this, they will receive nothing short of my deepest respect for their integrity and adherence to the "rules."

When we breed our birds as per the words in the SOP's...one does not expect to be told that these rules will not be used to JUDGE these birds! This would be discrediting this fine hobby and the years of diligent work by the people that enlisted their expertise to draw up these worded descriptions in the Standards.

To quote the fellow that some of my bantam Brahmas came from originally...Dearest Mr. Wallace has some very good words of advice...

Yes, there should be three or more pencilings, but two is not going to disqualify any partridge female, especially in bantams.

What? Who said anything about disqualifying a bird based on mere pencillings? Are you unable to discuss the finer points of this variety then without going over the top in dramatic extremes? This is a defect not a DQ!

Fred P. Jeffrey, March 15, 1974, says in the Preface to his wonderful publication Bantam Chickens:

A lot of folks feel we pay way too much attention to the intricate details of feather color at the expense of more important aspects of chickens, productivity for one.

I don't.

Chantecler = Production.

For me, there is no more complete a description for my breed.

FYI, a poultry show IS a beauty contest with productive poultry (cover of the APA SOP states "Standard-bred Production") entered to be judged based on what can be examined and seen presented at the show. This is not an egg contest, a dead chicken carcass class or a laying competition, never mind showmanship competition on how well trained and behaved your bird acts with you as a guide. This is a beauty contest of productive birds whereby the judge is asked to judge the specimen against the words of what an IDEAL example is. Not how many eggs the bird laid, or how to fix the bird, or breed the bird into a better example or whatever. There are guidelines for judges to follow that make it so the judge is not to marked down a female that is productive but the very best female often shown by the master exhibitors in a heavy breed of chicken is a barren hen, especially in the Partridge variety in a general purpose breed of chicken. A barren hen is NOT a productive hen at that point in her existence...not in egg laying terms!

She would NOT have a body that is distended/lowered by egg production, not suffering from giving to her eggies (loss of pigment and condition waning), and simply because her metabolism is not youthful and quick as she once was when younger...her manufacturing of the Partridge patterned feathers would be slower and thus more precise than in her youthful faster vigorous days. Not often that many realize the reason Cuckoo Marans have a wavy fuzzy barred expression on their feathers is because energy in the day time that is available to make feather patterns is redirected at night time when it is less warm to keeping the bird warm instead of making feathers. A bird only has so much energy to distribute so at night, keeping you alive is more important than making precise markings across a feather. That change in temperature in such a fast feathering variety means the markings go from slow and precise to quick and fuzzy...night versus day expressed like rings on a tree.

Many will have nothing but troubles with intricate patterns like Partridge because, IMHO, they let their birds down. A check in growth of the feather can ruin the perfect production of a Partridge pattern and is often caused by letting the birds run out of water, some stressor like a food change, exposure to inclement weather/threat of predation, any bad husbandry skills or whatever...something that inhibits the slow and steady, precise making of the markings on the feathers. Good old time human doctors use to look at the hands of a patient to see how their finger nails looked...past illnesses can show up as off colours or ridges in your nails....just like poultry, we don't l00k our best when we are not kept in the best of conditions & unhappy... When prime conditions are on offer, this only helps to accentuate the genetics your chicken strain may have for decent pattern marking productions.

Happy contented birds l00k good; inside and outwards...Go figure!

Sure...right as rain when E. Y. Smith of Cornell University says:

My birds will always be selected for size, temperament, disease resistance, reasonably fast growth, egg production, and egg size - ahead of exact coloring. I think most poultry keepers feel the same.

And if you have read this thread, I have stated this and am not one of those people that have my priorities where "intricate details of feather color at the expense of more important aspects."

As said, my list goes on down from: vigour & disease resistance, fertility & production, temperament, longevity--all these come BEFORE colour pattern or what the birds L00K like as in phenotype!

So after investing 30 years into learning about all these "important" items and how to produce them in birds... when you have all your ducks in a row and you now only have the phenotype left as a challenge...why not beat the odds and continue to challenge yourself by having non-white or non-black birds to challenge yourself with? Go for the "Royalty of the Showpen" in the Partridge or the most difficult of the self-colours in Buff...why, because you can!


I have Jumbo sized eggs and nine pound cockerels with Chanteclers producing for me at 5 years plus in simply lovely sweet tempered and healthy conditions. Old is good! I'm old...as dirt some daze!

This is Chantelle last year...this coming June she shall be SIX years young.
Vigour & disease resistance, fertility & production, temperament, longevity - she has all these!

​

YES her plumage is too soft but she still gives me Jumbo sized eggs...not shabby to me at all. Her progeny have harder feathers and are a richer self-Buff and so it goes, generation after generation as we try to improve on the breed in looks. Improve on the form because we have the FUNCTION already decent. To me, a Chantecler is not a Chantecler if you don't have production in them. Rick and I chose this as our only Standard sized breed of chicken because we wanted a source of plenty of great big eggs (winter eggs since we are working on eight months of it now!) and firm tasty meat to bless our home plates.

The day of glory has arrived​

Dr. R. E. Rochon of Clarence Creek, Ontario, January 1919:

Another female with vigour & disease resistance, fertility & production, temperament, longevity.
​

So here's a nice healthful and productive female...got firmer feather but now white miscolours in the tail and shafting...you go out to grab something wanted and let other things go on the quest. Then you go back to fix that and lose something else. Round and round we go...whee!

Rome was not built in a day but I do not ever expect to attain perfection but working on it. As Dr. Carefoot says, we need to put all the components for perfection in the breeding pen and for me, then we hope and wish for a bit of good luck.

Vigour & disease resistance, fertility & production, temperament, longevity...getting tired of typing these out.​

This girl Dana (daughter to Gertie) is HUGE but her groundcolour is too light plus I don't like the bump in her cushion... Where are those scissors to cut pieces out I do like...and that pot of glue to stickum all in one Chant?

There are all levels of poultry expectations within this Hobby and this is the reason why there is a never ending bit of entertainment in store for all of us...from beginners to oldtimers.



Quote:


Bro W produced a product that others wanted and would buy in a productive sensible chicken breed...

Bro W, his students and some of the 1919 Capons from La Trappe in the belle province of Quebec
​

Brother Wilfrid is quote by H. Gordon Green of Ormstown Quebec, as saying his birds would not be winning in the show ring and for good reason.

The Chantecler & Other Rare Poultry Breeds By Linda M. Gryner:
Oka Chants only complied to the SOP for two years after the breeds recognition in 1921...

Just AFTER the Chantecler breed in the White variety was accepted by the American Poultry Association in 1921, just two years later Bro W went on re-instilling other breeds of poultry into the Oka Chanteclers. Frere Wilfrid, he made a second influx of the Rhode Island breed, this time in the White Rhode Island which was instilled into the Oka version of the Chantecler in 1923. More breeds were instilled again that were not done in the SOP compliant White Chanteclers that were completed and accepted as a recognized breed in 1921.

In making the White variety of the Chantecler, the APA SOP says only Dark Cornish x White Leghorn and Rhode Island Red x White Wyandotte were used in 1908. The only other breed used in the SOP accepted variety of White Chanteclers was the White Plymouth Rock.

The SOP Chantecler is not the Oka Chantecler...time to listen up to the Quebecers who have had the Oka birds going on for nigh over 90 years and counting.

Bro W started up an association of his very own with groups that would judge the quality of where he wanted the Oka Chants to go. The Association des Eleveurs de la Poule Canadian Chantecler had their own Standard in 1921 and the Chants were larger (weighed more) with other differences than the APA SOP. His Standard for the Oka Chantecler is not the same as the APA SOP Standard for the Breed. There are even drawings showing what the Oka Chanteclers should look like.

Yeh, you can bet your bippy the Oka Chant of Bro W's is not the same as the ABA or APA SOP Chanteclers.


Partridge and Self-Buff are not varieties for the faint of heart or easily disappointed. I have over 45 years invested in this hobby...what's few more decades invested heading for the grave gonna mean.

Do as you wish but for those of us who surpassed the historic challenges, leave us to have the three or more pencillings that are narrower compared to the even width of the ground colour. Certainly up to the challenge, n'est pas? as Wilfrid would surely say!

Doggone & Chicken UP!

Tara Lee Higgins
Higgins Rat Ranch Conservation Farm, Alberta, Canada