Cream Legbar Working Group: Standard of Perfection

[dretd]

It'd be nice to have some UK people on this board to help y'all with the standard. I just hope that whatever is decided people stick to it. I'm rather fond of the appearance of the breed and would hate to see it not get recognized, or when a standard is approved people not sticking to breeding to that standard. That's what will take it from something unique to just another breed and a laughing stock breed for backyard folk.

Agreed.

I have been very pleasantly surprised by the camaraderie and great positive attitudes of everyone I've met in the Cream Legbar club. Although there will always be people that want to make a quick buck, so far everyone I have met here is really interested in improving the breed and wants to make them the best they can be. I think that is why there is so much discussion over this one little topic.

A whole lot of people worked very hard ( not me and thanks you guys) to get the standard and breed this far and I think we all want to be true to the original intent of the breeders in England as well as the bird as it was developed by Punnett and Pease. Lively discussion is good and leads to informed decisions where everyone has at least had the chance to voice an opinion. If people have input, they will feel they have some ownership and that will help the breed move forward in a positive way.

 

[KPenley]

off-topic question: Does anyone know why one ear lobe would be white and the other have a couple of red splotches? Is this like a puppy who has a spot on one ear? tia

 

[CibolaChooks]

off-topic question: Does anyone know why one ear lobe would be white and the other have a couple of red splotches? Is this like a puppy who has a spot on one ear? tia

Mine are the same way. Especially the one, he has really nice large round earlobes but the one side is all yellow and the other has some red splotches. I think its just one of those things to work towards fixing. It must be like a puppy that has one spot on its ear. Do your other roos have clean earlobes with no red splotches?

 

[KPenley]

Mine are the same way. Especially the one, he has really nice large round earlobes but the one side is all yellow and the other has some red splotches. I think its just one of those things to work towards fixing. It must be like a puppy that has one spot on its ear. Do your other roos have clean earlobes with no red splotches?

London is all white so far in the ear lobes, but he still has a good deal of growing to do. I'll have to go check the freezer camp boys.

 

[fowlman01]

I am with you. I did a lot of UK image searching and found:
1) there are a lot of off-type Cream Legbars over there, too. I think the US is doing really well to have come as far as we have in such a short time (and blackbirds13 your birds are really nice, btw) and
2) I found no decent pictures of non-shafted female's chests. A lot of side pictures so its hard to know for sure but what appears to be shafting at the edges (laterally where it comes around and meets the side of the body) of the breast outline.

In the CSU thread here the Wellies have the same situation with shafting on the breast. That is a good thread to look through. The Dutch don't mention shafting either and a Dutch judge was able to show a bird that had very little shafting on the chest and mentioned that their judges complain about the shafting and mark the birds down for it. In the APA SOP shafting is a general defect unless specifically mentioned as being a breed trait.

Anytime you have a situation where there is a cut........even a small cut (1-2 points) , you will have some judges cut it more that it really is because it stands out.

I also learned that there are a lot of pictures online of very bad birds....to the point that a person would be led to believe that it is the way they should look. No one could find a picture of a Wellie with a clear chest until the Dutch judge posted one and commented on it....so don't necessarily go by the pictures you find online. The idea of contacting a British judges is a very good idea.

When you get ready to have a qualifying meet you will need a minimum of 50 birds (equal amounts of C,H,K and P) to be shown. All 50 need to be close to the Standard for the breed. It is a good idea to enter more than 50 as any that are DQ'd will not count. you want to do it the first time out or you will have to wait even longer to get them in the Standard. It's not an easy process. If you do two varieties it will be 50 of each and I'm not sure that a different color crest is going to be worth it for this group. It's up to you. I have never seen another variety qualified just for the color of a small crest.

The APA requires a breed to reproduce at 50% true to breed. This is to cover blue and is pretty liberal. Again ......there is no bird that will meet the SOP 100%. Some get close though.

Walt

 

[dretd]

... In the APA SOP shafting is a general defect unless specifically mentioned as being a breed trait....

Anytime you have a situation where there is a cut........even a small cut (1-2 points) , you will have some judges cut it more that it really is because it stands out.

... The idea of contacting a British judges is a very good idea....

When you get ready to have a qualifying meet you will need a minimum of 50 birds (equal amounts of C,H,K and P) to be shown. All 50 need to be close to the Standard for the breed. It is a good idea to enter more than 50 as any that are DQ'd will not count. you want to do it the first time out or you will have to wait even longer to get them in the Standard. It's not an easy process. If you do two varieties it will be 50 of each and I'm not sure that a different color crest is going to be worth it for this group. It's up to you. I have never seen another variety qualified just for the color of a small crest.

The APA requires a breed to reproduce at 50% true to breed. This is to cover blue and is pretty liberal. Again ......there is no bird that will meet the SOP 100%. Some get close though.

Walt

Wow, thanks for stopping by and your wonderful sage comments.

I have been wondering if I have either been misunderstanding exactly what shafting is (is it only cream or is any color lighter than the vane considered 'shafting') or perhaps the degrees to which a hen will be marked down for the shafting. The shafts themselves run a different direction than the barbs in the vanes and seem more reflective. I think that depending on the light and angles the shafting can seem better or worse. I have three photos to look at all from the same pullet.With the flash the shafting seems really bad, but in natural lighting from the side it almost disappears.
Natural lighting, the shafting seems to disappear when the center is viewed from the side:

Flash:

Bright Natural lighting

In your opinion, how bad is this type of shafting? Much of a deduction or not?

When I compare her to my HQ Welsummer, the Wellie is much worse--can I assume that if a Cream Legbar had this amount of shafting there would be a greater deduction?:

 

[fowlman01]

Shafting is a contrast of colors that runs along the feather shaft/quill. It can be any color but, It is usually thin like the shaft. When it is wider it looks even worse. When I say worse, I am talking about seeing it on a bird that should not have it. There are some breeds where it is a requirement. It is a 1/2 to 1 1/2 point deduction per section. The breast is only one section, but judges tend to weigh heavier on cuts than they should when they are that visible.

A little inside info. Any cut that is visible to the exhibitors at a show is typically cut more than it should be if the judge doesn't have the right amount of confidence. The exhibitors that lose will pick apart a bird...lol It shouldn't make any difference to the judge, but let me tell you it does. A confident judge will explain that it is only one point. Any of these visible faults are usually the kiss of death if you show birds. It is not right, but it is human nature.

Walt

 

[dretd]

Shafting is a contrast of colors that runs along the feather shaft/quill. It can be any color but, It is usually thin like the shaft. When it is wider it looks even worse. When I say worse, I am talking about seeing it on a bird that should not have it. There are some breeds where it is a requirement. It is a 1/2 to 1 1/2 point deduction per section. The breast is only one section, but judges tend to weigh heavier on cuts than they should when they are that visible.

A little inside info. Any cut that is visible to the exhibitors at a show is typically cut more than it should be if the judge doesn't have the right amount of confidence. The exhibitors that lose will pick apart a bird...lol It shouldn't make any difference to the judge, but let me tell you it does. A confident judge will explain that it is only one point. Any of these visible faults are usually the kiss of death if you show birds. It is not right, but it is human nature.

Walt

Good info.

Could you elaborate about the word 'cut'. I am not sure what that means?

I think that the color is a really obvious thing that gets zeroed in on and seems to hold more weight than physical flaws even though in my mind the physical flaws are by far most important. Probably the most important thing for me is size and frequency of egg laying ( Chickens are meant to be a useful animal, not just eye-candy imo) and yet this is something that is not bred for (unless it is important to the individual breeder)--because its not really judged.

I appreciate your insights about judging its just the same in other species of animals only perhaps more-so there.

 

[ChicKat]

Mr. Walt and Dr etd,

Thanks for these insights and the really good conversation! In a qualifying meet -- would birds that show more color - but have every other trait be able to count toward qualifying the breed? Can the club arrange to have some other meets in the years prior so that we can get expert views of our birds? -- Pictures are great - but they don't compare to the real thing.

• In the UK Jill Rees has won the highest prizes in the Poultry shows there with her CLs and prior to that it was Emily de Gray. -- If their birds are the best - and their birds have shafting, then that would eliminate basing a revision to the USA CL's draft SOP based on the fact that Walt stated that substandard birds on the internet are definitely not the ones from which to determine how a bird should look. And for all of us -- Walt's advice needs to be taken to heart. One of the reasons that our SOP is in draft form is so that any needed revisions can be incorporated.

• Like dretd, my objective is for birds that perform (produce eggs), that are autosexing, healthy, have good personalities etc. -- The fact that they are beautiful is icing on the cake. I kind of see showing as great competition for kids, a way to improve the breed and to have the public in general see how beautiful chickens are, a wonderful sport/recreation. For my part, probably the only reason I would/will show is to help to get the breed qualified though.

• Like a few others have said, I prefer the appearance of the white/cream feather shaft being visible, But that is our personal taste. Were it invisible (and as yet no one has found a bird that doesn't have the feather shaft/vein visible to my knowledge) it would be the effect of taking away the pin-stripes in a pin-stripe suit. It's subtle but definitely something that adds texture.

To reiterate what I'm trying to get across:
1. we think that all the birds known to us have feather shafting, and that includes top birds in the UK
2. appearance is important - but we are all spending way too much time/energy on color IMO and not enough on type - Are they ornamental birds or production birds that look striking - where is this going 5-years or 10-years from now?
3. Most people that have weighed in on this appearance issue, prefer the visible feather shaft....and as yet no one has produced a bird that doesn't have it. SO - why don't we craft language into the draft SOP to include this trait? (Especially since the CL forebears (gold legbar in particular) have it mentioned in SOP --- and --- we have a working theory that it was omitted by accident from SOP in the UK. --- A revision would not remove the potential USA SOP from draft status - and if anyone ever found a CL that doesn't have it, then it could be revised out -- but otherwise - what would be the objection to incorporating it in the draft SOP?

It brings up some questions - that the CL club members are surfacing in the Survey the club is putting out - BTW thank you all members who have completed it -- it automatically closes tomorrow - AND - it is an auto close. Then the board of directors meeting on August 1st - it will be discussed...

If a beautiful bird is NOT autosexing is it still a cream legbar? (I say 'no')
If a Cream Legar lays other than blue or bluish green or greenish blue eggs is it still a Cream Legbar?
How much coloration is going to be "permissible" or are all the birds raised from two true CL parents CLs?

Got all my chickens back last night and the yard is like the plague of locusts - except crawling with grasshoppers.... I will have to get a movie of them when I let them out this morning.

 

[fowlman01]

To be clear. The APA does not promote pretty birds. If the breed is known for egg laying and autosexing it should do that well. If the SOP is followed the birds should perform......if the body type is written correctly. It s not true that showing is all about pretty bags of feathers. That is the perception online because of dog shows etc. if you read the first 30 pages of the SOP you will see many references to the BODY of the bird. The type....or body of a chicken is the most important part of the bird in a show. Excessively high tails are an indication of an unthrifty bird as an example as is flat breasts etc. The color of the bird should be the last consideration.

When I judge if the bird does not feel like a viable bird in my hand, I don't care how pretty the feathers are. The APA does not get into personalities of the birds, but the structure is very important and it can't perform if the structure is not correct. I can't tell what it's egg production might be when I handle a bird, but I can tell you if it is built right to do the job it was intended to do.

Walt