Cream Legbar Working Group: Standard of Perfection

[fowlman01]

1) This male have a straight line from the legs to the front of the breast. That is bad in my book. I am look for rounded breasts.
2) The breast does extend past the end of the beak. That is good in my book.
3) The tail is low. Good
4) The tail is long. Good
5) He has a short beak. Good
6) Eyes are set far back (not in the 1st 1/3 of the comb), they are high on the head (not a big distance between the comb and eyes), I would have to look from the top, to see if the eyes are wider than the skull, but they are defiantly not sunken. The head is flat on top not round. All good things in my book.
7) The serration on the comb are good. Not tot thin, not too deep, not curving to the back.
8) I can't say anything about the neck. The 1920's illustration commissioned by the Brown Leghorn club show more curve and with the rounded breast appears longer, but I really haven't look at enough birds to know if this is just the pose at the second the shot was taken of if there is really any difference.
9) This male has more elongated ear loges that Fowlman01's Bantam white Leghorn. The Bantam Leghorn were nearly circular. I know different breeds specify different shapes and sizes for the ear lobes, but don't know which is preferred in this case. (The 1920" SC Light Brown Leghorn Illustration show longer ear lobes. I really don't know what the SOP requires here).


Okay it was a stretch on #8 and #9... I really am neutral on everything else that I can see from this profile. If this were my bird I would make selection based on the head, breast, and tail alone from this profile. I would also look at the width of the skull, the length of the back (I measure in fingers to see who is longer and who is shorter in a group), I would check the keel for length and straightness, I would check to see if the pelvic bones were straight, I would measure the distance between the pelvic bones (again in fingers), I would measure the depth from the back to the keel bone, the capacity as measured from the keel to the pelvic bone, I would gage the thighs with my hands for comparison, compare the width of the shanks, and compare the width of the body. Then I would move to color, and hope that I made a good decision when processing day comes.

Thanks...I will comment later. That is good. What would you work on first with this bird? Lets not get into color yet.

w.

 

[KPenley]

Here goes...

Comb: Looks straight, upright, firm and even on the head. Has 5 distinct, deeply serrated points, which do extend pretty straight off the back of the head.
But, the comb seems a little large to be considered medium, there appears to be a bit of an extra serrated point at the front, and looks to have a thumbprint in the base. Does a bit of frostbite count against him on the blade?
Beak: Nice medium size, slightly curved.
Face: Looks fine, clean-cut and free from wrinkles.
Eyes: Look good, will probably help to make good layers based on position.
Wattles: Nice and long, fine and smooth, could possibly be a little better rounded.
Ear-Lobes: Oval, broad, well fitted against the head. Seem a little large to me, but match the drawings on page 118 under the medium comb head so they're probably fine.
Head: This is an area I need to have shown to me. This birds appears to have a moderately long and fairly deep head, but they all kind of look rounded to me. I think you may have to see it in person to tell if it's truly flat on top. Or is there a way to tell in the picture?
Neck: Nice and full, but I would like to see the neck a little longer, more of an arch, with longer hackles. Perhaps this is a cockeral though with some growing to do (based on the small spurs).
Back: I like the length, but it seems to slope all the way to the tail (like our Legbars) instead of starting it's rise at the center of the back. Saffle feathers are full, but could be a little wider and longer (again perhaps age will fix?).
Tail: large and well spread, but carried just a tad to high. Main Tail, Main Sickles, Lesser Sickles and Coverts look good to me.
Wings: Carried a little low, but maybe just appears that way because of the dark feather that it got caught on? Primaries and secondaries seem broad and overlapping (unless that dark feather is a secondary).
Breast: Carried well forward, but needs more rounding and the full part seems too high. Age again perhaps will fill it in? Feathers look to be broad and carried pretty close to the body.
Body and Fluff: Underline does not conform with the top line. The body does not seem like it is deep, or has proper girth. Will age fix this? Feathers and fluff look good to me.
Legs and Toes: Look good as far as I can see from this angle.

Sorry it took so long, but I had a lot of flipping back and forth to do.

 

[Pozees]

Depth of body and length of back, to improve egg laying ability, and if able, increase length of neck and sweep of breast to tail while adding/improving the first two characteristics. How? My novice approach would be to find a hen with deeper keel and longer back (or if necessary, one hen with each of those characteristics to this male, toe punch or wing band their progeny so you can differentiate and see whether it helped, how much, and whether one hen has actually been able to improve both characteristics even though she showed only one). Breed improved male get back to her/them. Use improved males from that second generation over improved females of the first generation.

 

[fowlman01]

Here goes...

Comb: Looks straight, upright, firm and even on the head. Has 5 distinct, deeply serrated points, which do extend pretty straight off the back of the head.
But, the comb seems a little large to be considered medium, there appears to be a bit of an extra serrated point at the front, and looks to have a thumbprint in the base. Does a bit of frostbite count against him on the blade?
Beak: Nice medium size, slightly curved.
Face: Looks fine, clean-cut and free from wrinkles.
Eyes: Look good, will probably help to make good layers based on position.
Wattles: Nice and long, fine and smooth, could possibly be a little better rounded.
Ear-Lobes: Oval, broad, well fitted against the head. Seem a little large to me, but match the drawings on page 118 under the medium comb head so they're probably fine.
Head: This is an area I need to have shown to me. This birds appears to have a moderately long and fairly deep head, but they all kind of look rounded to me. I think you may have to see it in person to tell if it's truly flat on top. Or is there a way to tell in the picture?
Neck: Nice and full, but I would like to see the neck a little longer, more of an arch, with longer hackles. Perhaps this is a cockeral though with some growing to do (based on the small spurs).
Back: I like the length, but it seems to slope all the way to the tail (like our Legbars) instead of starting it's rise at the center of the back. Saffle feathers are full, but could be a little wider and longer (again perhaps age will fix?).
Tail: large and well spread, but carried just a tad to high. Main Tail, Main Sickles, Lesser Sickles and Coverts look good to me.
Wings: Carried a little low, but maybe just appears that way because of the dark feather that it got caught on? Primaries and secondaries seem broad and overlapping (unless that dark feather is a secondary).
Breast: Carried well forward, but needs more rounding and the full part seems too high. Age again perhaps will fill it in? Feathers look to be broad and carried pretty close to the body.
Body and Fluff: Underline does not conform with the top line. The body does not seem like it is deep, or has proper girth. Will age fix this? Feathers and fluff look good to me.
Legs and Toes: Look good as far as I can see from this angle.

Sorry it took so long, but I had a lot of flipping back and forth to do.

There is no time limit on this....lol The head is hard to show people in pictures. This is something you need to see in person. I may not get all my input done until Monday as I'm busy too. I am bringing 28 birds to a show in NV tomorrow morning and I haven't caught any of them yet.

w.

 

[fowlman01]

Depth of body and length of back, to improve egg laying ability, and if able, increase length of neck and sweep of breast to tail while adding/improving the first two characteristics. How? My novice approach would be to find a hen with deeper keel and longer back (or if necessary, one hen with each of those characteristics to this male, toe punch or wing band their progeny so you can differentiate and see whether it helped, how much, and whether one hen has actually been able to improve both characteristics even though she showed only one). Breed improved male get back to her/them. Use improved males from that second generation over improved females of the first generation.

Thanks for your answer about how to fix your identified problems. It sounds as if you also read the Heritage thread.

w.

 

[flyingmonkeypoop]

I don't have my standard handy but just some things that come to mind that need to be fixed to make him look more like a leghorn. Please point out my errors.

Possible thumb prints in the comb
Cupped wattles
Needs a more rounded breast
Wings are low
Back looks a smidge short but it could be due to his stance
Legs look off, I can't quite pinpoint why but again, could be due to his stance

Overall his carriage is just off to me. He is just too upright or something


He does have a well spread tail though

 

[KPenley]

There is no time limit on this....lol The head is hard to show people in pictures. This is something you need to see in person. I may not get all my input done until Monday as I'm busy too. I am bringing 28 birds to a show in NV tomorrow morning and I haven't caught any of them yet.

w.

Best wishes for your birds showing! I guess this is a bit off subject, but how do you travel with that many birds that far? I've heard at least one person talking about feathers breaking during their travels, so their bird's weren't shown. Can you offer any advice?

 

[Pozees]

Walt, HLF is one of my favorite threads, there is an unbelievable amount of knowledge shared there, including your own. I am eternally grateful to you and the others who generously share acquired knowledge with those of us thirsty for it.

 

[fowlman01]

Best wishes for your birds showing! I guess this is a bit off subject, but how do you travel with that many birds that far? I've heard at least one person talking about feathers breaking during their travels, so their bird's weren't shown. Can you offer any advice?

Thanks. I have the right kind of carrying cases and vehicle to keep them in good shape. The van has rear air conditioning and a 4'X 8' box that holds all the boxes/carrying cases.








No broken feathers. We show from 25-50 birds and travel many miles. Chickens, ducks and geese.

Walt

 

[fowlman01]

Walt, HLF is one of my favorite threads, there is an unbelievable amount of knowledge shared there, including your own. I am eternally grateful to you and the others who generously share acquired knowledge with those of us thirsty for it.

That is a great thread and it has some contributors that really know chickens. Another is: https://www.backyardchickens.com/t/...esteading-heritage-poultry/1690#post_12141875

This is a great post that explains some of the showing history and why it was done. Showing gets a lot of bad comments on BYC.......mostly by people that are familiar with dog or livestock showing, but not poultry showing and they lump them all together. No one knows who the birds belong to in a poultry show....the birds are only identified by an entry number and the owners can't be around them during judging. In any event showing chickens is not for everyone, but going to one to see wonderful birds should be on everyone's list. That is where you can pick the minds of master breeders. The Columbus OH show sometimes has over 11,000 birds. European shows have as many as 40k birds.

w.