- Thread starter
- #551
Hi all,
To update, we had five, plus my own review of the language for the male shape (post 425). Those that reviewed the male are GaryDean26, Blackbirds13, ChicKat, Lonnyandrina, Babymakes6, and myself, Redchicken9. Several items that came to light are that the tails are high and potentially not full, an exact number is required for the comb, and we struggle to have an image for some of the language, although it seems acceptable. An example of this is a head that is well-balanced and of fine quality. It seems some of this is subjective to how many birds you see (what is the best balance) and versus another breed that may have a broader head like brahmas. Contributions on the male shape will be addressed and re-posted for a second look.
In the meantime, the female shape is posted (post496). Thank-you for the first review ChicKat! Please, if you're able to review the language and image for the female cream legbar, please do. Also think about suggesting a description for the crest.
Next will be the conversion of the language for the color of the male, then female, which is where a lot of the conversation is at. The spectrum of views is already present. I think we need to understand there is a spectrum of views, ideas, concepts, but also an existing precedent. I don't know how to do it differently than starting with the BPS and looking at our birds. Clearly our birds are what are here in the USA. However, our birds are meant to be cream legbars. If these are opposing viewpoints to you, then they are. However, to me these ideas may not exclude each other and could be the same. Many of us will take our own forks. I have never shown a bird, I may never show a bird (of course this can change), but I can appreciate that standards are a way to define what makes this bird unique, beautiful, and an ideal. It helps me to make decisions on what to keep and what to cull. None of us created the cream legbar and there exists a deep and worthy history. In some ways the history is stronger than individual preference in terms of a standard. That doesn't mean that anyone's preference might not be the collective preference. It just means that there's a framework to be worked in and a balance to find that may suit many of us. It's important to express to contribute to the whole answer, but not worry about being the whole answer. So I applaud everyone here, this is exciting, and challenging, and fun, and worth doing!
When this working group was announced I put a thirty day comment period out there, which I believe ends this Friday. The process has been both fast and slow, some of the lag my own. Can I have someone second and third the idea that we extend this comment period by another thirty days? Next 30-Day Goal: Conclude draft language on male (end of this week?) and female shape (shortly thereafter). On both we should have a solid working draft. Introduce cream legbar language for male and female color. Debate the heck out of it, then ideally conclude with greater understanding and consensus. Please let me know your thoughts.
To update, we had five, plus my own review of the language for the male shape (post 425). Those that reviewed the male are GaryDean26, Blackbirds13, ChicKat, Lonnyandrina, Babymakes6, and myself, Redchicken9. Several items that came to light are that the tails are high and potentially not full, an exact number is required for the comb, and we struggle to have an image for some of the language, although it seems acceptable. An example of this is a head that is well-balanced and of fine quality. It seems some of this is subjective to how many birds you see (what is the best balance) and versus another breed that may have a broader head like brahmas. Contributions on the male shape will be addressed and re-posted for a second look.
In the meantime, the female shape is posted (post496). Thank-you for the first review ChicKat! Please, if you're able to review the language and image for the female cream legbar, please do. Also think about suggesting a description for the crest.
Next will be the conversion of the language for the color of the male, then female, which is where a lot of the conversation is at. The spectrum of views is already present. I think we need to understand there is a spectrum of views, ideas, concepts, but also an existing precedent. I don't know how to do it differently than starting with the BPS and looking at our birds. Clearly our birds are what are here in the USA. However, our birds are meant to be cream legbars. If these are opposing viewpoints to you, then they are. However, to me these ideas may not exclude each other and could be the same. Many of us will take our own forks. I have never shown a bird, I may never show a bird (of course this can change), but I can appreciate that standards are a way to define what makes this bird unique, beautiful, and an ideal. It helps me to make decisions on what to keep and what to cull. None of us created the cream legbar and there exists a deep and worthy history. In some ways the history is stronger than individual preference in terms of a standard. That doesn't mean that anyone's preference might not be the collective preference. It just means that there's a framework to be worked in and a balance to find that may suit many of us. It's important to express to contribute to the whole answer, but not worry about being the whole answer. So I applaud everyone here, this is exciting, and challenging, and fun, and worth doing!
When this working group was announced I put a thirty day comment period out there, which I believe ends this Friday. The process has been both fast and slow, some of the lag my own. Can I have someone second and third the idea that we extend this comment period by another thirty days? Next 30-Day Goal: Conclude draft language on male (end of this week?) and female shape (shortly thereafter). On both we should have a solid working draft. Introduce cream legbar language for male and female color. Debate the heck out of it, then ideally conclude with greater understanding and consensus. Please let me know your thoughts.
Last edited:
