Conversely, I always love the voice in the old literature. I find it soothing with a strong sense of place and nobility of purpose and function. I am always mindful, though, to take it with a grain of salt. They knew a lot back then, and one gets the sense that they really worked at their poultry. Still, there is
a lot that they did not know. They often make grand pronouncements of gloom and doom that, nowadays we know to dismiss. Poultry authors past and present (and one often gets the sense with older writers that they at least had their hand in poultry) love to make paracommunicative, sweeping statements about breeds: "this breed is great for such and such, or this breed has a big problem with this or that thing." A breed has a potential for this or a potential for that, but the fact of the quality remains in the strain; it is an immediate effect of the breeding of each generation. The truth of the breed, or even the strains within the breed, is now:
It's often written that Dorkings are the king of all meat birds! Well, sure, in potential. It's wrapped up in their type and in the process of selection, safeguarded by the SOP. Are they actually the king of all meat birds? No, because I don't think there's a single strain in North America today that meets the genetic potential for the breed. I actually don't even think there's one that's really that close. Nevertheless, I do think there are some breeders heading in that direction, and with continued focus and discipline over time I think we'll get there .
Dorkings are often said in the old literature to be tender and to lack hardiness and to be susceptible to wetness--rubbish! All of these things are strain based and dependent on the immediate breeding of the birds. Our birds are tough, flat out tough, but this is because of selection in a trying environment. Now the single combs of the Reds and SGs aren't safe here, but that's not a Dorking statement. A Minorca wouldn't make it past November. Our coops (
http://www.yellowhousefarmnh.com/photo-tour) are without insulation in the middle of a snowfield on lake level with damp, heavy air. YHF rule #1: no single combs. The rose comb of the Whites? Impervious.
I am a major reader of the old poultry literature, of old literature in general actually, but--just like reading new literature--it often needs to be taken with a grain--or a pound--of salt. At the risk of this post becoming long, I'd share this quote from a more current work, the late Dr. Carefoot's book
Creative Poultry Breeding , published in 1985, which I'll abridge for the interests of brevity. In way of biography, Dr. Carefoot was a poultry geneticist and past president of the Poultry Club of Great Britain (the APA of the UK), ergo he was a writer who was specialist, breeder, and judge:
In common with many civilized societies the poultry fancy is in danger of becoming obsessed with a longing for "former glories". The current, almost paranoiac, desire is to preserve rarity irrespective of quality. Without intending any disrespect to the fancier who wishes to preserve breeds which do not appear ever to have been firmly established, when one looks at many of the rare breeds one can immediately see why they are rare [...] The breeder wishes to improve, not to preserve [...] the striving for perfection provides the interest which fuels our incentive [...] History is only important where it provides clear examples of where on can improve one's stock[...] What is gone is over. The future of quality stock is to breed aggressively with the intention of improvement. If every breed had but a handful of breeders competing fiercely, quality would almost certainly improve dramatically. Consequently the urge to collect breeds of poultry the way some collect postage stamps, does little to improve the breeds kept [...] the fancier wishing to keep rare breeds alive would be more effective if he concentrated mainly on one or two such breeds, hatched and reared plenty [...] if a breeder only breeds a handful of chickens, by in large his strain deteriorates [...] Rarity is not a virtue in itself; indeed when one sees an outstanding bird one realizes that rarity is indeed a vice[...] the production by a skillful breeder of high quality birds of a particular variety will attract sufficient interest to ensure preservation and, one hopes, improvement [...] if the conservationists attained a sufficiently high standard of stock within a particular breed it would take care of itself. In practice, high quality stock is the rarest poultry of all.
Currently, because of what's happening now, our birds are very hardy. They come into lay when they should: at 5 to 6 months. They lay steadily from fall to summer. They are not prone to any exaggerated broodiness as is often suggested in the literature until just about this time of year. When it's hot, I have to be good about frequent egg collection, or I can get four brooding in the same box; however, with regular and prompt egg collection most will lay through the summer without going broody.
Our meat qualities are strong and improve with each passing season. However, I make this statement without any comparison to modern meat birds. It is inappropriate to compare standard-bred fowl to corporate meat birds; they're simply not the same creature. Without any value judgment toward either, they're simply not the same product. Standard-bred fowl fit the traditional cookery of progression from broiler to fryer to roaster to fowl. These are seasonal cuts that perfectly match the standard-bred growing season and the appropriate cooking methods of the given time of year. This is the rhythm for which Dorkings are built and are suited.
The Dorking was a truly awesome breed developed to a high level of perfection, which is the only way it has survived the neglect it has suffered over the last fifty years. La Fleche, Crevecoeurs, Redcaps, Houdans, among others have not been so lucky; they were dropped earlier; they were dropped harder. It is funny reading the old literature when one realizes that again and again the Dorking is hailed as the very best in meat quality, but then it was universally rejected on the most superficial, even foolish, levels: it had white skin and a supernumerary toe. The great opportunity today is that no one cares about whether a bird has white or yellow skin, although poultry writers, who are most frequently not poultry breeders, continue to parrot the ridiculous idea that Americans prefer yellow skin.
On the other hand, the Dorking is at the great disadvantage of coming in far too many color varieties. The SOP admits five only three of which are currently actually valid: Whites, Reds, and Silver Greys, but many are pushing ridiculous colors that never had any ,validity at all and most certainly never will. If we can galvanize a half a dozen breeders in each of the primary three varieties of White, Red, and Silver Grey, who are willing and able to specialize, hatch in number, and hold the course, the Dorking could rebound in the next decade.