Definition of Heritage Breeds

[rtroxel]

Well, I can see that I should have taken the day off to follow this thread. Wow. I'm really glad that so many people have responded. Thanks to each one for your time and opinion. I can also see that the topic has strayed off course a bit, so hopefully, no one will be offended by my changing the subject back to the point.

I feel that some of the questions that were posed were either over-looked or unanswered, while other statements were made that had some logical errors or fallacies. I hope no one will be offended if I try to point out some of these oversights in a few posts following this one.

 

[rtroxel]

Quote:
I really like this point. What exactly is the purpose of calling something "heritage" as opposed to "standard-bred" or some other category? I think people are trying to sell the birds as "heritage" poultry. Its a lot like the "organic" movement. What is organic? You might be surprised that lots of foods organic in the title only have 50-60% organic. It's all in a label.

So the purpose is to label an animal (in this case, chickens) in order to enhance its economic value and enable it to reach a specific market.

 

[punky rooster]

Quote:
I really like this point. What exactly is the purpose of calling something "heritage" as opposed to "standard-bred" or some other category? I think people are trying to sell the birds as "heritage" poultry. Its a lot like the "organic" movement. What is organic? You might be surprised that lots of foods organic in the title only have 50-60% organic. It's all in a label.

So the purpose is to label an animal (in this case, chickens) in order to enhance its economic value and enable it to reach a specific market.

I think everyone should read this agian:

Purpose:

Chickens have been a part of the American diet since the arrival of the Spanish explorers. Since that time, different breeds have been developed to provide meat, eggs, and pleasure.

The American Poultry Association began defining breeds in 1873 and publishing the definitions in the Standard of Perfection. These Standard breeds were well adapted to outdoor production in various climatic regions. They were hearty, long-lived, and reproductively vital birds that provided an important source of protein to the growing population of the country until the mid-20th century. With the industrialization of chickens many breeds were sidelined in preference for a few rapidly growing hybrids. The American Livestock Breeds Conservancy now lists over three-dozen breeds of chickens in danger of extinction. Extinction of a breed would mean the irrevocable loss of the genetic resources and options it embodies.

Therefore, to draw attention to these endangered breeds, to support their long-term conservation, to support efforts to recover these breeds to historic levels of productivity, and to re-introduce these culinary and cultural treasures to the marketplace, the American Livestock Breeds Conservancy is defining Heritage Chicken. Chickens must meet all of the following criteria to be marketed as Heritage

http://www.albc-usa.org/heritagechicken/definition.html

so in a way to get them more popular​

 

[centrarchid]

Quote:
I really like this point. What exactly is the purpose of calling something "heritage" as opposed to "standard-bred" or some other category? I think people are trying to sell the birds as "heritage" poultry. Its a lot like the "organic" movement. What is organic? You might be surprised that lots of foods organic in the title only have 50-60% organic. It's all in a label.

So the purpose is to label an animal (in this case, chickens) in order to enhance its economic value and enable it to reach a specific market.

Purpose I consider most is preservation of unique alleles (and their complexes) for potential future use. Resource of old time fowl may prove to be valuable resource in the event present production populations taken out or threatened by a pathogen or need for major change in production system that is more effective with allele complexes not presently existing in production flocks.

Economic benefits to those so engaged are justified to keep effort viable. If egg/embryo bank like with seeds can be developed, then profit motive not justified.

 

[fowlman01]

Quote:
I really like this point. What exactly is the purpose of calling something "heritage" as opposed to "standard-bred" or some other category? I think people are trying to sell the birds as "heritage" poultry. Its a lot like the "organic" movement. What is organic? You might be surprised that lots of foods organic in the title only have 50-60% organic. It's all in a label.

So the purpose is to label an animal (in this case, chickens) in order to enhance its economic value and enable it to reach a specific market.

Good point. Usually these kinds of names are to enhance the commercial value of an animal. The one that really surprised me was "free range". If you look it up it is not what it implies.

Walt

 

[rtroxel]

Quote:
I believe this is a very common misconception: All heritage breeders were just like our current concept of heritage chickens...

If you think that most/all chickens 150 years ago were raised in trees and on pastures with no care and no protection, you are quite mistaken. Look at the breed pictures in the old standards. How could such breed perfection be achieved by a person who didn't even care where his/her chickens were? The last excellent pictures of Lamonas, Campines, Hollands, etc. all come from an age when, although difficult and time-consuming, people took excellent care of their chickens and provided them all that they could in amenities. Were they not heritage?

Is it possible that families in the Great Depression, raising chickens out on the range, wouldn't have taken absolute care of them, protected them, and provided the best they had (at the least, clean water and a safe place at night)??? If a fox took even a cull chicken that was 2 days of no meat for the whole family. I'd bet my bottom dollar that there were plenty of measures taken to protect those chickens. Did that make them not heritage?

On the same hand, there seems to be a thought that all heritage chickens were as broody as Silkies. When were Leghorns, Hamburgs, and Campines developed? They have always been developed as egg-laying breeds and never as setting breeds. In 1874 a man who wanted good Leghorns for layers also had a few setting hens. That's the only logical answer. These breed characteristics were not results of evil commercial hatcheries infusing their corrupted genetics into show lines overtly over the last 150 years. They are simply the result of breed selection by people that were willing to deal with lack of broodiness if it meant increased egg production. Does that make them not "heritage" ???

It looks like Bufalogal touched on this on page 4, but I think it's epidemic

 

[rtroxel]

Quote:
I really like this point. What exactly is the purpose of calling something "heritage" as opposed to "standard-bred" or some other category? I think people are trying to sell the birds as "heritage" poultry. Its a lot like the "organic" movement. What is organic? You might be surprised that lots of foods organic in the title only have 50-60% organic. It's all in a label.

So the purpose is to label an animal (in this case, chickens) in order to enhance its economic value and enable it to reach a specific market.

Purpose I consider most is preservation of unique alleles (and their complexes) for potential future use. Resource of old time fowl may prove to be valuable resource in the event present production populations taken out or threatened by a pathogen or need for major change in production system that is more effective with allele complexes not presently existing in production flocks.

Economic benefits to those so engaged are justified to keep effort viable. If egg/embryo bank like with seeds can be developed, then profit motive not justified.

Excellent point. Let's include that in the definition. Why isn't it there?


Point #5:

A heritage breed is breed who has unique genetic value for the future.

 

[buffalogal]

Quote:
I see you found the same article about the Orloff that includes that old SoP for the breed; is this not the same bird that people are breeding today?
http://www.feathersite.com/Poultry/CGK/Orloffs/Orl_CraigR.html
The real question isn't how long ago someone claimed to have brought them to the west, it's when was the breed accepted into the APA, and what edition of the book were they left out of?

 

[centrarchid]

Discussion of past investment in protection of latter part of this thread is concerning extremes, not the middle ground of reality where birds roosted largely in and around barns in the company of other livestock under protection of barnyard dog and vigilant poultry keeper.

They were seldom kept as truely feral unless local wildlife was decimated and keeping any numbers confined in smaller coops and runs like today was difficult owing to very limited knowledge concerning nutritional requirments.

As for SOP providing a standred to select by, let us have a little fun. Photograph the best show birds of today using a very old black and white camera and compare it to top quality examples of yester year and see how they compare. Some breeds will be noted to have changed a lot over time. If genetic samples could be found, major differences will be found also, even if no new blood added through outcrosses.

 

[rtroxel]

Quote:
Which again makes me ask the question: Why include the word "Slow" when we define how our "heritage" breed MUST grow? How do "slow" and "productive" not make an oxymoron? Kind of like a fast snail? or an efficient waster (I think I have some students who do this with their time)?