Does having a rooster really mess up the egg laying???? pls clarify!

[kaitlyn_rae2003]

I have had a few people tell me, that if I want my hens to lay eggs, i cannot have a rooster with them! I thought they were nuts at first, but I keep hearing this advice, and my chickens, who range in age from 18-22 weeks are not laying yet. We have a BR roo who is very sweet to them, not an aggressive rooster at all. Is there any truth to this whole rooster with your girls = no eggs? Thanks for your advice!!

 

[krcote]

Very false! Your girls will be laying in no time

 

[pgpoultry]

No truth in the rumour at all. I have had hatches with hens and roosters together and the hens have started to lay at the expected time....their eggs soon get fertilised, though!

sandie

 

[gryeyes]

Are those folks nuts? Usually we hear the rumor that you CANNOT have eggs unless you have a rooster, which we all know is dead wrong. But to say roosters interfere with the laying process, that's just crazy. In the natural order of things, roosters are needed to fertilize the hens so they lay eggs which will hatch into more chickens. Gotta have a rooster for fertile eggs.

Now, carrying that concept forward, if you have a rooster to fertilize the hens for viable eggs to hatch, and your hens go broody and sit on the eggs TO hatch them, then laying is interrupted by the incubation process, which takes 21 days. Then the hen still doesn't lay eggs whilst she is raising the chick, anywhere from four to eight weeks or so. Before she lays again.

But unless you've got a broody hen, they'll just lay their eggs and walk away from them, never sitting on them to incubate 'em to hatch.

Hatching chicks requires fertilized eggs and incubation for 21 days. The parts to the equation are: Rooster, broody hen (either the one that lays the egg or another hen that will set on 'em for her), FERTILE eggs, and time. Embryos do not develop without incubation. Eggs can be fertile as all get out but you won't get chicks unless the eggs are incubated, either naturally under a broody hen or via the use of an incubator.

We've established that roosters aren't necessary for laying, but they don't "really mess up the egg laying" unless the most important factor is present: a broody hen.

Some folks hope for broodies and never get one, some folks have broody hens they cherish, and others wish their broody hens would get over it, because there aren't any rooster to fertilize the eggs. Broody hens don't know the difference - they'll set on unfertilized eggs, golf balls, doorknobs, just about anything close to round. THAT interferes with laying: broodiness. Not roosters!

 

[woodmort]

No. You've got a case of over eggspectation. Your pullets just aren't ready yet--give 'em time.

 

[sourland]

If a rooster with the hens= no eggs, how would there ever be more chickens?

 

[rdport]

I'm glad he is a nice roo...they are just a wee bit young to lay. So, No he is not the problem. In fact, he might be helping them arrange the nest. Sometimes the rooster gets in a nesting box and fixes it up.

 

[kaitlyn_rae2003]

Thank you so much for the replies! It sounded a bit absurd to me as well, but when all else fails, i know I can rely on you guys answers/advice way more the charming back woods NH crowd....lol nice state, nice people, but just like every other state, you do have your fair share of "highly educated, NUTS"!!!

Can't wait for eggs! Thanks again for the help