Farming and Homesteading Heritage Poultry

[bnjrob]

I still hold to that form does not follow function, and function does not follow form. I see them running parallel and working together to make a complete bird.

I hear and read a dogmatic adherence to the Standard as a complete guide to breeding productive birds. Though it is the best work I know for our purpose, I never got the impression that it was meant to explain how to breed productive birds.

With some of the Standard bred birds that I have kept, they fell short on a variety of points that added up to a less than productive birds. Usually the lay rate is not that bad. I do not think we expect 6 egg per week commercial performance. 5 would be nice, but four would not be the end of the world.

An appropriate POL is subjective. Most would agree that an April hatched bird that did not come into lay before the days were too short would be considered unproductive. You could be feeding that bird up to 16 wks longer to get eggs from her. If that is agreed, 32 wks is much too late. 28 wks is pushing it. An early April hatch will have pullets laying by October if POL is @ 24wks. That same batch hatched in March would be in full lay and the egg size up before the earliest hens molt
POL is not in the Standard or should it be. That is up to the breeder, and would have been a given 75 years ago.

Egg size is a problem in many. A 7 1/2 lb hen should not be laying medium large eggs. That is just a matter of selecting the largest eggs, raising the bar periodically. An appropriate size of egg for the size of hen is relevant. If I wanted medium sized eggs, I would rather feed a medium sized breed.

Early molters that take a long time to molt is killing time. She quit before her time, and eggs are lost. It isn't as if she quit eating. These hens are easy to identify and mark. The hen that waits for spring to warm up before she comes into lay is wasting time, but she is eating feed. Often these tendencies go together. A month on each side of winter might be 32 eggs. It could be the difference between a 140 egg per year layer, and a 160 egg per year layer. Perhaps more when these same birds are often not reasonable winter layers, and take summer breaks.

For the majority of the Standard bred birds that I have kept, if these three points were improved, the birds would be much improved. Their type and capacity was great, overall. It is the things that a judge cannot see where they fell short.

Cockerels that require too much time (and feed) to be useful. Many are not worth plucking at 16 wks., and are all feather. They look like something until we pick them up. Some should not be. It is only an illustration. Some cannot be useful at a young age when so much protein and energy is devoted to feather rather than flesh. They often dress out fine as adults. LOL. Excessive feathering is a challenge for some.

I do not expect remarkable carcasses at young ages, just useful ones. They are fryers at these ages. They are not as attractive, but they are tender. I never saw where plucked dead birds were attractive anyways. I prefer them battered and fried or grilled. We will slow roast a few roasters, but otherwise I will save the big money for steak and lobster. LOL.

All of these points are easy for an amateur like myself to identify and measure. My opinion is these are some of the most overlooked points and can be the difference between a productive bird and an unproductive bird. You cannot see it looking at the bird. All of the capacity in the world will not correct it. It is just a matter of watching and marking birds. Keeping a few more than we need, so we can afford to rid ourselves of the poorest performers. Breeding birds that have been evaluated. The best judges will not see it in the hand. The mentors will not teach it. The Standard will not tell us to. We have to know them ourselves. If it matters to us, we will. If it does not, we will not. If the eggs and meat was our livelihood we would. It isn't, so often we do not.

For getting birds that look like their breed, breeding to the SOP has to happen. But we all know you don't have to breed to the SOP to have productive birds. And if simply reading the SOP means that you know all there is about breeding productive birds - then apparently I missed that part because I haven't seen where the SOP tells how to breed specific traits. It tells me what my breed is supposed to look like and leaves a lot of things up to me. We don't all have mentors to show us how to breed the old fashioned way, so if the APA wants more breeders with productive birds, perhaps they need to add resources or links to resources for folks to get the info they need on how to breed for production with more specific details. Sometimes it's like the SOP shows us the destination and part of how to get there, but doesn't give us enough step by step direction. And for folks who don't know where to find those directions...they're out of luck.

 

[bnjrob]

Yep; I can sell direct to consumer from my 'farm' but to sell at the farmer's market I have to process in a USDA licensed facility; the closest one being around 70 miles away and I don't know if they would do poultry even if I could afford it. We have to work to get a lot of laws changed; just grateful that CA, AZ and other places are putting 'cottage' laws in place for home baked and canned good sales. Still some restrictions and still some red tape but nothing like it was.

Yes, some of the new cottage laws are helping, but not as much as I would like either. Here in TX, not only do the big ag producers lobby against changes allowing small producers to sell things, but even the medical associations get in on it, claiming that if people are allowed to sell their various farm products, that there is going to be widespread outbreaks of disease. And of course when a group of MDs are telling the state legislature that citizens are going to die left and right from salmonella and e coli if the rules are changed, they believe the doctors. It's a slow process for sure to get things changed.

 

[bnjrob]

My position would be that the APA has done enough, and what more they could do would be to emphasize it as an example. It sounds like that are preparing to do that.

I do not know that the judges can do much more. Perhaps Walt could explain what more a judge can do. Regardless, they would judge what we bring them.

I am not sold on the consumer driving any change. Certainly some are interested, and I imagine that some will always be. Maybe more than now, but realistically, how many more? Maybe I am a skeptic, or more skeptical than I should be.

Getting more interested in keeping Standard bred birds is easier, but is still no small task. We cannot take the position that our birds are better than your birds and expect to get anywhere. That turns people away.
I do believe that productive birds sell themselves. If I can have quality NHs that lay 200 eggs a little over 2oz, and provide a reasonable carcass @ 14-16 wks, why would I buy an undersized ugly red bird from a hatchery? The only selling point they have at that point is convenience, and economy. Many will go with that regardless if they are buying half of the bird. Literally.

It would be a definite benefit to the breeds if the hatcheries had an economic incentive to produce better birds than they do, but I wonder if that could be maintained given non selection is part of their game.

We are in a definite minority. Most do not care about what we are discussing. Of course many do, but compared to the overall boom in poultry keeping . . . Most want pretty layers with "good personalities", of pretty colored eggs. There is nothing wrong with that, but that is as far as most will get. I can't see them making any difference either. Can they really ever, other than provide an outlet for our culls? The strength of a breed is the sum of it's parts preserved by individual breeders. Not in how many may have them in their backyard layer flock.

The best hope that the breed's have is that their is a continued interest in exhibiting the birds. That is what saved them before this boom of interest took place, and that is what will save them when this surge of interest settles. And it will. The public will move on to slay other imagined dragons, and much of the backyard poultry community will be put off by birds getting sick. Killing them. Growing weary of cleaning coops from year to year while paying more for their eggs than they would at Walmart. It may be that we will not be able to continue to afford the luxury of this hobby.

I like Joseph's approach to promoting the excellence that can be achieved in this hobby by those that appreciate it. I think that is their best selling point, and encourages an interest in breeding birds. Promoting the joy that is in the effort of breeding birds is their best selling point, and good birds sell themselves. As a result supporting the APA and exhibiting and promoting the breed of choice.

I would not want to take away from that, but I would like to add to it. Like many people that visit this thread, I would like to take these excellent birds and make them more productive. Having my cake, and eating it to. I keep the birds I have because I enjoy them. Not because they are practical, but I would like to be more practical about my selection. As a result making them more practical to keep. They are livestock after all. I expect to do this by simply expecting it of them. I like the idea of raising them as if I did depend on them, because if I did, I sure would expect more. I do not want to needlessly waste. It isn't as if my good will or resources has no end.

I think all of us that are like minded are just going to have to keep plugging away and doing our own little bits to bring others into thinking this way and try to pass things on to each successive generation as best we can.

 

[Beekissed]

They are 5 yrs old in this pic and, yeah, they are a far cry from the SOP, but they and their other WR flock mates were laying 6-7 eggs per week in peak season when in their prime. Their feathering is closer to their body than any breeder stock I've yet to see and with a little breeding to a good male, I'm thinking their offspring would have been some real dandies. When butchered, the bird on the left's carcass was enormous, with huge amounts of good fat and that on mostly foraged feeds, as were her other WR flock mates.

That whole group of WRs were among the hardiest stock I've ever owned, light molts and quick molt recovery when in their prime, good mothering, good feed thrift, onset of lay was 6 mo....last to the trough and first to leave it, great foraging and good survival instincts. Calm and regal to a fault. Laid well into their later years, with good winter laying as well. Best chickens I've ever owned, bar none.

I still own the one on the right and she has fostered many a chick for me. She's now 6 and finally stopped laying this summer...heading to the cull list. This is a pic of her fostering 20 meat chicks for me...look at the tent on that bird and tell me she didn't have possibilities...




Now, if they can achieve that in a hatchery, why can't we? Why can't we have the best of both worlds? Good laying, health, vigor, feed conversion, early maturing, etc.

I say we will get what we settle for and only when we expect something better will we get something better in the area of production, early maturing, hardiness, etc. I know I'm just getting started in breeding actual breeder quality birds, but I know I'll never settle for 4 eggs per week out of them...that's winter laying, not spring laying. If I have to cull down to just one female and one male bird each year to achieve it, I will.

If not working towards the best, why are we even doing this?

I like this little blurb on the Australorp breed....you aren't telling me these old chicken guys were settling for 4 eggs a week. If it can be done once, it can be done again.

Quote:
It was the egg laying performance of Australorps that attracted world attention when in 1922-23 a team of six hens set a world record by laying 1,857 eggs for an average of 309.5 eggs per hen during a 365 consecutive day trial. It must be remembered that these figures were achieved without the lighting regimes of the modern intensive shed. Such performances had importation orders flooding in from England, United States of America, South Africa, Canada and Mexico. Well looked after Australorps lay approximately 250 light-brown eggs per year. A new record was set when a hen laid 364 eggs in 365 days.[9] They are also known to be good nest sitters and mothers, making them one of the most exceptional large, heritage utility breeds of chicken.

 

[Lacy Blues]

In order to be able to account for how many eggs each particular hen laid in a period of 365 days, you would have to trap nest. Either that or have one each of a hen that laid certain colored eggs and just keep track of them. People today, who do not live on farms and who do not depend on the eggs laid for their livelihood just don't have the time to watch over trap nests.

Of course you could just trap nest for approximately one month and then average it out but you wouldn't get an actual number, just an estimation.

Me, with my forgetfulness or absent-mindedness (whichever you want to use), I would have to set an alarm for each hour to go out and check trap nests, otherwise, I could have a hen spend an entire day fouling the nest with nothing to eat or drink while I am busily doing all the stuff I need to be doing.

 

[gjensen]

I do. And I'll tell you why....because if the poor, pitiful hatchery genetics can produce a bird that lays that well, then we can too.

You see these old hatchery WRs?




They are 5 yrs old in this pic and, yeah, they are a far cry from the SOP, but they and their other WR flock mates were laying 6-7 eggs per week in peak season when in their prime. Their feathering is closer to their body than any breeder stock I've yet to see and with a little breeding to a good male, I'm thinking their offspring would have been some real dandies. When butchered, the bird on the left's carcass was enormous, with huge amounts of good fat and that on mostly foraged feeds, as were her other WR flock mates.

That whole group of WRs were among the hardiest stock I've ever owned, light molts and quick molt recovery when in their prime, good mothering, good feed thrift, onset of lay was 6 mo....last to the trough and first to leave it, great foraging and good survival instincts. Calm and regal to a fault. Laid well into their later years, with good winter laying as well. Best chickens I've ever owned, bar none.

I still own the one on the right and she has fostered many a chick for me. She's now 6 and finally stopped laying this summer...heading to the cull list. This is a pic of her fostering 20 meat chicks for me...look at the tent on that bird and tell me she didn't have possibilities...




Now, if they can achieve that in a hatchery, why can't we? Why can't we have the best of both worlds? Good laying, health, vigor, feed conversion, early maturing, etc.

I say we will get what we settle for and only when we expect something better will we get something better in the area of production, early maturing, hardiness, etc. I know I'm just getting started in breeding actual breeder quality birds, but I know I'll never settle for 4 eggs per week out of them...that's winter laying, not spring laying. If I have to cull down to just one female and one male bird each year to achieve it, I will.

If not working towards the best, why are we even doing this?

I like this little blurb on the Australorp breed....you aren't telling me these old chicken guys were settling for 4 eggs a week. If it can be done once, it can be done again.

What you quoted from me states WE. Indicating a variety of people and a variety of breeds. There is a variety of breeds represented in this group. I do not think that it is realistic to expect the same across the board. It also would not be advisable for everyone to scrap the strain that they had already.

The Rocks that you had, apparently lay 280-290 eggs per year. That would be record setting in the days that the Rocks were used in laying trials. I have had hatchery Rocks through the years, and have not been as fortunate as yourself, realizing roughly 220 eggs in the pullet year. I do not doubt your claim. A dominant white bird with yellow legs could be had from a commercial cross and used to "improve" an existing strain of hatchery Rocks. Any number of scenarios could explain almost 300 eggs. These are rates similar to commercial Leghorns.

Now to the claim that we could produce (I will use Australorps to fit your example) Australorps that performed as they did when they excelled in the laying trial years. It would be hugely unrealistic to reproduce that for us. Keep in mind the farms that produced these birds had thousands of birds. Not hundreds or especially dozens. The selection was highly scientific for the day, exacting records were kept, hundreds of sires tested, and the pullets were religiously trap nested. There was an entire staff that managed these birds seven days per week. Australorps were not the only breed that had these numbers. It was true for Reds, NHs, Leghorns, etc. The famous laying strain for NHs was the so called "Newcomer" strain.These birds were the commercial birds of the day.The single record breaking Australorp pullet is still the breed's claim to fame.
These birds were also from specialized strains that were not dual purpose strains. It was the beginnings of specialization. They were replaced by birds heavier for broilers, and lighter as layers. They are gone to history.

None of us can duplicate this today. And why should we? Selecting birds for this level of performance on one end carries them so far in one direction that it would neglect the other side of the equation. If that is what I wanted, I would buy commercial leghorns and be done with it.

It is easy to stress performance to a point where we try to take them away from what they are supposed to be. The record setting birds of the days past were not good examples of the breed then. The Newcomer strain of NHs were too light in weight, and had poor color and type. The other extreme was the Christie strain that was a meat strain. The Standard calls for a dual purpose NH that is in the middle. A good dual purpose NH is a good all round bird. @ 200-220 extra large eggs, pullets laying @ 20 wks, and fryers at 14 wks would be a great example of the breed. That is if they had good color and type, representing the breed well. That is a catch. I could take some hatchery NHs and cross them with some female red sex links, and call them NHs. I could do that in two years, and they would be fantastic layers. BUT, not as good as the sex link. I went backwards, and they would be worth less, and eat more.

This is where and why there was a split between the APA and the commercial industry.

In a large enough flock (for variability to select from), and rigorous selection for a single point, progress can be made (up to a point) relatively fast. For every trait that is added for selection, a lot of time is added. By the time you have added 4 traits, the time required to make improvements is increased immensely. Some of these breeds with challenging colors, is all we can do to make incremental progress.

My Catalanas lay 220-240 eggs in a year as a pullet. Most of them closer to 220. That is as good as many hatchery birds. The best I can do as I try to improve them is to maintain that. There is too much to work on right now. My NHs lay a little better than 160. Possibly closer to 180 for some individuals. I would like to see that up, and get the egg size up. I would be happy with 200. I would not be interested in going any farther than that if it was at the cost of other characteristics. Otherwise I might as well scrap them and buy sex links, and replace them every two years. I would take no pleasure in that.

 

[RedRidge]

The very common theme in this discussion? We are preaching to the choir...

 

[ronott1]

The very common theme in this discussion? We are preaching to the choir...

It is ok to do that. The posts become part of the internet and is searchable via google so the public will read these posts. We are not the only audience.

 

[Fentress]

20 wks would be a reasonable consideration for the breed you are working with. Getting too far away from that would be a waste of resources in my opinion. Again, I am referring to an initial cull. There should certainly be enough retained for a final selection.

Just be careful, and this may sound contrary to what I said prior. It is not just when, but how they flesh out. They can get too big on their legs also, and there is a correlation between the size at that age, and their final size. Time would teach you what birds at that age will grow to be too big on their legs. We would not want them to lose fitness, or we might as well grow out hybrids. Emphasizing well spaced strong legs with good shanks should be helpful. Paying attention (feeling through the feather) for well developed thighs is another. Good thighs is good for the carcass and the bird.

Be careful about length with this breed. Some of the faster developing birds may be shorter birds and length. You would not want cobby looking birds where the hens did not have the necessary length for this type to have the capacity to be reasonable long term layers. Type is still the priority.

I thought he might look a little short in the body in this pic, but I think he has turned out OK, I'm going to double check. I think a short body is also correlated to an increased cushion on the females, an undesirable trait. Thanks for the advice.

 

[Fentress]

"The best hope that the breed's have is that their is a continued interest in exhibiting the birds. That is what saved them before this boom of interest took place, and that is what will save them when this surge of interest settles. And it will. The public will move on to slay other imagined dragons, and much of the backyard poultry community will be put off by birds getting sick. Killing them. Growing weary of cleaning coops from year to year while paying more for their eggs than they would at Walmart. It may be that we will not be able to continue to afford the luxury of this hobby."

Have not finished reading through everything yet, but the "imagined dragons" cracked me up. So well written and true in most cases. But, in this case, I disagree. At least, for the people who eat their chickens. Most of the folks will fall be the wayside, no doubt, but many will not. It's hard to explain, but it is just something you feel and you know what you are doing is good and true. I am aquiring skills now that will last a life time. I meet people from a variety of backgrounds that I know are committed to a new way of life. There are health, environmental, political, humane and for me even religious reasons why this is a credible practice.