I've been stewing over what Fred had to say above. I looked at the ABLC listing of chickens, and their footnote is that most data was compiled from Sand Hill. THen to me the data is applicable to Sand Hill stock, and not necessarily or likely to other strains. Perhaps it is a starting point: some characteristics are more likely to be certain than other points. I would feel more certain about egg color and foraging/ less foraging style than say numbers of eggs, or dressing weights.
I wondered if any feels like it could be valuable to record the same characteristics for the stock we do have. Perhaps m ost of us don't collect that level of data for a number of reasons. Just a thought.
All I know is this. There are, arguably, 5 or 6 strains of single comb Reds and a couple rose comb Red lines today. There is going to be a bit of variance in them, Not a whole bunch, but some. In the Barred Rocks, I honestly don't know if the Stukel line lays better than the Reese line I have, but I suspect they might. There's a fella up in Maine who has a nice line of BRs that lay quite well. The history of this line is hush-hush, not that it matters, as this guy now rightfully says they are his, as he has chosen the breeders for many generations.
That's about all I know, other than, absolutely, certain White Rock lines lay very well, for standard bred bird, even a touch over 240 eggs per year. I'd consider that really good laying, myself. My experience with White Rocks goes back almost 55 years. Those birds were never "supposed" to lay any better than that. We kept Leghorns back then for eggs, but even the Leghorns we had in those days were HUGE compared to the modern Leghorn Xs.
My concern with the modern White Rocks is the opposite. They've grown far too large. If I want White Giants, I'd keep White Giants. Shrug. It is what it is.
Last edited: