Farming and Homesteading Heritage Poultry

[Beekissed]

Have you read any of the old poultry magazines and books from 100 to 200 years ago?

First off those folks tried any and everything on their birds! There losses were no higher or lower than ours today.

I'm with Fred. My cure for most any kind of disease is to kill it. It's fast, effective and cost very little. One year I killed over 75% of my fowl when fighting Coryza. I won!!

Now as to preventives, that is a whole different ball of wax. I'll try and use most anything!

Read those old books; they all suggest preventives. Some of their thoughts would make these moderns squirm!

An example: Ground glass was fed for worms.

Arsenic was used for about everything and anything.

I think I'd draw the line to ground glass...but it's not dissimilar to DE when one thinks about it, as it works on the same principle. I'm with Fred on that as well...I've not had to kill too many birds for illness other than those brought in already with it, but I most definitely would, no matter how many or how few I had in my flock. I'm the predator in my own paradigm and by naturally selecting those with physical weakness, I hope to leave only the strong. It's worked for a very long time to eliminate illness in my birds and I'll continue it, be the birds hatchery mutts or heritage line stock...especially in the heritage lines as I expect more from them all the way around.

As for preventatives, I'm all about that as well, though not much on anything that couldn't be found in nature...ground glass not being one of them. But arsenic? In every green apple seed that is eaten from our orchard when the trees do a natural culling in the spring. I've never seen a chicken just eat around the core on those. Not that I would buy arsenic and feed it to the flock, but they can find that in nature enough.

 

[saladin]

One last thought, though not explicitly stated, the idea was evident that breeds of yesteryear were somehow or another stronger and more vigorous than the birds we have today. This is not necessarily the case at all. Those birds were given some highpowered stuff to keep them alive (in many cases).

Today, it depends on the breeder as to the health and vigor of the birds; just like it did 100 years ago.

 

[saladin]

agreed b.

 

[Ivagrove]

Along the line of what Saladin said, in the 1940's, before the rise of chemical agriculture, American farmers lost 39% of what was planted to pests, disease, blight, etc. In the 1990's, after a half century of ever-escalating chemical warfare, that figure had dropped to 32%. I think I'm just as well off learning to cope with nature while preventing as much trouble as possible by use of good practices.

 

[Beekissed]

I agree. How far have we really advanced and at what costs? Food safety is an huge issue right now and that includes our meats. At least the crops and animals were relatively safe to consume before the pharmaceutical age.

Anyhoo...just thought those topics would be worthy of discussion. I know it's easy to be hardcore when not owning valuable breeding stock...which is why I avoid investing too much money in animals. I don't want these questions to seem like a critique of other methods, just picking up a rock and examining the properties of it...it helps me think things through a bit better to bounce them off of others.

 

[Fentress]

I've made a big investment in staying mobile. Well built coops that can be moved and electronet fencing. I don't know if that protects them from all dieases or just the parasitic ones, but so far so good, nock on wood.

 

[saladin]

Mobility helps a great deal. However, anytime wild birds have access to chickens then you are going to see disease and parasites. Any of us that free-range (that's from true free-ranging to a fenced in area), use tie-cords, or have pens with fence that has 2" holes or larger is going to have wild birds coming and going.

Wild birds are not just a carrier of disease; they are THE carrier of disease.

 

[Lacy Blues]

I've developed quite a distaste for wild birds!!!!!

 

[Yellow House Farm]

It's just the way of it. I love seeing the wild birds, knowing that there is cost. A lot--not all--, but a lot, can be saved via early detection, spending a few extra moments in the evening listening to their breathing, being observant of how they're holding their bodies. A stitch in time saves nine. A quick cull of a questionable bird can save a lot of grief.

One morning this year I was doing chores, I noticed one of the cockerels was a bit trippy, nothing drastic, just not balancing right. I threw a little scratch, snagged him, and that was that, out of the environment immediately. A few weeks later, I noticed that the birds suddenly developed an intolerance for a specific cockerel, they were chasing it mercilessly, ad not allowing it to approach. My "odd behavior button" went off, I snagged the bird, instantly registered that it was underweight and noticed a clear flaw in eye color, which can be a harbinger of bad things--gone, no questions, no wondering "what if or maybe".

Have I probably culled treatable birds, certainly. Do I worry about whether our birds are tough and rugged? No. There is a strong advantage to selecting a breed, procuring stock, and then breeding that stock on your land for generations and generations.

 

[Extra Java]

This makes me feel better about my recent decision...Saw a new young ckl not coming to the feeder like the others. He looked a little ruffled. I don't know what was wrong and didn't want to wait and see if perhaps he would feel better tomorrow. I immediately culled it. None of the other birds are ill or acting off so, perhaps I did "save nine". Good advice.