Farming and Homesteading Heritage Poultry

[Fred's Hens]

I don't mind that you're not YHF, either.

There would be much to consider before settling on this as fact. We'd have to come to understand how loose feathering is related to what other traits and then how those traits actually come to affect laying. Anecdotally, perhaps, it's safe to say to that most of the breeds traditionally prized for laying are at least "fairly close feathered".

Yet here is an opportunity for yet another SOP, food for thought moment. Turn to page 29 of your 2010 Standard of Perfection, which if you haven't yet ordered I'm sure you're going to run to the APA website and do so straight away:

"All American, all English except Cornish, all French and Langshans: Feathers should be moderately broad and long, fitting fairly close to the body.

All Mediterranean, Hamburgs, and Polish: Feathers moderately broad and long, fitting rather close to the body." (SOP 29)

So basically, every single breed ever prized as an egg layer is to have feathers "fairly" to "rather" tightly fit to their bodies.

Buy your Standard and then remember this mantra: weight, type, feather, and symmetry. Repeat it over and over again until in is ingrained in your way of thinking about poultry: weight, type, feather, and symmetry.

Joseph, this post ought to be into a billboard somewhere. Truly.

 

[LindaB220]

Linda, how did you come to the conclusion that the Rocks would do better in the heat than the Dorkings?

Just from my reading. I read that the Dorkings did not handle heat nearly as well as cold. I have humid heat in summer and made the decision to get Rocks. I don't know where I read that. I have done so much reading I couldn't even manage a guess.

Sorry

 

[LindaB220]

Are the pullets black and the cockerels barred?

Did the cockerels have a white spot on their heads? If so they are a sexlink. The Rooster would have bee black and the hens would have been barred.

The boys should be good to eat and the girls should lay well.

I haven't even made a guess yet on male or female. Leaning toward male. BUT no spots and just a little brown around the hackles. I'm thinking mutts. Dark legs. But they are definitely shaped like Rocks.

 

[Yellow House Farm]

This demonstrated to me how it's the strain, not the breed, that determines heat tolerance.

This statement goes for practically ever single trait we colloquially ascribe to "breeds". In poultry, breed is a SHAPE.. SHAPE and BREED are the same word, and that shape is defined and contained by the Standard of Perfection. COLOR and sometimes COMB are the meaning of VARIETY or sometimes SUB-VARIETY.

Absolutely everything else is strain-based. A breeder's birds have the qualities, whether intentional, situational or accidental, for which the breeder is selecting, and those traits exist in the NOW. They are not permanent traits, and once they're gone, they have to be bred back into the stock.

The longer we commit to one breed on our premises and consistently select for desired qualities, the more assuredly our stock will possess them.

It's all about becoming a true breeder.

 

[TheBanditQueen]

I don't mind that you're not YHF, either.

There would be much to consider before settling on this as fact. We'd have to come to understand how loose feathering is related to what other traits and then how those traits actually come to affect laying. Anecdotally, perhaps, it's safe to say to that most of the breeds traditionally prized for laying are at least "fairly close feathered".

Yet here is an opportunity for yet another SOP, food for thought moment. Turn to page 29 of your 2010 Standard of Perfection, which if you haven't yet ordered I'm sure you're going to run to the APA website and do so straight away:

"All American, all English except Cornish, all French and Langshans: Feathers should be moderately broad and long, fitting fairly close to the body.

All Mediterranean, Hamburgs, and Polish: Feathers moderately broad and long, fitting rather close to the body." (SOP 29)

So basically, every single breed ever prized as an egg layer is to have feathers "fairly" to "rather" tightly fit to their bodies.

Buy your Standard and then remember this mantra: weight, type, feather, and symmetry. Repeat it over and over again until in is ingrained in your way of thinking about poultry: weight, type, feather, and symmetry.

Ah. I am enlightened. Thanks to both of you!!

I have the Standard on my list just as soon as I can squirrel away enough pennies under my mattress. Nearly there!

 

[gjensen]

Quote:
I never believed that one was necessarily more tolerant than another. All of this comb stuff has not sold me either. There could be some advantage, but it would be minor, and overall, pretty useless as a deciding factor. The rose combs etc. are more of an advantage in the cold than a disadvantage in the heat. The largest combs possibly could be more advantageous vs. the smallest combs, but many of the native breeds of Tropical southeast Asia have pea combs. I would not want someone to not consider Dorkings because they live in the South. We could do as well with them, as any other heavy breed. Rose combed or single comb. What can make a difference is body size, and mass. Larger, wider birds have more body around the core. Mass is an advantage in the cold weather, and a dis advantage in hot weather. Lighter birds should have more tolerance, but there is more to it than mass alone. In summer football practices, we have to watch the big lineman a little more than the corners or receivers. The big lineman have a tendency to overheat faster. But they tend to tolerate the cooler temperatures better. Of course their is a lot of individual variation. It is not a rule, but it is a tendency. So in theory, a Rhode Island Red may be better suited for the heat than a New Hampshire. They are longer and not as wide. I have done quite well with NHs in the hot and humid South though. I do not want to discourage anyone from considering their climate along with their breed of choice. I believe in marrying a breed or variety with our climate. I only think we should be cautious about assumptions, and internet reputations.

 

[Lacy Blues]

I think I just fell into a gold mine! Thanks to Joseph and George and you others who are handing out the nuggets. I will have to copy all of this into a document to make sure I don't forget any of it.

 

[Beekissed]

I agree! I'm glued to the monitor and have bookmarked posts and links. I know I will never rise to the point of being able to hatch out that many birds for all these test groups and such~just don't have the physical or financial oomph for it any longer, so trying to figure out how to just do this in a smaller way but still maintain quality of the strain(s).

 

[gjensen]

Quote:
I agree with the point you are making 100%, so I hate to say anything to the contrary. The point is excellent. However, feather type and lay rate are not genetically linked out of necessity. To contribute to what you are saying . . . I prefer to consider type as an indicator of potential. The bird has to have the capacity to perform. Their is a definite link between production and capacity. Your Anconas, Leghorns, and good Reds are good examples of good laying type. New Hampshires, and Delaware compensate for their lack of length, with width but they are built more for their carcass at young ages rather than to be long term layers. Minorcas have big long frames, that though slow to develop have the capacity to be productive layers of extra large eggs. Jersey Giants have big frames and a heavy body that could have made superior capons, but the large frames are slow to develop making them useless as early fryers. A place that New Hampshires and Delaware should have excelled. The later should be well fleshed earlier, without the time required to develop the massive frames. The Leghorn and Anconas that have good type are a picture of excellent laying type. It has little to do with feather type, but has a lot to do with body type. The have the type and capacity without a surplus of extras, making them especially efficient. This efficiency is how they eventually were preferred over the Reds etc. that had equal potential concerning their laying ability, but cost more to feed for the same amount of eggs. To me, connecting the SOP requirements with production is about understanding why the breed has the type that it does. Feather type has certain and definite functional advantages, and is important, but not concerning the quantity of eggs laid. A point that you consistently make that I appreciate is the emphasis on quality. If we are breeding birds, we should desire that they are excellent in every respect. Never compromising on what would be ideal on any point.

 

[Yellow House Farm]

I agree! I'm glued to the monitor and have bookmarked posts and links. I know I will never rise to the point of being able to hatch out that many birds for all these test groups and such~just don't have the physical or financial oomph for it any longer, so trying to figure out how to just do this in a smaller way but still maintain quality of the strain(s).

Don't worry too much, though. What can't be cured can be contained.

If a negative recessive were to show up and if a body were unable to run a progeny test to get rid of it, it would normally only really land on approximately 25% of the chicks, certainly not more than 50% of the chicks because of laws of inheritance, provided one never breeds from a bird exhibiting the trait, that is. Now some possible negative recessives can be seen either immediately or early on; these chicks can be culled immediately from the flock. Traits that are longer to show just help you decide who's invited to dinner.

Now some things are might just be a random mutation, i.e. one in so many might statistically end up with it. Take my strain of Dorkings, I have twice had rumpless birds, one pullet and one cockerel. If it is a negative gene within the population, then it doesn't rear it's head often to conform with my current understanding of genetics, which is admittedly amateurish; however, there is a likelihood that it's merely a mutation that happens. Four-toed breeds can randomly produce a five-toed chick; it's just a mutation, and color sports, though not common, certainly occur.

It's not a problem until it's a problem.