Farming and Homesteading Heritage Poultry

[capayvalleychick]

I would go as far to say that if someone has trouble with putting a bird's head on a stump, they have no business keeping poultry at all. Unless a spouse is willing to do all of the killing etc.

I understand what you are Bee are saying and agree with the general idea. However, this statement would mean that I have no business keeping poultry. I can't kill them. I've tried. I get physically ill when I do.
My husband no longer wants to do it. Yet, I definitely cull those that aren't good enough to be breeders. I find a local teenager/hunter to do individuals, or I take multiples to a processor for our freezer. Pullets/hens are sold as layers to backyarders. Those are just as good, if not better, than hatchery stock, plus I need to make some income from this to help pay for feed.

 

[Beekissed]

I don't have any problem with such things unless the birds don't get quick mercy if one cannot get a hold of their designated killer. That's just something that sticks in my craw....but that's not your problem as it's my craw that's doing the sticking.

As a nurse there have been many, many procedures and wounds that I had to tend to even though I was gagging in my throat and it made me ill the rest of the day....but it's not really about me. It's about that patient and I even hid my gagging by turning away and not letting them see me going through my necessary convulsions, because it's not about me. I didn't stop being a nurse simply because I have a sensitive nose or a weak gag reflex or I let things like that stick in my mind, because I was committed to the profession and doing it the best I could despite my own short comings.

I can't dictate what others do with their animals but I don't have to agree with it, no more than they have to agree with what I do with mine and that's all okay. We all have our standards and opinions and it's okay that they are not the same. Everyone pretty much lives with what they want to live with and it's different for every person, I imagine.

 

[bnjrob]

I understand what you are Bee are saying and agree with the general idea. However, this statement would mean that I have no business keeping poultry. I can't kill them. I've tried. I get physically ill when I do.
My husband no longer wants to do it. Yet, I definitely cull those that aren't good enough to be breeders. I find a local teenager/hunter to do individuals, or I take multiples to a processor for our freezer. Pullets/hens are sold as layers to backyarders. Those are just as good, if not better, than hatchery stock, plus I need to make some income from this to help pay for feed.

If you have a sustainable way to take care of your unwanted birds, that's great. And you have a humane, sustainable plan in place. Most folks I come across do not have that and they rely on *rehoming* their unwanted or illegal birds.

It's a serious problem when people are unwilling to eat their own birds but they won't let anyone else eat them either and they want someone to take them to a *forever home* like they're a dog, cat, or other more common pet. Some of the online *chicken keeper celebrities* are perpetuating this problem themselves, by trying to rehome roosters they can't keep and getting mad when someone suggests that they eat the thing.

We kill thousands of dogs and cats every day in this country because someone didn't want them and wouldn't spay/neuter them. Those deaths are for nothing. At least with a chicken, that *unwanted* animal can die a good death and sustain life for someone or something else.

If you only knew how many people threaten to not only dump on our doorstep, but to inhumanely and painfully kill their animals (including chickens), if me and my husband don't agree to take them off their hands....you would fully understand why some of us have very strong feelings on the subject.

I would rather dissuade someone from having an animal of any kind (including a human child) rather than deal with the unwanted living creature later on when people realize that they got in over their heads and didn't think everything completely through. Especially since it's these poor unwanted animals and children that suffer the most from the bad choices people make.

 

[Lacy Blues]

Regarding yellow legs fading with production...

I have the 2001 Standard. On page 5 under the heading of "General Comments" number 9 states "Everyone should fully recognize the effect that egg production has on the body outline, head furnishings, and in the case of yellow skinned varieties, the skin and shank color of the female.

Then on page 28 under the heading "Condition" at paragraph (b) Faded Pigmentation: A fading or bleaching of color from that described int he Standard for the beak and shanks or the pigment in yellow skin breeds is a defect when the result of poor health or condition, but shall not be considered such if the natural result of heavy egg production, age, or seasonal changes.

Regarding production, on page 29 under the heading Shape and Type in paragraph (e) Body: sub-paragraph (1) it reads Abdominal Capacity: A large abdomen or large internal capacity is necessary for adequate intestinal development, which is essential for rapid digestion and assimilation of food necessary to heavy egg production. ...

So to a judge, I can only guess this means that a HEN with faded yellow on her legs and feet will mean that she will not be disqualified for the fading if he checks her anatomy and her vent to determine if she is a heavy layer. For a cock bird, faded yellow in his legs and feet would be a disqualification. If he finds her crow-headed with a tight abdoment and a dry puckered vent, yes, she will be DQ'd.

I think too, in order to push the production side of the Standard, that 4H leaders and APA/ABA Youth Directors need to inform the kids of WHY they make that physical exam and WHY it is so important. The kids think they are only checking structure. They need to know that it is actually for breeding purposes and determining whether or not a bird is a good layer.

Every person getting involved with the breeding of chickens (or anything else for that matter) needs to know the methods used to determine the likelihood of a possible good breeder.

 

[bnjrob]

Regarding yellow legs fading with production...

I have the 2001 Standard. On page 5 under the heading of "General Comments" number 9 states "Everyone should fully recognize the effect that egg production has on the body outline, head furnishings, and in the case of yellow skinned varieties, the skin and shank color of the female.

Then on page 28 under the heading "Condition" at paragraph (b) Faded Pigmentation: A fading or bleaching of color from that described int he Standard for the beak and shanks or the pigment in yellow skin breeds is a defect when the result of poor health or condition, but shall not be considered such if the natural result of heavy egg production, age, or seasonal changes.

Regarding production, on page 29 under the heading Shape and Type in paragraph (e) Body: sub-paragraph (1) it reads Abdominal Capacity: A large abdomen or large internal capacity is necessary for adequate intestinal development, which is essential for rapid digestion and assimilation of food necessary to heavy egg production. ...

So to a judge, I can only guess this means that a HEN with faded yellow on her legs and feet will mean that she will not be disqualified for the fading if he checks her anatomy and her vent to determine if she is a heavy layer. For a cock bird, faded yellow in his legs and feet would be a disqualification. If he finds her crow-headed with a tight abdoment and a dry puckered vent, yes, she will be DQ'd.

I think too, in order to push the production side of the Standard, that 4H leaders and APA/ABA Youth Directors need to inform the kids of WHY they make that physical exam and WHY it is so important. The kids think they are only checking structure. They need to know that it is actually for breeding purposes and determining whether or not a bird is a good layer.

Every person getting involved with the breeding of chickens (or anything else for that matter) needs to know the methods used to determine the likelihood of a possible good breeder.

Yep - it says that. But I don't think it's being applied uniformly. I also think that the judges are not familiar with as many birds as they could be, because there are birds that aren't shown often - like Javas. And they fail to consult an actual SOP book while they judge and think that they know what the standard is. And there's more personal bias instead of objectivity sometimes when they judge than they would want to admit. There are some judges that have made comments on Javas that were off base and one of the judges supposedly raised Javas years ago. The comments showed me that they were completely unfamiliar with the current standard as compared to the standard from 100+ years ago. So it makes it hard to know what to do when the judges are human and think they are judging objectively, based on the SOP, when that might not entirely be the case.

 

[fowlman01]

There are really good judges and then some not so good. This is life. Half of all doctors were in the bottom half of their class too. Every judge is supposed to have a CURRENT Standard in their possession when they judge and if they are judging a breed that they do not know they should be looking it up. If they don't make sure that the club doesn't hire them again. If they are incompetent their are remedies. The easiest most efficient way is to educate judges to your breed. It is done all the time by some of the breed clubs.

The APA will be including a production section in the next Standard. The APA supplies the information but it is up to the breeders to implement this. There is no way that the APA can enforce these production guidelines other than making sure the birds are physically capable of good performance. Keep in mind that the hybrid does the best job laying and the best job for meat but the meat bird's can't reproduce like birds and the egg layers burn out quickly. None of the hybrid birds are meant for the long haul like the old breeds in addition some are ornamental and have no practical purpose.

Walt

 

[bnjrob]

There are really good judges and then some not so good. This is life. Half of all doctors were in the bottom half of their class too. Every judge is supposed to have a CURRENT Standard in their possession when they judge and if they are judging a breed that they do not know they should be looking it up. If they don't make sure that the club doesn't hire them again. If they are incompetent their are remedies. The easiest most efficient way is to educate judges to your breed. It is done all the time by some of the breed clubs.

The APA will be including a production section in the next Standard. The APA supplies the information but it is up to the breeders to implement this. There is no way that the APA can enforce these production guidelines other than making sure the birds are physically capable of good performance. Keep in mind that the hybrid does the best job laying and the best job for meat but the meat bird's can't reproduce like birds and the egg layers burn out quickly. None of the hybrid birds are meant for the long haul like the old breeds in addition some are ornamental and have no practical purpose.

Walt

I know you're right. Just wish that there were more out there like you, that work so hard to be informed and do things to the best of their abilities.

Putting in a production section into the SOP may at least help to bring it to the forefront of people's thoughts, even though it doesn't guarantee that folks will actually implement it in their breeding. I think it will certainly help us newbies to have that information right next to the appearance information.

 

[fowlman01]

Hey, I make judging mistakes. In my case the mistakes happen when I am distracted by something. Not because I didn't look up something. The human element can make differences in judging results but get your peers input and that will help you see what the Standard says. This current administration of the APA is very interesting in getting back to the roots of the APA. Birds that perform their intended purpose. There have been many changes including bringing the organization into the 21st century but also going back to the roots of what the purpose of the APA really is.

Lots of changes which I think are very positive changes.

Walt

 

[gjensen]

I understand what you are Bee are saying and agree with the general idea. However, this statement would mean that I have no business keeping poultry. I can't kill them. I've tried. I get physically ill when I do.
My husband no longer wants to do it. Yet, I definitely cull those that aren't good enough to be breeders. I find a local teenager/hunter to do individuals, or I take multiples to a processor for our freezer. Pullets/hens are sold as layers to backyarders. Those are just as good, if not better, than hatchery stock, plus I need to make some income from this to help pay for feed.

Kim, the fact that you pay someone to do it does not change that you are doing it. You are still the original cause. The person that you pay is a secondary cause, and an effect, because you set it in motion. Maybe I should have included aunts, uncles, nephew, nieces, neighbors, and friends along with spouses.

Every analogy breaks down at some point. The point is still the same. Killing birds is part of breeding poultry. You have just found a way around your reluctance to do it, but you are still killing them. You might not be swinging the axe, but you are killing them all of the same, and you have no trouble doing it.

For the general audience, it is difficult to understate that death and killing is part of this. When someone buys sexed hatchery pullets, they are "guilty" of having part in the killing of their male siblings. There is no way to be involved in the rearing of poultry without being involved in the killing of birds. The only way to not to is to abstain from keeping them, and the products they produce.

 

[Beekissed]