Farming and Homesteading Heritage Poultry

[Mervin]

Quote:
Thank you.
Mervin: I never said anything about you leaving I think you exaggerated on that part of my post, I just suggested you to start a educational thread with your type mindset (might be the wrong term, best I could think of) I don't find anything juvenile about that. I think it may be juvenile that you think of it in a offensive way. I also find it funny that you only quoted part of my post the most important part you left out.

Cybercat: thanks, and I never thought of that idea, that would be a cool thing to do! I'd love to see some more pictures of you partridge rocks, You are doing a great job with them!

These are th•Chapter ALBC links:
•Chapter 1. Selecting for Meat Qualities and Rate of Growth
•Chapter 2. Selecting for Egg Production
•Chapter 3. Ongoing Selection of Breeding Stock
punky

So, I've exaggerated. Then, I suppose my comments are not only appropriate but welcomed as well? If my dissent is okay, then I guess I don't quite follow why you'd suggest that I place them on another thread? Should I post them on this and another thread? What exactly is it that you're trying to say with your remark?

I've read through the documents you've cited. I've also read through some of the older texts they cite as well. As a matter of fact, try and find a single reference to the "Standard of Perfection" in "The Mating and Breeding of Poultry" by Lamon and Slocum, one of the ALBC's sources. The first chapter of your ALBC document states, "These guidelines are from well-established parameters developed by 'old school' poultrymen, as documented in some of the early to mid-20th century poultry texts." Okay, but I've seen darn few references to breed standards in the "old school" texts that I've looked at. All I'm saying is the ALBC added "Keep in mind that any bird that is selected for breeding must also meet the established historic standards for the breed" not the "old school" poultrymen themselves. In my reading of "old school" texts the attention seems more focused towards health, vigor, and the basic principles of breeding quality stock, not about minute details like the comb points and positive white in the feathers.

At this point, the only standard-bred birds I've had were Welsummers. I've had one pretty good cockerel and one awful cockerel , in terms of the breed standard. I've two pullets that are fairly good, one that is so-so, and one that is awful. Among the cockerels, the worst, as far as type, was reasonably well-mannered and very large. At least part of the decision to cull him was based on his type. He had a pale skin and feather stubs, but he was a bit meatier. After he had been culled, the cockerel with better type proved himself to be an ill-tempered little cuss that wasn't safe to have around. He was a bad feather puller and ultimately had to be culled for flogging my five-year-old girl every chance he got. Of the pullets, the one that I consider only so-so has the most marketable egg for me. Here egg are XL and terracotta colored with big, dark brown spots. From a subsistence point of view, the most desirable traits in my pen were in some of the worst birds in terms of the Standard.

The point I'm trying to make is that not everybody has the facilities or conditions that allow us to follow the "Rule of Ten" to breed highly-productive, standard-bred fowl. I really can't grow out a couple of hundred birds looking for the needle in the haystack. For those that can, I think that "Standard" breeding and the preservation of antiquities is noble, I really do. It is simply not the complete answer for everybody. I will do the best I can with the facilities I have, but it may also require that I look outside of the "Standard" on occasion.

 

[WallTenters]

Mervin... it seems there is no arguing with you. Sounds like you prefer your crossbreds to any heritage breed, and that's fine.

 

[knittychickadee]

Mervin,

Did you read the introduction in the book you referenced, "The Mating and Breeding of Poultry" by Lamon and Slocum?

Part of it states- "It must not be misconceived that this publication is designed to or can in any sense replace the American Standard of Perfection. The Standard of Perfection describes in detail the ideal birds of the different breeds and varieties, and it is perfectly apparent that in order to insure success in attaining these ideals, the first thing to do is to purchase a copy of the Standard and to thoroughly familiarize oneself with the requirements of the ideal birds so as to have a clear-cut conception in mind of the goal which the breeder desires to reach as nearly as possible. "

 

[punky rooster]

Going to try to help you out mervin and anyone else with a problem like this
I think you should use both those articles and the standard together as a guide as to how to select.

About your aggressive male; you did the right thing by culling him but your other one that you had, how old was he when you culled him and is there any way of getting him back? If so then if you had a super type female I would mate him to her and raise as many as I could and kept only the fast maturing, good typed males and crossed him back to the mother.

I understand about space, I have a limited amount of space too, so I am only going to keep maybe 12 LF max come winter time and hatch as many as possible and cull down from there. In my bantams I will probably keep 20+ come winter time because I can raise more birds in less space and it will be cheaper to do

 

[Yellow House Farm]

Quote:
I think I will forgo participating in this thread any further. I think your implication that I should leave is a bit juvenile though.

The OP's opening sentiments indicated they'd like to start a dialogue, which usually involves discourse and dissent.

Quote:
Perhaps if the ins and OUTS aren't really to be discussed there should be a disclaimer that heresy will NOT be tolerated in this open discussion.

The Joy of Heritage Poultry Within the Context of Agricultural Antiquity Preservation -- That would be my suggestion for a new title. Hopefully nobody will suggest that there might be cons when discussing the pro and cons then.

Greetings Mervin! I hope you do remain part of this thread.

Let's try not to invite each other to leave. Agreeing on everything is not going to happen in the near future. I think as this year progress and all of our chicks are growing there will be much to offer each other.

 

[FarmerDenise]

I think it is great that there a many people out there who are willing to keep breeding the heritage birds. I for one do not have the time nor space. I am going to breed my mixed flock with the best rooster I can get for my needs and hopefully end up with a bird that is perfect for us.
I still like to read about what those of you who are trying to maintain the old breeds are doing. I also need for you to do this, so I can get the birds I want for my purposes.
If I could, I would keep some birds special in order to raise a specific heritage breed and do a second flock of mutts for my personal home use.

 

[HaikuHeritageFarm]

My, there's a lot of rudeness here!

My interest in this thread has tapered off because I fail to see the difference in this vs. what is already being discussed on the other Heritage Poultry thread. The focus has again returned to breeding to standard, which is fine and good and all...but there's already a place for that.

 

[Yellow House Farm]

To breed to the Standard or not to breed to the Standard....that is the question.

Farms are personal things, it would seem. I live in a state of libertarians. Most of us, even if we're not libertarians, are libertarians.

I like the Standard. I like using it. I enjoy the historicity of the Dorking fowl, as well as their fine meat qualities. Culling to the Standard is a chore I enjoy. I do think that the Dorking Standard was written with distinct attention to aspects that promote the utility of the breed. I appreciate being able to rely on the Standard to guide me. I think that, without it, I'd really screw it all up. Having said that, I think that the Standard, for all of its exactitude, can be rather vague, or at least open to interpretation. For this reason, I've always enjoyed reading other texts to flesh out my understanding. Lamon and Slocum is great. I have read it, and read it, and reread it. I wish it said more. Lamon does defer to the Standard, and with him I agree that the Standard is centrifugal. Still, Lamon's text is darn good.

In reality, it would seem fair that many of our breeds, especially those we could refer to as foundational, arise as landrace breeds. Eventually they achieved a sort of zenith, and, as I understand it, it is the intention of the SOP to encapsulate that acme. It would seem logical enough that other landrace breeds could be developed. I'm not really sure that there is a need for one to be developed, but it could certainly happen. Then again, maybe it couldn't happen. Our world has changed, the sheer fact of transportation has altered daily living conditions so much that we no longer have the geographical restrictions that forced homesteaders to make due with what they had and therefrom select year after year for desired qualities that would eventually become genetically stable, forming a breed that could be expected to breed true. Of course, this happens because of genetic limitation. The constant reintroduction of a new this or that would throw everything into the air again.

 

[buffalogal]

Quote:
Well, if the thread were simply about Farming and Homesteading with chickens, then the SoP wouldn't matter, since we'd be talking about what works for you, (generic you) and if crossbreeding creates a bird that is successful on your homestead, that's great.

But we're specifically talking about heritage poultry, meaning older breeds that have a history of use on the farm and homestead. In North America, most of those older breeds do have a breed standard, and it's just as important when you're working toward preserving and using those breeds as their productivity. That's why it keeps coming up. Otherwise we could pretend that every striped chicken with a rose comb is a Dominique, and we know that's not the case. Still, there's more to the topic than breeding to the SoP; I know I'd love to read more about how they 'used to do it", and especially see more "antique" coops. My own chicken house is pushing 100 years; we just remodeled it and removed the broken glass in favor of 1 inch hardware cloth over the windows on the south side, and replaced the solid door with one covered in hardware cloth. When we had about three week's worth of brutal cold weather, I loosely covered the windows with plastic sheeting but left the door "open" to allow the birds to warm the space with their own body heat without sacrificing ventilation. There would be ice in the buckets, but they wouldn't be frozen solid, which was pretty good for not artificial heat.

Yellow House, I just caught the post about your better half insisting on keeping the R.C. Anconas...

Tell them they're welcome to drop me an email and we can discuss relative faults and strong points of our respective flocks; maybe work out a chick exchange later this year.

Edited to try and make sense out of a mangled sentence or two...

 

[spartacus_63]

Quote:
You do know that it is possible to have both in one bird right?

I'm sure it is possible to have both show and production quality in individual birds. At one time the RIR was a show winner and a top producing breed. Through the years the two priorities have wandered. I'm sure RIRs bred for the ring are still good egg producers and they most likely make good dinner guest too. Unfortunately, the two are not normally compatible on the priority list unless you are working with smaller flocks or have the ability to raise a large number of chicks to production maturity. That is the only way you can really determine overall production traits.

I was speaking in a general term regarding customers and the marketing of birds. Someone looking for a backyard or homestead flock for dual purpose and longevity is more likely to look to me for birds then to a SQ breeder. If someone wants to acquire some show girls, they most likely would look to an established breeder with some history of success. That is where the reputation comes into play.

To breed to the Standard or not to breed to the Standard....that is the question.

And what a great question it is too. Now to delve a little further into that question, why should we breed to it, or why is it not necessary to breed to it? For heritage breeds, or any breed for that matter, breeding to standard is important if you want a sustainable flock. The folks that put together the SOP did not do it with the intention of aesthetic qualities for aesthetic purposes. Although I have no idea the importance of a specific number of points on a comb, I am sure there is a reason. The descriptions of the breeds is for Perfection. If you breed your birds to look like the descriptions, odds are you will have a good producing bird. With that said, for homesteading purposes and with homestead facilities, it may not be prudent or even possible to breed your flock to Perfection. The importance of breeding is more of selection. Selection is driven by flock goals. If you do not breed for quality, your flock will degrade over time. I do also believe that you can breed for quality and not be tied to the SOP, but then you are straying from the heritage intent.

For those not interested in a sustainable flock or interested in developing a personal flock, then the SOP is not for you and doesn't need to be. It is still a good tool to reference to see what works for the type birds you want to raise. There are plenty of articles about what good chickens should look like as far as structure. If you just want production, then a base flock of breeders with a bunch of hybrids is the way to go. That is what my family did back in the old days. We had breeders, brooders, meaties and layers. We didn't set any records but the birds earned their keep plus.​