Heritage Large Fowl - Phase II

[Pozees]

Does anybody have any suggestions for me on this? Or should I just use her with a large male next year?

Oh, on the molting of young birds... I hatched last December and those are the young birds that are finishing up their molting now. Would this molt be equivalent to the one usually done at 18 months as there has been a total change in feathers? Will this show me the same things as that later molt? Bob used to say... breed from your older birds who have gone through that first big molt and you will know what you truly have. So, what I'm wondering is, could this situation be considered the same way?

On the first question, I would say try her with both a bantam and a LF male and see what each produces - she may carry genes that differ from her phenotype.

On the second question, if they appear, post-molt, as you would expect them to after a normal 18-month molt, then yes, I would treat them that way. If they appear as if they have just gone through a juvenile molt with more to come in 6 months or so, all bets are off. If there is no discernible difference, treat them as if they have finished their 18-month molt, and hope for the best. Late/early hatches can throw things off, and I suspect every strain behaves a bit differently. If you were to hatch from them in the next month or two, they may do exactly as the parents and molt next December or January, and then hold for a full year. Would it be preferable to have them molt at 12 months rather than 18, to give you an earlier idea of adult plumage?

 

[BGMatt]

That would depend on who determines the quality of or the description of a "mutt".  If by mutt one means a bird that no longer resembles some SOP silhouette but has amazing function for that particular breed, then it would rely on what is the purpose of a chicken in the first place.  From what I can understand, a lot of breeds were established from crossings of this or that other breed to gain meat or laying performance, or both, better feathering or more hardiness under certain weather conditions, etc., and by anyone's definition nowadays, the crossing of several breeds to get an end product that has traits from all of them would be a "mutt".   I have a dog like that...amazingly good dog that I would stand behind for many of his amazing traits, but in the end he's still considered a mutt by anyone else. 

Then, one takes that mutt and breeds more of the same until all those traits emerge consistently and then you can call it a "breed".  In the end, all the pretty feathers and great looking bodies are nothing without a purpose and a chicken's sole purpose is to provide food and breed more just like it that can provide food.  If that is the purpose, then one could reasonably say that the breed that supplies the most food, consistently, survives well and breeds more of the same kind, consistently, would be a top specimen in the chicken world...regardless if it meets some standard written long ago by men long dead. 

I would say, if one were to be breeding a breed to SOP and it couldn't provide a goodly amount of food to justify its purpose, then it would no longer possess the traits for which one would naturally want to breed a chicken, for chickens are first and foremost food.  Or have all breeds just dissolved into hobbies for elitists?  If so, then why would any practical person want to call themselves a "heritage breeder"? 

Just throwing thoughts around and looking for a light to be shed on some questions..... 

It's a mutt because the only definition of Heritage that has any traction and people behind it includes the Standard. The Standards for each breed are written with a form that allows the birds to fill their original purpose. If you take a Cornish, and turn it into a good layer it will require a different form and therefore will no longer look like a Cornish and indeed will be a mutt. Just like hatcheries sell. If people want to "breed" their birds this way and the way you describe they're welcome to I guess, but since this is a Heritage thread, they're kind of in the wrong place to discuss that.

As far as why would you want to be a "Heritage" breeder? Why not? I mean our birds are a living breathing walking piece of history. There's guys out there that can trace their birds all the way back to the original creator of the breed, or the original importation of the breed.

I do sympathize a bit with people who have forgotten the production aspect, they can only raise so many and feed so many. A lot of their potential customer base cares not for the old time tradition breeds, they only want it if it's "imported" or frizzle sizzle dazzle dazzle whatever mutts people are pumping out these days to chase money. So they hatch what they need to and the culls go in the trash. Don't need a lot of laying to do that.

I choose as many others (in this thread even) to breed the birds as they originally were because of both the history heritage factor and hopefully to spread out breed to others, and I want to be sure that if anyone proves themselves worthy enough to be entrusted with birds from me that those birds are the best representation of their breed that I can deliver which includes both production standards and conformation.

 

[Beekissed]

I dream of a chicken that looks like the breed is supposed to look, like many that I've seen on this thread...simply poetry to see...but is still a working, real chicken that performs top rate for laying, meaty carcass, fertility, hardiness, thriftiness, broodiness enough to reproduce its own kind and can rustle a lot of its own grub out on forage and have the survival instincts to do it.

I want a bird that is an excellent representation of the breed but is worthy of feed, not just for beauty and conformation, but for the practical purpose of eggs and meaty carcasses. A true dual purpose breed...with emphasis on the word "purpose". I want that 250-300 eggs per year type of performance in a heritage breed bird...or is that the Holy Grail and cannot ever be obtained through natural means?

I guess what I'm asking is if any of the heritage line breeders have managed to produce a bird like that, consistently, in their chosen breeds? If it can be done once, can it be done again?

If it can't be done at all, then it's a pipe dream and old hatchery mutts that produce well but are just mutts may be the only recourse. She won't be the prettiest gal at the ball but she gets the job done.

Can a person have stellar performance in a heritage breed chicken?

 

[BGMatt]

I dream of a chicken that looks like the breed is supposed to look, like many that I've seen on this thread...simply poetry to see...but is still a working, real chicken that performs top rate for laying, meaty carcass, fertility, hardiness, thriftiness, broodiness enough to reproduce its own kind and can rustle a lot of its own grub out on forage and have the survival instincts to do it. 

I want a bird that is an excellent representation of the breed but is worthy of feed, not just for beauty and conformation, but for the practical purpose of eggs and meaty carcasses.  A true dual purpose breed...with emphasis on the word "purpose".   I want that 250-300 eggs per year type of performance in a heritage breed bird...or is that the Holy Grail and cannot ever be obtained through natural means? 

I guess what I'm asking is if any of the heritage line breeders have managed to produce a bird like that, consistently, in their chosen breeds?  If it can be done once, can it be done again? 

If it can't be done at all, then it's a pipe dream and old hatchery mutts that produce well but are just mutts may be the only recourse.  She won't be the prettiest gal at the ball but she gets the job done. 

Can a person have stellar performance in a heritage breed chicken? 

Of course you can. 250-300 eggs a year would really push it for a dual purpose fowl but it should be doable, I would shoot for a more realistic 200 from dual purpose and leave the high numbers to the egg laying inclined birds. Remember not all breeds were created to be equal. That's why hatchery junk is...junk, they try to make all the breeds produce equally and they just weren't meant to do that. We have a better knowledge of genetics and better nutrition available to them then at any time before. With that knowledge we should be able to push the birds further.

Is it easy to produce such fowl? No. Can just anyone do it? No. Could you do it? Maybe. Knowing what to look for in your birds both by the standard and on top of it, truly understanding what it takes for them to do their job are musts. A breeding program that is efficient with clearly defined goals is a must, and you would have to stick to it without fail. You must be willing to hatch a ton and cull ruthlessly (what's that a high producing hen that looks terrible? Stewpot. A bird that can win class champion at any show in the country but doesn't lay? Stewpot.) That's what separates a true breeder from someone that just raises chickens.

Edit: and yes I know it can be done. My old line of Langshans laid 200 eggs a year on average, were mature and started laying before they were 7 months old (which was my goal), Males were close to cockerel standard weight at 24-28 weeks for butcher, and they were always competitive at the shows. Man I miss those birds. I'd give anything to have that line back, now starting from scratch and will do it again. It might take 5-6 years to get there though. That's something I left out above, if you want that...you have to WORK for it.

 

[BGMatt]

Choose your breed carefully is another point I want to make. If you need 300 eggs a year, pick a breed that realistically has a shot at that. The Mediterranean class is your friend. If you need meat for a family of four, ya know maybe a Hamburg that tops out at 5-6 lbs isn't the breed for you ya know? Brahmas, Orpingtons, Giants, Cornish that might be more your speed. Need a good number of eggs and good meat? Langshans, Reds, Rocks, Dorkings, hey maybe someone should save the Redcap while we're at it.

 

[3riverschick]

Form follows function - that has been misunderstood. Form and function should be one, joined in a spiritual union.
Frank Lloyd Wright
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/f/frank_lloyd_wright.html#Mb46m86fbGSkoTXJ.99

 

[gjensen]

So, are most heritage line breeders not breeding so much for production levels but just mainly on body type and such? Or does function follow form? If it does, then it would stand to reason if the SOPs were established back when they were having birds with exemplary laying, that the birds bred to that standard today would also have outstanding laying performances as well, wouldn't it?

I don't mean to make generalizations of all heritage breeds or compare them to this group of BAs described before, but I've read some pretty interesting accounts of laying performances from birds back in that period and I'm curious as to if anyone is duplicating that performance level in their breed here?

Many "heritage breeders" do no selection concerning production. Some do to some extent.

Have you heard how that bird that is still gorgeous as a two year old hen is your number one keeper. Maybe she is, but she has often not put a lot of energy into producing eggs either. The point is if form and feather is the only consideration, it would be easy to look over the rest. It does not take long or many of those before performance starts taking a nose dive.

Form enables function in a well rounded healthy bird. Function does not necessarily follow form no matter what anyone says. Some of the best typed bird are the poorest performers. Some of the birds with the poorest conformation are the best performers. There is a little bit more to laying genetics than type alone. Regardless, the hen has to have the capacity to perform.

That is not to say form or type is not important and it is most important. What you want is a well balanced bird that performs well over a length of time and is able to live a long healthy life and represent the breed well.

I think that a breeder should have an ideal in mind. Not only standard requirements. For example, a New Hampshire that is slow to mature and late to lay does not represent the breed well regardless of how good it looks. Then on the other extreme, a red hatchery bird that comes into lay early and is quick to mature does not represent the breed well either. Especially if there is no meat on the bones.

Concerning the birds setting the laying records, which is true and they did happen, are birds bred to an extreme for the sole reason to produce eggs. As you continue to push that extreme, you get away from other breed characteristics. Those trials and advances in production taught us a lot concerning laying genetics, but took those particular flocks away from their breed character. As more and more birds could lay those extreme numbers, the emphasis shifted towards feed efficiency. The larger breeds did not fit that bill. The leghorn took over and eventually the light brown egg laying strains.

What I have noticed in many of the more finely bred birds that I have had was that the lay rate was not poor. My concern has been more with egg size, when they came into lay, and how and when they molt out. I do not want a 7lb hen that lays medium sized eggs. I am not waiting until the following spring to get eggs, or messing with a hen that takes a three month break to molt. That is just me, but I cannot tolerate stuff like that. Not with modern farm breeds anyways. Improving those three points would go along ways to making a breed more popular and more in line with what they were made to do to begin with. Now, I realize that all breeds are not the same. Some you do not want to mature too fast.

These are just my opinions, but I am one of those that has all of the eggs from every pen marked on the calendar. I can't trap nest, or I would. I will know what pen produces what and I am paying attention to the individuals. I realize everyone is different, and this is just a hobby.

There is a lot of nice birds out there and no matter what trait(s) somebody emphasizes, that emphasis adds value to the whole.

 

[maryhysong]

So, are most heritage line breeders not breeding so much for production levels but just mainly on body type and such? Or does function follow form? If it does, then it would stand to reason if the SOPs were established back when they were having birds with exemplary laying, that the birds bred to that standard today would also have outstanding laying performances as well, wouldn't it?

I don't mean to make generalizations of all heritage breeds or compare them to this group of BAs described before, but I've read some pretty interesting accounts of laying performances from birds back in that period and I'm curious as to if anyone is duplicating that performance level in their breed here?

I think, as in any other type of stock breeding that what you put pressure on and cull for is what you get. If you are only hatching from your best layers you are going to get better layers; only hatch from the meatier birds, then more meat. Dual purpose birds lay less than layers but should have more meat on their bones. I think some heritage breeds have been neglected so that at this time you have to work to get them back to what they once were.

 

[Texasmja]

When reading the question asked about egg laying in Heritage breeds, I was reminded about a contest I had read about in the APA book I have for the LF Wyandotte.

As the story goes, during a very cold winter in 1899 my friend was getting a wonderful egg yield. I supposed that he had a comfortable pen and was giving them the best of care. One day I went to see his birds and was amazed to find them housed in nothing more than an open shed and getting hard grain twice a day. This setting me thinking because he was getting far better results than I was getting from my Rock pullets, with double the care. The next year I purchased several settings of White Wyandotte eggs and hatched chicks in the latter part of May and middle of June. I had 20 Wyandotte pullets and 40 Rock pullets hatched in May. Both lots had equal care but the Wyandotte pullets out laid the Rock pullets two to one. The Wyandotte excels as a winter layer and the Leghorn as a summer layer.

A five year egg laying contest was done at MO. State Poultry Experiment Station:
1st place - White Wyandotte
2nd place - SLW
3rd place - SC White Leghorn
4th place - SC Reds
5th place - Black Minorcas
6th place - RC Reds
7th place - Anconas
8th place - Barred Rock
9th place - White Orpington

My personal experience is that all of my LF Wyandottes are great layers all year round. I am always reading in the winter that no one is getting eggs without supplementing extra light, no extra light here and all are laying every day here. In the Summer people complain their birds are not laying....still laying here, they only slow down a bit if going through a hard molt, but most all of them keep laying.

 

[Beekissed]

Quote:
I just need to know it's possible. If it's possible, then I can do it. If someone else can do it, I can do it if I set my mind to it. I just needed to know if it CAN be done from current heritage genetics. I'd hate to have to reinvent a breed to get those traits back...that's going backwards instead of forward.

Excellent answers to my questions, each and every one! Thank you so very much!!!

Before I jump into big time investments in breeds of livestock I like to study on it for a long time, glean as much info as possible, formulate a solid plan and then jump in. If I get into heritage breed chickens I don't want to do it lightly and with just any old breed...I want to start with the one that closest suits my ideal bird and then go from there...no need to reinvent the wheel. Hence the questions...

I skim through here now and again and eavesdrop on different breed discussions and try to ascertain who is raising my dream bird out there. Bob had my favorite breed, White Rocks, and they are the bird of my heart, so it's likely I'd start there but I don't find much current info on anyone raising them and if they are improving laying performance, hardiness, feed thrift, etc. along the way.

I don't see much out on the net about heritage BAs, either....not many pics or blogs of any superlative animals out there but they would be my second choice. Both of these breeds have performed well for me in hatchery mutt genetics down through the years and if hatcheries can turn out a bird that can perform, so can we. Just would take some extra tweaking to not lose form when developing function.

Like Bob says...keep it in the middle of the road. I can do that...as long as the middle is where I want to be.

Will continue to study....thank you all for the very informative posts that answered my questions!