I can't believe it, that is exactly what I have been thinking, but you said it so much better than what I could have. I may end up being more of a consumer of standard bred poultry than a breeder. I don't know. But, that is not going to stop me from trying and if I have to run back to a breeder who is better than me, to occasionally get some more stock, then so be it. Let's put these birds to work and see what happens.I have 7 males and I did not need to keep that many. I was wanting to see what some did, and was picking who was going with who. Looks like I will use five. I will see what I produce this year, and go from there. I picture keeping around five males at any given point. The minimum I could see keeping is two males for two families, and a third that was extra.
Healthy, hardy, and vigorous is a compliment to the breeder and the breed. Poor production, fertility, hatchability, and livability is a liability. That reputation only survives so long.
It is hugely disappointing to have trouble getting birds to hatch and get started. Only the ultra dedicated will stick with birds that is especially difficult.
All of the breeds we keep were popular in their time and place, or they would not be here. Often they were improvements over their predecessors. I think the birds are better off if we maintain or improve on that reputation. There has to be demand on the lower levels.
There seams to be a natural structure to this. Up top, there are the rare few master breeders that consistently produce excellent birds. Then there is the aspiring breeders that multiply that stock, and supply the common hen keepers. If there is no demand at the bottom, then the breed is reduced to a few scattered flocks in the hands of the most dedicated. Any breed's population is most stable when there is demand at the bottom and an outlet for those up the ladder. There is no demand at the bottom unless the reputation is good.