HOLD THE PRESSES: Duane Urch is Done?!/Future of American Purebred Poultry

[Bullitt]

I see. That shows that the Rhode Island Red was historically more significant than the Buckeye. Just because one breeds has some genetics from another breed does not itself make that second breed important. Many breeds went into creating some chicken breeds.

But as the author of the article stated, many people are breeding the Buckeye. More power to them.

The point by the author is he is trying to encourage people to keep historically significant breeds strong into the future.

Each person has to decide what breed or breeds to work with. Maybe some people will focus on the breeds he is describing.

 

[The Moonshiner]

That shows that the Rhode Island Red was historically more significant than the Buckeye.

What does?

 

[Bullitt]

What does?

You wrote that the Buckeye breeders tried to use the name pea comb Rhode Island Red in order to get more attention. It did not work, so the name was changed.

The Rhode Island Red breeders did not change the name to single comb Buckeye.

 

[The Moonshiner]

Buckeyes were created by Nettie Metcalf.
The only American class breed to be created entirely by a woman.
(That in itself should be worth something historically.)
Anyways at that time she was the buckeye breed. There weren't "breeders" it was her alone and the breed she created.
She was somewhere in the Midwest or somewhere and the RIRs were on the east coast.
She heard there was another breed created with the red color as her breed. She contacted RIR breeders and both sides decided to swap and use the other breed to improve their breed. Both were established by then.
The RIR breeders encouraged her to take up their name for her breed. With her being alone and them having several breeders and a growing breed club she thought it would help her with recognition and popularity of her birds.
It actually hindered her so she went back to the buckeye name and going it alone.
Both breeds were accepted by the APA in 1904.

 

[Bullitt]

I have read before that the Buckeye was the only chicken breed entirely created by a woman. That is unique and historically significant. However, you could not argue that the Buckeye is more historically significant than the Rhode Island Red, which is one of the most popular and successful chicken breeds of all time. It would also be difficult to argue that the Buckeye has been historically important commercially, such as with the Leghorn or the Plymouth Rock.

Again, the author said many people are breeding the Buckeye. I hope they continue.

Which historically significant breeds need attention by breeders?

I think the Java should be saved, but its only significance is as a foundation breed for the Rhode Island Red, which from that was developed the New Hampshire. The Java is the second-oldest American breed, but it is not that important on its own. I just think the Java is a good dual-purpose chicken breed that forages well and reproduces on its own. The Dominique, the oldest American breed and called Pilgrim Fowl, was significant because for many years almost every farm had Dominique chickens running around.

The main point by the author is there are significant breeds that deserve breeder attention. I think the Rhode Island Red should be one of the breeds that stays strong into the future.

 

[ChocolateMouse]

@The Moonshiner you're right. I didn't anticipate it taking this turn. To me the general subject matter was rather obvious, I didn't see it going off on a tangent about people that kept chickens as pets since it was about BREEDING AND SHOWING APA POULTRY.

I tried to edit the original post but couldn't. So, here's hoping we can get back on track over here in the Exhibition, Genetics, and Breeding to the SOP forum.

What are we as a collective group of serious poultry enthusiasts going to do to encourage the survival of key breeds with waning popularity?

I actually think that the non breeding keepers and hobby breeders are perfectly fine. I think they can add to the conversation not detract from it. Sure, plenty want a fancy chicken rather than a utility chicken but an eye for beauty and fancy and mystique isn't new. I mean, people complain about dog breeds yet the first known written breed standard was for the pekingese of all things over 2000 years ago, the most wretched dog I can think of, whose original standard actually called for it's legs to be so deformed and short that it couldn't walk very far. That didn't stop countless useful breeds of dogs from being developed in the following millennia. This isn't new. Not even in chickens. The Onangadori was developed in the 1600s. Even the Ayam Cemani is cited to have been first described as being developed in the early 1900's. The Polish was developed and standardized in the 1500s. Fancy chickens kept for their looks only or looks AND utility have always had a presence.

I think the solution to this particular problem is actually to flip it around and utilize those breeders and fanciers who like the mystique of chickens and go in for those crazy breeds much like the Buckeyes have. If the Buckeyes can market themselves, if the Bresse can market themselves, why can't the Rhode Island Red, the New Hampshire, the Brown Leghorn, the Barred Rock, etc? This seems like a marketing issue as much as anything else.
These sorts of critical foundational breeds have strange reputations on the market. They're all hatchery stock so they're not what they SHOULD be, or they're nowhere near as nice as people say in the ways they say. And those are fair complaints! The difference between hatchery birds and really nice heritage bred varieties are drastic. They've got wildly varied personalities and they're seen as "that normal bird". It almost feels like other than being "red" or "barred" or "medium body weight or "skinny" they almost have no breed standard at all in the public eye. Which is, of course, the problem right? I would hazard that most can't tell a hatcher rhode island from a hatchery new hamshire. (My partner, who lives with and helps me with my birds, thought they were about the same breed made for the same purpose just a marketing scheme like cherry eggers and red sex links and red stars and ISA browns all being about the same.)

But I really believe the solution here is marketing. If you can't beat em, Join em! And to a tiny degree, the hatcheries know it too. Have you seen Meyers new "heritage barred rocks"? Rumor has it they're closer to breed standard. Certainly the pictures show an effort towards that compared to the photos in their "barred plymouth rock chicks" or "started pullets" of the same. They're betting on the same horse I am - that the future is in labeling.
If, as breeders, we can build a reputation for the "REAL" heritage breed, not those phonies you get from back yard mutts and hatcheries, we could be successful. Think about it - the good quality versions of these birds have so much going on for them. Robust sizes, good livability, refined personalities, good health, consistent production, hardiness, beauty, the sheen and length on the feathers, the arc of the back, the hold of the tail....

Heck, isn't that how these breeds took off in the first place? Everyone marveled at these breed for these traits back in the day. A little digging shows that these breeds were mythologized in their advertisements even back then!
(citations! (1) (2) )

Every good breeder for these birds should have a page espousing the value of the REAL heritage chicken right off the bat, mythologizing and emphasizing the good qualities of a well bred heritage stock, ESPECIALLY in comparison to back yard mixes and low quality hatchery birds. These pages should feature beautiful chickens with cascading feathers glowing in the sun and standing tall on the show platform. They should be getting pinned on pintrest, shared on instagram, groups on facebook should be made to show what real quality birds look like and emphasize the differences, they should be dramatized and presented with clear information about the traits of a Proper, True, REAL heritage breed. (And watch out for all the low quality impostors out there, they won't be anywhere near the same... Which is a true fact!)

I really think this is the future of these breeds and their best hope. It lets the fanciers, the backyard keepers, the people seeking eye candy poultry and fancy WANT those important breeds in the quality they should be kept in. It funnels money to the breeders that really put effort into the breeds. It's a good chunk of why some breeds have become massively popular and some have stagnated even in history. And I think it's important for promoting the birds we have today in their best form.

 

[Bullitt]

But I really believe the solution here is marketing. If you can't beat em, Join em!

It is like the discussion we were having about changing names and name recognition for breeds. Marketing the name and reputation of a breed is important for it becoming and staying popular.

I like the idea of the large hatcheries selling "heritage" strains of breeds. The large hatcheries can go a long way to keep a breed strong if they are trying to breed to the standard and the qualities that made the breed popular originally. The heritage strains for many breeds may also have more broodiness than the production strains.

Using that "heritage" title is partly marketing, but I also hope they are really trying to breed to the standard.

You know if a large hatchery is selling a heritage strain of a breed it is going to be the very popular breeds like Plymouth Rock and Rhode Island Red that may have been hurt by so much focus on egg production.

 

[HaikuHeritageFarm]

The issue has always been marketing, whether that's what it was called or not. The well-known poultry keepers that were networked and made themselves visible and talked their birds up built reputations. There were likely plenty of birds or breeds that were just as good that fell by the wayside because they didn't have an ambassador.

This problem is way more about people than it is about birds. Any breed could be a great breed with the right people behind it. With that in mind, preserving "historically significant" breeds is more about preserving history than anything else. You have to decide if you value that and want to play that game, I guess.

 

[The Moonshiner]

I think you've made some good points.
Sadly preserving history isn't what it used to be. Society has become more selfish.
It's more about the here and now now days. What I have and what I want is the priority.
Gimme gimme gimme and I'll throw it away soon and get something better.
When I was growing up we had the same old rotary phone with a twisted up cord for a decade or more. Now people can't go a year without wanting the new IPhone.
Who wants those same ol birds like their grandparents had when all these new and rare breeds are showing up.
Like everything else they'll jump on the new fad breed and throw them away in a year or two for the next rare breed.

You also mention the people. Your right. Breeders aren't like the old days. As a youth I could go to a show and a breeder would set down and talk birds for hours. Pour their hearts and souls out about their breed. Now you go to a show and try to talk to a lot of breeders and they don't want to waste time talking to a no body. They come off as a better then you attitude and snobbish. They act like their part of the school and school isn't taking on new pupils.
Its egos and attitudes there's no passion to pass the torch and get the next generation passionate. And the next generation don't seem to mind much.

 

[Bullitt]

I think you've made some good points.
Sadly preserving history isn't what it used to be. Society has become more selfish.
It's more about the here and now now days. What I have and what I want is the priority.
Gimme gimme gimme and I'll throw it away soon and get something better.
When I was growing up we had the same old rotary phone with a twisted up cord for a decade or more. Now people can't go a year without wanting the new IPhone.
Who wants those same ol birds like their grandparents had when all these new and rare breeds are showing up.
Like everything else they'll jump on the new fad breed and throw them away in a year or two for the next rare breed.

You also mention the people. Your right. Breeders aren't like the old days. As a youth I could go to a show and a breeder would set down and talk birds for hours. Pour their hearts and souls out about their breed. Now you go to a show and try to talk to a lot of breeders and they don't want to waste time talking to a no body. They come off as a better then you attitude and snobbish. They act like their part of the school and school isn't taking on new pupils.
Its egos and attitudes there's no passion to pass the torch and get the next generation passionate. And the next generation don't seem to mind much.

Wow! Talk about making some good points.

It seems there are a lot of selfish people these days. I cannot stand people who think they are better than others and only want to associate with "notable" people.

I would like to say something about saving historically significant breeds. It is not just about saving a breed for history's sake. These breeds became historically significant because they were very useful -- for eggs, meat, or both. Some breeds may be historically significant like the Cochin that helped make chicken breeding popular. These significant breeds became significant because they were great in some way, like a Leghorn for laying ability, or a Plymouth Rock as an all-purpose breed.