Iowa Blues - Breed thread and discussion

[IowaBlueCurt]

VERY INSIGHTFUL DAN!!! I like where you're going with those questions..........

 

[Hurley]

Kari, Connie - this inevitably means we will need to heavily outcross to produce the "beautiful show bird" Kari described. It is not currently within the genes. SP will need to go to something like SP rocks (which I have been unable to find a source for) and Birchens will have to be re-named or outcrossed and changed all together to conform to the pattern and coloration common among other breeds in the APA.

Connie, duckwing is a recognized term albeit an ugly one but very common amongst many breeders, so I wonder should it be left alone. By the way, I'm still drooling over the salmon breasted silver/gray pullet that Kari has. I'd be happy with a whole pen of those!

This push-pull conversation is good, but sooner or later the decision must be made and the other conversations need to be halted for the good of the breed. Decide, move forward, don't look back unless looking back is what we decide to do. That's the key, look ahead in the breeding program or look back and try to restore. That doesn't in itself seem to be a difficult decision - but here we are still discussing it (I'm not complaining please understand).

I too find myself flip-flopping on the various issues from week to week as I'm sure many others do, so I do understand how difficult it is to make a decision. The worst that can happen is a split in the philosophy so that some go one way and some the other. Both camps present very compelling cases for their vision of where the breed should go and there's bound to be a lot more conversation and debate before this is settled.

I would however end with this. What characteristics make our breed unique? Be they SP or Birchen, there are many breeds with striking birds in these patterns and colors. What makes the IB uniquely qualified to be a distinct breed? Perhaps that's where we need to concentrate first.

Exciting discussion and exciting prospects for the breed's future!

Yep, I agree that we'll need to make decisions, but I think we're currently in the exploratory part of the conversation, working our way(s) through the various thought processes, double checking and revising thought processes with more input. It all adds together to help us come to a conclusion/consensus/happy medium. Then we can take it from there, but this way everyone gets to be heard so all opinions/viewpoints can be taken under consideration as well as to be sure we're all on a level playing field with the information being presented/ferreted out. However, you are right, we'll need to draw the line in the sand where it seems most appropriate to do so and then stand by it.

 

[WVDan44]

However, you are right, we'll need to draw the line in the sand where it seems most appropriate to do so and then stand by it.

Yes, but all in good time. I think this is the growing pains you hear people talking about. Look how far the conversation has evolved in only six or eight months! Who knows where this will take us in the months to come.

All of you have wonderful insight into the issues. Very impressive. I can't wait to see my peeps!

Dan

 

[Hurley]

The ALBC, to be complete, wants nothing to do with our breed because by their definition it's not "pure". They made that point very clear that they consider the breed a dead breed unless some long lost flock is found somewhere that has an unbroken line from the original birds with no outside blood. Personally, to be honest, I think purity is a fallacy when it comes to animals who always have been and always will be in a state of flux and I greatly doubt the original birds were very refined as outlined by the variety historically listed in the breed, so looking for "pure Iowa Blues" is a bit like looking for pure goldenpoos. I do think of them as a historical breed or a heritage breed, but the ALBC will never recognize them as such, from my conversation with them. That's where their line is drawn, that's their process, which is fine, but they will never be a major contributor to the preservation of our breed as they don't wish to include it without absolute proof of "purity". They leave us on the "study" list as there is always a chance some "pure" flock exists, but they indicated that they deem this to be very unlikely, at least they did when I last spoke to them offering all of our documentation for their consideration.

As for the APA, believe me when I say I have had this conversation in as many forms as you can imagine with the AKC (and ASCA - the Aussie breed club before the evil AKC ruined them *tongue in cheek*), with the AQHA (quarter horses), with the reptile world, and any animal club world, to be honest. It won't be the last time. Personally, I like to show animals so throw me in that camp. I find anything worth doing is worth "geeking out" on, and I find that it gives an arena to showcase your successes as a breeder while comparing your stock to fellow dedicated breeders, but I certainly understand it isn't for everyone. I also love my Iowa Blues for their history and all that came before to make them what they are today and respect the wish to stay true to their origins.

To the breeder that doesn't give a hoot about show birds and thinks the breed is fine as is or that the original flock is the penacle of what we should shoot for, I do not foresee petitioning the APA as barring those individuals from breeding to their mental picture as perfect. To be honest, the future Iowa Blue enthusiasts and the masses will determine in what capacity (if any) the breed survives vs. becoming extinct. So far, the breed hasn't faired very well relying on preservation by people breeding them just as they are to remain just as they are. This is an admirable goal, but is not likely to be the only version moving forward into the future. Breeds that stagnate tend to die off, those that adapt (and in this case have viability and attraction to the masses) will move on to the next generation. The thought that all "traditional" is superior to "modern" is a mental line that some accept as a core belief, but it really is just another line in the sand, neither innately good or bad. The breed will evolve, offshoots will go in different directions, those that recruit the most followers will survive and populate. There's a reason you see more more xxx version of a breed than yyy. Those animals are what those people want, even if it's not what the other camp feels is right. There is nothing to say that either side is wrong, just different viewpoints, different wants in their chickens and, bless America, we're all allowed to make those decisions for our own flocks.

I think having a standard is important to take the breed from a motley crew of a few birds that survived the rigors of the past several decades to enough uniformity to actually call them a breed, which they've been skirting the line of for quite some time when you look at the variability. However, that being said, show people want a standard and will breed to their ideal of that standard thus the breed will evolve as that standard is approached. Hobby breeders will breed towards what they want on their farms, production wise, size wise, instinct wise, personality wise. Hatcheries will breed to what they can sell and what their purchasers are clamoring for. Those birds will never be the same bird, no matter the breed or species for that matter. That will be up to the breeders, the champions of the breed that promote it, and dedicated hobbyists both now and in the future. There will be different avenues that the breed will take, but I fail to see how this is a bad thing...it's just different. In the end, the version that survives (if any) is the one that is the most useful to the people promoting it. The dedicated breeder wanting show Iowa Blues (and who needs the standard to be accurate the most) will take their flocks in that direction and will be contacted by people interested in those birds. The dedicated breeder interested in staying traditional (much like my corn snake world where we have color/pattern morph ['show'] animals vs. locality [traditional] animals even without an APA) will invest him(her)self in their birds with equal fervor and will be contacted by people interested in the benefits of this (be they purists or homesteader/instinct-philes or historical buffs). The standard will mean less to this person, which is fine, there is no shame/superiority in either extreme, and no one says the purist has to have a show bird. I don't think the club has to favor the right or the left to the exclusion of the other. It can further the purist extreme via education and promotion of the breed while supporting the show extreme by publishing a well-written standard, promoting the show results, and increasing connections between breeders for all positions from left to middle to right. It's all publicity for the breed and increases its chances of survival and allows all camps to comingle in harmony (hopefully).

So, the discussion comes down to do we think the name of the varieties need adjusting or should they stand as is. Should the IBCC on the website promote/list other varieties in addition (i.e. silver duckwing).

After reading and considering all of the viewpoints listed, my summary is this: I feel the Birchen standard should hold as written, but be titled Gray. I feel the Silver Penciled should hold in name and standard. I reserve judgement on the Silver Duckwings, having none of them, and give my nod to the majority.

 

[Hurley]

Another shorter thought, regarding the silver pencileds. The main difference in those breeds for the distinctness and thinness of their barring stems from rate of feather growth. The slower the feathering, the thinner, sharper, more defined the striping. The more you select towards that, the more poorly feathered the chicks will be early on, which means they need more heat/care for longer, which hurts their rugged, self sufficient status as a broody, heritage breed. Just thinking out loud. I know early on I had a portion of the birds that showed tardy/retarded feathering, which I selected against as I prefer birds that feather out quickly.

 

[ottbjumper06]

If this helps anyone, I chose this breed for a couple of reasons #1, its attitude and personality, and #2, its coloration. I can tell you right now if the Iowa Blue had very fine penciling I wouldnt have liked it near as much as I do. Would it be correct to describe it as rugged?

 

[Hurley]

What attracted you to the breed?
Good to take a minute and consider this.

For me it was a combo of a lot of things...

The first thing that nabbed me was the name and story, before I ever was able to dig up photos (with serious effort, at the time as info was very very scarce.) They're IOWA blues, which being a transplanted Iowan, that was a draw.

Love their attitude and carriage, very proud, very charasmatic, tough and willing to defend their family, very much in character with my upbringing.

Re: coloration, the white manes on the cocks and the fancy patterns on the hens are lovely and well within my preference for patterns and lack of red/gold.

Their outline in general - I just love that cocky tail set, no matter how you paint the chicken.

Also love their faces which are so much prettier than a lot of breeds. I can't tell you how much I don't like that round, bulgey, donut around the eye appearance of several other breeds. That IB big, beautiful dark eye and refined face just does it for me. I think they are very pretty in the face, not clunky, boxy...more refined like an Arabian vs. an Appaloosa.

To be perfectly honest, as long as you don't paint them in red/gold/orange/yellow, I'll like their coloration. I'll never breed mine towards the greys that trend towards brown, find that wholey unattractive. I prefer the 'cool' end of the spectrum, and the brighter / less saturated the black/white/grey, the better. Slap that on an IB shape, and I'm in heaven.

 

[WVDan44]

What attracted you to the breed?
Good to take a minute and consider this.

For me it was a combo of a lot of things...

The first thing that nabbed me was the name and story, before I ever was able to dig up photos (with serious effort, at the time as info was very very scarce.) They're IOWA blues, which being a transplanted Iowan, that was a draw.

Love their attitude and carriage, very proud, very charasmatic, tough and willing to defend their family, very much in character with my upbringing.

Re: coloration, the white manes on the cocks and the fancy patterns on the hens are lovely and well within my preference for patterns and lack of red/gold.

Their outline in general - I just love that cocky tail set, no matter how you paint the chicken.

Also love their faces which are so much prettier than a lot of breeds. I can't tell you how much I don't like that round, bulgey, donut around the eye appearance of several other breeds. That IB big, beautiful dark eye and refined face just does it for me. I think they are very pretty in the face, not clunky, boxy...more refined like an Arabian vs. an Appaloosa.

To be perfectly honest, as long as you don't paint them in red/gold/orange/yellow, I'll like their coloration. I'll never breed mine towards the greys that trend towards brown, find that wholey unattractive. I prefer the 'cool' end of the spectrum, and the brighter / less saturated the black/white/grey, the better. Slap that on an IB shape, and I'm in heaven.

I have to say Connie, you have a way of putting things in perspective. Your last two posts really sum up our dilemma.

I chose the IB for many of the same reasons you mentioned; the story (lore), their toughness and the hawk fighting reputation, and the silver penciled bird which I thought was quite striking. I too like the beautiful head and eye of these birds as well as the comb of the cock birds. Later I came to believe that the sp pattern needed significant improvement and determined it could only be done by outcrossing.

I liken the IB to the Jack Russell Terrier which I bred and worked in the field as a sanctioned working judge of the JRT Club Of America. AKC attempted to recognize the breed which really does not breed true (the breed club says it is a type of terrier, not a true breed); the breed club resisted, some members bolted for AKC and the breed club brought suit, several years later a judge in CA determined that AKC could not take over the breed. So those who wanted to go AKC formulated a standard and a club, changed the breed's name slightly, and AKC had it's new breed The Parson Russell Terrier. Splinter groups soon formed and today, there are three distinct AKC breeds of terriers derived from the JRT plus the one the original breed club maintains. On top of all that, there are "purists" who have terriers that do not fit any of the standards per se owned by people who only hunt them and do not show, disdaining the show dog and the show ring. They will only breed their working dogs to other working dogs, caring only for the function and little for the form. None maintains the exact characteristics of the original terrier owned by one Parson Jack Russell, yet all of them maintain some portion of it. The only entity that really benefitted from all of this was the AKC. So Connie I suppose you are right. It will be what it will be to the various groups as their needs are fulfilled. I think I can finally go to bed and get some sleep now. Thanks for putting it so eloquently and precisely. We have a standard to work on - Let's roll! Good night.

 

[Jake Levi]

A great discussion !!

I was attracted by the story, then the hawk fighting and ranging ability, and the white penciled head on the cocks and the upright black body of the roosters, as well as the beautiful striped hens.

Now I am waiting to see how my small flock matures out as I have several color morphs developing. And two cockerals of different morphs, one of the dark gray/birchen and a SP Partridge, its all a very interesting melange. Eventualy I want to have a SP rooster and several SP hens, and breed the others to them.

I am looking forward to showing some next year, a great time to meet others with these.

We are in a formative phase now for sure, I would advise not throwing any babies out with the bath water, whatever we decide on for the preferred colors we can breed to with roosters of that color, two generations and we should mostly have them.

Meanwhile, enjoy what we have, and study them all.

What I want in my flock is a good homestead breed of easy ranging birds, that lay well and develop good meat quality birds, as fryers and roasters. Color can vary a bit but I would like a predominately SP flock, some grays now and then is fine.

Thats what I am wanting in my flock.

 

[WVDan44]

What I want in my flock is a good homestead breed of easy ranging birds, that lay well and develop good meat quality birds, as fryers and roasters. Color can vary a bit but I would like a predominately SP flock, some grays now and then is fine.

Thats what I am wanting in my flock.

One of the other and maybe most important attractions for me was the open conversation and no fluff approach of Connie and Kari, who are the two people I first conversed with about the breed. The name Iowa Blue was fascinating and I wanted to know more. These two people really poured on the info while not coming on as breeders who just wanted to sell chicks. I was impressed with their willingness to share and with the history as well. It was also a lot of fun and caused me to study genetics a bit when we got into trying to id some of the markers and such.

Jake, I too am interested in what was meant by a dual purpose bird back in the day. The ones I have are sure not table quality LOL being smallish and with out much of a breast. So there is another direction that some members might decide to go and research.

I'm starting to see what Connie is saying two and three posts back. As the needs of the individual arise, the bird can be adapted to fill those needs. Interesting. Thus the IBCC is sort of the standard bearer of the breed and the "compass" by which a standard is maintained, so let's not ever get down on the club for wanting to create a model that is attractive for the show ring (I'm certainly not suggesting that anyone is down on the club). After all, that's how breed standards are maintained - in the show ring. As Connie said there are the show birds, the hatchery birds and the barnyard birds (paraphrasing) and all of them serve a purpose.