Less-than-ideal offspring from 'heritage/standard-bred' chickens?

[NYREDS]

Sometimes 2 nearly perfect birds will produce nothing but culls. Genetics is at some level a crap shoot. I wish it was the case that every chick produced from a quality mating grew up to be worth breeding & showing. If that was so I'd spend a lot less on feed. The reality is that a good outcome is one bird worth keeping for every 10 hatched. Sometimes you'll do better than that & sometimes worse. I just did the final cull on this year's Dominique cockerels. This is the third time I've gone through them & there were 12 that made it this far. I ended up keeping 4 & sending the other 8 to the auction. I started with 38 cockerels to end up with the 4 I kept. Two I'll use in next year's matings & two I'll sell.
Breeding from someone else's culls will in all liklihood produce nothing but more culls. There is the occasional exception, remember that crap shoot thing. Sometimes the genes will line up in unexpected ways & produce a veritable "silk purse from a sows ear", but it doesn't happen often.

 

[jmc]

thank you. i am super busy right now, and i really want to get back to this thread which i started, but i'll have to wait a little more, as i am trying to 'go somewhere' with this thread, and it will lead into another thread i hope to start about 'heritage birds' and genetics................

 

[jmc]

So, we could reasonably say that

1. 'Heritage/Standard bred' birds are in fact unable to perpetuate themselves (as to their 'apa standard' or 'albc heritage-definition qualities')
2. It is not surprising that they are pretty rare creatures
3. We should not expect too many people to commit themselves 'long-term' to the task of producing such creations
4. Such birds will never be numerous, still less will they ever be MORE numerous, than what some call hatchery junk birds
5. It may be more proper to call the very few individuals that 'fit the SOP bill' or the 'ALBC definition' "works of art"

 

[al6517]

Mirroring past comments..............It is because of all the work it takes to raise truly great quality birds that the average joe cannot understand, we may keep 10% of the entire years hatch that is even worth a second look. It is not the work of for the shurkers that's for sure, thats why there are Hatcheries to provide the masses with 100% sub-standard stock that their buyers don't care either way what they get. Good breeders should be encouraged it's a dedicated passion few understand.

 

[Stumpfarmer]

Quote:
I think that's what one might call, at best, an uncharitable reading of the evidence.

First of all, show quality and "heritage/standard bred" are by no means equivalent terms: heritage breeds can have all of the qualities which led to them being developed without meeting the SOP for show birds.

Secondly, the implication in your list there is that there's no point in raising anything but hatchery birds, that there is no inherent value in raising birds from well-chosen breeding stock and maintaining a small flock of better birds than the big guys keep. That's pretty nonsensical from the point of view of genetics: sticking to the standards of big hatcheries means, more than anything, a loss of genetic diversity and dependance on big business for our animals. And from the point of view of small farmers and hobbyists, it's pretty meaningless: I raise the animals I raise because I like them as a breed, I am interested in breeding them toward breed standards because I want the breed to continue (and I do that on a level that takes a bigger financial committment than my chickens: I raise Polled Beef Shorthorns).

But more importantly, as someone put it above: genetics is a crapshoot. Breeding two apparently perfect animals can produce less than perfect offspring because they share recessive genes, more likely when the gene pool is too small, and the parent birds/cattle/any species of sexually reproducing organisms are too closely related: hatchery birds are as likely to suffer from that problem as birds from a relatively popular hobby breed.

I expect people to do more or less what they want to do, but I know that if what they want to do is show animals then they have to pay attention to breed standards and buy/breed/cull to reach those standards.

 

[Oldhound]

No breed of purebred animal of any species is flawless. All breeds need to be constantly sorted and culled ( removed from breeding programs). There is something called " the drag of the breed" whereby the animals , birds , etc will eventually revert to 'wild type" unless rigorous culling is practiced. The Dingo , Mustang , and Key West chicken are examples of such reversion. Also Hatchery chickens have to be culled for production as well , difference is the hatchery people don't log on here and discuss their business. Even hatchery chickens have to be culled once you find out which are laying eggs and which aren't if you care about costs.
Unfortunately many of the " Heritage Breeds " have been neglected for a long time and require more work. Some people are up to it and others are not.

 

[jmc]

Quote:
I think that's what one might call, at best, an uncharitable reading of the evidence.



First of all, show quality and "heritage/standard bred" are by no means equivalent terms: heritage breeds can have all of the qualities which led to them being developed without meeting the SOP for show birds. This point needs more investigation, and i would be definitely inclined to agree with you, if what you are saying is true; and i hope it is and suspect it is. I have to 'thread' on this point. This has to do with a 'problem' i have with albc definition of 'heritage' chicken.........

Secondly, the implication in your list there is that there's no point in raising anything but hatchery birds, that there is no inherent value in raising birds from well-chosen breeding stock and maintaining a small flock of better birds than the big guys keep. Calm down, dear friend. That is not what i am saying. Follow the text. I stick by it.That's pretty nonsensical from the point of view of genetics: sticking to the standards of big hatcheries means, more than anything, a loss of genetic diversity and dependance on big business for our animals. And from the point of view of small farmers and hobbyists, it's pretty meaningless: I raise the animals I raise because I like them as a breed, I am interested in breeding them toward breed standards because I want the breed to continue (and I do that on a level that takes a bigger financial committment than my chickens: I raise Polled Beef Shorthorns). Sadly strong adjectives in your response. I am not upset or intending to offend anyone. As i said, I stick to what i have written, and there is good reason.

But more importantly, as someone put it above: genetics is a crapshoot. Breeding two apparently perfect animals can produce less than perfect offspring because they share recessive genes, more likely when the gene pool is too small, and the parent birds/cattle/any species of sexually reproducing organisms are too closely related: hatchery birds are as likely to suffer from that problem as birds from a relatively popular hobby breed.

I expect people to do more or less what they want to do, but I know that if what they want to do is show animals then they have to pay attention to breed standards and buy/breed/cull to reach those standards.

Finally, works of art--rare though they be--definitely have their place; a necessary place in the world, even though the artists may be also be few. We absolutely need 'heritage/sop' birds around, but they will necessarily be in the minority, as will be those who 'create' them. Please do not get too angry with me and read into my text above.

Thanks to you all, blessings, and keep up your perseverance; we need your 'artwork'!

 

[saladin]

Honestly, I thought you rec'd some great responses. I will add my own thoughts as well.

Quote:
Those of us that breed Standard-bred poultry do consider them works of art. This is correct. We also consider them the best interpretation of the breed.

Maybe you don't know your poultry history very well? Nothing wrong with that except when you start making assumptions about poultry or poultry breeders. By and large it was Standard-bred fanciers that created many of the chicken breeds we have today. There were/are only a very few Ancient breeds of poultry. Fanciers took those birds refined them, and used them to create the many breeds we all enjoy today. For example, when a hatchery says they are selling Rhode Island Reds, they are claiming to have a product that past Fanciers created. When present day Fanciers see those birds and proclaim them less, much less, than the Standard-bred birds that the Standard-bred Society created, then that seems only right in my way of thinking.

 

[jmc]

Quote:
right on the nose, Al; i think 'standard breeders' are much to be encouraged; all the more so because there are not many of them among the vast population of chicken keepers and backyard breeders.
BTW, I hope you are still visiting your 'Holy of Holies' for devotional exercises every day.

Peace, dear man

maybe i should name one of my roos, 'Al'

 

[Erin~TheChickenLover]

I can not believe what some of these people have said to tell you the truth. I keep my chickens as pets that I can carry around and pet and ENJOY. I breed to make pretty healthy birds. I would not cull unless one of my birds was unhealthy. Why does it really matter if they meet some standard if they are perfect to you? Come on guys, try to enjoy chickens for how funny they are, how friendly, etc. When you get sooo worried about standards, I truly believe you forget the whole point. Enjoy your birds and keep them healthy.