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

[saladin]

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.

We do enjoy our birds. Why would you think we don't? Many of us have been raising and caring for these birds for decades. Why do we continue to do this when it cost so much if it were not for the love of our birds?​

 

[jmc]

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.

Great response, level headed and informative.

re. my no. 1 point above, which you say is incorrect. maybe it is a result of our all too fuzzy human language.

But since genetics tend to 'mediocrity' i do not see how it can be incorrect to say that two birds fitting the APA standard (and if that is what is used at shows for judging--and it may not be what is used at shows for judging-- then that also means show quality, no?) are able to produce, reliably, generation after generation, offspring that are equally 'SOP' birds.

When i made my OP, i knew the answer already. It has been stated by all the responses, so far.

No birds are going to successfully reproduce their excellence and improve upon it, generation after generation. They will go downhill, unless their is the intervention of the 'artist'. That is what I mean when I am saying that 'heritage/SOP' birds cannot perpetuate themselves, as to their 'APA standard' or 'ALBC heritage-definition' qualities. In this understanding, my first point is true. If it were not, NYREDS wouldn't have to spend so much on feed each year!

In a sense, the albc heritage/apa sop works of art are truly in a sense, not 'sustainable' as the artworks that they are. In a sense, so please don't read into what i am saying. i don't intend to offend. NOTE: I said, 'In a sense', not 'absolutely so'. That is what makes art--authentic classic art. not modern abomination--so precious, and ...................so RARE.

Without the skilled craftsmans hands and mind; his intervention, we can say, the art will never be 'reproduced'.

and i think we who are not APA SOP or albc definition breeders, can look with true gratitude on the artists and their work.

 

[saladin]

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.

Great response, level headed and informative.

re. my no. 1 point above, which you say is incorrect. maybe it is a result of our all too fuzzy human language.

But since genetics tend to 'mediocrity' i do not see how it can be incorrect to say that two birds fitting the APA standard (and if that is what is used at shows for judging--and it may not be what is used at shows for judging-- then that also means show quality, no?) are able to produce, reliably, generation after generation, offspring that are equally 'SOP' birds.

When i made my OP, i knew the answer already. It has been stated by all the responses, so far.

No birds are going to successfully reproduce their excellence and improve upon it, generation after generation. They will go downhill, unless their is the intervention of the 'artist'. That is what I mean when I am saying that 'heritage/SOP' birds cannot perpetuate themselves, as to their 'APA standard' or 'ALBC heritage-definition' qualities. In this understanding, my first point is true. If it were not, NYREDS wouldn't have to spend so much on feed each year!

In a sense, the albc heritage/apa sop works of art are truly in a sense, not 'sustainable' as the artworks that they are. In a sense, so please don't read into what i am saying. i don't intend to offend. NOTE: I said, 'In a sense', not 'absolutely so'. That is what makes art--authentic classic art. not modern abomination--so precious, and ...................so RARE.

Without the skilled craftsmans hands and mind; his intervention, we can say, the art will never be 'reproduced'.

and i think we who are not APA SOP or albc definition breeders, can look with true gratitude on the artists and their work.

Must be that language stuff; I do understand what you are saying now. Yes, I think you are absolutely correct in your assumption in that case.

 

[jmc]

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.

erin, i agree with you; and i like your response.

though i certainly understand and appreciate immensely the devotion and work of those who do follow standards and try to keep the old works of art cleaned off and lovely! And i think you do also, in your heart of hearts​

 

[al6517]

JMC : Yes I still frequent the "HOLY OF HOLIES" LOL............ where else do I have to hang out.

Without rules IE APA SOP there will be Anarky, what many fail to realize is without these dedicated breeders we wouldn't have the many breeds we have today. Without breeders we would just have chickens and that's it. I don't see the problem with trying to excel at something.

AL

 

[jmc]

Quote:
al, again. i agree with you absolutely. i hope you have seen my wholehearted tributes above dedicated breeders to the APA SOP, because they are my honest thoughts.


Now, Saladin, I am not a chicken breeding historian. the last few years i have done KC ducks, Ancona ducks, and Muscovy. I have indeed done some intense--even if not really lengthy--study of the history of duck breeds and loved it. My books were by Holderread, Chris and Mike Ashtons two main books, and Crawfords huge book, the sections on ducks and 'scovies.

I am aware of the historical note re. chicken breeding you mentioned above, and i MOST CERTAINLY understand why faithful adherents to the SOP and the albc def. of 'heritage' don't usually like what they see. (I have been at great great pains to make this clear in recent posts to those who will read carefully).

And just for the sake of clarity, I do not intend to say that point no. 3 of mine above is 'because of' the previous two. No syllogism there!

Thanks Sal, for sticking in here. I know you have much experience to share.


AL hangin' out at the chicken coop. You must be gettin' old!

 

[jmc]

Just a final clarification, if i may make one.

It was mentioned above that i was 'making assumptions about poultry and poultry breeders'.

I am not sure of what is meant by the term 'assumption' as used above. But it often is a none-too-flattering term. ("The assertion that something 'is' or 'is not' based on insufficient, little, or complete lack of, evidence")

Now, it may NOT be the case that Sal was using 'assumption' in this sense, but the context indicates that it is so used.

It is ironic that, IF it is asserted that I am making such 'assumptions', that itself is an assumption, and one which is not true. It is true for sure that there is an element of conjecture in my point about the future--obviously. For the sake of those who read my words i mention this: I do not make such assumptions.

My conclusions above, esp. no. 1, are not 'assumptions', but are based upon:

1. careful reading about breeding flock management,
2. personal conversations with a breeder of champion G. Campines,
3. personal conversations with and visiting the farm of a breeder of SQ Cu. Marans and award winning SQ Araucanas,
4. further data collection from the words of people on BYC
5. the helpful responses of earlier 'posters' on this thread--all of whom corroborate what i said in point no. 1 above
6. common sense knowledge about the reproduction of living things

My conclusions are definitely not 'assumptions' in the sense i defined it above, and as we often understand and use the term. There is nothing in the text, moreover, to indicate any derogatory or negative 'assumption' was made about poultry breeders.

I am willing to grant that other contributors possess knowledge and to rejoice in that, and it seems reasonable to expect the same from others.

I am not at all angry, btw. We just must be careful about what we say--hidden as we are behind our monitors.

You guys are great and much appreciated.

Now to start another thread!

Enjoy your weekend, and thanks to the dear Mods.

 

[Stumpfarmer]

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.

Your "point" is fine for you, it's when you try to make it everyone's point that you stray. People working on perfecting their flock to SOP enjoy what they're doing as much as you enjoy what you're doing: isn't it wonderful that people can do things according to their own taste?​

 

[Stumpfarmer]

Quote:
I'm pretty sure that Saladin was using the word "assumption" as it is used in most thoughtful writing, to refer to unexamined principles underlying a line of argumentation. Everyone makes assumptions, there is no way to communicate without them, but it's important to examine our own from time to time to make sure that they, and the conclusions behind them, are not contradicted by observable evidence.

I have two primary assumptions about breeding any domestic animal: the first is that genetic diversity is a good thing, in and of itself. The second is that there is value in keeping animals for the love of them, and keeping particular breeds for the love of the breed is one special case of that. It works out in different ways for different people: I am as interested in raising Silver Spangled Hamburgs for their efficiency in converting feed to eggs as I am for their SOP, and would very much prefer to develop a flock which is both beautiful and dynamite egg-layers. I would not presume to impose my values on people who are breeding show-quality animals for that end alone. I think it is equally valuable, in the long run, that some people are breeding for pet value. The Ultimate Chicken (or rose, dog, iris, cow, rhododendron, horse) is one which combines all possible positive values, of course, but I think I've seen one of those (out of all categories) in my long life (an Angus cow named Luisa, and I am not pro-Angus as a general thing).

And I have one important objection to leaving the breeding of any domesticated species in the hands of the big guys: they're not very good at considering the long-term biological consequences of their choices. I could go on for much too long giving examples of this, but the current extreme state of Holstein Friesian cattle, Cornish X chickens, BBW Turkeys, and Red Delicious apples (or modern Navel oranges) can be pointed out as places to start looking.

 

[cgmccary]

I have also seen great offspring come from less than ideal-looking parent stock -- but the parent stock was from a good breeder. I have also seen less than ideal offspring come from some great looking parent stock. This is not a perfect science.

Erin~ 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.

Your point of view is fine for your purpose. It all depends on your purpose for keeping chickens. These are multiple. If you keep simply for pets and to enjoy that aspect, then I agree with you, they are all great (there are no bad chickens). However, if your purpose is to improve a breed or to be a keeper of one of these heritage breeds (i.e. a preservationist), or to show a breed (all these reasons are enjoyable too), then you must breed to standard of perfection and take care of business.

A lot of the problems or disagreements that erupt on this forum is due to the fact that people are keeping chickens for many different reasons. I keep mine for many reasons. I enjoy my chickens and some of mine are even pets or others are just to look at (eye candy), still others are old friends, others I keep to be broodies, some for eggs, the spare cockerels go in the freezer (and I enjoy the meat & I like sparing the commercial industry of sales). I also like to show on occasion and thus, I breed my Buckeyes to Standard -- these are my breeder stock. There's not a single purpose here. And we all want healthy birds.

If your purpose was to show or preserve, then you'd better be worried about standards & SOP. Surely, you can repect this point of view. Also, another point I'd like to make is that, for me, the real enjoyment is the trial and error of the breeding. I didn't start with perfect birds, and I get a little aggravated when someone wants the perfect bird from me or they tell me, "I don't want your culls." -- I have heard this a number of times. What do you think I started with? Yes, I started with someone's culls. However, that cull had something I wanted to add to my birds. I got some great culls (One is the best Buckeye I have ever seen -- I still have that male! He produced a Best of Breed at the 2009 Ohio National in the second generation I line-bred him). You see, that cull had something I needed & wanted to add to my birds. He had been bred to SOP too. So, know that it is a pet peeve when you tell me, "I don't want your culls." I will say to you, then you don't have any focus or idea what you are doing. I also ask the person, "Why do you want Buckeyes?" If someone wants a two or three Buckeye pullets and no males & thus, they don't want to breed, why get superb specimens? Leave those superb specimens to those of us trying to improve the breed.

Another aspect: If I am working to improve, say, breast shape but you need better saddle feathers, then for you, there is nothing wrong with my cull. My cull is still going to be better than what you have now, for I am looking for some trait you aren't even focused on. All mine have great saddle feathers but I keep this one or that one for reasons that are my own insight/ reasons. What I see is that a lot of people want instant SQ birds without having to do any work. What is the enjoyment in that?

I also keep chickens for eggs, to eat the eggs, to give to friends & neighbors. See what I mean? I agree with what Stumpfarmer says in the previous post.

There is no right and wrong here (that goes for either end of the extremes).
Chris​