My White Leghorn - What to improve?

[The Moonshiner]

To be honest its confusing trying to follow you and this thread.
It started about wanting to show and opinions on a rooster. I think from there it has went back and forth from breeding to show to not breeding to show to breeding for mainly production to breeding just to learn.
From not trying to breed up a bad bird to look what ive bred up from same bird. From breeding up to finding better bird to bring in. At times its seems you want better birds and to show to other times when you didnt care about showing but playing around with what you have. Now its got into maybe crossing colors to bring in better type.
Be easier to give opinions if it was easier to figure out what you goal was.

 

[mrjoltcola]

That's because the thread has evolved. When I initially posted it, I lacked experience breeding for anything but egg production, and also didn't have an eye for the various faults. In the course of this thread and hatching a generation, and buying the APA standards book, I've learned a lot, and started seeing things when I look at a bird that I didn't see last year; one of those things is that perhaps tail length may take longer to improve. Then there is debate in the thread about breeding for standard vs breeding for production. You came into the thread after all that. I appreciate your feedback and experience. If it's hard to follow, all I can say is, its just chicken talk, after all. We shouldn't take it too seriously.

 

[3riverschick]

...

Breeding was simple back then. So much has been learned since then, but most people on this forum ignore it.[/quot
±_+++++
Yes there's a lot of ignorance when it comes to the deeper aspects of poultry breeding . it makes me a little crazy sometimes when I read this forum . but there are also the experts and the elites , the veterans . if you take time to find them there's such a lot of wisdom. I appreciate them so much. things were simpler back then but the foundation of the breeds often were being laid to the major Hallmarks .I find the classic lit a well of precious information in that respect . I especially like judge broomheads nine-page thesis on the Light Sussex in a brochure he wrote for the British poultry Club back in the 1920s. it's classic and I read it again often. you can find it over on Hathitrust Digital Library.

 

[3riverschick]

As far as True North Heritage's​ Hatchery, they do not seem much different than any other hatchery, other than they are small. The pictures on their website did not seen any better than any other hatchery. If you read closely, the Light Sussex that do well in shows were need by someone else with birds obtained from True North. They do not say if other birds were crossed in or not.
_------------
I am writing this from my cell phone so please excuse me if I'm not able to bold this type. Emily is a retired biologist and excellent with statistics. she's very scientific and has done a really good job a bringing the utility traits forward in her light Sussex. she does not show but she sells birds from her breeding which win at the shows. I understand that. I did the same thing with my Collie dogs when we had our kennel. Emily is also very sharing with her knowledge ,her statistics , and her methods .I've spent time talking to her and I'm very impressed . I intend to apply more of her methods to my next flock of chantecler.

-----------
I was unaware that Light Sussex had a wide gene pool and lots of veteran breeders.

Light Sussex was created from three different breeds so it has a wider gene pool then perhaps some of the other varieties . as far as veteran breeders ,well I guess I should qualify that . there are people who have raised quality light Sussex still around to talk to but they do not have the breed anymore. However, the other dual purpose Breeders are very helpful in learning how to establish Hallmarks common to all dual-purpose Heritage breed chickens . for instance the depth ,the width, the structural dimensions , the silhouette profile, the head points ,the back ,part of the tail. there are so many things that are the same among these breeds . I can learn from somebody who breeds Rhode Island Reds and then take that which is applicable and apply it to either the Sussex or the chantecler . it's just a matter picking and choosing the right wisdom from the right source.

----------
Do the veteran breeders still show? I am not sure I have seen any shown at shows I have attended.

No they do not show, More's the pity .those that did no longer have the lights . there were not any that I know of at the last APA National . it's a sad State of Affairs because the Light Sussex is a beautiful bird and deserves better.

----------
The Light Sussex I have seen were in need of lots of help. Granted, that can be said for many breeds and varieties.

Yes you are correct .
couple years ago I talked to Walt Leonard about the ones that showed up at the Columbus National and he told me they needed more depth . right now I'm working on research to find more about how to add depth to the Birds . it's tough to find people want to talk about it . They talked about egg-laying dimensions but to actually explain how to add depth to a bird I am having a really hard time finding that information . they talked about the length of Keel and capacity and capability and things like that but it is hard for me to understand how to translate that into actual breeding selection . trying to find that information is very difficult for me and I spend many hours looking for it
.
I understand the interplay between dimensions and production virtued but how to actually get the bones to grow to their proper dimensions and strengths and lengths I don't quite understand that yet . is it science is it art, is it both ...is it just complementery breeding or are there actually laws that apply . judge cards book on " breeding laws ", talks about breeding laws when it comes to color but what breeding laws are there when it comes to structure? I read about correlations but correlations aren't the same as breeding laws. or I might looking too deeply ? maybe it is just complementery breeding? if you have any good lit to suggest on this subject I would be more than grateful if you would share it . I'm just having a very hard time finding it. thank you

 

[3riverschick]

Frankly, I think all the breeds should have an illustrated standard. it sure would be nice for the Sussex and the chantecler . I remember when The Illustrated Standard for Collies came out . it made the Standard come alive .if we would take each sentence of our poultry standard and illustrate it and show how it becomes part of the whole and why that is important ...I think it would make things a lot easier for poultry breeders ,especially us newcomers. Poultry are much more difficult to breed than dogs . most of the breeding advice, except for the general laws and how to combine virtue in a pedigree doesn't translate from dogs to poultry.

 

[gojira]

Yes there's a lot of ignorance when it comes to the deeper aspects of poultry breeding . it makes me a little crazy sometimes when I read this forum . but there are also the experts and the elites , the veterans . if you take time to find them there's such a lot of wisdom. I appreciate them so much. things were simpler back then but the foundation of the breeds often were being laid to the major Hallmarks .I find the classic lit a well of precious information in that respect . I especially like judge broomheads nine-page thesis on the Light Sussex in a brochure he wrote for the British poultry Club back in the 1920s. it's classic and I read it again often. you can find it over on Hathitrust Digital Library.

Most of the experts, elites, and veterans I knew and learned from have passed on, and I doubt they would have posted on a forum such as this one. Things were simpler back the because they only understood a small amount of what was going on. What you seem to be considering hallmarks were typically just things used for marketing or due to personal preference. Many of of the things did not have the claimed effect. They are mostly just aesthetic.

 

[gojira]

Yes you are correct .
couple years ago I talked to Walt Leonard about the ones that showed up at the Columbus National and he told me they needed more depth . right now I'm working on research to find more about how to add depth to the Birds . it's tough to find people want to talk about it . They talked about egg-laying dimensions but to actually explain how to add depth to a bird I am having a really hard time finding that information . they talked about the length of Keel and capacity and capability and things like that but it is hard for me to understand how to translate that into actual breeding selection . trying to find that information is very difficult for me and I spend many hours looking for it
.
I understand the interplay between dimensions and production virtued but how to actually get the bones to grow to their proper dimensions and strengths and lengths I don't quite understand that yet . is it science is it art, is it both ...is it just complementery breeding or are there actually laws that apply . judge cards book on " breeding laws ", talks about breeding laws when it comes to color but what breeding laws are there when it comes to structure? I read about correlations but correlations aren't the same as breeding laws. or I might looking too deeply ? maybe it is just complementery breeding? if you have any good lit to suggest on this subject I would be more than grateful if you would share it . I'm just having a very hard time finding it. thank you

So True North has sold birds that have done well in shows? Or they sold birds to people who have done well in shows several generations later? I got the impression it was the latter from reading the website. Also, the birds shown in the website do not look like they would place well in a show. What is the egg production in the Light Sussex? How long does it take to get what weight of a carcass? What is their feed conversion for eggs and meat?

Just because a breed was created from three breeds does not mean it has a wide gene pool. That was very long ago. There has been a bottleneck since that time, and I would guess the gene pool is not so large. The silhouette profile, back, tail, etc. do not have much to do with production.

Adding depth is simple genetic selection. I thought you said True North was doing a great job at this, and she was very willing to discuss her methods? Now you say the birds lack depth and no one wants to talk about how to correct it. Egg laying dimensions are antiquated. That is why i already suggested you read more current literature. I have Cochinswith great capacity, but they may lay well under 100 eggs a year. A commercial Leghorn has much less capacity, and lays more than 300 eggs per year.

I think you rely too much on the older literature that was written before people really looked at what really goes on. Just because Judge Card titled his book Breeding Laws does not mean they were truly laws. Much has been learned since then. I remember you refused to give me references to the sources you were using when I was trying to see what perspective you were coming from. But, I will be nice since you asked. P. B. Siegel did a lot of work with White Plymouth Rocks beginning in the early 60s, if not late 50s. Dunnington was a co-author on some of that. Granted, this was for production, not to the standard.

 

[gojira]

Frankly, I think all the breeds should have an illustrated standard. it sure would be nice for the Sussex and the chantecler . I remember when The Illustrated Standard for Collies came out . it made the Standard come alive .if we would take each sentence of our poultry standard and illustrate it and show how it becomes part of the whole and why that is important ...I think it would make things a lot easier for poultry breeders ,especially us newcomers. Poultry are much more difficult to breed than dogs . most of the breeding advice, except for the general laws and how to combine virtue in a pedigree doesn't translate from dogs to poultry.

Some aspects of the standard are not important from a production standpoint. The are important from an exhibition standpoint. Maybe you have such a tough time because you do think certain aspects are important, when it was just personal opinion, marketing, or simply how things happened to come out. Keep in mind the standards for at least some breeds have changed over the years. If those characteristics were important, why would they change them?

 

[3riverschick]

Most of the experts, elites, and veterans I knew and learned from have passed on, and I doubt they would have posted on a forum such as this one. Things were simpler back the because they only understood a small amount of what was going on. What you seem to be considering hallmarks were typically just things used for marketing or due to personal preference. Many of of the things did not have the claimed effect. They are mostly just aesthetic.

_--------+-+
You're right most do not post here .Walt Leonard does on occasion . usually I can find they have posted once and then I can private message them and ask for their help and education . it takes ferreting them out a lot of times . could you list those hallmarks you consider aesthetic? it would really help me. I could eliminate them from my list of must haves. because they're aesthetic and I can make a short list of the things that are really important that it will keep me from getting confused. I sure appreciate it.
You're right about them understanding not as much of what is going on .I have a hard time separating the art from the science. Davis wrote a wonderful little book back in the 1890s called "the art breeding ". Online for free at Google Books. I keep going back to it .
sometimes Art and Science dwell so closely you have to have one to have the other . other times it's just art , and other times it's just science
I tell you , it can get really confusing sometimes . that's where the veterans help me and help me understand which is which and how much of each I need .
without an eye for chicken you might as well just be a copycat breeder . because if you can't visualize what you want then I think you're just out of luck. I was able to​ visualize with my dogs and it worked out well .

with the chickens it's harder for me because of these crazy sex linked genes. I'm working on it, it just takes time.
thank you and thank you for sharing!!

 

[3riverschick]

I admit to being a rabid breed historian .
I love researching and reading about whatever I'm breeding . I don't see how one can understand the nuances of a breed without doing that . without understanding the nuances, how can one breed a great animal?
I know you can have all the parts correct but the animal is still common.
it needs the nuances of the breed to be great .
what is great ? I thought a lot about it .
I went back to a great architect who I think had the answer. Frank Lloyd Wright said Form does not follow Function. Form and Function should be a sacred Union .
I thought about that . I see the measure of greatness as the measure of perfection of the Union between Form and Function ...plus the X Factor .
the X Factor is the nuances of the breed . that ethereal thing that makes you know that even though the bird "looks" like a Sussex it "is "a Sussex. it has the essence of Sussex or Leghorn or a Rhode Island Red or turkey. Anyway, I just wanted to share that and thank you again for sharing! I appreciate it.

My definition of Hallmark is literal . for me it means something listed in the APA standard. the major Hallmarks are the important things .The Minor Hallmarks are the Lesser cuts. if you want to expand on that I sure appreciate it . because sometimes it's hard being that literal when you're working with a living thing . thank you