Old and Rare Breeds

[Alaskan]

I went back and cobbled together two of saladin's posts, so we can all see again what breeds go where.

We might want to add to the list the breeds we are currently working on.

The three i am getting this spring,

Hamburg - Ancient
Dominique - probably Modern
Leghorn - maybe Modern

Ancient Fowl (existing before 1600)

Modern Fowl (1600-1845)

Industrial Fowl (1845-1940)


(I used the date 1845 because that was the date of the first poultry show. This happened, as you are aware, during the Industrial Age).

Examples of the breeds classified would be:


Ancient Fowl breeds:

Asil
Dorkings
Malays
Old English (Large Fowl)
Nankins
Pyncheons


Modern Fowl breeds:

Creves
LaFleche
Houdan
Java
Polish
Red Caps
Shamo
Sussex


Industrial Fowl:

Brahma
Cornish
Orpington
Rhode Island Reds
Cubalaya
Delaware
Holland

I did not classify breeds created after 1940.

 

[Alaskan]

But the rose comb leghorn are definitely industrial, 1883, and I am getting the rose comb ones.

 

[gjensen]

I think that Saladin and the SPPA have an established position now. It is a little different, but the logic behind it is the same. Look it up on the SPPA website.

 

[saladin]

OSU,
You have raised an excellent question. Please forgive me if I sound like I'm preaching to the choir, as I am well aware that your knowledge of fowl far exceeds my own.

Let's look at the facts:
1. We know that the Med. breeds like the Leghorn are degenerate Gamefowl (dunghills) that were then bred and selected along egg laying lines.
2. Probably the oldest of Med. breeds is the White-face Black Spanish.
3. The Leghorn became standardized in Britain in the mid-19th century; though it is difficult to say how much it was actually changed, improved yes, changed debatable.

As far as I'm aware that Columela did not mention a breed matching the Leghorn; that is not to say they weren't there. If he did then that settles the discussion as far as I'm concerned. What is needed with any breed is some sort of historical documentation.

In this case, the Leghorn, I would say it was a Landrace that became standardized in the mid-19th century. Thus, it is a Modern fowl with Ancient roots. On the other hand, I would definitely classify the White Faced Black Spanish as an Ancient breed. Perhaps even the root of the Med. tree.

 

[saladin]

More:
OSU,

My thoughts in putting forward these categories was as follows:

1. The word 'heritage' as been used to the point of meaninglessness.
2. The criteria of the ALBC for 'heritage' is utterly ridiculous. By stating that a bird had to be in the APA Standard before the mid-20th century leaves out some of the oldest known breeds in the world such as the Asil which has been documented in the United States since at least the 1830s.
3. Poultry folks should learn to follow basic historic periods instead of one generic catch word that explains nothing.
4. The categories should be broad and simple.
5. Documentation is a necessity for accurately placing a fowl in a category.
6. Fowl can be moved from one category to another as better information comes forward.
7. Discussion among knowledgeable individuals for the placement of fowl is the ideal route to a better understanding of our birds. This takes away any type of dictatorial approach as is apparent in the ALBC plan (which was invented by one man: Frank Reese).

 

[ChickenCanoe]

I agree. Not only do they want them to have been in the APA by then, they also don't care about breeds that arrived after 1900. That leaves out a lot of great, yet rare breeds that need a lot of attention.

 

[saladin]

I agree. Not only do they want them to have been in the APA by then, they also don't care about breeds that arrived after 1900. That leaves out a lot of great, yet rare breeds that need a lot of attention.

What this ultimately does is it makes the APA the arbitrator of so-called 'heritage' breeds. I am a long time member of the APA and other than Walt and a couple of other folks on this forum one of her main supporters. That does not mean I think the APA has or should have such authority granted to her.

The APA has and did have a definite plan for admitting breeds for recognition. NEVER IN THE PAST WAS THERE ANY CONCERN ABOUT THE AGE OR ORIGIN OF A PARTICULAR BREED WHEN IT CAME TO ADMITTANCE. Though a history was/is provided in The Standard, a history is not the criteria of admittance.

 

[hcammack]

I don't have any documentation but I assume the Faverolles would be a modern breed? I like the categories set up this way. Very helpful and more meaningful then just heritage.

 

[Alaskan]

I don't have any documentation but I assume the Faverolles would be a modern breed? I like the categories set up this way. Very helpful and more meaningful then just heritage. 

A super quick look-up said they were developed in 1860, so that would make them an industrial breed.


Ancient Fowl (existing before 1600)

Asil
Dorkings
Malays
Old English (Large Fowl)
Nankins
Pyncheons
Hamburg
White Faced Black Spanish

Modern Fowl (1600-1845)

Creves
LaFleche
Houdan
Java
Polish
Red Caps
Shamo
Sussex
Dominique
Leghorn, single comb

Industrial Fowl (1845-1940)

Brahma
Cornish
Orpington
Rhode Island Reds
Cubalaya
Delaware
Holland
Faverolles
Leghorn, rose comb

 

[fowlman01]

The APA has no policy on "heritage, heirloom or rare" designations. These terms are used by other organizations not the APA.

Walt