Old and Rare Breeds

[centrarchid]

Saladin,

Please note, animals raised as dunghill were game and used as such. Dunghill referred only to rearing system of their immediate source.

 

[saladin]

Quote:
Yeah centra, I saw that in your post. It was not that way around my part of the South. Here, dunghill refered to the lack of gameness more than the breeding system involved. Same word but different definitions.

 

[Chris09]

Quote:
It could also be that a breeder by the Dominique (a French boy name) who may have bred a barred chicken and the name stuck to all barred breeds at the time.

It would be hard to say just why the title Dominique was given to barred type fowl but it has/was and I believe that is the reason for American in front of the U.S. Dominique breed.
It is also stated in the SoP that a Dominique fowl was used in the breeding of the Plymouth Rock but it notes that it wasn't the American Dominique but a, "Single Combed hawk-colored fowl commonly found in that locality".
The use of the title Dominique was in or for a breed name has been used before the time of the American Dominique.

Chris

I don't know a thing about Dominickers; nor do I plan to ever keep any. I do know about Games and the people who keep them.

Back in the day, anything that wasn't game was a dunghill to a Game-breeder. It makes absolutely no sense to me that Game-breeders would have ever adopted a dunghill breed name as one of the color names. Old time Game-breeders all possessed one common trait in relation to any breed of chicken that wasn't game: Arrogance. They truly looked down their noses at all 'barn-door' breeds of fowl: hence the term 'dunghill.'

The oldest American Gamefowl books/articles that I own are more than 120 years old and they all refer to Dom colored Games. I will check with others that might have older material to see how early we can trace the name among cockers.

I agree with what you are saying 100%.
I know that the color "Dominique" (Dom) has been around for a long time and was on many type fowl over the years.

Chris

 

[Chris09]

Quote:
Yeah centra, I saw that in your post. It was not that way around my part of the South. Here, dunghill refered to the lack of gameness more than the breeding system involved. Same word but different definitions.

Around here a Dunghill referred to a bird with no gameness also.

Chris

 

[buffalogal]

Quote:
When I read someone referring to a dunghill fowl, at least in older publications, it's the 19th century version of a literary sneer at any bird that had not been bred by and improved upon by "modern" methods, any "game" qualities of the breed were not under consideration by the author. In view of how few people even use a word like dung anymore, much less have an actual dunghill about I have to admit it comes across as a bit pretentious.

 

[DaveK]

Quote:
centra,
I hear what you are saying. However, my experience is that if too few birds are hatched the result will be that the birds become smaller with each passing generation until they reach a plateau hence degenerate. (Bantams will become larger). There is always a move toward mediocrity.

I consistently have people come back year after year after year purchasing birds. All I can say is that most of the folks I've met in this world can ruin the best line in 3 years (3 generations). Breeding never seemed hard to me, but it is undoubtedly difficult for many people.

There are folks that I constantly funnel breed stock to in my favorite breed. This doesn't mean every year but it does mean regularly over the long haul. It's not that these folks are poor breeders. If they were they wouldn't get the best that I have available for them. It's just that circumstances prevent the keeping and raising of very many birds so somehow there are puzzle pieces or just a bit of different ancestry needed. I am awfully glad of their interest in this particular family but also thankful that I can keep enough to not be in the "I need something different" boat. And I completely agree with Saladin's last statement. I see what some do with a good start in a breed and wonder how hard did they work to ruin that? It does often come down to not raising enough to be selective enough about what to keep. Some of the pheasants in captivity have degenerated not always because of inbreeding to the extreme but because folks raised too few and had to settle for whatever they got. That's the beginning of a downhill run most often.

 

[centrarchid]

Quote:
When I read someone referring to a dunghill fowl, at least in older publications, it's the 19th century version of a literary sneer at any bird that had not been bred by and improved upon by "modern" methods, any "game" qualities of the breed were not under consideration by the author. In view of how few people even use a word like dung anymore, much less have an actual dunghill about I have to admit it comes across as a bit pretentious.

Snobbery, cowardice, name calling. Raises my hackles. I want a face to face with those old farts. Even my ancestors that behaved as such. The the birds ability to survive as dunghill avengers is part of what enabled their persitance as a breed. Food was more than what was dug from a turd pile and threats where more than presented by another bird, especially if you were female or a juvenile. In reality, I bet no more than a 1/4 cockers holdings were confined, most females and juveniles were out and about.

 

[saladin]

Quote:
When I read someone referring to a dunghill fowl, at least in older publications, it's the 19th century version of a literary sneer at any bird that had not been bred by and improved upon by "modern" methods, any "game" qualities of the breed were not under consideration by the author. In view of how few people even use a word like dung anymore, much less have an actual dunghill about I have to admit it comes across as a bit pretentious.

Snobbery, cowardice, name calling. Raises my hackles. I want a face to face with those old farts. Even my ancestors that behaved as such. The the birds ability to survive as dunghill avengers is part of what enabled their persitance as a breed. Food was more than what was dug from a turd pile and threats where more than presented by another bird, especially if you were female or a juvenile. In reality, I bet no more than a 1/4 cockers holdings were confined, most females and juveniles were out and about.

Like I said, "Arrogance." That's because it wasn't about survival it was about gameness. And in the trade-off we all lost some real vigour in our birds. You are on the money centra.

 

[centrarchid]

Quote:
Snobbery, cowardice, name calling. Raises my hackles. I want a face to face with those old farts. Even my ancestors that behaved as such. The the birds ability to survive as dunghill avengers is part of what enabled their persitance as a breed. Food was more than what was dug from a turd pile and threats where more than presented by another bird, especially if you were female or a juvenile. In reality, I bet no more than a 1/4 cockers holdings were confined, most females and juveniles were out and about.

Like I said, "Arrogance." That's because it wasn't about survival it was about gameness. And in the trade-off we all lost some real vigour in our birds. You are on the money centra.

You have to survive long enough to prove your gameness. Rearing good numbers in the past for such test was too expensive using the almost battery like control used for rearing games that seems to prevail today. Ultimately, all the more intensive rearing sytems will do is compromise survival quality outside the intensive rearing systems. Gameness will still be preserved. The survival quality outside the test for gameness is all that is left to me in respect to my line. My circle that goes nowhere other than a sad path.

 

[buffalogal]

Quote:
Now why would you think that, since long before 1850 Washington and Jefferson both kept a variety of chickens, and they were not all games. If those guys did it, it's a safe bet other farmers did too.

(I can't believe I miss typed "long" twice.)