Orp APA standard - dq question

[hinkjc]

I want to make sure I am understanding this correctly..

Disqualifications (DQ’s)

Yellow beak, shanks, feet or skin. (See General DQ’s and Cutting for Defects.) Note: As the DQ’s and Defect Cuts lists are extensive, serious breeders will need to refer to the A.P.A. Standard of Perfection (SOP). However, a specific defect cut for Orpingtons is 1 to 2 points for “Fluff within two inches or less of ground.”

I have always thought the bold section refers to how much shank should be showing on the bird? Meaning, if the fluff is below 2 inches, the bird would suffer loss of points, but is it still showable?

A lot of emphasis is put on the big pantaloons, which I think are quite attractive, however I want to ensure I am breeding correctly according to standard. Thanks in advance for your input.​

 

[Smoky73]

I would assume it means excess in the fluff or pantaloons as you call them. But, when I first read it I took it as an indication the bird was too short legged. Either issue would either make the bird short legged or appear short legged. I do not think there is anything in the standards for birds that talks about the leg length of bird. I know my standard from Holland for Dutch bantams indicate the leg length should not be longer than 4 inches (4 or 5, I do not recall)

And yes, as worded, it would mean a loss of points but not a DQ. You could still show them as everyones interpretation to the standard is different.

 

[Chris09]

The only DQ's I see for the Orp's in the ASOP are Yellow beak, shanks, feet or skin and General DQ's. If you go to General DQ's All breeds and varrieties:
1. Specimen lacking in breed characteristics.
2. Definite indacations of contagious or communicable diseases.
3. Evidence of faking.
Your right that there is a 1 to 2 point deduction for “Fluff within two inches or less of ground.”
But under General Scale Of Points there is 8 points for Body and Fluff so if a large amount of fluff would make the bird look off in body then I would think that they could take more point off the bird..
The only way I can see a Orp. getting DQ'ed for fluff is if there was so much fluff that it was lacking in breed characteristics but that would be a lot of fluff..

Chris

 

[BamaChicken]

The UK and American standards are definitely different. I am trying to breed to UK standard just because I like it better. I like a little more height in the tail

 

[Krys109uk]

I am trying to breed to UK standard just because I like it better.

I think a lot of people do. Lots of people like the bulkier appearance. US Orps are not supposed to look like the round deep European Orps.
UK birds have shorter legs; US birds one is supposed to be able to 'see underneath'
US tail angle (25° male, 15° female) also leads to a longer looking bird. UK tail angle (45° both sexes) tend to give the bird a rounder & generally cobbier appearance.​

 

[Goose and Fig]

I read somewhere that Buffs are supposed to be more tightly feathered- or "less fluff" than BBS Orps. They were bred that way. Are there different APA standards for these two?

 

[hinkjc]

I think both types are quite beautiful too. I was just asking for clarification that I was understanding this correctly, as it seems if folks want to show they will do better with birds bred to standard

eta - happymtn - no all orpington varieties have the same body conformation requirements.