We processed several young agressive roos and the meat is red. Not beef red but red. Is that normal? I thought chicken meat was more on the pinkish side. The roos were a BO and EE cross and 5 mos. old. We had done some earlier this year and don't remember those being as red. Any ideas out there? Thanks in advance for your opinions.
that's weird, could it have been blood? I am assuming you bled them out right? Maybe some soaked in??? what are you feeding them also what lighting were you looking at them in? I noticed my mixed brahma seems to have red skin (she has a bald patch by her rump, but since I have not processed her I have no idea if all of her is that way. I just figured it was her color. Hope you get some answers.
Working muscles are redder than non. Hence white meat and 'dark meat'. Chickens that actually are able to run around have more 'muscled' meat.
MP, they do free range a lot and yes, they ran around a lot chasing and ganging up on my hens. That is why they went to the butcher block. They were fed flock raiser along with all my garden goodies. Happychick, Yes, they were bled out. It isn't blood. The meat itself is very red. I just breasted them out and will use the rest for stock. I figured with as much running they did, the legs would be tough. BTW,, Thanks MP. I learn something new everyday. Did not know the meat color had to do with movement.
I've had the same thing. All my chickens are free-range but some will have redder legs then others. I just assume they are more active. I just gave my mom a 1 year old rooster that I butchered. A week later she asks me if there was something wrong with it because his legs were so red. I said that's because he has been running on his legs for a year! Not like commercial chickens who have just been standing in one spot for most of their short lives.
I once read about a turkey that had spent a month or so eating black berries and when butchered had a purple tint to its meat. Not sure if it was true or not but had your roos been eating berries of some kind?
