Pipd's Peeps!

[2ndTink]

I didn't know it was a thing in any other breed other than the first three you mentioned! It's also very interesting to note that silkied ducks exist; wonder if the same thing applies when it comes to how many genes in the code need to be mutated for it to show up. I do like some fuzzies, mostly looking at them in other people's flocks. I find them a little bit high maintenance for my liking, and setup. I cannot deny their beauty, however

I didn't know about the silkied ducks until @LTAY1946 brought them up the other week, and they lay blue eggs!

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

It's also very interesting to note that silkied ducks exist; wonder if the same thing applies when it comes to how many genes in the code need to be mutated for it to show up.

Not sure! I know that some sequencing has been done in other genes, like blue, that determined it was the same mutation in chickens as in ducks and I believe turkeys as well, but, silky ducks being so rare, I doubt their silkied gene has been looked into in that capacity. It is a recessive gene like in chickens and does the same thing, causes the microscopic hooks that hold feathers together not to develop, so it's likely to be at least a similar mutation.

I do like some fuzzies, mostly looking at them in other people's flocks. I find them a little bit high maintenance for my liking, and setup. I cannot deny their beauty, however

I personally haven't found any of my birds to be higher maintenance just because of their silkied feathering, with the only exception being that their feathering does not shed water so they end up getting soaked a lot easier than the smooth-feathered individuals. Cochin bantams in general are undeniably a bit high maintenance as compared to standard utility breeds, however, if only because they demand it.

I didn't know about the silkied ducks until @LTAY1946 brought them up the other week, and they lay blue eggs!

Ooh, I wasn't aware that they laid blue eggs! I really did not enjoy keeping ducks, I just have the one left and once she's gone I don't really want any more. But silky ducks are the one kind that could tempt me back into them. I have heard that they're rather difficult to hatch and have special needs when it comes to how swimming water is provided to them, though.

 

[fluffycrow]

Not sure! I know that some sequencing has been done in other genes, like blue, that determined it was the same mutation in chickens as in ducks and I believe turkeys as well, but, silky ducks being so rare, I doubt their silkied gene has been looked into in that capacity. It is a recessive gene like in chickens and does the same thing, causes the microscopic hooks that hold feathers together not to develop, so it's likely to be at least a similar mutation.




I personally haven't found any of my birds to be higher maintenance just because of their silkied feathering, with the only exception being that their feathering does not shed water so they end up getting soaked a lot easier than the smooth-feathered individuals. Cochin bantams in general are undeniably a bit high maintenance as compared to standard utility breeds, however, if only because they demand it.




Ooh, I wasn't aware that they laid blue eggs! I really did not enjoy keeping ducks, I just have the one left and once she's gone I don't really want any more. But silky ducks are the one kind that could tempt me back into them. I have heard that they're rather difficult to hatch and have special needs when it comes to how swimming water is provided to them, though.

Yup, water and them don't mix. It also seems to me that they smell worse than a normally feathered bird when soaked? It doesn't help that they all seem attracted to water... not sure how I feel about silkied ducks. With chickens, it's another thing, but ducks are waterfowl. It's in their name. Not convinced that something so integral to ducks, as in the case of water, is worth denying (or limiting to very specific uses), just to have something so cute

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

Yup, water and them don't mix. It also seems to me that they smell worse than a normally feathered bird when soaked?

Not sure that I've ever noticed that, but, to be completely fair, when it's been very rainy here, pretty much the whole flock gets soaked because they're a bunch of loons that don't know enough to stay in out of the rain, and my coops just stink of wet chickens all around

It doesn't help that they all seem attracted to water... not sure how I feel about silkied ducks. With chickens, it's another thing, but ducks are waterfowl. It's in their name. Not convinced that something so integral to ducks, as in the case of water, is worth denying (or limiting to very specific uses), just to have something so cute

Yeah, I definitely get that. But it's not so much that they can't have water to swim in at all, it's just that they can't have very deep water because their feathers can more easily get waterlogged and may end up causing them to sink. Maybe it's because ducks' affinity for water (and making a huge mess with it at every opportunity) is the reason I didn't enjoy caring for ducks in the first place, but giving them a more shallow water feature to swim in isn't necessarily a deal-breaker for me. Lots of people keep ducks without even providing them swimming water, only providing just enough water to dunk their heads in, and the birds don't necessarily have a worse life because of that alone. It's the curious difficulty with hatching that would probably put me off of the silky ducks, personally... and that ducks will be ducks and make a big mess with any even minimally adequate amount of water you provide them.

 

[2ndTink]

Not sure! I know that some sequencing has been done in other genes, like blue, that determined it was the same mutation in chickens as in ducks and I believe turkeys as well, but, silky ducks being so rare, I doubt their silkied gene has been looked into in that capacity. It is a recessive gene like in chickens and does the same thing, causes the microscopic hooks that hold feathers together not to develop, so it's likely to be at least a similar mutation.




I personally haven't found any of my birds to be higher maintenance just because of their silkied feathering, with the only exception being that their feathering does not shed water so they end up getting soaked a lot easier than the smooth-feathered individuals. Cochin bantams in general are undeniably a bit high maintenance as compared to standard utility breeds, however, if only because they demand it.




Ooh, I wasn't aware that they laid blue eggs! I really did not enjoy keeping ducks, I just have the one left and once she's gone I don't really want any more. But silky ducks are the one kind that could tempt me back into them. I have heard that they're rather difficult to hatch and have special needs when it comes to how swimming water is provided to them, though.

Oh, good point, I bet they just get water logged and sink. I think I'll be skipping the silkied ducks for now. My chickens already have my hands full!

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

Definitely don't get ducks at all, then! You'll be spending forever cleaning up waterers and their pool, only for it all to be a complete mess again the second the ducks have access to it. Your run will never be clean and free of mud, they make their own mud puddles by filling their beaks with water at the waterer and working it into the dirt over and over again. You'll always have water, mud, and muddy duck prints slapped all over your fresh, clean coop from ducks playing in water and making their mud puddles and then tracking it all inside. And all I had were tiny call ducks! I just do not know how duck people tolerate the constant mess!

 

[fluffycrow]

Not sure that I've ever noticed that, but, to be completely fair, when it's been very rainy here, pretty much the whole flock gets soaked because they're a bunch of loons that don't know enough to stay in out of the rain, and my coops just stink of wet chickens all around




Yeah, I definitely get that. But it's not so much that they can't have water to swim in at all, it's just that they can't have very deep water because their feathers can more easily get waterlogged and may end up causing them to sink. Maybe it's because ducks' affinity for water (and making a huge mess with it at every opportunity) is the reason I didn't enjoy caring for ducks in the first place, but giving them a more shallow water feature to swim in isn't necessarily a deal-breaker for me. Lots of people keep ducks without even providing them swimming water, only providing just enough water to dunk their heads in, and the birds don't necessarily have a worse life because of that alone. It's the curious difficulty with hatching that would probably put me off of the silky ducks, personally... and that ducks will be ducks and make a big mess with any even minimally adequate amount of water you provide them.

I can't judge anyone who doesn't keep their ducks in non swimming water, since I've never kept ducks and know nothing about how fulfilled they'd be with minimal water exposure. I simply know that if I were to get ducks, I would prefer to see them bring able to swim. The concern of hatching is definitely a real one, so I definitely get why you're hesitant about getting them

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

I can't really say, either, as I never really kept mine without swimming water except in the wintertime when it's just not possible to provide them with it. I just know that I've read about some breeders not providing their ducks with swimming water ever as a means of keeping their pens a little cleaner, and their birds don't look any worse off at least. They just seem to have so much fun even in shallow water that I'd hate to never provide them with it at all, personally.

I do know from experience that call ducks almost certainly have to have actual swimming water every now and then for basic hygiene, though, because their beaks and necks are too short to really reach their booties to properly keep themselves clean otherwise. So any time we have a spike of warmth in the wintertime, I try to put one of the bigger rubber water bowls out for the day so that Crash (my last remaining duck) can get a good swim in. Otherwise, her booty gets pretty gross by springtime.

 

[fluffycrow]

I can't really say, either, as I never really kept mine without swimming water except in the wintertime when it's just not possible to provide them with it. I just know that I've read about some breeders not providing their ducks with swimming water ever as a means of keeping their pens a little cleaner, and their birds don't look any worse off at least. They just seem to have so much fun even in shallow water that I'd hate to never provide them with it at all, personally.

I do know from experience that call ducks almost certainly have to have actual swimming water every now and then for basic hygiene, though, because their beaks and necks are too short to really reach their booties to properly keep themselves clean otherwise. So any time we have a spike of warmth in the wintertime, I try to put one of the bigger rubber water bowls out for the day so that Crash (my last remaining duck) can get a good swim in. Otherwise, her booty gets pretty gross by springtime.

I've heard similar things about calls. Do I remember it correctly that the silkied duck is also a bantam? They could possibly struggle with similar bill issues? By the way, Crash is a fabulous name for a call! Sorry for the very late response, I forget to hit post sometimes

 

[pipdzipdnreadytogo]

Silky ducks are considered bantams, but with normal proportions to their bill and neck, so I would not expect them to have the same issues as calls. They came from a mutation out of regular mallards. My understanding is that either the gene that causes silkied feathering in ducks or one linked to that gene causes their eggshells and membranes to thicken slightly as well, and that's why they struggle with hatching.

Crash, she's one of my birds whose name has a bit of a story behind it. When she was just an egg, I was candling just before lock down and she slipped out of my hand and went CRASH! onto the table and off to the floor. Thankfully, this was just my bedside table, so it wasn't much of a fall, but still enough that her egg was mostly crushed down one side. My dad and I carefully put candle wax over the cracks and hoped for the best. A few days later, Crash arrived, the only of her brood to hatch. My suspicion has always been that she was only able to hatch because of that event, and that her siblings died because they could not properly pip and had no help with breaking through their shells. At the time, I was too inexperienced to know what to look for in such a scenario, so unfortunately I was too late to help. That difficulty with hatching unassisted is what ended up putting me off of call ducks specifically, and why I'd hesitate to get into another variety that has its own hatching issues.

And no worries about forgetting to post! I do that sometimes, too! Then I realize I never posted and go back to a thread with my whole post sitting in the reply box, but someone's already jumped in to reply and my post is redundant at that point