Roos or no roos?

[Sharment]

I have recently started with my first quail in the form of some day-olds from a local quail/pheasant breeder. They are 3 weeks old today, and already starting to color out so I know I have at least two roosters out of the 11 chicks I started with. It is almost heartbreaking how fast they go from adorable babies to 'birds', isn't it? Anyway...

I have been wanting poultry for a long time, but neither my DH or myself can eat chicken eggs. But we can eat quail eggs fine, hence my little indoor flock.

So my question is this: in light of the fact that I am going for maximum egg production, should I keep at least one rooster around? Do the hens lay better if there is a male around, or do they lay well regardless? I have no plans to incubate any eggs for at least a couple years, so no worries there. (Thinking about going for jumbos next, for the bigger eggs.)

The breeder I got the chicks from said he would gladly take back any roos I end up with, but I don't want to give them up if keeping them around means more eggs in the long run.

???

 

[TwoCrows]

There is no need to keep a rooster around for eggs. Hens of all poultry kind lay them reguardless on whether there is a male around and having one around does not stimulate hens to lay more eggs. So if you are not interested in hatching any quail, you are better off without males. There will be a LOT less fighting going on with just keeping females.

 

[Sharment]

Thank you very much for clarifying - it will definitely mean less poo to clean up and the bags of feed will last me longer. Although I have to admit a little part of me was hoping for a slightly different answer. Being my first flock and having raised them from day one, I have gotten very attached and hate the idea of letting any of them go.