Glad y'all liked the photos. I hope they can be of help in future breeding work.
I have another thought that I realize might meet with some opposition, but I'm proposing it because I feel it is worth discussing.
It is this: I don't think the Orloff should be admitted to the APA Standard of Perfection.
My reasoning?
1) Breeds admitted to the SOP are required to be admitted in at least one standardized color.
~ What's wrong with that?
Many experienced, respected, and long-time chicken breeders agree that type (i.e. body structure, comb, wattles, etc.) is infinitely more important than color. But the SOP, as I understand, often has color standards that, in the case of a complex color like Spangled, are so picky that they will disqualify birds of excellent type just because they have too much or too little Spangling, not enough black here, not enough white there, blah blah blah. In other words, birds that are excellent in type and are Orloffs in every sense of the word are disqualified, and therefore APA Orloff breeders may be tempted to cull good birds in favor of weaker, poorer-typed birds because of color.
2) Breeds admitted to the SOP may undergo a gradual devolving in disease resistance, hardiness, laying ability, and muscle mass.
~ How so?
If a bird is admitted to a poultry club with an overly-strict standard (even a standard that focuses on type instead of color), breeders of that bird may be tempted to cull disease-resistant, hardy, good-laying, and "meaty" birds in favor of birds that are less disease-resistant, less hardy, poor-laying, and underweight, simply because the standard was too strict on how much fluff the beard has, on whether or not there should be even the smallest sprig of a feather on a foot or leg, or on the fact that the tail angle was 5 degrees too low. In short, in order to show their birds, APA Orloff breeders may be tempted to cull superior birds in favor of the inferior, "picture perfect" birds.
Please don't get me wrong. THE ORLOFF NEEDS A STANDARD! But the standard should NOT be too strict. If we do that (as the SOP seems to do, from what I have heard...though I could be wrong), we will do the Orloff a disservice, and the supposed "Orloffs" shown at the APA shows may be nothing more than weak, inferior individuals that should've been chicken soup years ago.
I get some of this thinking from a book by British poultry expert Fred Hams entitled "The Complete Guide to Raising Chickens, Ducks, Geese, and Turkeys," and also from an article by Laura Haggarty--well-respected breeder of Buckeye chickens--in the June/July 2013 issue of Backyard Poultry Magazine, entitled "Build the Barn; Then Paint It." I think one could also say I have heard this from gamefowl breeders. Perhaps even more important (to Orloff enthusiasts), I derived this from the UK Standard for the Orloff, which says that bird type is more important than color.
What do you all think? Is the APA SOP really as overly-strict as I think, or am I incorrect?
God bless,
~Gresh~
