Self Blue (Lavender) Silkie Thread

Yep, I have Lavenders.....a beautiful Cockeral named "Cowboy" (bought him from Bren).....a 3 mth old Cockerel named "Nathan" that I hatched from Natalies eggs....an unsexed 3 wk old from ultra1classis eggs....and I just bought 3 Lav pullets from Bren at the Shawnee show. One of them won R AOV too at Shawnee. Hoping by Spring I'll be hatching my own
 
Laura
Gus would never do such a thing. He was a stickler for details. I worked with him on the acceptance of the Blue Cream Light Brown Dutch variety, and I know there's no way that would have happened. He was a man of high ethics, whose interest was doing the right things for poultry and the Standard.

good to know the just and moral are out there:)
Bacres
I think we need to stray from this whole People disliking AOV breeders and such. This is a thread for AOV Colors. I will be willing to change the name to AOV Silkie Thread if people wish. Please let me know.

I love AOV's. And with out them we'd have very limited varieties in all breeds. My original post I was only commenting on the fact that the recognized varieties still need work and would be wonderful if you could go from area to area and see birds in a variety that are more consistant. not just one area or a big show and thats where you see them. Work on the recognized varieties before adding more to the standard. thats just my opinion​
 
Last edited:
Deb, as a representative of the ABA, and as someone who has known and worked with the man who was the Chairman of the Standards Committee for many, many years until his death, August Vinhage, I have to say your statement must be false, and frankly, I find it rather offensive.

Gus would never do such a thing. He was a stickler for details. I worked with him on the acceptance of the Blue Cream Light Brown Dutch variety, and I know there's no way that would have happened. He was a man of high ethics, whose interest was doing the right things for poultry and the Standard.

Now, I know there's a lot of politics in the exhibition poultry world (believe me, I've been on the receiving end of enough of it to know!) But that would NOT extend to admitting a variety to the Standard, it just wouldn't.

Please consider editing or deleting that statement, so that folks who don't know any better don't believe that it's true, as it's most assuredly not.

Thanks,

Laura, I did not name names of organizations or individuals.....I wasn't involved at that time, and I did not say that the ABA was involved in anything that wasn't proper, but I know for a fact that not all varieties went through the current qualifying process. That is what I KNOW to be true. If someone can prove me wrong, I'll be happy to apologize and own my error, but if you look into the facts as they apply to silkie varieties, I don't believe you can. The fact is that there were varieties that were added, whether they were added by the APA or ABA or whomever, they were added without benefit of qualifying as it is done today. It is not my intention to offend, and I certainly did not know that I was hitting a 'hot button'.

Respectfully,

Deb Steinberg​
 
Last edited:
And this is why I rarely post on forums........going back to lurkdom now!
wink.png
 
TO ANYONE WHO CARES:

I have 'edited' my original post to remove any reference to parent poultry organizations, as I am being threatened with legal action and accused of slander. If the BYC "powers that be" wish to delete any reference to that apparently 'ill advised' statement, they certainly have my permission. Anyone who knows me, knows that I don't fire off comments that are not true, and if I really cared about getting into a spitting match with anyone, I could dig up the facts and dates, but honestly I didn't know I was hitting such a hot button.
 
Quote:
Deb, as a representative of the ABA, and as someone who has known and worked with the man who was the Chairman of the Standards Committee for many, many years until his death, August Vinhage, I have to say your statement must be false, and frankly, I find it rather offensive.

Gus would never do such a thing. He was a stickler for details. I worked with him on the acceptance of the Blue Cream Light Brown Dutch variety, and I know there's no way that would have happened. He was a man of high ethics, whose interest was doing the right things for poultry and the Standard.

Now, I know there's a lot of politics in the exhibition poultry world (believe me, I've been on the receiving end of enough of it to know!) But that would NOT extend to admitting a variety to the Standard, it just wouldn't.

Please consider editing or deleting that statement, so that folks who don't know any better don't believe that it's true, as it's most assuredly not.

Thanks,

Laura, I did not name names of organizations or individuals.....I wasn't involved at that time, and I did not say that the ABA was involved in anything that wasn't proper, but I know for a fact that not all varieties went through the current qualifying process. That is what I KNOW to be true. If someone can prove me wrong, I'll be happy to apologize and own my error, but if you look into the facts as they apply to silkie varieties, I don't believe you can. The fact is that there were varieties that were added, whether they were added by the APA or ABA or whomever, they were added without benefit of qualifying as it is done today. It is not my intention to offend, and I certainly did not know that I was hitting a 'hot button'.

Respectfully,

Deb Steinberg

Deb,

The bottom line is, if you want the Standard for the Grays changed, go through the motions to change it. Slinging mud at the past is a waste of time. You got a problem? Fix it.

Laura
 
Geesh!! Maybe you are reading something different than what I did but I sure didn't read anything that sounded like she was
slinging mud at the past or having a problem that needed fixed!!!!!
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom