Show Off Your Games!

[Yahya Morse]

I reside in S.E.Texas so I haven't a clue how to care for fowl in the Michigan area. This particular stag has his own pen.I tether them out on good days to forage for greens.

 

[Yahya Morse]

Another 2014 stag Rodan getting some air

 

[maranfarmer563]

Rocky, I'm in northern Pennsylvania game are fine with below O weather,mink on the other hand can clean out a hen house in one night. Had one come in and kill 25 modern game in one night. Hawks are my biggest problem with free range birds

 

[Jungleexplorer]

Maybe this doesn't apply, but I believe it can...the mantra associated with the Pit Bulls (I am a Pit lover/supporter as a pet, abhore fighting & those associated w/it)....paraphrased, its not the breed, its what people do with it. We honestly got rid of a male Chihuahua after it almost killed a Pit puppy years ago. Any dog can be a fighter/killer, especially if allowed/bred/raised to do so (we don't like/tolerate aggressive).

I realize these games have the instinct in them naturally, very much stronger than, say, average layers, but, certain characteristics can be enhanced/diminished by breeding, directed by, or at the hands of humans. I don't see why anyone would see "manfighter" as a desirable trait in anything. Of course, as I think was mentioned before, those broody or mama hens are a force to be reckoned with. We have some I call Pit Bull game hens because they clamp down & don't want to let go when I'm checking eggs or hatching progress. I think all of those happen to be Greys, too, but I could be mistaken.

I have had many discussions on this thread on this very subject and it has got quite heated at times. Please let us not let that happen again. So, I will try to say this in the most respectful manner possible. If I see it going he wrong way, I will just bow out.

When it comes to Gamefowl and Pit Bulls, there is fact and there is opinion. Unfortunately, when most people talk about breeds, they do so from an emotional or cultural standpoint. Most of what a person knows or believes is taught to them by someone else, who was taught by someone else, who was taught by someone else. Often times, we place our faith in something we heard, not because it is factual, but based on our respect for and trust in the person who said it. As a person who has worked with many different cultures around the world, I see this nonfactual cultural influence in the everyday life of just about everyone I know. Let me give you an example of what I am talking about. This is the story of the Thanksgiving ham.

There was once a newly wed couple that was having their first Thanksgiving together. The wife was preparing the ham. The husband noticed that she cut a nice slab off of one end of the ham before putting it into the oven. Curious about this, he asked her why she cut the end of the ham off. She replied that that is the right way to cook a ham. The husband replied, "I'm sorry honey but I have never seen that done before. I don’t understand how that has anything to do with cooking a ham.” His wife started to get a little defensive and said, "MY mother taught me how to cook a ham and she always cut the end off!" They went back and forth until it was a full blown argument and the wife went in the bedroom crying and locked the door. After she cooled off, she decided to call her mom to find why she taught her to cut the end of the ham off. Her mom said' "That is the way your grandmother taught me to cook a ham. Why don’t you ask her?" So the wife called her grandmother who told her that she learned it from her mother. Finally, the wife called her great-grandmother and ask her, why she cut the end off the ham. The great-grandmother laughed and replied, "Because my pan was TOO SMALL!") LOL!

What makes this story so funny is how true it is. It is played out millions of times a day all over the world, and it is one of the most common causes of abrasive disagreements here on BYC. So what does this have to do with this subject? Well, there is no other breed of chicken that has more culture and pride attached to it then the gamefowl. The same could be said about Pit Bulls. When it comes to how either of these breeds act, there is fact and there is culture base opinion.

On the culture based opinion side, there are two basic fields of thought.

1. The an animal’s attitude and behavior is primarily determined by husbandry (How the owner cares for and trains it).

2. The animal’s attitude and behavior is determined by genetics (breeding).

So what do these fields of thought look like in regards to Gamefowl. Well, there are those that believe that a true gamefowl's attitude is completely controlled by its genetic breeding. You will hear people that are in this field say things like, “A Game cock must be penned or tethered because it will fight to the death with any other rooster it sees”. In the other field of thought are those that believe that through proper husbandry, a Game cock can be managed in much the same way any other rooster of any breed can.

What I find very funny; actually down right hilarious is that, you often find gamefowl owners that are also pit bull owners; and while they will fight you tooth and toenail defending the Gentetics argument when it comes to their Gamefowl (They are what they are and no amount of husbandry can change them), they will fight you just as hard using the Husbandry argument to defend their Pit Bulls (It does not matter what their genetic breeding is, they can be just as sweet as any other dog with the right owner). It is when you see these contradictory arguments coming from the same person or group of people that you know you are dealing with culture based opinions.

So which is it? Is it genetics or husbandry. Well, my personal experience has been that in most cases, husbandry can play a huge part in the attitude of an animal, regardless of it’s breeding. I say in most cases because, there are simply stupid animals that can't be taught anything, or very little. But the fact that a man can teach an elephant to stand on one foot on top of a barrel, is pretty strong evidence for the husbandry argument. I have raised chickens of many breeds for over 30 years. I have a very good understanding of their basic instincts. Based on this knowledge and understanding of chickens in general, I can say with certainty, that the typical way gamefowl owners raise their game cocks, could to lead no other attitude and behavior in their cocks then the one that they are getting. I am not saying that it is exclusively a husbandry issue, but that there is no possible way they would get any other response from their husbandry techniques then the one they are getting.

As far as pit bulls go, the same is true. Just like any other dog, regardless of their breeding, it is the owners attitude that is the primary determining factor in the attitude of the pit. But unlike with chickens, pits have a different dynamic involved. This dynamic is one of potential or capacity. A pit has the capacity to kill a human, a rooster (normally) does not. So if your Game cock or Chihuahua decides one day out of a clear blue sky to attack your child; your child might get some cuts or scratches; but if your Pit does the same thing, you will be having a sad family gathering in about a week. While a Pit is just a dog like any other dog, I think what bothers most people about Pits, is not the dog itself, but that the owners do not want to accept the responsibility that comes with owning an animal that has the capacity to take a human life. Walking around with a Pit is like walking around with a loaded gun, except that a gun does not have the capacity to have a crazy moment and act of it's own accord to take a life. Most Pit advocates that I have had discussions with, want you to think no differently about their Pit then you would if they were walking a Chihuahua. While nobody will disagrees that the Chihuahua has one of the badest attitudes in the dog world, they also have the least capacity to do harm and they have no capacity (normally) to take a human life. So you cannot compare a Pit with Chihuahua, because there is huge difference in capacity.

Another problem with Pits is that a huge portion of people that want to own a Pit are the kind of people that like the fact that they have an animal that can kill. For lack of a better word, let's just say they are people with a THUG like mentality. Go over to any gang ridden ghetto and you will find 9 Pits to one of any other kind of dog. And as I said before, because husbandry plays the biggest factor in the attitude of a dog, because these people generally have bad thug like attitudes, their dogs do to, and when that dog is a Pit, it is a potentially deadly combination.

Personally, I have no problem with people owning Pits, as long as that person acknowledges and takes responsibility for owning an animal with the capacity to act on it's own to take a human life. Regardless of whether it ever does or not, the capacity exists and that must be considered in how the owner handles the dog. I would say the same for owners of any other breed of animal that has the same capacity. In the Bible, the law was that if an animal attacked a human, it was put to death. But in the case where the animal displayed aggressive tendencies and the owner did nothing to prevent the animal from attacking a human; then if the animal killed a person, the owner was put to death with the animal. The Bible says that, "Because the owner knew that the animal was aggressive and did nothing to prevent it from getting out" (paraphrased). The basic idea was that if the owner had an animal that could kill a human, then they bore a huge responsibility to take measures to prevent that animal from ever doing so.

The bottom line is this. Gamefowl owners can’t argue genetics to defend their opinion of what a Game cock is and say that husbandry plays no part in their behavior, and then turn around and argue that husbandry is the only thing that matters when it comes to their Pit and that breeding and genetics play no part in their behavior. I personally believe the truth lies some where in the middle. I think husbandry plays a bigger part then genetics, but I don’t think genetics can be completely eliminated from the equation whether we are talking about Gamefowl or Pit Bulls.

I fully respect everyone’s right to disagree with me.

 

[jldward]

I have had many discussions on this thread on this very subject and it has got quite heated at times. Please let us not let that happen again. So, I will try to say this in the most respectful manner possible. If I see it going he wrong way, I will just bow out.

When it comes to Gamefowl and Pit Bulls, there is fact and there is opinion. Unfortunately, when most people talk about breeds, they do so from an emotional or cultural standpoint. Most of what a person knows or believes is taught to them by someone else, who was taught by someone else, who was taught by someone else. Often times, we place our faith in something we heard, not because it is factual, but based on our respect for and trust in the person who said it. As a person who has worked with many different cultures around the world, I see this nonfactual cultural influence in the everyday life of just about everyone I know. Let me give you an example of what I am talking about. This is the story of the Thanksgiving ham.

There was once a newly wed couple that was having their first Thanksgiving together. The wife was preparing the ham. The husband noticed that she cut a nice slab off of one end of the ham before putting it into the oven. Curious about this, he asked her why she cut the end of the ham off. She replied that that is the right way to cook a ham. The husband replied, "I'm sorry honey but I have never seen that done before. I don’t understand how that has anything to do with cooking a ham.” His wife started to get a little defensive and said, "MY mother taught me how to cook a ham and she always cut the end off!" They went back and forth until it was a full blown argument and the wife went in the bedroom crying and locked the door. After she cooled off, she decided to call her mom to find why she taught her to cut the end of the ham off. Her mom said' "That is the way your grandmother taught me to cook a ham. Why don’t you ask her?" So the wife called her grandmother who told her that she learned it from her mother. Finally, the wife called her great-grandmother and ask her, why she cut the end off the ham. The great-grandmother laughed and replied, "Because my pan was TOO SMALL!") LOL!

What makes this story so funny is how true it is. It is played out millions of times a day all over the world, and it is one of the most common causes of abrasive disagreements here on BYC. So what does this have to do with this subject? Well, there is no other breed of chicken that has more culture and pride attached to it then the gamefowl. The same could be said about Pit Bulls. When it comes to how either of these breeds act, there is fact and there is culture base opinion.

On the culture based opinion side, there are two basic fields of thought.

1. The an animal’s attitude and behavior is primarily determined by husbandry (How the owner cares for and trains it).

2. The animal’s attitude and behavior is determined by genetics (breeding).

So what do these fields of thought look like in regards to Gamefowl. Well, there are those that believe that a true gamefowl's attitude is completely controlled by its genetic breeding. You will hear people that are in this field say things like, “A Game cock must be penned or tethered because it will fight to the death with any other rooster it sees”. In the other field of thought are those that believe that through proper husbandry, a Game cock can be managed in much the same way any other rooster of any breed can.

What I find very funny; actually down right hilarious is that, you often find gamefowl owners that are also pit bull owners; and while they will fight you tooth and toenail defending the Gentetics argument when it comes to their Gamefowl (They are what they are and no amount of husbandry can change them), they will fight you just as hard using the Husbandry argument to defend their Pit Bulls (It does not matter what their genetic breeding is, they can be just as sweet as any other dog with the right owner). It is when you see these contradictory arguments coming from the same person or group of people that you know you are dealing with culture based opinions.

So which is it? Is it genetics or husbandry. Well, my personal experience has been that in most cases, husbandry can play a huge part in the attitude of an animal, regardless of it’s breeding. I say in most cases because, there are simply stupid animals that can't be taught anything, or very little. But the fact that a man can teach an elephant to stand on one foot on top of a barrel, is pretty strong evidence for the husbandry argument. I have raised chickens of many breeds for over 30 years. I have a very good understanding of their basic instincts. Based on this knowledge and understanding of chickens in general, I can say with certainty, that the typical way gamefowl owners raise their game cocks, could to lead no other attitude and behavior in their cocks then the one that they are getting. I am not saying that it is exclusively a husbandry issue, but that there is no possible way they would get any other response from their husbandry techniques then the one they are getting.

As far as pit bulls go, the same is true. Just like any other dog, regardless of their breeding, it is the owners attitude that is the primary determining factor in the attitude of the pit. But unlike with chickens, pits have a different dynamic involved. This dynamic is one of potential or capacity. A pit has the capacity to kill a human, a rooster (normally) does not. So if your Game cock or Chihuahua decides one day out of a clear blue sky to attack your child; your child might get some cuts or scratches; but if your Pit does the same thing, you will be having a sad family gathering in about a week. While a Pit is just a dog like any other dog, I think what bothers most people about Pits, is not the dog itself, but that the owners do not want to accept the responsibility that comes with owning an animal that has the capacity to take a human life. Walking around with a Pit is like walking around with a loaded gun, except that a gun does not have the capacity to have a crazy moment and act of it's own accord to take a life. Most Pit advocates that I have had discussions with, want you to think no differently about their Pit then you would if they were walking a Chihuahua. While nobody will disagrees that the Chihuahua has one of the badest attitudes in the dog world, they also have the least capacity to do harm and they have no capacity (normally) to take a human life. So you cannot compare a Pit with Chihuahua, because there is huge difference in capacity.

Another problem with Pits is that a huge portion of people that want to own a Pit are the kind of people that like the fact that they have an animal that can kill. For lack of a better word, let's just say they are people with a THUG like mentality. Go over to any gang ridden ghetto and you will find 9 Pits to one of any other kind of dog. And as I said before, because husbandry plays the biggest factor in the attitude of a dog, because these people generally have bad thug like attitudes, their dogs do to, and when that dog is a Pit, it is a potentially deadly combination.

Personally, I have no problem with people owning Pits, as long as that person acknowledges and takes responsibility for owning an animal with the capacity to act on it's own to take a human life. Regardless of whether it ever does or not, the capacity exists and that must be considered in how the owner handles the dog. I would say the same for owners of any other breed of animal that has the same capacity. In the Bible, the law was that if an animal attacked a human, it was put to death. But in the case where the animal displayed aggressive tendencies and the owner did nothing to prevent the animal from attacking a human; then if the animal killed a person, the owner was put to death with the animal. The Bible says that, "Because the owner knew that the animal was aggressive and did nothing to prevent it from getting out" (paraphrased). The basic idea was that if the owner had an animal that could kill a human, then they bore a huge responsibility to take measures to prevent that animal from ever doing so.

The bottom line is this. Gamefowl owners can’t argue genetics to defend their opinion of what a Game cock is and say that husbandry plays no part in their behavior, and then turn around and argue that husbandry is the only thing that matters when it comes to their Pit and that breeding and genetics play no part in their behavior. I personally believe the truth lies some where in the middle. I think husbandry plays a bigger part then genetics, but I don’t think genetics can be completely eliminated from the equation whether we are talking about Gamefowl or Pit Bulls.

I fully respect everyone’s right to disagree with me.

I don't have a problem with anything you said here. I don't think genetics should be ruled out either. It all matters. I don't mean to compare Pits & Chihuahuas except for examples of temperament. I absolutely agree there is a big difference in what can happen there. We have a few different dogs breeds here & don't tolerate aggression except for what's intended (hog dogs, coonhounds, yard/varmint dogs). I frequently keep my toddler grandson, & will not have any animals that I cannot have him around. I trust our Pit & American Bulldog implicitly around him, but I also do keep an eye on things when they're around each other, same as my Chihuahuas. Same with the chickens. I got rid of my Welsummer rooster because he would not stop attacking me & no way did I want, or would I have my grandson anywhere around him. Unfortunately, I think discussions on either topic will not be going away anytime soon (in society).

 

[Rocky64]

Rocky, I'm in northern Pennsylvania game are fine with below O weather,mink on the other hand can clean out a hen house in one night. Had one come in and kill 25 modern game in one night. Hawks are my biggest problem with free range birds

Thanks for the info, I'm lucky enough not to have any losses to hawks before and i haven't seen a mink(attacking my fowl) in at least 7 years.

 

[maranfarmer563]

I've had 3 mink in 20 yrs, they follow creeks and ditches

 

[Rocky64]

I've had 3 mink in 20 yrs, they follow creeks and ditches

That's the weird thing, I have 2 ponds, 2 swamps, and a stream that flows through my property. Last year, I lost over 20 adult bluegill to a mink, but he never went for my chickens, who free range near the pond.

 

[maranfarmer563]

They come at night while chickens on roost. Just a small crack under door or window and they slip in.

 

[Rocky64]

The last mink attack was in broad daylight and it killed 2 chickens and a duck before my uncle shot it( I was about 9 when it happened, so I couldn't shoot it)