Silkie thread!

[Sonoran Silkies]

Quote: No need to get snippy; you asked a question, I answered it. I have been on many chicken forums over the last 13 years, and have rarely seen ANY posts about silkies for meat; most of the few posts about eating silkies were in reference to a particularly mean rooster, and half of those were threats, not actuality. Only once in over a dozen years have I ever seen a post about raising silkies with the purpose of meat, and then they were literally planning to raise about 5000 birds; no it was not on BYC.

FWIW, I've seen a whole heck of a lot more posts about balut than about silkies as meat birds.

I specified Caucasians because I know that in several Asian countries silkie is considered a delicacy or health food. I also know the reaction of people that do not have chickens with whom I have discussed silkies.

 

[chisNchickens]

So I just noticed one of my porcelain chicks is forming a mild cross beak or twisting of the beak.
He/she is 5 weeks old. This chick was sold to me as BQ. Is this something that would not shown up at 1 week old and it was fine then but now is twisting.

No such thing as a breeding quality five-week old chick. Folks are wayyy too loose with the term "show quality". That and claiming your flock is "show or breeder quality" simply because it came from a show breeder (or even just a popular breeder). Not the case at all. I can always spot those to stay away from simply for those two reasons. You have a better chance of producing show quality birds, yes. But you will see here just as many or more very unappealing birds from those very same breeders. Just the way it is. 'Tis genetics.
Not intending to pick at anyone, specifically 3ChickensinNC, just an opportunity to point out the above.

 

[bamdim]

Yes, I do. I have two white, a partridge, a blue hen and a splash.

 

[Hawkeye95]

No need to get snippy; you asked a question, I answered it. I have been on many chicken forums over the last 13 years, and have rarely seen ANY posts about silkies for meat; most of the few posts about eating silkies were in reference to a particularly mean rooster, and half of those were threats, not actuality. Only once in over a dozen years have I ever seen a post about raising silkies with the purpose of meat, and then they were literally planning to raise about 5000 birds; no it was not on BYC.

FWIW, I've seen a whole heck of a lot more posts about balut than about silkies as meat birds.

I specified Caucasians because I know that in several Asian countries silkie is considered a delicacy or health food. I also know the reaction of people that do not have chickens with whom I have discussed silkies.

I wouldn't even begin to know how to cook black meat-- how would you know it's finished/cooked through? I've read on some Asian sites where they described the meat as gamey and tougher. Because it's tougher and gamey they use it in soups for pregnant women, and other various health reasons. I was at a reunion not too long ago and told people I was raising silkies and they were joking about eating them if I got tired of them. When I explained they had black meat, and pulled up a picture of a dressed out bird online, they were absolutely horrified! I'm not seeing much of a market for silkie meat around here. I do know they have a few black birds in the Asian market down town, but not very many and I always wonder how long those birds sit there before someone buys those things.

 

[Sanna]

I went and made an attempt to candle some of my eggs. I found a couple with the little veins and all, some looked very dark with the air pockets. Some looked clear.
I know there is a thread somewhere for the different stages of the egg development. I just can't find it! Could someone post the link for me?

 

[Chick_In_The_Burbs]

https://www.backyardchickens.com/t/...g-candling-pics-progression-though-incubation

This has where they should be and some other examples too.

 

[mystdogs]

https://www.backyardchickens.com/t/...g-candling-pics-progression-though-incubation
This has where they should be and some other examples too.

I hadn't seen that one before, I like that page. Thank you for sharing

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

Quote: I tend to rarely use those terms. I am likely to be more descriptive "drop dead gorgeous," "lots of potential," really nice except ...," etc. Some birds are better showbirds than breeders, and some are better breeders than show birds. The only thing that makes a bird "show quality" is meeting the standard, and depending on the size of the show, that may not be enough to win. If there is competition, you need to EXCEL at the standard, not just meet it. And then some judges interpret differently than others, and a winning bird under one judge may not place nearly as well under another judge (look at how often double shows have different placements). And then there are ambiguous terms like medium or very small. One person's medium is large to another and small to a third. Then there are people who want to judge size based upon height or length or width, which are not measured in the standard.

 

[SunnySkies]

Cute alert!

Three of our little ones. I love how calm they are compared to the Cochins we have too. They are more wild.

These three have a poofy looking head, and they are the smallest of the 8. One is pretty big already, and much darker, not pictured.

 

[Hawkeye95]

I tend to rarely use those terms. I am likely to be more descriptive "drop dead gorgeous," "lots of potential," really nice except ...," etc. Some birds are better showbirds than breeders, and some are better breeders than show birds. The only thing that makes a bird "show quality" is meeting the standard, and depending on the size of the show, that may not be enough to win. If there is competition, you need to EXCEL at the standard, not just meet it. And then some judges interpret differently than others, and a winning bird under one judge may not place nearly as well under another judge (look at how often double shows have different placements). And then there are ambiguous terms like medium or very small. One person's medium is large to another and small to a third. Then there are people who want to judge size based upon height or length or width, which are not measured in the standard.

This is where my poor rooster got judged-- was under the "height". But he is compact and when he's just standing, his hackles and tail meet. So I'm really wondering how "big" and I'm not talking about WEIGHT-- but how big other silkie cockerels are in comparison to him. Compared to my LF laying flock, he is tiny. I still need to weigh him to be sure of how "big" he really is. But I just didn't think he was really all that big. But it's interesting to hear about the size being judged. Anyway, I'm having a really hard time with this size stipulation and understaning it.