SOP's Can you help, or do you want to learn?

[SourRoses]

Well, some things are not so practical. Aficionados may wish it to be, though

Genetically speaking, there's something called "pleiotropy"... where a gene for one trait causes additional effect(s).
For example, Pea Comb brings the so-called "breast blister" which is just an area of different skin over the keel that makes the feathers intersect in a funny looking line.

There's also linkages, which are breakable but many breed standards leave room for some to linger.
Proponents of a certain breed may wish to present all traits as purposeful, but we are mere humans and not as in control as we tend to think.

Vaulted skulls are associated with crests.
Short legs are not practical for running away.
Naked necks seem like a predator magnet (reddish skin hues).
Large breeds can carry invisible heart problems.
I could go on but I don't want to make everyone mad

When we pick a breed or mix we are not just choosing positive traits but negatives too.

Some SOP's try to cover their bases by being intentionally vague.
Ameraucana for instance, where the most used word in the SOP is "medium"... medium this, medium that. And there are people who pretend that's an actual measurement!
It's like when my Mom sends me to the deli for sliced meat and insists every time on having it cut "regular". There is no regular, I repeat. She says "In the middle". There are 6 options! Which of the two in the middle is the actual middle?!

 

[Amer]

For example, I have been reading about the angle of the roosters tail. 30 degrees. I cannot be envisioning this correctly as most tails on roosters seem to be much greater than that - 70 to 90?

Hatchery birds in general have a lot higher tails than Standard Bred birds. Since show birds are rarer, the average tail angle is higher. Show breeders select for lower tails on many breeds because they are more balanced.
Plymouth Rocks are one of the breeds with the lowest tail angles. (Except for those Oriental and long tail breeds with negative tail angles.)
It's not my favorite type (I'm a d'Anver fancier, the males have 75 degree tails.) But in all breeds the tail transition should be smooth, unlike in many hatchery birds.

not my pic

Taking pictures of chickens is hard, but taking them and then cropping them really helps.

Feet my husband says are more important in a breeding animal than one might think. I think this bird has straight toes, but when photographing him, I see a feather on his short spurs, those might be rougher?

I think his beak is straight and symmetrical but it seems a bit short, is that good or bad?

How would you describe his eyes and ears? Those are mentioned in most SOP’s.

And to me, his tail is dang close to 90 degrees.

His tail is 90 degrees but what does it matter if he is a mix?
Some Standards call for short beaks, most medium/don't specify, a couple ask for long but not many. Beak length is of secondary importance to its strength and proper closure. His looks beautiful.
I would describe his eyes as "bold." Medium size.
Ears never get described however, his lobes would be medium-sized. The problem is the color. Birds should have either red or white lobes, not . He has what I like to call a "pingle comb" which is neither here nor there on the pea and single comb fronts. No Standard would call for a comb that is heterozygous for pea and single.

A question for those who breed to SOP: how many standards relate to physical appearance (phenotype) as it relates to health and function, versus aesthetics?

For instance, if a rooster’s tail is 10° past vertical, does that have some sort of direct negative effect on rooster health or behavior? Or is it “I don’t like how that looks”?

The Standard describes both. Obviously health is more important than beauty but if you can have both why wouldn't you?
It's sort of a medium between the very practical livestock standards and the very ornamental dog/cat standards. Remember that the reason people initially domesticated jungle fowl was for their ornamental qualities.
One thing all breeds in the SOP have in common is they are selected for health first and foremost. The first pages of the SOP describe how to do this since it applies to all breeds. Health issues are disqualifications or defects for all breeds, so if they already covered it in the general defects and disqualifications they aren't going to be redundant in the breed Standards by listing them all again.
Also in the front they describe the ideal body for health and production, which can only be judged by handling the birds. There are also pictures comparing the ideal and not ideal birds with their featherless bodies superimposed on how their bodies would look with feathers on so you know what to feel for in width and depth.
Even though it's already described at the beginning you can see deep and broad bodies described in almost every breed standard, even for lightweight breeds. A good skeletal base and well developed musculature is a must have for all breeds.
The breed standards describe what makes the breeds different and it focuses more on aesthetics and also the production qualities of each breed.
A tail angle has no bearing on health, but a bird that has a high tail because it leans forward too much or has too short and not a well filled back does not have ideal health and production.

 

[ChaosMom]

Hatchery birds in general have a lot higher tails than Standard Bred birds. Since show birds are rarer, the average tail angle is higher. Show breeders select for lower tails on many breeds because they are more balanced.
Plymouth Rocks are one of the breeds with the lowest tail angles. (Except for those Oriental and long tail breeds with negative tail angles.)
It's not my favorite type (I'm a d'Anver fancier, the males have 75 degree tails.) But in all breeds the tail transition should be smooth, unlike in many hatchery birds.
View attachment 4101821not my pic

His tail is 90 degrees but what does it matter if he is a mix?
Some Standards call for short beaks, most medium/don't specify, a couple ask for long but not many. Beak length is of secondary importance to its strength and proper closure. His looks beautiful.
I would describe his eyes as "bold." Medium size.
Ears never get described however, his lobes would be medium-sized. The problem is the color. Birds should have either red or white lobes, not . He has what I like to call a "pingle comb" which is neither here nor there on the pea and single comb fronts. No Standard would call for a comb that is heterozygous for pea and single.

The Standard describes both. Obviously health is more important than beauty but if you can have both why wouldn't you?
It's sort of a medium between the very practical livestock standards and the very ornamental dog/cat standards. Remember that the reason people initially domesticated jungle fowl was for their ornamental qualities.
One thing all breeds in the SOP have in common is they are selected for health first and foremost. The first pages of the SOP describe how to do this since it applies to all breeds. Health issues are disqualifications or defects for all breeds, so if they already covered it in the general defects and disqualifications they aren't going to be redundant in the breed Standards by listing them all again.
Also in the front they describe the ideal body for health and production, which can only be judged by handling the birds. There are also pictures comparing the ideal and not ideal birds with their featherless bodies superimposed on how their bodies would look with feathers on so you know what to feel for in width and depth.
Even though it's already described at the beginning you can see deep and broad bodies described in almost every breed standard, even for lightweight breeds. A good skeletal base and well developed musculature is a must have for all breeds.
The breed standards describe what makes the breeds different and it focuses more on aesthetics and also the production qualities of each breed.
A tail angle has no bearing on health, but a bird that has a high tail because it leans forward too much or has too short and not a well filled back does have indicate health and production.

Thanks; this is very useful (and reassuring.)

 

[Sic]

What breed is that rooster? Would you consider the tail and sickle feathers worthy of breeding?

It is amazing to me, that while I have had chickens for years - I really don't know how to look at them, and what to see.

Please keep teaching @Sic, that is what I want to learn.

He is a Bruges Fighter. This is not an APA breed, the standard is from Belgium. He is still a young Cockerel, but he does well to meet the standard with regards to body from beak to tail, he does however have incorrect eye color (too light), however, I wouldn't cull on account of eye color. I don't select worthiness based on individual body parts such as the tail, every body part that makes the whole bird is compared to the standard. He is the best specimen I have to date, and yes he has been set aside for potential breeding.

 

[townchicks]

Just following because it's interesting, even though I don't breed.

 

[Mrs. K]

An Introduction to Form and Feathering of the Domestic Fowl".

Is this a book with pictures? Or what? Could you quote parts of it?

Maybe what we should do, is pick a part of the bird to discuss - post pictures and politely critique them. Anyone reading this far, should know, that this is not an attack against a bird, or person with the said bird, and no bird or breed is perfect, just some are better than others. How does one know. What to look for is actually a rather in depth process.

Breeding is a slow process, one has to pick, hatch, wait and see, pick again.

Mrs K

 

[Mrs. K]

@Sic - you do know what you are doing! Could you take more pictures, and list more standard from the Belgium, and explain what you see? A huge part of my problem, is I can read the standards, but I am not really understanding what they mean. I think that might be true of a lot of us.

 

[Mrs. K]

even though I don't breed.

I have played with chickens for years - meat birds, layers, dual purpose, hatching...there are many aspects to this hobby, so even though you don't breed...yet.

 

[Sic]

Here is a chantecler cockerel at about 5-6 months. He was a hatchery bird, and wasn't the quality I was willing to work with. He is living a good life elsewhere. While he possessed good depth and width of body and tail carriage was decent, wing carriage wasn't good, but the lack of breast, narrow head, lack of prominent brow were the major deciding factors in not making the cut. Hope this is helpful to someone.

 

[Mrs. K]

I don't select worthiness based on individual body parts such as the tail, every body part that makes the whole bird is compared to the standard.

I have assessed cattle and horses - definitely see this.

But I am finding that when I read the standards, I am not quite understanding what they mean in individual parts. Or even parts (like sickle feather length) that I have ever considered.