Standard of Perfection

[Ducks and Banny hens]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I have to say as a poultry-man it was a magical and spirited time to live in for those interested in poultry generally. I have lived long enough to see poultry enthusiasm rise to it's highest only to fall miserably in the late 60's onward. I am glad as an old man to see the Nation as a whole taking a second look at poultry again. Poultry and farming generally made this Country great and it made the people great because they cared about one another on a level that today most people don't get or understand. We were there for each other then.[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Perhaps one does live too long to see what they would prefer not to see?[/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]But I am heartened that poultry still has the magical charm on people that it always has had. I don't know if it is a chicken's comical nature or their curiosity or their whimsical nature and how they can bond to humans. Maybe it's the fact that chickens are willing to take us into their flock on our terms rather than the other way around? And I know nothing beats the magic of a chick pushing out of its shell, drying off and looking to us totally dependent on us for everything even as they grow up![/FONT]

Yes, I sometime refer to these days as the 'Second Hen Fever'; everybody seems to be interested in poultry, which is great. Agriculture is on the rise again. Like you, I don't know what to make of it. Sometimes people take to farming etc. to 'get back to the land' in advent of some apocalyptic event, some take to poultry raising 'because it's cool', or because 'everyone else has chickens'. Some beging poultry keeping because they were simply drawn to for one reason or another. Whatever the reason, it's been about 70 years since the world saw agriculture climbing this high. For that matter, I hope it continues to rise. It's good for people. There are people (myself included) who aren't even using currency in regards to buying and selling to other farmers. It's great!


I also had an idea. You mentioned in a previous post that the SOP lacked pedigree requirements, thereby letting stringmen take their trade. What if we were to all write in to the APA and suggest them put pedigree requirements in the next SOP?

 

[NYREDS]

There are two Standards of Perfections. The ABA (all bantams and bantam ducks) and the APA (bantams, large fowl, turkeys guineas and waterfowl). There are differences between the two. Not so much in breed descriptions, but what breeds the two organizations recognize. The ABA was founded in 1917. The APA is the oldest livestock organization in the US and was founded in 1874.

The APA SOP does have the origins of breeds in beginning of the breed description. The 2010 APA SOP has several more breeds/varieties than the earlier versions. Most of the descriptions are the same through the years, with slight changes made to clarify points.

The last REAL stringman was Wilber Stauffer of Canton OH who just recently passed.

Walt

Not to take anthing away from Wilber who was a great chicken man but there's another, still living Stringman out there. John Hayes of Mt Upton, NY. John is listed in "The Stringman's Scrapbook". He's well into his 80s & while he doesn't show much anymore he does still have a few birds. He developed argueably the best strain of Blue Andalusians in the country.

 

[NYREDS]

I am one that feels like im in the dark as far as SOP goes. I have never read it. I would like too. I have looked on line for it with no prevail. does anyone know how I could geta copy of this to read? how is one to apply this to there flock if ya cant get it?

Dupicate post-sorry.

 

[AllenWMiller]

Thank you Fowlman and NYReds for keeping me up to date it is greatly appreciated and I am pleased that some contemporaries are still out there. Without this medium I would not know any of this. I went to my last WW2 reunion 2 years ago and wish there was a reunion for old poultrymen as I could reminisce with them.

As I've said I'm learning good things everyday thanks to you all!

 

[IowaHeritage]

Hello Allen,

I told you that I would be learning from you, and that prediction has certainly come true on this thread alone.

My guess is many of us envy your grandson but are glad he showed you the way to this site.

Please continue to lecture, write or whatever you wish as we are all eager to glean your knowledge.

I only wish I could deliver your chicks in person.........

Thanks,
Gregg


__________________________________________________________________________________________________



.

 

[AllenWMiller]

Thank you for your kind remarks Greg. I only wish I was still able to travel and come see your flock first hand that would be most special for me.

I'm not certain most would envy my grandson as he's had a difficult, hard life and has suffered great losses. Now he has to a great extent become my eyes and hands and legs in the coop as I can only get around in warmer weather as my grandson won't let me outside in cold weather though I've been lucky for the last few weeks as it has been very mild here; certainly not like last winter.

I muse that as an old poultry-man gets older he becomes much like a chick depending ever more on his caretaker; but I am most fortunate in this regard to have an excellent poultry-man caring for me!

And yes I am most grateful that he guided me to use the computer as I was laid up last year with a fracture of the hip. Long hours in bed were made easier when I was able to read and research without having to get to my library shelves. I often wonder if people realize how fortunate they are with the computer? Or is it like all technology that we take it for granted. I suppose it is all about perspective.

 

[chicken_boy_Kurt]

I've been reading bits of this thread since the beginning. I just read through the whole thing, and I have a question. I apologize if it was already asked.

Is it really necessary to sacrifice production for exhibition qualities? Shouldn't the SOP be describing a bird that has good production qualities? (For the most part.) I'm talking about birds that were developed for production originally, like Leghorns, Plymouth Rocks, RIRs, etc. I realize that some breeds were developed for reasons other than production, so they will obviously still not be the best egg or meat producers. But the birds that were originally bred for production, although they are now being bred for production, I think that the SOP would describe a bird that still has decent production qualities.

Does that make sense?

 

[capayvalleychick]

Is it really necessary to sacrifice production for exhibition qualities? Shouldn't the SOP be describing a bird that has good production qualities? (For the most part.) I'm talking about birds that were developed for production originally, like Leghorns, Plymouth Rocks, RIRs, etc. I realize that some breeds were developed for reasons other than production, so they will obviously still not be the best egg or meat producers. But the birds that were originally bred for production, although they are now being bred for production, I think that the SOP would describe a bird that still has decent production qualities.

This was a real concern to me, also. Utility is of primary importance to me. When I first started raising chickens, I ignored the concept of breeding toward the SOP because I thought that it promoted fancy rather than productive. At that time, I had never been to a poultry show or read the SOP. I assumed that poultry showing was like AKC dog showing, and I oppose that kind of breeding toward extremes with less thought to function.
Three years ago, a friend took me to my first poultry show. This opened my eyes. I'm embarrassed to admit to you old timers that I saw for the first time that type defines the breeds, rather than color. I also saw the huge difference in exhibition poultry in contrast to hatchery chickens. I do still wonder about weight differences. I'd like to see the weights of those birds (LF) to see if they fall within what is written in the SOP. I hope that doesn't sound rude, I'm simply curious.
My actual point in replying to you, is that I think that the (APA) SOP for those production breeds is written for production qualities. Yes, I finally bought the APA SOP, and have had another eye opening. Some crying, too, when I realized how many culls I've been feeding.
Look on pg. 21, where they show head & body characteristics indicative of vigor and productiveness. Reading the interpretation of standard, starting on pg. 28, I felt that this was written with utility in mind. What I don't know, is whether trends or judging have changed some of those exhibition breeds to where they are winning shows but are no longer productive. The SOP itself, IMO looks to have been written to protect production qualities. My own, very limited, personal experience with the breeds that I raise, is that both have not been bred to meet the SOP for so long that they have lost much of their utility.

I am an old newbie. I've had mutt chickens for around 20 years. Started breeding Silver Gray Dorkings in 2005, have done an awful job of it, and am now trying to get educated enough to do it right. Also added Delaware chickens in 2010. So, I have my work cut out for me.

Kim

 

[AllenWMiller]

To answer your question Kurt I would kindly just defer to Kim's most appropriate response.

It only takes are read over of the SOP to realize there is more to it than just producing a pretty show standard. This is why I started this thread and continue to emphasize the importance of SOP breeding as it applies to us all who are interested in chickens generally.

Remember as I've stated, the founders of the APA/ABA and the SOP were a mix of people from various backgrounds. You had fanciers and show folk yes, but you also had productionists and breeders and average home flock owners and small holders (what we today call backyard holders). I would like to tell everyone that some of the best fanciers were and still are breeders. Likewise there were more than a few production poultry-men who were avid fanciers and show folk. This is why the SOP is so much a part of chicken life in general; as a result of this cumulative foundation of knowledge.

I also want to thank everyone for coming to this table and showing me and everyone that there are a lot of people as knowledgeable and grounded in SOP and breeding as I or anyone could be.

And one thing I would encourage everyone to do is pay the dues and join the APA/ABA to strengthen the Associations. You can complain about the APA/APA just being about "shows" and "pampered" birds or you could get involved and inject new blood into the APA/ABA and get your voice heard and relevant issues that you all think are important. This way there would be hope to steer the ABA back to it's foundation and rejoin the whole poultry community.

(Note here: I am not affiliated with the APA or the ABA nor am I a member so no I have no vested interest in promoting either or both Associations. I am also not sure if my grandson is a member anymore.)

 

[ejb3810]

Allen, it is indeed a pleasure to find this thread and enjoy the articulation and knowledge that you are contributing. I have a question regarding your thoughts on inbreeding as a tool to advance desired physical, mental and production characteristics in poultry. On another thread it has been stated that most recessive genes cause adverse results in fowl. It has been my thinking that in some cases that may be true, but certainly not all or most even.
How would you suggest to use inbreeding in an effective breeding program, or would you advise against it ?