Sumatra Thread!

do you! That's awesome. Only know of one other person in the US that still has that line. They originally came that way too , well at least her line if they are the same.... it's very rare to find, but they are out there.. glad to hear you have at least 1 left...
I'm going to stick a few of her eggs under a broody again and see if I get another blue egg layer. A chick I sold last year to a friend lays blue eggs as well. Her eggs unfortunately seem to mainly hatch roosters.
 
Where did they get the blue egg laying gene?
I don't know much about the black old English game, but they were crossed with Sumatras in the 1970's. That was in britain not America though.
So my bird Sid has quite a games look and he is from a English strain so I think years back there's some old English in him. The american suatras look more like Sumatras should.

You know how you get really short legged Sumatras, do you reckon they have a bit of silkie in them?
 
not really, on a first time cross to a silkie you don't get the silkie feathers at all, you have to back cross a few times to get the silkie feathers back. Of the silkie Sumatra crosses that have happened here by pure accident, they were built more like a silkie and had lightly feathered shanks and any where from a small to medium size crest, and generally 5 toes and blue ear lobes.

I think with the shorter legs, its like the bigger is better deal. Instead of taking a too big of a bird and breeding it to others for bigger size, you take a bird that's to small and breed down your regular size birds
 
A blue egg laying sumatra would be easy as heck to make. We used to have black araucanas that would get black faces when they were in any amount of sunlight. Just take a tailed araucana from one of those lines and mate it to a good sumatra and you have a blue egg laying sumatra. The bodies are similar in build for the most part, both have pea combs and red based earlobes, yellow skin, black legs, all that good stuff. Since sumatras lay nearly white eggs anyway, the blue wouldn't be affected. Or like the folks that cross in sumatra to improve their araucanas, it is pretty easy to go from one to the other if you know what you're doing
 
I only like a purebred Sumatra, but my grandpa made a lovely Sumatra cross salt and pepper. I think one of my hens could have a very slight bit of silkie in her as she has extremely short legs and quite puffy feathers.

Any way last might my neighbours had a fox or a mink or something come through and it killed all their chicken.
It's not to much of a loss for them because they don't even know what breed they own but still its not good for me.
 
then it's is not a pure sumatra if it is bred with a Araucanas. I thought you guys where all for the original wild sumatras?
I am all for the original wild style sumatras. The blacks we have and even the duns are more wild like than the domestic, frumpy blues. The sad thing about the araucana crosses is that a blue araucana x sumatra looks more like a sumatra than many of the show strains I've seen. I have never made the cross but it has crossed my mind from time to time. Also, look at the bantam sumatras, they had rose comb bantams, OEGB, and heaven only knows what else mixed in which is why they look so domestic. If I had to choose, I would take an araucana x sumatra over any of the really long tailed, soft feathered show strains that are out there these days but that's just my opinion. The araucana crosses would at least be more feral like and good farm birds
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom