The Heritage Rhode Island Red Site

[JanetMarie]

I can understand what One Chick Two is saying. I have Production Reds and Heritage RIRs. In my research the original RIRs were created to be dual purpose, not show birds as they are today. Probably the feathers of the HRIRs today are darker than the original. My heritage RIRs are not dual purpose, but they were advertised as exhibition quality. They are heavy, compact, and brick shaped, with very dark feathers which are a little stringy. Poor egg layers, and the shells are not as thick as my other breeds' egg shells. They may be poor layers because they lay for a short time in the spring, and then they all go broody. Two go broody twice in a season. They also are very sweet and shy. Just pointing out I think she is right about the original purpose of the Heritage RIRs and they probably are different today than they were then. Maybe this is already covered in this thread and I'm repeating, but I would go cross-eyed reading all the posts!

 

[One Chick Two]

There are standard RIR's as well as heritage which are not production reds. I have had both. I still have a few of my standards but now I'm concentrating more on my heritage breeds. My standards are getting pretty old. I will keep them until the end of their days. My pens are set up for my heritages and the rest go into my pens that have the birds I do not breed and my older birds.

Also Rhode Island Reds were admitted to the APA's Standard Of Perfection in 1904. http://rirca.poultrysites.com/

Here are some of my standard RIR's. These pictures are pretty old and the girls are long gone too. My avitar is of one of my heritage girls.

Lovely girls! Hatching buddies. They looked very sweet.

Perhaps maybe...?

He said his birds seemed slightly darker than your RIR girls were, yet not quite as dark as your heritage gal, more... chocolate-ly? A bit more mahogany-golden red brown? More like this PR in hue, so perhaps...RIR? Also added, that his birds all looked virtually all the same- like clones. (PR all look vastly different from each other.)

 

[One Chick Two]

Give Dick Horstman a call and place an order for a dozen single comb Rhode Island chicks. You will be pleased with them.

Thank you very much!
And thank you to those who PM'd. I really appreciate all the assistance.

 

[cmom]

Quote:

Her beak looks more like a standard RIR. Every RIR's being a standard or heritage the color can vary and some may be darker or lighter than others. Heritage beaks are very dark and they have the brown horn color down the front of their legs. Also the legs can have more or less of the horn color down the fronts of them. You may have heritage but just not what I'm used to seeing. Again good luck with your birds. If you are looking for more heritage I agree Dick Horstman has nice birds. Also you can many times find some at poultry shows. At the poultry show I attended recently I took some to sell and sold them all. I do take pride in my birds as well.

Here are some more pictures of my heritage at different ages. They are a specific line, Reese/Mohawk. The boy in the front is my boy that recently won Champion American at a recent show. This picture was taken awhile ago. He has filled out more since this picture was taken.



















This is my boy that recently won Champion American at a show when he was young. His legs had very light horn coloring down the fronts and I thought it may have cost him some points but he is a very handsome bird now. From this picture you wouldn't know it.

 

[cmom]

I can understand what One Chick Two is saying. I have Production Reds and Heritage RIRs. In my research the original RIRs were created to be dual purpose, not show birds as they are today. Probably the feathers of the HRIRs today are darker than the original. My heritage RIRs are not dual purpose, but they were advertised as exhibition quality. They are heavy, compact, and brick shaped, with very dark feathers which are a little stringy. Poor egg layers, and the shells are not as thick as my other breeds' egg shells. They may be poor layers because they lay for a short time in the spring, and then they all go broody. Two go broody twice in a season. They also are very sweet and shy. Just pointing out I think she is right about the original purpose of the Heritage RIRs and they probably are different today than they were then. Maybe this is already covered in this thread and I'm repeating, but I would go cross-eyed reading all the posts!

When you get the time as well as One Chick Two, just read a few posts at a time until you read the whole thread. There is a lot of good information here. What line is your Heritage RIR's? I have Reese/Mohawk line and mine are very good layers. Right now I'm not getting a lot of eggs from them as they are molting but am still getting some eggs from them. Normally mine lay very well. I'm not sure if it depends on the line. Also I am very picky about the feed they get. I do feed my birds Show Gold feed and if for some reason I can't get it I will feed them Game Bird feed. It is a little higher in protein than regular layer feed.

 

[Fred's Hens]

I can understand what One Chick Two is saying. I have Production Reds and Heritage RIRs. In my research the original RIRs were created to be dual purpose, not show birds as they are today. Probably the feathers of the HRIRs today are darker than the original. My heritage RIRs are not dual purpose, but they were advertised as exhibition quality. They are heavy, compact, and brick shaped, with very dark feathers which are a little stringy. Poor egg layers, and the shells are not as thick as my other breeds' egg shells. They may be poor layers because they lay for a short time in the spring, and then they all go broody. Two go broody twice in a season. They also are very sweet and shy. Just pointing out I think she is right about the original purpose of the Heritage RIRs and they probably are different today than they were then. Maybe this is already covered in this thread and I'm repeating, but I would go cross-eyed reading all the posts!

I would be cautious about over stating generalities. There is no one, single, over riding truism, regarding egg laying or broodiness, that can be applied to the Rhode Island Reds. BTW, there is no such thing as a separate breed called "heritage" and another called "regular" Rhode Island Reds. The birds are either bred to the Standard set for them as a breed or they are not. It's that simple. The term "heritage" was used in this thread as a means of getting folks attention, as bait to lure to people in, but that's all it is. There is no breed short-handed with the initials "HRIR".



The Standard written for the breed merely describes the color as "lustrous, rich dark red". The precision of where that color falls on a chip chart is a matter of some debate and the breeder's taste. However, there is much, much more in the Standard for the breed than merely the color. The comb, head, tail, legs and particularly the body shape is unique to the Red. Even if you were to have good color, the body shape is mandatory and I've not seen hatchery stock with anything close to the proper shape (nor color for that matter) Worth spending some time reviewing the Standard, actually. Long, long ago the Reds took a big fork in the road, with some folks pushing for more and more egg laying and "blending into" the Reds, a lot of Brown Leghorn blood to accomplish that goal. Others, kept pursuing the more exotic, rich, dark, lustrous mahogany Red color and true type for their birds. The former dominate the feed store and hatchery kinds of Reds, which the latter are quite rare and only limited number of them exist.


One cannot generalize about broodiness, egg laying nor many other things. Each strain or long established line is unique and may have been pushed by the long time breeder in a certain direction, therefor generalities cannot apply to all RIR. I've have some bred-to-the Standard, exquisite Reds that are outstanding layers, for example.

 

[One Chick Two]

I would be cautious about over stating generalities. There is no one, single, over riding truism, regarding egg laying or broodiness, that can be applied to the Rhode Island Reds. BTW, there is no such thing as a separate breed called "heritage" and another called "regular" Rhode Island Reds. The birds are either bred to the Standard set for them as a breed or they are not. It's that simple. The term "heritage" was used in this thread as a means of getting folks attention, as bait to lure to people in, but that's all it is. There is no breed short-handed with the initials "HRIR".



The Standard written for the breed merely describes the color as "lustrous, rich dark red". The precision of where that color falls on a chip chart is a matter of some debate and the breeder's taste. However, there is much, much more in the Standard for the breed than merely the color. The comb, head, tail, legs and particularly the body shape is unique to the Red. Even if you were to have good color, the body shape is mandatory and I've not seen hatchery stock with anything close to the proper shape (nor color for that matter) Worth spending some time reviewing the Standard, actually. Long, long ago the Reds took a big fork in the road, with some folks pushing for more and more egg laying and "blending into" the Reds, a lot of Brown Leghorn blood to accomplish that goal. Others, kept pursuing the more exotic, rich, dark, lustrous mahogany Red color and true type for their birds. The former dominate the feed store and hatchery kinds of Reds, which the latter are quite rare and only limited number of them exist.


One cannot generalize about broodiness, egg laying nor many other things. Each strain or long established line is unique and may have been pushed by the long time breeder in a certain direction, therefor generalities cannot apply to all RIR. I've have some bred-to-the Standard, exquisite Reds that are outstanding layers, for example.

Thank you Fred's Hens. Knowing about the split helps very much. When you spoke about the 'blending' I was told by an old breeder the hybrid breeding began 1978, by a woman breeder (name escapes.) who was looking for a better egg producer. We just assumed that RIR pre, mid 70's that were not mixed with other breeds must have been inherently be heritage.

Quote:
Thank you. And thanks for showing the bird's age photos. Your birds look very pretty! I will read this whole thread eventually as well. (~Sigh.~)

My husband's birds as a kid were originally brought to them by an old farmer, and he had bred his birds for years. He did not name his birds, nor did my husband name his, even though they bred his birds for at least 10 more years. The photo I shared was just of one of our hatchery Production reds that I was just trying to illustrate the feather hue difference the best I could.

Thanks for all of the helpful suggestions and thoughts!

 

[Fred's Hens]

The "divide" was much, much earlier than 1978.

There were egg laying contests in the 1930's and big, big money was at stake in their contests and lots of breeders were accused of cheating and infusing their birds with Mediterranean blood to jack up laying rates.

The breeds are not species. They're made man composites from many breeds. The Red was a brand new composite at the turn of the previous century. It took decades for the breed to settle into a more fixed composite and slight tweaking of the written Standard, for many American breeds, was fairly common up to 1920.

The great divide between the lighter, heavy egg laying Red and the darker, modern exhibition Red likely took place around WW II. Following the war, the adaption of the genetics studies in poultry, followed by the modern industrial hybrids for extreme meat production on one side (CX meat bird types) and all the extreme egg laying hybrids for battery houses came later, circa 1970.

The bottom line is that the photos you showed were of a hatchery stock type RIR. Remember that "showing" in 4H involves teaching agriculture to youth and focuses on husbandry and the "show" was to demonstrate what the 4H student had learned, mastered and accomplished. If the bird is judged, it is mostly to see how well it was cared for by the 4H student. It is not judged for meeting any breed standards. It isn't a beauty show, but a practical, agriculture, education oriented "show".

Then or now, the 4H or Fair type "show" has very little in common with a Poultry Exhibition such as we speak of here, where instead, the bird is judged as to it's breeding against the Standard of Perfection. Two completely different kinds of "shows" really.

 

[One Chick Two]

The "divide" was much, much earlier than 1978.

There were egg laying contests in the 1930's and big, big money was at stake in their contests and lots of breeders were accused of cheating and infusing their birds with Mediterranean blood to jack up laying rates.

The breeds are not species. They're made man composites from many breeds. The Red was a brand new composite at the turn of the previous century. It took decades for the breed to settle into a more fixed composite and slight tweaking of the written Standard, for many American breeds, was fairly common up to 1920.

The great divide between the lighter, heavy egg laying Red and the darker, modern exhibition Red likely took place around WW II. Following the war, the adaption of the genetics studies in poultry, followed by the modern industrial hybrids for extreme meat production on one side (CX meat bird types) and all the extreme egg laying hybrids for battery houses came later, circa 1970.

The bottom line is that the photos you showed were of a hatchery stock type RIR. Remember that "showing" in 4H involves teaching agriculture to youth and focuses on husbandry and the "show" was to demonstrate what the 4H student had learned, mastered and accomplished. If the bird is judged, it is mostly to see how well it was cared for by the 4H student. It is not judged for meeting any breed standards. It isn't a beauty show, but a practical, agriculture, education oriented "show".

Then or now, the 4H or Fair type "show" has very little in common with a Poultry Exhibition such as we speak of here, where instead, the bird is judged as to it's breeding against the Standard of Perfection. Two completely different kinds of "shows" really.

Thank you. Just excellent, educational information.

I know the family didn't purchase hatchery chicks themselves, but, who knows what the farmer had...? lol

 

[JanetMarie]

When you get the time as well as One Chick Two, just read a few posts at a time until you read the whole thread. There is a lot of good information here. What line is your Heritage RIR's? I have Reese/Mohawk line and mine are very good layers. Right now I'm not getting a lot of eggs from them as they are molting but am still getting some eggs from them. Normally mine lay very well. I'm not sure if it depends on the line. Also I am very picky about the feed they get. I do feed my birds Show Gold feed and if for some reason I can't get it I will feed them Game Bird feed. It is a little higher in protein than regular layer feed.

Mine are the Underwood line. I have read some of this thread and someone else who has Reese/Mohawk line said they are very good layers. I'm not sure if it depends the line also. I question the breeding of these however, because when they were chicks they grew very slowly, one died as if it starved, one had a leg problem common to the meat bird industry (which should not have happened since mine were very slow growing). I know it wasn't error on my part, because I had some other chick breeds at the same time that grew well and thrived, and chicks I have raised before and after that have grew well also. I also read I awhile ago (maybe on this site) that the Underwood line grows quickly, but mine did not. So if I get that line again, I will try a different breeder. Also, I buy organic whole grains and grind and mix the food myself, with additives for other nutrients (the recipe changes somewhat according to season, chicks, adults, etc.) and free range.