Why is there such a bias against hatcheries?

[Michael Apple]

Some hatcheries have better stock than others. Some breeders are more attentive to their breeding programs than others. When it becomes more about money than anything else, it shows in their stock. I won't mention names in this thread, but there are hatcheries I will never do business with again because of their stock. Those that produce healthy chicks I buy will be recommended. The best way to hit the breeders and hatcheries who are irresponsible is give them no business.

 

[Michael Apple]

Quote: Less shipping stress if you order from hatcheries in your own state or neighboring states. Time of year matters quite a bit.

 

[Bullitt]

Some hatcheries have better stock than others. Some breeders are more attentive to their breeding programs than others. When it becomes more about money than anything else, it shows in their stock. I won't mention names in this thread, but there are hatcheries I will never do business with again because of their stock. Those that produce healthy chicks I buy will be recommended. The best way to hit the breeders and hatcheries who are irresponsible is give them no business.

Of course there are good and bad hatcheries and there are good and bad breeders.

 

[Bullitt]

Less shipping stress if you order from hatcheries in your own state or neighboring states. Time of year matters quite a bit.

Right. I would guess spring and fall are best when it is not too cold or too hot.

 

[3KillerBs]

...

Low hatch rates can occur regardless of how they are bred. Some breeds such as English Orps may have low fertility because of excess feathers around the vent. That does not mean that the breeder is breading wrong. The breeder may just not want to trim the feathers. ...

As a person trained in evolution and population biology, I would have to say that an animal which has been bred to have features that make it difficult to reproduce successfully without human intervention is definitely being bred wrong.

If the breed standards call for a feature which results in low fertility then the standards themselves are faulty.

 

[DCchicken]

As a person trained in evolution and population biology, I would have to say that an animal which has been bred to have features that make it difficult to reproduce successfully without human intervention is definitely being bred wrong.

If the breed standards call for a feature which results in low fertility then the standards themselves are faulty.

As a published scientist I would have to disagree with your statement. Please provide actual proof before making such a broad statement as "definitely being bred wrong." I would suggest that with every choice in a breeding program, there are unexpected results that crop up. But that does not end with the conclusion that someone is breeding wrong. The more likely scenario is that the breeder was simply working with what they had available.

Let's try to get back on topic here. The original topic was about why some people do not choose hatcheries for their chicks. Let's not stray into topic where we call someone's breeding program wrong.

 

[call ducks]

Let's try to get back on topic here. The original topic was about why some people do not choose hatcheries for their chicks. Let's not stray into topic where we call someone's breeding program wrong.

Actually the original topic was about whey their is a Bias to hatcheries....

 

[Happy Chooks]

I see a whole lot of assumptions here about breeders that show their birds. How are you basing your knowledge of breeders who show? Do you have breeder stock? Do you know breeders that show their birds? Have you been to a show?

I have both breeder quality stock and hatchery stock. Some of my favorite birds are hatchery birds (my first hens) or mutts that I've hatched here.

Hatcheries are great at providing one thing - birds that are bred to lay a lot of eggs. And they do that well. Sometimes they look like the breed they are supposed to, and sometimes not. They also are great at bringing people into poultry, who then upgrade to breeder stock later on. This isn't a slight against hatcheries, but when someone wants more than egg production, this is the natural progression. This is what happened with me.

It is true that breeder stock will not produce as many eggs as hatchery stock. A good breeder will look at all aspects of the bird, both visually and their productivity. A great bird that doesn't lay eggs is not going to give you the ability to make more of them. Breeders I know are doing what they can to meet the SOP AND have strong layers. Will they ever meet up with hatchery production? No, that's not their sole purpose. Another very large reason that breeder quality stock will not lay as many eggs.............they go broody. This puts them out of commission for laying eggs for around 8 weeks (assuming you let them hatch babies). Hatchery birds have been bred away from broodiness because it affects their egg production, so it is not desired when you are trying to crank out chicks.

I don't believe there are any biases against hatchery birds, they do what they are supposed to. It all depends on what you want from your flock. The problem lies in when someone puts up a picture of their hatchery bird and wants to know if it is show worthy. Most hatchery birds will not be show quality - again, it's not what they are bred for. That is not to say a hatchery bird can't be shown, but the majority of hatchery birds will not do well at a show. If showing is your objective, then you purchase breeder quality birds.

You obviously prefer the hatchery Reds and there is nothing wrong with that. But I can assure you that the original reds were the heritage Rhode Island Reds, not the birds from the hatcheries. All I have to do is talk to my step dad, who raised them before the hatcheries were around.

 

[Michael Apple]

Judges have been known to hand out awards to those who have birds with nice plumage, but the body type leaves much to be desired upon further examination. this is a subject that arises in breed clubs. Those who actually show birds are aware of this. What people categorize as "hatchery quality" versus "breeder quality" is debatable also. A bird of good stature, healthy plumage, disease resistance, and good egg production should be the standard, not just a good looking bird with attractive plumage in its prime. Longevity should matter.

I saw white Plymouth Rocks win once at a show, and they were large, cumbersome, carried MG, and had excessively long toes. When bad judges reveal themselves, it is up to the hard working and scrupulous breeders to defrock them. I'm sure there are plenty of good judges out there, but the bad ones encourage the destruction of breed standards, in addition to those who are pleased by simply winning an award.

I've seen birds develop from hatchery birds who were entered in shows and won. So in the end, the hatchery quality versus breeder quality categories don't mean squat. It is similar to people who sell "papered pups". Just because the dog has AKC papers doesn't mean you're getting something superior.

Again, some hatcheries are good custodians of their stock and others aren't. We all learn from experience, and continue to learn so long as we raise chickens. The best way to stop the production of bad stock is to give those producers no business. The only reason they last is due to ignorance, or industry standards (or lack of them) who purchase their birds. They are used by patrons of KFC, McDonald's, Foster Farms, Tyson, etc. So it would be a good idea to boycott those businesses too.

 

[chicksurreal]

I'm appreciating all of the information presented in this thread. Thanks to everyone who cares to share what they know and their experiences with hatcheries vs. breeders.

I'm so new to chicken keeping that it's somewhat daunting to go through all of the information, these types of discussions help a lot.