In Defense Of Breeders

[Fred's Hens]

Fred I don't mean any disrespect...


But let me defend what I do and what I am doing for a living.

But please spend some time learning about the history of how 4 way crosses were achieved, before you start bashing the industry. Of course you won't find this online. We really "don't care" for the APA version of them, but we have them, and we care more than most people do.

IR type Delaware, Vantress R Cornish, Colombian, Blue, and black New hampshires, are just some of the industrial heritage birds I can name off hand raised by one poultry farm in the sates for there meat breeding program. So please learn a bit more before you say misleading things, while these may not be APA heritage, they are technically a heritage breed by most other standards, and they breed true.

As I speak now I am scouring North America for the best production bred heritage birds I can find, so yes we do care about heritage breeds, they were crucial but we have let them go now to many strains have been mixed in with or bred into show strains and that is not always a good thing from a genetics stand point.

Unless you have bred a production bird you can not fully understand the role that heritage birds play, but today only certain flocks make the cut into a breeding program....

Not bashing the commercial industry at all. The birds are amazing. I kept them, on the egg side of things, for years and years and fully appreciate their capabilities and the work done to create them.

​

 

[call ducks]

Quote:
Seems like you were implying that we don't keep or utilize heritage breeds?

Quote:
This right here kind of paints it in a bad light. And there is a middle dual purpose production bred bird by Lohmann called the Lohmann dual that is being pushed in the German market because of regulations that may come into play...

The point is to say that we don't care about heritage birds is widely inaccurate when ever a company starts a new project the have to have starting flocks they don't just mix all of there pre-existing flocks together. I guess I am in a unique place that no else on the forums is, greater than a hobbyist but less than one of the big players.

 

[gjensen]

It still requires closely bred strains to make the crosses. Those "inbred" strains were the real achievement. Not the crosses themselves.

 

[gjensen]

I admire the ability of certain breeders and their achievements. It is a craft. It is not something that is picked up on overnight.

What I admire most is the breeders that have stuck it out with a breed or two, and have become known for them over time. I have found them to be generous, and thoughtful. It takes no small commitment to make continued progress over years and years.

There is a lot of people doing this and that, but very few that can claim sustained success of a decade or even more with a particular breed.

Very few hobbies have the opportunities that this hobby has to offer, or especially has the history that this one does.

 

[Fred's Hens]

Seems like you were implying that we don't keep or utilize heritage breeds?


This right here kind of paints it in a bad light. And there is a middle dual purpose production bred bird by Lohmann called the Lohmann dual that is being pushed in the German market because of regulations that may come into play...

The point is to say that we don't care about heritage birds is widely inaccurate when ever a company starts a new project the have to have starting flocks they don't just mix all of there pre-existing flocks together. I guess I am in a unique place that no else on the forums is, greater than a hobbyist but less than one of the big players.

Yet you yourself stated: We really "don't care" for the APA version of them. That is a rather curious statement to make on a forum which is expressly intended, as per the sticky, as a place for APA breeds,

Fully aware that searching for good DNA may always be an ongoing need. Given the hundreds and hundreds of APA accepted breeds and varieties, it stretches my own sense of credulousness to wrap my mind around how much interest there may be in all those varieties, but that is my issue. I sure don't wish to re-open the whole "heritage" breed thing on this particular thread. That's a whole 'nother quagmire altogether.

I've nothing against the industry. Nothing whatsoever. I say again, as I have enjoyed the industries products for years. If you heard my comments that way, I apologize.


Thus, I bow out

Peace

 

[racertomtom]

I have the upmost respect for all successful breeders, be it a corporate conglomerate that produces meat fowls in seven weeks or a commercial hatchery producing egg layers that lay two eggs per day. Both are amazing accomplishments.

The best I can tell, this thread was aimed at the Heritage Breeder. With that said, I have some issues with the wide spread use of the term “heritage Breed”. By definition, heritage refers to something inherited from the past. A Cornish x Rock is not a heritage breed even though it was derived from heritage breeds. These new varieties that have not yet been accepted, technically, are not even breeds, even though they possess the general characteristics of a particular breed. To consider these birds a heritage breed is at best an oxymoron or a marketing strategy. They were not inherited from anyone’s past, yet they are still great accomplishments.

 

[Manningjw]

I have the upmost respect for all successful breeders, be it a corporate conglomerate that produces meat fowls in seven weeks or a commercial hatchery producing egg layers that lay two eggs per day. Both are amazing accomplishments.

The best I can tell, this thread was aimed at the Heritage Breeder. With that said, I have some issues with the wide spread use of the term “heritage Breed”. By definition, heritage refers to something inherited from the past. A Cornish x Rock is not a heritage breed even though it was derived from heritage breeds. These new varieties that have not yet been accepted, technically, are not even breeds, even though they possess the general characteristics of a particular breed. To consider these birds a heritage breed is at best an oxymoron or a marketing strategy. They were not inherited from anyone’s past, yet they are still great accomplishments.

I don't think anyone made the claim that hybrid chickens are heritage - no one can. They do not breed true and they are not going to follow an APA label, because they are a hybrid.

I can only speculate what call ducks was arguing, but it seems like he is saying he cares about heritage breeds that are bred for what they were intended not necessarily APA label? Not sure.

It is all about what is important to you. In the early 1900's when Australorps were breaking the egg laying records they held actual egg laying competitions. Many different breeders submitting X number of their birds to live under the same conditions and strict egg counts and the winner was the breeder who had the best stock. The birds that won had nothing to do with APA and everything to do with how useful the bird was. I would love to find an Australorp that even under modern lighting regiments and feed could match their original production numbers - they should.

 

[call ducks]

Quote: Fred unforently the genetics seems to go with APA for some reason I don't get it!

 

[call ducks]

Quote:
Hey ManningJw,

That's about half of it, but what I am saying is we care about heritage birds, because with out them the smaller ones (like myself) can't start new projects. Some of us maintain flocks just for one trait (IE, a K/K flock of New hampsires, or k/k flock of New Hampsires). We have a lot of what I am going to call "Industral" heritage bird because they meet every requirement other than the APA one. The thing about APA that I really don't like is you are breeding for a few simple traits in the grand scheme of things, with small inbred flocks sadly it does a breed no justice.

 

[3riverschick]

Fred unforently the genetics seems to go with APA for some reason I don't get it!

Call Ducks, If you are breeding Light Sussex for production purposes, you are
breeding to the SOP whether you like it or not. Read the Standard, then read
the requirements for a productive fowl in either meat or eggs. They are the same.
The Light Sussex was cleverly created and balanced by legendary breeders who understood
you could have the best of both worlds in one breed. This is the tradition and history of the
Light Sussex. It is of all the Sussex varieties. I know you adhere to population genetics
curriculum. That's fine and a good thing. However, in the Sussex breed ( I don't know about
other breeds) but in the Sussex breed, production virtues and the description in the Standard
are the same thing. This is not by chance, it is by design. So, unfortunately, if you want to tout
the superiority of population genetics over standard SOP breeding practices , you need to
choose another breed.
Yes, I know what I am talking about because the first thing I do when entering
an animal breeding project is study the breed exhaustively. Why? Because until we
know the history and origins of a breed, we won't understand the nuances of a breed.
Understanding these nuances is critical to selecting for proper breed type. Which is critical to
success for a breeder. Let me also add that until Sussex breeders understand the nuances
behind the Sussex breed type which grants excellent production in all three arenas of expectation
( eggs, meat and show) we will continue to see unbalanced Sussex which excel in one area(s)
and fail in other(s). That is not the fault of the breeding technique, it is the fault of the
uneducated breeder. ( Please note the last 2 sentences are general statements of fact
( not opinion) and not pointed at anyone in particular, thank you.)
Best Regards,
Karen
Waterford English Light Sussex
western PA, USA