Bob Blosl's Heritage Large Fowl Thread

[cbnovick]

I know it I feel very fortunate to have some just like him which could/should be siblings or other previous broods/ hatch mates and I too have some half and halfs that he is the sire of. I'm looking forward to maybe one two outstanding individuals as he, well I have a couple already, but I'm interested in the crosses with him involved in too.




.
Thank to Mrs.Kathy and Jeremy(j-whip) too.


Jeff

Jeff- I think you hatched some of Jwhip's half and halfs too recently??? I would love to see pics...(-:
Here's a big "Hats off" to Kathy and Jeremy for making this cross available!!!!!

 

[Fred's Hens]

Enjoy this thread, but it saddens me not to see any White Rocks. One would think they'd gone the way of the dodo bird.

 

[3riverschick]

http://tinyurl.com/csde7dw
THE IMPORTANCE OF RHODE ISLAND RED FEATHER
QUALITY AND FEATHER CHARACTER
By Arthur O. Schilling Poultry Artist, Breeder, and Judge

Hi Walt, Bob and All,

I have been reading the above section in the "Knowledge" book.

Schilling covers the following 4 aspects of correct RIR plumage:

Feather Shape: Broad feathered
Feather Quality: Fine texure
Feather Substance: Feeling of thickness or substance
Feather Finish: Lusterous sheen

Have I got this synopsis correct? Are these the right definitions of the terms?



Then he sums up all of them by writing:

Schilling on HRIR plumage: " When you have a fine broad feathered female her plumage will have the feel of fine texture velvet as you pass your hand over her back or shoulders. The feather will have a feeling of thickness or substance, and she will carry a luster that is almost irridescent. She will have a sheen that is beautiful."



Do these terms and descriptions also apply to the male? How much of this knowledge can I take and directly apply to my Sussex fowl? How much is breed specific to HRIR?

Thanks,

Karen

 

[suncatcher]

I am still reading here, lots of pages with great info! Just marking my place.......

 

[catdaddyfro]

Enjoy this thread, but it saddens me not to see any White Rocks. One would think they'd gone the way of the dodo bird.

I have a standing order for WR eggs(J-whips) this season I surely hope it comes about for me,

Just got my call from the P.O. about 60 mi. away my Columbian Rock chicks(Yard full of rocks line from Fogellys group) will be here at 6A.M. in the mornin' whoot

hoot

lol

Jeff
its like Christmas all over again LOL

Maybe we could use this to drop a hint to either or both Jeremy, Mrs. Kathy, and Matt to post up us some of their eye candy to whet our appetities for a spell.

 

[catdaddyfro]

Jeff- I think you hatched some of Jwhip's half and halfs too recently??? I would love to see pics...(-:
Here's a big "Hats off" to Kathy and Jeremy for making this cross available!!!!!

I do, thats the half and half's I was referring to, I don't have pics maybe I could muster up some soon enough.

Jeremy has some of his own, gjensen has some and now Mrs, Kathy I heard got a passel of them started up too.

They are nice too I'm really liking what I'm seeing thus far. I don't know about the showing aspect but I think the utility of the breed is there or going to be there, just what these were bred -up for. Their prettiness and showmanship just so happened to come along as a bonus/side order. LOL

Jeff

 

[3riverschick]

HI!,
Some questions for the veterans, please:
I know at the beginning of the last century, in Britain, Red Sussex had it hard because they were so often
confused with RIR. The Sussex Standard requires a "close knitted" feather. Is that because they need
a close-knitted feather in order to get the correct width of feather?
The darker the feather, the more resistant it is to feather abrasion. Light Sussex have white bodies with
Columbian restriction. So the white feathers should be less abrasion resistant, right?... but they are still
abrasion resistant in spite of their color because they are "closely-knitted"?
Sussex were also "Cochinized" during the fad for melding Asiatic breeds into Western breeds. Schilling
writes (paraphrase) that when feathers are silky (Cochin influence) the under-color is deeper because the
outer part of the feather is so frail and needy, more pigment stays in the more robust under-plumage.
I remain incompletely educated

about the reasons behind the Sussex fowl breeders battle with colored
under-plumage in the Light Sussex during the same period Schilling discusses above.
At first I thought it was the effort to get rid of foreign blood.
Then I thought it was because of the mixture of locuses behind the foundation breeds which created the Light Sussex.
( 3 shots of eb and one shot of eWh..now the Light Sussex is eWh based).
Now I am wondering if it was because they were working to create quality feathering on this variety.
Light Sussex have Cochin behind them. Maybe they were trying to get away from the silky feathers (which had
darker under-color) ..so they were insisting on "white to the skin" in the plumage?
They could not have silky feathers and have it "white to the skin", right?.. if they
were dealing with Co restriction of black on a white bird? Am I close to correct?
Thanks for sharing,
Karen

 

[3riverschick]

I do, thats the half and half's I was referring to, I don't have pics maybe I could muster up some soon enough.

Jeremy has some of his own, gjensen has some and now Mrs, Kathy I heard got a passel of them started up too.

They are nice too I'm really liking what I'm seeing thus far. I don't know about the showing aspect but I think the utility of the breed is there or going to be there, just what these were bred -up for. Their prettiness and showmanship just so happened to come along as a bonus/side order. LOL

Jeff

Hi Jeff,
I was reading up on the bold type today in the Schilling RIR book. He says that when proper feathering is bred for, that body type also becomes more correct. I don't understand why, but thought it was a fascinating thought.
Best,
Karen

 

[Yellow House Farm]

In echo of all in response to that male, "Wow!" That was a surprise. Pretty chill.

 

[fowlman01]

Hi Jeff,
I was reading up o the bold type today in the Schiiling RIR book. He says that when proper feathering is bred for, that body type also becomes more correct. I don't understand why, but thought it was a fascinating thought.
Best,
Karen

If you think about feathers being the outside/exterior ........the part we see.......it makes sense . One of the best examples of how feathers can affect the way the birds can look just because of the type of feathers, are the British Orps and the American Orps.. Other than the head, the bodies should be the same, but these two look quite different. You have to have the right kind of feathers for the breed or it will be very hard to get them to look right. You can't fix a bad body with feathers, so feathers are just a part of the visual.

Walt