SOP's Can you help, or do you want to learn?

[Ted Brown]

Fantastic video, Ted, thanks for sharing!

You are welcome but the credit for posting should be to @Sic who originally posted the link and to @Mrs. K who started this thread and asked that it be included here (I copied from Sic's post).

Moreover, I sort of started this but Mrs. K elaborated and has attracted responses that I have found very interesting and useful. Very much appreciated!

 

[Mrs. K]

Thank you, THANK YOU!!! to @Amer, and @Sic for taking time to explain to us. If you both would continue to post, I for one, (and it sounds like others too) have found this fascinating and an entirely new aspect to the hobby.

This afternoon, I went down and really looked at my rooster. He is just a mutt, so none of the standards apply to him, but good body and muscular development do. In my humble work, I have tried to always pay attention to toes and beaks, and keel.

I have had a rooster with a dark tail in the past with those white feathers at the base. I thought poorly of them. But I see them in one of the pictures above

 

[Sic]

This is what I had hoped to hear. I’ve seen the opposite in dog world standards that too often encourage breeding for oddities that many seem to feel are cute but in fact lead to respiratory problems, etc.

But if the original purpose of the breed is ornamental or oddity, that is what the breed will be. What is the practical purpose of a silky or frizzle, muffs, beards, crests, etc, they could be bred out, but instead, are bred for, oddity this or that becomes a defining feature of a breed. It says a lot about human nature.

 

[Sic]

Lack of prominent brow - can you explain or show in a picture?

The chantecler should have a prominent brow due to the Cornish in the creation of the breed.
Bruges fighters also have a wide skull with prominent brow and deep set eyes. Much of the physical bone structure of a breed can be seen even in day old chicks(wide skull, prominent brow, deep set eyes, wide body, length of wing, etc). Genetics determine the how of skeletal formation, environment can determine if the chick reaches its full potential.

 

[Amer]

But if the original purpose of the breed is ornamental or oddity, that is what the breed will be. What is the practical purpose of a silky or frizzle, muffs, beards, crests, etc, they could be bred out, but instead, are bred for, oddity this or that becomes a defining feature of a breed. It says a lot about human nature.

Yes! And the first chickens were bred for ornamental qualities, not practicality!
Though it's still better than trying to breed for the extreme production of Cornish Cross or laying hybrids.
Breeding for any extreme is bad. Unfortunately many people will interpret the words "large" or "small" in the Standard and assume it's now a competition for the largest or the smallest when really it means relative to the size of the bird.
Even Modern Games which are known for their slightness have "width" and firm muscling written into their standard because pullets without enough body won't be able to properly lay and and scrawniness just means a weak constitution.
Modern Games are perfectly sound but there are a few other traits that are nothing but frivolous.

 

[Sic]

The chantecler should have a prominent brow due to the Cornish in the creation of the breed.
Bruges fighters also have a wide skull with prominent brow and deep set eyes. Much of the physical bone structure of a breed can be seen even in day old chicks(wide skull, prominent brow, deep set eyes, wide body, length of wing, etc). Genetics determine the how of skeletal formation, environment can determine if the chick reaches its full potential.

To carry on with this on one day old chicks, if the standard calls for long wings, the yellow chick has a wing length a little more than the width of its body, the dark chick has a wing length twice the width of its body, the important aspect is not the wing length, it's also relative to the width of the body, so you have to look at which has the more correct width of body and wing. In this case, the dark chick has a narrower body frame than the yellow, and a narrower skull, so my selection here would be towards the yellow chick. If, and it's a big if ...I didn't care about a breed standard at all, I might prefer to select on color and flight abilities for free range environment and choose the dark chick. Everyone has to determine for themselves what their own goals are, my personal goals are to conserve old or rare breeds, not to change , improve to fit my specific needs or desires, therefore my selection criteria will always be towards the standard of their respective breeds.

 

[Amer]

Everyone has to determine for themselves what their own goals are, my personal goals are to conserve old or rare breeds, not to change , improve to fit my specific needs or desires, therefore my selection criteria will always be towards the standard of their respective breeds.

Me too.
However it helps that my breed of choice aligns with what I consider the ideal beauty/personality/hardiness for a chicken
For me, there will be no other.

 

[Auntiejessi3]

Very good thread idea! Thank you!

 

[Sic]

Me too.
However it helps that my breed of choice aligns with what I consider the ideal beauty/personality/hardiness for a chicken
For me, there will be no other.View attachment 4102884

They are adorable too so that helps!

I like my chanteclers, I love my Bruges, but I absolutely adore my Deathlayers, they are the epitome of a self sufficient country chicken. If I ever decide to narrow my focus to only one breed, it would be the Deathlayers.

 

[Mrs. K]

So I looked up Deathlayer chickens - beautiful. Do you have the gold or the silver? How did you get started in them?

What do you like best about them?