Posted by CJR on October 12, 19103 at 13:10:40:
In Reply to: Re: Fluff posted by Neil on October 11, 19103 at 17:59:55:
Neil, Thanks for the observation. It is good to note these features in other breeds. The Partridge of the Wyandottes is not the Patrijs or Partridge of Europe, which is why we did not get that name for our Dutch when accepted by ABA and APA in the 1980s. (but ours should have been PARTRIDGE, AS IN DUTCH BANTAM). I was not there when this was "decided"! We needed more guidance from Holland--had some, but not edited before decisions were made.
Checked the Wyandotte Standard in ABA and APA and there is nothing listed about white fluff as defect in either, in fact, it is not mentioned at all! So it would not have counted at all in the judging of the Wyandottes. That part of our Standard, as written, was taken directly from the OEGB BBREd standard, I am sure, but will check on the Dutch Standard translation. Have to search for it! Keep on "looking"! CJR
: I got back from the Bay City show just a little bit ago, and I noticed that the Partridge Wyandotte bantams had noticable fluff. Just an observation I made...
: : At the Hannover, Germany Poultry Show, the Italianer is one of the largest classes. These are not our Leghorns, but the breed that the Leghorn was developed from--in White, as layers. Shown as the American Leghorn, it is considered a separate breed and had a good entry in several varieties. The Italianer is larger, and the folder I brought from the show lists 13 varieties. They are spectacular birds and in varieties, some we do not see here, even in other breeds. I was particularly interested in one variety, especially,Blaurebhuhnfarbig, because I was breeding some Dutch Bantams in that Variety, from some MhMh genes that one of my Dutch Bantams had. This Dutch, sent to me in my first birds (1986) as an offspring of a Spangled OEGBantam, and a LB Dutch. That shook me, as I was just getting started with DUTCH Bantams. I was extremely leeery of starting out with an announced crossbred. And this actually led to my visits to Holland to find out what we should be doing. I used the cock only one breeding, because he had such a wonderful Dutch Bantam tail and clear white earlobes of excellent shape and texture. (his earlobes were not pure white nor his legs really blue at all.) I mated him with a BLB hen. Only now, do I know some of the genes that were present in these birds. Because the Mh gene RUINS the Hackle and Saddle color of the Light Browns for generations, and is dominant when introduced. Jean heres an article you wrote that I found. Correct me if I`m wrong. You do not want the Mh gene in the Dutch. That is the gene that keeps the bird from having the fluff. And ruins the color as you mentioned. Thats why I like to see the fluff in the LB cockerels and even some in the BLB. Had to go look. The LB cockerels do have more than the BLB cockerels , but the BLB cockerels that have the most do seem to have the better tails. That would seem to indicate to me that these birds can`t have any OEG bred into them. Another question. Could the BLB cockerels with the larger amount of flull be carrying a more dominant gene for the better tails? Interesting. Rog
Post a Followup