# Buckeye Chickens



## BuckeyeChickens

Have any questions or interest in Buckeyes?

This is the thread to come to first....post your questions or comments here and we'll do EVERYTHING we can to help you!

Thanks,


----------



## Marengoite

Nice to see a Buckeye thread started, Jeff. 

I have been impressed with the birds I have so far. They are very calm, fairly easy to handle, and nice chickens to have around. My son's Hamburgs, by contrast, are crazy as Junebugs. They are fiercely independent and keep themselves apart from the rest of the flock and fly more than any of the other chickens I've had. They're interesting, but on the whole I like my Buckeyes better.


----------



## Apyl

I've never heard of Buckeye chickens. Are they cold hardy? Good layers? I think I will google them to see what they are


----------



## Marengoite

They have pea combs so they're very cold hardy. They are the only APA recognized breed created by a woman. They originated in Ohio and were developed as a dual purpose bird that would thrive in the middle of Ohio's snow belt.

Jeff has been working on developing a line of good layers and has their production up to around 200/year if I'm not mistaken. I'm hoping to find out starting next month if they live up to the press releases. Should be fun.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Apyl, the Buckeye is an American Breed and the ONLY breed of chicken developed by a woman right here in Ohio!!! It was accepted by the APA for the SoP in 1904 and because it is a Pea Comb fowl is very cold climate tolerant! Here is a History of the Buckeye by the originator, Nettie Metcalf;

_History of the Buckeye_​
_By MRS. NETTIE METCALF, Inglewood, Calif., the Originator. _​
We began housekeeping in 1879 with a flock of pure-bred Brown Leghorns, and didn't like them a little bit. They were into everything, scratched and destroyed more than their necks were worth, laid only in the spring, and hid their nests then in the most out-of-the-way places they could find, and when I wanted to kill one it was "always the wrong time ofthe year," according to my husband, for they were always scrawny and in poor condition.

<having settled on Barred Rocks to raise> I traded eggs with a neighbor who had Buff Cochins, and used the cockerels so raised with my Barred Rock hens and pullets. This produced a big, lazy fowl, so I looked around for something else to mix in. I visited a breeder of Black BreastedRed Games, who claimed his stock was pure, but I noticed that they were not uniform, some of them having yellow and some slate-colored legs, yet so handsome were they that I bought eggs and raised some fine cockerels from them,which I crossed upon my flock of hens.

This year's mating produced a few red birds, something never seenaround there before, and which attracted my attention and aroused an ambition to try and reproduce them. How I was laughed at for the attempt. Well, ridicule and opposition are just the spurs some people need,so I determined to "show folks" or die trying. I had no yards or conveniences except one 10x12 coop and the run of the 100-acre farm, but whoever heard of a woman stopping for anything, once her mind was made up!

The back yard was fenced and there were big picket gates on theplace which nearly always stood open, so I got a boy to help me unhinge acouple and carry them across two corners of the back yard; then, I borrowed acouple of big boxes for coops, and what more was needed? I penned up two pairs in these small enclosures. Had I to do this over again, I would start with onepair, but I was afraid of in-breeding in those days, so doubled my troubles bystarting with two pairs, thus getting the defects of four progenitors insteadof two.

My, what a flock I raised that year! No wonder my friends laughed!Green legs and feathered legs, buff chicks, black chicks, and even red andblack barred chicks; single combs and pea combs, and no combs at all, but fighters from away back. One good neighbor quit laughing and decided to help me out, but her husband "didn't want any of those Metcalf mongrels on the place"!

Many names for my new breed suggested themselves, and year after year they bred truer to the type I had in mind, which was a modified Cornish shape, with the very darkest of red plumage, hens containing some black not being objectionable to me so long as the males kept that dark red shade I admired.

I finally decided upon the name Buckeye Reds,and advertised and sold eggs to well-pleased customers, although some ofmy neighbors thought I ought to be prosecuted for fraudulently using the mails."My" they used to say, "anyone could mix up a lot of chickensand name them something and sell the eggs; it isn't right." But when they saw some of the letters from pleased customers they began to go so far as tooffer to trade eggs or roosters with me, and one man even made me the magnificent offer of "some fine, fat cockerels, Rocks, all ready for market, if I would give him their weight (their .weight, mind you) in late-hatched pullets." He calculated on getting about two pullets for each cockerel, you see.

Late in 1896, after having made up my mind to apply to have mybreed admitted to the standard as Buckeye Reds, Iread an' article describing Rhode Island Reds, andfor the first time found that the red chicken, idea was not original with me,but had been worked at many years down east. I immediately corresponded withleading breeders of Rhode Island Reds, exchangedbirds and eggs with them, only to find that they bred to a lighter shade ofred, and that they had rose and single combs while I had single and pea combs.

I now knew that the black-breasted Red Games I had bought were mixed with the Indian Game and that that was where I had obtained the pea comb,to me the finest of all combs.

Leading Rhode Island Red breeders, among them the late R. G. Buffington, advised me to drop the name Buckeye Reds and call mine Rhode Island Reds also, as they seemed to think they were so very similar. The help of a large club appealed to me and I finally took this bad advice, but was careful to keep the rose, single and pea combs yarded separately.

The difference in shape and comb and depth of color, however,convinced me that they ought to be bred to a different standard, and when the Rhode Island Red Club adopted the new standard, cutting out all slate inundercolor, I knew that standard would never do for Buckeyes.

My reason told me that all wild birds of brilliant plumage had slate, or leaden blue, undercolor, and I felt sure that this dark pigment was necessary in order to retain the dark plumage in the offspring.

So, while I threw in my single combs with the Rhode Island Reds, and bred them in their standard, my pea combs werebred along the old lines, and I returned to the old standard and name of Buckeye Reds. This old standard called for "a bar of slate across the feathers of the back, next to the surface color, the rest ofthe undercolor being red.''

In December, 1902, I fitted up a pen of Single Comb Rhode Island Reds and a pair of Buckeyes for the Cleveland show, atthe same time submitting a standard for Buckeyes and petitioned the AmericanPoultry Association to admit them to the standard. This was the first officialshowing for both breeds, the rule governing the admission of new breedsrequiring that two generations must be shown at three annual meetings of theAmerican Poultry Association. I lost the year 1903 by showing at an adjourned,instead of a regular, meeting, showing at Indianapolis instead of atHagerstown. Therefore, the technicality kept the Buckeyes out of the standarduntil 1905, while the Rhode Island Reds, single comb, were admitted in 1904.

My husband and I personally attended the meeting at Rochester, N.Y., in 1904, where we showed for the second time officially. The following yearI was unable to attend the meeting at Indianapolis owing to my mother'sillness, but sent birds for the third and last official showing, at the sametime submitting proofs in the shape of affidavits from breeders of Buckeyes,sworn to before notaries public, proving that they bred true to type and wereas claimed, and the Buckeyes were admitted February, 1905.

It was a heap more of a job than I had ever expected when I began,and I think I should have given up after the first showing at .Cleveland butfor the encouragement of the president and secretary of the American PoultryAssociation, who visited Red Feather Farm, August 24, 1903, examined my breed,and advised me by all means to go on with them, as in their opinion there wasmore than enough difference between them and the Rhode Island Reds to justify my claims to a distinct breed.

Now the difference is summed up in this way briefly: The Buckeye should be as much darker in color than theaccepted Rhode Island Red as the Rhode Island Red is darker than the buffbreeds. Their plumage should be so dark as to male as to look almost black insome lights, garnet-red being as near a description as I can give. The shapeshould resemble the Cornish Game, but the Buckeye isnot as hard in feather and has more fluffiness in plumage, but not so much asthe Rhode Island Red.

The comb of the Buckeye is a pea comb,small and close fitting to the head, and the weight of the bird is much greaterthan is apparent from the size, although I personally much prefer a maleweighing eight to nine pounds.

The laying qualities of the Buckeyes are proverbial, and they areexcellent sitters and mothers, although not very much inclined to broodiness.

I never aspired to a show breed, my object being utility qualitiesonly; but the great beauty of the Buckeyes is a sore temptation, and in thefuture more show birds will be produced yearly.

(printed in October 1917 "Poultry Success" Volume 28)


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Want to LEARN MORE about Buckeyes???

try this website;

www.americanbuckeyeclub.blogspot.com

A complete history of the Buckeye breed, the APA SoP and Buckeye Breeders Directory can be found at this site! We also have a GREAT Facebook Group with about 160 members at this location;

http://www.facebook.com/groups/126598094076064/


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

*Congrats to Sydney Shumaker of Clinton county, Ohio!!!*

Her Buckeye Cock was Grand Champion and Overall BEST of Show on Friday July 13th!


----------



## TajMaCluckCoop

Jeff,

As a girl born and raised in Ohio, the Buckeye breed sounds like something I should add to my flock. I'm only permitted 12 hens by City Ordinance so I have to choose wisely. I will be traveling the Akron, Ohio area this winter to visit family. Where are you located? Any chance I could see a Buckeye up close and personal? I haven't noticed any of them at any of the chicken shows I have been to in the New England area--but then I've only been to a few.

~Kimberly


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Kim, I'm located in SW Ohio (north of Cincinnati) so I'm a bit of a drive from Akron! However, I know some breeders up in the NE portion of the Buckeye state that might be able to show you some of their Buckeyes. Just keep me posted when you plan to head "west" and I'll see what I can do to conect you with a good Buckeye "lady" up near Akron!

There are a couple of Buckeye breeders in MA but I don't know of any in CT...check our breeder directory at the website maybe you will find someone in New England?!?!

I think you will LOVE the Buckeye....the history of the breed really pulled me in, not because they came from Ohio but because they were created by a woman! Nettie Metcalf had to be one heck of a woman, too because poultry was a mans world back in the late 1890's and she had to be a very strong woman to break into that APA "boys club"!


----------



## TajMaCluckCoop

Jeff,

Thanks for the info. I'll look for a breeder in Mass. The states in New England are really small, so anywhere in Mass is pretty close. Sadly, no roosters allowed so I can't champion a breed . 

I checked out the breeders and for a Mr. Rhodes in Mass, he's been breeding since 1970! I also read the article on understanding the SOP--very well written and illustrated! I enjoyed it very much, thanks.

~Kimberly


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

TajMaCluckCoop said:


> Jeff,
> 
> Thanks for the info. I'll look for a breeder in Mass. The states in New England are really small, so anywhere in Mass is pretty close. Sadly, no roosters allowed so I can't champion a breed .
> 
> I checked out the breeders and for a Mr. Rhodes in Mass, he's been breeding since 1970! I also read the article on understanding the SOP--very well written and illustrated! I enjoyed it very much, thanks.
> 
> ~Kimberly


Kimberly, its always GREAT to get feedback from "non-Buckeye" members regarding the website/BLOG, so THANKS!!! The "Understanding the SOP" page was something I wanted to put together for years but it took a GREAT team of folks to pull it ALL together so I can't take all the credit. Mr. Rhodes has been a Buckeye breeder for years and is getting up in age so his birds may not be around much longer....I think he is in his early 80's now but still keeping Buckeyes and turkeys?!?! Hope I'm still able to raise chickens when I'm 80!!! Let us know if you touch base with Mr. Rhodes we always like to hear about new Buckeye owners and their experiences.


----------



## sharkbait

I have been thinking about adding some buckeye's to my flock. How well do they get along with other chickens? Right now I have 10 golden commits and a bantam that I think is a americuna . Did I read right that you sell them? I am only about three hours away and love road trips.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

sharkbait said:


> I have been thinking about adding some buckeye's to my flock. How well do they get along with other chickens? Right now I have 10 golden commits and a bantam that I think is a americuna . Did I read right that you sell them? I am only about three hours away and love road trips.


Shark, Buckeyes are very social fowl and get along GREAT with other breeds! I do sell Buckeye chicks and hatching eggs each spring and from time to time adult fowl are available. At the moment I don't have anything available but please stay in touch as I will be selling some hens later this summer.

You might consider visiting our Buckeye Facebook Group, there are many Ohio based members that may be able to help you and could be closer to you as well; http://www.facebook.com/groups/126598094076064/

Thanks!


----------



## sharkbait

Thanks I will look up the fb group. Not to worried about the travel time I love road trips  if you want/need to thin some out around Oct post it on here and I will get some.


----------



## luvinmychickens

Hey! Im an Ohioan!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

luvinmychickens said:


> Hey! Im an Ohioan!


Thanks for dropping in and we hope you will take a closer look at the Buckeye since you are a fellow "Ohioan"!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

There are several folks at The American Buckeye Club facebook group that are selling Buckeyes ALL over the USA, in addition there are several "swap days" going on in Ohio that will include Buckeyes for sale! Come over and visit our little group to learn more;

http://www.facebook.com/groups/126598094076064/


----------



## BootedBantam

TajMaCluckCoop said:


> Jeff,
> 
> Thanks for the info. I'll look for a breeder in Mass. The states in New England are really small, so anywhere in Mass is pretty close. Sadly, no roosters allowed so I can't champion a breed .
> 
> ~Kimberly


I follow a blog from Mass. Tilly's Nest, love it!! http://www.tillysnest.com/


----------



## sabrina_wilson

BuckeyeChickens said:


> There are several folks at The American Buckeye Club facebook group that are selling Buckeyes ALL over the USA, in addition there are several "swap days" going on in Ohio that will include Buckeyes for sale! Come over and visit our little group to learn more;
> 
> http://www.facebook.com/groups/126598094076064/


Not on Facebook/sworn off...


----------



## Energyvet

Just went there to check it out but they are a closed group. I requested to join but not sure if I'll get in. Maybe I'll google search instead.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

if anyone is having trouble accessing the American Buckeye Club Facebook group please contact me with a private message (PM)....yes, it is "closed group" but i know the people who are the "administrators"!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Energyvet said:


> Just went there to check it out but they are a closed group. I requested to join but not sure if I'll get in. Maybe I'll google search instead.


Energyvet - Glad to have you on board at the American Buckeye Club Facebbok Group....with 200+ members it is the largest group of Buckeye owners on the "interweb" (stole that term from Mike Rowe of Dirty Jobs)!!! Yup, it's still a "closed group" but we pretty much welcome anyone with an interest in Buckeyes....thanks again for joining up!!!

http://www.facebook.com/groups/126598094076064/

PS - The ABC also has updated our website/blog and the Buckeye Breeder Directory page....if you wish to learn more about Buckeyes and don't care so much for Facebook try the website!


----------



## Energyvet

Thank you Jeff. You and your group are a real information resource. Always good conversation going on over there.


----------



## phishfood

How do Buckeyes do in hot, humid climates, such as Central Florida?


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

phishfood said:


> How do Buckeyes do in hot, humid climates, such as Central Florida?


phish, Buckeyes do GREAT in hot humid climates actually! We Ohioans know a little about humidity and this year was one of our hottest summers on record....many days over 95F in July & August. This was the hardest season I've seen on chickens in our area and lots of my friends reported a tremendous number of losses....I had few deaths from the heat this year (lost a couple old hens). There are several Buckeye breeders in Florida, too and they report outstanding results with their Buckeyes in hot humid weather. The important thing to remember is ALL chickens need good ventiliation, shade and fresh water when the temps climb in the summer!
Finally, I know Buckeye breeders in Arizona, Texas and Oklahoma that report their Buckeyes do remarkably well in the dryer, hot climates in these states.

Give Buckeyes a try, I think you will be very happy with them.


----------



## Energyvet

I would think it would matter too if they grow up on that environment or not. So getting chicks allows them to acclimatize better. An I wrong?


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Energyvet said:


> I would think it would matter too if they grow up on that environment or not. So getting chicks allows them to acclimatize better. An I wrong?


I actually shipped adult Buckeye roosters from Ohio to Arizona and Texas, both owners reported they both did very well in the summer heat later that same year! Condition and timing are more important I think....shipping in early spring or even late fall from Ohio to a HOT climate and the adult birds would do just fine.

Regards,


----------



## Shumaker

Someone told me that this is the place to be...well is it? I've got some puuuurrrrrrdy buckeyes, well my daughter does.........I still have to pay for the feed though


----------



## Shumaker

Our farm maintains a flock of roughly 50 mature buckeyes right at the moment. We were fortunate to raise about 150 buckeyes last season. From that we culled through and kept about 30 exceptional specimens for exhibition and breeding this coming season. Hoping to raise a couple hundred this coming brood season. Nothing like eating fresh eggs and chicken everyday!!!! Every year, we keep producing better quality birds so we are very excited for the future generations!!!!


----------



## Energyvet

Welcome to the forum, Shumaker. Lots of lively conversations to be part of. Chicken Forum Decal available if you are so inclined. Word games, stories. Lots of friendly Chicken People. We look forward to your wisdom, stories and photos. Have a nice visit.


----------



## Shumaker

Energyvet said:


> Welcome to the forum, Shumaker. Lots of lively conversations to be part of. Chicken Forum Decal available if you are so inclined. Word games, stories. Lots of friendly Chicken People. We look forward to your wisdom, stories and photos. Have a nice visit.


Thanks for the welcoming, glad to be a part of this thread. Don't know how much wisdom you'll get , but photos..... there should be plenty.....my daughter and her buckeyes tend to be pretty photogentic.  I look forward to seeing others' pictures and talking about this great family of poultry. I'm a strong advocate of breeding these birds as their creator intended through her writings and the appreciate the approach the ABC has taken with the breed.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> Someone told me that this is the place to be...well is it? I've got some puuuurrrrrrdy buckeyes, well my daughter does.........I still have to pay for the feed though


Glad to see you found the "Chicken Forum" and the "Buckeye Chicken" thread....yup, Syd has some very fine looking Buckeyes and I'm sure she is glad you pay the feed bill these days, too!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> ....my daughter and her buckeyes tend to be pretty photogentic.  I look forward to seeing others' pictures and talking about this great family of poultry. I'm a strong advocate of breeding these birds as their creator intended through her writings and the appreciate the approach the ABC has taken with the breed.


Did you see this on the Chicken Forum Facebook Page, Mr. Shumaker???

http://www.facebook.com/groups/126598094076064/#!/chickenforum

GREAT picture of the Champion Buckeye Cock shown by Syd....to say the least!!!


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Did you see this on the Chicken Forum Facebook Page, Mr. Shumaker???
> 
> http://www.facebook.com/groups/126598094076064/#!/chickenforum
> 
> GREAT picture of the Champion Buckeye Cock shown by Syd....to say the least!!!


Nope, sure didn't. Just got back from taking a look.....that looks like him.....I like the other picture on the poultry show central FB site or any of those where Syd is next to the bird. Thanks for the info!!!!


----------



## Shumaker

Oh boy, this thread is getting alot of views for the limited amount of posts........someone must like reading something......speak up; make yourselves known.....post pics...do something!!!!! Buckeye Nation is growing.......(insert Jaws theme music)......


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> Oh boy, this thread is getting alot of views for the limited amount of posts........someone must like reading something......speak up; make yourselves known.....post pics...do something!!!!! Buckeye Nation is growing.......(insert Jaws theme music)......


Yup, there seems to be a lot of "lurking" lately but that's GREAT....here are a few pics of Buckeyes to enjoy;









Ally Whitaker and here American Champion Buckeye Cockerel in Dayton, Ohio!









A yard full of young Buckeyes at Crains Run Ranch in Miamisburg, Ohio (summer 2012)









18 week old Buckeye cockerel @ Crains Run Ranch (summer 2012)


----------



## Shumaker

*Here's one our males*

We produced several like this one and a couple even nicer this past year. Just don't have pics of them yet......but we'll get them.


----------



## Shumaker

*Here is a couple more*

These are all birds that we have raised and have done very well with.


----------



## Shumaker

*Here are few more pics*

All of these pics represent the breed well.


----------



## Stoney_Creek

I made it...

Great looking birds Joe!


----------



## Stoney_Creek

A few pics:

These are chicks that I got hatched from J. Lay. Hatched Aug 24th.









A ham for the camera...these guys are growing a great rate for their age.









This is the first Buckeye Roo I had....I really liked him but he passed this past spring...









Through selective breeding (and don't have a lot to select from out here in Oklahoma) This is his prodigy...


----------



## Shumaker

Thanks for contributing Stoney_Creek....nice birds!


----------



## Shumaker

One of the many things that makes the buckeye different from the RIR, is not often seen from the exterior; the dark undercolor beneath the back surface feathers. Some birds unfortunately lack this trait and other's maintain this feature throughout the bird. Below is a picture illustrating the "bar of slate" that should be observed in ALL buckeyes. The lighter colored strains of buckeyes often are missing this important breed feature.


----------



## Stoney_Creek

Shumaker said:


> Thanks for contributing Stoney_Creek....nice birds!


Thanks!

Pretty excited actually about 2013...will have 4 different roo lines and several more hen lines to play with...some will prob be failures, but hoping to get better each year!

I'll have my original stock, a single roo that has the Ulruch name attached (can't confirm the claim, but he looks decent regardless of origins), Lay chicks in the brooder now...and some from a gentleman that lives semi local, Mr. Gibson. 4 lines to play with, mix and match. Smaller breeding pens this year and rotate roos...massive records...should be a great year!


----------



## Shumaker

I hear you Stoney Creek, the brood season is upon us once again and the future is always bright (or dark Mahogany Red)?!?!?!?! Breed these creatures in the image of their creator, put them back into the spotlight and let everything else sort itself out! Good luck with them.


----------



## Shumaker

Stoney Creek, those biddies certainly do look like they are prospering!!! good luck with them!


----------



## Shumaker

There were two great articles in the Poultry Press this month, I encourage everyone to read.......the first one talked about how buckeyes like to free range and play in manure. A case example was offered on of how skin color differs between ranged and pen raised birds. The second focused on the increasing popularity of the bird and how it is important to breed the bird as Nettie Metcalf intended the bird to look with brief comparisons to how the RIR and buckeye differ. I incourage everyone that has the opportunity to check them out!!!!!!


----------



## Shumaker

Mature buckeye hens should have strong head (wide skull, heavy brow over the eyes, small comb, and short/strong beak). Eyes should also be reddish in color). The attached pictures are a fair representation.


----------



## Shumaker

*Skin color*

When looking at a buckeyes actually skin color, it should be noted that a buckeye's skin color is YELLOW. The breeds that the buckeye was developed from all have yellow skin. That being said, there will be different shades or depths of yellow that can be observed depending on method the bird was raised. You will not observe white skin on a buckeye, rather a very faint yellow. I should be able to get some pictures of the phenomina here shortly. I have to dethaw a couple birds I processed last month.


----------



## Marengoite

"Dethaw." Is that the same as "freeze"? 

You are exactly right, Joe. I have a Buckeye in the crock pot right now and they are the yellowest skin birds I have ever cooked. The stock that is coming off is a bright, bright yellow whenever the crock pot bubbles up and splashes on the counter. When I read recipes for chicken & noodles, I see suggestions of adding yellow food coloring to brighten them up. Kind of pointless with Buckeyes, especially if you make your homemade noodles from the yolks of your Buckeye hens. Bright, bright yolks make nice yellow noodles that don't need any artificial coloring.


----------



## cgmccary

> Shumaker: A case example was offered on of how skin color differs between ranged and pen raised birds.


*Hey Joe, actually, nothing was said about "how skin color differs between ranged and pen raised birds" I said nothing about skin color. What I said in the Poultry Press article was:*



> This year, I had a group I free ranged and a group that stayed penned. There was a definite difference in appearance of the dressed bird between the two. I noticed the free range bird was more yellow in appearance (vs. the white appearance of the penned birds). There was not really any noticeable size difference between the two.


*This is a "comparatively speaking" statement and not denoting color of SKIN. Skin color is genetic but the overall appearance, as with the appearance of the of the legs, is feed related (i.e. more or less carotenoids in what they eat). Likewise, I can always discern the difference between birds that free range all the time and those who don't by degree of yellow (brightness) in the legs. *

Chris


----------



## Shumaker

Thanks for your input Chris. I was merely making a generalized statement regarding the breed. The statement was factual and in no way referenced you or I would have mentioned you directly. I was pointing out a breed trait and nothing more. As I have been doing with pictures in my prior posts. I am well aware of your article and its contents. I too processed my birds in the same manner (penned vs. free range) and noticed very similar observations. 

With that being said, there is a whole group on BYC that loves everything you have to say regardless of its accuracy. 

On a side note, have a decent show at the Nationals. I'm sure there will be rows of buckeyes. I only hope they get a knowledgable judge to go over them and judge the american class justly.

Good day.............................


----------



## cgmccary

> I was merely making a generalized statement regarding the breed. The statement was factual and in no way referenced you or I would have mentioned you directly.


Thanks Joe. I understand but you referenced the article and talked about skin color with that reference. As you can imagine, I am precise in wording (and have to be). Words are very important. Many years ago, I was representing a defendant in a capital murder case in Birmingham, AL. On the second day of trial, the prosecutor came in screaming and yelling that I had called him unconscionable, that it was in _The Birmingham News_ article quoting me as saying "He's unconscionable."

The Judge jumped all over me and put a gag order on me even though I swore to the Judge that if the newspaper had quoted me as calling the prosecutor "unconscionable," then I had been misquoted. I had not seen the paper that morning, but when I did get a chance to look at my quote, the reporter quoted me as calling the case itself (the indictment) "unconscionable" -- The "_It's unconscionable,_" quote of me responding to a reporter yelling at me is very different than me saying, "_He's unconscionable,"_ which I know never to say; I'd never personally attack the prosecutor -- "It's" vs. "He's"; "white appearance" vs. "skin color" -- very different meanings.

I won't say that when I write those PP articles in such haste that I am so very careful -- probably "paler" would have been a better description.

Your pictures of Buckeyes are worth a thousand words & much appreciated. You are a tremendous promoter of the breed, & it shows in the great quality of your birds.

I still have a lot to learn which will take many years of breeding and observing. I just try and report what I see.



> On a side note, have a decent show at the Nationals. I'm sure there will be rows of buckeyes. I only hope they get a knowledgable judge to go over them and judge the american class justly.


Of course, if I have anything to do with it, and I did as my deal with Ohio National allowed me to have the pick of the judges available, then I am going to pick the APA judge most quailified to judge my breed (I am limited to the judges on their list). I did pick. We are going to have Duane Urch judging the Buckeyes at Ohio National. I cannot think of a more qualified judge. Mr. Urch has had Buckeyes since 1958 and knows the breed unequivocally.



> With that being said, there is a whole group on BYC that loves everything you have to say regardless of its accuracy.


By the same token, there is an entire Yahoo group and Facebook group who believe everything you and Jeff say without regard to its accuracy & without question.

Good day to you . . .


----------



## Shumaker

Fair enough Chris, I'm sure many others read it as I did. we are still learning as well regardless of my "know-it-all" status among a few people. I appreciate the kind words regarding the fowl we are producing. Each year we are generating what I feel are better specimens. We are getting the width in the skull, breast, and back that is essental for the breed. The surface color, as well as, under-color is spot on for many. There will be a great deal of pictures to come. 

Mr. Urch is absolutely the best choice in comparison to every other judge that will be present. He was the gentleman that selected one of my aseel cock as the AOSB class champ a few years ago at the Nationals. I guess he's been in poultry the majority of his life......I can't think of a better profession (maybe the oil business, it certainly would pay better).

I truly enjoy the ABC yahoo and FB groups, the personalities are broad and ranging. A truly great set of people that all have an amazing interest in doing this family of poultry right. I'm currently trying to lobby to bring many of the personalities here. That would be a hoot.

Not quite as many people ready to exhibit, but "baby-steps" is the way I see it. To date, what I've shared with them is to the best of my knowledge correct regarding husbandry of poultry and the appearance of the buckeye as Mrs. Metcalf described in her writings. There is much debate among many of our members spanning a whole host of topics and the proper concensus derived which is always beneficial. It was a true blessing when I crossed paths with Jeff. Despite a few opinions of others, Jeff has the best intentions to help as many people as he can. He has been none other but a saint to my daughter!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Well if you guys wanted to drag me into this discussion it worked! I have NOT read the article in question posted in the Poultry Press but if this is what Chris wrote (posted a few replies earlier);

*"This year, I had a group I free ranged and a group that stayed penned. There was a definite difference in appearance of the dressed bird between the two. I noticed the free range bird was more yellow in appearance (vs. the white appearance of the penned birds). There was not really any noticeable size difference between the two."*

If you were NOT talking about "skin color" Chris what exactly was the "yellow in appearance vs. white appearance" supposed to convey to the reader??? Some of us already knew you were a lawyer, but thankfully you shared a very witty story about how "words matter" and then it seems you claim you were NOT talking about "skin color" at all in the PP article?!?! Reminded me of the old Bill Clinton days when he said, "it depends on what your definition of is, really is." 

Again, I'm not taking sides here Chris....I didn't read your entire article just what you posted in this thread and I think others will agree with me (both novice and experienced poultry folks alike) that it certainly sounds like you are suggesting "skin color" was different....perhaps next month you might add the same correction you made here about "skin color being genetic" in the Poultry Press?!?! Just a suggestion that might help PP readers who might have gotten the same impression Joe (and I) did.

Finally, the American Buckeye Club has nearly 300 members some frequent our Yahoo Group, others our Facebook group. I really don't think they believe "everything" I say (maybe they believe Joe more than I given ALL the Championships Shumaker Buckeye's have won in recent years) but when I do write something or post replies I make EVERY effort to be certain it's accurate and NOT done in haste.....people just hate when one must come back with excuses for not being clear and concise!


----------



## Shumaker

Will Duane be judging the whole American class or just the Buckeyes? I'm still trying to decide where Syd and I are going to go, there is a show down in TN that has two wonderful judges (both of which understand what a buckeye should be) without the politics that surround the event. Although, we did raise a male this year that, IMO, trumps anything I've been able to produce in the past few years. He will more than likely be feathered in by that time, I wouldn't mind if Duane took a look at him. Time will tell.


----------



## bellerophon09

Jeff and Shumaker, 
Seems like you guys are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here. Simple enough, color appeared whiter in penned birds vs free ranged birds. He wasn't trying to say Buckeyes have white skin. I don't think that anyone without an agenda against him thought he was saying it either. There are things in Jeff's article that could be picked on also. I don't think anyone in P.P. is a professional writer.


----------



## Shumaker

bellerophon09 said:


> Jeff and Shumaker,
> Seems like you guys are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here. Simple enough, color appeared whiter in penned birds vs free ranged birds. He wasn't trying to say Buckeyes have white skin. I don't think that anyone without an agenda against him thought he was saying it either. There are things in Jeff's article that could be picked on also. I don't think anyone in P.P. is a professional writer.


Bellerophone09, I'm not making anything out of anything. Didn't I more or less say the exact same thing "color appeared whiter ((I believe I said differs in color; meaning depth)) in penned birds vs free ranged birds". So lets keep things in perspective. My only agenda is presenting the very best birds my daughter and I can.

By all means with Jeff's article.....pick away....but you better come with meaningful accusations that are reference supported. Because you will get reference supported rebuttals with in-print facts.

That being said;

It is clear, that this thread is heading in the direction of the debacle on BYC to which many people have turned away from. I am here to provide information regarding the breed and help people understand what this breed should look like. Very few clubs have set up a point by point guide to help people understand a specific breed of poultry. We at the ABC have done this and are strongly working in the promotion of the breed. I am currently trying to bring some of those messages to this site in order to help generate curiousity of the breed. So please in the best interest of the this thread and the breed..... take the argueing back to the BYC thread. If you want to provide beneficial information by all means post away.

Have a pleasant day!


----------



## bellerophon09

Shumaker, 

I'm sure I can quote Nettie just as well as Jeff does if that is the reference support you are speaking of . Jeez, are we back in college writing papers again? In reality, Jeff's article was a rehash of everything Mr. McCary has written over the past couple years. There's just not that much to be said about one breed of chicken with just one color. I agree, no need to argue as long as you guys don't try on here what you do on BYC to the other club. Hopefully you will be stopped on here like you are on BYC when you try it.


----------



## Shumaker

bellerophon09,

Well, if you choose to bring up issues with anything I or anyone else writes, make sure you know what you are talking about, so we can have a good debatable conversion. If things can't be settled, then an agree to disagree ending can result. Not everybody has to think the same or even view things the same.....welcome to America.......Unlike the thread on BYC, I welcome a difference in opinion and the different angles to which things are viewed. It's not my way or the highway. As far as references go, it is one air-tight way to prove facts and set the rumors to rest. For example, I've ready a few books that claim the buckeye originated from a cornish/RIR cross. Based on much earlier writings, that is simply not the case.

As a matter of fact, I wish some would go back to college and learn how to actually write papers or at least do research (and no this is not directed toward Chris!!!!). It would certainly put alot of the uncertainty to rest. Agreed, only so much can be said regarding one breed that only has one variety, but it is a neat breed that is unique in many aspects. I've bred and raised american gamefowl and oriental gamefowl the majority of my life. I've always looked down upon the fancy breeds for their lack of vigor, health, and overall disposition. With the buckeye (at least by my observations), they act like gamecocks and present themselves much the same way. So here I am, due to the fact my daughter chose the breed for 4-H and I took an interest in it. 

What exactly did I do over at BYC that needed to be stopped....I provided a difference in opinion....nothing more and I wasn't satisfied with the details provided so I challenged them. Instead of debating and exploring them, I was turned away. I find it interesting how people tend to think that every comment I say is an attack or to discredit. Why would I be here if all I wanted to do is attack? I can be discredited just as easily as anyone else. I am here to share gained knowledge through experience. I am and always have wanted to share materials to help the beginner learn. There is no reason to agrue that!


----------



## Shumaker

*Moving on....*

When breeding and culling for buckeyes, it is important to watch for black surface feathers in the breast and in the thighs. It is also important for the breed to carry their chest somewhat upright like that of a cornish. These are a few of the traits that need to be taken into consideration along with the width/length of the specimen. To show an example, attached is a picture of a bird that does not have black surface feathers in either the breast or thighs. This trait can also been observed in the other pictures I've posted.


----------



## Marengoite

> Likewise, I can always discern the difference between birds that free range all the time and those who don't by degree of yellow (brightness) in the legs.
> 
> Chris


Chris,

I think you were spot on with the feed relationship. Just to make sure you are absolutely clear, it is the DIETARY difference you are detecting, not the pen vs. range situation, correct?

The reason I bring this up is that every year at the fair when they are judging broilers it is clear that some of them have much yellower legs, beak, and skin than others. All of them are pen raised, but the difference is in the feed. The County Extension service hosted a poultry clinic in conjunction with their quality assurance last year and the rep from the Co-Op was talking about the different feeds available. He pointed out that if the kids would buy the higher priced feed with marigold extract that their chickens would have the bright yellow appearance they are shooting for. If they fed the low cost (of course) feed, the chickens would lack the yellow pigmentation.

Presumably, ranging chickens are eating plants that contain the carotenes need for yellow pigmentation of extremities, skin, and egg yolks. My guess is that natural sources would include yellow sweet clover, goldenrod, marigolds out of my wife's flower bed (thankfully, the ones in her pots have been unmolested), and ragweed leaves just to name a few. I imagine that if folks would clean out their weed beds and toss the cuttings into the chicken pen, they'd get the same results as folks who let their birds range.


----------



## Marengoite

It might be fun experiment to feed pen raised birds the feed with marigold extract added and let the ranging birds fed the regular feed be the control to see what the difference is. However, it's not one I want to run. 

And for comparison, what's the effect on white-skinned blue-legged chickens?


----------



## cgmccary

> *Marengoite:*
> Chris,
> 
> I think you were spot on with the feed relationship. Just to make sure you are absolutely clear, it is the DIETARY difference you are detecting, not the pen vs. range situation, correct?


*Yes, you are spot on correct, it is the feed, their diet*. I did not vary the pen raised bird's diet much from the game bird feed I give them. They did get some mixes as treats (whole corn, pop corn, sunflower seed, wheat, milo, oats), but I did not give them a lot of greens (some when they had their mother hen til weaned; All mine this year were hen raised (even if penned).

I have seen legs yellow up nicely on whole corn but it has to be more than I was giving them. Their legs were yellow but not the brightness of the free ranging group.


----------



## Jenn-at-Sundog

I suspect that free-range chickens also get a lot more bugs in their diet as well as vegetation. Doesn't that contribute to the yellow yolks and legs too?


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

bellerophon09 said:


> Jeff and Shumaker,
> Seems like you guys are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill here. Simple enough, color appeared whiter in penned birds vs free ranged birds. He wasn't trying to say Buckeyes have white skin. I don't think that anyone without an agenda against him thought he was saying it either. There are things in Jeff's article that could be picked on also. I don't think anyone in P.P. is a professional writer.


Please identify yourself if you wish for me to address your ridiculous remarks further!!! For the record, having started this thread myself I responded to two comments, one posted by Chris and one by Joe....if ONE reply "makes a mountain out of a molehill", you must live on a VERY FLAT piece of dirt, friend.  Second, I don't subscribe to the PP and as I stated in my SINGLE reply did NOT read Chris' article only what he himself posted (I have NOT seen any of his articles) and I can see where someone reading this could identify with the article referencing "skin color". Chris also gave a resonable explaination in order to clarify the point he was trying to make. Finally, I don't have an "agenda" against anyone, if you were paying attention you would have noticed I WELCOMED Chris when he joined the "Chicken Forum" and started his own Buckeye thread! After you identify yourself, so we know who we are exchanging "barbs" with feel FREE to "pick away" at my PP article....I welcome your witty comments!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Jenn-at-Sundog said:


> I suspect that free-range chickens also get a lot more bugs in their diet as well as vegetation. Doesn't that contribute to the yellow yolks and legs too?


Jenn & Marengoite,

To some extent bugs can contribute, but the yellow pigment typically comes from "Xanthophyll" found in the leaves of many green plants....it is part of the carotene groups and most specifically is where the increase in "yellow" skin, legs and egg yolks comes from. By the way, you can feed pen raised fowl good alfalfa hay and get nearly the same results as "free range" in terms of brighter "yellow" in the skin, legs and egg yolk!!! Also another project worth consideration, Rick.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> When breeding and culling for buckeyes, it is important to watch for black surface feathers in the breast and in the thighs. It is also important for the breed to carry their chest somewhat upright like that of a cornish. These are a few of the traits that need to be taken into consideration along with the width/length of the specimen. To show an example, attached is a picture of a bird that does not have black surface feathers in either the breast or thighs. This trait can also been observed in the other pictures I've posted.


Another excellent post and pic Joe, while I don't get out to many poultry shows I do see far too many Buckeyes with black in the breast and thighs. The bird pictured is a GREAT specimen and if *I were going to harbor ANY resentment toward ANYONE it would be YOU* for having BETTER Buckeyes than I!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> ....And for comparison, what's the effect on white-skinned blue-legged chickens?


Rick, since I raise some "white skinned, blue legged" chickens I can tell you I have not seen any changes in their skin color (or leg color) as a result of being "free range" or "pen" raised. I suspect the "yellow pigment" found in the green plant leaves (Xanthophyll) has no impact on the "white skinned" birds and perhaps the genetics of this skin somehow blocks the carotenes?!?! The later just being a WAG on my part!!!


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Another excellent post and pic Joe, while I don't get out to many poultry shows I do see far too many Buckeyes with black in the breast and thighs. The bird pictured is a GREAT specimen and if *I were going to harbor ANY resentment toward ANYONE it would be YOU* for having BETTER Buckeyes than I!!!


Harbor away Jeff, you really only need to look as far as your backyard to find something similar. They suit me and Sydney and thats all that matters.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

joking with you as always Joe, I think you and Sydney are doing a GREAT job with your Buckeyes and I'm glad to see the progress you have made in such a short period of time! Keep up the good work.


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> joking with you as always Joe, I think you and Sydney are doing a GREAT job with your Buckeyes and I'm glad to see the progress you have made in such a short period of time! Keep up the good work.


I don't joke well, I'm far to serious of a person. Everything that I say is always meant to be taken in a serious nature. I'm going to go and pick up a couple older 10 pound buckeye hens tomorrow. I bet they have bodies on them! Their heads almost 2 1/2 inches wide.


----------



## Shumaker

Chickens with a proper balance of flaxseed in their diet will produce eggs with more Omega-3 fatty acid. These eggs are more nutritious for people, as Omega-3 fatty acids are believed to decrease heart problems. However, the flaxseed does not benefit the health of the chickens and can harm them if too much is added to their diet. The benefits of flaxseed are passed directly on to the eggs, which are not only more nutritious, but are often larger in size.

This is interesting information. I was reading about flaxseed and egg production, thought I'd share. I am seeing more suppliments out there now days than ever before, be careful not to "over-do" it for the welfare of the fowl.


----------



## Shumaker

*Heritage*

What exactly is a "heritage" buckeye? I've also seen phrases like "certified buckeyes" or "certified heritage" buckeyes. Since when does a buckeye need to be "certified" for it to be a buckeye? Are those terms used to basically peddle "(questionable) quality" birds or do they have meaning? Who certifies these birds? Do there credentials actually have meaning or did they come out of a cracker-jacks box? Where would one go to actually obtain such a certification?

I guess what I'm getting at people is there are some new ideas out there to help "inspire" the sales of these birds. Don't get sucked into the ideology that just because a couple extra "meaningful" adjectives are put infront of the breed they are any less or any better than birds from other flocks. I've often found that people do this so they can peddle birds and take advantage of hard working people who want to do the right thing.

This idea transcends to more breeds than just the buckeye. So be mindful and don't pay the elevated prices for sub-par birds. Do your homework and just don't grab the first birds you come across!!!!


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> We are going to have Duane Urch judging the Buckeyes at Ohio National. I cannot think of a more qualified judge. Mr. Urch has had Buckeyes since 1958 and knows the breed unequivocally.


Hey Chris, You never did reply to whether Duane would be judging just the buckeyes or the entire American Class at the Ohio Nationals. Do you know? I have know doubt that Duane understands the breed. However, in over 50 years of ownership; why hasn't he exhibited his buckeyes? I understand the man is well recognized with several merits, some of which are being a member of APA Hall of Fame (an amazing accomplishment!!!!), an APA grand master exhibitor with several breeds of which many are of waterfowl. I've never really noticed him associated with Buckeyes other than supplying chicks and young fowl through hatcheries. In 50 years with any breed, you would think he would be well honored for his exhibition attributes. By no means am I trying to question his knowledge (I don't think there is a single person on the planet that can do that), but just curious why he doesn't show them.

I've noticed that Mr. Urch gets amazing acknowledgement within your little group. Is it because the history he brings with the birds or the overall quality of the fowl?

I've talked with the man a few times regarding poultry in general and enjoy my conversations with him. He's been nothing less than a gentleman during our conversations. The next time we talk, I'll ask him directly why he doesn't show his buckeyes.


----------



## cgmccary

> Hey Chris, You never did reply to whether Duane would be judging just the buckeyes or the entire American Class at the Ohio Nationals. Do you know?


Sorry Joe, didn't see you ask that. I do not know the answer to that question and doubt I could get a straight answer on it that I would vouch for. When I asked for Urch to judge Buckeyes, I was told he would start on them first thing Saturday morning & I was not given any problem about it. I hope he judges the whole class. Also, I know things happen and something can change (like for some reason he does not come to the show or something. I have a back-up name or two judge I will then go to).

As far as why he does not presently show his Buckeyes, I have never asked him. Every time I have seen him, he is busy and judging. I do not know whether or not he showed Buckeyes sometime in the past. I assume at one time or another, he has shown a number of the breeds he possesses. Heck, he shows Guinea fowl. It seems like somewhere somebody told me he had Buckeyes one time at the MN State Fair (isn't that a show?).



> I've noticed that Mr. Urch gets amazing acknowledgement within your little group. Is it because the history he brings with the birds or the overall quality of the fowl?


Yes, I cannot speak for all members of ABPC, I can only tell you why I respect Mr. Urch and hold him in such high regard. It is a combination of a number of things: (1) his long history with the Buckeye breed, (2) his keen knowledge of the Buckeye (from my conversations & personal dealings with him and with others who know him); (3) his knowledge of all the breeds & other poultry; (4) He is an accomplished judge of all poultry. I would trust Mr. Urch to judge any breed, not just those that he keeps. So not just because of the length of time for me but more. I would not presume to speak for others.

I think your club, at one time, had Mr. Urch listed as a "Legend Breeder," or some such. That seems like an amazing acknowledgment as well. So I ask you the same: Is that because he has had Buckeyes since 1958? Of course, John Brown was also listed as a "Legend Breeder," and he has had Buckeyes since only 2000 (and when I viewed your list, it was back when it was first put up, so 2008 or 09 he was a "legend"?-- point being he had not had them a decade yet) so length of time of owning/breeding Buckeyes cannot be your sole criteria. Mr. Brown is a very respected & accomplished poultry breeder in general, so did that go into account? It seems like I remember something about it being about length of time of having the breed that made one a legend though -- Is there anybody out there who does not hold Mr. Urch as one of the biggest names in poultry anywhere (not only Buckeyes but all poultry?)? Didn't he help found the SPPA?


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> Sorry Joe, didn't see you ask that. I do not know the answer to that question and doubt I could get a straight answer on it that I would vouch for. When I asked for Urch to judge Buckeyes, I was told he would start on them first thing Saturday morning & I was not given any problem about it. I hope he judges the whole class. Also, I know things happen and something can change (like for some reason he does not come to the show or something. I have a back-up name or two judge I will then go to).


No need to appologize Chris; Thanks for the information. If Duane does judge the entire American class, I feel the Buckeyes will get a better shake, but time will tell. At any rate, good luck with the show.



cgmccary said:


> As far as why he does not presently show his Buckeyes, I have never asked him. Every time I have seen him, he is busy and judging. I do not know whether or not he showed Buckeyes sometime in the past. I assume at one time or another, he has shown a number of the breeds he possesses. Heck, he shows Guinea fowl. It seems like somewhere somebody told me he had Buckeyes one time at the MN State Fair (isn't that a show?).


I wasn't trying to point out anything negative, just curious why he hasn't been noted for exhibiting them more in the past, +50 years is a very long time. The MN state fair is indeed a show. That would be the first time, I've ever heard of him exhibiting them. If I'm not mistaken, Duane is a grand master exhibitor for his pearl guineas. That could be just it though, every judge out there has a breed or two that they excel or specialize with. Duane has a truck load, be it a semi-truck load. Between running his farm and judging, time for exhibiting is thin.



cgmccary said:


> Yes, I cannot speak for all members of ABPC, I can only tell you why I respect Mr. Urch and hold him in such high regard. It is a combination of a number of things: (1) his long history with the Buckeye breed, (2) his keen knowledge of the Buckeye (from my conversations & personal dealings with him and with others who know him); (3) his knowledge of all the breeds & other poultry; (4) He is an accomplished judge of all poultry. I would trust Mr. Urch to judge any breed, not just those that he keeps. So not just because of the length of time for me but more. I would not presume to speak for others.


That's awesome, he is a strong advicate of poultry and a great wealth of knowledge. I have a few breeders myself that I look up too in that manner. Thanks for sharing!



cgmccary said:


> I think your club, at one time, had Mr. Urch listed as a "Legend Breeder," or some such. That seems like an amazing acknowledgment as well. So I ask you the same: Is that because he has had Buckeyes since 1958?


That's a question best suited for Jeff, I really didn't pay much attention to that list. It took me all about a week to locate specimens that suited me and I have never really looked at the breeders list, no need to. I would assume that Mr. Urch having them for such a long period of time would have something to do with it......



cgmccary said:


> Of course, John Brown was also listed as a "Legend Breeder," and he has had Buckeyes since only 2000 (and when I viewed your list, it was back when it was first put up, so 2008 or 09 he was a "legend"?-- point being he had not had them a decade yet) so length of time of owning/breeding Buckeyes cannot be your sole criteria. Mr. Brown is a very respected & accomplished poultry breeder in general, so did that go into account? It seems like I remember something about it being about length of time of having the breed that made one a legend though --


Again, a good questions for Jeff. I would assume that knowing Jeff (not speaking for him); that list was made to help inform people of the individuals that has possessed and bred the buckeyes for some length of time. Those have weathered the storm for multiple years and may be a little more knowledgable about the breed. I remember talking about it briefly, it may have been color coded relying on length the birds were owned. It was to help newcomers from becoming prey to people who obtained the birds, slapped a new strain/label on them and began peddling them off for a quick buck independent of their quality.

I guess the "Legend Breeder" status could have also be provided because an actual strain was named after them and that name is seen fairly often throughout the community.....again....a good question for Jeff. I was just spit-balling my opinions.



cgmccary said:


> Is there anybody out there who does not hold Mr. Urch as one of the biggest names in poultry anywhere (not only Buckeyes but all poultry?)? Didn't he help found the SPPA?


Not to my knowledge, but my knowledge is somewhat limited in regards to Mr. Urch. The first time I've heard of him was a few years ago when Syd and I began raising the buckeyes. The previous 20 or so years prior, I was unaware he existed. On the same note; I wasn't raising many "fancy" birds, really just the games. So his name would have never surfaced in that arena. Mr. Urch may have had a hand in the SPPA, honestly I don't know. Based on how that question was worded, I would assume he was. A quick net check would confirm I'm sure.

Again, thanks for the information regarding the ON.


----------



## cgmccary

> *Shumaker:* I guess the "Legend Breeder" status could have also be provided because an actual strain was named after them


This brings up an interesting topic I get asked about. A "strain" named after someone, IMHO, is not meant as some merit badge or given to bestow achievement.

The strain was named after Brown because that is as far back as that population could be reliably traced at the time. Matt Johns got his Buckeyes from John Brown, and Matt to Laura Haggarty, then from her to Janet Hatch & so forth. John Brown told me he acquired his birds from a woman in Canada, but he could not remember her name. We could just as well had termed it the "Canadian Strain" (we just did not know this at the time when we were describing the population/strain but learned it later). I got my first Buckeyes from Duane Urch, bred just those birds and later bred an ALBC cock to them. I consider my birds Urch strain, but my own line. I later learned that Urch got his Buckeyes from Howard Tallman in 1958 (Florida). So instead of "Urch Strain," had we known it, we could have called it the "Tallman Strain."

For me, the whole idea of "strain" is to determine the primary population the birds originate from. After 2-3 years, a person breeding Buckeyes creates their own line of that particular strain. The line may or may not be better, the same or worse than the original strain. Thus, Laura would have her own line of Brown strain (this does not mean she got birds form John Brown but her source got his from John Brown). Matt John has his line of Brown strain. I would have my own line of Urch strain. Janet would have her line of Brown strain.

All the Buckeyes I know can be traced ultimately back to Brown/Canadian, Urch/Tallman, Rhodes, Romig or the ALBC (though there has been mixing of the populations) & there are probably a couple of other ultimate sources. As I mean the terms, *a "strain" is a population of a breed maintained by several or many breeders/ keepers in different locations but which retain both hereditary (genetic) traits and have a common origin (genetic) source exemplified by basic characteristics. A "line" is one person's intentional breeding of a strain over 2+ generations.*

You're are probably going to say that the above is not your definitions of strain and line. That is cool. I think a lot of the disagreements we may have has to do with our own definitions of the the term "strain" and "line." I admit most people use them interchangeably, but I do not (or try not to consciously do so).

So why would ALBC have their own strain as those Buckeyes can be traced back to several sources? My answer is that the ALBC Buckeyes were bred in 20-25 locations over several years and came from an amalgamation of different strains in a corroboration of effort and sharing (e.g. ALBC took the top 10% from each location using the Hogan methods and then selectively bred from those). The hatchings and selections were on such a grand scale that it created effectively a new strain (a distinct new population maintained in many locations). If bred correctly, they would maintain their own uniqueness. We did not have anything else to call it. A Strain cannot be faulted because someone took it at as their own line and thereafter, it worsened (although the bad line would not earn its own strain name) nor does a strain which becomes someone's own improved line suddenly get designated a new strain.

The strain groupings (who ever groups) is all an arbitrary creation anyway and as such, one can disagree with what, who or where a particular line, strain ought to be called or designated. We humans have always liked to categorize and group things to try and better understand them. If you tell me the majority of your Buckeyes are from Jeff Lay's, then I ask what is the main source of his birds. If he got his first flock from John Brown (Canadian), then whether or not he has crossed some other strain over them, if the majority of his matings were the Brown stock (the genetic source), then I would say you have the Shumaker line of Brown strain. This is not meant as a knock on you or on Jeff. If I have Buckeyes 20 years from now and have maintained my flock, I will still have my line of Urch /Tallman strain. People like to know the ultimate source of things. Again, it is arbitrary, and I do not know a better way to arrange Buckeyes at this time. Haven't the game bird folks done it this way for eons? Just asking.


----------



## Shumaker

*Part 1 of 2 (just not enough hours in the evening to reply completely*



cgmccary said:


> This brings up an interesting topic I get asked about. A "strain" named after someone, IMHO, is not meant as some merit badge or given to bestow achievement.


I agree with you whole heartedly!!!!! (Now don't be going around telling people that we agree, I have to keep my reputation as been a rear end).



cgmccary said:


> The strain was named after Brown because that is as far back as that population could be reliably traced at the time. Matt Johns got his Buckeyes from John Brown, and Matt to Laura Haggarty, then from her to Janet Hatch & so forth.


With that linage of breeders and the different perspectives of selection and culling, at that point they hardly deserve Mr. Brown's name attached to them. I wouldn't consider them the "Brown strain" at all because they are several generations removed.



cgmccary said:


> John Brown told me he acquired his birds from a woman in Canada, but he could not remember her name. We could just as well had termed it the "Canadian Strain" (we just did not know this at the time when we were describing the population/strain but learned it later).


That is interesting because I've never heard that one. Not saying its true ot false (I honestly don't know), but John has never mentioned it to me. I do recall him at one point saying something about when he got started but Canada was never mentioned. I'll ask him when I contact him in a week or so and report back what he tells me. I'm actually a little curious now.



cgmccary said:


> I got my first Buckeyes from Duane Urch, bred just those birds and later bred an ALBC cock to them. I consider my birds Urch strain, but my own line. I later learned that Urch got his Buckeyes from Howard Tallman in 1958 (Florida). So instead of "Urch Strain," had we known it, we could have called it the "Tallman Strain."


On a light-hearted note, if we wanted; we can call all of our birds the "Metcalf Strain". Kind of loses it validity though. At the end of the day, we have buckeyes and different people look at the birds in different ways. Makes things interesting when we (the breeder) can alter the appearance of a creature in just a couple generations based on personal selection. I always tell people to breed what suits them and makes them happy because after all, they are the ones throwing feed at them!



cgmccary said:


> All the Buckeyes I know can be traced ultimately back to Brown/Canadian, Urch/Tallman, Rhodes, Romig or the ALBC (though there has been mixing of the populations) & there are probably a couple of other ultimate sources. As I mean the terms, *a "strain" is a population of a breed maintained by several or many breeders/ keepers in different locations but which retain both hereditary (genetic) traits and have a common origin (genetic) source exemplified by basic characteristics. A "line" is one person's intentional breeding of a strain over 2+ generations.*


I have different feelings on the whole strain/line subject. I understand your point. You have made your point, if it works for you then thats great. Jeff even disagrees with my perspective. I can appreciate the "straiin/line" description from a historical standpoint, but at the end of the day, you have buckeyes. I don't think it matter how they got this point as long as they are here. (I can hear Jeff groaning now!) I think people get hung-up on the "strain/line" concept.

Buckeyes are buckeyes, there are wide range of characteristic and a wider range of lines, especially today. The breed has made a nice "comeback". When I got them, I didn't even know they were considered "rare". IMO, very few people actually have birds that resemble the complete description in the standard; traits very. I often get critized for being to critical.

Quality is quality...who cares where it came from. The goal is to reproduce quality of traits. Many people have difficulty understanding this due to their lack of knowledge of poultry in general. I'm not saying they can't or unable to or I'm in any way better. All I'm saying is it takes time and experience in breeding to understand how to enhance the birds from the shell, to the showpen, to the broodpen.

Generally speaking, I would assume that you would choose a decent male based on traits and not some "strain" or name; likewise regarding a female. If you have the knowledge of how to breed and maintain poultry; maintaining a breed based on characteristics and traits is really not that hard. Who gives a crap where the birds came from. I've yet to see a single "strain/line" out there that is a complete package based on Metcalf's writings.

It's the final product/the offspring that you base the quality of the seed stock on. I've yet to see anyone exhibit buckeyes on a regular basis in established exhibition shows with quality competition win consistantly.



cgmccary said:


> So why would ALBC have their own strain as those Buckeyes can be traced back to several sources? My answer is that the ALBC Buckeyes were bred in 20-25 locations over several years and came from an amalgamation of different strains in a corroboration of effort and sharing.


That would explain the huge variation in traits. I've been pretty critical of those birds. IMO, not all that many look alike. The color, body size, combs, tails, and head shapes all look so different from farm to farm.

To be continued...............................

Nice conversation!


----------



## cgmccary

The original ALBC Buckeyes did look uniform. I could barely tell them apart. People just lost them in a couple of generations because they weren't paying attention to their breeding. Same with any strain/ line/ group/ breed. If you went and looked at Jeannette Beranger's birds in N.C, you would see the original ALBC Buckeyes & you would like them. She does not show them but she does use them as a utility bird -- they breed them for food.

Mostly I agree with you Joe about the non-importance of strains/lines, the semantics, with one minor exception: For preservationist purposes, I think it is important to keep birds for genetic diversity as well (even though they may not be the very best but are the best in that particular group). I also will keep a bird that has some characteristic or trait accentuated. I also like breeding from older birds & I like to guard against genetic drift. But mostly, in principle, I agree with you. The strains/ lines are just a way of categorizing & grouping, that's all. I bet the genetic pool in Buckeyes is not that large.

I also disagree with you about the general state of the breed. I see Buckeyes overall as being in good shape, especially compared with some of the other American breeds. I see a lot of good ones out there. It is a breed that is hard to mess up and easy to work. I guess it is like seeing the glass as half empty or half full.

I also agree with you about the whole "heritage , certified" stuff in one of your previous posts -- it is sort of like the designation, "organic." It is just a marketing tool. This is America & I am not against people making money. However, I don't like people being taken advantage of --


----------



## Shumaker

*Part 2 of 2 let the madness continue!*



cgmccary said:


> A Strain cannot be faulted because someone took it at as their own line and thereafter, it worsened (although the bad line would not earn its own strain name) nor does a strain which becomes someone's own improved line suddenly get designated a new strain.


I suppose this concept can be applied to a few of the lines out there today. It's not the original breeders fault that the person who obtained them afterwards screwed up future generations.

As far as lines/strains are concerned; what if a person started with a male that was a mixture of strains/lines and bred it to a female of a different strain. The water tends to get pretty murky as far as names are concerned. Especially if you only start with two birds. They are still buckeyes though.

Ultimately, it's up to the future breeder to do the work and research what they bird should look like or get help when selecting respectable specimens to move forward. I think that is where the ABC excels because we work hard to help as many as we can (now that is a generalized statement and not aimed in any direction!)



cgmccary said:


> The strain groupings (who ever groups) is all an arbitrary creation anyway and as such, one can disagree with what, who or where a particular line, strain ought to be called or designated. We humans have always liked to categorize and group things to try and better understand them.


Yep, that's a fact!



cgmccary said:


> If you tell me the majority of your Buckeyes are from Jeff Lay's, then I ask what is the main source of his birds. If he got his first flock from John Brown (Canadian), then whether or not he has crossed some other strain over them, if the majority of his matings were the Brown stock (the genetic source), then I would say you have the Shumaker line of Brown strain. This is not meant as a knock on you or on Jeff.


Quit knocking us!!!!!! (kidding). Again, I do understanding what you are conveying. But some of the flocks that are out there are a mixture of two (or more) strains. Based on my conversations with Jeff, his flock is one of them. Sometimes your description can apply and others it becomes difficult. If you would go to extremes; we can say (as I said it before), they are all Metcalf birds. This is exactly what I meant when too much focus is placed on the origin rather than the actual birds.



cgmccary said:


> People like to know the ultimate source of things.


People are obsessed with it at times. IMO, more so than they need to been. Just because it came from a specific source doesn't necessarily mean it will produce better quality.



cgmccary said:


> Again, it is arbitrary, and I do not know a better way to arrange Buckeyes at this time. Haven't the game bird folks done it this way for eons? Just asking.


Game people are a fickle group (and fancy people are not ). Rather than refering to a group of birds as "strains", they are refered to as "families". Really nothing matters to many of the game breeders other than a families gameness and athletic abilities. I'm an outlier to that group of people as well because I focus of the details of the birds in breeding (i.e. feather width/length, station, width/length of the head, basically to make sure the bird is symmetic in appearance), bone structure is important to me. That can been witnessed in many of the pictures I post regarding to my gamefowl. Color isn't so much an issue or a focal point. I focus on the details.

With any bird, the first thing you see when you look at a bird is the color, head and the tail (or at least that is what I see). First impression is everything. The tail based on plummage tells me how well the bird is bred and the health based on feather condition and feather width. The head confirms everything else (health, breeding). The length/width of the head, the strength of the beak, color of the eyes, how the eyes are set in the head, how the bird acts (high-strung, relaxed, nervious, ect), size/shape of the comb. The head tells you alot, if you understand what you are looking at and know what to look for....that is where experience steps in to help. Overall; color speaks volumes for a bird; when looking at the depth of color and health/quality/uniformity of the plumage. As always symmetry is very important. The head, neck, legs have to match the body so that they are proportional.

I hope that makes sense, I kind of just threw it up there. Again, these are just my opinions. There are probably many beginners that will read this and look at there birds a little different trying pick out the different variables. Who would have though poultry would be so interesting.


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> The original ALBC Buckeyes did look uniform. I could barely tell them apart. People just lost them in a couple of generations because they weren't paying attention to their breeding. Same with any strain/ line/ group/ breed. If you went and looked at Jeannette Beranger's birds in N.C, you would see the original ALBC Buckeyes & you would like them. She does not show them but she does use them as a utility bird -- they breed them for food.


That is good to know! From what I've witnessed; yikes!



cgmccary said:


> Mostly I agree with you Joe about the non-importance of strains/lines, the semantics, with one minor exception: For preservationist purposes, I think it is important to keep birds for genetic diversity as well (even though they may not be the very best but are the best in that particular group).


That's fine with me. You are not the only one (yes, Jeff.....I know! history/preservation...blah...blah...blah ). America is fun, we can agree to disagree on the emphesis of small focal points.

As far as genetic diversity, it is entirely possible to maintain a breed with a small initial population. This will enhance the good traits as well as the lesser desirable ones.....proper culling will ensure the breed doesn't head the wrong direction. Once we get our flock were I want it, there is no way in the world I'd accept anything that will throw things out of balance. Our flock is closed now and probably will remain that way.



cgmccary said:


> I also will keep a bird that has some characteristic or trait accentuated. I also like breeding from older birds & I like to guard against genetic drift.


I'm the same way! I'd rather breed from my older stock. I highly value my older birds!



cgmccary said:


> I also disagree with you about the general state of the breed. I see Buckeyes overall as being in good shape, especially compared with some of the other American breeds. I see a lot of good ones out there. It is a breed that is hard to mess up and easy to work. I guess it is like seeing the glass as half empty or half full.


I guess you can look at it that way. I see alot of potential, but that is it. I suppose I like to knitpick (say it ain't so. Right?). I see birds that need a lot of help in color overall and size/shape of the body. The heads are often "scary" long and that translates throughout the carcuss. That's just me though. Now can you image how hard I am with our flock.....it's a wonder they all haven't been eaten for dinner!



cgmccary said:


> I also agree with you about the whole "heritage , certified" stuff in one of your previous posts -- it is sort of like the designation, "organic." It is just a marketing tool. This is America & I am not against people making money. However, I don't like people being taken advantage of --


Glad to hear it!!!!

Good luck with your birds Chris!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

*Strains, Lines, Families & Blood Lines*

Joe and Chris have been very busy and having given us ALL a great deal to discuss....since there was question about the ABC's "Buckeye Breeder Directory" and the use of "Strains & Lines" I hope to tackle these concerns with this reply;


The American Buckeye Club's (ABC) "Breeder Directory" wasoriginally intended to identify ALL of those Buckeye breeders know to exist in2008 (when the website was created) and to help NEW people coming to the breedfind Buckeye chicks, hatching eggs or adult fowl. These breeders could have been folks with 20or more years experience, hobbyist, exhibitors, or newbie's to the breed andour goal, at that time, was to associate that experience along with the linesthey have been breeding. We used 4 groupingsback then and a color code system to identify "Hatcheries", "Legacy Breeders", "Breeders"and "Hobbyist/Fancier"&#8230;. Today we simply use the color code system based onyears of experience with the breed. Inaddition, we found many people wanted to know what line or strain thesebreeders maintained&#8230;..I personally contribute that to the good folks at theALBC (American Livestock Breed Conservancy) when they began publishing theirBuckeye breeding program and stating they were using "Brown/Urch/Rhodes andPearce"! Prior to 2007 (and I had beenbreeding Buckeyes since 2002) I had NEVER had a single person buy a Buckeyefrom me and ask me, "what line, or what breeder did your Buckeyes originatefrom?"&#8230;.so I'm going to give ALL the credit (or blame if you prefer) to theALBC for generating this BUZZ in the Buckeye world.

The ABC also elected to use the American Poultry Association's(APA) definition for a "Strain"&#8230;.we can argue there is a difference between theterms "strain and line" until we are blue in the face but people use them interchangeablyso the ABC noted this in our current "Breeder Directory" (I personally don'tfeel they have the same meaning but I'll talk about that later)....here is theAPA's definition of "Strain" from the 1905 SoP (the ABC chose the 1905 versionbecause that was the first year the Buckeye standard was in print);

_"A family of any variety of fowls bred in line by descentby one fancier, or a successor, during a number of years, that has acquiredindividual characteristics which distinguish it more or less from other strainsor specimens of the same variety."_

*NOTE: the APAdefinition states "ONE FANCIER, or a SUCCESSOR"&#8230;. (Not several breeders inseveral places) it also says "during a number of years" (experienced poultrybreeders would say more than 5 years). More importantly having "acquired individual characteristics whichdistinguish it&#8230;.from other strains" and this definition implies those characteristicscan be "more or less", meaning improved upon or degraded is the way some mightinterpret this!*

The definition used by the good folks at the ALBC, one thatthey came up with in late 2010 or early 2011 for whatever reason, maybe in anattempt to separate "line and strain" but what about "family" (that's anothertopic for a later date) goes like this;

_*"A strain is a population of a breedmaintained by several or many breeders/ keepers in different locations butwhich retain both hereditary (genetic) traits and have a common origin(genetic) source exemplified by basic characteristics. A line is one person'sintentional breeding of a strain over 2+ generations."*_

(Thanks to Chris for adding the ALBC definition in his postit made life easier for me!) This ALBC definitionis very self serving and COMPLETELY wrong in terms of defining the term "strain". It does not take a rocket scientist ofgenetic scientist to know you can't have several breeders in several locationswith different breeding ideas and maintain a "strain" (you will maintain a "bloodline" but not a "strain")?!?! Chrishimself even agreed that the ALBC Buckeyes have suffered in a very short periodof time as a result of too many folks NOT breeding them properly or to a prescribedbreeding plan!!! We can't have it both ways folks and the APA definition hasstood the test of time but if you want to jump on the ALBC definition bandwagonthe folks at the American Buckeye Club (nor I) care and that is what makes twodifferent Buckeye Clubs so interesting in my opinion. Philosophical differences of opinion when itcomes to ONE word or ONE definition of that word is fascinating to say theleast!!!

Finally, let's consider the term "line"&#8230;..we see it often usedto describe both a "strain" and/or a "family" of birds but that is not 100%accurate (I personally tend to use the term "line" to describe a specific "family"or a "blood line" I'm working with but not a "strain"). If I cross "strain X" to "strain Y" I havecreated a new "family" (X+Y) or another "line"(X+Y) to continue using my "Line Breeding" technique with&#8230;.I did NOT create anew "strain" and I do NOT agree with the ALBC that a "line" must be 2+generations of a specific "strain"?!?! If a breeder breeds "strain X" for 2 or3 years is it still NOT the same "blood line", is it still NOT the same "strain"in those 2 or 3 generations??? (I say yes it is still the same "strain" andsame "blood line") However, if thebreeder of "strain X" breeds them for 6 or 10 years and CHANGES a trait orcharacteristic (even without introducing new blood) it may still be the same "bloodline" but becomes a different "strain" (this is the APA definition of strain)all together.

Great poultry men and breeders like I.K. Felch, and in more modern times HarryM. Lamon, often used the terms "blood line", "family" and "strain" in differentcontext than we see people use them today. I think the confusion lies in how one sees things from a "characteristic"or "blood line" (genetic) perspective. "Definiteblood lines are the result of a fixed plan of breeding with the consequentconcentration to a greater or lesser degree of the blood of some particularindividual, family or strain. Well established blood lines are characterized bya greater uniformity of the fowls belonging to these lines with respect to somecharacter or set of characters." (FromHarry M. Lamon's book "The Mating and Breeding of Poultry", published in 1920and reprinted in 2003).


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

*Packaging & Shipping Hatching Eggs*

On a lighter note the ABC members have had a great deal of questions about "Packaging and Shipping Hatching Eggs" in recent weeks and we partnered with the good folks at Poultry Show Central with a short "How to" on the subject! When you have a moment please take a look at;

http://www.poultryshowcentral.com/Mail_Hatching_Eggs.html

It's a GREAT website with info on Poultry Shows and Swaps ALL over the USA and outstanding TIPS as well.


----------



## Shumaker

And people ask we why I like buckeyes so much.....just look at the different personalities that raise the birds who provide the entertainment value! You couldn't make this stuff up.


----------



## cgmccary

> Chrishimself even agreed that the ALBC Buckeyes have suffered in a very short periodof time as a result of too many folks NOT breeding them properly or to a prescribedbreeding plan!!!


Likewise, I have seen photos of Buckeyes where the person said they got their original stock from you but they did not look like your Buckeyes (or Joe's) either, so any line, any strain can go the wrong direction in a couple of years.

I have seen ALBC Buckeyes bred properly that look great as well. For the record.


----------



## cgmccary

> I do NOT agree with the ALBC that a "line" must be 2+generations of a specific "strain"?!?!


The ALBC says this? I say that is my opinion because it only takes about 2 years to mess em up or get em better.

Actually, I made up my own definition of strain -- what I mean when I say "strain." It is probably close to what ALBC says.

yes, Jeff, you are correct that nobody asked lines, strains, etc. until the last 4-5 years. All the buzz about the different Buckeye populations began when ALBC was looking around trying to acquire stock for their project. For lack of a better word, they would say, "Rhodes hen" or "Brown cockerel," so it is purely arbitrary. There weren't really enough Buckeyes around to really start making the distinction in 2002 or 2004. In 2005 and 2006, I did not see people saying I have Urch strain Buckeyes. It didn't matter. It was hard enough just getting some Buckeyes. I called my flock a Urch flock before I heard anyone else saying it. All that has now fortunately changed. We need to stop living in the past and get some organization about the breeding and keeping up better with the various flocks.

In 2007 when I obtained a cockerel from Don Schrider, I asked him, "well I have Urch hens and pullets, so what do I call this one?" He thought a moment and said that these were really a new population and let's just call them ALBC strain. Don knows the Buckeye landscape better than me & generally, I like keeping up with what is what. I think all the different populations of Buckeyes (whatever you want to call them, strain, line, whatever) are deserving and have a place in the Buckeye world. We need all them. Being a micropaleontologist in my previous life, I like cataloguing things in groups (fossil, extinct animals & plants are grouped much like living animals and plants) -- it is the way my brain works (the taxonomy of fossils was always one of my strengths). If something else, some other system makes more sense to you , then great. I say whatever works for you, do it. I am not arguing it is only my way. It is the way I look at it.

Personally, I did not like the color coding of the breeder's directory that you (Jeff) had the last time I looked at it (I do not know if you are still doing it that way) -- those were your decisions who was green or red -- you were also using the various strain names.

Like Joe, I am about to close my flock as I have enough diversity, and the different traits to work with for the rest of my life without ever needing an infusion (of course barring some calamity or disaster, i.e. tornado, fire, predator, flood). Also, I do not consider myself a breeder of Buckeyes. I hatch out a lot less than you guys. I would like to hatch and have a bigger operation but simply put, I am very busy in my professional life, other farm animals -- and in the end, I hatch and raise for my own food consumption (and that is my purpose).


----------



## cgmccary

> *APA*: A family of any variety of fowls bred in line by descent by one fancier, or a successor, during a number of years, that has acquired individual characteristics which distinguish it more or less from other strains or specimens of the same variety."





> *Damerow:* strain: a family of related chickens selectively bred by a single person or organization long enough for all the chickens to be uniform in appearance or production capability and clearly distinguishable from other strains of the same breed and variety. An established strain is usually identified by its developer's name, which is commonly a corporation for meat or egg production strains and an individual breeder for noncommercial strains, such as those intended for exhibition, fly tying, or cockfighting.


I agree with these definitions of strain too. All a different way of saying the same thing. In giving my own version of what I think a strain is, I wanted to be more descriptive in what this meant to me, in my mind, as I don't want 25 breeders claiming to have 25 different strains in five years --i.e. there's not enough difference between one Brown flock and another, IMHO, to call each a new strain. When I saw Joe's Buckeye cockerel (and other birds) in the flesh at the Georgia show, to me, he looked like other superb males I have seen that originated in one way or another from Mr. Brown. And when I think about it, John Brown did, in fact, put his own look on the Buckeye. He had bred dark Cornish in his Buckeyes and he told Laura Haggarty and I that the Canadian woman he got his from, she had bred Chantecler in them. And I also thought Mr. Brown's vision of what a Buckeye should look like varied from others (in that, he placed greater emphasis on certain traits over other traits and the same for other folks-- for instance, Bob Gilbert and I differ on what we look for)-- Probably for all these reasons, Brown deserved to have a strain named after him.

One thing Don Schrider taught me is that all is acceptable, it is all good, and we need the little nuances and differences because that will make the breed stronger. Some time ago, I learned to accept that someone's vision of the breed may not be exactly like mine. The SOP description leaves us room to have these slight variations.

When I look at my own birds, I see what I see in other Urch flocks so the acquisition of individual characteristics which distinguish the bird from other specimens has to be a lot more than an improved bird and has to be more meaningful than you just having them for 10+ years -- it needs to be a more distinctive mark. Let's face it, it is one breed, one variety and there is only so much you can do with it -- in my mind, the different populations are set -- and I agree with both you, that, we have all crossed other "strains" into our flocks so giving them a "strain name" may be going too far-- let's just be honest -- my birds were Urch and I crossed an ALBC cock over a group of 8 hens/ pullets I had bred from pure Urch stock & went from there.

I'd like to see the Mean-as Snakes strain (to see if other than being as mean as hell, if they differed in some other significant way). The different hatchery Buckeyes look mostly like they at one time originated from Mr. Urch, albeit, not as well maintained in breeding -- some sources, we don't know, others we do.

Ultimately, all I would want to know and be able to convey is I got my birds from so & so who got theirs two years removed from so & so -- that's all.


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> And when I think about it, John Brown did, in fact, put his own look on the Buckeye. He had bred dark Cornish in his Buckeyes and he told Laura Haggarty and I that the Canadian woman he got his from, she had bred Chantecler in them.


I spoke with John last Monday (I was at his house) and he absolutely detests that chantecler is in the birds he has/had/ever had. I asked him out right. As far as the cornish is concerned, that only came about within the last 3 years or so. I can count the amount of actual crossed birds he possesses that have cornish in them on one hand. The concept seems fair enough, but doing it kills the tails and makes them short in station with larger bodies. They don't look symmetric. None of the birds he has sent out ever had cornish in them, so he says. That is the absolute truth. I've known that man my entire life. My father once upon a time raised birds with him when he was showing.

John's real emphesis has always been that real dark mahogany color. I spoke with him before I went to Jeff's the very first I went and he told me to pick the darkest bird I could get my hands on and to make sure the heads exhibited small combs/no wattles with respectably wide heads. The rest would work itself out.

As far as the birds I had down in Georgia, those had very little of John's blood in them; they were practically all Jeff's. The male I started with was a cross between some of Jeff's birds.



cgmccary said:


> Some time ago, I learned to accept that someone's vision of the breed may not be exactly like mine. The SOP description leaves us room to have these slight variations.


I'm still working on that ideology. I don't think Metcalf's version of the bird left much room to play on color and body description. At this point, I've given up on the SOP description and have focused on Metcalf's description.



cgmccary said:


> acquisition of individual characteristics which distinguish the bird from other specimens has to be a lot more than an improved bird and has to be more meaningful than you just having them for 10+ years -- it needs to be a more distinctive mark.


Yes! absolutely correct IMO. That is my I've not mentioned my fowl with my name; they are not unique enough to deserve a name! Oh...but plans are in the works to make them very unique........hopefully! It'll take a few more years and a great deal of breeding.



cgmccary said:


> I'd like to see the Mean-as Snakes strain (to see if other than being as mean as hell, if they differed in some other significant way).


Who would name there birds that? Who would raise birds that had that trait? I mean come on........really! That makes me laugh everytime I see that name. Then I sigh.....and think.....only fancy people.


----------



## cgmccary

> I spoke with John last Monday (I was at his house) and he absolutely detests that chantecler is in the birds he has/had/ever had. I asked him out right. As far as the cornish is concerned, that only came about within the last 3 years or so. I can count the amount of actual crossed birds he possesses that have cornish in them on one hand. The concept seems fair enough, but doing it kills the tails and makes them short in station with larger bodies. They don't look symmetric. None of the birds he has sent out ever had cornish in them, so he says. That is the absolute truth. I've known that man my entire life. My father once upon a time raised birds with him when he was showing.


John told me in November, 2009 at the Ohio National about the Cornish and the Chantecler. I am not just making it up. I was not the only person he told (i.e. not the only one standing there as I went and got another person and asked him to repeat what he had said & he did) & so he is telling you differently, so who knows? Since he told me and I have a witness, I feel I can repeat it. If true, then he had done it before 2009, and he did not have LF Buckeyes then (just the Bantams) so 2009 was 3 years ago so it would have been before longer than three years ago -- I did not ask him when about the Cornish. I just took him at his word & as I said, he repeated it.



> John's real emphesis has always been that real dark mahogany color.


Yes, I heard him say the same things as I walked with him to each Buckeye in the show (about 25 of them and asked him what he liked and did not like about them), and I appreciated and respected his take on the breed. I did not agree with everything but agreed with most. I see this emphasis in the other Buckeyes I have seen at shows that originated from Mr. Brown (whether they were directly from him or through say, Matt Johns who got his birds from John Brown).



> I don't think Metcalf's version of the bird left much room to play on color and body description.


I was referring to the SOP's description, and there is plenty of room. For instance, just take color only, the SOP says that the undercolor of all sections is red, except for the undercolor of the back which *SHOULD* show a bar of slate. It does not say MUST or SHALL show a bar of slate but SHOULD. It is not a DQ if it does not have any slate -- it just should have a slate bar in the back; this is some play room. In other words, I would argue that a Buckeye with a better body (i.e. broader back, wider heart girth, broader hips) with no slate bar -- all other things being equal, is the better bird than one that has a slate bar in the undercolor of the back. IMHO (and it's my opinion), the SHOULD allows an APA judge to place the bird lacking the slate bar higher -- this is room to play (and what I was referring).

The surface color according to the SOP is an *even shade of rich mahogany bay in all sections *except unexposed primaries and secondaries and the main tail feathers which *MAY *contain black. What if the wing was colored all rich mahogany bay, with no black whatsoever? Would this be according to SOP? an SOP correct bird? Yes, it just says it MAY contain black and then strictly defines if it does contain black, then where it may be -- this is room to play -- a lot. What if the main tail feathers (the coverts and sickles of the male), What if they were all colored a rich mahogany bay and no black? Correct as to SOP? Could be, I say because again the SOP says only in regards to the Buckeye male that the main tail feathers should be shaded bay and black avoiding a sharp contrast between body and tail -- again SHOULD not SHALL & no disqualification if no black -- again room to play. Certainly, the female could have an all rich mahogany bay tail, and it would be SOP correct.

Color is the easiest thing for anyone to see and get right in Buckeyes (especially the males). The body is more difficult. Again, my opinion.


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> John told me in November, 2009 at the Ohio National about the Cornish and the Chantecler. I am not just making it up. I was not the only person he told (i.e. not the only one standing there as I went and got another person and asked him to repeat what he had said & he did) & so he is telling you differently, so who knows? Since he told me and I have a witness, I feel I can repeat it. If true, then he had done it before 2009, and he did not have LF Buckeyes then (just the Bantams) so 2009 was 3 years ago so it would have been before longer than three years ago -- I did not ask him when about the Cornish. I just took him at his word & as I said, he repeated it.


I'm not suggesting you are making it up. How can you? I'm just relaying what I was told and what I've seen on his yard. Yep, he told me something different in comparison to what you were told, who knows? Oh, I beleive John did have LF buckeyes well before 2009; several years before. Case in point, I just picked up a couple hens that 10-11 years old and where his old foundation stock that he raised. There is absolutely no chance of chantecler being in those birds. There combs are great pea comb and everything I produced from the original hen from John had a great pea comb. The chantecler has a cushion comb and would really screw up a pea comb for generations to come! I don't know if you would ever really be able to get it back.

The cornish are still in the works to my knowledge. Repeating what he said is fine IMO, if that was what you were told. John is well aware of this being repeated (His son, Tony, has read it before on the net). You'll get the chance to ask him at this years meeting during the Nationals. This isn't my beef and I was meerly relaying what I was told. No need to explore this any futher. I'm just sharing my point of view.



cgmccary said:


> Yes, I heard him say the same things as I walked with him to each Buckeye in the show (about 25 of them and asked him what he liked and did not like about them), and I appreciated and respected his take on the breed. I did not agree with everything but agreed with most.


That's great, you don't have to agree with everything. Heck, there are a few things I don't agree with. The fun of poultry!



cgmccary said:


> I see this emphasis in the other Buckeyes I have seen at shows that originated from Mr. Brown (whether they were directly from him or through say, Matt Johns who got his birds from John Brown).


Then the birds should be labeled with Mr. Johns's name on them, not Mr. Brown's name. Mr. Johns was doing the breeding and selecting/cull/selling at the point he recieved them. Yes, they may have a few traits that resemble Brown's birds; BUT they are NOT Brown's birds, they are Mr. Johns's! I've seen pictures of so called "Brown" birds in and they look NOTHING like what Brown would produce and even accept as his own. That should be noted to all that supposedly have Mr. Brown's line, unless you recieved them direct, then you can't claim that. PERIOD

BTW, I haven't heard of any cushion comb problems from anyone. With as many people breeding Brown's "bloodline"; throwbacks do happen. I've yet to hear anything regarding cushion combs being produced. Have you?



cgmccary said:


> I was referring to the SOP's description, and there is plenty of room. For instance, just take color only, the SOP says that the undercolor of all sections is red, except for the undercolor of the back which *SHOULD* show a bar of slate. It does not say MUST or SHALL show a bar of slate but SHOULD. It is not a DQ if it does not have any slate -- it just should have a slate bar in the back; this is some play room. In other words, I would argue that a Buckeye with a better body (i.e. broader back, wider heart girth, broader hips) with no slate bar -- all other things being equal, is the better bird than one that has a slate bar in the undercolor of the back. IMHO (and it's my opinion), the SHOULD allows an APA judge to place the bird lacking the slate bar higher -- this is room to play (and what I was referring).
> 
> The surface color according to the SOP is an *even shade of rich mahogany bay in all sections *except unexposed primaries and secondaries and the main tail feathers which *MAY *contain black. What if the wing was colored all rich mahogany bay, with no black whatsoever? Would this be according to SOP? an SOP correct bird? Yes, it just says it MAY contain black and then strictly defines if it does contain black, then where it may be -- this is room to play -- a lot. What if the main tail feathers (the coverts and sickles of the male), What if they were all colored a rich mahogany bay and no black? Correct as to SOP? Could be, I say because again the SOP says only in regards to the Buckeye male that the main tail feathers should be shaded bay and black avoiding a sharp contrast between body and tail -- again SHOULD not SHALL & no disqualification if no black -- again room to play. Certainly, the female could have an all rich mahogany bay tail, and it would be SOP correct.


I know you were referring to the SOP's description. The whole lot of information you provided is exactly why the SOP description is a load of crap. The room to play is everywhere. No wonder why there is such variations in the breed. I personally breed them how Metcalf described them, but that is just me. Cornish game type bodies that exhibit very dark plumage based on the color of a bay horse coat (which is directly referenced in her writings), with dark undercolor. The bay horse color is pretty darn dark, like that of a dark buckeye nut (which has also been used to describe color)! Phases like dark garnet and dark cardinal red have also been writen to describe the color of the bird. Now that is tip-toeing the mahogany color really close. IMO, there are NO exception to her description. You have it or you don't. The APA description of mahogany bay for poultry is different than the horse coat color, in fact it's lighter in shade and even has different "acceptable" shades.

Now I undestand why a reddish-orange buckeye color is acceptable, it's a travesty to the bird and Metcalf's work getting them accepted into the SOP. I'm sure she would be crapping a brick right now if she saw some of the so called buckeyes. Just the other day, I witnessed a "buckeye" that looked more like a New Hampshire in color and the breeder thought it was correct.......really? Article after article she reiterates dark color and undercolor especially for the male birds, why is that so hard for people to understand, including the SOP/APA. There is actually one of the earlier SOP's (1910, I think, but could be wrong) that have the description wrong regarding the undercolor, at no point was the salmon undercolor ever accepted by the original breeder. That was the RIR shade of undercolor at that time. Those who consider themselves preservationist SHOULD see this and understand it.

Now with that being said, I'm not telling anyone they are wrong. By all means......breed them how they see fit. Breed them in there own image, there is obviously plenty of room in the SOP. I just breed them in a manner that makes me happy; I incourage everyone to do the same. Do what makes you happy. Again.....the fun of poultry!!!



cgmccary said:


> Color is the easiest thing for anyone to see and get right in Buckeyes (especially the males). The body is more difficult.


I feel just the opposite, bodies are easy to obtain and proper dark color is by far more difficult to obtain with the proper undercolor and clean wings being considered. Getting the birds to carry their bodies correctly (chest angle, tail carriage, ect.) is often off as well in many of the birds you see today. An agree to disagree is perfectly acceptable in this case. That is why I promote the total package and breeding everything as a unit rather than focusing on specific traits.

I'm actually at the point where the bodies on our fowl are getting too big. I have a 8.5-9 lb cockerel at 7-8 months old. His body is huge and will only get bigger upon maturity, upwards of 10 pounds (maybe more). I have several very large cockerels. The great thing is that they aren't fat. I butchered a bunch of birds I couldn't use, too my suprise, there was very little fat on them.

With all of the difference in opinion and wiggle room, why wouldn't people be interested in this family of poultry. Food + Beauty! It's very easy to make a line of there own and it still be "SOP/APA correct".


----------



## Shumaker

Here is the color I'm refering to: A bay color; which is also closely related to the buckeye nut color. Here is comparison with respects to a bird. The lighting is a bit different, but I feel the color is similar. It is definately not as light as sorrel horse colors to which the RIR of that day were compared to.


----------



## Marengoite

cgmccary said:


> Likewise, I have seen photos of Buckeyes where the person said they got their original stock from you but they did not look like your Buckeyes (or Joe's) either, so any line, any strain can go the wrong direction in a couple of years.


And as a newbie to chickens in general and Buckeyes in particular, this is exactly the kind of statement that gives me pause. I'm not interested in establishing a line or strain or whatever. My goal is to start with good stock, work from a foundation that will support the building of a healthy flock, and then hope to goodness I don't mess things up. For my part, I plan on relying on good mentors like Jeff and Joe (since they're more or less local) to keep me on the straight and narrow. But at the same time, such e-mails do provide a cautionary warning that breeding chickens is nowhere near as easy as it looks if one wants to maintain quality.

That being said, let me ask what we mean by quality. In the hunting dog world, I've always heard that one is only a single generation away from losing top notch hunting drive in dogs and that one must breed carefully and be very particular about choosing, selecting, and mating stock. However, when I was first married, I got my wife a dog that was a mutt from a cocker spaniel mother and unknown father. She looked like a miniature golden retriever and was raised for the first year in our apartment. However, dog training fool that I was, I did all the basic yard work and standard command training and she was a dandy dog. We ended up moving to the country and just for a lark, I took the dog with me on a hunting expedition. She turned out to be one of the hardest hunting jump dogs for rabbits, grouse, quail and pheasants I've ever had the pleasure to follow into the field. She quartered naturally and never got out of gun range unless she was on some hot scent. So, call me a skeptic on how quickly a breed can be ruined. Not saying it can't happen, but at the same time, there are some instincts that are so deep it's hard to eradicate them. By contrast, my daughter's golden retriever is smart as a whip, will retrieve faithfully, and is biddable as all get-out, but I'd never take her into the field either as a jump dog or as a non-slip retriever. She has NO bird sense whatsoever and has been gun shy since birth. So I do recognize that it is possible to ruin a breed, but it doesn't happen overnight or with a single generation. Usually.

So is it the same with chickens? Can a good line of chickens go bad that quickly if they don't incorporate outcrosses? Or is it really a struggle to maintain a top-notch line?


----------



## Shumaker

Marengoite said:


> So is it the same with chickens? Can a good line of chickens go bad that quickly if they don't incorporate outcrosses? Or is it really a struggle to maintain a top-notch line?


Very good question, it takes a couple generations to get things out of whack. It really isn't that hard to screw a family of birds up if you don't watch how they are being bred and improper husbandry. Inbreeding improperly, will get you there alot faster. Brother/Sister matings are never advised but if you understand what you are doing. It can greatly hone in on the good traits and quickly lead to adverse ones. It all boils down to how you select and cull birds. You need a population to do this. Selection is very important. Not every bird will work. The reason why I've brought up inbreeding is because this happens quite often in a backyard flock that has had a couple years to reproduce with no seperation. You begin to get a mixed bag of traits; good and bad. The bad traits always seem to get enhanced.

Maintaining top-notch birds really isn't that difficult. You have to remember that continually introducing new birds will also continually add new genes and traits (both good and bad). To maintain a top-notch family, it is almost imperitive that you close a family and inbreed. There probably are several out there that will disagree and thats fine. This is my opinion and absolutely not a fact. There are many books out there that can help you understand concepts and ways to line breed successfully. IMO, That is how the top-notch birds are produced! Three very key concepts......1)proper husbandry, 2)proper selection of parents (not every mating is going to work; that is determined through the offspring!), 3) probably the most important!; you have to SELECT and CULL hard to maintain the quality you want!

Hope that helps!


----------



## Marengoite

Shumaker said:


> Three very key concepts......1)proper husbandry, 2)proper selection of parents (not every mating is going to work; that is determined through the offspring!), 3) probably the most important!; you have to SELECT and CULL hard to maintain the quality you want!
> 
> Hope that helps!


Thanks, Joe. I will have to put this in a poster form and stick it to the wall. Looks like I'll have to get an incubator going so I have a nice selection to cull from. 

rick


----------



## Shumaker

Marengoite said:


> Thanks, Joe. I will have to put this in a poster form and stick it to the wall. Looks like I'll have to get an incubator going so I have a nice selection to cull from.
> 
> rick


Just be sure to not overdo it. Making them is easy, rearing them properly is a different animal. Make sure you have the room so they are not crowded and understand that they are pigs! The price of grain has to always be considered. If one falls behind, cull him after a brief trial period! DON'T get attached to the runts or birds with obvious defects! A weak bird will lead to illness that can be spread to the entire flock. Doing the right thing (culling)isn't always easy, but it will lead you to a much more healthy and rewarding flock.


----------



## Shumaker

Chris,

A couple months ago, a online newsletter was released by some heritage bird organization that discussed a few strains and who was currently breeding them. To my surprise, I was included under the Brown Strain along with a few other that did NOT obtain birds direct from John. I asked John about this and he replied that he had no idea who some of those names were and that he didn't provide birds to any of them. I contacted this organization and had my name removed because I felt that it was inaccurate. One hen doesn't constitute an an entire strain. After a couple back and forth emails, some goofball informed me that he knew more about my birds that I did. I found that really intriguing. A terribly misinformed rather rude individual, that obviously did not like me at all. Do you have any idea how they supposedly obtained my name along with the idea that I was breeding birds for John? 

This brings me to any other off the wall question that I've been pondering. Now, I established that John Brown has raised buckeyes for at least 9-10 years..probably a few more. He most definately had LF buckeyes before 2009 in disagreement of your previous post. John Brown's name is refered to often which I find great. He is a very knowledgable individual that has put considerable energy toward the breed. Now I know that Jeff Lay has raised buckeyes for at least 10 years now which is equivilant or very close, IMO, yet I don't hear the ABPC say one word about his birds. Jeff Lay has done much of the same has John and that man is terribly passionate about the breed. IMO, he has great birds that adhere to Metcalf's standards. 

In the "modern era", Jeff has just as much to do (if not more) with the promotion of the breed that nearly everyone in the ABPC.
Many organizations, such as the ALBC, ABPC, and those heritage people above never mention him. Why is that? Where are they getting their information? In that heritage newsletter, your name was mentioned. Everytime I turn a corner, you are mentioned and Jeff has had buckeyes longer than you and nearly all of the members in your group.

I'm just curious why this is? I've never asked Jeff and I just thought of that question today.

I look forward to your response, have a good one!


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> For instance, just take color only, the SOP says that the undercolor of all sections is red, except for the undercolor of the back which *SHOULD* show a bar of slate. It does not say MUST or SHALL show a bar of slate but SHOULD. It is not a DQ if it does not have any slate -- it just should have a slate bar in the back; this is some play room. In other words, I would argue that a Buckeye with a better body (i.e. broader back, wider heart girth, broader hips) with no slate bar -- all other things being equal, is the better bird than one that has a slate bar in the undercolor of the back. IMHO (and it's my opinion), the SHOULD allows an APA judge to place the bird lacking the slate bar higher -- this is room to play (and what I was referring).
> 
> The surface color according to the SOP is an *even shade of rich mahogany bay in all sections *except unexposed primaries and secondaries and the main tail feathers which *MAY *contain black. What if the wing was colored all rich mahogany bay, with no black whatsoever? Would this be according to SOP? an SOP correct bird? Yes, it just says it MAY contain black and then strictly defines if it does contain black, then where it may be -- this is room to play -- a lot. What if the main tail feathers (the coverts and sickles of the male), What if they were all colored a rich mahogany bay and no black? Correct as to SOP? Could be, I say because again the SOP says only in regards to the Buckeye male that the main tail feathers should be shaded bay and black avoiding a sharp contrast between body and tail -- again SHOULD not SHALL & no disqualification if no black -- again room to play. Certainly, the female could have an all rich mahogany bay tail, and it would be SOP correct.


I'd like to touch on this once again and look at it from a judge's point of view. Now I agree with you that body structure and confirmation is the most important, after all they are a dual purpose bird and meat is essential. BUT, let's say that you have a half dozen birds or even a dozen.

All of the bodies are equivilant (not likely), but let's just say that for the sake of arguement. Health, good plummage, nice heads, combs all are sufficent. Now, each one of them are slightly different in color (a few lighter "mahogany bay", some darker (all are "rich"); undercolor varies in depth but is present; the black feathering in the birds differ). The decision will have to made on color. According to the SOP; all are acceptable......God I wouldn't want to be that guy! Someone is going to feel poorly about the decision.

The judge would have to use his OPINIONS and his understanding to award placements based on color. With other breeds, the SOP is nailed down (several VERY tight). A judge should never have to take it upon himself to decide which color scheme is more appropriate if all variations are adequate. Not many judges truely understand the buckeye to begin with. All they have to go by is the wiggle room in the SOP. How do you think that makes them feel? I feel that this example right here makes the "room to play" very troubling. What are your thoughts?


----------



## cgmccary

Joe: I answered anything personal in a PM to you.



> *Shumaker:* Now I undestand why a reddish-orange buckeye color is acceptable,


I never said or suggested anything of the sort. I said rich mahogany bay ALL sections.



> *Shumaker:* The chantecler has a cushion comb and would really screw up a pea comb for generations to come!


I have seen some messed up combs which I assumed, at the time, might be due to a recessive gene for SC, but I really didn't know. The whole Chantecler thing surprised me.



> *Shumaker:* I witnessed a "buckeye" that looked more like a New Hampshire in color


This does not bother me. I would want to know if underneath those feathers, did it have a Buckeye body? Having a NH more compact body would be more worrisome. Bodies are also different between the breeds. What makes a Buckeye a Buckeye is first, its body. A NH is also faster growing (very fast growing being ready for slaughter in about 14 weeks) & a shorter body than the Buckeye.

A well known & long-time Java breeder once quipped he'd rather have a purple polka dotted Java with perfect type than one perfectly colored but with bad type.



> *Shumaker:* Then the birds should be labeled with Mr. Johns's name on them, not Mr. Brown's name. Mr. Johns was doing the breeding and selecting/cull/selling at the point he recieved them. Yes, they may have a few traits that resemble Brown's birds; BUT they are NOT Brown's birds, they are Mr. Johns's!


I respectfully disagree with you, & we can agree to disagree. It is *Johns' Line of Brown's Strain.* This tells me that Mr. Johns selected, culled and sold them to the buyer but that the original genetics is still Brown's. No matter what, the genetic material can be traced back to Mr. Brown though Johns would be responsible for what they looked like -- more information is given to the perspective buyer in doing it my way. If you bought Buckeyes from me, you would be getting McCary Line of Urch/ ALBC strain (since Urch went into creating the ALBC, it is mostly Urch strain). Other reputable breeders describe birds this way. One breeder once told me that Dennis Pearce Line of Buckeyes were Urch Strain (but they were 15 years removed and yet, they were still described this way!). If given more information, you will be able discern if what you are getting is a total outcross or not - IMHO, more information is better.


----------



## cgmccary

> *Shumaker:* Here is the color I'm refering to: A bay color; which is also closely related to the buckeye nut color. Here is comparison with respects to a bird. The lighting is a bit different, but I feel the color is similar. It is definately not as light as sorrel horse colors to which the RIR of that day were compared to.


I completely agree with you. I have often posted pictures of mahogany bay horses to illustrate the proper color. I agree with you the lighting can make the color look very different. Bright, direct sunlight can make a dark bird appear much lighter in a photo & vice versa. I never go by a photo as there's nothing better than actually getting to handle & seeing the bird (I weigh mine too but usually know by handling that it is going to make weight or not.).


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> .....So I do recognize that it is possible to ruin a breed, but it doesn't happen overnight or with a single generation. Usually.
> 
> So is it the same with chickens? Can a good line of chickens go bad that quickly if they don't incorporate outcrosses? Or is it really a struggle to maintain a top-notch line?


Marengoite, having been on both sides of the fence so to speak....I've bred, raised and trained "gun dogs" but no longer do so, instead I've been raising and breeding Buckeyes since 2002. The BIG and most obvious difference when it comes to ruining a "gun dog" is NOT just the breeding but also the training....I've seen many good bird dogs ruined by improper training or by fools who think they know what they are doing!

When it comes to chickens the fastest way to ruin a good family, strain or line is to "incorporate an outcross"....more newbies do this right out of the gate because they read too much nonsense over at BYC about "diversity"!!! A strong line, family or strain is strong because the breeder used strict line breeding techniques for several generations, this continuous mating of fathers to daughters, mothers to sons and using the I.K. Felch method produces little or no variation once you get 6-7 generations in....the most common mistake a newcomber makes is to take two good lines, families or strains and cross them without knowing the strengths and weaknesses within both groups! Sure it's okay to experiment but you can get pulled into the weeds very rapidly and within 2 or 3 generation have a total mess on your hands unless you get extremely lucky or you produce several hundred chicks and cull them as they mature looking ONLY for the very best. Most newcomers will hatch a few chicks and expect them to ALL be "show winners" but it just isn't that easy!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> And people ask we why I like buckeyes so much.....just look at the different personalities that raise the birds who provide the entertainment value! You couldn't make this stuff up.


"ditto"!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

cgmccary said:


> Likewise, I have seen photos of Buckeyes where the person said they got their original stock from you but they did not look like your Buckeyes (or Joe's) either, so any line, any strain can go the wrong direction in a couple of years.


Chris, that doesn't surprise me because I keep more than 12 Buckeye breeding groups and some are "pure" strains from the following breeders;

- Pierce
- Urch
- Rhodes
- Brown
- Pearce

In addition, I have breeding pens that consist of "crosses" between these strains and some of them are;

- Pierce/Rhodes
- Brown/Urch
- Pearce/Urch
- Brown/Rhodes

The first Buckeyes I owned were acquired in 2002 and were from Urch and Brown....I still have Buckeyes from these two strains and they look very different than the Pierce and Rhodes Buckeyes which I believe are (were) completely different "blood lines" than any I've owned. I've called these the "Eastern" group and the others are "western or midwestern" when I catalog them for breeding purposes!

Then there is the "line" I began working on in 2005 and still to this day, that were what I called my "Layer" line because the goal was to improve their egg laying ability. However, I still maintained the use of the SoP and did not deviate from the standard even when others said it couldn't be done! Just as folks began calling Buckeyes "ALBC strain" as early as 2007 (after 2 years of outcrossing) people began calling my Buckeyes by an incorrect name as well.....they used my last name "Lay strain" rather than "Layer Line" which is what I called them, my "Layer Line" was so named in the spring of 2009.

So back to your original comment Chris, people who buy chicks or hatching eggs from me don't always get "my" Buckeyes....they usually get a combination of multiple "blended" lines that I have been maintaining for several generations (unless they ask specifically for "my" line). In my opinion, the darkest color has NOT come from Brown or Urch or Pearce so that leaves us to guess which two the DARK color comes from!!! One can get DARK color from the Urch, Brown, Pearce or even HATCHERY Buckeyes if your willing to focus heavily on the BLACK....something folks don't seem to understand entirely but RIR breeders have done very well with for over 150 years.









Above is a picture taken this spring of about 60 Buckeyes from "my" line and these were all relatively uniform in color and type even at this young age!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

cgmccary said:


> ....In 2007 when I obtained a cockerel from Don Schrider, I asked him, "well I have Urch hens and pullets, so what do I call this one?" He thought a moment and said that these were really a new population and let's just call them ALBC strain.
> 
> .....Personally, I did not like the color coding of the breeder's directory that you (Jeff) had the last time I looked at it (I do not know if you are still doing it that way) -- those were your decisions who was green or red -- you were also using the various strain names.


Chris, allow me to address these two point;

1.) I only assumed it was Don Schrider who gave those Buckeyes in 2007 the "ALBC strain" name....frankly you and I probably agree that it wasn't a "strain" at all back then but a "line"!!! I personally find this fascinating and as I stated earlier I have to give the good folks at the ALBC all the credit (or blame) for this whole Buckeye "strain" infatuation that began in early 2008.

2.) You (Chris) were NOT ALONE in disliking the color coding system which described those Buckeye breeders who had been breeding Buckeyes longer than others. Mostly, those who had very few years experience with the Buckeye at that time and those who were trying to form a Buckeye club would sum up the "dislike" crowd. Some of the "dislike" crowd took it personally but it was never personal in nature, the Buckeye Breeder Directory simply presented who was breeding Buckeyes by years and nothing more! The American Buckeye Club NEVER stated a breeder with more years experience with the breed produced better stock....we actually stated the opposite in our description. The color code was a tribute to Buckeye Breeders with 5, 10 and 20+ years experience raising, keeping and breeding Buckeyes, nothing more.

Finally, I think you (Chris) and Laura took it more personal than others, perhaps this is why you both sent me threatening e-mails and letters asking that your names be removed from the Buckeye Breeder Directory?!?! Maybe I'm wrong but it certainly seemed at the time you both were worried about people knowing you had just recently owned Buckeyes....only having a couple of breeding seasons under your belt?!?! Again, this my version of the "dislike" crowd and you can set the record straight if I'm wrong. I had been working with two other Buckeye breeders here in Ohio to re-establish the ABC as early as autumn 2005 and long before I made contact with Don, you, Laura, the ALBC or the infamous "Buckeye Yahoo Group". When the American Buckeye Club established the website in May of 2008 you and the other's were still arguing over what name a Buckeye club (an exhibitors club I believe that Don Schrider had been pushing for before he left the ALBC and the yahoo group suddenly) should have. There was a great deal of talk about forming a club for exhibitors but little emphasis was placed on breeding or a breed directory....at least this is the way it appeared to me at the time.

Maybe this will answer another reply made by Shumaker when he asked, "why is Jeff Lay's Buckeyes never mentioned when you (Chris) write or comment about Buckeye breeders?"....frankly, I could careless and prefer my name not be mentioned because my Buckeyes continue to speak for themselves and since I have NOT read anything you write (unless you post it here in this thread I created) I can only guess it goes back to the "dislike" you harbor over the "Buckeye Breeder Directory" color code system or the "American Buckeye Club" in general. Perhaps it's time to move on....we, the ABC, can change the color code system, eliminate the date associated with how long one has been breeding Buckeyes and omit the "Strain" from the "Buckeye Breeder Directory" if that would put an end to the "dislike" and "personal agenda" comments directed at this forum in recent days?!?!


----------



## cgmccary

> *JEFF:* something folks don't seem to understand entirely but RIR breeders have done very well with for over 150 years.


*Me:* I disagree with you that RIR breeders have done well for over 150 years. The RIR was not admitted as an APA breed until 1904 (same as Buckeye), and their original color was much lighter; it appears that Buckeye was used to make them darker. Whereas the Buckeye's color has virtually remained unchanged since its creation, the RIR has went from a sorrel to its present day dark, dead red-brown color. Also, lately, the Buckeye has emerged as the American breed to beat at the shows. Buckeyes are showing up RIRs everywhere. The RIR breeders are well aware of this emergence and the reason for at least one APA judge's open hostility to our breed.

There's a reason the Buckeye's creator did not make the permitted black any more descriptive than she did (which has also remained unchanged) -- no I do not know the reason-- when one of you figure it out or have a theory, please let me know. Since she raised RIRs too, she was well aware of the RIR's more detailed description of wing & black.

I was only raising a theoretical (hypothetical & rhetorical) question with my no black anywhere position. I do not believe any revision to the SOP description is needed. I believe there is good reason for the color description and think we should stick with the creator's intent.



> *JEFF: *1.) I only assumed it was Don Schrider who gave those Buckeyes in 2007 the "ALBC strain" name....frankly you and I probably agree that it wasn't a "strain" at all back then but a "line"!!! I personally find this fascinating and as I stated earlier I have to give the good folks at the ALBC all the credit (or blame) for this whole Buckeye "strain" infatuation that began in early 2008.
> 
> 
> 
> *Me: Don had been sizing up the Buckeye different strains/ populations since the 1990s and already had the better understanding of what was out there. In 2007 alone, he had hatched 1200 chicks and culled down to the top 10%. In 2005 and 2006, he and Jeannette had went around and evaluated & weighing 25 different flocks at 8 and 16 weeks old, looking at what they ate, how they were housed, etc. By 2007, with the sheer volume of birds hatched, raised & evaluated over 3 years, they had brought the weight up more than a pound average & the various 20+ ALBC flocks probably deserved their own designation. I think having knowledge of the various flocks and their relationship to one another is invaluable at keeping the breed viable. I applaud the use of strain and lines names to keep it all straight. If someone wants to acquire new blood but does not want to do a complete outcross, then this information will be very helpful. Everybody cannot maintain such a diverse and large flock as yourself.*
> 
> 2.)
> 
> 
> 
> *JEFF:* You (Chris) were NOT ALONE in disliking the color coding system which described those Buckeye breeders who had been breeding Buckeyes longer than others. Mostly, those who had very few years experience with the Buckeye at that time and those who were trying to form a Buckeye club would sum up the "dislike" crowd. Some of the "dislike" crowd took it personally but it was never personal in nature, the Buckeye Breeder Directory simply presented who was breeding Buckeyes by years and nothing more! The American Buckeye Club NEVER stated a breeder with more years experience with the breed produced better stock....we actually stated the opposite in our description. The color code was a tribute to Buckeye Breeders with 5, 10 and 20+ years experience raising, keeping and breeding Buckeyes, nothing more.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Me: The problem was not so much as your color coding system as it was that you never asked me, or Laura or Bill Braden or a number of folks anything about our flocks and you did not ask us whether or not we wanted to be listed and if we did, what information. For me, you had my address and unlisted home phone on the list. You also had me as not NPIP when I was and it was listed by the State of Alabama. I did not know this until March, 2009.
> *
> 
> 
> 
> *JEFF:* Finally, I think you (Chris) and Laura took it more personal than others, perhaps this is why you both sent me threatening e-mails and letters asking that your names be removed from the Buckeye Breeder Directory?!?! Maybe I'm wrong but it certainly seemed at the time you both were worried about people knowing you had just recently owned Buckeyes....only having a couple of breeding seasons under your belt?!?! Again, this my version of the "dislike" crowd and you can set the record straight if I'm wrong. I had been working with two other Buckeye breeders here in Ohio to re-establish the ABC as early as autumn 2005 and long before I made contact with Don, you, Laura, the ALBC or the infamous "Buckeye Yahoo Group". When the American Buckeye Club established the website in May of 2008 you and the other's were still arguing over what name a Buckeye club (an exhibitors club I believe that Don Schrider had been pushing for before he left the ALBC and the yahoo group suddenly) should have. There was a great deal of talk about forming a club for exhibitors but little emphasis was placed on breeding or a breed directory....at least this is the way it appeared to me at the time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Me: You are wrong. I had announced to the world when I joined Laura's yahoo group (in 2008) that I had had Buckeyes for about 3 years, had acquired a cockerel from Schrider in 2007 which I bred to my young flock-- so if I had announced that I was 3 years new in 2008, why would I be upset about the non-revelation? Also, I did not take a Buckeye to my first show until the 2009 Ohio National so I was not in the mindset in 2008 that I wanted to exhibit. One of a breed club's functions however, is to provide for & facilitate the showing of the breed. It is ONE of its functions. Also, in 2009, I was living in the city keeping chickens against the city code and could only hatch a few birds each year; however, I was also planning to sell my home (in bad economic times), find a place in the country and move (which I did in 2010) -- the point being, I was going to have to get the birds off my little 1/8 acre city lot so the yard could have grass again so I could sell -- this was going to mean at least a year hiatus (if not more) from breeding. I was in no position to be listed as a breeder on any list. I had sold birds in 2007 and 2008 (had to cause I had no room to keep them). At ON, I had to sell the 3 cockerels I took to the show because I had promised the City Code Officer, the crowing males would not return. My two older males had already been moved to a friend's house.*
Click to expand...




> *JEFF:* The first Buckeyes I owned were acquired in 2002 and were from Urch and Brown....


*Me: For the record then, I take it that you do NOT agree with Shumaker's idea that if you acquire birds from someone who, in turn, acquired them from Urch that they should not be called Urch?*


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> I never said or suggested anything of the sort. I said rich mahogany bay ALL sections.


I know you what you replied, but according to the SOPs definition of mahogany bay; the darker reddish-orange color is accepted. I had a judge tell me this. Maybe we should work together to get this broad description better defined?



cgmccary said:


> I have seen some messed up combs which I assumed, at the time, might be due to a recessive gene for SC, but I really didn't know. The whole Chantecler thing surprised me.


I've actually seen buckeyes crossed with partridge chanteclers, they have a whole host of issues, the comb is just a starting point. The partridge color really effects the even color of the bird.



cgmccary said:


> This does not bother me. I would want to know if underneath those feathers, did it have a Buckeye body? Having a NH more compact body would be more worrisome. Bodies are also different between the breeds. What makes a Buckeye a Buckeye is first, its body. A NH is also faster growing (very fast growing being ready for slaughter in about 14 weeks) & a shorter body than the Buckeye.


I agree with you to a point, but the very first thing you see is the color, it should at least be close. What do you think Nettie would say? She prided the birds because for there color just as much the body. I feel they go hand in hand. Are you sure the NH has a shorter body than the buckeye? I don't know.



cgmccary said:


> It is *Johns' Line of Brown's Strain.* This tells me that Mr. Johns selected, culled and sold them to the buyer but that the original genetics is still Brown's.


How does the Brown Strain differ from other buckeye strains? You mentioned before that they look somewhat different.



cgmccary said:


> And I also thought Mr. Brown's vision of what a Buckeye should look like varied from others.


How so? I don't see much difference, IMO.



cgmccary said:


> If given more information, you will be able discern if what you are getting is a total outcross or not - IMHO, more information is better.


All that information is just fine, but don't you kind of lose sight of the bird itself. All of those names and descriptions aren't necessarily going produce better birds. Afterall, it is just poultry. That is my I like individual birds with desirable traits rather than the "name game" of strains/lines. At any rate, do what makes you feel good!

I had a guy ask me "what strain are yours".....I said "buckeyes".....I can imagine I looked ignorant at first. After a few minutes, I had the opportunity to talk with the man and cover what we have been covering as of late. It no longer mattered to him, what "strain" I had.....they were nice buckeyes.


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> I completely agree with you.


Quit doing that! No one is supposed to agree with me, it gives the impression that I can get along with people!!!



cgmccary said:


> I never go by a photo as there's nothing better than actually getting to handle & seeing the bird.


To support points in an arena such as this, the only thing you can do is go by photos to provide some type of comparison based on actual written descriptions. Having the real thing right in front of you is ultimately the best, but not everyone has that luxury. For those that are interested in the breed, it is a good "stepping stone" to help understand.


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Most newcomers will hatch a few chicks and expect them to ALL be "show winners" but it just isn't that easy!


Boy, isn't that the truth!


----------



## cgmccary

> *Shumaker:* I know you what you replied, but according to the SOPs definition of mahogany bay; the darker reddish-orange color is accepted. I had a judge tell me this. Maybe we should work together to get this broad description better defined?


I wish you'd stop listening to those judges who don't really know the breed. In time, they will. I think the description is fine as it is, as it has always been. We all know the mahogany bay is the color of that horse picture you posted. The SOP is fine.



> *Shumaker:* How does the Brown Strain differ from other buckeye strains? You mentioned before that they look somewhat different.


I would give my opinion here but whatever I say is going to be criticized, belittled, disagreed with, one way or the other. My opinion on the different groups does not matter one iota. I do not claim to know enough at this juncture to say anything; I am still learning.

I believe all the Buckeye strains, families, lines, populations, groups (whatever you want to call them) are equally important to the longevity and well being of this breed. I would not want to lose any one of them. Each have their place, their strong and weak points, including mine. Also, I would not mind working with any of the groups.


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> I wish you'd stop listening to those judges who don't really know the breed.


I don't necessarily take their opinions and utilize them (I have a very strong feeling to how these birds should look and nothing is going to change that! go figure...right?) but at the same time I'd like to help the judges better understand what they are looking at so I ask them what they see and if possible challenge their opinions (in a constructive way as any real breeder would). It's far from destructive. They are often appreciative that I have taken the time to talk with them!



cgmccary said:


> In time, they will. I think the description is fine as it is, as it has always been. We all know the mahogany bay is the color of that horse picture you posted. The SOP is fine.


I sincerely hope you are right regarding their understanding of the breed. Now as far as the description is concerned, I'm going to have to disagree to a point. Everything dealing with the body description is great (i.e. broader back, wider chest, broader hips, ect.). We can agree on all of that. We want well balanced birds.

I feel the undercolor on the back must be there (I'm not the only one that feels this way!), it was one of the main features that Nettie mentioned often and one of the main seperators from the RIRs.

I know the standard states that the exterior color an even shade of rich mahogany bay in all sections except unexposed primaries and secondaries and the main tail feathers which MAY contain black. The rich mahogany bay should be compared to that of the horse or cattle too which Nettie makes the comparison too. I feel that the color comparison has been lost to some extent in the mind of the judges. If that was done, all of the "Mahogany grumbling" will stop universally. I think we can both agree that the current color of the RIR is a few "ticks" too dark for the buckeye.

At least the primaries should be better described. I'm seeing alot of variation in them. Some are completely black, some look like a RIR type feather pattern, some contain just peppering, some are a mixed bag. Is the smutty peppering desirable? IMO, it doesn't look desirable. Let's clean it up a little and cut down on some of the room to play like other breeds in the american class.

The ideas I'm throwing out there are minimal, but yet help everybody involved with the breed. It cuts down some of the guess work. I'm sure the judges would appreciate it as well!

I would incourage you to think about it, no decision has to be made hastily. I'm sure we could make it to an arrangement that benefits ALL breeders. NOTE: Benefits all doesn't necessarily mean make all breeders happy, just eliminates the "room to play".

In reference to the brown strain variations:


cgmccary said:


> I would give my opinion here but whatever I say is going to be criticized, belittled, disagreed with, one way or the other. My opinion on the different groups does not matter one iota. I do not claim to know enough at this juncture to say anything; I am still learning.


Fair enough Chris, I could see that being a problem. We are all still learning!


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> I disagree with you that RIR breeders have done well for over 150 years. The RIR was not admitted as an APA breed until 1904 (same as Buckeye), and their original color was much lighter; it appears that Buckeye was used to make them darker.


It was pretty close to 150 years but not quite that long I don't think. The idea of breeding Red birds in Little Compton, RI was around decades before wealthy breeders noticed the birds and exploited them for money. Due to the location; Little Compton was a "melting pot" for many breeds of imported poultry and the district focused on producing the red color. In fact, Nettie was the first person to ever exhibit the RIR. I think it was in Cleveland, OH. I found that interesting.



cgmccary said:


> The RIR was not admitted as an APA breed until 1904 (same as Buckeye), and their original color was much lighter; it appears that Buckeye was used to make them darker.


Close enough, the Buckeye 1905, the RIR 1904; it was due to a technicality the buckeyes didn't make it into the standard in 1905. Yes, the RIR where much lighter in comparision. I've read stories that the buckeye was used to help darken the RIR color, but I don't beleive that was widespread or always the case. Some darker birds from Asia had a hand in it.



cgmccary said:


> Whereas the Buckeye's color has virtually remained unchanged since its creation


I would greatly like to know who wrote the SOP description of the bird. The reason why I am interested is because the RIR club wrote the RIR standard and has made several changes to it. I wonder who wrote the buckeye standard description and when? I would assume it would have been Nettie, but haven't came across anything to prove that. Wouldn't it interesting if a couple RIR people wrote it (just speculating)? After all, it was because of the RIR breeders' bickering that got the "Reds" removed from the original "Buckeye Reds" name.



cgmccary said:


> lately, the Buckeye has emerged as the American breed to beat at the shows. Buckeyes are showing up RIRs everywhere.


You think so? The White Rocks are a pain in my butt. I think that is the breed to beat (at least in Ohio). There are some absolute dandy RIRs here also! You are correct regarding the emergence of the buckeye, though.



cgmccary said:


> There's a reason the Buckeye's creator did not make the permitted black any more descriptive than she did (which has also remained unchanged) -- no I do not know the reason-- when one of you figure it out or have a theory, please let me know. Since she raised RIRs too, she was well aware of the RIR's more detailed description of wing & black.


I'd like to know that as well. I do know that ABC (early 1900's) did have a detailed color description to the primaries and secondaries.



cgmccary said:


> *For the record then, I take it that you do NOT agree with Shumaker's idea that if you acquire birds from someone who, in turn, acquired them from Urch that they should not be called Urch?*


Jeff probably doesn't agree with me and I'm fine with that. My belief's are often different. But they are mine.


----------



## Marengoite

Cutting to the chase, let me summarize what I understand to be the significance of this exchange.

Lines/strains are nice to know for historical purposes but since no one has summarized the strong and weak points of each line, what they add or detract from the breed, what their important contributions are, etc. then there really is not practical benefit to stating one's line. Coupled with the fact that folks can't agree on the difference between a line and a strain and there are people like Melodi who believe that one cannot maintain a line through line breeding, i.e. she was very clear that she believed genetic drift was inevitable and uncontrollable, then most of this discussion is academic.

By contrast, one can buy birds based solely on type and color and do just fine. In fact, one is BETTER off buying for type and color than buying for a particular line precisely because the differences between one line and another are not easily accessible or widely published. 

That's the take-away I'm getting from this discussion. Thank you very much, gentlemen. I think I will take the trio I have now and move forward with a Felch breeding plan and see what turns up. All I'm interested in is flock replacement and supplying some local friends with chicks anyway, so this plan sounds reasonable.


----------



## Shumaker

Marengoite said:


> Lines/strains are nice to know for historical purposes but since no one has summarized the strong and weak points of each line, what they add or detract from the breed, what their important contributions are, etc. then there really is not practical benefit to stating one's line.


That's the way I see it. But I'm sure you WILL get an adjusted point of view.



Marengoite said:


> Coupled with the fact that folks can't agree on the difference between a line and a strain and there are people like Melodi who believe that one cannot maintain a line through line breeding, i.e. she was very clear that she believed genetic drift was inevitable and uncontrollable, then most of this discussion is academic.


For the love of god, don't bring that spirited soul into the conversation. But she is completely and unequivocally wrong. A breed can most definately be maintained through line breeding. That process has been proven in the gamefowl industry for the last half of the century. If you understand the breed and know how to breed them, then you can absolutely maintain them and avoid genetic drift. In fact you can greatly enhance the birds by breeding toward the desired traits and away from the undesired ones.

If an arguement must insue, please provide examples and proof of such an occurance so we at least have something to debate. I better go get a six pack in preparation.



Marengoite said:


> By contrast, one can buy birds based solely on type and color and do just fine. In fact, one is BETTER off buying for type and color than buying for a particular line precisely because the differences between one line and another are not easily accessible or widely published.


That's the way I see its much like the statement above.



Marengoite said:


> That's the take-away I'm getting from this discussion. Thank you very much, gentlemen.


You're welcome, but there was a bit more mentioned throughout the entire exchange. Glad we could help to some extent.


----------



## Marengoite

Shumaker said:


> You're welcome, but there was a bit more mentioned throughout the entire exchange. Glad we could help to some extent.


Well, my cranial capacity has an upper limit, and I think this thread passed that a long time ago. So maybe that's not wax oozing out my ears. LOL.

Coming from the world of hunting dogs, I can state pretty much what the difference is between the Lavarek line of English setters and the Llewellin line. In fact, it's pretty obvious even after more than 150 years of breeding. It's to the point where I've run into Llewellin owners who don't even like to call their dogs English setters.

But when it comes to Buckeyes, I'd be curious to know what the obvious differences are in the lines. Clearly, there must be some difference or there wouldn't be all this discussion on them, but I'd be hard pressed to tell from this thread and elsewhere what those differences are.

And yes, I will refrain from mentioning She Who Must Not Be Named. 

rick


----------



## Shumaker

Marengoite said:


> Well, my cranial capacity has an upper limit, and I think this thread passed that a long time ago. So maybe that's not wax oozing out my ears. LOL.


Light weight....things are just getting good. I still have so much in my arsenal. I've not yet begun to have fun!



Marengoite said:


> But when it comes to Buckeyes, I'd be curious to know what the obvious differences are in the lines. Clearly, there must be some difference or there wouldn't be all this discussion on them, but I'd be hard pressed to tell from this thread and elsewhere what those differences are.


In reality, the differences are minimal. That whole topic would be under such scrutiny. No one would agree and life for the buckeye would become .....oh....so.....interesting (like its not already?). I don't think any one "strain/line" in theory is better than the other (I say that because people see the breed in different lights and value different elements of the bird). IMO, It's the breeders that make the difference. Some breeders understand what they are doing to better or at least maintain the birds while the "peddlers" do what they do.....care less about the quality and make as many as they can for the all mighty $$$$$. I've seen both kinds.

It all boils done to being knowledgable about the birds, some insight into breeding and making the correct decisions when initially obtaining brood stock. I often tell people that the cheapest thing in the poultry world when it pertains to exhibition is the brood stock.

The big differences between the "strains/lines" I've noticed are the combs, head structure, color, and the tails (all aspects about the tail). Depending on the quality of the breeder, the body structures will differ.

Keep them a coming Rick, you are asking good questions!


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> John Brown told me he acquired his birds from a woman in Canada, but he could not remember her name. We could just as well had termed it the "Canadian Strain" (we just did not know this at the time when we were describing the population/strain but learned it later).





cgmccary said:


> He had bred dark Cornish in his Buckeyes andhe told Laura Haggarty and I that the Canadian woman he got his from, she had bred Chantecler in them.


The idea of a whole "Canadian Strain" appears to nothing more than just that...an idea. I spoke with John this morning and he never recieved his original stock from a Canadian woman. They were from a woman out of Michigan. He obtained them at a show here in Ohio around 1999. She was selling 5 males and 3 females. He got 3 males and a the largest female. He then crossed the largest male with that female and that is there beginnings; the start to the "Brown Strain". I mentioned the introduction of the chantecler blood and he said that it must have been a miscommuntication because he described his birds as having a chantecler shaped body and had to work on making the birds more compact like a cornish structure. There was NEVER any chantecler blood in them. The biggest problem I see from the birds now is the splotchy color in the females especially when they moult in there second year plumage.

That will put the "Canadian Strain" to rest and open up a new alley to the "Michigan Strain". At this point he has not released anything with Cornish blood in them either. So no one has really seen these birds to this point.

Just trying to seal up the loose ends in my mind. I always thought that the publicised version was off.


----------



## cgmccary

> _*Marengoite:* Lines/strains are nice to know for historical purposes but since no one has summarized the strong and weak points of each line, what they add or detract from the breed, what their important contributions are, etc. then there really is not practical benefit to stating one's line. _




_Well of course, I am going to disagree with ya'll. In fact, I am in complete disagreement. I think for short term gain, it is your way._

_ I do not think keeping up with the various strains/ lines has anything to do with "historical purposes," not one bit. You have missed my entire point of view. Rather, it is important from a genetics perspective. First, for the breed as a whole, it is really most important that there is as big a gene pool as is possible. _

_If your only concern is showing, then I agree it does not matter where your birds come from as only type & color, comb, etc. is going to matter -- so your purpose for keeping the breed is what matters in the discussion. _

_For me, I have three groups in my own flock, and I keep at least one cockerel from each group whether or not it is the best in type and color or not. I do this to have as much genetic diversity in my flock as possible._

_On this subject, Don Schrider has said, among many things, the following:



*So many people showing poultry today, including licensed judges, are rank amateur poultry people. They understand reducing a genetic population in order to produce more even quality (faster wins), but they do not understand maintaining diversity by slowing improving all bloodlines or families of a breed. They understand using RIR crosses to produce even color and distinct wing color (when the SOP does not call for this in our breed). . .*

* . . . do not cull a family of birds out, but rather improve them each year; breeding is not about mating the "right two" birds together, but about managing relationships in your line so that you have the diversity to go indefinitely; selecting and culling, not matching breeders, is what improves your line over time; keep the best of each mating, not simply the best (which may all come from one mating); Visualize your ideal Buckeye, then make sure that the traits you need are in your flock even if one trait is only found on one bird; breed from any bird no matter how incorrect that bird is, if it is of your line and has what you are otherwise missing.*

Click to expand...



Within your own flock, if you keep only the best of the best, then many times, you will see that those birds are coming from one particular group. When I go to a show, as Joe can tell you from the one show we attended together, I like to take cockerels from each of my groups and they will be different. I like & dislike things about each one & on a particular day I will like one more than another. . . . don't lose sight that there are both objective and subjective elements here. What I cannot seem to convey to you all is that the subjective part is important and healthy for the breed too. It is OK that we see the breed a little differently. If not, then we'd just accept one person's birds and cull all the rest. What would that do to our genetic diversity? That is why I am not going to cause a heated argument discussing the strengths and weakeness of each strain/line from my point of view & why it is not important for this discussion.

For most of you (not Joe), none of what I said means anything, and it shouldn't. For those who maintain a breeding flock of any "sustainable" size and plan to keep doing it for the next decade or more (Joe), then it should be important to you. I do not maintain the flocks like Jeff or Janet Hatch (like Jeff, she has quite a diverse flock), but my flock is, I am proud to say, now about 65 or so (I cull for various things so generally I want to keep a flock of about 50-100, no more, no less-- I am finding it is what I am able to maintain & stay sane). Like Joe, I am wanting to close my flock. BTW, I admire Jeff and anyone for the hard work that goes into maintaining such a large and diverse flock. It is not easy keeping various flocks segregated, fed and watered and maintain a high level of care for the birds -- very difficult, a lot of hard work.

Contrasting, for the back yard breeder who has a small little flock (like I did when I was in the city), then bringing in new blood every so many years could be something they need to do for many reasons (i.e. one being to improve a particular trait like better saddle feathers or something, the other being to boost their genetic diversity), then most of the time (as Jeff has rightly pointed out), you do not want a complete outcross -- then knowing where the new blood is from (its original source & its present keeper) would let you know that what you are bringing in is not a total outcross. Does that make sense to you?
_


----------



## cgmccary

> *Shumaker:* The idea of a whole "Canadian Strain" appears to nothing more than just that...an idea. I spoke with John this morning and he never recieved his original stock from a Canadian woman. They were from a woman out of Michigan. He obtained them at a show here in Ohio around 1999. She was selling 5 males and 3 females. He got 3 males and a the largest female. He then crossed the largest male with that female and that is there beginnings; the start to the "Brown Strain". I mentioned the introduction of the chantecler blood and he said that it must have been a miscommuntication because he described his birds as having a chantecler shaped body and had to work on making the birds more compact like a cornish structure. There was NEVER any chantecler blood in them. The biggest problem I see from the birds now is the splotchy color in the females especially when they moult in there second year plumage.
> 
> That will put the "Canadian Strain" to rest and open up a new alley to the "Michigan Strain". At this point he has not released anything with Cornish blood in them either. So no one has really seen these birds to this point.


I will say that if there is one thing I have never been short on and that is my memory. My memory is like a steel trap, and it is the most useful trait I possess. There was no miscommunication about it & frankly, I do not want to know the reasons I was told what I was told. I went back through a lot of early correspondence (old emails) that I had with various Buckeye folks and find that different things have been told to different people (and I will not divulge what I found) -- Can we agree we do not know the facts here? Can we also agree that it does not matter?

The above being being said, IMHO, it does not matter what they were crossed with (I think we all agree that somewhere RIR and Cornish have been crossed in a lot of the Buckeyes in the distant past), I regard the Brown Strain as pure Buckeye and nothing less. Are we all OK?


----------



## Shumaker

*Figured I'd reply to this one first!*



cgmccary said:


> I will say that if there is one thing I have never been short on and that is my memory. My memory is like a steel trap, and it is the most useful trait I possess. There was no miscommunication about it & frankly, I do not want to know the reasons I was told what I was told. I went back through a lot of early correspondence (old emails) that I had with various Buckeye folks and find that different things have been told to different people (and I will not divulge what I found) -- Can we agree we do not know the facts here? Can we also agree that it does not matter?


Alright, I will agree that in the grand scheme of things it probably makes no real difference.



cgmccary said:


> The above being being said, IMHO, it does not matter what they were crossed with (I think we all agree that somewhere RIR and Cornish have been crossed in a lot of the Buckeyes in the distant past), I regard the Brown Strain as pure Buckeye and nothing less. Are we all OK?


Chris, I'm never OK.....problem since birth  (I blame it on the doctor; him or the mail man); Cornish (or at least Aseel; back in the day they looked pretty much the same) was definately utilized. How else did the pea comb and the dense body shape come to pass? I agree that RIR was probably introduced (Nettie, never admitted to it, but I have my suspicions). Like you, I regard John's birds as being straight as well.


----------



## Shumaker

cgmccary said:


> _Well of course, I am going to disagree with ya'll. In fact, I am in complete disagreement. _


_I called it first!! _
_"Ya'll".....Chris, the south is rubbing off on you! I thought you were a city boy? I have the same problem when I cross the Ohio River!_



cgmccary said:


> _I do not think keeping up with the various strains/ lines has anything to do with "historical purposes," not one bit. You have missed my entire point of view. Rather, it is important from a genetics perspective. First, for the breed as a whole, it is really most important that there is as big a gene pool as is possible. _


_Thanks for the clarification. As you mentioned before, I'd image that the gene pool isn't as big as we think it is. The relationship between the groups is closer than we think or would like to admit._



cgmccary said:


> _For me, I have three groups in my own flock, and I keep at least one cockerel from each group whether or not it is the best in type and color or not. I do this to have as much genetic diversity in my flock as possible._


_I have and do the same thing, but I make approximately 25-30 specimens (thats just the males) from each group and keep at least 3-4 that I feel are worth keeping; that fit my idealization and the overall description of the breed word for word. I watch them grow/develop and make my decisions based on the individual birds which ones should propagate. The other 2-3, I keep as back-ups in the event something would happen or the selected bird wasn't the best sire to future generations. I'll redo the mating with a different male (a brother) to see if the resulting offsprings differed. That way I never lose the genetics I need to maintain them. If they don't fit my idealization, they don't stay! I take the "keep the best and eat the rest" philosophy for each group._

_The same can be said of the females. Like you, I understand genetic diversty and its importance. I breed each of these families in their respected directions to maintain the individual families, but only very suttle differences seperates them. I keep detailed records of how everything is bred and the parents they are out of. Not only do I want to maintain them as a desired dual purpose breed but I'd like to do it in the show pen as well (the best of both worlds!). I have always managed my gamefowl in this manner with a great deal of success. _

_In regards to Mr. Schriders comments on the matter; he states (IMO) very accurate statements. It's good solid information that works. However I would disagree regarding _

*"make sure that the traits you need are in your flock even if one trait is only found on one bird; breed from any bird no matter how incorrect that bird is"*

_That trait your trying to hone in on better be pretty darn important because you are bring a whole host of unwanted traits along with it. Everybody does things differently and that is great, but that statement right there is disturbing to me (my skin actually crawled a little)._

_Technically, they are all supposed to be "pure-bred" birds, the fact is that some of them just suck! That is where I'm honing on what I feel are better representations of the breed and reducing the genetic diversity to a few families in which I'll be maintaining and breeding my idealization of the buckeye. To this point crossing the families between themselves has proven very successful, IMO._



cgmccary said:


> _Within your own flock, if you keep only the best of the best, then many times, you will see that those birds are coming from one particular group._


_That is not always the case, but I do see where you are going with your point._



cgmccary said:


> _It is OK that we see the breed a little differently._


_That is a very true statement. NOTE: "a little differently"; we have to make sure we keep the breed as a whole close to the originators description or at least the SOP (generalized comment). _



cgmccary said:


> _If not, then we'd just accept one person's birds and cull all the rest. What would that do to our genetic diversity? That is why I am not going to cause a heated argument discussing the strengths and weakeness of each strain/line from my point of view & why it is not important for this discussion._


_Fine.....I'm bias, let's pick my version of the breed, cull the rest!........kidding!! Heated argueing raises the number of views to the thread which leads to improved exposure of the breed...It's a win...win.........you're taking away all the fun!_

_Thanks for your input Chris_


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

cgmccary said:


> ......_For most of you (not Joe), none of what I said means anything, and it shouldn't. For those who maintain a breeding flock of any "sustainable" size and plan to keep doing it for the next decade or more (Joe), then it should be important to you. I do not maintain the flocks like Jeff or Janet Hatch (like Jeff, she has quite a diverse flock), but my flock is, I am proud to say, now about 65 or so (I cull for various things so generally I want to keep a flock of about 50-100, no more, no less-- I am finding it is what I am able to maintain & stay sane). Like Joe, I am wanting to close my flock. BTW, I admire Jeff and anyone for the hard work that goes into maintaining such a large and diverse flock. It is not easy keeping various flocks segregated, fed and watered and maintain a high level of care for the birds -- very difficult, a lot of hard work._
> 
> _Contrasting, for the back yard breeder who has a small little flock (like I did when I was in the city), then bringing in new blood every so many years could be something they need to do for many reasons (i.e. one being to improve a particular trait like better saddle feathers or something, the other being to boost their genetic diversity), then most of the time (as Jeff has rightly pointed out), you do not want a complete outcross -- then knowing where the new blood is from (its original source & its present keeper) would let you know that what you are bringing in is not a total outcross. Does that make sense to you?_


These are the things we (The American Buckeye Club) and I have been telling folks for several years now....everyone WILL and SHOULD have different breeding programs and different goals! It's simply not a cookie cutter program for any breed regardless of whether it is a Buckeye or Brahma. For me I don't look at my Buckeyes as a "single flock"....I have multiple families but the "line" I focus most on improving has been a closed "line" for years! There has NOT been a "complete outcross" (as Chris states) in this "line" since it began in 2002.....it's still far from perfect even after a decade of mating and raising only the best year after year and this is what few people fail to understand. I'm NEVER completely satisfied with the Buckeyes I produce....Chris has not stated this in his posts but I suspect he isn't either and I know Joe is never completely satisfied either! For me (Jeff Lay) I'm not going to grab a Buckeye from a swap meet and toss it into a breeding pen but if that's what some folks want to do then I'll support them any way I can but believe me when I say you just might open up a can or worms that could set your breeding program back 3 or 4 years.

Finally, it's NOT the size of the breeding flock that matters it's really about proper selection and if you know a little about the birds "pedigree" (history/genetics/sire/dam/brothers/sisters/offspring, etc.) you will be light years ahead of the game! Producing GREAT Buckeye cockerels and cocks (in my humble opinion) is far easier than producing GREAT Buckeye hens and pullets on a regular basis. As Buckeye breeders I think we ALL need to put more focus on the female side of our fowl but that's just my view as humble as it may be!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

cgmccary said:


> *Me: For the record then, I take it that you do NOT agree with Shumaker's idea that if you acquire birds from someone who, in turn, acquired them from Urch that they should not be called Urch?*


The Buckeye's that I acquired in 2002 that came from Urch and Brown were of that "strain" and are to this day....I have a pen of each what I call the old "Urch" and the old "Brown" strain. Joe and I have NEVER discussed what they "should be called", so I'm not sure where you wish to take this discussion????


----------



## cgmccary

> These are the things we (The American Buckeye Club) and I have been telling folks for several years now....everyone WILL and SHOULD have different breeding programs and different goals! It's simply not a cookie cutter program for any breed regardless of whether it is a Buckeye or Brahma. For me I don't look at my Buckeyes as a "single flock"....I have multiple families but the "line" I focus most on improving has been a closed "line" for years! There has NOT been a "complete outcross" (as Chris states) in this "line" since it began in 2002.....it's still far from perfect even after a decade of mating and raising only the best year after year and this is what few people fail to understand. I'm NEVER completely satisfied with the Buckeyes I produce....Chris has not stated this in his posts but I suspect he isn't either and I know Joe is never completely satisfied either! For me (Jeff Lay) I'm not going to grab a Buckeye from a swap meet and toss it into a breeding pen but if that's what some folks want to do then I'll support them any way I can but believe me when I say you just might open up a can or worms that could set your breeding program back 3 or 4 years.
> 
> Finally, it's NOT the size of the breeding flock that matters it's really about proper selection and if you know a little about the birds "pedigree" (history/genetics/sire/dam/brothers/sisters/offspring, etc.) you will be light years ahead of the game! Producing GREAT Buckeye cockerels and cocks (in my humble opinion) is far easier than producing GREAT Buckeye hens and pullets on a regular basis. As Buckeye breeders I think we ALL need to put more focus on the female side of our fowl but that's just my view as humble as it may be!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __________________


Yes! Well said Jeff. And no I do not think I will ever be completely satisfied either. There are set backs too. You lose a good bird and go to a back-up (i.e. not your first choice) or a particular male/ females match-up produces something that can become a problem -- most people will not need to over think it like we are doing here because they just want some Buckeyes and will not ever breed seriously or stick with it. Many people have lucked up by buying some eggs or chicks and had some good show birds right off the bat, but as has been said, that is not the norm. The pleasure is in the working at it each year and seeing them get a little better each year or seeing something new that you didn't notice before. 
Good thread. Lots more we can talk about.


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> . As Buckeye breeders I think we ALL need to put more focus on the female side of our fowl but that's just my view as humble as it may be!


Jeff...you with humble views.....come on man??....................kidding

I suppose I'm a man of few words and quite! Buckeye Nation....Hoo Raw

Females....fun........I guess I'll be the first to throw my ideas on the table. I think the females should be the same color as the males with the exception of the sheen. The darker, the better but it is often difficult. Avoid the really light (almost buff) appearance. Spotchy feather patterns should also be avoided, as well. I've noticed a small amount of light lacing from time to time, that should completely be avoided. I also will go as far as stating the primaries on the wings should be absent of smut or peppering.

Bodies are absolutely key. The body often translates to the body of the male offspring. I like big ol' heavy gals, but I've often noticed a set back in egg production with the larger hens. There is definately a give/take situation right there.

Maybe a good opportunity to breed in this fashion to make good meat production males and cross those males to a slightly thinner (better egg producing family) to help maintain shape and size while keeping egg production up.

Other suggestions/comments?


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

cgmccary said:


> Quote:
> Quote:
> *JEFF: *1.) I only assumed it was Don Schrider who gave those Buckeyes in 2007 the "ALBC strain" name....frankly you and I probably agree that it wasn't a "strain" at all back then but a "line"!!! I personally find this fascinating and as I stated earlier I have to give the good folks at the ALBC all the credit (or blame) for this whole Buckeye "strain" infatuation that began in early 2008.
> *Me: Don had been sizing up the Buckeye different strains/ populations since the 1990s and already had the better understanding of what was out there. In 2007 alone, he had hatched 1200 chicks and culled down to the top 10%. In 2005 and 2006, he and Jeannette had went around and evaluated & weighing 25 different flocks at 8 and 16 weeks old, looking at what they ate, how they were housed, etc. By 2007, with the sheer volume of birds hatched, raised & evaluated over 3 years, they had brought the weight up more than a pound average & the various 20+ ALBC flocks probably deserved their own designation. I think having knowledge of the various flocks and their relationship to one another is invaluable at keeping the breed viable. I applaud the use of strain and lines names to keep it all straight. If someone wants to acquire new blood but does not want to do a complete outcross, then this information will be very helpful. Everybody cannot maintain such a diverse and large flock as yourself.*
> 
> 2.) Quote:
> *JEFF:* You (Chris) were NOT ALONE in disliking the color coding system which described those Buckeye breeders who had been breeding Buckeyes longer than others. Mostly, those who had very few years experience with the Buckeye at that time and those who were trying to form a Buckeye club would sum up the "dislike" crowd. Some of the "dislike" crowd took it personally but it was never personal in nature, the Buckeye Breeder Directory simply presented who was breeding Buckeyes by years and nothing more! The American Buckeye Club NEVER stated a breeder with more years experience with the breed produced better stock....we actually stated the opposite in our description. The color code was a tribute to Buckeye Breeders with 5, 10 and 20+ years experience raising, keeping and breeding Buckeyes, nothing more.
> *Me: The problem was not so much as your color coding system as it was that you never asked me, or Laura or Bill Braden or a number of folks anything about our flocks and you did not ask us whether or not we wanted to be listed and if we did, what information. For me, you had my address and unlisted home phone on the list. You also had me as not NPIP when I was and it was listed by the State of Alabama. I did not know this until March, 2009. *
> 
> Quote:
> *JEFF:* Finally, I think you (Chris) and Laura took it more personal than others, perhaps this is why you both sent me threatening e-mails and letters asking that your names be removed from the Buckeye Breeder Directory?!?! Maybe I'm wrong but it certainly seemed at the time you both were worried about people knowing you had just recently owned Buckeyes....only having a couple of breeding seasons under your belt?!?! Again, this my version of the "dislike" crowd and you can set the record straight if I'm wrong. I had been working with two other Buckeye breeders here in Ohio to re-establish the ABC as early as autumn 2005 and long before I made contact with Don, you, Laura, the ALBC or the infamous "Buckeye Yahoo Group". When the American Buckeye Club established the website in May of 2008 you and the other's were still arguing over what name a Buckeye club (an exhibitors club I believe that Don Schrider had been pushing for before he left the ALBC and the yahoo group suddenly) should have. There was a great deal of talk about forming a club for exhibitors but little emphasis was placed on breeding or a breed directory....at least this is the way it appeared to me at the time.
> *Me: You are wrong. I had announced to the world when I joined Laura's yahoo group (in 2008) that I had had Buckeyes for about 3 years, had acquired a cockerel from Schrider in 2007 which I bred to my young flock-- so if I had announced that I was 3 years new in 2008, why would I be upset about the non-revelation? Also, I did not take a Buckeye to my first show until the 2009 Ohio National so I was not in the mindset in 2008 that I wanted to exhibit. One of a breed club's functions however, is to provide for & facilitate the showing of the breed. It is ONE of its functions. Also, in 2009, I was living in the city keeping chickens against the city code and could only hatch a few birds each year; however, I was also planning to sell my home (in bad economic times), find a place in the country and move (which I did in 2010) -- the point being, I was going to have to get the birds off my little 1/8 acre city lot so the yard could have grass again so I could sell -- this was going to mean at least a year hiatus (if not more) from breeding. I was in no position to be listed as a breeder on any list. I had sold birds in 2007 and 2008 (had to cause I had no room to keep them). At ON, I had to sell the 3 cockerels I took to the show because I had promised the City Code Officer, the crowing males would not return. My two older males had already been moved to a friend's house.*


Since I'm a simple man I'd like to stick with the theme of responding to the items about as #1 & #2 if you will indulge me??? While I never worked for the ALBC (like Chris did) and I am not close friends with Don (as Chris is) I was however once a member of the Buckeye Yahoo Group that has been mentioned by both of us....I also kept a back up of ALL the posts made between Don Schrider and the various parties both Chris and I have mentioned from the time I was a member of said Buckeye Yahoo Group. I also maintained copies of emails and letters sent to me by the parties involved even Mr. Braden (another topic entirely).....so you might say I know my ALBC and Buckeye history as well as anyone!
1.) There is a bit of inaccuracy in Chris' time line....Don & the ALBC gang "evaluated and collected" Buckeyes in 2005 & 2006 and in 2007 as Chris states they hatched a bunch of Buckeye chicks! From multiple outcrosses of various Buckeye lines or strains if you prefer....this is well documented by the ALBC and those lines were Rhodes/Pearce/Urch and Brown. This would mean the 2007 Buckeyes hatched were either 1st or at best 2nd generation offspring. Don even reported the 2007 Ohio National Buckeye Cockerel he won with was a simple outcross of Urch/Pearce blood lines following the November 2007 show?!?! By 2008 or 2009 the ALBC has perfected a "strain"....I think not but Chris and I will have to agree to disagree on this one.
2a.) Remember that little Buckeye Yahoo Group you mentioned Chris (i mentioned it too)??? Well there were multiple conversations between myself, you (Chris), Laura and even Mr. Braden at one point in time and this is where I learned about EVERYONES little breeding operation or start up! I think you and one Jamie Duckworth were working together in the spring of 2007 with your first batch of Buckeye chicks....at least that's what you and he posted in the spring of 2007, by the fall of that same year or maybe spring of 2008 you got an ALBC cockerel from Don or maybe the old posts from that Buckeye Yahoo group are wrong?!?! Again something is wrong with one of our time lines....but I can go back and double check my "references" just as I believe Chris can do as well. As far as getting names, addresses and phone numbers for the breeders directory they were the result of a simple "google" search....Mr. Braden provided his contact information to me directly via an email (i still have it too) along with the history of his "line or strain". A history that I shared (sent them Mr. Bradens original email) with some fools who have a "heritage" chicken website and they still elect to believe some other cooked up nonsense but thats a story for another time, too!

2b.) Perhaps instead of sending me a "certified letter" threatening me with legal action regarding your name (Chris McCary) and address being listed on the ABC "Breeder Directory" you should have been upfront and told me you were breaking the law by raising and selling Buckeye chicks from the city??? I would have understood completely, Chris!!! I'm really NOT as bad of a guy that some of those misguided followers think I am!!! Again, the facts are being a bit distorted and the time line is a bit off...in August 2008 I announced to that infamous Buckeye Yahoo Group that we (me and those other 2 Ohio based Buckeye breeders) had established a website with a "Buckeye Breeder Directory" and it would be officially launched on January 1, 2009. At that time we asked those who were interested in having their names added to come forward, send me an email with their particulars and they would be added FREE of charge....it's still FREE too BTW! It was just hours after I posted this that Chris' good friend banned me from that little group and so began a rivalry between The American Buckeye Club and the group that had not established a name.....again I'm sure you nice folks see it differently but like they say, "That's my story and I'm sticking to it"!!!

Finally, I'm not suggesting you are lying Chris, just suggesting your memory either isn't the "steel trap" it used to be or your time line is a little off. I'm sure you have something to add and I'm happy to give you the last word on this topic before I move on!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> Jeff...you with humble views.....come on man??
> 
> Buckeye Nation....Hoo Raw


"C' Mon Man" is my favorite segment on ESPN football talk!!!

You gotta stop being so serious with all this Buckeye Color and Breeding nonsense....I will stop talking about "stains and lines"!!!


----------



## cgmccary

> *Jeff:* While I never worked for the ALBC (like Chris did)


Are you trying to be humorous? I never worked for ALBC. I am a member when I remember to renew, pay dues, give contribution at end of year when I am able.



> *Jeff:* close friends with Don (as Chris is)


I call him a friend, and if I have a mentor, it would have to be Don. He has entertained my stupid questions for years and always patiently answered them (mostly by email). We have acquired stock from each other. I have learned a lot from him (but so have a LOT of people, so we can't ALL be his "close friends").



> I think you and one Jamie Duckworth were working together in the spring of 2007 with your first batch of Buckeye chicks....


I have never met nor worked with Jaime Duckworth. Duckworth had Buckeyes from Schrider, and I had just acquired the Buckeye cockerel from Don the November before -- our only connection.

The chicks I hatched in 2008 were the first chicks from my ALBC Cockerel crossed over my Urch pullets and hens (not my first Buckeye chicks hatched). I obtained started birds (6-7 months old) from Urch in 2005-2006 so by the time I obtained the cockerel in November, 2007 from Don (when I attended the ALBC conference in North Carolina), I already had a grown flock of 1-2 year old all Urch females so my first ALBC cross over Urch birds were hatched in 2008 so yes, I was excited about seeing how they were going to turn out. As I have stated many times, I had never seen another Buckeye other than my stock I acquired from Urch and their progeny until I saw Don's Buckeyes in November, 2007.



> Perhaps instead of sending me a "certified letter" threatening me with legal action regarding your name (Chris McCary) and address being listed on the ABC "Breeder Directory" you should have been upfront and told me you were breaking the law by raising and selling Buckeye chicks from the city??? I would have understood completely, Chris!!!


I only sent you a certified letter after you refused to take me off your listing which I sent you private emails. I was not breaking the law selling chicks from the city (keeping fowl unless caged and a pet or exotic was prohibited). The City Code Officer knew I had chickens and told me that as long as nobody complained, she did not care. The officer is my friend and testifies a lot for me (under subpoena) in court. She liked my chickens and was just doing her job; we're still friends. Even after the complaint from a neighbor a block away about the crowing, she said I could keep my hens but just get rid of the roosters. We were already planning our move. I moved my old roosters off the premises and put the Ohio National 3 cockerels in my basement for about 3 weeks until the show. These birds were from the second breeding of the ALBC cockerel I got from Don bred to his daughters (so 1st ALBC cross in Spring 2008, line bred back in Spring 2009, first show in November 2009). My time line is accurate.

When you joined Laura's Yahoo group (May 18, 2008), you said that you had been raising Buckeyes to SOP for 4 years. When I joined, I said 3 years (I was going to back to my very first Buckeyes (2005) so that would have been 3 years in 2008 so comparing my intro (3 years) to yours (a "little over 4 years"), then only 1+ year difference. I was a newbie, & I considered you rather new at the breed too. I did not make a distinction as to when I bred them to SOP, etc. Again, I was new and learning and still learning today.

Your post on May 18, 2008:



> Just joined the "group" and wanted to introduce myself. My name is Jeff Lay and I'm located in Miamisburg, Ohio at "Crains Run Ranch". I
> have been working with Buckeyes for a little over 4 years now and
> working to perfect our "strain". To date I have hatched and raised
> hundreds of birds with our first Buckeyes originating from Ohio, Texas
> and Iowa. At the moment we have over 50 birds in our breeding flock(s)
> and plan to expand to possibly 200 by 2009. I have also been breeding
> and raising Tennessee Fainting goats and have a few registered goats
> for sale if anyone out the is interested! Looking forward to getting
> to know all of you. Thanks for allowing me to join!
> 
> Jeff


You never mentioned Urch or Minnesota so why I am confused about you now saying you have had Buckeyes from Urch since 2002.

On May 19, 2008, you also asked Laura, Don and Jaime Duckworth to look at pictures and give them opinions of your Buckeyes (I guess you were being facetious.). Remember, I had never shown either in 2008, so again, I saw you as a contemporary (to illustrate to Joe where his and my mindset differ as to his original question):



> Since I don't show my birds, but have been breeding to the standard
> since 2004, I'd like to get some feedback from those of you who are
> experts! Don, Jamie, Laura and anyone for that matter please give your
> opinions. The Crains Run photo album has pics of what I think are two
> of my best Roosters, Brutus & Woody. Also some of my gals are pictured.
> I appreaciate any feedback both positive or negative on my
> flock...realizing it is difficult to judge any bird by a photo, give it
> your best shot!
> 
> Thanks,
> Jeff Lay
> Miamisburg, Ohio
> www.crainsrunranch.com


I admit that I got very mad about you posting my name, address, home phone and flock information without asking whether I wanted to be listed, if I was listed, then what information should be listed (what strain did i consider myself as having, NPIP, etc.) -- I was also very angry about you having me as "NPIP: No" which you refused to correct -- this is what prompted my certified letter to you. I don't think I should have revealed to you my neighbor problem, the city code problem or any such thing. I do not like getting *so angry* about such silly things so am embarrassed by that & for that I sincerely apologize to you. I overeacted.


----------



## Shumaker

*Moving on*

History is fun most of the time, but I prefer the kind that involves the make-up of the buckeye and that qwarky lady whole made them despite the impressive resistance of the RIR breeders. It would seem that nothing ever came easy for this breed.....still rings true even today! How about that!

I want to talk about buckeye hens and there improvement. Who wants to join me?


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

Shumaker said:


> History is fun most of the time, but I prefer the kind that involves the make-up of the buckeye and that qwarky lady whole made them despite the impressive resistance of the RIR breeders. It would seem that nothing ever came easy for this breed.....still rings true even today! How about that!
> 
> I want to talk about buckeye hens and there improvement. Who wants to join me?


Joe, what are your ideas on breeding a nice, clean, dark hens without making the roosters black? Can you describe the right processes in breeding both great males and great females?

And also wondering what qwarky is. lol


----------



## Shumaker

Circle_U_Farm said:


> And also wondering what qwarky is. lol


Sure...pick on the hillbilly because he can't spell and then laugh at him.....quirky....an individual peculiarity of character; no one can say she wasn't an ambitious, relatively independant woman.


----------



## Shumaker

Circle_U_Farm said:


> Joe, what are your ideas on breeding a nice, clean, dark hens without making the roosters black? Can you describe the right processes in breeding both great males and great females?


Asking advice after picking on me.........interesting..........I don't necessarily know if there are "right" processes, but their are definately expiremental processes. Personally, I think it all starts with a good colored male with the absence of black in the surface feathers to begin with. Watch that undercolor! It has to be there! Now this is my opinion. That male needs to be crossed over the best example of a buckeye hen you can find. Cull the resulting pullets very hard and make sure they are clean...if not...find a better starting female. The pullets should be clean. Take them and put them back under the original cock and you should be good to go on the surface color.......NOTE: it isn't always that easy and the trick is to maintain it.....just produce a good selection and never settle for below average. Ultimately you have to breed away from the black surface feathers while maintaining the undercolor. It's a real challenge but very doable.

Go back a couple posts and read the writings of Chris and Don Schrider regarding diversity and the couple replys following. See if that helps as far understand the importance of maintaining them threw families.


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

Shumaker said:


> Asking advice after picking on me.........interesting..........
> I actually asked the question before picking on you.
> 
> Go back a couple posts and read the writings of Chris and Don Schrider regarding diversity and the couple replys following. See if that helps as far understand the importance of maintaining them threw families.


I have read all of these posts. I understand the family ideas and breeding seperately to maintain the genetics but also keeping it diverse. I guess what I was wondering is.....In these "female" breedings, are most of the males going to be culls? If the hens are coming out with great undercolor and still maintaining that dark clean look, would most of the boys tend to be too dark? From what I understand, it is best to breed for males and females separately. Not necessarily two different lines, but seperate pairings.


----------



## Shumaker

Circle_U_Farm said:


> I actually asked the question before picking on you.


 Aren't you a clever little chit! Thats right! Gotta keep me in line.



Circle_U_Farm said:


> I guess what I was wondering is.....In these "female" breedings, are most of the males going to be culls?


Not necessarily.......at least not all of mine are. Let's face it, not all birds are going to alphas per se, that is why we are doing what we are doing and trying to get them that way, but its not likely in reality.

That is why I say judge the brood fowl based on the offsprings. Just like all birds aren't show birds; not all SQ birds produce good offsprings. Make sure you maintain their carcasses in the same respects. The total package has to always be considered.



Circle_U_Farm said:


> If the hens are coming out with great undercolor and still maintaining that dark clean look, would most of the boys tend to be too dark?


Too dark meaning black in the surface I'm assuming? Again breed them and find out; there are no guides. Watch for the black surface feathers in the chest of the females. I won't use them and I've had reasonable success.



Circle_U_Farm said:


> From what I understand, it is best to breed for males and females separately. Not necessarily two different lines, but seperate pairings.


I don't and won't breed them seperately. If you can produce respectable color, you can produce respectable females and males in the same mating. Just watch the length and width of the bodies you are selecting to breed.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Marengoite

cgmccary said:


> _Well of course, I am going to disagree with ya'll. In fact, I am in complete disagreement. I think for short term gain, it is your way._
> 
> _ I do not think keeping up with the various strains/ lines has anything to do with "historical purposes," not one bit. You have missed my entire point of view. Rather, it is important from a genetics perspective. First, for the breed as a whole, it is really most important that there is as big a gene pool as is possible. _
> 
> *If this is the case, then what ARE the genetics involved? If we push the "biggest gene pool possible" to its logical conclusion, then the "best" situation is a bunch of landrace mutts all breeding willy-nilly. That will give you LOTS of genetic variation. The whole purpose of a pure breed (and the SOP which is a description of the phenotypic expression of the genetic makeup of a breed) is to reduce{/I] the level of genetic diversity and limit the gene pool.
> 
> That being said, I'm curious as to what the benefit is to keeping inferior and inadequate representatives of the breed to broaden the gene pool. I'm guessing that is not what you are advocating. So what are you advocating?
> 
> If the purpose of maintaining a line is to preserve desired characteristics so they can be reproduced reliably and consistently (if there is another reason for keeping a line, do let me know), then why would we want a broad gene pool which will reduce our ability to duplicate progeny reliably? *_
> 
> For me, I have three groups in my own flock, and I keep at least one cockerel from each group whether or not it is the best in type and color or not. I do this to have as much genetic diversity in my flock as possible.
> 
> *Why? What do you gain from genetic diversity? If you get your flock to where you want it to be, why do you want birds that will dilute your gene pool if you were to mix them? And if you're not keeping them for crosses to the lines you want to develop, then what are they for? *
> 
> What I cannot seem to convey to you all is that the subjective part is important and healthy for the breed too. It is OK that we see the breed a little differently. If not, then we'd just accept one person's birds and cull all the rest. What would that do to our genetic diversity? That is why I am not going to cause a heated argument discussing the strengths and weakeness of each strain/line from my point of view & why it is not important for this discussion.
> 
> *It doesn't have to be a heated discussion or argument. I appreciate the subjective part. That's why different breeders like various lines. I'm familiar with this in gun dogs. Some breed clubs like the American Brittany Club have worked hard to maintain dual purpose dogs that do as well on the show bench as in the field. And breeding lines relate to specific characteristics which folks have no problem talking about. The argument is not what traits a line has or doesn't have, but rather which is the "better" line based on the expressed traits. I can tell the minute a Gordon setter hops out of the dog box whether it is a Springset dog or not. Jeff could do the same with Elhew pointers. The question is, can you do the same with Buckeyes. If I toss a Buckeye in the ring, can you look at it and say, "Oh that's a _______ line bird because...."
> 
> And this is where I would expect Jeff to chime in. With 12 breeding pens, and various lines, the difference may be subtle, but there must be differences. Where can I find them listed? *
> 
> Contrasting, for the back yard breeder who has a small little flock (like I did when I was in the city), then bringing in new blood every so many years could be something they need to do for many reasons (i.e. one being to improve a particular trait like better saddle feathers or something, the other being to boost their genetic diversity), then most of the time (as Jeff has rightly pointed out), you do not want a complete outcross -- then knowing where the new blood is from (its original source & its present keeper) would let you know that what you are bringing in is not a total outcross. Does that make sense to you?
> 
> 
> *This would make sense if there were a catalog of traits that each line contributes. Then one could breed intelligently.
> 
> And I'm still not convinced that genetic diversity is a worthwhile goal in itself as part of a purebred fancy. Granted, someone who does generation after generation of brother/sister matings is going to have a problem. But we have examples of linebreeding for generation after generation that has not introduced genetic diversity and has seen no loss of vigor or fertility.
> 
> Which then gets to the question (controversial or not) regarding lines in the first place. If linebreeding is detrimental to the breed, then why maintain a line? If it's not detrimental, then why do we need to cross? And if crossing is so vital to flock maintenance, then how much of it has gone on with the supposed "pure" lines? In other words, do all these folks maintain closed flocks? *
> _


_

Inquiring minds want to know._


----------



## Marengoite

Shumaker said:


> _I have and do the same thing, but I make approximately 25-30 specimens (thats just the males) from each group and keep at least 3-4 that I feel are worth keeping; that fit my idealization and the overall description of the breed word for word. I watch them grow/develop and make my decisions based on the individual birds which ones should propagate. The other 2-3, I keep as back-ups in the event something would happen or the selected bird wasn't the best sire to future generations. I'll redo the mating with a different male (a brother) to see if the resulting offsprings differed. That way I never lose the genetics I need to maintain them. If they don't fit my idealization, they don't stay! I take the "keep the best and eat the rest" philosophy for each group._


_The same can be said of the females. Like you, I understand genetic diversty and its importance. I breed each of these families in their respected directions to maintain the individual families, but only very suttle differences seperates them. I keep detailed records of how everything is bred and the parents they are out of. Not only do I want to maintain them as a desired dual purpose breed but I'd like to do it in the show pen as well (the best of both worlds!). I have always managed my gamefowl in this manner with a great deal of success. _

So, without divulging any of your secrets, can you give me some examples? I understand that in Buckeyes some have a cock line and a hen line because the best of both isn't always possible in a single line. I think that's part of the problem with dual purpose birds is that we are forced to compromise between the best characteristics for meaties and the best for layers. And some breeds don't have this problem because they aren't trying to be dual purpose. What would be a problem you are able to solve because you have access to genetic diversity?


----------



## Marengoite

Shumaker said:


> Bodies are absolutely key. The body often translates to the body of the male offspring. I like big ol' heavy gals, but I've often noticed a set back in egg production with the larger hens. There is definately a give/take situation right there.
> 
> Maybe a good opportunity to breed in this fashion to make good meat production males and cross those males to a slightly thinner (better egg producing family) to help maintain shape and size while keeping egg production up.
> 
> Other suggestions/comments?


And that is exactly my concern. I don't think Buckeyes will ever be able to compete with production breeds like production RIRs and BPRs for volume of eggs. But for the backyard flockster, I don't know that production yield is an important issue. RIRs and BPRs have a reputation for a snippy temperament, especially the roosters. Alex's BPR roo may go in the crock pot if Alex doesn't get him calmed down. The neighbor boys are terrified of him because he's chased them a couple times. I've never had that with any of my Buckeye cockerels and the roo I have now is shy as a kitten. We'll see what happens as he gets older. But even BPR hens can get a little bossy. So Buckeyes can be sold on temperament to backyard folks.

And that leads t the question - how well are we doing on marketing dual purposeness? My Buckeye cockerels were lean and leggy compared to the CX meaties sold in stores. Lots of dark meat, narrow breasts. Rich and flavorful, but most of the weight was in the legs and thighs. And if Alex's BPR ends up in the pot, I expect he will be even lighter in the breast.

So the question is, do we have a plan for finding the ideal balance between carcass weight and egg production? Surely someone somewhere in all the old writers has an opinion on the subject. That's the goal I'd like to breed toward.


----------



## Shumaker

Marengoite said:


> So, without divulging any of your secrets, can you give me some examples?


I idea of "secrets" is humorous. They are just chickens. People often make the concept of breeding harder than it should be. What kind of examples are you looking for?



Marengoite said:


> I understand that in Buckeyes some have a cock line and a hen line because the best of both isn't always possible in a single line.


Why not? Granted you'll never get birds that produce meat like a hybrid Cornish cross and egg production like a leghorn. But depending on the size of the flock and your family. I'm sure you will be able to produce enough meat and eggs from this family of birds that suits your needs. If you take the Cornish crosses; eggs will be lacking and if you take just the leghorns, well have fun eating those little peices of shoe leather.



Marengoite said:


> What would be a problem you are able to solve because you have access to genetic diversity?


The ability to breed the birds true to the standard for the next 20,30,50 years, while maintianing heterosis. Heterosis, hybrid vigor, or outbreeding enhancement, is the improved or increased function of any biological quality in a hybrid offspring. Heterosis is the occurrence of a superior offspring from mixing the genetic contributions of its parents. By having the seperate family that are bred to my idealization, I'll never have to go out and look for others. That way I can maintain my breed without incorporating negative traits (i.e IMO, poor color, different body structures, combs, heads, tails, ect.)

Not to mention, right now; the families I have on my farm have individual qualities that I feel are very important for the breed as a whole and by systematically introducing/combining/crossing them right now. I feel that I can get a better bird as a result. Then I can use the crosses to breed back to the individual persective families to make the families look similar but maintain their own genetics.

Every few years (let's just say 5 to throw a number out there), I can cross the families to maintain the hybrid vigor and keep the families strong. I hope that makes some kind of sense. Basically its based on controlled outcrossing of very similar families under strict individual requirments/standards. It's a bit different than pulling any bird from a different farm and introducing it.

It took me several years to understand the concept when I was younger, but it does help in the long run.


----------



## Shumaker

Marengoite said:


> And that is exactly my concern. I don't think Buckeyes will ever be able to compete with production breeds like production RIRs and BPRs for volume of eggs.


If you look at the other side of the spectrum, I don't think the RIR or BPRs can keep up with the buckeyes when they are bred to the cornish type of bodies. It's a give and take but I'd imagine that the egg production will be pretty close. There comes a time when I wish my hens would stop, but they don't. So I'm not complaining. I always seem to have plenty of fresh eggs.



Marengoite said:


> RIRs and BPRs have a reputation for a snippy temperament, especially the roosters.


I've witnessed a couple buckeye males that wanted to be froggy. They leaped and I responed with a swift kick, they went a sailing and they learned. For the most part they are awesome birds to have and very friendly. I actually have a couple males that will walk right up to me and want to be picked up. They will cut their wings/stomp at my feet and keep doing it until I pick them up. I enjoy that response.



Marengoite said:


> The neighbor boys are terrified of him because he's chased them a couple times.


Now that is worth pulling up a chair and getting afresh cup of coffee! Just be sure you don't spill it on yourself amidst the laughter.



Marengoite said:


> So Buckeyes can be sold on temperament to backyard folks.


I agree, they is why I've come to really appreciate them.



Marengoite said:


> And that leads t the question - how well are we doing on marketing dual purposeness? My Buckeye cockerels were lean and leggy compared to the CX meaties sold in stores. Lots of dark meat, narrow breasts. Rich and flavorful, but most of the weight was in the legs and thighs. And if Alex's BPR ends up in the pot, I expect he will be even lighter in the breast.


Are we marketing dual purpose...really? Those who want a dual purpose bird will do their research and come to their own conclusions. Buckeyes do have alot of dark meat (I love that trait, my wife however does not). It is what it is. My cockerels tend to be more well balanced. Good portions of meat of the breast as well as the thighs (proper feeding and good quality feed do help contribute to that). Now that is not always the case, but I'm breeding toward it. My birds tend not to be leggy, more medium stationed.....again...due to breeding and selection of the brood fowl. Let's face it, you are not going to get a cornish X type bird without crossing more of the cornish traits to them. You are comparing two different animals, now if you crossed the buckeyes with the cornish; I'd imagine you would get something very similar.



Marengoite said:


> So the question is, do we have a plan for finding the ideal balance between carcass weight and egg production?


Rick, it's a guess and check situation. Do the best you can with what you have and improve upon the results every year while trying to stay within the concept of the breed.....or.....you can breed toward laying while maintaining some type of decent carcass and breed the males to a cornish hen. Then you'll definately have meat birds. I can tell you right now, by venturing that route, you will more than likely get longer bodied birds if you breed toward the laying aspect of the breed. Nature of the beast.

At this moment, that is the best I can help you with your questions. Anybody is free to chime in. Hope that helps, but I suspect you were already aware.


----------



## cgmccary

> *Marengoite:* If this is the case, then what ARE the genetics involved? If we push the "biggest gene pool possible" to its logical conclusion, then the "best" situation is a bunch of landrace mutts all breeding willy-nilly.


*No. We are talking about breeding all the different lines and strains according to the SOP and slowly improving all the lines so they will not denigrate to land race mutts.*

*The reason having more strains and lines that are and remain genetically separate is healthy, there are many reasons, such as: a limited or small gene pool, you risk running into hatchability problems, inability to correct a bad trait and extinction (although breeding chcikens is not like breeding dogs, horses, cattle, cheetahs -- look at the cheetah in Africa, whose gene pool is so small that it will probably go extinct.). The Buckeye only recently (last decade) became a little more popular. There are still not that many large flocks (>100) & I bet you could count them on one hand. The Buckeye was at risk of extinction not less than 10 years ago. Other breeds essentially have gone extinct and others have never recovered from very low populations. I have always argued that if we lost the Buckeye, because it is a composite breed, one could essentially do what Metcalf did and recreate a Buckeye (something that looked the part) but it would not truly be the Buckeye we have right now because the strains and lines of Barred Plymouth Rocks & Cochins and the Game she used, those do not exist today so the nuances, traits we see, would likely not be there to the perfection of the pure Buckeye.*



> [*Marengoite:* Are we marketing dual purpose...really?/QUOTE]
> 
> *Yes. The very definition of a dual purpose is that it will provide a decent amount of eggs and a decent carcass for the table, never as good an egg layer as as egg laying breed nor a better carcass than a pure meat breed. The idea is to have one breed on your farm that you can reproduce, and you will get both to a satisfying degree. That is where your individual selection skills come in.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Marengoite:* My Buckeye cockerels were lean and leggy compared to the CX meaties sold in stores. Lots of dark meat, narrow breasts. Rich and flavorful, but most of the weight was in the legs and thighs
> 
> 
> 
> *The Buckeye (non-commercial) meat is more flavorful and has real texture. I'd argue a Buckeyes' thighs match any breed -- nothing puny about them. The breasts on mine are decent and enough. IMHO, it is a better carcass than a RIR and as good a egg layer in the first couple of years though a RIR lays better in later years (better longeivity -- its longer (a little narrower) body is built for this capacity. The different dual purpose breeds have different qualities and should be respected.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Marengoite:* This would make sense if there were a catalog of traits that each line contributes. Then one could breed intelligently.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, that is what your brain and eye are for (i.e. you look & dicipher whether what is in front of you is a good Buckeye body or not -- don't depend on someone else to tell you, evaluate yourself -- don't be lazy) & because such a catalogue would not hold true for all lines/ strains because as I have already mentioned, much can be lost in 2-3 generations if correct selections are not made.
> 
> I'm at work, gotta go. Forgive me if there are typos as I pecked away in a hurry.
Click to expand...


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> And that is exactly my concern. I don't think Buckeyes will ever be able to compete with production breeds like production RIRs and BPRs for volume of eggs. But for the backyard flockster, I don't know that production yield is an important issue. RIRs and BPRs have a reputation for a snippy temperament, especially the roosters. Alex's BPR roo may go in the crock pot if Alex doesn't get him calmed down. The neighbor boys are terrified of him because he's chased them a couple times. I've never had that with any of my Buckeye cockerels and the roo I have now is shy as a kitten. We'll see what happens as he gets older. But even BPR hens can get a little bossy. So Buckeyes can be sold on temperament to backyard folks.
> 
> And that leads t the question - how well are we doing on marketing dual purposeness? My Buckeye cockerels were lean and leggy compared to the CX meaties sold in stores. Lots of dark meat, narrow breasts. Rich and flavorful, but most of the weight was in the legs and thighs. And if Alex's BPR ends up in the pot, I expect he will be even lighter in the breast.
> 
> So the question is, do we have a plan for finding the ideal balance between carcass weight and egg production? Surely someone somewhere in all the old writers has an opinion on the subject. That's the goal I'd like to breed toward.


Dual Purpose is something that one can "market" when it comes to the Buckeye but folks who are raising birds strictly for meat generally want short term gains....many want 8 week old cornish crosses and don't want to put 18-20 weeks into a Buckeye regardless of how well we might say the Buckeye tastes! egg production in a Buckeye will NEVER be equal to that of the BEST of the RIR's or Production Reds because our Buckeye is not built like these other breeds....we can make improvements using the Walter Hogan method but to make significant changes in terms of eggs produced the hens body shape would need to "evolve" into a longer body. I think the "ideal balance" as you put it has never been well documented in the past 100 years (other than what the ALBC put out regarding their work on the Buckeye "project")....some believe a Buckeye Cock should weigh 9 pounds because that's what the SoP states but for breeding purposes i prefer a smaller bird around 8 pounds. that is my ideal weight for a breeder. some suggest butchering Buckeyes at 16 or 18 weeks....i say butcher them based on weight not weeks of age and when they are 7 pounds live weight that is when you may want to consider butchering Buckeye cockerels but again this is my "ideal" weight for a Buckeye meat bird. Finally, I think if your goal is to have the BEST dual purpose Buckeyes then use ALL the resouces available, Hogan, ALBC and the APA's SoP to build your breeding program!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Circle_U_Farm said:


> I have read all of these posts. I understand the family ideas and breeding seperately to maintain the genetics but also keeping it diverse. I guess what I was wondering is.....In these "female" breedings, are most of the males going to be culls? If the hens are coming out with great undercolor and still maintaining that dark clean look, would most of the boys tend to be too dark? From what I understand, it is best to breed for males and females separately. Not necessarily two different lines, but seperate pairings.


Josh, while i agree with Joe Shumaker's previous comment i would suggest using two somewhat different hens in a trio mating....using the BEST and DARKEST cockerel with DARK undercolor over two hens with excellent type but the difference in the hens will be in their undercolor! One with dark undercolor and the other without (clean or red....what ever you want to call it) but you will need to make sure to identify the eggs each gal lays and make certain you ID the eggs and chicks when hatched. Generally, dark undercolor bred to dark undercolor will produce DARKER fowl of both sexes but it can also bring out the black "fluff" too! Breeding the BEST pullets from this mating that have no undercolor back to their father should produce some of the best females in the second year or season of mating. That's worked for me but your results may vary?!?!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

cgmccary said:


> Yes! Well said Jeff. And no I do not think I will ever be completely satisfied either. There are set backs too. You lose a good bird and go to a back-up (i.e. not your first choice) or a particular male/ females match-up produces something that can become a problem -- most people will not need to over think it like we are doing here because they just want some Buckeyes and will not ever breed seriously or stick with it. Many people have lucked up by buying some eggs or chicks and had some good show birds right off the bat, but as has been said, that is not the norm. The pleasure is in the working at it each year and seeing them get a little better each year or seeing something new that you didn't notice before.
> Good thread. Lots more we can talk about.


Thanks Chris! I welcome the type of discussions that have taken place in the past several days....as Buckeye breeders we ALL share a common interest, "Preservation of the Buckeye breed" regardless of what our breeding goals might be we hope the Buckeye will be around another 100+ years!


----------



## Marengoite

Shumaker said:


> Granted you'll never get birds that produce meat like a hybrid Cornish cross and egg production like a leghorn. But depending on the size of the flock and your family. I'm sure you will be able to produce enough meat and eggs from this family of birds that suits your needs. If you take the Cornish crosses; eggs will be lacking and if you take just the leghorns, well have fun eating those little peices of shoe leather.
> 
> The ability to breed the birds true to the standard for the next 20,30,50 years, while maintianing heterosis. Heterosis, hybrid vigor, or outbreeding enhancement, is the improved or increased function of any biological quality in a hybrid offspring. Heterosis is the occurrence of a superior offspring from mixing the genetic contributions of its parents. By having the seperate family that are bred to my idealization, I'll never have to go out and look for others. That way I can maintain my breed without incorporating negative traits (i.e IMO, poor color, different body structures, combs, heads, tails, ect.)
> 
> Not to mention, right now; the families I have on my farm have individual qualities that I feel are very important for the breed as a whole and by systematically introducing/combining/crossing them right now. I feel that I can get a better bird as a result. Then I can use the crosses to breed back to the individual persective families to make the families look similar but maintain their own genetics.
> 
> Every few years (let's just say 5 to throw a number out there), I can cross the families to maintain the hybrid vigor and keep the families strong. I hope that makes some kind of sense. Basically its based on controlled outcrossing of very similar families under strict individual requirments/standards. It's a bit different than pulling any bird from a different farm and introducing it.
> 
> It took me several years to understand the concept when I was younger, but it does help in the long run.


OK, this makes sense. My goal is to build a sustainable flock that will maintain good representatives of the breed. I am starting with a trio from Jeff. The first year will be easy enough, I mark the eggs so I know which pullet they come from and keep the chicks separate so I have two related flocks of half-brothers and sisters. The next year and following is what throws me.

I know I can cross the original rooster over his best daughters. Would I also save two cockerels from the hens and cross them over their "aunt" hens? This would give me four flocks the second year. If I were to set up a spiral breeding system from these four flocks, would that be sustainable more or less indefinitely? Always assuming good selection practices, of course.

rick


----------



## Marengoite

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Finally, I think if your goal is to have the BEST dual purpose Buckeyes then use ALL the resouces available, Hogan, ALBC and the APA's SoP to build your breeding program!


Thanks for that summary, Jeff. I think this is probably the best advice you can give. Winter is coming on and that means lots of reading, research, and digging around. As a newbie to chickens, I'm trying to learn as much as I can. I'm going to need to get down and pay you and Joe a visit because there's a lot of education that needs hands-on approach and if a picture is worth a thousand words, then watching a chicken yard must be worth a million.

I will definitely be putting in the time on research this winter.

thanks,

rick


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> Thanks for that summary, Jeff. I think this is probably the best advice you can give. Winter is coming on and that means lots of reading, research, and digging around. As a newbie to chickens, I'm trying to learn as much as I can. I'm going to need to get down and pay you and Joe a visit because there's a lot of education that needs hands-on approach and if a picture is worth a thousand words, then watching a chicken yard must be worth a million.
> 
> I will definitely be putting in the time on research this winter.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> rick


You are welcome to come by anytime! I'm working on upgrading my breeding pens this winter so let me know and I'll save the heavy lifting for the day you plan to visit!!! LOL


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

*New Article on Buckeyes in Columbus, Ohio magazine*

Thought some of the "Chicken Forum" folks would be interesting in a recent article printed in a Columbus, Ohio based regional magazine called "edibleCOLUMBUS". It's a publication focused on "local foods" and this 2012 Fall/Winter edition has a very good write up on Buckeyes;

http://ediblecolumbus.com/fall-2012/come-aboard-the-ark-of-taste-sets-sail-for-ohio

Hope everyone finds it interesting, the American Buckeye Club helped provide reference material to the writer and she did an outstanding job!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

*building 2 families from 1 trio of Buckeyes*



Marengoite said:


> OK, this makes sense. My goal is to build a sustainable flock that will maintain good representatives of the breed. I am starting with a trio from Jeff. The first year will be easy enough, I mark the eggs so I know which pullet they come from and keep the chicks separate so I have two related flocks of half-brothers and sisters. The next year and following is what throws me.
> 
> I know I can cross the original rooster over his best daughters. Would I also save two cockerels from the hens and cross them over their "aunt" hens? This would give me four flocks the second year. If I were to set up a spiral breeding system from these four flocks, would that be sustainable more or less indefinitely? Always assuming good selection practices, of course.
> 
> rick


Rick, if you start with a trio of Buckeyes (1 cockerel and 2 hens) that are not closely related....we don't want brothers and sisters, but the two hens can be sisters. You could essentially create 2 "families" from this mating. The first year is put the trio together....keep the BEST pullets and 1 of the BEST cockerels. Year two prepare a second pen for the pullets and mate their sire to them....put the BEST son in with his momma and the other hen goes in with the pullets and old cock. The third year will produce more daughters and grand daughters on the Sire side....more sons and daughters from the Dam side. If the two oeiginal hes were NOT closely related (not sisters) you could build on 3 "families" from that original Trio but keeping a son from both mommas. The entire process is easier to follow and understand if you think or start with a pair rather than a trio! Some people use a flock or pen method where the pullets/hens are NOT related but this really increases the variation and complexity of the breeding process. Using pairs and thinking in terms of pairs will generally lead to better results in my humble opinion!


----------



## Marengoite

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Rick, if you start with a trio of Buckeyes (1 cockerel and 2 hens) that are not closely related....we don't want brothers and sisters, but the two hens can be sisters. You could essentially create 2 "families" from this mating. The first year is put the trio together....keep the BEST pullets and 1 of the BEST cockerels. Year two prepare a second pen for the pullets and mate their sire to them....put the BEST son in with his momma and the other hen goes in with the pullets and old cock. The third year will produce more daughters and grand daughters on the Sire side....more sons and daughters from the Dam side. If the two oeiginal hes were NOT closely related (not sisters) you could build on 3 "families" from that original Trio but keeping a son from both mommas. The entire process is easier to follow and understand if you think or start with a pair rather than a trio! Some people use a flock or pen method where the pullets/hens are NOT related but this really increases the variation and complexity of the breeding process. Using pairs and thinking in terms of pairs will generally lead to better results in my humble opinion!


Thanks, Jeff. I was thinking in terms of the trio I got from you. I'm guessing the pullets are sisters and the cockerel is not closely related, right? This is the Felch method you described, right? So if I followed this strategy for both pullets side by side, and only cross "families" under carefully planned conditions, this should allow for a sustainable flock without inbreeding, right? Sounds like I need to set up a good toe punch system and keep excellent notes.

Thanks,

rick


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Rick, if you start with a trio of Buckeyes (1 cockerel and 2 hens) that are not closely related....we don't want brothers and sisters, but the two hens can be sisters. You could essentially create 2 "families" from this mating. The first year is put the trio together....keep the BEST pullets and 1 of the BEST cockerels. Year two prepare a second pen for the pullets and mate their sire to them....put the BEST son in with his momma and the other hen goes in with the pullets and old cock. The third year will produce more daughters and grand daughters on the Sire side....more sons and daughters from the Dam side. If the two oeiginal hes were NOT closely related (not sisters) you could build on 3 "families" from that original Trio but keeping a son from both mommas. The entire process is easier to follow and understand if you think or start with a pair rather than a trio! Some people use a flock or pen method where the pullets/hens are NOT related but this really increases the variation and complexity of the breeding process. Using pairs and thinking in terms of pairs will generally lead to better results in my humble opinion!


My only question is....How can I tell the two's eggs apart in a trio breeding? My idea was just to put one of the pullets in with the roo at a time. Hatch out of those eggs for a month and then switch it up. I am hoping there is a way to tell a difference between the two to simplify my trio breeding plan. If they both lay in the same day, I can not tell a difference in the eggs. When I first got them, the smaller pullet layed smaller egg. Now that's not the case.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> Thanks, Jeff. I was thinking in terms of the trio I got from you. I'm guessing the pullets are sisters and the cockerel is not closely related, right? This is the Felch method you described, right? So if I followed this strategy for both pullets side by side, and only cross "families" under carefully planned conditions, this should allow for a sustainable flock without inbreeding, right? Sounds like I need to set up a good toe punch system and keep excellent notes.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> rick


Yup, the pullets are sisters, the cockerel would be their "uncle" so using the Felch method you are breeding "uncles to nieces"!!! Using the Felch method you could breed for many generations without adding new blood.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Circle_U_Farm said:


> My only question is....How can I tell the two's eggs apart in a trio breeding? My idea was just to put one of the pullets in with the roo at a time. Hatch out of those eggs for a month and then switch it up. I am hoping there is a way to tell a difference between the two to simplify my trio breeding plan. If they both lay in the same day, I can not tell a difference in the eggs. When I first got them, the smaller pullet layed smaller egg. Now that's not the case.


In the old days "trap nesting" was the best way to do this but you can use another little trick if you dont have trap nests.....using blue or green liquid food coloring apply a drop on the hen's vent the night before and the next morning when she lays you will have a little "color" on the egg she laid!!!


----------



## Shumaker

Well its been awhile since I checked in.........life's been busy with a new job and breeding season approaching. Cleaning out pens, getting ready for winter.....let's jump into the topic of the buckeye and sheen. I see people spraying birds down all of the time with the glossy spray on crap. I laugh and shake my head everytime I see it. 

I think it does more for the person doing the spraying than the actual bird..........proper breeding/good broodstock accompanied by health and diet with do more for buckeyes that a spraycan ever will.

Last summer during the county fair, so many people approached my daughter asking what she put on her buckeyes to make them shine they way the do. She told them...."Nothing, that's just the way they are".....those people actually thought she was lying and trying to hide a "secret". It's amazing how buckeyes will look if bred and reared properly with a great diet. I was reading in an old journal that the buckeye females should even have a sheen to them..of course...not to the extent that the males do. I've really noticed that in my birds and often questioned if it should be there. I'm glad it is, because they look better with it. IMO, I see many buckeyes in show pens today that look flat and lack the "pop" that makes the breed noticable. Would anyone like to add?


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

I would have to agree with Mr. Shumaker on the sheen topic. I recently went to a large show. I dont know the exact number of buckeyes there, but most of them looked dull. There were a few with some sheen, but for the most part, they didnt even look healthy. Mine look much brighter and healthier than the birds in that show. I do understand that it is the total package, not just the color, but come on. Why would a "reputable" breeder put a bird in the show ring if it didn't hit on every category. I plan on showing in the spring. I believe that mine are as good or better than most of the birds there. And I think I know what I am doing in the breed pens. Only time will tell. I can however tell you that I will go empty handed before I put a sub par bird in the show cage. And on another note.......WHY would anyone put a bird in a show if it was missing half its tail feathers or molting at all???? Is this normal?? I dont get it.


----------



## Shumaker

Circle_U_Farm, I'd very much like to see your birds, please let me know when and where the shows are that you plan on attending. I may just join you and hopfully at the end of the day; a buckeye will take the class.


----------



## Marengoite

I concur with Josh that there were a number of sub-par birds at the show we went to. We were looking at a Dark Cornish that appeared to be missing whole patches of feathers and was lying rather listlessly in the bottom of the cage. It would barely open its eyes to look at us as we were looking at it. I'm starting to think the easiest way to catch an infection is to take your chickens to a show. He didn't look healthy at all.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

The moult was a bit late for some birds this year and I suspect it might have played into the poor feather condition on some of the birds seen at the ON earlier this month?!?! One never knows this time of year if birds are going to be in proper feather condition or not!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

So how are your Buckeyes laying this year???


----------



## Marengoite

I turned the lights off the Sunday after Thanksgiving and I'm still getting eggs. Even one of my Hamburgs is still laying and they were late to the game.


----------



## Shumaker

I'm getting eggs by the hundreds.....we'll have a little over 200 buckeye eggs in the incubator this week......should have a little over 300 biddies on the ground come the end of January.... I've been working on a side strain of buckeyes recreating them with oriental and american game.....having my knowledge and connections with gamefowl and oriental game.....I've been able to find really dark mahogany lines that have all of the right traits to recreate a beautiful flock of birds. I was reading in another forum from a guy who owns buckeyes that this idea would lead to birds that wouldn't be consider buckeyes.....in reality as BREEDERS....there is really no merit to those statements....but as long as they breed true and abide by the standard........it is very possible. So many improvements can be made. Not to mention the end result will provide better meat production.


----------



## Marengoite

*Sop*

I believe I recall that post. In effect it was saying that if we could recreate a breed from foundation stock, even if the specimens met the SOP, they would not be "true" representatives of the breed. While this may be true for dogs and horses (since they keep stud books and track pedigrees), some of the APA judges on the list said that is not an accurate statement.

I don't have access to the SOP, but I was wondering how a meatier bird would conform to the standard. When I put my culls up this fall, I noticed that they were longer in the keel and narrow breasted for meat chickens like the Cornish. I would think that long keels would be something favorable to egg production but detrimental to meat production.

What I think is interesting is that even for a dual purpose breed, it is possible to stay within the standard and have a line that favors egg production and another line that favors meat production. Would this be within the scope of the standard, do you think?


----------



## Shumaker

And you're right...that is not an accurate statement but you have people being told this malarkey and they are ignorant enough to beleive it.

A meatier bird would adhere to the SOP and to be honest; the judges would probably prefer it......they are alot more appealing than some of the thin, snake-headed "buckeyes" out there today.

Good questions......the SOP is so broad and you can fit nearly any "buckeye" out there into it as long as the weight is close.
Some organizations seems to think if you get a lot of birds entered into shows, then you are promoting the breed. You are definitely promotingsomething&#8230;.a poor excuse for the breed&#8230;..and an overwhelming display that thebreed needs major improvement as a whole! This has gone on few several years now for the buckeye. At a fairly large show a month or so ago there was a larger turnout of what I refered to above&#8230;..very few were even the right color (this coming from a couple of judgesin attendance who were dissappointed in the quality). There were several that had white tips on the exteriorplumage&#8230;&#8230;you couple that with dull light red void of that beautiful sheen (you could tell there was adefinite lack of undercolor)&#8230;.&#8230;well....it was what it was......your typical hatchery buckeye. Yes&#8230;yes&#8230;I know&#8230;Let's not forget that "heart girth" is important and should be awarded heavily (afterall, they are a dual purpose bird), but the first thing you see is the colorand that will set the tone. The concepts of strains/lines have createdsignificant controversy and a false security of receiving decent poultry. You can clearly see where those concepts are taking the breed. I'm actually glad those concepts are aroundbecause it allows for me to see and not get fooled by poor quality. I can activelyseparate my flock from being anywhere near them and those who follow this strategy are helping me. 

The idea of a large gene pool is not a bad thing&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..genetic diversity can make maintaining a breed a bit easier&#8230;.but you have to step backand look at what there is to breed from. For those that pride themselves on real rich dark color with strong undercolor; wide heads and heavy bodies&#8230;&#8230;.the gene pool is severely lacking. Who would want to screw up their flock by addingwhat I mentioned above. Sure you can take a task like that on and in severalyears (6-10) get something you can do well with; in the show pens&#8230;.but youbetter know a thing or two about breeding and selection if you want to do it.Why would anyone want to add a lesser bloodline into a very strong one? If youbreak your flock down and breed correctly&#8230;&#8230;.you will have plenty of time(years&#8230;you'll probably need it) to properly find a line that compliments your own. The ALBC's efforts to have as "broad of genetic diversity" as possible basically created an amalgamated semi-mongerelized breed of chicken that has as its goals the opposite of the chicken fancy. The "preservationist's" goal was to get as wide a selection of genetic material possible while the fancier wants to narrow his genetic diversity to get specimens that breed true to type. Further proves my point above.

For some reason their are those among us that seem to think that you can breed color back todark mahogany in as little as 3 years&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..not likely&#8230;..if you don't have it to beginwith&#8230;..you won't ever have it and that goes with undercolor as well. Kind of shoots that quote "you need to build the barn before you paint" phrase all to heck. How can you paint it, if the paint isn't available in the gene pool.
There are multiple pictures on other sites of buckeyes, many of those people have had their birds for well over 5-7 years and still.....that disappointing dull red color. True buckeyes should be vibrant with a striking sheen throughout the body......this goes for both males and females......what you see today is simply not the case.
As far as egg production is concerned and it relationship to the SOP is that don't allow your pullets to get to long in the body.....It's true that the longer bodied birds will produce more eggs (goes hand-in-hand with the RIR train on thought), but you don't want an overly long buckeye. This will in return produce long males if you choose to breed from them and that will have an effect on the meat production of the family.


----------



## Shumaker

When I mentioned the ALBC above, it got me thinking a little more in depth (I know I should becareful, I might hurt something ) The reason why we have so much variety (if you will)in the buckeye has a lot to do with the ALBC. Theywanted to resurrect them so they collect birds from everywhere, started breeding andspread out thousands of chicks claiming they were "buckeyes". Theydidn't do it right, just spread out generation after generation of somethingmostly red. I can't tell you how manypeople I've come across that are extremely disappointed in the quality of theALBC birds they received. Most peoplehave totally purged them from their flocks and rightfully so.


----------



## Marengoite

And that brings us to the question of what it really means to "promote" the breed. I will have to say that the ALBC has done a great deal to publicize the breed and the cause of resurrecting the traditional standard bred fowl for back yard chicken keepers. But is publicity the same as promotion? And I wonder how much harm has come to the breed as a result of birds that don't meet SOP getting in the hands of more people.


----------



## Shumaker

I think that publicity and promotion are closely related. ["I wonder how much harm has come to the breed as a result of birds that don't meet SOP getting in the hands of more people."] Now that is a statement that should be looked at. I think of the RIR and the differences in quality between hatchery birds and those who actually have the REAL RIRs (amazing beautiful dark mahogany birds). The same can be said of the buckeyes. Proper culling of the birds that are just being peddled and staying away from hatchery type operations are key to making this breed great again. The key is to do your homework and not believe some of the kool-aide drinkers trying to make a buck or two.

Personally, I love seeing pictures of people's birds, sometimes angles and lighting make them hard to really access. But for the majority, a picture is worth a 1000 words. There are people that tend to disagree with this statement but theyuse that excuse for one of two reasons. 1) They want to spare someone'sfeelings and not cause waves (which is doing a huge disservice to the person asking).Refer to what actually can be observed and make note of any questionable traits. 2) They have no idea of what they are looking at and therefore won't make any reference of traits. A photo of a bird reveals more than one wouldthink. Remember, they are only chickens and a well bred bird will stand out in symmetryand proportion. Buckeyes are not really that hard to judge based on picture.Width in head, breast, back and shanks speak for themselves. All of thesefeatures can be directly correlated to body weight and health. Healthy birds willhave bright red facial features, stand very alert/proud and health can bewitnessed in feather conditions such as a brilliant sheen. Color is uncomplicated to evaluate as long asthe picture isn't overly dark. Even if that is the case, it is well noted thatthey appear nearly black in shade. Color is not rocket science, the bird eitherhas it or it doesn't. Usually, the birds are what they are, therefore deceptionis reduced. People To prove my point, you can go through any number of buckeyepictures on-line and you can see the differences between birds and there aremany differences.

Even if the bird were handled and determined to bea decent weight, why would a person want to utilize the bird if it was notproportioned correctly or has poor features including tail (length, angle,feather width), head structure (comb, wattles, overall width/length,eyes/colors, beak structure), body length/width, and overall station of the birdand last but not least color. A dark mahogany bird is easily observed incomparison to a lighter red bird. White feathers are can be easily observed ifthe color is appropriate; they stick out like a sore thumb. This can also beobserved in the RIR breed. The proper color of the RIR and buckeye are similar(not quite the same, but very similar). The only thing that may be difficult toobserve in a photo is undercolor, but by rule of thumb a dark bird most always hasdecent undercolor. So a huge amount of information can be observed utilizingpictures. So why would anyone want to use a bird that does have the appropriateweight/size but lacks with defects everywhere else? 

Simply put, if you don't want to know then don'task. A responsible breeder will ask and get many opinions from many people(from both experienced breeders and judges a like). Most decent people won'tcomment on birds unless otherwise asked to. But remember what is offered isonly opinion and should be taken as such. That is why gathering severalopinions are important. When other people say take "there is so much more to abird that it's outward appearance", that kind of makes me think&#8230;&#8230;what have theybeen smoking or what are they trying to peddle? When I offer advice, it ishonest and based on my years raising buckeyes coupled with the many years ofraising the birds that were used in the making of this great bird. Similaritiesbetween the buckeye and its precursors are amazing uniform. I'm here to makethis breed great both in overall appearance and under the feathers&#8230;..both whichgo hand in hand.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> And that brings us to the question of what it really means to "promote" the breed. I will have to say that the ALBC has done a great deal to publicize the breed and the cause of resurrecting the traditional standard bred fowl for back yard chicken keepers. But is publicity the same as promotion? And I wonder how much harm has come to the breed as a result of birds that don't meet SOP getting in the hands of more people.


Lot's interesting topics here to discuss and think about folks! Like Marengoite, I agree the ALBC has done an excellent job at "marketing" (promotion of) the Buckeye....they have now turned their attention more toward the "Heritage Chicken" direction and a simple visit to the BYC forum one can see they have made progress in this arena as well. With respect to the Buckeye, the ALBC had a good idea and one can argue it wasn't well executed but I think there were simply too many "cooks in the kitchen" that made a bit of a mess to some extent! A Shumaker pointed out genetic diversity is a double edged sword and the ALBC breeding program has certainly helped create greater "diversity" within the Buckeye breed.

We need more breeders like Mr. Shumaker willing to work with the Buckeye and making sure it continues to meet the Standard. In addition, there is a need for "utility" fowl that are intended for folks who want replacement birds year after year for eggs or meat....this is where the hatchiers tend to work best! I personally believe there is room for both Standard Bred Buckeyes and Hatchery Bred (utility) Buckeyes....I simply refuse to get caught up in this whole "Heritage" nonsense. The APA is muddying the waters by promoting the ALBC's definition of "Heritage Chicken" by allowing APA judges to "certify flocks" as "Heritage Chickens"....this makes absolutely no sense because the bottomline is "Standard Bred" Buckeyes ARE "Traditional" Buckeyes and we don't need a new definition for our Buckeyes!!!


----------



## Shumaker

A valid point is made. I know that I've made such references to the term "heritage" in previous posts. We don’t really need to and shouldn't use the term "Heritage" when we talk about buckeyes. The true term that should be used is STANDARD BREED LARGE FOWL. Heirloom and Heritage are just spin words. Free Range, Heirloom, Heritage, etc. are all words used by people selling something and have only become words used by poultry people fairly recently. So please don’t be fooled when these words are thrown around…..they DO NOT have a significant meaning. It is really sad when people or organizations need to use "new" terms to describe or market their same old poultry to enhance sales.


----------



## Shumaker

Boy that's something........all of the people reading these postings and no one wants to comment.......there must be some validity to what was written. I'm not out to discredit any organization or club, but rather shine light on the "marketing" world so people don't unneccessarily get taken advantage of.

On that note, I've read alot about buckeyes being "good" mousers........based on my experience with this breed they don't "mouse" any more than ANY other chicken breed. Which leads to my next question: How did that rumor even come up?...Better question.....who was trying to sell chickens?

Over on another buckeye forum, this description was a common occurrence......"they are such good mousers" and the "roar like a dinosaur".......mine do "call out" when they get picked up (like any other breed of poultry), but it's a far cry from a "roar". Who's trying to fool who and why?

I've never really thought to much about those two things....mostly because they weren't directly related to appearance.......what other "ficticious selling points" are out there in the name of "marketing" should we be made aware of so other people don't get bamboozled?


----------



## lynnae1

On marketing or promoting, I don't know what word is best to say, "encouraging the improvement of the breed, through education and opportunities to display and/or propogate specemins as close to the SOP as possible while continuing to maintain the dual purpose qualities of the breed". The movie "101 Dalmations" promoted the Dalmation dog, it did nothing to improve/or maintain good qualities/purpose of the breed.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

lynnae1 said:


> On marketing or promoting......the movie "101 Dalmations" promoted the Dalmation dog, it did nothing to improve/or maintain good qualities/purpose of the breed.


Excellent point Lynnae and this can hold true for ANY breed of chicken, too!!! The American Buckeye Club is focused on "preservation of the Buckeye breed" and we promote breeding to the APA SoP (standard of perfection). Maintaining "Standard Bred" Buckeyes without the "hype" or without calling them "Heritage" or "Old Fashioned" or "Heirloom" is the most important thing we can do for the breed! Not everyone understands the concept of "Standard Bred" fowl but it's a relatively simple concept....we follow a set of guidelines or a breed standard and attempt to breed the best examples to this standard as we possibly can. Hopefully more owners of Buckeyes will find this interesting and help do the same thing!


----------



## PA_Farmer24

LIke with most companies and/or organizations who try to market or promote a product, understand what you want to get of it is one of the goals that needs to be identified. I see this everyday across the country. I believe that when trying to come up with a plan a group, company, org needs to be clear on what examples they would like to use for help bring to light their product. THen once this is figured out by brain storming, bench marking then they can decide on the plan of how to market/promote the product for the betterment of the group, company org... Not doing this the correct way and staying within the lines of the plan will fail and so will the product. I do believe that the ABC is and does have a plan in place for the betterment of the Buckeye and yes things can change over time and when that happens you need to be able to identify and make adjustments accordingly. There is a wealth of knowledge within the ABC and even newbies can help by asking the questions that helps make the wiser/older member rethink things as well. 

Just my 2 cents worth. A newbie and always learning. 

Dave T.


----------



## Shumaker

Dave,
Thanks for the kind words about the ABC......buckeyes are great birds to own and they do serve a purpose not only for food consumption but also as enjoyable birds to raise and exhibit (if you are interested). Our goal is to help EVERYONE no matter if you have had birds for 50 years or thinking about getting them. If you are looking for a start to this great breed; stop by the website. You'll definately find what you are looking for and as a bonus....membership is free! The great thing about this group is that we want to help people that raise birds in general no matter the breed you choose. We enjoy the thought of getting newbies that we can "corrupt" or as we like to say "welcome to the dark side".  To help people, I don't want them to select this great family of fowl based on falsehoods like I've described above in previous posts. Buckeyes are what they are and if you are looking for more of a meat bird or egg production breed, the buckeye may not be the best choice....but for a dual purpose bird......you'll be hard pressed to find one better; especially if you like dark meat as I do. As far as clubs are concerned, in my mind, there is only one TRUE club that focuses on the preservation of the standard bred buckeye. The other description/names used for marketing aren't necessary. I encourage all to visit Buckeye Nation and get to know the crazy people apart of it.


----------



## borion

Hello Buckeye folks. I'm new to this forum and new to my ipad, so please be patient with errors. You guys sound like really serious chicken people. I only have 15 chickens, three of which are Buckeyes. two hens and and one roo. They've always been pretty skittish, even as babies. But they sure are beautiful. We all live in northern New Mexico. Got down to about 0 last night. I look forward to learning from you all..


----------



## Shumaker

Borion.....absolutely glad to have you interested. Stop by the ABC site, look up the facebook page or yahoo group which can all be found from our site. If you have any questions, we'll be happy to help and answer them either here or the other sites. Welcome to Buckeye Nation. *disclaimer*.....bring a sense of humor because you are going to need it! We have fun at what we do.


----------



## Marengoite

lynnae1 said:


> The movie "101 Dalmations" promoted the Dalmation dog, it did nothing to improve/or maintain good qualities/purpose of the breed.


Very well stated. And I believe that's the main difference.

Lots of folks are promoting Buckeyes. Not quite so many are improving or maintaining the breed according to standard.


----------



## Marengoite

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Excellent point Lynnae and this can hold true for ANY breed of chicken, too!!! The American Buckeye Club is focused on "preservation of the Buckeye breed" and we promote breeding to the APA SoP (standard of perfection). Maintaining "Standard Bred" Buckeyes without the "hype" or without calling them "Heritage" or "Old Fashioned" or "Heirloom" is the most important thing we can do for the breed! Not everyone understands the concept of "Standard Bred" fowl but it's a relatively simple concept....we follow a set of guidelines or a breed standard and attempt to breed the best examples to this standard as we possibly can. Hopefully more owners of Buckeyes will find this interesting and help do the same thing!


This leads to the next question. I'm familiar with dogs, cats, and horses when it comes to breeding. While they are all bred to a standard, they are never marketed as "standard bred" specimens. They are always referred to as either registered (if they have a documented pedigree recognized by a studbook or breed association) or purebred. I don't know that I have ever heard old time poultrymen refer to their stock as "purebred." They always seem to refer to them as standard bred.

They also speak of breeding other varieties into lines that need to be "brought in line" with the standard and this does nothing to reduce their claims to standard bred chickens. While those of us familiar with "pure" breeds, might find the practice objectionable, I am finding that poultry breeders are less fastidious about it that we are.

Would be interested in hearing other thoughts on the topic of pure bred vs. standard bred.


----------



## Marengoite

borion said:


> Hello Buckeye folks. I'm new to this forum and new to my ipad, so please be patient with errors. You guys sound like really serious chicken people. I only have 15 chickens, three of which are Buckeyes. two hens and and one roo. They've always been pretty skittish, even as babies. But they sure are beautiful. We all live in northern New Mexico. Got down to about 0 last night. I look forward to learning from you all..


And just to make things easy, here are some helpful links:

The ABC blog: http://americanbuckeyeclub.blogspot.com/ with (nearly) monthly posts on advice about keeping chickens. I would recommend exploring the tabs on the blog for some of the best historical information on the breed available anywhere.

The ABC Yahoo group: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AmericanBuckeyeClub/ While most of the conversation has moved to Facebook, the files section is an especially rich repository of breed information as well as general chicken raising and breeding information too.

The ABC Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/groups/buckeyechickens/
Don't let the "closed" status of this group put you off. Jeff or Ann will be happy to add you to the list of members if you want to see what we're talking about - and it isn't always Buckeyes. We do our best to avoid religion and politics, but most everything else is fair game. So if you have an opinion about the best firearm, meat goat, bird dog, or dairy cow, (or nearly anything else for that matter), this is the place to bring it.

Welcome aboard and as Jeff says, bring your sense of humor. You'll need it.

rick


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> This leads to the next question.....Would be interested in hearing other thoughts on the topic of pure bred vs. standard bred.


Purebred = Bred from parents of the same breed or variety
Standardbred = Bred to conform to a specifc external requirement

This is the way I see the differences between the two....anyone can breed a Buckeye and call it "purebred" provided it's parents and grandparents were of the same breed! However, to breed a "Standardbred" Buckeye requires the breeder to select for specific traits as outlined by a breed standard (the APA SoP for example). The same could be said about dogs, cats or horses....anything can be "purebred" without much selection in terms of characteristcs but if one breeds to a standard for that animal he or she is working to improve or maintain certain characteristics in the breed.


----------



## Shumaker

Ok....I'm going to play devil's advocate. Let's now incorporate the rediculous ideology of strians and line's into that description Jeff. Since many of today's individual strains don't necessarily comply to your "standard bred" definition as well as, the "pure bred" defintion either (several have other breeds more recently introduced i.e....Brown with cornish, ALBC with brookstock incorporating birds that had RIR (explains the lack of undercolor, light overall body color, and intermittent single combs)); What in your opinion is the current status of the recovery of the breed and are there many decent places to acquire true "pure bred" buckeyes? The Brown line and the ALBC line appear to be in many of todays flocks. The older Urch birds? The more recent line of Urch birds have the ALBC line in them....with that knowledge; has the Urch line lost some of it's "unique" qualities?


----------



## Marengoite

Stirring the pot, I see. 

Would love to see this mentioned in a couple other forums just to see the fur fly.


----------



## Shumaker

That would be pointless. You would be digging a little too deep in terminology and it would deeply contradict some of today's "buckeye beliefs" or methodologies. Anything more than pointing out that a bird looks nice and ONLY nice would cause too many waves resulting in mass objection. Maybe it's a result of denial due to ignorance trying to find the "old of the old" birds. Buckeyes should be better standardized than what they are today with a more defined SOP description....period.


----------



## PA_Farmer24

Shumaker said:


> Dave,
> Thanks for the kind words about the ABC......buckeyes are great birds to own and they do serve a purpose not only for food consumption but also as enjoyable birds to raise and exhibit (if you are interested). Our goal is to help EVERYONE no matter if you have had birds for 50 years or thinking about getting them. If you are looking for a start to this great breed; stop by the website. You'll definately find what you are looking for and as a bonus....membership is free! The great thing about this group is that we want to help people that raise birds in general no matter the breed you choose. We enjoy the thought of getting newbies that we can "corrupt" or as we like to say "welcome to the dark side".  To help people, I don't want them to select this great family of fowl based on falsehoods like I've described above in previous posts. Buckeyes are what they are and if you are looking for more of a meat bird or egg production breed, the buckeye may not be the best choice....but for a dual purpose bird......you'll be hard pressed to find one better; especially if you like dark meat as I do. As far as clubs are concerned, in my mind, there is only one TRUE club that focuses on the preservation of the standard bred buckeye. The other description/names used for marketing aren't necessary. I encourage all to visit Buckeye Nation and get to know the crazy people apart of it.


Shumaker I am already on the ABC Facebook page and have links to all the groups pages in my favorites. 
This is Dave T. Jr from FB group.


----------



## PA_Farmer24

not knowing a whole lot about how the classifications on chicken breeds work, I would assume that if and as long as the breeder was breeding two birds that met the SoP then they would be purebreed birds and any off spring would be classed that way as well. So in my mind for chickens standard breed and purebreed is the same thing. 

Dave T Jr.


----------



## Shumaker

PA_Farmer24 said:


> Shumaker I am already on the ABC Facebook page and have links to all the groups pages in my favorites.
> This is Dave T. Jr from FB group.


Yep, I know that and we are glad to have to apart of the madness!


----------



## Shumaker

PA_Farmer24 said:


> not knowing a whole lot about how the classifications on chicken breeds work, I would assume that if and as long as the breeder was breeding two birds that met the SoP then they would be purebreed birds and any off spring would be classed that way as well. So in my mind for chickens standard breed and purebreed is the same thing.
> 
> Dave T Jr.


That was my first thoughts as well Dave. But if you think about it........a "purebred" doesn't always meet the standard description provided for the breed. That is the only difference I see.


----------



## PA_Farmer24

Joe then my opinion is that the system is broken on either side. Not sure where the fix would be needed. I would have to guess that it would be with the SoP to align with what is going on with true breeders who are looking out for the best of a breed and not the backyard breeders who thinks they know everything but really don't. 

My thinking would be that breeders who are recognized by their parent group (ABC or the other(s)) we come together with their respective groups and others from the poultry industry to form a committee for each breed and they are the ones who develop the SoP for each of their breeds. Then it is passed by the APA as the governing body. 

I have to assume that there is such a process that I'm talking about and this how it's done. 


Dave T Jr.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> Ok....I'm going to play devil's advocate. Let's now incorporate the rediculous ideology of strians and line's into that description Jeff. Since many of today's individual strains don't necessarily comply to your "standard bred" definition as well as, the "pure bred" defintion either (several have other breeds more recently introduced i.e....Brown with cornish, ALBC with brookstock incorporating birds that had RIR (explains the lack of undercolor, light overall body color, and intermittent single combs)); *What in your opinion is the current status of the recovery of the breed and are there many decent places to acquire true "pure bred" buckeyes?* The Brown line and the ALBC line appear to be in many of todays flocks. The older Urch birds? The more recent line of Urch birds have the ALBC line in them....with that knowledge; has the Urch line lost some of it's "unique" qualities?


Joe, it is my opinion that far too many people toss around terminolgy without giving it much thought....take the whole "heritage" chicken nonsense for example! To answer your question, and again this is simply my opinion but I believe that while Buckeye numbers have increased the overall quality of the breed has suffered. Primarily, this is due to the lack of experienced breeders attempting to "keep" them! All three of the lines you mentioned and not really lines at all these days....it has been my understanding that both Mr. Urch and Mr. Brown have been "rebuilding" so their "new" fowl are not the same as their "old" (10-12 years ago). The ALBC Buckeyes are so scattered in terms of quality, confirmation and color its had to call them a line or strain at all except in name only! When someone sends me a photo of a really bad Buckeye it isn't difficult to determine it's origin was from an "ALBC" propagator. As far as purebred Buckeyes are concerned I can't speak for any other breeders but I personally have a 100% purebred flock that goes back to 2002....over a decade and I'm still not 100% satisfied with them! There are a few other folks, like yourself, who are producing some very good purebred and standard bred Buckeyes but it seems many of the ol timers are dying off every year. Since I started with Buckeyes we lost the "original" Rhodes, Urch, Brown, Pearce, Romig and Pierce lines....some of these guys might still be with us but their no longer producing what they used to and the Buckeye might just be in worst shape today than any other time in our breeds history.


----------



## Shumaker

The system isn't broken Dave, we just need to futher expose the peddlers just trying to make "buckeye-like" birds and slapping the buckeye name on them. It's no secret, the SOP does need to be better defined, it's only been roughly 110 years. The idea of people getting together to work on the breed is a keen idea but in reality there is a "cracker-jack" crew that will oppose anything suggested to ensure their birds fit the broad standard color description. It would be great to better define the standard to fit Nettie's writings, especially in the color description. Eveything else is pretty much agreed apon. The main focal points are the color in the wings, body, undercolor, and tail. The ABC feels that a darker maghogany color should be utilized but not as dark as the current appropriate RIR color. The buckeyes sheen alone would make them stand out in comparison. But truth be told, many of todays buckeyes don't have this color; let alone the sheen to go with it. This goes hand in hand with what Jeff mentioned above.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

PA_Farmer24 said:


> Joe then my opinion is that the system is broken on either side. Not sure where the fix would be needed. I would have to guess that it would be with the SoP to align with what is going on with true breeders who are looking out for the best of a breed and not the backyard breeders who thinks they know everything but really don't.
> 
> My thinking would be that breeders who are recognized by their parent group (ABC or the other(s)) we come together with their respective groups and others from the poultry industry to form a committee for each breed and they are the ones who develop the SoP for each of their breeds. Then it is passed by the APA as the governing body.
> 
> I have to assume that there is such a process that I'm talking about and this how it's done.
> 
> Dave T Jr.


Dave, I tend to agree with Joe....the Standard has been changed slightly over the last 100+ years but mostly in the realm of feather color and undercolor to some extent. Like Joe said, we should be looking toward the original vision that Nettie Metcalf put forth and that was a Buckeye of much darker mahogany color. However, color is small potatoes when one considers the Buckeyes over all shape or type. Exhibitors of Buckeyes are NOT always getting something as simple as the "back angle" correct....many have little if any slope in the back like the SoP states! We can't always blame judges if every Buckeye in a show has a flat back guess what??? Best of Breed will be awarded to a Buckeye with a flat back and if the system is broken this is where it fails ALL breeds!!! Judges have told me they compare all the birds of that breed to one another and use the SoP as a "rough guide" but it seems some of these shows are really more of a beauty contest between individual birds not to a Standard. Not all shows are done this way but it seems more and more these days are going in this direction so the end result is Buckeyes being bred to look like a "show winner" and NOT to look like a true "standard bred" Buckeye!


----------



## PA_Farmer24

Thanks for your input. Dully noted.


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Judges have told me they compare all the birds of that breed to one another and use the SoP as a "rough guide" but it seems some of these shows are really more of a beauty contest between individual birds not to a Standard. Not all shows are done this way but it seems more and more these days are going in this direction so the end result is Buckeyes being bred to look like a "show winner" and NOT to look like a true "standard bred" Buckeye!


That is a very true statement. That is why I take what most judges say with a grain of salt. However, there are a few out there that really do understand what the buckeye should look like. For the most part, you would be amazed to how ignorant many judges are in understanding the breed. One trend that I've noticed is how size of poultry in general has been ignored. Lately it seems that no matter what the bird looks like, the biggest bird (even if the birds readily tops 9 lbs) gets the most attention. The comb and wattles could be to large, back angle wrong, tail wrong, color wrong...but the bird will still win out. When that happens, it doesn't say much for the understanding of the breed from the judge. In general this is a problem for all breeds of poultry, I guess size matters?!?!?!


----------



## Riverdale

Jeff, drop me a PM. I am trying to reach a local breeder for chicks (not until March). If I get a good 'bator (see da thread ), I would not be adverse to adding a few more chooks


----------



## Shumaker

Here is one of our nice, dark cockerels we raised this past year. The sheen alone should seperate this breed from having the color appearance of a RIR.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> Here is one of our nice, dark cockerels we raised this past year. The sheen alone should seperate this breed from having the color appearance of a RIR.


Just can't seem to get them any DARKER, Joe?!?!


----------



## Shumaker

What ever do you mean? Give me at least 3 years.......isn't that the amount of time to get birds darker? Sure...............Below is a couple other examples selected from a generalized google image search.......in reference to color which one would you rather raise? It's clear which one is a "true" buckeye referencing Nettie's writings. The answer is pretty simple. Look at the overall color uniformity, depth color, and quality of sheen in comparison to the picture above or any other I've posted. People have got to start paying attention to the quality of birds placed in brood pens!


----------



## borion

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Just can't seem to get them any DARKER, Joe?!?!


I marveled at how dark the little guy is. He is a beauty! My buckeyes are very skittish. More than my other hens. Is this normal. They have been this way since they were chicks.


----------



## Shumaker

borion said:


> I marveled at how dark the little guy is. He is a beauty! My buckeyes are very skittish. More than my other hens. Is this normal. They have been this way since they were chicks.


Thanks Borion.....Generally, buckeyes shouldn't be all that skittish unless they have had a tramatic experience (tried to be eaten by a critter) or they are a result of less than desired breeding. My buckeyes are always under my feet when they are young (unless I have a net). When mature, they all tend to be very friendly, the males will just stand there and let you pick them up. I have a couple males that will walk over to you so you can pick them up.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

borion said:


> I marveled at how dark the little guy is. He is a beauty! My buckeyes are very skittish. More than my other hens. Is this normal. They have been this way since they were chicks.


Not typical of Buckeyes, Borion?!?! I've been raising Buckeyes since 2002 and have NEVER had a "skittish" one?!?! In fact, you are the first person I've ever heard say this about Buckeyes?!?! Mine are the exact opposite....they come running when they see a human and are always under foot, very friendly and easy to handle even for kids!!!


----------



## borion

Shumaker said:


> Thanks Borion.....Generally, buckeyes shouldn't be all that skittish unless they have had a tramatic experience (tried to be eaten by a critter) or they are a result of less than desired breeding. My buckeyes are always under my feet when they are young (unless I have a net). When mature, they all tend to be very friendly, the males will just stand there and let you pick them up. I have a couple males that will walk over to you so you can pick them up.


Holy cow. Mine could not be more opposite. And I have had to put my roo in his place on more than one occasion. I got them from a hatchery, so they may not be the very best of the breed. I love them anyway!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> What ever do you mean? .....in reference to color which one would you rather raise? It's clear which one is a "true" buckeye referencing Nettie's writings. The answer is pretty simple. Look at the overall color uniformity, depth color, and quality of sheen in comparison to the picture above or any other I've posted. People have got to start paying attention to the quality of birds placed in brood pens!


Like your Buckeyes mine tend to be on the "dark side"....you sure found a lot of "orange" Buckeye pics on the interweb!!! Maybe those are ALL "Heritage Buckeyes" and properly "Certified", too?!?!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

borion said:


> Holy cow. Mine could not be more opposite. And I have had to put my roo in his place on more than one occasion.* I got them from a hatchery, so they may not be the very best of the breed.* I love them anyway!


Might be because they are "hatchery stock"?!?!?

Good news is you can find a reputable Buckeye Breeder at the ABC website and get a fresh new start in 2013!!!


----------



## borion

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Might be because they are "hatchery stock"?!?!?
> 
> Good news is you can find a reputable Buckeye Breeder at the ABC website and get a fresh new start in 2013!!!


Yep, I just might do that! I really enjoy the buckeyes and would like to be able to pick them up and hold them. Thanks


----------



## Shumaker

borion said:


> Holy cow. Mine could not be more opposite. And I have had to put my roo in his place on more than one occasion. I got them from a hatchery, so they may not be the very best of the breed. I love them anyway!


If that is the case, it's almost a sure thing that breeding and poor breeding stock is to blame for making them skittish.


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Like your Buckeyes mine tend to be on the "dark side"....you sure found a lot of "orange" Buckeye pics on the interweb!!! Maybe those are ALL "Heritage Buckeyes" and properly "Certified", too?!?!


I wouldn't doubt it Jeff, I'd also bet a silver dollar that they have ALBC origins. The last picture has white in one of his streamers......I feel for the poor sap who was cursed with that bird......look at how dull he looks. I doubt very seriously that bird has one drip of undercolor. The sad thing is there are those out there that think this is the "correct" color for this family. Those birds have the exact same appearance as the RIR from the early 1900s (that's based on photos from that period, clearly I'm not old enough to have been there). Just further proof that you REALLY need to pay attention to whom your birds come from.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> I wouldn't doubt it Jeff, I'd also bet a silver dollar that they have ALBC origins. The last picture has white in one of his streamers......I feel for the poor sap who was cursed with that bird......look at how dull he looks. I doubt very seriously that bird has one drip of undercolor. The sad thing is there are those out there that think this is the "correct" color for this family. Those birds have the exact same appearance as the RIR from the early 1900s (that's based on photos from that period, clearly I'm not old enough to have been there). *Just further proof that you REALLY need to pay attention to whom your birds come from*.


Absolutely, Joe and this is the most difficult thing for some folks to grasp! Especially those who buy chickens for a "hatchery"....most birds that come from a hatchery are NOT bred to the STANDARD so they don't always have the right shape, type or color for the breed they are supposed to be. It's NOT that much more expensive to buy quality from a reputable breeder and guess what??? A top quality "standard bred" Buckeye doesn't eat any more than a hatchery or "utility grade" Buckeye!!!


----------



## borion

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Absolutely, Joe and this is the most difficult thing for some folks to grasp! Especially those who buy chickens for a "hatchery"....most birds that come from a hatchery are NOT bred to the STANDARD so they don't always have the right shape, type or color for the breed they are supposed to be. It's NOT that much more expensive to buy quality from a reputable breeder and guess what??? A top quality "standard bred" Buckeye doesn't eat any more than a hatchery or "utility grade" Buckeye!!!


I have enjoyed following you guys. Just a comment. I got my first chickens last spring. I can honestly say I had no earthly idea there were so many SERIOUS chicken people out there and certainly had no ideas regarding breeders vs. hatchery chicks. Hence, I ordered all mine from a hatchery. Horrors of horrors! I now know better, but how is a new chicken person to know? It never even occurred to me to search the net for Buckeye breeders. Again, you guys are teaching me a lot. Keep it up!

I have family in Ohio and go there once every year or so. Maybe I could just pick up my next chicks. Where are you?


----------



## Shumaker

borion said:


> I have enjoyed following you guys. Just a comment. I got my first chickens last spring. I can honestly say I had no earthly idea there were so many SERIOUS chicken people out there and certainly had no ideas regarding breeders vs. hatchery chicks. Hence, I ordered all mine from a hatchery. Horrors of horrors! I now know better, but how is a new chicken person to know? It never even occurred to me to search the net for Buckeye breeders. Again, you guys are teaching me a lot. Keep it up!
> 
> I have family in Ohio and go there once every year or so. Maybe I could just pick up my next chicks. Where are you?


Glad we could be of help to you or at least decent entertainment. I'm just half way serious Borion . There are people out there that take this stuff pretty personal. I may sound like I'm serious, but I just like to hammer on the peddlers that try to pass "buckeye-like" birds off as actual buckeyes. In doing so, I'm sure people are learning or at least the bare minimum realizing there is a difference in all breeds and to make sure to pay attention! When contacting breeders, the real ones won't make excuses...so if you get one that likes to make excuses on anything (especially appearance!)...pass them on by. Be sure to ask questions regarding the future breeding of what you get and ask them to recommend how to breed the birds you recieve. A true breeder will know what you are asking and provide beneficial information. In my mind, anything less is unacceptable. Beginners usually have to learn the hard way, but it's important to learn from it. Hatcheries are in it for $$$$ and most breeders are in it for the birds more so than the $$$$ unless you bump into a peddler and it's right back to the hatchery scenario (they just mask it better). There are a few buckeye peddlers so do your homework. On the flip side, you can learn proper or at least more sufficient husbandry techniques while raising the hatchery birds so when you get better stock you have an idea of how to better care for them.....so it's not a total bust. Always try to find the good side of any situation. Hang in there and have fun with it!


----------



## PA_Farmer24

borion said:


> I have enjoyed following you guys. Just a comment. I got my first chickens last spring. I can honestly say I had no earthly idea there were so many SERIOUS chicken people out there and certainly had no ideas regarding breeders vs. hatchery chicks. Hence, I ordered all mine from a hatchery. Horrors of horrors! I now know better, but how is a new chicken person to know? It never even occurred to me to search the net for Buckeye breeders. Again, you guys are teaching me a lot. Keep it up!
> 
> I have family in Ohio and go there once every year or so. Maybe I could just pick up my next chicks. Where are you?


Borion, I can say that I understand where you are coming from. Not knowing what to look for and how to approach buyng chickens. I too am new to this and currently don't own any as well. I am doing my research slowly and learning as much as I can on many areas before jumping into buying any chicks or starter birds. I have a few breeds that I would like to raise for both eggs and meat, but I want to do things right. At least in my eyes right. So like I stated before doing it very slowly. I found the ABC group on Facebook and requested to join there. Since then I have learn more than anyother group on FB. I find that yes there are many types of chicken breeders, small hobbie farms, back yard flocks. But in the end we have to do the home work and come up with a goal for what yo want out of yoru flock. Mine is a good bird that will produce good eggs and meat qualities. I am not into showing so the flashiness I don't need but I want to also have a bird that will meet or at least represent the SoP as best as possible. It's only fair to the bird.


----------



## borion

Shumaker said:


> Glad we could be of help to you or at least decent entertainment. I'm just half way serious Borion . There are people out there that take this stuff pretty personal. I may sound like I'm serious, but I just like to hammer on the peddlers that try to pass "buckeye-like" birds off as actual buckeyes. In doing so, I'm sure people are learning or at least the bare minimum realizing there is a difference in all breeds and to make sure to pay attention! When contacting breeders, the real ones won't make excuses...so if you get one that likes to make excuses on anything (especially appearance!)...pass them on by. Be sure to ask questions regarding the future breeding of what you get and ask them to recommend how to breed the birds you recieve. A true breeder will know what you are asking and provide beneficial information. In my mind, anything less is unacceptable. Beginners usually have to learn the hard way, but it's important to learn from it. Hatcheries are in it for $$$$ and most breeders are in it for the birds more so than the $$$$ unless you bump into a peddler and it's right back to the hatchery scenario (they just mask it better). There are a few buckeye peddlers so do your homework. On the flip side, you can learn proper or at least more sufficient husbandry techniques while raising the hatchery birds so when you get better stock you have an idea of how to better care for them.....so it's not a total bust. Always try to find the good side of any situation. Hang in there and have fun with it!


It was a balmy 37 degrees today so spent the day with the critters. Thought I'd sent pic of my buckeyes.


----------



## Shumaker

Thanks for sharing.......good luck with them


----------



## Shumaker

I was surfing the net today scanning various information regarding buckeye chickens and I happened to cross the ALBC website. What I found was interesting; according to the site and I quote "ALBC staff member Jeannette Beranger and former staffer Don Schrider developed a master breeder program for Buckeye chickens that has set the gold standard for expansion and selection of rare chicken breeds." Developed a Master Breeder program for Buckeye chickens that has set the GOLD standard for expansion&#8230;&#8230;..when? They certainly have the expansion part correct, but I've never witnessed in person or photograph any ALBC birds thatwould even be close to being in master breeders program. To date, there is NO buckeye master breeders. No one has achieved this honor according to the APA, however there are those that would lead you to believe that Mr. Schrider was a Master Breeder of buckeyes and you can read this for yourself within basic internet searches, but rest assured this is not the case. Why would such a thing be written if it wasn't the case? &#8230;&#8230;To pat themselves on the back and make what they have actually done out to be more than it should. The underlying motive is probably to better market the birds.

The only ALBC birds that are photographed are the ones that unknowing backyard enthusiasts obtain and share.Based on this alone would illustrate a very low bar is being set for standard within the selection of ALBC brood pens. They tend to hang their hat on being able to increase the overall size of the birds by a pound or so with a couple years. But in reality, it is not all that difficult if you hatch the birds early to give them time to grow during the growing season and continually pick the larger/wider birds to breed&#8230;.the main draw-back from that is a significant reduction in egg production.

The real issue I've noticed within the buckeye world is the lack of uniformity with all of the various "strains" (I guess that is what they are considered). You can go to any poultry show and if several breeders are there, the overall traits are widespread. This can even be said within a single breeders flock. Variations include the size of the head, size of the comb,variations in stance/station, length/width of the birds, color, length of tails and carriage of the tails. The ALBC "strain" has multiple differences in every trait I mentioned. I've only witnessed a couple "pure" ALBC birds. Both had multiple variations. I've also seen many crosses to other "strains" (or so they are called). One very common cross is to the Brown/Canadian "Strain" (which I find a bit misleading because Mr. Brown never admitting released his birds to many of the breeders claiming to have them???). Furthermore, I debunked this whole idea of Mr. Brown getting birds from Canada several posts back. The birds actually came from a guy named Mr. Johns,who did get his birds from Mr. Brown. Different people select and breed birds differently so they can hardly be considered Mr. Brown's birds at this point. 

At any rate, the ALBC/Brown crosses are all over the place in traits from farm to farm, even within a single farm. Pictures can be looked up using internet search engines, you can see this first hand. There is a farm out inthe midwest that has had some success showing buckeyes, the variations in the champion pictures are plentiful&#8230;look at the station, tails, color, heads, and combs&#8230;.each bird is different. I'm very sure they are all nice birds, but UNIFORMITY is a problem. I believe that this comes from the ALBC side more than anything.

With that being said, there are no perfect buckeyes, just like any other breed of poultry. My goal is not to discredit anyones birds, but rather help potential future enthusiasts realize the differences in the breed and to help them better understand the importance of getting sufficient broodstock they would be proud of. Times are tough, money is hard to come by and you has a buyer should be proud of / happy with what you spend it on. What I'm trying to say is when selecting a breeder to buy birds from, make sure you look at the flock in person or at least see pictures. If there is a lack of uniformity, what would make you think you would not have the same problem? Just because the breeder flashes an old "strain's" (like Urch or Rhodes or Braden) name doesn't make the birds any better that what they are. Remember you are buying the birds for what they are and not the name associated with them. 

Throughout the next few days (maybe longer), I'd like to bring up some of the older strains and talk about them. It should be an interesting conversation for those who choose to participate.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

borion said:


> I have enjoyed following you guys. Just a comment. I got my first chickens last spring. I can honestly say I had no earthly idea there were so many SERIOUS chicken people out there and certainly had no ideas regarding breeders vs. hatchery chicks. Hence, I ordered all mine from a hatchery. Horrors of horrors! I now know better, *but how is a new chicken person to know? It never even occurred to me to search the net for Buckeye breeders. Again, you guys are teaching me a lot. Keep it up!*
> 
> I have family in Ohio and go there once every year or so. Maybe I could just pick up my next chicks. *Where are you*?


Borion, you are NOT alone and my guess is 90% of the folks who buy chickens start with hatchery stock or birds from a feed mill (also hatchery stock typically). Over at the ABC, we don't knock the hatcheries when it comes to Buckeyes because we see them as serving a purpose....lots of folks just want to buy cheap replacement chicks or "utility grade" birds each year for meat or eggs. Dedicated Buckeye breeders generally work toward breeding to the "standard" (APA SoP) or improving on traits like egg production or meat quality....yes, generally Buckeyes from a reputable breeder will produce more eggs and meat than hatchery stock! So when you hear someone say buying "cheaper" stock isn't always money well spent this is what they typically mean. As hard as clubs like the ABC try we can't reach everyone nor could we as Buckeye breeders keep up with the demand for day old chicks and/or hatching eggs. Generally, when someone finds a breed they love they begin "researching" and thru the internet or forums they find a breed club! Both Shumaker Farm (Joe) and I are located in SW Ohio (Dayton/Cincinnati area) and speaking for myself you are welcome to contact me anytime you are going to be in this part of Ohio. We also recommend the ABC Breeder's directory but keep in mind we know a lot of folks ALL over the USA that have and sell Buckeyes that may not be listed in the "directory". However, the ABC Buckeye Directory is a GREAT place to start!


----------



## borion

Interesting. So, who, exactly, decides what the standard is? If I were to get serious in breeding chickens, which I'm not, where would I find the standards that would define the perfect buckeye, or any other breed? I just have chickens for fun, but I do show my goats, so who knows? Perhaps I might start attending some chicken events.


----------



## Shumaker

The APA ultimately decides what the standard is for each breed.....all in are a book "The standard of perfection" or SOP. With that being said, it's up to "qualified/certified" judges to interpret how the SOP reads. That in itself is much easier said than down because each judge has it in their minds what a breed should look like and that gets worse when a judge has a specific breed they are raising. They tend to judge the birds on how they are breeding their own birds rather than what the SOP states. I've seen this done before with buckeyes, New Hampshires, White Rocks and Wyandottes and a few others. Not only that, but they will also favor the breeds they raise. It's not their fault personally, I chalk it up to human nature. Then...you have breed clubs churping in the ears of judges that a specific breed "should look like this" and that further sways the decision of a judge (there is another club closely related to buckeyes that likes to do that). Other than that, judging is pretty straight forward in most cases, but the buckeye description is a fair one in respects to Nettie Metcalf's (the breed originator) description with the exception of color. The color listed in the SOP is very broad and much lighter than Nettie's intentions from her writings. That is why you see the variations in birds now days. Unfortunately, I doubt anything will ever be done about it.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

borion said:


> Interesting. *So, who, exactly, decides what the standard is?* If I were to get serious in breeding chickens, which I'm not, *where would I find the standards that would define the perfect buckeye, or any other breed?* I just have chickens for fun, but I do show my goats, so who knows? Perhaps I might start attending some chicken events.


Borion, as Joe pointed out the American Poultry Associaton (APA) publishes a book called "The Standard of Perfection" (we often call it the SoP) and it covers ALL the breeds that are accepted by the APA! The Buckeye was accepted by the APA in 1904 but was not printed in the SoP until the 1905 edition was released. Not all breeds are in the SoP, some have British (UK) standards and may not appear in the APA's SoP. You can find copies of the APA SoP online at Amazon or the APA's website generally.

With respect to the Buckeye the American Buckeye Club (ABC) has taken some of the guess work out of the SoP for you at our website. The page we call "Understanding the SoP" gives you the Buckeye standard in detail and the ABC goes a step beyond by offering you photo's of what to look for in your birds! As Joe pointed out APA judges (and breeders) can read the standard very differently so it helps to have the photo's that we provide in our website to guide you. The SoP does NOT offer this level of guidance it mearly says things like, "pea comb medium in size"....so you might ask "what the heck is medium in size?"....we attempt to answer this with photos at the ABC website. To our knowledge the ABC website is the ONLY breed club website that offers a guide of this type for ANY breed, too!!!

BTW - How did you find the hatchery that you purchased your Buckeyes from last year??? (Google search, Print Advertisement, Cataloge, other???)


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> I was surfing the net today scanning various information regarding buckeye chickens and I happened to cross the ALBC website. What I found was interesting; according to the site and I quote "ALBC staff member Jeannette Beranger and former staffer Don Schrider developed a master breeder program for Buckeye chickens that has set the gold standard for expansion and selection of rare chicken breeds." Developed a Master Breeder program for Buckeye chickens that has set the GOLD standard for expansion&#8230;&#8230;..when? They certainly have the expansion part correct, but I've never witnessed in person or photograph any ALBC birds thatwould even be close to being in master breeders program. *To date, there is NO buckeye master breeders.* *No one has achieved this honor according to the APA,* however there are those that would lead you to believe that Mr. Schrider was a Master Breeder of buckeyes and you can read this for yourself within basic internet searches, but rest assured this is not the case. Why would such a thing be written if it wasn't the case? &#8230;&#8230;To pat themselves on the back and make what they have actually done out to be more than it should. The underlying motive is probably to better market the birds.
> 
> The only ALBC birds that are photographed are the ones that unknowing backyard enthusiasts obtain and share.Based on this alone would illustrate a very low bar is being set for standard within the selection of ALBC brood pens. They tend to hang their hat on being able to increase the overall size of the birds by a pound or so with a couple years. But in reality, it is not all that difficult if you hatch the birds early to give them time to grow during the growing season and continually pick the larger/wider birds to breed&#8230;.the main draw-back from that is a significant reduction in egg production.
> 
> The real issue I've noticed within the buckeye world is the lack of uniformity with all of the *various "strains" (I guess that is what they are considered).* You can go to any poultry show and if several breeders are there, the overall traits are widespread. This can even be said within a single breeders flock. Variations include the size of the head, size of the comb,variations in stance/station, length/width of the birds, color, length of tails and carriage of the tails. The ALBC "strain" has multiple differences in every trait I mentioned. I've only witnessed a couple "pure" ALBC birds. Both had multiple variations. I've also seen many crosses to other "strains" (or so they are called). One very common cross is to the Brown/Canadian "Strain" (which I find a bit misleading because Mr. Brown never admitting released his birds to many of the breeders claiming to have them???). *Furthermore, I debunked this whole idea of Mr. Brown getting birds from Canada several posts back*. The birds actually came from a guy named Mr. Johns,who did get his birds from Mr. Brown. Different people select and breed birds differently so they can hardly be considered Mr. Brown's birds at this point.
> 
> At any rate, the ALBC/Brown crosses are all over the place in traits from farm to farm, even within a single farm. Pictures can be looked up using internet search engines, you can see this first hand. There is a farm out inthe midwest that has had some success showing buckeyes, the variations in the champion pictures are plentiful&#8230;look at the station, tails, color, heads, and combs&#8230;.each bird is different. I'm very sure they are all nice birds, *but UNIFORMITY is a problem*. I believe that this comes from the ALBC side more than anything.
> 
> With that being said, *there are no perfect buckeyes*, just like any other breed of poultry. My goal is not to discredit anyones birds.........


As Joe clearly points out there is a lot of inaccurate information about the Buckeye, lines and breeders out there on the "interweb" and many forums. It's very easy to verify thru the American Poultry Association (APA) who the Master Breeders of ANY breed actually are and again Joe makes a valid point....."there are NO Master Breeders of Buckeyes at this time"!!! I'm NOT sure if this is an attempt to intentionally mislead folks or is an error on the part of the person who wrote this at the ALBC website. However, I have seen this same thing as part of Mr. Schrider's bio at the Omega Fields website, too. http://www.omegafields.com/spokespeople/don-schrider

With respect to variation and the topic of "strains".....the ALBC created their own definition of the term "strain" and they don't use the same definition used by the American Poultry Association (APA). Much like they created a defintion for the word "Heritage" as it relates to turkeys and chickens but that's another story entirely. Given it takes several years to truely perfect a strain the ALBC began calling their two-way Buckeye crosses by the term "ALBC strain" as early as 2007, less than 2 years into their little Buckeye project! Furthermore, they have so many people "attempting" to breed Buckeyes in NC it should NOT be a surprise that they have such wide variation in terms of shape, size, comb or color!

Finally, I also agree there are no perfect Buckeyes nor are there any perfect lines or families these days. Old timers like Mr. Urch, Mr. Rhodes and Mr. Brown have NOT maintained their families of birds over the last decade and NONE of these lines are what they were 12-15 years ago! There was technically NEVER a real "Braden" line unless you consider crossing hatchery stock and then dumping them at an auction a breeding program?!?! Joe of Shumaker Farm's makes a very compelling arguement that prospective Buckeye buyers should consider the source of their stock prior to buying and just because someone is "selling" a particular line or strain or family doesn't mean that's what you are getting!!!


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> There was technically NEVER a real "Braden" line unless you consider crossing hatchery stock and then dumping them at an auction a breeding program?!?!


That is an interesting piece of information Jeff, interesting because there is a gentleman over at some Heritage Poultry group claiming to have Braden birds...he's made a You Tube video I beleive...he actually holds them in pretty high regards as being some of the better buckeyes around. But unfortunately, he was negligent and the straight males were all killed off. From reading, he incorporated the Urch birds into them which is certainly not going to help them very much. So hatchery birds were all the Braden line was? Interesting.........that kind of shoots the idea of long linage right in the foot now doesn't it. That same heritage group had my name in something regarding buckeyes a while back and the information was incorrect, I contacted them to correct the misinformation and asked them not to associate my name with other people on that list. Upon further contact, I was told that they knew more about my birds that I did&#8230;&#8230;I found that humorous.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> That is an interesting piece of information Jeff, interesting because there is a gentleman over at some Heritage Poultry group claiming to have Braden birds...he's made a You Tube video I beleive...he actually holds them in pretty high regards as being some of the better buckeyes around. But unfortunately, he was negligent and the straight males were all killed off. From reading, he incorporated the Urch birds into them which is certainly not going to help them very much. *So hatchery birds were all the Braden line was?* Interesting.........that kind of shoots the idea of long linage right in the foot now doesn't it. That same heritage group had my name in something regarding buckeyes a while back and the information was incorrect, I contacted them to correct the misinformation and asked them not to associate my name with other people on that list. Upon further contact, I was told that they knew more about my birds that I did&#8230;&#8230;I found that humorous.


This information came directly from Mr. Braden himself in a correspondence between he and I in June or July 2008! He had gotten Buckeyes eggs from a guy in Maine of unknown origin, some chicks from Sandhill (a hatchery in Iowa) and later purchased some chicks from Ideal Hatchery in Texas. He also stated at that time he had sold some Buckeyes to Ideal Hatchery at one time but Ideal told me they got their birds from Sandhill and Duane Urch originally. The best cockerel that came from Ideal was then bred to Mr. Braden's "old line" which he claimed was suffering from leg problems and infertility (in 2007/2008).

The "boys" from that Heritage website who put that video together got some hatching eggs from Mr. Braden right before his Buckeye flock went to a poultry auction! Apparently they got an entirely different story from Mr. Braden (so they claim) and naturally they know more about Buckeyes than you or I and have run with that outlandish story of the so called Braden lines origins. There are a lot of folks trying to rewrite both the history of Buckeye "lines" and the Buckeye history for that matter and these people will come and go....most REAL poultrymen (and women) don't take them seriously anyway!!!


----------



## PA_Farmer24

I will throw a wrenchin the whole process!!!! When I get my birds and start to have chicks and then continue with the the breed I will then be out of what ever strain that I started with and will call mine "Braden Strain" as my son's name is Braden!!!!!! LMAO!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

PA_Farmer24 said:


> I will throw a wrenchin the whole process!!!! When I get my birds and start to have chicks and then continue with the the breed I will then be out of what ever strain that I started with and will call mine "Braden Strain" as my son's name is Braden!!!!!! LMAO!!!


That is a GREAT idea PA_Farmer!!!  Should get some people's panties in a wad if you do....


----------



## Shumaker

PA_Farmer24 said:


> I will throw a wrenchin the whole process!!!! When I get my birds and start to have chicks and then continue with the the breed I will then be out of what ever strain that I started with and will call mine "Braden Strain" as my son's name is Braden!!!!!! LMAO!!!


That's just it Dave, all they are is names and it would seem that names come very easily anymore. Who in god's green earth would ever name their buckeyes "mean as snakes" line.....are you kidding me? First off, this to me would be nothing more than a bunch of culls (unless someone is trying to be cute with a naming scheme), because buckeyes shouldn't be mean in the first place but yet there are those that keep this name around and I can't imagine who would possible breed them. Further proof that there are many out there that do not pay attention to what is in their brood pens.


----------



## Shumaker

Here is a video that I came across a couple days ago and a perfect example ofwhat I mentioned many...many times in my postings on this thread. Proper husbandry is so CRITICAL when raising poultry or any other type of livestock for that matter. Healthy parents generate healthy offsprings. The choices in food and environment have a tremendous impact on health. There are so many things in this video scream poor husbandry and shameful animal practices. 

I wonder if this man could cram anymore in that shed with no ventilation, I can only imagine the overwhelming stench of ammonia due to the feces. The water conditions are atroshish. Look at how filthy their bowls are. Would you want to drink out of them? Proper husbandry STARTS at ensuring clear, fresh water DAILY. It is noted that they are fed "sawdust" from the meat plant&#8230;..I wonder if e-coli is a problem?

The roosts were half full and there are way too many birds there than spaces for them to roost . Toward the end of the video, there are birds at the "water" trough with blue clips around their beaks. Those are anti-picking "glasses" to prevent birds from feather picking and cannibalism at the sight of blood. Overcrowding is one of the main causes feather picking. That in itself is further proof that they are WAY too overcrowded.

Here is a question; Would you buy chickens from someone who keeps their birds in such over-crowded filthy conditions? DO YOUR HOMEWORK AND BUY FROM RESPONSIBLE BREEDERS (for all breeds; not just buckeyes), also be sure to check the Better Business Bureau website. You would be amazed of how bad some business practices are. Save yourself the unwanted headache.

This video speaks volumes in the degree of mating practices to generate birds. It exposes and illustrates some very bad practices by someone who claims to be a breeder! To produce a healthy, strong, and vibrant flock, it is essential to understand the matings that have gone into producing offsprings so there is no risk of inbreeding or cross-breeding negative traits. With this specific example, the ability to control genetics is not possible; how would you ever be able to better the breed? There must be a dozen males in that pen mashed in with I can't tell you how many females. This is a clear example of a chicken peddler that cares more about making chicks and eggs to sell for $$$$$; rather than the health of the seed stock. It is also noted that these birds are "happy"....really?!?!?! If those are "happy", I wonder what a "sad" one has to live in? Give me a break! In addition, note that comments were disabled (and removed) for that video. I can't imagine why?


----------



## Energyvet

Pottingers cats. Enough said.


----------



## Shumaker

Energyvet said:


> Pottingers cats. Enough said.


Very interesting, I was unaware of that nutrition study. That is VERY intreguing.

"All four generations of the raw meat and raw milk groups remained healthy throughout their normal lifespans. The first generation of all three processed food groups developed diseases and illnesses near the end of their lives. The second generation of all three processed food groups developed diseases and illnesses in the middle of their lives. The third generation of all three processed food groups developed diseases and illnesses in the beginning of their lives and many died before six months of age. There was no fourth generation in any of the three processed food groups. Either the third generation parents were sterile or the fourth generation cats died before birth! Remember, all four generations of the raw food groups were healthy throughout their normal lifespans."

Now the study was applied to mammals, specifically felines. I wonder if it corrolates to fowl?


----------



## Energyvet

I'd bet my life on it. In fact I do every time I sit down to eat.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Energyvet said:


> Pottingers cats. Enough said.


Didn't Pottenger's cat study prove that "some raw meat" along with raw milk (unpasturized) was better than "cooked meat" or diets that contained "more raw meat" than milk???

It seems to me his research proved there was some "protein" benefit found in raw meat that was missing (amino acid) from the cooked meat and as a result today's cooked meat cat foods must contain taurine (the amino acid) to keep the cats healthy.

Yet, I remain confused by this post Energyvet....what does Pottenger or his Cats have to do with the Shumaker post?!?!?


----------



## Shumaker

Jeff, the connection is the ""sawdust" from the meat plant" in my previous post...I beleive. How future generations can suffer if a proper balanced diet is not utilized. That is my take from it. Hence my question....can it be applied to fowl? The idea is intregueing.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> Jeff, the connection is the *""sawdust" from the meat plant" in my previous post*...I beleive. How future generations can suffer if a proper balanced diet is not utilized. That is my take from it. Hence my question....can it be applied to fowl? The idea is intregueing.


WOW! I complete missed that from the video.....it is shocking to me that somesone selling Buckeyes on the internet would put a video like this on his website or post it on You Tube?!?!? Guess it goes to show you they know nothing about raising chickens nor have the common sense to "market" them!!! LOL 

Regarding the Pottenger's Cat study I still fail to see a connection to sawdust from a meat plant??? Since I don't have any experience with "meat plant sawdust" (I'm not even sure what it is exactly or why chickens would eat it???) I, like you, would be more concerned with disease or bacteria that my Buckeyes might eat but don't have enough knowledge on the material to make a SWAG as to its effects on poultry. Thanks for sharing this video and helping folks make better decisions when selecting breeders!


----------



## Shumaker

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Thanks for sharing this video and helping folks make better decisions when selecting breeders!


I'm the Bill O'Reilly of the Buckeye world. Just need some comedy relief guests from the "other" side to try and defend it now!


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

Shumaker said:


> I'm the Bill O'Reilly of the Buckeye world. Just need some comedy relief guests from the "other" side to try and defend it now!


Good luck with that comedy relief part. They want nothing to do with defending their positions to knowledgeble breeders. Only sheeple who take their word as gospel.


----------



## Energyvet

I just posted it because it was an interesting study on diet and nutrition. Quite a lot of people have never heard of it and so I suggested it. IMO everything is diet related.


----------



## Shumaker

Energyvet said:


> I just posted it because it was an interesting study on diet and nutrition. Quite a lot of people have never heard of it and so I suggested it. IMO everything is diet related.


I found it very interesting and something new to think about! Thanks for your input. Everything indeed is diet related in some shape, way or form!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Energyvet said:


> I just posted it because it was an interesting study on diet and nutrition. Quite a lot of people have never heard of it and so I suggested it. IMO *everything is diet related*.


I agree "Energyvet", diet is extremely important and we need to treat poultry like the critters they are! This is why I am NOT a big fan of the "organic" or "vegitarian" chicken feed we are seeing today. Chickens are NOT like people, just as cats are not people....if we took a group of cats and fed them nothing but veggies they would more than likely become very ill and die! If humans elect to be "vegans" that is none of my business, they can do whatever they choose and I support their right to be "vegan". However, when I can't find chicken feed with animal protein in it because someone thinks a chicken should be a "vegan" then I have a problem! In my opinion a growing chicken NEEDS the right amount plus the right kind of protein (aminal protein is different than plant protein) in order for proper bone and muscle growth. Just as Pottenger's Cat study we really need to be aware of what goes into our chickens....many of mine don't free range while growing up so they dont get the insects, mice or grubs that would benefit their growth. I rely on my chicken feed for the animal protein so I have had to resort to adding "fish food pellets" (fish meal) to my commercial chicken feeds.

Finally, for a variety of reasons I don't agree with adding dry cat or dog feed to my chickens diet because I (and others) eat the eggs and eat the chickens. Most dry cat and dog feeds contain ingredients that are not intended for human consuption so I simply wont feed them to the food I intend to eat either! Lots of folks on the internet disagree with my position and that's fine but I think they should be willing to fully disclose to their egg buying customers what they feed their eggs layers. Even the folks who have jumped on the "organic" band wagon talk openly on the internet about feeding dry cat food to their chickens at times?!?!? REALLY...how "organic" is that I ask?!?!? Anyway, your comments about "diet" is spot on and a very good one to discuss in my opinion!


----------



## Energyvet

I learned many years ago that the transit time in birds is much faster and the purity of dog or cat food is far less than it should be for feeding birds. That was pertaining to rescuing song birds or nurturing young parrots. So, we really shouldn't be feeding cat and dog foods to birds. 

People and animals have been living together for hundreds of years and suddenly we invent feed and we can't live without it?!? Nonsense.


----------



## Shumaker

energyvet said:


> so, we really shouldn't be feeding cat and dog foods to birds.
> 
> People and animals have been living together for hundreds of years and suddenly we invent feed and we can't live without it?!? Nonsense.


amen brother!


----------



## Shumaker

I would personally like to thank this website and the moderation group for allowing people to speak their minds and contribute to threads with honest feelings/opinions. This is truely a wonderful place to discuss poultry. Thank you very much!!!!!


----------



## Energyvet

Thank you for your participation, knowledge, experience and wisdom of all things Chicken. I'm so glad we became chicken friends! 

And I really like chicken land too!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Shumaker said:


> I would personally like to thank this website and the moderation group for allowing people to speak their minds and contribute to threads with honest feelings/opinions. This is truely a wonderful place to discuss poultry. Thank you very much!!!!!


Ditto!!! This is a GREAT place to share thoughts, ideas and opinions!!!


----------



## Bluerooster

I've found that chikins will eat just about anything that doesn't eat them first. 
That said, they'll eat things that are definately not good for them. But I don't think I've
had any come down sick from eating any of the strange stuff I've seen them eat.
But I'll not intentionally feed them any kind of food for dogs or cats. But I've seen the hens 
peckin' around in the dogs food bowl from time to time. 
I had a rooster kill a hawk once, and I caught him just as he was starting to devour the hawk. 
I was quite surprized at that, but I figured that it was a young hawk, and th' roo saw him commin'.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Bluerooster said:


> *I've found that chikins will eat just about anything that doesn't eat them first.*
> 
> That said, they'll eat things that are definately not good for them. But I don't think I've had any come down sick from eating any of the strange stuff I've seen them eat.....


I agree "bluerooster" chickens will eat just about anything....my point regarding NOT feeding dry cat or dog food to chickens was not so much about it harming the chicken. My point was I don't particularly want to eat eggs or chicken meat when that chicken has been eating dry cat or dog food.....since the pet food makers put "not safe for human consumption" on their cat and dog food I don't really want to eat eggs or meat that came from a bird who was eating that pet food!


----------



## borion

BuckeyeChickens said:


> I agree "bluerooster" chickens will eat just about anything....my point regarding NOT feeding dry cat or dog food to chickens was not so much about it harming the chicken. My point was I don't particularly want to eat eggs or chicken meat when that chicken has been eating dry cat or dog food.....since the pet food makers put "not safe for human consumption" on their cat and dog food I don't really want to eat eggs or meat that came from a bird who was eating that pet food!


I couldn't agree more. My hens have now begun to eat the poop from my guardian dog. Really wish I hadn't seen that.


----------



## RedBird

Energyvet said:


> People and animals have been living together for hundreds of years and suddenly we invent feed and we can't live without it?!? Nonsense.


Too true. I've fed my dog raw for 7 years now, and it's amazing the number of people that think a dog can't live without a bowl of kibble.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

borion said:


> I couldn't agree more. My hens have now begun to eat the poop from my guardian dog. *Really wish I hadn't seen that.*


LOL....Some things you just can't get out of your mind!!!


----------



## Marengoite

borion said:


> I couldn't agree more. My hens have now begun to eat the poop from my guardian dog. Really wish I hadn't seen that.


My brother-in-law commented one time last spring that he wouldn't mind having a rooster for his place and last summer while I was loading up cockerels for processing, one rogue missed his chance for a one way trip. He was over at my BIL's next door following around the horse and pony. He's stayed there ever since and occasionally my BIL will joke that "Bucky" enjoys the occasional hot meal.


----------



## Shumaker

Well, since we are talking about feed and tis the season for hatching and raising chicks; let's jump into what to feed baby buckeyes. There are ill-advised rumors floating around that high protein is the best way to feed young buckeyes. I see 3 problems with feeding high protein feeds to young poultry.Sure, it is well documented that the growth rate do increase and pretty rapidly, but what isn't visually witnessed is what long term effects feeding high protein does to them. Unless you are feeding them out to be Cornish X's (to which they are not) for rapid growth then slaughter, I would greatly recommend not feeding feeds that have protein contents of greater than 22% (really 20%) should work out just fine.

If we look closer at the meat production chickens, specifically Cornish Xs, the protein content is reduced to keep them as breeders. So why would we want to provide buckeyes with feeds that have high protein content if we are wanting to produce breeding and egg production stock? Feed manufactures (poultry scientists more likely) developed the formulas for most of the chicken feeds on the market today. They have done a lot of experimental trials and research to determine what a "balanced" feed would yield the best results for the different stages of growth for poultry. You have to remember, these are only chickens and not rocket science. 

Which brings to problem #1: If you're raising young pullets to become layers, you want them to grow slowly enough to develop good strong bones and to reach a normal body weight before they begin producing eggs. High-protein diets tend to hurry the birds into production before their bodies are quite ready. Therefore, the ration for growing pullets, from leaving the brooder at 6 weeks to about 14 weeks, should be about 18 percent protein. I've personally witnessed a few layers get too big too fast and have leg and joint problems from being fed high protein feed. Your laying hen only needs 16-18% protein and anything above that is a waste, both in the feed lot and your pocket book. 

Which runs right into problem #2: Proteincosts money and the higher protein feed is almost certain to be more expensive.Feeds that contain 30% protein is too high of protein for poultry and a waste of money just because they don't need that much protein. If you feed more protein than your chickens need, they will simply pass it out of their system.
 
Which ends us at problem #3: How they pass it out of their systems and problems that could result if it isn't passed due to a variety of reasons. I have read that high protein levels can contribute to gout or kidney damage in poultry. Feed containing 30% of protein or more causes uric acid production which in turn creates an excretory load on kidneys. In birds uric acid is the end product of nitrogen metabolism. Uric acid is a nitrogenous waste from protein breakdown and is produced mainly in the liver to which is excreted by the kidneys. High blood levels of uric acid favor its precipitation in tissues. Uric acid is not toxic but precipitated crystals can cause mechanical damage to tissues like kidneys, heart, lungs, intestines and also in the joints. These crystals severely damage body tissues. So Gout is a condition in which kidney function decreases to a point where uric acid accumulates in the blood and body fluids.

So to conclude; if you choose to feed your birds with feeds that have a high protein content, I think the folks recommending this course of action are uninformed.


----------



## Marengoite

Shumaker said:


> Well, since we are talking about feed and tis the season for hatching and raising chicks; let's jump into what to feed baby buckeyes. There are ill-advised rumors floating around that high protein is the best way to feed young buckeyes. I see 3 problems with feeding high protein feeds to young poultry.Sure, it is well documented that the growth rate do increase and pretty rapidly, but what isn't visually witnessed is what long term effects feeding high protein does to them. Unless you are feeding them out to be Cornish X's (to which they are not) for rapid growth then slaughter, I would greatly recommend not feeding feeds that have protein contents of greater than 22% (really 20%) should work out just fine.
> 
> If we look closer at the meat production chickens, specifically Cornish Xs, the protein content is reduced to keep them as breeders. So why would we want to provide buckeyes with feeds that have high protein content if we are wanting to produce breeding and egg production stock? Feed manufactures (poultry scientists more likely) developed the formulas for most of the chicken feeds on the market today. They have done a lot of experimental trials and research to determine what a "balanced" feed would yield the best results for the different stages of growth for poultry. You have to remember, these are only chickens and not rocket science.
> 
> Which brings to problem #1: If you're raising young pullets to become layers, you want them to grow slowly enough to develop good strong bones and to reach a normal body weight before they begin producing eggs. High-protein diets tend to hurry the birds into production before their bodies are quite ready. Therefore, the ration for growing pullets, from leaving the brooder at 6 weeks to about 14 weeks, should be about 18 percent protein. I've personally witnessed a few layers get too big too fast and have leg and joint problems from being fed high protein feed. Your laying hen only needs 16-18% protein and anything above that is a waste, both in the feed lot and your pocket book.
> 
> Which runs right into problem #2: Proteincosts money and the higher protein feed is almost certain to be more expensive.Feeds that contain 30% protein is too high of protein for poultry and a waste of money just because they don't need that much protein. If you feed more protein than your chickens need, they will simply pass it out of their system.
> 
> Which ends us at problem #3: How they pass it out of their systems and problems that could result if it isn't passed due to a variety of reasons. I have read that high protein levels can contribute to gout or kidney damage in poultry. Feed containing 30% of protein or more causes uric acid production which in turn creates an excretory load on kidneys. In birds uric acid is the end product of nitrogen metabolism. Uric acid is a nitrogenous waste from protein breakdown and is produced mainly in the liver to which is excreted by the kidneys. High blood levels of uric acid favor its precipitation in tissues. Uric acid is not toxic but precipitated crystals can cause mechanical damage to tissues like kidneys, heart, lungs, intestines and also in the joints. These crystals severely damage body tissues. So Gout is a condition in which kidney function decreases to a point where uric acid accumulates in the blood and body fluids.
> 
> So to conclude; if you choose to feed your birds with feeds that have a high protein content, I think the folks recommending this course of action are uninformed.


Now let me throw a monkey wrench in the discussion just for argument. I've been to more than my fair share of poultry clinics both at the state level and at the county level and have heard from The Experts (Read: Feed Dealers and Co-Op Reps who have "no vested interest" in providing wrong advice) to feed the CX broilers nothing but the bagged feed. They said the feed has been scientifically formulated to optimize production, blah, blah, and that if you let your chickens forage or eat table scraps it will actually inhibit their growth and they won't do well at the fair.

So let's turn this wisdom on its head and ask - does the high pro feed make a difference with free range birds? My Buckeyes are not like broilers and they won't camp out around the feeder waiting for me to dump the feed down their gullets. If I leave the pen open, they will spend 90% of their time eating grass (presumably low protein), my wife's flowers (low protein), various weeds, and lots of bugs and worms (obviously high protein). And that doesn't count any scratch I toss in the pen so they'll work the litter or clear out weeds from a particular spot or whatever.

So, I would grant your initial premise is true - a 100% diet of high-pro feed is likely not called for with respect to Buckeye chickens. A good way to check is to do a gas chromatograph reading of a stool sample to see what nitrogen compounds are making their way through the digestive system. Lots of complex amino acids means very little digestion and they're getting too much, while low molecular weight nitrogen compounds mean that the amino acids are getting broken down in the digestive tract. If you don't have a gas chromatograph handy (and I don't any more since I'm no longer working in the chemical industry), a simple sniff test will help. If the poo smells like ammonia, it's breaking down nicely. If it smells like White Castles the night after, then you have lots of amino acids making their way through. But why go to all that bother? I'd guess that you are absolutely correct. Hi-pro is not warranted.

But here's the kicker - what is the percentage of overall protein in the diet of ranging chickens? Additionally, if I blend my own mix - toss in cracked corn, some BOSS, and lots of table scraps and garden weeds - will that solve the problem?

And then here's the question - do we have a data table to use for Buckeyes and other similar dual-purpose fowl? Now THAT would be nice. Has anyone done that research? I would be happy to do it, but I don't have the yard set up for carefully controlled dietary studies. Anyone want to fund me?


----------



## Marengoite

So, here's another question - among free ranging birds, will they self-regulate protein intake and balance it with browse, bugs, and forage to achieve optimum growth instinctively?


----------



## Energyvet

Don't assume vegetable matter is always low protein. Green peas are very high in protein. And vegetable proteins work differently in body systems then animal based proteins. As an example, if you want to cause cancer in any animal or human then feed high animal proteins 30%. But feed that same animal 30 % plant based proteins and you have a different outcome. Generally bodies (all kinds) need about 11% protein to be healthy and productive. Young animals have higher calorie needs not protein needs.


----------



## Energyvet

And yes Maren. Animals will find what they need and nourish themselves appropriately. There have been studies done on bears where they will even medicate themselves with the appropriate herbs to treat diarrhea, parasites and other maladies.


----------



## Marengoite

Well, I hear vegans all the time going on about how veggie protein is just as healthy if not more healthy than animal protein. So it's good to hear an "it depends" answer. I'm guessing obligate carnivores like cats would not thrive on veggie protein (get's back to Pottinger again, doesn't it?) but omnivores might need a mix of both. And obviously cattle don't thrive on animal protein very well, especially if it's other cattle. Same with sheep. TSE seems to set in. 

So the question stands - If the high protein food is used, but mixed with grain and forage, will chickens self-regulate to the optimum level?


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> Now let me throw a monkey wrench in the discussion just for argument. I've been to more than my fair share of poultry clinics both at the state level and at the county level and have heard from The Experts (Read: Feed Dealers and Co-Op Reps who have "no vested interest" in providing wrong advice) to feed the CX broilers nothing but the bagged feed. They said *the feed has been scientifically formulated to optimize production, blah, blah, and that if you let your chickens forage or eat table scraps it will actually inhibit their growth and they won't do well at the fair.*
> 
> So let's turn this wisdom on its head and ask - does the high pro feed make a difference with free range birds? My Buckeyes are not like broilers and they won't camp out around the feeder waiting for me to dump the feed down their gullets. If I leave the pen open, they will spend 90% of their time eating grass (presumably low protein), my wife's flowers (low protein), various weeds, and lots of bugs and worms (obviously high protein). And that doesn't count any scratch I toss in the pen so they'll work the litter or clear out weeds from a particular spot or whatever.
> 
> So, I would grant your initial premise is true - a 100% diet of high-pro feed is likely not called for with respect to Buckeye chickens. A good way to check is to do a gas chromatograph reading of a stool sample to see what nitrogen compounds are making their way through the digestive system. Lots of complex amino acids means very little digestion and they're getting too much, while low molecular weight nitrogen compounds mean that the amino acids are getting broken down in the digestive tract. If you don't have a gas chromatograph handy (and I don't any more since I'm no longer working in the chemical industry), a simple sniff test will help. If the poo smells like ammonia, it's breaking down nicely. If it smells like White Castles the night after, then you have lots of amino acids making their way through. But why go to all that bother? I'd guess that you are absolutely correct. Hi-pro is not warranted.
> 
> But here's the kicker - *what is the percentage of overall protein in the diet of ranging chickens?* Additionally, if I blend my own mix - toss in cracked corn, some BOSS, and lots of table scraps and garden weeds - will that solve the problem?
> 
> And then here's the question - *do we have a data table to use for Buckeyes and other similar dual-purpose fowl?* Now THAT would be nice. *Has anyone done that research?* I would be happy to do it, but I don't have the yard set up for carefully controlled dietary studies. Anyone want to fund me?


Marengoite, I'm not going to address the Cornish/Rock or hybrid feed issue directly but what the feed producers say is accurate (based on my personal experience). When feeding a "complete feed" at X percentage of protein one will see optimum results in a CONTROLLED environment (no free ranging). This is true with Buckeyes and I suspect with any other breed of chicken for the most part. Personally, I wouldn't limit the thinking to simply the percentage of protein in the free ranging diet as your first question in bold above asks. What I have found when feeding my Buckeyes is consistancy GROWS the BIGGEST and FASTEST growing birds. If you turn them out to free range too early (lets say 6-8 weeks) they go thru a slow down in growth as a result in a change in diet and perhaps one could argue it's protein related but I don't believe that's the only reason!

I have conducted my own research (unscientific in nature but I used controls and collected data) with Buckeyes that were cooped and fed a commercial feed (containing animal protein) for 16 weeks, another group was given different brands of commercial feed (the same protein levels and some were plant protein only), another group was fed a mixture of commercial feed and table scraps and finally another group was turned out to free range at 6 weeks of age and given the same supplemental feed as the control group. Birds were weighed at 6, 8, 10, 12 14 and 16 weeks and all the birds evaluated were males. The results were interesting to say the least and none of the birds died (a good thing) during the evaluation. In my test the birds that were housed for 16 weeks and fed the same "locked" formulation of feed had the highest level of weight gain than any of the others and the birds given an inconsistant diet (changed brands weekly) of commercial feeds had the least amount of weight gain. More interesting was the other two groups, the 6 week old "free rangers" and the coop fed commercial feed and table scraps. Both groups were almost identical in terms of weight gain (somewhere between the control group and the "inconsistant" group) but they were lighter in weight than the control group! I expected different conclusions but my test proved the commercial boys were right.

I'm not sure my "data table" for the Buckeye feed test means a great deal because I suspect weather, location, type of soil, type of plants in my pasture (lots of clovers), even the bugs in my area vs another location would contribute to altering the results?!?!? Finally, I didn't test different levels of protein in this "evaluation" but I did conduct a lower protein vs high protein study once on Buckeyes and tend to agree with Joe....the higher protein feed didn't add much in terms of weight vs. cost to make it beneficial in the Buckeye diet. What I do see in my Buckeyes is by feeding a 22% chick feed until they reach 6-8 weeks of age tends to produce BIGGER bodies (muscle) and bones in my cockerels than if I switch to an 18% or 20% at say 4 weeks like a lot of folks do! Does a Buckeye need 28-30% protein like so many "interweb experts" claim they do for optimum growth??? Not in my opinion!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marengoite said:


> ....So the question stands - If the high protein food is used, but mixed with grain and forage, will chickens self-regulate to the optimum level?


I don't believe any domesticated animal or fowl can "self-regulate" their protein, coloric or fat levels when left to their own devices?!?!? Some one mentioned studies or research conducted on bears....scientist have witnessed bears pouring on the calories (and fat) prior to hibernation and this just seems to be instinctive, perhaps triggered by shorter hours of daylight and/or cooler weather. Mother nature is a wonderful thing and are always looking for ways to understand how she pulls off her magic!!!


----------



## Energyvet

I mentioned bears simply to point out that animals are selective in their eating. They've done similar studies with dogs. And I think that heavier birds might be the data as they were enclosed and only allowed pellets, however I won't assume a heavier bird is healthier or that their meat a better choice for me to consume. You could get more $ per pound like a producer wants, but is it better nutritionally? It's like the nutritional component of free range eggs and industrial farm eggs. Vastly different profile. I think you would find the same to be true if you compared bird to bird from your study.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Energyvet said:


> *I mentioned bears simply to point out that animals are selective in their eating.*


Yup, I completely understand and agree animals are very selective with respect to what they will eat or seek out to eat! I managed a 1300 acre land lease for over a decade and we practiced QDM (Quality Deer Management) to improve the deer herd. This required planting lots of different "food plots" and it was amazing how quickly the deer began using our food plots rather than eating twigs and leaves! However, when acorns were plentiful the deer left the food plots in search of these high protein treats. Yup, I agree, animals can be very selective!


----------



## Energyvet

Thank you. What am interesting story.


----------



## spatte68

Marengoite said:


> My brother-in-law commented one time last spring that he wouldn't mind having a rooster for his place and last summer while I was loading up cockerels for processing, one rogue missed his chance for a one way trip. He was over at my BIL's next door following around the horse and pony. He's stayed there ever since and occasionally my BIL will joke that "Bucky" enjoys the occasional hot meal.


My bucks love following the horses around. I imagine that helps with worm control for the horses since the bucks are gobbling down whatever they find in the hot meal.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

spatte68 said:


> My bucks love following the horses around. I imagine that helps with worm control for the horses since the bucks are gobbling down whatever they find in the hot meal.


See the same thing with the cattle and poultry....chickens love to scratch in a cow patty!!!


----------



## Energyvet

That's what he does in omnivores Dilema. The chicken tractor follows the cows around the different pasties every 3 days so they don't overgraze the land. And the chickens recycle the bovine waste. It's a beautiful picture of an ideal farm. That's my goal. To create something like that with my collective life's knowledge.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Energyvet said:


> That's what he does in omnivores Dilema. The chicken tractor follows the cows around the different pasties every 3 days so they don't overgraze the land. And the chickens recycle the bovine waste. It's a beautiful picture of an ideal farm. *That's my goal.* To create something like that with my collective life's knowledge.


Sounds like a reasonable goal to me!!!


----------



## viper1

*Confused*

Is Buckeye chickens a breed or Ohio growers?


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

viper1 said:


> Is Buckeye chickens a breed or Ohio growers?


Buckeyes are a breed of chicken that were developed by a woman in the 1890's who lived in Ohio! Here is a photo of a 4 time American Champion and his owner Ms. Shumaker of Shumaker Farms Poultry right here in Ohio;










You can see more pics and learn more about the breed by going to the website link in my signature below, too!


----------



## DarkRedBird

viper1 said:


> Is Buckeye chickens a breed or Ohio growers?


There are a lot of buckeye breeders and enthusiasts from right here in Ohio. I for one am all about raising as much of my own meat, vegetables, fruit, eggs, and anything else on my own terms. The buckeyes fit into my homestead plan perfectly. They are great for Ohio because of their pea combs and general cold heartiness. They also take the heat very well. Last summer with all of those near record temps, they were the only breed I have that were out and about during the middle of the day while my silkies were lounging in their shaded areas of the coop and my production red layers were hiding under the deck. And last week with highs in the single digits, the only birds in sight were the buckeyes who seem to love the extremes. Nothing like a white canvas with a dark mahoghany red bird hunting for grass that may have been left uncovered. That along with their deliscious flavor in both their eggs and meat make them my favorite breed. And their popping red feathers are a sight to see out in the yard. Very doscile, freindly, and instinctive nature as well.

Anything you want to talk about, fire away. Our group is knowledgable on about anything outside the city limits. And welcome to the buckeye page.


----------



## viper1

*ok*

Well I was told to look up the buckeye people and that they are into homesteading. Probably wrong forum.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

viper1 said:


> Well I was told to look up the buckeye people and that they are into homesteading. Probably wrong forum.


Generally speaking The American Buckeye Club could very well be the "buckeye people" and we have a very informative website/blog, a Facebook group, a Yahoo Group and a Google+ Community!!! Lots of "Buckeye people" (about 250) talk daily at the Facebook Group;

http://www.facebook.com/groups/buckeyechickens/

Many of these "Buckeye people" are into homesteading and building coops, tractors from recycled or repurposed materials. Some build their own incubators, waterers and feeders as well and share that information with the group!

The website is very informative with a Buckeye Breeders Directory to help folks locate Buckeye hatching eggs, day old chicks and adult Buckeyes for their farm or homestead.

http://www.americanbuckeyeclub.blogspot.com

Lot of folks here at the Chicken Forum are from Ohio and there are "Buckeye people" ALL over the USA....most of us just happen to own "Buckeye Chickens" and speak the "Buckeye language" because we are part of the "Buckeye Nation"!!! Hope you decide to join us Viper1 we would love to have you raising and breeding Buckeyes one day soon!


----------



## Energyvet

I sent him here. Please treat my new friend well.


----------



## Shumaker

You have to love illegitimate practices. If you are having problems selling your fowl for what they look like, you shouldn't use other peoples pictures!!! Always do your research before just buying eggs, chicks or birds from ANYBODY!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/12-Buckeye-...678?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item257a5d8eae


----------



## viper1

Shumaker said:


> You have to love illegitimate practices. If you are having problems selling your fowl for what they look like, you shouldn't use other peoples pictures!!! Always do your research before just buying eggs, chicks or birds from ANYBODY!
> 
> http://www.ebay.com/itm/12-Buckeye-...678?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item257a5d8eae


Well i dont under stand. How do you know thats not his chicken? I'm hoping to buy from a respectable dealer around her. Or online.
What do you all think of the chicks at the hardware and feed store?


----------



## Marengoite

viper1 said:


> Well i dont under stand. How do you know thats not his chicken? I'm hoping to buy from a respectable dealer around her. Or online.
> What do you all think of the chicks at the hardware and feed store?


Viper, Joe knows that doesn't belong to the seller because it's his chicken. LOL.

And yes, reputable sellers about. The best way to find a reputable seller is to check with customers and see if they're satisfied. I can vouch for Jeff as I've purchased from him and have raised a number of his birds all the way to the freezer. I plan on hatching out some chicks this spring from a trio I bought from him.

Joe is a good guy too, but he doesn't sell chicks or hatching eggs.

If you are going to buy from a hatchery, I would recommend that you buy local if you can. That way you get to meet the folks who are hatching the chicks and possibly get to see their operation. All the chicks and poults I bought last year I picked up. Sure, it cost me some gas, but I wanted to see what the operations looked like.

Also, the value of hatchery chicks is dependent on your goals. If all you want is some eggs for the family, I'd recommend one of the hybrid laying breeds like Golden comet (Meyer hatchery), Golden buff (Eagle's Nest Poultry), Sex link (Ideal Poultry) or any of the other major hybrids. They will be egg laying machines and will give you two very good years of eggs. They'll lay nonstop if you keep lights on them through the winter.

However, if you want strictly meat chickens, the Cornish cross are the ones that will eat nonstop, get to weight in 8 weeks, and are mostly maintenance free. If you want something that is actually able to walk when it gets some size, you might try the Freedom ranger (Redbros/Rainbow Ranger at Meyer) and its variants. They get to weight at about 12 weeks.

But if you want both eggs and meat, any of the dual purpose breeds will work. I currently have Buckeyes and Barred rocks for my dual purpose birds. I prefer the Buckeyes for meat and the Barred rocks for eggs, but the Buckeyes lay enough eggs to keep us happy. They aren't as big as my Golden comet's, but they're respectable. Same for the Barred rocks which are midway in size between the Buckeye's and GC's eggs.

Hope that helps.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Energyvet said:


> I sent him here. Please treat my new friend well.


We treat everyone well Energyvet!!! So he (Viper1) was in the right place afterall??? Now that Shumaker Farm's guy....he is the one you gotta watch out for, LOL!!! It's our Facebook group that gets BRUTAL...we rein it in here at the Chicken Forum!!!


----------



## Energyvet

It just seemed like his feeling were hurt and this playground is a nice and safe one. Want everyone to be relaxed, happy and able to enjoy the resource. I'm an idealist (you know) so I wish the world could be like chickenland. Lol

Gotta tell you how nice it is to see all you buckeyes spreading yourselves around and schmoozing with us simple folk. We're getting to be one big happy kibbutz. 
(Isn't that what it's called?)

I love chickenland, buckeye nation and others. Keeps me from having to face my real life. :-0


----------



## Shumaker

viper1 said:


> Well I was told to look up the buckeye people and that they are into homesteading. Probably wrong forum.


Homesteading? Interesting concept. I'd be willing to say that the homesteading days are over. With the modern advanced in technology, electricity, transportation, feed, grocery stores, ect. The whole idea of TRUE homesteading is just that......an idea. Now if you want to raise and/or produce your own food, I see nothing worng with that; in fact I do it myself.....but we all buy some type of bagged grain/feed, use running water generated by power or public water system and use a stove to cook everything. The true meaning of homesteading is a distant memory left behind in the history books. Why is it that people try to use terms that really don't apply?


----------



## viper1

*hmm*



Energyvet said:


> It just seemed like his feeling were hurt and this playground is a nice and safe one. Want everyone to be relaxed, happy and able to enjoy the resource. I'm an idealist (you know) so I wish the world could be like chickenland. Lol
> 
> Gotta tell you how nice it is to see all you buckeyes spreading yourselves around and schmoozing with us simple folk. We're getting to be one big happy kibbutz.
> (Isn't that what it's called?)
> 
> I love chickenland, buckeye nation and others. Keeps me from having to face my real life. :-0


Well just felt by BuckeyeChickens remark to read and not ask questions I was asking too many. Just backed off in respect of that. No if some one gets in my face this old misplaced hillbilly usually jumps back. 
I have helped with chickens and tend to know more then it sounds like. But some times at my age a person don't trust every thing they remember from years gone by.
I do appreciate the kind words and back up Energyvet. I will try to not bruise so easy. But if lots of questions isnt appreciated around here. then its probably not a place for me. As I tend to measure 4-5 times before cutting. LOL!

I have found some averages and would like to know if every one agrees.
Chicken feed for egg layers -4 to 6 oz. each a day 
Meat - 2 lbs for every 1 lb of raised chickens

Coups 2 sq ft per chicken with a run of 4 sq per chicken. For average size or large.
1/2 for bantys or small chickens.

Meat chickens 24 hour lighting with little room for moving.

Tractors size per chicken, for meat or egg not sure.

Thinking 6-8 laying hens and 4-5 meat chickens Roosters or hens??

Thinking Cornish cross for meat. Not exactly sure which to use. 3.5 to 4 sound small for frying.

Which eggs and why are some so rich in taste? Chicken or raising?

Feed doesn't seem to bad around here. 50 lbs around 16-17.00 in store maybe cheaper at feed meal. 
Also has any one ever tried the rubber fingers on a drill or mounted motor. Do they work? We always scalded and plucked or skinned.
Well that's enough for now till i think of more and the chicken whispers book is good also. Sorry if I offended any one wasn't my intent.


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

Welcome, Viper.
You can ask any questions you have. Somebody here will have an answer. 
As far as feed goes, I just keep my feeders full. I have cats and they tend to keep the mice away. So the answer to that I am not sure of. Somebody else will probably know better. As far as meat, I would say that a chicken usually has 1-2 pounds of guts, feathers, and bones on average. Depends on the breed really. The rest should be meat. I like to give my birds a little more than 2 sq. ft. each. That's a little cramped for me. Those sound more like commercial requirements. The more room you give them, the less problems that will arise. As for runs, it depends on breed as well. When I have raised cornish cross, I gave them no lights, as they were outside. And I took their feed away at night. It gave them time to digest. Some others I know give light and feed 24 hours a day. It's up to each individual taste I guess. 
As far as flavor in the eggs, it depends on feed and environment. The reason the store bought eggs have less flavor is because they are old. Fresher eggs have more flavor. It takes over a month to get from the commercial farm to the grocery store. And they have no access to sunlight or fresh air. So if you are raising your own eggs, they are probably going to be richer than anything you find at the store. 
I pay $12.90 for 50# at the local mill. Haven't bought any commercial feed for a while so couldn't tell you what that costs.
I am in the process of building a home made plucker from a washing machine right now. I sure hope it works well. I dont think the whole drill finger thing will last long. I saw a video on youtube of it and that drill was taking a beating.
Hope I could answer some of your questions. Keep em coming if you like.


----------



## karenbrat1

Hi Viper,

Theoretically, yes, Cornish-Rock cross (shortened as CX below) broilers have a 2:1 feed conversion rate. However, that is 2 lbs. feed for 1 lb LIVE weight, not meat. It also depends on how many die while you're raising them as to what actual feed cost per pound of dressed bird you'll have  There is a nice chart showing approximate weekly and cumulative feed intake and growth rate for 1 through 8 weeks, for both sexes at http://www.welphatchery.com/cornish_rock_care

I also raise my CX outside in movable pens, so they are in the dark at night. You want to withdraw feed 12 hours a day anyway to help keep them from dying of "flip"... also covered on Welp's broiler care page above.

CX will give you the most meat in the shortest amount of time with the best feed conversion. All they do is eat and poop. They're so heavy it's an effort for them to move at all. Males grow faster than females. Next best would probably be the Freedom Rangers, see www.freedomrangerhatchery.com I haven't tried those yet. Standard dual purpose breeds like Buckeyes, Rocks, Reds etc won't be a good butchering weight til 16-22 weeks of age, have much longer and leaner breast, thighs and legs, but they can forage for some of their feed, and have much more flavor.

You only want 4 or 5 meat birds? I put *at least* 50 in the freezer every year for 2 people, we eat chicken pretty often, and I give some to friends and relatives. Some of those are CX and the rest are my dual-purpose breed culls.

4 sq ft per laying hen is a crowded minimum, more is better, probably 8-10 sq ft if confined in a coop. Coop space is not so important if they also have access to a large yard or can free range when they're not laying eggs or sleeping. Not sure on feed rates for layers, I too free-feed them. If you short their feed, they will short you on eggs. I have a goofy friend who only fed her hens what they could clean up in ten minutes twice a day, and she was wondering why they were eating their own eggs (because they were starving, that's why!).

Eggs taste and look better (dark yellow yolks) if the hens have access to greens. In the winter when all is snow- and ice-covered here, I give mine hay and rabbit pellets free choice in addition to their regular feed.

For best egg laying rates, the most big eggs with the best feed conversion, of course get production White Leghorns or any of the Sexlink hybrids as they are bred for efficient egg production. Next would likely be Rhode Island Reds and Barred Plymouth Rocks. They will all be pretty much done with their prime laying careers in two years. You could always start with some of those from your local feed store while deciding if you want to take on a rarer breed. The feed stores in my area all sell RIR, BPR, White Leghorns, CX, Easter Eggers, Black Australorps, Silver Laced Wyandottes, and Buff Orpingtons; any of those are good for starting out with.

My husband built me a Whizbang Chicken Plucker from the how-to book by Herrick Kimball. It is lined with those rubber fingers and does a great job but it was expensive to build. The drill-mounted fingers look very awkward, and I've read that "tabletop" pluckers will sometimes yank the bird away from you. If you're only going to do a few you may as well hand pluck.

Have fun with your chickens!


----------



## viper1

*thanks*

Well thanks lots of good info. I love fresh eggs my problem is the wife who really only eats hard boiled eggs. LOL! 
I'm going to get the first ones from the tractor supply I believe. But there are so many choices. If interested or can give help check out my post in beginning chickens. I believe its under my plans or something aong that.
I really dont want to post same thing every where. I have so many questions that i get confused to where i write one or the other. also my age and health has a lot of bearing on the repeat posts. So Im sorry ahead of time. LOL! I posted my plan im thinking a long. On chicks ,space and all, Also the list of my choices. So please feel free to respond. As for breeds I just cant decide. So many choices so little time. Im thinking 25 sq ft pen for the meat chickens so not sure how many would fit.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

viper1 said:


> Well thanks lots of good info. I love fresh eggs my problem is the wife who really only eats hard boiled eggs. LOL!
> I'm going to get the first ones from the tractor supply I believe. But there are so many choices. If interested or can give help check out my post in beginning chickens. I believe its under my plans or something aong that.
> I really dont want to post same thing every where. I have so many questions that i get confused to where i write one or the other. also my age and health has a lot of bearing on the repeat posts. So Im sorry ahead of time. LOL! I posted my plan im thinking a long. On chicks ,space and all, Also the list of my choices. So please feel free to respond. *As for breeds I just cant decide. So many choices so little time.* Im thinking 25 sq ft pen for the meat chickens so not sure how many would fit.


That's the upside and the downside to the poultry world I think "Viper1"....lots of different breeds to choose from and in my opinion none of them are bad choices, just some are better suited for certain jobs! If all I wanted to do was fill the freezer every 8 weeks or so I'd go the cornish cross route and for my eggs get some Golden Comets or Black Stars from the feed mill or TSC! Good luck with your search and with any luck we will hear more from you as your chicken operation continues.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

FYI - The ABC Website/blog was just updated to include several NEW breeders in the Buckeye Breeder Directory!

If you are breeding and selling Buckeye hatching eggs or chicks you can be a part of the Directory FREE....no gimics, no membership we want to help promote the Buckeye breed and a listing has ALWAYS been FREE!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Big weekend for Shumaker Farms & there Buckeyes at the West Central Ohio Poultry Club Show last weekend (March 9-10). The Buckeye Cock pictured below won Champion American and was Best of Breed. One of the Shumaker Farms Pullets won Reserve of Breed, too!









CHAMPION AMERICAN / Best of Breed - Shumaker Farms









Reserve of Breed - Shumaker Farms

Congrats to Joe and Sydney Shumaker for their accomplishments!!!


----------



## Energyvet

I was wondering where you all were. Lol. Welcome back and congratulations!


----------



## lilychicken

I was born in Ohio and proud of it! I love the "overly exaggerated" weather changes


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Energyvet said:


> I was wondering where you all were. Lol. Welcome back and congratulations!


I have been busy with hatching Buckeye chicks and selling both hatching eggs and day-old chicks! More than likely Joe has been doing the same plus getting prepared for some of the spring poultry shows. 2013 has started off with a tremendous number of Buckeye chick orders which is a good thing but it demands a lot of my time trying to get chicks hatching every Sunday night or Monday morning then boxing them up for shipping! Cleaning incubaors, hatchers and brooders....feeding/watering this years new replacement chicks all keeps me hopping this time of year.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

lilychicken said:


> I was born in Ohio and proud of it! I love the "overly exaggerated" weather changes


This Ohioan is ready for spring!!!


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Big weekend for Shumaker Farms & there Buckeyes at the West Central Ohio Poultry Club Show last weekend (March 9-10). The Buckeye Cock pictured below won Champion American and was Best of Breed. One of the Shumaker Farms Pullets won Reserve of Breed, too!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CHAMPION AMERICAN / Best of Breed - Shumaker Farms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reserve of Breed - Shumaker Farms
> 
> Congrats to Joe and Sydney Shumaker for their accomplishments!!!


Congratulations to the Shumaker clan for another big showing. You guys are definitely putting great birds out for the public to see.


----------



## AlexTS113

Show me some of their eggs please! Is it true that they almost look like chocolate?


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

AlexTS113 said:


> Show me some of their eggs please! Is it true that they almost look like chocolate?


Not the Buckeye eggs AlexTS113?!?!? They lay a medium brown egg but generally their shell color is NOT dark like chocolate!!! Maybe your confusing the Buckeye with the Maran which do lay very dark brown eggs???


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Circle_U_Farm said:


> Congratulations to the Shumaker clan for another big showing. You guys are definitely putting great birds out for the public to see.


Yup, Congrats to Shumaker Farms for their BIG win in Wapakoneta, OHIO!!!


----------



## Shumaker

Thanks guys the congrats and support! We are just doing what we do!


----------



## Energyvet

Go Shumaker! We are proud to know you! Keep up the excellent work!


----------



## karenbrat1

*Re dark eggs breeds*



AlexTS113 said:


> Show me some of their eggs please! Is it true that they almost look like chocolate?


Hi Alex, dark-colored eggs are laid by Welsumers, Marans, and (European) Barnevelders. The American Barnies' egg color is still a work in progress. If you buy hatching eggs for any of these breeds, insist on seeing a photo representing the actual egg color you will be getting. Many sellers tout in their ads that their breed is well known for laying dark eggs, and may even show pix of very dark eggs in their ads... but they most carefully do not say that YOU will be getting dark eggs. I learned this the hard way.

I've had Welsumers for a little over a decade now and I love their non-aggressive and gorgeous roosters, and the hens are very good layers of large to XXL eggs. The eggs are a lovely rich brown, sometimes lighter shell color but covered with tiny to larger dark flecks/spots, they should be at least the color of a terra-cotta flowerpot if not darker. Of course some hens lay lighter in color, personally I only hatch the darker eggs. They are industrious foragers and rarely go broody. They do not lay in winter where I am (northern Idaho) unless put under light, and even then, not that well. Their straight combs and wattles especially on the roos are prone to frostbite.

I tried Black/Blue Copper Marans but they don't lay as well as the Wellies, the roos were more aggressive, I found the breed to be rather nervous and flighty, and their eggs were only a shade darker (if even that much) than the Wels. Their combs and wattles are even bigger, meaning even more chance of frostbite.

I also tried Barnevelders before I found out that they do not lay dark eggs yet in the US. This was about 4 years ago and possibly some breeders have made improvement in color. I was so disappointed that their eggs were beige to light terra cotta. Again, large frostbite-prone combs, and though they have a reputation for calmness, the ones I had (eggs hatched from several different breeders) were hysterically flighty. However they were great layers once they got going in the spring, and their glossy, double-laced feather color was beautiful. They are very susceptible to Marek's, so I would recommend getting them vaccinated if available. I gave the last of my Barnie hens to my neighbor after a dog attack wiped out his backyard flock, and "those shiny hens" are his grandkids' favorites.

I just got Buckeyes last fall, a trio from Joe Shumaker. I am trying them because I wanted a non-aggressive breed that grows well for the table (Marans and Welsumers take a long time to mature and do not have meaty carcasses). The rose comb is a bonus, not so prone to frostbite. I lost one of the pullets a few months ago, but the remaining one, now a year old, has been laying 3 large, beige eggs every 4 days since the end of January after her winter break. I have young'uns of theirs growing and so far I very much like the breed's personality and bold calmness, and am admiring the broad backs and chests which bode well for the table 

Best wishes in selecting a breed to work with... so many interesting breeds, so little space and time!

Karen B


----------



## Energyvet

Thanks Karen. That was very informative. Thanks for taking the time to write it all out.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

karenbrat1 said:


> I just got Buckeyes last fall, a trio from Joe Shumaker. I am trying them because I wanted a non-aggressive breed that grows well for the table (Marans and Welsumers take a long time to mature and do not have meaty carcasses). The *rose comb* is a bonus, not so prone to frostbite. I lost one of the pullets a few months ago, but the remaining one, now a year old, has been laying 3 large, beige eggs every 4 days since the end of January after her winter break. I have young'uns of theirs growing and so far I very much like the breed's personality and bold calmness, and am admiring the broad backs and chests which bode well for the table
> 
> Karen B


Great post Karen B and I'm sure you meant "pea comb" in your post....the Buckeye does NOT get frostbite like the single comb or even rose comb varieties because their "pea comb" sits low on their head!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Nice new Buckeye chicks in Idaho!!! Thanks for sharing these Karen B.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

More happy Buckeye chicks;








thanks to Jennifer St. John for sharing her pic!!!


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

My first buckeye hatch of the year. Started with 23 during a snow storm. Had 4 that were clear and 4 that didn't come out of the shell for whatever reason. One has part of it's intestines hanging out/umbilical cord issues. All 15 are acting like normal buckeye chicks.


----------



## Pathfindersfarm

Happy little ten day old Buckeye chicks in Kentucky. Going to move them off the wire soon and onto shavings, it's warm enough to get them into a brooder box outside soon!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Circle_U_Farm said:


> My first buckeye hatch of the year. Started with 23 during a snow storm. Had 4 that were clear and 4 that didn't come out of the shell for whatever reason. One has part of it's intestines hanging out/umbilical cord issues. All 15 are acting like normal buckeye chicks.


Keep us posted on those "straw" pellets you are currently using Circle_U maybe they will be on the market around here soon?!?!?


----------



## Pathfindersfarm

Circle_U_Farm said:


> One has part of it's intestines hanging out/umbilical cord issues.


Oh, that's sad, 

I have found this to be an excellent resource for diagnosing incubating problems, might want to check it out: http://poultry.msstate.edu/pdf/extension/troubleshooting_incubation.pdf

I hope the rest of them do very well for you, good luck with them.


----------



## karenbrat1

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Great post Karen B and I'm sure you meant "pea comb" in your post....the Buckeye does NOT get frostbite like the single comb or even rose comb varieties because their "pea comb" sits low on their head!


Whoops yep -- I had Wyandottes for a few years, and had ROSE comb on my PEA brain!

Karen B


----------



## Energyvet

Great little chicks in all the pics. Gotta love that color!


----------



## rob

love the pics. some great looking chicks.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

more Buckeye chicks compliments of Jacque Baldwin Charwood of North Carolina;










Plus a hatch from Dennis Thomas in the Lone Star state;


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Buckeye chicken nuggets....photo by Marie Taylor;


----------



## ReTIRED

UNCOOKED _Breaded Chicks _? ( from Tyson )
*Ha-Ha !
*-ReTIRED-


----------



## Pathfindersfarm

Too adorable!


----------



## BuffaloGal

The peeps are cute, but the look that hen is giving the camera makes the shot.


----------



## Pathfindersfarm

BuffaloGal said:


> The peeps are cute, but the look that hen is giving the camera makes the shot.


I *know*! You can just hear her saying "Errrr?!" So funny.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Marie Taylor always takes great pics of her Buckeyes!!!


----------



## Alyssa

I've been considering getting a buckhorn or two ... where do folks think is the best place to find good, solid, pure stock for a buckeye?


----------



## TXRedBird

I have a few dark Buckeyes that i'm currently raising


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

Www.americanbuckeyeclub.blogspot.com This is the club site of which most Ppl posting on this thread belong. Pathfinder is part of a different club. There is a breeder directory. Also a page for understanding the sop. A tool to help with seeing what may need improvement in your birds using actual pics. Its a very nice site with a wealth of info on the buckeye.


----------



## TXRedBird

I have a few dark Buckeyes that i'm currently raising


----------



## TXRedBird

I have a few dark Buckeyes that i'm currently raising


----------



## Shumaker

TXRedBird said:


> I have a few dark Buckeyes that i'm currently raising


hahahahahahaha....keep them dark and you'll be alright......but make sure they have good heart girth!


----------



## Apyl

Lets move on from the disagreements and nasty posts. Please let this post be available for members who want to actually discuss the breed or learn about it.


----------



## Shumaker

Apyl said:


> Lets move on from the disagreements and nasty posts. Please let this post be available for members who want to actually discuss the breed or learn about it.


Just now reading this....I whole heartedly agree with you on this one!


----------



## Pathfindersfarm

Alyssa said:


> I've been considering getting a buckhorn or two ... where do folks think is the best place to find good, solid, pure stock for a buckeye?


You can find a list of breeders of Buckeyes at this website: http://www.americanbuckeyepoultryclub.com/Breeders.html


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Alyssa said:


> I've been considering getting a buckhorn or two ... where do folks think is the best place to find good, solid, pure stock for a buckeye?


Hi Alyssa, aside from the nice post from Laura (pathfinder) you can visit the American Buckeye Club website for a breeders directory as well. Some of the folks at the ABC directory also have websites that you can link to in order to see a lot of nice pictures of Buckeyes or learn more about the breed as well.

There are many good Buckeye breeders, some breed to the APA Standard, some for utility and some just as a hobby. We are happy to help you find a reputable Buckeye breeder or even recommend a few good hatcheries if your interest is strictly utilitarian in nature. Thanks for asking about the Buckeye breed and have a great day!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Greetings "Buckeye Nation".....just wanted to remind everyone of the upcoming "American Buckeye Club 2nd Annual Meet" to be held on Memorial Day weekend, May 25-26, 2013 in Lucasville, Ohio. Hosted by the Southern Ohio Poultry Association and held at the Scioto County Fairgrounds (see map link below) this is a great venue for Buckeye owners to come out and show their fowl, talk with other Buckeye owners and breeders plus enjoy some GREAT food!

For entry forms visit http://www.sohiopa.com/ or contact;

Southern Ohio Poultry Assn

[email protected] 
312 O'Connor Rd 
Lucasville, OH 45648​The American Buckeye Club will provide club trophies to the Open & Junior Champions and a "SPECIAL" trophy to honor "Nettie Metcalf's Vision" of this DARK RED fowl. All ABC trophies will be awarded regardless of club affiliation, in other words you don't have to be an ABC member in order to receive a trophy!

https://maps.google.com/maps?q=193+...le,+Scioto,+Ohio+45648&gl=us&t=m&z=14&iwloc=A

If you have any questions feel free to PM me or post them here! Looking forward to seeing many ABC members and a few new faces in Lucasville in May, too!


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

I will be there.


----------



## Illinoisbuckeye

I have had Buckeyes for a few years now and really like them a lot right behind my Old English Game bantams. I just got a show quality cock last year and have used him over a lot of hens.


----------



## Circle_U_Farm

Where are you from in Illinois?


----------



## Pathfindersfarm

Bob Gilbert is in IL and he has some great Buckeyes. He's also an APA judge, and has been breeding poultry for decades.


----------



## Itsacutefuzzball

:shy: Sorry to ask, but what's so 'cool, good' about buckeyes in general?


----------



## Pathfindersfarm

Itsacutefuzzball said:


> :shy: Sorry to ask, but what's so 'cool, good' about buckeyes in general?


Well, gosh, I think they're just about the best all-around dual-purpose chicken there is.

They are a heritage breed of poultry that are ideal for a homestead or small farm. They have a mahogany bay red plumage, similar in color to the nut from the Buckeye tree. They have yellow legs and skin, and a pea comb.

Buckeyes are the only breed of poultry that was developed by a woman, Mrs. Nettie Metcalf of Ohio, back around the turn of the 20th century.

As dual-purpose birds, they are useful for producing meat as well as eggs. They are hearty in both warm and cold climates, and their pea comb, which lies close to the head, makes them an excellent breed for cold areas, as there is little to no risk of comb frostbite.

They are active foragers that love to day range, but do fairly well in more confined areas. If permitted to range on grass they will catch and eat all sorts of small prey, including bugs, mice, and even snakes. They are friendly birds who get along well with each other and humans.

Buckeyes lay between 150 and 200 medium to large sized brown eggs per year. The males typically weigh between 8 and 9 pounds, hens are generally about 6.5 pounds. The males dress out very well, with a broad breast and good meaty thighs, and the meat is very tasty.

At this point after having raised a number of breeds of poultry (I tried to count once, I think at least 12), Buckeyes are the only breed I raise.

Of course, I should also disclose that since I founded a breed club for them, the American Buckeye Poultry Club, back in 2008, I am a pretty big fan.


----------



## Jim

TXRedBird said:


> I have a few dark Buckeyes that i'm currently raising


I have to assume by the login ID that you are in Texas, how are they doing with the heat? I am near Houston and thinking about getting some.


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Itsacutefuzzball said:


> :shy: Sorry to ask, but what's so 'cool, good' about buckeyes in general?


Thanks for asking this very good question! Some folks like the Buckeye simply because of it's temperament, one might say "personality" in a chicken is what attracts folks to a certain breed just as much as other traits. The hens are very friendly, not flighty and docile while the cocks (roosters) will guard their flock well seldom are they aggressive toward humans.

Folks who love RED fowl and live is cold climates consider the Buckeye because their combs don't freeze in the winter like Single Comb Rhode Island Reds do! Even as a heavy breed the Buckeye does well in extremely hot climates like Texas, Arizona and New Mexico.....I have shipped many Buckeyes to the states over the last decade and their owners report they do very well.

Finally, the Buckeye has an interesting history and was created to be the IDEAL dual purpose large fowl. Having raised and bred them since 2002 this guy thinks they are "nearly perfect" in every way!!!


----------



## BuckeyeChickens

Illinoisbuckeye said:


> I have had Buckeyes for a few years now and really like them a lot right behind my Old English Game bantams. I just got a show quality cock last year and have used him over a lot of hens.


Congrats Illinoisbuckeye and welcome to the Buckeye Chicken thread here at the Chicken Forum!!!

A nice lady near Urbana, IL just came to my farm last week (about a 5 hour drive) to pick up 72 Buckeye day-old chicks!!! Seems she had trouble finding a reputable breeder in that area??? Feel free to post pics of your Buckeye offspring here....we encourage lots of pictures in this thread!!!


----------



## RedBird

BuckeyeChickens said:


> Congrats Illinoisbuckeye and welcome to the Buckeye Chicken thread here at the Chicken Forum!!!
> 
> A nice lady near Urbana, IL just came to my farm last week (about a 5 hour drive) to pick up 72 Buckeye day-old chicks!!! Seems she had trouble finding a reputable breeder in that area??? Feel free to post pics of your Buckeye offspring here....we encourage lots of pictures in this thread!!!


 What most people don't realize is that most reputable breeders are sold out months in advance of "chick season". They don't keep large numbers of breeders and most break up their breeding pens as quickly as they can so the birds aren't penned up for months on end.


----------



## Illinoisbuckeye

Thanks for the welcome. I have only had the buckeyes for a few years now so I am still learning but I have had chickens pretty much my whole life and have been raiseing show quality O.E sense I was a kid. I have about 40 buckeye and buckeye cross chicks hatched now and plan to hatch until the end of May depending on numbers. Circle U I live in west central Illinois just a drive across the river from Iowa and Missouri. I think the better question would have been what isn't so cool and good about the buckeye well I haven't found it yet.


----------



## Sundancers

RedBird said:


> What most people don't realize is that most reputable breeders are sold out months in advance of "chick season". They don't keep large numbers of breeders and most break up their breeding pens as quickly as they can so the birds aren't penned up for months on end.


Interesting ...

I know a few reputable breeders (chicks in general) and they go by last years sale numbers and add about 10 percent more for extra, (for growth) or if was a bad year they may breed up less.

Now I could understand if a breeder has reached their limit and have no room to grow but to paint all breeders with such a wide paint brush is a little unfair.

IMO ...


----------



## Illinoisbuckeye

I think it was ment to mean as far as getting the birds back into show condition after being in the breeding pens. I myself usually don't show a bird after I have started useing it for breeding unless it is one I really like showing and places well.


----------



## Shumaker

I give a HUGE thank you for banning some of the newer trouble! There is hope. That individual has totally railroaded BYC and I was praying that she wouldn't do that to this site. THANK YOU moderators of the chicken forum!!!!


----------



## ReTIRED

Shumaker said:


> I give a HUGE thank you for banning some of the newer trouble! There is hope. That individual has totally railroaded BYC and I was praying that she wouldn't do that to this site. THANK YOU moderators of the chicken forum!!!!


*Shumaker....
*I haven't ANY idea. information, or _understanding _of THIS POSTING.
*BUT....*I suspect that it "smacks of 'exclusionism' "...which, in and of itself, is definitely REGRESSIVE in almost ALL instances.

_PLEASE _explain....*OR ....*go back (of your OWN accord) to your _BELOVED_ "BackyardChickensForums" *! 

WHO *is *WHOM *in this "_Childish ONE-UPSMANSHIP STUPIDITY" _*?? !!


*( If you disagree with someone else...say so. O.K. 
NO NEED to be "dictatorial" about it. It's just someone's opinion....AND it IS the BLIND INTERNET. WHY make a fool of YOURSELF *?* )

We only LOSE when we "ban" someone or "exclude" someone. That person....perhaps inarticulate OR opinionated in their postings...is NOT _necessarily_ *ANETHEMA. *I "rue-the-day" that we ALL become the same. THEN...WE *ARE*
_doomed._

*MY *low-value (?) *2 pesos worth,* 

_only_...one MAN'S _opinion_, 
-ReTIRED-


----------



## ChickenAdmin

Shumaker said:


> I give a HUGE thank you for banning some of the newer trouble! There is hope. That individual has totally railroaded BYC and I was praying that she wouldn't do that to this site. THANK YOU moderators of the chicken forum!!!!


That's not why is was done.

I want to make something clear so we're all on the same page. We don't do drama. If you don't like what someone has to say put them on ignore.

This thread is locked while it's cleaned up, at which point I would like for it to continue minus the hurt feelings.


----------



## Chrissiepie

At what age do they typically start laying? I love my Buckeyes! They are awesome!


----------

