Sport killing, SOP killing.

Two unrelated thoughtas are bouncing around in my head and I just can't keep the lid on anymore. Let me state clearly I am not making a comment on where I stand on this issue. In fact, I might not even know where I stand. But I am tossing it out as something to think about. I know many people will claim that the two are not even related, apples and oranges. Maybe. Maybe not?

Someone posted recently that they got creeped out selling birds online since it seemed people might be buying them for the cockfighting ring.

Then we have another long thread debating breeding methods to attain the Standard of Perfection in a chicken and this discussion cannot happen without the very real mention of heavy culling which in Chicken Speak often means killing vast numbers of birds because they don't look right.

I'm trying to decide which I find more offensive. People setting roosters against each other to do what roosters do naturally anyway? Yes, they will die. Usually pretty quickly from blood loss. OR People hatching birds then culling them because they do not meet some established measure of beauty/size/whatever. The culled birds will die, usually pretty quickly, from blood loss.

SO if we consider the pursuit of PERFECT birds to be okay, then killing them in the name of OUR sport (SOP) is just fine. But we are going to plug our noses and turn away from those 'other' people who kill chickens in a sport that we do not approve of?

Are we hypocrites? Are we failing to think clearly and deeply about the ethics involved in either pursuit? It's okay for us to kill ugly chickens for no reason other than ugliness, but NOT okay to let them kill each other?

I urge you, BEFORE you start hammering out your answer at warp speed (which just leads to spelling errors) to ponder this dichotomy for a moment. This split in our personality and the arbitrary nature of some of the ideas we hold. I am very interested to see what other people think/feel about this.

I also wonder about culling, but can it mean something other than killing?
dictionary says, to select from others.

Uno, I think the difference lies not in the killing but the method of killing. Humanely putting down a bird for the greater good of the improvement of that breed, be it type or health, is a far cry from a long slow and probably frightening death in a cock fighting ring.

There is also something a little ugly to me about humans 'getting off' on the death of an animal.

I don't believe in animal rights, but I do very strongly believe in human RESPONSIBILITY to animals, ensuring they have a stress free life, as painless as possible and a swift and humane end.

I cannot abide suffering.

Sue

Well I will just jump in without to much thought.
The way I look at it is that we eat chickens and eggs that is why we have them that is why they were domesticated.
Some where someone said "what makes this a great hobby is that you can eat your mistakes".
Raising birds for their looks and for show is in my opinion a natural extension to raising birds for their primary purpose which is to be eaten. I know that whatever culling I do, they get a good life and a quick painless death. If I can raise a better prettier bird that conforms to SOP and still tastes good, lays nice eggs and it strong and fertile while why not. We can have our bird and eat it too.
Now to cock fighting.
These animals have their wings broken and taped to make them stronger, no thought to their comfort or care is considered.
Whatever it takes to make them strong and aggressive is the only consideration. They have no quality of life and their death when you look at it as a long painful process that culminates in death is certainly in my opinion a reprehensible hobby.
I just don't think the two things are similar in any way.
I think we all know you don't make any money raising backyard chickens but cock fighting is all about money and gambling,and kowtows to the most base of people. I think that alone puts the two at opposite ends of the spectrum.
There is my little rant.

On this topic, I can't keep quiet. I find the "sport" of cockfight deeply offensive because of the unbelievable suffering that is inflicted upon the fighting cocks; not only in the cock fight itself but in all the days of their life leading up to it. There is no way in the world that our raising a chicken in as much of a stress free environment as possible and then using them for the productions qualities of eggs or meat is even remotely close to the life and death of a fighting cock.

They breed them, feed them, harass them, taunt them, chain them close to each other so they're constantly frustrated, pump them full of steroids, then strap 3 inch gaffs (razor blades) to their legs for the fight. Both winners and losers get slashed and gouged until one finally dies from a fatal injury. Survivors with Injuries are often not treated and end their sorry days with missing eyes and infected wounds.

Nope, I do not feel like a hypocrite because I raise dual purpose chickens and I use them for dual purposes and at the same time try to improve the quality of my flock. If their destiny is the dinner table, I can assure you that they didn't spend a miserable life chained and treated in ways that would maximize their aggression and that the last 5 minutes of their lives were spent being repeatedly stabbed and gouged before they finally succumbed to death.

And just to flip it a bit, just because I use my hens as layers does not make me a supporter of the battery system either. These are just my feelings on the subject, and am not aiming them at any one in particular. Cock fighting offends my heart and my soul.

I don't like cock fighting or the people who endorse it. Yet, in a way, we who enjoy showing birds owe the sport of cock fighting because when it was banned by the English over a hundred years ago, gentlemen who could no longer fight their birds [legally anyway] still wanted to show them off. Thus exhibition poultry was born.

Because exhibiting poultry became fashionable it birthed the various Standards of Perfection countries like the UK, Australia and America have.

Many breeders cull undesirable birds that don't meet the SOP and frankly I see that wasteful. Yet breeders of animals, not just poultry, do just that. My opinion is that I would rather see these birds raised and given to other people so they can be useful and not just fodder. Yes, I have heard the breeders arguments that it's just putting birds with terrible imperfections as duck feet and improper combs into the ametuers hands where they can possible breed [shudder.]

Isn't it a good thing we people don't practice these sort of things on each other? Bet that can be a whole other topic

Thank you everyone who has posted so far. I am reading each post with intense attention. I can see the thought and effort that went into making each post concise, and clearly presented. There are many angles to come at this from. I hope some more thoughts/opinions show up. I try to grasp the meaning of what each poster is saying and so far am pleased with the clarity of expression here. I like to know how other people see things and think...right until I think I'm right and then no one else can possibly know as much as me! But that's NOT the case here!

"Culling" for me does not mean killing, it means they are not used in my breeding program. I don't bred unhealthy birds, so if there are pullets that do not meet the standard I want, including size, type and sometimes temperament, they go into my 'laying pen', some get given to family and friends and on the rare occasion are sold to someone else as 'layers'. I personally would rather people have healthy, productive , heritage birds for their eggs, than the commercial layers. The cockerels are either grown out and feed us or go on to feed someone else.
As chickeesmom says, the dictionary says `culling` means to select from others. My dictionary on the computer says: to remove an inferior person or thing from a group.
I do not agree with or condone cockfighting.

True, culling may not necessarily result in a dead bird. It just means that they are removed from the breeding program. However, even if they are killed, it is done quickly and humanely.

The roosters in the cockfights are only allowed to do what comes naturally if that means fighting. There was an article a while back where a guy in India was killed by his rooster as he tried to push it back into the fight while it was trying to escape. Which brings me to the metal gaffs they strap to their legs to make sure they inflict as much damage as possible. A normal rooster fight would usually not result in a death and the loser is able to retreat. Doesn't happen in a cockfight.

Outside of the ring, they don't exactly live the lives of Riley either. I know a guy whose Grandfather had fighting birds back before it was banned in Canada. He said the roosters would be outside year round each tied to a wooden barrel and that's where it would live regardless of weather. Hardly optimal living conditions but, for his purposes, I suppose it worked. the toughest meanest birds would survive.

An article excerpt about cock fighting;


A common misconception is that the first domestication of the chicken was driven by a desire for food, but back then if a person wanted to eat chicken, they would simply go out and hunt it. If eggs were on the menu, you would search for them at the appropriate time of the year. It probably did not occur to our ancestors that birds could be farmed and eggs obtained out of season. No, the bird was captured and brought home so that it could provide entertainment. It has happened time and again in our history that, as soon as we learn that two animals are willing to fight, we put them together in a pit and start taking bets. In the case of the chicken, owners would often strap bone or metal spurs over the roosters’ own to insure a fight to the death and make it easier to determine the winner. It was not unheard of for the victor to die from his wounds as well.
Cock fighting started in India and quickly moved out in all directions. Reportedly the world's oldest spectator sport, it goes back about 6,000 years in Persia (modern day Iran). Popular with most of our ancient ancestors, it still continues in many places around the world. In England, cock fighting has a long history going back to pre-Roman times and continuing right up through the Middle Ages until fairly recently. During the 1700's, cock fights would often follow racing meets. Every town had a fighting pit and country gentlemen would sometimes even hold matches in their drawing rooms (furniture makers went so far as to market special cock fighting chairs for these events). It was an activity that nearly everyone was involved in no matter how poor or rich. Fortunately, some people started to notice that the fighting pits were not nearly as much fun for the animals that actually had to get into them and public pressure finally coerced British Parliament to ban the activity in 1850.
Over the past century or two, cockfighting has largely fallen out of favour in our culture as well and is now legal in only two places in North America; Louisiana and New Mexico (and the animal rights activists are working hard on those two areas as well). In some cases, people are trying to bring back the activity by making it more acceptable to the general population. Oklahoma banned cockfighting in 2002. Recently however, Senator Frank Shurden has proposed reviving the industry by taking the blood out of the sport. According to his plan, the roosters would have their spurs covered so as to lessen the damage inflicted and they would wear little vests, similar to those worn by fencers, that would record hits electronically. It remains to be seen whether this will be enough to appease the animal rights groups. Even if the physical damage is limited, you would still be pairing the birds to fight and, unlike a human boxer or wrestler, the bird does not get to decide whether or not it participates.
I was surprised to learn that, during its long history, cock fighting has actually made some positive contributions to the world of sport, the most important being the notion of equitable competition. Today we wouldn’t dream of pairing Bill Gates with Mike Tyson for a boxing match (although, thinking on it, it would be interesting to see), but at one time it was something that could have actually happened. Right up into the 1800's it was normal for human boxers to receive little or no training and any two men might have been put into a ring for a bare knuckles bout. Yet, during this same time period, the pit roosters were being thoroughly trained for their fights and combatants were being carefully paired by weight. The popularity of the sport and the amounts of money involved were strong incentives to ensure that the matches were fair and balanced. Cockfighting also made major contributions to how our modern day sport tournaments are structured.

Very thought provoking post Uno.

The word cull has come to have a few different meanings for me.

Before I got more interested in breeding I thought it just meant to kill, having to dispatch an ill, deformed, or otherwise unhealthy bird from my flock. Never a nice event, but something that had to be done for the greater good of the bird, usually to end suffering.

Now cull has also come to mean removal from my breeding pool. Recently I’ve become more interested in breeding in general and basic poultry genetics as related to such. (I'm the first to admit lots still goes over my head ) I’d like to be able to breed “dual-purpose” birds that meet the standard (for a variety of reasons, one being I want my birds to be recognizable as their breed) that lay beautiful blue (and brown) eggs, and taste mighty good to boot. In order to achieve my goal, I need to be picky ruthless in the selection of my breeders. Those not chosen will be raised as if they were until of age when they’ll either be sold as backyard layers/pets or processed to eat. Just because I’m interested in selecting the best to improve overall quality, doesn’t mean I don’t value life.

And if some of my culls should find homes with people who desire to breed them, who am I to say they shouldn’t? I did the exact same thing for years with a lot of enjoyment.

So no, I don’t feel like a hypocrite. My chickens have a good life with me; plenty of food, fresh water, outdoor space and company. I protect them from predators/pests best I can and always try my damnest to help/heal any who become ill or injured. Not saying I’m always successful, because there are times I am most definitely not.

I’ve never culled a chick because it's feathers didn’t look right. Only when I felt quality of life would be poor due to defects or health reasons. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder after all.

As for cockfighting, I guess I’m naïve because I had no idea this was going on here until reading sweetjojo's post. And after reading what Lilfarm wrote happens to those birds, I feel physically ill. It is beyond cruel and I am appalled (but sadly unsurprised) there are people out there who think this is acceptable.

While I understand your comparison of the two Uno, I don’t agree with it at all. Apples and Grapefruit.

.

I do agree about not necessarily follow the SOP as if it were the be all and end all of poultry perfection.

As for the rest, my delicate Victorian Sensibilities prevent a response as I am going to swoon onto my sofa filled with puffy cushions.

As far as culling goes, the purpose for the cull also needs to be taken into consideration.

Are you culling for show birds where the SOP is of vital importance?

Are you culling for your own preferences in quality?

Are you culling for health?

Are you culling your lesser quality birds for your dinner?

Is your cull for a combination of the above?

Sue

Very interesting points Sue. If you don`t mind I will share my thoughts on them.

Schipperkesue wrote:As far as culling goes, the purpose for the cull also needs to be taken into consideration.

Are you culling for show birds where the SOP is of vital importance?For me the SOP is a guide. If you talk to 10 different people, you can get quite a few different interpretations of what is written. I use it as a guide to develop a bird that looks like the breed it is supposed to, but has the production, grow and vitatlity that is importatn to me.

Are you culling for your own preferences in quality?I think I do this. I have an idea about what I want my bird to look like and it may not be what others think. I also have a strong idea about what my birds should be able to do. Winter survival without heat or insulation, natural reproduction, and grow to produce a true dual purpose bird. Other people have different preferences.

Are you culling for health? I personaly don`t consider it culling when I have to dispatch something for health reasons. I consider it flock management and just one of the parts I am not reall keen on.

Are you culling your lesser quality birds for your dinner? I don`t always think the birds I eat are lesser quality, they just have something about them that I don`t happen to want in the line I am breeding.

Is your cull for a combination of the above?I think we always decide on a number of things with our birds and that is what is so great about this hobby. You can follow your own path as there is not just one `right` one!


Sue

^ I pretty much agree Coopslave. Other than the fact I've been using the word cull a little more loosely than you do. But I don’t think I’ll be doing that anymore. The last thing I want is for people to think I’m constantly killing my birds…


Anyway, reading through the responses again has definitely got me thinking outside my comfort zone. Although I may not agree with everything said, I do appreciate everyone sharing their thoughts in a civil manner. This is how we learn and grow, by expanding our horizons. So thank you all for that.

I also want to say there are many reasons to keep chickens, be it food, eggs, breeding, exhibition showing, or just plain pleasure, etc…none are right or wrong, none are better than the other. Our enthusiasm for poultry is what unites us, even when we don’t always see eye to eye. And I think it’s safe to say that enthusiasm is the reason we all choose to spend our time on a forum dedicated to such a fancy.

Hence why I'm here when I should be working.

I also wanted to add an aspect that not many have brought up. With cock fighting there is an 'enjoyment' people get out of their fights.

I get no form of enjoyment out of killing a bird that is substandard or sick. As in any part of life there are things we must do that are not enjoyable. That is one reason I want to improve my flock so that the need to cull will be reduced.

Also another reason I cull my birds is for the sake of the bird. I can box them up and sell them at an auction where who knows what kind of care they will recieve.

Animal husbandry is a big thing for me. The standard level of care for poultry is very low in my eyes. So I will cull a bird before I put it in a substandard level of care where it may endlessly suffer.

So I am yet to understand this compairison of cock fighting and flock improvement?


Don't fool yourself all domestic animals have, had, or are going through breeding improvement. Often time their culling process just goes on behind closed doors.

Culling for whatever reason is what we most likly all have done .We choose the best looking Rooster for what ever reasons that we decide meet our needs , and the rest ? well we sell them , we butcher them , and after all that is what they are here for isn't it ? Rooster fights ? well lets do the same thing to two people and see what they say ?? not a boxing match , or any of the other so called sports .........but a fight to the finish .Beat , claw , choke your oponant till they are dead .Now what do you think they will think about the sport ?My thoughts

I'm gonna do a little culling on Wednesday. I am going to box up the unwanted, uneeded birds and take them to a friend who likes eggs and rooster stew. I keep only what I need, she gets free birds. It's a win-win situation!

Reneggaide, I am intrigued by your DQ chickens. Dairy Queen? They lay eggs AND you can milk them?

We all seem pretty much in agreement that cock fighting birds live horrible lives. BUt I'll say don't beleive everything you read. SOme of the reading I have done suggests that people often treat their fighting cocks like royalty. Birds are treated differently culturally too, which seems to apply to all animals, cultural differences in the value of animals.

However, how come we are all up in arms about the cock fighters while we are not screaming and yelling about the horrible, abysmal and grotesque lives lived by MILLIONS of layers and meat birds in the massive, hot, crowded stinking barns that populate the US and parts of Canada? We know FOR A FACT the wretched lives of misery they experience from hatch to death and I think our kill systems have WAY TOO HIGH a failue rate for us to point our fingers at the cock fighters as if they are doing something bad. I think on his worst day, being chained to a barrel with earth below, sky above and fresh air on his back, a cock fighter is WAY BETTER OFF than some poor, pecked, crowded creature in a battery cage.

I do not condone or support cock fighting. I will not sell my own mature roos at auction anymore for fear of this. I agree with the poster who said they prefer to kill their own culls, at least that way they know they're not somewhere being miserable. I feel the same. But I think buying a package of chicken breasts, which supports a horrific industy makes me as guilty as any spectator at a cock fight who throws his money down. I don't get out of the grocery store without throwing my money down. It makes me think. I need to expand my brain. And get one of those Dairy Queen chickens from Reneggaide!

Well I just wrote a huge long reply and the site froze up and I lost it. I am just to tired to redo it.
Uno I think you need to appreciate you are preaching to the wrong audience. That was the gist of it, but like I say I am to tired to try and rewrite it.

I am completely confused. I didn't hear Uno preaching, I heard her questioning, and heard many replies. What do you mean, Nuthatch?

I too was surprised at the term, but I suspect Nuthatch is using the word as part of a figure of speech, as in 'Preaching to the Choir'.

Sue

I love this topic and I'm going to rant but first a few things:

DQ Chickens? That's funny and that's RiDQlous! You should see my chest hair change when I type that.

Reneggaide... like the quote and agree but I always wonder whether he was on Peyote (or worse) when he wrote most of his stuff.

On to the rant...

I agree with the comments on cock fighting, not a fan and I also think battery cages are a little disugusting. But! Convince Joe Big City that he has to pay a bit more for chicken or eggs and he'll cry fowl (pun there... see that). I think we like to turn our eyes when something is truly offensive, as long as it doesn't affect our livelihood or our cheap way of life. It takes some SERIOUS pressure to change things that aren't right. Think Abraham Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation. It only happens when someone REALLY wants something and it aligns with political pressure.

As for the SOP well, I could go on for a loonnggg time about that but I would not "wax poetic". Now, I understand the need for such a "bible" and that fact that people worship its pages. However, nature is moving, changing, dare I say evolving in the same paragraph as the words bible and worship? To me, the SOP is a snapshot in time. It's the interpretation of what a breed looks like at one point (usually many years ago). ALMOST EVERY SINGLE ONE (yes, I meant to type that) of those birds didn't exist a hundred years before the first SOP was created, yet here we are about 140 years later expecting them all to exist in their same state, and we hold this as the rule.

Now I know some of your are going to talk Cochin this or Dorking that but how many people tested Cochins or Dorkings for DNA 50 years ago, or kept 1000 year old SOPs on their desk to make sure their chicken was OK.

I'm not saying this not a worthwhile pursuit nor a fruitless endeavour. There is much to be learned by aiming for standard and the benefits of keeping chickens are numerous. I just think that sometimes we need to question whether it really matters if a bird is "not up to standard" because it has a few off-coloured feathers. What are our priorities? And that's not just a question for the group, that's a question for each individual.

im writing from the emotional aspect, im really pritty new to chickens, i have only got in to them for about 2 years! and in the 2 years that i have had them (im still working at making a larger flock)so far i have only had to cull one hen, she was suffering badly and i could not stand seeing her like that! culling (like KRL says) does not give you a good feeling but some times needs to be done! cock fighting on the other hand! a person is getting pleasure out of watching 2 aniamls kill each other! its disgusting!!! im still at the point where culling for me is selling the chickens to people that i now! but i see no problem growing your culls up, giving them a good home and good care and eating them later on!
as for layer and grower barns~ they are also disgusting! but they will be hear till more and more people that don't know any better stop buying from supermarkets and start buying our culls!!! that would be a win win!!

Sorry Nuthatch if it seemed I was preaching. Wasn't my intent. Just had some thoughts in my head of a poultry type nature and thought, hmm, wonder what other people think about this stuff?

And yes, we here on this site know the ugliness of the commercially raised bird. Like someone else said, if Joe KnobHead Public would think about these issues, speak up about these issues then maybe these situations would change. BUt Joe KnobHead Public wants cheap food, not ethical food.

Still, as the day ends here, I wonder if I am convinced that killing in the name of sport is better or worse than killing in the name of beauty/perfection. I mean, if you ask the chicken, do you prefer to be dead duking it out in the ring wearing razors, or do you prefer to be dead because I stretch your neck or maybe chop off your head, I think the chicken will ask if there is a choice C, because A and B don't end well for the chicken.