Clarification on Araucana and/or Ameraucana terminology

Very interesting points from both sides of the coin!
Since this is an open forum, and our asses are allowed to swing as they may, I too am going to throw mine out there! It might cause a few eye rolls, but I'm OK with that because It is something else to consider! Yes, I agree (according to the APA) that a chicken is not considered a true representative of a breed unless it matches that of which is described in the big holy book! So with that said, How can we sell, trade, give away, etc, etc... birds with "breed" titles unless they have been judged by an APA official and declared a "good representative" of the breed? I know this is a bit silly, but not any more so than saying a chicken, that is the result of mating two birds from the "same" breed that "are" considered to be pure, not an Ameraucana because the leg color isn't quite right, or the feather color isn't right, or the _ _ _ isn't..... ! I find it funny how some people say (and I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone in particular) "That chicken can't be called an Ameraucana, it's an EE because it is not a "recognized" color!". Yet, some of these same people go on to talk about how beautiful some Splash Rooster is that they have or have seen!?!? Well the last thing I heard was that the "Splash" was not a recognized color either! I guess that one is OK though because it is supposedly close to being allowed.
Again, because of the "butts" thing, I'll also say this. Even though I truly like the blue/green eggs, the beards/muffs and all the various feather colors I have seen these birds display, it is because of this I consider them to be low on the totem pole in the world of "pure breeds". A bird can be considered a pure Ameraucana, and even win a ribbon, yet it lays an egg that isn't blue/green!
Maybe we need to start an official CCC (Canadian Chicken Club) pedigree Registry. Then these hair splitting opinions wouldn't be so relevant!

Dark Wing Duck wrote:Very interesting points from both sides of the coin!
Since this is an open forum, and our asses are allowed to swing as they may, I too am going to throw mine out there! It might cause a few eye rolls, but I'm OK with that because It is something else to consider! Yes, I agree (according to the APA) that a chicken is not considered a true representative of a breed unless it matches that of which is described in the big holy book! So with that said, How can we sell, trade, give away, etc, etc... birds with "breed" titles unless they have been judged by an APA official and declared a "good representative" of the breed? I know this is a bit silly, but not any more so than saying a chicken, that is the result of mating two birds from the "same" breed that "are" considered to be pure, not an Ameraucana because the leg color isn't quite right, or the feather color isn't right, or the _ _ _ isn't..... ! I find it funny how some people say (and I'm not pointing any fingers at anyone in particular) "That chicken can't be called an Ameraucana, it's an EE because it is not a "recognized" color!". Yet, some of these same people go on to talk about how beautiful some Splash Rooster is that they have or have seen!?!? Well the last thing I heard was that the "Splash" was not a recognized color either! I guess that one is OK though because it is supposedly close to being allowed.
Again, because of the "butts" thing, I'll also say this. Even though I truly like the blue/green eggs, the beards/muffs and all the various feather colors I have seen these birds display, it is because of this I consider them to be low on the totem pole in the world of "pure breeds". A bird can be considered a pure Ameraucana, and even win a ribbon, yet it lays an egg that isn't blue/green!
Maybe we need to start an official CCC (Canadian Chicken Club) pedigree Registry. Then these hair splitting opinions wouldn't be so relevant!

Good Points dark wing
I would also say if they are out of AM Parents then they should be AM
and I guess I could always say my different color ones are a work in progress that always seems to work
I had some Columbian marked hens and they layed the darkest blue eggs but have not produced any more
Oh well I guess I will say I have non Variety pure bred Americaunas.

Easy! Easy!

I've kind of just determined that an EE or (easter Egger) just references an Ameraucana/Araucana that isn't up to snuff, maybe like a mixed-colour orpington would just be called an Orpington. It's not not an orpington based on its structure and feathering, it's just not a recognized colouration.

Thanks for all the opinions and input, it's all appreciated and I think everyone has good points. Part of me wonders if there is such a thing as 'purebred' araucana when it comes down to things. Some born with tufts, some not, some with beards some not. We know they're that breed because they came from that breed and those eggs but the genetics lined up to cancle out or fail to produce a specific traits. Maybe it's a breed that's more in progress than people would like to admit?

I also wanted to say, those black Amer pictures were beautiful.

Sorry, Dark Wing Duck, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree. The CCC should be the Confused Chicken Club. Now I would sign up for that!

uno wrote:Sorry, Dark Wing Duck, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree. The CCC should be the Confused Chicken Club. Now I would sign up for that!

HEAR HEAR!! Im tired of looking puzzled all by myself. Let us determine these things for ourselves, we are Canadian after all.

IPF and Coopslave, I really learned from your input but now I have a question of my own. I was under the understanding that if an Ameraucana laid a green egg it was probably an EE because all pure Ameraucana laid only blue eggs of various shades. Can you both give me your opinion on this. My Whitmore line has slate colored legs and only lay blue eggs with no exception and have the muffs and beards but having said that I always thought that the name slate and olive green were different descriptions for the same color so I am glad that you showed the pics of the proper colored legs which is the color that I have . Looking back a few years I realize that when I had EE they in fact did have olive green legs and laid both blue and green eggs.
Omega Blue Farms, I have a question for you. I am not criticizing you but do you cross your variety's of Ameraucana? The reason that I ask is that I traded some chicks with a member in the past who had a beautiful large black roo from your farm and she gave me chicks which were supposed to be blue and they were until they got older and then in half of them the color brown started to show up on the wings and back so I got rid of them because I personally only want true variety and I am not saying that there is anything wrong with mixing varieties if you do but just that it is not for me and that would explain why the brown started to show up in some of them. I have to admit that when the person who I traded with posted a pic of the black roo that originated from your farm I was very impressed. It was the largest and broadest black Ameraucana roo that I had ever seen.

Dan, the history of most breeds involves outcrossing, especially the healthy ones. The ameraucana being extremely new, has much outcrossing in it's recent history. I've yet to see a black line that doesn't show signs of recent outcrossing. The breed is still finding it's way.

I've always felt that the black line coming out of the US showed too much Australorp influence, and sure enough the breeder who got the variety off the ground verified to me that he did indeed use Australorp to settle the colour down. It's well documented that other varieties utilized Faveroles which were found to make the eggs bluer. Unfortunely, the positive effects of that outcross are short lived.

Locally, most of the heritage birds in people's backyards hatch in Texas. I have a problem with this. It tells me that our local heritage breeders are doing something wrong and that the current approach is not sustainable.

When I returned to the hobby 10 years ago, I wasn't impressed with the body type of the Ameraucana's available so I set out to start over from scratch. I wanted a more compact meatier bird. To increase the genepool's blue egg modifier genes, I stuck with Blue egg laying stock; crossing a hatchery ameraucana with local araucanas and then crossing the offspring with araucana wild stock from PEI's Jocelyn.

Dan, you need to realize that my breeding program is not devoted to serving the fickle show breeder, my line doesn't offer instant show gratification. My birds offer food. For me, food is first, and we don't eat the feathers. I'm pleased that my line can now reliably produce a 3 pound fryer in 14-16 weeks and a 4 pound roaster within 20 weeks.

As for show traits, the line is slowly gaining consistency. Combs are much better than they were two years ago, and the white underfluff problem is almost gone. All while improving meat production consistency. Two of my pullets took both class and reserve class just this last weekend at a sanctioned show. More APA points. FWIW, they were up against the american line. Truth is that neither pullet stood out to me as exceptional show birds. When I went looking for birds for the show, I couldn't find anything that I really liked so just picked three that were close and put them in without bothering to bath or any sort of show prep. I got lucky, or maybe it was their body type that made them stand out. They are now back in their flock and I would not be able to identify the winners this morning.

When I sell breeders, I sell genetic potential, not a finished product. If anyone wants to benefit from my hard work, they better be prepaired to do a little work of their own. The person that sold you chicks should probably have taken a season or two to get to know the genepool before selling chicks as potential breeding stock. Unfortunately, such patience isn't part of this hobby. I try to communicate realistic expectations when making sales, but maybe I wasn't clear enough.

So OBF
What are saying is that you cross your colors??

Omega Blue Farms wrote:Well opinions are like our rumps, everyone has one. However, the fact is that the APA is our governing body in these matters and it does not support your opinion.

I don't believe it does the breed (hobby) any favours to recreate the rules as they fit our personal marketing agendas. It only creates confusion for newcomers to the breed, and distracts them from learning the essense of the breed. I believe that this divisive issue has done more to hurt the reputation of the ameraucana breed than help it. It makes the Ameraucana breed community look like a community in dissarray.

Omega, you keep saying that I have my opinion because of a certain breed club and that is not true. I have nothing to do with that breed club and I am not even a member. I have a serious interest in the breed though. I am not a Grand Master Breeder, but I have been kicking around the poultry fancy for a few years now, in two different hemispheres. I form my opinions around what I see and what the Standard has to say. I do not have marketing agendas as my birds are my hobby not my living. I sell a few extras every year that don't make my breeding pens (I also give a lot away) with full disclosure about why I chose to sell them.

I too could make the same statements as you as I feel that people selling any thing that 'might' lay a coloured egg of some sort are also doing terrible things for this breed. It takes more than a beard, muffs and a coloured egg to make an Ameraucana.

I have the APA Standard, open in front of me right now. Under disqualifications it has: Presence of ear tuffs, absence of beard and muffs. I hear all the time about people that have 'Ameraucana' chicks that don't have pea combs or beards and muffs.

As I look further down I see the recognised varieties are: Black, Blue, Blue Wheaten, Brown Red, Buff, Silver, Wheaten and White.

The Black and Blue varieties state that the shanks and toes are dark slate with the bottoms of the feet and toes white. The beak, black on the Black variety and dark horn on the blue.
The other varieties state that the shanks and toes are slate with bottoms of the feet and toes white. Most of these varieties have a beak requirement of horn to light horn.
They then go on to discuss the feather requirement of each variety.

So when I read the APA Standard I do believe it supports my opinion. It is telling me there is a breed called an Ameraucana that has a very interesting history of development. It tells me that there is a comb, distinctive facial features and a certain body type that distinguishes the breeds from others. It tells me that there are 7 Varieties that are recognised by the APA at this stage in the breeds development.
As far as egg colour goes, it is simply noted under Economic Qualities as a general purpose fowl for the production of meat and eggs, the latter having distinctive blue shell coloration.

This is where I have formed my opinions about this Breed, reading and researching the APA for the attributes a breed I am interested in should have. It is the same thing I have done with every breed I have gotten into. So please do not say again that my opinion is some parrot of someone elses as that is not the truth.

Sorry Sweetened, this is why I did not pipe up earlier, there threads always seem to go the same way. I am torn between trying to get more information out there about the breed and just staying out of it and not giving a sh*t. So this will be my last post on your thread that I feel has been taken over. I enjoyed your pictures and I am sure they will lay lovely coloured eggs for you.


Dan, you raise a question that is another toughy. You are very lucky to have a line that meets the requirements of the breed and variety. Nicely done!
The blue eggs are much easier to get in development of a new colour if a white laying bird is used. They do not add brown modifiers. That is why many of the Ams you see now have a more Mediterranean look about them instead of the meaty qualities they should have and that Omega wants to get back to. This will help keep the eggs blue, but it also can add white lobes, which I have seen often.
Most times when a new Variety is developed and outside breed is introduced to get this new colour. Then it is a matter of breeding back and back and back to re establish type again but still keep the new feather colour. It is a balancing act that takes years! I would say this is where the brown modifiers have crept in. For me the last thing I would work on is the egg colour if I was developing a new variety in this breed. Get the rest right first and keep the 'O' gene there all the time, but worry about the green colour when all else is truly consistent. So once you have the feather, body type, comb, shank, vitality, productiveness, fertility then you have a consistent product and you can start sorting egg colour.

Here is another personal opinion that I have formed all on my own. I think the blue is to pale in most of the varieties that I have personally been exposed to. I would like my blue to be a bit more BLUE and not the soft pastel blue that fades and fades as the laying season rolls on. The blue egg layers that I had in Aus did not have the same fading and I would love to try and figure out why I get it here. Egg shell colour should stay the same, but that has not been my experience to this stage.

Ok, back to is a green egg layer always an EE? I think in an ideal world that statement should be true but as you know birds are always a work in progress. I think all Ams should lay a blue egg and all mine do at this stage (although to light for my taste) but a green egg would not be the end of the world for me personally (as long as it was not a dark, olive green!) if it was an exceptional bird. I would just use it carefully, keep only pullets from it so I know what it is passing on, and use it to improve my program as much as I could.

Again, just my butt........I mean my opinion.

Slate and olive green (leg colour) are definintely not the same - green legs reveal the w allele. Being recessive, the w allele is pretty hard to get out of your breeding stock - it will keep showing up every now and then unless you rigorously test cross.

Slate is a result of dermal melanin with no epidermal melanin, and no w allele expression.

My understanding is that Ameraucana eggs should be pure blue, and any tint of green means you have a brown allele, at at least one of the many brown egg colour loci. It is VERY difficult to get rid of that last bit of green - way harder than getting rid of the w allele.

I'm a geneticist, not a breeder of pure breeds, so am no expert on the standards.

appway wrote:So OBF
What are saying is that you cross your colors??

no I do not believe that is what I said. From the initial 3 way cross, I selectively bred in 4 different directions. Each direction became a closed breeding flock. Once one is heading down one of the colour paths, it's makes absolutely no sense to cross colours.

Omega Blue Farms wrote:

appway wrote:So OBF
What are saying is that you cross your colors??

no I do not believe that is what I said. From the initial 3 way cross, I selectively bred in 4 different directions. Each direction became a closed breeding flock. Once one is heading down one of the colour paths, it's makes absolutely no sense to cross colours.

Here is what you said
That is the reason I asked

To increase the genepool's blue egg modifier genes, I stuck with Blue egg laying stock; crossing a hatchery ameraucana with local araucanas and then crossing the offspring with araucana wild stock from PEI's Jocelyn.

[quote="coopslave] So when I read the APA Standard I do believe it supports my opinion. [/quote]

You can believe this all you want but it doesn't make it true.

By your logic, a Blue Fawn Muscovy (cross between blue and chocolate) is not a muscovy because it is not a recognised variety according to the APA.

One of the reasons we enter birds into shows is to test our interpretation of the Standard of Perfection. Many of the opinions and assumptions shared in this thread can be easily tested by having birds judged in sanctioned shows. No need for a memo from the APA!

Simple fact is that any coloured Ameraucana can be entered into a sanctioned show and be judged. If it is a non-standard but bona fide variety, and labelled AOV, it gets judged according to the breed standard and the variety. If a non standard colour, and entered as AOC, it gets judged against the breed standard with colour ignored. Any bird lacking proper Ameraucana body type should get disqualified.

Therefore, any bird entered into an APA sanctioned show as an AOC Ameraucana that places is a reasonable representative of the breed. One can hold onto their opinions as tightly as they want, they cannot change this simple fact. Like it or not but understanding this fact is part of understanding the breed, understanding the Standard, and understanding Standard-Bred poultry in general.

That is very Interesting Omega Blue Farms
I Hope Rico or Heather will post on here and straighten it out as I can not see how see how that will work because if thats the case there would be alot of Mutts being being shown
My rump my Opinion
PS waiting to hear back From APA to hear what they say about it

.

Higginsrat wrote Anyone that is a true breeder of colour patterns, especially the intricately marked varieties, if they are on the ball, "crosses colours!" You betcha. Real colours, not Self-Black and certainly NOT Self-White, a.k.a. lack of pigment. Those are easy peasy and require no real finesse to get right generation after generation...once you have established the strain of course! Black and White win at shows very very often; there are less faults AND less difficulty getting these right. No challenge and they simply BORE ME near to tears! <<yawn>>

I agree they should cross colors to achieve the different colors
OMega Blue was asked a simple Question if the blacks from the farms line was crossed it was said that they did not cross but as I said in the quote yes they do.

I will not get intio it about dogs as this is a Poultry site But I have shown and Bred Purebred Registered dogs since I was 13 years old so for over 43 years and to be Purebred it has to be registered. If it is a pet it is Fixed and My litters I have had runts and they have lived long lifes and even been shown.
So I guess in my eyes and mind if a person is going to show AM's They should be the Recognized and approved colors Should they be able to be shown as AOV I will say yes but they should not be able to get anything but a ribbon saying they were shown not BV or RV again that is my opinion

.

I wanted to thank everyone for their contributions and I wanted to say I have a bit better understanding despite it all. Particularly (and this isn't to say others contributed less), I wanted to thank Coopslave, Omega and Higgins for their passionate responses.

This topic has kind of strayed, but I don't mind -- so I'll stray it even further. This is a hot topic, and I don't really understand why. There are 3 different descriptions of what sounds like the same set of birds with slightly varying qualities. It's not, but it should be as simple as blue-green = EE, Green = Araucana and blue = Ameraucana. Clearly there are other differences. It's great to know there's another colour/variety entrance, but lets be honest, I won't be breeding for shows anytime soon.

I thought I would mention I find it disheartening that people can't express their opinions about this without feeling attacked on the matter. What happened to the days where someone could say "I believe this because of this this and this" and someone could say "I believe in that because of that, that and that" and people would just acknowledge another person's point of view by saying they understand that person's belief system, however theirs is different. There's a lot of finger pointing and 'you're crazy/wrong'; nobody is wrong here, honestly. Everyone here is working to what they see as a betterment of the breed -- it doesn't make them wrong, it makes the pioneers and advocates. If I want to breed for coloured egg laying chanty-type birds, that's my right. If they're true to body type for Chanty but lay blue eggs, in my eyes that may be a chanty, not an EE because the egg colour is the only difference. It's a project -- it's not wrong. If we're talking about dogs (as mentioned), a Labrador retriever that isn't show quality isn't any less a Labrador retriever and there's absolutely no reason why someone shouldn't can't breed that dog if it has traits that THEY appreciate. A prime example is the GSD (watch me burn some people here). Some 'show quality' dogs now can hardly walk because of the stance that's being bred into them, yet I've seen them take best of breed. You ask the farmer who works his GSD if he wants a show version; he'll tell you 'no'. Those show breeders will also tell that farmer his GSD, who works, is inferior. It's all opinion. The conversations should be "I have my non-show GSD breeding line for X because it works for me." The response should be "And I have my GSD's because of X, and that works for me." Neither person is wrong in the scheme of things, and one may not approve of the other, but opinion is the grey area of life where all people must meet and accept that other's have their own.

Thanks again

YUP, Ill buy that if no one else will...and the bluu egg laying chanty too!! Chanticaunas!!

HigginsRat
I am not going to quote alot of the stuff
but It was the Dalmatian that they Bred to a Pointer For Kidney Problems that were in Dalmatian's and it is still causing alot of flack today.

As for exibition only that is fine it is a way to make extra money for the clubs CKC does it as well as Chicken clubs.

If a new Variety is shown AOV or AOC and they get BV or RV for the Aov that they are entered in that is fine as long as it stops there. I guess what gets me is The people that advertise the win as They have beet all of the Recognized Variety's That are there. Or the ones that show a total cross that cannot produce its self but looks like the breed.

I have alot of crossed color AM's and I love them all

Will I try and show them AOV no but that is my choice.

I am Fully aware that a New color Variety has to be shown as exhibition to try and be recognized But it also has to be a group of people not just one person that enters a show.
I guess in the long run I am not saying the other colors are wrong it is just the people that are crossing the colors and getting a recognized color out of the mix and showing it and winning and then breeding it to sell eggs or chicks but not ever coming clean that it is out of different colors.

I guess with me producing are correct and good representative of a breed is more important then the sale of the produce.

Just wanted to Add Sweetend I love the Colors of the Birds that you posted and will be interesting to see the egggs they produce
I has a couple that were colored like your white with the black neck feathers and they produced the best colored Blue eggs ever.
Did not mean to Hijack your thread But all in all it has been very interesting and have learned alot about what people are breeding and alot about true colors

Joe

HigginsRAT wrote:

Omega Blue Farms wrote:Once one is heading down one of the colour paths, it's makes absolutely no sense to cross colours.

And BS Man...talk to me when you are breeding Partridge (and NOT on a Silkie...forget that--try a Chanty or two, eh!), Silver Pencilled, Mille de Fleur, Magpie, Pied, or maybe a really simple one like Silver Spangled Hamburgs...then you can tell me all about "not needing to cross colours!" BS Man...BUNS of STEEL, what do you think I was calling Wayne??

Tara, you never fail to create a smile.

I tend to manage my genepools quite differently than most standard bred breeders. I don't want show birds, I want PRODUCTIVE birds that can be shown. I am less than impressed with the quality of most of the birds I see in poultry shows, poultry swaps, backyards, etc despite the sincere efforts of many dedicated breeders. My conclusion is that the conventional breeding methods used to maintain Standard Bred birds is inadaquate. I don't feel historically popular approaches are capable of sustaining the breeds anymore. Now this is just my opinion, and not a fact, LOL. At any rate, it's been said that repeating the same actions hoping for different results is an act of insanity.

I start by creating a genetic mess that possesses all the traits I want, along with lots of traits I don't want. Then generation after generation I slowly remove the unwanted while maintaining the wanted traits. Each generation, maintaining the diversity that provides all the desired traits takes precidence over removing unwanted. Slow and steady. Quantitative traits take precidence over Qualitative.

Now every genepool is different and therefore I take different approaches with each. If I consider my muscovy, the call of BS is definately accurate. I have absolutely no problem crossing the blacks, blues, and chocolates and I do so without hesitation.

However, the question was centered on how I manage my Black Ameraucanas and the simple truth is that I have no desire of outcrossing them. The goal of the breeding effort is to establish a new benchmark for the breed. There is currently nothing good enough for me to justify outcrossing to and therefore an outcross would take me backwards, not forwards. What I've seen to date tells me that I'll be dead before genetic drift and/or inbreeding depression forces an outcross.

Egg colour is far too complicated to simply suggest that blue is more pure than green.

You can cross any green egg laying mutt to a leghorn and get the prettiest blue eggs. Leghorns carry a gene that supresses brown eggshell pigments. Leghorns also have white earlobe colour. This is why many ameraucanas that lay blue eggs also have white earlobes, a disqualification for the breed.

I liken the obsession some have for pure blue eggs to not seeing the forest for the trees. It's been my experience that colour intensity is far more valuable than the specific shade of colour. Granted, I have absolutely no use for Olive Green eggs and never hatch from them, but I will take an intensly coloured AquaMarine coloured egg over a pale blue one anyday of the week. An intense blue/green is far more appealing in the egg carton than a washed out blue that almost looks white. Especially when produced by a bird with red earlobes.

The obsession over blue eggs is an arbitrary notion that ignores the histories of the breeds and their marketability. From a historical perspective, aquamarine is no less accurate than sky blue. The obsession ignores what makes the breeds special and attractive. Some here like to distance themselves from the notion of marketability, but the simple basic truth is that marketability is what determines the sustainabiity of our breeding efforts. Those breeders that ignore marketability are breeding for extinction, what's the point in that?

The majority of those that want our breeding culls are looking for pretty eggs. Like it or not, but colour intensity and diversity of shades make for prettier eggs. A carton full of washed out sky blue eggs is rather boring in comparison. Therefore, colour intensity is far more valuable to the breed than any specific shade.

I agree, intensity is a neglected (and to me, too, highly desirable) colour trait.

To clarify - the brown-egg-colour-suppressing gene in leghorns is sexlinked and recessive. Thus a male leghorn crossed with a green-egg-laying hen will give (female) offspring that lay blue eggs, but the reverse cross will not. And (as of course you know, but others might not) those blue-egg offspring won't breed true; the brown egg alleles are hiding, not eliminated.

Thanks IPF
Very well said

And it is nice to know that The Blue Egg layer's that people are selling can lay brown eggs even if they appear to be one of the Pure Variety's that they are selling

I'm confused -

You say:
"The Blue Egg layer's that people are selling can lay brown eggs even if they appear to be one of the Pure Variety's that they are selling"

If it lays blue eggs, it always lays blue eggs, never brown eggs. A given bird will always lay eggs of the same colour (although they vary by intensity over the season).

I assume you mean that:
1. A bird that looks like an Amer/Arau can lay brown eggs; and/or that
2. A bird that lays blue eggs can have a daughter that lays brown eggs?

If so, yes, both those statements are true.