Ear Color, How Many Lines, etc.

[Tailfeathers]

I just sold 7 cockerels and roosters today.  I even sold General Grant though that was hard to do but there\'s no since breeding him and going backwards.  I think Ulysses was the last remaining bird from my original start.  

Now I\'ve got the #7 BW Cockerel with the really clean hackles left, a #3 BW Cockerel (from last years #11 - General Grant - over #13 BW hens), and a #8 W Cockerel (from last years #12 W rooster - Tucumseh - over #13 W hens.)  Both the W & BW #13\'s are full sisters.  

I will breed all females I keep under each of the 3 males.

So now I\'m looking at my bird talley and seeing things like:  

1) I have two #1 Wheaten pullets.  One has pale ears and one doesn\'t.

2) I have one #2 BW pullet that has white ears.  

3) I have two #7 BW pullets that I don\'t think have any major faults.  At least I don\'t have anything recorded now.  I will take another look at them.  But I culled two #7 BW pullets because one was clean-faced with white ears.  White but not enamel white.  The other had white ears, a big comb for a female, and was somewhat off color.  And then I have a #7 Wheaten pullet that has good ears, good tail, but a bad over-sized comb.  Almost like a cockerel\'s.

4) I have three #8 pullets.  One W that is ok (no major faults), one BW that is ok, and then another W that has white ears.

5) I have a one #11 BW pullet, two #12 W pullets, and one #13 W pullet that all seem ok.

6) I have two #14 Wheaten pullets that both have pale ears.

7) I have three W pullets that are not toe-punched so they\'d be a 0 or 16.  I didn\'t have a 0 or 16 pen so these were chicks that must\'ve somehow gotten loose as I took them out of the hatching tray or something else happened where I couldn\'t tell who they were and didn\'t punch them.  
    So here are my thoughts and I\'d like to get everyones feedback on these:

1) WRT to #1 above:  breed the one #1 and cull the other.  Agree or disagree?  How touchy is the pale/white earlobes?  Easy to fix or no?

2) This sole #2 pullet is the result of last year\'s #11 W Rooster over the #10 BW hens.  As a reminder, the two #10 BW hens give a white and almost white egg but I get 4 to 5 eggs a week from each.  So, should I do the same with these as Mike suggested with the #7 rooster and breed them? Oh, see also has white ears.  Would that make a difference in whether I should breed her?

3) As you can see, my #7\'s are all over the place.  So I\'m thinking of breeding my #7\'s only to their brother and then keeping only the offspring with good ears, good muffs, and good combs.  Yes?  No?

4) I\'m guessing I should cull the #8 pullet with white ears & only breed the other two?

5) No brainer.  I\'ll breed all these.

6) Rather than ask the obvious question about the ears again, I got to looking back through the previous several years of breeding plans and it reminds me of another question.  Does anyone already have some kind of ancestry chart they use to keep track of the lineage of their birds?  If so I would like to get a copy if possible.  If not, I can probably make one which brings me to another question... how many years should I keep track of and trace back?  I\'m thinking back four generations - to the great, great grandparents.  Shouldn\'t that be far enough?

7) A couple of them look really good.  Initially I was thinking I wouldn\'t breed them since I couldn\'t go back and trace where they came from.  But now that I see them and how good they look, I\'m wondering if it might not hurt to breed them and just identify them as a 0 and create a new line from there?  What would be some pros and cons to this?

Ok, I\'m going to work now on my Breeding Plan.  Look forward to hearing any and all comments, suggestions, etc.

God Bless,

[Mike Gilbert]

Lots of info, lots of questions.   Each breeder will have their own priorities and their own methods.  The important thing is record keeping, so you know a year from now which bird is out of which mating.   One method I have used with some success is what I call  \"double fault\" culling.  In an established line any bird with two or more major faults is culled, not bred from.   Just as an example, I would consider white (or brown) eggs AND white earlobes a double fault.   If a bird has only one of those faults, and is good otherwise, I would use it with a mate that would compensate for those faults.   Never breed two birds together that both have the same fault.   Sometimes test matings are required to eliminate a fault, such as males that throw pullets who lay white eggs.

[John]

Does anyone already have some kind of ancestry chart they use to keep track of the lineage of their birds?

Not that I use it or recommend it, but there is poultry pedigree software out there.  Just do a search.
Several years ago someone was really promoting thier program, but don\'t see the ads anymore.

[Schroeder]

Sorry for such an elementary question but can someone explain the #\'s preceding the birds description, e.g. #7 BW.  

[greeneggsandham]

I think it simply means number 7.  Probably their method for keeping track of who came from where.

[Tailfeathers]

Thanks everyone for the replies.  Mike I like the \"double fault\" rule and will use that.  I also like the \"never breed two birds together with the same fault\".  

So now I have a follow up question.  When looking at my #7 cockerel with the really clean hackles but has pinkish white ears, and then looking at what I wrote about the #7 females... would you then say to not breed the #7 male to any #7 females that also have light ears?  Or, in other words, due to all the other characteristics of the other #7 females, can I expect to get nothing but light ears from breeding a brother to sister when both have light ears?  

Obviously there must be some red ear genes in the line because I\'ve got #7\'s with nice really red ears.  My thought is more intense inbreeding coupled with ruthless culling would expedite cleaning up the line or eliminating it altogether.  True or no?  And since I don\'t know which is the dominant and which is the recessive gene, that\'s why I ask.  

Schroeder, the #7 is the toe-punch ID of the bird from last years #7 breeding pen which consisted of my #12 W Roo over my #10 BW hens.

God Bless,

[Mike Gilbert]

So now I have a follow up question.  When looking at my #7 cockerel with the really clean hackles but has pinkish white ears, and then looking at what I wrote about the #7 females... would you then say to not breed the #7 male to any #7 females that also have light ears?  Or, in other words, due to all the other characteristics of the other #7 females, can I expect to get nothing but light ears from breeding a brother to sister when both have light ears?  

Obviously there must be some red ear genes in the line because I\'ve got #7\'s with nice really red ears.  My thought is more intense inbreeding coupled with ruthless culling would expedite cleaning up the line or eliminating it altogether.  True or no?  And since I don\'t know which is the dominant and which is the recessive gene, that\'s why I ask.  

It\'s difficult to answer this without some photos of your #7 clean hackled cockerel.   Any chance you take a few shots and post them here?   But other things being equal, I would use the #7 K in several ways.    But if he has white in the lobes I would not mate him to females that have enamel white in the lobes.  Pale or pink is different than white.  Nearly all my Ameraucana females have pale lobes and I consider that a breed characteristic, especially in the bantams.  But I do look for good red lobes in the males.
Here is how I might use him.   First I would mate him with one or more white egg layers to see if he throws any that do not lay blue eggs.  I never mate brothers and sisters.  Cockerels to their mothers, cocks to their pullet offspring, yes, but not brother/sister.     I would also mate him with some of your best blue egg layers that have red earlobes.
Since clean hackles seem to be so rare in this variety, I would consider mating him back to his best daughters next season.  Those daughters would have to have good lobe color and lay a decent shade of blue egg.  All this assumes no major type flaws which would require compensatory matings.
Again, photos would help.

[Tailfeathers]

Thanks Mike.  Just FYI, none of my birds have enamel white in the earlobes.  At least I don\'t think they do.  They certainly don\'t look like a normal white-eared chicken.  Some are just pale or pinkish.  Some are more white but it\'s still not what I\'d call a enamel or ear like a normal white-eared bird.  Leghorn for example.

Unfortunately, I don\'t have a digital camera handy anymore.  The one I had was the wife\'s Christmas present and she took that with her of course.  If I ever make any money this year, the first thing I\'m treating myself to is a new Canon 7D though!

I\'m copying your notes to my breeding plan so I can remember.  Thanks!

How come you would \"never\" breed a brother to sister?

God Bless,

[Mike Gilbert]

How come you would \"never\" breed a brother to sister?

It is the most extreme form of inbreeding, and repeated use of this method year after year will usually accelerate inbreeding attributes such as decreased production, decreased hatchability, infertility, genetic deformities, and slower growth.  That has been my experience.   It is different, of course, if the parents of the birds to be bred are totally unrelated.   That\'s why I should have qualified my statement by saying, \"in established strains.\"

[Tailfeathers]

Thanks Mike.  I\'m aware of all those things and the increased risk.  Just wondering if I missed something.  

Just for the record, I\'ve never bred Brother to Sister in the past but was just thinking about doing so on the #7\'s because of all the variations I\'m getting - of which some of them are for the good!

God Bless,