The Official Forum of the Ameraucana Breeders Club > Exhibiting & Promoting
Feathers between toes
Guest:
As you said, stubs are a disqualification on breeds that are supposed to be clean legged, and according to the APA:
--- Quote ---Faking is a deliberate attempt to deceive the judge or a prospective purchaser.
--- End quote ---
More specificly, from page 34, under General Disqualifications in the American Standard of Perfection 2010::
--- Quote ---e. Clean Legged Chickens, Guinea Fowl, Ducks and Geese
1. Preseence of, or unmistakable evidence of the removal of any down, stub, feather or part of feather from shank below the hock joint, or foot, or toe.
--- End quote ---
I\'ve never shown a chicken in my life, but experienced at showing other animals. My experience is that some people cheat, including, sometimes, the judges. The dishonest people usually try to justify it with \"Everybody else is doing it.\" :rolleyes:
ETA: Before I gave my life to Him, winning was important enough that I didn\'t consider it cheating as long as I didn\'t caught. Today I still don\'t claim to be a saint, but consider some things far more important than winning a show.
Mike Gilbert:
Steve, if I thought the practice was dishonest I would not be openly discussing it in a public forum. My idea of faking is, for example, coloring or burning white tips on dark feathers, shaping the comb or removing side-springs by cutting (except for birds that must be dubbed), using a needle insertion to straighten a comb, and drugging a bird to make it seem docile. The list could go on. How about inserting substances in cattle to make them appear more muscular in certain places? Nevertheless, it (removing stubs) is a valid topic for discussion. I would like to hear what other experienced exhibitors have to say. Let me repeat, no-one should ever go against their own conscience.
Jess:
Evening Folks.
Steve, you are right on.
There are things in life that are a lot more important than winning at a show.
I would never intentionally deceive any one, if I do, I’m deceiving myself.
I think if it has a defect it is a cull no mater what else it may be.
Just my humble opinion
Jess
Mike Gilbert:
Jess, if we all cleaned out the birds that had \"defects\" most of us would have few birds left, if any. There are none that are perfect.
Beth C:
--- Quote --- if we all cleaned out the birds that had \"defects\" most of us would have few birds left
--- End quote ---
I\'d have zero. I wonder how many people have been run out of this hobby by unrealistic expectations. When I first got started I read posts (mostly from novices) on another site railing against \"irresponsible breeders\" who use birds with defects (and we\'re talking such truly unforgivable defects as laying an egg with a greenish cast or having less than perfect beards/muffs :rolleyes:). By their standards every bird I owned should have been destroyed - it was absolutely demoralizing. I\'d likely have given up had I not found more experience breeders, many of them here, who raise birds in the real world...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version