Project Colors and the APA

[Jean]

If you have been or plan to work on a project color of ameraucana, I strongly suggest you become a member of the APA.

It has been said that the APA is going to change their rules for accepting new varieties.  They have supposedly already put a moratorium on any new variety until they have hashed this out and changed their By-Laws.

The new rule they want to pass is that the five breeders who have bred the new variety for five years must also be a member of the APA.  They plan no grandfather clause to this proposal. 

If you have a problem with this proposal and are currently a member of the APA, I suggest you contact your District Representative and discuss a "grandfather" solution.  Since most people working on project varieties have been following the written guidelines provided by the APA for the past several years, to change it after many have just finished their five year mark is not fair.

I would also encourage all members of our Board of Directors to become members of the APA.  The APA sanctions all our shows and is the "Parent Organization" of poultry exhibitors and clubs.

[John]

This has been a topic on another forum a while back and evidently the APA still hasn't modified the procedure that they put on hold.  Here are some of my thoughts on the subject that were posted on the other forum...

I've been part of several businesses and organization and the way they are going about this sounds very unusual to me. I don't know why they would suspend part of their constitution, while looking at revising it. Unless someone's safety is involved that is not normal operating procedure and it makes me less likely to trust the APA.

To make the change (the 5 breeders have to have been APA members during the 5 years), without some type of grandfathering is outrageous. At a minimum they should allow any of the 5 that don't meet the criteria to pay back dues, so the petitioner isn't punished by their sudden change in plan. What next? In three or four years will they reset the clocks with another requirement?

I have over 3 decades of breeding and exhibiting experience with memberships in both breed clubs and our local show club. Because my main hobby is breeding and not exhibiting I've never joined the APA...points don't mean anything to me. If they were lobbying on my behalf, like the NRA does, I would have joined. If the 5 year membership rule was in affect years ago I would have joined, but now I will wait to see how the officers of the APA resolve the problem they came up with before affiliating my name with their organization. Membership in a club needs to provide some benefits/privileges and I certainly understand that. If the APA can't regain their prior reputation to establish them as The premiere organization representing standard poultry it is time to start a new club.

[Clif Redden]

I have been in favor and support of trying to get other varieties, such as the Splash and Lavenders recognized and I think it would be in the ABC's best interest to try to work with the APA since they are the organization who recognized the Ameraucana in the first place and hold the Standard of Perfection in which we are all to go by. I  intend to join the APA .

[Mike Gilbert]

Cliff, it was actually the ABA who recognized Ameraucanas first.   ABA recognition came in 1980, the APA not until 1984.   The large fowl Ameraucanas came in on the coat tails of the bantams, the LF without even a qualifying meet.   We in the Ameraucana Bantam Club at the time were surprised to say the least.   After the announcement was made, I worked with John Skinner of the University of  Wisconsin, then chairman of the APA Standards Committee, to re-word the bantam Standard for the APA.   John did the primary work, but submitted it to us for comments and revisions.   He got a bad rap from Don and a few others, but he was as impartial as anyone could be.  Prior to the APA qualifying meet for bantams (Ohio National, 1983) John had encouraged us to work with Tom Lippincott's group based in Ohio to form a unified Ameraucana Standard, but we had already been approved by the ABA, and Tom would not cooperate with us.  His birds had mostly yellow and willow shanks, so I suppose that was the main reason. 

[Clif Redden]

Thanks for the correction Mike. I was focused on Large fowl.

[Lee G]

Good food for thought here.

I’m not a member of the APA (yet), although I do own an SOP and reference it a lot. But I do see the importance of supporting an organization that is almost 150 years old and full of dedicated folks committed to maintaining a written Standard for the breeds within. While I do not agree with everything they are doing, (John makes good points) without the SOP and the governing body of the APA, the genetic diversity we enjoy today may have been lost years ago. As it stands, they help to keep the collective gene pool broad and deep across North America, which only benefits us all. Plus, the SOP keeps everyone on the right track in their breeding programs. Without such guidance, breeds that took 50 years or more to develop could be gone in the blink of an eye. And what a true shame that would be... I’m also fairly new to poultry (since 2009) and to breeding poultry (my real obsession began in earnest in 2010) and have much to learn. And I do want to learn…

Cliff, it was actually the ABA who recognized Ameraucanas first.   ABA recognition came in 1980, the APA not until 1984.   The large fowl Ameraucanas came in on the coat tails of the bantams, the LF without even a qualifying meet.   We in the Ameraucana Bantam Club at the time were surprised to say the least.   After the announcement was made, I worked with John Skinner of the University of  Wisconsin, then chairman of the APA Standards Committee, to re-word the bantam Standard for the APA.   John did the primary work, but submitted it to us for comments and revisions.   He got a bad rap from Don and a few others, but he was as impartial as anyone could be.  Prior to the APA qualifying meet for bantams (Ohio National, 1983) John had encouraged us to work with Tom Lippincott's group based in Ohio to form a unified Ameraucana Standard, but we had already been approved by the ABA, and Tom would not cooperate with us.  His birds had mostly yellow and willow shanks, so I suppose that was the main reason.

Fascinating how it all worked out…

[John]

The concept of the APA is a good one and similar to the AKC for dog fanciers.  As with any organization they have had ups and downs.  A century ago the ABA was formed and as I recall history tells us it from discontent with the APA.  Even though the two groups now work together they have not merged and some have more allegiance to one than the other.  I believe competition is good and the two should either not be in cahoots or join together.  The ABA only deals with bantams, so that limits them when it comes to being a true alternative.
The APA created a problem by changing/suspending rules in the middle of a game.  If you are a member or join, please work from within to get them straightened out.  It is obvious they need leadership with officers on the same page.