Inbreeding....

[Hilary B]

You're not the only one!
Once the mounting horror reached a critical level I looked further down the post and saw the words "hatch an egg"... there was a definite sigh of relief.

I do wish people wouldn't talk about animals like they are people! It may seem a bit cute but mainly it's a bit potty and leads to some VERY strange things like the OP sounded.
(Granted, it probably would have been a bit more obvious if I'd come to the post from the main forum and not the New Posts page.)

I refer to animals' families/relation in the same way as I would for human animals, and use 'he' and 'she' rather than 'it' mainly for clarity (within context). I always have done and I intend to continue. Why does it bother you?
I really can't see any reason to imagine the thread referred to humans. Why would anyone discuss incest on this forum, isn't there some ruling about 'illegal matters' being banned?

[Bramble-Poultry]

Having had some experience of this, it is perfectly acceptable (according to Gregor Mendel) to allow the F1 generation (first cross) to perform a cross of father to the daughter to "fix" a desired trait within the gene pool, and create the F2 generation.

However, at this stage you would not want to mix the F1 and F2 together ideally, nor cross back to the father as this could not only fix desired traits even further, but could also fix faults, some unseen internal problems.

Therefore, i do have genuine concerns when i hear about small gene pools of particular birds as i worry that the blood line is getting rather confused. If at all possible, you should outcross a F2 bird with one of a similar line to the father, but not the father.

E.G fathers line is P1, brother P2, brother P3 etc

Fathers line (P1-P3) mates to hens and creates F1(P1), F1(P2) and F1(P3)
Father line then can back cross to F1 hens to fix gene and create F2(P1) F2(P2) and F2(P3)

To get the next generation (F3) i would suggest crossing either F2(P1) cocks to F2(P2) hens, F2(P2) cocks to F2(P3) hens and F2(P3) cocks to F2(P1) hens to develop three new bloodlines, and then keep crossing back and forth over the years to keep the lines as unrelated as possible, or possibly (if you need to fix more genes) P1 cock to F2(P2) hens etc etc

However, also bear in mind if you keep going back to the grandfather (or even great grand father) the viability of the eggs may suffer as this particular bird will be aging all the time and may not pass on the best genes at all.

Note that places like the Wernlas Collection run a minimum of three breeding groups of each type to keep the bloodlines pure as possible.

Again, i worry for the Chocolate Orpington Bantam as these birds are descended from 4 original birds. If we keep interbreeding these will will develop inheritted problems. We need to mix up new blood to refresh the gene pool of this bird. As the chocolate gene is a recessive one, carried on the Cock, we could cross the chocolate hens to black orpington cocks and then we will get 25% pure chocolate, 25% pure black and 50% black, carrying chocolate. This would give enough diversity to cross in between to freshen up the blood lines for a further two or three generations.

It also might help bring down the price of these birds as i feel that the breeder has a strangle hold on supply and happily charges £270 for 6 hatching eggs (and some mug pays it too). This makes them not only a highly inbred group, carry potential problems, but a major theft risk to the person who owns them. Reducing their price will certainly help in the second regard, and introducing new blood from the black gene to what is essentially a mutated throw back (sorry to be so cruel sounding to this lovely little bird, but call it as it is I say) to create the chocolate gene, will help preserve the purity of the blood.

[organic]

Hilary, you've made a connection that simply isn't there. I have no issue at all with using gender references like him/he and her/she in relation to livestock. It's terms like "girls" and "boys" and referring to the human element in livestock (and pets for that matter) as "mummy" and "daddy" that's a bit odd.

They aren't girls, they are pullets or hens.
They aren't boys, they are roosters or cockerels.
They aren't babies, they are chicks.

That's what I mean when I say talking about them like they are people.

As for the incest thing - there were a few jokey comments between a few posters, no more. I even pointed out the reason it read the way it did.

I humbly offer my most utterly sincere apologies. I'll try to remember not to have another fleeting moment where a thread seems to be talking about something that it isn't, by design or accident, and be sure to think through all the angles (I'll probably use note paper to make sure I've contemplated it thoroughly) before I have any funny moments and I certainly won't post anything about them ever again no matter how much I laughed about it or how many others mention something similar.

Ever so sorry.

[frias]

I will continue to call my hens my girls and the cocks my boys. And yes I have a mummy hen. I always say "hello girl" to my mums dog too as I don't think "hello bitch" sounds very nice!
Had to smile when my neighbour asked me if her male duckling would mate with his mother.

[organic]

Feel free.
I dunno why a throwaway comment has been taken as something akin to a cease and desist notice.

[Eco-Chic]

Why would anyone discuss incest on this forum, isn't there some ruling about 'illegal matters' being banned?

Any poster committing incest ain't likely to worry about posting violations are they?

[Hilary B]

Hilary, you've made a connection that simply isn't there. I have no issue at all with using gender references like him/he and her/she in relation to livestock. It's terms like "girls" and "boys" and referring to the human element in livestock (and pets for that matter) as "mummy" and "daddy" that's a bit odd.

They aren't girls, they are pullets or hens.
They aren't boys, they are roosters or cockerels.
They aren't babies, they are chicks.

That's what I mean when I say talking about them like they are people.

As for the incest thing - there were a few jokey comments between a few posters, no more. I even pointed out the reason it read the way it did.

I humbly offer my most utterly sincere apologies. I'll try to remember not to have another fleeting moment where a thread seems to be talking about something that it isn't, by design or accident, and be sure to think through all the angles (I'll probably use note paper to make sure I've contemplated it thoroughly) before I have any funny moments and I certainly won't post anything about them ever again no matter how much I laughed about it or how many others mention something similar.

Ever so sorry.

They are 'people' of a different species. They ARE 'boys' and 'girls' and little ones ARE 'babies' of their kind. While I would not usually refer to 'mummy' or 'daddy' I do (if it describes what I mean) comment on ' Mother' or 'Father' (or even 'Aunt' or 'Uncle').
If you throw in a comment like "I wish people wouldn't...." you must expect those who see no reason NOT to do what you comment on to reply in a less than amused way. There isn't much sign of amusement in that kind of remark. As for taking the 'ump at someone disliking the way it comes across, pot... kettle... I'm sure you know the rest.

[petal]

Blimey. Rule the roost! I think of my chickens as girls and boys and give them human names, i prefer them to some humans, don't you?!
Very interested in the chocolate orpington line- can't believe what people are paying for hatching eggs! Incredible....

[Bramble-Poultry]

Mine are all my babies too - all 148 of them!!! and yes the vast majority have names (not that I can remember them all but Charlotte can!)

[Eco-Chic]

I doubt I would be able to think up 148 names.

All my animals are my babies, girls, boys, littleys when they are good. They are farmyard names and profanities when they are bad.

[Bramble-Poultry]

Ah but isn't that the case with all animals and kids for that matter - my kids have nicknames but when they are naughty its their full name including middle name!!!

So with chickens its no different they get called *beep* words as my kids call them and farmyard names!

148 names - I don't think of them - thats what Charlotte is for - if ever you are short of a name or two she has a notebook full - she jots them down whne they come to her and then are utilised at some point - I have to say I think her best yet is our trio of black cochins they are called "Nick and bock and glory" (say it fast including the ands)!!

[Eco-Chic]

...our trio of black cochins they are called "Nick and bock and glory" (say it fast including the ands)!!

Now that is very good

[Nicos]

BP- thanks for all that info- it's very interesting!

I just want to make sure I do the 'right thing' peeps!

[organic]

Hilary, there's a gulf of difference between a few people having a laugh and someone deciding to take someone to task over something they DIDN'T say... and that person getting titched about someone having a dig about that same thing they didn't say.

Do you not think that it's a bit strange that of 200odd thread views and about 9 different posters before you (including the OP, I might add, who joined in on the joking) - only you saw fit to come wading in all defensive about what had (and hadn't) been said?

Over it.

[Hilary B]

Hilary, there's a gulf of difference between a few people having a laugh and someone deciding to take someone to task over something they DIDN'T say... and that person getting titched about someone having a dig about that same thing they didn't say.

Do you not think that it's a bit strange that of 200odd thread views and about 9 different posters before you (including the OP, I might add, who joined in on the joking) - only you saw fit to come wading in all defensive about what had (and hadn't) been said?

Over it.

errrr......... my reaction was to the phrase "I wish people wouldn't....." If that was meant humourously, it was very badly worded. If you want to take it from there, that is your choice.
I didn't see any 'joking' in the idea of the thread meaning something totally unrealted to what it DID mean. I agree that such comments COULD be humourous, but because of the phrase mentioned above, I didn't see it that way, and I reacted accordingly. If you dislike some of us not 'getting the joke' perhaps you should wonder whether you need to express your meaning better (I know I sometimes have that problem).
I don't know where you got 200 odd comments between the supposedly humourous 'objection' to the thread and my reply to that comment, since this thread is only 30 posts long!
Now I will say that I don't always get my opinion across very clearly on message boards, I also don't actually get greatly bothered. Any impression that I am annoyed (as opposed to irritated and feeling pedantic) is a combination of me not putting it well, and the reader misunderstanding.