Backyard Poultry Forum • View topic - Australian Standard book

Backyard Poultry Forum

Chickens, waterfowl & all poultry - home of exhibition & backyard poultry in Australia & New Zealand
Login with a social network:
It is currently Wed May 23, 2018 6:17 pm

All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 194 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 9:13 pm 
Offline
Forum Founder
Forum Founder
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:22 am
Posts: 6523
Location: Tallangatta, Vic
the big schilling watermark picture in the link looks good ruff :thumbs:
Not sure about the little sketches, they don't look balanced in my eyes at all....

_________________
MONEY can't buy happiness....but it can buy CHOOKS, and that's pretty much the same thing


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 9:16 pm 
Offline
Proud Rooster
Proud Rooster

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:27 pm
Posts: 293
Location: Mundoolun - Gold Coast Hinterlands Qld
Another Review

We had some friends over for morning tea and our two copies of the Standards were on the table. Also on the table was the latest Neepa Year Book, which has several hundred coloured pictures of show fowls in it. These people are not show poultry breeders or exhibitors, but they do have a few assorted purebred backyard layers.

One very significant comment they made was about the Australian Standards book is the lack of quality pictures for each individual breed and colour and I do agree with them.

Novices really would love and enjoy to see the colours of those fowls such as Blue & White in the Australian Langshans and the Australorps, all the different pretty colours of the Belgians, Japanese, OEG’s and Modern Game, the rare colours in the Sussex and Wyandottes, and all the different colours of the lovely Waterfowl, and many many more pictures.

It is not as if the Australian Standards Committee didn’t have access to all of these pictures because they had libraries from some of the best poultry photographers in the country as well as dozens of pictures send it from the various breed societies. They acknowledged most of them in their book.

Some of the pictures and hand drawings are fabulous, and some are woeful.

My simple comment is that if mere backyarders can point this out, why couldn't those learned men on the APS Committee listen or consider some other options?

In saying all that above I still love the book and my husband, who wrote one of the new standards for one breed, is happy as well (although he grumbled about some of the weights of the fowls), but as I pointed out to him, “You are a judge, you know all these fowls, we mere novices know nothing. Why didn't they have pictures like Neepa?” He couldn’t answer.

The other slight failing in the review of this book is the lack of Judging and Stewarding Guidelines. There has been an excellent 32 page booklet written for new and old Judges and Stewards that has sold now over 150 copies. I know about this booklet as I typeset the damn thing. :roll: We would have liked to have seen that as part of an Australian Judging Standard as well.

Perhaps when the 3rd Edition is thought about we can help them?

The Australorp Club of Australia has done a little review here: http://www.australorps.com/4.html

Cheers from Wendy :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 9:26 pm 
Offline
Showy Hen
Showy Hen

Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:40 pm
Posts: 247
Wendy_S wrote:
Another Review

We had some friends over for morning tea and our two copies of the Standards were on the table. Also on the table was the latest Neepa Year Book, which has several hundred coloured pictures of show fowls in it. These people are not show poultry breeders or exhibitors, but they do have a few assorted purebred backyard layers.

One very significant comment they made was about the Australian Standards book is the lack of quality pictures for each individual breed and colour and I do agree with them.

Novices really would love and enjoy to see the colours of those fowls such as Blue & White in the Australian Langshans and the Australorps, all the different pretty colours of the Belgians, Japanese, OEG’s and Modern Game, the rare colours in the Sussex and Wyandottes, and all the different colours of the lovely Waterfowl, and many many more pictures.

It is not as if the Australian Standards Committee didn’t have access to all of these pictures because they had libraries from some of the best poultry photographers in the country as well as dozens of pictures send it from the various breed societies. They acknowledged most of them in their book.

Some of the pictures and hand drawings are fabulous, and some are woeful.

My simple comment is that if mere backyarders can point this out, why couldn't those learned men on the APS Committee listen or consider some other options?

In saying all that above I still love the book and my husband, who wrote one of the new standards for one breed, is happy as well (although he grumbled about some of the weights of the fowls), but as I pointed out to him, “You are a judge, you know all these fowls, we mere novices know nothing. Why didn't they have pictures like Neepa?” He couldn’t answer.

The other slight failing in the review of this book is the lack of Judging and Stewarding Guidelines. There has been an excellent 32 page booklet written for new and old Judges and Stewards that has sold now over 150 copies. I know about this booklet as I typeset the damn thing. :roll: We would have liked to have seen that as part of an Australian Judging Standard as well.

Perhaps when the 3rd Edition is thought about we can help them?

The Australorp Club of Australia has done a little review here: http://www.australorps.com/4.html

Cheers from Wendy :D


JMO but this is were the Breed Associations should publish there own colour guide/ judging requirements. The Australorp club seems to be on the front foot. How many of the top Australorp breeders like modern game breeders judging there fowl? for eg. Wouldn't it mean far more for another top Australorp breeder to be judging there fowl??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 9:35 pm 
andy the big illustration is not the one in the aus poultry standards, it is those 4 little ones. considering the commitee members took advise from the national poultry clubs then i feel perhaps it is the INDAIN GAME club of australia who wanted these illustrations included. i cannot believe people like rick kemp and james bishop would support such obscene illustrations.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 9:49 pm 
Offline
Proud Rooster
Proud Rooster

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:27 pm
Posts: 293
Location: Mundoolun - Gold Coast Hinterlands Qld
Senators RR wrote:
JMO but this is were the Breed Associations should publish there own colour guide/ judging requirements. The Australorp club seems to be on the front foot. How many of the top Australorp breeders like modern game breeders judging there fowl? for eg. Wouldn't it mean far more for another top Australorp breeder to be judging there fowl??


Hi RR,
I think that most of the breed associations submit their preferences, guilelines and adjustments for "consideration" to the Standards Committee. Then it is up to that committee.

You will find that most Poultry Clubs engage specialist Soft Feather and/or Hard Feather and /or Watefowl Judges for their various sections. Some judges are proficient in all or two sections.
At the Australorp Shows they engage specialist Australorp Judges.

There are lists of the various judges on each state bodies websites and in their calendars for all to see.
Here is the one for Qld. http://qldpoultry.com.au/doc/Judges_List.pdf
Here is the one for South Aust http://www.sapoultryassoc.org.au/new-page-23.htm

I hope this helps,

Cheers from Wendy :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 10:17 pm 
Offline
Showy Hen
Showy Hen

Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2011 3:40 pm
Posts: 247
Your key word Wendy is consideration. If an Association has put up proposals that has been singed off on by ALL the voting members then why should another committee have the final say?? That should just be the publishers.

It does not matter how many people tell me that experienced people can judge twenty breeds of soft feather, hard feather, water fowl. and not miss something or not lean to personal preference when putting up BIS. It is not possible to do this for ANYONE, to the standard that breeders and exhibiters deserve.

I was at an albreeds show recently, just having a look and noticed some RIR bantams that had had feathers plucked from there feet. Now I would understand if an allbreed judge missed that but would consider a RIR breeder and judge should not have and if so should loose his judging certificate. Now I claim to know nothing about these other breeds now days but can still pick up the odd thing out. On saying this I was not there for long enough to see the cards up and would have loved to have seen the results.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 10:43 pm 
Offline
Proud Rooster
Proud Rooster

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:27 pm
Posts: 293
Location: Mundoolun - Gold Coast Hinterlands Qld
Senators RR wrote:
Your key word Wendy is consideration. If an Association has put up proposals that has been singed off on by ALL the voting members then why should another committee have the final say?? That should just be the publishers.

On this point we agree entirely, but it is not the various breed associations who finally compile tthe standards and select the pictures. It is the APSC. That is why there is so much contraversy about the various pictures and weights.

Senators RR wrote:
It does not matter how many people tell me that experienced people can judge twenty breeds of soft feather, hard feather, water fowl. and not miss something or not lean to personal preference when putting up BIS. It is not possible to do this for ANYONE, to the standard that breeders and exhibiters deserve.

I was at an albreeds show recently, just having a look and noticed some RIR bantams that had had feathers plucked from there feet. Now I would understand if an allbreed judge missed that but would consider a RIR breeder and judge should not have and if so should loose his judging certificate. Now I claim to know nothing about these other breeds now days but can still pick up the odd thing out. On saying this I was not there for long enough to see the cards up and would have loved to have seen the results.

I am not a Judge, so I can't comment on those comments above in the quote. But it goes on the dedication, knowledge, experience, and integrity of the individual judge.

I wish I could download you a copy of those Judges Guidelines. for BYP, as they discuss integrity, study and knowledge at great depth. Unfortunately I'm not allowed to post a copy here, so you'll have to buy one from http://www.qldpoultry.com.au

Cheers from Wendy :D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2012 11:17 pm 
Offline
Showy Hen
Showy Hen

Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 5:17 pm
Posts: 131
What do you do when the judges blatantly do not judge to the standard anyway i.e handling of oxfords 15 points I think I have only ever seen one judge in the last 10 years who took it into consideration the rest did not even worry about it,I am starting to think its all about the exhibitors not the fowls,so in a way it is a waist of time having standards if the judges do not abide by them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 8:57 am 
what do you do when judges do judge to the standard like the drawings of the indian game?


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2012 9:01 am 
Offline
Junior Champion Bird
Junior Champion Bird

Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:06 pm
Posts: 720
Senators RR wrote:
If an Association has put up proposals that has been singed off on by ALL the voting members then why should another committee have the final say?? That should just be the publishers.

It's hard to fault that logic Senators. Excellent point!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 26, 2012 11:23 am 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 8:28 am
Posts: 554
ruff wrote:
what do you do when judges do judge to the standard like the drawings of the indian game?
Yes ruff this worries me also! You continually see fowls off the mark deviating further and further from the original! See the below posted in Sep 2011 on page 6 of this thread!

pedro73 wrote:
DenisL wrote:
If the pictures of the perfect standard OEG are not right, well it's up to fanciers to tell the Standards committee with compelling and convincing evidence. Has this evidence been put to the Standards Committee
Uncertain! Or perhaps Standards Committee put the compelling and convincing evidence of the pictures in?

The quickest way to assist the thought process with consistency; is to limit variability!

With text and pictures you limit the variability! Ask a dozen 12 year olds to mix orange with red and yellow paint and you'll get 12 variations but show them what the finish product must look like and you've set a standard which they will strive to achieve!
And the below on page 5 of this thread.

pedro73 wrote:
Our standards original intention was to draw together relevant points/traits/characteristics breeders from the period where focusing on to assist in categorising and judging poultry to ensure breed constancy and preservation. Does the Australian Standard(s) do this? Personally I don't think it has assisted; as any breeder who is striving for excellence is not going to breed solely to the information contained Australian Standard(s) and if they do well aren't they fools! If breeders are focused on it content of the Australian Standard rather the bigger picture they're just perpetuating fads and trends; around and around they go just like a merry-go-round! Books must contain relevant content to go down in history which you speak so passionately of! They must draw from the past but contain clear, precise and relevant referencing to points in our fowls development to assist in accurate interpretation. Remember a text that goes down in history is one that remains relevant long into the future! The standards should be striving to be a complete reference guide for showing, categorising and preserving poultry in Australia not a glossy coffee table text. If this publication fails to address and clarify problems within the Australian Fancy; such as those we so commonly see on our Backyard Poultry Site then it is a wasted opportunity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 10:57 am 
Offline
Showy Hen
Showy Hen

Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 9:13 pm
Posts: 227
Ruff the Indian game club of aust had no input into the standards and were not asked either and there biggest upset was the inclusion of the whites which there won't be a class for at there national show as the show to the British standard !


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 12:11 pm 
i think the ONLY thing in the standards the indian game club is upset by is the whites which personally i think is daft and i cannot for the life of me understand why.

a very similar drawing exists in the australian indian game handbook promoted and sold by the club and i have personally asked a number of the indian game club members (for example winifred klepp who was one of the main authors) about the drawing and none feel there is anything wrong with it. that betty wilcox book is no better (she couldn't even get her genetics right).i have recently choked on that where one page she says one thing and another page another thing. they always err to the shorter the thicker the better. sometimes they get obssesed by lacing too, many mentioning triple lacing being a great thing.

personally i think they need to rewrite the standards to their way of thinking because for the life of me the pictures and the writing do not match.


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2012 4:09 pm 
Offline
Gallant Game
Gallant Game
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 10:49 pm
Posts: 489
Location: South Australia
Just a few points from my own personal observations:

One photo or painting/drawing in the standards is no doubt meant to encourage uniformity and the ultimate form to aim for, BUT… in my experience the sum total of what a breed or colour is all about requires consideration of multiple numbers of birds in order to gain insight into the natural occurrence of variability within the breed.

Moderate or middle-ground interpretations of any standards are usually the best way. This knowledge can only come by considering many good or winning examples of a breed and then forming a moderate view in your own mind as to what to aim for.

The trouble is that one photo chosen by a narrow group of people is unlikely to please the majority in every way. And what happens if that one photo does not match yours or the judge’s view of the breed? Some people will always get caught up in fads, and extreme interpretations of the standards. Some of these are even represented in pictures of the current standards (yes, nobody is perfect).

I have seen in various shows birds win that fit the standard quite well but are quite different to the winning bird in the next show (and not picture perfect to the standards picture). I have even bred birds myself that side-by-side are quite different to each other and yet match the standard and could both potentially be winners. Top judges and breeders have taken out the standards and described to me where the picture falls short of the breed in one aspect or another.

Breed experience and specialisation is one key. It takes a long time to extensively understand every nuance of a particular breed or colour. AND… going against the notion of the one perfect example capturing the breed, I think 10 (or more) good examples are a far better way to immerse oneself in the nature of a breed. Then you can find your own middle ground, OR choose one example to aim for as your personal preference.

You have to like your own birds. If you do, and you breed them well and they don’t contravene the description of the standard, then I think you are doing OK. Show these birds enough and they will win (sometimes). The winning bird on the day, mainly, is the bird whose appearance fits with the judge’s concept of a good bird. After all he/she came to their own conclusion about type as I have already described here, have they not?

Cheers,

ML

_________________
"Somewhere over the mountain..." (or was that "rainbow"?)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 194 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

All times are UTC + 10 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
©2004-2014 Backyardpoultry.com. Content rights reserved
freestone