Ameraucana Forum

The Official Ameraucana Forum => Exhibiting, Promoting & Club Notes => Topic started by: John W Blehm on June 12, 2015, 03:03:43 PM

Title: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on June 12, 2015, 03:03:43 PM
It has been over a decade since Michael Muenks and I started re-creating bantam lavender Ameraucanas (in 2005).  Michael used lavender Old English Game and I used lavender d’Anver to bring in the lavender gene/color.  We both crossed to black Ameraucanas.  (update...There were bantam lavender Ameraucanas bred and exhibited by a few members in the late 1980s and early 1990s, but they didn't catch on and those lines are believed to be extinct...2/9/2018)
I also started developing large fowl lavenders, in 2005, using the bantams crossed to large fowl black Ameraucanas. (corrected "2006" to "2005", on  1/30/17)
 
Lavender and blue are very similar, but different colors created by different genes.  They look like shades of gray to me with lavender being lighter and more of an even color.  Before the lavender gene was properly identified and labeled “lavender” (lav) the variety (color) it created was named “self blue”.  The word “self” means “same”; different breeders use it in different ways, but here it was meant that the blue color was the same all over the bird without lacing or any other variation.  Today we know that both the phenotype and genotype of lavender and self blue are different.  Blue is created when an otherwise black bird has one copy of the dominant blue (Bl) gene.  It doesn’t breed true.  A blue chicken bred to a blue chicken will produce black, splash and blue chicks.  I don’t know of any breeds that have a true “self blue” variety recognized according to the dictionary definition.  Andalusian blue would be a prime example of the blue (Bl) color, but it has lacing so it is not what they call “self” blue. Lavender on the other hand does breed true.  A lavender chicken bred to a lavender chicken produces only lavender offspring (of course there are exceptions to every rule). 

Since the APA and ABA officially call the lavender variety self blue they are the same variety according to them.  Fred Jeffrey in his book BANTAM CHICKENS also lists at least 10 other names for this same color. So lavender and self blue are the same variety or they are two different things, depending on the definition of the term “self blue” we are using at the time.
I’ve heard the term “self” used to describe that the crest on a Polish chicken was the same color as the rest of the bird, that a d’Uccle was not mottled and that a black bird without green sheen is self black.  “Self” is an old term and is often very confusing.  The standard uses variety names like buff, black and white without the word “self” as a prefix even though they are "self" colors, yet with blue they feel they need to include it.  I guess when someone wants to get lavender silver or lavender wheaten recognized the powers that be will require name changes to “self blue silver” and “self blue wheaten”.  A lavender buff will have a difficult time getting recognized as “lavender buff’’ or “pink”!  If bantam and/or large fowl Ameraucanas are ever recognized as such by the APA/ABA they should be recognized as "lavender" or not recognized at all.  I’ve suggested to the APA that once lavender Ameraucanas are accepted they should refer to the APA's "self blue" PLUMAGE description (page 178 of my 1998 Standard) while retaining the official "lavender" variety name. Perhaps it would be a good time for the APA to include the lavender name as an alternative in the self blue description...such as "self blue/lavender".  This isn't asking for any radical change or to have the Standards rewritten as some have claimed.  Other breed clubs that want to get their lavender varieties accepted should be able to do the same or have them accepted under the self blue name if that is what they want.  Some have suggested that all the current “self blue” varieties would have to agree to change them all to the lavender name or none at all.  Again this isn't true.  No one is asking them to change the names of their already accepted varieties or to correct the mistake in terminology, but welcome them to if they so desire.  Radical change is not needed here and isn't being asked for.  I would imagine that someday in the decades ahead all the misnamed self blues will be lavenders.

From the Dutch bantam book translated to english.
Lavender
Quote
In contrast to the blue, the colour lavender had no difference in shade between certain body parts. The aim is to achieve an even shade of silver gray all over the body and it is significantly lighter than blue.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Cesar Villegas on June 17, 2015, 08:25:19 PM
It has been over a decade since Michael Muenks and I started creating bantam lavender Ameraucanas.  Michael used lavender Old English Game and I used lavender d’Anver to bring in the lavender gene/color.  We both crossed to black Ameraucanas.
A year later, in 2006, I started developing large fowl lavenders using the bantams crossed to large fowl black Ameraucanas.
 
Lavender and blue are very similar, but different colors created by different genes.  They look like shades of gray to me with lavender being lighter and more of an even color.  Before the lavender gene was properly identified and labeled “lavender” (lav) the variety (color) it created was named “self blue”.  The word “self” means “same”; different breeders use it in different ways, but here it was meant that the blue color was the same all over the bird without lacing or any other variation.  Today we know that both the phenotype and genotype of lavender and self blue are different.  Blue is created when an otherwise black bird has one copy of the dominant blue (Bl) gene.  It doesn’t breed true.  A blue chicken bred to a blue chicken will produce black, splash and blue chicks.  I don’t know of any breeds that have a true “self blue” variety recognized according to the dictionary definition.  Andalusian blue would be a prime example of the blue (Bl) color, but it has lacing so it is not what they call “self” blue. Lavender on the other hand does breed true.  A lavender chicken bred to a lavender chicken produces only lavender offspring. 

Since the APA and ABA officially call the lavender variety self blue they are the same variety according to them.  Fred Jeffrey in his book BANTAM CHICKENS also lists at least 10 other names for this same color. So lavender and self blue are the same variety or they are two different things, depending on the definition of the term “self blue” we are using at the time.
I’ve heard the term “self” used to describe that the crest on a Polish chicken was the same color as the rest of the bird, that a d’Uccle was not mottled and that a black bird without green sheen is self black.  “Self” is an old term and is often very confusing.  The standard uses variety names like buff, black and white without the word “self” as a prefix even though they are "self" colors, yet with blue they feel they need to include it.  I guess when someone wants to get lavender silver or lavender wheaten recognized the powers that be will require name changes to “self blue silver” and “self blue wheaten”.  A lavender buff will have a difficult time getting recognized as “lavender buff’’ or “pink”!  If bantam and/or large fowl Ameraucanas are ever recognized as such by the APA/ABA they should be recognized as "lavender" or not recognized at all.  I’ve suggested to the APA that once lavender Ameraucanas are accepted they should refer to the APA's "self blue" PLUMAGE description (page 178 of my 1998 Standard) while retaining the official "lavender" variety name. Perhaps it would be a good time for the APA to include the lavender name as an alternative in the self blue description...such as "self blue/lavender".  This isn't asking for any radical change or to have the Standards rewritten as some have claimed.  Other breed clubs that want to get their lavender varieties accepted should be able to do the same or have them accepted under the self blue name if that is what they want.  Some have suggested that all the current “self blue” varieties would have to agree to change them all to the lavender name or none at all.  Again this isn't true.  No one is asking them to change the names of their already accepted varieties or to correct the mistake in terminology, but welcome them to if they so desire.  Radical change is not needed here and isn't being asked for.  I would imagine that someday in the decades ahead all the misnamed self blues will be lavenders.

From the Dutch bantam book translated to english.
Lavender
Quote
In contrast to the blue, the colour lavender had no difference in shade between certain body parts. The aim is to achieve an even shade of silver gray all over the body and it is significantly lighter than blue.

John any word if Lavender for both bantam and LF will be recognized any time soon?
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on June 17, 2015, 08:50:42 PM
No.  The APA recently changed their rules in the middle of the game and now all 5 breeders that have been breeding them for 5 years must have been APA members for those 5 years.  I've never been a member so that means I wouldn't be one of the 5 needed, but I'm sure there are at least 5 APA members out there that have had them for time required...at least with LF.  I think the bigger obstacle is that from what we've heard the APA and especially the ABA would want us to settle for the "self blue" variety name.  Personally although it would be nice to see lavenders accepted, I would rather just continue breeding, selling and showing lavenders than to see them accepted as self blue.  I feel that would be caving in to the APA/ABA like the Silkie club did.  One option we've discussed is trying to get LF accepted first so we don't have to deal with the ABA and the APA may be more receptive to "lavender".
Having said that I'm sure the club would pursue getting "lavender" accepted if enough APA members, that have bred them for 5 years, want to push for it.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: The Malcolms on June 17, 2015, 09:40:22 PM
I don't know enough to know if this helps but the APA does accept the lavender variety in Guinea Fowl...
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Beth Curran on June 22, 2015, 08:35:37 AM
I'm guessing that 5 years has to be with no lapses in membership? I've been a member but since it hasn't been a high priority thing, I've let it lapse here and there. It's a dirty trick to change the rules and not grandfather, but I'm sure that was the point...
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Harry Shaffer on June 22, 2015, 05:09:41 PM
Well the term "Self BLue" has been a term that has been used for over a century.  When they bred black Orpingtons to White Orpingtons in the early 1900's they called the blues  "Self Blues".  They were blues the real ones and not lavender without lacing.  Since then the standard was changed that all blues had to have lacing like the Andalusian blues.  So things change with time and so will the term Lavender be used eventually because that is the correct scientific term to use.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on January 01, 2016, 03:48:05 PM
<<Differences between Lavender & Blue>>  (http://www.edelras.nl/belgians/colour.htm#lavblue)

Quote
How to distinguish between Lavender & Blue

It is very easy to identify a Lavender bird by looking at the main tail feathers. If the outer-side feather shaft is pale & the inner feather shaft is dark, it is more than likely Lavender. The inner feather-web has a darker iridescent-like sheen, extending outwards from the shaft.

The andulusian type blue (Bl/bl) usually have dark feather shafts, regardless whether laced or non-laced. No matter how pale in colour, the blues (Bl/bl) don’t have the same tail characteristics (as above), as the lavenders.
 
the lav/blues have a combination of traits from both varieties. Some signs of lav/lav, Bl/bl (Lavender/Blue) are:

* paler lavender shade
* darker feather shafts
* roos with darker hackles.

It is rather frowned upon in the Belgian Barbu bantam world, mixing lav (Lavender) with Bl (Blue), as the above traits are considered flaws in lavender varieties. Lavenders are to have:

Lavenders (lav/lav)
Both genders: even lavender shade throughout, no sexual dimorphism
* Light feather shafts on outside
* Darker feather colour (web & shafts) on inside. This applies to both Lavender colour & gold/straw colour on Porcelaines.

There is the known feather quality issues with lavenders, eg wing patch in roos, fret marks, etc, although the wing patches are not found in all lavenders. Then there is the trait of darker flecks or darker feathers in the blues, plus the sexual dimorphic traits.

More can be found here: Question for Kazjaps on lavender vs blue (http://www.the-coop.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=94210#Post94210)
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on January 01, 2016, 09:49:51 PM
I did a search on the BYC forum  (http://www.backyardchickens.com/f/14/general-breed-discussions-faq)for "lavender" and found topics for:
Lavender Orpington
Lavender Silkie
Lavender Marans
Lavender Easter Egger
Lavender Araucana
Lavender Polish
Lavender Cochin
Lavender Brahma
and even Lavender Ameraucana!
I think we really started something when Michael and I created lavender bantam Ameraucanas in North America.  Since then lavender has been picked up by many other breeds and some that aren't breeds. 

Lavender (chicken plumage)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavender_(chicken_plumage))
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Spencer Crouse on January 04, 2016, 09:52:38 AM
I think the name Lavender sounds more appealing than self blue.

Yet what it boils down to is if the apa would even consider having a bird called lavender over self blue.

Lavender guinea are the only thing the apa recognizes with the name lavender, all other poultry are listed as self blue.

I personally think there is a much better chance the apa would recognize the new variety if it was listed as self blue.

The ABC is also trying to get the lavender/self blue variety accepted. They are going for the self blue title.

If its all about the hobby and the betterment of the breed I believe self blue would better benefit the process of getting the apa to recognize the variety. Naming the birds lavender instead of self blue seems like we are going against the apa naming and could cause us to not have the color accepted for many more years.

For everyone raising lavenders or self blues, the term you call them is what is documented so if you raise lavenders for 5 years and the name lavender is not accepted you can not change the name and say you raised self blues for 5 years to count toward the 5 years of showing the breed... just some food for thought.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Spencer Crouse on January 04, 2016, 09:57:34 AM
Also I am all for unbiased equality.
The email that was sent asking to vote for:

1. lavender
2. self blue
3. dont care

Clearly was pushing members to vote for lavender and not self blue.
I strongly believe unbiased wording would better benefit the club.

Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on January 04, 2016, 10:39:31 AM
Also I am all for unbiased equality.
The email that was sent asking to vote for:

1. lavender
2. self blue
3. dont care

Clearly was pushing members to vote for lavender and not self blue.
I strongly believe unbiased wording would better benefit the club.

Spencer,

The entire email is posted below.  I told everyone that "my position is clear" and Mike "leans the same way".  It only asks for the member's vote without any bias that I'm aware of.  It has been my position from the start, with the majority of club members all these years, to only have them recognized as lavender. 
I do understand some would have preferred "no preference" rather than "don't care" as the wording for the 3rd option.

Quote
Our club is considering petitioning the APA to get large fowl lavender Ameraucanas as an accepted variety.  Some fanciers are opposed to the “lavender” name and prefer “self blue”.  More information about the two names is in the attached article and on at this link to the Ameraucana Forum.  I created LF lavender Ameraucanas as “lavender”, so my position is clear and Mike’s attached article leans the same way.  Please vote, by reply email, to let our acceptance committee know if enough members support “lavender” before moving forward.
 
PLEASE VOTE FOR ONE OF THE THREE OPTIONS
1.     Lavender
2.     Self Blue
3.     Don’t care
 
Thank you,
 
John W Blehm
Ameraucana Alliance

What we are seeing is that while most breeders of lavender, regardless of the breed, want the name lavender.  More and more are willing to settle for self blue just to get them recognized, using the “you can’t fight city hall” argument.  There is no incentive for me to go with the flow.  We started using the lavender name in North America, but the Silkie folks were first to try to get lavender on the books and caved to ABA pressure.  Since then the dominoes continue to fall.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Mike Gilbert on January 04, 2016, 11:42:45 AM
Our members have voted, and the overwhelming majority is for lavender.   It's time to come together as a club in order to present a united effort in the attempt to get this done.    If we fail, the other club will still get them recognized, only under a different name, so what do we have to lose by trying?
Nothing ventured, nothing gained.   
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Russ Blair on January 04, 2016, 12:47:40 PM
I agree Mike, if the vote is for Lavender then let's move forward.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Mike Gilbert on January 04, 2016, 03:02:39 PM
We are in the process of compiling an address list to find out which members are willing to help out with affidavits and qualifying meets.   They must be APA members five years, and that is one of the questions being asked.    Russ, you will be among those receiving an email soon.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Cesar Villegas on January 04, 2016, 03:43:39 PM
Everyone I know calls them Lavender. So Lavender has my vote
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Tailfeathers on January 04, 2016, 11:47:27 PM
Michael, I agree that the AA should go forth with putting together a proposal.  Let the ABC put forth theirs and the AA do the same. 

And this is where it will get tricky.  It is pretty likely that the two clubs would NOT put forth the same proposed standard - unless there was some collusion from somebody in both clubs.  Not insinuating anything here whatsoever.  Simply saying that it is VERY unlikely they would both be the same.  Much more likely there would be differences to some varying degree in the description for Type, Color, History, etc.  Just one more thing I see problematic in having a membership in both clubs.

Then both Clubs have their Qualifying Meet, perhaps even simultaneously, and the Club who comes out on top gets their Proposed Standard admitted.

This would also force the Board of Directors to explain why they get to choose the name of the breed instead of the folks making the proposal as is stipulated in the SOP.  It should also diminish or eliminate any perceived biases as was eluded to because one is not a member of the APA or a preference toward one club over the other or anything of such nature.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Tailfeathers on January 04, 2016, 11:58:25 PM
Spencer, what you perceived as "clearly pushing" Lavender over Self Blue was not so clear to at least one person.  Yours truly never saw any such thing. 

The additional commentary was just that - commentary.  It provided factual information to consider about the issue and it was clear to me that the purpose of the poll was to obtain the information from the Club members on whether or not there was the support in the Club to move forward with what would be a difficult fight in proposing the standard for admission under the name Lavender.

And frankly, when I'm asked for my opinion, whether by vote or otherwise, I could give two hoots less what somebody else thinks about it.  You ask me, I'm gonna give it to ya.  And if you don't like my reply, you shouldn't have asked.  In other words, even if the email was pushing Lavender (which as I said I do NOT believe was the case), that isn't gonna change my vote if I don't agree with it.

I think I probably made my position clear from one of the FB screenshots I attached with my post on what I see the SOP stating and where the responsibilities for admission lie with each party.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Mike Gilbert on January 05, 2016, 07:26:55 AM
We are in the process of compiling an address list to find out which members are willing to help out with affidavits and qualifying meets.   They must be APA members five years, and that is one of the questions being asked.    Russ, you will be among those receiving an email soon.

The address list was compiled yesterday, just in time for the ABC announcement.   So that time was wasted as there is no point in proceeding.  Knowing the bias of the Standard Committee chairman, I had planned to go through the APA Directors and other officers, as I know several of them.   But the ABC threw up an obstacle that would be next to impossible to overcome.   
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Cesar Villegas on January 05, 2016, 08:07:46 AM
We are in the process of compiling an address list to find out which members are willing to help out with affidavits and qualifying meets.   They must be APA members five years, and that is one of the questions being asked.    Russ, you will be among those receiving an email soon.

The address list was compiled yesterday, just in time for the ABC announcement.   So that time was wasted as there is no point in proceeding.  Knowing the bias of the Standard Committee chairman, I had planned to go through the APA Directors and other officers, as I know several of them.   But the ABC threw up an obstacle that would be next to impossible to overcome.

What obstacle was that?
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Mike Gilbert on January 05, 2016, 08:18:46 AM
We are in the process of compiling an address list to find out which members are willing to help out with affidavits and qualifying meets.   They must be APA members five years, and that is one of the questions being asked.    Russ, you will be among those receiving an email soon.

The address list was compiled yesterday, just in time for the ABC announcement.   So that time was wasted as there is no point in proceeding.  Knowing the bias of the Standard Committee chairman, I had planned to go through the APA Directors and other officers, as I know several of them.   But the ABC threw up an obstacle that would be next to impossible to overcome.
What obstacle was that?

Just the fact that the ABC announced they were pursuing self blue as the color, they already had enough affidavits to do it, knowing that the Standard Committee chair was in their camp on the issue.   They undermined our effort to qualify the variety as lavender.  What is really ironic is that there actually is a self blue and it is not lavender. What do you call a blue bird without the lacing and pretty much one shade all over? Granted, this color is not in the Standard, but there are many color varieties not yet in the Standard. So what happens when somebody wants to qualify a REAL self blue for recognition? It's a pretty sad situation.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on January 13, 2016, 03:58:24 PM
What is really ironic is that there actually is a self blue and it is not lavender. What do you call a blue bird without the lacing and pretty much one shade all over? Granted, this color is not in the Standard, but there are many color varieties not yet in the Standard. So what happens when somebody wants to qualify a REAL self blue for recognition? It's a pretty sad situation.

REAL self blue is also known as solid blue and non-laced blue (http://www.the-coop.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=110714&Searchpage=6&Main=14793&Words=lavender&Search=true#Post110714).  Click on the "non-laced blue (http://www.the-coop.org/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=110714&Searchpage=6&Main=14793&Words=lavender&Search=true#Post110714)" link for more info.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Harry Shaffer on January 13, 2016, 06:56:40 PM
Over the last three years I have had some blue Orpingtons void of lacing and they were not lavenders.  I should have taken pictures but they were culled for other reasons not their color because I do not breed blues only use them to upgrade my birds for features.  Remember when they crossed black orps to white orps back in the early 1900's they produced blues that were then called self blues.  They only added the lacing because sometime they changed the standard that all blues should look like Blue Andalusians now very few meet that quality in all the breeds for blues.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Suki on January 14, 2016, 05:03:41 PM
Also I am all for unbiased equality.
The email that was sent asking to vote for:

1. lavender
2. self blue
3. dont care

Clearly was pushing members to vote for lavender and not self blue.
I strongly believe unbiased wording would better benefit the club.

Frankly Spencer, I didn't see any bias, but as you did what do you think it should have read that would colour neutral?  But that's besides the point,  if this group went for self blue to make the APA happy couldn't we still get them in ahead of the ABC? or is that now moot?  I would gladly change my vote to "self blue" if the right party could get credit.


Brownie.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Russ Blair on February 02, 2016, 05:19:01 PM
Not sure if this is the right spot to post this. But just received my poultry press. I would like to thank Mike Gilbert for his article pertaining to this matter. It was well written and spoke with dignity. Thanks Mike I really enjoyed the read.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Mike Gilbert on February 02, 2016, 09:31:33 PM
Thank you Russ.   I try.   I'm waiting to hear from my Director after he returns home, but I am hearing rumors that our effort fell on deaf ears at the APA Directors meeting in California last weekend. 
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Cesar Villegas on February 03, 2016, 07:15:15 PM
Thank you Russ.   I try.   I'm waiting to hear from my Director after he returns home, but I am hearing rumors that our effort fell on deaf ears at the APA Directors meeting in California last weekend.

I saw a picture of the director over the weekend.

All that came to mind was the grouchy elderly man yelling "get off my lawn" hahaha

Hopefully the APA can get younger more open minded leadership in the future.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on February 03, 2016, 07:34:08 PM
I saw a picture of the director over the weekend.
All that came to mind was the grouchy elderly man yelling "get off my lawn" hahaha
Hopefully the APA can get younger more open minded leadership in the future.

Hopefully the APA can get...more open minded leadership in the future.  ;D
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Mike Gilbert on February 03, 2016, 09:42:35 PM
Bob Vaughn is not the problem.  He is a warm personable human being who is also open minded.   It is most of the other directors I'm concerned about, and an overbearing, arrogant Chairman of the Standards Committee.   
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Tailfeathers on February 03, 2016, 10:25:05 PM
I look forward to seeing the PP article.  I wish I'd have thought of it, and must apologize for not, but had I done so I wudda called my District Director and talked with him before the meeting.  Not sure it wudda done any good as he's kind of a "go along to get along" kinda guy but I'd have tried.  If ya think it might help lemme know and I'll do so now.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Cesar Villegas on February 04, 2016, 12:06:50 AM
I saw a picture of the director over the weekend.
All that came to mind was the grouchy elderly man yelling "get off my lawn" hahaha
Hopefully the APA can get younger more open minded leadership in the future.

Hopefully the APA can get...more open minded leadership in the future.  ;D

Touché John haha  ;)
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Suki on February 05, 2016, 09:10:49 AM
Yes the ABC is claiming victory for "self-blue" :-\   
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Harry Shaffer on March 15, 2016, 01:13:57 PM
I would say it is a defeat and not a victory. 
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Shari Nees on April 15, 2016, 03:12:51 PM
Personally,  I call that color, lavender but that's me.

Worked with the Lavender color for 3 years,  learned a lot by doing test breeding.
 And during that time, I have decided its a color I don't want to continue with for various reasons.

Ones with the best feather structure and health,  was the birds that looked Lavender, all the feathers and shafts were lavender in the front half of the bird, but the tail and some of feather to the back of my birds had a slightly darker shaft, very even color and would breed true.

3rd year in, Mareks ripped through the pure Lavender flock,  only birds that did not have any issues were the above.  Luckily, they were in an area away from the rest of my birds.  Disinfected that whole area twice with virkon s. 
Of all the years raising poultry in WA and OR, I have never dealt with that disease.  Had a crash course here in VA. 



Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Rebecca G Howie on June 27, 2016, 06:03:05 AM
I would say it is a defeat and not a victory.


I agree, Harry. Self Blue just causes more confusion and heartburn when people are trying to understand the difference between a Lavender and a Blue variety
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on November 25, 2016, 06:59:18 PM
As I was doing chores the LF lavenders caught my eye so I took some photos.  Here is one, with a few split pullets in the shot also.  Tails on the LF males are ratty, but some are better than others.  Overall I think they are looking great.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Russ Blair on December 28, 2016, 05:36:51 PM
I know pictures usually do not do birds justice. In this case they all look like the same color/shade. Which means I would agree they look pretty darn good John. Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on December 28, 2016, 08:24:24 PM
I kept 6 LF lavender cockerels and I'm using the three with the best tails to breed from.  The other three are in my pen with a bunch of spare cockerels of different breeds and varieties, both bantams and LF.  This photo is of one of two that are sharing duties over 19 pullets.  The other keeper is mated over one extra large pullet. 
I know there is a push by some in the ABC to try to put some distance between their LF lavenders and mine, but Harry is the only other breeder to create a strain after he heard I was.  He and I know those that we sold lavenders to and we know that the two lines were crossed by some of them.
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: Mike Gilbert on December 29, 2016, 08:57:28 AM

 John, based on that photo, the cockerel appears to be one of the best lavender males I've seen to date.   Do you think feather quality will be an ongoing issue with this variety as it has been in some other breeds?   
Title: Re: lavender vs self blue
Post by: John W Blehm on December 29, 2016, 10:54:34 AM
...Do you think feather quality will be an ongoing issue with this variety as it has been in some other breeds?

Yes, but never say never.  The problem is mostly with the tails on the males and even once the variety is recognized it should keep many from going higher than BV.  Breed from the best has been the plan, but after over 10 years some tails especially on LF cockerels are as bad as ever.  Outcrossing with blacks may still be the best way to see improvements.
For those of use that like the lavender color, but don't want to deal with the ongoing feather quality issue I believe breeding other varieties that incorporate lavender may be the answer.  Take multicolor black and white varieties like birchen and silver and add lavender to turn the black areas lavender and we can have lavender birchen, lavender silver, etc.  Will they have the same feather quality problems as 100% lavender?