Blakeslee: Fancy Points vs. Utility 



179 



en 

 H 

 Z 



l-H 



o 



Ph 



H 

 Z 



o 

 u 



z 



o 



l-H 



H 



u 



w 



U 

 <i 

 W 



CONDITION 

 WEIGHT OR 



SIZE 



COMB OR 

 CREST AND 



COMB 



HEAD AND 

 ADJUNCTS 



Beak — 

 Eyes - — 

 E. Lobes 

 Wattles 



NECK 



Shape 



Color 



BACK 



Shape 

 Color 



BREAST 



Shape 



Color 



BODY AND 

 FLUFF 



Shape 

 Color 



WINGS 



Shape 

 Color 



TAIL 



Shape 

 Color 



LEGS AND 

 TOES 



Shape 



Plumage 



Color 



? 



^ 



I 



z 



X 



±- 

 / 



■ X" 

 J- 



2^ 



K 



"i" 



'^- 



X — 



TOTAL DEFECTS 





ORDINARY TYPE OF POULTRY SCORE CARDS 



Essential parts of the score cards of the two White Wyandotte hens shown in Fig. 12. At 

 the left is the list of "cuts" made by the professional judge against No. 132, the good layer, 

 while the cuts made against No. 137, the poor layer, are shown on the right. The fact that 

 the poor layer was scored highest, taken in conjunction with similar cases reported all 

 over the country, indicates that breeders of fancy poultry are inclined to lose sight of the 

 real purpose of breeding fowls, and to fix their attention on merely fancy points instead 

 of on the egg-laying function. (Fig. 13.) 



By their fruits are they judged; and 

 although a misplaced feather on a hen's 

 leg may disqualify her from the show 

 room, it does not disqualify her from 

 showing her ability to lay. For this 

 purpose was .she brought into the world, 

 and for a well spent life only should she 

 receive a crown of reward. Milk test- 

 ing associations are rendering to the 

 practical breeder a similar service to 

 that afforded by egg-laying contests, 

 although the length of the tests does 

 not give the best opportunities to judge 



the real merits of an animal. Such 

 contests, based on production, arc 

 obviously more difficult to conduct than 

 those based on mere inspection but are 

 commensurately more valuable. 



From what has been said, it is not 

 intended to imply that show room con- 

 tests should be done away with. They 

 have elements of too great value even 

 to agriculturists for such drastic treat- 

 ment. It is suggested, however, that 

 the standards be changed and account 

 be taken of yield wherever possible. It 



