134 LLSSONS IN POULTRY KLLPING SECOND SLRILS. 



it would l>e foolish for him to enter Ins birds ut all. Hence we may assume that a man who 

 continues to successfully engage in strong competition in shows of any degree of Importance 

 does habitually do a number of things which the rules of the show say he shall not do. On 

 this point there can be no dispute. The facts are self apparent to anyone who knows the con- 

 ditions with which exhibitors have to deal. 



Let us briefly examine these conditions: 



To the visitor at a poultry exhibition, to the public at large, it is merely an exhibition, a dis- 

 play of fine fowls. For the exhibitors the poultry show consists of many competitions in the 

 results of skill in breeding to a prescribed set of ideals, the full accomplishment of which, in 

 combination, is practically impossible. 



In some respects these standard requirements are absurd : as when a fowl is disqualified for 

 a defect inconspicuous until the fowl is subjected to a very close examination, or so obscure 

 that its existence may not be positively identified without the aid of a magnifying glass. Were 

 these requirements part of a consistent system they might be treated with more respect by 

 exhibitors, but as the application of the same standards admits with trifling punishment and 

 sometimes even wituout punishment blemishes and faults conspicuous as far as any quality of 

 the fowl could be distinguished, the more fa'miliar exhibitors become with the difficulties of 

 producing fowls free from faults and with the incongruities in standard requirements the less 

 evil they will see in disregarding or breaking rigid requirements about trifles. 



Novices in the breeding of fowls rarely appreciate the scarcity of specimens which even 

 approximately measure up to an educated conception of the requirements of the standards for 

 their variety. The erroneous prevalent idea of the uniformity of thoroughbred birds and the 

 fixity of characters in them is responsible for the common misapprehensions on these points as 

 it is for many other difficulties of beginners. 



To illustrate: In many varieties what are known as "foul" feathers (that is, feathers not 

 colored or marked as required) are likely to be found even in stock that has been most carefully 

 bred. Indeed specimens on which an expert judge who made a thorough search for them 

 could not find such feathers are very rare. The rule which requires specimens to be 

 exhibited in their natural condition is commonly held to prohibit the removal of such feathers. 

 It would generally be affirmed by officers of associations who might be questioned on that 

 point that the intent of the rule was to prohibit the plucking of such feathers. 



But the plucking of feathers which mar the appearance of the fowl, and the removal of 

 which makes no visible defect or lack in the plumage is an act practically impossible of detec- 

 tion, after the job is done, and between this protection from consequences and the general feel- 

 ing of exhibitors that the rule is unreasonable it has come about that exhibitors almost without 

 exception after a few seasons experience pluck all the feathers that shouW be removed to 

 make the bird appear at its best. Hence the rule is practically a dead letter except with 

 novices who wish to strictly observe regulations and do not know the facts in regard to the 

 common neglect of the rule, and do not appreciate the conditions which have made it obsolete. 



While the facts given above do not justify a violation of such rules by those who consider 

 such violation wrong, they do explain how it is that a great many exhibitors consider the 

 violation of such rules an act involving no special moral turpitude. I have always maintained 

 that such rules were wrong, because they could not possibly be enforced, and the disregard of 

 unreasonable rules, while perhaps not of itself deserving severe condemnation, is to be 

 deplored because of its effect on the observance of reasonable requirements. From this point 

 of view I say that of the two evils the rule which prohibits fitting of this kind is the greater. 

 The constant publication of such a rule also tends to confirm the prevailing error among 

 beginners as to the possibility of producing fowls which are fit for exhibition without special 

 attention to the removal of superficial faults. They naturally argue that if it were not a 

 reasonable requirement it would not exist. 



To show that such disregard of rules or laws is not peculiar to poultry exhibitors, and has 

 been, and is, practiced by very large numbers of people without subjecting them to condem- 

 nation as particularly bad, let me cite the general disregard in this country of laws of the 

 kind known as " Blue Laws," and the almost universal failure of people subject to taxation to 

 return lull schedules of their taxable property. If the reader disposed to be severe on poult y 



