August
4, 1980
Dear
Mr Plant,
I
have received your letter with the comments on the Australian Game Bantam. I
have increased the weight by four ounces in each of the four categories as you
have suggested. I originated the American Game Bantam. They are really
miniatures of the larger Fit Games and when I first began to advertise them, I
called them PIT GAME BANTAMS. Later they were changed to the American Game
Bantams. I found that there was a natural aversion to the word PIT by the
average fancier and dropped the word PIT in my advertisements after which I
began to ship them all over the USA and the Caribbean Islands as well as South
America.
In
developing some of the varieties of this breed, I often searched for the
smallest of the large fowl, either male or female and found that in three or
four generations I could get them down in size to the required standard. The
larger male or female was first mated to a regulation sized specimen. A number
of eggs were incubated and the smallest selected each generation until they
met the required weights, I would surmise that this could be the best way to
make the fastest progress in bantamizing the Australian Game Bantam.
I
would suggest that your friend keep a sharp lookout for the smallest specimen,
either male or female, or both, of it’s large fowl counterpart, stud mate
them and select the smallest each year with his present stock and I think he
will be agreeably surprised with the results.
Somewhat
over two weeks ago I returned your script on the Pekin Bantam together with my
comments which you asked that I make for an appropriate space in your
comments. Also was enclosed my version, which was discussed with our Standard
Committee, of an appropriate description that would be required if it is to be
included in our proposed fifth edition of the ABA
Standard. I asked the postmaster whether I could register this material
and explained the importance of it and he informed me that this could not be
done, so I sent it any way. Hope that it has arrived by now. Most of your
mailings to me come through in from three to five days.
I
am quite pleased to learn that you are beginning to believe that a separate
detailed shape and color description is advisable for the male and female.
This, I feel, is very helpful to the beginner and also prevents the judge from
making different judgements on just what is the requirement in the various
sections of the anatomy. The elimination of either/or requirements is another
thing that I feel you should work for also. Variations in the number of
serrations in the comb, different in the eye color, etc., are confusing to the
beginner and judge, too. In a given specimen, how do you decide which of the
variations should be the best, everything else being equal.
In
the earlier part of this century, Maurice Wallace, a famous Canadian breeder
writer, APA judge, and a member of the APA Standard Committee for several
years was a STICKLER for the elimination of the either/or provisions in the
standard descriptions. Both he and Arthur Schilling imbued in me the necessity
of eliminating this phrase in our descriptions. I hope your wife is in better
health by this time.
Sincerely,