Bird losing feathers...

[Kymarose]

My poor chicken looks half naked!! It seems... all of a sudden most of her feathers are gone. I checked her for mites but didn't see anything crawling, or anything that looked like it would be bugs. I did treat her and the hen house with DE, and sprayed WD40 around on the perches and woodwork. Is there another reason a bird would lose all of it's feathers like this? Originally I thought she was molting as my birds are molting right now. But.. this poor bird is pretty naked. What other treatment can I do for this along with treating for mites?

There was a discussion some time ago about using WD40 on chickens... under their wings and on the vent to treat mites.

Thank you in advance for your replies.

[Neil E. Grassbaugh]

Originally Posted by Kymarose

My poor chicken looks half naked!! It seems... all of a sudden most of her feathers are gone. I checked her for mites but didn't see anything crawling, or anything that looked like it would be bugs. And you should be able to see them, if you know what you are looking for. There are are many good sites for you to make you well informed. One I like is - http://ohioline.osu.edu/vme-fact/0018.html And I did treat her and the hen house with DE, A complete waste of time and and expensive fossil dust and sprayed WD40 around on the perches and woodwork. That worked so long as the WD-40 is wet, and that wouldn't be very long Is there another reason a bird would lose all of it's feathers like this? Sure. Originally I thought she was molting as my birds are molting right now.The smart money says you are right.

But.. this poor bird is pretty naked. What other treatment can I do for this along with treating for mites? There is no "treatment" for moulting and I will bet that that is exactly what is happening with her. Some birds, some breeds, moult faster than others. And you can also be assured that these fast moulters are of families of better egg laying abilities. For over a hundred years production poultry breeders have known that the good, "fast", moulter is a better layer. It is a characheristic to be prized if you are interested in egg production.

There was a discussion some time ago about using WD40 on chickens... under their wings and on the vent to treat mites. I have yet to understand why anyone would want to use a refined petro chemical that may have un-researched side effects to control external parasites on poultry. There are many reliable products for parasite control on the market. The best research we have says that these products are safe for the birds and humans associated with them.

Thank you in advance for your replies.

Now for the THREAD EXTENDER.

Exhibition chicken people are so confused about this moulting thing.
I hear all the time about "a cat walked by the chicken coop and threw them into a moult", "it rained and threw all my birds went into a moult."
Most of the time, not all, these birds are in what I call the perpetual moult. These are birds that are most of the time in reasonably good feather and showable. Good trait for a show chicken. They will not be good layers.
Then there are the birds who moult out quickly and with the demands on their systems do not grow feathers back in that are as long as before the moult. These generally get culled because the breeder/exhibitor thinks he will perpetuate this trait that renders the birds as less desiareable show specimiens. Never mind that they are poor layers and will produce poor layers. If she lays only one egg in her entire life and the chick out of that egg produces a big show winner that female will be remembered as "one of the greatest breeders I ever had." Actually these extremely poor layers are culls.

The Honarary Grandson started out with Partridge Wyandotte bantams that started to lay very late in the season and didn't lay very many eggs then. Well we did not keep those poor layers around for years getting a dozen or two eggs out of them that produced showable but non productive daughters. We killed them. Today - those Wyandottes lay like commercial Leghorns and win their share of BB and better.

(Oh - and I coddling those "sweet disposition" male birds will sooner or later net you an incubator full of infertile eggs.)

I wonder to this day why the writers of the Standard, who knew about this correlation between moulting and egg laying as well as the shortening of feathers did not write this into the Standard. Talking about birds that were developed as production types here. It makes no difference about Sebright Bantams. Laying a bunch of eggs is not important in that breed. Good thing too. They can hardly reproduce themselves.

And another thing (while I am on a roll) why are the most obvious non laying HENS in the show cage placed?

Some years ago there was a famous Black Giant hen that weighed about 16 lbs. that was showed all over the country and was a big time winner. Her pubic bones were as tight as a 12 week old pullet and by the owners admission had "never laid an egg in her life". That bird belonged, along with a cevical dislocation, in an empty feed bag - not on Champion Row.

I won't even get into Call Ducks, Asiatic "henlets" and such.

The moral of the story-
Are we, the self styled great saviors of the old breeds, are actually breeding them into extinction?

[goosedragon]

Great Post Neil! But I fear that now that they have the feathers they might start heating the Tar.

[MKG]

Thundering applause!!!! Kudos for a great post Neil.

[Kymarose]

Thanks Neil for your reply. I knew about moulting... but knew nothing about "fast moulting". This... I am sure is what is happening to my poor bird. I want to say, "Ethel!! GEt your clothes ON!!!" I won't worry about her now, or any of the others if/when this happens. She is a layer for sure and of the Black Star breed. This is my first full year of laying hens. They were summer chicks in 2008. I've had bantams 3-4 years and I've seen a regular moult but this is my first experience with fast moulting. I took your advise, checked Google for pictures of fast moulting. Some pretty funny looking birds out there.

Thanks again for setting my mind at ease. I really enjoy this forum, for the most part, for the information available here. Thanks!

[Neil E. Grassbaugh]

Originally Posted by Kymarose

Thanks Neil for your reply. I really enjoy this forum, for the most part, for the information available here. Thanks!

You are welcome - I think.
Bunch of cantankerous old geezers that we are.

[3dogs]

If it weren't for a bunch of cantankerous old geezers we wouldn't have the variety, beauty and utility of the birds available today. Thank you all!

[Pathfinders]

Originally Posted by Neil E. Grassbaugh

You are welcome - I think.
Bunch of cantankerous old geezers that we are.

Speak for yourself Big Guy. Some of us are sweetness and light, and know that a hen that dumps all her feathers at once is to be treasured.

[Kymarose]

"You are welcome - I think.
Bunch of cantankerous old geezers that we are."

()



"Speak for yourself Big Guy. Some of us are sweetness and light, and know that a hen that dumps all her feathers at once is to be treasured."

I will keep this in mind. Right now she's ugly as sin... but I will treasure her.

[Patrick]

Oh, Mr Neil, you've finally blown it. Normally I hang like a salivating groupy on every word of genius begotten of your perfect marriage between the commercial and the exhibition sides. But not today. You didn't loose me on the molting issue, nor on the temperament issue (but remember, it's "personality", not disposition). You're right on, about the framers of the standards, in how they knew so much about what really makes a good bird aside from color and condition, by wondering how they could miss what they did. They got it mostly right, I think, and compared to today's figurative societal standards, they were as close to perfection in their work than we're likely to ever see in anything again. Your assessment of the production issue is perfect. I think it was Don Schrider in one of his talks who said that you can follow the standards to create a body on a bird which has the capacity and theoretical type to produce, but you also have to select the ones that actually use that package to it's full potential, and DO produce.

Now those Asiatic henlets, let us just hope that the uptight, I mean upright short backed body is conducive to low productivity. They're headed there with the happy roo syndrome, so if we're lucky the combination will succeed in fullfilling your prophecy. Yes, let's get them to throw some henny feathers in there for good measure. That's a happy sounding word, henny. I'll bet they go for it.

But yes, Mr Neil, you lost my admiration on the Call duck issue. It looked there for a moment like you were on the right track. You got it with the Sebrights, but then you strayed. Isn't it the same thing with Call ducks? They don't lay many eggs because they don't have to. We know that they've been selected for a type and size that doesn't allow much for that, but what does it matter, because they are intended for nothing more than for us to admire? Now yes, I'll admit that it would be nice to have a little bantam duck which layed well, to hatch 100's out from which to pick show specimens. Why they never got as hot about the sexy little mallards, I'll never know. Can you imagine how many colors they could be breeding into them now, if they tried? They lay like a cheap....., well, whatever is cheap and lays well. I might even forgive those who'd have to name every new variety after their favorite finger licking food. Just kidding, I'm not THAT open minded, but you get my point.

Oh, I almost forgot, the Calls were bred to shoot their little mouths off, which they still do quite well. From that point of view, you could even say that the Calls are more genuine as a breed than most any other in our show halls, by still having a majority of individuals which can fulfill their original purpose.