Brother - Sister mating update.

[colt39]

First generation - F1 = 0.25 (1 + 0 + 0)= 0.25

Second generation - F2 = 0.25 (1 + 0.5 + 0) = 0.375

Third generation - F3 = 0.25 (1 + 0.75 + 0.25) = 0.5

Ray lol, why don't you just give it up!

If I had planed on it & had a game plan, maybe I would have did it differently but it just happened that way.

But, atleast I did not just throw a bunch of hens in a pen & breed them to their brother after one single mating just to get an IC.

Can you answer this question since you are the expert or do you not know?

If you breed a Cousin to a Cousin with the same copy of a given trait from an ancestor, they have the same probability of passing it on as a bro/sis that got the same copy from the same ancestor.

TRUE OR FALSE?????

Arnold, what do you think?

Also do that for 20 since I can prove I have had them atleast since 1987.

It is only obvious that bro/sis is faster. No one has said other wise. What I have said & ONLY said was it is not the only way & an IC can be manipulated by selection because it is based on a random mating. Are we looking for numbers on paper or homozygosity in our fowl lol.

Ray, I can't find what it is called either when a Cousin is bred to a Cousin. What is a Bro bred to his Sis called. But, it is fact that second Cousins are out of Cousins bred to two totally different individuals that are not related just like a 1/2 brother has only one related parent. Not sure why you are the only one who can't comprehend this.

The only time the IC goes down is when you go from 1st Cousin to second & so on. I did not do that. It stayed Cousin to Cousin.

[colt39]

Ray, TRUE OR FALSE?????????????

Originally Posted by colt39

If you breed a Cousin to a Cousin with the same copy of a given trait from an ancestor, they have the same probability of passing it on as a bro/sis that got the same copy from the same ancestor.

TRUE OR FALSE?????

[slwnstdy]

Originally Posted by colt39

First generation - F1 = 0.25 (1 + 0 + 0)= 0.25

Second generation - F2 = 0.25 (1 + 0.5 + 0) = 0.375

Third generation - F3 = 0.25 (1 + 0.75 + 0.25) = 0.5

Ray lol, why don't you just give it up!

If I had planed on it & had a game plan, maybe I would have did it differently but it just happened that way.

But, atleast I did not just throw a bunch of hens in a pen & breed them to their brother after one single mating just to get an IC.

Can you answer this question since you are the expert or do you not know?

If you breed a Cousin to a Cousin with the same copy of a given trait from an ancestor, they have the same probability of passing it on as a bro/sis that got the same copy from the same ancestor.

TRUE OR FALSE?????

Arnold, what do you think?

Also do that for 20 since I can prove I have had them atleast since 1987.

It is only obvious that bro/sis is faster. No one has said other wise. What I have said & ONLY said was it is not the only way & an IC can be manipulated by selection because it is based on a random mating. Are we looking for numbers on paper or homozygosity in our fowl lol.

Ray, I can't find what it is called either when a Cousin is bred to a Cousin. What is a Bro bred to his Sis called. But, it is fact that second Cousins are out of Cousins bred to two totally different individuals that are not related just like a 1/2 brother has only one related parent. Not sure why you are the only one who can't comprehend this.

The only time the IC goes down is when you go from 1st Cousin to second & so on. I did not do that. It stayed Cousin to Cousin.

\

Jim, not worth paying 200 bucks for that software, and the evaluation copy only does up to 10 generations so wouldnt trust the numbers (they actually go down haha)....

BTW, the formula shown above (I believe) is according to Falconer (developed in the 1980s). It was proposed over Wright's formula as a simpler way of calculating IC. I remember though there was a caveat there, that it applied only for consecutive matings of the same type every year, and you could only use the coefficient (the ".25") if it was either Bro-sis, Father-Daughter, Mother-son. At least, that is my understanding.

[slwnstdy]

Arnold, how about my question lol?

Quote:
Originally Posted by colt39

If you breed a Cousin to a Cousin with the same copy of a given trait from an ancestor, they have the same probability of passing it on as a bro/sis that got the same copy from the same ancestor.

TRUE OR FALSE?????



Jim, there are more people on this site that have been looking at this longer than I have (check the previous threads), I wish they would join in the discussion. But as all you have for now is my opinion, and at the risk of posting assumption rather than fact, here is what I think.

The answer to your question is TRUE.

On a single trait such as leg color, or even ability perhaps...However, the qualifications for homozygosity, IMHO relate not only to a single trait within a pairing but itis a reflection of the entire family or flock. That is, when you say IC is at 75% it means 75% of the flock are homozygous to the same amount of common genes. that is if the common set of traits are AA, BB, CC 75% will be AA, BB, CC.

I do believe you can have a family with individuals carrying homozygous genes, like AA, BB, CC then AA, gg, DD and xx, YY, ZZ. Individually there is no recessive there, but is the family homozygous (if there is such a term). This is why I guess Ray has now brought out the term ISOGENIC.

What is important is that across the family the genotypes are as close as possible. So the goal is not individual homozygosity, but to create a family of fowl that are ISOGENIC.

Having said that, if your cousin-cousin is already 25 generations the IC might just be up there anyway...who knows?

My two (aussie) cents, SLW

[colt39]

Yes, the formula was for father Daughter starting at 25%.

OK then so if my statement is true them from that point with selected Cousins forming a new strain, are they just as apt to stay with a pair of bro/sis mating even though the IC in the pair of Cousins is lower because we are not using a random pair? You say true!

Making a new strain will have to start with little to no homozygosity or you are not doing much that has not already been done.

But, if anybody thinks a guy could not take Cousins out of two pairs of Uncle/Niece, selectively breed thru single mating, process of elimination and not have as much or even more homozygosity (in the entire flock) than a guy who pen mates, then the fowl were not worth breeding anyways. Even if he single mated, the traits, homozygosity & quality is the same as handed down by the same common ancestors so the IC's only use is on paper because it is not calculated for selected individuals. This is where common sense steps in.

So the goal is individual homozygosity at first then the whole strain thru ONLY selecting those individuals.

Is there a magic wand that can be used to say that a bro/sis mating will make a homozygous family any faster than a cousin/cousin mating when they both are selected for & show the desired traits they each received from common ancestor(s)? No lol!!!

So, lets go to that one bro/sis that has been said that Ray started with. Because if not, he used Cousins too.

Give him one bro/sis mating using his pen mating method. Then give anybody else a mated pair of Cousins that were selected & show the same desired traits from the same common ancestors. But, they single mate every year selecting & doing a process of elimination.

Who's fowl will be ISOGENIC or closer to it even though one has a higher IC.

You can use the IC formula described because Ray does not select. He has stated that one is just as good as the other & locked after the first single mating. But, since I or anybody else that has culled, selected & used a process of elimination, that formula does not even apply. I have read many times that it is formulated on random pairing. RANDOM!!!! There is nothing random about selection. Totally opposite of each other.

So, you are using the wrong formula for anybody that selects & single mates. IT DOES NOT APPLY!!

[Mike Everett]

I find it is interesting that on the same site, Ray has quoted and the evidently the source of ya'll's relationship formula, if you just read a little farther it states: Practical uses of (F)...two are listed;
a) Predicting the effects of Inbreeding Depression.
b) Assessing the risk of inheriting Genetic defects.

It also states that studies on chickens have shown that for every 10% increase in (F) the hatchability declines 4.36%.

[Mike Everett]

Originally Posted by RayBoles

It has now been two or three years that I posted my method of breeding brother to sister and line breeding from there. I would like to know if any have tried it and what was their outcome.

Read this carefully and tell me what has changed?

[Dark Rooster]

The words "line breeding from there" stick out to me.....

[Mike Everett]

Originally Posted by Dark Rooster

The words "line breeding from there" stick out to me.....

Bingo... the man is blowing smoke up these guy's a$$ and some fools believe it, they don't have the experience or the understanding of genetics to understand the reality of what he is now saying. Colt was right that it is a gimmick to promote his welfare. In the past it was proven even to Ray that his "Locked" fowl in just a couple generations of BxS was invalid, so he switched his sales pitch that you had to have 20 generations of BxS, totally opposite to what he was spewing then. Wake up folks Ray is a chronic bull$hitter and some of you are just eating it up, it's out there in his own words. There is more proof that he hasn't even come close to his boast or even practices what he preaches.

[don128]

I'm going out on a limb here to even post to this thread, so mabey I'm not qaulified or mabey so. I don't know how long many of you guy's have been breeding fowl, I myself for 36 years. I've always known that brother sister mating is a no.no. as it is in all of nature. I have tried it, got a few good ones, even brought the line back closer to correct looks. But I just don't think you can beat nature, nature won't allow it. I have known many breeders that done it, but they all failed in the long run. I know this is not what should be posted on this thread, but after reading all this for a few months, I begin asking myself, who is really qualified to answere, you or me. I know that you can get a good one now and then, but it's taboo. It's an abomination. This is just my opinion, I gave up this practice 30 year ago. To try and change the ground rules of nature is a task that I wish you well with, but my opinion is a road to fail. To me, crazy breeding is just that.....crazy breeding.

[blades61]

this probably wont stay but it is a joke i thought of this ole boy was doing his sister she said you do it like daddy he said yea thats what mom said

[David Dunn]

You would never want to mate bro and sister unless you absolutly had to I have had good success line breeding but i havent tried bro and sister. You can take a pair and breed father to daughter and mother to son. Breed them down to 7/8-1/8 on each side and then set up several lines breeding the two lines back together and still have the original cross. Then you can cross those lines in almost endless combinations depending on how many lines you made. This is a form of inbreeding to just not as closely related as bro and sis. The main thing is to keep acurate records. This is the method I prefer.

[kywolf]

Originally Posted by Mike Everett

I find it is interesting that on the same site, Ray has quoted and the evidently the source of ya'll's relationship formula, if you just read a little farther it states: Practical uses of (F)...two are listed;
a) Predicting the effects of Inbreeding Depression.
b) Assessing the risk of inheriting Genetic defects.

It also states that studies on chickens have shown that for every 10% increase in (F) the hatchability declines 4.36%.

i've dabbled with a few heavily inbred familys over the years an one of the things they have all had in common were,#1 they were hard to raise,if you could get an egg to hatch they were about impossible to raise an #2 they all were manfighters.i see the comparison with the white mice being made but those mice are raised in a lab.i dont know any rooster fighters that raise their cocks in a lab.

[kali ises]

kywolf daviddunn,don128 - finally some common sense!

[Chance]

Originally Posted by don128

I'm going out on a limb here to even post to this thread, so mabey I'm not qaulified or mabey so. I don't know how long many of you guy's have been breeding fowl, I myself for 36 years. I've always known that brother sister mating is a no.no. as it is in all of nature. I have tried it, got a few good ones, even brought the line back closer to correct looks. But I just don't think you can beat nature, nature won't allow it. I have known many breeders that done it, but they all failed in the long run. I know this is not what should be posted on this thread, but after reading all this for a few months, I begin asking myself, who is really qualified to answere, you or me. I know that you can get a good one now and then, but it's taboo. It's an abomination. This is just my opinion, I gave up this practice 30 year ago. To try and change the ground rules of nature is a task that I wish you well with, but my opinion is a road to fail. To me, crazy breeding is just that.....crazy breeding.

Sorry Don, but completly dissagree with this statment. NATURE promots heavy inbreeding, any which way. Most animals live in a localised area, they breed and rear there young who stay and breed in the same area. If you leave a flock of sheep or a herd of cattle to the own they will breed with each other every chance they get with out hisitation or there relationship with the other animal. Even migratory animals all come back to the same spot to hatch/ breed there young, in birds often to the same nest site so this promotes inbreeding.
Have you never known a dog to escape from his pen to mate with his mother , sister or the local tart. Havn't seen one yet that was fussed about his mate.

[colt39]

Originally Posted by kywolf

i've dabbled with a few heavily inbred familys over the years an one of the things they have all had in common were,#1 they were hard to raise,if you could get an egg to hatch they were about impossible to raise an #2 they all were manfighters.i see the comparison with the white mice being made but those mice are raised in a lab.i dont know any rooster fighters that raise their cocks in a lab.

Here is the thing. If you turned them into man fighters, it was in them to begin with.

Inbreeding is a good thing to get homozygosity in your brood fowl so they have consistency when bred. It does not cause problems that were not already there.

With that said, I do agree about them loosing livability, health & hatchability rate if taken too far.

How much inbreeding really depends on your fowl & their ability to take it & the quality to begin with that is in them.

On the other hand, I also agree that out-breeding depression occurs more than many want to admit. This is why a guy starts out with high quality fowl that produce ace cocks & he burns up the pit for a couple years & then he has bred them to this or that & can't win a fight.

So, I say, Good, GOOD FOR WHAT????? Brood fowl need to be inbred to be able to pass on quality traits & are good in the brood pen but are not as good in the pit.

Crossed cocks are full of vigor & good in the pit but are Heterozygous & not as good in the brood pen!!!

Understanding this & how to do both will surely help in the long run.

[Mike Everett]

[QUOTE=colt39;4155815]Here is the thing. If you turned them into man fighters, it was in them to begin with.

Inbreeding is a good thing to get homozygosity in your brood fowl so they have consistency when bred. It does not cause problems that were not already there.

With that said, I do agree about them loosing livability, health & hatchability rate if taken too far.


On the other hand, I also agree that out-breeding depression occurs more than many want to admit. This is why a guy starts out with high quality fowl that produce ace cocks & he burns up the pit for a couple years & then he has bred them to this or that & can't win a fight.


I disagree on the out-breeding depression, it's an easy fix, if you put something in and it don't work don't do it. Check out Genetic Loads...With inbreeding if you have a problem it might be several generations up the pedigree before it appears. And you have to find it and get rid of everything that might be a carrier a very dubious task. Out-breeding is not exactly what people are saying it is, another miss-conception. It's not just crossing something too many times. It's usually in population genetics where breed-able types mate with different isolated populations and bring in disadvantageous genes. Example: say you have a large lake with a river inlet on one end and an outlet on the other. They are the same species of fish just different isolated populations that mate in the lake. The ones near the inlet are genetically predisposed to go upstream to lay and the, the ones near the outlet go down stream to lay. Out-breeding occurs when the two population sometimes meet in the middle and mate. There offspring are confused and don't know what direction to go when it's their time to mate, thus usually die out. That's why it's best not to breed two conflicting types like high-breakers and grounders the offspring are confused.

[slwnstdy]

Originally Posted by colt39

.....

You can use the IC formula described because Ray does not select. He has stated that one is just as good as the other & locked after the first single mating. But, since I or anybody else that has culled, selected & used a process of elimination, that formula does not even apply. I have read many times that it is formulated on random pairing. RANDOM!!!! There is nothing random about selection. Totally opposite of each other.

So, you are using the wrong formula for anybody that selects & single mates. IT DOES NOT APPLY!!

Jim,
Agree with the parts of the post I deleted above. On the last two paragraphs though, I clarify.

All formulas apply on individual matings only. The formula can be used in Ray's cast because he breeds B-S through and through. If someone breeds mother to son through and through (not going back to grandmother) it is aso usable ---> this is the simplified Falconer one that has the ".25" mutipier in the beginning.

I will not comment on Ray's flock mating because I dont fully understand it. Let him explain it first I guess. But from the limited posts I have seen, what happens is every year there is one definitive single mated pair that identifies the generation. He may choose the best stag and pullet from last year's singe mating and then single mates them this year.

The rest he flock mates. It is in another one of his posts just the last couple of weeks, check it out.

Thanks to all the new posters who have come out to join the thread. We all learn from each other, regardless of which side you are on.

Keep on posting (and breeding), SLW

[cnucum]

Anybody would like to explain the term "short bred"?

[Mike Everett]

Originally Posted by RayBoles

It has now been two or three years that I posted my method of breeding brother to sister and line breeding from there. I would like to know if any have tried it and what was their outcome.

Maybe some of you need to read this again...he says nothing about continuous BxS mating, that came recently after his Locked Gene Method from which this thread started. He was proven wrong and came up with another scheme. Just to refresh some of the newcomers, he claimed his fowl were locked after 2-4 generations of BxS, he saw the light and went to the other ridiculous method. He is asking about a method that obviously only took two-three years, not twenty.

[colt39]

[quote=Mike Everett;4155838]

Originally Posted by colt39

Here is the thing. If you turned them into man fighters, it was in them to begin with.

Inbreeding is a good thing to get homozygosity in your brood fowl so they have consistency when bred. It does not cause problems that were not already there.

With that said, I do agree about them loosing livability, health & hatchability rate if taken too far.


On the other hand, I also agree that out-breeding depression occurs more than many want to admit. This is why a guy starts out with high quality fowl that produce ace cocks & he burns up the pit for a couple years & then he has bred them to this or that & can't win a fight.


I disagree on the out-breeding depression, it's an easy fix, if you put something in and it don't work don't do it. Check out Genetic Loads...With inbreeding if you have a problem it might be several generations up the pedigree before it appears. And you have to find it and get rid of everything that might be a carrier a very dubious task. Out-breeding is not exactly what people are saying it is, another miss-conception. It's not just crossing something too many times. It's usually in population genetics where breed-able types mate with different isolated populations and bring in disadvantageous genes. Example: say you have a large lake with a river inlet on one end and an outlet on the other. They are the same species of fish just different isolated populations that mate in the lake. The ones near the inlet are genetically predisposed to go upstream to lay and the, the ones near the outlet go down stream to lay. Out-breeding occurs when the two population sometimes meet in the middle and mate. There offspring are confused and don't know what direction to go when it's their time to mate, thus usually die out. That's why it's best not to breed two conflicting types like high-breakers and grounders the offspring are confused.

Yup, I agree Mike. It is an easy fix. If you see it right away & stand fast & do not settle for any decrease in quality what so ever.

But for some, they do not pay attention to the quality going down & the aces are fewer & fewer until they can't win a fight & then realize it and its too late.

It is like breeding a mutt because his grandfather was a pure Lab & expecting him to throw out good hunting dogs.

[colt39]

Originally Posted by slwnstdy

Jim,
Agree with the parts of the post I deleted above. On the last two paragraphs though, I clarify.

All formulas apply on individual matings only. The formula can be used in Ray's cast because he breeds B-S through and through. If someone breeds mother to son through and through (not going back to grandmother) it is aso usable ---> this is the simplified Falconer one that has the ".25" mutipier in the beginning.

I will not comment on Ray's flock mating because I dont fully understand it. Let him explain it first I guess. But from the limited posts I have seen, what happens is every year there is one definitive single mated pair that identifies the generation. He may choose the best stag and pullet from last year's singe mating and then single mates them this year.

The rest he flock mates. It is in another one of his posts just the last couple of weeks, check it out.

Thanks to all the new posters who have come out to join the thread. We all learn from each other, regardless of which side you are on.

Keep on posting (and breeding), SLW

I agree, all formulas apply on individual matings only. But the COI formula is based on RANDOM pairs, no selection. By selection, it is basic mathematics because all genes are either dominant or recessive & are made up of two alleles. just TWO. And if they show the traits you are breeding for, the traits are either homozygous or heterozygous & it is a basic math formula to figure out the probability.

The formula can be used on anybody who linbreeds as well. There has been nothing said about breeding back to a grandmother or grandfather. You linbreed continuously to his daughters each generation. In this case, it is my daughters daughter is my granddaughter but my daughter.

here is a quote of Rays that will help you understand his method better.

QUOTE]I have never single mated a hen except the one I used to origianaly lock the genes and I have never breed a cock that has been fought.]

Also Since the 7/8 pullets were used in the first cross and were inbred, when their brother was used to breed to their offspring, (His Nieces) the IC has to be adjusted because the 7/8 pullets extra homozygosity will make it more likely that they will transmit to their grandchildren the same copies of the same alleles that they passed to their daughters bred to their brother who also has copies of the same alleles.

Does any of this make sense or are some just using a formula that is used on flock mating that is random. IT ONLY APPLIES IF THE MATINGS ARE RANDOM.

[Mike Everett]

An example of Outbreeding Depression as related to gamefowl, might be as follows: In the PI where long legs are a desired commodity..would it be wise to breed to a family of very short legged fowl into them? If you did and got shortlegged fowl that is Outbreeding Depression, disadvantageous genes cause it, not the act of crossing.
Too much crossing probably can effect the original family simply because the good genes were diluted, this isn't Out-breeding Depression.

[cnucum]

Originally Posted by colt39

Does any of this make sense or are some just using a formula that is used on flock mating that is random. IT ONLY APPLIES IF THE MATINGS ARE RANDOM.

Sir Jim, I think the most important aspect of these is the "Stocking Up" on the same traits... As you said before if you select fowls that are closely related (even bro-sis) and having the traits you desire, breeding them together will yield results that will express those traits more likely, especially if their relation is from a single ancestor that have been proven to stamp those traits to it's offspring. More better I believe than breeding fowls that are not related that also shows the same traits.

I read one poultry article a long time ago, stating a study made that "crooked breast bone" is not "hereditary", but by using a fowl that has that and repeatedly breeding to it, you will get more and more fowls that have that defect.

"Stocking Up" on the same traits... It's like having a lotto ticket that you already have half of the numbers that will appear, you will have a greater chance of getting the remaining winning numbers vs. another ticket that still has the full range of numbers...

[OREVON]

Originally Posted by cnucum

Anybody would like to explain the term "short bred"?

as what i heard from one of the videos of the late Emoy, "shortbred" chickens are chickens that were crossed to different lines so many times you can think of.

[Mike Everett]

Originally Posted by colt39

I agree, all formulas apply on individual matings only. But the COI formula is based on RANDOM pairs, no selection. By selection, it is basic mathematics because all genes are either dominant or recessive & are made up of two alleles. just TWO. And if they show the traits you are breeding for, the traits are either homozygous or heterozygous & it is a basic math formula to figure out the probability.

The formula can be used on anybody who linbreeds as well. There has been nothing said about breeding back to a grandmother or grandfather. You linbreed continuously to his daughters each generation. In this case, it is my daughters daughter is my granddaughter but my daughter.

here is a quote of Rays that will help you understand his method better.

QUOTE]I have never single mated a hen except the one I used to origianaly lock the genes and I have never breed a cock that has been fought.]

Also Since the 7/8 pullets were used in the first cross and were inbred, when their brother was used to breed to their offspring, (His Nieces) the IC has to be adjusted because the 7/8 pullets extra homozygosity will make it more likely that they will transmit to their grandchildren the same copies of the same alleles that they passed to their daughters bred to their brother who also has copies of the same alleles.

Does any of this make sense or are some just using a formula that is used on flock mating that is random. IT ONLY APPLIES IF THE MATINGS ARE RANDOM.

Folks that quote is farther proof he is poofing you....LOL The only way he could reach a (F) of 98%, is he would have had to breed a single mating one pair of BxS/line each year to reach it in 20 generations.

[cnucum]

Originally Posted by cnucum

Anybody would like to explain the term "short bred"?

Originally Posted by Mike Everett

An example of Outbreeding Depression as related to gamefowl, might be as follows: In the PI where long legs are a desired commodity..would it be wise to breed to a family of very short legged fowl into them? If you did and got shortlegged fowl that is Outbreeding Depression, disadvantageous genes cause it, not the act of crossing.
Too much crossing probably can effect the original family simply because the good genes were diluted, this isn't Out-breeding Depression.

Mike... Is this the explanation for my question? I only heard of this term from the late Mr. Emoy Gorgonia... Describing fowls so crossed up that they are no good no anymore... Well that's how I understand him anyway...

[colt39]

Originally Posted by Mike Everett

An example of Outbreeding Depression as related to gamefowl, might be as follows: In the PI where long legs are a desired commodity..would it be wise to breed to a family of very short legged fowl into them? If you did and got shortlegged fowl that is Outbreeding Depression, disadvantageous genes cause it, not the act of crossing.
Too much crossing probably can effect the original family simply because the good genes were diluted, this isn't Out-breeding Depression.

I agree Mike but let me give you my example & see what you think.

You cross the tall bird with the short bird because the short bird is all you have at the time.

you get some short ones & some tall ones in the offspring.

So, you eat all the short ones & you loose the original tall one so you use the tall ones that came from the tall one bred to the short one. Then, even though they are tall, down the road they ended up short because it is in their genes.

Chris, glad you have common sense & a good breeding method!!!!!

[super fly]

Originally Posted by Mike Everett

Bingo... the man is blowing smoke up these guy's a$$ and some fools believe it, they don't have the experience or the understanding of genetics to understand the reality of what he is now saying. Colt was right that it is a gimmick to promote his welfare. In the past it was proven even to Ray that his "Locked" fowl in just a couple generations of BxS was invalid, so he switched his sales pitch that you had to have 20 generations of BxS, totally opposite to what he was spewing then. Wake up folks Ray is a chronic bull$hitter and some of you are just eating it up, it's out there in his own words. There is more proof that he hasn't even come close to his boast or even practices what he preaches.

He has some already hooked as seen from the growing number of Boles apologists in this thread. Some have took to explaining things for Ray. The fact is Mr. Boles does not have chickens. He was confronted with this fact before in the old B/S mating threads when a group of Filipinos, including Edwin Aranez came to his Alabama farm a few years ago and found nothing. As to whom between Edwin and Ray to believe,..your guess is as good as mine. Ray disappeared for a while in this site but has since resurfaced with a new claim that his chickens are in Mexico and that he has brother/sister mated his Sweaters 20 generations to come up with his genetically superior fowls. Good luck confirming it guys. Lesson: When the well is dry, men will take to drinking any water they could find...

[nicogamefarm]

Originally Posted by super fly

He has some already hooked as seen from the growing number of Boles apologists in this thread. Some have took to explaining things for Ray. The fact is Mr. Boles does not have chickens. He was confronted with this fact before in the old B/S mating threads when a group of Filipinos, including Edwin Aranez came to his Alabama farm a few years ago and found nothing. As to whom between Edwin and Ray to believe,..your guess is as good as mine. Ray disappeared for a while in this site but has since resurfaced with a new claim that his chickens are in Mexico and that he has brother/sister mated his Sweaters 20 generations to come up with his genetically superior fowls. Good luck confirming it guys. Lesson: When the well is dry, men will take to drinking any water they could find...

this what im trying to tell but somehow he got some good lawyers in this tread depending his breeding system hehehe .