Nov/December 2025

Breed of the Issue - CHINESE OWLS CHINESE OWLS – Page 33 – Purebred PIGEON generations. A single minor fault should only move a bird down a place or two in a class and would not prevent a bird from being first in its class, best of color, and, possibly, a champion or reserve champion. If you really think about it, you would probably agree that none of us has ever seen a Chinese Owl that did not have a minor fault to some degree. The main question is how many points, or fraction of a point, do we deduct for a minor fault from the 100 points total. Again, the answer is dependent on the severity and location of the fault. Minor faults in an area that do not have many points or an area that has several parts to be addressed such as “flights, tail, and body” will have deductions of a fraction of a point and, therefore, will have little effect on the placing of the bird. Minor faults in an area that have larger amount of points al- located to it, such as the three frills or carriage/station/type, will have a larger deduction. This may be several points and, therefore, a greater affect on the placing of the bird. Examples: There are only 3 points for all of the feet and legs. A major fault in this area could result in a 3 point deduction but a minor fault must be allocated over all of the different parts. Thus, a few feathers below the hocks, a couple of long toes nails, or a small web in the toes should only result in a deduction of ¼ to ½ point per fault. Never more than 1 point so it should have very little affect on the placing unless you have 2 birds that are very close in total points. The neck frill/collar has 15 points allocated to it so a minor fault in this area will carry a larger deduction of points. AV-shaped neck frill will probably get a deduction of at least 3 points which will move it down several places in a large class. There may be exceptions to the rules in some cases. A major fault could be treated as a minor fault at the discre- tion of the judge. Some of our shows occur in September and October when many of the birds are still molting quite heavily. In some cases, there would not be enough birds to make a meet if we only showed finished birds. The judge should take this into consideration and possibly treat this as a minor fault so the best potential birds place close to where they would if they were finished. Another example would be a minor vertical split in the breast frill that ap- pears to be caused by the bird having an empty crop. In no case should a judge treat minor faults such as pink eye ceres, a few pinholes, slight molting, white toe nails, etc. as major faults because of their personal prefer- ences. That would be totally unfair to the exhibitors who are breeding and exhibiting their birds in accordance with the written standard of the NCOC. Remember, as an NCOC certified judge, you are required to judged by the NCOC standard of perfection, not your own standards. Finally, there is no set method for a judge to use in determining the points given to a particular bird and how to use that in placing them. In our discussions the most common method appears to be adding up the deductions rather than trying to keep track of the total points after deductions. Then you would look at the good points to use to offset any deductions to chose between 2 birds. If both have areas with no faults then we must look at the depth of the quality points. If they both have good neck frills but one is a little closer to the eye and closes better in the front, that might be enough to offset a minor fault deduction. This part is all very subjective. The end goal is to pick the most balanced birds. This should equate to selecting the birds that would have the highest point total if the judge were to use a point card system even though the NCOC does not require it. This goal cannot be met if our judges fail to pick a bird simply because of simple faults like a couple of feathers on the back that don’t lay flat or discounting one that leans slight- ly forward while ignoring one the leans a little too far back. Try to focus on evaluating the good points as well as the bad points. F ollow - up C omments - 2025 It has been 4 years since this letter was sent to all of the certified judges on record at that time. We have had 4 more complete the certification process since then. The candidates must be an apprentice under 2 different certified judges as part of the process. Based on the results of the written exams, I believe that each of our new judges had at least one apprenticeship under a judge who stressed the major and minor faults while evaluating the birds with the candidate. It is imperative that any judge working with a candidate of the certification process discusses the major and minor faults frequently and thoroughly. This is the best time to engrain the importance of evaluating the a class of birds for their major or minor faults, as well as their strengths, to ensure that the birds that most conform to the new standard win the color classes and end up in the cham- pion line-up. Anything less is a disservice to the candidate and, eventually, the exhibitors. It is sometimes difficult to determine if a judge is applying the revisions to the standard because they seldom make any comments. It is very important that our certified judges routinely make comments about their decisions, es- pecially on the upper part of a class. The comments regard- ing why a bird is being sent back should contain wording used in our standard to describe the major or minor faults. These comments can be of great help to the exhibitors in understanding why their favorite bird didn’t win. Good comments can eliminate misunderstandings and hard feel- ings. No comments fosters doubt and confusion.•