1. Source hierarchy
We prefer university Extension and government/agricultural sources for breed traits and housing guidance. Specialized organizations and established poultry references are used when stronger sources do not cover a needed trait. The source registry currently contains 23 records, and the breed database contains 42 breeds, hybrids, and common types.
2. Raw facts and normalized traits are separate
Each breed record can contain raw facts such as annual egg range, egg color, body-size class, and temperament summary. Traits used for ranking are normalized to a 1–5 planning scale. A normalized score is not a scientific measurement; it is a transparent way to let multiple documented characteristics interact in one planning tool.
3. Confidence matters
Trait records include confidence levels and source references. Missing traits are not treated as “average.” The engine reduces the data-quality score when important information is absent and can penalize missing climate evidence in severe conditions.
4. Housing is a hard constraint
Indoor coop area and enclosed run area are calculated separately. Recommended flocks use the planner's comfort targets, which are intentionally larger than the published reference minimums stored in the housing database. Extended winter confinement applies an additional indoor-space multiplier.
5. Climate changes trait weights
The planner begins with state-level cold and heat profiles and can refine them with an approximate ZIP-code centroid. Users can manually override unusual mountain, coastal, or desert conditions. Severe climates increase the importance of documented cold or heat tolerance. A strict-climate option can exclude documented severe mismatches rather than merely penalizing them.
6. Household preferences change the ranking
The primary goal receives the strongest preference weight. Secondary priorities, family handling, experience, broodiness, free-range goals, egg colors, and breed-diversity preferences then modify the ranking. A breed is not “best” in the abstract; it is better or worse for a particular set of constraints and goals.
7. The engine optimizes flocks, not just individual breeds
After ranking candidate breeds, the engine generates valid one-, two-, and three-breed flock compositions. Each flock is evaluated for individual breed fit, egg-goal fulfillment, housing margin, flock-composition preferences, egg-color goals, and data quality. A strong individual breed can lose to a more complementary mixed flock.
8. Alternatives must differ meaningfully
The planner returns the highest-scoring valid flock and then searches for alternatives that remain above a quality threshold and differ materially in composition. If a third genuinely strong option does not exist, the tool should not manufacture one.
9. Egg estimates are planning ranges
Where source-backed annual egg ranges exist, the engine converts them into conservative weekly planning ranges. Actual laying varies with age, daylight, molt, health, nutrition, season, stress, and individual genetics. If too much of a proposed flock lacks production data, the planner suppresses the precise flock-wide estimate.
10. Monetization is downstream of recommendations
Ad inventory, affiliate availability, product prices, commissions, hatchery relationships, and sponsorships are not inputs to the breed or flock scoring functions. Recommendations are calculated first. Commercial links can be displayed only afterward.
Limitations
This is a planning tool, not veterinary, legal, zoning, or animal-welfare advice. Breed tendencies do not guarantee the behavior or production of an individual chicken. Local weather, predators, disease risks, ordinances, and management practices can change what is appropriate.
Database version: 0.2. Last database review: 2026-10-04.