I have a neighbor that has me second guessing myself, we will call him "Indiana Jones".
When I first bought my baby chicks 2 months ago Indiana Jones told me that I wouldn't get eggs without a rooster. I explained to him that I have had chickens in the past which laid eggs quite nicely, and I have never owned a rooster. Yesterday he brought up the issue again that I wouldn't get eggs without a rooster. I told him again that I, along with many other urban farmers have city chickens that have NEVER EVEN SEEN A ROOSTER.
(In the hallway at church), I told him that I would give him a lesson on the birds and the bees: Just as a woman ovulates monthly releasing an egg, without the help of a male, chickens ovulate daily and release an egg without the help of a rooster. If a man fertilizes the egg of a woman, you get a baby, and if a rooster fertilizes a chicken egg, you get a chick. But, the male is not necessary for the ovulation.
So, here is what he told me, I've searched online to see if this is true, but can't find the answer.
He told me that the reason my chickens will lay eggs without a rooster is because there is steroid in my feed. He claims he knows this is true because his friend that grew up on a commercial egg hatchery told him this.
It made me feel like a little ignorant backyard farmer.
I have asked my feed provider on many occasions, if the feed I was purchasing was medicated. They have always assured me that it wasn't. I have always assumed that a steroid would classify as a medication.
Am I completely wrong?!?!?