California roller flier, Sam Smitty, discusses his White Barred Rollers.
Tuesday, September 5, 2017
Friday, December 30, 2016
Using "Mirror Tape" to Protect Pigeons From Falcons
As we have seen in other videos, some poultry and pigeon fanciers have relied on the use of "hawk balls" and other reflective items placed around their yards to act as a deterrent against birds of prey. Many have reported some success with these methods and it is theorized that reflective surfaces may deter or startle birds of prey.
One problem for Roller fliers is that their kits fly well above these types of reflective objects.
In the following video, a pigeon fancier from the Far East (possibly India or Pakistan), who also happens to be a falconer, shows us "how to protect your pigeon from falcons" utilizing reflective tape.
In the video, he is seen carefully applying small strips of reflective or "mirror" type tape to the outer primaries and also several tail retrices of one of his flying birds. Obviously, this is based on the theory that any attacking falcon or hawk who attempts to attack the bird from above will be deterred by the reflective surfaces of the tape.
Though I have found no examples of Western pigeon fliers utilizing this method, in "Attacks by Birds of Prey on Racing Pigeons. A Report for the Confederation of Long Distance Racing Pigeon Unions of Great Britain and Northern Ireland", there is mention of the use of reflective "sequins" which were applied to some Racing Homers. The report remarks that "This method involves attaching small reflective discs (dressmakers sequins) to the plumage of the pigeon. We could find no research literature relating to this method of deterrence and their use seems to have arisen through individual experimentation by pigeon fanciers. There are two potential ways in which these deterrents may work. The first is through a repulsion effect in that a bird of prey will not approach the reflective object, in which case they can be placed anywhere on the bird where they will be visible to a predator. The second is that they could distract a bird of prey during an attack and give the pigeon a better chance of escape, in which case they need to be positioned where the distraction effect is greatest. It is possible that the prominent white wing bars seen on many bird species have evolved because they distract predators during an attack. The combination of movement and highly contrasting wing coloration may interfere with the peripheral vision of a bird of prey as it strikes. Birds of prey have both monocular and binocular visual fields; the former is important in wide angle distance vision whilst the latter is thought to be most important for judging precise distances such as during landing or an attack (Campbell & Lack, 1985). However, we could find no published information on the potential distraction function of wing bars or on the interaction between monocular and binocular vision in birds of prey. Sequins placed on the wings of a Racing Pigeon could potentially have a distraction effect on an attacking bird of prey."
However, the report also noted that: "old-birds wearing sequins did not home more successfully than their loft companions that were not wearing sequins. In fact there was a non-significant tendency for the opposite to be true. It is possible that the sequins actually marks out an individual pigeon within a flock and makes it more vulnerable to attack by a bird of prey. However, we cannot say that any old-bird, with or without sequins, which
failed to home from the training tosses, was killed by a bird of prey. What we can say
is that the level of losses of experienced pigeons during training tosses was not reduced by the application of sequins".
Needless to say, the jury is still out on the application of "on-board" reflective surfaces as a deterrent.
That being said, it certainly cannot hurt to try..
Tuesday, November 8, 2016
25th Hawk loss today
Earlier today, I lost two more kit birds to Hawks. These mark the 24th and 25th confirmed lost kit birds since July and we're not even at the height of the BOP season yet.
The losses included a young Blue Baldhead Blackburn that was still squeaking and a mature Black Baldhead Oddside that I have had high hopes for awhile. These came from two different kits. One would think after suffering a loss in one kit, the next kit out would be home free, but it's not so.
In the meantime, following the second kill, another Cooper's Hawk appeared in a tree out back to eyeball the birds in the lofts.
The Black Bald was mostly James Turner blood and had previously been hit by a Peregrine hen and was lucky enough (at the time, at least) to have been simply drilled into the ground opposed to being snatched or cut up by talons. The bird had since grown pretty hawkwise and had avoided several other attacks by promptly flying to ground or flying into thickly leaved trees to avoid attack.
Ultimately, if something is not done about the Bird of Prey problem, it will probably eventually mean the extinction of the true Birmingham Roller pigeon, as well as other types of performing tumbler pigeons, due to the fact that Birds of Prey always tend to seek out the best birds in a kit. As a consequence, many successful roller breeders have chosen to simply give up instead of being defenseless as these over-protected winged demons proceed to cut their kits to pieces. Some of them have even got out of pigeons entirely after it became apparent that even their penned up stock birds were not entirely safe.
The losses included a young Blue Baldhead Blackburn that was still squeaking and a mature Black Baldhead Oddside that I have had high hopes for awhile. These came from two different kits. One would think after suffering a loss in one kit, the next kit out would be home free, but it's not so.
In the meantime, following the second kill, another Cooper's Hawk appeared in a tree out back to eyeball the birds in the lofts.
The Black Bald was mostly James Turner blood and had previously been hit by a Peregrine hen and was lucky enough (at the time, at least) to have been simply drilled into the ground opposed to being snatched or cut up by talons. The bird had since grown pretty hawkwise and had avoided several other attacks by promptly flying to ground or flying into thickly leaved trees to avoid attack.
Ultimately, if something is not done about the Bird of Prey problem, it will probably eventually mean the extinction of the true Birmingham Roller pigeon, as well as other types of performing tumbler pigeons, due to the fact that Birds of Prey always tend to seek out the best birds in a kit. As a consequence, many successful roller breeders have chosen to simply give up instead of being defenseless as these over-protected winged demons proceed to cut their kits to pieces. Some of them have even got out of pigeons entirely after it became apparent that even their penned up stock birds were not entirely safe.
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Winging It! Enter the world of competitive roller pigeons
Saturday, October 15, 2016
How important is genetic testing before allowing a stock bird to spread its genes throughout a family of Rollers?
A recent article published by UC Davis entitled "How a Genetic Mutation From 1 Bull Caused the Loss of Half a Million Calves Worldwide" illustrates the necessity of thorough genetic testing before allowing a stock bird to establish its influence throughout a family of Performing Roller pigeons or other types of Domestic Animals.
The article tells the story of how one bull, Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief, was single-handedly responsible for the introduction of a lethal gene into the genepool of Holstein dairy cattle that up to current day has resulted in the loss of a half million Holstein calves as a result of spontaneous abortion.
Chief, who was born in 1962, through the miracle of modern breeding practices, sired 16,000 daughters, who in turn gave rise to over 500,000 grand daughters and more than two million great grand daughters. Several of his sons, including Walk Away Chief Mark, who was sired in 1978, also became dominant sires in the Holstein breed in North America. Mark was even more prolific than his sire, fathering over 60,000 daughters. According to UC Davis, Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief is single-handedly responsible for 14% of the genome in the current Holstein population of North America which is estimated at being about 9.2 million cows.
Recent genetic sequencing in Holstein cattle turned up a group of mutant genes simply identified as "APAF1" which is a recessive lethal gene that was not only associated with lower fertility rates, but also spontaneous mid-term abortions in cattle. Over the last 35 years, this lethal gene has cost the dairy industry an estimated $420 million just in veterinary costs as a result of complications. The source of this devastating lethal mutation was found to be none other than this single legendary sire: Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief, who was also noted to have otherwise dramatically improved the production capabilities of Holstein dairy cattle.
While we Performing Roller breeders lack the sort of breeding technology that cattle breeders do and there is no genuine likelihood for a single stock bird to produce offspring by the thousands, it is still relatively easy to spread the genetic influence of a single bird throughout an entire family of pigeons. This is, in fact, an inevitable when the culmination of every Roller breeder's desire is to create his own family of first class rolling pigeons. This can only be done by starting with a small select group of pigeons and utilizing linebreeding/inbreeding techniques in an effort. Regardless of their aerial quality, great care must be taken in selecting the pigeons that are used in building up a family of pigeons, in that even the best pigeons may possess unwanted recessive genes. If a breeder does not pay close attention and neglects to work to expose these latent and unwanted characteristics, it is relatively easy to spread them through their family in such a way that inside of a half dozen or dozen generations, they become such a plague as to destroy our breeding efforts completely. These types of latent genes may range from common aerial faults such as poor stability, lack of homing instinct, infrequency, poor kitting ability, improper wing action, etc. on up to more severe and far more damaging genes that have negative impacts on reproduction, physical or physiological issues or even sub-lethal or lethal genes.
Some examples of known recessive genes in pigeons that if accidentily perpetuated in a line of Performing Rollers would have a destroying affect include such genes as those for Ataxia, Clumsy, Wobbly, Silky, Porcupine or Scraggly plumage and others. As one example, Ataxia, which is a recessive gene known to exist in Birmingham Rollers and some related breeds, results in physiological behavior that is almost remindful of the symptoms of Paramyoxovirus (PMV-1) in that an underdevelopment of the neural areas of the brain results in a lack of complete coordination of physical movement. Such birds exhibit an abnormal gait, exhibit peculiar flight and for all intents and purposes, exhibit other behaviors that could be simply described as a sort of "mental retardation". In the early 1990's, the late Gary Blain, who could best be described as a "serious backyard pigeon geneticist", had among his many various genetic color projects, several pairs of Roller X West of England Tumbler crosses that routinely produced Ataxiac offspring. For several years he kept several birds afflicted with Ataxia at his loft for observation purposes. One of these was a Recessive Red cock with short grouse legs that exhibited not only a strange gate that resulted in the bird rocking side by side and even backward whenever he walked, but also strange neck tremors and irregular modes of flight. I saw this bird on a number of occasions and one of my major observations was that the bird had very peculiar pupils. Not only were they irregularly placed, being set very far forward and rather down toward the join of the mandibles of his beak, they also had a very peculiar shape, being almost diamond-like opposed to round. Like many rolldowns, the pupils of this bird also seemed very slow to react to the shining of a bright light in his eye. While none of his siblings or cousins exhibited the strange pupils and seemed far less afflicted than this bird by the neurological characteristics of this genetic disease, they were, none-the-less, also afflicted in varying degrees. The double grandfather of these Ataxiac birds was a Roller cock that was so possessed by the roll that he could barely get off the ground and had come from a fairly notable breeder in Southern California, while the double grandmother was a West of England from a prominent show breeder in California. It was never clear which grandparent had actually contributed the gene to these birds, but the results of inbreeding their offspring was so devastating that within a few generations, Mr. Blain decided to destroy every last one of them (including both grandparents) because he knew that the gene, being a recessive, would be just about impossible to breed out of them and always yield a large percentage of birds that were afflicted with the disease. While Ataxia, as well as Scraggly and other types of genes responsible for what could best be described as "damaged plumage" would pose obvious genetic problems in a family to even the most casual observer, there are other genes out there that are just as devastating, even if their effects are less obvious to the average breeder. For example, in the 1940's, the late Dr. Willard . Hollander and Wendell M.Levi put up a paper on the Polydactyly gene which was discovered among a family of Silver Utility Kings at the Palmetto Pigeon Plant. This simple recessive gene resulted in an extra back toe and also sometimes other characteristics. While a feature like this might go mostly unlooked and even be reasonably tolerated in a Utility breed or a Sporting breed, much the same as webbed-feet which are common in Birmingham Rollers, the writers also found that the gene was a sub-lethal, in that every bird that was afflicted (some 25 of them) did not live to maturity. In later years, Dr. Hollander, who I corresponded with quite regularly and who was responsible for teaching me much about pigeon genetics, discovered another gene, this one, sex-linked, that he-called "web lethal" that appeared in Racing Homers in the loft a breeder named Dennis Peterson. While some of the afflicted birds died at young ages, quite a number were "dead-in-shell". Later on, the well known pigeon geneticist, Robert Mangile, finally actually managed to produce a cock bird that was homozygous for the gene that actually lived to maturity. Another odd mutation called "Erratic" was documented by Mangile in 1983 that resulted in birds that when alarmed showed odd head movements that sometimes resulted in the bird holding its head upside down over its back, birds that walked in circles, seemed incapable of flight and also would not eat feed off the ground. Most of them had to be handfed, while weaning the squeakers was next to impossible to such an extent that by 2014, the birds that Mangile was studying ceased to exist due to all the difficulties involved in their survival. In 1987, Mangile also reported on a gene he called "Foggy" about which he reported "they appear to have a frozen owl-like gaze in your direction with their bill slightly elevated. Unlike normal birds which seem comfortable viewing you with one eye, foggy birds tend to look at you over their bill, with both eyes, not unlike a real owl. This aspect may shed light on the malady. Their skull appears wider between the eves, thus producing a flattened "knob-like" head with wide-set eyes (see photos). In a few instances the widened skull was noted in newly hatched squabs. Fledglings appear to be vision-impaired and less mobile than loft mates; and restricted to the floor".
This list of known "nasty genes" could go on and on, but the point is, they are hiding out there. Without adequate genetic testing, some of these genes could be easily spread throughout an entire family of birds, some of them completely un-noticed by the average breeder apart from perhaps an observation that "something doesn't seem right".
On the otherside of the coin, there are also many genetic factors in rollers that are responsible for what could best be described as "faults" and "quirks". As a whole, we do not know much about these genes because they've never been adequately studied, and as a result, they have often given rise to some pretty wild, if not controversial, theories about breeding rollers such as the idea that continually breeding dark birds together results in infrequency and later and later development, that "the pearl eye puts more fly into them", that "some colors, like white selfs and yellows, can't roll due to some genetic inferiority" and so on, that have no real basis in sound genetic science. In reality, these sort of unwanted "quirks" that start to appear in most families are really the result of genes that were already present, yet lying latent in the birds that made up the foundation of the family. Those genes may be mere aerial, behavioral or physical faults, or they may be physiological.
In decades past, much ado was made out of so-called "Inbreeding depression", which was the theory that continued inbreeding and linebreeding, regardless of how it was carried out, would always lead to issues of infertility, genetic diseases and ultimately, the ability of a bloodline to continue to reproduce and survive. While this can in fact, take place, the general population, including many animal breeders, chalked it up to a sort of mysticism that took place because this type of inbreeding is viewed as un-natural and the result of our "playing God with nature". In reality, Inbreeding depression takes place because of the presence of what are called "recessive deleterious alleles". That is to say, they are caused by genes which are only rarely expressed in a large population, but become frequently visible in a small population due to the level of inbreeding which creates a lower genetic variation as each generation passes. When we breed Rollers or other types of domestic animals with some sort of standard of excellence in mind, lowering the genetic variation among our breeding stock is the name of the game, assuming that the characteristics we are perpetuating come as close to "the standard" as possible, for the simple fact that the end result is a (hopefully) higher and higher percentage of birds produced each generation that come near that standard. The only way to lower the genetic variation in your loft, and thereby produce more birds which come close to the standard, is by inbreeding and linebreeding as close as possible, always keeping in mind that the genes we are cultivating in higher percentages each generation include not only the positive ones, but also the negative ones too. As stated earlier, those genes we "don't want", may not be physically apparent to the naked eye of the breeder for a few generations and often, when they do become visible, it may be too late to stop them.
With these facts in mind, the birds we select to build our base from must be thoroughly tested to the best of our ability before we begin to allow their genes to heavily influence our breeding program.
By far, the fastest way to adequately test a stock bird that we are considering using as a foundation bird, is to breed it to at least two different mates, breed as many offspring from the two matings as possible and to then inbreed the offspring for a few generations. For the best results, we would take our potential foundation cock, breed him to two different hens and breed at least 10 youngsters from each mating. In an ideal world, those two hens would be his own daughters. We would then take all those youngsters and breed them together, making up full sibling matings from each breeding, as well as some half sibling matings consisting of a youngster from each mating paired together. From these, we would breed as many youngsters as we could, keeping very good records on them. At this point, we should begin to have a good idea what sort of recessive genes the potential foundation cock is carrying. For an even more thorough test, we would take some youngsters from these matings and also breed some of those together, which would be composed of not only some more full sibling matings, but also some linebred first cousin matings. In the meantime, you can also breed the cock to the best of his linebred grand daughters and great grand daughters.
In the above manner, we can quickly lower the genetic variation of the resulting offspring, limiting it to mostly the genetic influence of the potential foundation cock which allows us to determine fairly good insight into his genetic makeup, both his strengths and his weaknesses.
As one can imagine, since it is necessary to fly Rollers to adequately test them, the above process can take much time and effort. In spite of this, it is the only way to adequately test a potential foundation bird if a breeder wants to insure that he has made the right choice for his foundation.
And if the foundation cock was indeed the "right choice", you will find yourself way ahead of the rest, because once you've done this sort of test, you will probably find that this breeding exercise has resulted in a good many pigeons that have the qualities you desired from the cock.
~ Jack Chambers
The article tells the story of how one bull, Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief, was single-handedly responsible for the introduction of a lethal gene into the genepool of Holstein dairy cattle that up to current day has resulted in the loss of a half million Holstein calves as a result of spontaneous abortion.
Chief, who was born in 1962, through the miracle of modern breeding practices, sired 16,000 daughters, who in turn gave rise to over 500,000 grand daughters and more than two million great grand daughters. Several of his sons, including Walk Away Chief Mark, who was sired in 1978, also became dominant sires in the Holstein breed in North America. Mark was even more prolific than his sire, fathering over 60,000 daughters. According to UC Davis, Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief is single-handedly responsible for 14% of the genome in the current Holstein population of North America which is estimated at being about 9.2 million cows.
Recent genetic sequencing in Holstein cattle turned up a group of mutant genes simply identified as "APAF1" which is a recessive lethal gene that was not only associated with lower fertility rates, but also spontaneous mid-term abortions in cattle. Over the last 35 years, this lethal gene has cost the dairy industry an estimated $420 million just in veterinary costs as a result of complications. The source of this devastating lethal mutation was found to be none other than this single legendary sire: Pawnee Farm Arlinda Chief, who was also noted to have otherwise dramatically improved the production capabilities of Holstein dairy cattle.
While we Performing Roller breeders lack the sort of breeding technology that cattle breeders do and there is no genuine likelihood for a single stock bird to produce offspring by the thousands, it is still relatively easy to spread the genetic influence of a single bird throughout an entire family of pigeons. This is, in fact, an inevitable when the culmination of every Roller breeder's desire is to create his own family of first class rolling pigeons. This can only be done by starting with a small select group of pigeons and utilizing linebreeding/inbreeding techniques in an effort. Regardless of their aerial quality, great care must be taken in selecting the pigeons that are used in building up a family of pigeons, in that even the best pigeons may possess unwanted recessive genes. If a breeder does not pay close attention and neglects to work to expose these latent and unwanted characteristics, it is relatively easy to spread them through their family in such a way that inside of a half dozen or dozen generations, they become such a plague as to destroy our breeding efforts completely. These types of latent genes may range from common aerial faults such as poor stability, lack of homing instinct, infrequency, poor kitting ability, improper wing action, etc. on up to more severe and far more damaging genes that have negative impacts on reproduction, physical or physiological issues or even sub-lethal or lethal genes.
Some examples of known recessive genes in pigeons that if accidentily perpetuated in a line of Performing Rollers would have a destroying affect include such genes as those for Ataxia, Clumsy, Wobbly, Silky, Porcupine or Scraggly plumage and others. As one example, Ataxia, which is a recessive gene known to exist in Birmingham Rollers and some related breeds, results in physiological behavior that is almost remindful of the symptoms of Paramyoxovirus (PMV-1) in that an underdevelopment of the neural areas of the brain results in a lack of complete coordination of physical movement. Such birds exhibit an abnormal gait, exhibit peculiar flight and for all intents and purposes, exhibit other behaviors that could be simply described as a sort of "mental retardation". In the early 1990's, the late Gary Blain, who could best be described as a "serious backyard pigeon geneticist", had among his many various genetic color projects, several pairs of Roller X West of England Tumbler crosses that routinely produced Ataxiac offspring. For several years he kept several birds afflicted with Ataxia at his loft for observation purposes. One of these was a Recessive Red cock with short grouse legs that exhibited not only a strange gate that resulted in the bird rocking side by side and even backward whenever he walked, but also strange neck tremors and irregular modes of flight. I saw this bird on a number of occasions and one of my major observations was that the bird had very peculiar pupils. Not only were they irregularly placed, being set very far forward and rather down toward the join of the mandibles of his beak, they also had a very peculiar shape, being almost diamond-like opposed to round. Like many rolldowns, the pupils of this bird also seemed very slow to react to the shining of a bright light in his eye. While none of his siblings or cousins exhibited the strange pupils and seemed far less afflicted than this bird by the neurological characteristics of this genetic disease, they were, none-the-less, also afflicted in varying degrees. The double grandfather of these Ataxiac birds was a Roller cock that was so possessed by the roll that he could barely get off the ground and had come from a fairly notable breeder in Southern California, while the double grandmother was a West of England from a prominent show breeder in California. It was never clear which grandparent had actually contributed the gene to these birds, but the results of inbreeding their offspring was so devastating that within a few generations, Mr. Blain decided to destroy every last one of them (including both grandparents) because he knew that the gene, being a recessive, would be just about impossible to breed out of them and always yield a large percentage of birds that were afflicted with the disease. While Ataxia, as well as Scraggly and other types of genes responsible for what could best be described as "damaged plumage" would pose obvious genetic problems in a family to even the most casual observer, there are other genes out there that are just as devastating, even if their effects are less obvious to the average breeder. For example, in the 1940's, the late Dr. Willard . Hollander and Wendell M.Levi put up a paper on the Polydactyly gene which was discovered among a family of Silver Utility Kings at the Palmetto Pigeon Plant. This simple recessive gene resulted in an extra back toe and also sometimes other characteristics. While a feature like this might go mostly unlooked and even be reasonably tolerated in a Utility breed or a Sporting breed, much the same as webbed-feet which are common in Birmingham Rollers, the writers also found that the gene was a sub-lethal, in that every bird that was afflicted (some 25 of them) did not live to maturity. In later years, Dr. Hollander, who I corresponded with quite regularly and who was responsible for teaching me much about pigeon genetics, discovered another gene, this one, sex-linked, that he-called "web lethal" that appeared in Racing Homers in the loft a breeder named Dennis Peterson. While some of the afflicted birds died at young ages, quite a number were "dead-in-shell". Later on, the well known pigeon geneticist, Robert Mangile, finally actually managed to produce a cock bird that was homozygous for the gene that actually lived to maturity. Another odd mutation called "Erratic" was documented by Mangile in 1983 that resulted in birds that when alarmed showed odd head movements that sometimes resulted in the bird holding its head upside down over its back, birds that walked in circles, seemed incapable of flight and also would not eat feed off the ground. Most of them had to be handfed, while weaning the squeakers was next to impossible to such an extent that by 2014, the birds that Mangile was studying ceased to exist due to all the difficulties involved in their survival. In 1987, Mangile also reported on a gene he called "Foggy" about which he reported "they appear to have a frozen owl-like gaze in your direction with their bill slightly elevated. Unlike normal birds which seem comfortable viewing you with one eye, foggy birds tend to look at you over their bill, with both eyes, not unlike a real owl. This aspect may shed light on the malady. Their skull appears wider between the eves, thus producing a flattened "knob-like" head with wide-set eyes (see photos). In a few instances the widened skull was noted in newly hatched squabs. Fledglings appear to be vision-impaired and less mobile than loft mates; and restricted to the floor".
This list of known "nasty genes" could go on and on, but the point is, they are hiding out there. Without adequate genetic testing, some of these genes could be easily spread throughout an entire family of birds, some of them completely un-noticed by the average breeder apart from perhaps an observation that "something doesn't seem right".
On the otherside of the coin, there are also many genetic factors in rollers that are responsible for what could best be described as "faults" and "quirks". As a whole, we do not know much about these genes because they've never been adequately studied, and as a result, they have often given rise to some pretty wild, if not controversial, theories about breeding rollers such as the idea that continually breeding dark birds together results in infrequency and later and later development, that "the pearl eye puts more fly into them", that "some colors, like white selfs and yellows, can't roll due to some genetic inferiority" and so on, that have no real basis in sound genetic science. In reality, these sort of unwanted "quirks" that start to appear in most families are really the result of genes that were already present, yet lying latent in the birds that made up the foundation of the family. Those genes may be mere aerial, behavioral or physical faults, or they may be physiological.
In decades past, much ado was made out of so-called "Inbreeding depression", which was the theory that continued inbreeding and linebreeding, regardless of how it was carried out, would always lead to issues of infertility, genetic diseases and ultimately, the ability of a bloodline to continue to reproduce and survive. While this can in fact, take place, the general population, including many animal breeders, chalked it up to a sort of mysticism that took place because this type of inbreeding is viewed as un-natural and the result of our "playing God with nature". In reality, Inbreeding depression takes place because of the presence of what are called "recessive deleterious alleles". That is to say, they are caused by genes which are only rarely expressed in a large population, but become frequently visible in a small population due to the level of inbreeding which creates a lower genetic variation as each generation passes. When we breed Rollers or other types of domestic animals with some sort of standard of excellence in mind, lowering the genetic variation among our breeding stock is the name of the game, assuming that the characteristics we are perpetuating come as close to "the standard" as possible, for the simple fact that the end result is a (hopefully) higher and higher percentage of birds produced each generation that come near that standard. The only way to lower the genetic variation in your loft, and thereby produce more birds which come close to the standard, is by inbreeding and linebreeding as close as possible, always keeping in mind that the genes we are cultivating in higher percentages each generation include not only the positive ones, but also the negative ones too. As stated earlier, those genes we "don't want", may not be physically apparent to the naked eye of the breeder for a few generations and often, when they do become visible, it may be too late to stop them.
With these facts in mind, the birds we select to build our base from must be thoroughly tested to the best of our ability before we begin to allow their genes to heavily influence our breeding program.
By far, the fastest way to adequately test a stock bird that we are considering using as a foundation bird, is to breed it to at least two different mates, breed as many offspring from the two matings as possible and to then inbreed the offspring for a few generations. For the best results, we would take our potential foundation cock, breed him to two different hens and breed at least 10 youngsters from each mating. In an ideal world, those two hens would be his own daughters. We would then take all those youngsters and breed them together, making up full sibling matings from each breeding, as well as some half sibling matings consisting of a youngster from each mating paired together. From these, we would breed as many youngsters as we could, keeping very good records on them. At this point, we should begin to have a good idea what sort of recessive genes the potential foundation cock is carrying. For an even more thorough test, we would take some youngsters from these matings and also breed some of those together, which would be composed of not only some more full sibling matings, but also some linebred first cousin matings. In the meantime, you can also breed the cock to the best of his linebred grand daughters and great grand daughters.
In the above manner, we can quickly lower the genetic variation of the resulting offspring, limiting it to mostly the genetic influence of the potential foundation cock which allows us to determine fairly good insight into his genetic makeup, both his strengths and his weaknesses.
As one can imagine, since it is necessary to fly Rollers to adequately test them, the above process can take much time and effort. In spite of this, it is the only way to adequately test a potential foundation bird if a breeder wants to insure that he has made the right choice for his foundation.
And if the foundation cock was indeed the "right choice", you will find yourself way ahead of the rest, because once you've done this sort of test, you will probably find that this breeding exercise has resulted in a good many pigeons that have the qualities you desired from the cock.
~ Jack Chambers
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Hawk Deterrents - the Hawk Ball
Racing fancier John Glemser discusses his use of "Hawk Balls" to try to deter hawks from attacking his Racing Pigeons. He remarks that after having done a lot of research, he believes that the placement of shiny objects such CDs helps to prevent hawks from attacking his pigeons.
You can obtain commercially produced "bird deterrents" from Amazon.com such as those below. Do they work? Who knows? But, it can't hurt to try.
You can obtain commercially produced "bird deterrents" from Amazon.com such as those below. Do they work? Who knows? But, it can't hurt to try.
Monday, September 5, 2016
Video - THINGS YOU CAN DO TO HELP KEEP THE HAWKS FROM ATTACKING YOUR Pigeons
Racing Homer flier, Dennis W. at Hawkbait Lofts talks about some of the tactics he is using to keep low flying hawks such as Cooper's Hawks from attacking his homers. He says: "THIS IS A SHORT MOVIE SHOWING THINGS I PUT IN THE TREES AND PUT ON MY LOFT TO KEEP THE HAWK ATTACKS DOWN....ALWAYS REMEMBER IF A HAWK IS STARVING TO DEATH NOTHING WILL KEEP HIM FROM TRYING TO GET ONE OF YOUR BIRDS."
In this video, Dennis W. is mainly talking about the placement of highly reflective objects around his lofts such as hanging CD's in trees, sticking them to the eaves of his loft, as well as what appear to be owl shaped mirrored reflectors. While he states that this tactic has helped, he is clear about the fact that it is not foolproof.
You can obtain commercially produced "bird deterrents" from Amazon.com such as those below. Do they work? Who knows? But, it can't hurt to try.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)