nicksiders
1077 posts
Dec 27, 2006
8:00 PM
|
Outstanding looking birds, Dave. Really nice.
Nick
----------
Snicker Rollers
|
MCCORMICKLOFTS
987 posts
Dec 27, 2006
8:13 PM
|
I like that shot of Eagle's Father. Great looking pigeon Dave.
|
sac_spinners
28 posts
Dec 27, 2006
9:07 PM
|
Nice birds Dave, i really like the looks of Eagle and his father
spin to win
chor
|
ultrasonic
28 posts
Dec 27, 2006
9:10 PM
|
Very nice looking birds!
|
motherlodelofts
1221 posts
Dec 27, 2006
9:16 PM
|
Very nice looking birds Dave !!
Scott
|
luis
64 posts
Dec 27, 2006
10:25 PM
|
Dave that's a great pic of your bird "Eagle" it's not often you get your birds on film with such a striking pose.
|
knaylor
397 posts
Dec 28, 2006
1:25 AM
|
Nice birds dave, Really like the hen!! Question though how did you train Eagle to pose for you??? LOL
|
JMHD
47 posts
Dec 28, 2006
2:52 AM
|
Dave Nice looking birds what is Eagle's foundation? Just curious. John M.
|
GREED FOR SPEED LOFT
165 posts
Dec 28, 2006
7:01 AM
|
DAVE, the ressesive red hen looks like the kind(sa-weet),she looks engineered to spin. Good looking birds.
R-LUNA
Last Edited by on Dec 28, 2006 7:01 AM
|
Ballrollers
533 posts
Dec 28, 2006
1:46 PM
|
Guys,
These birds feel as awesome as they look, and are as close to what I consider ideal type as any I've ever handled. I had the honor of handling Eagle, and the others, when I visited Dave this summer for a few days. I think you have the most consistant type set in a stud of rollers that I have ever seen, Dave. Good work!
YITS,
Cliff
|
Ballrollers
536 posts
Dec 28, 2006
7:56 PM
|
Dave,
The difficult part, for me, is that birds of so many different types are capable of quality performance (as long as balance is there) with only subtle differences in that quality. These are very difficult to identify in the air for many of us, and even more difficult to assign cause and effect to, with regard to the impact of a particular type on the bird's performance. It is easy enough for most of us to focus on breeding all those birds that perform, and assume that they must have the total package of type, feather, and balance if they can perform with quality. So I typically find at least a few different types in a loft of quality performers. Even in your own loft, Whitey (ouch, that still hurts) represented, what I call the "old-style roller type", which was different from the type represented by Eagle. So I think I understood where you were coming from when you said you were "parting with an old friend" that was a good performer and producer, because you were taking your breeding program in a different direction, with regard to type and peformance, in the outcrosses with Ivan's family. That must have been a difficult decision to make; and one that can only be based on years of experience in breeding and flying rollers; seeing a lot of birds fly in the lofts of other roller men, and from those observations, being disciplined enough to move forward with a very specific goal in mind for yourself and your stud of birds.
Some men appear to select type based on an esthetic value they hold in their mind, or a belief system of what type and feather produces the best quality performance. (My own personal standard is pretty typically represented by Eagle and his sire.) Is that how you derived yours? Or was it more seeing the performance and production of a particular bird or two and proclaiming "This is it!" I hope I'm making a little sense here, because this something that many of us can derive benefit from, if you don't mind sharing!!
Brian (BMC), I would imagine that at your level of experience that you might be dealing with some of these same issues in the stock loft. I haven't had the pleasure of seeing your birds, yet, (which I intend to do at some point, but do you find that your own stock selections are based on a personal goal of an ideal type in mind that you have found performs best, or are you of the opinion that if it can perform, it must possesse the total package?
YITS,
Cliff
Last Edited by on Dec 28, 2006 8:06 PM
|
motherlodelofts
1227 posts
Dec 28, 2006
9:41 PM
|
"Some men appear to select type based on an esthetic value they hold in their mind, or a belief system of what type and feather produces the best quality performance."
Cliff , you are a 100 0/0 correct , I battled that myself in the past and have since learned that it wasn't about just what I thought it should look like, I think that there are particulars that balance out others , some I don't think can be seen or felt,at least not by me.
Many time's the feather give's the bird an impression of being something other than what it actually is , on the perch particular birds can look long in the back, but in the hand this just isn't the case (just an example here)
Consistant type come's from the tightning of the gene pool, if the birds are selected properly most families only go back to a few birds which also pulls it all in as far as consistancy.
Scott
|
GREED FOR SPEED LOFT
166 posts
Dec 29, 2006
6:39 AM
|
Scott, and Dave well spoken.One thing that i have seen with many fanciers is that when they (just) bred for type they also set there self behind on performance of their bird stock quality, it has to be the whole package or make up when chosing for breeding purposes.
R-LUNA
P.S DAVE what is behind your birds and the mother to your R/R hen..........late
|
Ballrollers
538 posts
Dec 29, 2006
9:02 AM
|
Good point Richard. Neither has intrinsic value in itself without the other in place. And I'm with you on this one Scott, with regard to the things that decieve us or escape detection. No question about it. Proper selection for the total package; tightening the gene pool; I guess we cannot say it too many times. And I might also add, rigid standards. It's so tempting to overlook a "small" fault or two when a particular bird has many other things going for it. And it is so easy to overlook a type or feather flaw when we do happen to detect them, when that bird is good in the air. So after such due diligence, Dave, do you not feel that you violated your principals in bringing in the outcrosses from Ivan's family? Do you not risk having to start the process all over again with a whole new diversity that now exists in your gene pool? I'm interested in your thought process in this decision. How tight is tight? I guess that is the relevant question, here. Bro/Sis, Father/daughter, Mother/son, half bros and sisters, and cousins, obviously. At what point in the process of inbreeding do we begin to bring out undesireable recessive traits? I know there may not be answers to some of these questions, but they are certainly valid considerations. And then what about members of the same general family with the same foundation bird in their distant past? Now I begin to question the homozygosity of the genetic package. Good stuff for us to think about, guys. Thanks.
YITS,
Cliff
Last Edited by on Dec 29, 2006 9:26 AM
|
Velo99
784 posts
Dec 29, 2006
12:20 PM
|
Okay guys,
While we`re on the subject, how many season should one breed a certain pair to find out if they have the goods? I bred from a bunch of pairs last year. I have picked three that produced the highest quanitity of good birds. Gonna rally around these for? how long? I have so many combinations I could use from the pool in the foster side. The route I think I am gona take is the best 06 hens and cocks on the parents next year. On course or not?
----------
If they don`t kit,they don`t score.
Color don`t roll and peds don`t fly.
It`s a comp thing,understand?
V99
|
155
127 posts
Jan 16, 2008
5:18 PM
|
nice birds
|
gotspin7
1232 posts
Jan 16, 2008
5:19 PM
|
Nice ones!
----------
Sal Ortiz
|
elopez
368 posts
Jan 16, 2008
5:22 PM
|
Dave,
Love how Eagle looks, he sure looks like a spinner!
----------
Efren Lopez
SGVS
|
smoke747
551 posts
Jan 16, 2008
5:23 PM
|
Real nice Dave!!!
smoke747
|
crystalpalace
258 posts
Jan 16, 2008
6:25 PM
|
I enjoyed looking at your stock birds. Dave they look like they should shell out good youngsters. Good luck in the flys. F.R.S.
|