|
The Original All Roller Talk Discussion Board Archive >
Hunger and Body weight
Hunger and Body weight
Page:
1
Pinwheel
215 posts
Apr 15, 2010
5:17 PM
|
I was reading an abstract on pigeon behavior and how they use food as reinforcement. It stated that a pigeon is brought to 75% of its weight when well fed to be in a stable state of hunger. For a Birmingham roller of approximately 8 oz, 75% of its well fed weight is 6 oz. Has anyone ever used weight to decide if your birds are in a stable state of hunger for flying??? Is 75% of well fed weight too much of a reduction to fly on? I should add that they used a bird for approximately 5 mins to tape a button. What do you feel in percent body weight is proper weight to fly a roller to perform well. I would actually like to try that and use weight as a guide to judge my birds are performing their best. Although 6 oz to 8 oz doesnt really seem that much, to a pigeon it substantial.
I understand you wouldnt want to loose muscle mass to get a body weight reduction of 25%.. But I do know people use food control. But when you restrict feed are you also changing body weight as significantly as 25%?
----------
Flying in someone else's backyard: Portable Kits
Last Edited by on Apr 15, 2010 5:21 PM
|
wishiwon2
325 posts
Apr 15, 2010
10:27 PM
|
"I would actually like to try that and use weight as a guide to judge my birds are performing their best. "
I dont mean this to sound rude, but use your eyes as the judge whether your birds are performing their best. Experiment just a little, pull them down til performance deteriorates, feed them up til the same. Observe the tell-tale signs indicating which direction you need to adjust, up or down. I garuantee you it will be easier and more predictable than weighing them all the time ...
----------
Jon
If it were easy, everybody would do it
|
Scott
3006 posts
Apr 16, 2010
6:01 AM
|
Don't over think it.. handle your birds and learn often for condition.
----------
Scott Campbell
" God Bless "
|
Pinwheel
216 posts
Apr 16, 2010
11:20 AM
|
No, Its not rude. I was offering another way to determine performance. Was there a correlation between a range of weight that performance was the best. Just curious if anyone looked at that.
What are some parameters on a physical that one would follow to know there bird is in ideal condition.
----------
Flying in someone else's backyard: Portable Kits
|
J_Star
2293 posts
Apr 16, 2010
11:44 AM
|
Put them on Wheat for a while.
Jay
|
wishiwon2
326 posts
Apr 17, 2010
5:19 PM
|
I am not aware of any solid, reliable anecdotes that correlate body condition to optimum performance in rollers. I think there is a reason(s) for that.
Prime rolling behavior is dependant upon much more that simple physical condition. The mental state or attitude is equally, perhaps more influential than weight. Rollers compared to other performing breeds (racers) are not best at any maximums. For example; Im not a homer guy but I think I know a bit about them. Racers perform best when in tip-top physical condition, rollers do not. Rollers are athletes but they can be over trained and in too fit of condition for prime rolling (beneath maximum). Racers perform best when stimulated by predictable measures (ie widowhood, young rearing, etc), rollers do not. There are few if any motivational control measures for rollers. They dont perform for feed, they typically do worse when pairing up and we cant condition them to perform on a cue.
The trick with rollers is you must balance the physical and mental states somewhere in the middle to get top performances.Becasue of the 'somewhere in the middle' and balance aspects of roller flying, it is difficult, nigh impossible to write or describe a script for managing a kit of rollers well, outside of a few general principles. Add to that the variability between families and rote management is prone to failure.
My experience has been that it isnt so much 'where they are' on any given day, but more where they are headed condition-wise. It is near impossible to maintain peak performance condition for any length of time. It can be short as 2-3 days up to a cpl weeks. Inevitably they will need adjustment in managemnt to get back to peak condition. In my opinion, it matters whether you are approaching or diverging from that peak. Just preceding and just after peak, they would appear by most all physical measure to be the same, but in terms of management the strategy must be opposite. I cannot handle one of my kit birds and tell you if today will be a good performance (unless it is in the extreme condition good or bad). But within a few minutes of watching them fly, I can tell you if they're on or not and some of what I need to do to remedy it (not that Im always successful at getting it done). In my opinion, there is no substitute for learning to read your birds and learning what changes to apply to get them where they will work their best. Like Scott said, sometimes we over think things instead of opening our eyes and exercise patience in learning.
----------
Jon
If it were easy, everybody would do it
|
pigeon pete
535 posts
Apr 18, 2010
7:41 AM
|
Hi Jon, there will not be any solid reliable anecdotes because anecdotes are just short, often amusing stories.
But, your post made me think a little about how we can over analyse the subject.
Your premise could be taken from your opening statement to mean that rolling form is unrelated to bodily condition, but then you go on to relate weight or condition to performance around 5 or 6 times.
For example,
The mental state or attitude is equally, perhaps more influential than weight
and,-
Racers perform best when in tip-top physical condition, rollers do not.
Rollers are athletes but they can be over trained and in too fit of condition for prime rolling
Inevitably they will need adjustment in managemnt to get back to peak condition.
The trick with rollers is you must balance the physical and mental states
I am probably being over critical, because I think you really meant that condition and weight alone are not indicators of rolling form, but they must be combined with other factors. Also there are no hard and fast rules with rollers, some rollers will in fact perform at their best when in tip-top physical condition. But you did correlate body condition (too good or too bad) to sub optimal performance, so I suppose that is a solid anecdote of correlations, even if only to illiminate the two extremes of weight / condition from the question of using weight/condition as a guide to performance..,lol
However correlation is not the same as proof, other factors are needed to point us in the right direction.
A more useful way to come at this is shown in the last part of your post about observing your birds and adjusting accordingly.
A new starter could be confused by reading the whole post and that sound advice at the end could be missed.
I think we are often in danger of not seeing the birds for the treatise.
Pete.
Last Edited by on Apr 18, 2010 7:44 AM
|
wishiwon2
327 posts
Apr 19, 2010
11:37 AM
|
If my post came across as if I think that physical condition is unrelated to performance, Im sorry. It does. However it is not the only factor to consider and may not be the most important in order to get the best from our birds. It also is a moving target. Excluding the extremes, there are a number of combinations of mental state and physical state that result in top performances in the same bird(s). I dont believe there is a single static condition that is ideal. That is why I suggest that weighing birds is not adequate method to predict top performance. I dont know if that makes sense or not.
I'll add, that I believe feed not only affects body condition (weight, strength, etc) but that is can be used to manipulate the birds mental state too, over short periods. We can withhold feed or feed grains that affect minimally a birds physical condition, but add to or reduce mental stress, which affects the performance. They may not actually be starving, but if they think they are, they will act differently. Or they may be filled up and therefore mentally content, but full of 'empty' feed that adds little to their body.
Thanks Pete for pointing those things out. Anecdote was not a good word choice. It is the 'after the fact observance' to which a cause could be assigned, vs. scientific method where a hypothesis is proposed and tested.
And yes, I am guilty of over analysing things sometimes. It is difficult to write and describe things that are seemingly 2nd nature. In my work, I often deal with large predators. I cannot describe to in words to you how or when I know what they will do. I just 'read' them, their body language, expression, behaviours, etc. and am able to know how they will act. I wished I could read rollers as well as I can wolves and grizzly bears, perhaps if the consequences were more significant with pigeons I would ... lol. I think its the same sort of 'understanding' though.
----------
Jon
If it were easy, everybody would do it
|
pigeon pete
536 posts
Apr 19, 2010
1:43 PM
|
Jon, good luck reading those critters, it would be long distance reading only if I had to do it.
|
Post a Message
|
|
|