| Home Page
Page 2
Page 3
Photo4 Page
Photo5 Page
Photo6 Page
|
|
|
|
Below is an article that was written in the early 80's by Cornell. In this article he talks about inbreeding as it relates to the Birmingham Roller.
MAKE MY DAY by Cornell L. Norwood
It is my primary intention in this endeavor, to submit viable information to those who may find it useful in the pursuit of their fancy, that there will be those who find portions of this material offensive, this is also my intention.
With regard to the Birmingham Roller, there is an increasing contingent of those who feel they have knowledge enough to offer the novice advice on the subject, which in fact, they are possessing of little enough an I.Q., to outwit a dead plant. In a relentless effort to promote themselves, these feather merchants, and their lacky proteges, serve only to visit a great deal of harm on the fancy at large. One such misguided individual, residing in the bay area of Northern California, wrote an article on the advantages of inbreeding Bill Pensoms 514 line to excess. Anyone who were to employ such a method, would certainly raise a kit of brutish young Thunder Buzzards. Bill Pensom fashioned the blood of his 514 hen into a line of outstanding spinners. Well after acquiring the best stock available to him, Bill applied the knowledge and experience he had gained over the years to produce quality rollers at will. With the understanding of the breed he possessed, Bill could accomplish this with pet shop birds, if need be. The important point here is the enduring knowledge and its application, more so than any one line or bird, that someone has managed to secure birds of great repute, only qualifies that person as a mere collector of pigeons. Much like the individual of the north, too often we see people who view simple ownership as an end, when in fact, it is but the beginning, a means to an end. Immediately following acquisition, such fellows attempt to forge a reputation as a breeder of great rollers, based of course on the efforts of someone else. This mentality reflects a lack of understanding regarding the breed, which is evidence against their ability to measure up to the famous pigeons they keep. Inbreeding is a practice whereby, a very limited gene pool is purged of its undesirable traits, through a selection process applied by the fancier. This is affected by breeding blood relatives so closely, that it is possible to develop a gene pool, which may be represented by a single ancestor. This method enables a breeder to fix desired traits in any breed of domestic livestock, and by virtue of the resulting uniformity, a strain is created within the confines of that breed. I might add, that the resulting strain born of this practice may be inferior, as well as superior. In and of itself, the only guarantee offered by inbreeding, is singular uniformity. There is no guarantee of quality written or implied. Where the results of this method will have a beneficial effect on any breed, I would recommend inbreeding as a matter of course. Unfortunately however, with regard to the Birmingham Roller, the application of this practice will result in disaster. The primary appeal of the Birmingham Roller is it display of true rolling. This exhibition of recessive behavior is the result of genetic interaction. Performance is demonstrated by the individual in varying degrees, this is testimony to the presence of opposing genes governing the same trait. The degree, to which an individual will exhibit performance, will be determined by the ratio in which these genes are present. This is a condition that demands regulation, as any attempt to render this behavior pure, will upset the ratio, promoting the cultivation of degenerate offspring, which exceed the frame of reference claimed by the ideal. The effects of inbreeding, as it is commonly defined, provides no consideration to the genetic regulation of the performance equation, inbreeding will invite degeneration. Degeneration is literally defined, as a return to a natural state, usually one of a lower order. The invariability of inbreeding, would provide birds of too stable a persuasion, along with those which be overdeveloped in the roll, with the ground eliminating the latter, one would be left with birds that approach their natural state of non-performance, i.e. DEGENERATE. So it is, that when applied to the condition of the Birmingham Roller, inbreeding is a proposition of diminishing returns, and should be discarded as such. With some justice, it may be argued, that inbreeding and line breeding, are one method in the same. Generally speaking, this may very well the case, but in reference to true rolling pigeons, the differences in results each method will afford, are startling. Thus, if cultivation of birds which approach the ideal are to be reared on a consistent basis, these two breeding methods must be considered completely separate. The cultivation of rollers of the first order demands that certain requisites be satisfied, line breeding is the lone method, which will lend itself to this objective. This practice will, at once afford the regulation of performance, hold degeneration at bay, as well as fix those desirable physical traits, in a strain, which are common to the ideal. This is made possible by the implementation of a ruthless selection process, which rivals natures own, in conjunction with a limited, but broad enough based gene pool to allow for the adjustments that must continually be made, if a strain is to be properly managed. I would like to go into much more detail regarding this subject this subject, but fine the space prohibitive. However, I would like to close on this note. I learned this concept from Bill Pensom, it took me many years with the birds to understand it. I am obviously a slow study, but for those who would respond to this article, I am a very formidable one.
To Doris Pensom, this one is for you...............
|
|
|
|
BILL PENSOM'S ABILTY TO JUDGE ROLLERS By Bruce Cooper
All roller fanciers who can read and have the good sense to subscribe to the APJ and read Bill Pensoms articles on rollers and the condition the fancy is in today. Before every roller fancier dashes off into print and makes a fool of himself, let me bring a few facts to light that may give some of you some extra food for thought. First of all, it is easy to condemn what you do not know or have not had the good fortune to see. Bill Pensom to me was a near myth that I was sure was surrounded by more foolish tales of false ability than any one in the history of pigeon culture. It was a stunning experience to fine out the truth. Over the years, things that Pensom has said for the sole purpose of enlightening the fancy have been misinterpreted, misunderstood, misquoted, and used against him. Those he help educate in the roller game and who became prominent, became jealous and turned against him. For the benefit of the many roller breeders who have heard tales of Bills abilities and doubt they exist, let me cite a few examples and you judge them and me, the teller of this story. First, the thing that has got Bill into more hot water than anything else is his insistence that you judge pigeons value on the ground. This is so easy for him that he is beside himself to understand why everyone cant do it. Oh, so you say he cant do it either. Listen friend, you are in for a shock! He can do it so fast and so easy that it leaves you blinking you eyes.
I was in Los Angeles a few years ago for the Rose Bowl game. I had a crate of pigeons to send to the National along with me. I was staying with my friend Dick Stephens, and the local roller clan was in Dicks backyard. In the group of my birds was a short, fine bodied, perfectly feathered, young badge cock. All who viewed my birds were admiring this bird as one of the better ones they had seen. Bill was late arriving and as he did, I was holding this young cock in hand. As Bill walked up, I asked: What do you think of this, Bill? He looked at it, shoved it back with: Blimey, Bruce, its rubbish. Surely you breed better than that.Then, feeling embarrassed, he patted me on the neck and said, Lets have a look at the rest.
Well Pensom, at a glance, could tell what others couldnt by studying it, that the bird was a real roll-down as I only, already knew. Pensom was in the Northwest this past year and went through many lofts, picking out the good spinners while they were perched. I've been all over the country and watched any number of fanciers try this and they do no better than a good educated guess. Bill, however went into my loft and lined up my stock. He put birds in order of there worth. He filled the hen cages first and lined them up into the exact order of their spinning ability. The many fanciers present were like me, mouth agape and awed. But he had one miss I thought. She was a checkered self he had in the twelfth hole. She was fast, light, and frequent as they get and still fly. I question this pick. Bill took the bird and showed us the lack of muscle on the back and said: While this is a good spinner and still could be used for stock, she is lacking in muscle and, if flown long enough, will give out and kill herself coming in. Also, she will be a little slow getting back to the kit for competition. That about bowled everyone over as they all knew the bird and knew I flew her for all visitors in my #1 kit, but had pulled her on competition day. (A footnote to this story is tragic, as she did later kill herself at the age of 2 years, three months coming into land.) Bill then lined up my cocks and again in the order that several years of flying had shown me to be their true valve. Another time, while visiting in Los Angeles I was at Ralph Hiltons watching his young birds go. Pensom, Hilton, and I were going to dinner. As I was already dressed, Ralph left me alone to watch the kit. I had Binoculars and was impressed with five birds that were exceptional. There was a sixth bird that rolled as often as the five, but not as tight. They were of different markings so I had it in mind to handle the five good ones and the lesser roller when they came in. Pensom hadnt seen Ralphs birds go yet that year and was going to try to make it for the fly. He was delayed and arrived just after they had landed. The birds were extremely hungry and started to trap in, but our greeting each other spooked a few of them up. The sixth bird I described, as frequent but not tight enough, was among them. Ralph who was coming out the back door as Bill was watching the birds, caught a glimpse of the action and was asking how they look, only to hear Pensom say rubbish, with his very English accent. Then Pensom dove into the loft, good suit and all, and started catching pigeons and stacking them under his arm like ears of corn. He emerged with five (yes, all five) of the birds I had picked out of that young kit by 45 minutes of very close observation. You can say what you like my friends, but to me this is a pigeon man.
Now to work myself back to where I started with Bills statement that you must pick them on the ground. I asked him about this during one of our talks. What can you see in a bird on the ground that you cant see in the air Nothing! he answered, except that occasionally a fairly good spinner will be a little lacking and you can choose a better type. Now I didnt ask him if you mated them in the air, only picking birds for the stock loft. It is obvious they must be balance together in the coop. Really the reason this gets Bill in trouble with the uneducated is very simple. One group goes off mating birds in the coop for show type, not knowing what a good spinner looks like in the coop. Another group says Bill is nuts no one can tell a spinner on the ground. There is also the smaller minority that claim they can pick a spinner in the hand. Usually a few tests show you that they are frauds. No doubt there are others who can do it, but my experience shows they are few in number. To me it is pretty obvious, Pensom is criticized and condemned by a noisy few who do not know of the great ability with the pigeons the man really has. Those who go to paper and pen to throw rocks will look foolish to many of us who know the real truth about Pensom, who is no doubt the worlds leading pigeon fancier.
Twenty five years ago there were Birmingham Rollers in America that could spin, no question about that. There were lofts of birds in this country for many, many years that contained excellent birds. The fact remains unmistakable, however that Bill Pensoms birds and words have improved the roller hobby as no other breed has been improved by the influence of one fancier. I am not going to try to present Bill to you as the Messiah of roller pigeons, or that every thing he says or has said should be inscribe in stone. In his lifetime, he has changed his views on certain aspects of the hobby and birds. This is as normal and healthy as apple pie. What galls the very soul of a person who has known Pensom, has seen his birds spin and compared the type he keeps and advocates against the round, little dumplings being pushed by some of the leading show men, is to be at a show like the Milwaukee National and hear some drippy nosed idiot of a few years experience expound on the lack of ability and merit of Bill Pensom and his birds. Most of the leading Roller men in the United States today, who gained their reputation in the flying game, acclaim Bill Pensom as the worlds foremost breeder of Roller pigeons. Ninety percent of the countrys leading showmen claim he is far less. That my friends, if you will think about it, ought to tell you something. |
BALANCED MATINGS by Howard Mccully
The object in Breeding rollers is to produce a kit of young birds, uniform in size and type so that the best kit action and performance may be had; and from these kit birds, find youngsters that will make breeders, perpetuating the best qualities of the old birds. The best performers in the air are not always the best stock birds. Continual mating together of the best birds in the air without regard to type or size will breed as many different types of birds as there are stock birds. The results are deterioration in quality. The perfect rolling ability ceases to exist as the type deviates from the standard. Among rollers, wildness in the eye, short, weak secondaries, and pinched faces, are the first signs of deterioration. The use of these birds for stock ultimately results in roll downs. In pure Birmingham Rollers, there should never be any doubt that the birds will roll. Ray Perkins wrote: "Of the two thousand or more rollers I bred, their were none which would not roll in some manner, if given the time and opportunity." And Bill Pensom: "Quite right, all types will roll because they cannot help it, but we have found the type which is the answer to everything." It having been established by these men and others that all pure Birmingham Rollers will roll, fanciers can now set about to increase the number of good birds by balanced matings: by selecting the stock birds on the ground with due regard to aerial ability. By balanced matings we mean to mate the most perfect type birds together, neither one to have more than minor faults, and the same minor faults must not be present in both birds. We must breed for type. The tightest, truest rolling birds are of a certain type as brought out in the "ROLLER JUDGING PROCEDURE" bulletin. The birds will be mated to produce that type, taking into consideration, strength, stability, feather quality, both quill and webbing, and aerial ability. First the birds are judged according to the "JUDGING PROCEDURE" and graded right down from best to poorest. The ones with that intelligent Look and Balanced Carriage are best for stock. These will mated so as to balance out minor faults. After a strain has been established and justified, the best birds cannot always be mated together; on account of eye color, feather quality, color of plumage, size, strength and aerial ability. There is considerable overlap in these points and they will be taken up one by one.
1. The eye in Rollers and the surrounding facial features show the intelligence or expression, which corresponds to the personality in humans. The orange eye is most expressive. Bill Pensom considers that the yellow eye puts in more roll and the pearl eye puts in more fly. A pearl-eyed bird should be mated to a yellow or orange-eyed bird. Continual mating of yellow eyed (or its varied shades) birds will result in excessive performance. A matter of record, from experience. It is more difficult to read the expression of a bull eyed bird, so they are not as desirable for stock. However, bull eyed birds may be used if they are ideal spinners, and are of the correct body type. Failure to read the expression of stock birds correctly is the cause of breeding 75% of the bad Rollers.
2. According to Mr. Pensom, the best birds come 1st: in red check and dun, the most regular performers and mixtures of these colors, 2nd: in blue check, the most stable, 3rd: in black, 4th: Tortoiseshell, 5th: Dun bred reds, and so on. He means any marking in which these are the basic colors. There is a loss or weakness in the pale colored birds. If one color is continually bred for, the pigeon deteriorates. When there is a loss of soundness such as -too prolific spinning, and failure to kit, TH E N is the time to clash colors; still in the same bloodlines. The pale colored birds should be mated to the darker, stronger colors. A light grizzle could be mated to a red check or dun; blue bar or pale blue to a black; tortoiseshells and light blue grizzles go with any color. Blue checks go with red checks and duns W H E N there i s a loss in stability in the red checks and duns. Always mate pale or soft to the hard or dark colors. If wild-eyed birds are used instead of birds with the right expression, then the clashing of colors will little good. Wild eyed birds should N E V E R be used for stock.
3. It is better to stick with short cast birds entirely. NOTE. In a 1968 changes this part of his personal standard. stated, and I quote,"First of all, we have to be able to recognize the champion Birmingham Roller. Such a pigeon is of small dimensions, 6 to 8 ozs. in weight when in proper flying condition, round of body, which is not too deep or shallow, not too pronounced in chest; and rather long cast." What also should be noted is the fact that Pensom had changed his short cast theory some ten plus years prior to this 1968 publication. But as this was his last publication that I know of I decided to draw from this particular documentation
4. The medium sized bird is the most useful in the loft and looks the best when performing. Small birds do not have the stamina and the feather quality decreases as the size decreases. The large birds often harm the performance of the whole kit by flying in front and soaring.
5. Whenever possible to do so, two apple bodied birds should be mated together. Birds with the SAME body feel should be mated together. no substitute. All fanciers do not have enough of the right sort at the start but it is better to breed ONLY the few good ones. Shallow keeled birds lack stamina and cannot stand up to the rigors of kit flying and performance, because they do not have enough body capacity. Birds with keels a shade deep are good for stock. They are more vigorous and on account of the greater muscular development, will show more velocity in the spin.
6. In breeding for quality Rollers, only those with the high wide forehead and full face may be successfully used. Avoid birds with long narrow heads. The small birds are best, so long as they are physically sound.
7. While it is generally true that all Rollers will roll and TRUE TYPE 0 N E S will spin. True type ones will be found that do not spin or do any more than lightning fast flip. The reason they do not spin is due to a greater resistance power to the roll. They usually have everything in regard to type, feather, and expression. These birds are most valuable in the breeding loft.
8. The birds MUST be mated according to the time of development. Mating early developing spinners together is the quickest way to deteriorate the birds. Any boy can do that and they soon become a loft of worthless birds. Pensom said “He who has discarded all non performers will never be able to assemble a kit of first class rollers.†The American Pensoms are now found to be largely the same blood. Therefore, the very late developers MUST be mated to the early develops to obtain sound Rollers. All birds that develop their full spinning ability the first year are early develops. Those that spin at a rate of 18 months are late developers. These birds can only be discovered by flying them as holdovers, meaning they are flown the second season prior to ever being used as breeders. Some birds will begin to spin after they have bred youngsters. For this reason many fanciers mate up yearlings. MOST ALL CHAMPIONS start to develop at the age of from 8 months up.
End..........
|
|
|
|
As of late there is much talk about the HOLE Vs NO-HOLE. I am one who likes a bird that rolls with a hole. We as breeders of Brimingham Rollers have not gone beyond the hole. If this were so then everyone would be breeding rollers that roll with a HOLE.The Hole Is the ultimate in breeding & flying rollers. Below is a e-mail that Tom Monson posted on Earl's Roller List that explains my point of view better than I can. This was written on March 13, 2001.
Hi, Ken Firl:
You say, "I just have to disagree with the thinking that THE BEST CAN'T BE improved on." You ask why I believe that our "best" spinners cannot be better than those of years ago. I'll agree that, in the abstract, from a philosophical point of view, anything can be improved upon. After all, in an eternity of time and possibilities, anything "can" happen, it's just a probability calculation: eventually, with enough chimps playing with enough typewriters, over eternity, it's conceivable that a chimp could type out Shakespeare's "Hamlet." Philosophically, anything is conceivable. (I'm not making light of your assertion; I'm just making a point with this extreme example). As to whether the "perfect" roller has ever been hatched, I don't think so. However, neither do I believe that our best individual roller of today is any better than the best individual roller of fifty years ago. This is just my opinion. There will never be evidence to prove this one way or the other, so all we have to go on is personal opinion. However, my opinion is based on the fact that, between about 1910 and 1950, there were a great many fanciers in and around Birmingham who bred Birmingham Rollers. Probably several thousand. Of course, most of these were just back garden yahoos who bred from a few pair, flew them sporadically or let them free-loft. But there was also a hard-core constituency of true roller fanciers who were frequently trying to breed and fly the very best INDIVIDUAL rollers they could. They were not sidetracked by frequency of breaks or turns-all they cared about was ideal individual spinner. If they could not breed one, they went in search of one they could re-settle to their own loft and fly and claim as their own. They then wagered on these pigeons, trying to win individual bird competitions that were hastily organized over bragging rights in the many local pubs. These informal competitions appear to have been quite frequent, perhaps several per week around Birmingham. Pensom said that these competitions frequently led to the discovery of some outstanding, true spinning Birmingham Rollers. Pensom often called these, "rare rollers." Pensom visited these fanciers, principally in the Black Country, every chance he got. For a time, he was an "omnibus driver" (bus driver) in and around the Black Country, and always had his eye out for good rollers, even when he was driving the bus. He angered his passengers from time to time because, if he saw a kit up somewhere, he would slow down and look up at the sky or drive off-route to get a closer look. If he saw any good performers, he would stop the bus and get out to watch the birds and record the location, so he could return later on his own time and meet the owner and examine the pigeons. You can imagine how upset his passengers were. Between about 1920 and 1950, Pensom and Ken Payne witnessed tens of thousands of rollers on the wing, and eventually concluded that there were only a handful of fanciers who consistently bred the most outstanding pigeons: "Out of all the fanciers we met, we eventually spent our time with Bellfield of Cradley Heath, Homer of Quarry Bank, Tomkins of Stourbridge and Wyers of Stourbridge. It was from these fanciers that we built our studs. It was the old-timers of over sixty who commanded our affections the most, since the younger fanciers did not know so much, although we did on rare occasions acquire a bird of value from them." Now, based on these circumstances, let's at least agree that Pensom was in a position to be able recognize a great roller if he saw one. After immigrating to the USA, Pensom continued to travel and visit fanciers every opportunity he had. And he was always on the lookout for a great pigeon that might be able to enhance his own stud. If he ever found a pigeon that showed such promise, he would do almost anything to obtain it and prove it in his stock loft. Admittedly, most of them didn't work out, but that's roller breeding. The point is, if anyone had ever seen the best individual spinners from 1920 to 1960, it was Bill Pensom. There were legions of fanciers who made frequent visits to PENSOM?S lofts just to see his pigeons. Many of these said that, while his kits were just so-so most of the time, just as ours are on non-competition days, he would occasionally have visitors on a day when his kit was at its best, and they say they saw phenomenal spinners. If Pensom had a large number of fanciers visiting on the same day, as was the case every year at the Pageant of Pigeons, if his kit wasn't showing fanciers what a real roller could do, he would lift stock birds off the nest and toss up more and more birds until he could demonstrate what the ideal champion spinner's performance looks like. Many of us have heard old fanciers tell of someone they knew who bought a batch of young birds from Pensom and say that they saw the fastest, cleanest, most perfect spinner they ever saw in their lives one day when viewing a kit of rollers that included a few that had been bred by Pensom. Now then, let's assume at least for the sake of argument, that Bill Pensom was familiar with the ultimate capacity of a true roller, at least equal to anyone else who lived between 1920 and 1968. Pensom was familiar with the common ego trip of American fanciers of the time who had never visited England and had never seen the handful of astounding spinners Pensom had seen in all his travels. These egotistical Americans, most of whom were more knowledgeable in showing than they were in flying their pigeons, sometimes liked to assert that they had "improved upon" the English rollers, that their American birds were superior to the English birds. Now, Pensom was also a man of ego when it came to pigeons, but at least when Pensom talked about rollers, he knew whereof he spoke. Here's what Pensom said in reply to the egotistical Americans: "The claim that American fanciers have greatly improved the Birmingham Roller is just wishful thinking. There is a mental and physical limit to this breed's capacity, which becomes impossible to go beyond. The majority of fanciers have yet to see their first ideal spinner. The evidence is to be found everywhere, both around the show pens and around the backyards . . ..On another occasion, Pensom said:"Birmingham Rollers are mentioned in old books, such as Fulton's and Lewis Wright's, which date back quite a bit. Personally, I should say rollers are a very old breed. One thing is certain - as a breed, it is well past the stage of being improved upon so far as rolling is concerned." Okay, Ken. I know a little about rollers. There are at least a couple of dozen men on this List who know more about rollers than I do. In my opinion, no one of them, nor all of us combined, have an understanding of rollers equal to Bill PENSOM?S understanding. Certainly there are a few who are more adept at roller training and kit flying than Pensom was. I believe Monty Neibel was more adept at kit flying than Pensom was, or any of us are today. However, PENSOM'S understanding and knowledge of rollers, how good they could be, and what it takes to breed them at their highest capacity of ultra-high-velocity spinning, surpassed that of any man before or since. Remember, I'm just giving my opinion: others are sure to disagree (but they'll be mistaken). Now, if such a man as Pensom, after 50+ years in the roller hobby on two
continents, observed that "There is a mental and physical limit to this breed's capacity which becomes impossible to go beyond," I give that opinion enormous weight and credence. I also believe that Bill Pensom came closer to achieving that capacity in his pigeons than anyone has. For this reason, I will agree wholeheartedly that some of our most outstanding spinners today are equal to the most outstanding spinners of 50 years ago. But I am not persuaded that the most outstanding individual spinners of today have SURPASSED the most outstanding individual spinners of yesteryear. I firmly believe that Pensom either bred in his own loft, or was witness to, examples of the ultimate pinnacle of true rolling: ultra-high-velocity spinning with ideal style. Ken, I hope that responds to your question of "why can't the best today be better than they were 50 years ago?" In addition, you ask, "Were the best from 50 years ago better than the best from 150 years ago?" My answer: I believe they were. Here's why I believe that. Bill Pensom, who knew about rollers, their development and history, said that, prior to the First World War, the overwhelming majority of rollers to be found anywhere in Birmingham were just tumblers or slow rollers or shapeless, nonstylish rollers. It was his opinion (he was there, I wasn't) that the endeavor to breed "families" of really impressive, stylish, high-velocity rollers first began just after WW I. Prior to this time, the excellent spinners were just genetic flukes that popped out now and again, but no one had succeeded in breeding them with any consistency. To someone who had suggested that the old Whittinghams or other nineteenth-century rollers imported from England were equal to those of the 1950s, Pensom said: "I am familiar with what went on in the flying tumbler fancy in and around Birmingham since 1900, and with the exception of Bert Goode of Harborne, who is the last of the old roller men to be alive, I am the last one left who can authenticate the situation. Whoever imported flying tumblers from England prior to the First World War from any source must have got all they
wanted for three pence a piece; this is all they were worth. "The real breeders from the beginning of the century could be counted on one hand, and the greatest of them all was the late Bill Richards of Harborne, Birmingham. He was regarded in the highest esteem by all the breeders of rollers. His birds could be recognized anywhere, and he could tell by looking at another fancier's birds whether or not there was any of his blood in the other's birds." I'll admit that much of this, my opinion, is based on Bill Pensom?s views. But no one has presented me with evidence that they comprehend rollers better than he did. And the closer I stay to PENSOM?S way of doing things, the more success I've had with my own birds today. I believe the presence of the hole WHEN VIEWED DOWN LOW (rarely visible otherwise) is an indication that the pigeon is rolling with its wings in proper position. It does not necessarily indicate that the bird has good velocity. Some guys get all caught up in how to streamline the bird, and reduce its size, in order to enhance its aerodynamics, thereby reducing drag, thereby increasing velocity. That's great--nothing wrong with that. But velocity also results from thrust and the rapidity of the wing beat, with the wings beating in the proper position during the roll. If we streamline them at the expense of muscle and tendon strength or nerve "twitch" speed, they'll have less drag, but we may also sacrifice thrust. I think the roller CAN be improved. But I think those who believe they've done it already are fooling themselves. I don't believe we've seen the ultimate roller yet. As to those of the roller hobby who get excited about the speed of their "no-hole" rollers, I sincerely doubt that their birds have surpassed the BEST of the "hole" rollers of the past. If some guy shows up some day with a high-speed video camcorder with a deluxe lens and proves to me that my best hole roller on a good day is a revolution or two per second behind his best no-hole roller, I'll congratulate him, I may try to buy a bird off him to see what effect it might have on my family, but I'll keep working to produce faster rollers WITH the hole. I hope this helps to answer your interesting questions, Ken. I don't have all the answers to these difficult questions; I just have my personal unproven opinions.
Your friend,
Tom Monson.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BILL PENSOM by CORNELL NORWOOD (1988)
I was asked by Ron Dent to write an article for a club bulletin concerning Bill Pensom. He reasoned that because there are so few people around still active in birds who actually new Bill, there should be at least one article included written by such a person. At the time, my only reservation was the degree of interest such an endeavor would generate, especially considering the volume of collective material written regarding the man and his birds. So in the end, I will attempt to deliver a somewhat fresh perspective about Bill, and try not to dwell on those, which have been worn to a frazzle.
I knew Bill Pensom to be a perfect gentleman, that statement should not be interpreted to mean he was mild of temperment, he was anything but. However, he didn't believe in public displays of temper or a great deal of confusion. Pensom did hold certain convictions relative to the Birmingham Roller to be true and energetically promoted both. He was motivated by a basic need to see those who would risk so much time, money and frustration in such a hobby, provided at the very least with a set of basic instructions. Bill believed that any fancier, after having invested so much was entitled to the risk of experiencing a little success as well. Whatever enemies he incurred along the way, and there were many, were born of jealousy rather the demeanor or the methods employed by Bill Pensom. It was my pleasure to have known Bill for 11 years. He befriended me as a child in 1957, and it is a friendship that I cherish to this day. While there are times that I feel his loss, he lives for me in the things he taught me about not only the birds but also life as well. He had the capacity to appreciate the beauty in the most seemingly insignificant detail. And therein lay his unique talent. This man was a perfectionist when it came to his birds and was more accurate in his analytical abilities and interpretation than anyone before or after. I am convinced that his firm reluctance to dismiss any detail no matter how unimportant it appeared at first glance in the total scheme of things, enabled him to breed rollers on a consistent basis which proved to be far superior to any stud of Birmingham's since. The Pensom strain was the product of a combination of elements which included vision, science, and experience to make Bill's birds what they were------------the definitive state of the art among sporting pigeons. It is unfortunate that while the fancy probably enjoys as much popularity now as it ever has in the past, if not more, birds of the first class order do not exist in numbers enough, collectively speaking, to compare to what was contained at any given time in Bill's backyard. This may seem a harsh statement to some, but it may be the case that the truth is subject to smart on occasion. I was once told by a fellow in San Diego, Ca. that he did not like Pensom birds. It was more than obvious this fellow considered his very questionable stud to somehow be of greater esteem. But after inquiring as to his first experience with Pensom birds, of which there was none, I determined that his opinion was a reflection of his own ignorance. This observation was born out by the poor derelict excuses he falsely represented as Birmingham Rollers, and the"ridiculous prices"he was charging. Sad but true, all too often we find those who would be king, attempting to personally benefit at the expense of the public as well as the breed. It should be obvious that ultimately it is the breed, which has suffered the most for this prevailing attitude. The Bill Pensom I knew did not have much patience with such people nor the conditions they inevitably create in the fancy. If we all ignored such clowns, they would be forced to seek areas where their special talents are more appreciated, like the nearest circus. Pensom was a teacher, a scholar amongst roller men and a good friend. While he may not approve of this article ever seeing the light of day, I am sure he would agree with it's content.
End...........................
|
|
|
|
Adenoviral, E. coli and Paratyphoid Infections in Pigeons by Gordon A Chalmers, DVM Email: gachalm@telusplanet.net
The occurrence of adenovirus and its combination with the bacterial organism E. coli (the shortened form of its longer scientific name, scherichiacoli) has been causing grief to fanciers in many parts of the world today, especially in youngsters as they begin mixing with those from other lofts during the racing season. This is a highly stressful time for these birds, and because their immune system is often not completely developed at this stage of their lives, they are susceptible to any number of infectious agents. As well, in response to the stresses imposed by crowding, training and racing, etc., their adrenal glands, located just ahead of the kidneys, right under the vertebral column, release corticosteroids into the circulating bloodstream. These steroids suppress the ability of the incompletely developed immune system to respond effectively to invading agents such as bacteria, viruses and parasites. One unhappy consequence of this depressed situation may be infection with adenovirus and a disease-producing strain of E. coli, which together, can bring about signs of illness characterized by vomiting and diarrhea. Vomiting may be difficult to evaluate since it can occur during the night, and by dawn, other youngsters in the loft may have eaten the disgorged grains. In other instances, digestion is slowed and affected youngsters may retain feed in their crop, something British fanciers describe as "holding their corn", (to British fanciers, "corn" means any combination of grains fed to pigeons).
The following is a brief look at some aspects of these infections.
1) ADENOVIRUS. In Europe, two different adenoviral infections are known to occur in pigeons, and are designated Types I and II. Type I was discovered in 1976, and occurred in young pigeons during the first half of the year, with a peak frequency in June. The major sign of this adenoviral disease was watery diarrhea. E. Coli often complicated this disease, and resulted in a more severe diarrhea, as well as vomiting and occasionally, death. Treatment with appropriate antibiotics was often successful. At post mortem of affected birds, there was evidence of enteritis (inflammation of the intestines), and the liver was often normal or only mildly abnormal. However, microscopically in the liver, there were characteristic changes that indicated adenoviral infection. Type I adenoviral infection seems likely to be the disease that affects many young birds over the world today.
Type II adenoviral infections occurred in Belgium in 1992, and were characterized by sudden death in pigeons of all ages. There were very few clinical signs in affected birds prior to death. Occasionally, there was fluid, yellow diarrhea and vomiting. However, the major sign was sudden death within 24 hours of the onset of illness, with none of the obviously sick birds surviving longer than 48 hours. Antibiotics had no effect on the outcome of this disease. In individual lofts, losses were variable, and usually amounted to 30%, but in some cases reached 100%. At post mortem, affected birds had a pale, yellow, swollen liver that had a characteristic red sheen. Microscopically, there was massive destruction of the liver, along with typical changes indicative of adenoviral infection. Although this infection began by affecting one age group in a loft, in 70% of cases, the disease eventually spread to all age groups. To the surprise of investigators, in lofts in which these acute deaths occurred, pigeons that did not die remained completely normal. Even youngsters in the nest grew normally after their parents died of this infection, if they were able to feed themselves or were raised by other pairs. Whether Type II infection has yet occurred in North America is not known to me. In my experience with other species of domestic birds and animals, adenoviral infections usually occur when immune function is depressed. For example, in young, growing broiler chickens, infection with a virus known as the agent of Infectious Bursal Disease severely damages the immune system, thus allowing for the invasion of another virus, this one an adenovirus, that causes a disease known as Inclusion Body Hepatitis. Fortunately, a vaccine developed against the Bursal Disease virus has been effective in preventing Inclusion Body Hepatitis. In another example, some Arabian foals are born with an inherited condition known as Combined Immunodeficiency Disorder in which the immune system is severely underdeveloped. Massive adenoviral infection, especially pneumonia, is often associated with the death of these foals.
In pigeons, I continue to wonder about the largely hidden effects of circovirus infection which, like the AIDS virus in humans, causes severe damage to the immune system, and thereby, acts as a "trigger" that sets in motion, the further destructive effects of adenoviral and E. coli infections. Circoviral infection in pigeons could have an effect similar to that of the virus of Infectious Bursal Disease in chickens, i.e. severe damage to the immune system followed by invasion of the adenovirus and E. coli. One of the characteristic "footprints" of Circoviral infection is an upsurge in outbreaks of other conditions - canker, coccidiosis, paratyphoid, etc., so it would be reasonable to include adenoviral and E. coli infections in that list of possibilities. Treating adenoviral infections is difficult, if not impossible. Unlike bacteria, viruses are not susceptible to antibiotics. However, in recent months, the use of elderberry juice in treating affected youngsters has been touted as a method of dealing with this infection. Although I am not certain of any scientific basis for this claim, it may be worth examining. (See RP Digest, June 1, 2001, page 32, article by Bert Oostlander)
At least one adenoviral vaccine has been offered for sale in Europe and North America. One prominent veterinary friend whom I contacted about this vaccine observed that the results of vaccination in his area were mixed, likely because many fanciers didn?t follow through with the required second (booster) vaccination, which, by extension, likely didn?t allow for the development of a sufficiently high level of immunity to protect exposed birds.
Perhaps the only practical approach is planned exposure to the virus, which could be accomplished through early mixing of young birds from different lofts in say, club training tosses, etc., well before the racing season, to allow them to go through the infection and develop protective immunity that would carry them though the race season. The use of the dewormer known as levamisole has been shown to stimulate the immune system, and according to Dr John Kazmierczak of New Jersey, a dosage of 50 mg per gallon of drinking water once a week, may be helpful. Also, the use of a multivitamin mix containing vitamins C and E in the drinkers once or twice a week is practical and provides additional support to the immune system. A wide-ranging loose mineral mix containing the trace mineral selenium, which is important in the normal development of the immune system, should be available free choice all year long.
2) E. COLI. Broadly speaking, E. coli are usually innocent, normal inhabitants of the intestines of many species, including humans. However, like other creatures, E. coli organisms exist in Nature as a number of strains that range from the most innocent through to the most deadly. Some dangerous
strains of E. coli in the intestines may cause disease by their production of potent toxins (poisons) that are absorbed through the intestinal wall into the bloodstream, from which their far-reaching effects in many tissues throughout the body are manifested. I suspect that the E. coli strains that are part of the E. coli-adenoviral problem in youngsters these days are toxin-producing strains. Still other dangerous strains of E. coli are able to breach the intestinal wall, enter the bloodstream where they multiply (called "septicemia") and are distributed to a variety of tissues to produce signs of illness. Some joint, brain and ovarian infections, etc. in pigeons are caused by these tissue-invasive strains of E. coli. Like other creatures, humans are not exempt from the effects of dangerous strains of E. coli. Improperly cooked hamburgers containing a hazardous strain of E. coli have caused serious illness and death in humans. Last year, in Walkerton, Ontario, Canada, seven people died and many more individuals in the town became seriously ill after they were exposed to a deadly toxin-producing strain of E. coli identified as 0157 that contaminated municipal drinking water. Some strains of E. coli recovered from sick domestic birds and animals may be specifically identified by the use of specialized laboratory techniques, such as those that identified the previously mentioned strain of E. coli in humans as 0157. In other examples, young pigs with diarrhea may have a strain of E. coli identified in part, as K88, and young calves with a similar problem may be affected by a strain identified in part, as K99. However, I am not aware if these or related procedures are in routine use to identify disease-producing strains of E. coli in pigeons. I understand that Drs Steve Weir of Oklahoma and Ron Van Ryswyck of Michigan explored this subject a few years ago, and may have further updated information. In pigeons, as in many other species, the mere finding of E. coli organisms in a sample of droppings cultured in a laboratory does not necessarily mean that they are the cause of a problem. They could be completely innocent. For example, if samples of droppings are collected several hours after they have been passed, and if these samples have not been refrigerated during shipment to the laboratory, E. coli organisms that are present in these droppings can multiply during transit and, on culture, result in large numbers that may give the false impression that they are the cause of the problem. However, if freshly passed samples of droppings are collected quickly, refrigerated immediately, and kept refrigerated on route to the laboratory, there is a greater chance that large numbers of organisms cultured from these droppings may well be significant, especially if those large numbers can be tied to the problem being experienced in the birds. If a pure culture of E. coli organisms is recovered from a variety of tissues (heart blood, liver, kidney, etc.) from a freshly killed sick bird, there is a strong likelihood that they are the cause of that particular problem. Fanciers should ask for and expect an interpretation of the laboratory findings of E. coli (or any other significant organism cultured) found in submitted samples. However, if the fancier hasn't properly collected, refrigerated and shipped specimens to the laboratory, it becomes very difficult for laboratory staff to provide useful interpretations of their findings. An advance phone call to the laboratory for instructions on collecting, handling and shipping samples of droppings or other specimens, is always good idea.
PARATYPHOID. The paratyphoid organism found in pigeons is usually, but not always, Salmonella typhimurium variety copenhagen. In fact, in the experience of Dr Gerry Dorrenstein of Holland, 94% of the strains of paratyphoid organisms his group has recovered from pigeons are variety copenhagen. This variety seems to be almost specific for pigeons, although occasionally, it has been found to cause disease in chickens. Like other birds and animals, most pigeons exposed to paratyphoid infection recover completely, either through treatment or natural defensive mechanisms, but as in the case of other species of birds and animals, the occasional bird is unable to clear the infection, and becomes a permanent carrier. As Dr Dorrenstein points out, it is still not known just where the paratyphoid organisms hide in the body of a carrier, but he suggests that this hiding place could be within certain patrolling defensive cells called macrophages where they are protected from body defenses. (Note: "macro" means "large";
"phage" is from the Greek word "phagein" meaning "to eat" hence, these are large, mobile defensive cells that engulf foreign material, such as invading bacteria, parasites, yeasts etc..) It is obvious that not all engulfed foreign invaders are killed by these large cells, but in some way, the invaders remain alive and isolated within the cells that engulfed them, and here they are protected from other defensive mechanisms in the body. As a result, during periods of stress, the immune system becomes depressed and less vigilant, as a result of which the paratyphoid organisms can escape from their hidden locations. Once they have escaped, they begin to multiply and then to be shed in droppings from which they are readily spread to other susceptible birds in the loft. In my experience, variety copenhagen can be sensitive to an unusually wide variety of antibiotics, except in cases in which fanciers have misused these products and have induced antibiotic resistance in these organisms by under dosing the birds in the first place, or by treating for a shorter time than recommended, or both. For this reason, it is often practical to have laboratory tests run to determine the most suitable antibiotics to use. In general, Salmonella species are notorious for their ability to transfer from one species of animal to another. However, in the case of variety copenhagen, it seldom ever transfers to other species, and this includes humans. So, in general, the fancier who is experiencing an outbreak of paratyphoid infection in his birds doesn?t have to be overly concerned that he will contract the infection himself, however individuals whose immune system is weakened or damaged should take extra precautions. In general, fanciers should take normal precautions with sanitation and personal cleanliness while working with an infected flock. Treatment of E. coli and paratyphoid infections is best managed through laboratory assessments of antibiotic-sensitivity tests to choose the most effective antibiotic or other anti- bacterial product. Given the general misuse of anti-bacterial products, in some cases, these organisms may have developed some level of resistance to antibiotics?hence the value of laboratory cultures and antibiotic-sensitivity examinations to ensure use of the most effective product. According to Dr. David Marx of Oklahoma, all of his isolations of paratyphoid organisms from pigeons continue to be sensitive to Baytril (enrofloxacin), with more than 90% of these isolations also sensitive to Amoxicillin and Cephalexin. By contrast, Dr Paul Miller of Pennsylvania reports that his laboratory has isolated from pigeons, some strains of paratyphoid organisms have developed a great deal of resistance to antibiotics, and that only Baytril seems to be effective in treating these infections. This information points up, once again, the value of laboratory cultures and an accompanying antibiotic sensitivity examination. As an advocate of the use of friendly bacteria, also called probiotics, and associated products for a more natural approach, as opposed to the constant use of antibiotics, in attempting to prevent E. coli and paratyphoid infections in our birds, I have noted that some commercial supply houses in the US are offering products containing the sugar lactose to aid in preventing paratyphoid infections in particular. I certainly support the use of such products and others, in the fight against paratyphoid organisms, but I would offer a few words of caution on the use of lactose when fanciers are dealing with, or trying to prevent, problems caused by E. coli, and even paratyphoid. To explain in a bit more detail, friendly bacteria such as those in yogurt or in commercially available probiotics, usually include Lactobacillus spp., along with certain species of Streptococcus, sometimes called Enterococcus, etc.. In the USA, commercial products such as PrimaLac and Benebac, among others, are available. Some of these products have been developed specifically for turkeys as well as for egg-producing and broiler strains of chickens. Dr Gary Davis of North Carolina State University has done a great deal of research on the probiotic called PrimaLac in quail, pheasants, domestic ducks, turkeys and laying hens. He reports that his results have been very positive, with the most significant effects being improvements in livability, egg size, body weight gains and immunity. The poultry grade of PrimaLac is available from Bob Adams of Star Labs (Email address: bobadams@siteone.net). In Canada PrimaLac is available from Nuhn Bio-Tech, Stratford, Ontario (Ph: 519-393-5770). Certainly, the best source of these bacteria for pigeons would be those derived from normal, healthy pigeons, if such products are commercially available. However, PrimaLac seems very promising indeed, especially because of the range of positive effects found by Dr Davis in several species of birds. One can only hope that pigeons would benefit similarly in fact, a colleague of Dr Davis, Dr Mike Wineland, has been using this probiotic on his pigeons, and swears by it. The organisms in all of these products are believed to have at least two mechanisms of operation in the intestines. Firstly, they can multiply to very high numbers of organisms that form a protective physical barrier that may be up to 12 or more organisms deep, lining the inner surface of the intestines. Secondly, in the low levels of oxygen in which these bacteria live in the intestines, they produce and release into their environment, lactic acid which of course shifts conditions in the intestines to the acid side of neutral. (As an aside, it is my understanding that, in the USA, two basic kinds of yogurt are available, one a killed product, and the other containing live cultures of bacteria. Obviously, the product containing live cultures of bacteria is the one to choose. Check the label of the product you buy. As well, remember that because these products contain live bacteria, you must not combine them with antibiotics or any disinfectant, both of which will kill the bacteria you want to utilize in your birds.) Now, E. coli and paratyphoid organisms much prefer to live and reproduce in slightly alkaline conditions, whereas in a hostile acidic environment, their numbers can drop drastically (in some studies, up to 97%). In promoting the use of such products, where practical, to reduce the heavy reliance on antibiotics to solve health problems in pigeons, I have been advocating not only the use of probiotics and a small amount of apple cider vinegar (5-10 cc per liter, or "2 " tablespoons per US gallon of drinking water, as suggested by Dr Colin Walker - see RP Digest, June 1, 2001, page 24) to help acidify intestinal contents, and thereby create conditions that are hostile to the survival of E. coli and paratyphoid bacteria. As well, in dealing with paratyphoid infections, I have also suggested the addition of some lactose to the drinkers, as a source of nutrient for friendly bacteria in their production of lactic acid. Lactose is the chief sugar found in cow's milk, and is available as whey powder from health food stores, cheese and milk factories, livestock feed companies, and commercial pigeon supply houses. As noted by Dr Paul Miller, one problem with the use of lactose is that birds lack the enzyme lactase, and so are unable to break down and utilize the lactose themselves. The presence of this lactose in the intestine can draw fluids from the bloodstream into the intestine, and may result in diarrhea and dehydration that can add to that caused by the concurrent paratyphoid infection. Fortunately, paratyphoid organisms themselves aren?t able to ferment lactose either, which means that they are unable to use this sugar as a nutrient in their life processes. Equally fortunate for us is the fact that the friendly species of bacteria mentioned earlier certainly will use lactose as a nutrient in their production of lactic acid. Now here is the fly in the ointment, so to speak. It is important to understand that, although paratyphoid organisms are unable to ferment lactose, E. coli on the other hand are known to be lactose fermenters, that is, they actually use lactose as a nutrient in their life processes. For this reason then, it is my opinion that the use of lactose when E. coli infections are occurring should be avoided because this sugar simply aids these organisms to thrive and multiply in great numbers. For this reason, I would NOT recommend that lactose be used in drinkers when birds are affected with adenovirus + E. coli infections, or to help prevent E. coli problems. Yes, use lactose along with probiotics and organic acids, etc., to help prevent paratyphoid infections, but avoid the use of lactose when you are dealing with or trying to prevent E. coli problems.
Summary
1) To treat ongoing E. coli and paratyphoid infections, use an appropriate antibiotic or other anti-bacterial product, preferably one selected through antibiotic-sensitivity testing by a laboratory, and at full dosage for the full-recommended period of time.
2) In an attempt to prevent these infections in future, once the original infection has been treated effectively with the appropriate antibiotic, you can add to the drinking water, probiotics such as yogurt and/or other commercially available live products, and even apple cider vinegar or other organic acids like citric acid from lemons or commercially available sources, to help create in the intestines, a physical barrier of friendly bacteria, plus acidic conditions, both of which are hostile to E. coli and paratyphoid organisms. It is my understanding that, in order it acquire a good, viable population of friendly bacteria in the digestive system, often takes a number of days. As a result, I usually recommend the use of probiotics for 7-10 days at a stretch, repeating at intervals, especially throughout the breeding and racing seasons. When attempting to prevent paratyphoid infections in the first place, or after infected birds have been treated with the correct antibiotic, at this time. You can add lactose and apple cider vinegar, or other organic acids.
3) The use of the sugar lactose will aid friendly bacteria in their own life processes, including the production of lactic acid, in an attempt to prevent paratyphoid infections. Although it is readily used as a nutrient by friendly bacteria, lactose is NOT fermented by paratyphoid organisms, so it doesn?t aid the growth of these bacteria. For this reason, its use along with friendly bacteria in probiotics in attempting to prevent paratyphoid infections may be helpful. Lactose should NOT be given either during the course of E. coli infections, or when attempting to prevent infection by these bacteria, because of the fact that E. coli organisms actually use lactose in their life processes. There is no point in helping these bacteria to continue causing problems in our youngsters. Certainly, to try to prevent E. coli problems, use yogurt and/or other sources of friendly bacteria, as well as products such as apple cider vinegar to help acidify intestinal contents, but definitely avoid the use of lactose when E. coli are involved in a disease process.
4) Be aware that the use of lactose in birds may itself cause some diarrhea and dehydration.
|
BELOW IS AN ARTICLE BY W.H.PENSOM ON HIS DEFINITION OF WHAT A CHAMPION ROLLER IS.
What is a CHAMPION Roller? by William H. Pensom
I have been asked this question a lot of times and still fanciers ask the same question. It is generally assumed that the deep solid spinner is the ultimate in perfection, but that is not so. The height of perfection in spinning is the highest velocity in which the bird rotates downwards in a straight line, and in the smallest compass. Perfect spinning is recognized when a small hole, from a side view is easily seen when the bird is rotating. The word deep is also misleading when applied to the depth a pigeon will roll. Some birds will roll over and over for many yards, even a hundred or more. Not the ideal spinner however, as velocity and distance go hand and hand. The deeper a bird rolls the slower will be the rotation at some point, even if it does roll perfectly at the beginning. In my opinion the most satisfactory depth is around 8 or 9 yards. In this distance an ideal spinner will maintain its speed all the way down. Regularity in the number of times the pigeon rolls in a certain time is also a deciding factor. Forty rolls in 20 minutes would not be anything out of the ordinary for a Champion. The Champion is extremely versatile since it can vary the distance it rolls at will. In addition to these variations the pigeon can tumble in an orthodox manner of tumbling over and over for several times downwards. It can also twizzle, which is a mode of performing at very high speed in a manner illustrated by twirling of a dinner plate with the finger. This type of performance should not be confused with what is call plate rolling. Plate rolling takes on a twirling pattern like twizzling but it is much slower and it is a very low form of performance. The Champion is also capable of what is called mad tumbling, a performance that is expressed in a series of extremely rapid backward somersaults in an apparent horizontal order. The Champion does not perform all these attributes in succession but does so according to the mood it is in, or according to the circumstances in which it finds itself in the kit. Every well-informed fancier I have known has endeavored to produce a bird, which could accomplish these feats. While the pigeon, which spins in perfect order and with increasing regularity, is a most desirable character, it is far from being the ultimate in performance. The solid roller is not too infrequently produced but the real Champion is rare indeed and we see few of them in our lifetime.
|
|
|
|
BREEDING THE BIRMINGHAM ROLLER PIGEON by Bill Pensom "1968"
The breeding season will soon be upon us, and the fanciers who have not already done so will be giving serious thought to the mating of their birds. There are numerous kinds of performers of many varying types. The fancier has to decide for himself which class of performance and type appeal to him the most. One?s own evaluation of the stock at hand depends upon the knowledge gained by previous experience. Each year fanciers add to their store of knowledge by the education derived, not only from their own birds and practices, but also from those of others. Whatever the choice of the fancier, he must use his wits to not only maintain existing qualities, but to try and improve upon them. It must not be forgotten that there is always room for improvement in any branch of domestic livestock breeding. While I am conscious of the fact that many fanciers hold their own interpretation of what constitutes quality Birmingham Rollers, I am also conscious of the fact that there are many fanciers who have yet to see the ultimate quality expressed by the true Birmingham Roller. It is for their edification that I pen these lines. First of all, we have to be able to recognize the champion Birmingham Roller. Such a pigeon is one of small dimensions, six to eight ounces in weight when in proper flying condition; round of body, which is not deep or shallow; not too pronounced in chest, and rather long cast; nicely refined in head shape, which may well vary in contour between long, curved, or flat; pinched in face. There is generally a space between the end of the keel bone and the vent bones. They are short of leg and are to be found both clean and muffed legged. The most important feature is the eye, which should be bright and expressive of high intelligence and character. The eye can be of any color: pearl, yellow, orange, bull or brown and multicolored. Many fanciers discard birds, which are possessed of bull eyes, odd eyes, and mixed-colored eyes, mostly to satisfy a fad. In so doing, they very often throw away the very birds they should keep. In any case, the eye indicates the temperament and the potential of the pigeon as a progenitor of good stock. There may be exceptions to this description, but they should be treated as such, since they would not be capable of contributing much towards the goal we seek.
The true Birmingham Roller has no equal or peer. It stands out above every other known performer. In performance it rotates with lightning rapidity, and of such violence as to portray a small ball with a hole in the center, the size of a dollar piece, spinning downwards for a considerable distance. The presence of the hole indicates perfect spinning; without it, the pigeon is either rolling too slowly or the roll is shapeless. Such birds never attain championship class. The mature Champion Roller is also better equipped to control the depth of the spin when coming to drop, and barring accidents, will fly and perform to a ripe old age. There is no other class of performer which gives so much satisfaction as the true Birmingham Roller, both in the air and in the breeding pen; anything else are just rollers. It is obvious that there has to be more understanding of the breed, for without the right kind of stock, such high quality cannot be produced. It must also be understood that the Birmingham Roller is one of the most difficult of breeds to cultivate, and only real fanciers possessed of patience and determination to own the best should consider breeding them. Very little can be accomplished in a few years, although in the process a fancier will always have at his command birds of no less quality than other fanciers seeking the same goal, which is most satisfactory. Each year he will recognize quality in performance and any outstanding bird should be used in the stock pen. Depth of performance is secondary to correct spinning, and while the champion is generally set between twenty-five to thirty feet in depth, it is important to keep in mind that those birds which rotate the most revolutions in the shortest space regardless of depth are the ones to value most. It is common among some fanciers to exaggerate the depth a bird will roll; for example, 15 feet becomes 30 feet or more, 25 feet often being estimated as a hundred or more. A true spinner very seldom exceeds 30 feet and very often this depth spells disaster.
"Mating"
In mating these pigeons for the best results, we have to consider the efforts of the bird during the processes of developing into a first class spinner, and the effects on its development of the physical and nervous system. Birds, which begin their performances at an early age generally, go through a most exhausting process, which often inflicts in the mind of the owner some doubt as to the value of such a bird. In consequence of such development the pigeon does not enjoy a complete moult in its first year. No pigeon is mature until it has completed two full molting periods, although this does not deny the use of young pigeons in the stock pen. A suitable mate for the above example must be chosen from those which did not begin to develop until a much later date, or until after the first moult. This is the only method to guarantee aerial an spinning stability. When a fancier has established a stud of stable, high-velocity spinning pigeons, his best plan in the future will be to choose mates as they look on the ground rather than by selecting them out of the air. Mates should possess similar qualities, especially as regards expression of character, the only compromise coming from bodily make-up. Since color or shades of color are closely allied to character, it is to our advantage to give much consideration in this direction. The basic colors are blue check, red check, and dun. Mixtures of these will give the best results.
When aerial performance, both collectively and individually, is of no primary importance, the art of mating becomes of little or no concern. This appears to be the most popular category for fanciers: to exercise their skill in producing birds to certain physical and colorful standards, at the same time maintaining a decent standard of performance. It is from this area we can hope to breed with some regularity birds specifically for the show pen. It should be understood that it is impossible to cultivate the highest quality spinning rollers, maintaining these true qualities, and to try and produce show pen winners at the same time. It cannot be done. In order to breed show birds, a fancier needs two breeding lofts; one for show and one for high class Rollers.
"Competition Flying"
The Roller fancy is notorious for its confusion. This is caused, I believe, by a lack of knowledgeable fanciers capable of teaching the novice. A cure for this confusion is an indulgence in flying contests. In this connection local clubs should be formed to foster and encourage members to fly their kits against each other. The use of the British system or rules for flying completions will give the most satisfactory results. No contests should be made with kits of less than 20 young birds and 25 old birds. Kits of lesser numbers have no incentive to give of their best if judged on collective or simultaneous performance. If fanciers are so isolated that they cannot enjoy competition, there is nothing to stop them from introducing this order of things to themselves; it will still pay dividends. In striving to produce the ideal spinning Birmingham Roller, many breeders are apt to confine their choice of breeding material to those individuals, which conform to the desired standard of performance during flight. Insufficient attention is paid to such things as constitution, temperament, and even to the reproductive background. Genes for qualities which are ignored or considered to be of little immediate importance may be lost or dissipated, not through the workings of a mysterious or malign force, but because no effort has been made to retain or cultivate them.
Any hereditary character, which is ignored or taken for granted, instead of being watched and consistently bred for, may quickly be lost in a breed or strain, possibly beyond recall. The careful consideration of all desired qualities is essential if they are to be preserved or enhanced. This applies equally to structure, constitution, temperament or ability. Any idea that inbreeding can by itself be the cause of any form of deterioration or degeneration is totally unjustified. High flying and true rolling ability may certainly be stabilized and improved by inbreeding if sufficient care is given to the choice of Rollers used for breeding in each generation, and is accompanied by sensible selection. If a weakness appears in inbred stock, it is because the parents or other ancestors carry the genetic factors responsible. Inbreeding may be said to be a device by means of which all qualities, good and bad, which lie latent or hidden in a strain may be brought to light. To accuse inbreeding of creating faulty conditions of any kind is ridiculous. The importance of selection has already been mentioned, but it is not a creative force and its effects are limited by the nature of the material to which it is applies. The conception of a breed as possessing an unlimited degree of plasticity, and capable of being modified in any direction by selection is mistaken; so is the assumption that by selection we can ensure that each generation will show a progressive development of the attribute selection is based upon.
Selection can never cause the emergence of a quality, either physical or mental, that is not already represented genetically in the stock used for breeding. The only way to effect improvement in any direction is to make sure that the appropriate genes are present in the pigeons mated, and to endeavor to fix them in duplicate in the strain or in a goodly proportion of the birds bred in that strain. Whether that end can be achieved through a program of inbreeding and selection, or may necessitate some out crossing in the preliminary stages will depend entirely on the nature of the foundation stock. "Pedigree Breeding"
One essential of scientific breeding is the keeping of accurate records. Many breeders have very complete memories of outstanding pigeons of past fame, but very few of us could remember the characteristics of birds that go into even a three-generation pedigree. It is essential to have a complete picture of one?s breeding stock before commencing breeding. The building of a strain depends on the breeder creating his own pedigrees. A strain is something, which is established; therefore, it cannot come except by inbreeding. The breeder alone, from the start, is entirely responsible for what goes down on paper. Pedigrees can only be molded and established in accordance with one?s own practical experience. I possess information and pedigrees on some of the birds used in the manufacture of my strain from 1914. These were birds I kept and some, which I was closely associated with in the lofts of the old timers among whom I lived. Like all livestock breeders who sell their stock, I am frequently asked for pedigrees, and in nearly every case this request is carried out. Beyond giving the parents, the rest is given very reluctantly. I fail to see what useful purpose can be served by supplying information on Birmingham Rollers which I have bred in the past and which in no sense would benefit anybody but myself. I firmly believe that pedigrees of the unknown can and do create a condition of degeneracy, since pedigrees for Rollers depend entirely upon the observations of the breeder himself. How can one portray on paper the true characteristics of rolling pigeons such as temperament, reaction to mental instability, and relation of mental instability to organized training and environment? It simply cannot be done. Therefore, when a fancier mates his stock according to pedigree, he becomes victim to wishful thinking with the hope that something good will come of it. The correct procedure to pursue in the creation of a successful stud of rolling pigeons is to purchase the right kind of stock from the right kind of fancier. It is important that the beginner either sees the quality of the vendor?s birds in flight or takes the work of some reliable fancier who has seen them in flight, and who knows the breeder well. If the purchased stock is of any value the beginner, after a period of three years, should be able to own a flock of rolling pigeons to be proud of. Only dissatisfaction can accrue from less that the best. There is no formula available which can establish a Birmingham Roller as a product noteworthy among pigeons except the evaluation and praise of qualified authorities on the breed who are able to frequently witness outstanding birds in flight. The only guarantee another breeder can have of the birds he has acquired other than the integrity of their breeder is that the birds stated in the pedigree have met with the full approval of other qualified breeders who are better informed in the intricacies of cultivating real rolling pigeons. It is generally known that there is a society in this country, which bears my name. It is a society consisting of some ardent fanciers each with a desire to cultivate and perpetuate the Pensom strain of Birmingham Roller. In fairness to them and to myself I feel I should be allowed to pass a few comments about the situation. The club was inspired by the late Ray Perkins of Connecticut, and in cooperation with the late Bob Evans of San Mateo, was fostered and instituted in 1945. I was asked if I had any objections to this; my answer was "Not at all." For a number of years the club existed for the sole purpose of cultivating highflying, deep spinning Rollers of the highest quality. This condition did not last however, as a craze for breeding Rollers to a special pattern for the show pen soon overtook the principles on which the club was founded. Many practical Flying Roller breeders dropped out because of friction and confusion brought about by this turnabout in thinking. Large quantities of pigeons were broadcaster free to anyone who would join the club. The result was that the offspring of these pigeons, which had been bred under the illusion of the being dual purpose Rollers, were further distributed, meeting with the approval of the show man and the lesser-informed beginner, and the disapproval of those who knew better. This was anything but a savory reflection on my strain of Rollers. I am frequently reminded that this condition still exists. I had always expressed disapproval to the club rule that "anyone who kept other than Pensom Rollers would not be eligible as a member of the club". I felt, and still feel, that such a rule is a denial of fanciers to think for themselves, is against the better principles of cultivating true spinning pigeons, and is a restriction on the endeavors of true flying fanciers to improve their stock from other sources. Where is the fancier who would refuse a better pigeon than his own from any source? I have often imported different strains of Rollers from Birmingham, not in any way to cross with my strain, but as a means of educating those who are anxious to extend their knowledge in the field of flying Tumblers and Rollers. Many fanciers have benefited by these ventures. In view of these importations I resigned on my own accord from the club. I am not blind to the fact that some may think otherwise. This event gave rise to persecution of my birds and myself; I don?t think I was the loser. While pedigreed birds are an essential for membership, I have to say that I know of many longstanding instances of birds being pedigreed which can claim no right to this distinction. The Rollers represented by this society are not representative of my strain of Birmingham Rollers; moreover, the erasure of my name from the register would better serve the fancy and myself in particular. Over the years there has been opposition to other fanciers besides myself by the jealous fantasies of others who supposedly breed and produce better birds than anyone else. They apparently are constantly in the running for the number one position in the fancy at any cost. Words are the price. These attributes contribute nothing to their pigeons, to themselves, or the fancy except suspicion. We have heard plenty about what is called the Whittingham strain from time to time, and of Mr. Whittingham being the world?s greatest Roller breeder. I feel it is incumbent upon me to try and clarify this belief, which I do entirely without any personal prejudice, in view of the fact that there were so many others of that day who were, without any possible doubt, masters of the game far above any claims of the former. To some this may seem antiquated to talk about, but is extremely important that a true record of the history of the fanciers and the breed be recorded. I am familiar with what went on in the flying Tumbler fancy in and around Birmingham since 1900, and with the exception of Bert Goode of Harborne, who is the last of the old Roller men to be alive, I am the last one left who can authenticate the situation. Whoever imported Flying Tumblers from England prior to the First World War from any source must have got all they wanted for three pence a piece; this is all they were worth. The real breeders from the beginning of the century could be counted on one hand, and the greatest of them all was the late Bill Richards of Harborne, Birmingham. He was regarded in the highest esteem by all the breeders of Rollers. His birds could be recognized anywhere, and he could tell by looking at another fancier's birds whether or not there was any of his blood in the other?s birds. His birds were small and tight and compact. Their predominant color was red check, dun, and the various shades of blue and blue check. The few odd self or two, were but throwbacks. He had a remarkable eye for a pigeon. He could readily sum up the quality of any bird he saw including physical defects, which would have escaped the eye of any other fancier. He was a regular visitor to the Backcountry, where he was a household word. Bill Richards never sold or gave away any of his birds. The only blood of his Rollers, which got into other hands, was obtained by the noble art of catching. Catching strays was always considered a sporting event in Flying Tumbler circles in those far off days. His family of Rollers was the only one in existence up to the twenties, which portrayed a well thought out process of breeding skill. The facet of the limited variety of color proved his belief in inbreeding, which everybody else was frightened of. Bill Richards died in 1938, after 70 years of keeping Rollers, and never a day without them. I was fortunate to acquire 25 of his birds at this time from his brother Ard, who was a famous breeder and exhibitor of the badge marked exhibition Long Faced Tumbler. Next on the list is Harry Bellfield of Cradley Heath, Staff's. He was a most unassuming man, and as successful with his pigeons as he was with his business. He liked a Roller, and nothing but the swiftest and straightest spinners pleased him. His birds were varied in color and pattern, both clean legged and muffed. He did not keep as many as did Bill Richards because for one thing he was victim to the wiles of his many admirers who constantly contrived to get pigeons from him at any price. There are few who are proof against such acute agitation. H. Bellfield was noted for an outstanding grizzle cock, which was a wizard in the air. It was one of the most reliable pigeons that ever flew. As a stock bird this cock was responsible for most of the good pigeons flown at any loft, which had been fortunate enough to acquire offspring of this bird. I purchased many birds from Harry Bellfield during the twenties. After seventy years and, like Bill Richards, never a day without them, he was compelled to give up his birds on the advice of his doctor. I was sent for and advised to take all of them. There is no more distressing moment than when acquiring a man's pigeons on such terms. On retirement H. Bellfield purchased a home especially suited to flying his birds. His loft was situated on the peak of a knoll, and on occasions, due to wind direction, you could look down on his birds and watch them roll. His birds were deep and extremely regular, and it was seldom they could fly for more than twenty minutes. He flew several times each day, weather permitting, and each time they would fly and roll to their utmost. He also had in mind when he chose this situation the existence of extremely long grass which grew all around the knoll, and which varied very little in growth all the year round. The idea was to lessen the possibility of any of his birds destroying themselves should they make a mistake and roll all the way. All outstanding Rollers are subject to mishaps, especially when the wind is blowing in a certain direction. Harry Bellfield was a great Roller fancier. Another fancier of note, and whose name was also a household word, was Elija Tomkins of the Lye, Stourbridge. He was an old fancier with experience from the cradle. He was especially noted for his ?Patched? breed. These birds were mostly red ckecs with uneven white patches distributed on various parts of the body, or whites with an uneven distribution of red chec patches over various parts of the body. They were very attractive birds and as good as they come as spinning Rollers. A fifteen-year-old cock from E. Tomkins played a prominent part in my family of Rollers; in fact, it was the sire of my dun hen 1613. E. Tomkins was also a great old fancier, a description any words of mine could do little justice to. Ben Homer of Cradley Heath was also very prominent in the fancy, and any bird acquired from him was a treasure for anybody. On retirement, he spent all his daylight hours down in the garden with his birds, a small house having been built for this purpose and his convenience. His main ?Old Un? was a white cock, a son out of H. Bellfield?s old blue grizzle cock, or Silver, which is the term used for a light blue grizzle in Flying Tumblers. When Ben Homer passed on I acquired the white cock together with three more of his favorites, a wish he expressed before his death. These birds also helped me along. Another outstanding fancier was J. Thompson of Harborne. A lifelong fancier, and noted for his two old pairs, a dun bald cock, a blue chec badge hen, a creamy badge hen and a magnificent red spangled saddle cock. It was a pair out of these famous pigeons that produced my old Spangled Cock. This cock was a champion spinner for fifteen yards, and produced the bulk of my strain. He was also a big winner at the shows in his day. He lived until he was eighteen. It may be interesting to note that Byron Wedgwood of Show Tippler fame offered me a good price for this cock on behalf of J. E. Graham who was in England at the time. There was not enough money to buy him. Old Jack Taylor of Rowley Regis was another unique figure in the fancy. He was a hard man to deal with, but if you did obtain a bird from him, so long as he had bred it, it was a great asset to the loft. I did not know him intimately as he was about 80 when I first met him. I often saw from a distance his two bull terriers, which would have killed anybody attempting to set foot within 20 feet of the pigeon pen. Of great interest to me was a stuffed specimen of a blue saddle hen, which Jack Taylor said was over 100 years old, and was supposed to have broken her neck during flight. This hen was typical also of the best rolling pigeons known to me through my experience and typical also of the best Rollers at the present time. Jim Skidmore of Blackheath was also an outstanding fancier and his collection of Rollers was always the envy of all who saw them. In his later years he established a family of 90 per cent red checs, since by the knowledge he had gained, he had begun to inter-breed. His stud consisted of birds from Bellfield, Richards, and myself.
A fancier of high repute was Harry Young, a businessman. He had the reputation of traveling the country and buying, at any price, every good bird he could find. He was also a true fancier and clever breeder. Birds from his stud were often given credit for establishing many lofts with the highest quality deep spinning birds. I never met Harry Young, but he was well known to my father and his associates and from this source I gained a good picture of him. Both Bellfield and Richards obtained birds from him. There were scores of other good fanciers, outstanding in their different ways, but lacking the skill of the others. They were the follow-the-leader type of fancier, so to speak. There is no one alive today who can tell me anything new about Rollers or the Roller fancy, or about its existence from 1900 to the present time. I am familiar with all the best fanciers in Britain today and they still keep descendants of my strain, a strain molded from the best of the stock of the foregoing fanciers. These are also the Rollers which I sent to the United States and which are to be found in many lofts throughout the world today, particularly in the United States. Corroboration of this will be found in the lofts of Leroy Smith, Patchogue, Long Island, who has kept this strain of Rollers since 1934. What of Roy Smith? A fancier of 60 years or more, and one who has tried every known domestic breed of Rollers up to the time he received his first imports. His reason for keeping them is obvious. Roy Smith has made a name in the Roller world as an outstanding breeder of first class spinning Rollers and he has kept the family as pure as it is possible to keep it. He would not even use a pigeon from anybody even though such a bird was produced from a pair he had either sold or loaned out. Roy Smith has been of great service to the fancy and if any man deserves a Master Breeder?s Certificate, it is he. It may not be generally known that Roy Smith is acclaimed as one of the greatest breeders of Brown Leghorns in the world, if not the greatest, which testifies to his genius as a breeder of livestock. Another fancier deserving of praise in this connection is Stanley Plona of Connecticut. He also is a close friend of Leroy Smith, from whom he obtained his stock and he also is as particular in his choice of birds, and a stickler for the one family. Visiting Connecticut last year, I was able to witness one of the best kits of stable, deep spinning Rollers I have ever seen. It is by the generosity of these fanciers that the Roller fancy is able to sustain and enjoy the pleasure only Roller pigeons can give. Incidentally, these are the only fanciers from whom I will obtain a bird to use in my loft. There is no doubt that by this time I am already condemned for blowing by own trumpet; certainly I am, and I could and ought to blow it much louder. It is not personalities that are important. It is the facts, and these I set myself out to put before the fancy, not only for the benefit of the fancy, but in consideration for those who like the facts. When I read the hysterical convulsions of those unqualified experts who dare to opine the non-existence of those pillars of the fancy in favor of the unknown, I am duty bound to state the true facts, as they have existed before and since the turn of this century. No wonder the fancy is in a state of confusion. There are large numbers of Birmingham Roller lovers who are constantly being misled by nit-picking bigots who know no more about Rollers than those they hope to educate. Fanciers are better advised to use their own common sense and try to evaluate their own efforts. They should travel as much as they can and obtain first hand, the lessons available from the most successful breeders known. I am in the happy position of being able to substantiate anything I say about Rollers, should there be any doubt about it. When I say anything of importance I am dogmatic about it. I use the definition "I" and not "we" which is nothing but a defensive expression and one of doubt. Who is "we" in a debate of this kind? Is it etiquette or what? When a man writes any treatise, he alone is entirely responsible for it. This responsibility cannot be shared by anybody else, and he should expect to take the consequences. It is a sorry state of affairs for anyone who has to become a false authority.
|
A very good article by Dr. Gordon Chalmers, DVM.....Bacterial Infections of the Intestines of Pigeons. Another Approach
By: Gordon A Chalmers, DVM, Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada Email: gachalm@telusplanet.net
Considering the movement and trade in pigeons over the world, fanciers should not be surprised when a variety of diseases occur in pigeons over a period of time. In most cases, there is a triad of circumstances consisting of 1) the resistance (or lack of) of the pigeon, 2) the presence of the bacterium, virus or parasite, plus 3) the environmental or stressful conditions that permit the particular disease to occur. Note that infection itself by a given disease-causing agent does not necessarily mean the existence of overt disease. For example, the presence of a few coccidia in the intestines of resistant pigeons tends to maintain a very high level of immunity to that species of coccidia. This situation is most certainly infection of tissues of the intestines. However, coccidiosis, the disease, is not present. In this case, there is a good balance between the presence of a few coccidia and the immune system of the bird, which is able to control the numbers of coccidia quite well. However, frank disease may occur if circumstances tip the balance in favor of the coccidia. For example, persistently wet floors during a cool, rainy period, or overflowing waterers that keep the floor constantly wet, can change the balance. In this situation of cool, damp conditions that are ideal for coccidia and other parasites, those coccidia shed in droppings and contaminating the floor, are now able to develop further to a stage that makes them infective and therefore, potentially dangerous. Very quickly, under these conditions, many thousands of infective forms of the coccidia can develop on the floor. Birds picking around the floor can swallow many of these infective stages, and as a result, there may be an overwhelming challenge to the immune system as numerous coccidial forms invade cells of the inner surface of the intestines, and the birds develop signs of the disease coccidiosis. Note that the coccidia passed in droppings are not immediately capable of causing disease because they must develop to an infective stage first. Birds can pick up fresh coccidia from droppings and will not develop the disease. Youngsters represent an age class that is particularly vulnerable because they have not yet had an opportunity to develop good immunity through gradual exposure to low numbers of coccidia in the environment. Instead, they are now faced with a massive, overwhelming challenge, and the result is a severe outbreak of coccidiosis. Other organisms, notably the bacteria, but also the viruses, Chlamydia, etc., often operate in the same way, taking a biological advantage when environmental circumstances are favorable and there is a concurrent relaxing or failure of defense mechanisms in the birds. Salmonella spp. (also called paratyphoid organisms), and also E. coli, are two species of bacteria that represent other examples of the same situation. In pigeons, one of the most common Salmonella sp. is Salmonella typhimurium variety copenhagen, although several other strains of salmonella organisms can certainly be involved in producing disease in pigeons. Variety copenhagen seems to have a close and even specific relationship with pigeons. If there is any good news (or maybe more correctly, less bad news!) about salmonella infections, some of it is associated with variety copenhagen. Firstly, this strain is often highly sensitive to a very wide range of antibiotics and other anti-bacterial drugs. Secondly, this strain seldom ever causes infection in humans. This is a significant point because the major importance of most strains of Salmonella sp. is their known capacity to leap species barriers and infect quite a number of classes of birds and animals, including humans. In general, Salmonella typhimurium variety Copenhagen seems to be most associated with pigeons, even though it is able to infect other species such as chickens, for example. Problems with Salmonella sp. and E. coli infections in pigeons are most common in younger birds. Adult birds often don?t have signs of infection, but in some instances, they too can become infected and develop signs of disease. Youngsters with salmonellas develop diarrhea that is often green. This occurs because the intestines are empty of food, and only bile- stained fluids loaded with organisms pass through as droppings. Later, in a more chronic stage that occurs after these bacteria invade the bloodstream where they multiply, they can then move into and infect joints, which swell and result in lumps on wing or leg joints. Note that infection by the organism Streptococcus bovis can often mimic the signs and changes seen in paratyphoid infections in pigeons, even the joint swellings. Only post mortem examinations and cultures of various tissues from affected birds can differentiate these two diseases satisfactorily. A number of antibiotics and other anti-bacterial products can be used in the treatment of paratyphoid infections, with varying degrees of success. Part of the reason for this fact is that, although most infected birds (or any animal or bird) infected with a Salmonella sp., completely eliminate the infection, the occasional bird or animal will remain a permanent carrier of the organism and this is the catch. Such carriers appear generally very healthy, with no visible indication that they harbor the organism, but they continue to be a ready source of Salmonella sp. organisms for other birds in the loft. If conditions are ripe, and birds become stressed from feeding youngsters, weaning, racing, crowding, etc., such a carrier can begin to shed large numbers of these bacteria into the intestines and then into the environment. If youngsters in particular become exposed, they can develop serious disease. Stress produces chemical and cellular changes that decrease the ability of the body to defend itself against infection. Opportunistic organisms such as Salmonella sp., among others, take advantage of the situation and begin to multiply and produce thousands, and even millions more organisms that are shed in droppings to contaminate the local environment. Vaccination is often practiced, sometimes with checkered success. As mentioned earlier, treatment can be highly successful in most birds, but the very real possibility that a carrier bird may exist in the loft after the infection has gone through many or all birds, poses a continuing threat to the health of the entire loft. The use of sodium acid sulphate or other acidic products as loft dressings on floors, perches and nest boxes is a chemical approach that has merit because it creates an acidic environment that a number of disease-producing organisms, especially intestinal bacteria, find too hostile for survival. As fanciers, we can use this information to our own advantage. These organisms much prefer to live in an alkaline environment, so it is obvious that the use of lime as floor, perch and nest box dressings should be avoided when infections caused by Salmonella sp. and E. coli occur. The use of lime will actually favor the organism and allow it to survive. In 1973, a man named Esko Nurmi in Finland developed a procedure in which he fed litter and droppings from salmonella- free, clean, healthy flocks of chickens, to normal, day-old chicks. Afterward, he found that these chicks were resistant to a challenge dose of salmonella organisms given to them by mouth. The principle behind this process is that "good" bacteria in the droppings of clean flocks of birds colonized the intestines of these chicks and simply overwhelmed sites of invasion by salmonella organisms. The same principle applies when a broody chicken scratches in the soil and calls her chicks to pick in that area. The intestines of these chicks are colonized very quickly with masses of "good" bacteria picked up in the soil at this time. In other words, this defense network competes with and excludes disease-producing bacteria, hence the expression competitive exclusion. The means by which this protection against salmonella and other disease-producing bacterial organisms is accomplished are not completely understood. However, there are two known mechanisms that operate to protect birds against disease when the principle of competitive exclusion is applied. Firstly, the "good" bacteria in the normal droppings seem to form within the intestine, a physical barrier that may be 10-12 bacteria deep. These protective bacteria actually bind to specific sites on the inner surface of the intestine, and by this means, prevent contact by Salmonella sp. with the inner surface of the intestine, and so, prevent these disease-producers from breaching the wall of the intestine and entering the bloodstream. The second process that occurs is an actual chemical alteration in the intestine. The "good" bacteria in clean droppings are anaerobic species (an = without; aerobic = oxygen), i.e., they are able to live and reproduce in an environment in which levels of oxygen are low. In such a situation, the life processes of these bacteria are completed in an anaerobic state. In such an anaerobic environment, these organisms produce and excrete lactic acid as one of the by-products of their life processes. In turn, the lactic acid that is excreted by the bacteria into the surrounding environment of the intestine creates a shift from a normally alkaline state to a more acidic condition in the intestine. The importance of this fact needs to be re-iterated: many disease-producing bacteria like Salmonella sp. and E. coli, for example, like to live in a slightly alkaline environment where they can reproduce well. In an acidic environment, they are inhibited from reproducing, and their numbers drop dramatically, in some cases by 97% or more. One of the many "good" bacteria present is the Lactobacillus sp. that we also find in yogurt and similar products used for human food. Other "good" bacteria that are also present in yogurt include two species of lactic acid-producing Streptococcus, among others. The Lactobacillus sp. bacteria not only colonize the intestines, but they also attach to the wall of the crop, and are mixed with food that has just been eaten. As the food moves into the proventriculus and gizzard, and then into the intestine, the "good" Lactobacillus sp. bacteria move mechanically with it and multiply in the intestine. However, scientific information obtained from trials using several pure cultures of Lactobacillus sp. in chickens showed that this organism alone was not capable of conferring on chickens, the desired resistance to Salmonella spp.. Additional methods had to be incorporated along with the use of Lactobacillus sp.. A few basic products incorporating these ideas of using "good" bacteria to combat Salmonella sp. infections are being examined in the poultry industry. One of these products is called "an unidentified culture". In this situation, intestinal contents from chickens known to be salmonella-free are incubated in a warm, anaerobic environment. The bacteria that are grown in this way are not specifically identified, but this culture is then fed to the birds. The second of these products is called "a defined culture", meaning that specifically identified bacteria from a culture of intestinal contents of normal chickens are included in a mix of bacteria that may contain up to 50 different species of bacteria. Thirdly, there are products called "probiotics" which are cultures of only a very few kinds of bacteria, i.e., for example, the kinds that are found in yogurt. One such starter product for preparing yogurt at home contains a Lactobacillus sp., as well as two identified species of Streptococcus. One species of Streptococcus, that produced lactic acid, for example, was found to inhibit the growth of 75-85% of disease-producing strains of E. coli, but only 45% of livestock varieties of Salmonella spp. It is further interesting that this lactic-acid producing strain of streptococcus was able to inhibit 100% of strains of Clostridium perfringens, a cousin of the organism Clostridium colinum that is known to cause ulcerative enteritis in young pigeons. All of these products are given to birds by mouth, often through feed or drinking water. (The advertising columns of racing pigeon magazines offer similar products for use in drinking water. No doubt, many are good products, but we have cultured at least one widely touted, advertised product and found very few bacteria present.) In the poultry industry, these products are being used in at least three situations: 1. They are given to day-old chicks to allow the rapid colonization of the intestine with "good" bacteria, which protect against infection by Salmonella sp. 2. In mature breeder chickens, these products are used if there has been an outbreak of salmonella infection. Birds are first treated with an appropriate antibiotic, after which they are given the "unidentified culture" to prevent re-infection. 3. At times of stress, these products are given to increase the numbers of "good" bacteria that, in turn, will increase the acidity of the intestines, and thereby decrease the risk of an outbreak of intestinal disease. These products are alive, i.e., they contain live bacteria, and in order to be useful, the bacteria have to remain alive. So, exposure to sunlight or heat during periods of storage will adversely affect these cultures. They must not be mixed in water that contains chlorine, iodine or other disinfectants, simply because these chemicals will kill the desirable bacteria in the culture. Similarly, they can't be used when there are antibiotics in the water, for the same reason. In poultry, only the "unidentified culture" appears to be effective against salmonella organisms. "Defined cultures" and "probiotics" are more effective against disease-producing strains of E. coli, for example. Yet another class of probiotics are the organic acids, that include citric, lactic, formic, and propionic acids, that are being added to feed and water for poultry, to produce the same effect, i.e., acidification of intestinal contents to increase resistance to disease-producing bacteria in the intestine. Historically, lemon juice, which contains citric acid, has been used on feed by many fanciers as a vehicle for holding brewer's yeast, etc.. Even given some of the limitations of these different products, it is known that methods that will 1) effectively "block out" disease-causing bacteria, and 2) create an acidic condition in the intestines of birds, will help to eliminate or markedly reduce the numbers of a variety of disease-producing bacteria. (Unfortunately, they don't have any effect on coccidia or worms.) Two small examples from my own limited experience: A pigeon fancier who had a number of undetermined losses associated with diarrhea in nestlings, decided to try this non- antibiotic approach. He obtained a package of yogurt starter, which contains Lactobacillus and Streptococcus spp., (both produce lactic acid), mixed it with warm milk, incubated it in a warm place to allow the bacteria in the starter to multiply, and added it to a mixture of small grains and rolled oats, to produce a somewhat crumbly, semi-dry mash that he placed in a feeder on the floor. His old birds took to this mixture avidly while they were feeding youngsters. The result was that no more youngsters were lost, and the health of remaining birds improved markedly. In another example, a fancier was having problems with the intestinal infection called ulcerative enteritis (caused by the bacterial organism called Clostridium colinum mentioned earlier in this article) in youngsters aged 12-20 days, the age that seems to be most critical for the occurrence of this bacteria- caused disease. Some youngsters in the first round had been affected and he decided to try to prevent it in the second round. He mixed plain yogurt with enough warm water to make a thin milkshake-like solution, stirred it to remove any lumps, and gave it by feeding tube to 10-11 day-old youngsters in the nest, before there was any sign of disease. This was done twice and sometimes three times a day for 4-5 days. Result: no evidence of ulcerative enteritis in any of these youngsters. Both of these cases definitely don't represent solid scientific proof of the effectiveness of this type of product because no group of youngsters was left untreated to see whether disease would occur in these birds. However, there were encouraging indications from these limited trials that there may be a great deal of merit in this approach to prevent some bacteria-caused infections of the intestines, in spite of studies that showed very little positive effect in eliminating or reducing the numbers of Salmonella sp. by the use of cultures of Lactobacillus sp. alone. Likely, to be on the safe side, it is better to use the "shotgun" approach of a combination of several of these methods, rather than relying on yogurt-based therapy alone. What are some other stressful situations that could lend themselves to this application? One of the most obvious times occurs when youngsters are weaned, when stresses are very high: they have been separated from their nest box and close parental care, they are now in strange, unfamiliar surroundings, and they may be frightened, tired, hungry and thirsty. If the weather is also bad, add another stress to the list. Possibly just before weaning and through the first 2-3 days after weaning, the addition of yogurt, yogurt starter slurry, lactose (see later in this article) and organic acids in a mash feed or in warm drinking water might be enough to load the crop and intestines of these youngsters with a formidable barrier of protective lactobacilli and streptococci, plus an already established acidic environment through the addition of organic acids to the mix. Another way to introduce the "good" bacteria in yogurt is to draw some liquefied yogurt into a 3 cc syringe from which you have removed the needle, open the youngster's mouth, gently push the syringe into the back of the throat, and deliver the liquid. The throat of a 12-day-old youngster can easily handle a syringe of this size, especially when it is used gently. Practically, it would seem best to try mass treatment of the entire flock, and to use most of these procedures at regular feeding times, so that old birds will eat fresh crumbly mash or drink fresh water containing these "good" bacteria and the organic acids, which are then fed immediately to youngsters in the nest. Weaning youngsters onto such a mash, or providing water containing these bacteria after weaning would be practical. Two other critical times during which these preparations could be useful are just before shipping birds old or young to a race, and/or just after the birds return from a race. If birds are sent racing with a protective wall of "good" bacteria lining the crop and intestines, this procedure could thus be effective in preventing the establishment of colonies of disease- producing strains of Salmonella sp. and E. coli picked up in shipping baskets. Work with poultry has demonstrated a definite decrease in numbers of Salmonella sp. in these birds if "good" bacteria are allowed to become established in the intestines before there is any exposure to salmonella organisms. Logically then, the most opportune time to use these methods is in the days before birds enter the shipping baskets to be certain that the intestines are well colonized by "good" bacteria beforehand. A similar process used right after birds return from a race also might help to prevent infection at this stressful time. Another point is that if returning racers bring with them Salmonella sp. or disease-causing strains of E. coli, the use of these products both before and after the race might also protect stock birds, racers and youngsters that remained at home. Exhausted, flown-down birds that return days or weeks late, possibly injured, from tosses or races, would seem to be ideal candidates for this type of therapy, given the high level of stress they have been and are under. Birds, especially youngsters, that are ill from other infections such as canker or coccidiosis, could be highly susceptible to intestinal infections, and might benefit considerably from a treatment of "good" bacteria at this time. Note: It is highly important that you don't mix antibiotics in the water if you also plan to add "good" bacteria. The antibiotics will kill these bacteria in the same way that they kill disease-causing bacteria. If antibiotics are judged to be necessary, use them first for the required number of days, stop using them, and then add "good" bacteria to fresh water. Two other approaches with a similar objective are used today in the poultry industry, with special emphasis on eliminating Salmonella sp. from breeder flocks, and even broiler flocks. One of these procedures is to add the sugar lactose to pelleted rations or to drinking water at the level of about 5%. A good practical source of lactose is whey powder (it is about 70% lactose), available at feed companies, milk and cheese factories, and food stores, and can be added to drinking water. The principle is this. When whey is swallowed, the lactose present is converted by bacteria in the crop and intestines into lactic acid, which, in turn, shifts conditions to the acid side of neutral, and provides the same kind of control over disease- causing bacteria in the intestines. The other modern approach uses combinations of the organic acids mentioned earlier in this article, which do the same thing, i.e., acidify intestinal contents to create a hostile environment for disease-causing bacteria. These products are available for use in pelleted feeds, as well as for drinking water for poultry, and could easily be adapted for use in pigeons, especially the water formulation. The working solution is available in gallon jugs and directions for use are on the label. One of these products is called Acid-Pak 4-Way. Pigeons are not poultry, so why use methods developed for the poultry industry? Well, as I see it, there is just no point in letting good scientific information from one species go to waste, when there could be direct application of the same principles in another species in this case, racing pigeons. Sometimes it seems that there is a real scarcity of good scientific information on racing pigeons, particularly because of the great secrecy that abounds in the sport, and until we become more open as racing pigeon sportsmen and women, we have to be able to borrow useful information and ideas from other domestic species, and adapt them for use in pigeon racing. From the foregoing information, it is obvious that not only is one of these procedures valuable, but also, combinations of these approaches just add more arrows to your bow, so to speak. So, the addition of Lactobacillus and Streptococcus spp. cultures from yogurt or similar products to water can easily be combined with the addition of organic acids and/or lactose, to insure that intestinal contents become acidic, and therefore, protective against serious disease-causing bacteria such as Salmonella, E. coli, and Clostridium spp. of bacteria, among others. I suspect that the most practical approach for pigeon fanciers is a combination of the "good" bacteria in yogurt (or similar products), lactose, and organic acids. A major point about the use of "good" bacteria, lactose, and organic acids, singly or in combination, is that by these means, we should begin the process of halting the uncontrolled, cavalier use of cocktails of antibiotics and other anti-bacterial drugs so much in use and abuse not only by fanciers, but also by many segments of our livestock industries. I sense that too many of us are using too many drugs too often, and obviously, unnecessarily in some cases. It is better to have a plan to try to out-manage and out-maneuver disease problems rather than relying primarily on management through antibiotic treatment. We can take the approach of medicating only when necessary, and then use management strategies that could include those outlined in this article, among others, to stay ahead of disease, or to say it another more positive way, to promote good health. The stories of so many resistant bacteria and parasites in pigeons in Europe, and our importation of these resistant strains of organisms along with the birds we bring in by the thousands, suggest to me that the faster we adopt strategies that are different from the standard methods of throwing antibiotics willy nilly at a disease problem, the better. I believe that these non-antibiotic approaches to therapy are worth exploring and developing in racing pigeons. They may well represent the present and future key approach to anti-bacterial therapy in pigeons, as the number of types of bacterial organisms that develop resistance to modern antibiotics increases beyond our ability to cope with them by use of traditional antibiotic therapy.
|
|
|
