community

Forum

Notifications
Clear all

They are what you want them to be.  

 

Muzza
(@muzza)
Noble Member Registered
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 1370
05/03/2020 9:39 am  

This is a very interesting thing.

I have pigeons which are Jansens, Van loons, Jos Thone's and Adrie Van de Rhrees.

Over here in Australia, If someone keeps and breed a strain of Jansens, or Van Loons, for example, they will be regarded as that strain. They would never be heard of in Europe anymore.

I notice that in Europe, If they are bred in a different place they can be called a different thing.

George Buscheart would be delighted!

Regards

Murray.


Quote
Andy123
(@andy123)
Member Admin
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 9394
05/03/2020 11:26 am  

My thoughts on this is:
Any pigeons bred in a loft should be given the name of the person who’s loft it is bred in. It can be called a family based on a particular strain but can only be called a particular strain if bred in that persons loft. George Buscheart’s pigeons were made up of pigeons from many different strains but once bred in his loft they were called Buschearts regardless of their origin.
If you have bred a pigeon in your loft, that pigeons genetics are unique to you. No one else has those particular genetics. The more your family develops the more unique your family is to what anyone else has.
The pigeons that are bred in our Barcelona loft will be a mixture of birds bred from different members on this forum to form a Barcelona team. So these should be called the ukpigeonracing strain or something similar.
Or is this taking away the accolade of the original strain makers??
Just my opinion.
It will be interesting to hear what other members thoughts are on this.


ReplyQuote
devo56
(@devo56)
Member Admin
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 7730
05/03/2020 1:49 pm  

I think this is why we have pedigrees for our birds, you then know what you have in the loft. I agree with Andy any youngsters in my loft will say on their pedigree bred by George Dever of Five Star Lofts. It will still have the Original family lines going back.


ReplyQuote
Andy123
(@andy123)
Member Admin
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 9394
05/03/2020 3:35 pm  

I think this is why we have pedigrees for our birds, you then know what you have in the loft. I agree with Andy any youngsters in my loft will say on their pedigree bred by George Dever of Five Star Lofts. It will still have the Original family lines going back.

I do agree that keeping records is important and we need to know the breeding of our birds. But within these pedigrees needs to be the racing achievements of the parents and grandparents in a fair bit of detail, good and bad and not just the odd good performance. Not necessarily on a pedigree certificate but definitely within our own records.


ReplyQuote
lestheeagle
(@lestheeagle)
Noble Member Registered
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 2097
05/03/2020 6:22 pm  

My thoughts on this is:
Any pigeons bred in a loft should be given the name of the person who’s loft it is bred in. It can be called a family based on a particular strain but can only be called a particular strain if bred in that persons loft. George Buscheart’s pigeons were made up of pigeons from many different strains but once bred in his loft they were called Buschearts regardless of their origin.
If you have bred a pigeon in your loft, that pigeons genetics are unique to you. No one else has those particular genetics. The more your family develops the more unique your family is to what anyone else has.
The pigeons that are bred in our Barcelona loft will be a mixture of birds bred from different members on this forum to form a Barcelona team. So these should be called the ukpigeonracing strain or something similar.
Or is this taking away the accolade of the original strain makers??
Just my opinion.
It will be interesting to hear what other members thoughts are on this.

Spot on Andy. 😀

Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.


ReplyQuote
Trevor Hodges
(@trench)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 9626
06/03/2020 11:11 pm  

It is an interesting topic and one that will always divide opinions but I do agree that whatever the pedigree once in someone elses loft the pedigree of future progeny becomes far less valuable. If I as a mediocre fancier had a loft full of one particular strain my birds would be far less valuable than the same pedigrees in far more successful loft yet to all intense and purpose they are the same birds.
Des Coulters loft was made up with birds from many different successful UK distance fanciers but were marketed as Coulter, when Des sold pigeons he would tell the buyers that he didn't sell pedigrees just good pigeons.
I have always liked pedigrees for interest but have always had a right mixture of families which I pair together as I see fit, having said that I do try to keep a certain amount of my birds true to the original strain and then cross these together.
At the moment I have mainly Des Coulter birds with a fair few Crammond and Langstaff crosses as well now with a some Brasspennings, Kirkpatricks, Faroes, Janardens and now the new addition of the Lambrecht. I do keep all these original strains on my records and I would still use these names when telling other fanciers what the birds are.


ReplyQuote
Potter29
(@potter29)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1637
07/03/2020 1:35 am  

Well put reply andy , bang on pal


ReplyQuote
Saul
 Saul
(@saul)
Eminent Member Registered
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 45
07/03/2020 7:26 pm  

I think this is why we have pedigrees for our birds, you then know what you have in the loft. I agree with Andy any youngsters in my loft will say on their pedigree bred by George Dever of Five Star Lofts. It will still have the Original family lines going back.

I do agree that keeping records is important and we need to know the breeding of our birds. But within these pedigrees needs to be the racing achievements of the parents and grandparents in a fair bit of detail, good and bad and not just the odd good performance. Not necessarily on a pedigree certificate but definitely within our own records.

It seems to me pedigrees are subject to a lot of observer bias, as in we laud the exceptional performer, they get to be stock birds or studs, and they get a huge progeny and influence on the genetics as a consequence. We talk about, observe, and track the successful candidates far more attentively than the average or poor ones. That unawareness of the denominator means its surely almost impossible to assess which lines have the best "exceptional" percentage across the piece.

And then there's that regression towards the mean effect whereby if you cross supertall world class basketball player to supertall worldclass basketball player, the kids are taller than average sure, but not as tall as the parents and no guarantee they will be as good at basketball.

The way natural selection would do it would be to breed everything to everything in huge numbers (because you can't know or predict the gene combos that will deliver greatness) and then apply a strong selection pressure, distance, speed, predator avoidance, disease resistance, whatever you want to select for.

Sorry, rambling, I know nothing about pigeon breeding, just thinking out loud.


ReplyQuote
Trevor Hodges
(@trench)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 9626
07/03/2020 8:42 pm  

I think this is why we have pedigrees for our birds, you then know what you have in the loft. I agree with Andy any youngsters in my loft will say on their pedigree bred by George Dever of Five Star Lofts. It will still have the Original family lines going back.

I do agree that keeping records is important and we need to know the breeding of our birds. But within these pedigrees needs to be the racing achievements of the parents and grandparents in a fair bit of detail, good and bad and not just the odd good performance. Not necessarily on a pedigree certificate but definitely within our own records.

It seems to me pedigrees are subject to a lot of observer bias, as in we laud the exceptional performer, they get to be stock birds or studs, and they get a huge progeny and influence on the genetics as a consequence. We talk about, observe, and track the successful candidates far more attentively than the average or poor ones. That unawareness of the denominator means its surely almost impossible to assess which lines have the best "exceptional" percentage across the piece.

And then there's that regression towards the mean effect whereby if you cross supertall world class basketball player to supertall worldclass basketball player, the kids are taller than average sure, but not as tall as the parents and no guarantee they will be as good at basketball.

The way natural selection would do it would be to breed everything to everything in huge numbers (because you can't know or predict the gene combos that will deliver greatness) and then apply a strong selection pressure, distance, speed, predator avoidance, disease resistance, whatever you want to select for.

Sorry, rambling, I know nothing about pigeon breeding, just thinking out loud.

Very well put mate, I don't think you are far off the mark with that analysis mate 👍🤠


ReplyQuote