URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Roller Pigeons
  HTML https://rollerpigeon.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Genetics
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 8870--------------------------------------------------
       George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: Tony Chavarria Date: September 12, 2011, 11:38 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       In Graham Dexters excellent book "Winners With Spinners", under
       the chapter titled "Selecting Stock and Managing The Breeding
       Loft" several English Fanciers among which are Barry Shackleton,
       Bill Barret, Bob Brown, Ernie Strafford, and others  are asked
       to comment on selecting rollers under the context of having the
       knack for selecting stock off the perch. He mentions Ernie
       Strafford and Bob Brown along with Bill Pensom having this
       knack.
       [img width=194
       height=276]
  HTML http://www.rollerpigeon.my-business-domain.com/i/Image%20Hosting/tn_WinnersWithSpinnersCover.JPG[/img]
       One of the fanciers whose response I find interesting is the one
       by George Mason, here is his quote on page 67:
       [img width=440
       height=204]
  HTML http://www.rollerpigeon.my-business-domain.com/i/Image%20Hosting/tn_GeorgeMason_Dont_Have_To_Roll_Well_2.JPG[/img]
       The money quote is the 10% that are selected on the way they are
       bred "family-wise": "...They don't have to roll well in the air.
       They don't have to roll at all, I would still put them in the
       stock pen provided they bred right and they have got brothers
       and sisters that are doing the job".
       I can see that there are going to be various opinions on this
       practice but in the context of having the knack for selecting
       rollers, can good rollers be produced from birds selected with
       this practice?
       Be sure to participate in the poll, lets see what the majority
       think about this practice for those with the knack.
       #Post#: 8871--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: 2y4life Date: September 12, 2011, 11:56 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I can see why George Mason said that. I've talked with him
       before, both through email and phone, and he mentioned then that
       he did this although he never mentioned the exact percentage.
       I've yet to experience this as I'm still a "squeaker" in
       breeding terms but those experienced flyers and breeders have
       experienced breeding the best flyers together and still not get
       any good rollers at all. Sometimes they breed their
       average/subpar rollers together and get great rollers.
       While click pairs are usually best to best, every now and then
       you will find a click pair that is not best to best. If they
       have it in them, the genes to roll and mental stability, they
       can still produce top notch spinners.
       Remember what Mason said. They have to have been bred right so
       you don't just find culls to breed from. The parents have to be
       top notch and the brothers and sisters have to be good.
       Basically, every now and then, you can select a bird based on
       how it looks and its pedigree (parents AND SIBLINGS). This only
       works if you are working within a family. If the strain's gene
       pool is tight, this method will work sometimes.
       Mason did say the best method is still best to best but as he
       mentioned there in the book, he only does this to about 10% of
       his breeders as an experiment. If it doesn't work, they are
       gone.
       As a newbie, I will not be trying this method until probably
       another 5 years or so once I get a firm hold on the family of
       birds I'm working with (lol at 5 years...maybe 30???)
       BTW, to answer the question above, absolutely YES. A well-bred
       nonroller or average roller CAN produce good rollers. There's a
       side note though, the chances are slim but it does happen.
       Tou
       #Post#: 8877--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: raul carreiro Date: September 12, 2011, 6:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I think most here would say a non roller is a cull, regardless
       if its siblings, related birds are good performers and are from
       a well bred family/strain. I would agree however with GM that a
       non rolling bird can produce good birds. I would only resort to
       such a breeding if I had nothing else to breed to! Its my
       opinion some will  breed  to non rollers  if they have few birds
       of quality and want to make up breeding pairs to get the
       quantity. But hey getting good birds from mediocre or non
       rollers is a fact! But then again  mediorce musicians can get  a
       top hit once in a life timeLOL!
       #Post#: 8882--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: donnie james Date: September 12, 2011, 8:19 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       hay tony,
       i have to agree and disagree with george on this on the agreeing
       part they tell me if you take a non-roller and put a good roller
       they will produce good good rollers but on the other i tried
       this a couple time and the birds didn't roll out of a non-roller
       and a good roller and i think its a waste of a breeding season
       .........................donnie james
       #Post#: 8895--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: Paul Conway Date: September 13, 2011, 4:44 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Would a bird that doesn't roll from a good cross with good
       brothers and sisters rolling well, be better than a sibling from
       the same pair that rolled sloppily?   I'm thinking the
       percentage of fanciers that can pick out the 10% that don't roll
       but would still be good breeders is a very small percentage of
       us?  Why suggest such a practice to the masses?.  Why not use
       the brother or sister that were rolling good?   Someone on here
       (Scott?) made a harsh statement about rollermen being better off
       if they culled half thier breeders.  Harsh, but with a healthy
       dose of truth and reality in it. What practice would be better,
       attempting to pick a non-roller for your breeder loft or
       increasing your standards of your breeders by eliminating the
       bottom half of the breeding loft??   I'm not buying it as
       general practice. Most of us aren't and will probably never be
       good enough to do this and if we were then we're certainly good
       enough to pick one that does roll that will produce good
       offspring. Heck that later should be a cake walk for someone
       that can do the former.  For us mere mortals, it's hard enough
       to pick a good breeder from the birds that do roll nice, look
       good, etc, etc, etc.,   Some of that was free flowing, typing
       what I was thinking, but I bet dollars to donuts though that
       it's not nearly as cut and dry as I believe it to be on first
       glance.  Man, spending time with Mr. Mason and those like him
       would be an education for sure.  regards, Paul Conway.
       #Post#: 8899--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: tom wingfield Date: September 13, 2011, 6:40 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       i am not going into a long detailed story, but here in short is
       a true story, years ago there was a man in oregon that had the
       best to be had pensom stock. a new be came to him and got 8
       pairs of birds out of his cull pen, none rollers, lazy birds,
       out flyers, roll downs, ect... this new be flew better kits bred
       out of these culls than any of us had ever seen flown  at the
       original breeders loft..........fact
       #Post#: 8902--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: Joe Asaro Date: September 13, 2011, 9:43 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       wingpatch....It's Bill Pensom, Not (Penson). If they were roll
       down's and all sorts of culls they were in there for a reason.
       This person from OR would not have given away Culls to a person
       new to the sport as stock birds. :o :o Joe
       #Post#: 8912--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: tom wingfield Date: September 14, 2011, 11:15 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       joe, thanks for the spelling lesson l.o.l. , no one said they
       were given for stock birds... the point i was trying to make was
       made...the birds had been culled but were out of birds mr.
       cribbs had for many years...mr. cribbs stock was from the best
       of mr. pensom , & mr. smith ... the breeding was there......tony
       the man that got the birds had to cull just as mr cribbs had
       done... you get culls from what ever you raise from , at lease i
       do..........tom
       #Post#: 8913--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: 2y4life Date: September 14, 2011, 12:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=wingpatchloft link=topic=708.msg8912#msg8912
       date=1316016913]
       joe, thanks for the spelling lesson, no one said they were given
       for stock birds... the point i was trying to make was made...the
       birds had been culled but were out of birds mr. cribbs had for
       many years...mr. cribbs stock was from the best of mr. pensom ,
       & mr. smith ... the breeding was there......tony the man that
       got the birds had to cull just as mr cribbs had done... you get
       culls from what ever you raise from , at lease i do..........tom
       [/quote]
       Genetically speaking, this is quite possible. It's unlikely but
       possible just like what George Mason said. It's possible to get
       great birds out of non-performers so long as the non-performers
       are out of good stock and have great siblings.
       The thing is, while the culls that Tom were talking about were
       culls, they still carry their parents genes and some of the
       genes were expressed and others weren't. If you breed some of
       those so-called culls, it is possible to get some recessive
       genes out (that didn't show/come through) in those culls to come
       out in the offspring.
       Just like a friend of mine who is 5'7". His mom is 5'9" and his
       dad is 6'4". He is the shortest in his family and has 2 brothers
       and a sister. His sister is almost 6' while his two brothers are
       both taller than his dad > 6'4".
       My friend has two boys, both in their teens. The older boy is a
       senior now and is 6'3" and the other boy is in middle school and
       is almost 6' now. Their mom is 5'2" or so.
       This is just a real life example of how certain genes get passed
       down and how some don't or how they do or do not show
       themselves.
       #Post#: 8947--------------------------------------------------
       Re: George Mason: Agree or Disagree?
       By: charles_b Date: September 18, 2011, 3:59 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Is it worth breeding a Non roller. How many of his/her offspring
       will be non rollers. I would rather breed good roller to good
       roller to prevent the breeding of a non roller that eats the
       same amount of food as a great performer.
       *****************************************************
   DIR Next Page