Roland

Old adage, 'youngsters show no fear'. They did well against a seasoned and first rate Germany side. Remember when Capello did the same against the world Champs Spain and won. Nike and Board not Happy. Then he left Rooney Out! Not before time as he was no longer international force he was. The F.A.'s sponsors kicked up a riot as Rooney's and the F.A. sponsor's and Cappello was OUT!

the RSPB have about a constant £140 million given each year in donations and wills etc. They are also the biggest, or next biggest land owners to the Church of England.

Me too Fid. Mind missis is too tight to buy a bag anyway lol

Some time of course to, as Kyleakin Lofts does. Other than that I don't. I believe one must use one or the other of what they intend. Nice small compartment where they are easy to catch and become very tame ... A great belief, which I feel may well bear some merit, is that single birds will fly to the owner - Like a mate. I know more probably have tame birds with great success... and able to spend time. I, personally, don't, can't spend the time, so I feel catching and handling odd times does more harm via upsetting them... Even causing stress - especially after a time, via doing this. So I have pretty wild birds. Another reason I always enter a compartment and move very quietly around when feeding etc. I will most days spend 10 minutes or so just 'Being There and allowing them to settle again. Nind also on open loft ones' time is curtailed at to actual time that can be spent and handling them.

March / 1st week in April.

Bermane Steverne Would be a good fight next for Joshua. Went Distance against Wilder ... nigh 3 years ago, and hasn't done oat in last couple of years like. Fights Wilder again next week,,, Big pay day, but he went close and shook Wilder up last time... Won't next one, but is a very7 tough and trying fighter. I'd Josh to win later next year, but will know Bermane is there I'd wager.

Yep Wilder has been pushing for this fight ... along side of Haye and Tyson Fury. The latter two wisely avoided... offered cheap talk instead. Josh knows he isn't in the same class yet.... and maybe won't be, but will, possibly, at some time be a great pay packet.

Like I posted earlier, Takam was / is a hardened and tough old battle steed. Record shows he can take a punch too. Also Josh is learning... and once again see good management picking and choosing his opponents well. A real good learning fight and confident booster I believe. Admitted he is far from the finish article as of now. Takam was offered THIS fight same too as the Hungarian, and paid to be fit and ready in case needed, so was fight fit too.

going for the treble: England have already won the U20 World Cup and the U19 Euros, semi finalist in the under 23's – leaving the FA hopeful the future is bright for the senior side. Brewster netted his first when Callum Hudson-Odoi chipped in behind the flat-footed defence. Liverpool’s Rhian Brewster sensationally fired his second hat-trick in two games to send England into the U17 World Cup final. Formidable Brewster grabbed a treble to set up a final against Spain or Mali – as England’s age-group teams continue to thrive. Brewster has been the star of the show netting three in the quarter final against the USA in a 4-1 win. And he repeated the feat against a dangerous Brazil side, as England’s movement down the flanks tore Brazil apart. London born Brewster was nicked from Chelsea a couple of years ago and has already played in front of Jurgen Klopp for the Anfield U18 side. His poaching skills were brilliant today as England progressed in 30C heat in Kolkata, India. Very happy all. Swore a mite at the goals scored against us ... more than usual as I always do lol, especially as we ha missed some chances. But all in all more than well deserved. Thought this morning regards the Rugby League, that I think - depending on draw, that the Semi finalist will be the All Blacks, the Aussies, England and Fiji. I would go for the All Blacks as the winners.  Final could go as New Zealand beating the Ausies, and England losing to Fiji. I hope I'm wrong, but won't be any money on it being different. Looks like Dountay Wilder is talking up a fight with Joshua for next year. Will be then a good contest. RRRRRRRRRRR The English Rugby league didn't do much good in as much as they lost. However it was to be expected. The Aussies are 2/9 to win the W/C. England second favourites at 6/1. Think that tells the story. However, credit well due, they played well and held their own .... mostly. Could it be a repeat of the final? Mind I think New Zealand have to be respected. Write off a side with the class of Dean Whare, Jordan Rapana and Roger Tuivasa-Sheck at your peril. And watch out for Melbourne’s monster Nelson Asofa-Solomona off the bench. They will take all the beating. Strange how a year can take an unbeatable side to new lows VIA the media. Never write the All Blacks off at any sport... be it at your' peril. Very happy all. Swore a mite at the goals scored against us ... more than usual as I always do lol, especially as we ha missed some chances. But all in all more than well deserved. Thought this morning regards the Rugby League, that I think - depending on draw, that the Semi finalist will be the All Blacks, the Aussies, England and Fiji. I would go for the All Blacks as the winners.  Final could go as New Zealand beating the Ausies, and England losing to Fiji. I hope I'm wrong, but won't be any money on it being different. Looks like Dountay Wilder is talking up a fight with Joshua for next year. Will be then a good contest.

Money Rules! Remember going to east Midland's RPRA meeting's regards the Glass timer. Was brill. Never lost or gained a second in a year etc. etc. Was based on the clocks used for Space Travels etc. Was a 1/5 of a cost as what on the market, and clocking simpler etc. Never had a chance of getting allowed. Excuses a shambollocks or stupidity as to why. Of course it was suitable for feathering nests lol.

True any ... but then when we do markings for the Nationals we cope easily with different ET's. Often thought there will be a little assessment of a gadget to fit of all ET's for this purpose. Obviously can be done now.

A voice of realism Avante. That is why so many lofts fanciers often state 'The best birds I every had / have were freebies given via a friend' or such. Fancy wrappings are etc. to sale any thing .... Just look at the Supermarkets / shops etc. Then add the 'Claims' made fpor selling much ... too much often.

I believe ... Taken from the Alberta Classic: In answer to my querie regards the Pickle Lake race, and distances … when their young birds would / could race over 500 miles 2 -3 time a year, sometimes two back to back. ….... by Halcanada » Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:38 pm: None that I am aware of. The Up North Combine sponsored a young bird race from 400 average miles. Lots of participants. Last weekend. Not enough day light hours for me at that time of the year. Not for day birds, I would be flying about 520 miles. Not too bad a course. North to South west. Strangely enough, the Fed I am in are basically sprint fliers. Yet they clocked in good time. Here is something I read recently. "Distance racing has very little to do with the actual distance, it is the time that the bird spends on the wing. This is affected by environmental conditions such as weather, winds, time of liberation, daylight. Irish racing pigeons fly many, many miles over the sea in their races from France every year...you can take the cream of the Dutch distance birds and see how many would manage this task ? The cold air over the sea provides no lift, so they need to be really tough to make that crossing. Unconditioned birds will not complete this task. The reality is that birds, through natural selection, get good at what they are tested against. I don't think that too many fanciers in Ireland or the UK would be without their "Old Blood" to ensure that they time in. On a good year the birds will be 12 hours doing 500 miles, on a bad year the race would be lucky to see a single bird in the first day....and the liberation is always early morning. I even think that the Belgians would challenge your assertion that the Dutch are the best....even the Polish and some of the German birds fly further and into more difficult terrain. Depends on what you want to see " My club will not fly over 300 miles. Old birds. But I do with the Fed..... End of. Halcanada is a English man that hails – Like Bill Butterfield one time the C.U. P   resident - from Hartlepool, now residing in Canada. Again I repeat only healthy and conditioned birds win hard races. Too many rely on – In my view – easy days and blow homes race. They never give the birds the credit they deserve but all too often refer to them in a 'Human Context'. They aren't, and in natures way, surpass us in many attributes in power. Too many state for their bird 'My birds couldn't do that'! They are bred for spring and days with a sun on their back'. 'Their pedigrees show that they are sprint birds etc. and hence never given the chance! A good fancier once said 'Belgium birds are brought and MADE here'! (The U.K.) A loft brags often. Gets write ups in the pigeon mags '…...... it only keeps and breeds from 12 pairs of racers' etc. ! Yet after a good season or two, sales of 100's ever season 'To keep the numbers down and often stated '…... 'These birds will win for you as for me'! 'I would race them my self with confidence' … Omitting that his confidence is that they are culls. Yes many fanciers flock to buy them lol. Was a very good flyer here in my club that only had 8 to 12 pairs of birds tops. He won from every point.  Was one to beat. Then whilst meet up with a well known  National winner, several times  and on both North and South Roads, he name cropped up that he once brought a kitt, a selection of his birds back in the 70's. Straight off I couldn't help but smile, well nearly laugh.  He looked and said …. 'Yeah you itguessed, rubbish'. A good lesson learned there then! Yet this club  fancier sent birds all over the U.K. Etc I went one morning to pick his birds up for a training toss one morning.... 1st week in April. Was, as he told me, a done practise every season. 1st week in April, enoigh time to have two ronds to race the y/b season … Wel that of course is true. He had 8 pairs! With in minutes he bragged he'd sent that yesterday 42  pairs to Scotland. Last week had dispatched others to Grimsby, Southend, London etc. etc. etc. I laughed to my self. 'Where do you breed them from 8 pairs lol. I already knew! He had two friends, brothers, that lived nigh opposite from me. No longer racing, in fact no longer club members and hadn't raced for decades. They had old stables in their grounds full of breeding pigeons ... I know many 'National' winners that have such lofts too. Breeding pens. YOU KNOW THIS TOO!   One must have a good re-pore, trust and friendship if bringing new stock. Top fancier do buy in … often no more than to give each other 'Good Names'. BUT they also lend and borrow and swap with each other the real good uns. These are the birds one seeks I believe.

I don't think so. He is 39 and quite tough for sure. But has but has beaten but few class names to be honest. Think he will fall in 8. http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/355273 However when they made the fight for Kubrat Pulev they had already made the fight in regards Carlos Takam to be ready for the fight on the proviso that Kubrat Pulev wouldn't make it Think though it will help A.J in as much of gaining experience and help till he fights Alexander Povetkin. Then maybe the dreaded De. Wilder. JMO.

Many I believe Steve are rotating their' birds. Was a time when most did this due to costs etc. Choosing races to prepare for the ones that they fancied going for. Yes some flew the whole program, especially y/b's flying the whole program ... Now it appears that many, too many breed to counteract their' losses.

Dal2 states '.... have a family of Kirkpatricka that will be as old as you that get it also...' Exactly. I wonder how close they are breeding wise?

Good read Kyleakin Lofts Now possibly the greatest sire was 'Northern Dancer' Certainly even today rates as one of the best ever! Never won a race. Was a real flop in fact wasn't it. Like wise with pigeons ... one needs to know what it will throw. Also what it's mate will throw. Now incest breeding is to keep the good traits one desires in his birds... but again this furthers the bad traits also. Now lets say that a bird has 10 good traits that we desire in our birds. 5 good strong traits. Ones you and we like... others the bad ones we wish to demote etc. So we find a hen that also has 10 traits, 5 good and strong and 5 not really what we want, or conceive we don't. If one studies and keeps records etc. whether in own loft or a mates - That's what top fanciers do... swap etc. Now we want in the birds to breed their good traits that should auger well and hopefully get 10 great desirable traits! the sad part is that all so often in most birds the Bad traits could be the stronger! Maybe we could breed 10 so - called bad traits in the youngsters. Now a simple truth is that once a cup is brim-full then it can't hold any more. the Bussearts / Jansenn / Logen Masserella and such were great 'Stockmen' because they had an affinity to see / know which and what could / would breed such and such. Jim said the most import thing in a pigeon is by far it's Constitution. Would never contemplate, buying or owning a good bird even that lacked this. Buy in other birds with good constitutions will also have the added vigour. An example. I bought in some young birds - great investment actually, though for a season nigh I was mad and thought I had been pressured and conned ... that's another story though. One, a pencil cock won as a y/b. Then I moved loft. It, like the others stayed. I didn't race that season as I was in the throes of moving again. I moved here in the October. This cock bird was an aristocrat in the loft. I broke it again like most of the others, and lightly raced it. that season it won Thurso in one club. A fortnight later it won Bergerac. I, of course gave it many different hens.... It never ever bred piddley pip. Some great looking off springs .... Why? Too many fanciers have loft full of 'Breeders' breeding rubbish. Because it was from so and so, or because they paid a lot of money for it! Next season will be better because ... and then they do exactly the same and wonder why!

John Hunter needn't reply lol. Inbreeding and line breeding What are inbreeding and line breeding, and what effect do they have? In genetic terminology, inbreeding is the breeding of two animals that are related to each other. In its opposite, out crossing, the two parents are totally unrelated. Since all pure breeds of animal trace back to a relatively limited number of foundation dogs, all pure breeding is by this definition inbreeding, although the term is not generally used to refer to matings where a common ancestor does not occur behind sire and dam in a four or five generation pedigree. Breeders of pure bred livestock have introduced a term, line breeding, to cover the milder forms of inbreeding. Exactly what the difference is between line breeding and inbreeding tends to be defined differently for each species and often for each breed within the species. On this definition, inbreeding at its most restrictive applies to what would be considered unquestioned incest in human beings - parent to offspring or a mating between full siblings. Some people and line breeding call uncle-niece, aunt-nephew, half sibling matings, and first cousin matings inbreeding by others. What does inbreeding (in the genetic sense) do? Basically, it increases the probability that the two copies of any given gene will be identical and derived from the same ancestor. Technically, the animal is homozygous for that gene. The heterozygous animal has some differences in the two copies of the gene Remember that each animal (or plant, for that matter) has two copies of any given gene (two alleles at each locus, if you want to get technical), one derived from the father and one from the mother. If the father and mother are related, there is a chance that the two genes in the offspring are both identical copies contributed by the common ancestor. This is neither good nor bad in itself. Consider, for instance, the gene for PRA (progressive retinal atrophy), which causes progressive blindness. Carriers have normal vision, but if one is mated to another carrier, one in four of the puppies will have PRA and go blind. Inbreeding will increase both the number of affected dogs (bad) and the number of genetically normal dogs (good) at the expense of carriers. Inbreeding can thus bring these undesirable recessive genes to the surface, where they can be removed from the breeding pool. Unfortunately, we cannot breed anything based on a single gene - the genes come as a package. We may inbreed and rigorously remove, say pups instance with PRA or even their parents or nest - mates from the breeding stock. However, remember inbreeding tends to make all genes more homozygous. In at least one breed, an effort to remove the PRA-causing gene resulted in the surfacing of a completely different and previously unsuspected health problem. It is easier and faster to lose genes (sometimes very desirable genes) from the breeding pool when inbreeding is practiced than when a more open breeding system is used. In other words, inbreeding will tend to produce more nearly homozygous animals, but generally some of the homozygous pairs will be "good" and others will be "bad.†Furthermore, there may be genes where heterozygosity is an advantage. There are several variant haemoglobin types in human beings, for instance, where one homozygote suffers from some type of illness, the other homozygote is vulnerable to malaria, and the heterozygote is generally malaria-resistant with little or no negative health impacts from a single copy of the non-standard hemoglobin gene. A more widespread case is the so-called major histocompatibility complex (MHC), a group of genes where heterozygosity seems to improve disease resistance. Is there a way of measuring inbreeding? Wright developed what is called the inbreeding coefficient. This is related to the probability that both copies of any given gene are derived from the same ancestor. A cold outcross (in dogs, probably a first-generation cross between two purebreds of different, unrelated breeds would be the best approximation) would have an inbreeding coefficient of 0. Note that this dog would not be heterozygous at every locus. There are genes shared with every multicellular organism, genes shared with all animals, genes shared with all animals with backbones, genes shared with all four-limbed animals (including most fish and all amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals) and with all mammals. Although the DNA might differ slightly, the proteins produced would be functionally the same. Further, the chances are that our dogs with inbreeding coefficient = 0 would still be homozygous for some genes shared by all dogs. The inbreeding coefficient thus specifically refers to those genes that are variable (more than one possible form) in the species and even the breed being considered. An inbreeding coefficient of 1 (rare in mammals) would result if the only matings practiced over many generations were between full brother and full sister. The figure shows how the inbreeding coefficient changes with generations of brother-sister matings. As a general rule, this type of mating cannot be kept up beyond 8-10 generations, as by that time the rate of breeding success is very low. However, the rare survivors may go on to found genetically uniform populations. This has been done in laboratory rodents, producing inbred strains of mice and rats so similar genetically that they easily tolerate skin or organ grafts from other animals from the same inbred strain. However, the process of inbreeding used to create these strains generally results in loss of fertility (first seen in these mammals as a reduction in litter size) which actually kills off the majority of the strains between 8 and 12 generations of this extent of inbreeding. A handful of the initial strains survive this bottleneck, and these are the inbred laboratory strains. However, very little selection other than for viability and fertility is possible during this process. You wind up with animals homozygous for a more or less random selection of whatever genes happened to be in the strains that survived, all of which derive from the parents of the initial pair. Note that two very much-inbred parents can produce offspring that have very low inbreeding coefficients if the inbred parents do not have ancestors in common. This, however, assumes that mates are available who are not strongly inbred on a common ancestor. If the parents are related to each other, their own inbreeding coefficients will indeed increase the inbreeding coefficients of their offspring. The critical factor is the coefficient of kinship, which is the inbreeding coefficient of a hypothetical offspring of the two individuals. Inbreeding has become an important consideration for wildlife conservationists. Many wild populations are in danger of extinction due to some combination of habitat destruction and hunting of the animals, either to protect humans or because the animal parts are considered valuable. (Examples are ivory, rhinoceros horn, and infant apes for the pet trade, as well as meat hunting.) For some of these animals the only real hope of survival is captive breeding programs. However, the number of animals available in such captive breeding programs, especially at a single zoo, is often limited. Biologists are concerned that the resulting inbred populations would not have all of the genes found in the wild populations, and thus lose some flexibility in responding to change. In reaction to this threat, they have developed networks such that animals can be exchanged among captive breeding populations in such a way as to minimize the overall inbreeding of the captive population. The idea is to select pairs in such a way that the inbreeding coefficient of the offspring is kept as low as possible. Most elementary genetics books have instructions for calculating the inbreeding coefficient from the pedigree. (For more information, see Dr. Armstrong's site, Significant Relationships.) However, these procedures have two major limitations. First, they are not really designed for cases where there are multiple common ancestors, though they can be used separately for each common ancestor and the results added. Second, they become impossibly complex as the length of the pedigree increases. It is by no means uncommon in dogs, for instance, to have pedigrees which can be researched in the AKC stud book and the KC Gazette and which go back to foundation dogs born around the turn of the century - perhaps 30 or even 40 generations earlier. With this type of long pedigree, foundation animals may appear a million times or more in the pedigree. With this in mind, a computer program called GENES was developed by Dr. Robert Lacy for the calculation of the inbreeding coefficient, kinship coefficients among animals in the breeding pool, percent contributions of varying founding ancestors, and related output, assuming full pedigrees to the foundation stock were available for all animals currently in the breeding population. For captive breeding populations, the less inbreeding the better, and this is the way the program is used. In pure bred livestock, the situation is a little different - we want homozygosity for those genes, which create a desirable similarity to the breed standard. Wright's defence of inbreeding was based on this fact. However, inbreeding tends to remove those heterozygotes, which are beneficial (e.g., the MHC) as well as increasing undesirable as well as desirable homozygotes. The practice is most dangerous in the potential increase of homozygous health problems which are not obvious on inspection, but which shorten the life span or decrease the quality of life for the animal. I do not at the present time have other dog breeds for comparison, but I recently submitted a Shetland sheepdog pedigree database to Dr. Armstrong for calculation of true inbreeding coefficients. This database was based on full pedigrees of all AKC Shetland Sheepdogs that had sired 10 or more breed champions (males) or produced 5 or more (females.) These top producing animals were set up as the current living population (a somewhat artificial assumption, as the dogs involved where whelped from 1930 to after 1990.) I would love to see some comparisons with other breeds. John, the ten year old needs time here lol. Inbreeding, Line breeding and Crossbreeding from NSAE NEWS VOL. 1 N6- December 12, 1997 INBREEDING's purpose is to fix certain traits or the influence of certain ancestors upon the progeny. This procedure varies in degree from intense close breeding to mild line breeding. Although inbreeding can be detrimental to fertility, vigour, and athletic ability within the offspring, it can also result in true-breeding strains of horses (that consistently pass important traits to their offspring). Because a process of inbreeding formed most breeds, the breeding of purebred horses is, my definition, a form of inbreeding. Some breeds are more inbred than others. (Degree of inbreeding depends on the number of common ancestors, how far back in the pedigree they appear, and how often each common ancestor occurs.) From a genetic viewpoint, inbreeding results in an increase of the number of homozygous gene pairs in the offspring. Homozygous refers to a condition where two paired chromosomes have the same allelle (gene type) at a corresponding point. Because two close relatives tend to have more of the same alleles (by virtue of inheritance) than two unrelated individuals, their mating provides a greater chance for identical alleles to be paired within their offspring. This increase in homozygosity is directly related to the appearance of both desirable and detrimental characteristics that were not necessarily apparent in the sire and dam. When horses are inbred haphazardly, without culling of inferior stock, many undesirable traits may become predominant in their offspring. For example, the inbred horse's ability to resist disease and his overall performance capacity are often depressed. The growth rate of the inbred foal, and the average mature size within the inbred herd, frequently decreases. Non - selective inbreeding is directly related to a depressed fertility rate, an increase in abortion and stillbirth. Some basic principles of genetics show why these traits are directly related to inbreeding. When two unrelated birds are mated, the chances of unidentical alleles combining within the resulting embryo are high. On the other hand, mating close relatives increases the pairing of identical alleles (increases homozygosity). The effect of increased homozygosity is a decrease in the number of heterozygous gene pairs and, subsequently, a decline in heterosis (i.e., loss of vigour and fertility). Although the reason for this allelic interaction is not clear, geneticists believe that its presence contributes to the overall quality of an individual. Therefore, as homozygosity increases within the inbred herd, physical quality controlled by over - dominant alleles declines. Roland any undesirable genes affecting the bird’s overall vigour and fertility are recessive. Fortunately, they have no influence in the heterozygous state, since the effect of the recessive allele is completely hidden by the effect of the corresponding dominant allele. Because of the overall effect of inbreeding is an increase in homozygosity! it increases the number of homozygous recessives. Hence, the effects of undesirable recessive genes begin to surface. Inbreeding does not create undesirable trait, it exposes recessive alleles for hidden weaknesses, which are present within the sire and dam. Because successful inbreeding demands the culling of inferior breeding stock over many generations (to help eliminate some of the undesirable recessive genes from the herd), it may not be feasible for some breeders. Not only is the time factor impractical for most breeders, the intense culling often necessary may be an economic problem. Additionally, the traits, which tend to surface within the inbred birds (such as depressed growth rate and decreased size, (reminds me of ‘Young Bird Sickness that!) contrast sharply with what many breeders select for. Therefore, the breeder must be objective when the need to cull arises. Perhaps the greatest advantage of inbreeding is that it increases the pre - potency of individuals within a herd / flock and consequently helps to create distinct true-breeding strains or families. This prepotency (the ability of a stallion or broodmare, for example, to stamp desirable characteristics upon their offspring with a high degree of predictability) is the result of the parent being homozygous for important desirable traits. When such a parent carries two identical alleles on corresponding points of a chromosome pair, he transmits that allele to the same chromosome point within his offspring. If two such parents are mated, the offspring will always possess the same desirable trait. Therefore, as inbreeding increases homozygosity, it also enhances prepotency. (This is advantageous only if the parents are homozygous for desirable traits.) As mentioned previously, inbreeding exposes certain weaknesses within the inbred herd. Uncovering these undesirable traits can be an important tool for the overall improvement within a large breeding program. By setting certain selection guidelines, and by carefully eliminating inbred individuals which show inherits weaknesses, the breeder can slowly remove any undesirable recessive genes from their herd. They will find that vigour and fertility are actually improved when inbreeding is accompanied by careful selection. A successful inbreeding program requires good foundation stock and severe culling over many years. For this reason, experienced breeders who operate large farms for the production of superior proponent breeding stock usually practice inbreeding. It can also be used to establish breeds, or true-breeding types, with respect to certain characteristics such as colour or size. A breeding system, which uses extreme inbreeding, such as mating between siblings or between parents and offspring, is referred to as CLOSE BREEDING. The detrimental effects of inbreeding (such as decrease in vigour, fertility, athletic ability and size) are usually exaggerated in a close breeding system. This is especially true when average breeding stock is used and little culling has been implemented. Close breeding can produce extremely good, or extremely poor, results. Success and failure depend on factors such as planning, foundation stock, emphasis on culling, and completeness of pedigree and performance records, etc. Haphazard close breeding could be very detrimental to the overall quality of the resulting offspring. To avoid disaster, a careful study of the merits and weaknesses of the breeding stock should precede a close breeding program. Only the most outstanding mares and stallions can be used with any degree of safety in a long-term close breeding program. Close breeding is a valuable tool in genetic research, since it quickly exposes hidden gene types that an individual carries. Because of its extreme nature and the chance, that it may suddenly cause undesirable effects in the offspring. Horse breeders do not often use close breeding. Some breeders, who operate large and well-organized program, might utilize close breeding if they progeny test their stallions. (One method of progeny testing a sire is to mate him to a large group of his own daughters. A study of the offspring determines whether he carries undesirable genes hidden in the heterozygous state.) After a stallion proves that he is of superior gene type, the experienced breeder may choose to continue the close breeding to increase prepotency of future breeding stock. LINE BREEDING, the most conservative form of inbreeding, is usually associated with slower improvement and limited risk of producing undesirable individuals. It can involve matings between closely or distantly related horses, but it does not emphasize continuous sire-daughter, dam-son, or brother-sister matings. The main purpose of line breeding is to transmit a large percentage of one outstanding ancestor's genes from generation to generation without causing an increase in the frequency of undesirable traits often associated with inbreeding. Because line breeding is not based strictly on mating closely related individuals (with very similar gene types), it does not necessarily cause a rapid increase in homozygous gene pairs. Consequently, it will not expose undesirable recessive genes as extensively as close breeding. For this reason, line breeding is generally a safer inbreeding program for most breeders. Intensive inbreeding (and resulting increased homozygosity) is often directly related to an increase in the expression of many undesirable traits. Therefore, the line breeder should carefully study pedigrees for each prospective mating and determine if, and how closely, the mare and stallion are related. By following certain guidelines, the breeder can limit inbreeding (and, therefore, homozygosity) within their herd. At the same time, they may increase the influence of a common ancestor upon the entire strain or family. CROSSBREEDING is the mating of horses from different breeds. Cross breeding may also be used to produce heterosis, the sudden increase in vigour and fertility caused by a sudden increase in heterozygosity. Because horses from separate breeds usually carry very different genotypes, crossbreeding causes an extreme form of heterosis. The possibility of each parent contributing identical alleles to their offspring is remote. Heterosis from crossbreeding often appears as a sudden improvement in physical characteristics, such as size, endurance, disease resistance, etc. New breeds are sometimes established by crossing members of two or more breeds and carefully inbreeding the original crossbred offspring. Crossbreeding initiates the desired change, while inbreeding increases the ability of each generation to breed "true to type.†Author Anonymous NSAE NEWS National School of Academic Equitation 22131 31st Avenue SE Bothell, WA 98021 (425) 806-8171 Craig P. Stevens Director cpszzz@concentric.net Copyright© 1997 - Craig P. Stevens, Director, National School of Academic Equitation. Printed here by special permission.

Years ago, Nigh all birds flew the programme and distances. Not home in race time very often next day or so. Now so very many fanciers daren't even enter into sending to such races. Yet the proven facts are A. ALL great strains / families are bred from such birds. B. Birds that win from the Distance and hard races also win at shorter races... So many feed light and high carbs and fat! Which is burnt out after 15 - 20 minutes, but gives them a good early start ... over the shorter races. This of course doesn't equate to the longer harder races. Sadly no one likes change. Also, mores the pity they / people become comfortable with 'Habits'.

Have posted reply. Even second cousins needn't be mated. However I will say that most will be able to see from certain birds that are breeding the youngsters.

Different families: A cock bird mates another hen from different family. Later the mating could be changed .... but even then I never let the youngsters of them be mated..... I started with 5 different families. I bring in another one or two as and when, if needed.

The stigma of Young Bird Sickness. I see that Germany has a rising percentage of getting and having it. Like here the same lofts getting hit year after year! If so why? I ask, do the youngster from past Y/B/S that got it, get it? Or are they immune? Now why does one have inoculations ? Polio Jab etc. etc.! Simple answer is that giving a human, an animal or bird a small dosage means the body gets shot of it, and BUILDS up an immunity. So why then do some lofts' birds get hit year after year? Is it simply that the birds haven't, aren't able, to protect the youngsters via passing on an immunity? If so why? We all know, or should, that bad breeding meaning a weak constitution, or complete lack of! Not able to build up an immunity, let alone a good constitution! Pedigree dogs get vaccinated galore. Dosages for say Parva. Yet go down with it and put down … Owners hoping to get a breeding or two, if possible, depending when hit with it! 'struth! Money, greed and ignorance eh! Yet, as many are told via the Vet, Mongrel wandering the street aren't affected! Why … the only answer to why is Because. Because they have built up an immunity. A strong and natural constitution! No jabs or special feed etc. Certainly not any expensive pills … which make me wonder why fanciers still rush to buy as such! So they look around and see others who are not affected. Sadly they think it is a Stigma as to them and the others! How come, they ponder, is it that I get it, and still have some good results, whilst they don't get it and their' results are good too …? … Hey! Need some excuses here mate they barter. DALL2 Posted 30 August 2017 - 16:43 PM I remember somone writing in the pres....Of the folks that haven't had YBS EVER .....50% are fibbers and the other have don't recognise the symptoms lol man up Steve and be real! Well another fancier, and very good national winner and flyer on the 'Natural' states. 'They have a fear of a stigma and want to excuse them selves (Needlessly) via downing others. Boo hooing and thus calling very good and honest fanciers who haven't had it 'LIARS'! Hence they feel better … but then again not really. A lot of truth there of course. Instead of looking in the mirror, they take so-lance that they aren't the only ones. Instead of boo hooing good and great flyers they should try and work out why. Yes I fear a lot of breeders (pigeons) could find another home...those many lofts severely hurt. But the answer is, or more than likely simply! Their' loft and their' continuance and determination not to ... Nor even believe that breeding from inferior constitutional bird has the Immunity bred out of them. Thinking things will get better eh! Simple truth again is 'IT won't'! Stop incest breeding willy nilly for starters and bring / mate with non related birds will be a boon. No bird in my loft is related. Out side of cousins, which even them would never be mated together. No incest contrivance. And as always I offer any one to take up the offer of just turning to my loft when ever and have a freedom of inspection, and avisiting cuppa / dinner etc. ANY TIME OF THE YEAR!

http://tmakowecki.com/Discussions/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2177&sid=7915c95048efe4a7794812311edaddbe&p=42391#p42391 Well, it sure looks as if these Scotsmen can race pigeons! According to the latest issue of The Canadian Pigeon International magazine from the CRPU https://www.thecanadianpigeoninternational.com/gallery Billy Bilsland is 7 times Scottish National Winner in 5 years! Have a deckers.... From Canada

:emoticon-0136-giggle: Ah but the wally was still locked and the Missis had the key lol.

Meant to mention. As leaving Berwick on Scottish visit my Sat Nav wouldn't start. Thought I'd cling to the coast. The realism that the new bridge could be a problem finding etc. was on my mind though ... not worried but a bit perturb I pulled up behind a lorry in lay by about 30 miles off. checking he wasn't having a kip I got his attention. Told him my Sat Nav was burst and asked regards getting to the new bridge as I thought there'd be new roads / directions etc. He said ' Could be ... that you need is a Sat Nav'. He then found an old one. Said he'd only used it a couple of times. Was about two and a half inches square and a 16 years Garmin. He would take a penny for it. I honestly tried, saying even a fiver! Worked a treat. O.k was up to date, but a great confident booster. Served me well. Thanks Jock once again where ever you are .... Took mine back. Store twiddled with it. Asked to try it again. Worked twice and then didn't no more. Took it back to store and had choice of a swap, an different one, or money back. Took money back as will use the wife's this week in Beacon Fells.