As promised. The following are the answers to the 25 eye-sign questions I posted prior to the seminar
The Discussion Centre: Eye Sign: As promised. The following are the answers to the 25 eye-sign questions I posted prior to the seminar
Billy it may well be also that THAT particul pairing don't suit. Now if they were both performance birds I would change mates, giving them both lesser mates. The offspring may well produce 'Goldern Pairs' for breeding... Next time niether though warrent a place I grant you.
Also if one knows THEY have Quality birds / blood, the wind will sort the chaff fine.
Answer to question No 19 and 20.
How many proven way's are there to select a mate for a Cluster. What are they
To answer this question I will relate a little story about a friend of mine Called Dennis Shaw.
Dennis was a dedicated flyer who would stop at nothing to win and his success which was quite good was due to this competative nature and attitude which was also a characteristic of his own families personalities. His farther was a Champion cyclist of Olympic caliber and also a very good pigeon flyer in his day.
Dennis flew in my club in Sth Australia, and after the release of my book in which I revealed for the first time ever the facts about the Cluster eye's. He set off on a mission to buy beg steal or borrow every Cluster eye'd bird he could get his hands on, and he did.
Exactly howmany he actually ended up with I never found out but, he was the happiest guy you ever met now that he had this information and was going to set the world on fire because of it.
Needless to say. It didn't take long for him to start telling me of the successes of some of them BUT, he also pointed out that there were also many failures???
This of course gave me cause for concern until after examining some of his matings and this was when I discovered that he had made a fatal error in his pairings.
You see dear reader, what Dennis had over looked in his eagerness to be an ace, was the one and only rule you cannot ever break when mating birds by eye-sign.
The method was discovered originally back over 500 years earlier than Giggot by a man called Abdule Fassule, in the land of Persia.(Turkey today) And was used as per his recommendations by Giggot back long before 1848 during HIS developement of the long distance racing pigeon which, when he tried them out for the very first time at the 1848 worlds fair in London held at the Chrystal Palace. Were the first long distance racing pigeons ever seen and, later because of their success, were called approprietly, The Antwerps. Named after the city from whence they came and subsiquently flew back home to.
There are very few rules in the breeding of racing pigeons which are cast in bronze as it were. Some one out there in pigeon land will be able to show where they had just as much success by doing the exact opposite to what the rules say you should. Except THE RULE OF MATING.
If I had to, I could condense the technique down into one word, and that would be "CONTRAST"
If you look it up in a dictionary, you will find that it is the "visible difference" between say two colours. EG. BLACK and WHITE. YELLOW and PEARL?? Gray circles and yellow ones etc etc.
Therefore, the rule is that you MUST use a Contrast, of the many colours as it is possible to find in the eye's of your breeders and even SOME of the other eye features.
If there ever was a secret to anything in this subject, it was this rule of CONTRASTING the eye colours of the parents in the breeding stock, to IMPROVE the QUALITY of the off spring being bred to be over and above that of the parent birds.
In my fifty years of HANDS ON breeding of pigeons, I have NEVER been able to prove this one rule wrong dispite many many thousands of pairings for myself and others around this world.
The letters of agreement which I received after the release of my book were in the thousands confirming what I had recommended as being factual and many of these came from none believers in the subject of eye-sign.
I would pass on that same advise to you today, Always contrast the colours of eye's of your breeders when ever possible.
NEVER mate two eye's of "identicle" colours together. If you have a family of yellow eyed birds, mate the Old Gold yellow's with the pale Daffodil yellow or, the butter cup yellow but, never the same colour.
The dark pearls to the light pearls and if these are not different, then you may have to resort to using the eye-sign circles to find your contrast but regardless of which it is, use it, THE BETTER THE CONTRAST THE BETTER THE MATING.
This will give you the desired improvements you so badly want and need I promise you AND, you will breed a "wider variety" of contrastable coloured eye's to continue on with into a never ending future.
This information also explains fully why the Greens and Violet eye's are such a prolific breeders of good birds. Because they are in complete CONTRAST with ALL the other colours appearing in the eye's of our birds.
A final word on this subject.
Never confuse the contrasting of colours, with contrasting the eye features. A wide circle to a narrow one. THIS ADVISE IS TOTALLY WRONG. You will only decrease the overall width of eye'sign in the young produced by doing this.
Retain what you have in the cock by "matching" it with a hen of equal strength and width if possible, BUT A DIFFERENT COLOUR.
The single tubed eye which I have mentioned so many times on here is also explained by this word contrast. It too is in complete contrast to all the other eye's found in our birds and this is clearly why they too breed good birds so prolifically.
Now I hope you have a some what deeper appreciation for my insistance that you cannot teach this subject PARROT FASHION from what you read in books, You also cannot learn it that way and anyone who say's you can, and believes you don't need hands on experience is talking out of his...... hat. 
And the beat goes on.
Bobo I know you beleive what you are saying. But like you asked me where is the proof. You say dont breed same color to same? What are your proofs that this is bad? Sorry quoting some dead Persian (Irani) aint proof. Or was it a Turk? Lets race. Bye BillyT
Hitler had an theory how genetic would enhance the breeding for a pure race..... But if that had had suceeded... there would syill have had to be millions of culles every year. that doesn't add up or make any sense... fortunately it was stopped, at great coast abeit.
The out cross IS the strength. The Mongel is fitter better less virus prone etc. The pedigree lacks oh so much - out side of the odd one - to out crosses and mongrels. IT no more than the BLOOD being strengthen, improved via the out cross
Humans are a perfect example.
Incest, close relative breeding, from Egytian / Roman British aristecrats etc have only produce inferior and most mental cases. HENCE the rules for marriage etc.
It is strictly Taboo in nature and we are forever learning fron Mother there.
To Billy and Roly. The proof is in the fact that I have been checking it out in LIVE BIRDS for decades. HANDS ON. Not from pictures. Not from books. Not from tapes or any of that crap,or from what some one else say's in magazine articles. From what I personally have seen with my own little blues. Actually they're Green.
You cannot learn this subject by reading books and listening to tapes. And anyone who say's you don't need 20 years of HANDS ON learning is an..........iot. ......blithering???? I think. But, it's the old old story.
YOU CAN LEAD A HORSE TO WATER BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE HIM DRINK. And the beat goes on?
Hi Bob that's not true you can lead a horse to water and make him drink just tie his head one quarter of an inch from the trough then kick him in the nut's and you will see him drink real fast ha ha .bill.
Well Bobo, I think you are wrong on breeding or not breeding by colors of the eyes. As you know my authority is watching the wild birds down at the KMart parking lot. Dont see yellow to yellow eye breedings being swept up by the barrelfuls by the clean up crew. Your 40 years of eyeballing aint effected the survival of these culls in the least. You can lead a horse to water but you cant make him eat bullshit. Why are you, a man I believe talks good sense, suddenly shoveling the Bull Shit? You sure your mother was not crossed with a yellow eyed Dingo? Your turn. Lets race. Bye BillyT
ROLY,
MOTHER NATURE DOES BREED BY INCEST, BECAUSE IF IT DIDN'T, NO SEPERATE SPECIE'S WOULD BE IDENTIFIABLE.
YOU WILL ALSO NOTICE THAT IF YOU LOOK AT AN ENGLISH SPARROW THAT IT & ALL IT'S FRIENDS ARE EXACTLY THE SAME COLOR OF FEATHER & EYE, RIGHT DOWN TO THE TOE NAILS.
PS SEE YOU IN A WEEK, AFTER ST THOMAS TRIP.
WHY DOES ONE COTTON TAIL RABBIT, LOOK LIKE ALL THE REST.???
THE ONLY TIME THAT THERE WILL BE A DIFFERENCE IS WHEN YOU GET A MUTATION, SUCH AS ALBINO.
ALL BREEDING OF CHICKENS TO GET BETTER EGG PRODUCTION WAS DONE BY INBREEDING, JUST AS WELL AS MILK PRODUCTION IN COWS.
ONE STUD BULL & MANY COWS.
ALL PASSENGER PIGEONS ARE EXTINCT, BUT MAYBE THEY JUST DOWN SIZED THEMSELVES INTO THE SMALLER DOVES TO MAKE A TINY TARGET.
P.S. SEE YOU IN A WEEK AFTER ST THOMAS TRIP
Well at least your consistant Billy Boy. But you also (and as usual) over looked one very important thing and that is. The K-mart birds DON'T have to fly in competition over vast distances.
I never said or implied that not contrasing the eye's of the parents would breed weak birds or whatever but, they will not be as good as the best of their parents or as good as we require and desire.
Don't take my word for it Billy or anyone else reading this. Go and look at your best stock pairs and see for yourselves. Your best birds will have come from the contrasted pairs.
PS
To Bill. I assume you know also how to brick a camel from being a five day camel into a 10 day camel by bringing two house bricks together quickly on the same parts of it's anatomy??? 
It has a tendancy to clean out their ears and sinuses and make their eye's water all at the same time.
Myron they are Genitic species. And the genes etc. make are uniformed. From Wildrbeast to cock roaches etc. ALL have like pigeons the Trait.... Make up. But nothing woild cock it up quicker then inbreeding. Look what they have done tro so many species ...
Roly, you are wasting your time talking genetics to our resident conclusionist. He can't even understand the simple basics of eye-sign let alone a science like genetics.
It might be me but, all I can see him doing at the moment is running round in circles looking for a way out of the mess he's B/S..ted himself into.
Last week it was dark eye's only winning bad weather races, now it's the eye pigment is a filter for excess light entering the eye throught the iris proper. Does this mean that Bull eyed birds can't see properly?? I DON'T THINK SO. And now, since I revealed what speed lines really mean, he's back peddling at a 100 mph out of that mess, by trying to misenterprite what I said and trying to change it into meaning something else entirley different again to suit his needs.
This latest one is a real doozy where he is telling that the pigment in the eye is a sort of filter protecting the inner eye from excess light entering through the iris proper.
Where does he come up with this junk.
I know I'm wasting my time asking but, just to prove a point that he hasn't a clue in hadies what he is talking about, I shall ask the following. I'm doing this to give him a chance to riddle out of his dilema.
If as you say, only the fast birds have this pigment in their eye's, and which according to you is used during their fast flights etc, to filter out the excess light????? (My boggles everytime I read that rubbish) then prey tell us why the fastest birds in the world (Falco Pere Grinus) The Peregrine Falcon and nearly all Falcons does not have ANY pigment in their eye's? Then when your head stops spinning, consider that Hawks and Eagles do have the pigment in their eye's? Why is this? And why don't pigeons with the pied eye's have a vision problem.
It's because light DOESN'T enter the eye through the iris proper that's why.
Have a look at a bull eye and what you see is the base on which the entire iris is built on. Light cannot go through it, if it did, the bird would be blinded.
This sort of Blows your silly hypothesis out the window doesn't it? Surely even you can see this. BOOK is wrong.
And while your at it.
Why don't you explain why the OWL's display the best possible examples of the pigmented beads that form Clusters in pigeons eye's and, which you claim are filters etc but, if what you are trying to have people believe is true,then how can you possibly be correct when everybody including the village nut case know's that the wise old Owl fly's and hunt's at night, when the light is anything but excessive. You did it again. WILL YOU NEVER LEARN FROM YOUR CONSTANT MISTAKES? Most people do. You can't learn this subject from books and tapes. You have to get out amongst it.
So you see dear reader, what we have here is yet another fine example of someone opening his mouth and inserting his foot. And all because he insists on speaking out BEFORE he has any facts to go by.
If you don't know Myron, DON'T GUESS, Stop applying your own limited understanding to it, and be like everyone else, ASK and we will help you, but don't make up STUFF like you do just to try to sound like you know what your talking about when you don't. You should have learned by now that YOU WILL GET FOUND OUT AND MADE TO LOOK WHAT YOU DESERVE TO BE. REDICULOUS.
Sorry but it's your own fault and you have no one to blame but yourself.
Answer to question No 22.
Does light enter the eye through the iris proper.
Who cares????ha ha ha
But in all truth. NO IT DOESN'T. It isn't known if the cilliary body (that's the brown base you see in the bull eye which is completely without pigment covering it) is responsible for the constant changing size of the aperture of the pupil, or the retina at the back of the eye. However, which ever it is, it most certainly isn't the pigment in the iris that causes the changes.
Perhaps the light sensitive cells that do cause it are to be found on the surface of cilliary body itself, It certainly looks that way when you watch it under a scope as light is played onto it? I DON'T KNOW AND WILL NOT GUESS OR SPECULATE but, neither does anyone else in the scientific comunity.
Fortunately, it isn't of much importance to the eye-sign exponent so don't be overly concerned.
There is one thing for sure though. If you could scrape away the pigment from within an eye, you would find as did and have many times, that as soon as the pigment is removed, the eye then changes to being nothing more than a plain old every day BULL EYE???
And that's the "only" difference between them and the ordinary pigmented eye or coloured eye. The presence of pigment.
Please, don't let anyone try to tell you that the bull eye is faulty or that the birds with them cannot see properly. They can see just as well as any other eye. Either In the dark or the brightest day.
I have had them come in the dark throughout the night many times, and won blow homes and hard races with bull eyed birds, not to mention that one of the best stock birds I ever owned also had a bull eye.
I have reached a point now that pictures are a must from here on out so.
When the new kind of scanner arrives this week, hopefully I will be able to post some interesting pictures which demonstrate all the things I have talked about perfectly, and also the pictures of the eye of a double 500 mile L/A Combine winner owned by Lawrence Bauber of the Disneyland Llofts, which shows very clearly the TWO LAYERS of blood veins and capilliaries that make up the iris proper.
Unfortunately this picture also Blows away Bill Richardsons theory of the eye heart cooling thing which it wasn't intended to do but, O Well??? The truth will prevail.
Those at the seminar saw these pictures for the first time but, now you will all see them as promissed together with the single tubed eye's.
Well back to my KMart authority. Those wild pigeons with no eyesign or pigments have been found by Rufus the parking lot cleaner, plastered to the light poles because they couldnt see well enough to know when to dodge. Send him a loupe ASAP. Lets race. Bye BillyT
HA HA HA Yes it is VERY funny isn't it Billy. Actually to me it's more pitifull than comical. Wouldn't you think he'd learn by now? I hope I never go senile. It's gotta be terrible.
Answer to No 23.
I am throwing this answer in because it is so quick and easy that and any real eye-sign man would have known it in a heart beat.
What do the Greens and Violets have in common.
There are in fact two answers to this question both of which are correct.
The first of these is that they both share a common ancestor.
The second being that, you cannot breed one without the use of the other.
In other words. It's like the words of the old Sinatra song. Love and Marriage. You can't have one without the......other. And if you think you can, your only fooling yourself.
The third thing they have in common is that they are both at the "TOP" of the ladder when it comes to breeding better pigeons.
BECAUSE THEY ARE IN COMPLETE "CONTRAST" TO ALL THE OTHER COLOURS OF EYE'S FOUND IN OUR BIRDS.
Answer to No 24.
Name three families that were recognizable by their eye colours.
Sions. Janssens. Bricoux. Jan Ardens. Hansseines. Gurnays. Jurions. Beckearts. Devrendts. Puttries.
So let see if I'm getting you right.
What you're saying is that when the homing pigeon was created, via the original breeds, that these originals posessed violets and greens, but thru breeding were deteriorated to lesser quality eyes?
Claud. there is no better breeder than Mother Nature.
She sorts out the weak and the inferior and eliminates them by all kind's of what appears to us as cruel, but they go on regardless.
Whare there Violet and Greens came from to begin with???? This we will never know but, when you get the time or chance, have a look at any assortment of wild pigeons especially the Smerls and the old English carrier etc, and you'll see what I'm what I'm talking about. Perfection, each and everyone of them. And the same applies to ANY wild bird.
These are the real thoroughbreds. They all look alike to a greater degree of perfection than you and I will ever reach with our systems. But, of course she has much longer to perfect her progeny and, is not controlled by a need to win races.
Did we through incorrect in and line breeding eliminate the Violets and the Greens? I DON'T KNOW BUT, THEY CERTAINLY ARE GETTING HARDER AND HARDER TO FIND???????????????
Which colour is recessive to the other(VIOLET,GREEN)? If you cannot produce one without the other, then one must carry the other???
Bob,
Are the Smerls and English Carriers not man created? And if so, why would there eyes be more consistent than the racers?
The only birds that I would be able to view of that type would have to be man raised. Is this to say that they've retained the eye conformation to this day?
I don't for a second believe that it was in or line breeding that has caused the decline in numbers of such eyes. More so the incorrect breeding.
Just for further clarification. Your saying that one of the parents must have a "green" or "violet" eye in order to produce one? Or, that it simply must be somewhere in the pedigree like the grandparent or great-grandparent?
Also, when you speak of "greens" and "violets", are you talking about Dominant greens and violets? Or is that simply redundant (i think I'm refferencing Bishop on this particular)?
Keep up the good work!
To Pete. That's an eye-sign question for sure. The answer is that. They both will produce each other direct. In other words. The Green will produce offspring which are Violet and visa versa. And this goes on right down to the great great great stage. So you tell me????? It isn't easy to do but, the Violet can be bred back in if it was not too far back in the ancestry. This is why you must keep accurate records of such things.
To Claude.
The first racing birds were developed by Giggot back in the early part of the 18th century.
He used four established breeds to do this. The Smerles the Egyptians, the long and short faced Owl's.
These were developed from their natural state to show standards over the years so, when I say they were man made, I don't actually mean man made from scratch.
The English carrier was developed in the same way from the egyptian carrier which were originally taken to England by the conquering Roman army who used them as carrier pigeons. It is not known how far they would fly them to or from.
What I want to point out is that, you must have the colour in the immediate ancestry of one of the parents in order to reproduce it.
Finally. There is no such thing as dominant Green. It is either Green or it isn't. Violet on the other hand does come in the dominant and the recessive forms.
In breeding and or line breeding does not deminish the eye's but, if the eye-sign is not taken into account when selecting and mating the breeding pairs, the Violets and Greens will eventually fade into the background as will the breeding and foundation eye's.
The best way to release these now DORMANT genes is by outcrossing, which will bring them and a million other things (good and bad) back to the surface???????
Hope this helps you Claude and thank you both for asking.
.... the English carrier was developed in the same way from the egyptian carrier which were originally taken to England by the conquering Roman army who used them as carrier pigeons. It is not known how far they would fly them to or from...
And as they were the first recognised 'Dwellers' here it seems that they might be so. But Ceaser we know / Hannibal used them as carriers. Also Bibical times !!? Long time that - they were used. Babylon / Assyrians etc.
Hence just show what crap the 'Tent Sptter into' Still fortunately not missed -spoke and twallup, regards Belguim being the FIRST to have and develope racing / homing pigeons. Yes they did .. like many others.. put a loft of effort and time into the developement of the birds. But so did many others 100's - 1000's of years earliar.
1600's there were 'Street races here. and who knows how long before. Richard the Queer . Lion Heart / John also had trained homing pigeons etc. Even distances of release points for Hawking. AND the beat goes on.
Bobo you have a following, OOHing and AAHing at your every drool and kissing the brown lips. Now you know we are not enemies. Some quotes fron your seminar. "Sadewater has used the same pictures for 30 years." "Cream of your loft can be determined before flying." "Eyesign is no longer questioned but is mostly believed now." "By eyesign I can probably pick your future winners." "Chambers is wrong on how light penetrates the eye." Believe me, trust me, nothing but eyesign can prove the value of a bird." Are these rational statements or the blather of a demented soul in decline? And you have the balls to say I am senile? Your turn my friend. Lets race. Bye BillyT
In the order they were posted. Roly.
I don't seem able to get your point. The first LONG DISTANCE pigeons were released at the Chrystal palace London by Giggot at the 1848 worlds fair. That is fact, documented and recorded.
I never said that pigeons were not used before that for the carrying of messages etc. The ancient greeks used them also so what are you on about.
The point I obviously didn't get across was that they didn't fly very far.
Giggot changed this and flew them back to Antwerp across the channel 400 miles to Belgium where it all started. 19 Of the 23 released made it home, and from those 19 birds came all our present day racing birds like it or not, that is true.
Billy T. I NEVER called you senile. Why would I do such a thing? Read my post again. I was talking about Muron.
Seminar quotes. I can probably pick your future winners. What's wrong with that statement? I've been doing it for 40 years.
Sadewater has used the same pictures for 30 years I don't think I said that either. But what's the difference if he does? Some of my pictures are old but the story doesn't change. The things we saw back then are the same today.
What I did say was that I am going to try and do in three hours what Sadewater takes about 8 hours to do and guess what, he's right.
You cannot do what I attempted to do in 3 hours. Just as you couldn't read War and Peace in that time.There's too much to tell.
As for Doctor Chalmers and his thoughts on how light enters the eye through the iris. Yes I did say he was wrong and feel strongly that he is and believed that my explanations of why were very clear and easy to understand. Read them again and tell me why and where I'm wrong. That should be easy if your right.
From the SEMINAR text..........Today eye-sign is generally accepted as being an integeral part of the racing pigeon, and today is studied by more people than ever before in the history of the sport. I believe this to be true and see evidence of it every where I go.
I NEVER said that " nothing but eye-sign can prove the value of a bird. I don't know where you are getting this from but it wasn't at my seminar.
What I have said is that. NOTHING can give the pigeon flyer the information that he requires to know that eye-sign can give, or, with the same degree of accuracy AS EYE-SIGN can. And I follow this by quoting the following definition.
Eye-sign is the only visible means by which it is possible to predict the probable capabilities of a racing pigeon.
You must have been at another seminar Billy, because you certainly didn't hear ANY of the things you are saying you did at mine.
Bobo dont want to disparage a friend, but I did take good notes. Review the video. I have exact quotes. But nevertheless You are a friend and I will take your word. Who cares anyway. Check 13 posts up, am I senile or not? If you are going to attack me stand by, I love a fight. I guarantee you a good one. Jim the Magnificant be damned. Lets race. Bye BillyT
Billy scroll back to November 17 12-28 pm. just above this posting.
How you thought I was talking about you is beyond me. Have another look. I think you might have been talking to The resident NIT WIT.
The script I read from has taken many years to compile and has been at every seminar I ever did but, you are definately misquoting me my friend.
I hope someone did record the talk, I would love to hear it to be doubly sure.
Mc BLT,
Which one am I, "OOHing" or "AAHing"?
Be carefull now. Your starting to presume, and though not a sign of senility, still not a favourable trait.
My questioning MrEyeEyeCaptain does not make me a follower. My impression is that he has done some good work. But without error? Sorry.
That's why the probing.
No different than what you do to him, but with the one difference being that I beleive in eyesign. Self taught mind you. Like Bob says, not from the book. Good to read, but must do one's own application. That's why it strikes me as funny when they class eyesign as the short route. In my mind, there's no shorter route than the basket theory. Breed lots, send them off, fill the towns with culls, and the consistent ones I'll breed from, sort of thing. That to me is the easy route!!
Let them up!!
To BoB,
He's got you on the senile gig.
Claude back in the padded cage. You cannot escape the white coats with the net. If you smell a turd hold your nose may be closer than you think. Love a fight. Lets race. Bye BillyT
BLT
Still haven't answered my question, OOHing or AAHing? LOL
Let them up!!
Claude dont dont what you are expecting? What question have I not answered except that you are a poor example of a clone? Lets race. Bye BillyTaylor, 19222 Juergen Rd., Tomball, Tx 77377. billygtaylor@hotmail.com.
Billy T,
"BOBO you have a following, OOHing and AAHing at your every drool and kissing your brown lips."
You were obviously labelling me one of those names, just in humour was wondering which you were labelling me with is all. I must be ready to stand attention, when called my name what ever it may be.
Figured you to have a better attention span. My turn for presuming.
Let them up!!
Sorry Claude, still dont know what you are saying. Be more direct, alheimers cutting in. If you are saying I think you are a dink, Correct.Lets race. Bye BillyT
Mr Eye Sign. I was making a point that Pigeon and their feats were exploited long before the Belguim ans 1848
- The point I obviously didn't get across was that they didn't fly very far. -
Reuter was using them at great distance1
And many other have and had. FACT.
Giggot may well have been the first ORGANISED distance event. I have doubts too, very much so about that.
But His was in compartive recent tine a fore runner of things to come.
In documented history of say Josephius etc. many pointers are shown that distances - greater than 400 miles - were achieved. Infact mostly the historians it seemed that it was JUST a natural event and it didn't need any or much payiny attention too.
To Roly. Then all I can say is that we obviously read different history books. Reuter was in business in the late 18th to the early part of the 19th century and the birds flew in relays of 50 miles. Two birds carrying the same message just in case of mishap.
The duke of Wellingtons bird still holds the distance record of 5000 miles, having flown from Icaboo island off the coast of Africa back to London.
The distance was measured by a straight line on a map but, there was some doubt that the bird would have actually flown that path, because it would have meant flying over the Sahara desert (3000 miles) which would be impossible so, the actual course taken was probably around the coast line, which was more like 7000 miles, the remarkable thing about this was that it was flown by a CARNU (A large breed of table bird, originally bred for eating by Abdule Fasule 400 years earlier) not one of Giggots long distance racing birds.
Foot note
The bird died less than a mile from it's loft after hitting a wire in the fog but, dispite this, it was still attributed with having completed the flight?
Agreed about Reuter... knew it was a relay, but how far I take your word for that... But was nothing to do with Giggots pigeons.... And look at the map from where Hannibals birds flew over the water to his coast line! Or however they achieved this...
Any way the point I am making is that Pigeons ... regardless of species - were used umpteen years before Giggots arse was the size of a button.
The most that can be attributed to him is that in a Organised fete his birds flew 400 miles... So What! He helped put the thought and interest I grant you for many, and that was great. But to think that pigeons weren't and didn't flew them distances is ludicriss.
Answer to No 25.
What is the significance of the Circle of Adaptation and what does it's presence denote.
This eye feature is probably the second most controvercial feature to be found in the entire subject.
Many people actually mistake this circle for being the circle of eye-sign, and I have met several well known pigeon people who are convinced that Bishop was talking about this circle when he discussed the circle of eye-sign??? Of course when asked, these same people admitted that they had never read Bishop and that ends that?????
So just to dispell any more thoughts in this direction, let's look at what the circle of adaptation really is.
I have discussed earlier how the Iris is formed on a base which, when seen to be void of pigment is nothing more than the same brown or black base seen in the bull eye.
This base is in fact the cilliary muscle itself and, if you take the trouble to look at the photos featured on the Bill Richardsons who calls himself the (book) site. you can see quite clearly in the side view of the eye how and what this base really is.
It is simply the thinnest part of the cilliary muscle which expands and contracts around the cornea or(lens)of the eye, forming the outer edge of the pupil.
As was once discribed on this site, this part of the muscle acts like a flange around the Cornea.
On occasions, this flange can be seen to crincle up as it is required to dilate and take on the appearance like a bottle cap effect surrounding the pupil.
Again I say with authority. There is no evidence to support and claims that a bird with eyes that dilate down to a pin point are superior in ANY WAY to the birds that only dilate normally.
Some would have you believe that the birds with the pin point pupils have superior vision to those that don't. THIS IS FALSE INFORMATION and is based on the incorrect understanding that eye-sign has something to do with vision.
EYE-SIGN HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH VISION. With the exception of the brief period when the eye takes on it's coloured appearance from young to adult, A pigeon with poor vision is a very very rare thing and any claims to the contrary are stupid. Always consider the sourse of such rediculous claims.
On other occasions, this same thin wrinkled inner section of the muscle can actually break off at say the 10 O-clock position, through to the 2 0 clock position, and hang down across the pupil appearing like a curtain hanging there.
I have seen it break free at one point only and tear around as far as half wat round the pupil then, hang into the pupil looking like a dark coloured worm or whatever in the pupil.
The circle becomes more obvious as the bird ages and is best seen in the bull eye.
So what does it's presence denote when found in the eye. In a simple word.....N O T H I N G.
There is and never has been any evidence to suggest that only birds with this circle displayed are capable of anything that birds without it are not capable of.
This includes Breeding ability Racing ability or either in the same bird.
I have seen many thousands of birds with this feature, many of which were excellent birds BUT. I have also seen JUST AS MANY good birds WITHOUT IT. It is not, nor ever was an EXCLUSIVE feature to good birds only as has been stated on here by some one who has difficulty knowing what day it is.
The circle of Adaptation only ever get's a mention by those who know better because in some birds it's there but, it's presence means NOTHING.
The same applies to the bottle cap effect that it SOMETIMES takes on and, the splitting into sections of it in older birds, or the breaking off of it etc like I have just discribed.
The birds vision is NOT impared when this breaking off and or splitting into segments occures.
What ever this inner portion of the cilliary muscle does is MEANINGLESS. And you can take that to the bank.
MY ADVISE IS TO IGNORE IT COMPLETELY.
This is the final answer to the 25 EYE-SIGN questions I posted and I wish to point out that that dispite my invitation to ALL (AND ESPECIALLY ONE) professed eye-sign men to jump in and answer any of them. NO-ONE RESPONDED. Now you can decide for your selves as to why but, I think I know??? And the beat goes on.
I was talking to a friend who pointed out that I omitted explain about the family traits and how this could be a family trait in some families.
I don't wish to sound like a big head but to the best of my knowledge, THERE IS NO FAMILY IN EXISTANCE where the C/A is a permanent fixture.
Certainly not any family that I am familiar with and I think I know all the recongized and established ones.
Again I will say, if any of the birds in your family do not have it, IGNORE IT. And NEVER CULL those born without this meaningless circle of adaptation.
It has NOTHING TO DO WITH EYE-SIGN OR A BIRDS ABILITY AT ANYTHING.
Ask those who sing it's praises what their opinions are based on? Then ask if they would cull birds without it. If they tell you NO. Then ask yourself a common sence question. Then why not cull if it's so important as they claim???????THAT'S WHEN YOU WILL REALIZE THAT IT'S TIME TO MOVE ON.
Move on and start listening to those who really know this subject AND DON'T JUST PRETEND TOO. And have the experience and the scores on the board to prove it.
The rest are fakes.
Mreyesign, as I said before, I have not had the privilege of handling birds from all over the world like you but the bottle cap a/c has been in all champion LONG distance birds I have had a chance to glass. No matter the strain. I am not trying to argue, that is just what I have seen.
Yes I too have seen many with it but, as I also said. I have seen just as many without it. And because of this, and having to talk in general terms, I must report what I see as I do move around.
As I have also said in the past, if it is a family trait, then by all means breed to it and watch for it in your birds but, do not generalise the fact as being applicable to all birds.
It is not generally a pre-requisite to flying the long distance races, just as the oval pupil isn't, or the eleven flights in both wings isn't.
I will make it a point to come up and see these 1200 mile birds of yours one day Marvin. As you know I love long distance races. The longer the better.
In the mean time, if you ever get some of them photographed I would love to see them posted on here or, send me some slides which I will gladly pay for and I can include them in my seminar as American 1000 mile eye's together with the Aussie and European 1000 milers. etc.
Mreyesign, I have been playing around with trying to take eye pictures with my digital camera. Like Nick Brent told me it is tempting to call the birds some bad names. It is a lot harder to do than I immagined. Now, there will not be any actual 1000 milers because none of them are still alive. The hen that won me the pool money at the AU Convention is a grandniece of one of them, so her father (nephew of one) may be as close as we can get. As I mentioned before, the airlines quit taking birds when it was going to be over 80 degrees so we lost our source of transportation to the 1067 mile station.
Marvin,
that's the thing about pigeon pictures ... (eyes or normal ones) Patience is what you need LOL. for eye-pictures you also need a good macro function on your digital cam ... and you got to keep both the cam and the bird's head perfectly stable so the cam can take a sharp shot
greetz,
D
Dam it Bob.....Wish I could have met you at the convention....so much to learn so little time.Oh by the way....does any one know if theres a club in Langley...BC......Thanks
Bill Shubbie
DavidB, thanks. Just messed around a little. Maybe I'll get something viewable one of these days.
Bill....check out the CU website...lots of guys that live in Langley...
Well thank you Mr,KING......they may have some competion there very soon......maybe as soon as next year....I;ll check to see who I have to be on the look out for.....different weather there than what I'am used to.....may make a big difference.......would be interesting any ways....fun also...thats the most important part......Thanks again...have heard many great things about you...nice to see you here..
B.C. lived out there for 2 years a long time ago. Now there is God's country. Makes my heart ache thinking about it.
Bill, There's North Rd & Surrey & lots of competition. Chris Peeman's old clubs & I think you have some of Tom Springs birds don't you,he's out there still I think & many more.If you check some of the Canuck Classic results you'll get the general idea. Only a stones throw from the Island clubs & Jeff Mawbey and some guy in need of help called Ali.
Hello Lost
This site will give you some information on North Road club here out west.
You'll have to hop the ferry to the island and have a visit, be glad to show you around.
http://www.pigeon-race.com/pigeon_society.htm
Jeff Mawbey
To Bill Schooobe do. Thanks for the kind words Bill. Yes there is a lot to it and dispite taking 3 hours, I still left quite a bit more out. In fact that was the hardest part deciding what to put in and what to leave out. Not easy. O well it gives me something to write about when the new machine arrives. Glad to see your back and look forward to arguing with you in the future .
Hi Billy Butt
Just finished the eyesign DVD. Very informative. Thanks.
Mike no problem at all glad you liked it. bill
Bill
Are you calling the liberations for the NRRPA trailer this year?
hi mike yes will be doing that task again love it it keeps me going
Jimm Did you get your dvd yet bill
Bill..No sign of the DVD yet..sometimes I think our mailman is a little lack daisy coming down our dead end street..even on nice days..lol
Hopfully it will get here ok..
Bill glad to hear you are the liberater..I think it is one of the most unappreciated jobs going..You are welcome to it..I know you will do a good job.
Hi Bill
Oscar is coordinating the Upper Canada National liberation this year, so he will be in touch with you before the day. It is going to be a great race this year with COC on board again. Lets hope for clear skies and a nice little 5 to 10 kph south wind. Maybe we can set a record for lofts and birds. If the racing keeps going like it has so far, everyone should have lots of birds. Of course there is quite a few race between then and now.