Daryl

My suspended aviaries are lined with cement sheeting to reduce the heat effect and I've had no problem with it. Having said that, and as Kaz said, it's on the ceiling so the edges are pretty much out of reach for chewing anyway.

Did any of the affected batches make it to Australian shelves? Also wondering if anyone on the forum uses this, or any other handrearing formula for their budgies, either as supplementary feeding or to handraise their budgies.

How close to the fence it is will be an issue council will have rules on. Agreed. My council states the aviary has to be a minimum of 1 metre from the fence. However the distance from the front road is to be a minimum of 5 metres and the distance from your own or neighbouring house is up to 25 metres dependant upon the number of birds you keep. Definitely worth tracking down your council website (or visit if the info is not available) to determine if your chosen placement recieves the council tick of approval.

I know this is only a typos or spelling gaff, but ya gotta laugh when trying to picture budgies or birds eating palletts..wooden they get splinters LMAO :D That's what happens, when your spell check,dosn't tell you have put the wrong word. :rolleyes: Pallets: A designer food for wood ducks!

D: I feed pellets as an ADDITION to my birds balanced diet which also consists of seeds (dry and sprouted), vegetables, and assorted mineral additives. BJ: Most show bird breeder are more concerned with progeny production than the long term liver & kidney damage, due to vitamin & mineral overdose. D: That's a pretty broad and sweeping statement and an insult to the people who frequent this forum. It's also contradictory as long term liver and kidney damage is going to prevent progeny production. I am aware of the effects of feeding particular pellets as a sole source of nutrition but that's not what I'm advocating. A quick browse through the posts in this forum will show you that breeders here ARE very concerned with the well being of their birds, some paying more attention to their birds' diet than their own! D: The pellets are offered in a separate bowl on a daily basis. Most of my birds eat the pellets, a few do not so obviously they mustn't taste too bad. BJ: Too bad doesn't mean good. D: So if you went to a smorgasboard buffet and most of the diners ate, say, the roast, your conclusion would be that you still can't tell whether the majority think it tastes good? If a fish slapped you in the head would you know it was a fish? Geez!!! D: I'm not sure why people insist on coming on here and starting threads about how pellets are the work of the devil and nobody should feed them as a single source of nutrition to their budgies. BJ: I'm sure I never said that! D: Your topic heading says "B.J's Pellets or Natural Diet, NO CONTEST". That sounds to me like you're post is discussing a pellet only diet vs a natural diet. You also wrote "why would you force your birds to eat anything they don't like?" D: I note you're in Manchester and I'm not sure how things operate over in the UK, but you're on an Australian forum and for what it's worth i know of NO budgie breeders who feed their birds a diet consisting solely of pellets. BJ: Come on, Australia a big place. There could be some you don't know about. D: Nope, I know them all. ;-) Okay, say I knew about 100 and none of them fed a diet consisting solely of pellets. Do you really think the feeding of pellets as a sole dietary source is that big of a problem in budgie breeders? Personally I only know of 1 guy that replaced seed with pellets as a trial and that was 14 years ago. I don't know if he persisted with that. I tried it myself a few years ago on a small sample of birds for a few weeks and concluded that the birds did better on a diet with pellets plus all the usual stuff (although I sort of suspected that might be the outcome). Typically budgie breeders in Aus (as far as I know) haven't taken on the idea of pellets but parrot breeders here have embraced it in a big way. D:The few of us who use them feed in addition to a balanced diet. BJ: In a balanced diet. Why would you need them? D: You're right, they probably don't need them, but given they've been developed by an avian nutritionist and my birds like to eat them in addition to their non-pellet diet I feel that they may benefit from their inclusion. D:Also, making absurd statements about protein coming from the slaughter house is just downright misleading as your post implies BJ:Your right, I can only speak for pellets manufactured in GB. I worked for 2years in a slaughter house. No doubt Australian pellets are made from prime steak. D: The ingredients list might be a giveaway, especially the little bit of writing on some where it says "contains no animal products". Perhaps some do contain meat products but none of the mainstream ones that I've looked at here contain any meat products. None! D: ALL pellets are the same! That's like saying all cars are **** because you bought a piece of junk from "Dodgy Dan the Car Sales Man". BJ: Funny you should mention cars. The one I have is great but there are at least four identical models that I have spotted with a different manufacturers badge on. D: I think you missed my point. See next para for explanation. D: As with any product it's up to the consumer to determine which product is suitable because unlike the implication in your post, pellets are not all the same. BJ: Well I can't prove they are & you can't prove they ain't. D: No YOU can't, but have you tried using Google? There's a lot of pellets types/brands on the market but I'm not going to fill this post further with countless lists of ingredients. I'm sure some are much better than others too but again that's for the buyer to research and decide. D: One final thing: most pellets contain a mycotoxin deactivator. Do breeders know where their seed comes from and if it's been treated for mycotoxins or even what the dangers of them are? Given our (Aust east coast) wetter climate of the last 12 months mycotoxins are sure to be more prevalent in grains now than in our past drier years. I attended a chook forum last year and questioned the expert pitching his mycotoxin deactivator to the audience about how our budgie seed could be treated. In short, he didn't know. Seeing as you've spent the "latter part of your working life" in "seeds, grain and animal feedstuff" perhpas you would be able to shed some light on how we can decrease the risk of mycotoxin in seed. BJ: Sorry I'm not a scientist. I retired in 1985, but if you know, why don't you tell us? Pellets are like sausages. it's best not to know wots in em! D: If I knew I wouldn't be asking you, lol! That is why I was asking as you've included in your introduction how you've worked in the seed and grain business. I have no experience in this field but found it interesting that when I questioned the "expert" he agreed it could be a problem but wasn't sure what to do about it. Ironically his only suggestion was to feed a foodstuff which contained a mycotoxin deactivator which, lo and behold, are in the pellets I feed! I don't know how effective this approach would be especially since a few of my birds (I'll estimate it'd be about 10-20%) consume little or no pellets. BJ: That was hard work. my typing finger will need a long rest now. Yours No insult intended. B.J. D: I guess in summary you're saying that pellets shouldn't be used as a sole dietary source and on that we both agree. However I feel they have a place offered as a part of my birds diet given the research done by the manufacturer to make it as a "complete diet". I just choose to make my birds' diet a little more complete by also feeding all the traditional stuff. Anyway, I gotta go as I'm going to be late for work if I don't get outside and feed the other animals including the old horse who gets 2 scoops of pellets morning and night. Uh oh, better not start again!!! Have a good day BJ. Cheers.

*sigh* here we go again........ I feed pellets as an ADDITION to my birds balanced diet which also consists of seeds (dry and sprouted), vegetables, and assorted mineral additives. The pellets are offered in a separate bowl on a daily basis. Most of my birds eat the pellets, a few do not so obviously they mustn't taste too bad. I'm not sure why people insist on coming on here and starting threads about how pellets are the work of the devil and nobody should feed them as a single source of nutrition to their budgies. I note you're in Manchester and I'm not sure how things operate over in the UK, but you're on an Australian forum and for what it's worth i know of NO budgie breeders who feed their birds a diet consisting solely of pellets. The few of us who use them feed in addition to a balanced diet. Also, making absurd statements about protein coming from the slaughter house is just downright misleading as your post implies ALL pellets are the same! That's like saying all cars are **** because you bought a piece of junk from "Dodgy Dan the Car Sales Man". As with any product it's up to the consumer to determine which product is suitable because unlike the implication in your post, pellets are not all the same. One final thing: most pellets contain a mycotoxin deactivator. Do breeders know where their seed comes from and if it's been treated for mycotoxins or even what the dangers of them are? Given our (Aust east coast) wetter climate of the last 12 months mycotoxins are sure to be more prevalent in grains now than in our past drier years. I attended a chook forum last year and questioned the expert pitching his mycotoxin deactivator to the audience about how our budgie seed could be treated. In short, he didn't know. Seeing as you've spent the "latter part of your working life" in "seeds, grain and animal feedstuff" perhpas you would be able to shed some light on how we can decrease the risk of mycotoxin in seed.

ask RIP......she both uses this and sells it. That's the Ken Yorke product she sells Yorke The link given above by Jimmy is a free one and quite comprehensive but takes a while to grasp.

Thanks Vicki for posting, I hadn't heard this news which is very sad. A lovely person and a huge loss to the budgie breeding world.

You can get a good look at BIRDREC from the screenshots at the following link at Ken Yorke's site: http://users.tpg.com.au/users/kyorke/p20.htm

Don't let this non-ring event happen to you. Remember the chorus of the following for advice next time:

An awesome result Splat, congratulations. For those that don't know, this is one of the biggest things you can win on the Victorian Show Calendar in the year!

Definitely a pain RIP. YUP! I'm ALWAYS going to honour my high school science teacher and his calling them Mendel Squares so no matter HOW many times you make this point it won't make an inch of difference okay! Well sorry, but ya teacher got this one wrong. Just like trying to explain to some notable budgie breeders that YF is recessive to green and not masked by it, right Good luck. Some people just can't assimilate and prefer to listen to the usual run of the mill BS! When faced with this argument I just ask them to explain to me how YF is masked in both SF and DF and how you breed such birds. That usually stumps them.

The YF is only dominant in the Blue series but recessive in the Green series. Perhaps the question should be as to whether the YF should even be termed a Dominant variety!

Whilst on the topic of "The 50% Rule", I would like to discuss the following: There is no such thing as "my bird is 50% breeder A and 50% breeder B" (or ANY percentage less than 100%), just because you crossed 2 birds, one sourced from breeder A and one from breeder B. I believe this is a constant error perpetuated in auction catalogs and in general conversation. Let me explain my thinking using simple colour genetics with which we are familiar with and in each case I'll relate these back to the statement above. I'll also refrain from using actual breeder names and simply use the terminology Breeder A, Breeder B etc. Case 1: If you breed together 2 pure Light Greens (from breeder A), the offspring will be 100% pure Light Green (ie Breeder A to Breeder A gives 100% Breeder A). Breeding a pure light Green (Breeder A) with a pure Sky Blue (Breeder would, in the generally accepted terminology, give birds which were 50% Breeder A and 50% Breeder B. Given that these offspring (all Light Green/Blue) carry a Green gene and a Blue gene then this appears to be correct. However, what happens when you breed your 50/50 bird to Breeder B (ie a LIght Green/Blue to a Sky Blue)? The resultant offspring would be half Light Green/Blue (ie comprising 50% Breeder A and 50% Breeder and half Sky Blue (100% Breeder . However, using the thinking often used in percentage calculations in auction catalogs and general conversation we would expect this: A "50% Breeder A/50% Breeder B" (Light Green/Blue) bird crossed with "100% Breeder B" (Sky Blue) bird gives offspring which would be termed 25% Breeder A and 75% Breeder B. As you can see this type of calculation is a load of the proverbial you-know-what as, to use the example above, would infer we have a bird which is 75% Breeder B. This is impossible as you can't have a bird which is 25% Light Green and 75% Sky Blue. Case 2: You mate your Breeder A (your Light Green cock) with a Breeder C (which happens to be a Single Factor Dominant Pied Light Green hen) We know that the theoretical progeny of this pairing will be 50% Light Green and 50% SF Dominant Pied Light Green. Again, using the old "averaging of breeders percentages" rule above, you would expect an outcome where ALL of the chick contained 50% Breeder A (ie 50% Light Green) and 50% Breeder C (ie 50% SF DP Light Green). This is obviously a nonsense as it such birds (ie a half of a SF pied) don't exist and the outcome doesn't correlate with the theoretical colour outcome above which shows that half of the chicks are 100% Breeder A and half of the chicks are 100% Breeder C, not a mix of such. Case 3: If you've followed my ramblings so far, well done! Now for a final example: A bird from Breeder B (therefore 100% Breeder , a Sky Blue cock is mated to a bird from Breeder C (our SF Dominant Pied Light Green hen) As most auction catalogs would have you believe, all offspring from this pair would contain genes which were 50% Breeder B and 50% Breeder C. However, the colour outcome would be: half chicks - SF DP Light Green/Blue (ie this seems to be 50% Breeder B and 50% Breeder C, so far so good) half chicks - Light Green/Blue (ie 50% Breeder B, but only half of the Breeder C (the Light Green part) was passed on. How do you define this as a percentage? Half of the Breeder C portion (the pied) is missing!!) Conclusion: The examples given above are relatively simple. Of course from this we could introduce a mix of colours and varieties whose inheritance is recessive, sex-linked or dominant etc in nature and this exercise would become a nightmare. But this is the situation we face when combining the thousands of gene combinations which make up and control the inheritance of the exhibition features we strive to perfect. The percentages are nonsensical as they can't truly be tracked unless we know the inheritance of each specific feature we are trying to control and the makeup of each bird from Breeder X. Which of course we can't. When someone states they have a bird which is 100% Breeder X, what exactly does that mean? What is the definition of a 100% Breeder X bird other than to indicate it was bred by Breeder X? However, did Breeder X breed it from their long line of champion Normals, their developing Pieds, or a pair of outcrosses they themselves purchased? In short, I believe it is pointless stating a bird contains percentages of certain breeders as there is no way this can be proven nor does it actually mean a lot. If it is desired to "name drop" how your stock has been developed then perhaps the more correct way is to simply state only the breeder's name(s) used to create the bird. The real percentages are anyone's guess

I think FordMob has hit on something here. We bleat about loss of numbers in "the fancy" but maybe it's just an image problem. Maybe to get more blokes involved we need a bit of a danger element thrown in, a Fear Factor if you like. You can't sit at the local with a few mates and tell them how you've been pulling spots and trimming vents all day. You'd be laughed out of the Ladies Lounge. That stuff just doesn't do your manliness levels any credibility. Forget about terminology, what we need is meaner birds, dangerous little b@ggers that strike fear in the hearts of even the blokiest blokes as they enter your aviary and see a feathered missile launching itself straight at your nether region. "Crikey, what do you call these things?" "Killer budgies", you proudly reply. Breeding them up to this level shouldn't be too difficult, we've all had the hen that's ripped our hand to to a bl00dy mess as we've gently prised her from her chicks. The task of just feeding them would be a life and death adventure, but you'd just have to harden the @#$# up and face the music at feed time. Soon the demand for the fighting Chuck Norris of budgies would be insatiable. So blokes of Australia, now's the time to take our hobby from "fancy" to "blokey". Killer budgies, you know you want them.