nubbly5

Great job Kaz! You definitey should be in intermediate (if not open) IMO! How many birds were benched yesterday?

Don't apologise nubbly! The whole reason I pasted that info is because, as I said, that is the info I was going off because I felt it was from a trust worthy source. I was HOPING for discussion and clarification if possible. As long as someone can assure me that one or the other type of ivermectin is effective and going to work then i'll be happy. One further question to ask though. How often should we alternate mite/worm treatment products to prevent resistance developing? And what product would we use as an alternate? Cattle pour on is used primarily, so our switch out option would be?? That IS the question Dean. In sheep production there have been many instances of worm drenches becoming ineffective due to over use/poor use. The advise has been varied from double summer drenching (2x drenches in short succession in summer when worm eggs don't survive well on pasture) to the now common advice to do worm egg counting and only drench those sheep that are shedding a large number of worm eggs (indicating a large worm burden present) and this is generally only young stock as older animals tend to bulid a semi immunity/resistance to the worms themselves. All the current worm drenches available for sheep are now no longer fully effective (apart from organophosphate combos) and strategies for rotation are implemented on a yearly basis. Sheep lice have also developed resistance to most of the chemicals available to treat them and rotation strategies are only just being discussed at farm level now with the scientific community undecided on the best approach. For cattle treatment, widescale drenching is only usually practiced on youngstock (the most susceptible to worm burdens) with adult stock rarely treated. This has left most cattle drenches still effective. For horses routine 6 weekly worming treatment has lead to widespread resistance to every available worming product (whites, clears and mectins). So it seems that the more selection pressure you place on the pest the faster you force the population to evolve. Thinking about it, if you drench hard the only pests you leave behind are those that are resistance or maybe just semi tolerant so the harder you select out the susceptible individuals, it becomes quite obvious that the NON SUSCEPTIBLE pests are the only ones left behind to multiply and presto you have a resistant population. Thats all nice but it doesn't help us much. I have never really heard of a reasonable product rotation developed for bird treatment and the trouble comes for when trying to find something else to rotate to. Each family of chemicals must be considered together i.e. all mectins, all white drenches (called bz's), all clear drenches. There are different actives that belong to the same family and rotating between these is not actually rotating at all as chemicals affect the pests in the same way and therefore a cross resistance develops. So for rotation sake ivermectin is the same as abermectin is the same as moxidectin etc. From what I can see we have little to nothing to rotate to. For mites and lice we can rotate between SP's (synthetic pyrethroids (AIL, fly sprays and surface sprays are all SP's) or ivermectin. I have not seen any other compounds that can be used in birds. OP's (organophosphates) are not suitable as birds are extremely sensitive to them (as one of our forum members found out when using a cattle spot-on whose active is an organophosphate and lost almost every bird that they treated). For worms I think that there are only 2 different compounds available, a clear drench (piperazine or something like that) that I've seen in pet shops and ivermectin in the many different forms that we use. Does not leave too much choice really. The best bet would be to monitor the effectiveness of worm treatment by doing pooh samples or sending away pooh samples to see if your worming program is still effective. And maybe rotate your chems once every year or two to break up the selection pressure a bit. Maybe figuring out if, like other animals, it's just the young stock that is more affected by worms and using treatments for them only. The trouble is that production systems that make $ for the economy are always going to get better research $ that the budgie hobby. Hey it was amazing enough that one PhD student wanted to do her thesis on French moult otherwise we'd all still be trying to point the finger at moths or mites or genetics and not know that it is in fact a virus.......... Oh and Randmness best bet is you get a price from your local store - ring for a price quote and ask for the cost of the smallest pack they have. As it is this will treat many budgies for a long time so maybe better to go the vet route anyway. Ring both and see the price difference. The vet will charge you a standard consult plus whatever extras they decide to put on (cost of ivermectin plus margin etc) but lots of different vets have lots of different consult prices. Or you could contact a budgie club near you and see if they might be willing to sell you some ivermectin treatment..........

Hey GB I think things get a bit confused when we dicuss sky violets cobalt violets etc. But I understood the sf to be explaining the violet portion not the cobalt portion so the bird in question was cobalt AND sf violet. So from my point of view it's easier to say something like sky df violet (menaing a skyblue bird with 2 violet genes) or muave sf violet (meaning a mauve bird with 1 violet gene). So for me the cobalt sf violet is a way more accurate way of saying visual violet. If I'm off on completely the wrong track here I'm hoping Jen will set me straight!

Because the amount they would sell to bird owners compared to the many thousands of dollars that it would cost them to register the product specifically for budgies is not worth the effort. Besides we all use it now registration or not so in effect they would not really be gaining extra sales dollars by doing so.

Two bottom ones look like olives but could also possibly be violet dark greens but with the violet coming from the cobalt side this is less likely (that crazy linkage thing). Dark purple cheek patches and grey green shade to body colour would indicate more likely olives but they can sometimes be a bit tricky. With mum being a Cobalt SF Violet (which you definitely CAN get - also called a visual violet) it's possible to get light green, dark green and olive in the same nest when paired to a dark green dad. Shame dad does not seem to be split blue or might have got some more violets. Oh and cobalt violets LOOK violet. This is the combination you need to aim for to get the best violet colour as the violet modifier (especially if it is a df violet but still with sf violets) combines best with the colbalt to give you that nice rich violet colour (visual violets in other words).

Ivomec sheep drench is not water soluble it's solvent based - that's one of the issues with it if you use it as a bird oral treatment. As one of our previous threads shows: http://forums.budgiebreeders.asn.au/index....showtopic=24762 Cattle pour-on is also solvent based but is used undiluted. Bird specific ivermectins are water based for flock treatment in water. All ivermectins must be protected from sunlight. Also there are subtle differences between products registered in different countries so while our Ivomec sheep drench in Aus is solvent based and undilutable in water (as is the US formula) NZ may well be different. Just been to Argentina where there are different forms of Ivermectin again to what we have here in Aus. Sorry to be pedantic Dean but this IS my field - I deal with animal health products every day of my working life and although I don't specifically sell Ivomec I am well aware of the product (many of the available generics) and the different ranges available as they compete with products that we market. And yes worms and any pests can build resitance to chemicals and drugs - cocci, worms, lice, mites you name it.......

Okay so we can't get this yourself than from a Rural shop without the Vet's okay first...? Is that right... :hap: Because I thought the product that was named up top was this... http://www.nrrbs.com.au/animalhealthivomec.htm *scratches her head in confusion* Sorry to confuse LB. There is a specific reason that I'm being a little evasive and that is because TECHNICALLY (as I mentioned in the first post in this thread) the ONLY person LEGALLY allowed to USE a product in a manner than otherwise stated on the label is a qualified vet. THEY LEGALLY can only supply the product to you if they have first seen your animal OR have a working knowledge of your flock (that's why some will request a poo sample before sending vet script only drugs to you) before they can sell the product to you on script. You can then use the product on your animals in the manner outlined by your vet. BUT you CAN LEGALLY walk into your farm merch shop and purchase Ivomec Pour-ON, Baymec Pour-ON, Cydectin Injectable for cattle and sheep without the need for a vet script as the product is registered to be "free sale" which means no script needed. So all you need is your money. They will not ask you WHY you are buying it or want to see your animals as they have no legal requirement to do so. The slightly tricky part is that formally advising you to do this and then use the product on your birds is TECHNICALLY ILLEGAL as is you using it on your birds. As is purchasing a big pack and decanting the product into smaller bottles for resale as many many clubs do due to the cost savings involved. Luckily it's not actually POLICE illegal just operating against the laws and regulations laid down by Australia's Agchem regulation authority and chasing a few budgie clubs it probably not on their radar (or more likely they are unaware of the practice - hoping this does nothing to change that). Hope that clears things up somewhat.

I just hope it's used as a spot-on and not orally. Read here: http://forums.budgiebreeders.asn.au/index....showtopic=24762 After speaking with a Norbrook rep whilst we were both killing some down time on our repective trade displays I asked him about what is best to use and my post reflects what he said. Sheep Ivomec is designed to be used ORALLY on sheep and therefore does not have some of the same ingredients that make it easily absorbed through skin as does the cattle pour-on products. He also commented that quite a few bird owners also use the injectable form of ivermectin but he was also of the opinion that due to it's design to be used as an injectable, that the pour-on would be the best formulation to translocate both around the birds feathering as well as penetrate into the skin. The only way you'd be able to determine the difference in effectiveness would be to do a worm egg count but then if you are getting satisfactory mite control then at least you know that at least one pest is being effectively controlled then you'd just have to guess at the worms side of things I suppose! GB if you are happy with what you have and it's giving you good effectivity on mites at least then all's good. The main issue I have is that purchasing from vets is expensive and unecessary (usually) as they generally want to (and legally need to as the product is not registered for budgies (but maybe ausmectin is I'm not aware of this product - will look)) give you a script for the product but it's freely available at farm merchandise stores very cheeply. Also after discussing with product rep determined that pour-on is the best product by design. This does not mean that other forms will be completely inneffective. Just found Ausmectin..... just another generic Ivomec (copy in other words). Not registered for budgies so vet would still have to provide it on scripted basis and Leanne by law they have to see your animal (or have a working understanding of your flock) before they will provide a script - that's the law too!

Damn it! Missed this thread altogether or I would have put some on her. Great to hear that she's running well. Did you have a dabble RIP?

Sad though. This is the whole point of peer reviewed information - so that you don't end up publishing rubbish just like this. Then the www came along and let people publish whatever fantasies and bullsh*t that came into their head. Sigh. At leaset we know better but some people don't and would stumble across this website on a search (as I did). Mind you this site is soooooooo confusing that you probably would not get much usable information out of it anyway....... even if it weren't so completely incorrect. Had to have another read . Poor ole Eric gives himself away in the very first paragraph "much like little parrots".......... um yes because the ARE little parrots!!!!!

You need to be very gentle! Break the sheath bit by bit rather than trying to rub and break the whole lot off in one rub. I do get some feathers come out too but have refined my technique enough that I don't lose too many! The only need to wait really is if the quill is still blood filled. If you don't then you end up with bleeding messes.

Here is another bit that made me giggle. "One of the problems of the modern Dominant Pied is that the colour in the body has become very irregular. This will have to be seriously dealt with in the near future, to prevent the bird reverting back to a normal."okay I get the irregular body colour but reverting to a normal......... pelease! There is plenty to wonder about in this website. As I can't cut and paste (otherwise I would post more pearlers from here) I will give you the whole website address to have a look at. There are some nice Pied quotes there too! http://www.angelfire.com/ak/whisperingwings/page2.html. Mods please remove this if it's not appropriate to post the addy.

Funnily enough there was no e-mail address to contact - maybe they just put this stuff up for fun?.............. BUT I also could not copy to paste into post. I had to screenshot, type and then copy....... what on earth would you protect that (un)intellectual property for I had to ask.

I found this pearler of a website filled with amazing information about budgie varieties. I think someone has been smoking something or woke up from a vivid dream and decided to write about it! With information like this out there and the gullibility of the general public these days, how can beginners be anything but totally confused. A little excerpt: "As clearwings are recessive, most birds will produce either dark or light babies. One of the problems of this variety is, that unless the fancier knows the background of his or her birds, then suffused or diluted babies will be produced. As in all forms of budgerigar, there are light, medium and dark in all colours. If two birds of the light group are paired together, then very weak-coloured birds will be produced. If two dark-coloured birds are paired together, then the bird is known as a double factor Clearwing." All I could think was "What the........"

From what I can figure out it ( dom pied spangle ) would be shown as spangle ? okay Kaz..... what made you say spangle? (this question is because I'm interested not critical if your answer!) Probably because I couldnt locate my copy of the standard and it was late and I was tired Hahahaha! The reason I asked you to work it out was that my standard was still in the car, it was late and I couldn't be bothered to go and get it to check if they were allowable combinations

I use a generous "squeeze" of shampoo (might be 10 mls or similar) to 5-6 litres of water. And yes a complete dunk and sometimes if the bird is really grotty (white lacewings are a prime example) I will suspend the bird (head out) in the water to allow a bit of flapping self-washing to occur. For just a few seconds though. And yes they do sometimes come up spluttering. I like to have a pet shammy close to hand to wipe away excess water so birds don't breath in water!

From what I can figure out it ( dom pied spangle ) would be shown as spangle ? okay Kaz..... what made you say spangle? (this question is because I'm interested not critical if your answer!) From what was written before first you have to check if the combination is an allowable one. So on page 24 of the standard you check the combinations section at the bottom. Its a dom pied and a spangle. Dom pied is class 15, spangle is class 14. If it IS allowable then the bird is entered as the highest class - so dom pied (15). Check the dom pied entry and go along the line of combinations. If 14 (spangle) appears in the line (which it does) then it is an allowable combination. If it does not as for the case with say a Dom pied lacewing combo then the bird is a non standard variety (or in actual fact a non standard combination of varieties). Yes Dave I agree it was a lovely bird and why it got second in a class of 6 or so and not last. I tossed up for some time about giving it first place but the bird that I finally put up was a great bird too - both had different faults - bigger and a better outline and better marked but not quite as well feathered facially as this fellow. I have to admit to really liking bird with mordern faces - good directional feather, good width of head and wide deep masks. I have to actually make sure I look at the bird as a whole and consider outline, deportment, etc etc. It's probably why I took time to really ponder this bird - I loved his head and face features! Like I said, not often seen in rec pieds........

Yes, I have to admit to being a little bit crud at spot removal,particularly if I'm in a hurry AND it's only a small show. And then there is the balance betwenn cleaning up the mask and making big holes in it (people may have seen this particularly on cinnamons). I try for a balance and sometimes make a conscious decision to leave a few in so that the mask is not completely denuded. For the Nationals I actually don't despot at all as I prefer much more skilled bird despotters to do the job (the carers). I don't think it restricts their chances of getting into the team too much and certainly reduces the risk that one of my birds will go with only 3 main spots. In fact WABC tell exhibitors that if they prefer not to despot it will not count against their bird but in some cases it can affect the balance of the bird (visually).......

Check your standard Kaz, then give us the answer!

In the past I have often been asked (even by serious open competitors) how I get my birds looking in their prime for shows. I thought I would share with BBC show members how I go about making my birds look their best for the big day. The washing technique was demonstrated by Tim Tassi (from Plunket and Tassi fame) a few years ago when he visited SWBC. For the nationals I start this process 3 weeks in advance. For a table show it may only be a couple days prior. Last show was the day before the show as I was away with work before that First step: Pin feather removal. There are many different ways of breaking pin feather coverings. I rub the feather sheath between my fingernail and thumb to break the sheath and the gently rub between my fingers to remove the feather sheath completely. Stay clear of blood quills. You might need to do this several times over a few days if the bird has a few blood quills. If you break a blood quill, wait until the bleeding stops completely and then wash (or rewash as the case my be) the birds head. Second step: Bucket washing. Requires 2 buckets, boiling water and cold water, shaving brush, baby shampoo, clean dry towels, clean show cages or holding cages in warm area away from draughts. Boil water and pour a portion into both buckets, add cold water until water temp is good baby's bottle temperature - not too hot and not too cold. Add baby shampoo to one, keep other for rinsing. Dunk budgie quickly into water and use shaving brush to wash feathers and head as required, make sure you don't drown the bird by holding it underwater long, a quick dunk or two and then use the brush. Rinse in clean water bucket in the same manner and then quickly dry off in clean towel and put budgie into draught free cage to dry. Step three: Despotting This is tricky if you have not had any practice. Take a good pair of flat tweesers and carefully pluck out extra spots and shadow spots. You need to make sure you know which the main spots are and be careful not to pull these out (obvious I know). I do this after washing as despotting agravates the skin around the spot feathers sometimes loosening the remaining feathersand the extra weight of the water can make the drop out too, losing some main spots. If there is anything I can advise here is that you practice on nonshow birds in your aviary to get the techinique that works for you. I often gentle blow on the spot feathers to separate them other feathers so I can be more sure of which feather I have gripped in the tweesers. Step four: Spraying When preping for the nats I use boiling water in a spray bottle with some apple cider vinegar and a tiny amount of glycerine (only a couple mls of each to 500mls boiling water), then on very fine spray so the water cools before getting to the bird, I spray until the water runs off. I try to do this daily but due to work committments it varies. As the birds feather condition improves (due to the washing and extra preening it promotes), the water tends to slick off more than make the feathers wet. This is a sign that the bird is in prme feather condition. I don't worry about this step for table shows. I do NOT pull tails or flights any more. Had bad experiences with them not growing back so it's all up to fate these days if the tails are in or not at the time. BUT I do move my budgies to try and promote a full moult well prior to when they need to be growing new tails etc. This seems to work well for me so far. Just to show you the difference that bucket washing alone can make (this was the day before yesterdays SWBC show) I present Holy S*%t and Holy C$#p. Notice the extra volume that the washing gives to frontal feathers - nice! Ignore the slightly bodgy despotting effort too (at least I managed to NOT pull out any main spots for a change....

If they are an allowable combination (you have to check your standard for this - the matrix section) then the bird is always entered into the class with the highest class number. I have to admit to scurrying off to check my standard to make sure that the combo of rec pied and spangle was indeed allowable. I thought it was when I judged them but I wantd to make 100% sure .

It had to go in recessive pied - no other choices! The bird must be entered into the variety class that has the largest number (unless it was a hen of course and then it could have been entered as a hen instead). I was judge yesterday but called on Cec and Gary when I needed. I judged the bird and the class in question yesterday. It was a great solid bird but it was more solidly marked than it appears as the spangle markings remove some of the black from feathers that would ordinarily be fully black so does it have too much marking for a recessive pied???? If it was actually normally marked instead of spangle it definitely would have appeared heavily marked. Difficult question at the time and one that did ultimately affect my judgement of the class. The bird I put in first place was also a strong bird but better marked for a recessive pied. It was Gary's bird as I found out later and knowing the quality of Gary's spangles I can understand why he would put them into his rec pieds. As a dominant variety at least it won't be hiding anywhere, it's either there or it's not there and that's that. Gary asked me if I found it more difficult to judge the bird with spangle markings. I had to answer yes for the reason I stated above. If you look at where the actual marked feathers are and then imagine them fully black this rec pied, although a strong contender is too heavily marked. It was actually a really strong class with about 6 or so open grade birds to judge against each other - unusual for rec pieds in WA. And to answer Kaz - I would have been tempted to enter it too it was a solid bird with directional feather and head qualities not often seen in rec pieds.

If the cock was not all that well and had to be treated that can definitely affect chick health and livability. Even if the hen herself is not affected they can both pass anything onto the baby chicks when feeding them and they are pretty fragile little things. But your overall results are astonishing - very satisfying I would imagine. Will be exciting to see how all the babies develop! Good job!

I use (currently Noromec Pour-On for cattle due to price competitiveness) 2-3 times per year over my entire flock. I do a once a year full stock take of all birds - catch check ring number to records, handle bird and check for any issues, apply spot-on treatment and release. This way I do a routine worming and my birds stay clear of scale and feather lice. Have never had a scale problem in my aviary since starting this routine. Although I have heard that it's possible for any animal to have an allergic reaction (anaphalactic shock - spelling?) when treated with Ivomectin I have had no adverse affects from Ivomec treatment of my birds (even multiple drops accidently squeazed out of dropper!). Although you might see the birds fluffing and scratching the site of application directly following treatment I have found this to be a normal reaction and transient.

Yes dave that's right. Green, YF and blue are all on the same allele so a visual yf could be yf/b or yf/yf (what we normally call single factor yf or double factor yf).