News and Articles

Avian Influenza (‘Bird Flu’) and Pigeons

Gordon A Chalmers, DVM

Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada

Email: gacdvm@telus.net

The current worldwide concern about the spread of Avian Influenza among humans and poultry in southeast Asia also has many pigeon fanciers interested in the role of pigeons, especially racing pigeons, in this serious disease. On the basis of these concerns, it seems appropriate and timely to take a look at this disease, and to provide important recent information for the benefit of fanciers.

Influenza has been known since 1878, and is caused by a Type A influenza virus. There are three types of influenza viruses, namely A, B & C. Type A viruses have been recovered from humans, swine and horses, and occasionally, from birds and other mammals. Types B and C are usually isolated only from humans. The virus currently infecting in birds in southeast Asia is a Type A influenza virus.

Thousands of influenza viruses belonging to many subtypes have been recovered from domestic and avian species over the world. Infections in domestic or confined birds have been associated with several forms of the disease, ranging from inapparent to mild upper respiratory disease, to loss of egg production, through to acute fatal disease. At present, Avian Influenza is recognized in two forms: 1) Highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), also called Fowl Plague, and 2) Low pathogenic avian influenza. (LPAI)(‘Pathogenic’ refers to the ability of an infecting agent to produce disease – hence, a virus that is highly pathogenic is capable of producing severe disease and often, acute death.) The highly pathogenic form spreads rapidly among flocks of poultry and is often highly fatal. It has been noted that one gram (about 1/30^th of an ounce) of contaminated droppings from infected chickens can contain enough highly pathogenic virus to infect 1,000,000 birds. Conversely, the low pathogenicity form generally causes only mild disease.

In general, free-flying wild birds do not develop significant disease following infection with influenza viruses, but infections are widespread in many of these birds. It is particularly important to note that influenza viruses are readily recovered from migratory waterfowl, especially ducks, over the world. There is a great deal of speculation about the importance of this very large reservoir of influenza viruses in wild birds. This reservoir may serve as a source of viruses for other species, including humans, lower mammals, and birds. The high rate of infection allows for the maintenance and emergence of new and potentially highly dangerous strains, by means of mutation and/or genetic reassortment.

Species of birds that become infected with the virus of Avian Influenza, shed it from the respiratory tract, from the eyes, and in droppings. Spread of the virus can occur by means of droplets of liquid sneezed by infected birds, or in their droppings. Vehicles, equipment, cages, clothing, and insects in contact with these infective droplets, or with droppings from infected birds, are ready means of spread.

Now, what is the role of pigeons in Avian Influenza? To answer that question more fully, we can look at some past examples of outbreaks of the disease in poultry in North America, plus the current one in Asia, and the tests that were conducted on pigeons collected from areas in which the disease occurred.

In late 1992, antibodies to Avian Influenza were found in blood samples from a commercial flock of turkeys in the northeastern USA. (Note that antibodies are protective substances that are produced by the defensive network of the body in response to an infection). Investigation showed that there was a possible association between this flock and live bird markets. An influenza virus designated H5N2 was isolated from birds in one location. State jurisdictions were concerned by this situation and took both control and eradication measures when appropriate. Public poultry markets, shows and exhibitions were quarantined and premises on which the virus were isolated and depopulated.

Because of the very great concern by state and federal officials for the health and economics of the poultry industry in several jurisdictions in the USA, racing pigeons were included under the umbrella of domestic poultry, and accordingly, racing was banned in a number of concerned states. To date, however, the body of scientific evidence indicates strongly that pigeons are not involved in the transmission of Avian Influenza to domestic poultry.

During an outbreak of Avian Influenza (H5N2) nine years earlier (1983-84), again in the northeastern USA, scientists conducted a survey of wildlife to determine the potential of wild birds to spread disease locally among farms, or to carry the virus to more distant locations. Included in this survey were 1) wild and free-flying domestic ducks and geese, 2) wild or free-flying domestic birds closely associated with poultry farms, poultry manure, or poultry carcasses, 3) mice and rats found inside and around houses containing infected poultry, and 4) wild birds of any species reported sick or dead within the quarantine zone.

Tracheal (windpipe) and vent swabs from birds, and lungs from mice and rats were examined for virus. As well, in some instances, toes from birds and rodents were also collected for the same purpose. When feasible, blood samples were also obtained from birds and small rodents. Attempts to isolate virus were conducted on 4,132 birds and rodents collected within the quarantine zone. Included in this number were 473 pigeons (92.6% of these pigeons were obtained from known infected farms), 81 pigeon feet (all of them from influenza-affected premises), and seven mourning doves. None of the 4,132 samples was positive for influenza virus. Blood samples from 2,147 non-aquatic birds, including 383 pigeons, were negative for antibodies to Avian Influenza – an indication that infection by this virus had not occurred in these birds. An additional 313 birds, including 50 pigeons, collected from the quarantine zone, were also negative for influenza virus. It is important to note that experimental attempts to infect pigeons with this strain of Avian Influenza did not result in either multiplication of the virus in these pigeons, or evidence of antibodies in the blood. The results of all of these studies indicated that pigeons were not infected with Avian Influenza and did not spread it.

In the 1993 outbreak in the USA, in the period from February to May, blood samples were collected from 17 flocks of meat varieties of pigeons, mainly White Kings located within the quarantine area, for evidence of antibodies to Avian Influenza. Flock sizes varied from 2000 - 3000 birds, and represented a total of about 34,000 - 51,000 birds. Approximately 10 birds per flock were sampled, for a total of 160 birds. In every instance, all pigeons tested were negative for antibodies to Avian Influenza.

Another study published in 1996 on the susceptibility of pigeons to Avian Influenza, found that groups of pigeons inoculated with two strains of highly pathogenic influenza virus or two strains of nonpathogenic virus remained healthy during the 21-day trial period, did not shed virus, and did not develop antibodies to this disease – further evidence that pigeons are not a factor in the spread of this disease,

Experimental work in 2001/02 has shown that pigeons infected experimentally with the highly pathogenic form of the virus (designated H5N1, and of Hong Kong origin) did not develop signs of this disease and did not have detectable changes to this disease in their tissues. As well, virus was not found in their tissues and neither was it re-isolated from swabs of tissues. These findings indicated once again that pigeons (along with starlings, rats and rabbits used in these studies), are largely resistant to infection with this virus.

Even more recently in late July, 2005, in response to concerns about reports that school children in Thailand had become ill with the H5N1 strain of virus following exposure to pigeons, Dr David Swayne, Director of the Southeast Poultry Research Laboratory, USDA/ARS, Athens, Georgia, USA, wrote to me by Email, as follows, quote:

"Dr. Kaleta (Germany) recently published a review of Avian Influenza (AI) in pigeons and concluded, as I also believe, that pigeons are resistant to avian influenza viruses and have not been a reservoir or vector of the virus. Other studies have supported the resistance of pigeons to AI virus infections. Some people have confused die-offs in pigeons to avian influenza when paramyxovirus type 1 is a common cause of neurological disease and death in pigeons, and not avian influenza.

We have conducted experimental studies in pigeons using viruses isolated from dead pigeons in Thailand. Even direct inoculation of these viruses into nasal cavity of pigeons caused limited infections with between 60-80% of the pigeons not becoming infected. This suggests the mortality from H5N1 HPAI virus in pigeons may have resulted from synergy between AI infection and some other pathogen.

The ’illness in school children’ is an unsubstantiated rumor. No AI virus was isolated from the children and I am unaware of any evidence of infection.

With this scientific information, it is unlikely that banning pigeons will have any impact on AI ecology and will not reduce the risk of AI infections of poultry or humans. The primary species that have natural infections with AI viruses are wild ducks and shorebirds (turnstones, gulls, etc.). Columbiformes (pigeons) and passerines (in general, songbirds) are not reservoirs and they are rarely incidental hosts following spill-over of the viruses from infected domestic poultry." Unquote.

The aforementioned findings indicate that although 60-80% of inoculated pigeons did not become infected, 20-40% developed slight infections. Such observations indicate that pigeons can become infected with the strain of H5N1 virus used in these experiments.

Guan et al (2000) studied three H9N2 viruses isolated from pigeons, Japanese quail or chickens but did not find signs of illness or internal changes, but did observe the presence of antibodies in inoculated pigeons.

Kaleta and Hönicke (2004) conducted a review of scientific literature on influenza viruses in pigeons and concluded that pigeons play only a minor role in the epidemiology of H5 influenza viruses. By contrast, these workers found that H7-infected pigeons can multiply and excrete H7 viruses, and develop circulating antibodies. These authors also stated: "The molecular basis for the discrepancies of susceptibility of pigeons to H5 and H7 viruses are presently not well understood. It is also not clear why pigeons are definitely more resistant to infection with highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses as compared to chickens and turkeys."

Despite some of these reassuring findings, fanciers should be aware of the possibility that if a returning race bird, or any wild bird for that matter, drops into a poultry farm on which the chickens are infected with Avian Influenza, it could pick up the influenza virus on its feet or feathers as it walks through droppings from these infected chickens. If this bird were to fly to another poultry farm, in theory it could be a mechanical means of spreading the virus to chickens on the second farm. The importance of this fact is that Type A influenza viruses can remain viable for long periods at moderate environmental temperatures, for four days in water at 22^oC (72^oF), and for over 30 days at 0^oC (32^oF). However, as noted in earlier studies, the feet of pigeons collected from affected poultry farms were examined for influenza virus and all were found to be negative.

As well, given present concerns about H5N1, fanciers should be very cautious. If necessary, fanciers should be prepared for a complete LOCKDOWN of their birds – no loft exercise, no access to aviaries, no shows, no loft visits, no exchanges of birds, no contact with poultry farms – and no racing. Our birds can live to race another day!

Given this information from the scientific literature, it is important to note the fact that pigeons are seldom infected by these viruses, but there are exceptions to this fact.

The reasons for the understandable caution and concern by regulatory agencies when they are faced with outbreaks of Avian Influenza include the fact that it can be a very costly disease. For example, the US government spent over $60 million in 1983-84 to eradicate a highly pathogenic H5N2 virus in poultry flocks (both chickens and turkeys). As well, current worries surround the concern that the H5n1 virus could mutate to infect large numbers of pigeons -- and much worse, that it might also spread widely to infect and transfer human to human.

Mask and Trailer

By

Nigel Lane

I have been asked on several occasions recently to write a book about long distance pigeon racing. The person who asked me, it was only one person, doesn't think I know much about long distance racing it is just that he thinks I should have picked up some good pointers from members of the NRCC when I have been talking to them over the past months. So lets have a go.

Long distance pigeon racing.

Chapter One.

The two most essential pieces of equipment.

The two most essential items of equipment for anybody taking up pigeon racing or anyone already established in the sport are a Mask and Trailer. Why? Well just to ensure you live long enough to enjoy your pigeons. I can hear cries coming from the back and tales of how "I've been involved in pigeon racing for the past 150 years and every morning before breakfast I've taken them out for 3 twenty mile tosses carrying the baskets on my back and then got back to do a full days work before nightfall without any damned trailer or mask." Well gentlemen, if that's you, all I can say is congratulations and well done but of course its not you that I am really appealing to. What concerns me is the crowd of flyers who do not join in your chorus of condemnation because they cant draw enough breath to speak, what concerns me is the sale after sale advertised by people leaving the sport because of pigeon lung, what concerns me is the number of flyers who have already passed on, prematurely, because of lung disease and heart attacks brought on by our sport. Make no mistake PIGEON RACING CAN DAMAGE YOUR HEALTH but, by the same token, pigeon racing NEED NOT BE A DANGER to anyone.

Pigeon lung.

As I hope you all know Pigeon Fanciers Lung (PFL), a form of Extrinsic Allergic Alveolitis (EAA), is an allergic reaction to pigeon protein. But what exactly does that mean? Well let's start at the beginning. We have to breath to live. We have to breath because we have to supply oxygen to our blood. We have to supply oxygen to our blood so that it can carry it to all the various parts of our body that cannot function without it. If our brain, for example, is denied oxygen for only a few seconds it will suffer damage that cannot be repaired and if this lack of oxygen continues for only a short time longer the brain will cease to function altogether. Many of you may think that this is a normal state for pigeon fanciers and though I accept that the symptoms may be similar the conditions are very different. How then does oxygen get into the blood? We breath in air, which contains the oxygen, through our mouth and preferably through our nose. Why preferably through our nose? Because here we have the first line of defence, that the body has created, against unwanted intrusions to our system. The tiny hairs lining the nose filter the air we breath and prevent some of the dust and other particles entering our bodies. There will be a lot more to say about dust and filtering later. The air we breath is carried down a tube called the trachea into the chest. Inside the chest that tube branches into two smaller tubes, the bronchi, which carry the air into the lungs where it continues to pass through a series of tubes, the bronchioles. They continue branching into smaller and smaller tubes until each ends in a tiny air sac, the alveoli, a minute ball smaller than a pin point so small you cannot see one with the naked eye and yet, as each adult has over 300 million alveoli in their lungs, if you could lay them all out flat they would cover the size of a tennis court. It is this mass of tubes and tiny air sacs that gives lungs their spongy feel.

While air is passing through these tubes blood, hopefully, is being pumped through a similar tube system. A system so large that if all the tubes were laid out end to end they would extend for over 100,000 miles. It starts out in the large arteries leaving the heart and is pushed along continually branching and diminishing sized tubes until eventually it reaches very fine hair like vessels, the capillaries. Capillaries are spread all over the body and it is here that the oxygen passes through their very thin walls into the body parts that need it. Just as oxygen is passed over to the body so Carbon Dioxide, a waste product created when the body uses oxygen, is passed back to the blood which carries it back to the heart. We tend to think of our heart as a pump but really of course it is two pumps serving two separate systems. The largest of these pushes blood round the body distributing oxygen and collecting carbon dioxide while the smaller works on a much shorter but equally important journey carrying that carbon dioxide to the lungs and bringing oxygen back to the heart. It is in the lungs that the blood, now in capillaries, comes alongside alveoli. Oxygen, from the breathed in air, passes through the walls of the alveoli into the blood and carbon dioxide is passed back. The oxygen enriched blood is carried to the heart to be pumped round the body while the carbon dioxide returns through the bronchioles to be breathed out. During this process, even while the body is at rest, about 8-10 pints of blood are pumped by the heart each minute and about 12 pints of air exchanged. When the body is working hard these volumes rise dramatically. So, even in relaxed times, the body requires a lot of air, demands a lot of oxygen and needs a lot of blood to carry it round.

How do pigeons affect these systems?

I started by stating that PFL is caused by an allergic reaction to pigeon protein. At the mention of protein we think of food proteins but there are many, many proteins which carry out an enormous range of tasks in the body. The human body has over 30,000 types of protein working in a whole variety of ways. The pigeon protein, that is concerned here, is carried mainly in pigeon bloom, droppings and other dusts. You will all know of pigeon bloom and will have seen clouds of dust coming from your pigeons when they shake and groom themselves. You see the bloom because you are looking at thousands upon thousands of particles together with pieces of dead skin and other debris but the particles of bloom themselves are very small so small that you cannot see one on its own. Each particle is less than 5 microns and a micron is just 1/1,000th of a millimetre. So it is here in the bloom, mainly, that we get the harmful protein. It is not difficult to see that when you are in the vicinity of your pigeons, in the loft, at a show or sale or anywhere in close proximity you will be breathing in these tiny particles of dust. Even if you breath through your nose particles this small will pass through the natural filter system and find their way into your lungs and the alveoli. It is here of course that the damage is done. The body has many complex systems for protecting itself from external harm and often it is the effects of this protective action that we find uncomfortable. A boil is really the bodies reaction to something it finds harmful. Blood is rushed to the site and literally fights a battle with the infection. In the process many blood cells are sacrificed to fight off the danger and this is what causes the swelling and in turn the discomfort. In a similar way when the pigeon protein reaches the alveoli they react against it. It is a little more complicated than this and I think it is right to say that nobody at this stage knows all the answers but research continues and knowledge grows by the hour. With PFL we are talking about the specific reaction of the body to pigeon protein, I will deal with this in a little more detail later, but it does not take a genius to realise that if pigeon protein can find its way to the lungs and the alveoli then so can many other forms of dust and particles. There are of course as many lung diseases as there are forms of dust. You will all have heard of farmers lung and miners lung and many others together with the dangers of asbestos. Each one has its dangers, some more acute than others, but all damaging all dangerous. Then of course is the most wide spread of all, the activity whose sole object it would seem is to get as much damaging material into the lungs as possible, smoking.

If you just think for a minute about the size of the alveoli and the function they perform you will realise just how important they are to your health and fitness and how easy it must be to damage them, block them or otherwise impede their work. Some of you might think that as you have over 300 million alveoli it should be possible to do without some of them. This reminds me of the young boy who's parents wanted to stop him masturbating so they told him if he continued it would make him go blind. He wanted to know if he could do it a little and wear spectacles. Well of course things don't work out quite like that. I said before that PFL is not quite as simple as dust causing inflammation to the alveoli. What actually happens is that the body becomes sensitised to pigeon protein. It is when the body is sensitised that you get an adverse reaction on exposure. What this means in effect is that you are unlikely to feel ill on your first exposure to pigeon protein and of course many people never become affected by it. What it also means is that over a period of time and over a period of exposure, sometimes many years, you gradually become sensitised to it and the condition gradually creeps up on you. There are estimates that 6% to 22% of flyers have symptoms following exposure to pigeons while a British Pigeon Fanciers survey suggests that 16% show the symptoms but 31% are sensitised. As I said earlier with PFL we are speaking specifically about the reaction to pigeon protein because often tests will tell people that they do not have pigeon lung allergy when they themselves think they have and show some of the symptoms. They may not have the allergy but of course they do have something that is not helping them with their health. So while pigeon protein is the thing we are concerned with in PFL anything we breath in can be harmful. Just look at the amount of dirt and dust that builds up in and around a loft. That's dust from the pigeons, from the corn and from the nest bowls all flying around in the air, beaten up by flapping wings, driven round by ventilation systems and breathed in by us all.

How do we know we have PFL.

We only really know that we have PFL when we have a blood test which tells us we have. This test will tell us if we have raised levels of reaction to pigeon protein because everyone is likely to produce an anti body reaction but some will produce a greater reaction than others. So what should we look out for in deciding whether we should take a blood test? Generally the first signs are feelings of a flu like illness starting a few hours after being in contact with pigeons. This can take the form of feverishness, dry cough, headaches, aching joints, sweating, exhaustion and shortness of breath or breathlessness. There can also be weight loss over time and for those who are very sensitive the reaction time can be much quicker. If you are feeling any of these symptoms either individually or in any combination then you should seek medical advice and take a blood test.

There are two reassuring facts:

1. You cannot catch PFL from anybody else or pass it on to anybody else. You can only get it by coming into contact with Pigeon Protein.

2. PFL is not fatal as long as it is identified and treated and proper precautions are taken. It can however cause permanent changes to the lungs and chronic ill health if it is not treated or just ignored.

How do we avoid PFL.

It would be simple to say that the only sure fire way to avoid PFL is to avoid Pigeon Protein. This in turn means avoiding Pigeons. To some, who are highly sensitised or who have already become very ill this may be the only choice. For the vast majority of people this is really not necessary. PFL is of course only part of the story so in setting out to avoid PFL we should also seek to avoid all lung disease and damage. If the damage is caused by dust and debris, which it is, then we must find WAYS of dealing with dust and debris. I say ways because to deal with it properly you need a raft of precautions as there is no one single answer to it all. The first thing to consider is the way you keep the pigeons. It has become fashionable, and many who are successful will say essential, to have closed in lofts. I don't think there is a problem with closed in lofts except that they must have good and adequate ventilation. Now much has been written about ventilation, really from the pigeons point of view, and what is good for them may or may not be good for you but some of the best advice comes from Steven van Bremen's "Space Age Ventilation" which I am sure you are all familiar with. I am not going to go into the detail of it here except to say that it describes the removal of air, and with it a large amount of dust and debris, by use of a mechanised extractor fan system. It is actually quite cheap, quite simple, very effective and should be a top priority with all who have closed lofts.

There are alternatives to closed in lofts. I saw just a little while ago lofts in Germany where the whole of the front was open to the elements covered only by wire mesh to keep out vermin and intruders and a fine woven plastic mesh to keep out the worst of weather. Air and dust flowed freely. There are all sorts of more traditional lofts which offer a greater flow of air and finally there is the rabbit hutch concept so ably illustrated by Keith Mott in his article first published in the British Homing World (Vol. 73. No: 6470 Jan 7^th 2000 Page 22) again I will not go into detail except to say it is a system that relies on large nest boxes, resembling rabbit hutches, that are kept in tiers out in the open without any other enclosure. The object, from the fanciers health point of view, in any system must be to produce an atmosphere that is as free from dust as possible.

Personal protection.

Having created a dust free environment in the loft the next thing to consider is how you can protect yourself whilst with the pigeons. This is really very simple you just have to take notice of the advice that has been on offer for a very long time now - ALWAYS WEAR A MASK, CAP, AND GOWN and even GOGGLES when in the loft, at shows or marking. This may seem to you to be a great inconvenience and totally unnecessary because you feel no ill effects from the pigeons but one of the main problems with this disease is that it creeps up on you over time. For a long while, perhaps years, you think you are OK but all the time your lungs are undergoing change and then one day you realise just how bad you are. By this time of course things can be quite bad. The real stupidity is that all the time it was preventable by ALWAYS WEARING A MASK, CAP, AND GOWN.

Masks.

There are several excellent masks. I have tried three myself over the years which I will mention here but any mask that conforms with European Standards EN149:1991 or 2001 for disposable masks or EN143:2000 for reusable filter masks, or equivalent standards in other part of the world, is acceptable. There are two vitally important considerations with any mask. The first is that it provides a good fit to the face so that you are not breathing in air that does not pass through the filters and secondly the effectiveness of the filters. You will remember just how small pigeon protein is and many masks will not provide the stringent level of filtering required. The final thing I want to say here about masks in general is be prepared to be totally horrified by the volume of dirt and debris that gets deposited on the filters in a very short time. All of that would have ended up in your lungs. If you have any doubts about wearing a mask now I can assure you they will disappear once you start.

The first two masks I have used are both made by MOLDEX which is an international company meaning you should be able to obtain its products any where in the world.

Moldex 2405.

This is a simple lightweight face mask that you throw away after a period of use. This mask has been available on special offer through the British Homing World for some time now and is quite popular. It provides you with adequate protection from pigeon protein and is quite comfortable to wear. You can mould the mask to your face and breath air through most of the masks surface, which acts as the filter, while in the centre is a small rubber one way valve flap, a Ventex^®-Valve, that enables you to breath out easily. This mask is quite adequate but it is especially useful to carry around with you to shows, when visiting lofts or marking stations etc. It is so small and light that you can just tuck it in a pocket and hardly notice it.

Moldex 4000.

Moving up the scale we come to a much more substantial mask and it is this sort of mask that I think every pigeon fancier should think of as his basic piece of kit. I found this to be a really first rate product which is very well made and easy to clean and maintain. It comes in three sizes to fit correctly any shape face and head and it has a range of replaceable filters. In this case you keep the mask and throw away the filters after a period of use. The filter level needed to protect against pigeon protein is P2 or above. It is of course dearer to purchase than the 2405 masks but over time it is likely to work out more economic.

Aircap 2.

The last mask which I have tried is the Aircap 2. One of the drawbacks with a conventional mask is that you know you are wearing a mask. It requires more effort to breath, you have something covering your mouth and nose which is not always pleasant and you can have problems with spectacles misting and so on. The Aircap does away with all that and instead you have a steady stream of filtered air pushed down over your face from a small fan mounted in the peak of a baseball cap. There is a full face visor so you have good vision, you can speak and be heard and you have no discomfort. It is light on the head and incorporates a cap. The only slight drawback I have found is noise from the fan, but truthfully this is quite minor. The cost is appreciably higher but you have to pay for your comforts.

Cap and gown.

Normally you only get a cap and gown when you graduate from university but if you are going to graduate as a pigeon flyer you need them when you start. There is no need for any great fashion, trend or expense. The object is to wear something covering your head and normal clothes when you are with the pigeons that you leave with the pigeons so that you do not carry pigeon protein into the house or to other people. I said earlier that you cannot catch PFL from anybody else or give PFL to anybody else and that is true but you can carry the very thing that will give others PFL so make sure you leave it in the loft. There have been instances where wives of pigeon flyers have contracted PFL, no not from cleaning the pigeons out but simply by sleeping with the old man. Snuggled up warm and tight, feeling safe and sound in the night but all the time breathing in pigeon protein from his hair. Its not just wives of course, you have to consider the girlfriend as well.

Why do I need a trailer?

There is little point in going to all the trouble of a dust free loft and ALWAYS WEARING A MASK, CAP AND GOWN if you are going to transport pigeons in your car. Even in the biggest cars you have a very limited volume of air and if you are going to put pigeons in there the protein will soon pervade the entire atmosphere. It will still be in the car when the pigeons have been taken out so everyone using the car will breath that air friends, children, grandchildren. Once again whilst you cannot give PFL to anybody else you can ensure they are exposed to pigeon protein by having pigeons in your car. No they are not going to fall over after one trip but don't risk their health. Adopt the simple principal and do not carry pigeons in your car. Save your life and theirs get a trailer.

An update.

Since this article was first published I have received several telephone calls about pigeon lung which makes it clear to me that there are things that need to be clarified, probably enough to write a book about this disease alone. Two quick points to begin, I am not medically qualified and I don't sell masks. I say this because I do not want anybody to get the wrong impression. I am more than happy to explain to anybody at anytime what I know but if you need an expert opinion about your condition or treatment you must go to your Doctor. Equally I do not sell masks or stand to gain from their sale in any way. I would just like to see you all wearing a mask because it is in your interest to do so.

AIRCAP 2

This section is my unashamed tribute to the AIRCAP 2. As stated above I have tried three masks and the first I tried where the MOLDEX 2405 and MOLDEX 4000 in that order. I have nothing bad to say about either. They are both very good masks that do a first rate job and that is the most important issue. So please if you prefer them or can only afford them, use them, they are excellent and you will be protected. I have now used the AIRCAP 2 for about a year. I cannot give you facts and figures about its efficiency, I am not qualified to do so, I can only tell you about my experience with it. It really is almost a pleasure to use. The problem with a mask is that it is a mask. You always know you have it on, you have to have it tight to your face to make a seal and you have to work harder to breath in. This may sound silly, but if you are already short of breath, as many of you are, you will notice that little extra effort you have to make to draw air through the filters. A mask is never really comfortable it either tickles your face or you get a build up of condensation inside which can get irritating. If you wear spectacles there is always the problem of them steaming up whatever you do, very often you find people only sort of half wear the mask. I spoke with someone just the other day and when I asked if he wore a mask he replied " Yes, on my forehead." so often the way. With AIRCAP 2 none of this applies. The reason is that is a totally different concept. First and foremost it does not have to fit tight to your face. Instead you wear a baseball cap with a full face visor that sits about an inch in front of your face. So there is none of the facial discomfort. The air you breath has already been drawn through filters for you by a fan sitting on the peak of the cap, so you have no extra effort. That filtered air is pushed gently down over your face by that same fan, which in summer can be quite refreshing. This also keeps spectacles from steaming up and you get no build up of condensation. Yes you do get some condensation at the bottom of the visor but it is not in your vision and it can fall from the visor without impeding you, so you hardly ever notice it. It is the action of this air being pushed down over your face that prevents contaminated air coming up into the visor and so keeps you safe. The final real advantage is that you can speak and be heard so that you can carry on a conversation in company or over the telephone with the mask in place. Today I hardly notice that I am wearing the mask as I carry out the full range of jobs about the loft from feeding to cleaning and even repairs. I think it is excellent and I recommend it to you all.

Mask, Cap and Gown.

The whole point of this article is to say that everybody, when involved with pigeons, should wear a Mask, Cap and Gown. Its no good waiting until your lungs are damaged. Start wearing a Mask, Cap and Gown today and you will probably never get lung damage anyway. If you start wearing a Mask, Cap and Gown from the day you start with pigeons you will almost certainly not get lung damage. I had one call from a man who has lung problems. He wears a Mask, Cap and Gown now but he has damage already. Because of his problems his wife is helping him by cleaning the pigeons, a very nice thing to do, but she is not wearing a mask. Please, please, please if you want to play about with your health that is a matter for you but do not encourage others to risk theirs.

Smokers and Pigeon Lung.

Now it is often said, normally by those who smoke, that smokers do not get Pigeon Lung. This is not strictly true. There is some evidence to show that there is a lower incidence of Pigeon Lung amongst smokers. Normally when you see the term "some evidence" in scientific papers it means that there has been no proper research into the subject but it is something noticed from research into other things. It would be unwise therefore to read to much into this. I will give you my explanation, but you must remember it is only my opinion, which is that smokers are doing such great damage to their lungs already, by smoking, that the effects of Pigeon Lung are not so noticeable. By smoking you are killing yourself, slowly perhaps, but surely nevertheless so STOP SMOKING and wear a Mask, Cap and Gown when with your pigeons and give yourself a chance.

Can the damage to your lungs heal.

There is no simple answer to this because it depends on what damage, how much and so on. There is a very general rule though. Damage to your lungs is irreversible. I told one caller that since wearing a mask my lungs had improved, which surprised him because he thought that lung damage could not be repaired. He was right of course. There is a subtle difference between permanent damage and, for want of a better term, temporary inflammation occurring before permanent damage is done. When you give up smoking or when you start to wear a mask, having had some breathing problems, any temporary inflammation is likely to subside and you will almost certainly have improved breathing. The benefit may only be small but I can assure you it will be worth it. You will not get back you full lung capacity, which even with healthy undamaged lungs deteriorates considerably with age, because any permanent damage cannot repair.

To conclude

I would like to thank Dr. Gavin Boyd, and all members of the British Pigeon Fanciers Medical Research Team www.pigeon-lung.co.uk for all the work they have done and continue to do on our behalf researching into this disease. Much of the information in this article is taken from their work and their advice. If you feel you have a problem with the disease I quote advice from the team below:

Go and see your own Doctor. The blood test (10ml. of clotted blood) helps to confirm the suspicion about the condition if you have it.

If any difficulty - write to:-

David Martyn
Research Co-ordinator,

16 Laurel Avenue, Lenzie, Glasgow, G66 4RU, Scotland UK

Your Doctor can contact the above directly on 0141 776 1634.
(From outside the U.K. +44 141 776 1634)
Fax: 0141 578 6418 (Outside UK +44 141 578 6418)

I would also like to thank Yale University School of Medicine for allowing the use of their graphics of the lungs and alveoli, showing you just what they look like, together with Moldex www.moldex.com for pictures of the 2405 and 4000 masks and Bradwest Safety Co.Ltd www.aircap2.com for the picture of the Aircap2 mask.

The final word.

Whoever you are, wherever you are ALWAYS WEAR A MASK, CAP, AND GOWN and even GOGGLES when in the loft, at shows, marking or anywhere near pigeons.

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN REPUBLISHED BY WSJ WITH THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR.

Racing from Lerwick.

There is little doubt I think that Lerwick is the most challenging regular race point for North Road racing in the UK. So much so that the North Road Championship Club (NRCC) was formed 100 years ago with this specific race in mind. The Club has gone on to become the premier north road club in the UK and Lerwick still remains the central part of its programme. Part of the appeal is that it is as far North as it is practicable to go and provides a truly long distance race for even the shortest flyers at 470 miles. When you start to look at Lerwick's location, nestled into the Shetland Islands, washed by the North Sea and the Atlantic Ocean and as near to Norway as it is to Scotland you start to appreciate its remoteness. For Lerwick sits just North of the line 60 degrees which slides round the world from Anchorage in Alaska through the middle of Hudson Bay on past the Southern tip of Greenland to Leningrad before it cuts through the middle of Siberia and out to the Bering Sea. Lerwick is a long way North.

The weather at Lerwick is unpredictable. We race from there only in the best months of the year but at Lerwick the weather can change in moments. Much of the weather's influence comes from the sea. Lerwick is surrounded by sea and this of course presents its own challenge to the pigeons. They have to fly at least 100 miles across the sea and realistically much further before they can come to land. There is of course endless speculation about the route or routes they take but that first massive stretch of sea is obligatory.

In 2001 the Clubs centenary year the race for the Kings Cup, the premier trophy, and a free entry motor car ensured a good entry but that was all that could be ensured. Because of the weather conditions encountered at the race point it was decided to liberate at about mid day thus making it impossible for the shortest flying birds to make it on the day. Early the next morning though the winners were timed and good pigeons were timed throughout the club. Many lofts however not only did not time but never had a pigeon return and so because of some feelings of disquiet and the usual rumours that abound a Questionnaire was published in the pigeon press inviting all to respond so that some sort of evaluation could be made.

Lerwick and the Questionnaire.

In the end I received 50 responses. That is 50 from a total of 572 who sent pigeons to Lerwick and a membership of about 1,350. In addition to this I received three responses from non members, one from Swindon, one from Howden and one from Northants. I have not included these details in the analysis but I will refer to comments they made. I would like to express special thanks to these three people and I will respond to them personally in due time. I also received a letter from a member which was full of comment but unfortunately did not answer any of the questions so again this has not been included in the analysis although I will refer to the comments. One of the 50 responses also included pigeon numbers from a friend and two of the respondents did not send to Lerwick so that reduces the number in the Lerwick analysis to 49. In addition I received a long E-mail from Davie White, who has assisted the Club at Lerwick over many years. He is a pigeon fancier of long standing himself and has a vast knowledge of Lerwick and all it means to pigeon racing. I shall be quoting Davie at length.

The facts.

In 2001 572 members sent 3,343 pigeons to Lerwick and 473 birds were timed. Forty nine members submitted details of the 278 pigeons they sent, that is 8.6% of the membership sending 8.3% of the birds. These members timed 55 pigeons, 11.6% of the total timed. These facts give a basis for the legitimacy, or otherwise, of any conclusions that we may draw. From the start we can say that the respondents sent fractionally less pigeons and enjoyed a slightly better race, in terms of numbers timed, than the remainder of the membership. (14.1% of birds sent were timed but the respondents timed 19.7% of the birds they sent.)

The next fact concerns the number of pigeons still missing. The 49 respondents have a total of 138 pigeons still missing out of 278 sent. This means that about half the pigeons are still missing from fanciers who had a slightly better timing ratio. I think it is therefore fair to assume that out of the total of 3,343 pigeons sent to this race 1,672 or more are still missing. While many of you have said there were great losses this is the first time that we have been able to quantify the loss. Often pigeons make it back within a few days and here many did, out of the 140 pigeons in our sample that returned 77 did so in race time and a further 63 returned later, but this still leaves half our pigeons missing. The rate of returns is erratic in that several in the sample got all their pigeons back, several got none and the others fit all the combinations you could think of between these extremes..

Unfortunately questions 8 and 9, which hopefully could have thrown some light on whether the missing pigeons were the good or not so good, elicited more indignation than information, and so there is no useful data available. To those who thought these questions silly, well, we are all entitled to our opinion are we not.

Twenty six thought that the pigeons that returned in race time were in good condition and five thought they were not. Several respondents of course did not have any pigeons return and others did not answer this question. Twenty two thought it was a good race and twenty four did not but I can find no real correlation between returns and this opinion. In other words some who got all their pigeons thought it a bad race and some who did not get any thought it a good race and the others were variously between. Opinion then on this subject though split fairly evenly is not solely judged on returns.

Looking at the Sections

Section A sent 443 and timed 96 (21.7%), B sent 530 and timed 81 (15.3%), C sent 809 and timed 121 (14.9%), D sent 214 and timed 30 (14.0%), E sent 224 and timed 32 (14.3%), F sent 675 and timed 61 (9.0%), G sent 32 and timed 3 (9.4%), H sent 55 and timed 7 (12.7%) while Section I sent 361 and timed 42 (11.6%) We can see that the percentage timed decreases gradually moving from West to East and more markedly with distance, although Section E appears about 1-2% high and Section F about 2-3% down on the general pattern. When we look at the average open position, Section A 189, B 211, C 208, D 259, E 217, F 259, G 433, H 373 and Section I 288, it really concurs with the above pattern. What this would tend to show, I would suggest, is that the distribution of birds that were timed is fairly even across the radius both in terms of number and speed given the conditions. There are no glaring holes or gaps. (In Sections G and H the numbers involved are small and when combined with the greater distance provide less reliable results.)

I have also looked at respondents returns compared to section average times to see if those with high returns had fast pigeons or those with low had slow and while there are some individual examples that might fit this thesis there is no general pattern. Finally there is the matter of velocities. The Section average open positions, shown above, would indicate a fairly even spread of velocities amongst the sections throughout the range 1295.95 to 444.43 ypm. Looking through the result one can see that the tail off is fairly even throughout the range though the drop from 1295 to 444 (798.52 ypm) is quite considerable and averages at 1.7 ypm per position.

Conclusions.

The conclusions we can draw from this are limited but I think it important to understand them before we move to opinions, explanations and reasons.

1. About 50% of the pigeons were lost. (This is a minimum figure which could be as high as 60%)

2. About 28% of the entry returned in race time. (This is probably a maximum figure which could be as low as 23%)

3. About 22% of the entry returned out of time.

4. Those pigeons timed were spread fairly evenly throughout the Sections.

5. The velocities of these pigeons was also spread fairly evenly throughout the Sections.

6. The velocities were spread over a wide range.

7. The returns, though erratic from one individual to another, are similar across the sections.

8. Generally, the condition of pigeons that returned in race time was good.

9. Opinions, to date, about whether the race was good or bad are split fairly evenly.

It would seem we had a race in two halves those that returned and those that did not. This I think accounts for the division of opinion as to whether the race was good or bad because in the first half, those that returned, the race was quite good. It was testing, as evidenced by the wide range of velocities, there were some very good performances and the spread across the sections was fairly even. The second half however puts a different view on the whole thing. Losses of this magnitude are not acceptable and we must come to understand the cause or causes if we are to learn and avoid this sort of thing in the future. It may be that on occasions we cannot avoid losses of this kind in which case we may at some future date be obliged to consider whether we continue to race from this location. So they are important issues and worthy of close scrutiny.

The Opinions.

The first opinion I would like to mention has been voiced by five respondents, at times quite vociferously. One said " I was of the opinion that the aim of the NRCC was to promote long distance racing and to liberate so late in the day, with no hope of the birds arriving to the loft on the day, made it a lottery." and another "To purposely force a night out is stupid and cruel. The race becomes a lottery, depending on the quality and safety of the perch found. If those in the farthest sections want to risk it they can, but not many do." Now interestingly these responses came from Derby, Lincolnshire, Norwich and Cambridgeshire because from Ipswich, Colchester and Harwich I received quite the opposite. Clearly there is a depth of feeling over this subject. I have said it before and I will say it again at the limits of our radius from Lerwick you are very lucky, except on a very favourable day, to get pigeons on the day. Every member of this Club is entitled to equality of treatment and I think it is incumbent on us all to consider others when adopting a view on a point like this. It is important therefore that the Club formulates a policy on one/two days races for future occasions. Clearly those who object to the late liberation felt it had some effect on the result but as they did not elaborate I have no way of knowing what the effects are alleged to be. Perhaps this is a topic we could, and should, discuss at more length later. A point raised by another, who I can only assume does not object to a late liberation, is that it should be at 1500 or thereabouts to allow a light feed in the morning before liberation.

The next opinion voiced, by a couple, is that sea fog was to blame. I quote one who is himself quoting the words of a man who works for MAFF and goes to the Shetlands with RSPB officials to ring raptors, "Four miles off the coast is a bank of fog. It remains there most of June. Sometimes there is a break. Your birds hit this bank of fog 75% turn back. The raptors have a field day." Followed by this plea from our respondent "Why o Why is this information never released back to the people who pay". First I do not doubt the general point made by the man from MAFF but I must ask, Was he there on the day? Did he witness our pigeons being released into a bank of fog? If he did then let him come forward and say so but if we are just relying on the general point he makes then even in his words "Sometimes there is a break". This of course is one of the reasons why we have so many holdovers at Lerwick, waiting for the breaks in the fog or other adverse weather conditions. I ask you to hold any further judgement on this matter until you have read what Davie White has to say.

Another comment from one respondent was that cost cutting measures were in place. All that I can say is that this year of all years there was no need to "cut" costs as up until and including this race we had record entries bringing record income. Beyond that my experience of the committee is that they, in every decision I have seen thus far, wish to do what is right and cost is not an overriding factor.

Comments from a couple of respondents relate to a subject I mentioned in these notes some months ago with suggestions that Lerwick comes after Thurso in the calendar. The reasons given are that it gives more flying time and distance to condition the pigeons and that it is better for the small loft who can only keep one team.

The final comment that I have received, relating specifically to Lerwick and this race, comes from a 14 year old member who, I believe, makes the most pertinent point yet. He says in answer to the question asking if he thought it a good race "No because when they showed on the weather forecast that it was going to be the hottest two days of the year at that time, they shouldn't have let them up in that heat." Heat is a factor that we have probably not properly considered before. This becomes all the more important as our climate changes, we are, it would seem, going to get more extremes of weather which in part means more hotter days. (I hope you all saw the very excellent article by Mike Staddon "The importance of rehydrating pigeons")

That I believe is a fair summary of the comments made by our members but there are some comments I would like to include from persons outside the NRCC. The first is from Howden in Yorkshire and a member of the York's & Linc's N.R. Combine who had a race from Lerwick that same day. This respondent sent 4 pigeons and got one out of race time and is still missing three. Their pigeons were liberated at 0900 that day and the combine has a radius of 380-480 miles from Lerwick. They had no day birds and the winner was timed to Goole Club, an approximate distance of 445 miles, with a velocity of 794 ypm. The second is from a flyer in Swindon, Wilts flying with the South West of England who sent three pigeons and timed one with a velocity of 1047.7 ypm. I am not sure of hand whether these birds were liberated with ours or whether they went 15 minutes earlier.

Last but by no means least I would like to include the comments of Davie White. They are the compilation of two E-mail's, the second of which was in answer to a couple of questions that arose from the first.

"I have read your article in this weeks paper. I would like to give you some of my thoughts regarding this years Kings Cup race. I have been present at every N.R.C.C. liberation since 1968/69 and to be fair have seen some good, some bad, but in every situation the convoyer has tried to get the pigeons away in good conditions. This years decision to have a Mid Day liberation was the correct one given that it was not until the following Saturday at 10.30 am that the fog started to clear.

Our own pigeons that were due to be released at Beauly (Inverness) that same weekend came home in their baskets on the Tuesday following your race the weather was that bad all the way down. The reason they were not liberated was because of low cloud and mist, but if you look at a map of Scotland the Beauly Firth is very much West of the Lerwick doos flight path.

There was some fog /mist at Thurso but the weather in Orkney was much better and clearer as my friend in Orkney could see the Caithness Coastline something you cannot do if there was extensive fog about. People tend to think that fog extends forever but around our shores it can only be some half a mile in-depth. Sure there were "Lerwick" doos that landed in Wick that day but did they belong to the NRCC?. On the day of liberation there was no fog between Shetland and the "normal" Scottish mainland route the doos normally take, i.e. South east direction heading some 2-3 out past Aberdeen and down the North Sea coastline. The wind that day pushed the pigeons further west but in my opinion the fog was not a problem. All I know is the weather was good for the first 160 miles and clear in Fraserburgh and Aberdeen.

The last two races from Lerwick have been blow-homes and the wind directions have been favourable for the previous NRCC races this year until Lerwick. So having had a Lerwick bird this last 2 years counted for nothing this year as some of the pigeons were not on the wing long enough to establish good orientation for a much slower head-on type of race. How many pigeons were left at the Liberation site and throughout these Islands? Less than 1% is the answer, given the 2 liberation's that day and with over 60% of those strays being yearlings it is no wonder that our club members are run off their feet for the week after the race collecting pigeons and restoring them to health then sending them back to Aberdeen where Ian Mckay sends them home by Amtrak. We also send them back home with friends going on holiday to the mainland only for 25% of the fanciers to call us when the birds get home. There are more RSPB members per Capita than most places in the UK so we have to be very careful when dealing with the public in Shetland regarding stray pigeons. This year we have had pigeons arriving here that have been liberated at Liege in Belgium (Scottish National) Brussels (West Durham Amal ?), also Thurso, Fraserburgh, Berwick, Stonehaven pigeons have all flown the wrong way and ended up here. So every pigeon reported by the public around June time is not always a Lerwick bird if you understand my meaning. Finally I would like the Club to think very seriously about yearlings. A lot of the yearlings picked up this year had terrible fret marks and were obviously sent here for a last chance most of these pigeons were usually "gifted" to myself and other island fanciers saving the fanciers £25 to get them back. Far better to have a yearling race from Thurso with a special price for that bird. With a barrier of 2 year old pigeons and over for all organisations racing from Lerwick would see a big difference in returns and the more returns each year the bigger birdage.

To many yearlings, too many Federation pigeons and blow home racing contributed to a hard race pigeons being unable to work home with velocities under 900 ypm. As a neutral Observer I have seen this "Hard" Lerwick race coming for a few years."

Conclusions.

It would be very nice if there were one single simple factor that we could blame everything on. It would be nice and easy if we could say that it was Phil Ringe who threw them away. Life is rarely like that and it certainly wasn't on this occasion. When you compare the way our pigeons came through to others liberated on the same day but at a different time it is clear that Phil got the best from the day. What would have happened if we had held for a week or more no one knows. What is it then that we wish to blame? I would suggest that if the first part of the race had been as it was, and those that failed to return had arrived within a few days then this would have been a hard but successful race. So what we are really looking at is the 50% plus birds that did not return and why?

First of all I can see no grounds for saying it was because it was a two day race. If anybody wishes to differ on this point I would be very pleased to hear what reasons they give and what evidence they have to support the view. I can see that some pigeons might fare better than others on a race over two days but I cannot see that two days of itself will prevent birds from getting home.

Secondly I think it is clear that fog played no significant part in this. It may well be that some of the birds did get mixed up in fog in the area of Thurso but if they did they were already lost or off course. From what Davie White has to say the first 160 miles was clear giving them a good start and getting them to the mainland.

As far as we know the only other weather impediments were a head wind and heat and I have no doubt at all that both played a part. The pattern of our result does not really show that these were devastating conditions in themselves but that they provided a tough test that some coped with better than others. I know that it is said, probably quite rightly, that some will always get through but I don't think this is what we see. Our pattern is that of 20% at least coming through in a steadily diminishing scale with a further 20% making it over the next few days and a large percentage not making it at all. So although the heat and wind played a large part some other factors must be involved. Once we have eliminated or taken account of the external factors we must look to ourselves.

One factor that I am sure played a part was the soft run up that we had. Almost every race before Lerwick was a fast tail wind. They did not have the opportunity to build up the experience and fitness necessary to deal with a head wind on the longest race. Combined with this of course for the past few years we have had very favourable circumstances for Lerwick races so even pigeons that had done well on previous occasions could not be relied upon to do well this time. There is of course very little that you can do about this, the weather is not in our hands, but the one thing we could do is put the Lerwick race at the end of the calendar so that Thurso was there as an additional conditioner.

Another factor is dehydration and drinking. The pigeons, in conditions like this, would be severely tested. The head wind would make them work hard and the heat would aggravate the situation. In hot weather and hard work it is not only water that is lost and needs to be replenished but various trace elements as well. They are called trace elements because only minute amounts are required but without them the effects can be devastating. Something that always comes to my mind when I think of this is film of Jim Peters trying to finish the marathon at the Commonwealth Games in 1954. There you had a man who had guts enough for two and the athletic ability to match and he ran himself into the deck. Our pigeons can be like that and as somebody said to me quite recently it is those with the most guts and determination that are most likely to. They go on and on especially in heat with a head wind using energy and losing body fluids, and although they may be able to pick up water they are unlikely to pick up the trace elements as well. They go on and on and eventually reach a state like Jim Peters where they are all over the place. They can no longer fly and they can no longer think. Quite suddenly they are on the ground a prey to anything around and unless they are very fortunate soon in a state where they can no longer even feed or drink. It does not take very long at all. What can we do? First we must take more regard of temperature in liberation consideration. Next we must pay more attention to drinkers and transporters. Thirdly we must consider providing electrolytes in some of the water before liberation's, I am not going to say what or when, we need to take good veterinary advice. I will give one small tip though because many of you I know are not keen on buying medicines or preparations. Electrolytes are important and what is required is something that is almost the same as sea water. The commercial preparations are very good and I have no wish to dissuade people from using them but for those others please try about half a teaspoon of Malden Sea Salt in a gallon of water. It needs to be sea salt and Malden is about as good as you get.

Finally we must pay greater attention to the pigeons we send. You will have read the comments of Davie White above when he says that less than 1% of pigeons liberated were left on the Islands but 60% of those were yearlings and a lot of them had terrible fret marks being sent for the "last chance". Together with that of course is the number of eggs collected by the convoyer from the baskets. Do questions 8 and 9 really sound so silly now? We must seriously review the situation of yearlings going to Lerwick and we must pay more attention to what we send. I would suggest that we consider training, qualifying and empowering marking station handlers to examine pigeons and refuse those they find unfit.

I have tried to lay before you a balanced account of the evidence without to much of my influence. There does remain of course the other part of the questionnaire which I will deal with at a later date.

Nigel Lane

THIS ARTICLE IS REPUBLISHED HERE BY WSJ WITH THE EXPRESS PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR.