usual novice boy girl query...

[lazydaisy]

just to double check!! If you don't mind seeing MORE "boring"   photos of spudgies.....

I know this one is correct....   number 1...our oldest girl, coming into/in breeding condition, maybe coming up to a year old (ish) ....



number 2.....this one is  11 weeks old, and supposed to be a girl?






number 3.... October 16 hatch....huge compared to our first girl ...am confident he is a he!





number 4 ....November hatch....again huge compared to our first girl....supposed to be a girl??

[ffiscool]

lovely buds.. cute pictures..

[OP]

You have some beautiful budgies there.
Do I detect a touch of wit in your introductory line.

[lazydaisy]

ummmmmmm..... lol....maybe a little....you all must get fed up at times of the same questions all the time? Thanks both. Just wanting to double check with people who know what they are doing

[OP]

I can only speak for myself when I say it depends on how the same old questions are asked. You had the courtesy to introduce yourself and ask your questions in a courteous manner. I still can't answer the mutation questions, although we do have members that certainly can. I am in the learners section with regards to gender and from my experience you have them all correct. The real medium to expert members will be on later in the day and even early in the morning. Some have other occupations during the day and others are in a very different timezone to us, even different hemispheres.
Nice to meet you & welcome to the forum.

[Marianne Marlow]

Apart from number two all the genders look right.

I can't tell with that one because of the flash.

Can you take one in natural light?

[lazydaisy]

is this better?

will try to get a good photo tomorrow daytime

[suesbird]

Hello from me and the buds. I'm a novice too I'm afraid.

[ffiscool]

Hard to tell in the last pic but I wonder if a girlie

[lazydaisy]

Feb 1, 2017 18:44:37 GMT ffiscool said:

Hard to tell in the last pic but I wonder if a girlie

Will try to get a decent clear photo of him/her in the daylight tomorrow. I am really not bothered either way as it is such a tame, and very beautiful little birdy

[Hezz]

Feb 1, 2017 15:17:12 GMT Marianne Marlow said:

Apart from number two all the genders look right.

I can't tell with that one because of the flash.

Can you take one in natural light?

I am in agreement with Marianne (once again ... I'm stalking you, M) ... number two is a very pretty little birdy, but a photo with no artificial light will be a big help.

[eldiel]

Hi

You wrote that hatched in October, is it really possible to have that much dark blue cere when the bird is only 4 months old??

[lazydaisy]

no idea on that one...only can go on what seller told us, and knowing horse dealers who if you ask "How old is that horse?", the response will often be, "How old do you want it to be?"....I don't trust many folk.....so, no, the age may well be wrong, considering he led us to believe he had bred him, yet I then find out that he was bred by someone completely different, and legit!

[nev90]

Looking at your other thread numbers 3 & 4 appear to have red leg rings which means they were hatched in 2014. If you examine the rings the number written sideways is the birth year.
I think number 2 is female.

[lazydaisy]

Feb 15, 2017 8:20:14 GMT nev90 said:

Looking at your other thread numbers 3 & 4 appear to have red leg rings which means they were hatched in 2014. If you examine the rings the number written sideways is the birth year.
I think number 2 is female.

hi Nev, the rings are in fact a bronzey orange, with a 16 year stamp. I spoke with a lovely chap from the UK Budgerigar Society, who has confirmed that they are indeed 2016 issued, and has given me the contact details of their breeders.