John,
I agree that there are behaviors that are VERY difficult to condition/ extinguish if the bird has had previous history in captivity with other falconers. Believe me, I've worked with more than my fair share of these birds and they aren't perfect, but they were at least salvageable in some ways. This entire thread, however, is about preventing problems from occurring in pristine passage or captive-bred birds.
In regards to your comments on the literature, you're off base and need to re-read some of these. Yes, hacking and passage birds were popular, but so were late-taken eyasses, and most of these authors go into detail on preventing mantling and screaming. And I know Bert is a pain to read, being in old English and all, but he actually said in his treatise that an eyas can outscore and be superior in head count to even the best haggard with time and patience. That just goes to show that even to Bert who was out to catch as much game as possible with his goshawks, he valued a quiet, well-mannered bird over anything else.
I've mentally checked out of the discussion of what does/doesn't make a good falconer and bird. I've said it a few times before on this thread, but just because I hold myself to a certain standard doesn't mean I always achieve this or that I expect anyone else to hold to the same; I am, however, willing to exchange dialogue with those falconers who DO hold the same high standards, are constantly pursuing perfection, and continue to seek ways to minimize undesirable behavior in their hawks.
Maybe I'm a bit pretentious, but if a falconer has an ill-mannered bird but catches a ton of game with it, I still regard the falconer the way I regard a parent who has an out of control, bratty child. When a kid is throwing a tantrum in public, I blame the parents, not the child. I'd rather share a dinner table with a kid who learned to dine with some manners instead of the one who smacks, chews with his mouth open, etc. These are anthropomorphic parallels, but I'm using these examples so that others can see where I'm coming from.
In any case, I'm pretty much done defending my personal standards, so I won't respond to those questions. Maybe someone can create a separate thread about these other things so it doesn't detract or clutter up this one? I've just run out of interest.
Regards,
Originally Posted by
Montucky
I think it is needed look at our bird's behavior and point the finger at ourselves. Having said that there are three aspects to a birds behavior under the charge of a falconer:
- Its history before the falconer got the bird
- The falconer's goals and objectives
- The falconer's skill
Certain behaviors like mantling are clearly innate part of a raptor's behavioral repertoire brought about by handling that may mimic sibling or parent interaction in the wild. The old books don't talk much about it as everyone flew passagers and haggards...and I dont think Bert for example would have produced a non-mantling imprint goshawk...he just would not have ever flown one if given the choice because it would not have EVER been able to produce the score (and performance) on partridge he would have expected. Game success matters
As far as hooding, yes it may be a reflection of skill, but it is not a reflection of poor falconry necessarily. The only criteria to which a falconer should be measured is (In my humbly realistic opinion):
- Good health
- good feather
- good facilities and perches
- regular hawking on suitable game.
A falconer can easily achieve these things being a poor hooder, with a mantling, food begging game terrorist of a hawk.
Falconry is a hunting sport; advanced training techniques and skill aides in this but it is secondary to the pursuit in the field with a healthy bird that is well cared for. At the end of the day, the details of training this or that all come out the same in the wash if the falconer is a hawking fanatic and knows how to produce game for his bird.
Dillon Horger
Pennsylvania
