Substandard Hawk Chalk Photos

[Breeze]

Stacia,

I am curious if you applied for the HC editorial position that was recently filled?

Bill Boni

I'm curious about this, as well. Sounds a great deal like sour grapes to me. You know, "whine"?

[jfincher]

I am hesitant to respond here because I hate to validate or perpetuate a very insignificant debate. Since I was the photographer though I feel some responsibility to fill in the story on this pic. This was a passage female red-tailed hawk that was being flown by an apprentice. This hawk took either 72 or 78(I can't remember which number but it was over 70) squirrels between First of Dec and March. This photo was taken in March at the end of the falconers season. The bird was hunted almost every day, as the falconer was voracious in his quest for squirrels and felt very strongly about hunting and not pet keeping. I am quite sure that some of the primary tipping and brushing was from transporting and housing, however squirrel battles are not very feather friendly some times either. Also let us not forget that feathers are renewable resources. We aren't talking about broken bones and missing eyes. The molt will take care of it, that is why it exist. Obviously there is a long standing need in wild birds to replace feathers or birds would not have evolved with this ability. I might add that I seriously doubt that any wild RT kills that many squirrels in 3 or 4 months so I have no doubt that falconry birds take more damage than wild birds. Simply put, its not fair to compare the two.
Those are the facts. Here is my opinion: I personally believe that a picture of a bird with over 70 tough kills flown by an apprentice is exactly how falconry should be represented, feather damage or not. Also thanks to those who complimented the picture.

I will add that the feather damage did not stop it from taking game, therefore no imping was deemed necessary.

[David]

We trapped several red-tails last season trying to get a passage for my apprentice. The one he keep had two broken tail feathers. Due to the broken feathers he must have been an escaped falconry bird as no self-respecting wild bird would allow itself to get into that condition.

[falcon56]

I am hesitant to respond here because I hate to validate or perpetuate a very insignificant debate. Since I was the photographer though I feel some responsibility to fill in the story on this pic. This was a passage female red-tailed hawk that was being flown by an apprentice. This hawk took either 72 or 78(I can't remember which number but it was over 70) squirrels between First of Dec and March. This photo was taken in March at the end of the falconers season. The bird was hunted almost every day, as the falconer was voracious in his quest for squirrels and felt very strongly about hunting and not pet keeping. I am quite sure that some of the primary tipping and brushing was from transporting and housing, however squirrel battles are not very feather friendly some times either. Also let us not forget that feathers are renewable resources. We aren't talking about broken bones and missing eyes. The molt will take care of it, that is why it exist. Obviously there is a long standing need in wild birds to replace feathers or birds would not have evolved with this ability. I might add that I seriously doubt that any wild RT kills that many squirrels in 3 or 4 months so I have no doubt that falconry birds take more damage than wild birds. Simply put, its not fair to compare the two.
Those are the facts. Here is my opinion: I personally believe that a picture of a bird with over 70 tough kills flown by an apprentice is exactly how falconry should be represented, feather damage or not. Also thanks to those who complimented the picture.

I will add that the feather damage did not stop it from taking game, therefore no imping was deemed necessary.

Thank you for this clarification, Jeff, with any luck it will put an end to this ridiculous subject. Stacia, are you familiar with "open mouth, insert foot"? Maybe you could now educate us all on the flavor of boot leather.

[Lowachi]

Thank you for this clarification, Jeff, with any luck it will put an end to this ridiculous subject. Stacia, are you familiar with "open mouth, insert foot"? Maybe you could now educate us all on the flavor of boot leather.

[Chris L.]

I will close this thread as well. Again, NAFEX is not a place to discuss matters with regards to the way NAFA is ran. I have this forum, for NAFA, to help promote the organization. I totally understand if some have issues with NAFA, no organization is going to please everyone. Hell look at NAFEX, I have some that hate it and some that love it. I can't and wont please everyone. I even had a guy tell me at this years NAFEX dinner that he hates NAFEX and thinks it is whats wrong with falconry today. All the while, he is picking out his FREE book he won that was worth 175.00...go figure??. There are proper channels to discuss one's disdain for NAFA and NAFEX is not one of them.

I enjoy stories of unicorn tears and butterflies. Lets start posting about the good stuff and get back on that.

Thanks for understanding!

Happy hawking,

Christopher Lynn