Jump to content

Talk:Falconry

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

revisions to tone and reorganized

[edit]

I deleted the section on St. Albans, revised the US regulation section to read more objectively, revised the captive breeding and hybrid section to be more inclusive, revised the "falconry around the world" section to be more inclusive, and finally, I reorganized sections to make more of a understable flow by topic and pulled out or combined redundant sections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goshawk2 (talk • contribs) 12:52, 8 December 2010 (UTC) Also - the history of falconry needs attention. there is much contradictory info concerning the earliest dates/origins of falconry. I tried to re-write to reflect the lack of specific evidence.... there needs to be specific citations for claims that it dates back to 2000 bc or longer. Even the record of Sargon II seems to be in dispute? Someone out there that knows this well should chime in - I would like to know what the prevailing archeological wisdom is? Hey, one more thing, in the first paragraph it says falcon refers to females only, then it say hawk refers to female only...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.185.87.133 (talk) 19:39, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The actual hunt?

[edit]

I don't see a place in this article or Falconry (training) where it describes what goes on during the actual hunt. Xytor500 (talk) 23:46, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-- As a layman interested in this more than the subtle distinctions of bird-licensing and species, I consider this something of a deficiency. For a start, what's with all the hoods and straps and stuff? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.137.240 (talk) 15:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy to add this section, but the actual procedure of a hunt will vary greatly depending on the species of bird being flown and the quarry being chased. I'm new to WIkipedia, should I add a lot of disclaimers about varying practices and such, or should I write separate sections on hunting with longwings vs. broadwings vs. shortwings? In other words, how much detail is warranted? Also, in re: "hoods and straps and stuff" should there be a brief overview of equipment (called "furniture" in falconry-speak) in the "current practices" section? Lastly, I'm not sure I'd be able to write in an "encyclopedic" tone--if I write a section on the hunt, someone else may need to come along and encycloped-ify it.

Actually, I'm not even sure where to start. In addition to hawking longwings vs. broadwings vs. shortwings, there are completely different practices involved in fist-hawking, forest-hawking, soar-hawking, hawking from horseback and even car-hawking. What a layman would see with a squirrel-hawker is very different than what you would see being done by someone hunting waterfowl or upland game birds. I can see why no one wrote this section before. The bit on furniture would be easy enough, the equipment is more or less the same everywhere, but the procedures will vary widely with the circumstances and there will probably be plenty of contention over how things are done if more than vague details are given. NajaNivea (talk) 16:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

-- I saw the questions above and added a link. This was removed because of the wikipedia policies. I was told a link on my userpage was however allowed, which I now put there. I am overthinking the idea of releasing some of the photo's into the commons section, however I have to check the licence version to choose.(Hummy2 (talk) 20:41, 15 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Eagles

[edit]

From the article:

"This genus has a worldwide distribution. They are large powerful birds that have only one representative in North America and Britain, the Golden Eagle."

Pardon me, but does this refer only to eagles used for falconry? I believe North America also has the Bald Eagle. KamuiShirou 04:12, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By definition, the Bald is a sea eagle, different Genus. Thanks, KamuiSirou! JT 02:05, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I forgot to say in my edit summary that I removed the copyvio notice. According the the main copyvio page, the site in question is in fact copying us! Djbrianuk 12:56, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A few rapidly transcribed notes

[edit]

Shakespeare "sharp set" Monguls, King Ethelburt (?). A royal activity. Aristo POWs. Died out with invention of flintlock pistol, cadgers, hobbies, mews (from Latin mutata, to change).

The Boke of St. Albans is widely quoted for its description of which social classes were assigned particular raptors for use in the sport of falconry. Throughout history many researchers have believed that the list was actually an allegory because the species listed for different castes were completely inappropriate for the sport. For example, Mary Queen of Scots favorite sporting ratpor was the Merlin, yet the Boke of St. Albans dictates a different species. The list from teh Boke of St. Albans should be considered a loose guide rather than a formal lawbook that dictated which raptors could be possessed by which social castes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rookhawk (talk • contribs) 04:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Where is a copy of the Boke of St.Albans?

[edit]

In 1486, the rules and ettiquette of falconry were put down in "The Boke of St Albans" by Dame Julyans Bernes "prioress of the nunnery of Sopwell, near St. Alban's; a lady of noble family, and celebrated for her learning and accomplishments, by Leland, Bale, Pits, and others", types of birds (and jargon?) are listed in that book.

Kestrel, Hawks, eagle, other birds used in falconry. Some are more commonly used than others, presumably. Also, people of different statuses were permitted to use different species.

  • Made, or manned (not trained)
  • "Stoop" on prey, to "foot" it
  • Ungladness (not illness)
  • Etc, (from book mentioned above?)
  • I'm looking for a copy of the Boke of St. Albans to quote from

Bird strikes, illegal trade

[edit]

There needs to be some discussion of the recent use of falconry as a bird strike mitigation measure at airports. Some discussion of the illegal trade in Saker Falcons for Saudi falconers is probably also appropriate.

The illegal trade in Sakers is largely myth, filled with decidedly inaccurate information (for example, the alleged value of the birds.

Regading the Bird Abatement, that might be a good tangent topic. It's not falconry in the truest sense of the word, but since falconry techniques are used, it's worth a mention. I'll add something about that. Might want to add something about Operation Falcon as well. JT 02:09, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Voice needs adjusting

[edit]

This article, while fascinating, reads like an enthusiastic introduction to the hobby, rather than like an encyclopedia article. Someone needs to "adjust the voice" to make it more encyclopedic. I'm going to add it to my list of things to do, but it's likely to be a while before I can get around to it. If someone else (perhaps someone who knows more about the subject than I) wants to go ahead and take this on, I promise not to get my feelings hurt ;-) —CKA3KA (Skazka) 23:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a couple changes to the tone, mainly in how to get instructed, but yes it may need some work. Feel free to continue. Some enthusiasm, masked in neutrality, wouldn't hurt though. Tyciol 02:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Bird control also requires a mention here. Falcons are routinely flown at corvid and gulls through out the world on land fill sites and rubbish tips —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.0.241.234 (talk) 16:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Falconry Training article needs to be deleted

[edit]

I started to edit it, but it's so riddled with gross inaccuracies that it's best it just be removed altogether. Being new to Wikipedia, I don't yet know how this is properly accomplished, but felt the need to warn/advise of the abundant misinformation. Meanwhile, I've "edited" it to a summary which expresses that it's not realistic to try to explain falconry training methods within Wikipedia, so that people don't gain inaccurate information or impressions. -JT, Falconry Alliance

JT, Thanks for all your hard work! I appreciate that you don't want inaccurate information in the article—none of us do—but was there no way to save any part of the training section? I know absolutely nothing about falconry, so I'm certainly no judge, but I found what I read to be interesting. I never dreamed that it qualified me to go out and try to train a bird of prey myself, but an overview for the layman of the general philosophy and overall methods of training would be enormously enlightening.
I know you say that the information was inaccurate, but did the inaccuracies represent practices that no falconer would subscribe to? I ask because it sounds to me—and again, I want to stress that I don't pretend to know anything about the topic—as if there may be some controversy concerning the best training methods. If that's the case, then an overview of the nature of the controversy would be equally fascinating. —CKA3KA (Skazka) 08:14, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sorry to have to say so, but there was so little fact in there that it was easier to delete it. The writer seems to be a recent zealot, one who read a book and then wrote from recollection... or had a very poor education in the first place. Within the first sentence alone we find:
  1. Falconers don't always start with a young bird
  2. When we do, we definately do NOT train an eyass with food, as it causes them to scream to you for food for the rest of their lives.
  3. Most prefer passagers or chamber-raised birds (which would be closer to the training that the writer was referring to.)
  4. While we're at it, an eyass is one taken as a baby. A passager is one taken after it has fledged the nest but before it is sexually mature (usually within the first year of its life.)

There were shreds of fact in there, but they were woven in between myriad inaccuracies, which is why I made that choice. But you're the official editor... do as you see fit. Feel free to email me if you want further info on falconry, raptor rehab or raptors in general. I've gone ahead and cleaned it up best as I can, but it still doesn't belong in here, as it's nowhere near comprehensive enough. -Unknown, JT again?

Tag formatting

[edit]

Raptor Rehabilitation comes up in a search of Wikipedia, but when I put the brackets around it, it comes up in red. Pardon my ignorance, is there something missing in the Raptor Rehabilitation article which causes it not to be parsed properly? JT 02:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I got it. The names are case-sensitive. JT 03:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"a reel of chalk line"

[edit]

This is referred to as an example of a non-existent thing under the Boke of St Albans heading. But surely it is an existent thing -- builders use chalk line reels. You stretch the string line out of the reel, then snap it to leave a chalky mark. mattw 02:08, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Falconry & Falconers, Falconeering &...

[edit]

After a cleanup of the article and talk page, I noticed that Falconeering was listed as an alternatie term for Falconry. I bolded this and redirected that term here to help that out. What confuses me is what term is used. Falconer is the only term I'm familiar with, but is there a possible term, such as Falconeer, Falconeerer, Falconeerist, Falconist, or something along those lines, or is Falconer used as the practitioner noun for both terms? Or is it 'The Art of Falconry' but 'I'm going out Falconeering'? What about Falconing, has anyone ever heard that one used? Tyciol 02:07, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It may be ambiguous, Anthony, but it's also what we say. Sorry.--JT 19:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


No Falconeering is not any term I've ever heard of, though I have heard of "Austringer", and "Dirt Hawker" both of these nouns refer to falconers that primarily fly against fur quarry as opposed to traditional upland game birds. (snafu918 2nd year falconer http://boisefalconry.blogspot.com)


Many falconers refer to it simply as "hawking." Generally the above variations of "falconing" are not used and are considered incorrect. Similar to squares/rectangles, all falcons are hawks but not all hawks are falcons. "Austringer" is not commonly used anymore and is specific to those hunting with "true hawks," the accipiters (goshawk, Cooper's, sharpshin, sparrowhawk). "Dirt hawking/er" is a more general term for someone who hunts furry--thereby "ground/dirt"--prey species with a hawk (most falcons only catch birds, with the exception of the kestrel and Aplomado falcon). People that are "dirt hawkers" normally fly redtails, goshawks, Harris' hawks and eagles.Broadwing (talk) 21:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling

[edit]

The Voice / singular perspective

[edit]

Too much of this reflects the attitude of falconers rather than falconry.

It's said that if you put 10 falconers in a room, you'll get 12 opinions. But this article must stick to the facts. The reasons for using a Peregrine/Lanner, for example are NOT accurate (and I'm not even going to get into a longwinded discussion on the psychological reasons for it, the legal aspects in the US vs. the EU and UK, etc.) So let's see about a major overhaul where it sticks to the facts, and refers them to local sources, maybe? What do you guys think we can do to keep this from being so blasted subjective? --JT 19:48, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sociable raptors

[edit]

The claim that Harris' hawk (and the Galapagos hawk) are the only social raptors is objectionable, to say the least. They are perhaps the only sociable birds used in falconry but the most sociable bird of prey is the black kite, which, in Northern India and Pakistan, often flies in flocks of over a hundred individuals.

Some other raptors roost or migrate in flocks—I'd have to say the Swainson's Hawk and Broad-winged Hawk, which migrate in flocks of tens of thousands, are as social as Black Kites. The article should probably say that Harris's Hawk is the only or one of the few raptors that hunt socially.

"The article should probably say that Harris's Hawk is the only or one of the few raptors that hunt socially." I too think that this is more appropriate snafu918 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snafu918 (talk • contribs) 16:21, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

POV on American falconry

[edit]

If the article is going to cover ways that U.S. regulations annoy falconers, it should also have some discussion of the reason for the regulations and whatever support they get. I can add a little bit on anti-falconry sentiment, maybe next week or the week after. With citations, which this section badly needs for studies that allegedly show that falconry isn't harmful.

I took out the claim that U.S. regulations are heavy-handed by world standards, considering what the article says about the tiny number of falconers allowed in South Korea and the total prohibition in Australia. —JerryFriedman 18:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional falconry

[edit]

First of all, it's a mistake to say that falconr first came from East Asia since it was previousl thought that it was created in Central Asia. Even the Chinese, Koreans and Japanese learned falconry from the Mongols and Kyrgiz. Anyway, I actually wanted to ask if anyone could tell me what birds were traditionally flown by falconers in different countries. I know that the Kazaks used golden eagles and Egyptians had their sakers. I also heard that the lanner falcon was favored in "the Middle East and Meditteranean" which isn't very specific. What about other countries? Bald Eagles have been used in North American falconry sporadically for some period of time. Arguably, the most notable "first account" of a Bald Eagle was as a mascot for a Wisconsin Civil War regiment, circa 1860. The first legitimate hunting use of the Bald Eagle was documented in the Falconer's Club of America Journal (1941-1961) by Daniel Mannix. Dan Mannix used a Bald Eagle for the pursuit of Iguanas in Mexico in the 1950s. Upon signing the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act in 1968, use of Bald Eagles for the sport of falconry was outlawed in the United States but the practice still continues occasionally in Canada. An article in the publication "American Falconry" written in the 1990s outlined the use of Bald Eagles for the pursuit of white tailed jackrabbits in Canada but its use as a falconry bird is very limited.

Beyond the regulatory hinderences the preclude use of the Bald Eagle in falconry, most countries that have bifurcated or wild Bald Eagles also have the Golden Eagle; a more traditional and conducive eagle for the sport of falconry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rookhawk (talk • contribs) 04:08, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Strike-through text==Bald Eagles in Falconry?== Does anyone know how Bald Eagles are used in falconry in Europe?--Jude. 14:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The bald eagle can be used in europe to hunt ground quarry instead of hunting fish like it does in the wild. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackyyll (talk • contribs) 01:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The best place to ask would be the International Falconry Forum. There is a link in the "External Links" section.Gregmik 01:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


It is my understanding that Bald Eagles are not used in falconry due to the fact that they eat fish primarily their hunting style doesn't afford the falconer the opportunity to "make in" and retrieve the kill as they will usually retreat to the treetops to eat and a full bald eagle is not going to fly out of a tree to your glove so they'll stay up in that tree all night and you'll risk losing the eagle. They surly are fast/powerful enough to use for falconry and there are exceptions to this rule, as I'm sure this bird could be taught to kill other quarry though it would not be easy. Mostly I think they are trained for use in flight demonstrations in Europe though I could be wrong. (snafu918 2nd year falconer http://boisefalconry.blogspot.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snafu918 (talk • contribs) 16:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arguably, the most notable "first account" of a Bald Eagle was as a mascot for a Wisconsin Civil War regiment, circa 1860. The first legitimate hunting use of the Bald Eagle was documented in the Falconer's Club of America Journal (1941-1961) by Daniel Mannix. Dan Mannix used a Bald Eagle for the pursuit of Iguanas in Mexico in the 1950s. Upon signing the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act in 1968, use of Bald Eagles for the sport of falconry was outlawed in the United States but the practice still continues occasionally in Canada. An article in the publication "American Falconry" written in the 1990s outlined the use of Bald Eagles for the pursuit of white tailed jackrabbits in Canada but its use as a falconry bird is very limited.

Beyond the regulatory hinderences the preclude use of the Bald Eagle in falconry, most countries that have bifurcated or wild Bald Eagles also have the Golden Eagle; a more traditional and conducive eagle for the sport of falconry.


Please could you tell me the references of your timeline. The timeline seems to be suspect and it is contradictory:

  • 4th Century BC - It is assumed that the Romans learned falconry from the Greeks.
  • 384 BC - Aristotle and other Greeks made references to falconry
  • 70-44 BC - Caesar is reported to have trained falcons to kill carrier pigeons.
  • 500 - a Roman floor mosaic depicts a falconer and his hawk hunting ducks—E. W. Jameson says that this is the earliest reliable evidence of falconry in Europe.

I have informations that the sun of Avitus from the Arverni who fighted at the Battle of Chalons and learned it propably from the Goths or Huns introduced falconery in Rom.--OleIfr (talk) 15:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birds to start with

[edit]

In the United States the type of bird you can start with is limited to 4. An apprentice can have a Red-tailed hawk and a Kestrel in most places. In Alaska only an apprentice may have a Goshawk.(In Florida you can have a Red shoulder but not a Kestrel. ( The permitted may possess only a red-tailed hawk (Buteo iamaicensis) or a red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus)Article IV, Sec.9, Fla. Const. Law 39-9.005 1/19/94 39-9.005 Falconry.)

I thought i'd put this here because the Birds to start With section isn't technically correct and doesn't correlate with the laws in the United States. I do not know how things in the U.K. and other places work though, but i definitely know they can use a Harris' Hawk.

As of the ~2010 changes, federal law no longer limits apprentice birds to 2, 3, 4, or whatever small claimed number of species. State laws vary, but the ones that adopted the federal rules without major modifications will generally allow apprentices to take raptors that are not peregrines, strigiformes, or eagles, and maybe a couple of others. I'd have to look it up for the specific blacklist. The section as is currently written is plainly wrong in this respect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.132.68.148 (talk) 21:28, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get some kbird lovin' in here!?

[edit]
  • The kestrels, both Common and American, although the smallest bird used in falconry and rightfully depicted as not a good beginner's bird, are fully competent gamehawks and can be extremely successful in the right hands. They are ideally suited to the sub-urban and urban falconry that many of us, due to increasing population density, are developing/forced to adopt. Many folks can't or don't want to fly the smaller accipiters (talk about non-beginner birds!!) and can't afford perlins, so a kestrel is truly the only bird that matches the available quarry. I hate to see them dismissed out of hand as if they were truly only suitable for knaves and serfs, when in fact they can be hunted year-round on species classified as vermin (certain sparrows, starlings, and blackbirds) and account for hundreds of kills in a year. The Yahoo Group "Kestrelfans" has nearly 800 members worldwide and continues to grow as our hunting habitats continue to shrink.

63.127.95.175 (talk) 19:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • I read on the internet about a case where someone said that he flew a kestrel and a lanneret together; the lanneret caught partridges; when the lanneret went into moult he flew the kestrel alone, and by imitating it had learned to catch partridges. Conversely, I have seen a gyr-saker which tried to hover like a kestrel because it had seen and imitated wild kestrels hovering while it was being trained. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The above example is just a matter of certain circumstances leading to the apparision that the birds have learned from another by seeing it done, there is no proof whatsoever that a raptor has ever learned from another raptor just by watching it. Regarding the kestrel story the case is quite easy to explain, when the lanner went to moult it is spring time and by the time the kestrel started catching partridge there were most probably young partridge easy to kill for a bird new to catching game. And Gyr Sakers as well as pure gyrs will hover, thats their natural behaviour not because they have seen it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.91.122.106 (talk) 07:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Image (?)

[edit]

from TiHa —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.136.230.137 (talk) 11:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger

[edit]

training Owls

[edit]

the tiny portion dedicated to the use of owls in falconry is quite poorly written. nearly all owl species can be used in falconry and have been very successful. the only part of training owls that is different from raptors is that you have to hand-rear and imprint them in order to train them successfully. Owls are definitely much less intelligent than other birds of prey. you need to give them a ruitene (sorry can't spell) otherwise they forgot what they are meant to do. for example, I saw a Siberian Eagle Owl in a demonstration which was constantly gripping the ground because she kept forgetting to let go. That is hardly what I would call intelligent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.168.93.3 (talk) 12:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


I would disagree with your statement that most owls can be used in falconry. I would say that most if not all owls can be used for flight demonstrations however that is not falconry. The larger and more intelligent owls have been used successfully in falconry but the smaller owls are really only suited for catching mice and voles, and while they will do well in flight demonstrations they are not good falconry birds Snafu918 (talk) 20:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Even for ones used in falconry, I certainly wouldn't say they are "very successful". Every story I hear the falconer says the owl starts off okay enough, but eventually quits or becomes less successful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.201.127.94 (talk) 04:24, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Falconry illegal in Australia?

[edit]

I know this is true however there is no citation and i can't find the legislation for this. Does anyone have a legal background who can help find the specific act that outlaws falconry in Australia? I believe it happen around 1975. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1NosferatuZodd1 (talk • contribs) 14:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definition not clear

[edit]

Pardon my ignorance but I find the current lead definition of falconry to be most unhelpful. What is it exactly? Is falconry just letting birds fly away and come back with a prey? danielkueh (talk) 22:03, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion

[edit]

I'm copying this from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Birds for your consideration:

I am reading falconry site. Falcon was symbol of some Mongolian tribes and some ancient historical course shows the pictures. You should be check the pictures of falconry on the themes of Persian ancient miniatures which is related Mongolian empire. That would be interesting for falconry site. (Badamsambuu. G202.131.235.68 (talk) 11:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)).

I must say that as the article says falconry may have begun in that region, a Persian or other Middle Eastern work of art showing falconry might be a good addition to the article, if available. —JerryFriedman (Talk) 20:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Senior project

[edit]

I am wondering if doing this would be a good senior project. I would only do this for about a school year and I would have to wright a report at the end of it but would it be a good idea. Nhog (talk) 18:31, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Useful reference

[edit]

For anyone interested in the history of falconry, I recommend this scholarly article: Edward H. Schafer, "Falconry in T'ang Times," T'oung Pao , Second Series, Vol. 46, Livr. 3/5 (1958), pp. 293-338, JSTOR. Keahapana (talk) 00:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Literature & Film

[edit]

Wot? no mention of Barry Hines Kestrel For A Knave? Shame on you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.146.68 (talk) 07:52, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And Ken Loach's 1969 film Kes based on the book? And H is for Hawk by Helen Macdonald? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.236.224 (talk) 16:40, 3 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Species for beginners

[edit]

From the page:

In North America only the American Kestrel and the Red-tailed Hawk are permitted for a beginner falconer during his/her apprenticeship

This seems to be an incomplete or incorrect statement. In Colorado, the regulations read that only those two wild caught species are allowed, but it seems that others are allowed if they are captive-bred. In Louisiana they also appear to allow red-shouldered hawks and this seems to be changing to allow more species. I am far from an expert on this subject (just reading up on it), so I am adding a citation needed tag. Hopefully someone who knows more about it can clean up or elaborate more in that section.

--HrafnWyrd (talk) 22:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What species?

[edit]

Some kind of falcon was used in the film Silent Running (1972). I obtained a picture, here. Does anyone recognise the species? Kintaro (talk) 23:36, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok... I now think it's a Harris's Hawk... isn't it? Kintaro (talk) 14:27, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Terms derived from falconry fix

[edit]

Bated breath and 'in a bate' are known to come from a verb 'bate' shortened from 'abate'. They are not Falconry related. Fed up is recent slang, a shortening of 'fed up to my back teeth'. I added some citations as well for ones I could find. Some things seem unlikely on this page, but I can't find a source either way so I left them alone to allow someone with access to other etymology systems to find a source for them. 50.175.40.46 (talk) 05:53, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chickenry

[edit]
Chickenry is a popular adaptation of the sport of falconry by those who lack the means to acquire and train actual raptors.

Found this recent addition by surprise, rather than from watchlist. Good for a laugh, but regrettably it can't stay. Pelagic (talk) 20:46, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But how does it work??

[edit]

I feel that this is a very important omission. Nowhere does it say how one actually hunts with these birds, or if they even do any of the hunting. --184.254.133.119 (talk) 12:11, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

1.) They do hunt 2.) The article really could use some exposition on how hunting is done

My main issue is that writing a hunting section that's general enough is challenging. Each type of bird has its own niche, and oftentimes falconers do things their own way. Also, you need to account for worldwide variation, since falconry is practiced in the U.S., the U.K. (and Europe in general), Saudi Arabia (where it's arguably more popular than anywhere else), and Japan. Which hunting methods would be representative?

Do we cover hunting squirrels with red-tails, which is somewhat popular in the U.S., but perhaps not anywhere else (to my knowledge)? Mongolian eagle falconry? U.S. eagle falconry? Saudi falcon races? People who throw their tiny accipiters at flocks of small birds like a football? Car hawking? I'm not sure that a complete list of methods would be achievable, primarily because there's a wide variety that's heavily dependent on region, environment, and local falconry culture. And even if it was, a lot of it would probably be minutiae that's too detailed for a general audience.

I do think there are ways to, at the bare minimum, establish a general expectation. One ought to come away with the understanding that the birds are working for themselves and they do not return with the prey, that in general hunting is the art of finding game, putting the raptor in a favorable position, and making the prey as vulnerable as possible, that hunting is rather often unsuccessful, and that one cannot will the bird to chase a specific animal in a specific way. Doing this in an encyclopedic fashion would be challenging. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CKraniak (talk • contribs) 17:14, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tyto alba - Cetrería - 01.jpg to appear as POTD soon

[edit]

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Tyto alba - Cetrería - 01.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on November 29, 2016. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2016-11-29. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:26, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Barn owl falconry
A barn owl (Tyto alba) returning to its falconer's hand. Owls are relatively uncommon in falconry compared to hawks and falcons, and training them is considered difficult.Photograph: Carlos Delgado
Archive – More featured pictures...
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Falconry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Further reading section

[edit]

The further reading section lists a lot of articles by the same author, all on the Kazakh tradition of hunting with eagles. It would be more helpful to only list only one or two overview articles on this subject, and where appropriate to use the other articles to add information to the Wikipedia article and provide inline links. Vejlenser (talk) 08:24, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So...what the heck is it exactly?

[edit]

I visited this page to learn what falconry actually is and found no adequate explanation. This is the first and only time I can say, I'm equally as ignorant after reading this article as I was before reading it.

So what is falconry?

I see the first sentence mentioned a hunt of some kind? I didn't recognize the term for what's being hunted - if in fact this is what the sentence conveys at all.

So how does a falconer find a falcon? How or why does the bird trust the person? Is it the same falcon each time or is it always different? How is this initiated?

Sorry to be so blunt - it's just frustrating because it's like the article wasn't written to be conducive to learning - rather it reads as if it was written exclusively for experts.

Sooooo what the heck is falconry??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:CC00:2341:F041:EE41:5838:FDB2 (talk) 14:20, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Basically what I'm asking in its simplest form is, a man goes outside and extends his arm and a bird lands - WHAT IS HAPPENING HERE? I don't care about species or technique or any varying details.

I just want to know where the bird came from (did the falconer catch it himself?) and if it returns to the person's arm? If so, why? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:1C0:CC00:2341:F041:EE41:5838:FDB2 (talk) 14:28, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point about the source and training of the birds not being well-covered here. There are a couple of sections in Falconry training and technique, but that article looks like it's getting moved to Wikibooks. Short answer is that the birds must be carefully raised and trained from a young age; they are either bred in captivity or captured when less than a year old. Pelagic (talk) 21:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I'm not comfortable with the restriction "wild quarry in its natural state and habitat" in the opening sentence. Trained raptors are also used for pest control and even to 'hunt' drone helicopters. Pelagic (talk) 21:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see that definition is on the IAF home page. Pelagic (talk) 23:14, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Drone "hunting" is a gimmick. Until I start seeing reputable falconers trying it or forum posts or literally anything besides one single news piece that no falconer I know has acknowledged it is a gimmick. The one time I've been in a field where a Gyr-peregrine could have tagged its training drone I deliberately bailed the drone so it wouldn't jack up its feet / get injured, and I have since heard stuff on facebook about people who's birds have been hurt by the rotors. (This being for drone training (see kite / balloon training), not drone "hunting".)
The "hunting wild quarry in its natural habitat" is more "proper" falconry, if you will. Other types of human interation with raptors being lure flying, educational display / flying (which is different from falconry and licensed differently), rehabilitation (which is different from falconry and licensed differently), abatement / "pest control" (which is different from falconry and licensed differently), and what we / they like to pejoratively call "pet-keeping," which is only falconry in the sense that you need a "falconry" license to have your pet.
My personal opinion is it's not really wrong to do "pet-keeping" in an ethical sense, just wrong to try to call it falconry, since falconry implies you're trying to hunt with your bird, and as it stands licenses give "pet-keepers" no choice in what they're called. That being said I'm sure the UK folks could give good solid reasons why they don't like their pet-keepers over there.) The position of some of the lines will vary depending on the interviewee's personal opinion and / or politics.
The main reason to define it like this is to elucidate the purpose of falconry-related activities, training, and whatnot (i.e. hunting is the point), and to distinguish it clearly from the other ways you can interact with a raptor. Falconry revolves around getting out and flying game, and if you aren't doing that (or at least trying to) you just have a fancy pet. The "wild quarry in its natural habitat" would disambiguate from releasing farm-raised animals or other not-exactly-"hunting" forms of hunting; I'm not convinced this is necessary. (Carhawking makes the "natural habitat" bit a little absurd. Catchin' grackles in the Wally World parking lot, baby. Falconry.) I'd have to ask one of the NAFA folks why they care about that particular turn of phrase; I think I'd be fine calling falconry "a form of hunting utilizing a raptor to catch prey in cooperation with a human participant", or something like that.
As far as training goes, a truly comprehensive work does not exist. There's regional variants (e.g. Mongolia, Japan (probably), Pakistan), and there's got to be at least 20 ways to hunt with a raptor just in the US. Even for a single bird the technique is so variable: a peregrine can be an eyass, chamber-raised, or passage, and you could hack them on top of that. With said peregrine you can hawk ducks or upland game, and there's someone out in ... west TX? AZ? ... that hunt rabbits with longwings so WHO EVEN KNOWS?
Laws: every state is different, every country is different. Licensing / the apprentice-general-master thing are US-only, I think. UK is no license. Saudis I think you just need a tractor with cash in the scoop (exaggerating). In Israel it's forbidden. New Zealand just recently(-ish) legalized it, but only with their local New Zealand ... buzzard? harrier? I don't remember.
The article obviously needs to be rewritten. I did start a rewrite (... a year ago?) but the hard part for me is deciding where to draw the line between "encyclopedic" and "too much", 'cause falconry itself is probably as variable as cuisine is; people do their own thing, and whatever's "common" in one place can't even exist in another due to variations in local land layout, laws, game available, local culture, local old-timers' experience, etc. I don't think you could realistically summarize everything , but I also don't know if there's a good way to decide which forms of falconry should be featured. I would argue the hunting / training / equipment styles might be broken down by region instead of ... whatever this thing is now.
Also, St. Albes needs its own article or something, maybe just a blurb in this one. That list is stupid; nobody has cared for at least 300 years.
I could drop a ton of NAFA or THA magazine references. But I want to see a better rewrite first. CKraniak (talk) 09:41, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also if you like y'all can take a look at the article I started and give me some feedback: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CKraniak/sandbox
I could use proofreaders and / or someone to make sure the structure is good, etc. It's obviously half-done, and maybe I'm a little biased but I like it more. CKraniak (talk) 10:16, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Falconry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:03, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Falconry. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:21, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Book of St Albans

[edit]

Listing of birds on this page is different to one in dedicated page. For example, Eagle is moved to Earl and Vulture is removed. This edit was made by user Lankamaster in Feb 28, 2018, with no references given. Trying to track back to original source (the book), it seems that the original edit was correct so I am changing it back. --Mikoyan21 (talk) 17:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:23, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Literature and Film

[edit]

No mention of US prime time television show FALCON CREST? 23.242.214.23 (talk) 17:41, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Falconry&oldid=1212939453"