HELP HELP, SAKER FALCON, FALCONRY
STEALTH B
hello people
I have a male saker falcon of two years he was flown by an aprentice
falconer at one time was flow to the lure
and was coming to the lure quite fine at 650grs. Here is where the problem
starts. The aprentice moved away and I bought the bird from him. At that
time almost six months ago I was moving from old house to new and had no
time to follow up with the traning. I put him in the mews and did not fly
him for a few months. Now that I have moved in and want to fly him he is
incredibly resistant to any type of manning. i sit in a low level lit room
at night after work and try to coax to come down. Even if a have little
tid bits of food he grabs the food and tears off my arm for the floor. He
is ill mannered for sure he foots me and will not let me touch him in any
way. I try to gently caress him and he just bates off my arm. I am trying
to calm the bird down but evrything i have tried has failed. Some one give
me some advice. Please.
STEALTH B
DBSCIENTIF
You said an apprentice had the bird and you bought it from him. This I
believe is illegal. As far as I know an apprentice can only keep a red
tail or kestrel and can not sell a bird. Something sounds fishy
here.!!!!!!!
Robert K. Oglesbee
Howdy,
I had a female saker and she was the same way. I had to tie the bird
to my glove and send days walking around and even working around the house
with her before she could be called manned. I also found that if I left
her for a week or more she would take a long time to settle on my glove.
She became a great bird after a lot a manning time. I flew her
at 2 lbs 2.5 ozs. She took many a duck, she even took a few rabbits.
I never could touch her much she just did not like it. It just took
a lot of time to mann her.
I would spend a lot of time with your bird, day and nite he will
come around. Good Luck and e-mail me with how he is doing.
Bobby
TwoButeos
I beleive that if he does not use the saker, a non-native bird, for
falconry, it IS legal to own, however, I do believe his attempt is to hunt
the bird, from his own statement. Also, if he bought the saker from an
apprentice, shame on that apprentice's sponsor for allowing him to handle
falcons or other birds until he is competent enough to handle the hardy,
easily manned and excellent hunting red-tail.
Dave Quinn
stea...@aol.com (STEALTH B) wrote:
<SNIP>
>Now that I have moved in and want to fly him he is
>incredibly resistant to any type of manning. i sit in a low level lit room
>at night after work and try to coax to come down.
I am not sure I understand what you mean. Are you saying that you are
trying to man the bird by calling it to the fist for food?
If this is the case then I am very surprised that the bird even tries
to snatch the food - it must be *really* hungry. This is definitely
NOT what is meant by manning the bird. There is also no way that you
should try to proceed via coaching from this group - you need someone
there with you. My advise would be to feed the bird up quickly, find
some proper help and start again.
If I have missed the point then I appologise, but there are some very
worrying hints in your post.
Dave
TwoButeos
I agree, I don't think anyone was actually "coaching" they guy, and I do
believe that everyone in the group advised him to get someone who knows
what their doing to help him, IN PERSON
BrCr1
Recently, Twobuteos wrote a response to the person with the Saker,about
the legality of owning such a bird.Now I have a question!Why would it be
legal to own the bird if it wasn't used for falconry?Wouldn't they still
need some type of permit?Any and all answers would be appreciated,as you
might have guessed,I'm new at this!
Thanks, Jodi
Jeffrey M. Jones
illegal to own/possess a bird of prey in the US. I have no idea what the
rules and regulations are in other countries.
Robert K. Oglesbee
In article <4uubck$e...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, br...@aol.com (BrCr1) says:
>
>Recently, Twobuteos wrote a response to the person with the Saker,about
>the legality of owning such a bird.Now I have a question!Why would it be
>legal to own the bird if it wasn't used for falconry?Wouldn't they still
>need some type of permit?Any and all answers would be appreciated,as you
>might have guessed,I'm new at this!
>Thanks, Jodi
No he would not need any thing. It is not a US migratory bird so it could
be keeped as a pet.
Hawk
Travis Wheatley
ha...@falcon.cy-net.net (Hawk) wrote:
[snip]
JodiUnless you're working for a zoo or you're a licensed
falconer it's
>>illegal to own/possess a bird of prey in the US. I have no idea what the
>>rules and regulations are in other countries.
>
>Sorry, but it is not illegal to own a bird of prey in the US if it is a
>non US migratory bird. (i.e. Sakers, lanner, ....).
>
>
>Hawk
Does that mean that one who has no falconry license and no
experience what so ever can legally practice falconry with
non-migratory birds of prey?
Are there state regulations that might prevent this?
What about hunting laws? Don't the hunting laws for each state
specifically define the act of taking game with a bird of prey
falconry, and as such require a falconry license?
Perhaps one can legally posess a non-migratory bird of prey
without a license. But, can one hunt (practice falconry) with
one without a license?
Buteo regalis
I'm pretty sure you are mistaken, as it is illegal to own any part of (and
I assume whole) a bird of prey without a permit in this country. I don't
think it would be wise or fair to try and keep any raptor as a "pet" and
it could land a person in a lot of legal trouble if they went about it the
wrong way. It might be wise to check out other restrictions before you
make assumptions; simply because it does not fall into the 'migratory
bird' category does not mean that there are no other laws governing it.
This is not meant in any way to be offensive, it is only advice and can be
taken or left. :)
Buteo regalis
\|/ \|/
| |
Hawk
In article <32147C...@msms.org>, "Jeffrey M. Jones" <jmj...@msms.org> says:
>
>BrCr1 wrote:
>>
>> Recently, Twobuteos wrote a response to the person with the Saker,about
>> the legality of owning such a bird.Now I have a question!Why would it be
>> legal to own the bird if it wasn't used for falconry?Wouldn't they still
>> need some type of permit?Any and all answers would be appreciated,as you
>> might have guessed,I'm new at this!
BrCr1
Thanks for the replies!Next question.........what would the general
falconry public think of such an individual? (one who kept an imported
raptor as a "pet"?Again,all opinions appreciated.
Jodi
Jeffrey M. Jones
Robert K. Oglesbee wrote:
>
> In article <4uubck$e...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, br...@aol.com (BrCr1) says:
> >
> >the legality of owning such a bird.Now I have a question!Why would it be
> >legal to own the bird if it wasn't used for falconry?Wouldn't they still
> >need some type of permit?Any and all answers would be appreciated,as you
> >might have guessed,I'm new at this!
>
> No he would not need any thing. It is not a US migratory bird so it could
> be keeped as a pet.
>
all the time and you don't need a dog trainers license to train one of
those. So someone could buy a Saker without having any experience with
any other bird of prey? What about a bird like the praire falcon, are
those clasified as a US migratory? I don't think it migrates at all. If
it is legal to do something like this I still believe that one should go
through it the legal, because if you can't take the time to go through
it legally then you don't have the patience needed for falconry.
JBever9879
In article <4v2ort$n...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, br...@aol.com (BrCr1)
writes:
>what would the general
>falconry public think of such an individual? (one who kept an imported
>raptor as a "pet"?Again,all opinions appreciated.
Wow ! a really loaded question. This one requires a well thought out
answer. My initial feeling is that a person who "pet keeps"..(has a bird
for showing off purposes, never hunts it, and likes to take it to the
mall) is not a person who will ever fully realize the " true essence " of
Falconry. This person has missed the point! He will never be able to
watch his bird reach a masterful level of its intended purpose. To hunt
and kill. To fly, and stoop! He will never understand what causes
falconers to have failed marriages, or why job security is often
compromised for the passions of the field. The joy of releasing a passage
bird will be a delight that he/she could never
understand............Posession of birds should be for those who
understand these things. These are my initial thoughts........ Upon
thinking more clearly.............. my initial thoughts are unfounded.
The idea that a pet keeper shouldn't be able to have a bird because he/she
will never realize a birds full potential,or that he/she will not live up
to my standards as a falconer .... is not the real issue. the issue in my
opinion...is... who am I to judge how a person should derive pleasure
from thier choice of birds as long as it they also follow within the laws.
Ethically, I think it's deplorable to not spend proper time in the field
with a bird. However.... It's not up to me or the govt. to regulate that.
The bird in question if legally obtained is not a detriment to the
population. In my opinion it's very like owning a dog.(if speaking of
legally obtained birds) Anyone should be able to have one. The govt.
should not be involved with determining who can and who cannot have a dog.
I have met people who have mistreated, unloved unappreciated dogs. This
fact makes me mad. I think many are not qualified to have dogs! But at
the same time...what criteria is everyone going to agree on that will
allow every facet of dog ownership to be covered. I think lap dogs are
useless. So should all who want to posess a dog for sitting on the lap and
companionship be not allowed to have a dog. I think having a pointer for
the sole purpose of companionship is terrible. That type of dog needs to
be hunted! Should no one own a pointer unless it will be used to it's
fullest potential? These are made up opinions I'm trying to make a point.
i feel I am rather lacking in debate skills and writing in general. What I
hoped to illustrate is that If birds are captive bred or removed from the
wild without detriment to the natural order of things.... who is to judge
how a person derives pleasure from posessing a bird! Bottom line is NO ONE
CAN!
This goes against my deepest feelings to admit this! It really does.(
saying anyone should be able to posess birds) But falconers will never
realize the goal of unrestricted bird posession and the ability to trade
and breed birds and to hunt them as it was in the past,.. unless we argue
the bottom line! If Bird posession and usage does not harm the natural
order of things then there should be no restrictions on thier usage.
I know this will get many responses. I hope to play gos's role here. I'd
like to get some advancement on the issue. I'm really curiouss what
others think and would like to examine my own ideas with input from the
rest of you
Jason Bever
jbeve...@aol.com
jason Florida
Anyone seen my MERLIN?
GoHawking
To keep injured, non-releasable, educational birds, I see as an act of
charity!
But for a person to obtain a healthy bird, regardless of it's native
habitat, and not spend the time "legally" with any raptor, to fly and hunt
with these birds, that they are responsible for, just does not understand
falconry. They would not be credible, and do not deserve respect.
Of course there can always be unusual circumstances.
Ken Welch
"Stop talking, and go hawking"
Member of : North American Falconry Association
North Carolina Falconry Guild
Roy
In article <4v4hba$i...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, jbeve...@aol.com says...
>
are unfounded.
>The idea that a pet keeper shouldn't be able to have a bird because he/she
>will never realize a birds full potential,or that he/she will not live up
>to my standards as a falconer .... is not the real issue.
I think it goes to the heart of the issue. Here in B.C. you are not allowed to
keep a "pet" bird of prey. You get a permit issued for the use of Falconry. The
only way to keep a bird not used for falconry is if you have a zoo permit or a
breeding facility. True there are lots of so called falconers who are really
pet keepers but they should be encouraged to practice proper falconry. They may
not have to live up to our expectations but they should have to live up to the
wording on their permit.
Just another point. Are breeders pet keepers?
Roy
DuaneZob
It seems as if there is a lot of misconception as to what is legal and
what is not, if a bird does not migrate does that make it non-migratiry,
etc. This debate that is going on shows part of the problem with falconry
currently. A lot of people operate on heresay but have never picked up the
regs and read them and understood them. I don't mean the incomplete pages
of 50 CFR that USF&W sends you with your license.
50 CFR holds all the answers on the federal level. It is important to
remeber that state laws might vary.
A person can own a saker, lanner, lugger because they are not listed as
migratory birds in the list 50 CFR 10.13. Also not included in this list
are Steppe and Tawny Eagles as well as Barbary Falcons.
Most of these birds are listed as CITES class II or III so they do need
import permits if they are being brought in from outside of the US.
So, federally speaking a person can own(and it is an actual ownership, as
opposed to the limited use stewardship granted to migratory birds) a non
indeigenous, non protected species. In order to fly that bird after game
however, a person does need to posses a falconry license.
The gray area in all this is if a person flying a Saker after game needs
to complete a 3186a and report that bird as one in possesion. I have never
recieved the same answer twice from USF&W and the regs do not cover that
issue.
REmeber that states regs might vary. Some states consider possesion of a
bird of prey the practice of falconry.
Duane Zobrist
dan_mccarron
Forgive me, but why are we even giving this guy the time of day? Pet keeper or
falconer, who cares? Just look at the post title; "HELP HELP, SAKER FALCON,
FALCONRY". Doesn't the title strike you a little odd?
Technically speaking people, and I'm climbing out on a limb here, that saker's
source or how it was obtained (if you will) is still protected under CITES
(Conference on the International Trade in Endangered Species.) It's degree of
protection is dependent on it's appendix listing (I,II,or III).
Under this international treaty, listed species (and sakers are, I just don't know
what appendix listing they're under) have to be legally obtained under the various
CITES conditions. Appendix I listed animals are the most carefully regulated
species. I think sakers are Appendix II, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
So, where did this saker come from? Was it captive born, or legally imported with
all the paperwork/documentation. RECAP: Pet or not, it still had to be "legally
obtained".
The whole thing just smells a little funny, like a trout on the back porch, on a
hot August afternoon. Why don't we all just tell this guy to contact his friendly
neighborhood state Game and Fish Department or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
office, that's what they get paid for. That is, if he lives in the U.S. If he
doesn't, well, I apologize for wasting all of your time.
HELP HELP HELP, SAKER SAKER SAKER, what are you kidding?
My best to all,
Dan McCarron
Steve Crook
jbeve...@aol.com (JBever9879) wrote:
>In article <4v2ort$n...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, br...@aol.com (BrCr1)
>writes:
>
>>what would the general
>>falconry public think of such an individual? (one who kept an imported
>>raptor as a "pet"?Again,all opinions appreciated.
>
>Wow ! a really loaded question. This one requires a well thought out
>answer.
[ ... snip a nice bit of rambling :) ...]
> These are my initial thoughts........ Upon
>thinking more clearly.............. my initial thoughts are unfounded.
>The idea that a pet keeper shouldn't be able to have a bird because he/she
>will never realize a birds full potential,or that he/she will not live up
>to my standards as a falconer .... is not the real issue. the issue in my
>opinion...is... who am I to judge how a person should derive pleasure
>from thier choice of birds as long as it they also follow within the laws.
It's not just how YOU feel about it but what about the BIRD ?
>Ethically, I think it's deplorable to not spend proper time in the field
>with a bird. However.... It's not up to me or the govt. to regulate that.
>The bird in question if legally obtained is not a detriment to the
>population. In my opinion it's very like owning a dog.(if speaking of
>legally obtained birds) Anyone should be able to have one. The govt.
>should not be involved with determining who can and who cannot have a dog.
>I have met people who have mistreated, unloved unappreciated dogs. This
>fact makes me mad. I think many are not qualified to have dogs! But at
>the same time...what criteria is everyone going to agree on that will
>allow every facet of dog ownership to be covered.
Not a chance, but the request was for 'opinions'
>I think lap dogs are useless.
Not at all, they keep your lap warm. It's as DOGS they're hopeless.
>So should all who want to posess a dog for sitting on the lap and
>companionship be not allowed to have a dog. I think having a pointer for
>the sole purpose of companionship is terrible. That type of dog needs to
>be hunted! Should no one own a pointer unless it will be used to it's
>fullest potential?
Agreed (in principle) but surely the pointer at least has generations
of Human contact to fall back on so it can have some sort of life
if it's not working. At least it will probably be taken out for walks
(or even 'runs'). The keeper of the 'pet' raptor probably (? - certainly)
wouldn't be able to excercise it properly.
>These are made up opinions I'm trying to make a point.
>i feel I am rather lacking in debate skills and writing in general. What I
>hoped to illustrate is that If birds are captive bred or removed from the
>wild without detriment to the natural order of things.... who is to judge
>how a person derives pleasure from posessing a bird! Bottom line is NO ONE
>CAN!
>
>
>This goes against my deepest feelings to admit this! It really does.(
>saying anyone should be able to posess birds) But falconers will never
>realize the goal of unrestricted bird posession and the ability to trade
>and breed birds and to hunt them as it was in the past,.. unless we argue
>the bottom line! If Bird posession and usage does not harm the natural
>order of things then there should be no restrictions on thier usage.
>
>I know this will get many responses. I hope to play gos's role here. I'd
>like to get some advancement on the issue. I'm really curiouss what
>others think and would like to examine my own ideas with input from the
>rest of you
>
I'd add the qualifier
"anyone who can show they will take reasonable care of it"
However that's no more than the qualifier I'd put on the ownership
of ANY animal, especially any WILD animal.
The trouble is that the idea of a raptor as a 'pet' tends to imply
the sort of man (it's ALWAYS a man) who walks around with a pit-bull
straining at the leash because he thinks it makes him look tough.
Is there a reason that I missed why the original question was
about IMPORTED raptors. Surely it applies to ANY.
There was a book & TV series here in the UK about a Zoo (and exotic
animals) vet (can't recall his name). He came upon some REAL
horrors but that was before our Wild Animal registration acts.
Was there a reason for the question or was it just as a discussion
point ?
Steve
TwoButeos
RIGHT! Yep, he hit it on the head!!
TwoButeos
Hawk, I do believe you have to have a permit to possess exotic wildlife.
You do have to have a falconry permit, in the state of florida, to hunt
with any bird of prey, but I can still, as an apprentice, hunt with a
SAKER, as long as I have the proper papers to back possession of the bird.
Everyone would own tigers, pumas, bobcats, Tawny's, etc., if there were no
permitting requirements. I've checked this with US GFC
TwoButeos
You almost got it...you can get permits to possess birds of prey from
other countries, but you MUST be a licensed falconer to practice falcorny,
as well has have the propery quarry stamps ( if you taking the game, if
not, you don't need, say, a duck stamp, but you should have it for
ignorant Game wardens). If you are a federally and state licensed
rehabber, you can practice falcornry to rehab and hack out INDEGENOUS
birds only. You can use rehab/falconry to rehab, say, an injured African
Fishing Eagle, but it will be placed after it's better...
LOL! Mark
Buteo regalis
Here's just another small point to ponder...are hypbrids considered
'indiginous'? If not, who governs their ownership? Are they then also
legal to possess (as long as they are not uysed for hunting)? Also,
forgive this ignorant question, but is it considered as hunting by the
feds if you use bagged game? I would think not, but then, not everything
they say makes sense...
Buteo regalis
\|/ \|/
| |
JBever9879
Hey Regalis! Think you are wrong! Non native species are not protected by
the US Federal govt. This is why many many birds seen on tv commercials
movies etc... are exotics! Sakers and lanners are more similar to the
nuisance quaker parakeets, and escaped exotic pets in south florida. They
survive and breed, but can be killed trapped etc... no protection under US
laws. Same applies to sakers and Lanners. The fact that migratory birds
are migratory does not afford them protection either. Mallards are
commonly bought and sold, and are migratory! Sure they claim they are
domesticated strain , ...but so're the Peregrines being bred these days.
Hawk
Yes, it would be illegal to train a bird. If it is trained or used for
falconry you must be a permited falconer. Yes Praire falcons do migrate
some, ND is too cold for them in the winter.*smile* I do too, I feel
you should be permited. I just wanted to state what the law said. It
is not perfect.
Buteo regalis
Many apologies, I spoke out of turn. My books are all older (and my
memory dimms on the regulations) and i believed just referred to 'birds of
prey' as a whole, not distinguishing between native and non-native. come
to think of it, they may have been british books...i stand corrected and
will try to stick to topics that i am more familliar with.
TwoButeos
Jason,
I think you are partially correct. THe USG does not protect exotic
species, except you do have to have permits to import, and POSSESS them.
I am sure of this, I've checked. The imported exotic animal's facility
and condition can be inspected by USFWC. They have done It, I have been
there when they inspected properties...
Mark
Geoff Hirschi
duan...@aol.com (DuaneZob) wrote:
>It seems as if there is a lot of misconception as to what is legal and
>what is not, if a bird does not migrate does that make it non-migratiry,
>etc. This debate that is going on shows part of the problem with falconry
>currently. A lot of people operate on heresay but have never picked up the
>regs and read them and understood them. I don't mean the incomplete pages
>of 50 CFR that USF&W sends you with your license.
An additional point to bear in mid when talking about the "migratory
bird act" is that it does not focus on migratory birds. The migratory
bird act was initated as an important international treaty to protect
birds that migrate across U.S. borders.
From there the "cute -n- fluffy" environmentalists warped it to
protect almost all indeginous species of birds, wether protection was
needed or not. If you read through the species listed as being
protected by the migratory bird act, there are many that do NOT
migrate, such as ravens, crows, jays, etc. (I would give some exact
refrences, but I don't have a copy of the act available, sorry.)
I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm all for loosening this act
up a little. Really, why CAN'T falconers hunt larks with merlins and
robins with coopers and miscellaneous native sparrows and passerines
with sharpies? Why CAN'T I keep a pretty blue jay or cardnal feahter
I found while walkin in the woods? I submit there is NO logical,
scientific, or even rational reason "why not." I certainly don't want
to see "non-game" birds slaughtered whilly nilly (like egrets did
during the "egret feather craze in the 20's), but there is a LOT of
reasonable middle ground that is being overlooked.
Geoff
(soap box in hand)
http://developer.microrim.com/geoff/index.html
yzs...@prodigy.com
Geoff Hirschi
Dan McCarron wrote:
> Why don't we all just tell this guy to contact his friendly
>neighborhood state Game and Fish Department or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
>office, that's what they get paid for. That is, if he lives in the U.S. If he
>doesn't, well, I apologize for wasting all of your time.
OOeeeeewwwwww!
EVIL thought.
I like it though ;)
Geoff
DuaneZob
Your question about wether or not a hybrid is indigenous is covered in 50
CFR. There we are told that any bird which is even part protected is fully
protected as if it were pure bred. eg, a Gyr x Saker is still going to be
protected the same as a pure gyr.
Duane Zobrist
dzob...@falconryacademy.com
Bob Smith
The vet was David Taylor the book ZOO VET and the show DAY BY DAY
>
> There was a book & TV series here in the UK about a Zoo (and exotic
> animals) vet (can't recall his name). He came upon some REAL
> horrors but that was before our Wild Animal registration acts.
>
>
> Steve
>
>
Hawk
Yes they would say you are pacticing falconry and deal with you in that
way.
LdyHawk105
Steve,
This thread started when a "falconer" sent in a request for advice on a
saker that he was having trouble manning. Seems he bought the bird from
an apprentice.
Naturally, such statements set off a big hoo-haa in the alt.sport.falconry
community. Being all law-abiding falconers, but not always happys about
it (perhaps), people responded with vigor. I don't believe we've ever
heard back from the original guy. I hope that poor bird didn't buy the
farm.
Jamaica
Hawk
You people are some thing. The person only asked for help, who the hell
are we that we give him a problem when we do not even know what is going
on! You all make being a falconer suck. Get off the high horse. Just
give help. If you think some thing is worng then tell the feds and be
quiet.
Thank you
Hawk
gos...@worldnet.att.net
I've always heard that one uses a boat when trolling.
--
Regards-
Rob
*********************************************************************
"Cannibals prefer those who have no spines."
-Stanislaw Lem, 1963
*********************************************************************
TwoButeos
I think, being a falconer, it IS our responsiblity to help those with
questions....HOWEVER, I also think that we have a right to question those
who may put the safety and well being of a raptor at stake. I think that,
since he has not ever replied, that any bashing has been of his own
doing....
Mark
Hawk
He was given so much help, He did not want to ask for more. I guess we lost
a posible news group user. I guess we should be harder on those others that
asked us for help, even when nothing worng was done.
Hawk
Travis Wheatley
"Karen Irene Tolson Carroll (Thehawkmom)"
>Is is possible for me to see the original posting? I enterered into
>this thread after the original was posting.
Try "dejanews". They have a huge archive of virtually all
articles posted to any given internet newsgroup.
I believe their address is www.dejanews.com.
Karen Irene Tolson Carroll (Thehawkmom)
Is is possible for me to see the original posting? I enterered into