MISCELLANEOUS NOTES. 509 



of the Falconidce, about which there can be absolutely no doubt ; yet exactly 

 the same argument holds good in their case, viz., that a hawk or falcon will 

 almost invariably overlook a stationary bird.' 



I have, myself, time and again proved this to be the case, when trying to 

 catch falcons. Not long ago, I had my nets out with a white pigeon between 

 them, waiting for a Hodgson's Hawk-eagle, which soared over my bungalow 

 every afternoon. He arrived, my pigeon saw it and sat absolutely still, and 

 though the eagle was not 50 yards above it, appeared not to see it and conti- 

 nued ringing, higher and higher till I pulled the string, the pigeon fluttered 

 and the eagle was in the net before 5 seconds had gone. This was in an open 

 spot with dense jungle all round and a white pigeon on the bright green grass, 

 just about as conspicuous an object as one could well find anywhere, yet when 

 still, it was passed over by the eagle. This same species I have caught with a 

 rat, across a deep valley, at least 300 yards across, so there can be no question 

 of its being long sighted. 



In the same way I have waited for long minutes for a peregrine falcon 

 which would not look at a tame pigeon set behind a noose, right in front of it, 

 till the pigeon has moved or fluttered, and yet a peregrine will drop from the 

 heavens or appear from " nowhere " when another falcon, a decoy, is thrown 

 out in an open plain with a few feathers mixed with horse-hair nooses tied to 

 its leg, taking the feathers for a bird, in the decoy's claws. 



I could quote similar instances, ad lib. almost, to show that at least the 

 " hunting " birds do not notice stationary objects, and perhaps the same 

 applies in the mammals. It is not that they cannot or do not see them, for 

 they must. An object that is visible to a man at a hundred yards must be so 

 to an eagle at 50, and yet is unmolested till it moves. On the other hand a 

 " Lammergeyer " will see a bone in a dark ravine as he glides past, some 

 300 feet above it, and the same applies to kites, crows, vultures and such like, 

 but these are not " hunting " birds. 



Are their eyes keener than the hawk-eagles, hawks or falcons ? I should 

 doubt it. 



The birds which are in the habit of killing their own prey never seem to 

 notice or even look at a motionless object, and when they do see it, do not 

 appear to realize that it is worthy of note and so pass on. It is not because 

 they disdain to touch what is not of their own killing, as many books would have 

 us believe; for they will. Take a dead quail or any other bird, ruffle its 

 feathers a little and throw it out in front of a sparrow-hawk sitting on a tree 

 and see how often he will refuse it ? Or tie a string to its leg and pull it past 

 the tree the hawk is sitting on and it is ten to one he will come for it. Seeing 

 it move he possibly thinks it is alive, but he surely knows it is not the moment 

 he catches it, but once caught he will not drop it because it is dead. 



A man huddled up in a " machan " making himself as inconspicuous as he 

 possibly can with leaves and branches to aid him, might well be passed over. 

 I have frequently deceived crows on a kill by keeping still, and nobody can 



