**2. Concept of anti-predator behavior**

Captive breeding has a prominent effect on the well-being of gamebirds that are exposed to major alterations in their behaviors [18]. Fear of birds, run-down fostering, and motherly care was found to be associated with poor survival skills in the wild. Thereby, there is an increasing concern about natural and semi-natural rearing methods that may guarantee more successful releasing programs [19]. The altered behaviors are partially attributed to the absence of parental care during rearing and lack exposure to predators [20]. Accommodating these drawbacks is costly in terms of both labor and capital [7].

Predators can impact the costs associated with gamebird production in both direct (i.e., predation) and indirect (i.e., disturbance of reproductive birds) ways [8]. The economic losses suffered by the game industry due to predators may reach the order of millions of dollars to the game industry. The anti-predator (AP) training is an

*Intensive Farming and Welfare Regarding Anti-Predator Behavior of Chukar… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106371*

economical treatment for developing an early fear practice in chicks that sequel in improved predator avoidance [21]. If AP training is provided during an early age, it can be beneficial in terms of survival in the wild [11].

Many empirical approaches for stimulating and shaping AP behavior can be found in the literature [22–24] and are generally grouped in the following broad categories: (1) The flight initiation (FI) test aims at stimulating a flight response against a human intruder and is quantified by the distance, defined as the minimum distance for eliciting the flight response in birds; (2) The novel object (NO) tests simulate a happenstance with a novel item, usually associated with a food resource [25]; (3) The emergence/escape tests (ET) estimate the propensity of wandering into an unfamiliar or potentially dangerous environment from an instinctively harmless location [26]; Finally, (4) the predator exposure tests present the predator in a controlled manner to elicit its scrutiny or alarm calls under predation danger [27].

On the other hand, boldness - the exploration of the intimate habitat for food or other resources [24]—is usually assessed in conjunction with the threatening stimuli associated with the resources being utilized [24, 28]. In pheasants, boldness is described in terms of their exploration of food and novel objects. Training and application of the aforementioned AP tests can produce near-to-wild behavior in game birds. The early life of chicks in captivity is crucial for the development of such behaviors. Some training can induce stress in birds, but in the long term, these are beneficial [3], assuring the bird's survival in the wild once released.

As validated for other wild species, the AP training should be an essential part and parcel of the captive management of the species' restocking or reintroduction process [29]. Several authors called for the need of carrying out more AP behavior assessments for game birds in captivity (e.g., [2]). Exposure to predators can be potentially beneficial to captive-reared game birds destined to be released. However, the feasibility of providing AP training stimuli should be evaluated carefully. In fact, the consequences of exposure to living predators are still unknown.

When game birds are reared either for conservation, reintroduction, hunting, or meat purposes, it is mandatory to ensure the overall welfare of the birds. This study will ensure welfare through getting insights on the building-up of appropriate wild instincts and behavior in intensively reared Chukars and exploring the potential of captive breeding for future release programs to restock wild Chukar populations. This chapter also aimed to provide guidelines to produce gamebird still maintaining wild behavior through ethological experiments.
