hawks and would a rooster defend hens

[deerman]

Quote:
Yep just read a post where a guy was fine 60,000 for killing hawks.....and State DNR do check forums for those bragging about killing them. Protected by Federal laws no matter what State you are in.

 

[Amigatec]

Quote:
FYI--Killing birds of prey is a big bad no-no and carries a hefty fine and possibly jail time, certainly not something to brag about on an open forum.

In the State of Oklahoma it's legal to shoot birds that are killing your chickens.


Oklahoma

Oklahoma Statutes Annotated Currentness. Title 29. Game and Fish. Chapter 1. Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Code. Article V. Game. Part 4. Protected Game. § 5-410. Hawks; falcons; owls; eagles

Statute Details
Printable Version
Citation: OK ST T. 29 § 5-410

Citation: 29 Okl. St. Ann. § 5-410

Last Checked by Web Center Staff: 10/2010

Summary:

Oklahoma law prohibits the knowing and willful killing or molestation of hawks, falcons, owls, or eagles, or their nests, eggs, or young. The only exceptions to this prohibition are the taking of a hawk or owl in the act of destroying domestic birds or fowl, or the use of hawks, owls, falcons, or eagles by licensed falconers. For discussion of federal Eagle Act, see Detailed Discussion.


Statute in Full:

A. Except as otherwise provided, no person may knowingly and willfully, by means of any device, molest, injure or kill any species of hawk, falcon, owl or eagle, their nests, eggs or young.

B. Birds exempt from this provision are:

1. Any species of hawk or owl in the act of destroying domestic birds or fowl;

2. Any species of hawk, falcon, owl or eagle, except those species prohibited by federal law, when taken by a licensed falconer for use in the practice of falconry, as provided in Section 29-5-206[29-5-206] of this Code.

CREDIT(S)
Laws 1974, c. 17, § 5-410, eff. April 8, 1974. Laws 1975, c. 16, § 2, eff. March 4, 1975.

 

[deerman]

Quote:
FYI--Killing birds of prey is a big bad no-no and carries a hefty fine and possibly jail time, certainly not something to brag about on an open forum.

In the State of Oklahoma it's legal to shoot birds that are killing your chickens.


Oklahoma

Oklahoma Statutes Annotated Currentness. Title 29. Game and Fish. Chapter 1. Oklahoma Wildlife Conservation Code. Article V. Game. Part 4. Protected Game. § 5-410. Hawks; falcons; owls; eagles

Statute Details
Printable Version
Citation: OK ST T. 29 § 5-410

Citation: 29 Okl. St. Ann. § 5-410

Last Checked by Web Center Staff: 10/2010

Summary:

Oklahoma law prohibits the knowing and willful killing or molestation of hawks, falcons, owls, or eagles, or their nests, eggs, or young. The only exceptions to this prohibition are the taking of a hawk or owl in the act of destroying domestic birds or fowl, or the use of hawks, owls, falcons, or eagles by licensed falconers. For discussion of federal Eagle Act, see Detailed Discussion.


Statute in Full:

A. Except as otherwise provided, no person may knowingly and willfully, by means of any device, molest, injure or kill any species of hawk, falcon, owl or eagle, their nests, eggs or young.

B. Birds exempt from this provision are:

1. Any species of hawk or owl in the act of destroying domestic birds or fowl;

2. Any species of hawk, falcon, owl or eagle, except those species prohibited by federal law, when taken by a licensed falconer for use in the practice of falconry, as provided in Section 29-5-206[29-5-206] of this Code.

CREDIT(S)
Laws 1974, c. 17, § 5-410, eff. April 8, 1974. Laws 1975, c. 16, § 2, eff. March 4, 1975.

No matter your State law...its a Federal law , which overrules state law...(except those species prohibited by federal law)

Don't believe it...Post that you are killing hawks that are after your chicken. with your name and address.....bet your state law will not protect you.

.Even a Govener in one of the Southern State, and his hunting buddy got busted hunting waterfowl ,not within the federal law.

 

[thebirdguy]

I've got a friend here who was outside on the porch when a redtail hawk swooped down on a chicken... His big buff orpington killed the hawk...

 

[booker81]

Lost a hen today to a hawk - probably because she was the loner of the flock. The two roosters kept the rest of the hens herded under some thick spruce, and wouldn't let them out until I called them to the coop. No more ranging here for a while, but I'm glad it wasn't worse. The two roos stood guard about 5-10 feet from the trees, just pacing and watching. The hen that was killed was right in the middle of the yard.

 

[oldchickenlady]

My roo keeps a close eye on the sky...he even has me trained to look up when he makes his 'danger from the sky' call. The girls listen to him, too! They will freeze at first to see where the danger is, then run to the nearest cover. Mine free range for most of the day, we are in the woods where there are lots of hawks and owls and, so far... (knocking on wood) haven't lost one to a hawk yet...or anything else either. I know it is just a matter of time, but so far Rudy Roo has done a great job of keeping everyone informed about danger.

 

[deerman]

Amigatec
Here is a link to info on your State ...where gamecock breeders are looking at 6 months and 15,000 fines for each bird killed....guess what they are being charged even though they were protecting their chickens....Looks like you State thinks its ok...but not the Federal

Go down to were 31 are charged.


http://www.tulsaaudubon.org/conservation.htm

 

[Chicken.Lytle]

Quote:
Scaring hawks with loud noises is sometimes effective. The local airport has a propane cannon to scare off birds.

 

[brockton chicken lady]

thanks for the helpful info. think a spring rooster is in the cards for me and my backyard birds.

 

[Bulletproof Roo]

No matter your State law...its a Federal law , which overrules state law...(except those species prohibited by federal law)

Don't believe it...Post that you are killing hawks that are after your chicken. with your name and address.....bet your state law will not protect you.

.Even a Govener in one of the Southern State, and his hunting buddy got busted hunting waterfowl ,not within the federal law.

Necessity is a defense against of any malum prohibitum statute and many malum in se statutes. The taking of an innocent human life would be an example of a point beyond which the necessity defense fails.

"Necessity

A defense asserted by a criminal or civil defendant that he or she had no choice but to break the law.

The necessity defense has long been recognized as Common Law and has also been made part of most states' statutory law. Although no federal statute acknowledges the defense, the Supreme Court has recognized it as part of the common law. The rationale behind the necessity defense is that sometimes, in a particular situation, a technical breach of the law is more advantageous to society than the consequence of strict adherence to the law. The defense is often used successfully in cases that involve a Trespass on property to save a person's life or property. It also has been used, with varying degrees of success, in cases involving more complex questions.
Almost all common-law and statutory definitions of the necessity defense include the following elements: (1) the defendant acted to avoid a significant risk of harm [loss of valuable property upon which livelihood depends is considered harm]; (2) no adequate lawful means could have been used to escape the harm; and (3) the harm avoided was greater than that caused by breaking the law. Some jurisdictions require in addition that the harm must have been imminent and that the action taken must have been reasonably expected to avoid the imminent danger. All these elements mirror the principles on which the defense of necessity was founded: first, that the highest social value is not always achieved by blind adherence to the law; second, that it is unjust to punish those who technically violate the letter of the law when they are acting to promote or achieve a higher social value than would be served by strict adherence to the law; and third, that it is in society's best interest to promote the greatest good and to encourage people to seek to achieve the greatest good, even if doing so necessitates a technical breach of the law."