What Constitutes Hunting?

[RTF]

By NYDEC definition if you pursue harass or worry wildlife you are hunting. Does this mean only if you have a weapon in hand? Loaded or unloaded?

[Dad 6424]

I dont see to many deer chewing on there hoofs in worry lol Again it is NYDECs definition so its up to the officers as to what law you might be bending or breaking

[arrow nocker]

if you are alone and don't have a weapon it shouldn't be considered hunting.Since this could be scouting or just plain hiking or nature watching.If you Don't have a weapon and are aiding in someone to hunt then ye it is hunting.If you are pushing deer or being there to change a deers walking pattern or even sitting in a tree and talking on the radio to another hunting partner telling them if you spotted one then all that is considered hunting.

[mike rossi]

By NYDEC definition if you pursue harass or worry wildlife you are hunting. Does this mean only if you have a weapon in hand? Loaded or unloaded?

It doesnt matter if you have a weapon....

You and your pets are not supposed to disturb wildlife in any way except during an open hunting season or open dog training season ... There has been some discussion (unverified) about an exception made for bird watchers using calls. There also is some complicated exceptions for nuisance wildlife. There also an exception for unproteded species such as red squirrels, porcupines, woodchuck, monk parakeet, starling, and english sparrow. However, some authorities say you cannot trap unprotected birds in NY because the law prohibiting trapping birds does not indicate an exception ... You cant chase any wildlife with a boat , quad, etc.. either. If you harrass migratory species you will also violate the Lacy Act (dual violation) and other federal law(s).

[Nomad]

Guess I can't walk my dog around the neighborhood any more,or tie him outside for that matter he's always barking at them sending them a runnin .

Heck the deer are distrubing my dog and my TV watching.

[mike rossi]

if you are alone and don't have a weapon it shouldn't be considered hunting.Since this could be scouting or just plain hiking or nature watching.If you Don't have a weapon and are aiding in someone to hunt then ye it is hunting.If you are pushing deer or being there to change a deers walking pattern or even sitting in a tree and talking on the radio to another hunting partner telling them if you spotted one then all that is considered hunting.

Hiking which is restricted to designated trails isnt an impact on wildlife, although it does impact hunting when safety zones are imposed or hunting is banned to accomadate the public majority...

Regarding nature watchers: a true nature watcher needs to be stealthy like a hunter and ussually watches nature at a distance with binoculors, commonly from observation blinds or good vantage points ( like a hill top). This is a minimal impact that doesnt really worry or harrass wildlife...

Scouting, now thats a tough one...

[Geno C]

heres another topic that will get no where lol

[mike rossi]

Guess I can't walk my dog around the neighborhood any more,or tie him outside for that matter he's always barking at them sending them a runnin .

Heck the deer are distrubing my dog and my TV watching.

As long as they are not bucks with more than three points your ok....

[mike rossi]

heres another topic that will get no where lol

Where is it supposed to go Geno? Eveyone knows what pursue, worry, and harrass means... If the definition of hunting was doing the same but only while possessing weopons, it would say just that, but it does not.

[mxsmitz201]

what constitutes hunting.... guess it depends how much common sense the eco officer has, or the judge in court if you get ticketed.

[Geno C]

Where is it supposed to go Geno? Eveyone knows what pursue, worry, and harrass means... If the definition of hunting was doing the same but only while possessing weopons, it would say just that, but it does not.

well if what the OP wrote was the "Law" defined by the DEC, even tho very vague. then really you can look at it a million different ways and all that will come out of this will be "Interpretations". What one believes to be correct.... I bet even a DEC Officer will chalk that up to his own "Interpretation".

and your right, it would say just that. but it doesnt... and if its not then the rules and regulations should be revised and more clearly defined so no INTERPRETATIONS stem from whats supposed to be the law. When something is the law it should be clearly defined - No talking and a cell phone or texting while driving... cant get more black and white then that. Maybe the question should be why are some rules unclear and thus why do so many hunters not obey them? hmmm, maybe they dont understand them lol

[RTF]

It doesnt matter if you have a weapon....

You and your pets are not supposed to disturb wildlife in any way except during an open hunting season or open dog training season ...

So I guess when we all set up our game cams out of season we are all guilty of hunting if we bump deer out of the bed.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I guess if you have a pistol permit and carry while setting those cameras you are hunting out of season too.

[Doc]

"Hunting" means pursuing, shooting, killing or capturing (other than trapping as defined in subdivision 11) wildlife, except wildlife which has been lawfully trapped or otherwise reduced to possession and includes all lesser acts such as disturbing,harrying or worrying, whether they result in taking or not, and every attempt to take, and every act of assistance to any other person in taking or attempting to take wildlife.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'll bet the language about "disturbing, harrying, and worrying" relates to deer drives. I think the indication attempted is that drivers participating in deer drives (armed or not) are also subject to laws regarding hunting. That's just a guess, but it is the only thing that makes any sense to me. They want some words in the law to indicate that anyone participating in any kinds of hunting activities are subject to the definitions and laws regarding actual hunting.

We have another thread that talks about the DEC laws prohibiting deer feeding being challenged based partially on "vagueness". Here is just another one of many that may someday be challenged on the same basis.

[Jennifer]

I'll bet the language about "disturbing, harrying, and worrying" relates to deer drives. I think the indication attempted is that drivers participating in deer drives (armed or not) are also subject to laws regarding hunting. That's just a guess, but it is the only thing that makes any sense to me. They want some words in the law to indicate that anyone participating in any kinds of hunting activities are subject to the definitions and laws regarding actual hunting.

Yes, that can certainly be part of it! A deer drive does indeed harass deer, sometimes a great deal.

However, it also relates to people that toss firecrackers down active animal dens (i.e. foxes), or allow their dogs (or children!!) to run through active nest sites of protected birds, or teenagers that think it's funny to mess with a deer fawn until it's so stressed out that it might perish. Those are just examples based on real things that have happened before. People, in general, are often unnecessarily cruel , or at least thoughtless/ignorant about wild animals. I was on a beach this summer where a local sandpiper colony was being nuked by people intentionally letting their dogs run through the nests, causing both egg loss and nest abandonment, and kids playing with the chicks, which sadly means that the chick is done for most of the time. This would fall under the 'harassing, worrying, and disturbing' umbrella (as well as MBTA laws, which are federal, and not part of this discussion). These activities aren't even related to hunting, but the people that did them could get busted for the law described above.

My guess as to why it's vague: the moment you define exact situations that are illegal, it creates a slippery slope for anything not strictly defined (but common sense says falls under the vague umbrella of 'harassment'). I am not saying it's ideal, but it's just what I suspect.

[mike rossi]

@ post # 15

The MBTA laws certainly are "part of this discussion" when the violation involves migratory birds... The penalty would be a stiffer dual violation of both laws...

[Jennifer]

@ post # 15

The MBTA laws certainly are "part of this discussion" when the violation involves migratory birds... The penalty would be a stiffer dual violation of both laws...

That's true-- actually, now that I think of it, that might be where some of the language is borrowed from!

For those wondering, the MBTA is the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and is extremely strict in how one may deal with any birds listed as protected. It is on the Federal level, and fines are steep. Of interest is the wording:

Establishment of a Federal prohibition, unless permitted by regulations, to "pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture or kill, possess, offer for sale, sell, offer to purchase, purchase, deliver for shipment, ship, cause to be shipped, deliver for transportation, transport, cause to be transported, carry, or cause to be carried by any means whatever, receive for shipment, transportation or carriage, or export, at any time, or in any manner, any migratory bird, included in the terms of this Convention . . . for the protection of migratory birds . . . or any part, nest, or egg of any such bird." (16 U.S.C. 703)

http://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/migtrea.html

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/RegulationsPolicies/mbta/mbtintro.html

These laws are why we have special duck stamps, licencing, regulations, and the HIP Harvest Information Program, in order to hunt species on this list such as waterfowl, crows, woodcock. This is also why it is illegal to sell parts of or even entire mounts from legally harvested wild waterfowl, with exception of for the purpose of fly-tying.

[mike rossi]

@ Post 17

Keep in mind that what is harmful to migratory birds is likewise harmful to the cherished whitetail deer... And, every species except introduced invasives are covered by one or both of these laws...