Dropped that coyote

[mike rossi]

The sentence you quoted is actually written occupying OR cultivating. But you could also autorize someone in writting or if you have an employee that is cultivating the lands.

Fair enough, that is my first guess, however if you read the entire regulation the language becomes ambiguous.

 

Still doesn't mean you can shoot coyotes or other protected wildlife out of season ... 

 

>>> You must live on the property.

 

>>> If you do not occupy the land, it must be agriculture land, and you must be the owner or immediate family member, leasee or employee with WRITTEN PERMISSION.

 

>>> Otherwise you must either have a nuisance wildlife trapping license or a nuisance permit  must be issued by the DEC.

 

>>> Last but not least, the animal must actually be a nuisance

[verminater71]

O.K...let's skip all the BS in the middle

 

evan if the guy was in NY? he would still be legale

 

coyote comes in his yard...nuisance ... yes

 

was staring at his cat...menaceing...yes

 

it was a legale kill.... I'm not for poaching or hunting out of season, but there's a big difference between an agriculture feild and your mowed lawn....any animal seen as a threat in my yard is DONE

 

 

[verminater71]

.

 

Still doesn't mean you can shoot coyotes or other protected wildlife out of season ... 

 

it's like fighting with a liberal....

 

coyotes or fox injuring private property may be

taken by the owner......yes you can shoot out of season IF a nuisance

[growalot]

I find it interesting...original poster aside...that ppl did not get up in arms over my having to kill 3 raccoons in 2wks  due to tearing up my dog and charging me ...out of season...but with a yote you'd press for more burden of proof of it being a nuisance....they are actually both predators just in different ways...by the way all were disposed of as required.

 

Is it due to perceptions...rabies well known in raccoons  over yotes...fur prices....more fun  to legally hunt.. for sport... yotes than  raccoons? Is one considered "vermin" and the other a species to hunt as with deer ...or fowl

 

Now mind you no sarcasm here just curiosity on how they differ in ppls minds

[WNYBuckHunter]

Theres nothing ambiguous about it. The OP stated that the coyote was within close proximity to his home (40ish yards, or 120ish feet) and pets. Coyotes are known to eat cats and dogs. That would make the coyote a threat to his pets. Done deal.

[growalot]

Seeing I'm asking...Why are wood chucks not protected...even crows are protected...they don't breed any more than most fur bearers..they can't possible do as much crop damage as rabbits, raccoons, or crows...they don't have as much an impact on forests as do those other critters...yet it's open season on them..why?

[WNYBuckHunter]

Probably because of the damage they do to livestock. They dig holes, livestock step in them and break their legs, farmer is out a bunch of money.

[growalot]

I suppose that would be true way back when...but now speaking of dairy farms ...NYS pretty much requires they be contain in barns ....you don't see the field upon field of grazing cattle those are all in crops now..

I can't speak for any place else but in this general area....driving the back roads...most wood chuck holes I've seen have been in the sides of culvert ditches...farm fields are just worked too much....I know there are grazing beef cattle...and horse farms..but still?

[josephmrtn]

I suppose that would be true way back when...but now speaking of dairy farms ...NYS pretty much requires they be contain in barns ....you don't see the field upon field of grazing cattle those are all in crops now..

I can't speak for any place else but in this general area....driving the back roads...most wood chuck holes I've seen have been in the sides of culvert ditches...farm fields are just worked too much....I know there are grazing beef cattle...and horse farms..but still?

Sorry grow you dont know what your talking about.... our cows are REQUIRED to spend time outside every day unless it is bad weather or we have some other plausible excuse...

[growalot]

Joe ..I'm just going by what our cousin told us...he  has a very large dairy farm in Hornell area and we were asking him about his new barn facilities...this is what we were told...

Our son worked for a large dairy over near Naples...those cows were never let out...and the farm near us that just won farm of the year...just built new barns and those cattle never leave the facility...And perhaps Eddie could help me out on this...there is a huge dairy...they actually now produce their own fuel with the cow manure...across the flats in Groveland...those cows never leave the barns and ppl visiting have to don booties before entering..Our neighbors kid worked there one summer....

[growalot]

Perhaps it's due to the ridiculous value of these purebred cattle...I know that I was surprised to find out that with the  artificial insemination only breed programs that he can  pretty much insure only females will be born in the herd if that's what he requires...Our last family Reunion at the farm last year was very interesting

[mike rossi]

Seeing I'm asking...Why are wood chucks not protected...even crows are protected...they don't breed any more than most fur bearers..they can't possible do as much crop damage as rabbits, raccoons, or crows...they don't have as much an impact on forests as do those other critters...yet it's open season on them..why?

 

Here are some guesses: Few people hunt them, there is little/no market for their fur, and hibernation protects them part of the year. Not sure, just another guess, maybe they cache food underground and stay there with their young until they can forage on their own.

 

 

Edited April 17, 2013 by mike rossi

[growalot]

Well then you haven't driven around our parts ..because all summer long you can hit most any back road with a farm field and find a couple of guys laying on their bellies behind a rifle on a bipod ...

 

But you hit the nail on the head..even though they are edible being grass grazers...ppl don't eat them and they have no monetary value...I guess that makes them less important an animal species than say a possum?....hhhmmmmm

[mike rossi]

The sentence you quoted is actually written occupying OR cultivating. But you could also autorize someone in writting or if you have an employee that is cultivating the lands.

I read that again I think you are right about occupy OR cultivate. Not sure about your second sentence though. Doesn't that sound like written permission can only be given to a farm employee? I think it does and I am pretty sure that legally authorizing a non employee requires a nuisance permit, unless that person is a licensed wildlife control operator.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

After a re read, I would agre with that Mike

[PREDATE]

Seeing how I'm "DEAD WRONG", where in the world did the OP suggest that he/she was on cultivated lands? Although it does apply in some cases, the majority of the estimated 823,000 hunters in NYS probably are not engaged in farming.

I'll clarify that any "Joe Schmoe"or family that isn't engaged in farming  and also occupies said land needs a nuisance permit.

If you're still in disbelief then read the link that I posted like 3 pages ago in this very thread.

It clearly states that you may not take a coyote anytime, that you need a permit to take one out of season and that the DEC may issue a permit for a landowner to take if there is proof that the coyote is threatening public welfare or safety.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/81531.html

Edited April 17, 2013 by PREDATE

[WNYBuckHunter]

I read that again I think you are right about occupy OR cultivate. Not sure about your second sentence though. Doesn't that sound like written permission can only be given to a farm employee? I think it does and I am pretty sure that legally authorizing a non employee requires a nuisance permit, unless that person is a licensed wildlife control operator.

 

It depends on which type of nuisance animal you are talking about, if you read the entire section, they are slightly different for each one. Read through it again.

 

Environmental Conservation

  § 11-0523. Destructive or menacing wildlife; taking without permit.

    1. Owners and lessees and members of their immediate families actually

  occupying  or  cultivating  lands, and persons authorized in writing and

  actually employed by them  in  cultivating  such  lands,  may  take  (a)

  unprotected  wildlife  other  than birds and (starlings, common crows

  and, subject to section 11-0513, pigeons, when such wildlife is injuring

  their property or has become a nuisance thereon. Such taking may be done

  in any manner, notwithstanding any provision of the  Fish  and  Wildlife

  Law, except section 11-0513, or the Penal Law or any other law.

    2.  Any  bear  killing  or  worrying  livestock  on  land  occupied or

  cultivated, or destroying an apiary thereon, may be taken or killed,  at

  any time, by shooting or device to entrap or entice on such land, by the

  owner,  lessee  or  occupant  thereof,  or  any  member  of the owner's,

  lessee's or occupant's immediate family or by  any  person  employed  by

  such  owner,  lessee  or  occupant.  The owner or occupant of such lands

  shall promptly notify the nearest environmental conservation officer and

  deliver to such officer the carcass of any bear killed pursuant to  this

  subdivision. The environmental conservation officer shall dispose of the

  carcass as the department may direct.

    3.  Red-winged blackbirds, common grackles and cowbirds destroying any

  crop may be killed during the months of June,  July,  August,  September

  and  October by the owner of the crop or property on which it is growing

  or by any person in his employ.

    4. Varying hares, cottontail rabbits  and  European  hares  which  are

  injuring  property  on  occupied farms or lands may be taken thereon, at

  any time, in any manner, except by the use of ferrets, fitch-ferrets  or

  fitch,  by the owners or occupants of such farms or lands or by a person

  authorized  in  writing  by  them  and  actually  employed  by  them  in

  cultivating such farm lands.

    5.  Skunks  injuring  property  or which have become a nuisance may be

  taken at any time in any manner.

    6. Raccoons, muskrats, coyotes or fox injuring private property may be

  taken by the owner, occupant or lessee thereof, or an employee or family

  member of such owner, occupant or lessee, at any time in any manner.

    7. Whenever black, grey and fox squirrels,  opossums  or  weasels  are

  injuring  property  on occupied farms or lands or dwellings, they may be

  taken at any time in any manner, by the owners or occupants  thereof  or

  by a person authorized in writing by such owner or occupant.

    8. No license or permit from the department is required for any taking

  authorized by this section.

    9.  Varying  hares,  cottontail  rabbits,  skunks, black, grey and fox

  squirrels, raccoons, muskrats, opossums or  weasels  taken  pursuant  to

  this  section  in  the  closed  season  or  in a manner not permitted by

  section 11-0901 shall be immediately buried or cremated. No person shall

  possess or traffic in such skunks or raccoons or the pelts thereof or in

  such varying hares or cottontail rabbits or the flesh thereof.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Seeing how I'm "DEAD WRONG", where in the world did the OP suggest that he/she was on cultivated lands?

I'll clarify that any "Joe Schmoe"or family that isn't engaged in farming  and also occupies said land needs a nuisance permit.

If you're still in disbelief then read the link that I posted like 3 pages ago in this very thread.

It clearly states that you may not take a coyote anytime, that you need a permit to take one out of season and that the DEC may issue a permit for a landowner to take if there is proof that the coyote is threatening public welfare or safety.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/81531.html

 

Cultivated lands means nothing. The OP obviously either owns or rents the home, therefore he owns or occupies it. He does not need a nuisance permit.

[verminater71]

Seeing how I'm "DEAD WRONG", where in the world did the OP suggest that he/she was on cultivated lands?

I'll clarify that any "Joe Schmoe"or family that isn't engaged in farming  and also occupies said land needs a nuisance permit.

If you're still in disbelief then read the link that I posted like 3 pages ago in this very thread.

It clearly states that you may not take a coyote anytime, that you need a permit to take one out of season and that the DEC may issue a permit for a landowner to take if there is proof that the coyote is threatening public welfare or safety.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/81531.html

 

you need to read it AGAIN, you ARE dead wrong, you said you need a permit which you don't I proved that

 

Owners and lessees and members of their immediate families actually

  occupying..... OR... cultivating

 

IF IT IS IN YOUR YARD SHOOT IT.....totally legal

 

what you're talking about is shooting something in AG fields...different than shooting something in your yard

[PREDATE]

Ok I see that. I missed the occupying part. My mistake.

He may have been occupying the home, so then for that matter we could also speculate the possibility of this person being within 500ft of another home.

 Then comes the determination of whether or not the coyote was being a nuisance or damaging. This determination needs to be made. It's not as simple as shoot on site.

 

Simply looking towards a house is neither. He only said he has cats, not that the coyote was watching them.

• Nuisance Wildlife - A wild animal that may cause property damage, is perceived as a threat to human health or safety, or is persistent and perceived as an annoyance. Examples include a skunk or fox living under the porch or shed. If an animal is not causing any concern, for example,it is simply passing by, is observed only once or twice and does not cause any harm, then it should not be considered a nuisance.
• Damaging Wildlife - A wild animal that damages property, for example, digs up your yard, eats your landscape plants or vegetable garden, kills or threatens your livestock or pets, fouls your lawn, eats the fish in your pond, damages your home, etc.

 

Why is the DEC making contradicting statements in that the ECL code says they may be taken legally anytime if it's a nuisance and the website/regbook says that a permit is needed if it's only a nuisance? Referring only to the hunting regbook would lead to thinking that a permit will be needed. Confusing!

 Also, can anyone post a link to these ECL codes that is actually from a NYS Govt. site that says these are legally binding and not from an off server. Just wondering if this may just be a proposed bill or amendment. Seems that the DEC could clarify these discrepancies a little better to the public.

Edited April 17, 2013 by PREDATE

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Seeing how I'm "DEAD WRONG", where in the world did the OP suggest that he/she was on cultivated lands? Although it does apply in some cases, the majority of the estimated 823,000 hunters in NYS probably are not engaged in farming.

I'll clarify that any "Joe Schmoe"or family that isn't engaged in farming  and also occupies said land needs a nuisance permit.

If you're still in disbelief then read the link that I posted like 3 pages ago in this very thread.

It clearly states that you may not take a coyote anytime, that you need a permit to take one out of season and that the DEC may issue a permit for a landowner to take if there is proof that the coyote is threatening public welfare or safety.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/animals/81531.html

It isn't solely cultivated lands. It state occupied OR cultivated.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Why is the DEC making contradicting statements in that the ECL code says they may be taken legally anytime if it's a nuisance and the website/regbook says that a permit is needed if it's only a nuisance? Referring only to the hunting regbook would lead to thinking that a permit will be needed. Confusing!

 Also, can anyone post a link to these ECL codes that is actually from a NYS Govt. site that says these are legally binding and not from an off server. Just wondering if this may just be a proposed bill or amendment. Seems that the DEC could clarify these discrepancies a little better to the public.

Agree 100%. A guy shouldn't have to be a lawyer to understand it.

[verminater71]

http://www.dec.ny.gov/permits/28635.html

 

 

http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/LAWSSEAF.cgi?QUERYTYPE=LAWS+&QUERYDATA=$$ENV11-0523$$@TXENV011-0523+&LIST=LAW+&BROWSER=BROWSER+&TOKEN=49587204+&TARGET=VIEW

[mike rossi]

It depends on which type of nuisance animal you are talking about, if you read the entire section, they are slightly different for each one. Read through it again.

 

Environmental Conservation

  § 11-0523. Destructive or menacing wildlife; taking without permit.

    1. Owners and lessees and members of their immediate families actually

  occupying  or  cultivating  lands, and persons authorized in writing and

  actually employed by them  in  cultivating  such  lands,  may  take  (a)

  unprotected  wildlife  other  than birds and (starlings, common crows

  and, subject to section 11-0513, pigeons, when such wildlife is injuring

  their property or has become a nuisance thereon. Such taking may be done

  in any manner, notwithstanding any provision of the  Fish  and  Wildlife

  Law, except section 11-0513, or the Penal Law or any other law.

    2.  Any  bear  killing  or  worrying  livestock  on  land  occupied or

  cultivated, or destroying an apiary thereon, may be taken or killed,  at

  any time, by shooting or device to entrap or entice on such land, by the

  owner,  lessee  or  occupant  thereof,  or  any  member  of the owner's,

  lessee's or occupant's immediate family or by  any  person  employed  by

  such  owner,  lessee  or  occupant.  The owner or occupant of such lands

  shall promptly notify the nearest environmental conservation officer and

  deliver to such officer the carcass of any bear killed pursuant to  this

  subdivision. The environmental conservation officer shall dispose of the

  carcass as the department may direct.

    3.  Red-winged blackbirds, common grackles and cowbirds destroying any

  crop may be killed during the months of June,  July,  August,  September

  and  October by the owner of the crop or property on which it is growing

  or by any person in his employ.

    4. Varying hares, cottontail rabbits  and  European  hares  which  are

  injuring  property  on  occupied farms or lands may be taken thereon, at

  any time, in any manner, except by the use of ferrets, fitch-ferrets  or

  fitch,  by the owners or occupants of such farms or lands or by a person

  authorized  in  writing  by  them  and  actually  employed  by  them  in

  cultivating such farm lands.

    5.  Skunks  injuring  property  or which have become a nuisance may be

  taken at any time in any manner.

    6. Raccoons, muskrats, coyotes or fox injuring private property may be

  taken by the owner, occupant or lessee thereof, or an employee or family

  member of such owner, occupant or lessee, at any time in any manner.

    7. Whenever black, grey and fox squirrels,  opossums  or  weasels  are

  injuring  property  on occupied farms or lands or dwellings, they may be

  taken at any time in any manner, by the owners or occupants  thereof  or

  by a person authorized in writing by such owner or occupant.

    8. No license or permit from the department is required for any taking

  authorized by this section.

    9.  Varying  hares,  cottontail  rabbits,  skunks, black, grey and fox

  squirrels, raccoons, muskrats, opossums or  weasels  taken  pursuant  to

  this  section  in  the  closed  season  or  in a manner not permitted by

  section 11-0901 shall be immediately buried or cremated. No person shall

  possess or traffic in such skunks or raccoons or the pelts thereof or in

  such varying hares or cottontail rabbits or the flesh thereof.

Only number 5, regarding skunks, does not say in express terms occupant, close relative, leasee or  farm employee with written permission. Every other animal on there does. I would still double check this with a ECO lieutenant  before I would apply it to skunks ...

[mike rossi]

Ok I see that. I missed the occupying part. My mistake.

He may have been occupying the home, so then for that matter we could also speculate the possibility of this person being within 500ft of another home.

 Then comes the determination of whether or not the coyote was being a nuisance or damaging. This determination needs to be made. It's not as simple as shoot on site.

 

Simply looking towards a house is neither. He only said he has cats, not that the coyote was watching them.

• Nuisance Wildlife - A wild animal that may cause property damage, is perceived as a threat to human health or safety, or is persistent and perceived as an annoyance. Examples include a skunk or fox living under the porch or shed. If an animal is not causing any concern, for example,it is simply passing by, is observed only once or twice and does not cause any harm, then it should not be considered a nuisance.
• Damaging Wildlife - A wild animal that damages property, for example, digs up your yard, eats your landscape plants or vegetable garden, kills or threatens your livestock or pets, fouls your lawn, eats the fish in your pond, damages your home, etc.

 

Why is the DEC making contradicting statements in that the ECL code says they may be taken legally anytime if it's a nuisance and the website/regbook says that a permit is needed if it's only a nuisance? Referring only to the hunting regbook would lead to thinking that a permit will be needed. Confusing!

 Also, can anyone post a link to these ECL codes that is actually from a NYS Govt. site that says these are legally binding and not from an off server. Just wondering if this may just be a proposed bill or amendment. Seems that the DEC could clarify these discrepancies a little better to the public.

 

Here is a link and a good look up engine:

 

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/ENV/11/5/11-0523

Edited April 17, 2013 by mike rossi