Hunter Harassment

Summary: This section reflects Indiana's hunter harassment law. A person who knowingly or intentionally interferes with the legal taking of a game animal by another person with intent to prevent the taking commits a Class C misdemeanor. A person who fails to obey the order of a law enforcement officer to desist from conduct in violation of section 2 of this chapter commits a Class B misdemeanor if the law enforcement officer (1) observed the person or (2) has reasonable grounds to believe that the person has engaged in the conduct that day or intends to engage in the conduct that day on specific premises.

Summary: A person commits hunter or fisherman interference when he or she intentionally or knowingly obstructs or interferes with the lawful taking of wildlife or aquatic life by another person with the specific intent to prevent that lawful taking. This includes things such as blocking or impeding the person hunting, using objects or barriers, using artificial or natural stimuli to hinder the lawful taking, or even using a drone in a way that interferes with another person's lawful taking of wildlife or aquatic life. A first violation is a Class B misdemeanor with enhacements for subsequent offenses.

Summary: This section comprises Idaho's hunter harassment law. Under the law, no person shall intentionally interfere with the lawful taking or control of wildlife by another; intentionally harass, bait, drive or disturb any animal for the purpose of disrupting lawful pursuit; or damage or destroy in any way any lawful hunting blind with the intent to interfere. Idaho also expands these activities to include the harassment, intimidation, or threatening of any person who is or was lawfully engaged in the taking of fish or wildlife by such means as personal or written contact, telephone, e-mail, or a website.

Summary: This law reflects Iowa's hunter harassment provision. Under the law, a person interferes with hunting, fish, or fur-harvesting activities when he or she: intentionally places him or herself in a location where his or her presence affects the behavior of the game thereby affecting the feasibility of taking the animal; intentionally creates a visual, aural, olfactory, or physical stimulus for the purpose of affecting the behavior of the animal to harass or obstruct the hunter; or alters the condition or placement of the hunter's personal property to obstruct that person. A first offense is a simple misdemeanor; a second or subsequent offense is a serious misdemeanor.

Summary: This law reflects Hawaii's hunter harassment provision. The law states that no person shall intentionally prevent or attempt to prevent the lawful taking of game by a licensed person. Such prohibited acts include placing oneself in the line of fire; creating a visual, aural, olfactory, or physical stimulus to affect the behavior of game to be taken; affecting the condition or placement of personal property used in the taking of animals; and obstructing a person's access where the person intends to lawfully take game. Violation of this law incurs a fine of $500, thirty days imprisonment, or both.

Summary: These Georgia laws comprise the state's hunter harassment provisions. Under the section, it is unlawful for any person to interfere with the lawful taking of wildlife by another person by intentionally preventing or attempting to prevent such person from such lawful taking of wildlife; engage in activity tending to disturb wildlife for the purpose of intentionally preventing the lawful taking of such wildlife; or fail to obey an order of a law enforcement officer to desist from prohibited conduct. The section also allows the superior court of a county to enjoin prohibited conduct and imposes civil liability on violators.

Summary: This law represents the state's hunter harassment provision. Under the law, a person may not intentionally, within a publicly or privately owned wildlife management or fish management area or on any state-owned water body, interfere with or attempt to prevent the lawful taking of fish, game, or nongame animals by another or attempt to disturb wildlife or fish to prevent their lawful taking. Any person who violates this section commits a Level Two violation.

Summary: This Delaware law reflects the state's hunter harassment provision. Under the law, no person shall wilfully obstruct or impede the participation of any individual in the lawful taking of fish, crabs, oysters, clams or frogs; the lawful hunting of game birds or animals; or the lawful trapping of any game animals. Violation is a class B environmental misdemeanor. Incidental interference is not unlawful.

Summary: This statute comprises Connecticut's hunter harassment law. A person violates this section by intentionally or knowingly doing such things as driving or disturbing wildlife for the purpose of disrupting the lawful taking of wildlife; blocking, impeding, or otherwise harassing a person who is lawfully taking wildlife; using natural or artificial visual, aural, olfactory or physical stimuli to affect wildlife behavior; erecting barriers; interjecting oneself in the line of fire; or remaining on private lands without permission with the intent to violate this section. Any person who violates any provision of this section shall be guilty of a class C misdemeanor.

Summary: This law represents Arizona's hunter harassment law. Under the law, it is a class 2 misdemeanor for a person while in a hunting area to intentionally interfere with, prevent or disrupt the lawful taking of wildlife as defined under the law. It is a class 3 misdemeanor for a person to enter or remain on a designated hunting area on any public or private lands or waters or state lands including state trust lands with the intent to interfere with, prevent or disrupt the lawful taking of wildlife. "Incidental interference" arising from lawful activity by public land users is not unlawful under this section.