O.C.G.A. § 27-3-13 (2019)
Hunting of wildlife or feral hog from boats, aircraft, or motor vehicles
(a) It shall be unlawful to hunt any wildlife or feral hog from an electric, gas, or diesel boat, a steamboat, a sailboat, an aircraft, a hydroplane, a hovercraft, or a motor vehicle; except that alligators may
be hunted from any boat or watercraft under power and feral hogs may be hunted from motor vehicles in accordance with an applicable wildlife control permit issued by the department. (b) Any person who violates the provisions of subsection (a) of this Code section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not less than $250.00 and, in the discretion of the sentencing court, imprisonment for not more than 12 months; provided, however, that such fine shall not be subject to suspension, stay, or probation except that if the court finds that payment of such fine would impose great economic hardship upon the defendant, the court may order such fine paid in installments.
History
(Ga. L. 1955, p. 483, § 61; Code 1933, § 45-511, enacted by Ga. L. 1977, p. 396, § 1; Ga. L. 1978, p. 816, § 45; Ga. L. 1992, p. 2391, § 4; Ga. L. 1993, p. 91, § 27; Ga. L. 2003, p. 654, § 10; Ga. L. 2015, p. 1352, § 7/HB 475.)
Annotations
Editor’s notes. - Ga. L. 2015, p. 1352, § 1/HB 475, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: ‘‘This Act shall be known and may be cited as the ‘Feral Hog Control Act.’ ’’ Ga. L. 2015, p. 1352, § 2/HB 475, not codified by the General Assembly, provides that: ‘‘The General Assembly finds that feral hogs are an invasive species in
Georgia and are detrimental to the natural resources and agricultural production of the state. Feral hogs cause significant damage to crops and wildlife habitat. In addition, as carriers of communicable diseases, feral hogs pose a health risk to humans, livestock, companion animals, pets, and native wildlife.’’
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Hunting ‘‘wildlife’’ from motor vehicle. - An accusation alleging that the defendants ‘‘did with force of arms unlawfully hunt, chase, or kill wildlife from a motor vehicle’’ was deficient, since one may admit to hunting wildlife from a motor vehicle and still be innocent of criminal activity. Manley v. State, 187 Ga. App. 773, 371 S.E.2d 438, cert. denied, 187 Ga. App. 908, 371 S.E.2d 438 (1988) (decided prior to the 1992 amendment, which substituted ‘‘wildlife or feral hog’’ for ‘‘game bird, game animal, or fur-bearing animal’’ in subsection (a)). When defendants turned their truck around and went back to shoot a deer in a field, they were ‘‘pursuing’’ the deer upon a
public highway from a motor vehicle; therefore, the evidence was sufficient to support their guilty verdict. Passmore v. State, 253 Ga. App. 901, 561 S.E.2d 123 (2001). Conviction for separate offenses. - Where defendants hunted from a motor vehicle on a public road at night using a light exceeding six volts, it was not error to convict them of the three separate crimes of hunting at night, hunting on a public road, and hunting from a motor vehicle. Sanford v. State, 169 Ga. App. 769, 315 S.E.2d 281 (1984). Cited in Holzmeister v. State, 156 Ga. App. 94, 274 S.E.2d 109 (1980).
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 35A Am. Jur. 2d, Fish, Game, and Wildlife Conservation, § 53.
C.J.S. - 38 C.J.S., Game; Conservation and Preservation of Wildlife, §§ 55, 56.