View previous topic | View next topic

Flying: Birds

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

misterchris
500355.  Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:03 am Reply with quote

Ooh good call scottydog

http://www.hbo.com/sixfeetunder/credits/index.shtml

Apparently it IS illegal to film using real crows. The crows used in SFU were actually pied crows who had to have their chests painted black.



Can't find any real evidence to support the statement that filming crows is illegal in the States though.

 
scottydog
500358.  Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:07 am Reply with quote

Hmm. How is it less cruel (assuming that is the basis of the legality or otherwise) to own, paint and film a pied crow than it is just film a crow.

I'm gonna skuttle off to google now and find something, or try at least, to explain all this.

So I'll just shoot the crow and research all this.

 
scottydog
500369.  Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:16 am Reply with quote

OK. I found this link. The American Migratory Bird Treaty Act lists the crow on it's protected species list.

This Treaty as far as I can see, restricts capture of listed birds for commercial purposes.

It seems that man in bar may have been correct...

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/intrnltr/treatlaw.html

 
misterchris
500370.  Mon Feb 09, 2009 9:16 am Reply with quote

I'd do some more research into it myself but I'd better get some work done today.

 
MacGyverMagic
500586.  Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:51 pm Reply with quote

scottydog wrote:
Just looked on this thread for the first time. I remember reading somewhere that it is illegal to film crows in America for any commercial purpose.

I said that outloud in a pub once and was told buy man at bar that this was not true,

but, it IS illegal to have ownership of a crow (or any other migratory bird species) in America and thus, if said bird is from one of these animal stunt star tame creature places then that ownership would be the illegal bit.

I will let you all now put me bang to rights.
Well, if you were on the show you'd have been klaxoned after your first two sentences. But you're on the right track with migratory birds as the other posts show.

 
MacGyverMagic
500587.  Mon Feb 09, 2009 1:53 pm Reply with quote

scottydog wrote:
OK. I found this link. The American Migratory Bird Treaty Act lists the crow on it's protected species list.

This Treaty as far as I can see, restricts capture of listed birds for commercial purposes.

It seems that man in bar may have been correct...

http://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds/intrnltr/treatlaw.html
Correct! I'll post the full details with the question in the opening post.

 
mckeonj
502118.  Wed Feb 11, 2009 4:13 pm Reply with quote

OK, so what were the birds in Hitchcock's "The Birds", they looked an awful lot like crows to me. Maybe they were Canadian Redneck crows.

 
Jenny
502168.  Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:38 pm Reply with quote

According to the IMDB database they were 'all kinds of birds', but the Wikipedia entry for the film mainly says seagulls when it specifies a particular attack.

 
Jenny
502169.  Wed Feb 11, 2009 5:38 pm Reply with quote

Nasty buggers, seagulls.

 
samivel
502201.  Wed Feb 11, 2009 8:20 pm Reply with quote

Taste disgusting as well.

 
misterchris
503416.  Fri Feb 13, 2009 12:51 pm Reply with quote

mckeonj wrote:
OK, so what were the birds in Hitchcock's "The Birds", they looked an awful lot like crows to me. Maybe they were Canadian Redneck crows.


This made me dig out my Hitchcock books.

From The Dark Side of Genius by Donald Spoto...

Quote:
... Ray Berwick trained hundreds of gulls and crows and ravens to dart at the right moment, to perch, return and swoop over the actors' heads. Mechanical birds were constructed for a few shots involving children...

The final great attack of the birds was to involve the leading lady herself: she would be caught in a room full of crows and gulls and ravens that would tear at her until she collapsed in a state of shock...

Birds were hurled at her; frightened, they flew away as she defended herself against the gulls and crows with wild, increasingly honest and unacted gestures of terror.


That's all I could find about the birds - doesn't say what type of crows they were or if they had to paint any to look like real crows.

 
misterchris
503425.  Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:01 pm Reply with quote

Found this QI - still says they used crows for the filming though. Makes me wonder whether the Act that banned the use of crows came in after 1963

http://www.hitchcockwiki.com/wiki/Documentary:_All_About_The_Birds_-_transcript

 
suze
503555.  Fri Feb 13, 2009 5:03 pm Reply with quote

My first thought was "was the movie shot in the USA" - but it was, at Bodega Bay north of San Francisco to be precise.

The appropriate piece of law is the Migratory Bird Treaty Act 1918, which banned all trade in "all migratory birds and their parts (including eggs, nests, and feathers)". On the face of it, that would have made it illegal to own a crow in the USA at the time the movie was made in 1963, and the list of species to which the Act applies mentions the following:

Crow, American, Corvus brachyrhynchos
Fish, Corvus ossifragus
Hawaiian, Corvus hawaiiensis
Mexican, Corvus imparatus
Northwestern, Corvus caurinus
White-necked, Corvus leucognaphalus

of which the American crow is by far the most commonly encountered in North America.

However, the Wiki article on C. brachyrhynchos mentions that most American crows are non migratory - while American crows living in Canada fly south for the winter, in the warmer parts of the USA they are permanently resident.

California is certainly a warmer region, and so it would seem likely that crows living there stay put in winter - which would have provided Mr Hitchcock with his get out.

 
minimal100
662119.  Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:21 am Reply with quote

1. Under United States federal law it is illegal to keep a crow without a special permit. If you rescue a baby crow, and keep it for any length of time, you should be aware that you are breaking the law and may be subject to federal penalties. In most cases, however, it is unlikely that anyone will bother you, but you should still be aware that if you keep the crow as a pet, without a permit, it may be confiscated by the federal authorities if it comes to their attention.

3. Crows are intensely social animals and if they are not allowed to associate with other crows, particularly with their immediate family, when thery are young, they may never be accepted into "crow society". Being excluded from a family or "cooperative" group is perhaps the worst thing that can happen to a crow. You should keep this very clearly in mind when you consider "rescuing" a baby crow. If it can not return to live a satisfactory life in the wild, it will be your responsibility and, since crows can live for 30 years or more, this is a very serious responsibility.

 
Neotenic
662124.  Tue Jan 26, 2010 11:33 am Reply with quote

Verbatim source for the above

This has lead me to find possibly one of the most fabulous sentences enshrined in US Federal law;

Quote:
Crows shall not be hunted from aircraft;


50 CFR 20.133

 

Page 2 of 3
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group