City council has clipped the wings on a resident’s request to raise a falcon because — among other reasons — approving it would contravene the animal bylaw and set a precedent.
Brandon Kobelsky and Rick Bryne, president of the Saskatchewan Falconry Association, addressed council during its Oct. 10 executive committee. Kobelsky had applied for an exemption under a section in Bylaw No. 5432, Keeping of Animals Bylaw, so that he could raise a falcon at his residence.
In its email to city hall, the association said the Ministry of Environment recognizes the group, while the province heavily regulates the sport. Meanwhile, it said the bylaw lets residents raise pigeons if they’re a member of those clubs.
After the presentation and a discussion, council voted 5-2 against the request. Councillors Kim Robison and Doug Blanc were in favour.
The decision becomes official once council approves the minutes at a future regular meeting.
City hall’s concerns
In a report, city administration said approving the request would depart from the bylaw and be a first-time occurrence. Setting this precedent would allegedly open the door to other applications and could have unintended consequences.
Secondly, the report noted raptors are birds of prey and not pets, which makes them “inherently dangerous and forever wild.” Some falcons may attack small dogs or cats, and while they live in tight spaces, they remain territorial.
“If they feel harassed, they have an aggressive defence mechanism, will dive-bomb people or pets and have the capability to cause harm,” said the report.
Furthermore, hawks and other raptors could be a nuisance and disturb people since they give off loud screeches when hungry. Meanwhile, council lacks information on the proper care methods for raptors in a home and ensuring their well-being, the report continued.
Lastly, city administration said the association’s comparison of keeping pigeons is illogical with a raptor since those provisions do not apply to the bylaw’s prohibited animals list.
Presentation
Kobelsky explained that he used to live in Mossbank and engaged in falconry there. However, when he moved here, he learned that Moose Jaw didn’t allow raptors “for whatever reason.”
He wanted to keep a falcon where he could easily access it and monitor its well-being, while he would only use the bird for hunting bunnies and gophers in farmers’ fields. Furthermore, his bird would not attack the city’s club-based pigeons since he would only engage in falconry outside city limits.
Kobelsky has one falcon now — a red tail — but could have more later based on how well his skills progress. If he quit the sport — the animals can live 10 to 15 years in captivity — he would release the bird into the wild, where it would have a near-perfect survival rate — as long as a farmer or horned owl didn’t kill it.
Falconers keep their raptors in a building called a mew, which has two sets of doors that ensure the bird can’t escape as the individual is entering, explained Bryne. The chances of the bird escaping are “almost none,” while — aside from cutting locks — no one unauthorized can enter.
“Also, they are not a noisy bird. So if noise is a concern, it’s not an issue,” he said.
Falconry is a small sport provincially since only 30 people are in it, while participants can keep two wild birds and an unlimited number of captive-bred birds, Bryne added. The conservation officer would be responsible for monitoring the animals.
Council discussion
Robinson pushed back against administration’s suggestion that Moose Jaw had never allowed falconry or that this was precedent-setting, alleging he knew some people who used to live here and kept raptors.
Furthermore, he said this bird would be contained in a pen and never be flown or “sported” in city limits. Based on his research, living in a pen gave the bird a better chance of surviving than living in the wild.
“In my opinion, do we leave ourselves open if a councillor had a dog — a pit bull — and we said there’s too much risk? Does that play a part?” Robinson said. “There’s a chance with any animal that you could have unintended consequences, like a cat … digging up the neighbour’s flowerbed.
“In my opinion, falconry is more managed than someone with a cat or pet canine.”
The animal bylaw is from 2012, and while some residents may have kept falcons, they may have done so without obtaining an exemption, said Coun. Heather Eby. Meanwhile, the bylaw lists other prohibited animals, so she didn’t want council to start approving requests since “a precedent is a precedent.”
She pointed to administration’s report about lacking information on the proper care of raptors in a residential setting as something she appreciated.
“There are way too many unknowns for us and unintended consequences … ,” Eby added.
Mayor Clive Tolley wondered if city administration had looked at whether other communities allowed falconry — it had not — since the sport is popular in other countries. Due to immigration, council may one day have more residents ask if they can keep raptors, which is why council should consider amending the bylaw.
Council had a problem with a beekeeper years ago and had to persistently pester the province to investigate since that hobby is provincially regulated, Coun. Crystal Froese said. Moreover, council approved a policy in 2020 that allowed beekeeping, even though she had concerns about it.
“So my hesitation with supporting this (falconry) is it’s provincially governed and we do not have the resources in the city to look after this area if there is a problem … ,” she continued, adding the Humane Society does not have the resources to handle raptors if falconers abandon them.
The next executive committee meeting is Monday, Oct. 23.
