Problem Solving

Is It Illegal to Feed Crows?

Not under any federal or state law we read. Crows are federally protected, but that law bans killing and capturing them, not feeding them. The bans are local: Homer, Alaska names crows, Yarmouth, Nova Scotia writes them out of its songbird exemption, and Bandon, Oregon moved in 2026 to put them back under its ban.

Not in most of the US and Canada. Federal law protects crows from being killed, captured or kept, not from being fed, and no state rule we read names them. The bans are city and town codes, and the trap is a definition: in ornithology a crow is a songbird, so a bylaw that lets you feed songbirds lets you feed crows unless it says otherwise.

We read twelve rules, eleven of them in their own text and one, Bandon's, through news reports. If crows are taking over your feeders rather than visiting a pile you put out for them, the fix is on our American crow profile. Telling a crow from a raven or a grackle is on black birds identified.

The rules we read#

For your own yard, read the "Your backyard" column first.

Three rows ban feeding crows in a backyard outright (Homer, Yarmouth and, in effect, Allen Park), Illinois bans ground feeding where deer live, and Bandon is moving to join them.

Why the answers online disagree#

Search the question and you get two answers: illegal because crows are protected, or legal everywhere. Neither holds.

"Crows are protected, so you can't feed them." Protected is true: American and fish crows and both ravens are on the federal list in 50 CFR 10.13. But the Migratory Bird Treaty Act makes it unlawful to "pursue, hunt, take, capture, kill, attempt to take, capture, or kill, possess" a listed bird, along with selling, shipping and importing it. Feeding is not one of those verbs, so it is left to states and towns.

"It's legal everywhere." True for federal and, as far as we found, state law. Wrong in Homer, Yarmouth and Allen Park, and in Illinois deer country if the food is on the ground. A third claim also circulates: that Homer lets senior citizens feed crows at Bishop's Beach in winter. That comes from Ordinance 07-16, a 2007 proposal "to allow senior citizens to feed crows during the winter within the area of Bishop's Beach City Park." The copy on the city's site leaves the enactment date blank, and chapter 5.38 as archived in 2024 has no such exception. Do not rely on it.

Federal law: protected, not off limits#

Crows are the odd case among protected birds: hunted and controlled under standing federal rules.

Hunting. Under 50 CFR 20.133, state crow seasons "must not exceed a total of 124 days during a calendar year" and may not fall "during the peak crow nesting period." In Hawaii, "take of crows is prohibited."

Control without a permit. The depredation order in 50 CFR 21.150 lets a private citizen control American, fish and northwestern crows without a federal permit when they are "causing serious injuries to agricultural or horticultural crops or to livestock feed," when "they cause a health hazard or structural property damage," or to protect a listed species. Nonlethal methods must be tried first each calendar year, an annual report on FWS Form 3-2436 is due "by January 31st of the following year," and state law still applies. The same order covers grackles, blackbirds and cowbirds, read in full on is it legal to kill grackles at a bird feeder. Its crow cases, state seasons and Ontario's licence rule are on is it legal to kill crows.

Ravens are on the protected list but not in the depredation order, so the no-permit route does not cover them. The penalty for unlawful take is up to $15,000 and six months (16 USC 707(a)). The same law governs removing a crow's nest and keeping a crow feather.

Canada is simpler. The Migratory Birds Convention lists its protected non-game birds by group, and the songbird line covers "all other perching birds which feed entirely or chiefly on insects." Crows eat almost anything, and no group in the list takes them in, so they fall to the provinces. Ontario's rules are on the house sparrow trapping page, towns on are bird feeders illegal in Canada.

Arizona and Illinois#

Arizona. ARS 13-2927 makes it a petty offense, in counties of more than 280,000 people, to feed, attract or entice wildlife "intentionally, knowingly or recklessly." The exception covers "tree squirrels or birds," and a crow is a bird. The raccoon page reads the same statute for mammals.

Illinois. 17 Ill. Adm. Code 635.40 makes it "illegal to make available food, salt, mineral blocks or other products for ingestion by wild deer or other wildlife in areas where wild deer are present." A crow is other wildlife. The exemptions that matter here are "elevated bird/squirrel feeders ... located within 100 feet of a dwelling," feeding animals other than deer "by hand as long as a reasonable attempt is made to clean up unconsumed food," and feeders that deer are fenced out of.

So in Illinois deer country, peanuts tossed on the lawn every morning for the crows break the rule. The same peanuts on a platform feeder on a post within 100 feet of your house do not,, and neither does hand feeding with cleanup. Other deer rules are on does a deer feeding ban apply to my bird feeder.

Homer and Bandon: crows by name#

Homer, Alaska passed its rule in 2006 (Ordinance 06-01(A)) as chapter 5.38, "Bird Feeding Nuisance":

"No person shall intentionally feed or bait wild bald eagles, crows, ravens or gulls anywhere within the Homer City limits."

"Crow" means "any species of crow," and "feed" means to "provide, place, expose, deposit, distribute or scatter any edible material with the intention of feeding, attracting or enticing" those birds. Owners and tenants may not "cause or allow" it on their property or the right-of-way next to it. The fine is in a city schedule (HCC 1.16.040) we did not read. Because the rule turns on intent, seed a crow steals from a songbird feeder is not "feeding" a crow; peanuts set out for it are. The gull side is on the seagull page.

Bandon, Oregon shows how a crow rule can come and go. Sinclair's Oregon stations (KVAL, NBC16) reported on August 3, 2026 that the city in 2020 "declared feeding wild animals a public nuisance while allowing an exception for feeding songbirds from feeders designed to prevent access by other wildlife." Then "when the ordinance was revised in 2022, crows were removed from the list of prohibited birds because they are classified as songbirds." After a resident's request in July 2026, the council voted to move forward with an amendment under which "crows would once again be prohibited from being intentionally fed while maintaining the exception for properly designed songbird feeders." Residents cited noise, droppings and property damage. The final vote was still to come when they reported it, and we could not obtain an adopted text, so this page does not state its final wording or fine.

When a crow counts as a songbird#

Bandon's 2022 change is not a quirk. Many bylaws exempt "songbirds" from a feeding ban, and the usual legal definition is "a bird belonging to the oscine division in ornithology." Crows are in that division. As Minnesota's Department of Natural Resources puts it, "Corvids are oscine passerine birds," with the specialized vocal apparatus of the true songbirds. Three Canadian bylaws use the same definition and land in different places:

• Windsor, Ontario (By-law 67-2021, passed May 3, 2021) defines "song bird" as "any bird belonging to the oscine division in ornithology" and leaves song birds out of "wildlife" altogether. A crow may be fed on five conditions, including a device "sufficiently above grade as to not attract or be accessible by wildlife," spill removed "forthwith," and feeding that "does not interfere with the normal use or enjoyment of any other property." A crow flock on a neighbor's roof is where that last one bites.
• Toronto (s. 349-10.1, since April 1, 2023) counts songbirds as wildlife, so feeding them is legal only through the songbird exemption: a device "sufficiently above grade so as to not attract or be accessible to wildlife," on private property with permission, and spill "removed in a timely manner." A crow qualifies as a songbird; the food still has to be in a feeder, not on the ground. All four conditions are on the squirrel page.
• Yarmouth, Nova Scotia (adopted January 13, 2022) copied Windsor's wording almost word for word, then wrote the exception out: a Songbird is an oscine "but does not include crows, pigeons or seagulls." And: "No person shall feed any bird other than a Songbird or Hummingbird." In Yarmouth, feeding a crow is an offense, $50 to $1,000.

If your town's bylaw exempts songbirds, read its definition. If it says oscine and does not exclude crows, crows are in. If it says "songbirds" without a definition, the bylaw does not settle it.

Allen Park: no crows named, no way to feed them#

Allen Park, Michigan rewrote section 6-21 in Ordinance 03-2025, adopted February 25, 2025. It bans feeding pigeons and sea gulls outright. Crows are not named, but every other bird may be fed only "from a self-contained feeder" that keeps other animals out, is "elevated at least forty-eight (48) inches above ground level," stops seed falling, "has an opening no greater than 2 inches wide," and holds no more than 2 pounds.

Feeding "from any open, free access container, tray or platform" is prohibited, and a resident may have no more than five feeders. That leaves no lawful home for the open trays and ground food crows depend on; crows cannot perch on a tube feeder or fit through a caged feeder. Separately, feeding any bird is unlawful if it makes birds "congregate, roost, or linger" on someone else's property, which describes a crow flock exactly. Fines are $250, then up to $500, then $1,000 per offense.

Feeding crows without breaking these rules#

Across these rules the same three things get you caught: feeding on purpose (Homer, Bandon), food on the ground or open to other animals (Illinois, Toronto, Windsor, Allen Park), and a flock that ends up on a neighbor's property (Windsor, Allen Park).

Where it is legal, the routine that keeps it small also keeps it out of these rules: a measured handful of whole peanuts once a day at a set time, and nothing left by dark. The profile explains why a schedule beats an all-day supply. Leftover food draws rats, and spill is covered on seed mess and dead grass. Skip scraps (see what not to feed birds). If a neighbor has already complained, start with neighbors and ordinances. And if what you want is fewer crows, the feeder geometry that shuts out big black birds is on grackles and blackbirds.

Where this page stops applying#

• Other towns. Search your town's code for "feeding of wildlife," "crow" and "songbird," then read the definitions. How to find a code: municipal and county ordinances.
• Bandon is from news reports; its final text was not available to us. Anchorage's April 2026 feeding ban (AO 2026-53(S)) targets eagles, and the news account we read names no crow or raven. Its fines are on is it illegal to feed bald eagles.
• Penalties for Homer are in a fine schedule we did not read. Illinois's section states none.
• Other states and provinces, including Washington, California, New York and British Columbia, we did not read for crows.
• Parks have their own rules.

This is a reading of statutes, regulations and bylaws, not legal advice.