Daily Bag Limit/Possession Limit?

[sakoshooter]

If birds possessed in one's freezer are not going to count towards the possession limit, then it also should be that birds at a person's CAMP (tent, trailer, motorhome, etc) should not count towards the possession limit either.

If I go on a bird hunt for two weeks and I'm set up in a campground with my trailer, I should not have to follow a different set of rules than the hunters who lives in the area and goes home every night.  

I believe it reads: a person's residence - so unless you're getting your mail at that tent or camper, it wouldn't count Bobcat.

I'm gonna try and come up with some one to contact concerning a definition change and better clarification for all bird hunting. If you guys come up with someone, holler at us.

Here's the federal language, which includes more than just personal residence:

Sec. 20.35  Field possession limit.

    No person shall possess, have in custody, or transport more than the
daily bag limit or aggregate daily bag limit, whichever applies, of
migratory game birds, tagged or not tagged, at or between the place
where taken and either (a) his automobile or principal means of land
transportation; or (b) his personal abode or temporary or transient
place of lodging; or (c) a migratory bird preservation facility; or (d)
a post office; or (e) a common carrier facility.

This is part of the reason this is so freakin confusing. "Aggregate" - dictionary - to collect into one mass, the whole amount.
By your printing of the federal language, you could not have more than 7 ducks in your possession.
According the WA State WDFW Enforcement, you can transport double the daily bag limit(14 ducks)just like the WA State regs state. But your total possession limit includes what you've got in your freezer from the same year.
From my conversations with the WDFW recently, this also relates to upland birds.

All the more reason to get a definition change to "excluding cleaned or processed and frozen birds."

This simple language will allow us regular law abiding regular Joe's to continue hunting as we have been for years and yet allow enforcement to cite the poachers that shoot a limit in the AM, throw em in the freezer without cleaning them only to go out in the PM and do it again.
Even at that, it's basically unenforceable.

[sakoshooter]

WDFW Director Phil Anderson
General Phone - 360-902-2936
email - phil.anderson@dfw.wa.gov

If we're all in aggreement with the language above, let's keep it simple for Mr Anderson so we can get this change without making it too confusing or creating a mountain out of a mole hill please.

[xd2005]

This is part of the reason this is so freakin confusing. "Aggregate" - dictionary - to collect into one mass, the whole amount.
By your printing of the federal language, you could not have more than 7 ducks in your possession.

I don't read the Federal rule that way (not that I've never been wrong before). It says daily limit or aggregate daily limit, whichever applies. To me, that is saying if you've been out 1 day, you should only have the daily limit in possession, but you can have up to the 2 day limit if you have been hunting multiple days.

[sakoshooter]

This is part of the reason this is so freakin confusing. "Aggregate" - dictionary - to collect into one mass, the whole amount.
By your printing of the federal language, you could not have more than 7 ducks in your possession.

I don't read the Federal rule that way (not that I've never been wrong before). It says daily limit or aggregate daily limit, whichever applies. To me, that is saying if you've been out 1 day, you should only have the daily limit in possession, but you can have up to the 2 day limit if you have been hunting multiple days.

I agree with you as to what the possession limit is but the definition you quoted says aggregate. I then quoted the dictionary defintion of aggregate, that's all. Aggregate does not mean dbl daily bag limit.

[bigtex]

The problem I see with changing this rule/law is that the feds manage migratory wildlife (which does not include species such as pheasant, chuckar, grouse, quail) but does include doves. Having a state law saying you can have more then a posession limit at your residence but a federal law saying you can only have a posession limit is contradictory. And since the feds are essentially the supreme lawmakers of migratory wildlife in this country there rules are the ones of the land. States can restrict migratory waterfowl hunting further then federal regulations, such as restricting battery operated decoys, but they can't loosen federal regulations. Most of the waterfowl regs WDFW has are essentially just adopted from USFWS. WDFW is actually limited in how many days can be open for migratory waterfowl, USFWS sets a limit. It's not like most other species where if WDFW wanted a longer season they could do so.

[bigtex]

This is part of the reason this is so freakin confusing. "Aggregate" - dictionary - to collect into one mass, the whole amount.
By your printing of the federal language, you could not have more than 7 ducks in your possession.

I don't read the Federal rule that way (not that I've never been wrong before). It says daily limit or aggregate daily limit, whichever applies. To me, that is saying if you've been out 1 day, you should only have the daily limit in possession, but you can have up to the 2 day limit if you have been hunting multiple days.

I agree with you as to what the possession limit is but the definition you quoted says aggregate. I then quoted the dictionary defintion of aggregate, that's all. Aggregate does not mean dbl daily bag limit.

When dealing with legal terms you can not use a dictionary. In statutes there is usually a term or definition section. For example the term "public highway" means different things in different parts of the RCW.

Here is the federal definition of aggregate limits in regards to migratory waterfowl:


(1) Aggregate bag limit means a condition of taking in which two or more usually similar species may be bagged (reduced to possession) by the hunter in predetermined or unpredetermined quantities to satisfy a maximum take limit.

(3) Aggregate daily bag limit means the maximum number of migratory game birds permitted to be taken by one person in any one day during the open season when such person hunts in more than one specified geographic area and/or for more than one species for which a combined daily bag limit is prescribed. The aggregate daily bag limit is equal to, but shall not exceed, the largest daily bag limit prescribed for any one species or for any one specified geographic area in which taking occurs.

(5) Aggregate possession limit means the maximum number of migratory game birds of a single species or combination of species taken in the United States permitted to be possessed by any one person when taking and possession occurs in more than one specified geographic area for which a possession limit is prescribed. The aggegate possession limit is equal to, but shall not exceed, the largest possession limit prescribed for any one of the species or specified geographic areas in which taking and possession occurs.

[sakoshooter]

The problem I see with changing this rule/law is that the feds manage migratory wildlife (which does not include species such as pheasant, chuckar, grouse, quail) but does include doves. Having a state law saying you can have more then a posession limit at your residence but a federal law saying you can only have a posession limit is contradictory. And since the feds are essentially the supreme lawmakers of migratory wildlife in this country there rules are the ones of the land. States can restrict migratory waterfowl hunting further then federal regulations, such as restricting battery operated decoys, but they can't loosen federal regulations. Most of the waterfowl regs WDFW has are essentially just adopted from USFWS. WDFW is actually limited in how many days can be open for migratory waterfowl, USFWS sets a limit. It's not like most other species where if WDFW wanted a longer season they could do so.

Just trying to get the ball rolling. It'll end up in the USFWS hands I'm sure but we've got start somewhere.

[xd2005]

Can we take a step back and someone define whether it is state or federal laws that seem to be limiting TOTAL possession to 2 daily limits?

Is there another federal law other than the federal "Field Possession Limit" one we have referenced a number of times? Sorry, just getting a bit confused as to who said what, especially with the presence of the Field Possession Limit language, which was even referenced by WDFW at one point.

[Fishnclifff]

Actually, all the fed and state laws have been quoted.

The fed rule sets the daily field possesion limit, the state rule follows suit.

The state sets the daily bag limit, per the fed migratory act provisions allowing the states to do that.

There ya go, clear as mud.

The definitions of the possession rules are what  is driving this.There is no state definition as to when possession ends, and the fed rule is poignent in its limits, it does not define it either.

The LEO's can't all come up with the same definition, and the USFW and The WDFW staff can't come up with the same definition.
So we are left hanging.

Our goal is to get a definition added to the rules, similar to the salmon rules, using the afore mentioned verb-age, to make sure what we are all on the same page.

Right now we have books to go by, but no page to reference.

[h2ofowlr]

Did we ever get a final letter on this or definitive answer?  Or is this still clear as mud?

[Fishnclifff]

Last reply I got, was it is being reviewed at the fed level.
There was a huge uproar about this coming out of Texas, and the southern states.

Seems the LEO's are using the possession obscurity to enhance charges for being over the limit....IE__ get busted for shooting too many birds  and they go to your house and want to add to the carnage.

Lots of chatter coming from the SE states.

[h2ofowlr]

Question asked: The question I have is in regards to this daily limit and possesion limit
scenario:


Does prepared duck meat e.g. frozen (raw or cooked) duck sausage, dried
duck jerky, pre-baked and frozen whole duck or canned duck continue to be
part of the posession limit? What is the the law on this and where in
the CFR is is located?
Thank you for the consideration in answering this.

USFW RESPONSE

Thank you for your inquiry regarding possession limits. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's mission is, working with others, to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people.

In 50 CFR 20.11 you will find the definition of possession limit-

"Possession limit means the maximum number of migratory game birds of a single species or a
combination of species permitted to be possessed by any one person when lawfully taken in the
United States in any one specified geographic area for which a possession limit is prescribed."

In 50 CFR 10.12 possession itself is defined-

"Possession means the detention and control, or the manual or ideal
custody of anything which may be the subject of property, for one's use
and enjoyment, either as owner or as the proprietor of a qualified right
in it, and either held personally or by another who exercises it in
one's place and name. Possession includes the act or state of possessing
and that condition of facts under which one can exercise his power over
a corporeal thing at his pleasure to the exclusion of all other persons.
Possession includes constructive possession which means not actual but
assumed to exist, where one claims to hold by virtue of some title,
without having actual custody."

Possession ends when the object ceases to exist such as when a bird is consumed and the remaining parts are discarded. Simply making the waterfowl into sausage, jerky, or other products does not constitute an end to possession.

Thank you for your cooperation in complying with our regulations that help protect fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats. Please feel free to respond to this message with any further inquiries that you may have regarding this matter.

_____________________________
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Law Enforcement
4401 N. Fairfax Drive (Mailstop: LE-3000)
Arlington, Virginia 22203

[Fishnclifff]

This is what is being reviewed.

Looks like it will take a court decision to clarify when a duck stops being a duck.

[Atroxus]

So if you have a buddy who likes duck but can't hunt you could give all 14 of your possession limit to the buddy and be legal to take 14 more? If so, let's take it a step further. What if you harvest 14 and give them to a non-hunting spouse or child?

Also if you have the ducks processed into sausage or something how do you tell how many ducks you have left at any time?

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

[CP]

Possession ends when the object ceases to exist such as when a bird is consumed and the remaining parts are discarded. Simply making the waterfowl into sausage, jerky, or other products does not constitute an end to possession.

So possession ends when the toilet is flushed.  The Feds have ways of telling how many birds are in the sausage and how many are floating in the bowl before you push the handle.