Hunting Washington Forum
Other Hunting => Waterfowl => Topic started by: Everett on January 24, 2011, 08:26:02 PM
-
Can someone tell me how many ducks I'm allowed to shoot in one day. It looks like 7, but the possession limit is 14? Same with Canada Geese, it says 5, but the possession limit is 10? I'm not sure if this matters, but all I'm going to be hunting are greenhead mallards and canada geese. Please let me know when you get a chance and thank you in advance.
-
You can shoot 7 ducks a day, some species have restrictions.
You can shoot 4 geese a day, not 5, the 5 limit is for the early goose season, there are also some restrictions on geese as well.
-
Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow.
-
Also, don't plan on shooting too many ducks if all you are gonna shoot is greenheads :chuckle:
-
Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow.
Sure you could.... Eat 7 birds a day
-
Right you can have 14 in your possession, but you can still go hunting the day after you have 14, as long as you dont have them in your possesion at the time you are hunting.
Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow.
-
Thanks you guys, I didn't want to get stopped by the game warden with 14 and get into trouble.
-
As long as you didn't kill all 14 on the same day you're fine. :chuckle:
-
Yeah, I don't know what I would do with 14 ducks in one day anyway. I'd have to clear some room in the freezer I guess. :)
-
Right you can have 14 in your possession, but you can still go hunting the day after you have 14, as long as you dont have them in your possesion at the time you are hunting. Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow. CORRECT
That's not true. Possession limit is 14, period. You can't have more than 14 ducks in your possession at any given time. Nowhere does it say "in the field". Possession means at your house, at your camp, in your freezer. What may be an out here is if they are processed like into pepperoni. If the game warden shows up at your house though and you have more than 14 ducks, I think you're screwed.
-
Right you can have 14 in your possession, but you can still go hunting the day after you have 14, as long as you dont have them in your possesion at the time you are hunting. Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow. CORRECT
That's not true. Possession limit is 14, period. You can't have more than 14 ducks in your possession at any given time. Nowhere does it say "in the field". Possession means at your house, at your camp, in your freezer. What may be an out here is if they are processed like into pepperoni. If the game warden shows up at your house though and you have more than 14 ducks, I think you're screwed.
That is my understanding as well. If you have 14 breasted ducks in your freezer, you aren't allowed to shoot any more until some of them are consumed. 14 total in possession whether in the freezer of in the field. They wouldn't normally enforce that way, but it is the letter of the law if they want to.
-
Right you can have 14 in your possession, but you can still go hunting the day after you have 14, as long as you dont have them in your possesion at the time you are hunting. Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow. CORRECT
That's not true. Possession limit is 14, period. You can't have more than 14 ducks in your possession at any given time. Nowhere does it say "in the field". Possession means at your house, at your camp, in your freezer. What may be an out here is if they are processed like into pepperoni. If the game warden shows up at your house though and you have more than 14 ducks, I think you're screwed.
Gopher, that has always been my understanding as well.
-
I'm not quite sure about that. what about trout fishing every day and filling up a freezer? I always thought it was in posession when you were stopped and checked, especially with long seasons with daily limits.
-
My understanding has always been that it didn't matter where you possessed them, just that you possessed them
-
Onc they are procesed, or cleaned, I think you are good to go
-
I just read the regs for razor clams. It says one limit and any more need to be frozen or processed. I don't know how many times me the wife and kids went down for three days and dug limits every day and then brought them home on ice and cleaned them. Imagine the fine there, :yike:
-
Right you can have 14 in your possession, but you can still go hunting the day after you have 14, as long as you dont have them in your possesion at the time you are hunting. Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow. CORRECT
That's not true. Possession limit is 14, period. You can't have more than 14 ducks in your possession at any given time. Nowhere does it say "in the field". Possession means at your house, at your camp, in your freezer. What may be an out here is if they are processed like into pepperoni. If the game warden shows up at your house though and you have more than 14 ducks, I think you're screwed.
THIS IS TOTALLY UNTRUE.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The federal possesion limit ONLY applies to between the place you kill the waterfowl TO your vehicle or place of permanent or temporary abode or other facilities.
IT DOES NOT APPLY TO YOUR FREEZER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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.
-
Finally!!! someone said it!!! hahahahahaha!!!!! Thank you Fishnclifff....I was hoping all the people werent goin out to hunt again till they ate the seven that they shot the day before, or waiting till they ate ducks till they had less than 14 in the freezer...!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol....
-
Well, from what I see, NOWHERE in the state laws does it say anything about that. It very simply says that the possession limit for ducks is 14......period. Says nothing about in the field or in transit or at your residence. As far as the federal law goes, state law trumps that if it makes things more restrictive but even the federal law says 14 is your possession limit.
-
Onc they are procesed, or cleaned, I think you are good to go
That has to be true, most guys save up their duck and goose meat all season and at the end they take 50-100 lbs. of meat to the butcher to get processed. 50 lbs. is like about a hundred ducks worth.
-
Right you can have 14 in your possession, but you can still go hunting the day after you have 14, as long as you dont have them in your possesion at the time you are hunting. Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow. CORRECT
That's not true. Possession limit is 14, period. You can't have more than 14 ducks in your possession at any given time. Nowhere does it say "in the field". Possession means at your house, at your camp, in your freezer. What may be an out here is if they are processed like into pepperoni. If the game warden shows up at your house though and you have more than 14 ducks, I think you're screwed.
THIS IS TOTALLY UNTRUE.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The federal possesion limit ONLY applies to between the place you kill the waterfowl TO your vehicle or place of permanent or temporary abode or other facilities.
IT DOES NOT APPLY TO YOUR FREEZER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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.
Should have posted this sunday night or monday. :chuckle: :chuckle:
-
Well, from what I see, NOWHERE in the state laws does it say anything about that. It very simply says that the possession limit for ducks is 14......period. Says nothing about in the field or in transit or at your residence. As far as the federal law goes, state law trumps that if it makes things more restrictive but even the federal law says 14 is your possession limit.
State law does not trump federal law, It works in conjunction with fed. laws.
We hunt watrrfowl under the FEDERAL MIGRATORY ACT, located in Title 50, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 20.
Quote: Under Federal law established by international treaties with Canada, Mexico and other countries with whom we share migratory birds, the Service has ultimate responsibility for regulating migratory bird hunting nationwide. Through a regulatory process that begins each year in January and includes public consultation, the Service establishes the frameworks that govern all migratory bird hunting in the United States. Within the boundaries established by those frameworks, state wildlife agencies have the flexibility to determine season length, bag limits, and areas for migratory game bird hunting.
Each state has primary responsibility and authority over the hunting of wildlife that resides within state boundaries. State wildlife agencies that sell hunting licences are the best source of information regarding hunting seasons, areas open/closed to hunting, etc. (Hunting of migratory birds such as ducks and geese is managed cooperatively by state fish and wildlife agencies and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service). Migratory waterfowl hunters must possess both a state hunting license and a Federal Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp (Duck Stamp), and each hunter needs a Harvest Information Program (HIP) number for each state in which they hunt migratory birds. "
Per WAC 232-28-433, you can harvest 7 ducks per day, and be in possesion of no more than 14.
This would allow you to travel to eastern Wa or hunt a 2 day hunt and be able to legally transport you birds if you limited both days.
The possesion rule was to stop feather hunters years ago.
-
THIS IS TOTALLY UNTRUE.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The federal possesion limit ONLY applies to between the place you kill the waterfowl TO your vehicle or place of permanent or temporary abode or other facilities.
IT DOES NOT APPLY TO YOUR FREEZER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You should confirm this with a Federal warden because you are incorrect. This debate goes on every year and to clarify the law, I talked with six different districts....three from the State, three from the Feds. Not your local warden, but THE GUY IN CHARGE!
Every State LEO stated that a STATE officer will not check your freezer and it is their interpretation that possesion ends when the birds reach your place of residence (not your hunting shack) and they are cleaned. On the other hand, EVERY Federal officer said that a Federal agent will check your freezer and possesion only ends when the birds are consumed. This includes frozen birds, duck sticks, jerky, whatever, it all counts.
As said previously, a state law cannot make a federal law less restrictive, but it can make one more restrictive.
Granted, the likelyhood of getting your freezer checked depends a great deal on breaking another law that makes them pay some attention to you, but it is good to know the law and the risk to protect yourself.
-
No state or fed official will check your freezer, unless they have concerns that you are taking over your limit. Then you had better have proof of what you took and how many days you took it in.
Otherwise
Possesion in the field ends at your CAR when hunting.
There is no other federal or state law telling anyone how much they can posses at their homes.
Everything else is just someones opinion and we don't hunt according to someone's opinion, we hunt per the regulations set forth by the federal and state gov'ts.
-
So if I have 21 ducks 12 geese in my car by myself the lawman will just assume that I must have finished a three day hunt :dunno:
-
Either that or your buddies gave you their limit :dunno:
-
If you have it in writing your buddies gave you their limits would fly.
-
Where did he check you?
What law man?
-
Possesion in the field ends at your CAR when hunting.
There is no other federal or state law telling anyone how much they can posses at their homes.
Everything else is just someones opinion and we don't hunt according to someone's opinion, we hunt per the regulations set forth by the federal and state gov'ts.
[/quote]
This is about the dumbest stuff I've ever seen posted and I feel sorry for anyone foolish enough to listen to your advice.
Well, I guess you should post up your contact info so we can direct the wardens to you for advice on the subject, since they wouldn't know what the law is! :chuckle:
-
I'll tell you what...before you come back on here and post up some more of your interpretations, why don't you call a Federal office and get the opinion of the guy in charge. That way, we won't have to read any more of this nonsense and you will have learned something new.
-
I have had this same talk with different wardens. They have all agreed with me.
There is 1 standard given by the gov't pertaining to possesion limits-- ie-- the FIELD POSSESION LIMIT.
Unlike fishing regulations, the waterfowl regs do not contain language requiring a limit be in a processed form.
Now
Please post the state and or federal laws that state you can only have 2 possesion limits at any time, any where. Your home, freezer, or where ever.
If this was the case, noone could accumulate enuf meat to make jerky.
-
The only reason I bother replying to this is so some one new doesn't get into trouble by following what you believe to be true.
First, you have to understand that there are two different LEO agencies, State and Federal, that have juristiction over this. Each has a different interpretation of the law. The State views possession limit ceasing once you reach your place of residence (not your vehicle as you stated, if this were true then you could go on a week long trip, stay in your camper and shoot 7 birds each day without being in jeapordy and drive home withn 49 birds in your possesion). The Feds however, view the possesion of a bird to cease ONCE IT IS CONSUMED. Now, in the day to day scope of things we most often have contact with State LEO and if you asked everyone of them about the interpretation they would tell you that it ends once you reach home (thereby, one could save up enough birds to make sausage). However, this wouldn't make you safe because there are a few Federal LEO running around out there who, if they did have the reason to check your freezer, would cite you for being over the limit. It doesn't happen often and usually only when you are being investigated for another charge, but it does happen.
The important element to all of this is that the Federal interpretation of this law supercedes the State's interpretation of this law.
If you want to feel safe thinking that you know everything about the law, that's fine. However, you shouldn't come on here spreading info that could someone into trouble by following your advice.
-
WAC 232-28-434 Agency filings affecting this section
2010-11 Migratory waterfowl seasons and regulations.
DUCKS
Statewide
Oct. 16-20, 2010 and Oct. 23, 2010 - Jan. 30, 2011; except scaup season closed Oct. 16 - Nov. 5.
Special youth hunting weekend open only to hunters 15 years of age or under (must be accompanied by an adult at least 18 years old who is not hunting): Sept. 25-26, 2010.
Daily bag limit: 7 ducks, to include not more than 2 hen mallard, 2 pintail, 3 scaup, 1 canvasback, and 2 redhead statewide; and to include not more than 1 harlequin, 2 scoter, 2 long-tailed duck, and 2 goldeneye in Western Washington.
Possession limit: 14 ducks, to include not more than 4 hen mallard, 4 pintail, 6 scaup, 2 canvasback, and 4 redhead statewide; and to include not more than 1 harlequin, 4 scoter, 4 long-tailed duck, and 4 goldeneye in Western Washington.
Season limit: 1 harlequin in Western Washington.
AUTHORIZATION REQUIRED TO HUNT SEA DUCKS
Here is the WAC and it's the same as what the regulation pamphlet says. Doesn't say anything about where you are or condition.....says 14 ducks for possession limit. I also called the USFWS office in Redmond yesterday and talked to the head guy there and he told me the possession limit is 14.......period.
-
The only reason I bother replying to this is so some one new doesn't get into trouble by following what you believe to be true.
First, you have to understand that there are two different LEO agencies, State and Federal, that have juristiction over this. Each has a different interpretation of the law. The State views possession limit ceasing once you reach your place of residence (not your vehicle as you stated, if this were true then you could go on a week long trip, stay in your camper and shoot 7 birds each day without being in jeapordy and drive home withn 49 birds in your possesion). The Feds however, view the possesion of a bird to cease ONCE IT IS CONSUMED. Now, in the day to day scope of things we most often have contact with State LEO and if you asked everyone of them about the interpretation they would tell you that it ends once you reach home (thereby, one could save up enough birds to make sausage). However, this wouldn't make you safe because there are a few Federal LEO running around out there who, if they did have the reason to check your freezer, would cite you for being over the limit. It doesn't happen often and usually only when you are being investigated for another charge, but it does happen.
The important element to all of this is that the Federal interpretation of this law supercedes the State's interpretation of this law.
If you want to feel safe thinking that you know everything about the law, that's fine. However, you shouldn't come on here spreading info that could someone into trouble by following your advice.
Actually Gopher the way the enforcement of migratory waterfowl enforcement works is that the USFWS deptuzies every state wildlife enforcement agency to enforce USFWS laws. So when a WDFW (or any other state) Officer contacts you during duck season he is actually using federal authority. Every migratory waterfowl violation that takes place can actually be cited in state or federal courts, the violation in federal court would be a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The states are not really the decision makers when it comes to waterfowl seasons, there are strict restrictions that the states must follow, such as season length and other federal regulations.
-
Per the USFWS Migratory Bird Treaty Act which EVERY state must follow:
TITLE 50--WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES
CHAPTER I--UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR (CONTINUED)
PART 20_MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING--Table of Contents
Subpart D_Possession
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.
-
Actually Gopher the way the enforcement of migratory waterfowl enforcement works is that the USFWS deptuzies every state wildlife enforcement agency to enforce USFWS laws. So when a WDFW (or any other state) Officer contacts you during duck season he is actually using federal authority. Every migratory waterfowl violation that takes place can actually be cited in state or federal courts, the violation in federal court would be a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.
This is true, but talk to a state LEO and he'll tell you that they won't seek out a violation by checking your home, unless it is to follow up on another violation.
The states are not really the decision makers when it comes to waterfowl seasons, there are strict restrictions that the states must follow, such as season length and other federal regulations.
[/quote]
[/font]The Feds set the framework and give the states the authority to make the season or bag limit MORE restrictive, but not less restrictive.
-
Per the USFWS Migratory Bird Treaty Act which EVERY state must follow:
TITLE 50--WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES
CHAPTER I--UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR (CONTINUED)
PART 20_MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING--Table of Contents
Subpart D_Possession
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.
Once again, correct, notice that it says shall not possess AT his automobile....or his personal abode.
-
Per the USFWS Migratory Bird Treaty Act which EVERY state must follow:
TITLE 50--WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES
CHAPTER I--UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR (CONTINUED)
PART 20_MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING--Table of Contents
Subpart D_Possession
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[/b] (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.
Once again, correct, notice that it says shall not possess AT his automobile....or his personal abode.
It does not say "shall not possess AT his automobile....or his personal abode.
."
See the bold print above --- it says clearly----at or between the place where taken and either--- notice the parenthesis around all the choices in the statement? They separate the sentence into parts after the word either.
Here is the explanation that was given to me by the Fed gammie in the Skagit district---
If what you say is true--- a person who shot their limit of 7 ducks, everyday of the season, would harvest 728 ducks---7 x 104 days.
according to your position, that person would have to eat 7 ducks per day, for 102 of the 104 days.
Her words--" that is absurd."
I will ask again: State the federal law or state law that restricts you to 14 ducks in your freezer during a 104 day season.
-
Per the USFWS Migratory Bird Treaty Act which EVERY state must follow:
TITLE 50--WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES
CHAPTER I--UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR (CONTINUED)
PART 20_MIGRATORY BIRD HUNTING--Table of Contents
Subpart D_Possession
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.
[/b]
Once again, you have to read all the words in a sentence. This reg. applies to the DAILY LIMIT AND THE AGGREGATE DAILY LIMIT
2ag·gre·gate verb \ˈa-gri-ˌgāt\
ag·gre·gat·edag·gre·gat·ing
Definition of AGGREGATE
transitive verb
1: to collect or gather into a mass or whole
2: to amount to (a whole sum or total) : total
So we see class, this 1 single federal regulation gives us all the answers to __ what is the daily limit? and How many ducks or geese can we be in posession of while hunting? IE---
The daily limit is 7.
You may not possess more than the aggregate limit ( 14)
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.
-
HaHa, I'm beginning to think that you're a guy that just likes to argue or feel that he is always right. Either way, my responses weren't meant to try to convince you of anything cause I don't care how many ducks you have in your freezer. Rather, they were intended to warn unsuspecting hunters that there is some confusion about the law and that they need to satisfy their questions through their own research.
For myself, if I ask a Federal warden if he would cite me if he found more than 14 ducks (per household member) in my freezer and he says 'Yes', I don't need to see the law in print. I consider myself to be fairly warned.
You really ought to call a Federal officer and debate it with him because it is obvious that there isn't anyone here that knows as much as you do.
-
Read the above posts. I did have this talk with a federal game officer, she agreed with me.
The federal law has been posted more than once. Reaqd it. there is nothing in it about your freezer or what you have in your house, ONLY, what you possess while hunting in the field.
A person on this board associated with wildlife law enforcement, BigTex,, posted the same exact federal regulation for you to follow.
Every hunter at the Ridgefield Wildlife Refuge that i talked with about this, including the Fed. agent that runs the place, is in agreement with me.
What more do you want?
You cannot provide proof of a fed. or state reg. that states you cant have more than 14 in your freezer.
Every hunter reading this is learning what the ONLY fed. regulation posted is telling all of us.
-
BUT.......The STATE LAW says the possession limit is 14. Doesn't say anything about to or from. Says possession limit. I got corrected above for saying that state law trumps federal law. Well, it does here. Just like the state law against using motorized decoys. Federal law allows it, Washington state law doesn't. Federal law has some extra wording in it about possession in the field.....state law doesn't.
-
Any lawyers on here? :dunno: :chuckle:
I've never really known the answer to this issue but I tend to agree with Gopher. The state law says the possession limit is 14 and that's that. You can't have more than 14 in your possession, and that includes in your freezer at your home. However, I also know that law enforcement wont go around searching people's freezer so for all intents and purposes the law really only affects what you have in your possession before you get home.
I've always thought it to be kind of ridiculous that someone who lives close to where they hunt really does not have to follow the possession limit because they take can take their daily limit home every day and put them in the freezer, whereas guys who are camping or staying in a motel, can only hunt for two or three days (depending on species)before they have to cut the hunting trip short and go home.
-
I skipped ahead so I missed a couple pages but I will say this: I was on the volunteer duck/goose reporting program for the Dept of Interior for quite a few years. The first few years I simply filled out their form(they sent me)listing each duck/goose species, gender and county taken. After a few years of this, the Dept asked me to participate in their 'wing' program. They sent me the envelopes and I filled them out and returned them with duck/goose wings in them. Most of these years I harvested approximately 75 ducks and a dozen geese.
Not once in all those years was I ever asked if I had more than 14 ducks in my freezer. 75 is more than 14.
Actually I started in the program when the limit was 5 and dropped to 4 for a couple years. Even then I was never asked if I had more than the possession limit in my freezer.
I read the same thing in the regs you guys read but for a lot of years now Iv'e gone by the same rules for possession as was explained to me years ago. Daily limit means just that. Period. Possession means you can shoot a daily limit two days in a row(IE: a two day hunting trip)and still be legal transporting said possession limit to your house for processing.
To say that a duck hunter can only have a possession limit in his freezer at any given time is absurd.
To put this in perspective: A deer or elk hunter(example)could not harvest a deer during the 2011 season if said hunter still had venison cut/wrapped in his freezer from 2010. Since you can only harvest one deer/elk, having meat from more than one deer/elk in your possession at one time would be a violation.
I could go on and on if you want to bring fish into the picture but I think we get the point. I'm not trying to be a jerk but the question originally asked has been lost in the argument that followed.
I've had my dealing with the State and Feds also. Sometimes common sense in not part of the discussion. Half the time neither knows what the other is doing.
Bottom line and something I do(when I'm lucky enough to shoot a limit twice in two days)often is to take a possession limit and transport it to my house. I feel confident and safe and legal doing this.
-
Any lawyers on here? :dunno: :chuckle:
I've never really known the answer to this issue but I tend to agree with Gopher. The state law says the possession limit is 14 and that's that. You can't have more than 14 in your possession, and that includes in your freezer at your home. However, I also know that law enforcement wont go around searching people's freezer so for all intents and purposes the law really only affects what you have in your possession before you get home.
I've always thought it to be kind of ridiculous that someone who lives close to where they hunt really does not have to follow the possession limit because they take can take their daily limit home every day and put them in the freezer, whereas guys who are camping or staying in a motel, can only hunt for two or three days (depending on species)before they have to cut the hunting trip short and go home.
:yeah:
I don't think it is very likely anyone's freezer will be examined. However, with big game I keep the tags in the freezer because it is required until the meat is consumed.
I agree with Bobcat: it does not seem logical that you could shoot 14 ducks, take them home to your freezer, and keep on hunting but if you put them in a cooler at your hunt location, you're done.
Also, if I need to move someday: does this mean I can only take 14 ducks per trip from one house to the other?
-
Gopher,
Can you cite state or federal law that says possession limits apply to your freezer.
-
I'll just say this. If a WDFW Officer is checking your freezer your probably have a lot worse things to be worried about then a couple ducks over the posession limit. Just make sure you don't have over the posession limit while out in the field or back at camp.
-
The bird phamplet says the possession limit is 14 and that's all it says. Unlike the fishing pamphlet that goes one step further when it comes to fish. Game fish......same thing, there is a possession limit that is two daily limits. Doesn't say in the field or where, just the possession limit. If you're at your house, you possess them. Now, the place where it does make an exception......and that's spelled out....is with salmon where the regulations say you can possess up to 40 pounds "in frozen or processed form". Seems to me that if they, the state, had wanted to make that exception for waterfowl, deer, elk or whatever else you hunt or fish for, they would have said it that way. I agree that if the game warden comes to your house to look in your freezer, they're probably not after a few ducks over 14, but I suspect they could make you jump through some hoops if they wanted to.
-
Well the federal law in the pamphlet, that copmes from the federal migratory act, allows you to have 2 daily limits in your possession while in the field.'
The migratory act does not contain language as to how many at any time you can possess at your house.
I have hunted ducks for 15yrs and the fed rule has always been the norm for everyone I know.
Why is it different for you?
-
I guess I wasn't the only person that had a question about this. My understanding now is that you can shoot 7 ducks a day, but you can only possess 14 at your camp or in your truck. That makes sense, I don't foresee the game department coming and checking anyones freezer, unless they got a report you were poaching. Thanks again, guys. :)
-
To make things interesting, look at page 23 in the bird regulations, under "Wanton waste of migratory birds."
In brief, it states that you must retain birds in your actual custody between the place taken and a list of places, one of which is your automobile. So does that mean that I can take the birds to the car and then throw them in the woods? That would sure take care of the possession problem. The Feds say yes, the State says it would be considered reckless waste.
You would think that the WDFW would put the definition of "Possession" as it applies to bird hunting, in the regulations. This has been an ongoing source of debate for years and it needs to be cleared up for the benefit of sportsman and those enforcing the law. It is rediculous to think that each officer is forced to make up his mind in regard to the interpretation of this and we are supposed to comply with a law that no-one seems to be clear on.
-
Well the federal law in the pamphlet, that copmes from the federal migratory act, allows you to have 2 daily limits in your possession while in the field.'
The migratory act does not contain language as to how many at any time you can possess at your house.
I have hunted ducks for 15yrs and the fed rule has always been the norm for everyone I know.
Why is it different for you?
Well Fishnclifff, I'm not going to get in a pissin' match with you here. I'm not a 15 year old kid who's just starting out, I've been hunting and fishing in Washington for over 50 years and that's the way I read the regulations. I try my darndest to read the rules and the law and if there's something that I don't understand I start doing some homework. This afternoon while I was driving around on the Hancock tree farm near North Bend, I was stopped by Sgt. Chandler, one of the wardens who works that area. I told him about the discussion here and asked him what the rule was. He got out the regulation pamphlet and we looked at it. Without even reading it, he immediately told me that the possession limit was 14 ducks. He didn't have the federal law there but said he'd check. As I said above, I called the USFWS office in Redmond on Friday and talked to the head agent there, Phil, can't remember his last name, and he gave me the information that I forwarded on.....14 ducks in your possession no matter where you are. If you are reading the state law any other way, I'm sorry but I can't see it other than the way it's written. Some here agree with me, some don't. I'm done with this boxing match with you though.......
-
Gopher,
If you talked to the WDFW and that Sgt. I'm going to go with what you decided to do. I just like to do things by the book, it saves a lot of trouble later on.
-
Everett
Things got a little off track from your original smiple question of how many ducks can I shoot but it got some reaction and some head scratching going on so I guess that's not such a bad thing....... The whole idea is to have fun out there and enjoy yourself and not have to be always looking over your shoulder. This state's fish and game laws are not easy to understand by any stretch of the imagination and to top that off, it always seems like they're changing them on us. An old friend of mine from Alabama once told me that their hunting and fishing regulations are pretty easy to understand. It if doesn't say you can then you can't. Maybe a little too simplified.......
-
I agree with Gopher. The possession limit of not more than 2 daily limits means that technically you can not have more than 2 daily limits in your possession...........(doesn't matter whether they are in your home freezer). When I used to duck hunt all the time, I was aware that occasionally we would have more than our possession limit of ducks in the freezer. But, what are you going to do?
You just have to realize that you are technically breaking the law and just don't give an officer a reason to come check your freezer. :twocents: Oh, and finding a good recipe for duck doesn't hurt either. The guys that are really going to be potentially way over the possession limit are the guys saving all the ducks in a season for jerky or pepperoni.
-
Here is what I have found. WAC does not have a specific item in there for possession limit, other than
"WAC 232-12-001
Definition of terms.
Definitions used in rules of the commission are defined in RCW 77.08.010. In addition, unless otherwise provided:"
Here is an entry to the Washington Register, but I am not certain the exact interaction as to the code itself. I understand this to be revisions to the code as deemed fit. Remember, we are dealing with the government, so it's likely that the laws sort of lay haphazardly on one another rather than existing in a logical sequence.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/laws/wsr/1997/07/97-07-076.htm (http://apps.leg.wa.gov/documents/laws/wsr/1997/07/97-07-076.htm)
summary in here is, for those not wanting to look to bullet 11 "(11) "Possession limit" means the number of daily limits allowed to be retained in the field or in transit."
So the way that I read this, in my not so lawyerly way is
They amended the definitions to the law in 97.
There is no further amendment to the law
Therefore, this falls under the "otherwise provided" of 232-12-001 and is the legitimate definition.
-
Not that anyone cares what I think, but I've seen actual quotes of game rule definitions by Tex and Cliff explaining the rule and showing it does not mean TOTAL possession, but possession while in the field. I'm kind of confused why there is still an issue.
Gopher- it seems you have talked to a number of different officers/wardens regarding this, have you asked any to quote the actual rule that they are interpreting? It either exists or does not exist. One thing I do know, people can say "officer so-and-so told me the laws says this" and the officer/warden or judge will simply look at the rule as it is written and apply as such.
-
Well I'm gonna eat a big plate of crow here.
I am also issuing a public apology to Gopher, who i sent a PM to and was an a**hole in my message to him. Gopher, i am sorry the way I acted toward you.
After doing a lot of internet research on this issue, this issue is being debated on numerous forums nation wide.
The federal law, 2009 CFR Title 50, Volume 6, gives the definitions of possesion, and related terms.
It does specify field possesion limits as 2 daily limits. But, the possession definition is more restrictive.
It states you have to give the birds away as gifts, or send them to a taxidermist. You are allowed only 2 daily possesion limits.
There is an opinion by USFW, that says birds remain in your possesion until consumed. On a forum in the south, there was talk alluding to members of a club that were cited for being over the limit, because they had pepperoni sticks made from duck, that had not been consumed. No proof was offered, just comments made. Asinine if you ask me.
I found some court rulings on the issue.
1 from Louisiana, a guy was ticketed for over the possesion limit while picking up the shot birds from a boat blind. he took his small boat to retrieve 8 ducks shot by the party on the boat. He shot 2, but picked up all 8. the wardens called him to shore and cited him. Pricks.
He appealed and lost, because they used the strict definition of possesion in the field rule.
The appelate judges noted in their decision, some ambiguity of the possesion definition, but because he didn't question the definition in his defense, they did not make a ruling on it.
In California, a goober, Not you Goober, went out shooting ducks for the hell of it and they caught him over the limit in the field. They obtained a search warrant for his house and found 300 ducks and 28 geese, whole, uncleaned, unplucked in his freezer. He admitted he didn't have any idea what to do with them.
They used the federal definition of possesion to charge him with gross poaching. He pled no contest and was sentenced.
It appears this law places honest hunters in a possible quagmire of fed. **it while hunting.
After 86 yrs, you would think they would have clarified this definition by now.
So it seems the LEO's are happy using the fed. definition to bolster a simple charge into a larger case
Seems the only way out is to get the state to change the verbage to equal fishing and upland game: IE::
Possesion ends when the game is in a processed form.
Seems like a big DUH, but it is the govt we are dealing with.
Anyone in the know with state legislators can put this bug in their ear, maybe get it changed for next year.
A Texas sports writer noted in an article on the subject, there is talk of the feds raising the possesion limit to 3 time the daily limit for the 2011-2012 season. Who knows.
Now, i will go stand with my nose in the corner, until I learn to play nice with others.
-
Well, now that we're all pizzed out....What you believed is a common misconception and while few fall victim to the law, it is there. It really is due to states telling the guys their version of the law without stating that the federal version is different..sort of setting you up because I know that they know.
I remember the first time I asked a Fed about that and his attitude was as if I was some dirtbag trying to rape the resource. He proceeded to give me a lecture about how hunting isn't intended to be subsistence down here (my example to him was that I like to eat ducks throughout the year, instead of living on them during the duck season to stay within the limit).
Another example as to how the difference between the two agencies can be misleading happened when steel shot first came out. It was only required in zones around certain refuges and we were told by state wardens that they weren't enforcing it off of the refuge itself. Foolishly, we believed them and were hunting on private land 1/4 mile within the boundary (but not on the refuge) and ran into a federal warden, who promptly issued the citation (his statement, 'Well, we're enforcing it"). Never trusted one guy's statement again.
Thank's for pursuing it to a conclusion and addressing it in a classy manner.
-
What a clustertruck! :bash:
Good thing you guys waited till the season closed to figure this out... :chuckle:
So what is my possession limit on deer, elk or bear...all that steak in my freezer? How about those razor clams I canned last year? How about the mushrooms I sauteed and froze this year?
Personally, I am a bit tired of feeling that big brother is setting me up, or watching a bit too closely to what I am doing. I don't want to break any laws, but for crying out loud, your average duck hunter on this side my have a hard time reaching a possession limit in the freezer. IMHO, waste of wildlife is the law I want enforced. When I come across a pile of ducks with the breast meat ripped out and the entire rest of the bird tossed aside.... This is the law I want enforced, this is waste IMHO. How about that pile of salmon on the riverbank with their eggs yanked out?
I give up. :bash:
-
My words exactly Iceman...........
-
FishnCliff, you earn my vote for class in your last response. :tup:
As for possession limits for big game, there are none to the best of my knowledge. That may be because there needs to be a validated tag for each animal taken, and the tag needs to remain with the respective animal until consumed.
-
Also, if I need to move someday: does this mean I can only take 14 ducks per trip from one house to the other?
Yes. :chuckle:
-
FishinClifff- Man, there's no need to be groveling and apologizing here. This is a forum.......a place where everybody and anybody is entitled to their views and opinions. Opinions on ethics and "would you do this or that" are not black and white and there is no right or wrong so those discussions are easy. I'll be the first one to admit that the laws we all live under are not easy to understand.....whether you're driving a car on the freeway or hunting and fishing. You try to stay within the laws as best you can but there will always be questions. The original post here was from a guy who simply wanted to know how many ducks he could shoot. It took off from there and made a lot of folks start scratchin' their heads. Some members of this forum are very opinionated and that's OK. If you and I had been face to face having this discussion, I seriously doubt we would have ended up on the floor "in the mud and the blood and the beer". I took no offense at your remarks. We're good. :)
-
Seems the fire is starting to go out, so I thought I'd throw some more wood on it :chuckle:
FROM WDFW:
The possession limit of 14 is not accounting for any birds you may have processed in your freezer at home. The detailed summary of the Federal Regulations regarding possession limits is listed on page 23 of the Migratory Waterfowl & Upland Game Season pamphlet.
The link below will take you to a page within the WDFW website that has an electronic version if you do not have a hard copy available. When you open the link just scroll down to the middle of the page to find the waterfowl pamphlet.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/regulations/ (http://wdfw.wa.gov/hunting/regulations/)
If you have any additional questions or concerns please don’t hesitate to contact us again.
-
The question then would be what is the definition of "processed"?
-
The question then would be what is the definition of "processed"?
To me, processed is not the key part of the response. To me, the key is that she referenced the exact regulation that has been listed on this thread a few times. And that regulation never mentions processed.
-
What a clustertruck! :bash:
...................... When I come across a pile of ducks with the breast meat ripped out and the entire rest of the bird tossed aside.... This is the law I want enforced, this is waste IMHO.
Probably need a new thread for this subject........but here goes anyway. I'm not sure there is a law requiring the "rest of the bird" to be eaten.......??? :dunno:
-
I sent a followup requesting further clarification, the response:
"I just used the “freezer” as a possible scenario. You are correct that the possession limit is referring to the field or in transit. Sounds like you’ve got a good grasp of what the regulation is saying."
-
What a clustertruck! :bash:
...................... When I come across a pile of ducks with the breast meat ripped out and the entire rest of the bird tossed aside.... This is the law I want enforced, this is waste IMHO.
Probably need a new thread for this subject........but here goes anyway. I'm not sure there is a law requiring the "rest of the bird" to be eaten.......??? :dunno:
Curly, this duck meat waste issue has been addressed alot on here already. I for one am not going to start a new thread on it again...... :chuckle:
-
The question then would be what is the definition of "processed"?
Processed: Action, When one eats the ducks he took and sleeps for 7.5 hours wakes up has coffee sits on pot wipes clean and flushes = processed :EAT: :crap:
-
The question then would be what is the definition of "processed"?
Processed: Action, When one eats the ducks he took and sleeps for 7.5 hours wakes up has coffee sits on pot wipes clean and flushes = processed :EAT: :crap:
:chuckle: I can't argue with that!
-
I have sent an e-mail to USFW asking about the definition and if they can provide written verbage as to whether processed meat is still considered a duck.
there is their opinion posted on this discussion already.
We will see if anything changes.
-
What a clustertruck! :bash:
...................... When I come across a pile of ducks with the breast meat ripped out and the entire rest of the bird tossed aside.... This is the law I want enforced, this is waste IMHO.
Probably need a new thread for this subject........but here goes anyway. I'm not sure there is a law requiring the "rest of the bird" to be eaten.......??? :dunno:
Curly, this duck meat waste issue has been addressed alot on here already. I for one am not going to start a new thread on it again...... :chuckle:
Oh, how did I miss those discussions. I'll do a search and see what I can find. :hello:
(and the comment about starting a new thread was directed at myself. I figured I should start a new thread instead of commenting in this one..............)
-
I sent a followup requesting further clarification, the response:
"I just used the “freezer” as a possible scenario. You are correct that the possession limit is referring to the field or in transit. Sounds like you’ve got a good grasp of what the regulation is saying."
So if the possession limit is in the field or transit then what the heck is the bag limit?
If you're caught with 14 ducks in the field can you just say you shot them yesterday and are carrying them around? Why would they even have a bag limit? Something doesn't seem quite right there...
-
MP123, All it does (if interpreted that way) is to prevent someone who is camping or otherwise staying away from home while hunting, in shooting more than 14 ducks. If you go on a 7 day hunt, you basically can only get two ducks per day. (on average)
It needs some clarification, because you're right- it doesn't seem right when the guy who hunts from home basically does not have to follow a possession limit but the guy who hunts away from home DOES. ???
-
Well now that you mention it, I guess you could look at it that it allows the guy hunting away from home to have 14 ducks rather than only the 7 that the bag limit would allow. It still seems a little hard to enforce though.
Not that I'm going to be carrying around 14 ducks anytime soon! :chuckle:
-
MP123, All it does (if interpreted that way) is to prevent someone who is camping or otherwise staying away from home while hunting, in shooting more than 14 ducks. If you go on a 7 day hunt, you basically can only get two ducks per day. (on average)
It needs some clarification, because you're right- it doesn't seem right when the guy who hunts from home basically does not have to follow a possession limit but the guy who hunts away from home DOES. ???
Just take a walk with your birds each day to the post office and you'll be good :chuckle:
-
Okay here is the latest from the horses uhhh mouth as it were:::::::
Mr. Pepper,
In your e-mail you have addressed all the appropriate WAC’s and Statutes that pertain to limits of waterfowl including daily and possession. To clarify the total number of ducks a person can harvest in one day is seven ducks following the species specific limits. The total number of ducks an individual can possess is 14 ducks following the species specific limits. What this means that if you go out hunting two days in a row and harvest your limit each day you will have reached your total possession limit. If those 14 ducks are just kept you would not be able to legally hunt a third day since you would be exceeding your possession limit unless you ate or used some of your ducks first. If you have any other questions let me know.
Sergeant Carl Klein
Aquatic Invasive Species Coordinator
WDFW Enforcement Program
W-21
Cell (360) 790-8006
Office (360) 902-2346
-
LOL...perfect, two completely opposite responses, both from WDFW.
-
Well, this is as clear as mud now...
Maybe no one knows what a possession limit is! :dunno:
-
Okay here is my response back to him and his response back to me. It seems if we follow the daily limit of 7, and have no more than 2 limits in the field, we are good. Thats the only way they are going to check us, it seems.
Thank you for your information.
A lot of hunters believe the state possession rule is too vague. There is no verbage as to where you can be in possession of 14 ducks, except in the fed field possession rule.
The possession rule that you stated, puts a whole lot of hunters in a bad place. They hunt all year and save the meat from all their ducks, to be made into, as we like to call it, duckaroni.
If we were to strictly adhere to the rule verb-age you quoted, there would be no more duckaroni being processed by the local butcher shops, and
law abiding, or so we thought we were, hunters would be setting ourselves up for some serious state and fed infractions, just by saving our meat to be processed later.
There should be a way to change the verb-age to allow for birds that are prepared for processing, IE butchering, etc, are no longer counted in the possession limit. The same as salmon an upland game birds. It seems to be, that after you butcher a duck or goose and separate the meat from the bone, and discard the rest of the bird, it ceases to be a duck.
The fed rule states possession ends only if the birds are given away as gifts or sent to a taxidermist. Their verb-age does not mention possession ends only after consumption. That seems to be an opinion.
Thank you
Clifford Pepper
Mr. Pepper,
Here is a clipping from the regulation pamphlet that states the possession limit is 14 ducks ( it is the chart showing limits in the front of the book). There are also possession limits for all species including game birds and fish. The laws were written this way to make the enforcement of limits possible and ensure that our wildlife resources are used in a sustainable manner. The enforcement of possession limits usually only comes in during the investigation of egregious violations. If you have further questions or concerns let me know.
-
It sounds almost like 14 is the limit for possession anywhere including home but they don't really enforce it much?
I agree that at some point a duck ceases to be a duck. I mean if I had one half of a Mallard breast and one half of a Widgeon breast in my freezer do I have possession of one whole duck?, two ducks?, or no ducks? What if I make all 14 in to Duckeroni and then eat all except one piece. Now how many do I have in possesion? A guy could go crazy with this stuff :dunno:
-
Fishncliff,
I appreciate you taking the time to TRY to get this cleared up.
Your answer did say that if you eat or 'did something with it', then you could hunt again. I'd assume that 'did something with it' meant that if it was processed(cleaned and in your freezer)that you 'did something with it'.
In another post on here, the hunter stated he'd killed 488 ducks this year. There is no way an average human is going to consume that many ducks plus the geese he didn't list in any given duck season.
Also, if the intent was to only allow the taking of 14 ducks, I'd have to assume that enforcement would concentrate their efforts on waterfowl guides first and check their freezers knowing they harvest large numbers of ducks/geese.
My own common sense(has nothing to do with the law)tells me that the possession limit was set up strickly as a guideline with hunters in mind that make over night forays. Even then enforcement knows full well this law is almost impossible to enforce.
If I just came off the lake with a limit of ducks, stiff and cold, and threw them in the back of the truck with the 7 dead, stiff and cold ducks from yesterday and an enforcement officer pulls up, how are we going to tell the difference between yesterday's and today's birds? Can't, period. I would be legal under the possession limit law though. Will that warden ask me how many I have at home in the freezer? Doubt it. If he did and I answered him honestly, would he want to search my freezer? Doubt it.
Fishncliff, post the response you get back please. I'm printing it and putting it in my blind bag for future reference. Might be worth printing, putting in a zip-loc bag and keeping in the freezer with your meat folks.
-
I guess what they need is a punchcard to control the number of ducks each hunter takes. They could give you the first punchard free with the purchase of the usual licenses needed for waterfowl hunting, good for whatever the possession limit is for each species. Once you fill that one up you could purchase another one for say, $20. Would be a great money maker for the state, plus it would only be fair that those who take more of the resource, pay proportionally more. I think I'll send this idea to the appropriate people at the DFW. :IBCOOL:
-
Please dont.
-
LOL...perfect, two completely opposite responses, both from WDFW.
No real surprise right there!
-
I guess what they need is a punchcard to control the number of ducks each hunter takes. I think I'll send this idea to the appropriate people at the DFW. :IBCOOL:
I will kick you in the jimmies. Ok prob not. But dont give them any more Ideas to take our money.
Fishncliff,
I appreciate you taking the time to TRY to get this cleared up.
Your answer did say that if you eat or 'did something with it', then you could hunt again. I'd assume that 'did something with it' meant that if it was processed(cleaned and in your freezer)that you 'did something with it'.
In another post on here, the hunter stated he'd killed 488 ducks this year. There is no way an average human is going to consume that many ducks plus the geese he didn't list in any given duck season.
Please note; the above answer was an opinion given by USFW as to the definition of " when possession ends"
There is no " did something with it" defined in any rule, state or fed.
They say possession ends if you
A. Gift it to someone
B. send it to a taxidermist
C. eat it.
Thats all your choices.
For the guy who shot 488 ducks. If they checked his freezer and found those ducks IN ANY FORM, he would be charged with gross poaching.
The Sgt that responded to me did not even attempt to discuss changing the definitions. I guess they want to keep this in their back pocket for enhancing a menial charge of possessing over the limit.
Don't want to kill the cash cow.
-
. When I come across a pile of ducks with the breast meat ripped out and the entire rest of the bird tossed aside.... This is the law I want enforced, this is waste IMHO. How about that pile of salmon on the riverbank with their eggs yanked out?
I give up. :bash:
Some states state specifically what parts of a bird must be taken (i.e. breast, thighs, wings), some don't. I haven't seen anything about this from WA though. Regarding deer, elk and other species, these animals are regulated by State laws only, so there isn't the confusion there is with ducks by having different interpretations from two different agencies (you have tags for each animal, you are fine).
-
I guess what they need is a punchcard to control the number of ducks each hunter takes. They could give you the first punchard free with the purchase of the usual licenses needed for waterfowl hunting, good for whatever the possession limit is for each species. Once you fill that one up you could purchase another one for say, $20. Would be a great money maker for the state, plus it would only be fair that those who take more of the resource, pay proportionally more. I think I'll send this idea to the appropriate people at the DFW. :IBCOOL:
Please do not do this
-
Fishncliff,
Your post stated his response was 'used some of them'.
There is no " did something with it" defined in any rule, state or fed.
Used some could mean: Prepared some. Processed some. Canned some. Brined some. Frozen some.
Most of my duck/goose breasts get combined with my venison scraps and taken to Mt View Meats for their famous North Country Hot summer sausage.
And the idea of a punch card, please keep that idea to yourself. The Fed Duck Stamp already takes care of this. So does the State Duck Stamp.
-
Yeh I'm tryin to get a definition for that statement. So far everyone tells me the same 3 choices.
I will let you know.
-
You know, thinking about this, we have the perfect case study right here on this forum. I'm going to pass a couple of threads by a local duck god, on to some Federal Wardens that I know. I'm sure his freezer is full of ducks that they might be interested in seeing and we'll all get to watch the interpretation of the law in action. It might take awhile, as they like to build solid cases against guys, but they'll straighten it out.
-
You know, thinking about this, we have the perfect case study right here on this forum. I'm going to pass a couple of threads by a local duck god, on to some Federal Wardens that I know. I'm sure his freezer is full of ducks that they might be interested in seeing and we'll all get to watch the interpretation of the law in action. It might take awhile, as they like to build solid cases against guys, but they'll straighten it out.
:tdown: Come on dude give it up
-
What does this goober guy even know, what an ass! :stup:
You know, thinking about this, we have the perfect case study right here on this forum. I'm going to pass a couple of threads by a local duck god, on to some Federal Wardens that I know. I'm sure his freezer is full of ducks that they might be interested in seeing and we'll all get to watch the interpretation of the law in action. It might take awhile, as they like to build solid cases against guys, but they'll straighten it out.
:tdown: Come on dude give it up
-
Yeah really *censored*ty to jump on someones success who takes the time to post on here
friggin internet cops suck, get a life dude !
-
I have been tempted to refer this forum to the FW guy I am discussing this with,
but
My goal is to get a definition to the current rules, or change them, so we can all follow the law, like we do, and keep our duckaroni stash.
Not give someone ammo to unnecessarily screw someone else.
Goober, if you know someone is poaching, just turn em in.
-
Below is the response I got from a State Game Warden. I've know this person for many years. She also told me she double checked this with her Sergeant. She's been working waterfowl areas for many years. Used to work the Nisqually area. Probably the most curteous wardens I've ever dealt with. Name withheld for obvious reasons.
Copied and Pasted:
1st email response: Well what I can say so far is Possession Limit is the number of daily limits allowed to be kept in the field or transit. Doesn’t have anything to do with what is at your residence.
2nd email response: Wow. I am not sure who is who on there. But right when I think they are getting it right someone thinks they are clarifying it and has it completely wrong. The definition of POSSESSION LIMIT – in the pamphlet is: The number of daily limits allowed to be kept in the field or in transit. In the field or in transit is ANYWHERE other than at an ordinary residence. An ordinary residence is where you live.
-
[ The definition of POSSESSION LIMIT – in the pamphlet is: The number of daily limits allowed to be kept in the field or in transit.
I haven't heard back from the Sgt. from F&W, that I am e-mailing, on his definition , but I think the only way to clarify this whole mess is to have the above verbage, or something similar, entered into the regulation pamphlet.
-
I agree Fishncliff. I stated that to the officer I'm talking with. She's still waiting for clarification from above and then she'll email me back.
I asked her to take the time to read the entire thread so she could get a feeling for what the average law abiding duck hunter was up against. She said she did.
We'll see how this finalizes. If it goes the wrong way, we're gonna have to submit a 'Rule Change' to go into effect immediately. I believe 'rule changes' have to go before the legislature and they're session is almost over for this year I believe.
-
Soooo...can we hunt coyotes at night?? :dunno:
-
As long as you don't shoot more than the daily bag limit.
-
Heard back today, but it was the same old same old.
Eat it or give it away.
If ya gift it, gotta have a tag and records.
He said those are the only rules. The state law follows the fed law.
I did ask him if and how to get the rules reworded to allow for processing.
-
This is a perfect example of one hand not knowing what the other hand is doing.
I'm still waiting on my end for final explaination.
-
I guess what they need is a punchcard to control the number of ducks each hunter takes. They could give you the first punchard free with the purchase of the usual licenses needed for waterfowl hunting, good for whatever the possession limit is for each species. Once you fill that one up you could purchase another one for say, $20. Would be a great money maker for the state, plus it would only be fair that those who take more of the resource, pay proportionally more. I think I'll send this idea to the appropriate people at the DFW. :IBCOOL:
Some states do this. Some states also have transport tags for each duck/goose you shoot.
-
The punch card idea, according to USFW and WDFW doesn't nullify the possesion limit of double the daily limit.
Their interpretation is you can only have 14 anywhere.
Thats not what the rule says, but thats the way they are interpreting it as.
-
I guess what they need is a punchcard to control the number of ducks each hunter takes. They could give you the first punchard free with the purchase of the usual licenses needed for waterfowl hunting, good for whatever the possession limit is for each species. Once you fill that one up you could purchase another one for say, $20. Would be a great money maker for the state, plus it would only be fair that those who take more of the resource, pay proportionally more. I think I'll send this idea to the appropriate people at the DFW. :IBCOOL:
Some states do this. Some states also have transport tags for each duck/goose you shoot.
This has been in effect for years in western WA for the pheasant release sites. Since it was not policed, it became so abused by dishonest hunters that starting last year the WDFW simply more than doubled the pheasant license and did away with the punch card. No one was writing their birds down or being reported. Because of this, the number of birds released per hunter was cut in half this past season and there was less money overall for the program.
Waterfowl hunters already buy a small game license, state duck stamp and federal duck stamp. We DO NOT need a punch card to purchase. Many of us also belong to Ducks Unlimited and spend plenty at their fund raising auctions.
-
Got an email today. It said to call. I'll call tomorrow. That answer makes me wonder.
-
Well, I finally got my call back and it's not what we wanna hear.
The WDFW waterfowl dept says that 'technically' the possession limit includes what is in your freezer also. They did go on to say that they would never check your freezer as 1)they don't have the authority and 2)the law was not written to 'technically' include birds cleaned and frozen, it was written to prevent a person(s)from shooting limit after limit the same day and get away with it because he took the first limit home to his freezer, so on and so on.
I mentioned that a definition change was in order to exclude "cleaned or processed and frozen birds". I was told to contact Lt Eric Anderson - WDFW Enforcement - Waterfowl Division.
Upland birds never entered this discussion but they fall under the same regulation as far as possession limit goes. Hey upland bird hunters, we need you to jump on the bandwagon here!
I think we need everyone to send emails to Lt Eric Anderson(WDFW Enforcement)concerning a definition change, don't you guys agree?
-
I'm with ya. Researching a good e-mail address now.
Unless you got one.
-
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. :twocents:
-
The fed rule in the book states-- at or between the place taken and automobile, temp or perm abode, or mail or processing center.
That seems simple enough, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut
There are some that are using the strict definition of possesion by the fed rule, as the way it is. It's confusing and really open ended.
Workin on that e-mail now.
-
Fishncliff, oh so you're saying a camp and a home would be considered the same under that law?
-
Temporary abode.
-
So say you had two hunters, and you camped out for 14 days and each hunter killed a limit every day- I'd be a little nervous driving home with 196 ducks on ice in the cooler in the back of the truck. Wouldn't you?
However in the exact same scenario except it's someone who lives close to the same hunting area, and they drive home every night- they would have nothing to worry about with the same 196 ducks sitting in a cooler on ice in the garage.
-
I feel ya.
I did a 3 day once. got checked, had 2 days worth cleaned and on ice. They said i was good, but cautioned me that not all officers were that way.
If you limited the whole season, you could have 728 in your freezer. With the current wording of 14, imagine the ticket.
What we are hearing from officials, even at your house you would not be okay. Kind of an ace in the hole card for LE.
Thats why we are tryin to get some wording changed, to keep all of us from becoming unwitting criminals.
-
I'm sure the definition is also interpreted differently between officers as well. The way it is written they just write a ticket and let the judge decipher what the rule should be.
-
There is so much vagueness, it leaves our a**es hanging out.
They have the power to confiscate our guns and gear, on a BS rule, that noone can agree on the true meaning.
Hopefully we can work out some thing.
-
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. :twocents:
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.
-
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. :twocents:
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.
-
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. :twocents:
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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. :(
-
Did we ever get a final letter on this or definitive answer? Or is this still clear as mud?
-
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.
-
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
-
This is what is being reviewed.
Looks like it will take a court decision to clarify when a duck stops being a duck.
-
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
-
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.
-
Right you can have 14 in your possession, but you can still go hunting the day after you have 14, as long as you dont have them in your possesion at the time you are hunting. Daily bag limit is how many you can shoot in one day. Possession limit is the total number you can have in your possession. If the possession limit is 14, you cannot possess more than 14 at one time. If you shot 7 yesterday, and 7 today, then you can't shoot any tomorrow. CORRECT
That's not true. Possession limit is 14, period. You can't have more than 14 ducks in your possession at any given time. Nowhere does it say "in the field". Possession means at your house, at your camp, in your freezer. What may be an out here is if they are processed like into pepperoni. If the game warden shows up at your house though and you have more than 14 ducks, I think you're screwed.
THIS IS TOTALLY UNTRUE.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The federal possesion limit ONLY applies to between the place you kill the waterfowl TO your vehicle or place of permanent or temporary abode or other facilities.
IT DOES NOT APPLY TO YOUR FREEZER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
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.
Tell em Fishncliff. We went thru this pretty thoroughly last year. You could probably do a search and come up with a 20+ pg thread but Fishncliff pretty much sums it up right here.
-
Looks like its time to break out the Crayola box and dumb it down even more, i forgot that in todays day and age folks aint born with common since!
-
Looks like its time to break out the Crayola box and dumb it down even more, i forgot that in todays day and age folks aint born with common since!
Personally I am more inclined to believe a post with references to applicable legal code such as the one from h20fowlr which I quoted below. If you know of a place that clarifies or refutes h2ofowlr's post maybe you should share it instead of of saying that people have no common sense. :twocents:
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
-
Maybe i have a different way of looking at and reading the regs than others that need a more clear explanation of them but i understand it just fine and some folks don't so they need to break out some way of dumbing it down as we use in the military for terminology sorry if you took offense to this and didn't understand my :twocents:
-
Maybe i have a different way of looking at and reading the regs than others that need a more clear explanation of them but i understand it just fine and some folks don't so they need to break out some way of dumbing it down as we use in the military for terminology sorry if you took offense to this and didn't understand my :twocents:
Unfortunately when it comes to laws/regulations they tend to be written by lawyers and/or politicians, so they are either so complicated you need a degree to understand them or so vague that they can be exploited. In this case it seems to be the latter. If you go by the letter that h20 got from USFW then it seems that any number of birds that you have on you or at home count. So lets say I have 7 ducks in the freezer, and one that I got mounted by a taxidermist that I can only harvest 6 more. This would really suck for someone that has a lot of duck mounts. Someone else though might interpret it that the mounts don't count. That's really where the problem lies, it seems to be open for interpretation. When we have laws or regulations that are open for interpretation that means we have the potential for people who believe they are following the law to be arrested and/or fined because a LEO or worse, a judge interprets it differently. I bet if 5 of us sent emails to USFW with the same question we would get back *at least* 2 different interpretations of the law on this.
-
Yes i totally agree with that but some people though just need an illustration
-
A mounted duck would be a consumed carcase, unless you leave the inards in it and throw it on the wall! If solid and frozen waiting to go to the taxi. then it would go towards your bag limit!
-
A mounted duck would be a consumed carcase, unless you leave the inards in it and throw it on the wall! If solid and frozen waiting to go to the taxi. then it would go towards your bag limit!
Looks like I need to drop some birds off at the taxi.
Ever wonder if they warden would enforce this law if you were legal in every other aspect?
-
straight forward rules. If you don't understand you prob shouldn't be hunting :yike:
-
straight forward rules. If you don't understand you prob shouldn't be hunting :yike:
That's right up there with "I know, but I'm not gonna tell" If it was that "straight forward" this thread would not be pages long.
Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
-
I guess Im lucky that my family loves duck, we eat ours within a few days. :IBCOOL:
-
I am going to personally continue to follow the posession rule as it applies to my immediate posession. On my person, or in my vehicle. Same goes with fishing. In my boat, or in the cooler in the truck. We all know that F&W is almost without a doubt never going to come to your house to see how many ducks are in the freezer. Don't over harvest, and mind your manners, and you'll be fine. When i bring back 5 days worth of fish from oregon i'm not going to be in violation of a posession limit. That would be ridiculous.
-
I am curious what OutdoorGuardian thinks? It would be interesting to see how WDFW interprets/enforces it.
-
I recently asked this very question to an enforcement officer who attends our hunter education classes. His intepretation was that game in a freezer is not part of a possession limit.
My suspicion is that while game in a freezer is technically/letter of the law part of a possession limit, no one would be cited for that unless there was some other cause.
-
I know this is beating a dead horse, but I feel compelled to add my :twocents: . My first year guiding in AK, I got into a little trouble because I misunderstood possession limits as well. Had 3 days of limits at the end of a 3 days trip, while the possession limit was 2 days worth of limits.
What the agent in AK told me when he issued my citation was that the fish no longer apply to my possession limit once they have been processed.
Processed was defined as meat that was prepared or preserved in such a way that made it fit for human consumption after two weeks. This meant; smoked, salted, frozen, canned, etc... Simply in a cooler on ice was not sufficient.
Once the meat was processed, that daily bag limit no longer applied to the possession limit.
Since this ordeal I have applied the same rule to my fishing and hunting here in WA, and had zero issues with any LEO.
It was interesting to read the response from the USFW though. I'm really surprised that is how they interpret possession limit.
-
I know this is beating a dead horse, but I feel compelled to add my :twocents: . My first year guiding in AK, I got into a little trouble because I misunderstood possession limits as well. Had 3 days of limits at the end of a 3 days trip, while the possession limit was 2 days worth of limits.
What the agent in AK told me when he issued my citation was that the fish no longer apply to my possession limit once they have been processed.
Processed was defined as meat that was prepared or preserved in such a way that made it fit for human consumption after two weeks. This meant; smoked, salted, frozen, canned, etc... Simply in a cooler on ice was not sufficient.
Once the meat was processed, that daily bag limit no longer applied to the possession limit.
Since this ordeal I have applied the same rule to my fishing and hunting here in WA, and had zero issues with any LEO.
It was interesting to read the response from the USFW though. I'm really surprised that is how they interpret possession limit.
AK laws are not necessarily the same as Federal law, fish is not necessarily the same as waterfowl. At issue here is Federal law governing the possession limit for waterfowl.
-
If I had over 14 ducks mounted and on display at my house, could I still hunt ducks legally?
-
If I had over 14 ducks mounted and on display at my house, could I still hunt ducks legally?
Yes. Unless you freeze dry them as your mounting technique......... ;)