1. Welcome to Taxidermy.net, Guest!
    We have put together a brief tutorial to help you with the site, click here to access it.

Federal Migratory Bird Tags

Discussion in 'The Taxidermy Industry' started by scpol, Dec 8, 2011.

  1. great post guys....ive always pondered alot of what is being said and have been given similar answers to the same questions.one thing i have always argued about the possession limit law is if it is as rich p is stating, what happens when i have a limit of duck breasts in one bag and their skins in seperate bags, tagged? cant turn six whole birds into twelve simply by cleaning/skinning....also, it is my understanding of the law that only the identification portion(head or wing attached) has anything to do with "while in the field".the remainder of the possession limit still applys..one thing we all can agree on is these laws were written and designed for a much different time than we are in now and no doubt need to be reviewed/updated/clarified...there was a breakthrough article written a while back on filling out an affidavit and swearing to a magistrate about freezer contents ect when dealing with legally taken birds/skins from multiple years just as your describing harry...dont know that i buy it but anyway....
  2. Riverland

    Riverland New Member

    In the WI migratory bird regs this is what is written. Possession limit: it is illegal to possess more than two daily bag limits, except on opening day when possession limit is the same as daily bag limit.

  3. Here is the tag I have always used. You can, as stated, make your own tags but be certain you have all the proper info on them.

  4. that is a good one lone wolf but folks have to remember that SOME states require more info, like license number ect that is NOT required by the feds...note the fine print at the bottom of the tag.it meets tagging requirements of the USFWS.
  5. This is true trophy...this one works for me here. It would be best for anyone mounting migratory birds to include "ALL" info they need to meet USFWS and any additional info needed for their state on their respective tags. I don't know how many states require migratory birds to be tagged but the Fed. Code certainly does require it.
  6. RDA

    RDA Well-Known Member

    fed migratory rules are the same for every state,, they dont change. ONLY daily limits vary...
  7. Harry Whitehead

    Harry Whitehead I love to hunt Buffalos!!!!!

    OK Boys!!! Here is the deal in KENTUCKY. Now this would apply to Kentucky only but I think that there has been a change in the Federal interpretation of this as well. States may or may not see this the same way but it would not hurt to call your State Law Enforcement Division and as the question, "when does a bird (waterfowl) cease to be part of your POSSESSION LIMIT"? Do not ask your local CO. It would be better to get the interpretation from the main office and THEN address this with your local CO. Now, to lay the ground work with some definitions. Daily limit is set by each state with guidelines from the feds so each state is different but it is whatever the state designates as the number of birds that can be legally taken within a geographical area. Possession limit is the number of birds that each hunter can possess legally within a geographical area. There is no mention federally of what a possession limit is. That is left up to the state to designate from what I understand.
    Now, after speaking with one of the Majors (I think she is) in Law Enforcement of Kentucky Fish and Wildlife she states that possession limits as defined by Kentucky is twice the daily limit, WHILE IN THE FIELD. This reg basically is obsolete and Law Enforcement has actually tried to drop the reg because it really serves no purpose. Originally, the reg was put into place during the market hunting days when hunters would hunt for weeks at a time and amass huge quantities of waterfowl for sale. Since the laws have changed and you can no longer sell wild game the need for a "possession limit" is mute. So, having said all of that, the reg as it reads now only applies to hunters taking waterfowl after two or more days of hunting. They can only have in their possession twice the daily limit while coming from the field, in transit to their abode or hunting camp, going to the post office or common carrier or to the taxidermist or game processor. Once this "possession limit" has reached your home it no longer is part of your possession limit and you can start over again. If you think about this it makes sense. Having birds in your freezer at home count as part of your possession limit would be an enforcement nightmare and basically unenforceable just as she explained. Maj. Minton was very nice and informative and it would benefit all of you to have a relationship with your local and state Law Enforcement Agencies.
    Now that all of this is as clear as mud, I would like for some of you to call your State Law Enforcement office and ask the questions that I have. Remember to ask them verbatim so as not to confuse the issue at hand because we already understand what a possession limit is, we just need a determination of when a bird ceases to be part of that limit....
    GOOD LUCK!!!!!!
  8. i agree ron but was trying to note that some states require more info than what the feds do..didnt want some of the readers to assume that if they met federal guidelines they were fine.the majority of states dont require license numbers ect but there are a few that do...any state can be more restrictive than the feds but not more lax as you know....
  9. RDA

    RDA Well-Known Member

    Harry,,,,you keep confusing state and fed issues. IN Nevada, you may ONLY POSSESS the legal bag limits UNLESS they are "processed" which means breasted. Once breasted they no longer count towards a possession limit. But if you have whole frozen birds in your freezer here, they WILL be counted against any possession rules. It is not an 'in the field issue"...
  10. Sprigman

    Sprigman Member

    Here is what is in the Texas Hunting Regulations about possesion....the last sentence is where is gets tricky.

    Attached Files:

    • 001.jpg
      File size:
      88 KB
  11. Harry Whitehead

    Harry Whitehead I love to hunt Buffalos!!!!!

    Ron, I'm not confusing Federal and State at all. It seems that you are and I'll tell you why. I just called Headquarters with the Dept of Fish and Game in Nevada. I asked for Law Enforcement and the guys line was busy. I left a message and he called me back within 10 minutes. I will not mention the guys name because he asked me not to but he said and I quote, "the possession limits are aimed at hunters in the field. We don't want a guy in the marsh, hunting 7 days a week and hoarding a huge amount of birds." He also stated that unless something is "gross", that Law Enforcement would not pursuit a violation. Asked what he meant by that and he said "unless we hear of a guy that has a couple hundred birds in the freezer we will not pursuit the situation. If a guy actually does have that many he is usually up to something else and we would get a search warrent and go have a look." I explained that I was a taxidermist from Kentucky and that we were having a discussion about possession limits on a taxidermy forum. He was very polite and informative. Now, let the comments begin....

    PS I think that it would serve EVERYONE or at least the President of each State association to call and talk to Law Enforcement regarding these laws. It seems that there is confusion within our own ranks......No, I'm not poking at you Ron....Just trying to help...
  12. RDA

    RDA Well-Known Member

    Cheeses and Rice Harry.... ::) ::) Now,, call the ELY office,, Elko office, Tonopah and fallon Office etc etc, and I promise youll get DIFFERENT answers each and every time. So you go right ahead and tell me how it is in my neighborhood from a phone call lol! DId they happen to mention to you that this year for the first time ever, they included a section in the hunt book on what exactly is the "edible " parts of the bird due to just this situation??????? :eek: nawwww prolly not....
  13. RDA

    RDA Well-Known Member

    I once called AZ fish & game about hunting Cranes, they too were polite and helpfull....They helped me right out of a non res license fee and tag fees when there were NO cranes nor any where to hunt them, as they FAILED to mention that the wildlife area holding them all was OFF LIMITS to hunters during the crane season so photographers could "shoot" them instead. gettin the drift?
  14. i think both of you are right in a way...:) what is in practice is what harry is saying and is confirming by these calls but what i,ron and others read of the law, it simply does not mention anything about "in the field"..i have read these backwards and forwards many times and most recently because of some discussion at our duck camp in arkansas.it does however make note that a temporary abode/duck camp is not the same as ones permanent dwelling, which was important to me as we are there for several days at a time.slippery slope no doubt
  15. DL

    DL Well-Known Member

    A friend of mine belongs to a duck club here in Ca. People have homes there and they also have a central area where everyone processes there birds. They pluck them and cut off the wings there and then walk to there houses with the birds. This little newby warden came in there and cited him for having birds in possesion that the species couldn't be identified. When he went before the judge he (judge) reamed the warden and warned her not to come back in his court room again for such nonsense.
  16. Harry Whitehead

    Harry Whitehead I love to hunt Buffalos!!!!!

    Ron, don't get pissy and I won't. This is merely a discussion on an important matter that every taxidermist needs to understand and it is nothing aimed at you personally eventhough your example of not understanding the law is exemplary of most taxidermists. BTW, I don't think that it was Fish and Wildlife's responsibility to tell you where the cranes were. Sounds to me you should have done your homework.....

    Now, check out these scenarios.
    1. Every bird taxidermist has birds he hasn't mounted in the freezer. These birds could span over several years. If you have 12 birds in the freezer (twice the daily limit in Ky), can you go hunting?
    2. I had a client bring in 3 canvasbacks for mounting. He shot 2 one weekend and the third the following weekend so he never had over his possession limit of 2 birds WHILE IN THE FIELD. When he brought the birds to me he had 3 total. Is he in violation?
    3. If a client has 10 birds with you to mount, all from one season. The season is not over yet. If he goes hunting and kills a limit of birds is he in violation?
    The answer to all 3 scenarios is NO!!!!!! Not once does the person have over his possession limit WHILE IN THE FIELD after two or more days of hunting.

    Now, check these out.
    1. A hunter goes on a trip to Kentucky to hunt waterfowl for 3 days. On day one he shoots a limit of birds. 4 mallards, a wood duck and a canvasback. Day two he shoots 4 mallards, a wood duck and a canvasback. Day three he shoots 6 teal. He cleans all his birds and keeps them in his possession. Is he in violation?
    2. Same hunt but different hunter. First two days this hunter shoots the same thing as the hunter in scenario 1. Difference is on day three THIS hunter shoots 4 Mallards, a wood duck and a redhead. He cleans all his birds and keeps them in his possession. Is he in violation?
    3. Same hunt but hunter three cleans his birds from the first day and they eat them. He then goes on to shoot 4 mallards, a wood duck and a canvasback on the next two days and cleans them and keeps them in his possession. Is he in violation?
    The answer to scenario 1 is YES. The hunter never has twice the daily bag limit for each species but has more than 12 birds cumulatively WHILE IN THE FIELD!!!
    The answer to scenario 2 is YES!!! He is in violation of having too many mallards and wood ducks!!!
    The answer to 3 is NO. He never has in his possession more than twice the daily bag limit of birds both individually or cumulatively.

    I think that you will find that once you talk to most Law Enforcement folks and they realize that you know what you are talking about then you get a little better response. I hope that this has helped some of you. Again, it's just good practice to have a relationship with you Law Enforcement people both your Game Warden and the people at Headquarters. It never hurts to call and ask questions but just make sure that you ask the RIGHT questions.......
  17. Harry Whitehead

    Harry Whitehead I love to hunt Buffalos!!!!!

    Oops, the answer to scenario 1 is yes...He can go hunting because they are at his residence and not "in the field". I was carried away!!!! :) :)
  18. RDA

    RDA Well-Known Member

    Harry, in your post, you mention the game warden saying" we only do that if someone has 200 birds", which in essence means they can do that if your only ONE bird past the "possession" limits. There is no quantification after "past the possession limit". And possession limit means those birds that are whole. If you look at the last sentence of that paraphrased law previously posted, it too states "once FINALLY processed".... Once breasted neither the meat nor the carcass now counts as possession.
  19. Harry Whitehead

    Harry Whitehead I love to hunt Buffalos!!!!!

    Ron, in my conversation with the Warden he said that but you have to realize in what context. When he said "200 birds" we were in a segment on our conversation about how many days the season had be open and the mere fact that he had that many birds would indicate that he had actually been OVER his possession limit. I really don't see where this is all that hard to understand. If the law was enforced as you guys see it then every bird taxidermist in the US would be in violation as would most hunters that have birds mounted.
    Nevermind, I'm beating my head against the wall. You guys just keep doing what you're doing, it dosen't matter...
  20. harry, all we are saying is what the law says...we all understand what is practiced but most dont like the idea of hinging their court appearance dates on someones opinion..its just a shame that these reg's cant be redone to be much more clear which would in turn make enforcement and folks like us who are trying to follow the law do so...