# Fish possession question



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

For the past several weeks I've been looking carefully at a whole bunch of different laws and it has given me some questions about possessing fish.

Say I go to Flaming Gorge and I catch a 52 pound lake trout that I want to have mounted. It is my one fish over 28 inches at the Gorge and my one in possession.

My question is, when does that fish come off my possession? As far as I can see the regs only provide for getting them off your possession is by donating them at various places or consuming them. Fish in the freezer still count. There is no rule I can find for having a fish mounted.

So when does the fish come off your possession limit? It is never donated. It is never consumed. 

The Flaming Gorge hypo is just an example. It would apply equally to any fish you were going to mount. I just used it because it was a 1 fish limit, and for some wishful thinking.


----------



## k2muskie (Oct 6, 2007)

That is a great question there Dodger...I would think to be safe I'd ask the DWR maybe Mr. Cushing can provide us with an answer or direct us to the someone who could provide an answer.


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

I think it is out of your possesion when you give the fish to the taxidermist and he gives you the signed slip of paper for it. 

TEX-O-BOB would know.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

Once you have taken the fish in to be mounted, it is no longer counted as part of a possession limit.
You should leave all the info required with the person doing the work.
I'm not sure how this works if you do the work yourself though.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Once it is no longer consumable. If it is in your freezer and waiting for the taxidermist, you could change your mind and eat it. Once it is in the taxidermy process, you ain't gonna throw it on the BBQ and make a meal of it.

Fishrmn


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

I think I agree that when you take it to the taxidermist, it is probably off your possession limit. I don't think that is donation (you don't actually have any intent to give the taxidermist the fish) as the Proclamation uses the word. And, I don't necessarily think that counts as "consumption" as the Proclamation uses the word. 

Technically, the way the rules are written, it could sit on your possession limit forever. 

Paging TEX-O-BOB and/or Drew Cushing!


----------



## Chaser (Sep 28, 2007)

Maybe the word "consumption" should be accompanied by the word "processed." That opens up a whole different can of worms, however, as "processed" could be interpreted as cleaned, filleted, made into jerky, smoked, etc, etc. You bring up a good point, Dodger.


----------



## TEX-O-BOB (Sep 12, 2007)

wyogoob said:


> I think it is out of your possesion when you give the fish to the taxidermist and he gives you the signed slip of paper for it.
> 
> TEX-O-BOB would know.


This would be correct. Once I (taxidermist) takes "possession"of said fish you are no longer in charge of what happens to it. The meat or carcase gets eaten by someone or thrown away. If it is a replica and you take the fish home with you after the taxi looks at it and gets the size info he needs, it is then back in your "possession". As long as the fish is with you or in your house, boat, camper, tent, whatever.... It is in your possession and counts as such.

Clear as mud?


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

Thanks for your answer TEX-O-Bob! So say you take possession of the fish, do your thing, and give it back as a mounted fish. Is it still on my limit? At that point, it would be back in my possession. 

As a side note, what happens to the meat when you do a skin mount?


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Once it has been mounted by a taxidermist, it isn't a fish anymore. It is a mount. It cannot be eaten. It no longer counts as being in your possession.

Fishrmn


----------



## drew cushing (Jan 19, 2010)

You are correct. Once you drop the fish off at the taxidermist it is no longer counted as part of your possession. Our game laws were all written with the thought of consumption of flesh in mind. The only exception to this would be our fur bearers. Keeping this in mind once the flesh is no longer consumable then it no longer can be counted as part of your possession. The interesting thought that I had is what about the taxidermist that has more than his possession in the freezer waiting.

Drew


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

drew cushing said:


> You are correct. Once you drop the fish off at the taxidermist it is no longer counted as part of your possession. Our game laws were all written with the thought of consumption of flesh in mind. The only exception to this would be our fur bearers. Keeping this in mind once the flesh is no longer consumable then it no longer can be counted as part of your possession. The interesting thought that I had is what about the taxidermist that has more than his possession in the freezer waiting.
> 
> Drew


Thanks for your answer Drew! It seems like the line between possession and out of possession should be when the fish is dropped off rather than when the meat is no longer consumable. My thought is that it is a lot harder to tell when the meat is and is not edible than it is to tell if the taxidermist does or does not have the fish. What if the taxidermist is mounting his own fish?

I thought the same thing about the taxidermist's freezer. Technically the rules would prevent the taxidermist from keeping more than his limit of fish in his freezer. But I doubt any taxidermist has ever had a problem with the technicality.

Any chance we could get this cleared up in a future Guidebook Drew? It could probably be fixed with a line in "donation" section of the guidebook that adds "taxidermist" to the list of acceptable donation facilities.



Fishrmn said:


> Once it has been mounted by a taxidermist, it isn't a fish anymore. It is a mount. It cannot be eaten. It no longer counts as being in your possession.
> 
> Fishrmn


I think that explanation makes sense. The only thing that is difficult is figuring out when the meat is and is not consumable anymore.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Dodger said:


> My thought is that it is a lot harder to tell when the meat is and is not edible than it is to tell if the taxidermist does or does not have the fish. What if the taxidermist is mounting his own fish?
> 
> 
> Fishrmn said:
> ...


If the fish is in a Taxidermist's freezer, you can't eat it unless you are the Taxidermist. And I've never had any difficulty determining when fish flesh was no longer consumable. Nothing worse than three day old fish.

You're certainly over thinking this. If it's not in your possession, it's not in your possession limit. When the taxidermist has it, you don't. When it's been mounted it can't be eaten. When it can't be eaten, it's not in your possession limit.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

Fishrmn said:


> If the fish is in a Taxidermist's freezer, you can't eat it unless you are the Taxidermist. And I've never had any difficulty determining when fish flesh was no longer consumable. Nothing worse than three day old fish.
> 
> You're certainly over thinking this. If it's not in your possession, it's not in your possession limit. When the taxidermist has it, you don't. When it's been mounted it can't be eaten. When it can't be eaten, it's not in your possession limit.


No, I really do appreciate what you are saying and I don't disagree. All I'm saying is that the Game Warden has to be able to tell when he should or should not write you a ticket.

If I have a fish in my freezer for a week, it is probably still consumable. If I have a fish in my freezer for a year, probably not. I'm just saying consumable isn't an easy line to draw for purposes of whether the Game Warden should or should not write a ticket.

Possession is a tricky legal concept and it isn't always clear. If you had a freezer in a storage locker down town, you'd not be in "possession" of your fish but they would still count on your possession limit because you have constructive possession.

You are right though. I am over thinking it and I doubt that it would really ever be a problem. I'm am a little over-technical. I just want to make sure I'm on the up and up.


----------

