# Possession Limit Quiz #2



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

So here's another quiz on limits:

This season my brother legally hunted ducks in Utah (Pacific Flyway), Wyoming (Pacific Flyway) and Illinois (Mississippi Flyway) Possession limit for Utah is 21, Wyoming is 21, and Illinois is 18.

My brother resides in Illinois and there's only one license holder in his household.

How many ducks can my brother have in possession?

.


----------



## Ryan (Jul 13, 2012)

He can have the highest possession Limit out of three states he legally hunted in.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

wyogoob said:


> So here's another quiz on limits:
> 
> This season my brother legally hunted ducks in Utah (Pacific Flyway), Wyoming (Pacific Flyway) and Illinois (Mississippi Flyway) Possession limit for Utah is 21, Wyoming is 21, and Illinois is 18.
> 
> ...


He can posses the amount the state he lives in says he can posses.


----------



## Fowlmouth (Oct 4, 2008)

So if I go to Nebraska and shoot 500 snow geese (conservation order) and come back to Utah I can only legally posess 60?


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Fowlmouth said:


> So if I go to Nebraska and shoot 500 snow geese (conservation order) and come back to Utah I can only legally posess 60?


Call the DWR and ask, I am pretty sure it has to do with state of residence. I am sure you could argue about it and if you had proof you might get them to let you go with it. But then again, when was the last time you heard of them coming into someone's home to check the ducks they have in their freezer?


----------



## brettb (Aug 23, 2009)

The legal amount of the state or province you shot them in.

Brett


----------



## dkhntrdstn (Sep 7, 2007)

here is a email back from the dwr on this.




Thanks for your question about possession limits. After reviewing Utah's rule and the Fed's rule, there isn't a clear answer to your question, so I understand your confusion. The Fed's have been working to clear up several issues on possession limits and this is something that they are hoping to resolve sometime in the future. Here is my best stab at your question based on current waterfowl rules:


You cannot legally take more than your legal bag limit in one day in any given state. For example, you cannot go to Idaho and shoot a limit of geese (4) and then come back to Utah and shoot a limit of geese (3). You can go to Idaho and shoot 2 geese, then came to Utah and shoot 1 goose though. I would assume that you could shoot 3 geese in Utah, and then travel to Idaho and shoot 1 goose, as long as you had a valid Idaho license. In the case of snow geese, I assume as long as you were adhering to the bag/possession limit of that state, and adhering to the transportation requirements (leaving parts attached for identification), and had the valid licensing requirements for the state you were hunting in, you would be able to have a higher possession limit of birds if you brought them back to Utah. For the most part, our law enforcement officers are understanding in circumstances like this, as long as you can justify your situation. It would look a lot better if you had 100 processed snow geese in your freezer and a valid hunting license from Nebraska in April, than having 100 unprocessed snow geese in your garage with only a Utah hunting license in July.


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

dkhntrdstn said:


> here is a email back from the dwr on this.
> 
> Thanks for your question about possession limits. After reviewing Utah's rule and the Fed's rule, there isn't a clear answer to your question, so I understand your confusion. The Fed's have been working to clear up several issues on possession limits and this is something that they are hoping to resolve sometime in the future. Here is my best stab at your question based on current waterfowl rules:
> 
> You cannot legally take more than your legal bag limit in one day in any given state. For example, you cannot go to Idaho and shoot a limit of geese (4) and then come back to Utah and shoot a limit of geese (3). You can go to Idaho and shoot 2 geese, then came to Utah and shoot 1 goose though. I would assume that you could shoot 3 geese in Utah, and then travel to Idaho and shoot 1 goose, as long as you had a valid Idaho license. In the case of snow geese, I assume as long as you were adhering to the bag/possession limit of that state, and adhering to the transportation requirements (leaving parts attached for identification), and had the valid licensing requirements for the state you were hunting in, you would be able to have a higher possession limit of birds if you brought them back to Utah. For the most part, our law enforcement officers are understanding in circumstances like this, as long as you can justify your situation. It would look a lot better if you had 100 processed snow geese in your freezer and a valid hunting license from Nebraska in April, than having 100 unprocessed snow geese in your garage with only a Utah hunting license in July.


Well as my high school teacher would say, "that answer is as clear as mud". I guess if you have a legal hunting license from multiple states they would give you a pass to posses what you are allowed from each state then. By the way, I just checked and Louisiana has NO POSSESSION LIMIT on snow/blue geese, so get yourself a Louisiana hunting license and you can have as many as you want...


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

As Goob has said, there is a 1:1,000,000,000 chance that anyone is coming to raid your freezer.
Possession limits were to deter market hunters back in the day. They've stuck around to limit game hogs. 
Catch and release isn't an option out hunting unless you shoot them with a camera instead of a gun. 
The issue I have is respecting the sport and the wildlife whether it be a bird, big game, or fish. It's all a limited public resource that we all need to protect the best we can. 
People who shoot game or catch and keep fish that have no intentions of eating them shouldn't be in the field or be very limited in the field, not harvesting or at least not overharvesting game or fish and trying to find creative ways to avoid possession laws. 
Most of these folks don't worry about possession laws anyway and keep piling up game in the freezer and later throwing it away or throwing it away shortly after to make more room for the new game they've harvested. 
These folks are often times the biggest "takers" of the sport and to make matters worse are the biggest complainers when asked to give back or would be expected to give back as much as they take through volunteer work or donation.
They all seem to have that entitled attitude that it's owed to them and they have the right to take every bit and then some....always to the point of excess to prove some kind of unknown point or to beat their chest in triumph, but even excess is never enough. 

Just ranting on from many of the rants I've already taken up space and time on here before. Carry on.


----------



## stuckduck (Jan 31, 2008)

I agree Band man.

What chaps me is they guys that say "I donate them to the food shelter" I have a hard time with that. It breads the wack and stack attitude. with no care for the bird. Ask the feds.. they really frown on it as the migratory program is not set up to feed the poor. There are better ways to do that. 

Same as the guy that shoots big game and doesn't care for the meat. More about the inches than the animal itself. My 2 cents.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

dkhntrdstn said:


> You cannot legally take more than your legal bag limit in one day in any given state. For example, you cannot go to Idaho and shoot a limit of geese (4) and then come back to Utah and shoot a limit of geese (3). You can go to Idaho and shoot 2 geese, then came to Utah and shoot 1 goose though. I would assume that you could shoot 3 geese in Utah, and then travel to Idaho and shoot 1 goose, as long as you had a valid Idaho license. In the case of snow geese, I assume as long as you were adhering to the bag/possession limit of that state, and adhering to the transportation requirements (leaving parts attached for identification), and had the valid licensing requirements for the state you were hunting in, you would be able to have a higher possession limit of birds if you brought them back to Utah. For the most part, our law enforcement officers are understanding in circumstances like this, as long as you can justify your situation. It would look a lot better if you had 100 processed snow geese in your freezer and a valid hunting license from Nebraska in April, than having 100 unprocessed snow geese in your garage with only a Utah hunting license in July.


This quote isn't just troublesome, it is downright scary!!! This is the agency charged with enforcing the law. Shouldn't they *KNOW* the law? Things like "I would assume" and "For the most part, our law enforcement officers are understanding in circumstances like this" absolutely make my head want to explode!

So what if your assumption (not knowledge of the laws you are employed to enforce) is incorrect? Or, what if get a law enforcement officer that doesn't fit into "the most part?" Seriously, this response from the state's wildlife law enforcement agency scares the crap out of me and makes my blood boil!


----------



## 1BandMan (Nov 2, 2007)

TS30 said:


> This quote isn't just troublesome, it is downright scary!!! This is the agency charged with enforcing the law. Shouldn't they *KNOW* the law? Things like "I would assume" and "For the most part, our law enforcement officers are understanding in circumstances like this" absolutely make my head want to explode!
> 
> So what if your assumption (not knowledge of the laws you are employed to enforce) is incorrect? Or, what if get a law enforcement officer that doesn't fit into "the most part?" Seriously, this response from the state's wildlife law enforcement agency scares the crap out of me and makes my blood boil!


CO's and LEO's have an interesting job that's often left up to interpretation. I felt that the CO's explanation was *reasonable and sensible*. 
What happens sometimes is that the CO or LEO is left to interpret the law the best they can. If they feel there was some sort of wrongdoing or a law was being broken they issue a citation,even though sometimes it's not 100% clear and 100% black and white. The suspected violater, having due process can challenge the CO's or LEO's interpretation and let a judge, county attourney, etc. determine whether it sticks or goes further in the legal system. A lot of times the gauge of whether it goes further in the legal system is determining what's *reasonable and sensible.*

If your reasonable and do what most reasonable people do and find sensible or acceptable, then your probably not going to be confronted by a CO or LEO in the first place and if you are confronted by that CO or LEO, it's really not likely that a judge, county attourney or whomever, is going to rule against you or determine that they have a case strong enought to pursue things further if there is a concern about interpretation of a law,..... if your doing what would be considered reasonable and sensible.

I and I'm sure 95+% of sportsman rarely ever have issue with possession laws. 
I know that I don't shoot, eat, gift, etc. enough wild game to ever have an issue with the law or my conscious either one. 
Posession laws are in place to discourage folks from raping and or taking too great of an advantage of a natural resource.

The possession law shouldn't ever be an issue as I really don't see folks using wild game or fish for their main source of sustinance as the costs per pound probably range in the 30-$50 dollar area, but like anything else it seems that it has to be taken to extremes.....again not for sustinance but for some deficit in that person's life to be able to brag or pound their chest or fill some void that wasn't taken care of or filled when they were a little kid or something I'm not sure. Kind of crazy to me that their needs to be a law like this in place, but..........their obviously does.


----------

