§ 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.
Found this in the US Fish & Wildlife service laws.

If I were to be asked whose birds were who's just act like you know and start showing them.

From what I understand there isn't a specific law about commingling and it is not illegal. However you are not allowed to shoot over your limit or transfer birds in the field.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID...35&rgn=div8

"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."

So if you have a pile of birds or several limits of birds on a strap a legal argument can be made that one person is in possession of over a limit of birds.
While game wardens don't write the laws they do interpret them. The legal definition of "possess" and "have in custody" are the issues here. If you pick up a strap of a birds with over your limit a game warden can argue that you are in possession of them and are therefore over your limit regardless of the fact that your buddy is standing next to you with zero birds.
Get ticketed and fight it in court Wayne. Unless there is a precedent case where it was dismissed they will continue to write tickets and interpret the law the way they see fit. There could be one but that is a legal search that is out of my pay grade.

Hogman. I looked at both state and fed regs. I cant find a single word written about it. I am about the chalk this one up to one of those "They say" legends. In other words i am about to bull-dookie, it is made up.

Tvilbig. That is as close as i have seen to what is being discussed. That doesnt pass the smell test.

Possession is not defined as merely on your person. I think what actually happens when a citation is written, the people that piled the birds can't tell who shot what. Then you got a problem.

So far as piling up for a picture amd the internet GWs start barking, is plain silly.

This is the link he sent me

http://www.fws.gov/le/waterfowl-hunting-and-baiting.html


I read the one from the earlier post. If it were me i would do just what i did. Call the GW and ask. He will be the one checking you. I will talk to one tomorrow and get the full statute. Let us know what your local office said.

X2

I'm not saying its right or I agree with it just saying that is the legal reasoning behind the citations.

I think you are correct.

From all the stories I've heard the LEO will ask the hunters who's birds are who's and when they can't easily identify it then a citation is written because possession is unclear. If you can't tell him those are mine and those are his then he is going to assume they are all yours and all his. I haven't ever heard if all hunters are ticketed or if only one is. They could write tickets to both if you point at the pile and say those are our birds since both are claiming possession of all of them.
What it comes down to is unless someone fights them in court they can pretty much interpret the law however they want. Until there is a case on the record that clarifies the law they can continue to write citations. And even after the case they can write citations but they will be easy to dismiss when the precedent case is presented. We can argue it untill were blue in the face about what is and isn't possession but until someone does it in a court of law it doesn't matter.

As far as internet game wardens, they need to get a life.

Disclamer: I am not a lawyer but I did stay at a holiday inn express last night.

Back off, Internet Game Wardens make me feel like I have a life !!!

This is the way I have always understood the law, but that is not to say I have never taken pictures of piles of birds. I don't see why people on the internet get so upset over it. Its not like they would be paying the ticket.

So if two people shoot the same bird. Whose bag does it count towards?

It goes in your bag, I'll shoot another

If 20.35 Field possession limit. If this is the arrest title they use to write the citation, I call BS on it.

They will write whatever they feel like and more than likely Joe Hunter will pay since unlike a speeding ticket doesn't affect your insurance and more of a pain to fight than pay. I for one have plenty of time on my hands and will fight in court, if I am in the right, if guilty of an actual violation and not a perceived one then I'll pay.

The two wardens I work with do not care as long as it does not exceed the limit of people hunting. Now they did state that if you run across a Federal Game and Fish Officer you WILL have a problem.

I agree.

Why act? You should know.

I think it depends on how big of an a-hole you are to the warden.

A little Courtesy goes a long ways.

I have never had a problem with a warden, state or federal. I find that if you just answer their questions, and give them time to assess the situation, most will generally lighten up and tell you why they were checking you in the first place. Sometimes they were called by some well meaning (but ignorant) person making a poaching claim, etc. If so, with a good attitude you can generally share a good laugh with the wardens and possibly make a friend in the process. Normally, they aren't trying to be billy bob bada$$es...but hey they have a job to do, so give them a break, leave the attitude in your pocket, and usually you can keep your money in there too.

Usually, if you can't find an answer to a specific question in the regulations...you can dig through actual court cases and find some that will apply to any specific case (e.g., commingling, possession, etc.) They are considered interpretations of the regulations, since the court "interpreted" the regulation, as written. Hope this information helps.