Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It is Factually True: Kerry DID Break Federal Law on Goose Hunt
today | self

Posted on 11/01/2004 5:21:34 PM PST by fideist

If you remember the story, Kerry did not want to be seen carrying the dead goose he shot in the photo op. So while exiting the field he had a birdboy run on up ahead out of the camera shot carrying the goose. When asked, he said each hunter shot one, but in all pictures, he is the only one not shown carrying a dead goose.

Duckhunters on the website the Duckhunter's Refuge pointed out this was a violation of federal law, it involved not "maintaining field possession" of the game.

When this question arose, I emailed the head waterfowl biologist for my state, who is a friend of mine. But unfortunately, he was on vacation for a couple weeks.

Anyway, today was his first day back in the office and here is his reply --

Kevin,

You cannot give your birds to another in the field under any circumstances, even if you tag them. You must carry your own birds and cannot even leave them in the field according to federal rules. At your vehicle you can tag the birds with your name, address, signature, date and sex and species of birds in the bunch to give them away. At a persons dwelling or yours, you can give them away untagged. Hope this helps.

My friend did not have a clue why I was asking, I just asked if it was a federal law that hunters "maintain field possession." That was all.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bookemdanno; chargekerry; crime; federalcrime; goose; hunt; hunting; kerry; kerrycampaign; kerryphotooops; kerryphotoops; kerrysgoosehunt; law; quack
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 next last
To: fideist

A violation though it might be, I doubt that Kerry's goose is cooked (and I quadrupually doubt mama T would be the one to cook it.) ;)


21 posted on 11/01/2004 6:48:02 PM PST by NonValueAdded (Kerry: I wholeheartedly disagree with you beyond expression)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fideist
Breaking these little laws are OK as long as your fronting a liberal political cause. Like the dead vote. People cross over to vote an other precincts. An extra ballot here and there. Inside help. Political affirmative action; so to speak.
22 posted on 11/01/2004 6:57:01 PM PST by oyez (¡Qué viva la revolución de Reagan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman
Freeping got interrupted by hungry kids & their dirty laundry.

Source: Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Wildlife Waterfowl Hunting Seasons 2004-2005

Page 9

(begin quote)Tagging. No person shall give, put, or leave any migratory birds at any place or in the custody of another person unless the birds are tagged by the hunter with the following information: (1) the hunter's signature; (2) the hunter's address; (3) the total number of birds, by species; and (4) the dates such birds were killed. No person or business shall recieve or have in custody any migratory game birds belonging to another person unless such birds are properly tagged.

Dual Violation: Violation of state migratory bird regulations is also a violation of federal regulations. (end quote)

http://www.dnr.state.wi.us/org/land/wildlife/regs/

Did you see any tags on those geese being toted out of the woods? I don't recall seeing any but, as I indicated earlier, I hadn't thought of that possible violation until reading about it on this thread so I wasn't looking for a tag.

23 posted on 11/01/2004 9:16:57 PM PST by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Nov3

No,because you are legally still in possession if you are in the boat also.IF you leave the boat and your buddy is still in the boat AND there are two geese(not tagged),then your buddy is over the legal(federal) possession limit.


24 posted on 11/02/2004 5:35:02 AM PST by quack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: PokeyJoe
It's considered an attempt to avoid a bag limit.

Yep.Exactly right.

25 posted on 11/02/2004 5:36:39 AM PST by quack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: fideist

bttt


26 posted on 11/02/2004 5:38:34 AM PST by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fideist

"Even in the smallest of things can the depths of one's heart be seen." 16th century Samurai saying.


27 posted on 11/02/2004 5:39:11 AM PST by Tijeras_Slim (I want to have fanatical henchmen when I grow up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fideist

Any such laws are illegitimate.


28 posted on 11/02/2004 5:39:32 AM PST by Sloth ("Rather is TV's real-life Ted Baxter, without Baxter's quiet dignity." -- Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oyez

Oyez,
The federal goverment doesn't see these as "little laws".Migratory bird hunting is federally controlled.Think of it like having a Bald Eagle season.Eagles are federally protected with no season though,of course.


29 posted on 11/02/2004 5:42:47 AM PST by quack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: fideist
You cannot give your birds to another in the field under any circumstances, even if you tag them. You must carry your own birds and cannot even leave them in the field according to federal rules.

There's another possibility here. Kerry didn't really shoot the bird. The other guy did. It really was his bird, not Kerry's.

If that were so, Kerry managed to keep the letter of the law, but he lied about his "conquest." I doubt the "mighty hunter" could hit the broadside of a barn, let alone a moving target.

30 posted on 11/02/2004 6:00:48 AM PST by wai-ming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quack
I know. If it were you or me, they throw us in the klink and throw away the key. But John Kerry gets a pass. Makes me sick! Like campaigning from the church pulpit. OK for democrats. IRS violation for Republicans.
31 posted on 11/02/2004 6:05:01 AM PST by oyez (¡Qué viva la revolución de Reagan!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: wai-ming
There's another possibility here. Kerry didn't really shoot the bird.

Actually,I "believe" he shot all of them.Explains why there were so many shots to down 4 geese.I can see where someone wanting to gain a political friend would let them shoot away.Happens all the time in the real world.That is just pure speculation on my part though.

32 posted on 11/02/2004 6:09:20 AM PST by quack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: fideist

bump. But remember, laws are only for the little people.


33 posted on 11/02/2004 6:11:00 AM PST by Rebelbase (Indiscriminate reprisals strengthen the terrorists. Targeted ones weaken them. Aim is everything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bad company
I'm glad you posted this as I didn't know this. Thanks.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

34 posted on 11/02/2004 6:22:04 AM PST by WildTurkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TheBattman
Where does this crap come from? As much as I truly don't like sKerry, I would like to see the actual law in print that is supposedly being quoted here. There is NO law that says you have to carry out your own bird(s). . . .I have even asked a couple of guides I know about this supposed rule/law - they all say it's BS. . . .let this non-issue BS story die.

Here it is from the head waterfowl biologist for the state of Illinois (my source for the regulations all along) --

"See pages 23-24 of the Digest of Waterfowl Hunting Regulations. The federal rules are listed chapter and verse there. See "Wanton Waste", 50 CFR 20.25 and "Custody of Birds of Another", 50 CFR 20.37. especially. Also note the gift, (50 CFR 20.40) and tagging (50 CFR 20.36) sections. CFR is Code of Federal Regulations. Should be able to find them under the USFWS web page somewhere."

Enjoy your crow.

35 posted on 11/06/2004 11:39:23 AM PST by fideist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

Wise words in general, but in this case, dead wrong. This is FACT. See above for chapter and verse.

36 posted on 11/06/2004 11:41:31 AM PST by fideist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: fideist

50CFR20.25 refers to the physical possession, but does not address this specific issue:
[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 50, Volume 2]
[Revised as of October 1, 2002]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 50CFR20.25]

[Page 39]

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 C--Taking

Sec. 20.25 Wanton waste of migratory game birds.

No person shall kill or cripple any migratory game bird pursuant to
this part without making a reasonable effort to retrieve the bird, and
retain it in his actual custody, at the place where taken or between
that place 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.

[41 FR 31536, July 29, 1976]

[[Page 40]]

[Code of Federal Regulations]
[Title 50, Volume 2]
[Revised as of October 1, 2002]
From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
[CITE: 50CFR20.37]

[Page 40]


CFR 20.37 does deal directly with possession - Was "Kerry's" bird tagged? Did it actually require a physical tag (geese don't have to be tagged here in Arkansas - so I don't know if this applies).

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. 20.37 Custody of birds of another.

No person shall receive or have in custody any migratory game birds
belonging to another person unless such birds are tagged as required by
Sec. 20.36.

[[Page 41]]


CFR20.40 deals with giving the game to another person as a gift (as many of us hunters do with what we don't consume ourselves). IT deals with the regulation that the hunter's name, date of kill, and license number must be included with the game. Again, there is no physical tag that must be attached to the bird, as long as the person in possession has the required information with the game (in writing). Don't know how much this applies either:

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. 20.40 Gift of migratory game birds.

No person may receive, possess, or give to another, any freshly
killed migratory game birds as a gift, except at the personal abodes of
the donor or donee, unless such birds have a tag attached, signed by the
hunter who took the birds, stating such hunter's address, the total
number and species of birds and the date such birds were taken.

[42 FR 39668, Aug. 5, 1977]


CFR 20.36 Does deal with tagging - but again, the bird itself (despite what the wording sounds like) does not have to have the tag literally attached.

I have been checked by both state and federal (USFW) officers while in the field, as well as when returning to the vehicle. EVERY time, the birds have been carried by just one or two people (never more than one or two limits among us). The officers almost every time ask who shot which birds. Once we were even asked if we were reminded that whoever wound up with the birds needed the info from the other hunter's license.

I praise God that you are not a game warden -

But I will admit that - at least on the surface - and in a VERY nitpicky way, Kerry was in a "grey area" regarding having the guide tote out his goose.

Now, if he gave the goose away to anyone else (guide included), then the person receiving the goose MUST have the above mentioned documentation.

Of course, I have doubts regarding Kerry actually shooting that goose. So the entire argument may actually be moot.

If I get a chance (and if I actually go waterfowl hunting this year), I will try to remember to ask a warden and/or USFW officer about the legalities of birds being carried out of the field by a guide/other person.


37 posted on 11/06/2004 10:30:09 PM PST by TheBattman (Islam - the cult of Satan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: fideist
This is FACT. See above for chapter and verse.

Sorry. You lose. You cannot cite any law specifically that Kerry was in violation of.

38 posted on 11/07/2004 10:32:47 AM PST by WildTurkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: WildTurkey
Sorry. You lose. You cannot cite any law specifically that Kerry was in violation of.

Sorry to hear about your sudden case of vision loss.

[A better assumption than you have no integrity.]

39 posted on 11/07/2004 11:54:45 AM PST by fideist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: fideist

I didn't know this, either. Thanks for posting it. So much for the Great White Hunter.


40 posted on 11/07/2004 11:56:21 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson