# Jerky vs. Bag limits



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

I decide to start a separate thread on this discussion.

I got a call back with a partial answer from a CO.

1) When the jerky is processed, either at home or at a
meat market, it is NOT considered part of your bag
limit. The Feds consider a meat market similar to 
a license plucker. It is STILL the individuals responsibility
to properly identify each bird when the meat is getting
processed. Once the meat is through the grinder, it is no
longer considered game. Here is the twist, the COs/Wardens
use the term manipulation of game, such as processing into
sticks or jerky. They were not in consensus when it comes
to grinding the meat vs. cutting the meat off the bone and
slicing for jerky. They seemed to all agree that grinding
was considered manipulation of game, but there was 
some disagreement about slicing.

2) When done at a residence premise, they felt the same 
principals would apply. But, if someone gets the bright
idea of bringing a meat grinder into a hotel room, the answer
would be busted, since this is not YOUR residence premise.

They were going to get a firm answer from higher up 
when it comes to slicing.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

"When the jerky is processed, either at home or at a 
meat market, it is NOT considered part of your bag 
limit."

Let me understand this...A non-res. could take his daily limit to a butcher shop and have pepper sticks made EVERY day for 14 consecutive days?


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

> Let me understand this...A non-res. could take his daily limit to a butcher shop and have pepper sticks made EVERY day for 14 consecutive days?


Orrrrr a resident could do it for 60 days??? Come on Ken. :huh:


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

That is correct Ken.

As long as the butcher process the meat everyday 
before the hunter harvest another duck/goose.

For example, if you were at home and ground your
limit of geese every day, the Feds consider that 
manipulation of the game and it is not consider 
any part of your bag limit.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Only guides hunt 14 straight days.

As soon as you get your limit...take em to the butcher shop and start over.


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

You never know Ken,

Some guides may hunt 60 days straight!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Think this is pretty well resolved in Canada, or at least Sask. Know of some MN hunters (casting no aspersions) who got HEAVILY fined (not to mention stopped, frisked and searched at gun point) for improperly identified birds in the form of sausage. No wings sticking out of the sausage tubes. :wink:

Maybe you guys are saying this, but I always thought the same rule applied in the US, that until they reached "home", and unless consumed or legally given away, birds needed to remain identifiable and could not be processed into strips, ground or anything else that destroyed identification. In other words, it would be okay to take to a processor once you get home, but not mid-trip.

I've often thought it would be nice if processors could fill out a "report" that indicated who, what and how many of critters they processed, in lieu of the need to keep identification. Not to "game" the possession limits, but to make transport more convenient and safe. Sometimes it's darn hard to keep birds "fresh" during the rest of a hunt and all the way home, and then there's the need to clean twice. The report would address all this. May take a $15-20 extra fee to compensate a processor for their time and effort of reporting, but that seems fair and reasonable.

We bring a small chest freezer to Sask., that we just plug in while hunting and at any over-nights on the way back. Even with warm weather, the birds stay nice and frozen in between plug-ins on the way back home. But, we still need to clean twice......


----------



## Sasha and Abby (May 11, 2004)

Clean them and eat them every day like we do. Then let the officials sort through our scat and see what kind and how many of each duck we shot... :beer:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

Dan and all
I always thought game was to remain identifiable until the trip ended at home. I have fished Canada many times and they *are* sticklers about that stuff. At home it was always eat a few and take home the rest. Processing afield? I don't think I will test the water until I am absolutly sure! Dan as you put it ANY "G" MEN OUT THERE?

Have a good one!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

I find it hard to believe also...especially when the regs. say a wing or head must be attached.I wouldn't want to test it either,in Canada or the US.


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

I've talked to wardens in ND and Sask....there has to be a head or wing attached or you will get fined....even if they constitute all of your legal possession. When you get home they can be dealt with anyway you want to deal with them. I can't believe a NR could conceivably take home 84 ducks and 42 honkers after being in ND for 14 days. (shooting 7 - 2 day limits) NO WAY!


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

Good morning Folks,

Like I stated in the 1st post, the wardens were in consensus,
that does not mean all agreed on grinding the meat. When 
I get a final answer I will post the response from the Feds.

Now answer this question, how can a warden treat a group
of NRs different from residents? I have a hard time believing
that there are not individuals, aka the "posse", that don't get
their legal limit processed into sticks or jerky and then 
proceed to go out and harvest more birds!

What is the difference?


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

The things really get blurry when you add in Spring Snows with no possession limit.


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

You all have to admit that good jerky can go along way!!!Try making a bag of it and bring some to the farmer where you harvested those birds and see what kind of a response you get back from there ( if you can that is). I bet they will let you hunt their land again! 
It's the thought that goes a long way with farmers


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

23. Transportation and Storage
License holders must accompany their game (excluding hides) during transportation. Game may be shipped by common carrier in receipt of proper bill of lading. No resident of the state may ship game or parts thereof (other than hides) out of state without a permit from the Department. Any resident, other than a licensed fur buyer complying with Section 20.1-03-23 of the North Dakota Century Code, who ships or transports such hides or furs, shall tag each hide or fur with the name of the person having taken it and the person's furbearer license numbers. Except for legally gifted game, it is illegal to possess or transport another's game animal or parts thereof (excluding hides) without the license holder accompanying.

Commercial processors and common carriers may possess any person's legally taken possession limit of game. Each piece of game must be tagged with the owner's signature and address, date taken, number and species of game, and license number of the person who harvested the game.

Game may be gifted to another once it has reached the licensee's personal permanent residence, or, if the game has been processed and packaged and the game is tagged with the above information. Any gifted game to be transported must be tagged with the above information. Termination of possession can only be accomplished by: 1) Gifting of legally harvested game. 2) By consuming the game. (Processed and packaged game is that which has been plucked or skinned with entrails removed but identification requirements are still met.)

Nonresidents may transport or ship from the state a possession limit of upland game. No one may possess in the field, transport, or ship at any one time, more than a possession limit of upland game. No one may possess, store, transport, or ship at any one time, more than a possession limit of migratory game birds. No person shall ship migratory game birds unless the package is marked on the outside with: (1) the name and address of the person sending the birds, (2) the name and address of the person to whom the birds are being sent, and (3) the number of each species contained in the package. No person shall put or leave any game birds at any place unless the birds are tagged by the hunter with the following information: the hunter's signature and address, date taken, number and species of such birds, and small game or waterfowl license number. The above tag is required if the birds have been left by the hunter for cleaning, storage (including temporary storage), shipment, or taxidermy services. No person shall transport migratory game birds belonging to another person unless such birds are tagged as required (see above). Passengers in a vehicle that is transporting their birds are not required to tag their birds


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

PSDC said:


> What is the difference?


The Possee's birds have reached their final destination. An nr's have not. No different in reverse, if the Posse hunted the field next to you in the Metro. You'd be able to run home, clean birds, zip to the processor and hunt and limit 43 days in a row. The Posse would need to run to the motel, clean to leave identification, hunt no further after reaching the possession limit and do their processing only after they and their birds reach "home". You can argue logic of the distinction from many angles, but that's the difference.


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

Sorry Dan,

Don't agree with you. If they are using the same processor
and get the meat done at the same time, are you trying
to tell me that the resident can still go out and hunt because
he is at "home" and the NR can't because he is not at his/her
legal residence? That "theory" doesn't fly with me!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

PSDC,

It may not "fly" with you, but I think that's the rule. It's not an r/nr issue. It's all about "final destination", whether "intra" or "inter" state.

No different for me if I'm on a 4 day trip to Rugby. I can't limit two days, have them processed, keep gunning and bring home two daily limits worth of jerky and two daily limits of whole, properly identified birds. I could, however, run back to Fargo after day two, have the first two day's worth processed and run back up to Rugby and limit days three and four.

The logic can be argued, and I'll gladly admit if I'm wrong, but I think that is the rule.

Sounds like someone may need to make some different plans this Fall...... :wink:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Your'e right Dan...when I hunt pheasants SW of Bismarck...I am under the same rules as a non-res.When I hunt here at Bottineau...I go home everyday.If I cleaned the birds in a field here I would still have to leave identification on till I got home.

So I guess the difference is taking them home or not.


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Hey PSDC, If you're so sure.... Let me know when and where you are hunting this fall. I could use the TIPS money!!! :wink:


----------



## Bob Kellam (Apr 8, 2004)

The consequences are to great for me to be messing around with gray areas, I am not going to risk my future hunting seasons on the intrepretation of a Game Warden. Eat some, transport identifiable carcasses, make jerkey at home.

Have a good one!

Ken I like that tag thing, I think it should be brought back, My two cents.

Have a good one!


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

Hey Djleye,

If you could read, I stated that the Feds were getting back to
me with the answers. I think Bob kellam stated it best, right
now this is a gray area for both the hunters and enforcement.

Don't worry about me, hunt with family and friends that are
residence of ND, including several wardens!


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

Bob, Ken and who ever else mentioned it....I also like to see the tagging procedure implimented. Seems to work in Sask for upland. Also it works fine for the deer we tag every year. Kind of seperates out who's trying to screw the system. There'll be people, like the few guys that transport thier deer in the back of a pickup while holding an unopened tag, that try to mess with things but on the whole I think it will work well. Also it will make it hard to untag for processing unless you happen to be at home.


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

WOW all this over JERKY?? :sniper:
I bet I have the best reciept for Jerky!!!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Mav....I don't know...my pepperoni sticks are pretty good!!! :withstupid:


----------



## djleye (Nov 14, 2002)

Mav.....Best jerky I have tasted, hands down!!!! :beer: :bop:


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Sure wish my Dad or someone I knew owned a butcher shop. :rollin: Then me and all my friends could pound em' daily without a care in the world. I'll just keep hoping for a shot at that elusive full colored drake Pinny and an assortment of greenheads in ND. It's all about the love!!! I'll still be packin' the pork roast and ribeye's for my trip. :wink: 
:beer:


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

:******: Nice of you to imply stuff Goldy.


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

Just a joke GG.  I don't think if I was seriously trying to offend you I would have been rolling in laughter or doing the smiley beer mugs. I guess the jerky issue is more serious than I thought. Wow. Have a good one.


----------



## Maverick (Mar 4, 2002)

I still got the best Jerky in town!!!! :beer:
Although Ken's Pepperoni stick sound interesting...


----------



## hoosier dhr (Jul 24, 2003)

It says in the regs that if u eat it its no longer possesion.

One C/O told me that simply cooking it is good enough.
But not all C/Os think alike. 
Last year we hung some ducks out to bleed (thought high enough) something eat them over night, probably cats we saw the next day! :sniper:

Very grey area!


----------



## Leo Porcello (Jul 10, 2003)

> KEN W Posted: Tue Aug 24, 2004 6:42 pm Post subject:
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Only guides hunt 14 straight days.


I took 1 - 14 Sep off and I will hunt each and everyday. I am no guide. Just a guy that is crazy and I do mean crazy about hunting honkers!


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Goldy, was that you I seen last year with the gas powered wood chipper in tow. :lol:

Have you ever seen a hog clean a duck, takes about 15 seconds. When I was a kid my crazy uncles shot a few poop ducks and instead of dirtying there knives they pitched them to the hogs!! :-? 
Talk about grizzly, but a unique way to clean em'!!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

PC...your'e the exception.When I go to Sask and hunt 6 days in a row...I'm wore out.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Ken I bet you have a few more sunsets under your belt than PC :wink:


----------



## Goldy's Pal (Jan 6, 2004)

> Goldy, was that you I seen last year with the gas powered wood chipper in tow.


Yep, that was me alright.  Just between you and me though, :roll: it's actually a freezer/dehydrator/ shreader combo unit dressed up as a wood chipper. 0 to 6 birds in 4.5 seconds. Top that for a meat chopper!! Does a nice job on beef cattle too.


----------



## Ryan_Todd (Apr 11, 2004)

:rollin: is the season here yet.


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

Talked to the CO last night that was working with the Feds.

The "final destination" theory is wrong. He stated they 
would treat both Rs and Nrs the same when walking out of
the butcher shop with your limit of sticks/jerky.

He did say one thing, the Feds are dragging their feet when
it comes to a concrete answer. The reason, this may be a
huge loop hole for hunters to exceed their limits and still be
legal when hunting away from home.

I hope everyone has a safe goose hunt over the weekend!


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

Thanks for thr update.


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

PSDC,

Don't know if you're talking about a "CO" from MN, ND, Fed or CN, but I think this is one of those things you will get a variety of opinions even among law enforcement types at various levels within the same agency, say nothing about among different agencies. Further, when it comes to this stuff, you can't assume that just 'cause any particular agency has rules that it interprets one way, that another agency doesn't have other rules or other interpretations. How the Feds treat this has no bearing on any rules a state may adopt or how they might interpret their own rules.

This should be more than a little warning:


> He did say one thing, the Feds are dragging their feet when
> it comes to a concrete answer.


 And what isn't disputed is that I know of some who have been popped for this in Sask. and I think it was FH who knows of some who have been popped in ND.

You want to grind 'em up and keep piling on when away from home, have at 'er. You can always tell it to the judge. Think until you can show something a little more concrete than the thoughts of one CO on an issue that's, at best, a work in progress, I'll hang tight on the final destination "theory".


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

Thanks for the response Dan. I will ask him if there are 
different interpretation for each state. Good questions.
I would believe all states will follow with what the Feds
come back with an answer. My understanding when
the wardens/CO were discussing the question, there
was a collective of COs from MN, WI, ND and Feds.

My biggest concern, as for many on this site, what if
the Feds determine that processed jerky/sticks would
be considered part of your possession limit when it is
located in the freezer at home!

I would believe it would become an enforcement 
nightmare!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

P,

Not only possibly different interpretations from each state, but potentially completely different rules from each state. Some states, like ND, borrow heavily from the Fed rules when it comes to creating rules of possession, identification, transportation etc. But all states have their own, separate rules that are separately applicable and enforceable for activities there, and subject to their own interpretation.

So, as to any given act, it may sound like a problem under a Fed rule but is interpreted by the Feds NOT to be a problem, may sound like a problem under a similar state rule that the state interprets IS a problem and is at the same time clearly a problem or not a problem under other states' rules. To my knowledge, the Fed rules of posession, identification, transportation, etc. of migratory birds don't "preempt" comparable state rules. And, as to non-migratory game, clearly the states seperate rules would also (probably in most cases, soley) govern. So, any given act could violate both Fed and state rules, one or the other or neither.

An analogy is the inevitable discussions after any heinous crime about whether the person will be charged by the state and/or the Fed for what are the very same acts, just under separate laws/rules at the two different levels that may apply to some or all of the same acts.

Again, this is not an "r/nr" issue. The applicable (Fed and particular state) rules of possession and identification would apply equally to you and me as pertains to a five day waterfowl trip to Rugby or Lac Qui Parle.


----------



## gandergrinder (Mar 10, 2002)

Dan,
I thought the Fed rules as applied to waterfowl were set as the minimum standard and that states could impose tighter restrictions if they chose to but had to maintain at least the minimum dictated by the federal laws. Am I wrong or have I misinterpreted the federal rules?


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

Which "Fed rules"?

On species limits and season length, Feds definitely set the "outer" and states are free to elect tighter, but not looser. When it comes to the particulars of what constitutes "possession" and id and transport rules, to the extent weighed in by the Feds, I guess that would sort of also be the case (i.e. wherever you happen to be, at a minimum those rules would apply, even if there are no comparable state rules). Subject to preemption principles (kind of a complicated mess that I don't think apply here), states could be more rigorous in terms of how long something is in your "possession" and what id requirements must be followed. Whether the state CO's would actually enforce the Fed rules if tighter than theirs, and vice-versa, on these particular subjects, I don't know.

At the end of the day, I just don't think it's safe to assume that, just because a Fed or MN CO says he wouldn't write you for 12 ducks worth of sausage and 12 whole ducks on the way home from an out of town trip, you're actually compliant with Fed rules, and it's even more risky to assume that even if okay by the Feds or a state that you're good to go with all states' rules. As has been explained to me, the "final destination theory", where unless consumed or legally given away, game must maintain identification until it gets "home", is alive and well in ND.


----------



## Qwack (May 25, 2002)

buckseye said:


> 23. Transportation and Storage
> License holders must accompany their game (excluding hides) during transportation.


Missouri has a similar law. A state CO was giving me a lecture about accompanying my game while hunting because I had left a dove on my stool while I was out walking the treeline. I asked him if the law required me to take my duck strap in to the cafe after the hunt. He said "yes". :roll:


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

OK Dan,

Maybe you can search for the other states and tell
me which ones have different regs?

I have checked a few and they are all the same for
legal limit and identification.

Let me know if you find something different, please.

GG, states a good point, they all seem to have the 
same regs when it comes to the Fed's guide lines.

No state seems to be have more restrictive regs.


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

Dan,

Let's say I go out and hunt with GG and we shoot our limit
of geese for two days. Then take the meat to the market
to get processed. Then after processed, go out and hunt
for two more days and take that limit home with the sticks.

There is a difference, than GG having a freezer full of geese 
and sticks at home.

I don't think so!

Name the movie!

Hint: I'm winning, I'm winning!


----------



## Dan Bueide (Jul 1, 2002)

P,

Thanks, but I'll decline your invite to complete a 50 state survey. When you do, you may find that many if not all of the states borrow to a great degree from the Feds on the waterfowl rules, but they still constitute the state's own rules and still could be interpreted differently on things like id requirements and posession. As we've well acknowldged here, these are very grey areas and different states could take completely opposite positions. On anything other than waterfowl, the specifics of "possession", id and transport are likely to be less uniform.

For me, I just won't assume that all regs are the same, and when I hunt waterfowl, upland, turkeys or anything else, I'll just check the applicable proc. Neither will I assume that similar sounding regs will be interpreted by all states/agencies the same. When grey, I'll error on the side of caution or get a definitive answer from someone within that particular agency rather than rely on the thoughts of someone from another agency on an issue that even for them is under construction.

In your example, are you staying at GG's house? If so, as the rule has been explained to me, GG's okay and you're over possession limit with two daily limits of dark geese whole and another two days worth into sticks, since the birds have not reached their final destination. If you're hunting together out of town and neither of you has reached "home" before you fired up the grinder (regardless of whether home is Oakland, St. Paul, Fargo, Madison or Atlanta), you're both over limit. As I said before, you can argue the logic many different ways, but that's the rule as has been explained to me.

You're getting way too hung up on painting this as a r/nr issue. Same rules apply to r's hunting away from home.


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

Well, got my answer today from the Feds.

They would prefer I did not post the answer.

Chris, they also would appreciate if you could
pull this thread.

I think you probably can figure out why.

Thanks.


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

"They would prefer I did not post the answer"

Secret Laws????????????? :eyeroll:


----------



## PSDC (Jul 17, 2003)

Sorry Ken,

I am only doing what was requested by the Feds.

End of discussion for me.


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

If we knew the, everchanging with the wind, fed rules we could follow them, wouldn't that be a shame for enforcement. :eyeroll:


----------



## Remmi_&amp;_I (Dec 2, 2003)

AMEN, Buckseye!


----------



## Field Hunter (Mar 4, 2002)

"They would prefer I don'r post the answer"? Kind of like going through a rather lengthy joke and then not remembering the punch line!


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

PSDC's credibilty :bop: ! There it was gone!!! :eyeroll:


----------



## KEN W (Feb 22, 2002)

PSDC...I now understand ....your credibility is still high.

Let it go guys he has a VERY good reason....I am locking this thread.


----------

