Possession limits
 

I’ll make the call, but for interest sake,

Mapping out my season. Archery antelope, then east for annual waterfowl shoot. Except something is going to get in between, like a million sandhill cranes pouring south down the border.

Question, if I take my pressure cooker and can my game ‘at the cabin’, is it removed from the possession tally? I would guess so, as it now is just meat.

No, possession includes “processed” meat. You can’t go to the lake and catch clean and can as many fish as you want because they finally rest in cans or jars. You have to adhere to “possession” limits.

LC

I imagine the rules are the same and agree with you but he is talking birds not fish

I

I used fish as an example because that what most people “can at the cabin” but I agree with you I think it applies to both.

I believe big game are different however because the license and tag is valid for individual animals. So if you have meat left over from one year still, the New Current license and tag authorizes you collect another, the previous license/tags allow you to posses previous years “meat”.

LC

All good I know there was definitely a crack down with canning fish on site years ago because it was a major issue in some areas

Sometimes as hunters/fishermen I believe we need to put less effort into figuring out how to take as much as we can and think in moderation instead. Plus it gives you an excuse to go hunting/fishing more lol

Best example of possession limit abuse was few years back many fishermen just had to fill their coolers with fish fillets. Now we have very few lakes with decent fishing in Alberta.

I’m a catch and release kinda guy.

For waterfowl, possession is deemed to be held until prepared for immediate cooking. Interesting that the term cooking is used over consumption. Im just thinking that my home away time may be longer this season.

The possessions limits for waterfowl have changed this year-once cleaned and at home, no longer goes against your limit--for geese and ducks--not sure about cranes

Are they going by primary residence? If not it might make it possible to do as the OP is thinking

For MIGRATORY game birds only the rules have changed quite a bit. These are the first changes to the Migratory Bird act in something like 50 years. Possession limits have changed, now no longer includes mounted birds, it used to and a couple of other changes. There are other changes proposed that have not become law yet. One of the proposed changes is that once birds are in your home freezer or fully processed they no longer count in your possession limit but that has not passed yet as far as I know. Currently, if you made sausage or Jerky they are no longer part of possession limit, I don't know about canned meat. Let us know what you find out when you call in.

Best current link:
This is the actual possession rules currently

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/....html#h-476981

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment...s/alberta.html

From what I have seen, it is the law in the new regs, which would be great if they could release, probably couple weeks yet.

Another option is to take your birds into a butcher for processing.
This will effect the "possession" limit in the same way as if you took them home.

Meaning the packages have to wrapped by a licensed commercial vendor?
One of our hunting parties is a well known chef from Vancouver. I’m hoping he’ll recommend some canning additives to try out. His nickname is butcher.
Alberta fish and wildlife is silent on the issue, directing me to the feds. I hope I can get a response from them before season start.

Feds have released 2020-2021 Regulations.

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/....html#h-476981

The following is a a direct quote:


11 (1) Subject to subsection (2), no person shall possess or transport a migratory bird unless at least one fully feathered wing is attached to the bird.

(2) The wing and the plumage thereon may be removed from a migratory bird

(a) when the bird is prepared for immediate cooking; or

(b) after the bird is taken to the residence of its owner for preservation.


Still a bit ambiguous,,,, does a temporary residence qualify or not? I have heard impetrations that temporary residences would qualify (similar to liquor consumption regulations),,, but I sure would like to see a legal definition of residence before betting the farm on that!

Yes. This is probably an option.

Get confirmation from the Feds.

I am not sure that it works that way,,, a processing facility is not your residence
and you will not necessarily be cooking it immediately at the facility.

You can still gift birds to reduce them from your own possession, however,,,, so getting your birds processed and then giving them away if not taking them to your own residence should be okay.

BUT,,,,, we really do need legal opinion on all this rather than conjecture.

Our group had thought of grinding goose meat for this same reason. We spoke to fish and wildlife about it and they said no go! In fact if you remove the wing from the carcass before getting it home you can be charged.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually cooking it, making Jerky, sausage or canning would seem to me to be a very different thing. Once the meat is processed into a finished product it can be transported without violating the evidence of sex and species rules. I know we take game in to a processor in GP, then haul the processed meat home to Edmonton, Winnipeg and 100 Miles House. We are NOT violating the rule that says we have to leave evidence of sex and species on the animal during transport. If F&W were to charge us I am more than confident they would lose that argument in court, in fact I doubt any prosecutor would pursue it.

The rules do not say "Permanent Residence" for preservation, it says residence. Legal definition of residence is actually quite broad. I am not offering a direction to others or a legal opinion, but if I had preserved meat at my hotel or cabin and was then transporting said preserved meat to another residence I would be more than willing to argue any charge relating to that in Court. Be aware however that you cannot transport processed Migratory game into the States; to cross the border it must have a wing attached. That rule is separate to what is being discussed here.

I have seen more than one opinion from enforcement officers that was not accurate but they are still a better source than opinions on forums.

So there’s that 2a, or, 2b
Calgary office said no to the whole idea until I pointed the cooked over consumed, and that ended that, referring to the fed.

I checked the definitions in the Migratory Game Act, their definition of residence is different than most statutes and is quite specific, so in this case 2b does not apply till you get the Birds home.

From the Definitions section;

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/....html#h-476804

2a however still applies in the case of meat that is cooked, at your residence or elsewhere. That would mean ground raw meat or sliced and packaged, no, or at least it would be less clear as ground and sliced could both be argued to having been prepared for cooking but the whole immediate part is kind of an outlier. That said, canned, cooked Jerky, cooked sausage etc should be a clear yes.

My mistake, 2b disregarded

I think this came up in a previous thread. You can gift them to others to take them off your limit. This includes gifting the to you wife, children or other family members in you house hold.

Pleasant conversation with a fed this morning.
Regardless of state, cooked or otherwise, it’s possession. I can transport with documentation another’s possession. Gifting reduces your possession at the time of the transaction.
In the end, the only difference is that canning doesn’t require a wing remain attached, but requires enough documentation to satisfy an inspecting officer.

So once it is canned, what qualifies as sufficient documentation to satisfy an inspection officer, because I can't think of a thing that would tell you how many goose and what type are in those jars? Possession limit is a lot different for Snows than Canadas as an example.

Regs will out soon enough, all of this will be a moot point

How do you figure.

I doubt it, as usual they will be worded ambiguously and will be subject to interpretation.

It doesn’t matter how they write the regulations, there will always be people that “interpret” the the regs to suit their own personal priorities. You can’t please everyone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A follow up email from CWS

According to the agent I spoke with, he suggested the intent was to remove uncertainty. An inspecting officer could raise suspicion and confiscate the lot for testing, if unsatisfied with identification. The agent recommended species, count, license # on each container, along with a hunters declaration if the license # is other than your own.

As mentioned, once you’ve gifted into another’s possession, your reduced that amount.