Anyone know the legality of using shot, wild migratory birds for dog training???
Printable View
Anyone know the legality of using shot, wild migratory birds for dog training???
Its a pretty grey area. I do use some shot migratory birds (mergys and the odd goose) but prefer to use farm raised ducks instead...just on the off chance of a CO confrontation. I imagine they would be understanding but it still makes me nervous.
Some HRC folks may be able to shed more light on the topic.
I'm sure a lot of people use birds they shoot for training. Lot easier and cheaper.
I could be wrong but I'm pretty using birds you have shot for retriever training is common. That may mean the bird won't be edible later :) which would bother folks who believe in eating everything they shoot(reasonably so). , but I see no law against it.
http://www.ec.gc.ca/rcom-mbhr/?lang=en&n=99FDEC59-1
Brent,
Here is some information, you'll note for the purpose of training retrievers. I did not find but also know that retriever clubs can hold up to 250 legally taken ducks for the purpose of training/trialing.
http://v1.canadabusiness.mb.ca/Mirro...Serverf97c.gif Canada-Manitoba Business Service Centre
Member of the http://v1.canadabusiness.mb.ca/Mirro...Server3619.gif network
Skip to content|Skip to institutional links
Common menu bar links
Home Page > Home Page
- Topics
- Seminars
- Business Taxation
- Legal Information
- Exporting
- Importing
- Business Guides
- Government Programs, Services and Regulations
- Guides By Department
- Guides By Topic
- Intellectual Property
- Labeling/Advertising Requirements
- Online Publications General Business Information
- Retail
- Starting a
- Guide to Starting and Running a Home Based Business in Manitoba
- Business Financing
- Library
- Business Toolbox
- Guest Advisor Program
- Guide to Starting and Running a Home Based Business in Manitoba
- Legal Guide
- Business Planning Workbook
- Information
- About Us
- Increasing text size
- Regional Offices
- Site Map
- Manitoba videoconference network partners
http://v1.canadabusiness.mb.ca/images/printheader.jpg Migratory Birds
Environment Canada
Last Verified: 2006-12-07
Act: Migratory Birds Convention Act, S.C. 1994, c. 22
Regulation: Migratory Birds Regulations, C.R.C., Vol. XI, c. 1035, p. 8143, as amended
Related Reading
More Information
To Whom Does This Apply?
Persons whose activities risk causing harm to birds need to be aware of required permits and regulations prohibiting certain activities. Affected persons and businesses include:
- hunters and users of migratory game birds
- taxidermists
- aviculturalists
- businesses training retriever dogs
- businesses using eiderdown
- researchers studying birds
Eligible Activities
Hunting, trafficking or commercialization of migratory birds.
Summary
The Migratory Birds Convention Act, 1994 and its Regulations protect migratory birds, their eggs and nests. The Act and Regulations regulate hunting, prevent trafficking and commercialization, harm to birds nests and eggs, harm to birds by pollution. They also control the uses of migratory birds through permits.
Harmful substances may not be deposited into areas frequented by Migratory birds.
Migratory birds may not be sold or used in commercial trade unless authorized by a permit.
Aviculturalists may buy and sell captive-bred birds to other aviculturalists, with the authorization of a permit.
Hunters can give away their birds for the purposes of mounting or human consumption, or for training dogs as retrievers. Hunters are not allowed to give away their birds for the collection of feathers, a commercial activity.
A person may sell the feathers of migratory game birds for the purpose of making fishing flies, bedding, clothing or other similar uses if the feather used is obtained under the authority of a valid migratory game bird hunting permit.
A person may collect, possess, sell or transport eiderdown with the authorization of a permit.
PermitsMigratory Game Bird Hunting Permits can be purchased from Canada Post as well as from provincial vendors in the provinces of British Columbia, Manitoba and Prince Edward Island.
Scientific Permit No charge Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit/Conservation Stamp $17 Avicultural Permit $10 Taxidermist Permit $10 Eiderdown Permit $10
Any other permit can be obtained from a regional contact listed below.
DISCLAIMER
Information contained in this section is of a general nature only and is not intended to constitute advice for any specific fact situation. For particular questions, the users are invited to contact their lawyer. For additional information, see contact(s) listed below.
Manitoba Contact(s):
Ms. Lorraine Tomkewich
Wildlife Enforcement Division
Environment Canada
115 Perimeter Road
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 0X4
Telephone: 306-975-5042
Fax: 306-975-6061
Web site: http://www.ec.gc.ca/envhome.html
National Contact(s):
Ms. Hélène Lévesque
Migratory Birds Conservation
Canadian Wildlife Service
Environment Canada
Place Vincent Massey
351 Saint-Joseph Boulevard
Gatineau, Quebec K1A 0H3
Telephone: 819-953-1419
Fax: 819-994-4445
E-mail: Hélène.Lé[email protected]
Web site: http://www.ec.gc.ca/envhome.html
http://v1.canadabusiness.mb.ca/images/printcontact.jpg DISCLAIMER
Information contained in this document is of a general nature only and is not intended to constitute advice for any specific fact situation. Users concerned about the reliability of the information should consult directly with the source, or seek legal counsel.
LINKS POLICY
Some of the hypertext links lead to non-federal government sites which are not subject to the Official Languages Act and the material is available in one language only.
http://v1.canadabusiness.mb.ca/images/printfooter.jpg
© 2012 Canada Business
The Canada/Manitoba Business Service Centre
http://v1.canadabusiness.mb.ca/images/logo_wedc.png
http://v1.canadabusiness.mb.ca/image...c_partners.png
http://v1.canadabusiness.mb.ca/image...v_Manitoba.jpg
Hey Brent,Quote:
Originally Posted by brent
I really think this is a grey area because on one hand you will be letting the meat spoil (freezing and thawing repeatedly will make the meat bad) but I am not 100% sure if migratory birds fall under the FWCA spoilage rule or not. The FWCA has the spoilage law but mentions migratory birds fall under the Migratory Bird Act and Regulations which has no spoilage law which I can find. Probably best to contact the MNR and check up on the matter. Personally, I would simply contact a local farmer and purchase a dispatched domestic one because it is much easier to get and you would be 100% in the clear legally (probably not best to argue whether it is moral or not to use legally shot migratory birds as training aids).
Dyth
Since Jobber's cited a "gray area" and Kraka's mentioned Manitoba, this might be a good cautionary tale before you go using wild birds for training. I told Kraka yesterday we have no possession limit on snow geese in my precinct in the first place but many of the snows I've used for training down the years were cripples shot by other hunters and recovered by dogs from a large body of water in "my backyard." That wasn't really training, throwing them as dead birds later was, however. Thing is, if there were possession limits or strictly-enforced "wanton waste of game" laws hereabouts, all bets would've been off.
Dyth,
According to the above section, this is clear re purposes of dog training.
"Hunters can give away their birds for the purposes of mounting or human consumption, or for training dogs as retrievers"
I didn't know that. The Mountain Valley Retriever Training Club website is incorrect as they state in the club rules it is illegal (Club rule 12).Quote:
Originally Posted by krakadawn
Re. the above , I think that you will find this to be " A Club Rule " to ease every ones mind, it prevents outsiders , people that do not know from complaining that " hey you are using migratory birds to train with " , also there would be a possibility of some unethical hunters donating their unwanted birds to the club and going out and shoot some more because they can claim the "we do not have any in our possession " so we can go and shoot some . Or those that would cull their birds , donating well shot up birds or the hens .Quote:
Originally Posted by Dythbringer
I think you can read between the lines and see what I am getting at , the MVRTC is just trying to prevent any possible problems by purchasing their birds for training purposes and the hunt tests as do most other clubs .
Burlygirl straightened me out on that. I am fine with it being a club rule (and it does make sense) but it does state false info. Thanks jaycee.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
While I appreciate what and how Jaycee has explained cause goodness knows we get flack when it's not deserved for dogs and hunting etc.......But I also believe we need to stand tall about what we are doing. Nothing illegal here and it has been known for decades that good retrievers conserve game.
For many years I was part of a presentation during waterfowl week at a provincial park. We did not shy away from using birds for the retriever demonstration and often took the opportunity to discuss with members of the crowd. Just like the Heritage laws affirmed our right to hunt, we should never run and hide or sugar coat the message especially when it is completely legal.
A law abiding person should never fear being upfront with what you do.
exactly!!Quote:
Originally Posted by krakadawn
Oh for....
No one is hiding. I made the mistake of hazarding a guess as to why the rule had been left as is or even overlooked. I said that it wasn't my rule and that it was there when I arrived, and guessed that it kept the urbanites from assuming we shot birds just to throw them around and play with their lifeless bodies. Never knew it'd be a case of people assuming that I was a law-abiding person hiding what I was doing, or by extension, that the club was law abiding and yet hiding what we were doing. The written rule will get looked at.
Alana,
My comment was in response to Jaycee who was quite accurate in my mind about the issue. Certainly no malice toward you but I will not back up on standing our ground in general...in general.
Krakadawn, as long as there is no malice toward me, we're good. As for your response directed at Jaycee, it appears he was making an observation on how the rule could have come to fruition (and he also wouldn't have known Dyth and I had already spoken, so he was probably trying to provide an explanation to Dythbringer in a timely fashion). Seeing as how MVRTC sits in the middle of a conservation area that is close to being swallowed by city and is constantly making more and more changes toward it being a 'park' and not a conservation area in the traditional sense of the term, I think it's a good guess. We as a club take many measures to ensure we have an amicable relationship with the park, its employees and the people who frequent the park grounds. (Burly has made the trek for PR purposes on more than one occasion, and that little dog has won over many a surly spectator). Purely a guess on my part, but the rule could have been written with the park's rules in mind, and it may be 'illegal' in a park sense, not a law and order sense. As stated, it'll get looked at if we want to call into question the semantics of it all. I never asked you to back up, but I did need to make it clear that no one was hiding and I feel like this is making Rule 12 a mountain when it's probably a mole hill.
As always, if you want to know the real life legalities of something, always go straight to the source. Concerning that, thank you Jim for copy and pasting the information concerning the facts/laws and the Migratory Bird Convention Act back in post #5 on this thread. I hope the Original Poster read that answer, as it covered their question =)
Revisiting this subject, Clubs can save themselves a pile of money not having to buy mallards if their members are able to help out.
The possession limit for clubs is 200 birds, not 250.
POSSESSION
- 10. (1) No person shall have in his possession in a province or any area within a province on the first day of the open season set out in Schedule I for that province or area, carcasses of migratory birds of any species in excess of the number specified as the daily bag limit in Schedule I for that species in that province or that area.
- (2) No person shall have in his possession in any province at any time, carcasses of migratory birds of any species in excess of the number specified as the possession limit in Schedule I for that species in that province unless that person has
- (a) an export permit certifying that those carcasses were lawfully taken in another province, or
- (b) a valid licence for hunting migratory birds issued by another province,
and the number of carcasses does not exceed the possession limit for that species in the province that issued the export permit or licence, as the case may be.- (3) No person shall have in his possession in any province a carcass of a migratory game bird belonging to or taken by another person unless the carcass has attached to it a tag that is signed by the holder of the migratory game bird hunting permit under which the bird was taken and that indicates
- (a) the name and address of the owner;
- (b) the number of the migratory game bird hunting permit under which the bird was taken; and
- (c) the date the bird was taken.
- (4) Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (2), a corporation that trains dogs as retrievers may, for the purpose of that training, have in its possession not more than 200 carcasses of migratory game birds.
- (4.1) Subsection (3) does not apply to a corporation referred to in subsection (4).
- (5) Subsection (2) does not apply to a person acting under the authority of a permit issued pursuant to section 25 or 26.
- SOR/79-544, s. 4;
- SOR/82-703, s. 4;
- SOR/99-393, s. 1;
- SOR/2000-331, s. 3.
Labber is right but you must also keep on record the migratory stamp # that the birds were harvested under along with the hunters name and dates the birds were taken on as proof the birds were legaly harvested. In tbe event the mnr pay you a visit. When we held the 2011 national we used shot birds for the first 100 birds saved the club a 1000 bucks. For alot of our trials we buy our birds from Amos. If we have a good year we will put some away for next year the freezer is empty now.
Actually, ChrisQuote:
but you must also keep on record the migratory stamp # that the birds were harvested under along with the hunters name and dates the birds were taken on as proof the birds were legaly harvested. In tbe event the mnr pay you a visit.
Means that Retriever Clubs are exempt from the demands of:Quote:
- (4.1) Subsection (3) does not apply to a corporation referred to in subsection (4).
However, not just anybody can claim to be part of a retriever club and have more birds than their stamp provides for.Quote:
(3) No person shall have in his possession in any province a carcass of a migratory game bird belonging to or taken by another person unless the carcass has attached to it a tag that is signed by the holder of the migratory game bird hunting permit under which the bird was taken and that indicates
- (a) the name and address of the owner;
- (b) the number of the migratory game bird hunting permit under which the bird was taken; and
- (c) the date the bird was taken.
The club president should be signing a letter to the club game steward identifying him as that, and documentation such as last years trial catalogue should be present as proof of this legal waterfowl possession purpose.
Scott, I've not seen any reference to catalogues etc to support use. We do use club letter head and a note from the club Secretary.
On another note the Act is under review and questionaires were available to clubs. Of special interest was the section on wastage....what that looks likes. This would hopefully clarify breasting birds and retaining for training.
I've usually just use merganzers for work birds or utilize eaters by filleting the breast out first then tying a string around them .
TD
i have been told by a mutual science friend that once birds are breasted the carcass is not considered a game bird and therefor not subject to regulation.Quote:
Originally Posted by krakadawn
I would hope that the regulations remain as they are. The use of whole wild ducks, are a great benefit to the sustainability of the retriever clubs and their conservation benefits as a whole. They are also a much more Eco friendly alternative to buying farm raised ducks for use at trials