Quote Originally Posted by DaveStewart View Post
Then again...the word possession could be clarified to say that a fish is in possession if not released immediately after it has been caught and removed from the hook. There would be no question then and no one would be at the mercy of someone's opinion. I certainly agree most CO's use common sense....they are also subject to being wrong just like any other human being....and so are judges, especially when the law is not clear. Like I said before, obviously the reason no one has answered my email is that no one knows for sure because the law is not clarified.
The duality of definition of the word "possession" seems to be a sticking point ... not to mention the fact that we're talking about two different subject matters ( ie - what constitutes a fish being "in possession", and what defines the whereabouts of a "possession limit")

Is a fish that bites your lure/bait & gets caught on your hook & still in the water ... technically "in your possession" ... or does it have to be removed from its environment (water) and placed in yours (boat/bank/dock) ... or does it have to be placed in a contained environment (stringer/basket/cooler/livewell) ?? That seems to be the concern on the definition of "possession", as it applies to limits/culling/giving away of fish. IMHO ... that definition of possession would apply only to a fish placed in a contained environment (with the intent to keep or cull). Since culling is legal in KY, once you've got a limit you don't have to stop fishing (or catching) ... you just have to stop "keeping", so you cull a smaller fish for a larger one. If the next fish you catch isn't bigger than your smallest fish, you release it and continue to fish for one that is.

In the case of "possession limit", as it pertains to "where" you're keeping those fish, and when does a processed fish count or not count ... the vagueness of the statement/ruling put out by the KDFWR is subject to misinterpretation, and should be clarified in terms that cannot be misunderstood. I think this could be done, but I think it hasn't been done for the simple fact that there's so many variables that a simple ruling isn't possible. Maybe, since the clarification of a law could open up a whole other can of worms or end up being worse or more confusing than the current one, the KDFWR shouldn't "amend" the law ... but strike the current one & rewrite the whole thing, to include those circumstances "where" a possession limit & processed fish are and are not legal.

I think Dave & I are on the same page, as far as needing a more defined clarification of these rulings, in either case. I don't think we should be at the mercy of a vague law that's left up to the CO to interpret on a case by case situation, when it could be written definitively & cover all possible situations. It would make it so much easier for the angling public & the CO's to understand & comply with, even if it did result in a negative, or more restrictive outcome. At least we'd ALL know the confines of the ruling, and the consequences of violating it.

I also believe that ... if you give fish away, while still on the water & continuing to fish, you're still subject to the daily creel limit, and as such you would be in violation if you continued to catch & keep fish beyond the numbers of that specie's creel limit. It would be no different in catching over your limit and "giving" those extra fish to your boat partner(s). The person "receiving" those fish would also have to count those fish as part of their daily limit & possession limit !!

Good discussion ... !!

... pappy