Be careful if you shoot Asian carp on state border rivers

[carptracker]

Bighead carp just included on Lacey Act, (assuming Obama signs bill). Silver and black carp already on the act. This means you cannot transport them live across state lines, which is a tricky proposition on rivers on state borders.

It sounds like there will be some discretion for officers to decide how to proceed. But be careful out there. If you also hook and line fish, be VERY careful about any bait you collect and use on state boundary rivers. I'm not sure if it is legal everywhere to use Asian carp for bait, even dead. If you cross state lines and break a state law related to fish while breaking that law, you will be in violation of another portion of the Lacey Act, and fines are VERY bad for Lacey act violations - and jail time included.

Answers from the FWS Enforcement folks:

Q: What happens if a commercial or sport fisher is fishing on both sides of a state border river and some of the fish don't die immediately, or are still alive when offloaded at the ramp? Normally these would not be in water, but would be alive.

A: Injurious species are listed both in the Lacey Act, 18 USC 42, and in 50 CFR part 16. The soon to be listed (assuming of course that S. 1421 is signed by the President) big head carp will be added to 18 USC 42. The interstate shipment of injurious species, such as the silver carp, is prohibited by the Lacey Act and the federal regulations that implement the Lacey Act regardless of potential state law violations. So, in a nutshell, any commercial or sport fisher who catches a bighead carp (or silver or black carp as they were already on the injurious list) must kill the fish immediately before transporting it across state lines. As you can imagine, there is ample some room for officer discretion here. For instance, if a person were to catch a bighead carp on the Illinois side of the MS River and then have their boat drift over into Missouri waters seconds after the fish is in the boat this would probably not be met with a citation despite *technically* being a violation of the Act. That said, an officer might have a different take on a situation in which someone was found to have a live fish in a cooler and the explanation was that he/she was going to kill the fish as soon as they were back at the boat ramp. To be on the safe side, it would be advisable that anglers make every effort to kill a bighead, black, or silver carp the moment it's in the boat.

Q: What about live bait collection under the same scenario? AC are not legal bait in some states, but would it be a Lacey Act violation if they were captured on one side of the river and transported to /used used on the other, where legal?

A: As you say, fish harvested illegally in one state and then transported across state lines is a potential violation of the Lacey Act, 16 USC 3372. Likewise, fish that are harvested legally in one state and then transported into another state (regardless of whether or not it is legal to have these fish live in State #2) is a violation of the Lacey Act, 16 USC 3372. This is probably self-evident, but it would not be a Lacey Act violation if someone were to legally harvest live bighead carp for bait in a state that permitted this practice and used that bait in the same state. In other words, the injurious listing only applies to interstate movement of live fish and in no way trumps state law that applies to the harvest/use of live bighead completely within the boundaries of one state.

[carpsniper]

Good info Duane. In IL it's been illegal to possess the asian carp alive for a while now.
I hope that CPOs will give bowfishers a bit of lee way here. Our plan is to kill them whenever we can.