Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 36-502 (2026)

Possession — Transportation — Shipment of wildlife — Restrictions — Exceptions — release of captured wildlife. 

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Possession — Transportation — Shipment of wildlife — Restrictions — Exceptions — release of captured wildlife. 

No person shall possess, transport or ship in any manner, or accept for transportation or shipment any wildlife except as hereinafter provided.

(a)  Possession and Transportation.
1.  The possession and transportation of any legally taken wildlife shall be lawful when the same is in the possession of or is being transported by the taker of said wildlife and is accompanied by the appropriate licenses, tags, and/or permits attached and/or validated in the manner prescribed by the provisions of sections 36-409(d) and 36-410(a), Idaho Code.
2.  Possession or transportation of any legally taken wildlife by any person other than the taker shall be lawful when such wildlife is accompanied by a written statement prepared and signed by the taker showing the number, kind, and date taken and the name, address and license number of the taker and other such information as may be specified by the commission. In addition to such statements said wildlife shall be accompanied by the appropriate validated tag therefor and/or such permits as may be required under the provisions of this title except, for anadromous fish, the permit need not accompany the fish so long as the permit number is written on the proxy statement. Provided, however, that no person may lawfully claim, be granted or assume ownership of more game animals, game birds, or game fish taken within the state than allowed by possession limits established by the commission.
3.  It shall be lawful for a person to ship or a common carrier to accept for shipment any legally taken wildlife provided that all packages containing such wildlife shall be plainly labeled designating numbers, sex and species of wildlife contained therein and the name and address of the consignor and consignee.
4.  No person shall give another person wildlife to possess or transport unless they also give the transporter a proxy statement as provided in subsection 2. of this section.
(b)  Unlawful Possession. No person shall have in his possession any wildlife or parts thereof protected by the provisions of this title and the taking or killing of which is unlawful.
(c)  Release of Captured Wildlife. Any native wildlife, classified as predatory wildlife or unprotected wildlife, captured as the result of activity deleterious to human activity, may be released on private lands in the county of origin or on private lands in adjacent counties to the county of origin, with the written consent of the landowner of the property where the release occurs. The written consent shall include the date and the number of each species to be released.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1985–2015 · leading case: State v. Maidwell, 50 P.3d 439 (Idaho 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Maidwell, 50 P.3d 439 (Idaho 2002). · cites it 7× “On December 17, 1998, the State charged Maidwell with the misdemeanor offense of unlawful possession of parts of wildlife in violation of Idaho Code § 36-502 . He was summonsed into court, and initially represented himself.”
State v. Simpson, 54 P.3d 456 (Idaho Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 6× “All three defendants were charged with two counts of possession of an unlawfully taken elk, Idaho Code § 36-502 (b). They moved the court to dismiss the charges, arguing that the hunting rights provisions in the Nez Perce Treaty of 1855 (“Nez Perce Treaty”) made state game laws…”
State v. Wimer, 800 P.2d 128 (Idaho Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 6× “§ 36-405(c)(1), and taking an elk without having a license of the proper class, I.C. § 36-502. A Fish and Game officer attempted to seize Wimer's hunting license, but Wimer told the officer that it was located at Orogrande.”
State v. Michael G. Long, 280 P.3d 195 (Idaho Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “Long was cited for recreational trespass, Idaho Code § 36-1603 (a), and unlawful possession of wildlife, Idaho Code § 36-502 (b). The case proceeded to trial and after completion of the evidentiary portion, the magistrate granted Long’s motion for judgment of acquittal pursuant…”
State v. Cutler, 708 P.2d 853 (Idaho 1985). · cites it 4× “Appellants assign as error the magistrate court's denial of a motion to dismiss charges against them for violations of I.C. § 36-502(b), the possession of unlawfully taken or killed wildlife.”
State v. Thompson, 948 P.2d 174 (Idaho Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “I FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Charley Thompson was convicted on January 23, 1995, of possessing unlawfully taken game, I.C. § 36-502. As part of the sentencing under that conviction, Thompson's hunting license was revoked and he was not allowed to hunt or purchase a hunting…”
State v. Thurman, 996 P.2d 309 (Idaho Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “Thurman conditionally pled guilty to one count of unlawful possession of a mule deer doe and one count of unlawful possession of a mule deer fawn, I.C. § 36-502, after his motion to suppress the evidence was denied by the magistrate.”
State v. Thompson, 948 P.2d 174 (Idaho Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “I FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Charley Thompson was convicted on January 23, 1996, of possessing unlawfully taken game, I.C. § 36-502. As part of the sentencing under that conviction, Thompson’s hunting license was revoked and he was not allowed to hunt or purchase a hunting…”
State v. Rex Floyd Rammell (Idaho Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 18× “As a result of killing the elk in the wrong zone, Rammell was charged with possessing unlawfully taken wildlife, a misdemeanor, pursuant to Idaho Code § 36-502 (b). The district court, in its opinion and order on appeal, noted the case’s arduous procedural history: 1 On April…”
State v. Montana Second Jud. Dist. Court, 2015 MT 294 (Mont. 2015). “” Idaho Code Ann. § 36-502 (b). The Court concluded that unlawful possession of wildlife is continuous conduct for statute of limitations purposes because “the legislature made it unlawful for any person to “have in his possession’ the wildlife parts, rather than to ‘take…”
— Idaho Code § 36-502(a)(3) — 1 case
State v. Wimer, 800 P.2d 128 (Idaho Ct. App. 1990). “§ 36-405(c)(1), and taking an elk without having a license of the proper class, I.C. § 36-502. A Fish and Game officer attempted to seize Wimer's hunting license, but Wimer told the officer that it was located at Orogrande.”
— Idaho Code § 36-502(b) — 4 cases
State v. Maidwell, 50 P.3d 439 (Idaho 2002). “On December 17, 1998, the State charged Maidwell with the misdemeanor offense of unlawful possession of parts of wildlife in violation of Idaho Code § 36-502 . He was summonsed into court, and initially represented himself.”
State v. Cutler, 708 P.2d 853 (Idaho 1985). “Appellants assign as error the magistrate court's denial of a motion to dismiss charges against them for violations of I.C. § 36-502(b), the possession of unlawfully taken or killed wildlife.”
State v. Simpson, 54 P.3d 456 (Idaho Ct. App. 2002). “All three defendants were charged with two counts of possession of an unlawfully taken elk, Idaho Code § 36-502 (b). They moved the court to dismiss the charges, arguing that the hunting rights provisions in the Nez Perce Treaty of 1855 (“Nez Perce Treaty”) made state game laws…”
State v. Rex Floyd Rammell (Idaho Ct. App. 2013). “As a result of killing the elk in the wrong zone, Rammell was charged with possessing unlawfully taken wildlife, a misdemeanor, pursuant to Idaho Code § 36-502 (b). The district court, in its opinion and order on appeal, noted the case’s arduous procedural history: 1 On April…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.