Help Stop Lawless Actions Of New Hampshire Fish & Game Conservation Officers

New Hampshire Live Free or Die
Help Stop Lawless Actions Of New Hampshire Fish & Game Conservation Officers

New Hampshire – -( Earlier this week I testified in favor of HB 282 which is intended to stop the lawless actions of the Conservation Officers of New Hampshire Fish and Game.

I explained to the committee that even though the department receives significant funding from federal excise taxes paid on firearms and ammunition; those who carry concealed purchase far more ammunition for training than hunters who fire a few shots a year. Contrary to what you may have heard, Fish and Game is not funded by hunting and fishing license fees alone. Yet, it is everyone who is impacted by Fish and Game's lawless actions that HB 282 will stop.

It is outrageous that Conservation Officers can search and arrest using the low level of proof known as reasonable suspicion but Major Crime Unit State Troopers who investigate heinous crimes against humans must meet the higher burden of proof known as probable cause.

We have two webpages which detail the problems and abuses at New Hampshire Fish and Game. Click here and here for a brief overview of the abuses and lawless actions by this rogue agency.

It came as no surprise to me that Chief of Law Enforcement Col. Kevin Jordan and Legal Counsel Paul Sanderson came out in force to oppose HB 282. They want to keep the status quo. They want to leave the door open for Conservation Officers to violate peoples Constitutional rights with the approval of the General Court. HB 282 will change this and no bureaucrat ever wants to lose power.

Sadly, some people who hunt and fish are more interested in covering for Fish and Game then supporting our Constitution. One person is worried that someone fishing with spin tackle in a fly fishing onle pond could not have his tackle inspected if HB 282 is enacted. He should be more concerned with the loss of Constitutional rights that HB 282 will reverse. Right now, today, Conservation Officers can act on “reasonable suspicion” instead of the higher burden of proof known as “probable cause” that every other police officer in New Hampshire must meet.

We need to keep the heat on the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee. Email all members of the Criminal Justice and Public Safety Committee and politely ask them to vote HB 282 “ought to pass”.

Pre written message to: [email protected]

Dear Representatives,

The New Hampshire Fish and Game Department has turned into a rogue anti-Constitution, anti-freedom, state agency within state government. HB 282 will go a long way towards reforming this agency by no longer allowing warrantless searches and seizures for violation and misdemeanor offenses. Offenses that either carry no jail time or no more than one year in jail. To the contrary, state police major crime unit troopers, investigating homicides and sexual assaults are required to obtain a warrant issued by a judge.

Please vote HB 282 “ought to pass”.

It would also help to contact the prime sponsor Representative James Spillane and thank him for taking the initiative to bring Constitutional Government back to New Hampshire. [email protected]

Please don't wait, the committee could vote on HB 282 at any time! As always, thanks for your continued support!

In liberty,
J.R. Hoell
Corporate Secretary – NHFC, Inc.

New Hampshire Firearms CoalitionAbout New Hampshire Firearms Coalition:

The New Hampshire Firearms Coalition is New Hampshire's only No Compromise Gun Rights Organization. While many so-called “gun rights groups” work to curry favor with politicians and the media, NHFC is working aggressively to hold politicians accountable and to put a stop to gun control. Visit:

  • 15 thoughts on “Help Stop Lawless Actions Of New Hampshire Fish & Game Conservation Officers

    1. Here in Washington state game wardens can enforce all federal laws they do have more jurisdiction than the WSP ! The WDFW LAW officers face more armed people in remote places alone than any other law enforcement agency anywhere in the state! I do support them and the jurisdictions they have! So the liberals made pot legal in Washington pot smokers better watch out were the smoke land air or sea they can enforce ALL FEDERAL LAWS!

    2. Pennsylvania game commission is not much better. Officer came on our land searched it without probable cause a warrant or reasonable suspicion. Admitted to pulling game camera cards from our cameras and checking the photos. Contacted Harrisburg and they did nothing.

      1. I agree, the Pennsylvania Game Commission is nothing but a Criminal enterprise that needs it’s wings clipped. I hope we get a similar bill started here in Pennsylvania. The Game commission officer’s have a Gestapo attitude that needs addressed. What should be done is that the Hunters should get a ballot every 4 years to vote who should be on the Game Commission board, Not some politican.

    3. The arguements made in the article are full of logical fallacies, it’s basically taking “gun control 101” arguements and twisting them against the DNC. Strawman arguements, appealing to emotion, appealing to a higher authority. It is also completely ignorant of the practicalities that the DNC, or any officer performing similar duties, utilizes in investigations. I hope the author of the article stops using the same tactics that the progressive left uses in gender studies courses, in that they twist everything into something problematic, and instead uses logical rationale to articulate their points in the future.

    4. It is not just there, it is also here in AZ. I have had, on two separate occasions, game wardens threaten me, question me as to how I got where I was even though I was on a clearly marked.S. road, trying to intimidate me into leaving because I was hunting deer and then elk. I did not go anywhere. I offered that they might want to call the sheriff at which point the both left. Maybe these guys came from commie calif? This was a few years back but I would not be surprised that both Game and Fish officials were still working. I had my tags and I did present them, still they tried to intimidate me. Don’t give an inch or they will take a mile. Just two more people who value wildlife and treason more than people. Arm up, carry on.

    5. So let me get this straight; even though open carry is legal anywhere anytime, if you go hiking while carrying a handgun for bear or snake defense, you can be arrested for poaching?! That’s messed up!

    6. In Arkansas we have game and fish that can come into your home without any proof of wrong doing. The state and local officials use them to get into places that they have no justifiable cause to be. The abuses of power in our state by game and fish is a disgrace. Why we continue to give them 1/8 cent tax revenue is wrong. We need honest and fair treatment of citizens not Nazi tactics we see now. They have more money than any state organization and the worst record of abuse and no on is saying anything for fear of retribution.

    7. While I agree that the police here in NH are tough, there is a very good reason why. the drugs and crime here are out of control ! I haven’t heard of any abuse of authority by F&G here, I am not against keeping them honest, but they are as likely to find more common types of criminals in the woods as they are hunting and fishing law violators. Our gun laws are very relaxed here with constitutional carry and stand your ground. I’ll take my chances with our cops over any other state law enforcement anywhere.

    8. Generally, all the police need to detain a person in a public place and search him is reasonable suspicion that there may be “crime afoot” as Terry v. Ohio put it, or that he may have evidence of crime on his person. It still takes probably cause to make an arrest; that is a federal standard and there is nothing New Hampshire can do to reduce that. I expect that people are confusing the standard for detaining a person for an investigation, with arresting him. The federal standard for detention is reasonable suspicion. The standard for arrest is probable cause. The case law setting all this out goes back a long way. A detention is a short restriction of a person’s freedom to leave while an investigation based on reasonable suspicion is carried out. An arrest is the taking into custody of a person with the intent to pursue charges based on probable cause that the person committed a crime. Lots of times people who have only been detained and then released go around saying “I was arrested for nothing.” But they were never actually arrested, so the standard of probable cause never kicked in.

      People who have not really read the 4th amendment mistakenly believe that all searches require warrants. If you read it, it is clear that the framers intended two standards of searches: reasonable suspicion without a warrant, and a warrant based on probable cause. The Courts have looked to the framers’ writings about this, and the differentiation is based on the circumstances. Very basically, your home and office and other immovable places under your control where you have a high “expectation of privacy” will require a warrant (with exceptions such as emergencies), while movable things like people and their cars in public places where they have less expectation of privacy do not require a warrant but only a reasonable suspicion that there may be evidence of a crime to be found.

      1. Thomas Steinke,

        The 4th Amendment prohibits unreasonable seizures and unreasonable searches:

        The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

        The only search deemed reasonable during an investigatory detention is a frisk for weapons to ensure officer safety during the investigation. Per Terry v Ohio, any investigatory detention requires articulable reasonable suspicion of criminal wrongdoing, and a subsequent frisk requires reasonable suspicion that the detained person is armed and dangerous. Beyond a frisk any lawful search must be based on probable cause of criminal wrongdoing established at the scene or on a warrant issued based on probable cause. A search incident to arrest is lawful without a warrant, because probable cause must exist to justify the arrest and a search of the area within the arrested person’s immediate influence Has been deemed reasonable to ensure officer safety and to preserve any evidence that might otherwise vanish.

    9. My Pappy used to tell me, from when I was about 7 years old, that as soon as you put some people in a uniform that it would go to their head and turn them into a Little Hitler. He also told me that the reason they made the local police wear uniforms was so that unsuspecting strangers would immediately be able to identify half the crooks in town, and be able to be very wary of them. These lessons from dear old Pappy usually came when we were watching Andy Griffiths and Barney Fife. So I used to take his wisdom as attempts to be humorous. But then when I was 12 years old, there was a scandal involving 10 officers of a neighboring township, where they were all arrested for burglarizing the homes of residents when they went away on vacation. Their scam was to convince the residents to inform them when they went away, so that the police could keep an eye on their house. Of course, they used that knowledge to arrange the burglary of their houses. Then The lights went on and I knew my dear old Pappy wasn’t making any jokes. It certainly is a shame that the bad ones also give the good ones a bad name. The good ones should really do more to get the bad ones off the force and behind bars where they belong.

    10. New Hampshire law enforcement in general is a little intense for my liking. I grew up in Mass but only a stone’s throw from the border, and a lot of my family and friends live in the state.
      Police in general are way too gung-ho there. Can’t speak on DEC officers but assume they also aren’t very fun. New Hampshire is a very confusing state to me.

      1. I’m a 40+ year resident of the granite state and there are a couple of thing I think this article and comments have wrong. The first is the article is talking about arrest for reasonable suspicion, and I think he has arrest and detention confused. Just because you are in handcuffs does not mean you are arrested. You can even be read your miranda while being detained when an officer questions you. Keep in mind that if you are being questioned and you are already in cuffs be very careful how you answer – or you could have bars to go with the cuffs.
        Second regarding the comment that NH Cops are over zealous. I seriously doubt that, but as a non resident I can understand why you might think that. Just like most any other state if you are not from there you’re fair game so mind your p’s and q’s. In short, if you are from Mass or Vermont or Maine and you are speeding on rte 93, 89, or 95 for example expect that you’ll get pulled over before a NH motorist. Not fair, but it happens a lot.

    Leave a Comment 15 Comments