• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

IS NHFC RUBBING KNEES WITH HUMANE SOCIETY UNITED STATES??

jpk said:
Do you know how many productive letters/calls/emails you could have sent to your reps/sens/gov in the time you've spent trying to fabricate a nonsense issue out of thin air?
Click to expand...

Already did and it has gone out to many more than you realize. There is no "Fabrication" everything is direct quote from NHFC's own document. So now as Far as I am concerned NHFC and its Board can all go pound sand
 
FisherTech said:
"SB 48 is a study bill, that is all, it will not change anything on its own. Yet, many hunters reflexively oppose any study of the department at all. That is a short sighted mindset. We will work with and cooperate with anyone who shares our goal of changing the structure of Fish and Game to stop the anti-gun activism and civil liberties violations."

"See this:
http://www.nhwildlifecoalition.org/index.php/funding-n-h-fish-and-game/ "

Above is a direct quote from NHFC website and email, So the alliance hasn't ended just being masked. So beware of the spin that is being foisted upon you.
Click to expand...

So I guess that you are in favor of anti gun activists running the department and allowing conservation officers to violate peoples civil rights on a regular basis? Well you did say that you were once a fish cop so maybe you did the same... here's the thing, I don't hunt, never have, never will, I really like supermarkets. I do hike with my dog and I'll carry any gun I please concealed or openly and I am getting sick and tired of fish cops telling people if they are caught in the woods with a gun thats evidence of poaching and that if you have a flashlight in your car your shining deer. Give me a break, these are wild animals who realy cares? Having a gun and a flashlight are evidence of being prepared to defend yourself.

Just look at Northwoods law, the department employs a conservation officer named kevin bronson who said in one of the episodes that he moved to NH from NY. He probably brought his anti gun ideas with him and is teaching the others how to be even more anti gun then they already are

As far as Im concerned, the department has outlived its usefulness and should be completely shut down. What a waste of money. The same NHFC webpage that you claim shows NHFC is wrong also shows how the FG department uses the equivalent of slave labor to teach hunter education? Are you OK with paying up to an 11% tax when you buy a gun or ammo? Im not!
 
Hunter Safety Instructors and Trapper Education Instructors are "Volunteers" They do it for the love of the sport and seeing others come into it. Since you brought this topic up, Another falsehood being laid out by NHFC and whom ever writes their webpage is that Massachusetts Hunter Safety Instructors can charge whatever they want is an out right LIE they are also Volunteers. So the veracity of that organization and its spokes person is really questionable.

That 11% percent will not change as that is on the federal level and is paid "originally" by the Manufacturer. Do away with a Fish and Game Agency and no license sales and the state will no long receive that money, No more Boat Ramps, No more Public Access. You really need to educate yourself, instead of being a blind mindless follower of NHFC.

Don't ever accuse me of abusing people rights, I got into more shit with the Environmental Police for sticking up for peoples rights.
Now since you don't hunt, or trap, it looks like you have a problem with those that do?
 
Last edited:
FisherTech said:
Hunter Safety Instructors and Trapper Education Instructors are "Volunteers" They do it for the love of the sport and seeing others come into it. Since you brought this topic up, Another falsehood being laid out by NHFC and whom ever writes their webpage is that Massachusetts Hunter Safety Instructors can charge whatever they want is an out right LIE they are also Volunteers. So the veracity of that organization and its spokes person is really questionable.

That 11% percent will not change as that is on the federal level and is paid "originally" by the Manufacturer. Do away with a Fish and Game Agency and no license sales and the state will no long receive that money, No more Boat Ramps, No more Public Access. You really need to educate yourself, instead of being a blind mindless follower of NHFC.
Click to expand...

No sir, it is you who are lying, I just went to the linked NHFC page and they said, with emphasis added: "It is a bad thing for several reasons. First, in states that require a training course to obtain a concealed carry license, such as Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, Florida and Virginia, the instructor is free to charge any amount. (As far as we know, in all states that require training the instructor may charge any amount.)"

They never said that hunter education instructors can charge, what they said was that in states that require a training class to obtain a concealed carry license, those instructors are free to charge whatever they want! Isn't the free market the American way?

As for the 11% gun tax you are kidding yourself if you really believe that the manufacturers are paying it. They are passing it along in the form of higher prices that is the reason police ammo is priced NET OF TAX. The only reason the tax is still around is because many folks dont know about it. Put it on a receipt, like sales tax and you will hear the uproar. What is really outrageous is that those who conceal carry usually practice a lot and consume far more ammo and pay far more tax then hunters who might fire a box or 2 a year.

Do you really think that a true Second Amendment absolutist cares about boat ramps and hunter education if those things result in higher gun and ammo prices? NOT!
 
So once again we know where you are coming from. "I have mine and I don't give a shit about You" So why did NHFC bring up the Course requirement for being able to get License to Carry when it had nothing do with HUNTER SAFETY? More Spin and delusion on the part of NHFC. They seem to have learned their lesson quite well from their "Friends and Allies" at NHWC (HSUS)
 
I know for a fact that MA Hunter Ed classes are FREE to all attendees, that instructors are NOT paid and not allowed to get paid. So anyone else that posts that MA HE instructors can charge or students pay for the classes is spreading lies!

Sadly that is why all MA HE classes fill up instantly when posted and almost 50% never show up. The class I took had ~75 enrolled and only 42 actually attended the first class. No skin in the game means folks sign up and if something else turns up, they are no-shows. Usually people show up when they have "skin in the game" (paid for the event).
 
FisherTech said:
So once again we know where you are coming from. "I have mine and I don't give a shit about You" So why did NHFC bring up the Course requirement for being able to get License to Carry when it had nothing do with HUNTER SAFETY? More Spin and delusion on the part of NHFC. They seem to have learned their lesson quite well from their "Friends and Allies" at NHWC (HSUS)
Click to expand...

Have you even contacted NHFC to ask why they are supporting HB 282 to force conservation officers to folow the same rules as the real police?

No spin, read the NHFC webpage again, their point is clear, the fish and game dept gets $25.89 in federal gun tax money for every hour that each hunter ed instructor teaches a state required class. This amounts to hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. Instructors (NHFC calls them slaves) get nothing. By contrast in the states that require a class to get a concealed carry license the instructor can charge any amount. This is an outrage, non hunters seem to subsidizing hunter education through federal gun taxes.

But lets get back to HB 282.... it is a good bill and I think everyone who spends any time outside should be in favor of limiting warrantless searches.
 
They and you are presenting two different items, Hunter Safety and States that require a Concealed Carry course are not one in the same. Didn't you make mention of that on a previous post? Oh yeah, You did! The Volunteer Instructors know all about the money, so the Salacious Implication that those persons are "Slaves" is garbage Further if you knew anything about police work, they are following the same rules as the "Real Police" but that would prove too much for you to comprehend or understand the case law for that matter.

If there are violations of civil rights by all means bring up the complaints and charges. How come that hasn't happen?
 
I already did get back to it and spoke with my reps and one them alluded to me that Hoell reminds him of the days of Vallaincourt.
 
FisherTech said:
Further if you knew anything about police work, they are following the same rules as the "Real Police" but that would prove too much for you to comprehend or understand the case law for that matter.

If there are violations of civil rights by all means bring up the complaints and charges. How come that hasn't happen?
Click to expand...

So wait a minute. Now you are in support of current F&G practices?

I am having a real hard following your concerned rants and now my head hurts.

Obviously one should be wary of any bipartisanship between NHFC and NHWC/HSUS but could have been better presented for discussion? I certainly think so...
 
Nick, There are some training issues here, But at the same time most of what is addressed in that bill are already addressed by case law. So if there are these "egregious" civil rights issues where are the law suits. Now any vessel is subject to inspection when on the waters of the state. There is case law on that. Any police officer who makes a lawful stop of a motorvehicle, and observes something (Whatever it might be) that leads him or her believe that there is reason to believe that a crime is being committed or has been committed, can look further.
Now with vessels. The State Marine Patrol (Dept. of Public Safety) is not addressed, they have the same authority to fully inspect a vessel on the waters and have the operator open the engine compartment to check for proper safety equipment. No reason for the stop is required other than, they are on the water.
The demanding under threat of penalty to display the kill site I do have issue with, as that regulation was for the purpose of collecting biological data, not prosecution, In fact the regulation does say for the purpose as I stated. No person should be required demonstrate that they did not violate the law. IT IS THE GOVERMENT'S JOB TO SHOW THAT YOU BROKE THE LAW.
So as I said there are some training issues, I don't think that any one talked Col. Jordan about this, My take is that NHFC is still Pissed Off about the commission improperly voting to oppose the Constitutional Carry Bill and not letting go after it was addressed and corrected.
 
FisherTech said:
They and you are presenting two different items, Hunter Safety and States that require a Concealed Carry course are not one in the same. Didn't you make mention of that on a previous post? Oh yeah, You did! The Volunteer Instructors know all about the money, so the Salacious Implication that those persons are "Slaves" is garbage Further if you knew anything about police work, they are following the same rules as the "Real Police" but that would prove too much for you to comprehend or understand the case law for that matter.

If there are violations of civil rights by all means bring up the complaints and charges. How come that hasn't happen?
Click to expand...

No its the same thing, a course that is required by operation of state law. In the case of hunter safety the anti gun fish and game dept is making hundreds of thousands of dollars from free (slave) labor and in the case of a concealed carry class the instructors who actually do the work are getting paid. When someone else gets paid for anothers work that is slavery.

FisherTech said:
I already did get back to it and spoke with my reps and one them alluded to me that Hoell reminds him of the days of Vallaincourt.
Click to expand...

As for HB 282, I emailed some state reps as well and they said nothing of the sort about Mr. Hoell. They said that they are tired of fish and game abusing the public and the publics trust. The facts are that current law allows fish cops to search without a warrant based on the lower burden of proof called reasonable suspicion. HB 282 will change this to probable cause with a warrant just like every other police officer in the state.

FisherTech said:
Nick, There are some training issues here, But at the same time most of what is addressed in that bill are already addressed by case law. So if there are these "egregious" civil
rights issues where are the law suits.
Because fish and game has a track record of picking on those who are not financially able to fight and most plead to a low level offense because that costs less than a lawyer. There have been suits, they were settled with confidential terms.

Now any vessel is subject to inspection when on the waters of the state. There is case law on that. Any police officer who makes a lawful stop of a motorvehicle, and observes something (Whatever it might be) that leads him or her believe that there is reason to believe that a crime is being committed or has been committed, can look further. NO THEY CAN'T. See State V. Sterndale. There is no automobile exception in NH. They must get a warrant.

Now with vessels. The State Marine Patrol (Dept. of Public Safety) is not addressed, they have the same authority to fully inspect a vessel on the waters and have the operator open the engine compartment to check for proper safety equipment. No reason for the stop is required other than, they are on the water. And the marine patrol is a professional agency and its leaders at state police dont seem to have an anti gun agenda. I boat a lot and the difference between marine patrol and fish and game is significant. I remember way back in the 1990s fish and game published a boating access and safety map saying it was unlawful to carry concealed on a boat. The executive council had to force them to change it just like they forced them to stop testifying for gun control after the battle for constitutional carry.

The demanding under threat of penalty to display the kill site I do have issue with, as that regulation was for the purpose of collecting biological data, not prosecution, In fact the regulation does say for the purpose as I stated. No person should be required demonstrate that they did not violate the law. IT IS THE GOVERMENT'S JOB TO SHOW THAT YOU BROKE THE LAW. Finally -- a point of agreement! But all those statutes that allow searches on reasonable suspicion without a warrant and similar statutes that allow arrest basically force people to self incriminate. Sadly many folks dont know their rights.

So as I said there are some training issues, I don't think that any one talked Col. Jordan about this, My take is that NHFC is still Pissed Off about the commission improperly voting to oppose the Constitutional Carry Bill and not letting go after it was addressed and corrected.
Click to expand...

I ask again... have you even contacted NHFC and asked? They answer all emails but other then Hoell I dont think any of them are on this board.
 
"I ask again... have you even contacted NHFC and asked? They answer all emails but other then Hoell I dont think any of them are on this board. "

I won't spend my time talking to idiots that align themselves with Animal Rights Creeps to accomplish their agenda. Once they did that all bets and support is off.

HEY NHFC F*** YOU!!!
 
I think all law enforcement agencies should operate under the same rules regarding searches and stops. HB282 makes sense, none of this crap about "well bring up abuses and then we'll address it with training or case law will get it fixed". Purely BS argument to allow abuses to continue, and the fixes will cost those who end up accused in court having to pay lawyers to get it resolved.
 
I was at the Criminal Justice committee hearing on HB282. I missed the first few who gave comments, because I came from the regular NHFGC meeting, which I attended in my role as a member of the House standing committee on Fish and Game and Marine Resources.

I could barely squeeze into the room, but I did so. It was beyond SRO.

Those who commented against the bill uniformly said they've never been harassed by F&G, but context matters: they don't consider it harassment to be forced to produce a license and open all containers for inspection, nor to be forced to lead a CO back to the location of the kill and the gut pile. One said, "I was raised different." I suppose he was raised with undue deference to warrantless searches.

Those opposed repeatedly pointed out that having a license is consent; those in favor repeatedly pointed out that the authority isn't limited to those who have licenses. One opponent complained that it would require a warrant to perform safety inspections on boats, and I wanted to cheer out loud at the irony: that's exactly what proponents have argued, that "regular" police have a higher standard and can't just randomly stop people to search them or inspect their vehicles.

I signed the blue sheet in favor of the bill.

I won't have any friends on the Commission, but I'm okay with that.
 
FisherTech, While you are fixated on a non-issue, the real issue is not being addressed. F&G VIOLATES the natural rights of the citizens, that are enumerated in the NH and US Constitutions.

F&G either needs to reform themselves and abide by the constitution, or it will be done for them from the outside.
 
design said:
FisherTech, While you are fixated on a non-issue, the real issue is not being addressed. F&G VIOLATES the natural rights of the citizens, that are enumerated in the NH and US Constitutions.

F&G either needs to reform themselves and abide by the constitution, or it will be done for them from the outside.
Click to expand...

JR. You still didn't answer the first question, So just go back to Hoboken.
 
Wow, NHFC and their fellow Free State Anarchists are so wrapped up about their revenge for the Fish and Game Commission unlawfully (though unsuccessfully) opposing the Constitutional Carry Bill, several years ago that they aren't even paying attention about a bill calling for a Constitutional Amendment in New Hampshire allowing cities and towns to make by laws or ordinances that are more restrictive than state law. Usually this is called "Home Town Rule".
 
FisherTech,
1. If you are going to make accusations about NHFC, you might want to double check your facts. We have consistently opposed these type bills in the past. When the two versions, [YES there are 2 CACRs (CACR4, CACR8) that would allow for home rule] this year have hearings, there will be an NHFC alert on them. At this point in time, (1/12) neither of those 2 CACRs have been scheduled for a hearing. We send out alerts weekly on the hearings.

https://www.nhfc-ontarget.org/2018/...stitutional-amendment-proposed-action-needed/
https://www.nhfc-ontarget.org/2018/02/action-alerts/cacr-19-further-information-action-needed/


2. Regarding the other prior post: I have addressed your question: back on page one I clearly stated:
"For the record, no member of NHFC is part of NHWC. "

3. If you are going to spend time with personal attacks about moving out of state, would you be willing to at least sign it with a real name? Just a thought, it is always easy to attack someone when wearing a mask....
 
FisherTech said:
"We will work with and cooperate with anyone who shares our goal of changing the structure of Fish and Game to stop the anti-gun activism and civil liberties violations."

"See this:
http://www.nhwildlifecoalition.org/index.php/funding-n-h-fish-and-game/"

JR. Above is a direct quote from NHFC's website, May be you should check out who NHFC is going to bed with.
Click to expand...
What do you find objectionable about linking to a page that factually cites the source of funding?

Many hunters and anglers support splitting off Search and Rescue, as a waste of F&G resources. What does OHRV education and safety have to do with the core mission of F&G? Why are they performing boating safety checks on people who aren't fishing or hunting? Why can't boat launches (overwhelmingly used for recreation, not fishing or hunting) fall under some other agency?

The enforcement of laws has created a lot of mission creep.

It's time for Fish & Game to get back to fish, and game.
 
Just thinking out loud here, but I would think boats with motors would best fit under RMV (Registry of Motor Vehicles). I'm talking from my point of view, in Massachusetts, but think this would make sense in any other state as well. I'm not sure at all what NH has, but I guess you can apply it as necessary here.

I'm not sure what to do with people in canoes, kayaks, or rowboats without motors who are not fishing or "gaming" (hunting). Perhaps put them under some parks commission or something.
 
KBCraig said:
Many hunters and anglers support splitting off Search and Rescue, as a waste of F&G resources.
Click to expand...

I'd imagine that F&G owns incident command of S&R
because when some fool wanders off-trail (or off-cliff),
they're the largest group of state workers who can be trusted to
mobilize and enter the woods without becoming victims themselves.

And unless a bucket of fingerling trout need aeration,
they don't have anything urgent to do on their day job
that can't wait until next week.

Coyote33 said:
Just thinking out loud here, but I would think boats with motors would best fit under RMV (Registry of Motor Vehicles).
Click to expand...

Would those best be termed:
• Registry Clam Cops
-or-
• Clam Registry Cops
Inquiring minds want to know.

ETA:
Coyote33 said:
I'm not sure what to do with people in canoes, kayaks, or rowboats without motors who are not fishing or "gaming" (hunting).
Click to expand...

Why do these people need anything "done" with (or to) them whatsoever?

Someone on NES once pointed out that the Fire Department pretty much sits at the Fire Station until there's a Fire. They may do the occasional safety inspection of a business, and maybe forensics on an arson job, but they mostly don't go looking for trouble.

Why does the Canoe/Kayak/Rowboat Department need to go tearing around town "doing things" to Canoers, Kayakers, and Rowboaters?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

To cynical of society?, Gunbroker transaction
Replies
20
Views
467
40 Creedmoor fan
4
Is there a reason.......
2
Replies
57
Views
1K
RumRunner
RumRunner
If you want more proof that we need good guys with guns, go ask the Fort Worth highway driver who—along with his children—is alive today
Replies
3
Views
237
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
Groton is next in line
Replies
5
Views
77
snowballs
snowballs
Facebook is insane.
2
Replies
43
Views
948
HARRYM
H
Back
Top Bottom