# Do game wardens have any special powers concerning the 4th amendment? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 24, 2012, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275 "2012-07-24T20:00:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![sweeteviljesus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@sweeteviljesus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweeteviljesus)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/1 "2012-07-24T20:00:01Z")
It is an item of faith in some circles that game wardens have special privileges regarding search and seizure that other LEOs don’t have. I can’t see how this would be true. Is there anything to this? Thanks, Rob ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/2 "2012-07-24T20:04:31Z")
It would depend on the state laws in your jurisdiction. I am not a hunter but I can see there being some sort of implied consent law. Want to hunt? Then you consent to being searched by the game warden while doing it. Hunting is not a guaranteed right. I would think that the scope of the search would be limited by law. Sort of like the implied consent laws regarding DWI and operating a motor vehicle. I’m sure these things vary greatly from state to state. ---
**Author:** ![Sicks\_Ate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Sicks\_Ate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sicks_Ate)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/3 "2012-07-24T20:06:05Z")
I wonder if [this](http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/02/17/hawks-foxes-and-videotape-a-4th-amendment-tale/) is the case you’re referring to? > [@](#): > > The backstory: In late 2006, someone called the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries to report seeing a protected bird caught in a trap on VanKesteren’s farmland. A game warden went to the site and found a cage trap with two caught pigeons. Pigeons are not protected birds. > [@](#): > > In January 2007, the officer and special operations agents returned to the farmland and set up a hidden video camera in a tree, pointed at VanKesteren’s fields. The camera was on for 21 days. At one point, VanKesteren was recorded taking two red-tailed hawks from the trap and beheading them. ---
**Author:** ![sweeteviljesus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@sweeteviljesus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweeteviljesus)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/4 "2012-07-24T20:06:33Z")
To what extent can consent be implied? Rob ---
**Author:** ![skdo23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@skdo23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/skdo23)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/5 "2012-07-24T20:27:17Z")
Everything that a game warden does is done on behalf of the government, and thus the Constitution applies to them the same way that it does to any other LEO (in my home state of Vermont, game wardens are state police officers with additional specialized training for fish/wildlife issues, however there is also some overlap with local animal control officers in municipal areas). It might be that hunting, fishing, etc., privileges are not “rights” that would trigger 4th Amendment issues, but this does not mean that game wardens actually have powers that transcend the Constitution. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/6 "2012-07-24T20:40:31Z")
There’s a doctrine somewhere (IANAL) that police have special powers of search for vehicles, because unlike a house or office, it can drive off with evidence if not searched in a short time. So all LEO have search powers slightly more permissive for cars. ---
**Author:** ![Sicks\_Ate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Sicks\_Ate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sicks_Ate)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/7 "2012-07-24T20:43:06Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > There’s a doctrine somewhere (IANAL) that police have special powers of search for vehicles, because unlike a house or office, it can drive off with evidence if not searched in a short time. So all LEO have search powers slightly more permissive for cars. Vehicle searches were quite severely restricted a couple years ago, though. I don’t remember the case, but it used to be than an officer could search the entire vehicle bumper-to-bumper incident to arrest. I think now the rule is that they can only search the proximity of the arrested person. Someone who knows better can correct me. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/8 "2012-07-24T20:45:36Z")
> [@sweeteviljesus](#): > > To what extent can consent be implied? > > Rob I can only explain using what I know. Which is motor vehicle law. I believe it is the same in all 50 states although the wording is different. The act of driving itself implies consent to give samples of your breath (or blood in some states) for the purposes of testing for intoxicants. Invoking your rights will do no good. It would only bring an additional charge of refusing to submit a sample which is usually the same or greater penalty than the DWI. I can see how the act of hunting could lead to implied consent with regards to the Warden having the power to check licenses, your catch, which weapons you are using, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/9 "2012-07-24T20:48:19Z")
> [@Sicks\_Ate](#): > > Vehicle searches were quite severely restricted a couple years ago, though. I don’t remember the case, but it used to be than an officer could search the entire vehicle bumper-to-bumper incident to arrest. I think now the rule is that they can only search the proximity of the arrested person. > > Someone who knows better can correct me. I used to be more up on the subject than I am now. Its hard enough keeping track of my own jurisdiction. New Jersey courts have done away with search incident to arrest almost completely. Our rules are much more restrictive than SCOTUS has ruled. ---
**Author:** ![Sicks\_Ate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Sicks\_Ate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sicks_Ate)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/10 "2012-07-24T20:52:08Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > I used to be more up on the subject than I am now. Its hard enough keeping track of my own jurisdiction. New Jersey courts have done away with search incident to arrest almost completely. Our rules are much more restrictive than SCOTUS has ruled. Here we are, [_Arizona v. Gant:_](http://www.volokh.com/posts/1240325772.shtml) > [@](#): > > The Supreme Court handed down Arizona v. Gant this morning, imposing a new limitation on the search incident to arrest power when the police want to search an automobile. Under New York v. Belton, the rule has been that the police can search the passenger area of a car when they arrest an occupant or recent occupant of the vehicle. Today, in a vote of 5-4, the Supreme Court added a new limitation: The police can search a car following arrest only if they could have a reasonable belief 1) that the person arrested “could have accessed his car at the time of the search” or 2)“that evidence of the offense for which he was arrested might have been found therein.” ---
**Author:** ![sweeteviljesus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/898d66/32.png) [@sweeteviljesus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sweeteviljesus)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/11 "2012-07-24T20:57:20Z")
In Austin, Texas where I live, we have, right now, a no-refusal Breathalyzer/blood test for suspects detained for DUI because a warrant is issued in these cases. Here, anyway, without that you could refuse to blow (but you will be arrested and your driver’s license suspended until the matter is adjudicated). Rob ---
**Author:** ![GreasyJack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/df705f/32.png) [@GreasyJack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreasyJack)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/12 "2012-07-24T21:13:42Z")
One issue is that with a quick search during a _Terry_ stop, the officer is ostensibly only searching for weapons, and so a normal cop has to think up some sort of vaguely-plausible reason why he might think someone would have a weapon if he wants to search their car or person. Game wardens are pretty much always dealing with potentially armed people, so that particular hurtle is very rarely an issue. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/13 "2012-07-24T21:50:33Z")
> [@skdo23](#): > > Everything that a game warden does is done on behalf of the government, and thus the Constitution applies to them the same way that it does to any other LEO (in my home state of Vermont, game wardens are state police officers with additional specialized training for fish/wildlife issues, however there is also some overlap with local animal control officers in municipal areas). It might be that hunting, fishing, etc., privileges are not “rights” that would trigger 4th Amendment issues, but this does not mean that game wardens actually have powers that transcend the Constitution. It might also be that there’s fine print on your hunting license or its supporting documentation. It would be rather trivially easy to just add a few sentences saying “Acceptance of this license grants an officer of the State of Vermont the right to search the bearer and/or his/her vehicle for animals or animals products blah blah blah when hunting blah.” Boom, now it’s overt consent. ---
**Author:** ![jtur88](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e9c0ed/32.png) [@jtur88](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jtur88)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/14 "2012-07-24T22:16:49Z")
It’s more than just a car. A sportsman is subject to both a bag limit and a possession limit. The bag limit is the amount of game that can be taken in one day, and the possession limit is what the hunter can be in possession of, including the freezer in his basement. That is typically the equivalent several times the daily bag limit. Historically, game wardens had a right to enter the home of a hunter or fisherman, and search for fish and game that had been bagged on previous days. That was a long time ago, and I haven’t kept up with recent court rulings, but my point is that the warden’s search power is not limited to cars. ---
**Author:** ![Machine\_Elf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/82dd89/32.png) [@Machine\_Elf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Machine_Elf)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/15 "2012-07-24T23:00:08Z")
> [@jtur88](#): > > Historically, game wardens had a right to enter the home of a hunter or fisherman, and search for fish and game that had been bagged on previous days. What is the definition of “hunter” for this purpose? How does a game warden determine whose home he can and cannot enter? > [@Loach](#): > > I can see how the act of hunting could lead to implied consent with regards to the Warden having the power to check licenses, your catch, which weapons you are using, etc. What is the definition of “hunting” for this purpose? How does a game warden determine who is hunting, and therefore from whom he can demand a license and/or special access for searches? If I’m hiking through the woods during hunting season wearing blaze-orange (because I don’t want to get shot at!), does a game warden have the authority to stop me and subject me to various searches, e.g. for a license and/or weapon? ---
**Author:** ![skdo23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a5b964/32.png) [@skdo23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/skdo23)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2012, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/16 "2012-07-24T23:00:47Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > It might also be that there’s fine print on your hunting license or its supporting documentation. It would be rather trivially easy to just add a few sentences saying “Acceptance of this license grants an officer of the State of Vermont the right to search the bearer and/or his/her vehicle for animals or animals products blah blah blah when hunting blah.” Boom, now it’s overt consent. Good point, although I don’t have a hunting license handy right now to verify this (I usually only go deer hunting, so I buy a license every year in early November and toss it a few weeks later when the season ends). Another thing worth pointing out is that, at least in VT, most hunters do not own the land they hunt on, instead it is usually U.S. National forest, “unposted” (“posted” = displaying signs produced by the state and made available to landowners stating that hunting is prohibited w/o permission), posted but w/ the landowners permission (very common, most landowners just want to meet you and set forth a few ground rules, they aren’t necessarily anti hunting), or flat out trespassing, so it might be that in most instances there is no right to privacy for hunters because if they encounter LE it’s almost always on someone else’s land. ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2012, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/17 "2012-07-25T17:59:00Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > The act of driving itself implies consent to give samples of your breath (or blood in some states) for the purposes of testing for intoxicants. Invoking your rights will do no good. IC is only applicable if a person is under investigation for DUI, not blanket authority to take/demand one when a person is detained! Right? ---
**Author:** ![lawbuff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/13edae/32.png) [@lawbuff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawbuff)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2012, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/18 "2012-07-25T18:09:26Z")
> [@sweeteviljesus](#): > > It is an item of faith in some circles that game wardens have special privileges regarding search and seizure that other LEOs don’t have. I can’t see how this would be true. Is there anything to this? > > Thanks, > Rob State specific, but as stated, they are constrained by the 4th AM. A PEACE OFFICER in Ohio, is a person of one of many agencies, including a Wildife officer. Now the power of ARREST/S&S is still spelled out in law. As an example, in Ohio, oddly, the Highway Patrol, while they have traffic jurisdiction staewide, thier “Criminal Law/Arrest” jurisdiction is limited to crimes on state property, etc., is is not as broad as others have. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2012, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/19 "2012-07-25T19:02:41Z")
> [@lawbuff](#): > > IC is only applicable if a person is under investigation for DUI, not blanket authority to take/demand one when a person is detained! Right? As a defense? Yes. If an officer is determined to not have proper PC for the stop to begin with the rest should get thrown out. But it is not something I recommend drunkenly arguing at the time. ETA: The way I wrote that isn’t quite right. First there is a determination of PC towards the stop. There is also a determination of PC as to the intoxication. Both will be broght up during a suppression hearing. ---
**Author:** ![Raza](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/raza/32/213_2.png) [@Raza](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raza)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2012, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275/20 "2012-07-25T19:14:00Z")
From Florida, of which I used to have some familiarity (these sections deal with Wildlife Officers specifically): [QUOTE=FSS 379.3313] Such law enforcement officers have the authority, without warrant, to board, inspect, and search any boat, fishing appliance, storage or processing plant, fishhouse, spongehouse, oysterhouse, or other warehouse, building, or vehicle engaged in transporting or storing any fish or fishery products. Such authority to search and inspect without a search warrant is limited to those cases in which such law enforcement officers have reason to believe that fish or any saltwater products are taken or kept for sale, barter, transportation, or other purposes in violation of laws or rules adopted under this law. [/quote] and > [@](#): > > in addition to the authority granted in subsection (1), a law enforcement officer of the commission who has probable cause to believe that the vessel has been used for fishing prior to the inspection shall have full authority to open and inspect all containers or areas where saltwater products are normally kept aboard vessels while such vessels are on the water, such as refrigerated or iced locations, coolers, fish boxes, and bait wells [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/do-game-wardens-have-any-special-powers-concerning-the-4th-amendment/629275.md?page=2)