If you’re heading to the White Mountains this weekend to hike or enjoy the winter weather, you should prepare accordingly or risk a bill for thousands of dollars.
New Hampshire is one of the few states where people who call for rescue while hiking, climbing or doing other outdoor activities face the possibility of being charged for the effort.
While it doesn’t happen often — New Hampshire Fish and Game Colonel Kevin Jordan said they will only bill those who have been “really outrageously reckless” — it still serves as a deterrent for those who might otherwise leave home unprepared.
“If you forget that outer heavy layer, we’re not going to bill you for it,” Jordan said. “If you don’t have any equipment or any knowledge of what you’re doing and you created a situation where everybody had to be put at risk to come and get you, then that is something that we’re going to bill for.”
Advertisement
Jordan said the department typically conducts between 180 and 200 rescues each year, and of those, around 12 on average will end up with a bill.
The cost for a rescue ranges depending on the circumstances but often runs more than $5,000, especially if an airlift is required. Jordan said many who are charged end up paying less than the total cost through legal settlements, and the department knows most can’t afford a sudden expense of upwards of $10,000.
State law provides no specifics on who can and cannot be charged for a search-and-rescue effort, stating only that those found to have “recklessly or intentionally” created a situation requiring rescue can be held liable for the “reasonable cost” of the rescue. If they do not pay, they might have any license, certification or tag issued by Fish and Game, or even their driver’s license, revoked.
While many of the rescues performed last year involved injuries or unavoidable circumstances, even for experienced hikers, others were the result of hikers failing to bring the proper equipment, starting a hike late in the day so they got stuck in the dark, not researching their route beforehand or ignoring warnings about the difficulty of the trails they chose.
On Dec. 19, two Massachusetts teens were rescued from Mount Monadnock after they started a hike around 5:30 p.m., after dark, according to a news release Fish and Game published at the time. One of the two teens was “heavily intoxicated” and they both fell into a freezing-cold brook, the department said, and were billed for the effort.
Advertisement
Earlier in the month, a pair of hikers had to be rescued after leaving for a 9-mile trek at 1 p.m. without adequate clothing for the temperatures and navigating the trail with only a cellphone. They called for help when one of the hikers suffered a leg injury.
“They lost their composure and would not listen to any advice being given to them,” a department spokesperson wrote at the time. “If hikers cannot adhere to the hiker responsibility code … then they should consider staying home. Rescues of this magnitude and conditions put rescue personnel at great risk.”
A sign at the top of Mt Lafayette along the Greenleaf Trail as pictured on Saturday, October 11, 2025 in Franconia New Hampshire.Sebastian Restrepo
Jordan said the most common issue he sees among unprepared hikers is a lack of headlamps or other light sources, generally because people don’t expect to still be out in the mountains after dark. When the sun goes down, they end up having to rely on cellphone flashlights to see, and along with the cold temperatures, their device batteries run down quickly.
In general, unprepared hikers and climbers fail to bring the correct equipment for their trips, such as snowshoes or microspikes, food or just extra layers to protect from the cold. In warmer months, many don’t understand that temperatures above the tree line are far colder, but in the winter, the situation can be even more dire.
“Especially like this weekend, when you’re going to have wind chills down into the 30-below mark, they don’t layer up enough,” Jordan said. “They don’t understand the concept of layered clothing and how important it is for your survival.”
Advertisement
The issue is not limited to travelers from warmer climates, either. Jordan said they tend to rescue locals and people from out-of-state in equal measure.
“People would like to say, ‘Oh, it’s those people from down below that don’t understand,’” he said. “Well, that’s not exactly true.”
When New Hampshire lawmakers first passed the law allowing people to be charged for their rescue in 2008, many residents were concerned it would jeopardize safety by discouraging people from calling for help. But Jordan said that hasn’t been the case. Sometimes, hikers will ask their rescuers when they reach safety if they’ll be considered responsible, but hardly ever before.
“If you’re in a car accident, you’re not worrying about what the ambulance is going to cost. If you’re injured, you want the ambulance and you worry about (the cost) on Monday,” he said. “It’s no different hiking.”
One hiker, who was rescued in early 2025, told New Hampshire Public Radio at the time that he wasn’t sure if he would be billed, but if he wasn’t, he planned to make a donation to thank the rescue team for saving his life.
Advertisement
“My answer was ‘whatever you guys have to do,’” Bart Zienkiewicz, of Naugatuck, Connecticut, told the radio station. “If I see a fine or a bill or whatever you need to call it, I’m happy to be able to pay that bill versus not paying it, of course, if things had gotten really bad and they couldn’t find us.”
How to protect your wallet
Beyond simply being prepared for an excursion, the best way to avoid a bill in the thousands of dollars is to purchase a “Hike Safe” card, a voluntary, state-run program started to raise money for search-and-rescue efforts. The virtual card costs $25 for an individual or $35 for a family and protects the holder from liability for the costs of a rescue while they are participating in any outdoor recreation activities in New Hampshire for the calendar year.
Before the Hike Safe card’s introduction in 2015, search-and-rescue was funded almost entirely by fees from hunting and boating licenses (which also exempt the holder for liability for rescue costs). But Jordan said most of the people being rescued were not the hunters and boaters who were funding the program, so Hike Safe was born.
In its first year, Hike Safe brought in more than $100,000, Jordan said. Last year, the amount was more than $300,000 — not enough to fully fund the program, but a huge help that allows Fish and Game to purchase new equipment for rescue teams.
Technically, a Hike Safe card holder can still be charged if their rescue is caused by particularly egregious behavior, but Jordan said in more than a decade of the card’s existence, that has never happened.
Advertisement
He said he didn’t know how many of the 180 to 200 rescues each year involved people with Hike Safe cards, but estimated that it was a very low percentage of the total.
“If people are going to buy a Hike Safe card because they feel like they want to contribute to the program, those are the people that are usually hardcore hikers,” he said. “They’re prepared and I don’t ever see or hear from them again.”
Authorities allege Joseph Sawyer brandished what appeared to be a handgun during a robbery at St. Mary’s Bank in Nashua, N.H., on June 12.Boston FBI
A Townsend man was arrested Wednesday night in connection with two armed bank robberies in New Hampshire and New Jersey last month, federal authoritiessaid.
Joseph Sawyer, 52, was arrested by FBI Albany’s SWAT team after the bureau’s Boston office and Nashua, N.H., police learnedhe might bein upstate New York, FBI Boston said in a statement Thursday.
Investigators said thealleged robberies happened at St. Mary’s Bank on Northwest Boulevard in Nashua on June 12 and at a Chase Bank in Boonton, N.J., on June 27.
During both robberies, prosecutors allege Sawyer brandished what appeared to be a black semiautomatic handgun, ordered everyone inside the banks to get on the ground, and demanded their cell phones before stealing cash, according to a criminal complaint filed in New Hampshire federal court.
Advertisement
The complaint alleges Sawyer stole $6,000 from the Nashua bank before fleeing in a Honda minivan. Investigators say he discarded a shopping bag containing the bank manager’s cell phone in a nearby parking lot before driving away.
Investigators linked the two robberies through surveillance footage and license plate reader data, according to court filings. Authorities allege the minivan was driven with stolen New Jersey plates during the Boonton robbery that were later replaced with Massachusetts plates registered to Sawyer’s late father.
Sawyer was charged with one count of bank robbery in New Hampshire, court records show. It was not immediately clear Thursday night if he is being represented by an attorney.
The case is being prosecuted by the United States Attorney’s office for the District of New Hampshire, the FBI said.
Breanne Kovatch can be reached at breanne.kovatch@globe.com. Follow her @breannekovatch.
Fighting the transgender sports ban is ‘utterly misogynistic’: Riley Gaines
Fox News discusses the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold transgender sports bans. Former NCAA All-American Riley Gaines states it’s ‘insane’ to challenge biological sex in sports, asserting boys should not compete in girls’ sports. She calls the opposing movement ‘misogynistic,’ advocating for female athletes’ rights and fair competition, a view echoed by Education Secretary Linda McMahon. This highlights the contentious issue in women’s sports.
A pair of trans athletes in New Hampshire have dismissed their lawsuit to challenge the state law that protects girls’ sports after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Title IX ruling on June 30.
Advertisement
The trans teenage plaintiffs, Parker Tirrell and Iris Turmelle, originally filed the lawsuit in 2024 to challenge a current New Hampshire state law prohibiting trans athletes from participating in girls’ sports. The lawsuit later expanded to add President Donald Trump’s administration to the defendants after Trump signed the “No Men in Women’s Sports” executive order on Feb. 5, 2025.
The lawyers for the trans athletes claimed Trump’s executive order, along with parts of a Jan. 20 executive order that forbids federal money from being used to “promote gender ideology,” subjects the teens and all transgender girls to discrimination in violation of federal equal protection guarantees and their rights under Title IX.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM
A transgender athlete and the Supreme Court(Getty Images)
The U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire then ruled last year that female athletes represented by Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys were permitted to intervene in the case to defend the state’s women’s sports law and the administration’s executive orders.
Advertisement
Now, after the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling, which protects state laws that ensure only females compete in girls’ sports, there is no room for the trans teens to fight the law in New Hampshire.
“Women and girls deserve privacy, safety, and equal opportunities. That can’t happen when males are competing in women’s sports, taking spots on women’s athletic teams, and winning women’s championships,” ADF Senior Counsel and Vice President of Litigation Strategy Jonathan Scruggs said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital.
USA POWERLIFTING, ONCE IN TRANS ATHLETE LAWSUIT, SUPPORTS SCOTUS RULING: ‘LAW HAS CAUGHT UP WITH THE SCIENCE’
“President Trump’s executive orders and New Hampshire’s law recognize common sense and track Title IX, the federal law that ensures equal opportunities for women in athletics. We are grateful this case is coming to an end and that New Hampshire is free to protect its female athletes.”
Fox News Digital has reached out to Tirrell and Turmelle’s attorneys at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders (GLAD) for a response.
Advertisement
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
A protester waves a transgender pride flag outside of the U.S. Supreme Court Building on June 18, 2025 in Washington, DC. Advocates organized a rally in response the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in US v. Skrmetti, in which the justices ruled to uphold state bans on gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth.(Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
The SCOTUS rulings in West Virginia v. B.P.J. and Little v. Hecox, the high court upheld state laws requiring student-athletes to compete on sports teams that correspond with their biological sex at birth rather than their gender identity, in a 6-3 decision.
However, there are still 23 states, including California, New York and Massachusetts, that don’t have any such laws, and some of those have laws to protect trans athletes in girls’ sports.
Advertisement
Jackson Thompson is a sports reporter for Fox News Digital covering critical political and cultural issues in sports, with an investigative lens. Jackson’s reporting has been cited in federal government actions related to the enforcement of Title IX, and in legacy media outlets including The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Philadelphia Inquirer, The Associated Press and ESPN.com.
New Hampshire Governor Kelly Ayotte (Getty Images)
New Hampshire Gov. Kelly Ayotte has signed legislation requiring public school employees to disclose information about transgender students to their parents or legal guardians, reversing a 2024 state Supreme Court ruling that upheld students’ privacy rights in certain circumstances.
Advertisement
Thanks for registering! You can update your email subscriptions at any time in the
My profile section of your account.
Ayotte’s office announced on 2 July that the legislation had been signed into law. Under SB 430, educators must respond to written requests from parents for “material information” about their child, even if a student has asked that the information be kept confidential or fears negative consequences at home.
Supporters of the legislation, such as Republican state Senator Tim Lang, argue the measure strengthens parental rights and enables families to better support children who may be struggling. “If you don’t tell the parent, the parent can’t watch for the signs of self-harm,” Lang told New Hampshire Public Radio.
Educators and LGBTQ+ advocates, however, say the law places teachers in an impossible position by forcing them to choose between complying with the law and protecting vulnerable students. Megan Tuttle, president of NEA-New Hampshire, the state’s largest teachers’ union, said in a statement that the legislation is “vaguely written and risks putting educators in a position of outing a student.” She added that schools should remain places where every student feels “safe, seen, and free to be themselves.”
Aimee Terravechia, executive director of LGBTQ+ advocacy group 603 Equality, warned the law could erode trust between students and educators while speaking with New Hampshire Public Radio. “Schools should be a place of learning… and a place of critical self-examination,” she said. “Placing educators into a role of monitoring and reporting removes the trust necessary for a thriving academic environment.”
Advertisement
The legislation also effectively overturns a 2024 New Hampshire Supreme Court decision, in which justices ruled that keeping a student’s gender identity confidential did not unlawfully interfere with parents’ rights, noting that parents still retained numerous ways to support and communicate with their children outside the classroom.
Share your thoughts! Let us know in the comments below, and remember to keep the conversation respectful.