The occasion of a change in leadership of New Hampshire’s Department of Fish and Game obliges us to re-examine its traditional role in an era of climate crisis.
Today, the most pressing issue facing Fish and Game is: How must we revise the mission of the department so it can address the long-term climate crisis? The traditional mission and structure of Fish and Game reflects 20th-century conditions. What is Fish and Game’s 21st-century role?
New Hampshire Fish and Game’s highest priorities should be:
■Optimize carbon storage in our forests. The older the forest, the more atmospheric carbon it removes and stores. If we preserve more unmanaged stands, adopt low-impact forestry, and terminate all forms of short-term, intensive logging, such as clear-cuts and whole-tree chipping, New Hampshire’s still young forests have the potential to remove and store huge amounts of carbon.
■Protect and restore habitat for climate-stressed species. From 1995 to 1998 many of the state’s leading conservation scientists served on the New Hampshire Ecological Reserves Steering Committee or its distinguished Scientific Advisory Committee. In the summer 1998, ERSC recommended the establishment of a statewide network of connected, buffered ecological reserves whose goal is the protection and restoration of ecosystem integrity.
Initially, the directors of Fish and Game and the Division of Forests and Lands urged the ERSC to develop an implementation strategy. A few months later, without consulting ERSC members, the two agencies and three Concord-based conservation organizations took over the work and effectively disbanded ERSC.
Two decades later, New Hampshire has no network of ecological reserves. Climate-stressed species, especially plants, smaller animals, and invertebrates face a daunting challenge to disperse across New Hampshire’s oft-fragmented landscape in quest of more favorable, less climate-stressed, habitat. A network of reserves improves their chances of survival.
Policies for hunting, fishing, motorized recreation, and other recreational pursuits must respect and reinforce climate policies.
Scott Mason’s application for the job of executive director of New Hampshire Fish and Game is silent on the challenges posed by climate change. Mason lacks essential scientific qualifications to lead Fish and Game at this critical moment, especially knowledge and experience with the impacts of climate change on all native species, and experience in the conservation of biological diversity and the protection of ecosystem integrity in a landscape stressed by climate change.
The executive director of Fish and Game must provide statewide support to local, volunteer conservation commissions who work unselfishly to protect the beautiful natural heritage of the communities they love, especially during the climate crisis.
At its 2017 town meeting, Stratford voters overwhelmingly approved a warrant article to establish a conservation commission. Mason opposed the article. Stratford’s 2017 Town Report recorded (page 19): “Scott Mason voices his opposition and says that he has concerns of the future use and interference from the Commission and is strongly opposed to the creation of the Commission and that the Select-Board has the authority that the Conservation Commission would have.”
Mason is out of step with citizens throughout New Hampshire who value the important contributions of our local conservation commissions to preserving land health, species preservation, and reduced atmospheric carbon levels.
I urge the Executive Council to reject Mason’s nomination to serve as executive director of New Hampshire Fish and Game. I further urge the Fish and Game commissioners and Gov. Chris Sununu to nominate a candidate who is capable of transforming New Hampshire Fish and Game into a leader in combating the 21st-century climate crisis.
(Jamie Sayen serves as Stratford town moderator, but the views expressed above are those of a private citizen, not an elected town official.)