John Litvaitis lives in Madbury.

Once again, New Hampshire’s Fish and Game Department is facing a budget shortfall. For more than a decade, this vital organization, staffed by a cadre of skilled and dedicated professionals, has been hampered by inadequate financial support.

Historically, Fish and Game relied on sales of hunting, fishing, and trapping licenses as its revenue base. In the 1930s, license sales provided over 90% of the needed funds. That “user-fee approach” made sense when the major role of the Department was the restoration and management of game and fish populations. However, legislative mandates have expanded the responsibilities of the department to include search and rescue, marine fisheries management, providing public boat access, nuisance wildlife control, off-highway recreational vehicle (OHRV) education and enforcement, environmental review, non-game and endangered wildlife management, habitat conservation, and public outreach.

Unfortunately, as the department’s responsibilities expanded, license sales began a long-term decline. By 2023, license sales contributed only 25% of the department’s annual budget. Federal funds, OHRV registrations, and other revenue sources provided the bulk of the much needed support. Only 2% of the $35 million annual budget in 2023 came from the state’s general funds – that’s not enough. Next year’s budget has a projected $2 million deficit. The complexity of issues Fish and Game staff are confronting, from habitat fragmentation, to invasive species, to climate change, will require additional funds from a broader base of support.

How can support for the department be increased? One obvious consideration toward gaining additional support is to make the organization more attentive to the interests of the public-at-large. The Fish and Game Commission is an 11-member governing body of the department and its basic structure dates back to the 1930s. It is comprised of a representative from each of the 10 counties plus one representative from the Seacoast region of the state. Included in the list of qualifications, commission members are required to have held a hunting, fishing, or trapping license for five of the last 10 years.

As political appointees, they are responsible for establishing policy; approving hunting, fishing, and trapping regulations; approving some financial transactions; and nominating the executive director of the department. This structure hasn’t been free of criticism. Some state residents feel that the commission only considers the input of a limited number of hunters, anglers, and trappers (or consumptive users). That’s unfortunate because a much larger number of state residents (and visitors to New Hampshire) enjoy encounters with wildlife while hiking, canoeing, or simply viewing bird feeders (or non-consumptive users).

The recently formed “Committee to Study Fish and Game Department Funding and Partnerships” will explore ways to enhance the funding base of the department. Whatever approaches are identified, public support for them will be essential. One obvious step in gaining that support would be to increase involvement by non-consumptive users in the decision-making process within the department. For years, there has been resistance to any substantive change to the governance of Fish and Game. That, at least partly, may explain why the financial shortfalls of the department have been a perpetual problem.

I fear that “traditionists” at Fish and Game may view non-consumptive users as being opposed to hunting, fishing, and trapping. That is not correct. Expanding representation on the commission does not mean adding people who oppose some of the core missions of the department. It is time that we acknowledge the diverse interests that are concerned with the well being of New Hampshire’s wildlife. We all have skin in the game and should support full funding of this essential organization.