Attendees
Present: Emma Ellsworth/Chair, Matthew Sisk/Vice Chair, Malcolm Haith/Secretary, Kyla Hastie, John Hitt, Deborah Rocque, Eve Schlüter/Director, Tom O’Shea/Commissioner/DFG, Nicole McSweeney/Assistant Director of Outreach and Education, Todd Richards/Assistant Director of Fisheries, Emily Myron/Assistant Director of Land and Habitat Conservation, Trina Moruzzi/Assistant Director of Operations, Kris McCarthy/CFO, Joe Rogers/Conn. Valley Wildlife District Manager, Patricia Huckery/Northeast Wildlife District Manager, Todd Olanyk/Central Wildlife District Manager, Andrew Madden/Western Wildlife District Manager, Nicole Keleher/Habitat Restoration and Management Program Manager, Jennifer Sulla/General Counsel/DFG; Public: David Morin
Acceptance of the minutes of the July monthly business meeting
Vice Chair Sisk moved to accept the minutes of the July business meeting as presented. The motion was seconded by Dr. Rocque. The vote in favor was unanimous.
Chair's comments
Chair Ellsworth provided comments on the launch of a Massachusetts ballot initiative, Question 6: to Establish the Nature For All Fund Initiative. The purpose of the initiative is to allocate a percentage of recreational product sales taxes (sporting goods, recreational vehicles, and golf courses) to a dedicated fund for conservation. She reported that it is projected to raise up to $100 million per year and noted that it is not a new tax but instead earmarks monies from qualifying sales to the fund. The Chair reported that there are other states in the country that already have a similar fund, and that over 150 organizations have signed onto the initiative, which could be used to help fund MassWildlife projects as well.
Chair Ellsworth reported that there is mounting community pressure related to tax and funding equity from the towns around the Quabbin Reservoir watershed because the towns are not being compensated for restrictions on land use. These restrictions affect property values and revenue-generating resources for these border towns as they try to fund basic community needs like schools, first responders, roads, and other infrastructure. The structural and conservation challenges on land use for these towns in the face of these unfunded mandates put a strain on municipal budgets, and the Chair reported that the citizens of these towns are lobbying the state for relief.
She also reported that Red Fire Farm is the largest producer of organic produce in the state, and that the owners recently provided insight into the intensity of deer depredation issues on agricultural businesses, as well as the impacts of other natural disasters. A letter authored by the farm owners included in the Board members’ meeting packets details the decimation caused, including labor costs and loss of sales from damaged products, and has been submitted to legislative representatives in efforts to influence the votes being taken on the proposed hunting law changes.
Director’s updates
Director Schlüter reported to the Board the assignments of MassWildlife staff as part of wildfire mobilizations to Minnesota, one in late July and another planned for the middle of August. She reported that Habitat Biologist Ben Mazzei was then on a wildfire mobilization to the “July Lightning Fires” in northern Minnesota, and she noted that an early July lightning event sparked over 20 wildfires in that region, 15 of which are still active.
Mr. Mazzei began the mobilization on Saturday, July 25, with the Massachusetts Wildfire Crew #1 as part of a suppression module (SMOD) composed of 10 wildland firefighters from DCR and Mr. Mazzei. The crew was in its second week of service and Mr. Mazzei was serving as an Incident Commander (ICT5), at the squad level. The crew is working in and near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness area and other parts of the Superior National Forest. Their last day on the fireline was to be on the following Monday and they would fly home on Tuesday, August 11. The Director reported that another Massachusetts SMOD was scheduled to leave for assignment to the Minnesota July Fires early the following week, likely on the Tuesday. John Garofoli, Wildlife Technician with the MassWildlife Southeast District, was tapped to deploy as part of that 11-person SMOD, also composed of MassWildlife and DCR staff.
Director Schlüter also reported that Prescribed Fire Project Leader Alex Entrup and Restoration Ecologist Dan Bove were expected to leave for the Minnesota July Fires on July 11 and be on initial attack in the Superior National Forest starting July 12. This is part of an interstate partnership with the states of Iowa and Massachusetts for an engine assignment; Mr. Entrup would be serving as the Engine Boss, with Mr. Bove as an Engine Boss Trainee.
Dr. Schlüter thanked the wildfire staff for their commitment to these efforts and for their tireless work.
She reported that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) joined MassWildlife staff for a meeting in Westborough to discuss opportunities for expanded hunting and fishing opportunities on national wildlife refuges throughout Massachusetts. This was in direct response to Department of Interior Secretarial Order 3447 and USFWS Director's Order 233. Director Schlüter stated that it was a great meeting and that both agencies will continue to work closely to remove unnecessary barriers and address consistency between refuge rules and state regulations. Director Schlüter noted that draft regulatory packages for comment are expected sometime this fall or winter.
The Director reported that the instant award period for Antlerless Deer Permits (ADP) had begun on August 1. She was pleased to report that the lottery functioned properly and, as of the previous afternoon, nearly 4,000 hunters had already successfully used MassFishHunt to buy their ADP. However, despite all the testing that was completed in order to prepare, the Director reported that the online vendor did discover an issue impacting some customers during the checkout process on Saturday. These bugs were quickly resolved, and all impacted customers had been refunded. Director Schlüter extended her apologies to all the hunters who were impacted by this error and stated that the team is continuing to work with the vendor to identify the cause of the problem and prevent it from happening again.
Director Schlüter also reported that construction had begun to restore Century Bog, one of the largest retired cranberry bogs in Southeastern Massachusetts. For over 2 decades, MassWildlife has been working with partners on this large, watershed-scale restoration project, which will improve fish passage in Red Brook for migratory fish like sea-run brook trout, American eel, and river herring, and restore over 70 acres of wetlands and 12,300 feet of Red Brook. She thanked Southeast District Manager Jason Zimmer, who is leading the effort, as well as the many partners in the project, including the Division of Ecological Restoration, the Buzzards Bay Coalition, the Department of Fish and Game, the Division of Marine Fisheries, Mass Audubon, the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe, The Trustees, Trout Unlimited, NOAA, and more. She stated that the work is part of MassWildlife’s larger Southeastern Massachusetts pine barrens landscape restoration and community engagement initiative, which is supported by a nearly $5 million America the Beautiful Challenge federal grant that was awarded in 2022.
The Director was also pleased to report that MassWildlife had secured $1.4 million in funding from the In-Lieu Fee (ILF) program for salt marsh restoration at William Forward Wildlife Management Area. She explained that the ILF program is a mechanism used to compensate for the loss of aquatic resources, such as wetlands and streams, due to development activities. Instead of performing onsite mitigation, permit holders can pay a fee to a designated program, which then uses those funds to restore, enhance, or preserve aquatic habitats elsewhere. She noted that the Department of Fish and Game is the state sponsor of this program in Massachusetts. In this case, the funding will support restoration implementation and monitoring on approximately 390 acres over the next five years. The project will use ditch remediation, runnels, and nesting mound creation (e.g., salt marsh sparrow) techniques to improve marsh hydrology, enhance habitat for fish and wildlife, and increase climate resilience. MassWildlife is hoping to use these monies to leverage additional resources for a larger salt marsh restoration project in area. She thanked DFG Blue Carbon Manager Annalee Tweitmann, Northeast District Manager Pat Huckery, and Federal Aid and Compliance Manager Lori Cookman for all of their hard work on this project.
Director Schlüter closed with a reminder to the Board members that the Sargent Award and IHEA Award event would be held following the September Board meeting, September 23, beginning at 4:30 p.m., in the Field Headquarters. She advised that the invitations would be sent shortly and that the event, as usual, is by invitation only.
Commissioner’s updates
Commissioner O’Shea reported on the pending hunting legislation filed by the Governor, stating that the bills are still in conference committees with a hope that votes will occur in September or October.
He stated that the PILOT Program and PILOT Commission, related to compensation of towns for lost property taxes due to lower property values and state-owned property in the Quabbin Reservoir area, are conducting listening sessions at the state level that are being spearheaded by the local representation in those areas. He noted that he has reviewed some of the listening sessions that have occurred thus far.
The Commissioner reported that the Energy Facilities Siting Board, of which he is a member, has had large-scale projects related to battery storage and transmission upgrades come before it. His position has been to make sure to address any concerns about impacts to wildlife and fish within his purview, and he stated that public comment related to energy use and minimizing environmental impacts of the projects is ongoing.
Among recent biodiversity grant awards, Commissioner O’Shea reported that the City of Lowell has used a grant to create pollinator gardens and micro-forests. He stated that he also recently took a tour with the regional environmental council in Worcester as the Worcester Public Schools construct new pollinator and food gardens as well. He also noted that he had a meeting with UMass related to dark-sky lighting compliance that is upcoming.
The Commissioner attended a ribbon-cutting in Chelmsford for a new access point to the Merrimack River that provides public and emergency access. He stated that the In-Lieu Fee program is part of the Department’s Strategic Plan and progress has been made thus far, noting that a summary report is due to be published in the fall.
Personnel Report (Emma Ellsworth and supervisory staff)
Director Schlüter excused herself from the meeting and left the room to allow the Board to engage in a full discussion, out of respect for the Board and the other candidate.
Appointment of the Director of the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife
Candidates (in alphabetical order) Position Location
Deborah O’Neil Director Westborough
Administrator IX
Everose Schlüter Director Westborough
Administrator IX
Chair Ellsworth provided an overview of the process that had been followed to date by the Preliminary Screening Committee (PSC). This included updating the job description, a review of the resumes of applicants, and several rounds of interviews. The candidates that were interviewed were of exceptional quality and she thanked them for the efforts they made to present their candidacy for the position. Chair Ellsworth stated that the two finalists in front of the Board for discussion are a reflection of the top tier of those interviews. The Board members had been presented with the finalists’ resumes and cover letters, and she invited the full board to ask questions of the PSC related to the two finalists, but she noted that the PSC did not make a recommendation as this was a decision of the full board.
Dr. Rocque stated that she had no question about a specific candidate but about the process. She thought the Board lucky to have such high-quality candidates and she thought their qualifications were similar. She asked the members of the PSC for their assessments of the emotional intelligence of the candidates, and she asked whether any behavioral questions were asked. In response, Ms. Hastie reported that the questions all the candidates were asked contained the following themes: leadership ability, self-awareness, community building, delegation, and the candidates’ own reflections on mistake-making and vulnerability as a leader. The candidates were also asked how they react when receiving feedback that is hard to hear and to describe themselves in relation to continual learning and wanting feedback to continue to develop. When Dr. Rocque asked if the PSC felt candidates were similar, Ms. Hastie stated that both had emotional intelligence and both were focused on learning and improving, so they were similar in that respect. Mr. Sisk provided reflections on the emotional intelligence of the candidates and how they may match or where there might be a learning curve.
Mr. Haith asked about the PSC’s perceptions of each candidate’s ability to pivot and respond to changes if needed. Did they seem like they were fixed in their vision of the agency and its priorities or that they had flexibility in that vision? In response, Ms. Hastie summarized a research paper she recently read that compared the outcomes of hiring from inside candidates versus external candidates. She thought that both candidates were highly qualified, and both demonstrated an ability to pivot in the long game of state wildlife conservation, climate change, and budget challenges. Both understood the threats and both could lead a team forward. She noted that Dr. Schlüter is already so familiar with the status of all the issues in the state that she was able to articulate a clear vision in more detail than a person from Montana. Ms. O’Neil didn’t have the state or regional background to draw from, while Dr. Schlüter articulated a strong vison of the future. Given otherwise equal candidates, the understanding and deep knowledge Dr. Schlüter displayed showed that she can take MassWildlife forward into the future. Mr. Sisk noted that Ms. O’Neill came out twice from Montana to interview for the job and not all candidates who were local agreed to come in person, but he felt that now is not the time to have any substantial change in the mission of the agency. He stated that the Department and MassWildlife are at critical but positive junctures in how they interact with other agencies, internally and externally.
Chair Ellsworth stated that she was pleased the PSC had the opportunity to bring two very good candidates to the Board. She thought Dr. Schlüter did a good job of articulating her vision and brought a good balance between present and future needs. Dr. Schlüter also demonstrated depth and long-term thinking and is not afraid of the long game.
Mr. Hitt congratulated the PSC for bringing such strong candidates forward. He felt the members were dealing with the classic case of choosing between insider and outsider candidates. He asked how the committee addressed the institutional knowledge of an inside candidate and how the committee saw the strengths of the external candidate. In response, Mr. Sisk stated that the Commonwealth has immediate goals and existing efforts in conservation, and he wondered about the chances for success for an external candidate because of the need to move forward at the pace required to reach the goals that are established. Chair Ellsworth stated that Dr. Schlüter was able to present a long-term strategy for the agency that included pieces that will grow more slowly while addressing the immediacy of existing needs and challenges. She opined that both candidates are strategic thinkers, but Director Schlüter demonstrated the depth of her thinking.
Chair Ellsworth also provided the reference-check notes for each candidate. References for Ms. O’Neill commented on her integrity and professional ambitions. References for Dr. Schlüter described her as a collaborator and a long-term thinker and talked about her strength in cultivating relationships across state agencies and her passion for conservation work in the Commonwealth. Mr. Sisk thanked the other members of the PSC for their efforts. He stated that this may be the most important decision that these sitting Board members may make during their tenure.
Ms. Hastie moved that the Board appoint Everose Schlüter as the Director of the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife. Mr. Sisk seconded the motion. There was no discussion, and the roll-call vote was in favor unanimously.
Director Schlüter rejoined the meeting and thanked the Board members for the opportunity to serve as MassWildlife’s Director and for their confidence in her. She stated that it is a great pleasure and an honor to work with MassWildlife’s dedicated, passionate, and hard-working staff, and that conservation is something she cares very deeply about. She was honored to continue to serve the public in the role and working with all constituents to advance MassWildlife’s mission as its Director.
Promotion
Employee Position Location
Astrid Huseby Hunter Education Program Leader Westborough
Game Biologist IV
Assistant Director of Outreach and Education Nicole McSweeney requested the Board’s approval of the promotion of Astrid Huseby to Hunter Education Program Leader. She reported that the position has been vacant for over a year due to the retirement of Susan Langlois, and she thanked Central District Wildlife Manager Todd Olanyk for being the Interim Hunter Education Administrator. Ms. McSweeney provided information on Ms. Huseby’s professional background and the scope of her work in coordinating the R3 programs (Learn to Hunt, Archery, BOW [Becoming an Outdoors Woman], and Angler Education) with the Hunter Education program.
Chair Ellsworth reflected on her positive experiences as a volunteer in BOW programs and working with Ms. Huseby for the past several years. She moved to accept the promotion of Astrid Huseby as submitted. Ms. Hastie seconded the motion and the vote in favor was unanimous.
Update on MESA Priority Habitat mapping (Jesse Leddick)
Assistant Director for Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Jesse Leddick provided an overview of proposed updates to the Priority Habitat maps, which are related to MassWildlife’s regulatory review responsibilities under the Massachusetts Endangered Species Act, or MESA. He reviewed what Priority Habitat is, how it is used for regulatory review purposes under MESA, why Priority Habitat maps are updated, and an overview of the proposed maps, the public comment process, and next steps.
Assistant Director Leddick opened by reviewing that the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) is responsible for the protection of the state’s native biodiversity, with an emphasis on SGCN [species in greatest need of conservation] and their habitats. Of these, NHESP’s highest priority are species state-listed as Endangered, Threatened, or of Special Concern under the MESA. He reported that species are listed under MESA based on their level of imperilment, so it’s also important to highlight that federally listed species found in Massachusetts are automatically MESA-listed.
He briefly reviewed the various conservation tools the NHESP uses to conserve rare species and unique natural communities, including surveys and monitoring, data management and analysis, conservation planning, habitat restoration and protection, and regulatory review. Assistant Director Leddick reported that the NHESP has statutory and regulatory responsibility for protecting state-listed species and their habitats under the MESA and under the rare species provisions of the MA Wetlands Protection Act. NHESP regulatory review staff also review and comment on projects under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act and the Massachusetts Forest Cutting Practices Act. Although Priority Habitat maps are used under each of the acts, Assistant Director Leddick reported he would be focusing exclusively on MESA, which is regulatory review’s primary tool.
After a brief review of the history of the MESA and its regulations, Assistant Director Leddick pointed out that the regulations also define Priority Habitat, which represents the geographic extent of habitat for state-listed species and is used as a trigger for regulatory review. The MESA regulations outline the regulatory review process, but also the process for delineating and updating Priority Habitats, which must be re-evaluated every 4 years. The rest of Assistant Director Leddick’s remarks would be his report on the latest re-evaluation.
Assistant Director Leddick briefly explained how NHESP delineates Priority Habitats based on verified observations of species that are accepted into the Natural Heritage database; the extent of the habitat they need based on their natural history; and refinements of that mapping for habitat quality, landscape context, and existing development. These mapping procedures and the latest biological research on which they are based, are reflected in habitat mapping guidelines we maintain and update for every species with mapped Priority Habitat. He then showed a slide with a large area of confirmed observations of multiple listed species in overlapping polygons and reported that biologists map suitable habitat for each species based on each occurrence record. The biologists then merge the mapped habitats together into a single polygon that is a Priority Habitat.
Assistant Director Leddick highlighted that NHESP doesn’t map Priority Habitat for every listed species or for every observation. For example, poor-quality sites where biologists think the local population isn’t likely to persist may not be mapped. This is very important because MESA is a tool for the conservation of our most imperiled species, so NHESP only wants to map sites and require regulatory review where it will lead to meaningful conservation and recovery of that species. He explained projects proposed in Priority Habitat must be reviewed to determine if a Take of the species or its habitats will occur, and that regulatory review staff work collaboratively with landowners to avoid or mitigate that Take. He then provided an overview of potential regulatory review outcomes and the percent of projects that result in each outcome.
He then discussed the numerous reasons the Priority Habitat maps can and do change, including changes to the MESA list; new species occurrences; removal of "historic" occurrences (more than 25 years old); the latest biological research about how species use habitat; evaluations of species-specific regulatory review outcomes; better aerial photographs, GIS layers, and tools; and the exclusion of sites with poor estimated population viability based on size, quality, and landscape context. All these factors lead NHESP to regularly reevaluate where Priority Habitat is mapped, and many staff spent the majority of the last year doing just that. He also noted that staff really began the reevaluation in conjunction with the updates to the State Wildlife Action Plan last fall, and then moved on to updating mapping guidelines based on the best available science, ensuring that all observation occurrences were reviewed, and then developing proposed updates to Priority Habitats.
He then showed an overview map of the proposed Priority Habitat map and provided an overview of mapped non-marine habitats in protected, water/wetland, and unprotected areas. He highlighted that the total acreage of proposed non-marine Priority Habitat is very similar to the current Atlas except that there is a small decrease for unprotected land.
There is a public comment period on the proposed changes to the map and Assistant Director Leddick reviewed the many avenues through which it is widely advertised, so that the public may contribute written comments (mail, email, or Online viewer), and he reviewed the timeline for action before it is published. The public comment period is 60 days, August 5 to October 4; staff will review comments and revise the map if necessary within 30-60 days of the public comment period end; and he estimates that MassWildlife will likely publish the 16th Edition of the Natural Heritage Atlas no earlier than December 2026. Once finalized, Priority Habitat maps will be viewable online via the MassWildlife website and MassMapper, where people will be able to also download a corresponding GIS layer. Staff also then send town-specific PDF maps to every planning board, building inspector, and conservation commission in the Commonwealth where Priority Habitat has been mapped. This helps keep municipalities informed and better able to answer questions and provide initial guidance to landowners and developers. And it is at that point that NHESP starts using the new Priority Habitat map as a trigger for regulatory review.
In conclusion, Assistant Director Leddick gratefully acknowledged that the proposed maps are the result of thousands and thousands of hours spent by MassWildlife staff, particularly those in the Natural Heritage and Land and Habitat Conservation programs, and he listed many of the key staff involved including several DFG staff. He acknowledged these staff have spent countless hours conducting field surveys, coordinating with conservation parters, interacting with interested members of the public, reviewing occurrence records, ensuring that every record meets the highest standards of data quality and integrity, and reviewing the most current scientific literature. He stressed that mapping new Priority Habitats is the final step in a process that unfolds over several years.
After a discussion among the members, Director Schlüter stated that there are 22 federally listed species in the Commonwealth that are protected. She highlighted the MESA regulations’ strengths in how they protect the species that exist. She also noted that some land acquisition projects are recommended due to the presence of certain listed species, and that the agency’s biodiversity goals related to habitat restoration and the priorities that have been established also rely on this mapping.
Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Advisory Committee Appointment (DFG Commissioner Tom O'Shea)
Commissioner O'Shea requested the Board’s approval of the appointment of Andrew Finton of The Nature Conservancy as a full member of the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Advisory Committee. Commissioner O’Shea provided background on Mr. Finton’s extensive contributions and strong leadership in his current role and how his skill set would be a great benefit to the committee.
Mr. Sisk moved to accept the Commissioner’s recommendation of Mr. Andrew Finton as a full member of the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Advisory Committee. Ms. Hastie seconded the motion and the vote in support was unanimous.
Director Schlüter spoke very highly of her expectations for Mr. Finton’s participation on the Advisory Committee based on the many professional collaborations she has engaged in with him.
Confirm the September business meeting date and time, at the MassWildlife Field Headquarters and on Zoom
The members confirmed the September business meeting date and time: September 23, 2026, at 1:30 p.m. Following the September meeting, the Francis Sargent Award celebration will be held at 4:30 p.m.
The October meeting has also been set, for Wednesday, October 21, 2026, at 1:30 p.m. Both meetings will be held at the MassWildlife Field Headquarters, 1 Rabbit Hill Road, Westborough, and on Zoom.
Members’ comments
Mr. Sisk reflected on his attendance at the July 2026 Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Advisory Committee meeting, which Board members Mr. Hitt and Dr. Larocque also attended. He reported that MassWildlife Assistant Director for Land and Habitat Emily Myron gave the Advisory Committee her report on MassWildlife’s habitat goals and at a future meeting that committee will review Mr. Leddick’s MESA report. He stated that the subcommittee is going to look into ways that they as individuals can best support the agency and bring its goals to the forefront of public discussion. He provided positive feedback on his attendance and experiences at an Archery 101 event in Milton at Governor Hutchinson Field that was conducted by MassWildlife’s Outreach and Education program staff.
Dr. Rocque spoke about the potential for establishing and expanding conservation partnerships in Western Massachusetts with both private and public landowners. She is interested in how she can utilize her professional and personal experiences to help with engagement and create opportunities for potential partners to be able to come together.
Adjourn
There being no further business, Mr. Sisk moved to adjourn. Ms. Hastie seconded the motion. The vote in favor was unanimous, and the meeting adjourned at 3:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Malcolm Haith
Secretary
List of documents presented to the Board in its August business meeting packets
August agenda
Draft July meeting minutes
August Personnel Report
Copies of emails from small business owners to Emma Ellsworth RE the importance of passing the proposed hunting law changes
Resume and letter of interest of Andrew Finton
Massachusetts Environmental Police monthly calls-for-service report for July 2026
Legal notice of public comment period on Priority Habitat maps for the 16th Edition Natural Heritage Atlas (321 CMR 10.12[6])