Public lands in private hands is not a problem exclusive to the west

[TheWanderer]

Just found out about a plan to lease hunting rights in state forest sections in Delaware (where I live) to private indiviaduals. Unbelievable.

https://www.facebook.com/DelForestService/posts/2014660388551046

As a member of BHA I contacted them thru Facebook last night (waiting for answer) and am contacting local state rep today. Any other suggestions for people to reach out to about this?

Thanks.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Not a Facebook guy, I would send letters to Delaware Governor's office, Delaware State Forest, DNREC office, manager of Redden State Forest, and whoever has any oversight or administration responsibilities over this proposal and the state land involved. If there is a state land board, as there is in Montana, I would attempt to voice concerns through a letter or speaking at their next meeting.

 

[rideold]

Worth trying the county commissioners as well. It impacts them and their constituents. They may feel like they have some skin in the game.

 

[dgever]

How could limiting the number of hunters accessing a property help with controlling the deer population? Has the public been able to hunt this state forest in the past?

 

[OriginalOscar]

Interesting. Both tracts have this same clause. https://dda.delaware.gov/forestry/maps.shtml

The following rules & regulations apply ONLY to Redden State Forest Lands:
 Closed to deer hunting during October and December antlerless seasons.
 Headquarters, Jester, Ellendale, and Chesapeake Tracts are Quality Buck only

One is 826 acres and the other 245 acres so public hunters should be able to control the deer if they had opportunity to hunt anterless.

 

[1_pointer]

How could limiting the number of hunters accessing a property help with controlling the deer population? Has the public been able to hunt this state forest in the past?

Properties of the size mentioned could, theoretically, have a higher harvest with fewer hunters. Too many hunters could push the deer off the property to adjacent property that cannot be hunted.

 

[mplane72]

I didn't read all the attachments but leasing public land hunting rights to individuals does not sit right with me. If the motivation is to limit the pressure to increase keep deer from being pushed out and increase the harvest there are other ways to manage it. Many parks that hold management hunts run a lottery for hunters where multiple people get a crack at the animals through a limited window in the season.

 

[dgever]

I didn't read all the attachments but leasing public land hunting rights to individuals does not sit right with me. If the motivation is to limit the pressure to increase keep deer from being pushed out and increase the harvest there are other ways to manage it. Many parks that hold management hunts run a lottery for hunters where multiple people get a crack at the animals through a limited window in the season.

Absolutely agree. In NY the areas open to hunting closest to the city use an aditional permiting process to manage hunter numbers. Here saftey seems to be the driving factor. Long Island, Westchester, and Sterling State Forest Park have differnt solutions that don't include selling hunting rights. I find this program to be extremely troubling.

To TheWanderer-
To start a BHA chapter you need 100 members and 3 people willing to serve on the board. Looks like there at least 30 people who are rightfully outraged about this program in Delaware. Maybe you could team up with New Jersey to start a Mid Atlantic chapter. They are dealing with the loss of Bear Hunting.

 

[dgever]

I didn't read all the attachments but leasing public land hunting rights to individuals does not sit right with me. If the motivation is to limit the pressure to increase keep deer from being pushed out and increase the harvest there are other ways to manage it. Many parks that hold management hunts run a lottery for hunters where multiple people get a crack at the animals through a limited window in the season.

Absolutely agree. In NY the areas open to hunting closest to the city use an aditional permiting process to manage hunter numbers. Here saftey seems to be the driving factor. Long Island, Westchester, and Sterling State Forest Park have differnt solutions that don't include selling hunting rights. I find this program to be extremely troubling.

To TheWanderer-
To start a BHA chapter you need 100 members and 3 people willing to serve on the board. Looks like there at least 30 people who are rightfully outraged about this program in Delaware. Maybe you could team up with New Jersey to start a Mid Atlantic chapter. They are dealing with the loss of Bear Hunting.

 

[TheWanderer]

I got contact back from BHA, called my local state senator, and the Delaware Dept of Agriculture that the State Forest control falls under.

From what I'm seeing there is a fair amount of outrage over this possibility and they are reconsidering though I don't have first hand knowledge. I am not aware that there was any period of public comment.

These are two tracts of Redden State Forest here is Sussex County DE. Parts of the state forest are managed for "quality buck only". No state forest sections have late doe harvest and this "lease program" was being considered due to deer damage on neighboring farms.

While fewer hunters could theoretically harvest more deer you would think a public access program like: a. sign in limited hunters daily b. opening delayed doe harvest where this is none c. lottery for the public. To my knowledge none of these were proposed. I am aware of no period of public comment regarding this lease program.

 

[mplane72]

I got contact back from BHA, called my local state senator, and the Delaware Dept of Agriculture that the State Forest control falls under.

From what I'm seeing there is a fair amount of outrage over this possibility and they are reconsidering though I don't have first hand knowledge. I am not aware that there was any period of public comment.

These are two tracts of Redden State Forest here is Sussex County DE. Parts of the state forest are managed for "quality buck only". No state forest sections have late doe harvest and this "lease program" was being considered due to deer damage on neighboring farms.

While fewer hunters could theoretically harvest more deer you would think a public access program like: a. sign in limited hunters daily b. opening delayed doe harvest where this is none c. lottery for the public. To my knowledge none of these were proposed. I am aware of no period of public comment regarding this lease program.

d. ask the farmers complaining about deer damage how much hunting they allow on their farm?