Another Example Of Agency Capture By The Hunting Lobby
DEP documents reveal that DEP consulted with the NJ State Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs in developing and vetting their Glassboro Wildlife Management Area clearcut.
But the public was completely shut out.
(DEP did not even deploy their sham “14 step process” for forest management plans, which was developed in response to public outrage over the joint DEP/NJ Audubon logging project at the Sparta Mt. WMA.)
A few NJ insider conservation groups – who have long been a part of the problem – are throwing somewhat of a hissy fit over DEP’s lack of consultation with them (and the public) in the Glassboro WMA illegal clearcut: (NJ Spotlight):
“This should never have happened, so they must also take steps to improve their clearly inadequate process and meaningfully engage the public,’’ Gilbert said. “No significant projects should move forward without being subject to comprehensive review with public input. Our public lands deserve better.’’
These hypocritical groups themselves are part of the problem, for two primary reasons:
First, they have personal, professional, and organizational common interests with the DEP, play the inside game with DEP, publicly support DEP (while withholding criticism); deploy some of the same destructive management practices as DEP.
Here’s how that cozy relationship actually worked in this case (see this Feb. 24 friendly email from Emile DeVito NJCF to DEP Assistant Commissioner Dave Golden and note how Emile effectively runs interference and puts Emile in the role of intermediary between local citizens who discovered the illegal clearcut and the DEP. Note also the exclusive concern with process, not clearcutting:
Second, because they share some of the same scientific and policy views about wildlife, wildfire, and forest management and cultivate partnerships with the hunting lobby and rarely, if ever, criticize them or their undue influence on DEP management decisions. (see:
[Note: For those who like to read the peer reviewed published science to understand exactly what’s going on here, see:
So, you will not hear any specific criticism of DEP for consulting with the NJ State Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs (NJSFSC) or the abusive undue influence of the NJSFSC on DEP.
In an October 3, 2022 friendly “Hey Tom” email from Tyler Kinney, DEP Habitat Planner in charge of the project, DEP provided a copy of the Glassboro WMA clearcut plan and requested “feedback” from Tom Weeast, (at his work email, Lake Ave. Autobody) the Gloucester County Federation of NJSFSC: (and there is a Doodle meeting event as well with unknown participants. I filed another OPRA for them too):
Substantively, DEP documents show that the DEP made the hunting objectives absolutely clear in the “science” they relied on from a paper by the US Fish and Wildlife Service: American Woodcock – Population Status, 2022
Harvest Information Program
The Harvest Information Program (HIP) was cooperatively developed by the USFWS and state wildlife agencies to provide reliable annual estimates of hunter activity and harvest for all migratory game birds (Elden et al. 2002). The HIP sampling frame consists of all migratory game bird hunters. Under this program, state wildlife agencies collect the name, address, and additional information from each migratory bird hunter in their state, and send that information to the USFWS. The USFWS then selects stratified random samples of those hunters and asks them to voluntarily provide detailed information about their hunting activity. For example, hunters selected for the woodcock harvest survey are asked to complete a daily diary about their woodcock hunting and harvest during the current year’s hunting season.
It’s time that the hunting lobby stop dictating DEP’s wildlife and public lands management policies.
We need explicit new laws to stop these abuses.
DEP and their conservation allies don’t want to talk about any of that.
But will the NJ media tell the public about all these abuses?