A few weeks ago the subject of this column was about the growing deer density-related problems in many areas of the state, particularly the Southern Zone. As noted in that column, the problem was less about the growing densities of deer in these areas, but actually the habitat changes that are creating it. Now we may add another factor to that phenomenon – natural gas leases.
With the sudden and ongoing boom in companies eager to get in on the mammoth Marcellus and Herkimer gas-bearing shale layers in much of the western, central and southern parts of the state, coupled with a depressed economy in many of these areas, major changes in land ownership and philosophies are undergoing changes that may affect many of us.
Most obvious is the perceived sale value of major portions of land that potentially may attract lucrative gas lease, right-of-ways and royalties. Unused farmland values have and are soaring because of it. The extensive coverage of the Marcellus Shale makes large land deals more attractive to gas drilling companies, despite the proposed NYSDEC 40-acre minimum size area between wells. With prices per acre for the more desirable plots now in the thousands of dollars, even landowners who have yet to contract a lease with gas companies have a bright orange carrot to dangle in front of potential buyers of their land speculating on eventually getting in on the monies flowing from gas companies.
Such inflated prices – coupled with the current mortgage crisis – translate to selling prices well beyond the economic ability of the majority of upstate residents in these drilling regions. Add to this property and school tax increases that may often surpass the inflation rate, and the vast majority of upstate residents are struggling to maintain what they have, say nothing of adding to their financial burden.
The biggest complaint voiced by outdoor enthusiasts today is the rapidly shrinking access-by-permission to private lands. Especially so for hunting and fishing. Farmlands, both operating and in non-use, are often posted, allowing no one to set foot on them for whatever reason. While posting has always been a factor on farms, time was it was primarily done so the farm owner would know who was on his land, and for what purpose. Sadly, increased trespassing and damages to property by users have forced many farmers to shut the access door entirely. As more farms became off-limits or went on the selling block, people with sufficient capital to invest in land began either buying or seeking to lease them for recreational purposes – usually hunting.
Some may point out the abundance of state forestlands we have in our area, but realistically, even with those thousands of public acres, there's a limit to the density and uses they can shoulder without seeing negative impacts. With hunting, it's often too many hunters and limited game availability. Since habitat on most state forestlands is often inferior to that on private land, its ability to sustain equal densities of wildlife is diminished. The result is often overharvesting and over use as well as diminishing user satisfaction. Conversely, some private lands are experiencing major depredation on native and deomestic flora by overabundant deer.
As more lands go to gas leases and the number of drilled wells and pipelines increase, it's reasonable to assume the landowners, both old and new, will adopt new philosophies on their now valuable land holdings. This may be reflected in denied access, pay-to-access or annual charges to use the land for recreation. These lands' increased market value will probably also have an eventual effect on the values of the lands nearby, that could result in increased assessments or equalization policies. Of course on the other side of the coin, who wants to live right next door to an operating gas well? So this could prove to ease access and even create more attractive sale prices to some properties, at least temporarily.
With so much buzz about "all the money" the gas rush will create for some people, it certainly won't be shared equally by all resident landowners. It will probably end up producing the "haves" and the "have-nots," and despite attempts to level the playing field, it could spell trouble for the latter group in the long term, If you're looking for an analogy, go no further than Texas and Oklahoma, where landowners there generally fall into one or the other category with few remaining in the middle.
With all the small game hunting seasons currently open and bowhunting season for deer set to open this Saturday, Oct. 18, the number of hunters seeking places to hunt will increase. Where they end up hunting largely depends on long-term friendships with landowners who grant them permission, or they may have family members who own sufficient land, or the hunter may own or lease his own hunting land, or lacking these, the hunter will be forced to hunt public land. Want to bet where the highest hunter density will be, or who will have the best hunting or most satisfaction from the experience?
I think we should keep in mind the environmental, social and demographic impacts the natural gas rush will have on our area and on all of us who live here. Those of us who thought we'd seen the biggest local change when so many of the small family-owned farms disappeared and residential cluster developments began to proliferate haven't seen anything like what I suspect we'll see occurring, both economically and demographically, over the next few years.