Downright Poor Management

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources seems to have a list of laws and regulations it chooses to follow…and operates with blatant disregard for others. One example stems from a ruling by State Attorney General, Mike Cox made February 2, 2006. The ruling was a response to a question asking if it is legal to operate commercial bear baits on CFR land.

AG Cox’s response stated, “The commercial forestland program is regulated by State statute, and the program is administered by the Michigan DNR. (MCL 324.51101
et seq.) Certain types of activities are prohibited on participating land. Other than forestry operations, the statute generally prohibits activities of a commercial nature, therefore, a commercial bear baiting operation is a prohibited activity.”

Once area Conservation Officers were made aware of this determination they were openly pleased. CO’s stated they knew who was running commercial baiting operations on CFR lands and where they operated. Several vowed to start writing tickets as soon as the fall bear season opened.

The DNR administration in Lansing was not so pleased. In AG Cox’s letter of determination, he suggested contacting Ms. Cara Boucher, Section Manager, Forest Resources Management Section of the DNR…to report specific facts and locations of commercial baiting operations.

Several phone calls were made to Ms Boucher resulting in voice mail messages being left along with a call-back number. Ms. Boucher failed to return any of the calls. The following week a letter was mailed to Ms. Boucher asking the official position the DNR planned to take on enforcing the ruling, prohibiting commercial baiting on CFR land.

Two weeks went by without a response to the letter sent to Ms. Boucher. As a result, State Representative Rich Brown’s office was contacted…his office was asked to initiate a response from Ms. Boucher.

After about 2 weeks of trying Rep. Brown’s Legal Aide, Todd Gauthier reported he was unable to get a written response from Ms. Boucher. When questioned, “has he ever experienced such a lack of disregard from a public servant before,” he answered NO!
Obviously, Director Humphries has not instilled an atmosphere which expects administrators to function as public servants.

In an effort to get an official statement from the DNR on how they planned to enforce the ban on commercial use of CFR land…Aide Gauthier went to contacts in the DNR’s Law Enforcement Division.

The following is Mr. Gauthier’s summary of the current DNR position in the matter:

Mr. Gauthier wrote…I’m putting into writing the general policy of the DNR regarding commercial bear baiting on CFA (CFR) land as it was explained to me…It is the policy of the DNR to only respond to direct complaints from a landowner of commercial bear baiting on CFA? lands. If a landowner calls, an investigation is started, and, if warranted, proceedings to bring trespass charges on the offender are undertaken. If someone else calls however, about someone else’s CFA land, DNR policy is not to do anything. Does this type of baiting happen? Yes, everywhere…not the easiest to make a case on either.

DNR focus is on satisfying the landowner who has specific complaints, not becoming private security guards for International Paper or Mead, for example.

In response to the DNR’s position on this issue…CFR/CFA land is open to public hunting. It is not open to commercial operations, not even the land owner can use it for commercial purposes. The DNR is legally responsible for managing the CFR/CFA Program and all the rules applied to it. It is not the landowner’s responsibility to police land in the program.

Lucky for us the DNR role in our state’s law enforcement is somewhat limited…or, the next time you call to report a crime you’d likely be told, “we won’t respond unless you own the land the crime was committed on.”

Anyone hunting on CFR land in bear hunting areas should take this matter seriously. These commercial baiting operations are laying claim to the exclusive hunting rights to a large radius around each bait site. They do not have legal rights, but they’re making $750 to $1,500 a week per hunter off them. If you cross trails with them, or the hunter that paid to hunt there…they’ll expect you to leave and if you don’t things can quickly get out of hand.

The Michigan Department of Natural Resources needs deal with this mess before there’s a big shoot-out like in Wisconsin. Circumstances are not that much different.

The next article will explain in detail how the Michigan Department of Natural Resources is dodging the enforcement of State Land Use rules…providing a blanket waiver for any and all commercial guiding operations choosing to use land owned by or under control of the DNR.