Opinion ID: 842637
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: mcl 234.41901 explicitly authorizes the dnr to determine and define the boundaries of hunting areas in michigan.

Text: Part 419, Hunting Area Control, of the NREPA, provides a local governmental unit the only means of imposing additional hunting safety regulations beyond those originally prescribed by the DNR. The local governing body must ask the DNR to enact additional safety measures in an area if the governing body thinks that the safety and well-being of persons or property are endangered by hunters or discharge of firearms or bows and arrows. . . . MCL 324.41901(1). Part 419 vests the power to regulate and prohibit hunting, and the discharge of firearms and bow and arrow in the DNR. MCL 324.41901(1). In the event that a local governing body deems that the safety measures in place are inadequate to protect the general welfare, the local governing body can petition the DNR for a resolution closing additional lands to hunting. [5] The DNR must then hold a public hearing, conduct investigations, and submit its findings of facts and recommendations to the governing body of the local governmental unit. [6] After receiving the DNR's recommendations, the governing body can either accept the measures recommended by the DNR, or it can do nothing. If the governing body accepts the measures recommended by the DNR, it can incorporate the recommendations into a local ordinance that is identical to the DNR's recommendations. [7] The DNR retains authority to unilaterally terminate closure of an area to hunting. [8] If the governing body chooses to reject the DNR's recommendations, part 419 mandates that no further action be taken on the matter. [9] Contrary to the majority's interpretation, the plain language of part 419 explicitly authorizes the DNR to determine and define the boundaries of hunting areas in Michigan. MCL 324.41901 provides: (1) In addition to all of the department powers, in the interest of public safety and the general welfare, the department may regulate and prohibit hunting, and the discharge of firearms and bow and arrow, as provided in this part, on those areas established under this part where hunting or the discharge of firearms or bow and arrow may or is likely to kill, injure, or disturb persons who can reasonably be expected to be present in the areas or to destroy or damage buildings or personal property situated or customarily situated in the areas or will impair the general safety and welfare. In addition, the department may determine and define the boundaries of the areas. Areas or parts of areas may be closed throughout the year. The department, in furtherance of safety, may designate areas where hunting is permitted only by prescribed methods and weapons that are not inconsistent with law. Whenever the governing body of any political subdivision determines that the safety and well-being of persons or property are endangered by hunters or discharge of firearms or bow and arrows, by resolution it may request the department to recommend closure of the area as may be required to relieve the problem. Upon receipt of a certified resolution, the department shall establish a date for a public hearing in the political subdivision, and the requesting political authority shall arrange for suitable quarters for the hearing. The department shall receive testimony on the nature of the problems resulting from hunting activities and firearms use from all interested parties on the type, extent, and nature of the closure, regulations, or controls desired locally to remedy these problems. (2) Upon completion of the public hearing, the department shall cause such investigations and studies to be made of the area as it considers appropriate and shall then make a statement of the facts of the situation as found at the hearing and as a result of its investigations. The department shall then prescribe regulations as are necessary to alleviate or correct the problems found. [Emphasis added.] The majority is correct that part 419 only governs hunting weapons regulation of those areas established under this part. However, plaintiffs' land is subject to part 419 because plaintiffs' land is a hunting area that the DNR regulates. The DNR extensively and pervasively regulates hunting in the state of Michigan. In 1996 the people of Michigan, through legislative referendum, vested the DNR with the exclusive authority to regulate the taking of game in the state of Michigan. [10] In exercising its exclusive authority to regulate hunting, the DNR may, among other things, issue orders to [e]stablish lawful methods of taking game, [e]stablish geographic areas within the state where certain regulations may apply to the taking of animals, and [r]egulate the hours during which animals may be taken. [11] The orders promulgated by the DNR to regulate hunting are collectively known as the Wildlife Conservation Order (WCO). [12] Chapter XII of the order, titled Management Areas Defined, defines not only the areas in Michigan where hunting is allowed, but what type of animal can be hunted in which area. Saginaw County, in which plaintiffs' land is located, is mentioned multiple times in the order. WCO 12.73, 12.73a, and 12.73b define the parts of Saginaw County that are subject to DNR regulations with respect to deer hunting  the areas covered include the city of Saginaw. WCO 12.635 defines all of Saginaw County as a hunting area with respect to Spring wild turkey management. WCO 12.641 defines all of Saginaw County as a hunting area with respect to turkey management. WCO 12.673 defines all of Saginaw County as a hunting area with respect to Fall wild turkey management. WCO 12.700 and 12.701 define all of Saginaw County as a hunting area with respect to goose management. And the list continues. Clearly, the DNR considers Saginaw County, and the city of Saginaw contained within the county, a hunting area to be managed, properly defined, and established by the DNR. Consequently, because plaintiff's land is designated as a hunting area by the DNR, any changes to DNR hunting regulations in the area must follow the procedure outlined in part 419. The DNR has the authority to regulate the discharge of weapons for hunting on plaintiffs' property under part 419, and the city of Saginaw must follow the procedure outlined in part 419 to enact local ordinances that further restrict hunting.