Author Topic: An Attack on Our Ability to Shoot on State Lands  (Read 5975 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

doesch

  • Guest
An Attack on Our Ability to Shoot on State Lands
« on: January 11, 2016, 06:34:48 PM »
The DNR sent out an email today for plans for the following areas:

Fuller Woods State Game Area (Van Buren County) – provide comments to Mark Mills (millsm@michigan.gov)

Gratiot-Saginaw State Game Area (Gratiot and Saginaw counties) – provide comments to Chad Fedewa (fedewac1@michigan.gov)

Langston State Game Area (Montcalm County) – provide comments to John Niewoonder (niewoonderj@michigan.gov)

Leidy Lake State Game Area (St. Joseph County) – provide comments to Ken Kesson (kessonk1@michigan.gov)

Martiny Lake State Game Area (Mecosta County) – provide comments to Pete Kailing (kailingp@michigan.gov)

Muskegon State Game Area (Muskegon and Newaygo counties) – provide comments to Nik Kalejs (kalejsg@michigan.gov)

Tamarack Lake State Game Area (Eaton County) – provide comments to Sara Schaefer (schaefers1@michigan.gov)

Within these proposals is the sections on approved recreational use:
Recreational Use
FWSGA provides limited recreational use. Hunting is the most common use of the
property followed by hiking and wildlife viewing. State game areas in southern Michigan
are under continual pressure for other uses, however under Federal and State
regulations, recreational and commercial uses on the area that are not incidental to our
management for the purposes described above are generally not allowed. Some of
these uses can be allowed, under the following circumstances:
1. The uses do not interfere or conflict with the wildlife conservation purposes of the
area described above.
2. The Department has no obligations to determine if requested uses would conflict
or interfere; the burden of determining must remain with those requesting the
uses.
3. The requested uses cannot be exclusive of other allowable uses and must not
result in the Department losing management control of any portion of the
area.
4. A lack of a specific prohibition in rules and regulations for the area does not
constitute approval of the activity.
5. The Department always reserves the ability to disallow activities previously
allowed as wildlife conservation needs dictate.
Additionally, the Department will continue to monitor any existing commercial and
recreational uses for interference with the intended purposes of the area as described in
this plan.

Not only are these "rules" vague, but they appear to be an attempt to shut these areas down to target shooting through the guise of conservation.