Holding On for Deer Life in PM Township

[XLFD]

Less than three weeks after the lawsuit I filed seeking an injunction against the deer cull sponsored by the City of Ludington led to their leaders backing out of that expensive contract they had with the USDA, I have received feedback from both sides.  While this has been predominantly positive by the majority who were against that deer cull in the first place, I fear that the small minority who thought it was a good idea to have high-powered rifles being shot on school grounds will probably not be pleased by what I was able to accomplish late this week out in PM Township.

Quite simply summarized, I was able to shut down three weeks of deer culls in their township parks by showing how their own recently passed laws made their Deer Management Plan (DMP, aka deer culling) illegal.  I gave them notice that I would seek an injunction against further violations of these township laws until they can figure out how to make such operations in compliance. 

This wasn't a hastily made proposition I would make to the township.  I have reviewed the DMP and associated records provided by the township, reviewed the township's charter and code, chatted with the township supervisor over this topic, and correlated what I gathered.  I must admit being influenced by some folks in Ludington and the township who hoped I could do something about this culling operation, and initially not believing that I could help their cause because things weren't as egregious as it was in the proposed school forest culling plan, which violated laws at all levels and had nothing regarding safety measures in conducting some very dangerous methods of killing.

This was the notice I sent:

Notice of Intent to seek injunction against deer management operations in PM Charter Township

"Mr. Bleau and fellow commissioners of Pere Marquette Charter Township,

On October 26, 2021, this very PM Board unanimously passed an ordinance as described in the minutes:  "Board members conducted the second reading of proposed Ordinance No. 153, Parks and Recreation Ordinance, an ordinance to provide for the maintenance, management and control of parks and places of recreation within Pere Marquette Charter Township and to provide the penalties for the violations thereof. "

This ordinance has been codified in the general code, in relevant part as follows:

"Sec. 22-34. - Firearms and weapons.  It shall be unlawful for any person to: (1) Discharge a firearm of any kind or description; (2) Shoot and/or discharge an air gun, gas gun, spring-loaded gun or slingshot; or (3) Shoot with a bow and arrow, except during established hunting seasons on lands open to hunting. This provision does not apply to a target range or archery range officially established by the township board or its representatives."

"Sec. 22-36:  Wildlife.  It is unlawful for any person to trap, kill, wound, capture or intentionally disturb any bird, animal or other wildlife, except during established hunting and trapping seasons on lands open to hunting or trapping. The township board may except from the provision of this rule township parks and recreation areas, or parts thereof, when in the opinion of the township board such exception will best serve the public interest."

In its inception and execution, the township's 2023 Deer Management Plan fails to recognize these fresh and active sections of the law in PMCT.  A review of the relevant PMCT Board's minutes since these laws became effective, have shown that the board has never taken action to suspend these sections for this plan's effectuation, nor is there any part of the 2023 Deer Management Plan that shows any expected obeisance to these laws in its ten pages, to the contrary it explains how the PMCT and their agents will violate them to accomplish their stated goals. 

As a result it appears that the PMCT and its law enforcement agents are, and have been, in direct violation of the law, and I will seek to enjoin further non-compliance through civil action if the deer management efforts are not immediately suspended administratively for now and properly deliberated over at your next meeting so that the board can somehow square the circle regarding the obvious conflict in the township's laws and the 2023 Deer Management Plan.  

Such injunction will be sought early next week if I see no evidence that administrative suspension of the program is immediately forthcoming.  Please forward this message to the four other commissioners who have chosen not to provide their email information to the public they supposedly represent.  Thank you for your consideration of these points now, and in the future."

Verily, the PM Township administrative staff did not immediately capitulate, rather Mr. Bleau sent me back a letter that day with an initial defense and a vow to take it up with the township attorney the next day.  I had no argument with their defense as it claimed that another section (22-37) allowed for hunting under specially described circumstances, other than by acknowledging that the DMP clearly makes the case that culling is not to be confused with hunting, so that section 22-37 would not apply against them; however, the two sections I supplied could not so easily be dismissed, as 22-36 would be violated whenever a deer is wounded or killed by cullers, and 22-34 would be violated whenever a shot was fired.  

The township attorney apparently thought I had a point as they counseled the township to administratively postpone the DMP's culling operations until the next board meeting on February 14, 2023 at which points their options would be assessed.  I urge both sides of this issue to go to this Valentine's Day meeting at 4 PM with their sweethearts and argue from their heart what they want to happen as concerns the last two scheduled deer culls (on the evenings of February 16th and 23rd.

And before you either beatify me as the future patron saint of deer or curse my name as a cloven-hooved devil, understand that my main motivation in both cases is that I want my government agencies to follow the same laws (of which they create too many) that the rest of us are required to follow.  Then explain to us exactly why all the taxpayers are footing the bill for doing what many hunters would gladly pay good money to do more of if the government would just get out of the way and let them bag more deer during hunting season.

My message to those calling for these illegal culls by government agents is to get yourself--and all those you have any influence over-- to go out and buy a hunting bow, gun, ammo, and accoutrements and legally reduce the excess deer population you believe exists in a county that had 4800 documented lawful deer kills by hunters alone in 2022.  Quit encouraging government to waste public resources in getting involved with something the people should be, want to be, and are, doing.

[Freedom Seeker]

I'm glad PM Township is not as hard-headed and hard-hearted as it seems the City of Ludington is, in that they have at least taken temporary consideration of your warning of an Injunction against another deer cull.

I fully agree with you, let the deer hunters take a couple more. Feed their families or donate to a community cause. Use local resources (hunters) who know the area rather than pay Stange DNR people who don't live in the area, do not know the lay of the land, the buildings around or their neighbors living near where Strangers may be shooting.

An interesting point, last week as I was having my car repaired and as I sat in the waiting room of a local shop, two men started a conversation about "that Rotta" stopping the deer cull. One man seemed quite annoyed that his wife's plants were being eaten by the deer and Rotta making another lawsuit. But, the same Arguer seemed less annoyed by a part-time neighbor who weekly feeds piles of corn to "about 50". Evidently the neighbor comes on the weekend, feeds the herd of about 50 deer and goes back to her primary home weekdays. "By about Tuesday" the corn is gone and the deer "have to find other food sources" i.e. their hosta and cedar trees, etc.

My question is, how about stopping "feeding" piles of corn to deer? Those who may enjoy feeding and watching the deer are also a source of the problem aren't they? Shouldn't their neighbors be just as irritated at the "Feeders" as they are at Rotta?

P.S. The end of "A Lotta Rotta" discussion I overheard in the auto shop: it seemed X was defended by the second man "for helping clean up Scottville."

[XLFD]

You left out the part of the auto-repair story where you vigorously defended this 'Rotta' character, stridently telling them of his virtues.  Alas, even the loyal Apostle Peter denied having anything to do with Jesus three times before the rooster crowed.  

What has been lost to many in the general public is that at about the same time they were having the cull debate, they also nearly passed an ordinance that I generally disagree with on October 10th (it was sent back to committee, where they haven't really improved it yet):

Eight exceptions follow.  While I generally agree with the sentiments of this law, it troubles me that the city is intrusively regulating what we can do on our private property and beyond by making a too-broad law.  Technically, I can be grilling in the backyard or having a picnic in any park and run the risk of getting ticketed if I'm grilling or eating any food that a wild animal might find palatable.  

Sadly, the outdoor dining and food trucks that the City has promoted in the past have now been declared illegal unless you're eating at a table more than 5 ft. off the ground.  Isn't this discriminatory against midgets and children?  Poor House of Flavors, they can't let people lawfully eat their ice cream cones outside their doors:

Unless they uphold a minimum height requirement, because wildlife loves the ice cream:

Just like voluntary hunting is the answer to manage the herd, not costly culls, the answer to stopping folks from feeding the deer is to educate them, instill a duty on them when there is a deer overpopulation problem, and have them voluntarily comply, not passing a law that cannot be evenly enforced and runs the risk of being challenged by that annoying Rotta pest-- and you know he wants to.

[Freedom Seeker]

No, I did not enter into the conversation, neither denying or defending that guy Rotta. I was in a different room but one that had sight and good audible access. I'm generally not that confrontational to enter into a conversation of which I am not invited. Had I been invited, I would have set the record straight; however the respondent did a good enough job as I heard it and the conversation quickly turned to a rather mundane topic.

Keep up the good fight, X. I pray heartily that those elected and appointed and those lucky enough toget a job with the city start to realize your brilliance. How much money could they save if they listened to That Guy Rotta?

[Willy]

FS you are correct. The main reason deer are in town is because people feed them. There is plenty of food for them outside of populated areas but most animals prefer an easy meal.

X. You are right on the money. No matter what each citizens thinks of the hunting, culling or any other matter, those in  authority must follow the law. This do as I say, not as I do, attitude has been deeply ingrained in the Administrative Governments throughout the US.

It appears to me that in the PM ordinance the Township has denied the citizens a multitude of rights. As I read it "Sec. 22-34. - Firearms and weapons. does not allow for sighting in a weapon or target practice  on your own property [I'm referring to large acreage of rural property] or target practice with a bow and arrow.  Kids can't plink with a BB gun or even use a sling shot but are allowed only during hunting season?

Further more "Sec. 22-36:  Wildlife is saying that noone is allowed to use mouse or rat traps anywhere in the township unless it's during hunting season. How about that groundhog digging out the foundation of your house or outbuilding or the invading skunks and racoons. How about the coyotes trying to eat cats, small pets, ducks or chickens on your property.

What the hell were these commissioners thinking and do the citizens realize they have given up their rights.

[XLFD]

Thanks for mentioning how those laws are a bit much, because that's what I thought when I read through them, I just didn't pass along that sentiment in the notice.

Imagine kids shooting airsoft guns (many of which cannot even penetrate a plastic cup) or even paint guns for recreation, can't now because a township government, with large parts of the township of a rural character, said they can't and passed a law.  

When I was growing up, I made a giant slingshot out of the upper half of a broken pogo stick and an inner tube and shot small apples towards Mayor Krieger's kids two houses over in Scottville from a window on the top story of our barn.  It would travel on such an arc and shoot so erratic that the only thing they really had to worry about was cleaning up the apples.  Having this type of childhood amusement in PMCT would get you a visit from the sheriff and maybe a ticket nowadays.

I'm hoping that I can influence the PMCT administration team to follow Ludington's and even Scottville's move towards transparency by providing packets available to the public before meetings that would allow for the public to see what's coming up rather than be surprised a year later when a crazy law like the one's mentioned here go into effect.