Oppose Expanded Wildlife Feeding in Michigan
Add Your Name >>>
Michigan House Bill 4593 would allow an individual to engage in feeding of wild deer and elk in the state.
Sign Here. Let The MI Legislature Know You Oppose House Bill 4593.
*The National Deer Association collects contact information for the purpose of directing your petition to the proper Michigan state legislators.
Why Oppose Michigan House Bill 4593?
Oppose Expanded Wildlife Feeding in Michigan
Please consider joining the NDA in opposing HB 4593. The removes wildlife feeding authority from the Michigan NRC and removes the exclusion of feed for deer and elk. Click below to quickly and directly let your lawmakers know that you oppose HB 4593.
Michigan House Bill 4593 (HB 4593) would allow an individual to engage in wildlife feeding, including deer and elk, if the feed is located within 300 feet of a residence and the feed is no more than two gallons at any one time.
Currently, wildlife feeding in Michigan falls under the authority of the NRC, the rulemaking body of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). As a result, the NRC can issue orders concerning deer and elk feeding in the state, including depositing, distributing, or tending of feed in an area frequented by wild, free-ranging white-tailed deer and elk to prevent them from starving or for recreational viewing.
However, HB 4593 would remove that authority from the NRC and allow wildlife and bird feeding, including of deer and elk, within 300 feet of a residence and allow the placement of up to two gallons of feed. The bill also removes the current provision that wildlife feeding must be done in a manner that excludes wild deer and elk. The NDA defines supplemental feeding as the act of placing quality food resources for the purpose of increasing dietary quality. The practice of supplemental feeding and its role in deer management have grown in terms of controversy and complexity in recent years. The NDA acknowledges the available scientific data surrounding this issue is incomplete and, at times, inconsistent. The NDA supports providing adequate food and cover for deer through habitat management programs. The NDA does not support supplemental feeding in known CWD and bovine TB areas or where this activity may disrupt natural migratory patterns of deer.
Even more, the NDA believes that deer management decisions should be left to the agencies responsible for managing the resource. In this instance, we believe the NRC is best situated to make science-based decisions regarding wildlife feeding - not the legislature.