Michigan Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules  
Administrative Rules Division (ARD)  
MOAHR-Rules@michigan.gov  
REQUEST FOR RULEMAKING (RFR)  
1. Department:  
Natural Resources  
2. Bureau:  
Law Enforcement Division  
3. Promulgation type:  
Full Process  
4. Title of proposed rule set:  
State Land Use Rules  
5. Rule numbers or rule set range of numbers:  
R 299.921 – R 299.933  
6. Estimated time frame:  
6 months  
Name of person filling out RFR:  
Jennifer Wolf  
E-mail of person filling out RFR:  
WOLFJ1@michigan.gov  
Phone number of person filling out RFR:  
517-719-0028  
Address of person filling out RFR:  
525 W Allegan St, Lansing Mi  
7. Describe the general purpose of these rules, including any problems the changes are intended  
to address.  
Rules that list various unlawful acts for individuals who use or occupy lands under the control of  
the department. The rules also provide certain exemptions, penalty for violation of rules, and  
enforcement authorities.  
8. Please cite the specific promulgation authority for the rules (i.e. department director,  
commission, board, etc.).  
MCL 324.504(1) states, “the department shall promulgate rules to protect and preserve lands and  
other property under its control from depredation, damage, or destruction or wrongful or improper  
use or occupancy.”  
A. Please list all applicable statutory references (MCLs, Executive Orders, etc.).  
MCL 324.504(1).  
B. Are the rules mandated by any applicable constitutional or statutory provision? If so, please  
explain.  
Yes. As cited above, MCL 324.504 requires the Department to “promulgate rules to protect and  
preserve land and other property under its control from depredation, damage, or destruction or  
wrongful or improper use or occupancy.”  
9. Please describe the extent to which the rules conflict with or duplicate similar rules,  
compliance requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.  
MCL 24.239  
RFR-Page 2  
R 299.924 conflicts with R 299.927 regarding whether a hunting dog must be leashed on certain  
state-managed land. This conflict causes confusion for land users and enforcement personnel and  
does not reflect the original intent of the rules that hunting dogs being used on state-managed are  
not required to be on a leash. This amendment is designed to provide clarity and consistency to the  
rule provisions related to the leash requirement.  
10. Is the subject matter of the rules currently contained in any guideline, handbook, manual,  
instructional bulletin, form with instructions, or operational memoranda?  
No.  
11. Are the rules listed on the department’s annual regulatory plan as rules to be processed  
for the current year?  
Yes. However, this amendment was not anticipated in the annual regulatory plan.  
12. Will the proposed rules be promulgated under Section 44 of the Administrative Procedures  
Act, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.244, or under the full rulemaking process?  
Full Process  
13. Please describe the extent to which the rules exceed similar regulations, compliance  
requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.  
R 299.924 exceeds the leash requirements for hunting dogs in R 299.927. Under R 299.924  
hunting dogs are required to be on a leash on State-owned land other than parks, recreation areas,  
game and wildlife areas, designated campgrounds and access sites. R 299.927 permits hunting  
dogs to be off leash in those areas.  
14. Do the rules incorporate the recommendations received from the public regarding any  
complaints or comments regarding the rules? If yes, please explain.  
No.  
15. If amending an existing rule set, please provide the date of the last evaluation of the rules  
and the degree, if any, to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed  
the regulatory activity covered by the rules since the last evaluation.  
The rule set was last reviewed in 2018. There are no factors that have changed the regulatory  
activity covered by the rules since the last evaluation.  
16. Are there any changes or developments since implementation that demonstrate there is no  
continued need for the rules, or any portion of the rules?  
No.  
17. Is there an applicable decision record (as defined in MCL 24.203(6) and required by MCL  
24.239(2))? If so, please attach the decision record.  
No  
MCL 24.239  
;