Michigan bill to legalize wildlife feeding ignites debate amid criminal charges
The bill comes after the director of a popular animal welfare group was charged with feeding deer
Audio By Carbonatix
[
{
"name": "GPT - Leaderboard - Inline - Content",
"component": "35519556",
"insertPoint": "5th",
"startingPoint": "3",
"requiredCountToDisplay": "3",
"maxInsertions": 100,
"adList": [
{
"adPreset": "LeaderboardInline"
}
]
}
]
A push to legalize the feeding of deer and other wildlife in Michigan is reigniting a debate over public access to nature, wildlife disease prevention, and the role of state regulators.
The legislation, introduced last month with support from 45 state lawmakers — most of them Republicans — would allow residents to feed animals near their homes, despite a longstanding ban by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) aimed at curbing the spread of diseases among deer.
House Bill 4350, sponsored by Rep. Ken Borton, R-Gaylord, seeks to decriminalize wildlife and bird feeding under limited conditions. The feed must be placed within 300 feet of a residence; no more than two gallons may be distributed at one time; and it must be for recreational viewing or to prevent starvation.
“Feeding wildlife should not be a prosecutable offense in Michigan,” Borton said in a statement Wednesday. “We want our grandkids to sit by the window with bated breath when a blue jay or a black bear appears in the backyard. Those are core memories that help young people fall in love with the great outdoors. Yet, this is exactly what the DNR is taking away with their birdfeeder fear-mongering and clear abuse of law enforcement authority. They should be chasing down poachers, not little old women with an affinity for bird watching.”
The issue is personal for Borton. In 2010, he says, DNR officers cited him for baiting deer after spotting animals on the “Snowman Cam,” a livestream of his backyard where deer, birds, and other wildlife often gather. A judge later threw out the case and barred DNR officers from accessing Borton’s property without permission.
But four months later, he was ticketed again. That charge was also dismissed, but Borton said the drawn-out legal battle revealed how overzealous enforcement was harming people across the state.
“My attorney told me the DNR would probably continue to fine me and take me to court until I either ran out of money or gave up,” Borton said. “He said the only solution was changing state law. Fifteen years later, here I am still trying to do just that.”
Supporters argue the legislation is a commonsense fix to what they see as government overreach. But the bill faces steep opposition — and likely another veto — from Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who rejected similar legislation in 2021.
In her veto message at the time, Whitmer pointed to long-established research backing the current ban.
“The Natural Resource Commission’s ban on deer and elk feeding is based on strong scientific evidence, which demonstrates that feeding disrupts normal wildlife movement patterns, causing animals to congregate and thereby accelerating the spread of deadly diseases like bovine tuberculosis,” Whitmer wrote. “HB 4088 would cast aside sound disease management principles to loosen restrictions on deer and elk feeding, threatening our agricultural and hunting industries.”
The DNR’s restrictions, supported by the Natural Resources Commission, are designed to limit disease transmission among deer populations. Congregating around feeding stations increases the risk of spreading chronic wasting disease and bovine tuberculosis, contagions that have caused millions of dollars in losses for Michigan farmers and hunters.
The controversy intensified last month when the director of a well-known animal rescue nonprofit was charged with violating state wildlife conservation orders. Kelley Labonty, who runs the Detroit Animal Welfare Group (DAWG), was accused of feeding and habituating wild fawns near the organization’s rehabilitation center in Romeo. Labonty denies the charges, saying the deer had been released and were no longer under her care.
“They’re normal, healthy fawns that were released from rehabilitation, and I haven't seen them,” Labonty told CBS Detroit. “They weren’t even on our property. They were on a 500-acre open field across from us.”
Her attorney, Celeste Dunn, said internal DNR emails show officials targeted Labonty, adding: “Every taxpayer should be outraged that this has continued to go on because of a personal vendetta against my client,” Dunn said. “Looking at a video for a few minutes is not sufficient to determine if an animal is habituated.”
The DNR is also seeking to revoke Labonty’s wildlife rehabilitation permit, a move her attorney says could shut down the rescue entirely. A jury trial set for May 16 in 42-1 District Court will determine whether Labonty can continue to care for wild animals at the 25-acre DAWG facility in Romeo.
At an April 29 pretrial hearing, Assistant Macomb County Prosecutor Lisa Lozen said Labonty violated state wildlife conservation orders by keeping deer in rehabilitation longer than permitted and by improperly conditioning them with food, making them too accustomed to human contact. Dunn argued that the DNR has targeted her client for years and is using the charges to force the shutdown of her operation. She said the conflict dates back to a 2018 incident in Oakland County, when Labonty was working with officials on a response to reports of starving deer.
Macomb County Prosecutor Peter Lucido, a Republican, defended the charges, saying his office is obligated to prosecute cases where probable cause exists. In a statement Thursday, Lucido said the case is not about pet care, but about public health.
“Wild deer that have become accustomed to the presence or activities of humans pose health and safety risks,” Lucido wrote, citing the potential for disease transmission and vehicle collisions. “The MCPO is seeking to resolve this case and has given the individual charged with options that protect wildlife in an appropriate way.”
Labonty has refused a plea deal, saying it could cost her the wildlife permit that allows DAWG to care for injured animals.
“Why would we take a plea deal when we did absolutely nothing wrong?” she said. “These are criminal charges. We are not criminals.”
Michigan is not alone in dealing with this issue. Nearly 30 states have some form of restriction on feeding deer or other wildlife, though enforcement and scope vary widely. States like Illinois, Minnesota, and Colorado have bans on recreational feeding in areas where disease transmission is a concern. In other states, including Texas and Georgia, feeding is generally allowed, especially on private property, and when it’s tied to hunting or supplemental feeding in harsh winters.
In Pennsylvania, for example, deer feeding is restricted only in areas where chronic wasting disease is present. Officials there say targeted restrictions are more effective than blanket bans. In Wisconsin, wildlife officials allow feeding in some counties but prohibit it in others based on disease risk.
Critics of Michigan’s law say it takes a one-size-fits-all approach that unfairly punishes people trying to connect with nature.
The House Natural Resources and Tourism Committee has yet to vote on the measure.
