# Locked Constructed Ground Blind Question



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

dead short said:


> This is what the Wildlife Conservation Order says..... "(4) The placement or use of a ground blind on publicly owned lands shall in no way convey exclusive hunting rights to the area surrounding that blind."
> 
> It does not address either locking or use of the blind, only the area surrounding the blind.


Thanks, you made your post as I was writing mine.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

dead short said:


> This is what the Wildlife Conservation Order says..... "(4) The placement or use of a ground blind on publicly owned lands shall in no way convey exclusive hunting rights to the area surrounding that blind."
> 
> It does not address either locking or use of the blind, only the area surrounding the blind.



Thanks for giving input deadshort! 

If you are called to a scene where a guy leaves a tree stand out and someone beats him to that stand on state land and refuses to let the owner hunt it that morning .....how would handle it?


----------



## ibthetrout (Sep 24, 2003)

DirtySteve said:


> Thanks for giving input deadshort!
> 
> If you are called to a scene where a guy leaves a tree stand out and someone beats him to that stand on state land and refuses to let the owner hunt it that morning .....how would handle it?


What if you came out and someone is using your stand and it's the only one you have. Can you legally leave that person with the hunting spot, but take your equipment else where? I get that others can legally hunt your stand, but how do you reclaim your property if it is needed at the time?


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

ibthetrout said:


> What if you came out and someone is using your stand and it's the only one you have. Can you legally leave that person with the hunting spot, but take your equipment else where? I get that others can legally hunt your stand, but how do you reclaim your property if it is needed at the time?


If it is your stand, you take it. You can not be deprived of your lawful property or the use of it without due process.
As was stated earlier, there is no law that says you do not have the right to use the stand if someone else got to it first. The rule says that putting your name and address on it to make it legal does not guarantee exclusive use. There is no law that I can find that says you can not take back your own property. In other words, putting the stand on public property does not mean that you give up all rights to it.
On thing that you can do is secure a locked cage or bar on the seat area that would prevent someone from sitting in it.


----------



## dead short (Sep 15, 2009)

The way the WCO is currently written, the owner of a stand could take the stand. There is also wording that would allow the issuance of a cite to someone simply "using" the stand w/o putting their name and address on it. It seems to me that if I owned a stand I wouldn't want someone else putting their name on it. 

I'm going to call Lansing to try to get a history of the changes that have been made over the years to that section (for my own interest). I know a treestand on public property has always been thought of as first come, first served. 


Sec. 2.8 An individual may hunt with a crossbow or a bow and arrow from a scaffold, raised platform, or tree. An individual taking deer, elk, or bear with a firearm may use a scaffold, raised platform, or tree pursuant to all other hunting regulations. An individual taking fox or coyote with a firearm one-half hour before sunrise to one- half hour after sunset may use a scaffold, raised platform, or tree, pursuant to all other hunting regulations. An individual taking small game that are not migratory game birds with a shotgun may use a scaffold, raised platform, or tree pursuant to all other hunting regulations. In taking an animal, an individual shall not do any of the following on publicly owned lands

(1) Permanently construct or affix to a tree or other natural feature a scaffold, platform, ladder, steps or any other device to assist in climbing a tree, or use any item that penetrates the cambium of a tree in the construction or affixing of any device to assist in climbing a tree.

(2) Use or occupy a scaffold, raised platform, ladder, or step that has been permanently affixed or attached to any tree or other natural feature.

(3) Nothing in this section shall prohibit a scaffold or platform temporarily affixed to a tree by use of a T-bolt or similar device supplied by the manufacturer at the time the scaffold or platform was purchased.

(4) Use or occupy a scaffold or raised platform without having first etched, engraved, implanted, burned, printed, or painted on the scaffold or raised platform, the name and address of the user in legible English easily read from the ground.

(5) Use, occupy, or place a scaffold, raised platform, ladder, steps, or any other device to assist in climbing a treeif the scaffold, raised platform, ladder, steps, or other device is on public lands earlier than September 1 of eachyear or is not removed by March 1.

History Note: Am. 13, 1993, Eff. Sep 1, 1993; Am. 9, 1995, Eff. Jan 1, 1996; Am. 1, 1998, Eff. May 15, 1998; Am. 10, 1998, Eff. Jun 15, 1998; Am. 11,2007, Eff. Jun 8, 2007; Am. 2, 2009, Eff. Mar 6, 2009, with a sunset provision regarding the use of the crossbow effective Mar 6, 2012; Am. 17, 2010, Eff. Aug 13, 2010; Am. 6, 2013, Eff. May 10, 2013; Am. 14, 2013, Eff. Jul 12, 2013; Am. 5, 2014, Eff. Apr 11, 2014; Am. 3, 2015, Eff. May 8, 2015.


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

dead short said:


> The way the WCO is currently written, the owner of a stand could take the stand. There is also wording that would allow the issuance of a cite to someone simply "using" the stand w/o putting their name and address on it. It seems to me that if I owned a stand I wouldn't want someone else putting their name on it.
> 
> I'm going to call Lansing to try to get a history of the changes that have been made over the years to that section (for my own interest). I know a treestand on public property has always been thought of as first come, first served.
> 
> ...


This is an angle that I did not think of. In order for someone to use another's stand, they have to put their name and address on it, otherwise, their use would be illegal.
According to #4, the user's name and address would have to be physically placed on the stand by one of the methods specified, in other words, permanently affixed. Simply putting the name and address on a piece of paper and taping it to the stand would not suffice.

"4) Use or occupy a scaffold or raised platform without having first etched, engraved, implanted, burned, printed, or painted on the scaffold or raised platform, the name and address of the user in legible English easily read from the ground."


----------



## malainse (Sep 2, 2002)

That part also slipped by me. That is why is great to have a dnr officer here. Thanks


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

petronius said:


> This is an angle that I did not think of. In order for someone to use another's stand, they have to put their name and address on it, otherwise, their use would be illegal.
> According to #4, the user's name and address would have to be physically placed on the stand by one of the methods specified, in other words, permanently affixed. Simply putting the name and address on a piece of paper and taping it to the stand would not suffice.
> 
> "4) Use or occupy a scaffold or raised platform without having first etched, engraved, implanted, burned, printed, or painted on the scaffold or raised platform, the name and address of the user in legible English easily read from the ground."


One more thing. If another used your stand or blind and put their name and address on it without your permission, that could be considered vandalism. Of course it would be stupid for someone to leave their name and address on property they were vandalizing. :lol:
So it seems that to legally use another persons stand, or blind you would need to have permission from the owner. Without this authorization, the act of putting your name and address on it would be destroying private property.


----------



## DirtySteve (Apr 9, 2006)

petronius said:


> One more thing. If another used your stand or blind and put their name and address on it without your permission, that could be considered vandalism. Of course it would be stupid for someone to leave their name and address on property they were vandalizing. :lol:
> So it seems that to legally use another persons stand, or blind you would need to have permission from the owner. Without this authorization, the act of putting your name and address on it would be destroying private property.



Ok this really interests me now. It will be interesting to see what he comes back with.

I don't hunt others stands......but hypothetically if I did and received a ticket in this case for hunting a legal stand with someone else's name on it I would fight that one with a judge for sure.


----------



## dead short (Sep 15, 2009)

DirtySteve said:


> Ok this really interests me now. It will be interesting to see what he comes back with.
> 
> I don't hunt others stands......but hypothetically if I did and received a ticket in this case for hunting a legal stand with someone else's name on it I would fight that one with a judge for sure.


Although everyone is allowed to have their day in court, the argument would probably prove to be for naught. The WCO, as written now, requires the "users" name, not the "owners", although they would/could be the same.

This whole concept is quite different than past interpretations. I know hunters that only use legal stands the run across in the SGA. They simply don't want to risk one of their own being stolen.


----------



## miruss (Apr 18, 2003)

petronius said:


> One more thing. If another used your stand or blind and put their name and address on it without your permission, that could be considered vandalism. Of course it would be stupid for someone to leave their name and address on property they were vandalizing. :lol:
> So it seems that to legally use another persons stand, or blind you would need to have permission from the owner. Without this authorization, the act of putting your name and address on it would be destroying private property.


Nothing in there about giving permission!!! If your going the that route your own son or wife couldn't use it!!


----------



## dead short (Sep 15, 2009)

miruss said:


> Nothing in there about giving permission!!! If your going the that route your own son or wife couldn't use it!!


I think he means giving permission to put their name on it.


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

dead short said:


> I think he means giving permission to put their name on it.


Correct.
I have a feeling that a general office worker came up with the wording about putting the name and address on the stand not guaranteeing exclusive use. Why that wording is in the hunting guide as it is, is beyond me. It should have been explained better. Maybe you can raise these points with the higher ups in Lansing.


----------



## Downriver Tackle (Dec 24, 2004)

What about having multiple users names? For instance, if my son, wife, and I all use the same stand(same address), depending on who is hunting that stand that day.


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

Downriver Tackle said:


> What about having multiple users names? For instance, if my son, wife, and I all use the same stand(same address), depending on who is hunting that stand that day.


That is a great idea. I saw nothing in the rules that say you can't have multiple users.


----------



## dead short (Sep 15, 2009)

I'd go along with that.


----------



## MossyHorns (Apr 14, 2011)

DirtySteve said:


> Making your ladder stand unable for others to use is illegal. You cannot create exclusivity when you hang your treestand or place a tent blind/ground blind on public property. It has to be first come first serve. You may not like it but it is the law.
> 
> As I stated before....it would be illegal for me to break your locks but it is just as illegal for you to lock it.


I like the law even more now that dead short gave his take on it. It sounds like you may not like the law. Maybe next time you should actually know the law before telling someone they are breaking it.


----------



## brushbuster (Nov 9, 2009)

So what about the abandonment thing? If a stand is left later than the specified date what can become of that stand?
Not asking for opinions. If. It is abandoned does that mean it is up for grabs? Would really like to know the answer from a legal standpoint. Not an individuals ethics.


----------



## Downriver Tackle (Dec 24, 2004)

brushbuster said:


> So what about the abandonment thing? If a stand is left later than the specified date what can become of that stand?
> Not asking for opinions. If. It is abandoned does that mean it is up for grabs? Would really like to know the answer from a legal standpoint. Not an individuals ethics.



I'd say that it's still private property and subject to theft laws. Removal would have to be by a law enforcement person for the violation. Kinda like you can't steal a car because it's illegally parked, but the cops can tow it.


----------



## brushbuster (Nov 9, 2009)

Downriver Tackle said:


> I'd say that it's still private property and subject to theft laws. Removal would have to be by a law enforcement person for the violation. Kinda like you can't steal a car because it's illegally parked, but the cops can tow it.


Thanks for your opinion. I think it is up for grabs since the state regards it as abandoned property much like furniture left on the curb


----------

