ANGLERS

OF THE Organization Headquarters

PO Box 200
AU SABLE Grayling, MI 49738
Telephone: (989) 348-8462
Fax: (989) 348-2541
An affiliated member of the Federation of Fly Fishers www.AuSableAnglers.org
Founded 1987

May 25, 2023 Via Email and First Class Mail

Shannon Lott, Director

Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Executive Division
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, MI 48909
DNR-Director@Michigan.gov

In Re: Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Natural Resources

(“DNR”) and Department of Military and Veterans Affairs (“DMVA”) Regarding State
Land Use Permits for Military Exercises Related to Camp Grayling dated April 21, 2023

Dear Director,

In reviewing the above referenced MOU, the Board of the Anglers of the Au
Sable have a number of questions and are seeking clarification on several points in order
to understand how it will be implemented, and to enable us to explain this to our
membership accurately.

1. The DNR website states that the DMVA “may annually apply for land use
permits”, but the DNR Policy and Procedure 26.04.04 specifies that completed
applications for event and non-event land use permits be submitted at least 60 days in
advance of a proposed use start date. Will the DMVA be required to submit applications
for such permits only once a year or at least 60 days before each proposed land use?

2. Section Ia of the MOU stipulates a “narrowly tailored use of tax reverted State
Land by the Michigan National Guard for the purpose of conducting training exercises
related to Camp Grayling”. In comparing one section (Chester South Township,
T29N,R2W) of the PDF map which accompanies the MOU to the Open Data GIS map of
tax reverted land (https://gis-michigan.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/midnr::michigan-
dnr-tax-reverted-lands/explore?location=44.831936%2C-84.603893%2C11.00 ), parcels
in Section 15,16, 21, and 22 appear to be depicted on the PDF map, but are not included

1
in the Open Data map. Anglers seeks clarification as to which map is an accurate
depiction of the tax reverted land which is eligible for permitting under the MOU.

3. Both Section Ia and Section IIb references use by the “DMVA and Michigan
National Guard” and “National Guard members”, respectively. Will the permittees under
the MOU be limited to the Michigan National Guard, i.e. the Michigan Army National
Guard and the Michigan Air National Guard which are the only branches of military
under the auspice of the DMVA?

4. Section IIId states military training areas will not take place in “protected and
sensitive areas”. Can you provide a definition of “protected and sensitive”?

Related to this issue, the white paper provided by the DMVA in connection with the
original request for an additional 168,000 acres states:

• “CG manages its natural resources in accordance with the CG Integrated Natural
Resources Management Plan (INRMP), which has been developed by CG ENV pursuant
to the Sikes Act.
• The Sikes Act mandates that every military installation that impacts natural
resources needs to develop and implement an INRMP that is approved by military and
non-military stakeholders – in the case of CG, the non-military stakeholders are the
MDNR and the USFWS.”

What environmental assessments will be required before a land use permit is granted by
the DNR?

5. Under Section IIIf, can you advise the method that public service announcements
will be conveyed to the public, what information will be conveyed, and how far in
advance such notifications will be required?

6. Section IIIg1 delineates “small formation activity” involving less than 500
National Guard members and up to 100 “affiliated partner members”. Can you define
“affiliated partner members”? Would this include third party contractors and/or military
personnel that are not members of the Michigan National Guard?

7. Section IIIg2 specifies “Controlled trials of cyber and electronic warfare

technologies”. The use of the word “trials” seems to indicate an experimental and/or
testing of technologies. Is this true? Please define what “trials” means.

2
8. Cyber: It should be noted that cyber activity need not include any additional land
to implement (i.e., Col Kelly Hughes quote from 2015: “We can do this mission from
anywhere-we do not have to physically relocate to do it. As long as we have the
connectivity, we can operate from home station”; Michigan National Guard has
successfully conducted cyber warfare training on its existing base during its Operation
“Cyber Strike”; Michigan National Guard already has 4000 miles of fiber on its Merit
Cyber Range). Therefore, we question the necessity for additional land for cyber
activities, and ask that you indicate what rationale has been given to the DNR for the
inclusion of cyber activities in the MOU?

Electronic Warfare: Electronic warfare technologies encompass the entire

electromagnetic spectrum (radio wave, microwave, infrared, ultraviolet, x-ray and
gamma rays) and conceivably include electromagnetic attack, support and/or protection.
There are a myriad of emerging electromagnetic weapons being utilized and developed
for use by the military. Will the DNR require that the weapons to be utilized under a land
use permit are disclosed to the DNR staff on applications? Once identified, who within
the DNR has the expertise to evaluate the possible effects of such weapons on people,
wildlife, and the environment?

Does DNR have studies or other information that confirms that the electromagnetic
warfare weaponry is not experimental in the sense that the nature and scope of its effects
on people, as well as flora and fauna, are clearly established and well-known? If so, what
are the known effects? If not, will DNR require this information prior to considering
authorizing the use of such weaponry on Michigan property for training or any other
purpose?

9. Section IIIg3 specifies low impact or light maneuver training. What activities fall
within these descriptions?

10. IIIh1 specifies that live fire or any similar kinetic activity will not be permitted.
Many electromagnetic warfare weapons, such as the Army’s patented EMP rifle
modification which turns a standard M4 rifle into an electromagnetic pulse gun, do not
utilize ammunition traditionally defined as “live”- but electromagnetic directed energy
may be more destructive than bullets. Other anti-drone weapons may utilize radio and/or
additional technologies which may interfere with communications and/or navigation of
wildlife such as birds and bats. How will the DNR evaluate and/or regulate the use of
electromagnetic energy?

11. Section IIIh3 specifies that activity within 3000 feet of any inland lakes or
designated trout streams listed in Fisheries Order 210.23 will not be permitted. Does this
include the airspace as well as land?

3
In addition to hydrology, wetlands are of primary conservation concern to Anglers.
Wetlands play an extremely important part in maintaining the health of the watersheds, as
highly productive and biologically diverse systems that enhance water quality, control
erosion, maintain stream flows, sequester carbon, and provide a home to at least one third
of all threatened and endangered species. In comparing one section (Chester South
Township, T29N, R2W) of the PDF map which accompanies the MOU to the National
Wetland Inventory, the following quarter section parcels appear to contain wetlands*:

Section 15: NESE, NWSE, SESE, NWSW, SWSW, NENW, SENW

Section 16: SWSE
Section 21 NWNE, NENE
Section 22: NENE

Will wetlands be excluded?

12. Section IIIi specifies that the Michigan National Guard will pay for their land uses
permit applications according to the same fee schedule that applies to the general public.
Does this mean that the DMVA will not be exempt under the fee guidelines as a
governmental agency?

13. Section V states that the DNR and DMVA assume no liability for any actions or
activities conducted under the MOU, except to the extent that recourse or remedies are
provided by federal or state law. If the DNR’s definition of “affiliated partner members”
extends beyond members of the Michigan Army National Guard and/or the Michigan Air
National Guard (Section IIIg1), will the DNR require insurance or bonding? If so, how
will the amount be calculated?

In the event of any environmental contamination or degradation, would the

DMVA/National Guard be held accountable in accordance with EGLE remediation
standards and procedures? Or would they instead be governed by the provisions of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980
(CERCLA), as seems to be the case in connection with the cleanup of PFAS
contamination?

14. Section VII states that the MOU may be modified upon the mutual agreement of
the DNR and DMVA. Will the public be notified of any such modification, and, if so, in
what manner and with what timeframe and process for public comment will be provided?

15. We note that the MOU does not contain provision for complaints or reports of
violation from the public who will be using this land simultaneously with the National
Guard. How would these be received and responded to by the department? In the event of

4
violations by the National Guard, what will be the remedies? By what process may
claims be filed with DNR, DMVA or other offices and agencies involved in these
activities and what standards govern such claims? Is the statement about not assuming
liability intended to constitute an assertion of government immunity from liability?

Anglers would like to meet with the department representatives to address these questions
at your earliest convenience.

Awaiting your reply, I remain,

Sincerely yours,

_________________________
Joe Hemming
President
Anglers of the Au Sable

* A FOIA request for the GIS shape file(s) for the parcels identified in the MOU pdf
map, but as of the date hereof, are advised that the records do not exist. Therefore, the
accuracy of the parcels included on the pdf map cannot be verified.