Caught on Camera: Why Michigan Hunters Are Suing the DNR Over “State-Sponsored Trespassing”

By Derrick R. Stallings – HuntingOfficer.com

For generations, the phrase “a man’s home is his castle” has been a cornerstone of American property rights. But for many Michigan hunters and rural landowners, that castle has a major security flaw: the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (DNR).

A pair of high-profile lawsuits filed in late 2024 and early 2025 are now challenging the DNR’s long-standing power to enter private land without a warrant. At the center of the storm is a professional hunter, a “Buck Muffin,” and a legal loophole known as the Open Fields Doctrine.

The Incident: Mark Luster vs. the DNR

The most prominent case involves professional hunter Mark Luster. In October 2024, Luster shot a trophy-sized whitetail buck on his 82-acre property, which he manages through a company specifically for research and hunting.

However, his victory was short-lived. According to court filings, a DNR Conservation Officer, acting on an anonymous tip about illegal baiting, entered Luster’s private property. The lawsuit alleges that the officer:

• Trespassed without a warrant: Entering the 82-acre tract despite “No Trespassing” signs.
• Tampered with Evidence: Luster’s own cellular trail cameras allegedly captured the officer covering the camera lens for 14 minutes while he collected soil samples.
• Malicious Prosecution: Luster claims the officer used “anonymous tips” and outdated photos of a “Buck Muffin” (a grain-based deer attractant) from months prior to the hunting season to justify a search warrant after the fact.

Luster is now suing for compensatory and punitive damages, claiming the officer’s actions damaged his business, his reputation, and his Fourth Amendment rights.

The Legal Loophole: What is the “Open Fields Doctrine”?

Most citizens assume that law enforcement needs a warrant or “probable cause” to enter their property. Under the Fourth Amendment, this is true for your home and the immediate area around it (known as the curtilage).

However, a 1924 Supreme Court ruling established the Open Fields Doctrine, which suggests that “open fields” do not receive the same protection as houses. The Michigan DNR has used this for decades to justify walking onto private hunting land, hopping fences, and even cutting locks to check for baiting or poaching—all without a warrant.

A Legislative Groundswell

The lawsuits have sparked a firestorm in Lansing. In November 2024, the Michigan House passed House Bills 4073 and 4421 with bipartisan support. These bills aim to close the loophole by:

1. Requiring Warrants: Forcing DNR officers to obtain a search warrant before entering private property, just like the State Police or local Sheriffs.
2. Limiting Surveillance: Preventing the department from placing “spy cameras” on private land without judicial oversight.
3. Preserving Constitutional Rights: Explicitly stating that the state constitution protects private acreage from unreasonable searches.

State Representative Dave Prestin (R-Cedar River) has been vocal about the issue, stating, “No other law enforcement agency in the state twists the law to grant themselves permission to violate our constitution… the DNR cannot hold themselves above our constitution.”

The DNR’s Defense

The DNR maintains that their ability to enter private land is essential for protecting “public trust” resources. Because deer and fish don’t respect property lines, the DNR argues that if they can’t enter private land to investigate a trail of blood or a report of poaching, thousands of illegal kills would go unpunished.

Chief Jason Haines of the DNR’s Law Enforcement Division has stated that they already require officers to document “reasonable suspicion” before entering, but the agency fears that requiring a full warrant for every field check would make conservation enforcement nearly impossible.

Why This Matters for Hunters

If you own a small plot or a large hunting camp in Michigan, this case could redefine your rights.

• Privacy: Can an officer watch you from the bushes on your own land?
• Due Process: Is an anonymous tip from a disgruntled neighbor enough to justify an officer cutting your gate lock?
• Future of Hunting: If these lawsuits succeed, Michigan could become a leader in rolling back the Open Fields Doctrine, shifting the power back to the landowner.

The Bottom Line

Two major lawsuits are currently moving through the courts. There have been no final rulings yet, but the momentum is shifting. Whether you see the DNR as a necessary guardian of wildlife or an overreaching agency infringing on civil liberties, one thing is certain: the “Open Fields” are getting a lot more crowded with lawyers.

What do you think? Should DNR officers have the right to enter your land without a warrant to protect wildlife, or is your property line the absolute limit? Let us know in the comments!

*AI was used to help research this post