Moose license lottery and auction required, moose research account established, fees established, and money appropriated.
Summary
HF1333 would change Minnesota moose hunting law by requiring the Department of Natural Resources to issue at least four moose licenses each year, with at least two awarded through an annual lottery and at least two through a public auction. It also keeps existing eligibility rules for resident hunters, adds application fees, sets a $500 price for successful auction bidders, and requires the commissioner to make moose season and license information publicly available at least 60 days before the application deadline.
The bill creates a dedicated moose research account in the game and fish fund. Revenue from moose application fees, moose licenses, and auction proceeds would be deposited into that account and appropriated to the commissioner for moose mortality, calf survival, disease and parasite monitoring, habitat research, and related moose management goals. The bill also amends nonresident hunting fee law to add the moose auction license fee to the list of nonresident hunting charges.
Impact
The bill would amend Minnesota Statutes sections 97A.431, 97A.475, and 97B.505. In practical terms, it would replace the current moose licensing structure with a mandatory lottery-and-auction system, establish new fee and bidding requirements, and direct resulting revenue into a new special account for moose research. It would also affect hunters, especially residents eligible for moose licenses and nonresidents who may participate in the auction, while giving the commissioner new administrative duties related to notice, selection, and revenue management.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill text alone, the proposal appears policy-focused and conservation-oriented, with an emphasis on funding moose research and managing a limited hunting resource through a structured allocation system.
Contention
The likely points of contention are the auction component and the inclusion of nonresidents in that auction, since those features shift some access from a traditional resident-only licensing model toward a pay-to-participate system. Hunters who favor equal access or oppose commercialization of wildlife permits may object, while supporters may view the auction as a way to raise dedicated conservation funding and expand opportunities. The mandatory annual lottery and auction requirement, along with the $500 auction fee, are the most notable changes that could draw scrutiny.