Shotgun zone for taking deer eliminated, and counties allowed to regulate the type of firearms and ammunition used for taking deer.
Summary
HF2245 would eliminate Minnesota’s statutory “shotgun use area” for deer hunting and repeal the existing law that divides the state into a shotgun-only zone and an all-legal-firearms zone. Under current law, hunters in the shotgun use area are limited to legal shotguns with single-slug shells, muzzle-loading long guns, and legal handguns during the regular firearms season. The bill removes that statewide geographic restriction.
In its place, the bill gives county boards limited authority to regulate deer-hunting firearms locally. After notice and a public hearing, a county board could adopt an ordinance restricting the type of firearms used to hunt deer within the county, but any such ordinance could last no more than one year and would require a new notice-and-hearing process to be renewed. The bill therefore shifts firearm regulation for deer hunting from a state-imposed regional rule to a more localized, temporary county option.
Impact
The bill would amend Minnesota Statutes section 97B.031 to add county authority over deer-hunting firearm restrictions and would repeal section 97B.318 entirely. That repeal would remove the current statutory shotgun-use-area map and the associated statewide firearm limitations for deer hunting in that area. Counties that choose to act could impose their own short-term restrictions on firearm types, but only through ordinance and only after public notice and hearing.
Sentiment
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or formal support/opposition in the materials supplied. Based on the bill’s structure, the measure appears to be framed as a deregulatory change at the state level paired with optional local control, which may appeal to both hunters seeking broader firearm choices and local governments wanting flexibility. The absence of recorded proceedings means the overall sentiment cannot be assessed beyond the bill’s stated policy approach.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the balance between statewide hunting regulation and county-level discretion. Supporters may favor ending the shotgun-only zone as an outdated restriction and allowing counties to tailor rules to local conditions, while opponents may argue that a patchwork of county ordinances could create confusion for hunters and inconsistent wildlife-management practices. Another likely issue is whether county authority should extend to firearm and ammunition restrictions at all, given the traditional role of the state in setting uniform game-and-fish rules.