Use of unmanned aircraft authorization to assist in location and recovering deceased big game
Summary
SF 741 amends Minnesota’s prohibition on computer-assisted remote hunting to create a narrow exception for the use of small unmanned aircraft systems, or drones, to locate deceased big game for retrieval. The bill keeps the existing ban on remotely controlled weapons used to take wild animals, but adds a new provision allowing a person with a Federal Aviation Administration remote pilot certificate to use a small unmanned aircraft system for this purpose beginning January 1, 2027.
The bill also directs the commissioner of natural resources, working with interested stakeholders, to study and recommend any statutory or policy changes needed to support this use of unmanned aircraft. Those recommendations must address licensure and insurance requirements, equipment standards, whether an annual fee is needed to administer the new authority, protections for landowners’ property rights, and any other relevant issues. The report is due to legislative leaders by January 1, 2026.
Impact
The bill would amend Minnesota Statutes section 97B.115 by carving out a limited exception to the state’s remote-hunting prohibition and authorizing drone use for locating dead big game for recovery. It would not change the ban on remote operation of weapons to take wildlife, but it would create a new legal pathway for certified drone operators and likely require future administrative or legislative action to set licensing, insurance, fee, and property-access rules. The measure affects hunters, drone operators, landowners, and the Department of Natural Resources.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears generally pragmatic and limited in scope, aiming to modernize wildlife recovery practices while preserving the core anti-remote-hunting law. The absence of recorded votes or committee testimony suggests there is no documented public controversy in the provided materials, but the bill’s structure indicates an effort to balance hunting assistance with regulatory caution and landowner protections.
Contention
The main potential points of contention are how broadly drone use should be allowed, what qualifications and insurance should be required for operators, whether an annual fee should be imposed, and how to protect private property rights when drones are used to locate game. Stakeholders likely to differ include hunters seeking more efficient recovery methods, landowners concerned about trespass or privacy, and regulators focused on safety, enforcement, and administrative burden.