Minnesota House Bill HF2140

Minnesota 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/21/23
• Refer: 2/21/23

Caption

Compensation required for agricultural crop damaged or destroyed by wild white-tailed deer, rulemaking required, report required, and money appropriated.

Impact

The impact of HF2140 on state laws is significant, particularly concerning wildlife management regulations and agricultural policies. By enacting this legislation, the state acknowledges the economic challenges faced by farmers due to wildlife interactions and provides a structured approach for addressing these issues. The compensation provision is intended to alleviate the burden on farmers and promote agricultural stability in regions affected by deer populations. Moreover, the bill's requirement for rulemaking ensures that there will be oversight in how compensation is handled, which may involve state agencies in the execution of these new mandates.

Summary

House File 2140 aims to address the issue of agricultural crop damage caused by wild white-tailed deer. The bill mandates that the state provide compensation to farmers for crops that have been damaged or destroyed due to these deer. This legislation is particularly relevant to the agricultural community, as it seeks to mitigate the financial losses that farmers encounter due to wildlife interactions. Additionally, the bill establishes a framework for rulemaking and requires a report related to the compensation process, ensuring that there are clear guidelines on how compensation will be managed and distributed.

Contention

Discussions surrounding HF2140 may reveal notable points of contention, particularly among different stakeholder groups. For instance, while many farmers and agricultural advocates may support the compensation initiative, there could be concerns related to how the compensation amount is determined and the criteria for eligibility. Additionally, there may be debates regarding the balance between wildlife management and agricultural interests, as well as potential concerns about funding sources for the compensation scheme. As with many pieces of legislation that involve financial implications and environmental management, varied opinions are likely to emerge among legislators, environmentalists, and agricultural representatives.