ÍáÍáÂþ»­

ROCHESTER — Deer hunters in southern Minnesota can start grabbing their rifles, leaving the shotgun in the gun cabinet, during the 2026 firearms deer season.

State Sen. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, said the zone excluding rifles from deer hunting in southern and western Minnesota extends back to 1942, when different gun technology and different reasons existed.

Drazkowski said the deer population in the early 1940s was small, and the rifle exclusion — hunters were allowed to use shotguns, muzzleloaders and handguns to hunt in the area — was meant to help restore the deer population in the area.

"Back then, deer herds were decimated, and the DNR was trying to limit deer harvests," Drazkowski said, adding that the Department of Natural Resources at that time did not control hunting in Minnesota by issuing hunting permits like it does today. "The idea was to give deer a better chance."

The "shotgun-only" zone extended diagonally across Minnesota from just north of Moorhead, south toward Alexandria, across to St. Cloud and ending at the St. Croix River near Taylor Falls.

Contributed / Minnesota Legislature

Today, Drazkowski said, the deer population in southern Minnesota is burgeoning to the point that overpopulation helps lead to the spread of chronic wasting disease (CWD).

In fact, when the state hires hunters — even in southern Minnesota — to thin the deer herds with the hope of reducing the spread of CWD, it hires sharpshooters with rifles.

While Drazkowski praised the removal of the rifle ban in the Environment and Natural Resources omnibus bill, others say they are concerned about allowing rifles to be used in the more densely populated areas of southern Minnesota.

"I do think there will be some unintended consequences," said Bernie Buehler of Kasson.

A lifelong hunter, Buehler said one concern is safety. Hunters using rifles will shoot at distances of 200 to 300 yards, whereas most shotguns have an effective range of 100 yards or less. That extra distance, he said, can lead to rounds going astray when they miss their targets.

That concern, he added, could mean fewer opportunities for hunters.

"I think it’s a fine rule to have in place," Buehler said of the rule excluding rifles. "With the population density, less room between fields and buildings, there will be more accidents. If that's the case, landowners would be less likely to allow hunters on their property. As hard as it is to get people to let you hunt in their land, it’s going to be even harder."

Buehler said he's hunted for years using a shotgun slug — a type of ammunition much larger than the average rifle bullet used to hunt deer — and he's never had a problem bagging a deer.

But Antony Newman, a hunter from Chatfield, said when it comes to shotguns vs. rifles, the facts show rifles are safer and more ethical.

Newman said he grew up hunting in Wisconsin and has hunted deer both with a rifle and with a shotgun. Between the two options, he prefers a rifle for exactly the reasons that concern opponents of this new rule change.

"It’s a lot safer when you’re using a rifle," Newman said. "What you aim at is what you hit. They are extraordinarily accurate."

Most hunting rifles, he said, are bolt-action guns, meaning you basically get one shot at a deer. But one shot is all most hunters need due to the accuracy. Meanwhile, shotguns shooting slugs might pump out several slugs in quick succession. That means more lead flying — and larger projectiles with greater kinetic energy per round.

"With shotguns, the lead goes in directions you can't predict," Newman said.

Studies, he said, have shown that shotgun slugs tend to ricochet when they miss their targets, while rifle bullets tend to disintegrate when they hit the ground.

Drazkowski cited a 2007 study issued by the Pennsylvania General Assembly that said while rifle rounds can be more dangerous when fired at an upward angle, if firing in a level or downward direction, shotguns posed a greater risk to people and property.

Drazkowski added that when hunting with a rifle, hunters typically use a deer stand and shoot downward. In his experience, he said, shotgun hunters tend to hunt as a group, driving the deer.

Another aspect, Newman said, is how ethical it is for the animal being hunted. Because shotguns are less accurate, a hunter is more likely to hit a non-vital part of the deer, merely wounding the animal.

"When you're using a firearm that is less accurate, you’re wounding animals," Newman said. "If you don't track them right away, they wander off and suffer and die."

At 100 yards, he said, his accuracy with a rifle versus a shotgun is the difference between hitting a bottle cap or having a 12-inch circumference around his bulls-eye.

Newman said another bit of proof of the safety of rifles is Wisconsin's deer season. Unlike Minnesota, Wisconsin, he said, has one nine-day season, meaning "all the hunters are out at once." But statewide, Wisconsin's safety has improved since eliminating its "shotgun-only" zones.

Drazkowski said many states had "shotgun-only" zones in their states, but most have gone away from them, with Minnesota being one of three holdouts until the exclusionary rule was repealed. All, he said, have seen improved safety.

"The states around us have all gotten rid of their shotgun zones," Drazkowski said.

Plus, with fewer rounds going astray and smaller rounds used in rifles, that means putting less lead into the ground, which is better for the environment, Drazkowski said.

As for how landowners feel, Drazkowski said nothing in the bill would prohibit individual landowners from telling hunters what kind of firearm they can or cannot use on their property. In fact, individual counties can still place firearm restrictions on hunting within their counties.

But Newman said he hopes counties and landowners look at the safety studies and allow rifles across Minnesota.

"What part of safer hunting will landowners not be in favor of?" Newman asked rhetorically. "If you want safer deer hunting, you’d go for rifle hunting."