Minnesota deer farm group files suit against DNR, Board of Animal Health

St. Paul — The Minnesota Deer Farmers Association recently filed a lawsuit with the U.S. District Court-District of Minnesota against the Minnesota DNR and the Minnesota Board of Animal Health for “enforcing laws which will eliminate white-tailed deer farming in the state of Minnesota,” according to the lawsuit.

The lawsuit includes 41 plaintiffs, including the Minnesota Deer Farmers Association. The defendants include Sarah Strommen, DNR commissioner; Erica Sawatzke, board president of the BAH; Peggy Anne Hawkins, board vice president of the BAH; and other members of the BAH.

Erick Kaardal, attorney for the Minnesota Deer Farmers Association, said the key concept is to understand the difference between livestock and wild animals.

“The key thing to understand is that white-tailed deer are still considered, under Minnesota law, as livestock,” Kaardal said. “So, there’s a huge difference between being a wild animal and then being livestock. When the state of Minnesota designates animals as livestock, that means that the deer are subject to legal possession. The deer are property.

“In the controversy over chronic wasting disease, the state Legislature has really poorly managed the situation because they’re regulating it as livestock and these regulations really don’t pass constitutional muster. … These deer farmers are upset about their livestock being subject to these unconstitutional types of restrictions.”

New statutes

The 2023 Minnesota Legislative passed several new statues for white-tailed deer farms, including the transfer of oversight authority of white-tailed deer farms to the Minnesota DNR. Another big change is no new registrations for white-tailed deer farms ever in Minnesota.

The lawsuit states that the new statutes governing white-tailed deer farmers are violating multiple clauses within amendments. Current deer farmers can’t sell their deer livestock to anyone without a registration except one time to an immediate family member. And the state law prohibits the issuance of any new registrations.

The lawsuit reads that it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment in two ways. The first is discrimination between white-tailed deer farmers with registrations and those without because one of the plaintiffs, Dennis Udovich, wants to register as a white-tailed deer farmer, but can’t under the new statutes.

The second is discrimination between farmers with immediate family members and other farmers without immediate family members.

As mentioned, one of the new statutes from the 2023 legislative session states that white-tailed deer farmers may pass their farms down to an immediate family members only once, but there’s questions revolving around what are considered immediate family members.

MORE COVERAGE FROM OUTDOOR NEWS:

Agencies expect further decline in the number of Minnesota deer farms

Minnesota DNR assuming oversight of state’s deer farms as new laws take shape

Study shows that hunter harvest reduction can boost wild turkey numbers

The lawsuit continues to state that the DNR and BAH violated the “takings clause” of the 5th amendment, which centers on the DNR being authorized to destroy the deer herd upon violation of these new laws without just compensation.

The final violation is the “due process clause” of the 14th amendment, which focuses on the “state’s complete prohibition against the right of citizens to ply their trade, practice their occupation, or pursue a common calling as white-tailed deer farmers.”

DNR response

The Minnesota DNR released a brief response regarding the lawsuit from Gail Nosek, DNR communications director.

“The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources is aware of the suit challenging the constitutionality of various Minnesota laws regulating white-tailed deer farms, but we are not in a position to comment on the specifics of this active litigation,” the statement reads. “For background, during the 2023 session, the Minnesota Legislature provided the Minnesota DNR with oversight authority of the state’s white-tailed deer farms. As always, the Minnesota DNR takes very seriously its responsibility to protect the health of Minnesota’s deer population and follow duly enacted laws.”

Michael Crusan, BAH communications director, said, “We don’t have anything to say about ongoing litigation.”

Kaardal said he expects to have a hearing in a few months with hopes of a decision maybe within a year.

“It’s a hugely important decision for the Minnesota deer farming industry because the state is really treating deer farmers unconstitutionally and unfairly,” Kaardal said. “And it would be the end of the industry if these policies and laws are allowed to continue.”