[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6363859,"mediaKeyId","2165614-8811cf41173be7accca855cd564e4f7c","parentId",2165614,"title","Senate committee advances two deer‑farm bills after farmers, scientists and legal counsel press changes to DNR rules","audioSeconds",3025,"startMs",3608000,"endMs",6633000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2165614-8811cf41173be7accca855cd564e4f7c&start=3608&end=6633","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2165614-8811cf41173be7accca855cd564e4f7c/thumbnail_3608000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6363859/Minnesota/Senate-committee-advances-two-deerfarm-bills-after-farmers-scientists-and-legal-counsel-press-changes-to-DNR-rules","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363859-2f362001005306b329aa814a7d64cdad/orig.mp4?Expires=1771046126&Signature=QeYSi0MTMerONq4Vc-N4NB7f6fhxDoJCd6YPuE5NbC1srYDnTxtGuUWLZOdEHynxhAKq1W~Qs6Tzyt91i6nXY108KOIFGyRMkISZJF10qL8AUnhw0BfsEWHgk0Khvw4jkCe5oa9-qsPjB83WZKGl26EgQqFD4SOHDD8ZKnfkKTiBXVqKbT3H8SiusLCUoM8SrEeoyMOF0s-1SRehrw8LBOriHA8snOkJabJFDagBxFjdkqr27nBz~pJjN0fGBZAt57d36aJ9T7oquW8DENnmgbsns90wrcPOoKEyCQifz8S35mUzpKwHxXNIFooot3f~waVfVupnzDr6hMuzyyimFg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Minnesota Senate Media Services","date","2025-01-29T00:00:00Z","article","St. Paul — The Senate Agriculture and Rural Broadband Committee voted to send two related measures on deer farms — Senate File 553 and Senate File 659 — to the Environment, Climate and Legacy Committee without recommendation after a two‑hour hearing that featured deer farmers, a veterinary and legal overview, and a wildlife scientist’s review of the peer‑review literature.

Senate File 553, which addresses fencing requirements on registered deer farms, was moved by Senator Zach Anderson and advanced with an A2 amendment that conditions a new state fencing requirement on state funding to cover the cost of the additional fencing. Senate File 659, which would transfer regulatory authority for deer farms from the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) back to the Board of Animal Health, was moved to the next committee by Senator Weber. Both motions carried by voice vote.

Supporters told the committee the current DNR approach is harming farms, creating legal uncertainty and producing enforcement actions that amount to de facto efforts to eliminate the industry. “Deer farmers are livestock. They should be managed by the Board of Animal Health and not the DNR,” Senator John Wiesenberg said when introducing the measures.

Scott Fear, president of the Minnesota Deer Farmers Association and a longtime deer farmer, said the transition from Board of Animal Health oversight to DNR control has been “nothing short of a disaster,” citing shifting requirements and unclear contacts at the agency. Fear said DNR guidance on exclusionary fences contains a disclaimer that the documents are informational, yet farms have received notices of violation when their fences did not match the guidance.

“Where do we go?” Fear asked. He also gave a farm‑level estimate: one configuration he described as the “best” fence would cost his operation roughly $800,000; a lesser upgrade would still cost about $60,000 for his farm.

Attorney Eric Cardell, representing deer‑farm interests, told the committee the legislature has already recognized deer farming as an agricultural pursuit in statute (he cited Minn. Stat. 17.452). Cardell said recent state statutes and administrative measures — limits on registration transfers, moratoria on new registrations and the double‑fence/exclusionary fencing requirement — pose constitutional questions and give farms a reasonable‑investment expectation that has been undermined. He referenced a pending federal case, Deer Farmers Minnesota v. Straumann, and said the state’s approach risked a regulatory taking.

“In 2022 I advised a Senate committee on a related topic,” Cardell said. “Here the concern is that the legislature has created a legitimate occupation and regulatory steps are being used that appear to work to put people out of business.”

Dr. James Kroll, an emeritus professor with long experience in whitetail research and conservation, told the committee he reviewed the peer‑review literature and found no credible studies demonstrating that nose‑to‑nose fence contact transmits chronic wasting disease (CWD). He said animal‑health oversight and live testing protocols enable alternatives to mass depopulation and that breeding for genetic resistance — a strategy used in other states for related prion diseases — is a viable mitigation path.

“I am very familiar with all the literature on fences. There is not one scientific credible study that has been done about transmission through fences,” Kroll said. “It may happen, but the science is not there.”

Several deer farmers described regulatory inspections by DNR officers as intrusive and emotionally and financially damaging. Former law‑enforcement officer and deer farmer Steve Porter told the committee DNR inspections included body‑worn cameras and that the agency’s enforcement approach had felt like “weaponizing” law enforcement against his farm. He said his herd participates in USDA monitoring programs and that to date herd testing and USDA protocols have shown his animals to be free of CWD.

Multiple witnesses described genetic testing programs and voluntary breeder efforts to increase CWD resistance in breeding stock; one testifier said several Minnesota farms already have herds with high markers for genetic resistance. Several speakers urged an approach that uses breeder herds to accelerate resistance rather than broad culling.

Committee action: Senator Anderson moved Senate File 553 (fencing) to the Environment committee without recommendation; the committee adopted an A2 amendment that conditions any new double‑fence requirement on state funding to cover the additional cost. Senator Weber moved Senate File 659 (transfer to Board of Animal Health) to the Environment committee without recommendation; that motion also passed by voice vote.

What the bills would change: SF 553 would revise regulatory language tied to exclusionary and double‑fence requirements for deer farms; the A2 amendment adopted in committee requires the state to appropriate funding before the second‑fence requirement would be enforced. SF 659 would transfer primary regulatory authority for farmed deer back to the Board of Animal Health, a move supporters said would align deer with other livestock oversight.

Legal and procedural context: Attorney Eric Cardell flagged potential constitutional issues, including claims that the combined effect of moratoria on new registrations, restrictions on selling registrations, and fencing mandates could amount to a regulatory taking because they prevent owners from realizing the value of their farm businesses. Cardell referenced the pending federal litigation and urged temporary relief via the bills while courts and agencies resolve competing interpretations.

Next steps: Both bills now go to the Environment, Climate and Legacy Committee. Committee members signaled they expect additional hearings and may refine funding language in the amendment. No final legislative decisions were taken at this hearing; both measures were advanced to the next committee for further work.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Committee on Agriculture, Veterans, Broadband and Rural Development - 01/29/25","oneSentenceSummary","The Senate Agriculture and Rural Broadband Committee sent two bills about deer‑farm regulation to the Environment, Climate and Legacy Committee without recommendation after hearing testimony from deer farmers, a wildlife scientist and an attorney about fencing rules, agency authority and constitutional concerns.","taxTitle","2025 Legislature MN, Minnesota","taxId",77817,"location","Minnesota","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6363864,"Office of Broadband outlines BEAD timeline and targets; providers warn federal rules could limit participation",1114,0,1114000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2165614-8811cf41173be7accca855cd564e4f7c&start=0&end=1114","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2165614-8811cf41173be7accca855cd564e4f7c/thumbnail_0.jpg","/articles/6363864/Minnesota/Office-of-Broadband-outlines-BEAD-timeline-and-targets-providers-warn-federal-rules-could-limit-participation","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6363864-aff2e4d24f167d7003ef0854dd88a2c0/orig.mp4?Expires=1771046126&Signature=U2oSo3Wjvt-ULewtu9Ey6a4VCJQEgShvyc1mdZ57XzVVxuG8ZEWGnG2QTao0gcc9MFLJ25Zu3a8DarCiva3yUwhzl7NZnRbrRVOWYnS-E~DTWcil3Jjd95F6x6SvfTmypRYctIlx46QCvKdirDIjdH070Dm4BoeFq-raRvhhkAipuMOs7r78SIonNID1tfn9EbqnJR9bITjiwWW0pJVuuTuW7XvPyz7Bis6kIWQcADU09jP33IIeYtd2pTiykQ0EtVDLCjY7tqpT3dimxHu4oRwPFlLCJi0YGoKukBgeBzcz6t8RzJve8UtFrY4Ln3ZtXLOD0njrYOLR1Y2sc8iz2w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","St. Paul — The Minnesota Office of Broadband Development on Monday told the Senate Agriculture and Rural Broadband Committee that the state is preparing to submit its final Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) plan to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration and opened a pre‑qualification portal for internet service providers, with the first subgrantee selection round planned in March–April.

The announcement matters because Minnesota was allocated roughly $651–652 million in BEAD funds and must show that every unserved location it intends to serve will receive service before the federal money can be spent, Bridal Mackey, executive director of the Office of Broadband Development at the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), told the committee.

Mackey said the state completed its NTIA-required challenge process and that the state’s mapping vendor and DEED are building a public layer so residents and providers can see BEAD-eligible locations. She said the state will submit its final list to NTIA no later than Oct. 3 and plans three subgrantee selection rounds, with the first round open only to fiber proposals.

“We just completed our challenge process,” Mackey said. “We are working diligently right now with our mapping vendor to get a layer on our website so people can go in and see those locations where they're eligible.”

Why it matters: NTIA requires states to show BEAD-eligible locations will be served before federal funds are disbursed. Mackey said the challenge process left roughly 89,000 BEAD‑eligible locations in Minnesota; she described the number as the result of deduplication against federal and other funding sources. She also quoted cost estimates from a consultant that found universal fiber wireline coverage could cost in the billions: “in order to have universal wireline … it would be over $2,000,000,000,” she said, noting the figures were point-in-time estimates.

Committee members and provider representatives pressed DEED on practical obstacles for rural providers that could reduce participation in BEAD rounds. Brent Christensen, president and CEO of the Minnesota Telecom Alliance, and Melissa Wolf, executive director of the Minnesota Cable Communications Association, told the committee that several federal BEAD rules risk discouraging small and rural providers from applying.

“The NTIA rules require that NTIA has a lien on any facilities we put in the ground using BEAD dollars,” Christensen said. “Our members borrow money and can't accept a first-priority lien on facilities they already finance.”

Christensen also said NTIA’s open‑access requirements could undermine the subsidy intended to tip marginal business cases toward buildouts because competitors would be able to use the same network. He listed other concerns providers raised: pre‑contract archeological/environmental permit requirements, prevailing‑wage point scoring without telecom‑specific classifications, and a new installer certification that industry members say is time‑consuming and could remove workers from construction during the busy season.

“We need more carrots and less sticks,” Christensen said. “We need to work to remove these obstacles to participation, and we need to find a way to incentivize the rural broadband providers to provide the service that we want them to do.”

Wolf told the committee Minnesota cable operators are investing private capital statewide and that BEAD will not eliminate the need for state programs such as the line extension and low‑density grants. She said providers have ongoing concerns about the installer certification passed by the Legislature and warned that permitting delays can nullify federal grant awards if required state approvals are not in place.

“BEAD offers a once‑in‑a‑lifetime funding opportunity for our state, but its rollout has been very slow,” Wolf said. “The devil is in the details.”

DEED and industry also reviewed existing state programs: Mackey said the state has awarded dozens of border‑to‑border grants over 10 years (she cited figures including 34 border‑to‑border awards totaling about $58.2 million and line‑extension rounds funded with $15 million in capital projects dollars). She said the state’s competitive border‑to‑border grants provide up to 50 percent of eligible costs (75 percent for low‑population grants with a $10 million cap), are reimbursement‑based and require ISPs to offer at least 100/20 service at completion and be scalable to higher speeds.

Mackey described a digital equity capacity grant for Minnesota that DEED expects to administer after NTIA approval; she said Minnesota’s allocation for digital equity capacity grants is about $12 million and that the state’s application was approved in December 2024.

What’s next: DEED will open the BEAD pre‑qualification portal and the first subgrantee selection round; providers must pre‑qualify to apply. DEED must submit its final BEAD list to NTIA by Oct. 3. Committee members signaled they will continue oversight and raise concerns with federal partners and within the Legislature about how BEAD rules interact with state priorities.

The committee did not take any formal votes on broadband policy during the hearing; members said follow‑up work and additional briefings are likely.","The Minnesota Office of Broadband Development gave the Senate Agriculture and Rural Broadband Committee an update on state mapping, BEAD eligibility and grant timelines. Providers said NTIA rules (liens, open-access, prevailing wage and installer certification) and permitting delays risk deterring rural ISPs from applying.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Senate committee advances two deer‑farm bills after farmers, scientists and legal counsel press changes to DNR rules

Office of Broadband outlines BEAD timeline and targets; providers warn federal rules could limit participation