Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Subcommittee asks DNR to withdraw, resubmit donated-deer processing rule amid authority concerns
Summary
The subcommittee requested the Department of Natural Resources withdraw and resubmit a regulation on processing donated deer after DNR legal counsel said existing law does not authorize giving processors authority to treat unclaimed deer as abandoned.
The Regulations and Administrative Procedures subcommittee asked the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources to withdraw and resubmit a proposed regulation governing processing of donated deer after agency counsel told DNR staff the current law does not provide authority to permit processors to liquidate unclaimed meat.
Charles Ruth, a wildlife biologist who supervises the DNR big-game program, told the subcommittee the underlying statute prohibits sale of deer meat but a 2024 law allows DNR to issue permits to processors to legally process deer taken for donation and to recover a processing fee from the donor or a third party. "We talked with our general counsel and she felt like the way the law is right now it doesn't give authority to go in that direction," Ruth said, describing the specific gap as the ability to set a timeline after which a processor could consider meat abandoned and recover processing costs.
Representative Pat Taylor asked the agency to withdraw the regulation so DNR can propose language that addresses processors left with deer that hunters fail to claim at the end of the season. The committee approved the motion to withdraw and resubmit by acclamation; members later confirmed the action during a roll call sequence recorded in the transcript. The committee did not adopt revised language at the meeting.
Ruth told members DNR's counsel recommended pursuing a statutory amendment to provide explicit authority for processors to treat unclaimed animals as abandoned and recover fees; he said DNR would "come back and see us" with revised language. Committee members framed the issue as one of statutory authority rather than an operational dispute about processors' practices.
The subcommittee did not record a formal numeric roll call tally for the withdrawal motion in the transcript besides the voice-acclamation description; DNR staff said they would return with a new filing after consulting legal counsel and drafting proposed statutory or regulatory changes.
