Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hunting Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents packed meeting to urge caution on allowing rifles in county hunting zones
Summary
Dozens of residents spoke during public comment about a proposed change allowing rifles in parts of Houston County. Speakers emphasized safety, ballistics, and the need for further study; no formal action was taken during the meeting.
Dozens of Houston County residents used the board’s public comment period to press commissioners to move cautiously on a pending policy change that would allow rifles in some hunting zones.
The comments, made during the board’s regular meeting in Caledonia on Aug. 19, focused on safety, ballistics, and the adequacy of local outreach. Multiple speakers said they had come expecting a public hearing; county officials said no hearing had been advertised for that date.
Several speakers identified themselves and described experience with hunting, firearms instruction and ballistics. Shane Eastman, who said he lives in La Crescent, told the board he supported allowing rifles but asked that the county preserve “choice” and that regulation not be used to remove options for landowners. Mark Munson, a certified firearm-safety instructor who described decades of experience, stressed differences in how shotguns and rifles behave and said shotgun projectiles can travel differently in brush and terrain. Clayton Johnson, from Blackham Road Township, urged the county to consider how harvested deer would be used if tags were increased, suggesting programs to distribute venison to food banks.
Other residents pressed safety concerns: Wayne Feldmeier said rifle shots can penetrate multiple walls if fired in a residential context; Carol Sweeney Marnock and others said they preferred to remain with shotgun-only restrictions. Dustin Miller and Jake (John) Holder, both longtime hunters, disagreed on the need for change — Miller said rifles are already used in some circumstances and noted existing legal limits on barrel length and other equipment; Holder said he saw no reason to add rifles.
Speakers also discussed neighboring counties’ approaches and referenced a reported shooting along Interstate 35 in Minnesota as an example of stray rounds striking a vehicle. Several commentators urged the board to solicit more data and hold formal hearings so residents could review evidence about ranges, ballistics and local topography.
The board did not vote or adopt any change during the meeting. Commissioners and staff reiterated that no formal public hearing had been advertised for that date and that any policy change would require further public notice and a formal process.
The discussion is likely to reappear on future agendas as local and regional authorities continue to consider changes that state hunting seasons will permit in 2026.
