ABOVE: Aaron McCoy goes up to speak at a Martin County Commissioner public hearing on Tuesday about whether the county should keep their shotgun-only ordinance for deer hunting or follow the state and allow rifles.

FAIRMONT – A public hearing on whether to keep or remove the shotgun-only zone for deer hunting was held at the Martin County Courthouse on Tuesday.

For decades, Minnesota had a statute on the books that maintained the whole state be shotgun-only for deer hunting. Following a concerted effort over the past few years, the statute has been repealed, and rifles can now be used for deer hunting. The key within this repeal is it is up to the individual counties whether they go along with the repeal or keep their shotgun-only rule in place.

Around 30 people attended the public meeting, and several made their voices heard on the decision.

Welcome’s Todd Williamson was the first to go up. He voiced concerns that if they opened deer hunting to rifles, there could be issues with safety.

“They’re going to use ARs, and they’re going to have clips,” Williamson said. “If everybody went out one-on-one, I think we’d be all right. I’m still concerned it’s going to bring some bad hunting practices back. There’s going to be some road hunting. They’re going to shoot a deer, a great big buck out from the fence line.”

Fairmont’s Aaron McCoy was on the side of allowing rifles and not making Martin County a shotgun-only zone.

“The idea that shotguns are inherently safer than their rifles is a long-standing myth,” he said. “Modern rifles are more accurate, more predictable and more humane. We already allow rifles in Minnesota for predator hunting, often fired level with the horizon across the ground, yet there has been no public safety crisis. Deer hunting shots are usually taken from elevated tree stands, meaning the bullet is already traveling downward to the ground.”

Josh Eisenmenger agreed, stating that hunting with rifles can put down deer better and more accurately. He said when it comes to training, it is easier now than it was before.

“The ATF dropped their $200 tax for suppressors,” Eisenmenger said. “Your kids are out there. They’re in their box, stand, hopefully controlled setting. You’re behind their shoulder. Teach these kids the right way to do things better, suppressors so they can shoot, not worry about fracturing their hearing, like I know I’ve sustained hearing loss. It’s just a lighter recoil gun, more controlled.”

Commissioner Richard Koons said of the people in his district who have reached out, 90 percent of them are in favor of allowing rifles. County-wide, they have received over 300 phone calls, and Koons said around 65 percent are in favor of allowing rifles. One thing Koons said they would have to keep in mind is for the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to provide enforcement, the ordinance cannot be tweaked in certain ways.

“We can’t put a limit on the clips,” he said. “We can’t put age requirements, or the DNR will not enforce it. We have to fall on our local sheriffs.”

When it comes to safety, Travis Canales from Welcome said it is more about the ethics of hunters than the guns in hand.

“It goes to knowing your target,” he said. “Making sure you’re teaching your children, your hunting buddies. I do hunt in Michigan, similar to our landscape here. They were shotgun-only for a long time. I think it was six years ago, changed to rifle, and there was actually a decrease in hunter accidents.”

After everyone got to speak, Chairman Kevin Kristenson thanked attendees for coming out and speaking their minds. The commissioners will deliberate and are expected to make a decision at a regular February board meeting. Counties have until March 1 to report their ordinances to the Minnesota DNR.