Kelsey Hambor

For most of my life, I assumed the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources existed to protect wildlife. The name implies stewardship and care. But the deeper I looked, the more disillusioned I became. In practice, the DNR does not primarily function as a guardian of wild animals; it manages them as resources to be hunted, trapped, and killed.

Each year, the DNR authorizes and promotes hunting and trapping seasons for dozens of native species. These activities are central to the agency’s mission, funding model, and public outreach. License sales and permit fees finance a significant portion of DNR operations, creating a structural conflict of interest: wildlife must be killed for the system to sustain itself.

The claim that hunters are indispensable to conservation because they pay for permits collapses under scrutiny. Hunters have a vested interest in maintaining a system built largely by and for hunters—one that prioritizes “harvestable surplus” over ecological health. Meanwhile, roughly 82% of the public does not hunt or fish, yet bears the ecological consequences of these decisions.

This model closely resembles industrial agriculture. To maximize yields of “desirable” species such as deer or game birds, predators are treated as competitors and deliberately removed. But ecosystems are not farms, and wildlife is not a crop. When top carnivores disappear, the balance they maintain disappears with them.

Predators regulate prey populations not only through killing, but by shaping behavior. Wolves, mountain lions, bears, and coyotes influence where prey feed, how long they linger, and how frequently they reproduce. Without these pressures, prey populations grow unnaturally, overbrowse vegetation, degrade habitat, and ultimately suffer from starvation, disease, and die-offs. Humans then step in to “manage” the very problems their intervention created.

Scientific evidence shows that intact predator populations are largely self-regulating. Large carnivores control their own numbers through territory, social structure, and food availability. Killing predators disrupts these natural feedback loops, locking ecosystems into a cycle of perpetual human intervention.

Removing predators does not prevent imbalance—it causes it. What is often framed as “wildlife management” is, in reality, a system designed to maintain a steady supply of animals for hunting, not to protect ecological integrity.

The numbers are staggering. In the 2024–2025 MN season alone, Minnesota hunters and trappers killed at least 979 bobcats, 648 fishers, 652 martens, and 2,497 river otters. These are elusive, slow-reproducing species with critical ecological roles, yet their deaths are recorded not as losses, but as “harvests.”

And those figures represent only a fraction of the total toll. Coyotes, beavers, foxes, raccoons, muskrats, skunks, badgers, rabbits, squirrels, and weasels are targeted. Bears, deer, elk, and wild turkeys are hunted annually. Prairie chickens, grouse, pheasants, cranes, doves, snipe, woodcock, crows, and waterfowl are killed by the hundreds of thousands. Many of these numbers are estimates, meaning the true toll is likely higher.

This is not conservation as most people understand it. True conservation prioritizes the well-being of animals and ecosystems for their own sake, not their utility to humans. It recognizes animals as sentient beings, not inventory, and favors coexistence, habitat protection, and non-lethal solutions over guns and traps.

When an agency charged with protecting nature actively encourages killing native wildlife, the word “conservation” loses its meaning. Minnesota can do better. Until the DNR shifts its priorities from killing toward genuine protection, it will remain an agency that manages wildlife for human use, not one that truly conserves it.

Minnesota’s wildlife policies are shaped by public pressure. If you believe wildlife should be protected for ecological health, not managed primarily for killing, make your voice heard.

Amy Leinen 
ARC Campaign Manager

Contact the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources: 
info.dnr@state.mn.us
651-296-6157

Sample:

Dear Minnesota DNR Leadership,

I am a Minnesota resident writing to express concern about the state’s current wildlife management approach.

While I value conservation, I am troubled that Minnesota’s system prioritizes hunting, fishing, and trapping over the protection of wildlife and intact ecosystems. Predators and other native species play critical ecological roles, yet they continue to be treated primarily as harvestable resources rather than as essential components of healthy landscapes.

I urge the DNR to end lethal management of predators and furbearers, prioritize ecosystem health and biodiversity over harvest quotas, develop funding models that do not depend on killing wildlife, and center conservation policies around coexistence and habitat protection.

Most Minnesotans do not hunt or trap, yet we all share responsibility for the state’s ecological future. I ask that the DNR better reflect the values of the broader public and the best available ecological science.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
[Your Name]
[City, MN]