I guess we’ve fixed everything in this state, because the DFL has stuck a provision in our latest funding bill that prohibits beaver eating. It’s only under special circumstances, though: you can’t eat “nuisance beavers” that you killed to stop them from flooding your farm with their dams, but if you killed them because you trap them for their fur, yeah, go ahead, you can chow down on that fine furry beaver. Nuisance beavers can still be used for fur, castor oil, or taxidermy, just no eating allowed.

It’s a very peculiar law, because nobody can explain why this rule has been inserted. The Republicans are rightly peeved at this goofy and unnecessary regulation, and the DFL is being evasive and not explaining the purpose.

…a Senate DFL spokesperson issued a statement saying the conference committee dealt with “multiple provisions related to beavers coming from both chambers. This language emerged from many conversations between the House, Senate, DNR, and governor’s office.’’

It sounds like there was a lot of concern about beavers, and I wonder if maybe there might have been more significant issues to address. Apparently not; Minnesota has achieved policy perfection.

Why beavers? I have two hypotheses. One is that it was to give Minnesota Republicans something to do — it’s a distraction. They’re busy right now bragging about how they’ve all eaten beaver.

“I eat beaver. It’s fine,’’ Wesenberg said. “No one is going to get in trouble for doing it. I don’t know why it’s in the bill.’’

OK, dude, I’m happy for you.

My other hypothesis is that this is a cunning anti-Catholic ploy. The Catholic Church decided beaver was a fish and therefore you were allowed to eat all the beaver you want during Lent. This law will deny good Catholic farmers a traditional dish, apparently on a whim.

Don’t say I never criticize Democrats. This is a useless law that accomplishes nothing (they even say it won’t be policed or enforced) and justifies complaints that they’re going to pad the legal system with stupid regulations.