פירוש על ברכות 61:9

ONE WHO LETS BLOOD FROM A CONSECRATED ANIMAL. And this is difficult, for the Gemara says in the third perek of Avodoh Zoroh (44a) in regard to sacrificial blood offered on the outer altar and sacrificial blood offered on the inner altar, of the sacrifices, that both these of the inner altar and those of the outer altar are sold to gardeners as fertilizer. We see that there is no m’eelah penalty for using their blood and our Gemara says that benefiting from the blood of bloodletting does carry a m’eelah penalty?
And we can answer: that there in Avodoh Zoroh where the Gemara says there is no M’eeloh that is after sprinkling of the blood on the altar, and the owners of the sacrifice have already been absolved.¹It seems from this Tosfos that prior to the sprinkling of the blood on the altar, if one benefits from the blood he is subject to the m’eeloh penalty. This is contradictory to the Gemara in Yomo 59b. See הרועים מלא in the back of the Gemara for further discussion on this matter. Once the absolution has been accomplished there is no m’eeloh. This is not so here. The absolution has not yet been accomplished and blood removed from the animal by bloodletting prior to the sprinkling of the blood is subject to the m’eeloh penalty.

M.: Ze'iri.

Having committed me'ilah (see Lev. v. 15f.) because, being a non-priest, he utilised something that belonged to the Sanctuary.