[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6080452,"mediaKeyId","2946867-62755fb8a19c38014f8cc18132374750","parentId",2946867,"title","Representative Grama presents technical fish-and-wildlife corrections; committee discusses snaring penalties, air guns and enforcement of water‑use rules","audioSeconds",1412,"startMs",2117000,"endMs",3529000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2946867-62755fb8a19c38014f8cc18132374750&start=2117&end=3529","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2946867-62755fb8a19c38014f8cc18132374750/thumbnail_2117000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6080452/Vermont/Representative-Grama-presents-technical-fish-and-wildlife-corrections-committee-discusses-snaring-penalties-air-guns-and-enforcement-of-wateruse-rules","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6080452-25112f6e951ac7dd5ce5f5c56b278a18/orig.mp4?Expires=1776552123&Signature=Aekpgc~GkCqX5s8YrLGdxw9ufyoDQPhNN~5T7b1-N9ixMU4BLSRW4PA8abSilnRwFJXb~-4cSt6S7w1RQC~sRn0Tvrk1nzr1QAxt5w5Uu2W~jjHx6lqKiBIqqoS03DYxISrwWBOlKvQBYJ88mgOKesgkX735HZgdi-E~A4PQHuO977nQvtbczAZz8Ey0mB9FVcdYkFFN-EZnACV45kYcrEWfY-lhjRLRsAsZdfrP8LnwjymtFnaLbL57WUGkidFlr1RKWI6uZTDSgqJ0LA9Aia9v1UzMC-nceGJF2kvXBRXJql9z0KEblRJRuhNWcAzW7ONnhbmDTPFOY~8AHgXvhw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-04-10T13:03:48Z","article","Representative Grama told the Natural Resources & Energy committee that H.31 principally contains technical corrections to align statute with Fish and Wildlife Board rules and update obsolete language, with one substantive change: raising the penalty points for illegally snaring animals from 10 points to 20 points.

“It's really mostly technical changes,” Representative Grama said as he introduced H.31, and he flagged the snaring penalty as the bill’s main substantive provision: moving snaring from a 10‑point violation (which generally allows continued hunting) to a 20‑point violation that can lead to loss of license.

Grama also described draft language that had been proposed to add certain modern projectile devices — described in committee as air guns — to a statutory list that governs firearms carriage in vehicles. The committee removed that language before crossover because the draft wording lacked a clear statutory definition and could have been read to include handguns. “We ended up striking that section,” Grama said, explaining that the committee lacked time to define “air gun” and therefore deferred further action.

Following H.31, Grama walked the committee through H.231, a related package of changes that reorganizes penalty point references, strikes obsolete species names, clarifies reporting requirements for taking big game (including moose), and updates multiple appendix references after a rules renumbering by the Fish and Wildlife Board. Among the substantive changes discussed:

- Snaring was reiterated as moving from a 10‑point to a 20‑point violation to strengthen deterrence. Grama said the goal is to reduce the practice by increasing consequences.
- Crossbow hunting has been reclassified in the rule renumbering: references that previously listed crossbow violations explicitly are being removed because crossbow provisions now appear in a consolidated section. Some point assessments for failing to report big‑game takes are treated so they remain a 10‑point violation rather than being captured under broader 20‑point language in the appendix structure.
- The department’s statutory authority to require presentation of a rifle or shotgun (and requests to present those firearms to a warden) remains in statute; language to add “air guns” or similarly worded devices risked extending that requirement to handguns and was therefore pulled for further drafting.
- H.231 also contains provisions to allow enforcement of newly adopted “use of waters” rules by motor‑vehicle and boating enforcement officers, state troopers and fish and wildlife wardens, and to authorize civil penalties under the Judicial Bureau for violations of those rules. Grama said this aligns enforcement authority across agencies for rules that affect vessels and watercraft.

Committee members sought clarification on how the point system will operate after the renumbering and how reporting requirements interact with appendix violations that carry different point values. Grama explained that some duplicative references were removed to avoid double‑penalizing hunters and that the draft reassigns several cross references to the appendix sections where they now reside.

The committee did not take any final vote on H.31 or H.231 during this meeting. Representative Grama invited further committee review of definitions (notably for air guns) and refinements to the point and reporting provisions before the bills move forward.

The committee flagged several follow‑up needs: a clear statutory definition of “air gun” if the committee intends to regulate carriage in vehicles, a clean mapping of old appendix section numbers to the new numbering so hunters and wardens can track changes, and coordination with enforcement agencies on the use‑of‑waters enforcement language.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Natural Resources and Energy's Zoom Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","Representative Grama told the Natural Resources & Energy committee that H.31 principally contains technical corrections to align statute with Fish and Wildlife Board rules and update obsolete language, with one substantive change: raising the penalty points for illegally snaring animals from 10 points to 20 points.","taxTitle","Natural Resources & Energy, SENATE, Committees, Legislative , Vermont","taxId",48480,"location","Vermont","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6080456,"Committee pauses direction on 3‑acre stormwater rule, seeks more ANR detail before study",112,1991000,2103000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2946867-62755fb8a19c38014f8cc18132374750&start=1991&end=2103","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2946867-62755fb8a19c38014f8cc18132374750/thumbnail_1991000.jpg","/articles/6080456/Vermont/Committee-pauses-direction-on-3acre-stormwater-rule-seeks-more-ANR-detail-before-study","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6080456-ce7b4cda62a827a131ce2850699b6229/orig.mp4?Expires=1776552123&Signature=NORDkdyqAk7hUVs1fwUhKPz1SXWMlz15eOwAspEsipDp7qLdtX~C7cX1Jaa30GrjRHgIAjIbNl6-32WTjCdkLi~1ch97xaJJO1NgpYx11~380BM9Hk7rGfc9-eOQPRr-UcFeV~S5QkmBUJHsfX9ByBWrqPys86bwdqT~ZS1SgsobX2BKFLv1AldKoerJzE3IMixMqk49ddqPMCn7gvzzPTtcZXfPb2Ay~lqJ85DWlNcGMIh69sXtfNnGAwWYWwod-4tRNdoDEZdWcwveHNtGFu2zh089S34IWtLzJdj7PgxV5EqS8yiE3yYEwr8FrK74thLZ-RgvTr8T2bGgulfExA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Members of the Natural Resources & Energy committee on Thursday opened a detailed discussion of a planned study of the state’s 3‑acre stormwater threshold and related implementation schedule, but held off directing staff while seeking more information from the Agency of Natural Resources (ANR).

The committee’s focus was the study language in a draft starting on page 11 and the consequences of changing the rule that currently captures parcels of three acres or more for more stringent stormwater controls. “I would like to not be here having the same discussion in three years,” a committee member said, pressing for a study that resolves outstanding technical and equity questions now rather than later.

Committee members said the 3‑acre threshold derives from modeling tied to the federal Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) for phosphorus in impaired waters. As explained in the meeting, when the Environmental Protection Agency and ANR modeled required phosphorus reductions they “backed into” an amount of stormwater-managed area that corresponded to roughly three acres; lowering the acreage threshold would change how the model apportions required reductions and could shift the regulatory burden to smaller commercial parcels if residential property were exempted.

Members emphasized several practical problems they want the study to address: how ANR prioritized properties on the state’s list (schools, mobile home parks and parcels with municipal cooperation have been prioritized), how notices to affected property owners were issued, and the legal/permit history that left some subdivisions “orphaned” without valid, transferable permits.

“I think they have done that work and we need to make sure they come back and explain how they prioritized,” the committee member said, referring to ANR staff. Several members said some property owners received official letters only in the fall of 2023, after municipalities had been notified earlier — a sequence they called problematic for transparency and real estate transactions.

Members also discussed the 2002 stormwater manual and permit changes after the early‑2000s regulatory updates. The committee heard that the 2002 manual incorporated new impervious‑surface and sediment‑reduction concepts; permit issuance and renewal practices in the late 1990s and early 2000s left some developments without current permits when later rules were adopted.

On financing compliance, witnesses and members urged avoiding language that would automatically create a municipal “impact fee.” The committee discussed instead authorizing stormwater special assessments limited to a geographic stormwater district. “If you start expanding the use of those fees beyond what your con[ditions] are, then it becomes a taking,” one committee member said, arguing for careful statutory wording to limit assessments to stormwater purposes and the defined area.

Members also asked staff to compile a simple timeline for committee and floor presentations that explains which stormwater standards applied in given years (for example, what standard applied to homes built in the 1980s versus after 2002) so legislators and affected property owners can understand how permit history drives present eligibility for relief or requirements.

Rather than issue immediate direction to lodge counsel or advance study language, the committee agreed to request that ANR return with more granular materials — including any existing prioritization, cost estimates and a clearer explanation of the modeling that produced the three‑acre figure. The chair said the committee will delay formal direction to the legislature’s counsel until that ANR briefing.

The discussion also covered implementation scheduling in the draft bill: members noted that some implementation dates referenced in the draft had been pushed back and asked that any extension be paired with firm notice requirements for property owners. One committee member proposed language requiring notice “to all affected property owners, not just municipalities.”

Members and one participant representing affected property owners described the financial and title consequences for sellers when permits are missing. The committee discussed common remedies property owners use — such as escrowed funds to cover potential future repairs — and noted the uncertainty about how to calculate those escrows because remediation costs are not predictable.

The committee scheduled a follow‑up with ANR to review the prioritization and modeling details before taking further legislative action or instructing counsel to finalize study language.

The committee did not take a formal vote during this session; members described the meeting as a fact‑finding step that will guide a later decision once ANR provides the requested material.","Members of the Natural Resources & Energy committee discussed the mandate tied to a 3‑acre stormwater threshold, the federal TMDL driving that number, notice and equity concerns, and whether to use special assessments rather than impact fees; they agreed to delay formal direction until Agency of Natural Resources staff can supply more detail.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Representative Grama presents technical fish-and-wildlife corrections; committee discusses snaring penalties, air guns and enforcement of water‑use rules

Committee pauses direction on 3‑acre stormwater rule, seeks more ANR detail before study