Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Agriculture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Agriculture committee signals no objection to bill removing farmer reimbursement for wildlife crop damage
Summary
The Senate Agriculture Committee heard testimony that a long-standing statutory reimbursement for crop damage by deer or bears is an unfunded liability and indicated it will not object to a Fish and Wildlife bill that would eliminate the provision and cap prior liability at $5,000 per farm.
The Senate Agriculture Committee signaled it will not object to language in a Fish and Wildlife bill that would remove a state provision allowing farmers to be reimbursed for crop damage caused by deer or bears.
Steve Collier, general counsel at the Agency of Agriculture, Food and Markets, told the committee the provision has existed for decades but is effectively an "unfunded liability" because there is no dedicated fund to pay claims. "You can't really have a program that you don't have any money to support," Collier said, adding that the Department of Fish and Wildlife lacks a revenue source to finance recurring claims.
Collier described the statutory provision as historically permitting farmers to recoup up to $5,000 per year for financial losses from deer or bear damage. He said the provision was amended recently to cap reimbursements at $5,000 after at least one case in which the General Assembly appropriated money — Collier recalled "my memory is it's a hundred and $15,000, but that may be..." — to cover a much larger loss that arose before the cap. "The compensation provision will be eliminated," he told the committee.
The committee discussion distinguished between the reimbursement provision and other on-the-ground tools for farmers: Collier noted that farmers can still remove animals out of season if wildlife are causing damage and that certain allowances (for example, taking up to four deer without a permit in some circumstances) would remain. He also described practical limits to remedies, saying crop insurance often does not provide usable coverage for many Vermont farms because federal programs typically provide catastrophic or commodity-level coverage that does not match direct-to-consumer or value-added operations.
Committee members and staff discussed the bill as part of a Fish and Wildlife miscellaneous package (referred to in the hearing as H.231, section 19, page 25). Collier said the committee did not need to take further action beyond "letting it pass through" and not raising objection; the committee recorded no formal vote in the transcript.
Committee members and agency witnesses emphasized the larger policy context: crop losses from wildlife can be serious for small and specialty farms, and workable crop-insurance options are limited. Collier pointed to state and national conversations about improving insurance products and noted the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture has taken up related issues.
The committee did not adopt a formal motion or vote on the bill during the hearing. Members agreed to make no objection to the bill proceeding through the legislative process and to allow the sponsor and the Natural Resources committee to continue consideration.
As presented to the committee: the statutory reimbursement had been capped at $5,000 per farm per year; in practice it had rarely been used after the cap was adopted, although at least one large appropriation was made to cover earlier losses. The Department of Fish and Wildlife would retain authorities to work with farmers on on-site mitigation and, in certain circumstances, to authorize removal of animals causing damage.
