Committee OKs draft H.230 change to treat many fish-and-wildlife offenses as civil minor violations

The Judiciary Committee on April 10 voted to find draft number 2.1 of H.230 favorable after a focused discussion about creating a civil “minor violation” pathway for many fish-and-wildlife offenses.

Hannah Smith, general counsel for the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife, described the revised text and noted small wording changes that make the standard broader: the bill would allow an offense to be treated as a minor violation if (a) the offender has no prior history of fish-and-wildlife violations, (b) no evidence was seized in relation to the violation, and (c) a criminal warrant was not used in relation to the violation. Smith said the department is “fine with these changes” and that the draft reflects testimony the committee heard earlier in the week.

Justin Steffen, identified in the record as a department director, said he did not “see a significant difference” between the prior wording and the proposed change and described the drafting goal as making enforcement proportional so wardens can issue civil tickets instead of criminal informations in routine cases. Committee members framed the change as providing an intermediate enforcement tool between a warning and a criminal charge; the chair noted this would affect “about 85% of our violations” that are in the category covered by the change.

After discussion the chair moved to find draft number 2.1 of H.230 favorable and a second was recorded on the floor. The chair subsequently called for those in favor to raise their hands; the chair observed the finding as unanimous and said the committee would transmit the language to the bill sponsor for further work.

Ending: The committee’s finding advances H.230 to the next stage; members and agency counsel said they will continue technical review but that the draft’s language achieves the stated goal of permitting civil tickets where appropriate and avoiding unnecessary criminal prosecutions.