Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildlife Rulemaking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Speaker outlines scope of Fish and Wildlife Board authority over hunting, fishing and trapping rules
Summary
Mike Greg briefed the Natural Resources & Energy committee on how Vermont law divides rulemaking authority between the Fish and Wildlife Board and the commissioner, noting statutory provisions in Title 10, Part 4, the 1961 codification of board rules, and recent controversies over trapping rules and procedures for bag limits.
Mike Greg, a presenter, told the Natural Resources & Energy committee that state law places wildlife in public trust and that the legislature has delegated certain rulemaking and management duties to the commissioner of Fish and Wildlife and to the Fish and Wildlife Board.
"The wildlife of the state, under the constitution, under common law, and under statute are held in trust by the state for the benefit of the citizens," Greg said, summarizing the public-trust foundation for state wildlife law.
Greg said the legislature placed many Fish and Wildlife Board rules into statute in 1961 and that those statutory provisions remain operative "until such time as amended, revoked, or superseded by an act of the general assembly or by the fish and wildlife board." He explained that statutory text therefore controls when there is any inconsistency between a statute and a board rule.
The presenter described how the state has divided responsibilities: the Fish and Wildlife Board adopts rules governing methods of take (hunting, trapping and fishing), while the commissioner has broader management authority over wildlife resources and department operations. He said the board may adopt rules and also set certain specifics by procedure (for example, migratory-bird bag limits and other seasonal limits) to avoid the timing constraints of the formal rulemaking process.
Greg outlined several practical implications of that split: many board rules are collected in an appendix to Title 10 so the legislature can amend them directly; procedures allow the board to adjust bag limits or gear rules on a faster timetable (including to follow federal requirements such as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act); and rulemaking remains subject to public participation requirements even when done by procedure.
He cited recent controversies to illustrate how the division works in practice. The board adopted new trapping rules based on the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies' best-management practices; some objections were raised by an entity referenced in the hearing as "Elkhart," and the matter produced litigation. Greg said the department's adoption of a proposed allowance for captive restraint devices was blocked because it conflicted with existing statutory language banning snares, showing that statutory provisions will control when the two conflict.
Greg also summarized statutory constraints on methods of take: wildlife cannot be privately owned (except where rehabilitators are licensed), and statutes set limits such as prohibitions on machine guns, restrictions on use of lights, and minimum distances from roads. He pointed committee members to Title 10, Part 4 for definitions and the statutory framework governing fish and wildlife in the state.
Committee members asked several clarifying questions during the presentation about who sits on the board and the board's qualifications. Greg said the board has 14 members (one appointed from each county), generally serving staggered six-year terms, with the governor appointing members and designating the chair. He said county residency is the only statutory qualification and that any required training generally occurs after appointment.
Greg concluded by noting there is more to discuss — he had planned an additional briefing on the Lake Champlain Advisory Committee and agreed to return for that portion at the committee's convenience.
No formal motions or votes on policy were taken during this informational briefing.
