Vermont
Bill proposing changes to hunting and trapping rules spurs passionate testimony
Lawmakers in Montpelier are once again considering big changes to the state’s hunting and trapping regulations.
Proposed legislation on the table this session has many hunters and trappers in the state very concerned — though groups that advocate for animal rights say the changes are necessary.
Lawmakers in the Senate Natural Resources and Energy Committee have introduced a bill that would strip the state Fish and Wildlife Board’s authority to write hunting and trapping regulations. That body is mostly made up of people who hunt, fish or trap.
Instead, under the bill, the Department of Fish and Wildlife would write new regulations moving forward.
Additionally, S. 258 proposes banning hunting coyotes with dogs in Vermont and proposes a ban on baiting coyotes. Additionally, it would require foothold or body-gripping traps for fur bearing wildlife be set more than 50 feet back from any trail, class 4 road or other public area, including when the trap is set under water or ice.
The move comes after lawmakers on the committee that oversees rulemaking — the Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules or LCAR — told the Secretary of State this winter that new regulations the Fish and Wildlife Board adopted in 2023 for trapping and hunting coyotes with hounds do not do what they called for in law.
Generally, the Legislature sets the guiding direction for a change in regulation by passing a law, and state agencies draft the change, which comes back to lawmakers for review.
More from Vermont Public: Vermont has new trapping & coyote hunting rules. But some lawmakers want to change how they’re made
And while agencies, or in the case of fish and wildlife regulations, the Fish and Wildlife Board, are not required to change the regulations if LCAR objects to them, the ruling can be a mark against the rules if they are challenged in court.
And the new regulations on hunting and trapping already have been.
In early January, a coalition of four wildlife advocacy groups in the state — Protect Our Wildlife, Animal Wellness Action, Center for a Humane Economy and Vermont Wildlife Coalition — filed a lawsuit in Washington County Civil Court, alleging the new don’t do what lawmakers called for in statute.
Democratic lawmakers in the Senate Natural Resources Committee have said publicly they agree — though the Department of Fish and Wildlife stands by the board’s regulations and does not support the changes proposed in the bill.
Fish and Wildlife Commissioner Christopher Herrick told the committee Wednesday his department has issued 36 permits so far for hunting coyotes with hounds in the first ever permitted season on hunting coyotes in the state. The season ends in March.
“I recommend to you that we just implemented this — let’s see if it works the way you desired when you passed the bill,” Herrick said. “We haven’t even given it an opportunity to work.”
He said the Fish and Wildlife Board has been effective, and that the existing system has served Vermont well. He urged lawmakers not to tear it down because they disagree with parts of a rule, a dispute he points out is being hashed out right now in state courts.
“If the board had proposed rules which addressed the law, we wouldn’t be here today,” said Sen. Mark MacDonald, a Democrat from Orange County. “We’re here today because the laws that were passed were not implemented … the system has failed as currently structured.”
Who gets to decide?
For several years, wildlife advocacy groups have told lawmakers that they feel the Fish and Wildlife Board does not listen to their concerns about animal welfare in designing regulations for hunting, trapping and fishing.
Advocacy groups in the state have called for legislation to specifically require that people who don’t hunt, fish or trap have representation on the Fish and Wildlife Board — and this bill would do that.
Bob Galvin with Animal Wellness Action accused members of the Fish and Wildlife Board of calling wildlife advocates “bunny huggers” at a board meeting during the last year.
“I support hunters, trappers and anglers being on the board and having a seat at the table,” said Galvin. “And I want to see other folks like non-consumptive birdwatchers, hikers, scientists and other Vermonters who have spent considerable time in the field studying and understanding wildlife to also be involved in the conversation.”
“Non-consumptive” is a phrase hunters and trappers told lawmakers they take deep offense to, saying the language is “othering.” And they point out that some of the groups advocating for S.258have called publiclyfor a ban on trapping in the state.
Commissioner Herrick, with Vermont Fish and Wildlife, disputed the notion that organizations like the Vermont Wildlife Coalition haven’t had a voice. He said animal welfare groups were invited to participate in the working group that recommended the regulations the Fish and Wildlife Board approved — though groups including Protect Our Wildlife have been critical of that process.
“We’re not always going to agree, but I think it’s a mischaracterization to say that the department and the [Fish and Wildlife] Board do not hear from the public,” Herrick said. “The public is well represented. There’s a public comment period.”
Right now, the 14-person board is appointed by the governor, with members confirmed by the Senate.
The new bill proposes the board be appointed by the Legislature and by the Commissioner of Fish and Wildlife, and it requires that the board include people who don’t hunt, trap or fish.
As proposed, the board would give feedback to the department about all rules and regulations, rather than just those pertaining to hunting, fishing and trapping as it does now — which the department could choose to incorporate or to ignore. Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife says this change will overly complicate the way they manage wildlife.
And while animal welfare groups in the state say scientists at the department should make decisions about hunting, trapping and fishing, others say the current system puts hunters, trappers and anglers at the table in a way that generates effective regulations.
Chris Bradley, president of the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs says there is no justifiable reason for what he says is a “radical” change to how hunting, trapping and fishing are regulated in the state.
“Currently, the governor appoints these individuals based on their reputation, knowledge and experience of Vermont’s outdoors,” he said. “And yes, these historically have been ‘consumptive’ users. Under S.258, that board will be replaced by a politically driven board.”
Bradley did acknowledge gubernatorial appointees are also political — but he and others said they were more comfortable with the existing process.
Heated testimony
Lawmakers are taking testimony all week, and on Tuesday heard passionate appeals from both hunters and trappers and organizations that oppose trapping and hunting coyotes with hounds in the state.
Brenna Galdenzi with Protect Our Wildlife said her group strongly supports the bill, and called hunting coyotes with dogs “a public safety concern.”
“This isn’t the Vermont, again, for better or worse, of the 1950s,” Galdenzi said. “Vermont is more populated, with more people recreating on public lands … there’s going to be continued conflicts with the public.”
She said this bill will make decisions about managing Vermont’s animal species more scientific and more inclusive.
Sarah Gorsline with Project Coyote, which advocates for an end to Vermont’s open season on coyotes, said her group fully supports a ban on hunting coyotes with hounds. She said remaining apex predators are critical in the Northeast, where wolves and mountain lions have largely been extirpated.
“When personal traditions affect the larger community and public safety, then I would ask, how are those traditions going to adapt to new understandings provided by science, to living together with other community members in Vermont?” Gorsline asked lawmakers.
Mike Covey, a lobbyist for the Vermont Traditions Coalition who said he hunts coyotes with hounds and traps, said his group strongly opposes the bill. He said dog owners should be responsible for keeping their pets out of traps — and that Vermont should consider enforcing leash laws more strictly.
“Hunters, anglers and trappers are all wildlife advocates,” he said. “We’ve spent the better part of the century caring for, caretaking, stewarding and funding the sound management of wildlife throughout the country. And to suddenly be targeted as disposable in so many ways, that’s very off putting.”
Covey said anglers, trappers and hunters don’t feel heard and that there’s growing distrust in how regulations are written in the state, and trappers and hound hunters feel these changes whittle away at their ability to practice traditions that have been passed down in their families for generations.
Former state Sen. John Rogers of West Glover said Tuesday he vehemently opposes the bill, and that as a farmer who has lost livestock to coyotes, he supports the ability to hunt coyotes all year.
Rogers said he believes changing the makeup of the Fish and Wildlife Board would make it easier for people who oppose trapping to eliminate it — and he said most hunters and trappers don’t have the time to spend advocating for their traditions before lawmakers. He said he’s seen animal rights activists have referred to hunters as “knuckle-draggers” on social media.
“These people do not have the time to spend in the Statehouse lobbying for their rights. They do not have the money to hire expensive lawyers,” he said.
The advocacy organizations that testified Tuesday in support of the bill pointed out that they also have hunters in their membership and say they support the right to hunt in Vermont.
Amendment Wednesday
In an amendment Wednesday, lawmakers updated the language in the bill to eliminate the terms “non-consumptive and consumptive users.”
And they said they plan to look closely at whether any proposed changes to how regulations about Fish and Wildlife are written might disproportionately impact people from a particular socioeconomic background.
Testimony continues through the week, and lawmakers are scheduled to hear from a range of people Thursday, including those who hunt coyote with hounds and those who oppose it, as well as others concerned with the governance changes the bill proposes.
A list of testimony can be found here, and those who wish to testify can reach out to the committee directly.
Sen. Becca White, a Democrat from Windsor County who sponsored S. 258, called early in the week for respectful discourse about the issue, saying members of the committee have in the past received threats when debate over climate and environmental policy gets heated.
“One of the problems I’m already sensing with this legislation is that this is a very broad conversation about the identity of Vermont,” White said.
Have questions, comments or tips? Send us a message.
Vermont
WCAX Investigates: Police participation in border program draws scrutiny
BURLINGTON, Vt. (WCAX) – Vermont police officers are working overtime shifts along the Canadian border under a federal program that critics say could violate the state’s anti-bias policing laws.
“Up here, we’re so small we rely on our partner agencies,” said Swanton Village Police Chief Matthew Sullivan.
On a recent frosty Friday, Sullivan was patrolling along the Canadian border as part of Homeland Security’s Operation Stonegarden. The chief and other local officers work overtime shifts for the U.S. Border Patrol.
“It acts as a force multiplier because we’re able to put more officers out in these rural areas in Vermont,” Sullivan said.
During an exclusive ride-along, Sullivan showed us a field where, as recently as last fall, migrants were smuggled across the border. “These people are really being taken advantage of,” he said.
From 2022 to 2023, U.S. Border Patrol encountered just shy of 7,000 people entering the country illegally in the region, more than the previous 11 years combined.
In several instances, police say cars have tried to crash through a gate in Swanton along the border. Others enter from Canada on foot and get picked up by cars with out-of-state plates.
The chief says the illegal crossings strike fear among local parents. “They didn’t feel safe allowing their kids outside to play, which is extremely unfortunate,” Sullivan said.
Through Operation Stonegarden — which was created in the wake of 9/11 — Sullivan and his officers get overtime pay from the feds. “We’re kind of another set of eyes and ears for border patrol,” Sullivan said. His department also gets equipment and training.
Six agencies in Vermont participate in Stonegarden: The Vermont State Police, Chittenden County Sheriff’s Department, Essex County Sheriff’s Department, Orleans County Sheriff’s Department, Newport City Police Department, and the Swanton Village Police Department. Some three dozen across New England participate in Stonegarden. These agencies collect relatively small amounts from the feds — $760,000 in Vermont, $190,000 in New Hampshire, and $1 million in Maine.
But amid the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown, Stonegarden is under scrutiny.
“This has become quite relevant to a lot of people once again,” said Paul Heintz, a longtime Vermont journalist who now writes for the Boston Globe. “These three states have dramatically different policies when it comes to local law enforcement working with federal law enforcement.”
Vermont has some of the strictest rules about police assisting federal immigration officials. The Fair and Impartial Policing Policy limits cooperation with the feds and says immigration status, language, and proximity to the border cannot be the basis of an investigation.
“Vermonters have made clear through their elected representatives that they want state and local law enforcement to be focusing on state and local issues,” said Lia Ernst with the ACLU of Vermont. She says Stonegarden is crossing the line. “They don’t want their police to be a cog in the mass deportation machinery of any administration but particularly the Trump administration,” Ernst said.
The ACLU and other critics are concerned that Stonegarden creates a cozy relationship between local police and immigration officials that can be used to enforce the president’s immigration crackdown.
Heintz says the distinction between civil and criminal immigration enforcement can be fluid. In most civil cases in which the feds seek to deport, Vermont law enforcement can’t play a role because it’s against the law. In criminal cases, which local police can enforce, immigrants can be detained and charged.
“An operation may start out appearing to focus on a federal criminal immigration issue and may turn into a civil one over the course of that investigation,” Heintz said.
“There is a lot of nuance to it,” admitted Sullivan. He insists his department is not the long arm of federal law enforcement and is instead focused on crime, including guns, drugs, and human trafficking. However, if someone is caught in the act of crossing the border illegally, that constitutes a crime, and the chief said he calls for federal backup. Though he said that rarely happens.
“It’s a criminal violation to cross the border outside of a port of entry, and technically, we could take action on that. But again, we’re not here to enforce civil immigration while working Stonegarden,” Sullivan said.
Copyright 2025 WCAX. All rights reserved.
Vermont
Vermont Catholic Church receives bankruptcy court’s OK to sell Rutland property – VTDigger
Vermont’s Roman Catholic Diocese, now seeking to reorganize its depleting finances in U.S. Bankruptcy Court, has received permission to sell its former Loretto Home senior living facility in Rutland.
In a ruling this week, Judge Heather Cooper said she’d allow the state’s largest religious denomination to accept a $1 million offer from Rutland’s nonprofit Cornerstone Housing Partners, which wants to transform the Meadow Street building into transitional and long-term affordable apartments.
“The proposed sale represents the highest and best offer for the property,” church lawyers argued in court papers, “and the proceeds of the sale will assist the diocese in funding the administration of this bankruptcy case and ultimately paying creditors.”
Cornerstone said it had a $3.9 million commitment from the state Agency of Human Services to help it buy and rehabilitate the 20,000-square-foot facility.
The nonprofit could immediately launch its first-phase plan for 16 units of emergency family housing under a new state law that expands locations for shelters. But the $1 million sale is contingent on receiving a Rutland zoning permit for a second-phase plan for at least 20 long-term apartments.
“We’re not going to purchase the building if we can’t create affordable apartments there,” Mary Cohen, the nonprofit’s chief executive officer, told VTDigger. “The goal is to create permanent housing.”
Cornerstone already has heard questions from neighbors as it seeks a zoning permit from Rutland’s Development Review Board.
“I think it’s a lack of understanding,” Cohen said. “We’re good landlords. We house people and take good care of our property. The application process will allow a public conversation about what our plans are.”
The Vermont Catholic Church filed for Chapter 11 protection a year ago after a series of clergy misconduct settlements reduced its assets by half, to about $35 million. Since then, 119 people have submitted new child sexual abuse allegations — almost double that of an earlier 67 accusers who previously settled cases over the past two decades.
To raise money, the diocese enlisted Pomerleau Real Estate to market the Loretto Home after the facility closed in 2023. The property, under the control of the church since 1904, was initially listed at $2.25 million before being reduced to $1.95 million and, by this year, $1.3 million, court records show. The diocese received an unspecified number of offers before accepting Cornerstone’s $1 million bid this summer.
Under the Chapter 11 process, the Vermont church must receive court approval for all major purchases and sales until a judge decides on its call for a reorganization plan.
Vermont
Vermont soccer’s Rob Dow reportedly eyeing move to Big Ten program
Vermont soccer head coach Rob Dow appears to be headed to a bigger conference.
The longtime Catamounts head coach who guided Vermont to the 2024 NCAA championship in historic fashion is reportedly set to be hired by Penn State, according to Jon Sauber of Centre Daily Times. Shortly before Sauber’s online report on Wednesday, Dec. 11, WCAX-TV’s Jack Fitzsimmons and Michael Dugan broke news that Dow and the Nittany Lions were in “deep negotiations.”
UVM athletics officials declined to comment until there is an official announcement.
Dow’s ninth season at Vermont ended with an upset loss to Hofstra in the second round of the NCAA Tournament at Virtue Field. The Catamounts had entered this year’s tournament unbeaten and as the top overall seed. They also started 2025 as the top-ranked team in the nation in the United Soccer Coaches preseason poll.
Under Dow, the Catamounts have advanced to the NCAA Tournament in five straight seasons (2021-2025). They reached the NCAA quarterfinals in 2022, the third round in 2023 and then last year’s unseeded run to capture their first national championship with an overtime victory over Marshall at the College Cup in Cary, North Carolina.
Through his nine seasons at Vermont, Dow has gone 109-41-21 with four America East tournament crowns and three conference regular-season titles. His 11 NCAA Tournament wins are a program record. He stands five wins shy of matching Cormier and Ron McEachen for most victories in program history.
Dow spent five seasons as an assistant coach at Vermont before earning a promotion to head coach in 2017 following the departure of Jesse Cormier.
According to UVM’s salary records online, Dow’s current base salary is $200,000. In 2017, in his first year at the helm, it was $80,000.
If hired, Dow would be taking over at Penn State following Jeff Cook’s exit. Cook stepped down in November after an eight-year run and three NCAA Tournament appearances. The Nittany Lions went 5-8-4 this past season.
Penn State’s operating budget for the 2024 fiscal year for men’s soccer was 10th in the country at $2,099,653, according to data collected by Matt Brown of Extra Points. Vermont was slotted 28th in Brown’s story.
Rob Dow: Season-by-season record with Vermont soccer
2025: 14-1-5 (NCAA second round)
2024: 16-2-6 (national champions)
2023: 13-6-2 (NCAA third round)
2022: 16-4-2 (NCAA quarterfinals)
2021: 13-5-2 (NCAA first round)
2020-21: 5-2-1 (America East final)
2019: 11-6-1 (America East semifinals)
2018: 11-7-1 (America East quarterfinals)
2017: 10-8-1 (America East semifinals)
Total: 109-41-21
Contact Alex Abrami at aabrami@freepressmedia.com. Follow him on X, formerly known as Twitter: @aabrami5.
-
Alaska6 days agoHowling Mat-Su winds leave thousands without power
-
Politics1 week agoTrump rips Somali community as federal agents reportedly eye Minnesota enforcement sweep
-
Ohio1 week ago
Who do the Ohio State Buckeyes hire as the next offensive coordinator?
-
Texas6 days agoTexas Tech football vs BYU live updates, start time, TV channel for Big 12 title
-
News1 week agoTrump threatens strikes on any country he claims makes drugs for US
-
World1 week agoHonduras election council member accuses colleague of ‘intimidation’
-
Washington3 days agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa5 days agoMatt Campbell reportedly bringing longtime Iowa State staffer to Penn State as 1st hire