by Chris Bradley
On June 1, 2022, Governor Scott signed Act 165, which codified S.281 into law, with S.281 being an act relating to hunting coyotes with dogs.
When originally presented, S.281 was an outright ban on using dogs to hunt coyotes. After going through the legislative process however, that ban was turned into a bill that would atempt to regulate that activity through rules, which then passed the Senate Natural Resources Commitee unanimously.
Since it was enacted, the Fish & Wildlife Board, the Fish & Wildlife department, a dedicated working group and interested citizens all worked very hard to figure out how to implement Act 165, when it was clear that the intent was NOT to ban the activity but instead to create rules that would regulate and control that activity.
After all was said and done, and after receiving advice from the Fish & Wildlife Department, the F&W Board did their job and promulgated rules on coyote hounding with dogs.
Upon review of the Legislative Committee on Rules (LCAR) however, LCAR stated several concerns whereby they objected to several aspects of the Rules which they felt did not meet legislative intent.
Subsequent to Act 165 becoming law, several groups banded together to sue the F&W Department/Board over their belief that legislative intent was not adhered to, and in addition to suing over the Act itself, they additonally sought a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to have the state stop coyote hunting with dogs until the main case was decided.
On February 21, the Washington County Superior Court judge rendered his decision on the TRO, with that decision being a complete denial. His ruling can be found here.
In writing the decision it appears that the judge felt, given the evidence before him, that:
• The F&W Department did nothing unlawful,
• Based on the information the court had, the Board will likely be able to demonstrate that the definition of “control” did meet legislative intent,
• LCAR’s opinion that the temporary moratorium on coyote hounding is still in effect is not consistent with Act 165’s language or the VT Administrative Procedures Act, and
• Coyote hunting is in fact consistent with legislative intent and public interest.
This court decision should and must have a significant impact on further discussions about S.258.
The author is president and executive director of the Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Legislation
was this another dog and pony show/// who pays back the people for their lost time and money///
This is the POW wasting taxpayer time and money pursuing a distinct micro minority agenda.Thank you Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs, Vt F&W Dept, the Board, and Judge Tomasi.
This author, writing with intrinsic bias as both president & executive officer of the VT Sportsman’s Clubs, completely neglects to mention Bill S-0258 which will likely, regardless of anything thus far passing in lower court rulings, pass the legislature and essentially reorganize much of the F & W – and there is little to nothing any judge can do to alter that. The legislative body drafts all and any laws – not a judge nor any judge/jury. The state legislature is the lawmaking branch of the government. They hold “supreme legislative power”. The executive branch in VT includes the governor (who now holds no veto power), the LT. Governor, Treasurer, Sec. of State, etc.
Abiding by Constitutional requirements, the General Assembly, as per VT governmental structure and authority, “creates executive branch entities”
a.) including AGENCIES and DEPARTMENTS
b.) determines the entities to which it will confer authority AND the extent of that authority
c.) provides the manner for executing law
d.) may amend any of the foregoing
The judicial branch – the branch Mr. Bradley writes of, does NOT have the Constitutional Authority in Vermont (and the VT Supreme Cort has held) that this branch:
a.) does NOT have the Constitutional Authority & thereby cannot invalidate any law due to disagreeing with its policy. All the judicial branch of government can do is to make certain whether a claim meets Constitutional standards or violates any fundamental rights.
Therefore, the VT legislature will likely continue to pursue potentially passing S – 0258 and all it entails & there will likely also continue to be continued causes of action also being pursued in the courts with the usual appeals & advances to higher state courts.
It remains obvious that the majority of Vermonters and Americans in general who demand greater accountability and humane protections for animals will continue to both fund and fight for those animals in whatever forums they must in order to achieve the goals of proper safety protocols & protections for both wildlife and domestic animals nationwide.
Last but not least, again this article addresses only hunting which has largely not been a bone of contention of either the people of Vermont, the nation, nor of animal advocacy groups. The primary grievance remains trapping and the related & intrinsically biased structure of the F & W “oversight” boards that will almost certainly be restructured.
Once again, the attempts to chronically incite and create incendiary environs merely ignite further tension and cause, with good reason, the lawmakers to advance S – 0258 and related bills as expeditiously as possible.
Going over and over and over the facts, the realities, and the overwhelming concerns of the people as they pertain specifically to trapping shall never alter the final decision-making procedures & abilities that the legislature will ultimately decide. And again, further attempts to harass or amplify tensions on VDC only works to diminish sportsmen’s efforts in saving the highly unregulated “sport” of “recreational” trapping of animals.
https://www.facebook.com/share/HCbJZf8mP4UJjh5K/?mibextid=WC7FNe
This is a very informative video just put out by Vermont Trappers Association. Including biologists, wildlife management and laymen. Very informative and well done.
I know very little about trapping. However, after watching this video I can say I am 100% in favor of trapping and what Vermont is and has done to regulate this activity.
I apologize if I have not uploaded this video properly. But you can find it on YouTube it is called Stewards of the Wild presented by the Vermont trappers association.
I’m confused. If this is about trapping, then why the ban on hunting with dogs?
And thank you to the unceasing efforts of both national and Vermont State Animal Advocacy groups who continue to fight at all levels of government for fair & balanced regulatory control for our shared environment and the living creatures who inhabit it.
And thank you for your further unceasing efforts that have directly caused the inhumane & barbarous “sport” of trapping to have become so diminished with successive generations so that one day human animals might no longer take pleasure in torturing, tormenting, and killing our wildlife whilst proclaiming that participating in committing such grievous acts provide “necessary” or supposedly “sound” environmental justifications.
And thank you always for being the voice for those who have none – the animals who God alone created & placed upon this earth who share an integral and imperative role in our environment’s health and balance. Though we are all part of the food chain as created, the deliberate act of intentionally inflicting suffering & pain – or of taking pleasure or delight in the taking of another life in order to provide necessary sustenance – was not and is not part of God’s plan for creation.
Kathleen, I truly hope you will watch the above posted video . It may not change your mind about trapping (and hunting), but hopefully it will touch your heart in a way that you will not be so quick to speak untruths concerning people who also love wildlife.
I’ll try to watch it but with the knowledge that it was produced with a biased perspective, as it was made & disseminated by the VT Trapper’s Association.
However, in terms of speaking “untruths”, as a party who doesn’t post on VDC regularly, you may not be aware that if you simply peruse the dozen or so articles about trapping on VDC from the year 2023, you will find many of your fellow pro-trappers who utilized sexist, misogynistic, and abusive language against me simply because of my anti-trapping stance.
I won’t go into detail now, but since you mentioned “untruths”, those aspersions were not merely false but undignified and vicious – not exactly verbiage I would expect from purported “wildlife lovers”.
As it turned out, apparently those sentiments didn’t win the trappers much favor with legislators.
I hope you will take the time to read those as well.
if that dirty animal named coy comes in my yard, the judge will rule/// there will not be a vote/// i as a human am the higher authority///
By the way, Ms. Pitre – our family donated to your campaign the last time you ran even though you weren’t in our district. What was done to you was outrageous & intolerable.
In light of what you went through yourself though, I trust you can agree that demeaning verbiage & harassment was not at all proper on VDC either simply because I am an animal advocate and express a different opinion on this topic than most, though not all, of my fellow conservatives. And much like you, it served to do nothing to diminish my outspokenness on this or any issue.
I agree with you , Kathleen, it’s no fun to be on the receiving end of angry people and their actions.
Although I have not read the previous article responses that offended you, I’m sorry that you had a bad experience here on the VDC. I know Guy Page, the editor and publisher, to be a man of integrity and morals. Demeaning verbiage and harassment are not acceptable on his publication.
Thank you for supporting me in my run for representative. I agree with you that it is important we continue to be outspoken on our views. Free speech makes America strong.
Vermont Constitution
Chapter II
Article § 67. [Hunting; fowling and fishing]
“The inhabitants of this State shall have liberty in seasonable times, to hunt and fowl on the lands they hold, and on other lands not inclosed, and in like manner to fish in all boatable and other waters (not private property) under proper regulations, to be made and provided by the General Assembly.”
ALL CONCERNED VERMONTERS SHOULD READ THIS ALOUD AT TOWN MEETING WHEN THEIR LOCAL LEGISLATORS ARE PRESENT FOR QUESTIONS & ANSWERS.
Oppose S.258 and all similar overthrows of the Constitutionally protected Rights enumerated above…
Demand a Full Public Hearing in the well of the House Chamber ASAP!!@!
This issue has brought to light emotionally driven legislation counter to degreed, highly experienced, respected, professionals, gainfully employed in the science.
Legislation driven by people seeking to boost their hollow self-esteem by championing the cause du jour. We’ve all seen it before, harp seals, whales, lab monkeys, Purdue chickens, legal ivory trade, etc.
Dysfunctional souls that extol the life of a child is of no greater value than an animal. Animals whose entire existence consists of eating, breeding and fleeing predators. Most always succumbing to being eaten alive, starvation disease or a semi on I-91.
My emotionally stable, mature wife gets ample nods of approvement in her Montreal furrier coyote jacket and heels. Just as any native vermont woman should at the Essex House Tavern.
The Senate Committee on Natural Resources + Energy has jurisdiction over all matters relating to fish and game in the state. Not one of the members on that committee is a hunter or trapper.. Their argument for restructuring the F+G board is that the current board is biased and does not represent people with other views. Maybe we use their own logic and look at a restructuring of the committee itself for the very same reason. Hunters, trappers and other outdoor sportsmen are not being represented by the current members of the SCNR … Don’t we need balance there also?
Thank you Mr. Appleton.
And yet the obvious fact that there is no representation of sportsmen on this Senate committee, as stated here by you is not acknowledged by this committee, or of course, the anti hunting/animal rights group POW, even though with a claim of representing 3,000 “supporters” (.461% of the population of the State of Vermont, that’s right, four hundred, and sixty one thousandths of one percent !) compared to the 69,996 licensed hunters in 2023 (10.768% of the population of the State of Vermont) the animal rights group POW represents a micro minority of the people of Vermont. (approximately 650,000 citizens)This fact that you pointed out is further proof that these committees, be they House or Senate are anything but open minded, and unbiased. Their minds are already made up when they enter the committee room, as evidenced in an article in the pages of this publication regarding legislators playing on their phones/computers during an address to them by the Governor ! The deck has been stacked. We are in a fight, not just against a group with a different agenda than traditional Vermonters, but also against those that took an oath to defend our state constitution, and now want to trash it, one article at a time.
Vermont State Constitution, 1777, Governing Power, Section 67 “The inhabitants of this State shall have liberty in seasonable times, to hunt and fowl on the lands they hold, and on other lands not inclosed”
We’ll said sir! And just a side note.. Ive noticed when talking to other sportsmen that some are completely unaware of these bills.. they’re in disbelief and ticked off and it opens their eyes to where this is really headed. Somehow unless you’re really paying attention these proposals are sliding under the radar. The anti’s are hoping for this of course so we need to get the word out and get everyone who enjoys our outdoor heritage to contact their legislators..
Hunting is not and has never been the issue here, but obfuscation does come in handy when the trappers want to continue to spread their disinformation. This entire issue revolves solely around trapping specifically and chasing down coyotes simply for the joy of tormenting them and then killing them in cold blood. Americans do not eat canines and therefore having domestic canines run them down to exhaustion to blow their brains out as they stand trembling and attempting to seek shelter from their tormentors is inhumane and undeniably cruel. Trapping, again, kills thousands of pets, non-targeted species and protected & endangered species as there is no way for a set trap to use discrimination to determine whether or not the targeted mammal is being caught to be then killed. Therefore since trapping is not synonymous with hunting, re-reading the VT Constitution as it applies to hunting Hhunting has no bearing on the issue at hand.
Thank you to the wildlife protection groups in Vermont and the thousands of VT residents who support their tenacious quest to stop these cruel practices that have in the past completely annihilated entire species from this state’s forests which was the ultimate causation for any and all purported imbalances now supposedly being noted in the ecosystem. Obviously, prior to European settlers establishing settlements on North America hundreds of years ago, no such rash of “environmental imbalances” existed as the native Americans hunted merely for sustenance and not in deriving pleasure from any feeble attempt to conquer naturr.
The current board that Is privately hand chosen by the governor as supplied to him by F & W is biased, discriminatory, and chosen without any democratic processes involved. Many towns are completely unrepresented and most applications hold no professional or semi-professional experience in wildlife management whatsoever and are comprised of trappers exclusively, as opposed to being comprised of all types of wildlife and environmental enthusiasts in order to afford fairness, non partisanship, and a diverse voice in order to properly address the concerns and cares of all Vermonters who equally share in the wilderness experiences in VT and to whom the outdoor environs equally belong. This is imperative now since the F& W department itself has determined that 68% of all Vermonters polled oppose trapping. In true democratic fashion therefore, all Vermonters need to participate and partake in decisions that collectively impact us all.
And thank you to the VT legislature for taking the time to thoroughly listen to and view the numerous personal testimony, factual statistics and data, and video & photographic evidence presented by these humane organizations in these regards.
In the end, the VT legislature and tje VT court systems will determine how the current F & W now biased board must be changed to more fairly snd more suitably reflect both the current decreased interest and licensing revenues documented in trapping in general not just in VT but what is being witnessed on a national basis – as well as the many concerns broached by the majority of the populace of residents in VT who are tired of learning of domestic pets, non-targeted & protected species injured and killed by traps and trappers with regularity as supported by the data and related evidentiary materials presented by these groups. Advancements in creating a safer environment for all is possible, but trappers have refused thus far to accommodate these much needed changes.