by Sam Lincoln

I’ve had the honor of being a Vermonter who made a career working the land in agricultural and timber harvesting enterprises and my family has owned land in Vermont for generations. I also served as Deputy Commissioner of Forests, Parks, and Recreation under Governor Scott, where I worked on efforts to reform Act 250 to both protect forests and make the law work for rural Vermont.

Vermont’s forest economy businesses must compete and innovate and grow just to stay viable. But too often, our regulatory system makes that harder instead of easier.

It should not take three years to get a permit to make bark mulch on land a town has already zoned for industrial use.

A logger should not be denied a municipal permit to process firewood because their business is located in a forest conservation zone.

And it should not cost a small business owner one hundred thousand dollars in fees, expert witnesses, and other conditions to get permitted to produce the wood fuel chips that heat buildings, including our state house —fuel chips that are now hauled in from out-of-state suppliers.

These are not hypothetical scenarios. With the implementation of Act 181, and no meaningful consideration given to rural businesses, these complications are only going to increase in frequency and complexity. It is a significant deterrent to starting or growing a rural business.

These aren’t new issues. Rural business owners raised them long before Act 181 through testimony, stakeholder meetings, and good-faith participation in official Act 250 reform discussions.

And unfortunately, they were dismissed by a legislator as a “non-issue.”

That disregard has real consequences. It’s not just frustrating—it has undermined the businesses and supply chains that Vermont depends on to manage its forests, supply local wood products, support its farms, and sustain its rural communities.

To be clear, the legislature has done important work for rural Vermont. But when it comes to land use and environmental policy, many of us have been left out of the process, while others—often paid advocates—have had a disproportionate voice in shaping the outcomes.

I’ve written to the Speaker of the House multiple times with specific examples of exclusion or indifference toward rural Vermonters, with an offer to discuss them. I’ve received no response.

None.

So today, once again, as delays in Act 181 are being called for to “get it right,” rural Vermonters are being asked to trust the same process that has disregarded or actively worked against them for years.

We’ve already seen that movie. If we spend the next three or four years going through the same process—with the same structure and the same voices driving it—we should expect the same results.

We cannot do that. Too much is at stake.

The problem here isn’t a lack of input or potential solutions that protect the environment and our rural way of life. The issue is a lack of balance and accountability in how that input is considered.

If legislation affects landowners, they belong at the center of the process—not relegated to public comment sessions after the big picture policy decisions have been made.

The Legislature should repeal the “road rule” and Tier 3 provisions of Act 181. They do not work for the people most directly affected. If the goal is to address forest fragmentation and biodiversity, that conversation should happen openly—with the people who live and work on the land. Communication, education, and collaboration must come before regulation.

I’ll say it clearly here – no more decisions about rural Vermont without rural Vermonters at the table.

Sam Lincoln previously served as the Deputy Commissioner of the Vermont Department of Forests parks and Recreation and has worked in agriculture and forestry economies