by Alana Stevenson
There was a moratorium on coyote hounding as of July 1, 2022 according to section 11 of Act 165. This moratorium was to be lifted if the Fish and Wildlife Department could ensure a way to maintain control over hounds, prevent hounds from attacking people, farmed and domesticated animals, and prevent hounders from trespassing with hounds on private property. It was a long drawn out process that went through the Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (LCAR).
Vermonters have been trying to change how the Fish and Wildlife Board and Department treats wildlife and the public for decades but reach grid lock, every time — and here we are again.
Not only did the Fish and Wildlife Department and Board scoff, ‘hem and haw’ over recommendations made by legislators for hounders to control hounds — controlling hounds is considered a defacto ban — the department and board incrementally shuffled their feet, and while doing so, added detrimental language that would mitigate or nullify any potential regulations or safety measures from being enacted in the future. There’s no point in having or enacting legislation if it’s unenforceable or nullified by the next sentence in the legislation.
Upon the final meeting, the Fish and Wildlife Board decided they were not going to follow or implement any of LCAR’s recommendations, pointedly defying concerns made by legislators, and the next day lifted the coyote hounding moratorium. Legislators on LCAR assumed the moratorium would stay in place. But LCAR cannot ‘force’ the Fish and Wildlife Department or Board to do anything. The department and board members regulate themselves. So now the department has proclaimed applications for hounding are up for grabs.
Welcome to coyote hounding in Vermont again – no restrictions, no regulations, no control of dogs, no consequences for hounders when hounds attack people, non-target, or companion animals, and no protection for residents and landowners from hounders repeatedly running on their property.
The only thing that will prevent hounds from attacking people, and farmed and domestic animals, and ensure safety and protection for the public is legislation to ban hounding of ‘large game’ animals. Even legislators have no clout when it comes to modifying the behavior of hounders or actions of the Fish and Wildlife Board. Requiring hounders to control their dogs or banning hounding of bears, coyotes, raccoons, foxes, bobcats, and wolves altogether (all considered ‘large game’ animals) are the only options.
There is a bill H.323 that will ban coyote and bear hounding in 2024. For anyone who may be concerned that legislation targets beagles or regulates rabbit hunting, it doesn’t. Rabbits are small game species and beagles are not used for attacking and chasing large game. More aggressive dogs such as coonhounds and foxhounds are used.
Vermonters and their companion dogs have been attacked by coyote and bear hounds with no consequences for hounders. Public safety should take precedence over a small subset of the population who intentionally release hounds to chase, harass, and eviscerate wildlife for recreation.
There is some good news. Vermont residents can now sue the Fish and Wildlife Board and Department if they violate any recommendations made by LCAR regarding coyote hounding. Please monitor, record, and report any and all activity by hounders who taunt or mistreat you, trespass on your property, release dogs on your property, can’t control their dogs, or if there are any attacks or emotional distress caused by coyote hounders. Log and report any violations or concerns to any of these organizations: Protect Our Wildlife, Animal Wellness Action, Vermont Wildlife Patrol, and Vermont Wildlife Coalition.
Only together can we address the tragic treatment of hounds and abuse to wildlife, ensure safety of the public, respect for property rights, and prevent attacks by hounds.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Opinion, Outdoors, State Government
It would be nice to have Ms. Stevenson attribute her affiliations to any organized groups she may serve in her zeal to destroy yet another Vermont traditional game management option. Does she serve on the Board of Directors or as an officer or paid staff of any group dedicated to the ending of other forms of hunt, fish & fowl Rights Vermonters enshrined in their Vermont Constitution???
To quote Vermont Constitutional Chapter II:
§ 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.”
She may as well complain the Governor or other Executive agent of the state is not doing enough to censor folks who support hunting and other outdoor pursuits that are Constitutionally enshrined…. Again it would not be the role of any executive agents to deny Vermonters access to their Constitutional Rights. Her complaint that the Fish & Wildlife Board is too supportive of these Rights reveals most all we need to know about her other theological hatreds of traditional Vermonters.
PS When and where did you move here from Ms. Stevenson???
Legislators have enough trouble taxing and spending us nativist evil hunters into bankruptcy and emigration to civilized places like….
I pray my many generations of Fathers and Grandfathers forgive me for considering leaving for good.
Well stated and thanks Bill.
P.S. It makes ZERO difference when and where she moved here from. Her right to free speech is entrenched in the US Constitution of both the United States and of Vermont – and her intrinsic right, along with any other legal citizen, to move/travel/relocate within these United States is embedded within the same document as well. Just as she may have moved here from elsewhere, so did your family move here from elsewhere – either from another state within the union but certainly and without doubt from the European Continent wherein your “Fathers” and Grandfathers emigrated to a new nation and relocated to the State of VT from whence they originally were birthed.
As far as your referencing censorship, the only individuals attempting, very unsuccessfully as it turns out, to censor anyone would be those past posters who failed to intimidate & harass me specifically by utilizing juvenile, pedestrian, misogynistic, and rude verbiage which merely empowered both myself and obviously other animal advocates to place pen to paper and add more facts and statistics to the ever-increasing stack of information with which the legislative body in VT will utilize to introduce & enact future bills with regard specifically to trapping.
In the interim, as always, trapping remains a danger to domestic pets, protected and non-targeted animals and a barbaric & bestial “sport” that treats animal life as substandard, inferior living beings that require constant culling through pitiless and the cruelest of measures.
It’s all been said before: the majority of Americans both nationally & statewide oppose trapping, specifically.
Everything changes and evolves including environments, climate, economies, scientific theories, technology, transportation modes, people’s minds.
Such is life. Deal. Dog whistles on VDC and amassing commentaries on VDC (that despite the sheer number of trappers who obediently respond every time, always have wound-up on the losing end in terms of the “last word” ) will do nothing to alter said inevitable change. And defying legislators under the current climate seems highly ill-advised. But you do you.
“Vermont residents can now sue the Fish and Wildlife Board and Department if they violate any recommendations made by LCAR regarding coyote hounding. Please monitor, record, and report any and all activity by hounders who taunt or mistreat you, trespass on your property, release dogs on your property, can’t control their dogs, or if there are any attacks or emotional distress caused by coyote hounders.”
Taunt ? Like naner, naner ?
We too can play that game. Likewise there are laws protecting people lawfully participating in hunting, trapping, and fishing from harassment by people of differing views. I would ask anybody legally pursuing these interests to exercise their right to report anybody interfering in that right.
You mean like the lady that sprayed the bear hunters in the face with mace? Or the women vandalizing the bear hunter’s vehicles and then released their domestic Shepard severely injuring one of the hounds? Oh wait, those were the violent activists committing crimes…not the law abiding hunters.
https://www.outdoorlife.com/hunting/woman-who-bear-sprayed-hunters-charged-with-assault/
https://www.outdoorlife.com/hunting/vermont-residents-found-guilty-harrassing-bear-hunters/
Thanks Sam. Exactly like that ! Allthough it can also be something like coming out of the woods to find your vehicles tires flat. People following you around the woods hollering, beating on pot and pans. I’ve had an anti-hunter who saw me going to my treestand come out into the field which I was hunting, and attempt to scare the deer I was watching by waving the poncho she was wearing. If it had not been the landower’s step granddaughter I would have called the Game Warden. Instead I talked to her to her step grandfather, and he took care of lt .
Thank you Fish and Wildlife Board! Finally a government committee that does not bow and surrender our culture and traditions to an over amplified, emotionally driven alternative. Keep it up!
67 hunting, fowling, fishing/// in seasonable times/// the state owns the wild life///lands they hold/// you must water ,feed, house the states wild life///and other lands not enclosed/// you have to post your land/// once posted all law officers/// global ,federal, state, county, town, or city///will need a search warrant to enter///all federal and state lands must remain open for number 67 the state controls your license/// you must have permission to engage/// a
right is not by a governments permission/// any questions
F&G, thanks for standing your ground for Vermonters, the fools that we have never stepped into a hunting environment, and don’t know “jack ” about it all they know is a leftist agenda…………………………..
This is a wake-up call for all Vermont sportsmen and sportswomen, they don’t like you or what you like doing, leftists will destroy the Vermont we grew up in !!
Yet more masterfully composed writings that shall be presented to the VT legislature to evidence the callous, vapid, and intolerant mentality possessed by those who believe that they alone can commandeer the wilds of the forest and alone control, via the minority which they are. The lives of the beings that have existed upon these lands for a millennia and much more – long before the European settlers ever entered VT and laid claim to this region that they never originated from – can instead never hope to command it, as there exists no man alive to whom it inherently belongs. The wilderness remains now and forever a grace created by God endowed, with measure, to all of humanity through His gift of shared dominion. To believe otherwise is to believe in ignorant fashion.
If someone’s dog attacks you or your pet, there is definitely cause for civil action, and possibly criminal if negligence is involved. Did the person that got attacked do something, or just cry about it on the internet? If your dog attacks me it’s definitely not going to survive. If you put a trap on my land and I step on it, you’ll be tied up to a tree for a little while while you think about what you did. But these are solutions that don’t need any legislation.
Thank you for the additional commentaries mistakenly crediting the Department of F & W as being empowered to introduce bills and pass bills with regard to trapping, as merely the elected legislative body, in fact does. And thank you for all the past comments that were made in a feeble effort to harass & harangue those who advocate for animals on VDC (whom were quite obviously never dissuaded by the childlike or pedestrian displays) and were instead all being quietly compiled by the lawmakers who now seek to entirely reevaluate specific laws with regard specifically to trapping. The past comments along with the past referenced data and statistics that evidence the pet dogs killed by trapping along with the also already referenced non-targeted species & protected animals killed or maimed by traps are all After all, trapping is opposed by the majority of men and women. In Vermont. And nationwide.
Therefore, inevitable change is merely that: inevitable.
Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future. John F. Kennedy.
k.j.g. the only way your going to protect animal rights is to buy a 1000 acres of land and post it///no hunting, fishing, trapping /// you will feel must better and will be able to sleep at night/// question//// do animals have rights like people// do not forget to pay your property taxes on that 1000 acres///
Yes! If someone values wildlife, they will purchase property for the wildlife to be protected. A good, or ethical person would never try to advocate for the use of violent force of the state to enact their feelings, by stealing money from other persons, and criminalizing the minority.
does posting your land give you the right to evict the states asset///show me a public private contract that i signed to allow the states asset to enter my property///my property is not corporate it is private/// bought a property and had a lawyer make out the deed/// on the deed it said joint tenants because more than one name was on the deed /// i asked the lawyer /// if i am a tenant who is the owner///never got an answer/// guess i am paying property taxes that makes me a renter//
If you want to own land you need a property patent. A color of law deed is not proof of ownership. You can look up Ron Gibson for info on how to patent your property. This is how the train companies were able to bypass a lot of things in the Ohio dioxin train spill disaster, because the train tracks are patented property, and towns can’t afford million dollar lawsuits if they breach the law from big names (don’t expect towns to recognize YOUR patent, it only works for federal most of the time). For “evicting the state”, you only have the area in and around your house with current supreme court rulings, and the areas around your house need to have something to obstruct anyone from coming in. You basically need to be fully gated. No trespassing signs are due notice. You don’t need to post your land, you could just put no trespassing if you don’t want people on your property. There is a current court case in the works from a property where the fish and game somewhere was putting hidden cameras on their property, so there might be more developments on what the government can do on your property in the future. You can also get a no trespassing order on anyone, so maybe FOIA all the employees of the department you don’t want to trespass, and then it’s criminal if they are on your property. Just my opinion, I do not give legal advise.
thank you vermonter vermonter
As a sixth generation Vermonter, a Vermont property owner, a lawyer, a history professor, a hunter, the grandson of a man who survived the Great Depression by trapping in Vermont, and a “leftist” who has long supported Bernie Sanders and is mortified by Donald Trump, this discussion breaks my heart.
Every single one of us recognizes that gratuitous/unnecessary pain inflicted on animals is wrong. Every one of us knows that hounds should generally be kept under control, though the nature of hound hunts sometimes pose difficulties with property boundaries. No one wants pets or individuals to be harmed by hounds or traps. Every one of us knows that nature itself is far more brutal on wildlife than humans. And every one of us recognizes that there is a balance between human interests and the life and comfort of wildlife. (Do any of you non-hunters drive a car – and thereby pose a constant risk to deer? Live in a home that was once open land? Exterminate mice that invade your kitchen?)
Enlightened game management means preservation of long cherished traditions and a better existence for wildlife. It means land conservation, cleaner water and safer outdoor activities (with safety courses) and lots of exceptionally healthy natural food. I don’t need to go into the weeds here but the sale of hunting licenses and equipment has done more to protect wild areas in the United States than any other government program.
For all of you hunters/trappers who think all lefties hate hunters, think again. In fact, there is no greater leftist project in America than the preservation of wilderness and game lands for common use. Vermont goes a step further by permitting access to private lands that are not “inclosed” or posted. The hunting/conservation community may be the greatest left-wing force in America (though most Americans have forgotten what it genuinely means to be on the democratic left).
So we have a choice. Vermonters can either get swallowed up in the polarized politics that have plagued the rest of the country or we can do what is deeply rooted in our traditions: pragmatically broker compromises that will reflect all of our concerns. That means some change over time. It also means common respect and a refusal to demonize those we disagree with.
Trapping has changed over the past century. Far fewer people do it (mainly because fur prices have fallen dramatically). It is also more strictly regulated. Fish and Wildlife should investigate further ways to limit problems related to trapping — possibly no-trap zones, trap warning notices, or technological improvements that will protect pets. Owners who allow their dogs to roam freely on other people’s property should not be complaining about injuries from lawfully placed traps.
Hound hunting is still common in some parts of the state. Hounds that stray onto private posted property should be promptly retrieved (within an hour or two, after a reasonable attempt to notify the landowner and without any hunting taking place on the posted land). Property owners should be reasonably accommodating so long as the hunters are respectful and responsive. (I own nearly 200 acres and I would never demean or insult someone who is respectfully trying to retrieve their hounds.)
Hunters should redouble personal commitments to take game as humanely as possible and to respect the property rights of others (the vast majority already do).
Above all, both sides should stop demonizing the other and stop conflating the politics of fish and game laws with every other mindlessly polarized issue on the political landscape. I know a lot of great people who are hunters and trappers, and a lot of great people who find hunting and trapping disturbing. I love my days in the field deer or bird hunting. I wouldn’t force anyone to do the same. I don’t want to be forced to give it up – unless there is a compelling reason. So far I have not heard any. That’s a longer discussion.