By Sam Hartnett, Community News Service
Editor’s note: This story is via Community News Service in partnership with Vermont State University Castleton.
Should landowners who allow public trail networks on their property be compensated? That’s the question a study group would be tasked with answering under a bill in the Senate.
It’s too late to pass this year, but the bill, S.79, has gained bipartisan support and excited trail network advocates.
In Vermont, around 70% of public recreation trails crisscross private land. Through agreements with trail organizations and under state law, landowners allow the use of their land in exchange for liability protection — meaning they can’t be sued for injuries that occur on trails. But if landowners charge a fee for people to use their land, that liability protection goes away.
The bill would set up a panel to explore different ways to compensate landowners for allowing public use of their trails. The committee would measure the “costs and liabilities that private property owners incur” when they open up their land for public recreation, then report findings to the Legislature by the end of next year.
The bill includes $250,000 to hire a consultant to study the economic impact of the state’s outdoor recreation industry more broadly. The money would go to the Department of Forests, Parks, and Recreation and also support the committee’s work.
“We’re looking to have more tools in our toolbox for crediting landowners,” said Sen. Scott Beck, R-Caledonia, in a call last week.
Beck, one of a dozen co-sponsors on the bill, hopes the study would better identify the issues that landowners face and offer more ways to solve them. For now, it remains in the Senate Natural Resources Committee.
Threats to outdoor recreation trails frequently involve the transfer of land ownership. When a landowner allowing trails on their property sells to someone who doesn’t want the trails, issues arise. When a landowner cuts off public access to their property, trail networks can become fragmented and more difficult to use.
“Not everyone, especially people from out of state, are familiar with the public-private cooperation that is essential to trail networks,” said Nick Bennette of the Vermont Trails and Greenways Council in Statehouse testimony March 18.
Representatives of trail networks say their industry is crucial for Vermont’s economy as a whole. Kingdom Trails in Burke has brought in a $10 million boost annually to an economically challenged part of the state, the Northeast Kingdom, according to the trail network’s director.
“We value landowners so much, and we hope that the state can also recognize the public benefit that landowners contribute,” said Abby Long, the network’s executive director.
Long hopes the study can help solidify and grow outdoor recreation opportunities in Vermont, bringing more money into rural communities.
The outdoor recreation industry makes up around 4.8% of Vermont’s gross domestic product, or $2.1 billion in 2023. Vermont is second to only Hawaii in the portion of GDP coming from the industry.
“Outdoor recreation is woven into the fabric of Vermont,” Bennette said in the March 18 testimony.
Some senators on the committee feel that now isn’t the time to explore programs that could muddy the waters inundating the property tax system. Sen. Ruth Hardy, D-Addison, thinks her colleagues should focus on finding ways to overhaul that system before exploring any program that may offer tax credits.
“It’s not a good time to introduce the potential of any kind of additional property tax credit or exemption into the system,” said Hardy in a phone call Monday. “Once you study something and an exemption is recommended, it is harder to say no.”
Hardy also questioned how frequently there are problems in landowner-trail network agreements, as no statewide statistic exists on landowners leaving shared-use contracts. While some landowners have stopped allowing trail access, it is unclear how much of a threat the outdoor recreation business faces.
The state’s “current use,” program allows for properties to be assessed based on what the land is being used for instead of potential development value. Some lawmakers point to the program as a model of compensating landowners for the public benefit they provide through conservation or farming.
The committee convened by the bill could examine how the current use program might benefit landowners working with trail networks and include findings in its recommendations to the Legislature.
