Trapping — your opinions?
2023-04-05
Dear friend,
In House Corrections & Institutions, your Windham-6 State Representative heard testimony today and discussed S.14 - An act relating to a report on criminal justice-related investments and trends.
This bill is an important next step in trying to incarcerate fewer Vermonters. If passed, the Department of Corrections will gather better metrics on recidivism and even desistance. That's a new term for me, meaning the reduction in criminal behavior.
I welcome your questions on S.14. But I expect that I will continue to get more correspondence on two bills not in my committee:
I'm monitoring both bills.
To find out what's going on, I try to keep in touch with colleagues on the relevant committee, and I also do something that any of you can do from home -- I keep an eye on the schedule for the Vermont House Energy & Environment Committee. This week in the committee you see a lot of time on S.5.
Today, House Corrections ended our afternoon early and I had a few minutes to pop into Energy & Environment in person:
I've told residents that I'm concerned about S.5. I don't have anything new to report on that, though I hope I will have more to share soon.
What about trapping? I've just gotten word that it's going to be coming up this Friday afternoon at 1 p.m. in Energy & Environment:
I am getting a lot of emails from residents in favor of and asking me to support H.191.
For example, a resident wrote today, "I have previously let you know how I feel about the cruelty of trapping and hound hunting of animals in Vermont. I think I I have read that H.191 is coming up for a vote and I want to emphasize how strongly I feel about the need to ban these awful practices here and I urge you to vote accordingly. I also think that the 14-member Fish & Wildlife Board must be reconstituted. Currently it is solely comprised of hunters, trappers, hound hunters and fishermen, leaving the general population out of the decision-making process."
I do not have a position on H.191. The committee has not taken it up, and if I've learned anything from how the legislative process, no bill is simple.
I've been told by one resident that I legislate from my "personal agenda." (See my response -- My political agenda, revealed.)
Trapping is an example of a topic that knew very little about before being elected to the Legislature, and did not take any position on while campaigning. It would be hard for me to identify any "personal agenda" on this topic prior to being a State Rep.
If H.191 is taken up, it would be a good opportunity to tune into committee conversations and get to know the topic better. As with any topic, the specifics of a bill would be essential to consider before committing to a Yes/No vote. I have heard the viewpoint of citizens like the resident just quoted who want trapping banned.
I have also heard from residents who trap and consider it part of their way of life. In some cases is part of how they feed their family or make a living. They follow state laws, and they characterize their relationship with the animal population as one of respect.
I want to hear from and understand all of these viewpoints, and other information that I might not be aware of, before committing to a position.
I will have my own committee hearing at that time, so if you want to help your Windham-6 Rep be in two places at once, attend the Energy & Environment hearing and let me know how it goes.
Here's another bill that I'm fascinated by that's not in my committee. H.81 - An act relating to fair repair of agricultural equipment would help small farm and logging businesses be less reliant on bringing equipment into dealers for costly repairs. It would give equipment owners access to diagnostic tools that currently only dealers can access.
A couple years ago, our new G.E. washing machine required a service call just a month after I bought it. The digital read-out gave an error code, but as a consumer I had no way to read the code (and online tutorials didn't help).
When an authorized technician arrived, he immediately read the code and diagnosed the problem. The filter was clogged. The technician did something I could have done myself if I had the information. He removed the filter from the front of the machine and pulled out the Q-tip that had jammed it up.
It was that simple -- the washing machine was working again.
In this case, the technician classified the service call as falling under warranty and charged the manufacturer for it. But he could have charged us for it and we would have had to pay.
This bill relates only to ag equipment, but I'd like to see right-to-repair across more products. What do you think? It seems like a no-brainer to me, but there's always another viewpoint!
P.S. Do Twin Valley families have questions on PCBs? Another day, I can report back on relevant legislative activity and information in this area.