An act relating to establishing the Recreational Trails Compensation Study Committee
H.147 creates the Recreational Trails Compensation Study Committee to examine whether private landowners who allow public recreational trail use on their property should receive compensation or some other benefit. The committee is tasked with reviewing how private land is currently used for trails, identifying the costs and liabilities borne by landowners, evaluating the economic value of trail access to Vermont and local economies, and comparing compensation approaches used in other states or jurisdictions.
The study committee would include state officials, trail and outdoor recreation representatives, a land conservation organization representative, two private landowners with different access situations, a trail planning expert, and a municipal representative. The Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation would provide administrative, technical, and legal support. The committee must report its findings and recommendations to the General Assembly by December 15, 2026, and it sunsets on March 1, 2027. The bill also appropriates $250,000 in fiscal year 2026 to support consulting and economic analysis related to the outdoor recreation economy and the committee’s work.
The bill does not immediately change substantive property, trail, or compensation law; instead, it creates a temporary study body and funds research that could lead to future legislation. It directs the Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation to support the committee and appropriates General Fund money for consultants and economic analysis, which would affect state spending and agency workload. If the committee’s recommendations are adopted later, the bill could influence laws governing public recreational trail access, landowner incentives, liability, and possible compensation mechanisms.
The bill appears generally supportive of recreational trail access while also acknowledging concerns from private landowners. Its structure suggests an effort to gather balanced information rather than impose an immediate policy change, with representation from conservation, outdoor recreation, municipal, and private landowner interests. Because no committee transcripts or votes are provided, there is no recorded floor or committee sentiment to measure beyond the bill’s bipartisan-looking sponsorship and its study-oriented approach.
The main point of contention is likely whether private landowners who permit public trail access should be compensated, and if so, who should pay and how much. Related concerns include the costs and liabilities landowners face, whether trail access already provides enough indirect benefit to justify voluntary access, and whether incentives could encourage new trail development without overcompensating landowners. Another likely issue is how to set minimum standards for trail siting, design, construction, and management so that public access does not create undue burdens or risks.