Senate bill would change land‑posting to five‑year cycle and require buyer disclosure

Sen. Chris Maddox (Chittenden North) presented Senate Bill S.299 to the Natural Resources & Energy committee, proposing to change Vermont’s statute on posting land against hunting, fishing and trapping from an annual to a five‑year recording cycle and to require disclosure to buyers at transfer.

Maddox said constituents asked to reduce the administrative burden of annual reposting for large tracts and older landowners, and the bill would allow owners to choose a five‑year operative date recorded at the town clerk’s office. Counsel explained the draft makes the recorded filing date the operative date for the five‑year window and that notices must remain legible and maintained at boundaries and corners to remain enforceable.

The bill also adds a disclosure requirement tied to conveyance paperwork: before or as part of a real estate conveyance, sellers must notify buyers whether the property is posted pursuant to the statutory section. Counsel added a provision clarifying that failure to disclose would not affect marketability of title.

Committee members asked technical questions about recording mechanics (whether a posting recorded 09/15/2025 would remain effective through 09/15/2030), how clerks are implementing the Department of Fish and Wildlife’s guidance that a posting expires at the calendar-year mark, and whether the criminal trespass statute (13 V.S.A. §3705) interacts with this civil posting statute. Counsel identified 13 V.S.A. §3705 as the trespass statute and noted the posting statute in chapter 10 operates as a civil mechanism to enclose property against hunting.

Members also discussed practical issues — material durability of signs, whether posting at conveyance should appear on seller disclosure forms, and that the existing $5 statutorily listed fee has not been updated in decades. Counsel indicated the effective date in the draft was 07/01/2026 and that clerks and Department of Fish and Wildlife practices on timing can affect how filings are interpreted.

No vote was taken; the committee asked for follow-up clarification on recording technicalities, potential fee updates, and any enforcement questions best addressed by Fish and Wildlife or local law enforcement.