Draft wood‑products language would let owners designate logging/forestry land outside Act 250 jurisdiction, board tells committee

Members of the Land Use Review Board (LURB) told the House committee they reviewed a draft bill to recognize "logging/forestry" areas on parcels and provided mostly positive feedback while flagging drafting and definitional issues.

Janet Hurley, chair of the LURB, said the board does not object to the modifications in the draft and noted one provision (item 3) was already completed with the Agency of Natural Resources and can be struck. Hurley outlined how the proposed language would work in practice: a commission decision could recognize a parcel‑level designation dividing land into area(s) that support an Act 250 project and area(s) designated for active logging/forestry that would not be subject to Act 250 jurisdiction unless those areas themselves later triggered review.

Hurley gave a real‑world example involving a Northeast Kingdom quarry that carried a 100–200 foot buffer under an Act 250 permit; under the proposed language, a landowner could designate separate logging forestry land up front or later, but the commission would retain authority to impose tree‑cutting restrictions where a nexus to resource criteria (wildlife habitat, vernal pools, stream buffers) exists.

Committee members raised practical questions—whether a simple site plan could be used in lieu of a survey to mark a subset of the parcel, how existing permits interact with new designations (the LURB noted precedent for farming designations, including a prior Boyden Farm case), and which statutory definitions should be used. LURB and committee staff recommended reusing or harmonizing definitions already in statute rather than creating slightly different ones in the new bill; they said ANR will be asked to review the draft definitions.

Next steps: the committee will seek ANR feedback on habitat and definition issues and expects LURB to return with suggested language refinements.