Logging program pilot credited with improving water-quality compliance; sponsors seek continued funding

A contractor implementing Slow Camp and officials from the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation told the Senate Natural Resources & Energy Committee on April 3 that the pilot has helped loggers install water-quality practices that reduce runoff and keep logging work compliant with state standards, but that additional funding is needed to continue the program.

The contractor, introduced to the committee as Mr. Geran, told members the program began after the FY25 budget appropriated $1 million. "About $750,000 of that is reserved for contractors for implementation of practices," he said, describing a reimbursement model that pays 75% on contract and withholds 25% until field verification by foresters. He said his organization serves as the program administrator under contract with FPR and that as of the hearing about $200,000 in Slow Camp money remained and would likely be committed by June.

Why it matters: Committee members emphasized the connection between timber operations, erosion control and downstream water quality. Oliver Pearson, director for forest at the Vermont Department of Forests, Parks and Recreation, said Slow Camp has reduced discharges from logging jobs and supported compliance with the state's Acceptable Management Practices (AMPs), a key tool for meeting the Lake Champlain total maximum daily load (TMDL) phosphorus goals. "We see that the respect to the AMPs ... you're not seeing the discharges that this program was set up to address," Pearson said.

Program details and findings: The presenter said the program focuses chiefly on hardening truck roads and landings (roughly 75% of funds), with other awards for temporary stream crossings, skid-trail improvements and a smaller share for permanent stream crossings. The contractor said 29 eligible logging projects and 113 individual practices had been funded in the program's initial months and that participant evaluations showed high satisfaction and stronger financial feasibility for contractors who otherwise might have reduced or postponed required work.

Funding and next steps: Committee members asked whether the FY25 appropriation was general fund or clean-water dedicated funding; the presenter confirmed it came from the general fund. Both the presenter and FPR representatives said federal programs such as NRCS typically fund landowners, not contractors doing the on-the-ground work, which is why a state-level program is necessary. The presenter has asked the committee to support further funding when it forwards budget priorities to the Senate Appropriations Committee; he recommended about $750,000 to continue practice funding and suggested multi-year planning windows to improve sequencing and reduce operational risk for contractors.

Accountability and administration: Slow Camp uses pre-award site reviews and post-installation inspections by field foresters; final payment is contingent on verified compliance with AMPs. The presenter said the reimbursement structure is "standards-based" and designed to pay for installed practices that meet the water-quality goals rather than reimbursing every receipt. Pearson said the program complements other FPR and Clean Water Fund efforts, such as temporary bridge rental programs and a forestry-equipment loan interest buy-down for gear that reduces soil impacts.

What's next: Without additional legislative funding, the witnesses said the initial pilot will be exhausted this calendar year and the program would pause. The committee indicated it will receive additional testimony and may consider the funding request as part of its budget deliberations.

The committee recessed for schedule matters and moved on to other bills after the Slow Camp testimony.