House Transportation Committee hears concerns about cold-weather life-jacket rule; witness urges 6-foot trigger

A Vermont outdoor-advocacy witness told the House Transportation Committee on April 9 that a proposed cold-weather requirement to wear life jackets on vessels "underway" could interfere with hunting and bow-fishing and should be adjusted.

"When you're wearing a life preserver, it can affect the length of pull on your shotgun, making it more difficult to hit the target you're shooting at," said Mike Covey, executive director of the Vermont Traditions Coalition, who testified that the Senate had already made some changes to the original bill. Covey said he would prefer raising the current 3-foot water-depth trigger to about 6 feet so that common shallow-water hunting and bow-fishing scenarios are not swept into the requirement.

The provision under discussion would require life jackets to be worn in any vessel that is underway from Nov. 1 through May 1. Committee members pressed Covey on how the law treats being "underway" by human power versus mechanical power; he said the distinction means the rule would primarily affect canoes, kayaks and rowboats used while hunting or bow-fishing, rather than motorboats that must be brought to a mechanical stop before hunting.

Members also asked whether age thresholds were implicated; Covey noted that discussion in the Senate had included whether to extend a juvenile rule from age 12 toward age 18 but that the age change was not part of this bill section. On enforcement, Covey said state police and Fish & Game wardens would be the primary enforcement mechanism and that enforcement would likely be opportunistic, depending on patrols and available staffing.

The committee clarified that a penalty exists in statute: a maximum $50 fine for violations under 23 VSA 3317. The committee asked staff to confirm whether any Judicial Bureau surcharge applies to that penalty.

Why it matters: The committee is weighing safety benefits cited by supporters against practical access and recreation concerns raised by hunters and bow-fishers. Members signaled interest in refining the statutory language to avoid unintended effects on common, low-risk practices while preserving protections in deeper or colder water.

The committee did not vote on the provision; members said they would seek additional information from enforcement agencies and consider language changes in future sessions.