TAKE ACTION: Speak up by Nov 14 to Put Act 59 Back on Track
- Zack Porter
- 2 days ago
- 5 min read
The implementation process for Vermont’s landmark 30x30/50x50 conservation law has been a charade of manufactured consensus and status quo ideas. We need you to speak up by November 14 for public process, wild public lands, and the intent of the law itself.
Short on time? Skip ahead to "How to Submit a Comment" and add the next Act 59 public meeting to your calendar - a zoom link will be shared soon.
Act 59: How we got here; Where we're going
When the state legislature passed the Community Resilience and Biodiversity Protection Act (Act 59) in 2023, Vermont gained a wonderful opportunity to rebalance conservation for maximum ecological function and community benefit. The law set targets of conserving 30% of Vermont’s landscape by 2030, and 50% by 2050, following the guidance of Vermont Conservation Design — including protecting at least 10% of the state to become future old forest.
More than two years after passage, however, it’s clear that the Act 59 process has gone off the rails. Last year, the Act 59 inventory of existing conserved lands improperly counted all conserved agricultural lands, even conventional monocultures that blatantly violate the law’s mandate of including only those lands that constitute “sustainable land management.” The inventory also illegally counted thousands of acres of state “wildlands” that lack any legal protection whatsoever, contrary to the requirements of the law.
The so-called “Vermont Conservation Plan” process led by Vermont Housing and Conservation Board in 2025 has been characterized by closed door meetings, a “Framework Report” that has little to do with the law it is supposed to implement, and “listening sessions” that failed to provide substantive opportunities for the public to provide feedback.
Throughout this entire process, Standing Trees has consistently stood up for public involvement, wild places, and the intent of Act 59 itself. Following this advocacy, Act 59 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meetings are now open to the public (join the second public meeting of the entire Act 59 implementation process on 11/13 on Zoom and in Montpelier). We are sad to report that despite repeated requests for information, it took a public records request to learn the members of the TAC and “Project Management Team.” Months later, the public is finally getting a seat at the table.
These are small but important victories, and now is the time to make the most of them. Please join us in submitting a comment by November 14 — during the first real public comment period of the Act 59 Conservation Plan development process — to get Act 59 back on the right track.
How to Submit a Comment
The best way to submit a comment is by emailing the Vermont Conservation Plan Project management team (Trey Martin, Annie Decker, Becca Washburn, Gunnar Nurme, Billy Coster, Isaac Bissell, and David Beurle) at the following addresses (we recommend copying and pasting these addresses directly into an email):
Click here to read the “Vermont Conservation Design Framework Report” that VHCB and its contractor, Future iQ, are asking the public to respond to. It is ok if you are disoriented by the confusing, flowery language in this report — we are too! That’s why we are providing the following guide to some of our key concerns with the Plan.
VHCB and Future iQ are also providing a survey that the public can take — but we recommend sending your comments directly via email, both to make sure that the PMT sees your comment, and to give you a fair, full opportunity to express your thoughts, rather than just respond to prescriptive statements and prompts.
Our top-line message is this: The implementation process for Act 59 needs to go back to square one and start with a corrected inventory and full public process. Right now, the public is stuck commenting on a draft “Vermont Conservation Plan Framework Report” that has already been developed in private for months, and if continued, is unlikely to lead to a lawful or ambitious outcome for Act 59.
Below are some key concerns - please feel free to copy and paste, but please also add an introduction to make your comments personal! Why do wild places matter to you?
Key Points
The draft Plan needs to get back to the substance of Act 59 itself: The draft Plan barely refers to the specific language in Act 59 or mentions substantive parts of Vermont Conservation Design (VCD). For example, the draft Plan does not include any of the specific, quantitative recommendations from VCD, such as goals for recovering Old Forests across at least 10% of Vermont (see section 4.0).
ANR and VHCB should correct the inventory so that only lands that are permanently protected and managed as wildlands are counted. The inventory completed in 2024 gives Vermont ANR credit for Wildlands that lack any legal protection whatsoever. This accounting trick will detract from necessary policy changes and investments in wildland protection.
VCP must present alternatives and analyze the cost, benefits, and practicality of different ways to get to Act 59 goals. Currently, the “key principles” listed in the draft Plan (p. 6) say nothing about the cost, practicality, or timeliness of different ways of meeting the Act 59 goals. For example, this report should compare and contrast the economic benefits of extractive uses of public lands vs the ecosystem service benefits of public lands, as we recently analyzed in our new expert report. What are the benefits to taxpayers for clean water, carbon sequestration and storage, biodiversity conservation, and recreation when public lands are allowed to grow old?
Emphasize the need to protect large, wild, areas, particularly on public lands. The draft Plan includes relatively heavy emphasis on private lands (see, for example, p. 10) implicitly suggesting that the implementation of Act 59 should focus on private lands. Public lands, by contrast, are never directly discussed in the Report, but public lands have unique values, benefits, and management goals that distinguish them from the rest of the landscape. At a minimum, the Conservation Plan should map all “patches” of contiguous natural habitat (forests, wetlands, etc) that meet the minimum preferred sizes for Old Forest restoration in Vermont Conservation Design: at least 4,000 acres across the Green Mountains and Northeast Kingdom, and at least 500-1,000 acres in more developed regions like the Champlain Valley.
VHCB is unjustified in claiming a “General Consensus” or a fair Public Process so far: Absurdly, VHCB is presenting the Framework Report that the public now has the chance to comment on as “Draft 3,” and framing it as a result of “general consensus” from the public during summer listening sessions. During these listening sessions, the public had no access to draft documents, and was only provided sticky notes to give feedback. No consensus was sought, and no consensus was reached.
Thanks as always for taking action for wild public lands!