The Joint Agriculture, State and Public Lands & Water Resources Committee advanced an amended bill on Oct. 31 that would authorize payments to private landowners and lessees for extraordinary damage to rangeland caused by big-game herds.

What the bill would do: The draft (24LSO0114, "Excess Wildlife Population Damage Amendments") inserts extraordinary rangeland damage into the Game and Fish damage-claims framework, authorizes the Game and Fish Commission to adopt rules for calculating compensation, and specifies presumptions and payment formulas. The bill would presume extraordinary damage if either: 1) consumption of forage exceeds 15% of estimated annual production for the year damages are claimed; or 2) a population estimate for a big-game herd on the affected range exceeds the commissionobjective for two consecutive years. Compensation would be calculated using animal unit months (AUMs) and the USDA monthly AUM fair-market rates or the AUM payable to the state on state trust lands — and, by committee amendment, payments would be at no less than 150% of the private land lease AUM rate.

Why it matters: The amendment seeks to provide a payment mechanism for rangeland forage loss, a category landowners said historically was not covered by Game and Fish damage payments. Proponents argued it could provide relief in areas where elk and other big-game herds exceed biological objectives, while opponents cautioned about fiscal impacts and limits of agency authority over federal public lands.

Key implementation details discussed: Rick King, chief game warden and chief of the wildlife division, told the committee that the department would convert counts of animals and the time they remain on a pasture to AUMs, then multiply the USDA AUM rate by 150% to calculate payment. King and deputy chief Greg Smith described using the NRCS Range Analysis Platform (RAP) and aerial or camera counts to estimate forage production and animal consumption so the department could produce repeatable, defensible calculations. In a worked example used in the presentation, a 5,300-acre pasture with 300 elk on it for about 3.5 months yielded an estimate of 268 AUMs lost; at a baseline of $30 per AUM that example produced roughly $8,000 in payment before the 150% multiplier, and $12,000 after the multiplier was applied.

Fiscal and funding notes: The department said damage payments are funded from Game and Fish license and application revenue and federal excise taxes; it currently sets aside approximately $500,000 annually from fees, but total annual damage payouts have ranged from roughly $1 million to $1.5 million in recent years. King said the proposed change would likely increase payments and the department cannot yet estimate the fiscal impact until a fiscal note is prepared.

Limits and scope: Committee members and the department repeatedly noted the bill would not apply to BLM or Forest Service public lands in its current form. Staff told the committee the draft applies to landowners, lessees of state land and private land lessees; an amendment explicitly clarified private and state land lessees are eligible. Several lawmakers advocated for broader inclusion of federal land permits, but that proposal failed in committee after department and staff cautions about differing grazing and payment schemes on public lands.

Committee actions and resulting requirements: During the meeting the committee added an amendment requiring the Game and Fish Department to develop a plan to reduce elk populations in any area over objective and report that plan to the joint travel committee and the agriculture committee by Sept. 1, 2024 (or at the last 2024 interim meeting). The committee also added a sunset date (July 1, 2030) during a subsequent reconsideration and ultimately passed the bill as amended.

Opposition, procedural history and next steps: Several members questioned long-term fiscal exposure and whether the Game and Fish Fund could absorb increased payments without diverting funds from habitat projects and other programs. The bill was initially debated and failed on a first vote, then was reconsidered, further amended (including clarifications on lessee scope, the requirement for agency herd-reduction plans, and a 2030 sunset) and passed by the committee. The department will prepare a fiscal note and the bill will be available for the legislature to consider in session.