Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Fence Liability topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate committee approves printing of bill clarifying fence responsibility along federal land

2473543 · February 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Idaho Senate Agriculture Committee voted to print RS 32,111, a proposed addition to Title 35 that clarifies private landowners are responsible for fences bordering federal lands and allotments.

Senator Mark Harris, Idaho State Senate, Legislative District 35, asked the Senate Agriculture Committee to print RS 32,111, a statutory addition to Title 35 clarifying fence responsibility for landowners bordering federal land. "So, basically if you border federal land and allotment, the fence is yours, the private land owners," Harris said during the committee meeting.

The measure, Harris said, codifies an existing expectation that private landowners maintain fences adjacent to federal allotments because federal agencies will not build or maintain those fences. "It is an addition to Title 35," he said, describing the bill as a statutory clarification rather than a substantive change.

Committee Vice Chair Senator Zito asked whether the bill was a “fence to keep out” provision; Harris responded that the measure is intended to keep livestock off private rangeland and described it as a fence-out solution. "This is to keep the cattle or livestock from coming down on [private] ground," Harris said.

After brief discussion, Senator Van Orden moved to send RS 32,111 to print; Senator Taylor seconded the motion. The committee approved the motion by voice vote. Committee members asked no substantive amendments during discussion.

The bill as presented adds language to Title 35 defining fence responsibility for land that borders federal allotments; the measure’s supporters said it reflects established practice and responds to a recent lawsuit that highlighted uncertainty about statutory language. The committee took no final action on the bill’s substance beyond voting to print the request for sponsorship.