Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Livestock Depredation Compensation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel advances bill adding a 'possible' tier for compensation of livestock losses to wolves and grizzlies
Summary
House Bill 82 would add a third payment tier — “possible” — to Idaho’s depredation reimbursement program for livestock losses attributed to wolves and grizzly bears, aligning state reimbursement terminology with federal investigator classifications. The committee voted to send the bill to the House floor with a due-pass recommendation.
The House Resources & Conservation Committee voted to forward House Bill 82, which would add a "possible" category to the state’s livestock-depredation reimbursement framework for losses to wolves and grizzly bears.
Sponsor Rep. Gerald Raymond, R-31, described the change as a technical cleanup to last year’s House Bill 592 and said the new tier would allow payment when an investigator’s evidence indicates a loss is possible but cannot be definitively confirmed. "We have an animal that's been ... partially eaten with tracks around it, either wolves or grizzlies or both, but we did not see the murder," Raymond said; the proposed new category would permit payment when funding is available.
Multiple stakeholders testified in favor. Dexton Lake of the Idaho Farm Bureau Federation and representatives of the Idaho Cattle Association said livestock producers in some regions faced significant losses and asked for flexibility in the payment ladder; they emphasized the change is not an appropriation but a pay-path clarification that would use existing funds. Ellery Tucker Williams, legislative and community engagement coordinator for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, said the Fish and Game Commission supports aligning state terminology and investigator practice. Nick Fasiano of the Idaho Wildlife Federation also supported the measure, saying very little evidence sometimes remains at carcasses consumed by grizzly bears and wolves, making the "possible" classification relevant.
Committee members asked about who conducts investigations and how cases are classified; witnesses said federal Wildlife Services (USDA APHIS), Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA), the Office of Species Conservation and Idaho Fish and Game coordinate investigations and payments under the existing statute. Testimony included differing descriptions of recent data: one witness said ISDA records then showed confirmed losses first, then possible and probable; another witness said possible was the largest category for wolves in the most recent season. The committee approved a motion to send the bill to the House floor with a due-pass recommendation by voice vote.
