Fish and Game officials tell joint committee dedicated funds, nonresident tag draw sustain agency amid rising costs

Janet Jessup, a budget and policy analyst with the Legislative Services Office, told the joint Senate Finance and House Appropriations Committee that the Department of Fish and Game receives no general fund support and is primarily funded by licenses, tags and federal grants.

"The department does not receive any general funds," Jessup said, noting the department's Fish and Game Fund and Set‑Aside Fund include fees earmarked by Idaho code for specific uses.

Jim Fredericks, director of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, said the agency operates 19 hatcheries, manages 31 wildlife management areas and relies heavily on nonresident license sales. "Of the revenue that comes from licenses and tag sales, approximately 60% comes from nonresidents and 40% from residents," Fredericks said, adding the shift in 2025 from an over‑the‑counter model to a draw for nonresident deer and elk tags has so far produced revenue "at or ahead of where we've been in past years." He said some applicants who purchased licenses to enter the draw may or may not retain those licenses, leaving future totals uncertain.

Committee members pressed for detail on several budget items. Jessup clarified differences between fisheries facility inflation (which covers labs and has multiple fund sources) and fisheries inflation enhancement (a federal adjustment tied to Bonneville Power Administration funds and listed at $500,300 in the materials). She also acknowledged a posted PDF that contained an incorrect interim figure and said she would correct it after the hearing.

A central line of questioning focused on depredation claims. Fredericks said the department currently has $1,800,000 in spending authority to pay depredation claims and that when claims exceed that cap the agency prorates payments. "When claims come in higher than that…we have to prorate those claims, which means a producer may be getting paid 90¢ on the dollar," Fredericks said, noting access depredation fees (resident $5; nonresident $10) generate roughly $750,000 and, with other revenue, bring in just over $1,000,000—short of the typical annual payout.

Fredericks told the committee he is "very interested in rightsizing that program" and working with the legislature on potential options, including fee increases or identifying alternate revenue sources to better match spending authority with likely claim levels.

Members also questioned how the agency times habitat work during low‑water years and how it partners with federal agencies and private landowners. Fredericks described collaborative efforts in the Upper Salmon Basin, use of bypass channels for in‑stream work, and coordination with the National Marine Fisheries Service and other partners.

The committee heard that Fish and Game employs about 550 full‑time staff plus more than 400 seasonal workers, that many budget changes are one‑time project requests, and that chronic wasting disease testing and sample collection have increased operational costs. Jessup and Fredericks both said additional details and divisional breakdowns could be provided after the hearing.

The committee did not take a vote on any Fish and Game requests during this session; the schedule moves to budget setting work beginning Friday.