Melissa Wintrow — Asked to begin committee questions after the director's remarks.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked how the department works with other agencies on fisheries habitat projects during low-water years.
Melissa Wintrow — Asked whether the department has a plan to address recurring shortfalls in depredation claim payments.
Melissa Wintrow — Senator Wintrow asks a series of related questions about the budget book, including whether older settlements are included in the figures, how appropriation compares with actual spending, and where unspent appropriations are being transferred. She notes she may be reading the budget book incorrectly and asks for clarification on whether unused monies are being shifted between divisions or into personnel versus operating expenses, with the Attorney General and others responding within the same budget discussion.
Janet Jessup — Janet Jessup introduced herself as a budget and policy analyst with Legislative Services and began the Department of Fish and Game presentation.
Jim Fredericks — Identified himself as director of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game and introduced staff.
Jim Fredericks — Jim Fredericks, Director of Idaho Fish and Game, explained that wolf management cannot really be separated from grizzly bear listing status because as long as grizzlies remain listed and unauthorized take remains possible, the issues stay coupled. He added that delisting or take authorization could help decouple them, and noted that legal wolf trapping has not been shown to cause demonstrated lethal take of grizzly bears, making the issue primarily legal rather than biological.
Amber Worthington — Introduced as Deputy Director of Policy and Programs.
Ellery Tucker Williams — Introduced as legislative and community engagement coordinator.
John Oswald — Introduced as chief of the Administration Bureau.
Carl Bjerke — Senator Carlson questioned how much of the department’s budget growth directly increased harvest opportunity versus being absorbed by administrative or program expansion, and then followed up by asking for the ratio of administrative support to field staff support in the department.
Richard Cheatum — Representative Bruce questions the wildlife budget, first raising concerns about budget swings and one-time project authority, then following up by asking how much of the wildlife budget is allocated to predator management versus predator monitoring or conservation.
John Oswald, Administration Bureau Chief for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game — Identified himself and explained that budget fluctuations often reflect one-time projects and federal grant timing.
Edward Hill — Representative Harris asked how habitat project funding overlaps between the Department of Fish and Game and the Office of Species Conservation, and the Director responded to that question.
Edward Hill — Referenced as having raised the earlier overlap question in the Fish and Game budget.
Edward Hill — Representative Harris asks for a quick rundown of how many species in Idaho are covered under the ESA or otherwise protected. The administrator responds that, off the top of their head, the number is in the 30-plus range but under 50, and then begins to step back to further explain the office’s role in relation to Fish and Game while continuing to address the same question.
Jordan Redman — Referenced as having asked a related question about the surveys/committee.
Mike Edmondson — Introduces himself as administrator of the Governor’s Office of Species Conservation and notes his staff member Amy Lackovich.
Amy Lackovich — Identified as the fiscal officer for the Office of Species Conservation.
Administrator Mike Edmondson — Administrator Mike Edmondson discussed how his office tracks concrete species metrics, including habitat treatment for sage grouse, river and stream connectivity for salmon and steelhead, and human-bear conflict reduction for grizzly bears, noting that many of these metrics are available on the office website. He then addressed questions about a proposed merger with the Office of Energy and Mineral Resources, explaining that the two offices already work closely together on energy transmission, mining, and permitting coordination, and that consolidation could create efficiencies such as shared legal counsel, though he cautioned against cutting too deeply. He also noted increased emphasis on nuclear, geothermal, and Fast 41 projects. The discussion then moved to grizzly bear issues, where he said multiple outcomes remain possible and that the office is working to reduce regulatory burden and create a path to delisting. He added that wolf/grizzly issues are complex and tied to trapping, and later explained that his office works closely with tribes, with grizzly bear issues not currently overlapping the usual and accustomed lands of the tribes they work with most, while coordination remains strong on salmon and steelhead and tribal sovereignty is respected.
Director Fredericks — Was called on to respond after the administrator deferred to him.
Joe Palmer — Referenced indirectly as part of the committee context in the prior discussion; no direct statement in this section.
Jeff and I — The chief of the criminal law division identified himself and began answering questions about ICAC trends.
Jim Guthrie — Senator Hart and the speaker discuss how Idaho handles incarcerated illegal aliens and immigration holds, including whether prisoners would need to be released earlier to immigration authorities and whether the state would need to change its policy. The exchange broadens into a discussion of legislative authority over the issue, with Senator Hart asking whether the Attorney General’s office can work with the legislature on a framework for treating prisoners from certain countries differently. Hart then raises the growing Idaho prison census and asks for help reducing corrections costs.
Attorney General Labrador — Explains his understanding that prisoners here illegally generally remain in custody until their sentence is finished before being released on an immigration hold.
Attorney General Labrador — Says Idaho policy would likely need to change and notes that conditions vary by country of origin.
Attorney General Labrador — Explains that immigration authorities wait until the sentence is finished before taking custody on an immigration hold.
Attorney General Labrador — Agrees to look at the issue, noting legal and jurisdictional concerns.
Attorney General Labrador — Clarifies that the $242 million figure refers to the last three years, not just last year.
Attorney General Labrador — Explains the money came from Consumer Protection Division cases, including multi-state litigation against opioid manufacturers and tobacco companies.
Attorney General Labrador — Says the tobacco settlement brought in $70 million in his first year and reduced future litigation for 10 years.
Attorney General Labrador — The senator addresses the Attorney General while asking about the budget figures.
Attorney General Labrador — Says unspent money is returned to the state and that the office could handle the cut, though it would be difficult.
Attorney General Labrador — Says he has managed the budget conservatively and has not been asking for additional resources.
Attorney General Labrador — Explains that staffing efficiencies have been shifted into civil litigation and ICAC units, and warns cuts would now affect those areas.
Attorney General Labrador — Says cuts would affect the areas where he has added attorneys and that he has transferred positions to use funds more efficiently.
Janica Bischarat — Identifies herself as a budget and policy analyst with the Legislative Services Office and explains she prepared the LSO slides for the hearing.
Dustin Manwaring — Dustin Manwaring was called and listed during roll call.
Elaine Price — Elaine Price is called and listed during the roll call.
Elaine Price — Representative Price followed up on the budget discussion by questioning appropriation authority and whether the money remains in the fund, then pointed out a discrepancy between the budget book and the slide regarding temporary employee restoration. He noted that the slide appeared to show $1,109,800 instead of $110,090, referenced page 4-22 of the budget book, and asked to verify the correct number.
Elaine Price — Her earlier question is referenced while explaining a budget document error.
Brandon Mitchell — Listed in the roll call.
Brandon Mitchell — Representative Mitchell raised concerns about Fish and Game’s communications with constituents and the way surveys are being used. He questioned a $64,000 request to expand communications, noted that constituents were receiving conflicting information, and criticized survey questions—especially the issue of range finders in scopes—arguing that if surveys are conducted, the agency should actually listen to the public’s responses.
Chris Bruce — Listed in the roll call.
Chris Bruce — Asked the director to explain swings in the administration-level operating budget.
Mark Harris — Listed in the roll call.
Mark Harris — Asked why fisheries inflationary costs and fisheries facility inflation were separated instead of combined.
Mark Harris — Addressed by Ms. Jessup in explaining the distinction between the two fisheries-related enhancements.
Mark Harris — Was identified as part of the ad hoc committee recommending the non-resident tag system change.
Mark Harris — He asks about the $8.2 million fisheries habitat request and its overlap with the Office of Species Conservation.