Phil Hart — Noted as usually handling rules, but absent because he is in another meeting working on legislation.
Phil Hart — Took over chairing the meeting after the vote.
Phil Hart — Voted aye.
Amber Worthington — Amber Worthington was called forward as the next presenter for docket 13-014-01 and then introduced herself as the Deputy Director of Programs and Policy for the Department of Fish and Game, beginning her presentation on the rules dockets.
Amber Worthington — Amber Worthington, Deputy Director of the Department of Fish and Game, introduced herself and began presenting docket 13-01-08-24-01. She explained the structure of the docket, said she would cover the bulk of the material, and noted that sections 410.04(g) and (h) would be set aside for Ellery Tucker Williams to present later after the rest of the chapter was covered.
Van Burtenshaw — Addressed as Chairman Burtenshaw by the witness.
Van Burtenshaw — Chair Burtenshaw managed a brief committee exchange by recognizing a question, addressing a follow-up about the acreage split, and then recognizing the motion before handing the gavel to the Vice Chair.
Van Burtenshaw — Addressed as Mr. Chairman in the closing remarks.
Van Burtenshaw — Addressed respectfully at the start of testimony.
Van Burtenshaw — Voted no.
Van Burtenshaw — Presiding chair called for the vote and acknowledged the motion carrying.
Mark Harris — Named as a participant in the non-resident tag issuance advisory group.
Mark Harris — Moved to approve docket 13-01-04-24-01.
Mark Harris — Asked a question following the testimony.
Mark Harris — Asked about the HAC committee's discussion of wolves and the difference between big game and big game ungulates.
Mark Harris — Asked why no wolves were killed during the 77-day period.
Mark Harris — Asked a follow-up question to Mr. Crane.
Mark Harris — Asked Mr. Crane for a response to the 2005 wolf statute issue.
Mark Harris — Senator Harris first seconded Senator Conowitz/Connoisse's motion after a prior second was withdrawn, and later voted no on the matter.
Ms. Worthington — Ms. Worthington appeared before the committee, asked for support in adopting docket 13-01-04-24-01, and said she was available for questions. Shortly afterward, the committee moved her to the next docket, 13-117-24-01, continuing her testimony in the same hearing context.
Julie VanOrden — The transcript says 'Mr. Chairman, Senator,' indicating a response to a senator's question, but the speaker is not clearly identified.
Julie VanOrden — Voted no.
Jim Guthrie — Provided the second to the motion.
Jim Guthrie — Senator Guthrie first asked for a plain-language explanation of the carve-outs in the motion, then said he was leaning against the motion due to concerns about the technology and carve-outs. He was later recorded as a no vote, asked whether a substitute motion could be offered, moved adoption of docket 13-0108-2401, and ultimately voted aye on the substitute motion.
Ellery Tucker Williams — Named as the person who will present sections 410.04(g) and (h) later.
Ellery Tucker Williams — Identified herself as Legislative and Community Engagement Coordinator for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game and began presenting the next section.
Tricia Hebden — Introduced herself as Assistant Chief of Wildlife for Idaho and was referred to for the herd health question.
Trisha Hebden — Trisha Hebden, Assistant Chief of Wildlife for the Idaho Department of Fish and Game, explained the department’s process for responding to suspected disease in a private herd. She described how the agency would sample and test animals, coordinate with the Department of Agriculture and the landowner, and then determine the appropriate next steps, which could include additional sampling, landowner collection, or donation to a food bank depending on the disease.
Nancy Leman — Written testimony was received from her.
Nick Fasciano — Nick Fasciano is introduced as an in-person witness, comes to the podium, identifies himself as the executive director of the Idaho Wildlife Federation, and testifies in support of the pending rules. He argues that hunters need a serious discussion about advanced technology in hunting seasons, framing the issue around success, opportunity, and fair chase.
Von Stoshitsch — Announced as the next virtual testifier.
Tal Samson — Tal Samson testified in person from Pocatello and described his lifelong hunting experience and service on the HAC committee. He then discussed the history and importance of fair chase and sportsmanship, citing Theodore Roosevelt and the conservation ethic as the basis for limiting commercialization and advanced technology in hunting. Samson argued that devices such as thermals, drones, night vision, and live-feed game cameras undermine fair chase, noting that most western states restrict them and warning that allowing them in Idaho would give non-resident hunters an unfair advantage and erode hunting traditions.
Justin Webb — The committee first works to establish audio with virtual witness Justin Webb, then successfully connects with him and begins his testimony. Webb introduces himself as Executive Director of the Foundation for Wildlife Management and opposes the proposed technology restrictions. He argues that removing wolf management tools would be extremely costly for the state and that Idaho sportsmen and ranchers cannot afford to lose additional wildlife management options, urging expansion rather than restriction of sportsmen’s abilities. A later remark references Webb’s position as the alternative approach being criticized.
Mr. Webb — The committee asked whether there were any questions for him and thanked him for appearing before the committee.
Rob Thornberry — Rob Thornberry was introduced as the Idaho field representative for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership and then testified in support of technology restrictions, arguing they help preserve Idaho’s hunting tradition, family-based general seasons, and over-the-counter tag opportunities. He explained that the committee reached unanimous agreement through extensive public meetings, long hours, and outreach to stakeholders, and concluded by emphasizing that hunters may disagree on details but should protect the family-centered tradition of hunting.
Ron Taylor — Senator Ron Taylor was recognized by the chair and then thanked the Vice Chair before asking Mr. Thornberry about how the committee reached unanimous agreement, referencing the 'Hat Committee' and the number of people involved.
Ron Taylor — Begins a question and asks who can best answer it.
Ron Taylor — Is asked to pause while a virtual testifier is brought up.
Ron Taylor — Is returned the floor after the virtual testimony concludes.
Ron Taylor — Asks whether the proposed rules would negatively affect wolf control in Idaho.
Ron Taylor — His question about wolf control is being answered.
Ron Taylor — Not speaking in this section, but the motion discussion continues in committee context.
Ron Taylor — Recorded as a no vote.
Ron Taylor — Seconded Senator Guthrie's motion.
Ron Taylor — Vote is recorded in the roll call sequence.
Mr. Thornberry — The committee opened the floor for questions to him.
Craig Wilson — Craig Wilson introduced himself as a longtime hunter from Blackfoot, Idaho, and testified in support of Idaho Fish and Game’s high-tech hunting restrictions. He argued that thermal imaging, night vision, drones, aircraft, and similar technologies give hunters an unfair advantage and violate fair-chase ethics, citing Boone and Crockett’s definition of ethical hunting. He urged senators to vote in favor of the rule changes and restrictions, after which the committee thanked him and ended his testimony.
Gary Peck — Gary Peck testified in support of the proposed rule changes restricting certain hunting technologies. He introduced himself as a longtime Idaho hunter from Pocatello and acknowledged that he has often been critical of Idaho Fish and Game in the past, but said he was speaking in favor of the proposals. He argued that opponents’ claims about freedom and choice do not outweigh wildlife regulations, noting that rights are set within the framework of government rules. He said other western states have already determined these technologies create an unfair advantage for hunters, and he had not heard a convincing argument that Idaho should be different. He closed by urging the committee to approve the rule changes as proposed and preserve Idaho’s hunting tradition and wildlife resources for future generations.
Mr. Peck — The chair thanked Mr. Peck and noted that his time was nearly up.
John Christensen — John Christensen of Twin Falls, Idaho testified in support of the proposed rule changes, saying they help preserve hunting and fishing opportunities for his children and grandchildren. He argued that allowing every new technology to benefit hunters would undermine fair chase and reduce the animals' chance to survive. He added that hunting teaches the next generation ethics, knowledge of habitat, and restraint, and described hunters as a minority working to preserve a longstanding tradition. He concluded by warning that if hunters do not protect that tradition themselves, non-hunters may end up defining Idaho's hunting rights.