NATURAL RESOURCE INTERIM COMMITTEE
On November 9th, the Natural Resources Interim Committee started the morning by discussing the quagga mussel response led by the Idaho State Department of Agriculture (ISDA). Chanel Tewalt, Director of ISDA, discussed how the mussel systems create monocultures and would change Idaho's ecosystems and water recreation if left untreated. The state had a swift response once ISDA got genetic confirmation, and the Department had treatment implemented in two (2) weeks. ISDA collaborated with other state agencies, federal agencies, and stakeholders to ensure testing was being implemented and the spread was being stopped. Director Tewalt discussed that the state does yearly routine surveillance and monitoring.
They found adult quagga mussels in the Shoshone pool and veliger in the nearby waterways; they found veliger from Twin Falls Dam to Centennial Park. ISDA only found them in a six (6) mile stretch of the river, which helped them coordinate the treatment plan, and she noted their thankfulness that the affected area was so small. The treatment dissipation zone was sixteen (16) miles, and it would last about three (3) days in the water. The treatment had negative side effects and mortality of fish and plants, but without the treatment, the river would’ve been destroyed. Sturgeon mortality was the largest noted effect. Copper Sulfate was the front-runner for treatment but was ruled out due to its quick reaction and quick dissipation. ISDA needed something that would sit in the water and ultimately used Natrix, a chelated copper-based product. ISDA worked with the Natrix product manufacturer C-Prom and the Clean Lakes Group to coordinate treatment and ensure that the river consistently reached one (1) part per million to ensure effectiveness.
Phase one started at the Twin Falls dam, and the second began at Shoshone Falls, where the Shoshone pool was heavily treated. Director Tewalt noted that the river responded as they expected, and they saw mussel mortality within the first forty-eight (48) hours. Idaho Power allowed them to run the treatment through their plants at Twin Falls Dam and Shoshone Falls. She noted the mussels won't reproduce at fourteen (14) degrees Celsius, and it will be a long winter waiting to see if reproduction happens once water temperatures rise. Director Tewalt thanked the Legislature for their continuous investment in ISDA, as it enabled them to have the staff and resources to be able to implement a project at this scale.
Example of the impact of quagga mussels, provided by ISDA
Co-Chair Burtenshaw (R-31) asked why ISDA believes quagga mussels were found in the Shoshone pool if that area is not easily accessible. Director Tewalt noted the pools are not readily accessible and there is a lot of speculation about why they were found. Someone likely launched something at Twin Falls Dam, which floated downriver and settled in the Shoshone Pool. She also noted how education has been a huge part of their treatment process as people need to be more cautious about cleaning everything that is entering the water. Rep. Blanksma (R-8) mentioned she was out at the treatment process a few times, and she wanted to emphasize the hard work of the Director and the ISDA team. Sen. Guthrie (R-28) asked about the product, if others have used this, and if so, what the success rate is, and finally, the fish mortality. Director Tewalt explained that they didn’t see 100% mortality, mainly carp and minnow but also sturgeon further downriver. She explained how copper products are commonly used in agriculture and irrigation, and other states have used copper products previously. An example she provided was Colorado using copper sulfate for a lake treatment last fall, but they have since found veliger in the water. Director Tewalt doesn’t believe that Natrix has been used at this scale or this complexity previously.
Jim Fredricks, Director of the Idaho Department of Fish and Game (IDFG), spoke on fish mortality rates and how, before starting treatment, they knew it would be fatal to fish, but neither department knew to what extent. Director Fredricks highlighted that IDFG did pre-treatment fishery monitoring to get a full fish sample. IDFG did electrofishing sampling along the shoreline and mainly observed wide and small-mouth bass, carp, pikeminnow, and redside shiners. To determine the number of sturgeons, IDFG used Idaho Power numbers from 2022 in that region. IDFG monitored and marked 3,500 to 4,000 fish. Almost none of the dead fish they collected had the marking, they saw carp, largescale suckers, and pikeminnow dying at higher rates. Director Fredricks stated the department cleaned up around six (6) to seven (7) tons of fish, but there were more that did not float to the surface. In post-treatment monitoring, crews found large-mouth bass were not as affected as some of the other species, but white sturgeon mortality rates were high. The population estimate was about fifty (50), and they handled about forty-eight (48), but a slight upside is they were hatchery fish and can be replaced. The oldest fish in the area were thirty-five years old, and some were up to eight (8) feet long. Director Fredricks noted rebuilding the fisheries process, and they expect most fish to come back on their own, but the department can supplemental small-mouth bass if needed. The focus post-treatment will be sturgeon. Director Fredricks believes this happened in a good stretch of river when looking at fish populations, and they didn’t have too many negative impacts on fishery resources.
Susan Buxton, Director of the Idaho Department of Parks and Recreation (IDPR), spoke on the IDPR's involvement in the response. IDPR handles boat registration, and they send out information to everyone registered to let individuals know not to be in the water and inform them where wash stations are located. Director Buxton also noted they closed state parks along the river to further decrease recreation and potential spread. She discussed steps forward and looking at boat launches and other water access areas to have proper signage about cleaning things that encounter water and how to safely recreate.
Co-Chair Raybould (R-34) emphasized the importance of collaboration between agencies, noting how well they worked together, especially the help from the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). She was interested in hearing what they need from the Legislature to continue working together in the future as well as concerns the agencies have about working as collaborative partners. Director Tewalt took the lead on this question and stressed how the project would’ve been impossible without collaboration; ITD was incredibly responsive to the ISDA's asks. Looking forward, she noted the. difficulties with the Endangered Species Act and Plant Act and how it’s common for law enforcement not to enforce these acts. They had to do education on endangered species and that the sheriffs aren’t used to working on projects of this kind. She noted having to hire private security as the local communities don’t have the bandwidth to supply sheriffs or deputies to enforce closures. Co-Chair Raybould asked if the Idaho Code was limiting or challenging for them, and Director Tewalt discussed how the Endangered Species Act didn’t anticipate this type of work. They worked closely with the Governor’s Office to ensure the legality of their actions. Rep. Burns (D-26) expressed his thankfulness for their treatment plan, and they should be amazed at how successful, they hope, this was. The Governor's Office is working on looking at what ISDA needs going forward and what might need to be adjusted in case there needs to be another treatment implemented.
Sen. Guthrie asked about the overall cost and what she sees the administrative model look like moving forward. Director Tewalt stated the cost of the copper product was $1.3M, but they are still tallying the equipment cost and receiving invoices. Her rough estimate is $3M, but this will change once things start formalizing. But if they hadn’t had an aggressive treatment plan, it would’ve cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars. Rep. Rubel (D-18) asked about when retesting will occur; ISDA replied that spring runoff occurs in April or May, depending on the snowpack, and the spawning can continue into summer months until about twenty-four (24) degrees Celsius. August is a good veliger month for a lot of species. They anticipate testing in May and June to get an early sense, but the later summer months will hold more data.
Director Fredricks then discussed an update on the Grizzly Bears, specifically the administrative and judicial efforts to work towards grizzly bear delisting. The status of the grizzly bear recovery areas varies; there are 6 in the lower forty- eight (48) states with four (4) in Idaho. Idaho had the Selkirk/Cabinet Yaak ecosystem, the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, and the Bitterroot ecosystem. There are roughly two hundred (200) bears in Idaho. As the bear population recovered, areas would become delisted, and the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem was the first to reach recovery standards. In 2007, the Fish and Wildlife Service delisted grizzly bears in this area, but this was challenged and eventually overturned, and they were relisted in 2009. In 2017, they were delisted but then relisted in 2018. The court required three (3) new methodologies for delisting, the first being comparing the population growth over the years and being analyzed by a biologist, having a mechanism for genetic exchange between recovery areas (bears must be able to move between recovery areas), and the third being an analysis of what is left behind or a remnant analysis. Kathleen Trevor, Deputy Attorney General, spoke on administrative and coordination efforts, highlighting efforts in each region. The Greater Yellowstone Area is drafting a Tri-State Memorandum of Agreement between Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana. Once delisted, there is also a conservation strategy, a roadmap for state management. The Selkirk/Cabinet-Yaak is drafting a conservation strategy, and this region is shared with Washington and Montana; this region has lagged for unknown reasons. The Bitterroot Ecosystem is working on a Cooperating Agency Status on the environmental impact study process. IDFG works closely with the Governor’s Office and the Office of Species Conservation. US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is working on a new environmental impact survey for delisting grizzlies, and Idaho will be working jointly on this with an end date of 2026.
Ms. Trevor provided a judicial efforts history that highlighted Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana, filing three separate delisting petitions. Idaho petitioned to delist the lower forty-eight (48) population in March of 2022. In February of 2023, USFWS agreed to accept Wyoming and Montana petitions but denied the Idaho petition. USFWS is working on a 90-day finding and a 12-month finding, but these are running behind schedule, and the impacted parties are suing. A group called Save the Yellowstone Grizzly didn’t support the removal of three troublesome bears and sued IDFG and USFWS. Idaho used this lawsuit to state part of the issue is the denial of the petition to delist the bears. Sen. Risch introduced the S.2571 GRRR Act with Senator Crapo as a co-sponsor. Rep. Fulcher introduced HR 4997 to introduce identical language to delist grizzly bears in lower forty-eight (48) fully. HR 1245 and identical S.445 order the republication of the Greater Yellowstone delisting rule; this is cosponsored by Sen. Risch, Sen. Crapo, and Rep. Fulcher. Rep. Rubel asked if we know the population in the Northern Selkirk region, and if part of the bear population growth in Yellowstone was due to hunter education. Ms. Trevor noted that Canada, Washington, and Montana share the Northern Idaho population but the boundary area is about one hundred (100) bears. She also discussed local community efforts, the areas where bears disperse, and additional efforts in communities to reduce conflict and try and keep bears out of public lands.
Director Fredricks also discussed monitoring, conflict management, and having biologists and park rangers on staff. Co-Chair Raybould asked about the criteria for bear removal; Director Fredricks stated they have the authority to remove bears on private lands but not federal lands without the concurrence of USFWS. They can trap a bear, creating a problem, but they are losing areas to move them too. Rep. Burns asked if the agency has contemplated if delisting is successful and how the agency will move forward. Director Fredricks discussed one of the criteria for delisting is to have a conservation strategy in place. For managing hunting, they have an MOU with Montana and Wyoming outlining the allowable mortality in the region and how it would be allocated to different states. Director Fredricks noted they would not move a bear into an area that doesn’t already have grizzlies, and they would not be moved into an area with proximity to people. Ms. Trevor discussed liability and Idaho isn’t liable under the Tort Claims Act when dealing with wild animals.
Director Fredricks spoke on the 2023 legislation that gives no authority to the Idaho Fish and Game Commission. After hard winters, they heard many concerns about the survival of deer, combined with Utah and Wyoming implementing antler restrictions. There were concerns about displaced antler hunters going to Southeast Idaho, SB 1143 allows the commission to set seasonal restrictions on searching for, locating, or gathering antlers or horns to protect wintering big game. Before this winter they need to rebuild the deer population in the state's southeast region and implement an antler restriction for this upcoming winter. They heard from almost two thousand (2,000) people, over half supportive of some shed antler season. When asked if they only support the southeast or the upper snake, 90% said they support both regions. Other comments they heard were having it be applied throughout the state. Still, IDFG did not suggest enacting an antler restriction throughout the state or the southwest because of varying winters. There isn’t a biological justification to justify an antler closure. Other concerns were about the enforceability and more regulation. This will be presented to the IDFG Commission on November 15, 2023, to see what action the Commission wants to take.
Co-Chair Burtenshaw asked about managing each part of the state differently, and Director Fredricks replied that it would be used on an as-needed basis, and right now, it is only in the Southeast and Upper Snake Region. He also noted it would only be season by season and wouldn’t be long-term, and the Department would monitor the restrictions implemented by Wyoming and Utah. Dustin Miller, Director of the Idaho Department of Lands (IDL), provided the committee a fire and Good Neighbor Authority Update. He started by mentioning the tours they’ve done throughout the state that highlight the skills and decision-making abilities of firefights to stop fires and protect communities. Director Miller recapped the Master Fire Agreement that is renegotiated every five (5) years and was signed in May of 2023, lasting until 2027. This outlines the coordination and exchange of personnel, equipment, supplies, services, and funds for wildland fire suppression among participants. It also details cooperation on hazard mitigation, fire planning, response strategies, suppression, and post-fire rehabilitation and restoration. The Master Fire Agreement also defines which agencies are responsible for suppressing wildfire in specific areas and who pays for suppression.
The main agreement participants are the State of Idaho (IDL), Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and US Fish and Wildlife Services. The new components of the agreement increase IDL acres from 6.3M to 9.58M, decrease the number of acres protected under offset, and grant more acres in the Wildland Urban Interface to IDL. Under offset, whichever agency had the protection of the acres would pay all the fees associated with a fire. The reduction of offset acres would reestablish the Eastern Idaho timber protection district that the legislature authorized personnel and equipment for the last session. The goal is to move towards each agency protecting their acres and moving towards cost sharing. Director Miller also noted that Idaho has a competitive advantage because the state enters into agreements with local fire agencies and allows for more cost control.
Next, Director Miller recapped the 2023 fire season and noted the department suppressed a normal number of fires but had numerous factors keeping acres burned low. More instances of human-caused fires and interactions with the Wildland Urban Interface exist. During the 2023 fire season, only 10% of the ten-year average of acres were burned. IDL saw three significant fires in the Wildland Urban Interface; they fought these aggressively, and he gives credit to fire managers for keeping these fires small. The Forest Service was a tremendous help in Northern Idaho. When looking at acres burned by ownership, 1,400 acres of endowment lands burned, 12,300 acres of BLM land, and 64,700 acres of US Forest Service Land. Director Miller outlined fire deficiency warrant spending, which saw $2.75M in aviation resources, $885,500 in prepositioned engines, $6.6M in IDL non-team fires, $6.5M in IDL team fires, and $575,000 in other non-reimbursable fees. IDL does not have an aviation fleet and contracts with outside companies for this; IDL also uses data collection to predict fire risk and preposition resources appropriately. There are $4.7M in reimbursable fees for the state. The overall costs for the 2023 season were lower than normal, with fire suppression costs at $22M and $4.6M reimbursable, so the total Idaho obligation is $17.3M. The FY25 fire budget highlights are as follows:
East Idaho Forest Protective District: $500,000 to build and operate four new fire engines.
Inflation Costs: $250,000.
Transfer $17M to the Fire Suppression Deficiency Fund.
The Good Neighbor Authority program yields good results for Idaho, and the legislature has supported expanding the GNA. It is the primary tool for evaluating forest health. Idaho has a wildfire crisis on federally owned lands; the risk and costs of wildfires are staggering. The GNA allows the US Forest Service and BLM to enter into agreements for up to ten years with state forestry agencies to implement critical management work on federally controlled land when the federal agencies cannot do the work alone. Congress has refined and amended the GNA, and IDL was directed to carry out forest, rangeland, and watershed restoration services on appropriate federal lands within Idaho. The working group goals of the GNA are to increase the pace and scale of forest, watershed, and rangeland restoration on federal land, develop a self-sustaining program, and provide additive fiber to markets. The partnerships under GNA agreements help accomplish authorized restoration services on federal land. It also leverages federal, state, and partner resources to increase capacity to accomplish work. There are a few overarching master and supplemental agreements to harvest timber and restore on federal lands. One important facet of GNA, the abuse of NEPA, is the largest blow to federal lands. At the beginning of GNA, they thought it would revolve around timber sales, but they have seen other projects come to light. Project requirements are as follows:
States, counties, and tribes provide authorized restoration services on behalf of USFS or BLM .
Excludes the national wilderness preservation system and wilderness study areas.
No new permanent road construction is allowed, temporary roads are permitted.
All federal laws, policies, and regulations apply (NEPA, NFMA, ESA, HAS).
Projects are not required to be adjacent to state or private land.
State cooperators may sell and administer timber sales.
These include planning and monitoring, reforestation, aquatic organism passage, and road decommissioning and storage.
The Idaho legislature has made a continuous investment in the program. From FY16 to FY22, the legislature appropriated $250,000 in PC annually as seed funding. At the end of FY22, they saw how the Idaho GNA program was self-sustaining, so IDL reverted those years' $250,000 appropriation. In FY22, the legislature began appropriating $250,000 annually in OE for the GNA. Director Miller discussed the funding request for FY25; it includes three additional FTP and spending authority for $2M dedicated OE spending authority and $154,000 dedicated PC spending authority. This will help hire private businesses to conduct restoration services, among other things. Director Miller discussed achieving the state's goals for restoration through the GNA. The revenue generated from GNA timber sales is kept by Idaho and reinvested in additional projects on federal land, creating a perpetual funding source for restoration services. Since 2016 $11M in contracts with private companies for restoration services have been awarded in Idaho. Looking at the spending, roads and bridges get $4.8M, NEPA gets $3.4M, fuels reduction gets $1.6M, and $1.2M goes to others. In FY23, GNA added 23% additional volume to the federal timber harvest; GNA appears to be helping the Forest Service rebuild its timber harvesting. Idaho requires about one (1) billion board feet of fiber annually to sustain milling operations. 900M board feet is generated on Idaho's 4M acres. Active forest management works for timber harvest. The GNA will continue to add to the fiber supply and benefit Idaho jobs and the economy.
The last component of Director Miller’s presentation was an update on the ground-applied fire retardant funded on an experimental basis. After looking at ignition maps, they applied the product on I-84 from Simco Road to the West Mountain Home exit, a fifteen (15) mile stretch. He noted the heavy rains in August after application but discussed how the product can stay after significant rain. IDL noticed that the brunch grasses didn’t sustain active combustion when tested and saw positive initial results. They withhold about 25% of the product and want to try it in areas where they will be doing prescribed burning. IDL does lots of dozer lines when doing prescribed burns, but they want to try this product in addition. Co-Chair Burtenshaw asked if it is too early to say if the phosphate fire suppression was a good source of spending. Director Miller stated it isn’t too early as they have seen positive results in the trial. They don’t know how much the rain affected the product, but they will keep testing and presenting results.
Co-Chair Raybould noted the breakdown of human-caused and natural-caused fires and asked if the Director had any idea of the source of all the human-caused fires. Craig Foss, State Forester, took the question and discussed they are seeing this trend across the West and how 2022 had a lot more moisture and was a much different fire season. The human cause category spans a lot of factors, even the reignition of pile burns, campfires, or accidental chain sparking. IDL will enhance education, but this is not unique to Idaho. Co-Chair Raybould asked if they can categorize fires caused by criminal intent, and while Mr. Foss can get those numbers, he does not have them on hand. Director Miller noted the tremendous growth of Idaho and greater access and recreation on endowment lands. Education is important in reducing human-caused fires, specifically with campfires and chains.
