IDAHO, USA — This story originally appeared in The Idaho Press.
Snakes. Bears. Fish. Wolves. Whatever they may be, almost every state’s endangered species work is done by an independent state department.
But in Idaho, the Idaho Governor’s Office of Species Conservation (OSC) is a subsidiary in Gov. Brad Little’s office — squarely in the hands of the governor.
And it’s that office that is the resource for all Endangered Species Act-related matters, whether that be technical, legal or policy, Director Mike Edmondson said in an email. The office also participates in authoring plans and seeks and directs funding, Edmondson said.
Idaho Fish and Game, a government wildlife agency whose stated mission is “to protect, preserve, perpetuate and manage Idaho’s wildlife resources,” is focused instead on being on the ground working with the animals, a spokesperson for Fish and Game said. For example, Fish and Game sets hunting and fishing rules, monitors and sustains wildlife habitats and engages the public in conservation efforts to ensure a robust diversity of wildlife in Idaho, in particular for hunting, fishing and other recreational activities.
The state’s Wildlife Action Plan describes Fish and Game as the state’s “wildlife management authority,” but says it “does not administer significant regulatory programs other than regulating the take of wildlife.”
It’s this set-up that concerns many advocates, who spoke to the Idaho Press about their issues with what they consider the politicization of endangered species management.
“Endangered species management, and in particular with these large carnivore species, has always been very political,” said Nick Gevock, a Sierra Club wildlands and wildlife field organizer for the Northern Rockies. “I think this office just takes it to a whole new level.”
The governor’s office called OSC “a valuable, additive tool.”
Idaho Fish and Game did not return a request for comment.
“Endangered species management in Idaho is rooted in science,” Edmondson said in the statement. “Where species management impacts businesses, outdoor recreation, and Idahoans’ way of life — which some may consider to be political in nature — we work across the political spectrum and with diverse interests to mitigate impacts to any individuals, groups, or economic sectors affected by endangered species management decisions.”
Some advocates say they have seen value while working with the OSC during the past 20-some years, including John Robison, the Idaho Conservation League’s public lands and wildlife director.
OSC’s strength is in finding win-win solutions that are easy and rally people for wildlife, Robison said.
“There is a challenge though, because there could be decisions that need to be made that would clearly benefit Idaho’s native species but aren’t given a lot of opportunity,” Robison said. “Because someone, somewhere might have an issue with it. They might be overly cautious about community concerns.”
What species should be conserved and how to conserve them can be controversial topics, including in Idaho for salmon, grizzly bears, wolves and sage-grouse. For example, some stakeholders worry that any conservation plan could mean wolves killing livestock and a diminished ability to use the land sage-grouse live on.
Others worry that failing to act on conservation will mean the loss of animals critical for their habitats. Sage-grouse, for example, are an indicator of a healthy sagebrush habitat. Many species benefit from the carcasses that wolves leave behind. And when deer and elk overgraze an area, the vegetation recovers once wolves return.
“The problem is that when the political realm supersedes the biological realm,” said Steve Nadeau, a retired Fish and Game large carnivore biologist and author who has written about grizzly bears, “and the biologists aren’t able to speak for the resource.”
BIG CHANGE
In 2000, after a series of disagreements with federal officials over how to protect salmon and the introductions of bears and wolves to parts of Idaho, the Legislature approved SB 1490, which created the Governor’s Office of Species Conservation. The state appropriated $510,000 (around $1 million in 2024 dollars) and approved five full-time positions.
The OSC’s guiding principles are listed in the 2022 Legislative Budget Book as:
- Rely upon science and common sense in developing conservation programs.
- Involve all parties impacted by recovery decisions.
- Understand and incorporate Idaho values into conservation measures.
- Incorporate the state’s need for economic vitality into considerations for species recovery.
Specific goals included overseeing ESA (Endangered Species Act) programs, negotiating with federal agencies concerning endangered species, and supporting state, federal, and private stakeholders seeking assistance with ESA issues.
Representatives from groups like the National Cattle Beef Association, the Idaho Cattle Association, the Idaho Outfitters and Guides Licensing Board and the Intermountain Forest Industry Association supported the bill because it brought other stakeholders to the table.
Jane Gorsuch, vice president of the Intermountain Forest Industry Association, said the legislation would “consider all issues not just scientific concerns,” meeting minutes from the office’s creation showed.
Other groups, like Idaho Trout Unlimited, Gem State Flyfishers and the Idaho Wildlife Federation opposed it, often saying that it violated the 1938 initiative that created Idaho Fish and Game to separate politics and wildlife management.
Edmondson said OSC doesn’t manage Idaho Fish and Game and its programs.
Another bill, SB 1488, was introduced and heard the same day as SB 1490. It would have created a rare and declining species conservation office within the Idaho Department of Fish and Game. But instead it was held in the Senate Resources and Environment Committee.
In many ways, Idaho’s structure is unique. The Idaho Press could not find another state where the entity managing endangered species wasn’t an independent state agency. And though there’s often gubernatorial involvement, how much the state’s governor can influence endangered species management varies.
In Idaho, the political situation around endangered species has shifted drastically, advocates say.
Bert Bowler, a retired Fish and Game employee, recalled recently how over his 30-year career, the state government moved from advocacy toward not wanting to ruffle industry and agriculture feathers. Bowler retired in 2001.
“It was a good run, but it got so politicized towards the end of my career,” Bowler said. “For the Department of Fish and Game, they are there, and they are still doing a lot of good science and their data says this unequivocally, but that doesn’t seem to resonate with the Office of Species Conservation.”
A LEGACY OF PARTISAN BATTLES
The listing of endangered species has in many cases become a partisan exercise, with environmentalists battling industry over the listing and management of grizzly bears, wolves, salmon and sage-grouse.
Environmentalists want to breach the dams, stop killing wolves, reintroduce grizzly bears and protect sage-grouse. But industry and agricultural interests want to keep the dams intact, protect their livestock from carnivores and use the land sage-grouse live on.
And sometimes the debates are over the right way to save a type of animal.
For example, Idaho Republican Congressman Mike Simpson for years has added language in congressional bills to prohibit sage-grouse from becoming an endangered species.
“It wasn’t a concern when I first put it in, but certainly it has become political,” Simpson told the Idaho Press.
Sage-grouse habitat spans both public and private lands, Simpson said, and an endangered species listing would place more restrictions on grazing and other uses of public lands. The move would “hamper” states like Idaho, Simpson said, where over 60% of the land is public.
The governor’s office has been working with private landowners, Idaho Fish and Game and other stakeholders to create and implement a sage-grouse management plan, he said. Those partners would walk away if the sage-grouse is listed, he said.
“None of us want to see a species go extinct,” Simpson told the Idaho Press. “We need to preserve sage-grouse habitat. And that means working with all the different stakeholders.”
However, Simpson is one of the only elected Idaho officials who promotes removing the lower Snake River dams to save salmon — a move scientists say is required for the fish to avoid extinction.
The issue has been a minefield for a long time.
Scott Cleveland, who ran against Simpson for Congress this year, partially ran on the issue. In an interview with the Idaho Press, he echoed the idea that everyone wants to see salmon survive, but people want to go about it differently. And he said the issue of salmon and the dams has been politicized.
He’s worried that breaching the dams would affect energy and the economy.
“I think almost anything can be turned into a political issue. I think we need to make a good decision,” Cleveland said. “Whose best interest are we looking out for? The electricity users … or trying to go back to historical salmon populations the way they were before records were kept?”
The Office of Species Conservation has the control, said Tom Stuart, who has been active in salmon restoration work for decades.
“I’ve focused in other areas, realizing that the Office of Species Conservation is not likely to be helpful in its current makeup,” Stuart said. “One would have to conclude, looking at it from a neutral position … that Idaho really isn’t very interested in dealing effectively with endangered species in any way.”
Grizzly bears are another affected species. In 2001, then-Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne sued to stop a plan to reintroduce grizzly bears, calling the plan an attempt to force “massive, flesh-eating carnivores into Idaho.” Kempthorne could not be reached for comment.
He succeeded when, in June 2001, then-President George W. Bush’s cabinet moved to withdraw former President Bill Clinton’s grizzly plan.
There’s a huge resistance to reintroducing and managing species like grizzly bears and wolves in the state, said Gevock, with the Sierra Club. Idaho petitioned the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove federal protections for the animals throughout the lower 48 states.
This year, Idaho said it was pushing for a settlement that would make delisting grizzly bears in Idaho possible.
A 2011 Fish and Wildlife Service review found that grizzly bears should retain their threatened status but recommended that the bear be delisted in some states outside of the bear’s historical range.
The bears are a “valued part of our wildlife heritage,” Gevock said. The animals dig, aerate soils, move nutrients around and are a sign of a healthy ecosystem. “They belong there,” he said.
“Idaho scuttled the opportunity to recover grizzly bears into the Bitterroot ecosystem right at 2000,” Gevock said. “It’s just a reflection of Idaho’s abysmal management of these carnivore species.”
GOING FORWARD
Stunningly red fish swim through light-patterned waters in the Eagle Fish Hatchery, in a photo from 2015. Salmon numbers have been trending downward for decades and pressure is ramping up for something to be done.
Just last year, a landmark agreement was signed that moved toward the breaching of the four dams in eastern Washington. Known as the six sovereigns agreement, the partnership joined Oregon, Washington, the federal government and four tribes. Idaho was not a party to the agreement. Edmondson said the office was not invited.
“I think one of the impacts of the OSC is that Idaho is no longer a real partner in a regional effort to actually restore salmon,” said Pat Ford, former executive director of Save Our Wild Salmon. “I think that’s, in the long term, a political mistake, as well as obviously a mistake for the fish.”
In April 2019, Idaho Gov. Brad Little tasked OSC with establishing a salmon and steelhead working group. Meeting minutes show that Little asked the group to avoid the question of breaching the dams.
“Together we will develop effective salmon and steelhead policy for Idaho to ensure that abundant and sustainable populations of salmon and steelhead exist for present and future generations to enjoy,” said in the mission statement. Subgroups presented their recommendations in December 2020.
Edmondson pointed out that neither OSC nor Idaho Fish and Game actually manages federally listed species.
Once a species is listed it is under federal “management” by either the USWFS or NOAA Fisheries (NMFS), the federal government manages them through regulations and planning with the assistance of OSC and Fish and Game.
“The real answer is we all work closely together to “manage” listed species,” Edmondson said.
Watch more Local News:
See the latest news from around the Treasure Valley and the Gem State in our YouTube playlist:
HERE ARE MORE WAYS TO GET NEWS FROM KTVB:
Download the KTVB News Mobile App
Apple iOS: Click here to download
Google Play: Click here to download
Watch news reports for FREE on YouTube: KTVB YouTube channel
Stream Live for FREE on ROKU: Add the channel from the ROKU store or by searching 'KTVB'.
Stream Live for FREE on FIRE TV: Search ‘KTVB’ and click ‘Get’ to download.
