ICL Legislative Update: The Clock is Ticking at the Capitol

By mid-March, there is a sense that time is running out. Suddenly there’s barely enough time to amend bills or see others get through the process.

Last Monday, March 9 marked the loosely-followed transmittal deadline—the point when bills should have cleared one chamber and moved to the other. Yet new bills still appear daily in privileged committees. That’s not unusual; legislators often introduce late bills to test the appetite of the body before bringing them back early next session.

On the ICL Bill Tracker, we’re currently following 34 bills: Support - 11, Neutral/Reviewing - 6, Oppose - 17. Committees are expected to wrap up this week, with a target sine die of Friday, March 27. Whether the gavel falls then or later, we’ll be at the Capitol every day—speaking up for wildlife, renewable energy, public lands, clean water and clean air.

Wildlife

House Bill 678 moved quickly through the Senate Resources and Environment Committee last week. The bill would allow wolf trappers to meet the existing 72-hour trap check requirement using a remote camera. Notably, ICL was the only organization or agency to testify in opposition. Our concern is not that cameras should be prohibited. In fact, cameras could allow trappers to monitor traps more frequently and respond to catches more quickly. The problem is that the bill’s current language does not specify how long a trapper has to physically reach the trap after observing a catch remotely. As written, a trap could be checked near the end of the 72-hour window even if an animal had been caught much earlier, with no clear requirement for how quickly the trapper must respond. ICL asked the committee to send the bill to the amending order to address this simple loophole. The committee declined and approved the bill as written.

House Bill 630, which deals with aerial control of predatory wildlife, has still not received a hearing in the Senate. That does not necessarily mean the bill is finished for the session. Late session hearings are common, so we will continue monitoring it closely.

Meanwhile, Senate Bill 1326, which would significantly limit the authority of Conservation Officers to enforce certain wildlife laws, has passed the Senate and is expected to receive a hearing in the House State Affairs Committee soon. Senate Concurrent Resolution 124 on wildlife crossings has also passed the Senate and will likely receive a hearing in the House Resources and Conservation Committee in the coming weeks.

Energy

At the risk of sounding repetitive, energy bills keep coming. Last Friday, two more bills targeting data centers were introduced. H0895 limits water use for future data centers, requiring non-consumptive designs or use of municipal district water. H0897 tightens sales-tax exemptions so new data centers pay their fair share. ICL’s conservation team is reviewing both, but early signs suggest they are bills we can support.

Meanwhile, HCR032—“Energy Sovereignty”—passed the House Environment, Energy & Technology Committee. At first glance it sounds pro-Idaho, but a closer look raises concerns. The resolution prioritizes hydropower, geothermal, natural gas, and nuclear—effectively sidelining solar and wind. While resolutions carry little legal weight, they signal direction. In this case, one that could undercut renewable, clean energy in Idaho’s least-cost, least-risk planning process.

Water

Southwest Idaho is high desert where water is serious business. This session, lawmakers have introduced over 30 water bills, from cloud seeding to fast-tracking dam raises for more storage. What’s missing? Not one of these bills address the root cause: climate change.

According to science, water shortages are closely tied to a warming climate driven by burning fossil fuels. And with the extremely dry winter we’re experiencing right now, water worries are front and center at the Statehouse. Legislators who already farm in Idaho are already sounding the alarm over unseasonably dry fields but never mention what is causing less moisture.

ICL is focused on durable, long-term solutions—not just quick fixes that treat only the symptoms and not the disease. That means water conservation, smarter farming technology, and a focus on fossil fuel use reduction. The path is not simple or easy, but we know the direction: clean, renewable energy; more public transit; and encouraging, not discouraging, more hybrid and electric vehicles.

Public Lands

Conversations about public lands continue to dominate the Statehouse, even as many legislators seem increasingly fatigued by the topic. Despite that fatigue, the debate is far from over.

Senate Joint Memorial 111 has not yet received a hearing in the House, though we expect it could appear on an agenda soon.

Meanwhile, Senate Joint Resolution 103, Senator Ben Adams’s proposed constitutional amendment related to public lands, was widely expected to receive a vote on the Senate floor last Friday. Another week has passed without a vote. While the delay adds uncertainty, it also provides more time for Idahoans to speak up. If you care about the future of our public lands, now is the time to contact your lawmakers and let them know this is not the right path forward. Use our Take Action tool to make your voice heard.

Pesticides 

No pesticide bill yet in Idaho—thankfully—but we’re staying vigilant. Meanwhile, states like Kansas and Kentucky are moving fast, with votes possible today or tomorrow.

At the federal level, H.R. 7567, the “Farm, Food and National Security Act of 2026,” is headed to the House floor before Easter. If passed, it could impact every state, weakening safety reviews and giving chemical manufacturers a liability shield.

Get a full debrief of what’s going on with pesticide immunity bills in our latest blog. In the meantime, want to send Idaho’s Congressional delegation a clear message that you don’t support pesticide immunity legislation? Take Action.

Protecting Idaho

In 1977, the Harriman family gifted their Railroad Ranch, known today as Harriman State Park, to the people of Idaho with one clear condition: it must be managed by qualified professionals chosen on merit, not politics. SB 1300 breaks that promise. The bill would violate the Harriman Gift Agreement, putting 11,000 acres of pristine wildlands at risk and potentially jeopardizing public ownership. ICL stands with the Harriman family to defend the vision they entrusted to Idaho when the park opened to the public in 1982. 

If you do too, Take Action today and tell your legislators to oppose SB 1300.

HB 737 would merge two very different offices—the Office of Energy and Mineral Resources and the Office of Species Conservation—in the name of coordination and efficiency. On paper, it might sound like smart government. In practice, it raises red flags. 

The Office of Species Conservation safeguards 30 Endangered Species Act–listed plants and animals and nearly 300 Species of Greatest Conservation Need identified in Idaho’s State Wildlife Action Plan.

Combining that mission with an office focused on energy and mineral development creates a clear conflict of interest—one where wildlife too often loses out to human energy demands.

For that reason, ICL opposes the merger.

Alex’s Analysis

One of my favorite things in this world is discourse. Not argument for the sake of winning, but the kind of open, honest exchange where people approach disagreement with curiosity and the humility to recognize that we might be wrong. When we are willing to listen to perspectives different from our own, disagreement becomes productive rather than divisive. Curiosity creates the conditions for collaboration, and collaboration is how good ideas emerge and better laws are written.

Working at the Statehouse this year has been a stark reminder that curiosity is not always the default posture in politics. Too often, disagreement is treated as a zero-sum competition where someone must lose for someone else to win. I saw this firsthand after testifying on House Bill 678, when the response focused less on the substance of the analysis and more on attacking the Idaho Conservation League and questioning my sincerity. If the analysis is wrong, the response should be simple: engage with the argument. Curiosity asks questions, examines evidence, and improves policy. Personal attacks are often just a convenient substitute for doing that work.

As a fifth generation Idahoan who cares deeply about this state and its future, I believe curiosity is one of the most important ingredients of good governance. If we practiced it more often, Idaho would be better for it.

Listen of the Week

After the hearing on House Bill 678, where our own Alex Watt testified, we thought this exchange would make a fitting Listen of the Week. Our testimony made a simple request: recognize a loophole in the bill and send it to the amending order so the issue could be addressed before final passage. Alex even began his testimony by thanking the bill’s sponsor for their intention and acknowledging that remote cameras could improve response times for trappers.

However, instead of addressing our concern, the response quickly shifted to insults directed at the ICL and Alex personally. We encourage listeners to pay close attention to the exchange.

Moments like this illustrate the role we play at the Statehouse. Ours was the only testimony in the hearing that did not support the bill as currently written. When everyone else in the room supports a proposal, it becomes even more important that someone is willing to ask the hard questions and point out the problems others may overlook. That willingness to speak up, even when it is uncomfortable, is exactly why this work matters.