Week Five of the Idaho Legislative Session is in the books — let’s break it down.
Lets talk about it.
📌 Table of Contents
JFAC: A Vote on Health Insurance — and a Question of Fairness
SB1281 and the Parental Choice Tax Credit: A Question of Shared Sacrifice
Idaho Department of Water Resources: A Close Look at Idaho Water
Quagga Mussels in Idaho: A Serious Threat and a Strong Response
JFAC: $13.3 Billion Approved — And Why I Voted “No”
Friday was a big day in the Idaho Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee.
In roughly three hours, we voted on and approved 10 maintenance budgets for FY2027 totaling $13,324,023,100.
Here’s where that money goes:
$13,089,100 – Legislative Branch
$566,622,100 – Public Safety
$484,547,600 – Natural Resources
$5,728,135,200 – Health & Human Services
$1,580,987,400 – Economic Development
$100,502,600 – Judicial Branch
$89,468,100 – Constitutional Officers
$507,008,100 – General Government
$1,123,469,900 – Office of the State Board of Education
$3,130,193,000 – Public Schools
That’s the backbone of Idaho state government.
And I voted “No” on most of them.
Let me explain why.
What Is a Maintenance Budget?
A maintenance budget is supposed to fund agencies at their current level of service. It keeps the lights on. It doesn’t expand programs. It doesn’t create new policy. It simply maintains operations.
This year was different.
Earlier this session, agencies were asked to prepare for an additional 1% reduction for FY2026 and 2% for FY2027, on top of the 3% holdback already requested by Governor Brad Little.
Last Friday, the Legislature voted to accept that additional 2% cut for FY2027.
This week, those reductions were rolled into the maintenance budgets that came before us on February 13.
So what we voted on were not neutral “maintenance” budgets. They were maintenance budgets with 5% base reductions built in.
Across-the-Board Cuts Sound Fair. But They Aren’t Always Smart.
Across-the-board cuts feel equal. Everyone takes the same percentage. No one is singled out.
But they also cut lean agencies just as much as bloated ones.
They ignore performance.
They ignore risk.
And sometimes, they cost more than they save.
I’ll be honest — at first, I thought some agencies might be overstating the impact.
So I ran the numbers.
Example One: Pardons & Parole
Under the additional 2% cut, Pardons and Parole would eliminate one parole investigator, saving about $87,100.
That investigator processes roughly 30 parole cases per month. About 65% — around 20 individuals — are granted parole.
If those 20 remain incarcerated because there is no investigator to process their case, the cost to the Idaho Department of Correction is over $620,000 for just that first month.
And it compounds every month after that.
That’s not a true savings. That’s a cost shift.
We save $87,000 in one place and potentially create hundreds of thousands — even millions — in costs somewhere else.
That’s not conservative budgeting.
Example Two: Health & Welfare
To meet the target reduction, the Department of Health and Welfare would defer HVAC maintenance in its data center.
Deferred maintenance may look harmless on paper.
But we’ve seen what happens when maintenance gets postponed too long. Equipment fails. Systems flood. Emergency repairs cost far more than preventative maintenance ever would. We saw this movie play out 4 years ago and it cost the state millions.
Saving small dollars today can create major liabilities tomorrow.
Example Three: Idaho State Tax Commission
The Idaho State Tax Commission would save about $210,000 under the additional reduction.
The impact? Refund delays of 12 to 18 weeks.
Those delays could trigger approximately $3.5 million in interest payments from the General Fund.
That means we save thousands but risk paying millions.
That’s not a disciplined cut. That’s a gamble.
“We Can Fix It Later”
I’ve heard the argument that we can restore funding in enhancement budgets later in the session.
Maybe.
But if we pass flawed maintenance budgets and the body decides to adjourn early, those cuts are locked in. Agencies are left to absorb them. Services are disrupted. Costs shift.
My father always taught me do it right the first time. Hoping to come back and fix the budget in an enhancement bill later? Really? Again, I have been taught that “Hope” is not a strategy.
I’m not willing to gamble on fixing tomorrow what we knowingly create today.
For the Record: I Support Cutting Government — When It Makes Sense
Let me be very clear.
I am not opposed to reducing government spending.
In fact, I have identified nearly $69 million in targeted reductions that do not shift costs, do not create downstream liabilities, and do not gamble with core services:
$2,000,000 – Student Support Budget (Driver Training Account Fund)
$635,000 – MMIS interest from a dedicated fund
$4,500,000 – Parental Choice Tax Credit adjustments
$15,000,000 – Public Building Funds
$25,000,000 – Removal of administrative costs in managed care contracts
$21,858,900 – Residential habilitation rate adjustments
Total: $68,993,900
Those are examples of targeted, structural savings.
That’s what responsible budgeting looks like.
The Bigger Question
When $13.3 billion moves through committee in three hours, we owe it to taxpayers to slow down and ask hard questions.
The issue isn’t whether to cut.
The issue is whether we cut wisely.
Across-the-board reductions may look strong on paper. But if they create larger liabilities down the road, they are not fiscally conservative. They are shortsighted.
My vote wasn’t about protecting bureaucracy.
It was about protecting taxpayers from avoidable costs.
That’s the standard I’ll continue to apply — every time that gavel drops in JFAC.
Bills on the Senate Floor This Week
This week on the Senate floor we debated and voted on several bills covering education, public safety, court reform, and cleanup of outdated Idaho Code. One bill failed, while five others passed and now move forward in the legislative process.
Here is a summary of what those bills do and why they matter.
Senate Bill 1233 – Constitutional Courts Act (Failed)
Senate Bill 1233 would have added a new section to Idaho Code clarifying that no Idaho court may enforce or apply a judgment, decree, ruling, or arbitration decision based on religious or cultural law if it does not fully support and conform to the rights guaranteed under the United States Constitution and the Idaho Constitution.
The intent was straightforward: in Idaho courts, the Constitution is the highest legal authority. Period.
In plain terms, this means that no one — including me — can claim that their personal religious beliefs override the U.S. Constitution or the Idaho Constitution.
As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I take that principle seriously. The 12th Article of Faith teaches: “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.” That belief reinforces the idea that our faith does not replace constitutional government — it respects it.
This bill would have applied equally across the board. Whether it involves Sharia law, Jewish religious law, or any other body of religious or cultural law, none of it would supersede the constitutional protections that safeguard every citizen.
I believe the United States Constitution is an inspired document and that God had a guiding hand in its creation. For that reason, I supported this bill.
After debate, however, the Senate did not pass it. The bill failed.
Senate Bill 1234 – Lewis-Clark State University (Passed)
Senate Bill 1234 updates Idaho Code to change the name of Lewis-Clark State College to Lewis-Clark State University.
The change reflects the full range of degrees offered at the institution, including associate, bachelor’s, and graduate programs. It aligns state statute with the institution’s current academic structure and supports recruitment, retention, and workforce development efforts.
The estimated one-time cost of implementing the name change will be absorbed within the institution’s existing budget. No new state funding is required.
Senate Bill 1239 – Sex Offender Residency Restrictions (Passed)
Senate Bill 1239 strengthens protections for children by closing a gap in Idaho law. Under existing statute, registered sex offenders are restricted from being on school or daycare property and from residing within 500 feet of those locations.
This bill updates the definition of “daycare” to include facilities that are zoned, permitted, or approved by a city or county — not just those that are state licensed. The goal is consistent protections for children, regardless of how a daycare is classified.
There is no fiscal impact to the state or local governments. The bill simply updates current law to ensure uniform application.
Senate Bill 1240 – Guardianship and Conservatorship Reform (Passed)
Senate Bill 1240 is a significant modernization of Idaho’s guardianship and conservatorship statutes. The bill is the result of more than five years of review and collaboration among legal experts, community advocates, and stakeholders.
The legislation strengthens constitutional protections for individuals subject to guardianship proceedings. It increases notice requirements, raises evidentiary standards in many cases to “clear and convincing,” and provides expanded alternatives to full guardianship, including supported decision-making and protective arrangements.
It also reorganizes and clarifies portions of the code to make the process more understandable for families and courts.
There is no fiscal impact anticipated, and the updated procedures may reduce court time through alternative approaches.
Senate Bill 1248 – Repeal of the Capital Crimes Defense Fund (Passed)
Senate Bill 1248 repeals the Capital Crimes Defense Fund from Idaho Code.
This fund previously helped share the costs of public defense in death penalty cases. Since October 2024, those responsibilities have been assumed by the Office of the State Public Defender, making the separate fund unnecessary.
This repeal is part of the broader Idaho Code Cleanup effort and does not increase or decrease state spending.
Senate Bill 1249 – Idaho Code Cleanup: Time Reference Update (Passed)
Senate Bill 1249 makes a technical update to Idaho Code by removing outdated time-reference language. It is another measure within the Idaho Code Cleanup effort, ensuring our statutes remain accurate and current.
There is no fiscal impact associated with this change.
The Bigger Picture
Some weeks at the Capitol involve sweeping policy debates. Other weeks focus on refining and improving the structure of our laws.
This week’s floor action included both meaningful reforms — like guardianship modernization — and practical housekeeping measures to keep Idaho Code up to date and consistent.
Each bill, large or small, contributes to how our laws function in real life — in our courts, our schools, and our communities.
JFAC: A Vote on Health Insurance — and a Question of Fairness
Friday was one of those days in the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee that makes you stop and think.
In the middle of approving maintenance budgets with built-in cuts…
In the middle of discussions about reduced services and agency risk…
In the middle of a 4% holdback requested by Governor Brad Little…
JFAC voted on a motion dealing with state employee health insurance. And the outcome, whether intended or not, results in a pay increase for legislators.
Here’s what happened.
The Motion
The motion directed the Office of Group Insurance to keep employee premiums, copays, and deductibles at their FY2026 levels for FY2027. Rising health care costs would not be passed on to employees. Instead, reserve funds in the Employee Group Insurance Fund would be used to cover the increase. Benefits would remain unchanged.
Put simply: health insurance costs are going up, but state employees would not see an increase in what they pay out of pocket next year.
I want to be clear — protecting state employees from higher costs makes sense. There is no pay increase for state employees in FY2027. If their insurance premiums go up, their take-home pay effectively goes down. Holding premiums steady keeps their compensation stable.
That part of the motion was reasonable.
The Part That Troubled Me
Legislators and elected officials are part of the same group insurance plan.
At the same time we were voting to cut agency budgets by 5%…
At the same time we were accepting reductions in services and programs…
At the same time we were telling departments to tighten their belts…
We were also voting to shield ourselves from increased health insurance costs.
When everyone else is absorbing reductions, that deserves careful thought.
If rising insurance premiums are covered for us by state funds, that is, in practical terms, an increase in compensation. Our take-home pay stays the same even as costs rise.
No one framed it as a raise.
But the effect is the same.
My Alternate Motion
I offered a simple alternative.
Protect state employees from the increase.
But do not make up the difference for elected officials in the legislative and executive branches.
If we are asking agencies to reduce spending…
If we are asking departments to take risk…
If we are telling Idahoans that discipline matters…
Then we should be willing to absorb increased costs ourselves.
Leadership requires shared sacrifice.
The committee voted down my motion.
Why This Matters
This is not about personalities. It’s not about pointing fingers.
It’s about consistency.
When we talk about fiscal responsibility, it has to apply to everyone — including those casting the votes.
Idahoans expect their elected officials to lead by example. They expect fairness. They expect accountability.
These are not easy decisions, especially in a year filled with difficult budget choices. But transparency matters. You deserve to know what is happening in committee rooms and why certain votes are taken.
SB1281 and the Parental Choice Tax Credit: A Question of Shared Sacrifice
On Tuesday, February 10th, I presented a Request for Statute in the Senate Education Committee that led to one of the longest print hearings I’ve seen this session.
The bill is now numbered Senate Bill 1281, and it makes a modest adjustment to Idaho’s Parental Choice Tax Credit program, which was created last year under House Bill 93.
Let me explain what it does — and why I brought it forward.
What the Bill Does
The Parental Choice Tax Credit allows parents to claim up to $5,000 per eligible student — and up to $7,500 for students with disabilities — for qualified educational expenses outside the public school system.
Under existing law, the total annual cap for the program was scheduled at $50 million.
SB1281 adjusts that cap slightly for two years:
$48 million for tax year 2026
$47.5 million for tax year 2027
Beginning in tax year 2028, the cap returns to $50 million.
The structure of the program stays the same.
Eligibility stays the same.
The per-student credit amount stays the same.
This proposal simply reduces the overall cap by approximately 4% in FY2026 and 5% in FY2027 before returning it to its original level.
Why Bring This Forward?
My position is straightforward: if we are making cuts, everyone should share in them.
This session we have asked agencies across state government to absorb reductions. We’ve seen significant adjustments to K–12 funding through support unit changes. We’ve seen reductions in IDLA and virtual programs. Special education funding was revised downward. Higher education institutions are restructuring and consolidating programs after holdbacks. Career Technical Education is planning additional reductions on top of earlier cuts.
Even when funding appears flat on paper, inflation and rising costs for transportation, utilities, insurance, and classroom materials mean schools can purchase less than they could before. When costs go up but funding does not, districts are forced to stretch dollars thinner. That often results in delayed purchases, staffing pressure, or program adjustments.
During the hearing, I was asked about the Governor’s statement that K–12 would be held harmless. My response was simple: on paper that may be the intent, but in practical terms reductions have already occurred. Schools and higher education institutions have already made difficult decisions in response to declining revenue projections.
If traditional public education is tightening its belt, it is reasonable to ask that refundable tax credits participate in that same fiscal discipline.
Questions From the Committee
The print hearing lasted 45 minutes — far longer than most.
I was asked how this compares to other programs. For example, the LAUNCH program has already been reduced by $10 million in FY2026 and another $10 million in FY2027, totaling $20 million. Again, shared sacrifice.
Another question was why adjust a relatively new program before it is fully underway.
That’s a fair question.
My view is that if adjustments are necessary, it is better to make them early — before expectations are locked in and before families build long-term financial plans around a higher cap.
I also pointed out that we are currently making reductions that affect some of Idaho’s most vulnerable populations, including students with disabilities and children facing behavioral challenges. This bill is not an attempt to repeal HB93. It is not an effort to eliminate school choice. It is an effort to apply the same standard across the board.
When budgets tighten, everyone gets the same haircut.
What Happens Next
The committee voted 6–4 to move SB1281 forward to a full public hearing. It has been assigned to the Senate Local Government and Taxation Committee.
If the public hearing is anything like the print hearing, it will be a thoughtful and spirited discussion.
This issue isn’t about being for or against parental choice. It’s about fairness and fiscal responsibility during a time when we are asking many parts of state government to do more with less.
Idaho Department of Water Resources: A Close Look at Idaho Water
On Monday, February 9th, the Senate Resources and Environment Committee received a detailed update from Director Mat Weaver of the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR). It was a comprehensive presentation that touched on budgets, water administration, groundwater concerns, and long-term planning.
Water policy can sometimes feel technical, but in Idaho it is personal. Our farms, cities, industry, and environment all depend on getting this right.
Here is a summary of what we heard.
Budget Pressures and Planning
Like many state agencies this year, IDWR is planning for holdbacks in both FY2026 and FY2027. Director Weaver walked through a matrix outlining how 1% and 2% reductions would affect operations.
Potential impacts include delaying vehicle replacements, postponing flow meter upgrades, adjusting staffing funding sources, and reducing trustee and benefit fund allocations.
One significant funding component involves a long-running transfer supporting aquifer monitoring and modeling work. That transfer helps fund engineering technicians, hydrogeologists, hydrologists, GIS analysts, and related staff. Monitoring and modeling may not always make headlines, but accurate data is the backbone of sound water management.
The department is also working to modernize its processes. A one-time project to move beneficial use proof forms online would reduce paper handling and manual data entry. That improvement could increase efficiency, but its implementation depends on how holdbacks are ultimately applied.
Creation of the Water Administration Bureau
Director Weaver outlined the creation of a new Water Administration Bureau. Idaho law requires water districts in adjudicated basins, and as administration becomes more complex, the department reorganized to better support those responsibilities.
The new bureau combines existing staff with additional water resource agents and technical support. Its responsibilities include supporting water districts, creating and modifying districts, carrying out delivery calls, and managing conjunctive use between surface water and groundwater.
Demand for new or modified water districts continues to grow, particularly in areas tied to the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer and other developing basins.
Surface Water Coalition Delivery Call
One of the more complex topics discussed was the 2025 Surface Water Coalition delivery call.
The Surface Water Coalition represents senior surface water right holders along the Snake River. Delivery calls require the department to determine whether junior groundwater pumping is causing injury to senior surface water rights.
In 2025, the department issued multiple orders throughout the irrigation season. Curtailment orders ultimately affected hundreds of junior water rights, with injury volumes recalculated at different stages of the year. Enforcement included inspections, notices of violation, and coordination with water users to ensure compliance.
This process underscores how actively Idaho administers its prior appropriation system. Water rights are not just recorded — they are administered in real time based on supply and demand.
Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA)
Director Weaver also discussed administration of the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Area of Common Ground Water.
Administration in the expanded area began November 1, 2025. Expansion of the area required notice and public hearing, and updated modeling has refined how the aquifer is managed.
The goal is coordinated management across connected groundwater systems, recognizing that aquifers do not follow political boundaries.
Treasure Valley Groundwater Concerns
The Treasure Valley remains an area of concern, particularly in parts of southern Canyon County, southern Ada County, and the Eagle–Star area.
Comparative maps from 1980–2000 and 2000–2025 show groundwater level changes in certain areas. In response, IDWR and the Idaho Water Resource Board are expanding and recalibrating the Treasure Valley groundwater model, evaluating policies related to extension requests, and reviewing the basis of the Boise Moratorium Order.
As growth continues in the Treasure Valley, sustainable groundwater management will remain a central issue.
Bear River Compact
The committee also received an update on the Bear River Compact, the interstate agreement among Idaho, Utah, and Wyoming that governs allocation of Bear River water.
The compact divides the river into Upper, Central, and Lower divisions and allocates flows among the states. Idaho’s current depletion estimates remain within its allocated limits.
This is a reminder that Idaho’s water responsibilities extend beyond state lines and require coordination with neighboring states and federal partners.
Evaluating Government Efficiency
Finally, Director Weaver reviewed the ongoing evaluation of a potential merger between IDWR and the Soil and Water Conservation Commission. At the Governor’s request, a formal process was conducted, including stakeholder interviews and a strategic review.
The evaluation concluded that if a merger occurs, IDWR would be the appropriate partner agency, provided certain assurances are met. Legislation addressing this affiliation has been introduced this session.
Looking Ahead
Water management in Idaho is growing more complex. Population growth, evolving science, aging infrastructure, interstate compacts, and delivery call administration all require careful oversight.
At the same time, agencies are operating within tighter fiscal constraints.
Director Weaver’s presentation made clear that Idaho’s water system depends on accurate data, consistent enforcement, and thoughtful planning. From aquifer monitoring to interstate compacts, the work of IDWR touches nearly every community in our state.
Water is Idaho’s lifeblood. Sound management today protects our farms, our cities, and our future.
Investing in Idaho’s Water Future
Idaho Water Resource Board Update – February 9, 2026
On Monday, February 9th, the Senate Resources and Environment Committee heard from Jeff Raybould, Chairman of the Idaho Water Resource Board (IWRB). His presentation provided a detailed overview of the Board’s programs, infrastructure investments, and long-term strategy to secure Idaho’s water supply.
The message was straightforward: Idaho is making major investments in water — and those investments are critical to our future.
Updating the State Water Plan
Chairman Raybould began by outlining revisions to the State Water Plan and the Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer (ESPA) Comprehensive Aquifer Management Plan. A key policy direction is establishing a state-funded managed recharge goal of 350,000 acre-feet annually on average for the ESPA.
The revision process included public meetings, review of public comments, and final approval before submission to the Legislature earlier this year.
Aquifer stabilization remains a central focus of Idaho’s long-term water strategy.
Historic Levels of Investment
Since 2019, more than $650 million has been appropriated to the Idaho Water Resource Board for water infrastructure projects.
In addition, $250 million in federal American Rescue Plan Act funds are under contract and supporting projects such as:
Anderson Ranch Dam Raise
American Falls Spillway Rehabilitation
Mountain Home Air Force Base Water Resiliency Project
Lewiston Orchards Exchange Project
New York Canal Rehabilitation
All ARPA funds are under contract and scheduled to be expended by the end of 2026.
This level of investment reflects broad recognition that water infrastructure is foundational to agriculture, economic development, and community stability.
Eastern Snake Plain Aquifer Sustainability
A significant portion of the presentation focused on the ESPA Regional Water Sustainability Program, which supports the 2024 stipulated mitigation plan between surface water and groundwater users.
The program includes:
Managed aquifer recharge
Groundwater-to-surface water conversion grants
Surface water delivery system efficiency projects
Telemetry and measurement grants
Modeling and hydrologic analysis
As of January 2026, nearly $100 million has been obligated toward ESPA regional sustainability efforts.
Managed Aquifer Recharge
Idaho’s recharge program continues to expand. Since 2014, the Board has added substantial recharge capacity, achieving a 10-year average recharge of approximately 251,000 acre-feet annually, with total recharge exceeding 2.6 million acre-feet.
The estimated cost is about $32 per acre-foot, not including depreciation of infrastructure costs.
Recharge remains one of the most cost-effective tools available for long-term aquifer stabilization.
Cloud Seeding
Cloud seeding is another component of Idaho’s water management strategy. The collaborative program operates in several major river basins across the state.
The average annual operational cost is approximately $3.45 million, with an estimated average annual runoff increase of roughly 953,000 acre-feet — equating to a cost of about $3.62 per acre-foot.
While not a standalone solution, cloud seeding adds measurable runoff at relatively low cost.
Aging Infrastructure and Local Grants
The Statewide Aging Water Infrastructure Grant Program continues to assist irrigation districts, canal companies, and water users in repairing and modernizing aging systems.
Grants now cover up to 50% of project costs, capped at $2 million per project. Since 2023, more than $78 million has been awarded across 126 projects.
These projects strengthen dams, rehabilitate canals, improve diversions, and increase efficiency statewide.
Major Construction Projects
Two large-scale projects highlight the Board’s long-term strategy:
Mountain Home Air Force Base Water Resiliency Project
The Board completed construction of a 14-mile pipeline and pump station to provide surface water to the base, reducing reliance on declining groundwater supplies. The estimated Board cost was $40 million. The U.S. Air Force is constructing a water treatment plant with approximately $91 million in federal investment.
Anderson Ranch Dam Raise
In partnership with the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, this project will add approximately 29,000 acre-feet of additional storage capacity. The total cost is estimated at $125.8 million, with construction contracts expected in 2027.
These projects expand storage and strengthen Idaho’s long-term water resilience.
Looking Ahead
Chairman Raybould’s presentation underscored the scale and complexity of Idaho’s water challenges. Growth, climate variability, aging infrastructure, and competing demands require sustained investment and careful management.
From aquifer recharge to dam rehabilitation, from cloud seeding to canal modernization, Idaho is taking a comprehensive approach to water management.
Water is Idaho’s lifeblood. Protecting it requires planning, partnership, and continued investment.
The work of the Idaho Water Resource Board reflects that commitment — and the responsibility we share to safeguard Idaho’s water future.
Quagga Mussels in Idaho: A Serious Threat and a Strong Response
This week in Senate Resources and Environment, we received a sobering update from Director Chanel Tewalt of the Idaho State Department of Agriculture on the ongoing fight against quagga mussels in the Snake River.
This is not just another environmental issue. It is one of the most serious invasive species threats Idaho has ever encountered.
Why Quagga Mussels Are So Dangerous
Director Tewalt began by explaining how quickly these mussels reproduce and spread.
A single mussel can produce anywhere from 30,000 to 1,000,000 microscopic larvae each year. Those larvae can drift downstream for up to a month before attaching to hard surfaces using tiny hair-like threads. Once established, they multiply rapidly and begin filtering nutrients from the water at an astonishing rate.
That filtering may sound harmless, but it disrupts the entire food web. When quagga mussels take over, they remove the nutrients that native species rely on. The result can be dramatic shifts in ecosystems and steep declines in fish populations.
Other parts of the country have already experienced these impacts. Once quagga mussels gain a permanent foothold, the damage can be long-lasting and extremely costly.
Idaho’s Long-Term Preparation
Idaho did not wait for this threat to arrive.
Over the past 15 years, the Legislature has strengthened invasive species laws, funded watercraft inspection stations, expanded enforcement authority, and increased staffing. Those investments allowed the state to build a strong early detection and response framework.
That preparation proved critical.
Detection in the Snake River
In September 2023, Idaho confirmed its first live quagga mussel detection in the Columbia River Basin after more than a decade of sampling. The response was immediate.
Quarantine and delimiting efforts began right away. Treatment using chelated copper was conducted in early October 2023 — the first attempt of this kind and scale in North America.
Additional detections occurred in 2024 in the Shoshone Falls pool, Pillar Falls, and Twin Falls Reservoir. Treatment efforts continued, including the use of both chelated copper and potassium chloride.
In 2025, approximately 3.5 river miles were identified as infested. Director Tewalt reported that the impacted area had been reduced by 51 percent following treatment efforts. Another round of treatment was conducted late September through mid-October.
Complex River, Complex Response
The Snake River presents unique challenges.
The system includes deep pools, springs, waterfalls, hydropower facilities, and sensitive native species downstream. In certain deep areas, water movement patterns make full chemical mixing difficult.
Despite these challenges, treatment results showed rapid impacts on mussel larvae, minimal fish mortality, and copper levels dissipating as expected. State agencies coordinated closely to monitor environmental effects and ensure compliance.
This has been a careful, science-based effort.
Monitoring and Inspection Efforts
Monitoring efforts have expanded dramatically.
In 2025 alone, thousands of surveys were conducted statewide, including hundreds of pre-detection surveys and additional delimiting samples in the Mid-Snake region.
Watercraft inspection remains a critical defense. Last year, more than 171,000 watercraft inspections were conducted statewide. Over 24,000 of those inspections occurred at Snake River stations. Four new inspection stations have been added since 2023.
Law enforcement agencies also supported inspection operations with nearly 1,400 turn-arounds to prevent potentially contaminated vessels from launching.
Regional coordination has strengthened as well. Idaho works closely with neighboring states, shares inspection data, and participates in programs like “Call Before You Haul” to prevent the spread of invasive species.
Public Outreach and Transparency
Director Tewalt emphasized the importance of communication.
The state has held town halls, issued water-right and resident notifications, conducted extensive media outreach, and maintained ongoing coordination with local governments, federal partners, Idaho Power, and canal companies.
The public has been kept informed at every stage of detection and treatment.
The Bottom Line
Quagga mussels are not a minor nuisance. Once established, they are nearly impossible to eliminate. They threaten fisheries, hydropower infrastructure, irrigation systems, recreation, and the overall health of the Snake River.
Idaho’s response has been aggressive and proactive. Early detection, rapid quarantine, chemical treatment, expanded monitoring, enforcement at inspection stations, and public outreach are all part of the strategy.
The fight is not over, but progress is being made.
Protecting Idaho’s water requires vigilance, coordination, and continued investment. The work being done today is aimed at preventing long-term ecological and economic damage tomorrow.
This is an issue that affects all of us — and one we will continue to watch closely.