Idaho Gov. Butch Otter has told agency heads, lawmakers and anyone else who is interested to search their souls and examine the proper role for state government.

Last month, he ordered 4 percent immediate cuts in the state budget to offset two-thirds of the state's $151 million budget shortfall. He's working with his Cabinet to find another $50 million in savings, and that's just for the current fiscal year that ends July 1.

The governor said for the remaining gap, he's planning to work with state agency directors to find additional savings. Since Idaho already runs a pared-down state government, it's understandable that many people are worried the only choice left is to cut back services, especially unpopular ones like environmental enforcement.

While cutting spending is the primary driver, Otter still has the opportunity to look at sweeping changes that could make state government more efficient and better able to serve the public interest.

That's what Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire is considering with her natural resources agencies. She has just released the results of a task force look at consolidating agencies that protect the environment, fish and wildlife and manage state-owned lands. It's a part of the larger government reform package she promised in her campaign.

Otter and his Cabinet can get some ideas from her, even though Washington's agencies are different from Idaho's. One of her task force's ideas is to consolidate its resource tasks under two agencies, a Department of Environmental Regulation and a Department of Resource, Recreation and Land Management.

In addition, the task force has recommended:

• Creating consistent geographic regions for all agencies and sharing offices.

• Forming a single law-enforcement agency for hunting, fishing and land use and combining it with the state patrol.

• Consolidating all natural resource grants into a single agency.

Such reform of Idaho resource agencies would be complicated but largely could be done by statute. The biggest constitutional challenges would be on how to manage the state's endowment lands - that's left to the governor and other top state elected officials that make up the Land Board.

But the biggest challenge is, of course, politics. There are political reasons why Idaho has separate agencies. Ag groups like cattlemen and the dairy industry prefer the Idaho Department of Agriculture regulating confined animal feeding operations.

The mining industry would prefer the Department of Lands regulate mine reclamation. Hunters and fishermen want fish and game managed by an independent body. Lawmakers even split off managing endangered species protection into a separate agency to try to go around the Fish and Game Commission.

Smaller agencies like the Soil Conservation Commission have their own constituencies. Water quality, water quantity and stream channel protection are now split among three different agencies.

The idea that state endowment forests and range lands could be managed with a different mandate by the same agency that manages state parks is unthinkable to some. But do we really need the five elected constitutional officers making decisions on land easement and cottage site rent costs as the Land Board does today?

Could a business manager make many of the same decisions and return even more money to the schools and other endowment trust beneficiaries?

Many states, including Delaware, Georgia, Iowa, Missouri, North Carolina, Wisconsin and Michigan, have all of these tasks under one department of natural resources. These states have eliminated overlapping regulatory and administrative tasks and along the way improved service for the public.

The reforms also could reduce the role of special interests in resource management. Reform wouldn't be a way just to cut budgets, but to put the public interest first.

There are tradeoffs. One big environmental regulatory agency can become an unresponsive giant where some priorities can be lost or diminished. There also are a lot of choices. Should the natural resources board hire its director or should the governor?

"We must explore significant restructuring and find further budget savings," Otter said. "That's why I'm launching a public dialogue with Idaho taxpayers, lawmakers, agency officials, state employees and other stakeholders on how best to achieve meaningful reorganization of state government."

Perhaps Washington's reaction will help Idaho decide how badly it wants to consider a similar approach.

Rocky Barker: 377-6484