Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 18-7042 (2026)
interference with agricultural production.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
interference with agricultural production.
(1) A person commits the crime of interference with agricultural production if the person knowingly:
(a) Is not employed by an agricultural production facility and enters an agricultural production facility by force, threat, misrepresentation or trespass;
(b) Obtains records of an agricultural production facility by force, threat, misrepresentation or trespass;
(c) Obtains employment with an agricultural production facility by force, threat, or misrepresentation with the intent to cause economic or other injury to the facility’s operations, livestock, crops, owners, personnel, equipment, buildings, premises, business interests or customers;
(d) Enters an agricultural production facility that is not open to the public and, without the facility owner’s express consent or pursuant to judicial process or statutory authorization, makes audio or video recordings of the conduct of an agricultural production facility’s operations; or
(e) Intentionally causes physical damage or injury to the agricultural production facility’s operations, livestock, crops, personnel, equipment, buildings or premises.
(2) For purposes of this section:
(a) "Agricultural production" means activities associated with the production of agricultural products for food, fiber, fuel and other lawful uses and includes without limitation:
(i) Construction, expansion, use, maintenance and repair of an agricultural production facility;
(ii) Preparing land for agricultural production;
(iii) Handling or applying pesticides, herbicides or other chemicals, compounds or substances labeled for insects, pests, crops, weeds, water or soil;
(iv) Planting, irrigating, growing, fertilizing, harvesting or producing agricultural, horticultural, floricultural and viticultural crops, fruits and vegetable products, field grains, seeds, hay, sod and nursery stock, and other plants, plant products, plant byproducts, plant waste and plant compost;
(v) Breeding, hatching, raising, producing, feeding and keeping livestock, dairy animals, swine, furbearing animals, poultry, eggs, fish and other aquatic species, and other animals, animal products and animal byproducts, animal waste, animal compost, and bees, bee products and bee byproducts;
(vi) Processing and packaging agricultural products, including the processing and packaging of agricultural products into food and other agricultural commodities;
(vii) Manufacturing animal feed.
(b) "Agricultural production facility" means any structure or land, whether privately or publicly owned, leased or operated, that is being used for agricultural production.
(3) A person found guilty of committing the crime of interference with agricultural production shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be punished by a term of imprisonment of not more than one (1) year or by a fine not in excess of five thousand dollars ($5,000), or by both such fine and imprisonment.
(4) In addition to any other penalty imposed for a violation of this section, the court shall require any person convicted, found guilty or who pleads guilty to a violation of this section to make restitution to the victim of the offense in accordance with the terms of section 19-5304, Idaho Code. Provided however, that such award shall be in an amount equal to twice the value of the damage resulting from the violation of this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2014–2021 · leading case: Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Wasden, 878 F.3d 1184 (9th Cir. 2018).
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Wasden, 878 F.3d 1184 (9th Cir. 2018). “Opinion by Judge McKeown; Partial Concurrence and Partial Dissent by Judge Bea SUMMARY * Civil Rights The panel affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of the Animal Legal Defense Fund and vacated in part the district court’s…”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1009 (D. Idaho 2014). “On its face, section 18-7042 targets one type of speech— speech concerning “the conduct of an agricultural production facility’s operations,” I.C. § 18-7042,—but leaves unburdened other types of speech at an agricultural production facility.”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 118 F. Supp. 3d 1195 (D. Idaho 2015). “The Idaho Dairymen’s Association, a trade industry organization that represents every dairy farmer and producer in the state, responded to the negative publicity by drafting and sponsoring a bill that became Idaho Code § 18-7042 . The bill proposed criminalizing the types of…”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 300 F.R.D. 461 (D. Idaho 2014). “The IDA seeks to intervene because its members are “a specific target” of the undercover investigations and videography the law prohibits, and therefore have a special interest in ensuring that “the protections provided by the Idaho Legislature in I.C. § 18-7042” remain in…”
Animal Legal Def. Fund, Iowa Citizens for Cmty. Improvement, Bailing Out Benji, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Reynolds, 297 F. Supp. 3d 901 (S.D. Iowa 2018). “at 1201 (quoting Idaho Code § 18-7042 (1)(c) ). This intent provision cabined the application of the Idaho statute so that it only criminalized the sort of false statements that the plurality in Alvarez recognized the government may target with content-based restrictions: those…”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Wasden, 312 F. Supp. 3d 939 (D. Idaho 2018). “See Idaho Code § 18-7042 . Under this statute, a person interferes with agricultural production by knowingly: (a) entering an agricultural production facility by force, threat, misrepresentation, or trespass if the person is not employed at the facility; (b) obtaining records of…”
Fund v. Reynolds, 385 F. Supp. 3d 840 (S.D. Iowa 2019). “Utah 2017), the challenge to Idaho Code § 18-7042 in Animal Legal Def.”
Proj. Veritas v. Schmidt (D. Or. 2021). “3d at 1203–04 (quoting Idaho Code § 18-7042 (1)(d)). With these principles in mind, I examine each of the challenged exceptions to the recording statute’s general prohibition in turn.”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(1)(a) — 1 case
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Wasden, 312 F. Supp. 3d 939 (D. Idaho 2018). “See Idaho Code § 18-7042 . Under this statute, a person interferes with agricultural production by knowingly: (a) entering an agricultural production facility by force, threat, misrepresentation, or trespass if the person is not employed at the facility; (b) obtaining records of…”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(1)(d) — 1 case
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Wasden, 312 F. Supp. 3d 939 (D. Idaho 2018). “See Idaho Code § 18-7042 . Under this statute, a person interferes with agricultural production by knowingly: (a) entering an agricultural production facility by force, threat, misrepresentation, or trespass if the person is not employed at the facility; (b) obtaining records of…”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(2)(b) — 1 case
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1009 (D. Idaho 2014). “On its face, section 18-7042 targets one type of speech— speech concerning “the conduct of an agricultural production facility’s operations,” I.C. § 18-7042,—but leaves unburdened other types of speech at an agricultural production facility.”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(3) — 1 case
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 118 F. Supp. 3d 1195 (D. Idaho 2015). “The Idaho Dairymen’s Association, a trade industry organization that represents every dairy farmer and producer in the state, responded to the negative publicity by drafting and sponsoring a bill that became Idaho Code § 18-7042 . The bill proposed criminalizing the types of…”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(4) — 2 cases
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 118 F. Supp. 3d 1195 (D. Idaho 2015). “The Idaho Dairymen’s Association, a trade industry organization that represents every dairy farmer and producer in the state, responded to the negative publicity by drafting and sponsoring a bill that became Idaho Code § 18-7042 . The bill proposed criminalizing the types of…”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1009 (D. Idaho 2014). “On its face, section 18-7042 targets one type of speech— speech concerning “the conduct of an agricultural production facility’s operations,” I.C. § 18-7042,—but leaves unburdened other types of speech at an agricultural production facility.”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(l)(a) — 2 cases
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1009 (D. Idaho 2014). “On its face, section 18-7042 targets one type of speech— speech concerning “the conduct of an agricultural production facility’s operations,” I.C. § 18-7042,—but leaves unburdened other types of speech at an agricultural production facility.”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 118 F. Supp. 3d 1195 (D. Idaho 2015). “The Idaho Dairymen’s Association, a trade industry organization that represents every dairy farmer and producer in the state, responded to the negative publicity by drafting and sponsoring a bill that became Idaho Code § 18-7042 . The bill proposed criminalizing the types of…”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(l)(c) — 2 cases
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 118 F. Supp. 3d 1195 (D. Idaho 2015). “The Idaho Dairymen’s Association, a trade industry organization that represents every dairy farmer and producer in the state, responded to the negative publicity by drafting and sponsoring a bill that became Idaho Code § 18-7042 . The bill proposed criminalizing the types of…”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1009 (D. Idaho 2014). “On its face, section 18-7042 targets one type of speech— speech concerning “the conduct of an agricultural production facility’s operations,” I.C. § 18-7042,—but leaves unburdened other types of speech at an agricultural production facility.”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(l)(d) — 2 cases
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 118 F. Supp. 3d 1195 (D. Idaho 2015). “The Idaho Dairymen’s Association, a trade industry organization that represents every dairy farmer and producer in the state, responded to the negative publicity by drafting and sponsoring a bill that became Idaho Code § 18-7042 . The bill proposed criminalizing the types of…”
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1009 (D. Idaho 2014). “On its face, section 18-7042 targets one type of speech— speech concerning “the conduct of an agricultural production facility’s operations,” I.C. § 18-7042,—but leaves unburdened other types of speech at an agricultural production facility.”
— Idaho Code § 18-7042(l)(e) — 1 case
Animal Legal Def. Fund v. Otter, 44 F. Supp. 3d 1009 (D. Idaho 2014). “On its face, section 18-7042 targets one type of speech— speech concerning “the conduct of an agricultural production facility’s operations,” I.C. § 18-7042,—but leaves unburdened other types of speech at an agricultural production facility.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.