Officials from Montana and Wyoming filed petitions to delist grizzly bears in certain recovery zones, but the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Wednesday upheld the species’ protected status on the Endangered Species List.
Fish and Wildlife reacted to the states by denying proposals to transfer the species to state administration in a 171-page statement published on January 8. Rather, the government suggested updating the species’ protection laws and managing grizzlies as a single population throughout Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, and Washington.
According to a press statement from Martha Williams, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and a resident of Montana, this reclassification will help grizzly bears recover and offer a stronger basis for future delisting. Additionally, the suggested modifications to our regulation will give landowners and management organizations additional resources and adaptability to handle interactions between people and bears, which is a crucial aspect of grizzly bear recovery.
Elected officials in Montana and Idaho immediately criticized the announcement. Governor Greg Gianforte of Montana, who has long advocated for state officials to manage the species, criticized the Biden administration for adopting a scorched earth approach in its closing days.
In a prepared statement, Gianforte said that Joe Biden had adopted a scorched earth approach as he was leaving office. He has released terrorists from Guantanamo Bay, prohibited offshore drilling, and given special treatment to his son. Joe Biden still treats the American people and the law with disdain. It is time to recognize and celebrate the grizzly bear’s complete comeback throughout the Rocky Mountain region. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service needs to catch up with the latest scientific findings, abide by the law, and give back control of grizzly management to the states, where it belongs. We are eager to investigate a different course of action with the incoming Trump administration.
In a statement issued Wednesday, Idaho Governor Brad Little criticized the Biden administration for making the announcement just two weeks before President Joe Biden’s departure.
According to a news release, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is denying that grizzly bears in the lower 48 have met and beyond recovery criteria for years by refusing to delist them. In an effort to understand the reasoning behind the (services) decision, which appears to ignore the science and the combined efforts of stakeholders that have resulted in the successful recovery and conservation of grizzly bears, I have directed the Idaho Department of Fish and Game and Office of Species Conservation to thoroughly review the proposed rule.
In 2023, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was sued by the state of Idaho for the Biden administration’s decision to keep grizzly bears on the Endangered Species List.
A joint statement opposing the decision was made Thursday by Idaho’s Republican congressional delegation, which includes U.S. Senators Jim Risch and Mike Crapo as well as Representatives Mike Simpson and Russ Fulcher. The delegation stated that it favors locally created solutions that safeguard Idaho communities and has consistently pushed for the grizzly bears’ removal from the Endangered Species Act.
In the statement, Risch claimed that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s move is just another indication that the Biden administration doesn’t care about the grizzly bears that are destroying villages in Idaho. Although the federal government has frequently shifted the goalposts, a number of groups have achieved recovery targets. Restoring common sense and grizzly bear management to the states is long overdue.
The service’s judgment was deemed inappropriate by Crapo.
According to Crapo’s statement, the grizzly bear’s existing Endangered Species Act (ESA) designation ignores scientifically validated, commonsense management strategies as well as the bear’s robust recovery within its historic habitat. The public’s trust in the ESA is damaged by this revelation, which unjustly downplays the noteworthy successes of regional conservation initiatives.
Fulcher reiterated that the greatest approach to safeguard grizzly bear populations is through local control carried out by state agencies.
Fulcher added in the statement that the current administration has developed the terrible habit of trying to seize state-developed solutions. In opposition to this announcement, I join my colleagues in making sure that efforts to return this responsibility to Idaho continue.
Concerns remain over grizzly bear protection in the West.
In 1975, when there were only 300 to 400 grizzly bears remaining in the wild across the contiguous states, the species was listed under the Endangered Species Act. Over the past ten years, a series of proposed delisting moves, lawsuits, andpetitions have cast doubt on the future of grizzly bears.
Many of those questions are being addressed in the new comprehensive management plan of the Fish and Wildlife Service. The government suggests reducing the geographic scope of grizzly protections for endangered species.
The plan claims that this one unique population segment, which includes portions of Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, and Washington, accurately represents the regions where grizzly bears are found today and are anticipated to do so in the future. Despite some demands to restore grizzlies to places like the Sierra Nevada in California, the species is not expected to live outside of this boundary. The suggested smaller area is home to an estimated 2,314 bears.
A thorough and scientifically supported recovery framework will be provided by creating a single (separate population) that includes all six recovery zones. According to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announcement, the distribution of grizzly bears has greatly increased, mostly as a result of the dedication of state, federal, and tribal authorities. The Service also understands that highly resilient populations are essential to the regeneration of tiny and extinct populations. By meeting the recovery needs of the entire species, maintaining all recovery zones in a single (distinct population segment) will improve grizzly bear viability and the rate of recovery in the remaining ecosystems, increasing the possibility that the entire DPS will be delisted.
According to the Fish and Wildlife Service, the move is a preliminary step toward completing a settlement agreement with the state of Idaho that calls for a review of the lower 48 states’ grizzly bear listings by January 2026.
According to the Fish and Wildlife Service, the announcement today also addresses the states of Montana and Wyoming’s petitions to create and delist DPSs for the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem and Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, respectively, and concludes that these petitioned actions are not justified. The Service concluded that grizzly bear populations in those two environments do not, by themselves, represent legitimate (separate population segments) after carefully examining the best available scientific and commercial data.
Conservationists applaud as elected leaders voice opposition to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s grizzly bear plans.
Montana’s political representatives have been strong supporters of state management since the state initially filed its petition for delisting in December 2021.
For Montana, today’s announcement is extremely frustrating. Due to Montana’s decades-long adherence to the research, bear populations in the Northern Continental Divide and Greater Yellowstone Ecosystems have more than recovered. Moving the recovery goalposts further will only hurt the bear and endanger our towns in Montana. In a prepared statement, Republican U.S. Senator Steve Daines declared, “This is a shameful partisan play, and I’ll be pushing back every step of the way.”
In a similar remark, U.S. Representative Ryan Zinke, a Republican from Montana, said that it is evident from science that the bear has recovered and ought to be removed from the list.
We are actually on the verge of becoming a nuisance due to overpopulation. Zinke stated in a statement, “Just ask the hunters who are mauled every time a grizzly hears a dinner bell ring at every trigger pull, and the ranchers who lose calves and grain.” Unquestionably, the Biden Administration pushed this through with just 12 days remaining, knowing full well that it was a clear political ploy to curry favor with extreme environmentalists. Thankfully the political hands pulling the strings at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are about to be fired and President Trump will no doubt immediately rescind this train wreck decision. Elections are important because of this.
While many conservation organizations applauded the federal government’s decision, they cautioned that in order to fully appreciate the consequences of the proposed modifications to protective regulations for the future of the species, it would be necessary to closely evaluate the specifics of the revisions.
The Endangered Species Coalition, Friends of the Bitterroot, Friends of the Clearwater, WildEarth Guardians, and Wyoming Wildlife Advocates issued a joint statement saying, “We applaud the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for maintaining grizzly bears protected under the Endangered Species Act in the Northern Rockies and rejecting state management that would undo decades of conservation work that has helped us make tremendous progress toward bringing back a species that was almost wiped out.” Crucially, the states of Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming have implemented anti-predator laws that will undo the comeback of this iconic native species and are utterly equipped to handle grizzlies.
To guarantee that any new rule is based on the best available science and contemporary conservation techniques, the groups said they will all take part in the agency’s rule-making process. This entails embracing a fresh approach to grizzly bear recovery that promotes a cohesive population with enhanced habitat preservation, non-lethal conflict reduction, and natural connectedness.
The suggested measures, according to the federal wildlife agency, are meant to satisfy the concerns of people who live with and close to bears while also providing a complete new strategy for long-term bear recovery.
Grizzly bear populations are now geographically closer to each other than ever, and the Service has documented grizzly bear movement between some populations, indicating recovery zones are no longer discrete, Fish and Wildlife Services explained. The success of conservation and management initiatives to date is demonstrated by the increasing migration of grizzly bears, underscoring the significance of implementing and upholding conservation policies and management strategies that support bears’ ongoing movement.
Resolving disputes between locals and grizzly bears
To address concerns over human-bear conflicts, the service proposed a revision to a rule known as 4(d) that the agency expects will give management agencies and landowners greater flexibility and tools to take bears in the context of research and conflict management.
Under the Endangered Species Act, the 4(d) rule establishes requirements for lawfully taking, removing, or relocating grizzlies without requiring extra permits. Allowable take includes self-defense, demonstrable but non-immediate threats to human safety, and for bears committing significant depredations to livestock and crops. The proposed rule adds additional exceptions for grizzly take on public and private land.
Grizzly bear expansion is challenging for local communities and working lands, and the Service is committed to a collaborative approach and helping partner agencies, private landowners, and livestock producers by providing additional management tools While continuing efforts to promote conservation in areas critical to the eventual delisting of grizzly bears in the lower 48 as a whole, the proposed 4(d) rule acknowledges the need for additional flexibility and responsiveness on private lands and areas where grizzly bear populations are affecting private landowners and livestock producers.
The Fish and Wildlife Service said the public can comment on the proposed rules to designate a single distinct population segment and the associated 4(d) revision during the 60-day comment period following its publication in the Federal Register in the coming days.
In addition, the Fish and Wildlife Service will hold four public hearings on the proposed rule.
On Jan. 28, a public information meeting will be held in Missoula at the Hilton Garden Inn on Reserve Street from 3- 5 p.m. with a public hearing from 6-8 p.m. On Jan. 29, an meeting will be held from 3-5 p.m. and a public hearing will be held from 6-8 p.m. at the Kootenai County Fairgrounds in Coeur d Alene, 4056 N. Government Way, Building 19
A virtual public informational meeting, without a hearing, will take place on Jan. 30 from 6-8 p.m.
More information can be found online athttps://www.fws.gov/grizzlyrulemaking. Read the full FWS decisionhere.
Idaho Capital Sun editor-in-chief Christina Lords contributed to this story.
Daily Montanan,like the Idaho Capital Sun, is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Daily Montanan maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Darrell Ehrlick for questions:[email protected].
