Department of the Interior announced yesterday It was preparing to hand over more management of grizzly bears to Western state fish and game agencies, a move that could eventually lead to delisting from the federal list and a return to hunting of the iconic species.
The announcement was made by Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Brian Neswick in prime grizzly bear habitat just north of Yellowstone National Park, with western governors in attendance. While details of specific management changes are virtually non-existent — federal rules will be published on Friday — the Interior Department emphasizes that it is not removing grizzly bears from federal protection under the Endangered Species Act. Rather, it is proposing to “clarify the geographic area where grizzly bears in the lower 48 states are subject to protection under the Endangered Species Act.”
In areas where Interior believes they do not deserve protection, either because bear numbers have exceeded population limits or because they are endangering life or property, the USFWS has proposed amending current protective regulations “to provide additional management flexibility for authorized agencies and individuals who experience conflict with grizzly bears.”
Public comments will be received on proposed rulesWhat is called the federal 4(d) rule, as amended by August 17.
The news was widely appreciated Hunt And livestock groups as well as the Republican governors of Montana, Idaho and Wyoming said their respective agencies are ready to take on management responsibilities for the bear population, which has grown from a few hundred when listed as endangered in 1973 to more than 2,000 today. Grizzly bears are moving out of their strongholds in the Bob Marshall Wilderness Complex and Yellowstone Ecosystem south of Glacier National Park into habitats and human communities that are not accustomed to dealing with apex predators and opportunistic scavengers.
The rule announced yesterday authorizes state and tribal wildlife agencies to activate their own grizzly bear management plans in coordination with the USFWS. Don’t expect states to immediately move toward proposing hunting seasons for grizzlies, as many environmental groups have warned. In Montana, at least, the state Department of Fish, Wildlife and Parks has imposed a 5-year moratorium on hunting grizzlies.
“Director Nesvik, Secretary Burgum, and the entire leadership of the Department of the Interior have found a way to declare a victory for conservation under the ESA and provide for continued conservation under state management,” said Simon Roosevelt, executive vice president of conservation, research and policy for the Boone and Crockett Club. “The rule moves grizzly conservation from the now-solved problem of too few bears to the now-emerging realities of abundant bears. The predictable and misguided criticism of this would be that bears are losing protection. The accurate view is that bears and people are gaining the benefits of sustainable management.”
Burgum’s announcement did not indicate whether states would receive federal support as they undertake more grizzly bear management work. In both 2024 and 2025, at least 72 grizzly bear deaths were recorded each year, mostly at the hands of humans, according to the . Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Group. This is an increase of about 35 percent from the 10-year average of 54 bear deaths. according to Montana Grizzly Bear Conflict DashboardThe state has recorded 101 conflicts so far this year, including 30 killings of animals and 34 encounters with humans.
back from the brink
Grizzly bears in the lower 48 states were listed as “threatened” under the Endangered Species Act in 1975. If federal oversight has allowed populations to grow, it has also made them pariahs among Western cattlemen and some hunters, who flee under protection enforced by “Washington bureaucrats,” as Burgum called federal wildlife managers.
Supporters of this week’s Interior Department announcement cited population growth and insisted that grizzly bears make a full recovery and that they should be managed by state wildlife agencies. But environmental groups claim the census numbers are a misleading benchmark. The percentage of suitable habitat occupied by large bears is a better barometer for recovery, he says.
“It is extremely concerning that the Trump administration is seeking to hand over more management of the species to hostile Northern Rockies states,” said managing attorney Jenny Harbin. Northern Rockies Office of Earthjustice. “While we need to see the details of this proposal, it could put grizzly bears at greater risk at a time of record mortality for the species. Anti-science political moves must not be allowed to derail grizzly bear recovery. If this proposal would further harm the species, we are prepared to take the administration to court.”
But Montana Governor Greg Gianforte said the growing grizzly bear population should be read as proof that the Endangered Species Act works and that returning management to states should be celebrated as a conservation success.
“With this success has also come a challenge – bears have expanded into new areas and conflicts with farmers, ranchers, recreationists and residents have increased,” Gianforte said in the internal announcement south of Bozeman, Mont. “Returning management to the states is a welcome change and Montana is prepared to balance conservation and protection of our communities.”
Boone and Crockett Club’s Roosevelt says that just because management may have shifted from federal to state agencies, grizzly bear recovery is not over.
Changes to the ESA in the 1990s failed to create a consistent path forward for recovered species so they could remain out of federal protection.
Roosevelt says, “As a result, every attempt to list the bear has been challenged by strategic litigators who exploit this policy lapse to overturn decisions based on sound science.” “This political maneuver to keep the grizzly as a listed species in areas where it now thrives has the perverse effect of taking essential resources away from the more than 1,000 other species that are still correctly listed under the ESA.”
The USFWS grizzly bear rule amendment could allow bears in some ecosystems to remain under federal protection, while management in other ecosystems could be transferred to state agencies.
‘Damage’ question
Almost concurrently with Burgum’s announcement regarding grizzly bear management, the Department of the Interior, along with the federal Department of Commerce, announced last week It is removing the word “harm” from the types of actions prohibited by the ESA. That one term is the foundation of the federal act’s power to ensure habitat not only for endangered species but also for non-federally protected wildlife.
By repealing the regulatory definition of “harm”, the federal act could be “rolled back”
The actual text and original intent, which would end years of federal overreach.
Citing a 2024 Supreme Court case, “the Services determined that the prior definition of ‘harm’ was an unlawful regulatory intrusion that interfered with private property rights.”
But legal experts have stressed that the term undercuts most of the ESA’s authority, allowing agencies to ensure that critical habitat is not degraded or to impose penalties if it does. Bear advocates say that with the Trump administration rescinding the federal roadless rule and mandated increases in logging in grizzly bear habitat, repealing the “harm” language could slow or roll back conservation gains achieved under federal protections.
“I think of it as a dress rehearsal for delisting,” Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks Director Christy Clark said after Burgum’s announcement, according to the report. montana free press.
