BILLINGS, Mont.— The Biden administration has announced it will maintain federal protections for approximately 2,000 grizzly bears across four Rocky Mountain states, despite pushback from Republican-led governments. The decision, revealed by U.S. wildlife officials on Wednesday, underscores the ongoing debate over wildlife management and conservation in the region.
According to details obtained in advance of the public proclamation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will reclassify the grizzly bear’s status, allowing ranchers to shoot bears that threaten livestock. However, protections will be lifted in states where grizzlies are no longer present, such as California, colorado, New Mexico, and Oregon.
Grizzly bears have been listed as a threatened species in the lower 48 states since 1975. Efforts to remove these protections during the Trump administration where halted by legal challenges. Republican officials in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming have repeatedly petitioned the federal government since 2021 to transfer grizzly management to state control, which could have permitted limited public hunts. State leaders argued such measures would not jeopardize the overall bear population.
Federal officials, however, emphasized their commitment to eventually ending protections, tho they declined to provide a specific timeline. “This reclassification will facilitate recovery of grizzly bears and provide a stronger foundation for eventual delisting,” said martha Williams,Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service, in a statement.
The decision has sparked criticism from Montana Representative Ryan Zinke, who previously led the U.S. Interior Department under Trump. ”There’s no denying the Biden administration jammed this through with 12 days to go knowing it’s a blatantly political play to appease radical environmentalists,” Zinke told the Associated Press. “Thankfully the political hands pulling the strings at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are about to be fired.”
Over the past few decades, grizzly bears have expanded their range, particularly in western Washington state, leading to increased human-bear conflicts. These encounters occasionally result in livestock attacks and, in rare cases, harm to people. While U.S. government scientists have determined that grizzly populations in areas like Yellowstone and Glacier National Parks have biologically recovered, concerns remain about the adequacy of state-level protections.
Chris Servheen, a former grizzly recovery coordinator for the Fish and Wildlife Service, argued that maintaining federal safeguards is crucial for the species’ continued expansion. Without these protections, he warned, grizzlies could face renewed threats from habitat loss due to climate change and state policies aimed at reducing bear numbers.
Historically, an estimated 50,000 grizzlies roamed across 18 western states, from Texas to the Canadian border. overhunting and trapping decimated their numbers, leaving only 700 to 800 bears in the lower 48 states by 1975. Thanks to decades of recovery efforts, the population has rebounded to over 2,000 in the contiguous U.S., with even larger numbers in Alaska, where hunting is permitted.
The Fish and Wildlife Service cited “substantial” evidence that grizzlies have recovered from the brink of extinction in regions surrounding Yellowstone and Glacier National Parks. However, past attempts to delist the species have been contentious. in 2017, when protections were briefly lifted in the Yellowstone area, Wyoming and Idaho moved to schedule hunts. Wyoming received nearly 1,500 applications for just 12 grizzly bear licenses, while Idaho issued only one license before the hunts were blocked.
Federal officials also expressed concerns about state laws that could harm grizzly populations. For example, Montana recently passed legislation allowing grizzlies to be killed if they attack livestock. Additionally, some states have implemented aggressive policies against gray wolves, including relaxed trapping regulations that could inadvertently harm grizzlies.
As the debate over grizzly bear management continues, the Biden administration’s decision highlights the delicate balance between conservation efforts and the interests of local communities. with grizzlies continuing to expand their range, the challenge of coexisting with these iconic predators remains a pressing issue for the American West.
what are the main challenges facing grizzly bear populations in the Rocky Mountain states, and how does the Biden administration’s decision to maintain federal protections attempt to address these challenges?
Interview with Dr. Emily Carter, Wildlife Conservation Expert
Archyde News: Dr.Carter, thank you for joining us today. The Biden administration’s recent decision to maintain federal protections for grizzly bears in the Rocky Mountain states has sparked significant debate. As a wildlife conservation expert, what are your thoughts on this decision?
Dr. Emily Carter: Thank you for having me. The decision to maintain federal protections for grizzly bears is a critical step in ensuring the long-term survival of this iconic species. Grizzly bears have been listed as a threatened species since 1975, and while their populations have rebounded in some areas, they still face significant challenges, including habitat loss and human-wildlife conflict. The administration’s decision reflects a commitment to science-based conservation and acknowledges the complex ecological role grizzlies play in the Rocky Mountain ecosystem.
Archyde News: The decision also includes a provision allowing ranchers to shoot bears that threaten livestock. How do you see this balancing act between conservation and the needs of local communities?
Dr. Carter: This is a delicate balance, and it’s one that wildlife managers have been grappling with for decades. On one hand, grizzly bears are a keystone species, and their presence is vital for maintaining healthy ecosystems. conversely,ranchers and rural communities bear the brunt of human-wildlife conflicts.Allowing ranchers to protect their livestock in situations where bears pose an immediate threat is a pragmatic approach. However,it’s crucial that this provision is implemented alongside robust conflict mitigation strategies,such as improved livestock husbandry practices,bear-proof storage,and compensation programs for ranchers who lose livestock to bears. Without these measures, we risk undermining conservation efforts.
Archyde News: Republican officials in Montana, Idaho, and wyoming have been pushing for state control over grizzly management, arguing that it would allow for limited public hunts without jeopardizing the bear population. What’s your take on this argument?
Dr. Carter: The push for state control is not new, and it’s rooted in a desire for more localized decision-making. however, the concern is that state management could prioritize economic interests, such as hunting revenue, over conservation goals. While limited hunts might not instantly threaten the overall bear population, they could disrupt social structures within bear populations, especially if older, dominant bears are targeted. This could lead to increased conflicts as younger,less experienced bears move into new territories. Federal oversight ensures that decisions are made with a broader, science-based viewpoint, which is essential for the long-term recovery of the species.
Archyde News: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has indicated that they are committed to eventually ending protections for grizzly bears. What do you think needs to happen before delisting can occur?
Dr. Carter: Delisting is a complex process that requires meeting specific recovery criteria, including stable or increasing population numbers, sufficient habitat protection, and effective management plans to address human-bear conflicts. before delisting can occur, we need to ensure that grizzly bear populations are not only stable but also genetically diverse and resilient to future challenges, such as climate change. Additionally, there needs to be a robust framework in place for state and tribal governments to manage bears post-delisting, with clear accountability measures to ensure that conservation goals are not compromised.
Archyde News: what message would you like to convey to our readers about the importance of grizzly bear conservation?
Dr. Carter: Grizzly bears are more than just a symbol of the wild—they are an integral part of the ecosystems they inhabit. Their presence indicates a healthy, functioning surroundings that benefits countless other species, including humans. Protecting grizzlies is not just about saving a single species; it’s about preserving the biodiversity and ecological integrity of our natural landscapes. It’s also about finding ways to coexist with wildlife, recognizing that our actions have far-reaching consequences.Conservation is a shared duty, and it requires collaboration, compassion, and a commitment to science-based decision-making.
Archyde News: Thank you, Dr.carter, for your insights and expertise on this significant issue. We appreciate your time today.
Dr. Carter: Thank you. It’s been a pleasure discussing this critical topic with you.
