Grizzly Management Shift
Interior Department Shifts Grizzly Management to States, Retaining Endangered Species Protections
Anonymous
Key Points
1
If grizzly delisting occurs in the future, the first five years would require joint monitoring of the species’ status by state wildlife agencies and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
2
Tribal leaders have opposed delisting, with the Crow Tribe and Northern Cheyenne Tribe filing lawsuits in the past decade to keep the grizzly bears on the threatened list.
3
The formal announcement of the shift in management occurred on the ground near the Gallatin Wildlife Management Area in Montana.
4
Estimates indicate roughly 2,000 grizzly bears across Wyoming, Idaho, Montana and Washington are affected by the proposal.
The Interior Department has unveiled a plan to hand grizzly bear management to Western states, keeping the species listed under the Endangered Species Act but giving states more day-to-day control. The move, announced near the Gallatin Wildlife Management Area in Montana, affects roughly 2,000 grizzly bears across Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, and Washington, according to Bozeman Daily Chronicle.
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and Montana Governor Greg Gianforte made the joint announcement. The proposal uses a legal tool called a 4(d) rule — a provision of the Endangered Species Act that lets states manage recovered populations without removing federal protections entirely. Hunting is not authorized under the plan.
How the 4(d) Rule Splits Management Among States, Tribes, and Feds
Under the revised plan, state wildlife agencies would take the lead on state lands where grizzly recovery benchmarks have been met. Tribal nations would manage bears on tribal lands. The National Park Service and U.S. Forest Service would continue overseeing federal lands during the transition, according to Bozeman Daily Chronicle. Delisting — fully removing the grizzly from the threatened species list — is not part of this proposal.
If full delisting happens in the future, the first five years would require joint monitoring by state agencies and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Mountain Journal reported. That safeguard is meant to catch any population decline before it becomes a crisis. The current plan explicitly does not authorize hunting under any circumstance.
Burgum and Western Governors Call It a Return to Local Leadership
Burgum said the proposal returns conservation leadership to the West rather than leaving it with Washington bureaucrats, according to Western Ag Network. Gianforte and other Western governors stood alongside Burgum at the announcement, backing the shift as both science-driven and practical. The plan fits into a broader Republican push to reduce federal regulatory reach over wildlife management.
A 30-day public comment period has been reopened so the public can weigh in on the 4(d) provisions and the new governance structure. An earlier 30-day window had already closed. Montana Right Now reported that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service framed the revision as a way to give states flexibility while keeping the grizzly protected under federal law.
Tribal Nations Have Fought Grizzly Delisting in Court
Not everyone supports the shift. Native American tribes have strongly opposed any move to weaken federal grizzly protections. The Crow Tribe and Northern Cheyenne Tribe both filed lawsuits within the past decade to keep the grizzly on the threatened species list, according to Mountain Journal. Tribal nations view the grizzly as sacred and have argued federal protection is essential to the species' survival.
The current proposal does not remove ESA protections, but tribes remain wary of the direction. Under the plan, tribal governments would manage grizzly bears on their own lands. Critics argue that fragmenting oversight across state, tribal, and federal authorities could create gaps in protection, particularly in areas where bear territories cross jurisdictional lines.
Grizzly Population Has Grown, Pushing Old Recovery Boundaries
The Greater Yellowstone region has seen steady grizzly growth over decades of federal protection. The roughly 2,000 bears now spread across four states represent a sharp increase from the roughly 150 bears counted in the 1970s when protections first took hold. Mountain Journal noted the announcement was made on the ground in Montana to signal a practical, field-level approach to the issue.
That population growth is the core argument for shifting management. Supporters say the recovery has been a success and that states are now best positioned to handle bear-human conflicts, rancher concerns, and public safety. The 30-day comment window gives the public a formal chance to push back or offer support before the rule moves forward.
Sentiment
Mostly NegativeNEGATIVENEUTRALPOSITIVE
Publishers
28
Articles
27
Reach
55
A
AnonymousAuthor