Staff Reports
In yet another show of disdain for Western lawmakers and the ranching community, the Biden administration has clung fiercely to the outdated notion that grizzly bears deserve federal protection. Despite decades of sound science and recovery successes, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has rejected calls from Montana and Wyoming to remove these apex predators from the endangered species list. This move, more bureaucratic juggling than conservation, has ignited a full-blown outrage among state officials claiming that federal agencies are not just changing the game; they’re moving the goalposts entirely.
Republican representatives, including Arkansas’ Bruce Westerman, have been vocal in their frustration. The lawmakers point out that while bear populations have surged in areas like the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem—meeting the recovery goal of 500 bears way back in 2003—federal authorities seem more interested in bureaucratic ping-pong than actually addressing overpopulation and the associated risks for local communities and livestock. Rather than a delisting, the Fish and Wildlife Service opted for a confusing reclassification, proposing just one distinct population segment for bears across Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and Washington. This sparks the question: how does that help anyone but the endless stream of bureaucrats?
Today’s announcement from @USFWS is a shameful partisan play. Moving the goalposts on recovery is only harming the bear and putting our MT communities at risk & I’ll be pushing back every step of the way.
https://t.co/8i9byaGVJ2— Steve Daines (@SteveDaines) January 8, 2025
What does this mean for the bears? Nothing much. They’ll continue their endangered status under the Endangered Species Act while those pesky ranchers still have to worry about their livestock becoming the afternoon snack for the local grizzlies. The service promised that this “reclassification” would help in the long run, all while the population levels in areas like the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem have soared to over 1,000 grizzlies and continue to encroach on suburban areas.
Despite the success stories of states managing their own ecosystems, including previous attempts to delist the grizzly that were overturned due to lawsuits from environmental groups, the Biden administration remains entrenched in its position. Senators like Steve Daines from Montana have had enough of the political games, characterizing the situation as a shameful partisan play. At the end of the day, grizzly bears can be adorable, but they’re not exactly fluffy teddy bears, and the risks to ranchers and local communities are growing, not shrinking.
Surprisingly, it seems that this debacle has earned praise from environmental groups, who pat themselves on the back for “protecting” the bears, blissfully ignoring the damage done to local economies and safety. The Center for Biological Diversity, for instance, claims they’ve ensured a brighter future for grizzlies by keeping them on the endangered list, despite the clear and present dangers posed by an ever-expanding bear population. Meanwhile, ranchers and local wildlife managers remain wary of the soaring numbers, hoping for legislation to finally allow them some control over their own livelihoods.
As federal management continues to bungle the situation, Wyoming’s Governor Mark Gordon chimed in to remind everyone that state officials are the ones with specific knowledge about local wildlife needs. He believes these experts should take charge instead of letting distant bureaucrats dictate policies that directly impact the day-to-day lives of people living in bear country. The proposed new rule is set to enter a comment period soon, but with changes on the horizon come January, there’s a glimmer of hope. Republicans are gearing up to push for a significant overhaul once President Trump is sworn in, aiming to restore states’ rights and reinstate common sense into federal wildlife management.
