Why weakening federal protections endangers the Northern Rockies
By Benjamin Alva Polley EBS COLUMNIST
The Trump administration’s latest move on grizzly bears should set off alarm bells across the Northern Rockies and the nation. Last week, federal officials proposed to hand over greater management of these iconic animals to states that have spent decades trying to erase them from the landscape. On paper, grizzlies would technically retain their Endangered Species Act protections for now, and experimental population designations would remain unchanged. But the administration also plans to reopen a 30 day comment period on a revised 4(d) management rule first initiated under the Biden administration in January 2025—a seemingly bureaucratic step that could, in practice, decide whether grizzlies live or die.
The danger lies in who would be put in charge. While the federal government is far from perfect, it is at least bound by nationwide conservation standards and scientific review. Several Northern Rockies states, by contrast, have made no secret of their hostility toward grizzly bears. Legislatures and governors have pushed anti-predator policies, undermined biologists, and treated these animals as pests to be controlled rather than a species on the brink of recovery. Handing them more authority over grizzly management is like asking the arsonist to run the fire department.
We do not yet know every detail of the revised 4(d) rule, and that is by design. The administration has chosen to move first and explain later, leaving the public in the dark about how far they intend to go. But the broad strokes are clear enough to warrant serious concern. A rule that relaxes federal oversight or expands state discretion over lethal control could jeopardize decades of painstaking recovery work. Grizzly populations in the Northern Rockies remain fragile, fragmented and highly vulnerable to spikes in mortality.
That vulnerability is not theoretical. In recent years, grizzly bears have faced record mortality from conflicts with people, vehicles and increasingly permissive state policies toward killing large carnivores. These deaths are not just numbers in a report; they represent the loss of breeding females, key genetic diversity and individual animals that have managed to survive in a region that has never fully welcomed them back. When you stack new political maneuvers on top of already high death rates, the trajectory for the species becomes deeply troubling.
“It is extremely concerning that the Trump administration is seeking to hand over more management of the species to hostile Northern Rockies states,” said Jenny Harbine, managing attorney for Earthjustice’s Northern Rockies Office. “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 maneuvers should not be allowed to thwart grizzly bear recovery. If this proposal will further harm the species, we are prepared to take the administration to court.”
The stakes extend beyond one bear population. This proposal is also a test of whether we will allow ideology and resentment of federal environmental laws to override science and public values. Most Americans want grizzly bears and other wildlife to persist for future generations. They understand that the Endangered Species Act was designed precisely to protect vulnerable species from short-term political pressures at the state level. If officials succeed in weakening oversight for grizzlies now, other imperiled species could be next.
There is still time to push back. When the comment period opens on the revised 4(d) rule, the public—especially those who live in and love the Northern Rockies—must make their voices heard. We should demand a management framework grounded in science, not hostility and insist that any changes enhance, rather than erode, the hard-won gains toward grizzly recovery. The Trump administration may want to shift responsibility to states that have long opposed these bears’ very existence, but it cannot escape accountability for the consequences. Grizzly bears have survived decades of persecution to reclaim a foothold in their historic range. We should be strengthening their protections, not gambling their future on the very forces that pushed them to the brink.
Benjamin Alva Polley is a place-based storyteller. His words have been published in Rolling Stone, Esquire, Field & Stream, The Guardian, Men’s Journal, Outside, Popular Science, Sierra, and WWF, among other notable outlets, and are available on his website.
