Skip to main content

Sign up for our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values. Direct to your inbox.

 A grizzly bear and cub in Yellowstone. (Photo: wolverine_9_5/flickr/cc)

Jettisoning 'Best Available Science,' Trump Admin. Tosses Out Federal Protections for Yellowstone's Grizzlies

 The "ongoing threats the bears face will now be compounded by trophy hunting and lethal removal by trigger-happy state agencies," says Andrea Santarsiere of the Center for Biological Diversity

Andrea Germanos

The Trump administration announced Thursday that the Yellowstone grizzly bear population is losing its endangered species protections—a decision conservation groups say is "flawed and premature" and could make the iconic species the target of trophy hunters.

CNN reports: "The bears received endangered species protection in 1975, when their population was about 136. Today, there are estimated to be 700, more than enough to meet the criteria to be removed from the endangered list, the government said."

A press statement from Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke says that the "population was determined to be recovered because multiple factors indicate it is healthy and will be sustained into the future."

Andrea Santarsiere, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, doesn't see it that way. "This outrageously irresponsible decision ignores the best available science," she said. "Grizzly conservation has made significant strides, but the work to restore these beautiful bears has a long way to go."

Zack Strong, and advocate for NRDC's land and wildlife program, echoes that point. Though the numbers have  increased, he writes that the estimated population number represents "far too few individuals to ensure long-term genetic health. Until natural connectivity with the northern grizzly population occurs, scientific studies make clear that a minimum population of closer to 2,000 bears would be needed to maintain long-term genetic diversity."

Another problem with the rule from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, says Strong, is that it "dismisses the potential threat of climate change [... ] such as loss of food sources (like whitebark pine seeds) and shifts in denning time leading to increased conflicts with humans."

And then there's the threat bears that wander out of the park's confines will face.

The New York Times explains:

Under current law, eliminating threatened species protection for the big bear paves the way for Montana, Idaho and Wyoming to take over responsibility from federal managers outside Yellowstone. That means fewer restrictions; states alone will make the call on dealing with nuisance bears—and will probably include a hunting season for grizzlies. Bears within the boundaries of the national park will remain a federal responsibility and will not be hunted, unless they leave Yellowstone.

According to Santarsiere, that means the "ongoing threats the bears face will now be compounded by trophy hunting and lethal removal by trigger-happy state agencies."

The rule will be published in the Federal Register and will take effect 30 days after that publication. 

It's likely to face legal challenges.

"The government's campaign to remove protections provided by the Endangered Species Act overlooked important conservation issues and denied public comment on key points," said Tim Preso, and attorney with Earthjustice. "We will closely examine this decision, and are prepared to defend the grizzly if necessary," he said.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

... We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.

'Like a Teenager Promising to Clean Their Room in 30 Years': Biden Net-Zero Climate Goal for 2050 Ridiculed

"2050 is an extremely weak goal for the federal government to free itself from climate-heating pollution. It ignores existing technology and adds decades to GSA's own commitment to 100% renewable energy by 2025."

Brett Wilkins ·


Biden Should Cancel Student Debt or Watch $85 Billion Evaporate From US Economy: Analysis

Far-reaching cancellation enacted by Biden could add more than $173 billion to the nation's GDP in 2022 alone.

Kenny Stancil ·


Given Cover by Red-Baiting GOP, Corporate Dems Rebuked for Tanking Biden Nominee for Top Bank Regulator

"If you think that Senate Democrats rose up to [Republicans'] shameful display of modern McCarthyism by rallying around President Biden's nominee or her ideas that banking should work for the middle class, then you don't know the soul of today's Democratic Party," wrote one columnist.

Julia Conley ·


'S.O.S.!': Groups in Red States Nationwide Plead With Democrats to Pass Voting Rights Bill

"We can tell you firsthand that our Republican senators have no interest in joining this effort."

Jake Johnson ·


Revealed: US Public Pension Funds Are 'Quiet Culprits of Climate Chaos'

One activist called divestment "an ethical responsibility" given that "maintaining the status quo of fossil fuel energy production and investments will unquestionably lead to a self-created catastrophe."

Jessica Corbett ·

Support our work.

We are independent, non-profit, advertising-free and 100% reader supported.

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Quality journalism. Progressive values.
Direct to your inbox.

Subscribe to our Newsletter.


Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit | Privacy Policy
Common Dreams Logo