U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum announced a proposal to shift grizzly-bear management authority to individual states during an event near Bozeman on Monday, marking the Trump administration’s latest effort to reshape wildlife policy in the Northern Rockies.
The proposal, outlined at the edge of the Gallatin Wildlife Management Area, would allow Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho to each develop independent management plans in coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Burgum’s announcement was flanked by the three governors—Greg Gianforte of Montana, Mark Gordon of Wyoming, and Brad Little of Idaho—signaling regional alignment on the shift.
The Proposal and Its Limits
The Interior Department characterized the move as a 4(d) revision, a regulatory adjustment under the Endangered Species Act. The proposal stops short of opening grizzly hunting; instead, it would grant states authority to craft management frameworks with federal oversight.
Gianforte framed the shift as a return of control. “Montana grizzly bears are now Montana’s bear,” the governor said, underscoring the three-state coalition’s position that local management better serves regional interests.
Years of Conflict Over Delisting
The announcement represents the latest chapter in a nearly decade-long struggle over grizzly-bear protections in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. The first Trump administration sought to remove endangered-species protections in 2017, but the effort faced legal challenges that stalled delisting.
Wyoming conducted the first grizzly hunt in 40 years in 2019, but conservation groups sued, and courts blocked both the hunt and the delisting decision. The case remained unresolved through the Biden administration.
Since 2025, Western lawmakers have pushed House legislation aimed at achieving similar outcomes to delisting, building pressure for federal action aligned with state interests.
What’s Next
The proposal does not yet authorize hunting. Each state would begin forming its own management framework under this plan, though the regulatory process remains subject to potential legal challenge and federal review.
The shift reflects broader Republican efforts to devolve environmental authority to states. Whether the 4(d) revision survives legal scrutiny from conservation groups remains uncertain, and the path to actual state-managed hunting remains contingent on additional regulatory or legislative steps.
