All Eyes On Nesvik<\/strong><\/p>\nSome argue that it\u2019s past time to delist grizzlies from federal protection and hand management of them fully over to Game and Fish and other state agencies.<\/p>\n
That could include a hunting season for grizzlies in Wyoming.<\/p>\n
During his tenure as Game and Fish director, Nesvik advocated for grizzly delisting. His successor, Game and Fish Director Angi Bruce, has also publicly stated that she favors delisting.<\/p>\n
However, not everyone favors delisting some argue that grizzly habitat is still too fragmented, and sub-populations are isolated.<\/p>\n
Contiguous habitat and robust genetic exchange, not sheer numbers, should determine when grizzlies are ready for delisting, they argue.<\/p>\n
Nesvik taking charge at FWS has grizzly delisting advocates feeling hopeful, and delisting opponents worried.<\/p>\n
What Would Delisting Look Like?<\/strong><\/p>\nNesvik remains convinced that the grizzly population is recovered, and is nearly ready to be delisted.<\/p>\n
\u201cRecovery was achieved, by all accounts, by federal and state biologists in the GYE in the early 2000s,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
The purpose of the\u00a0Endangered Species act is to get to species to the point of recovery and \u201ccelebrate that recovery,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Research also indicates grizzlies have healthy genetics, he added.<\/p>\n
And genetic exchange will continue to occur naturally, as grizzlies wander and find new mates, or through wildlife agents occasionally transplanting bears between populations, Nesvik said.<\/p>\n
Despite some criticism that grizzly delisting is being \u201crushed,\u201d Nesvik said grizzlies have likely been more closely studied than just about any other wildlife species.<\/p>\n
It could take perhaps another two years to work through an analysis of the data on grizzlies and reach a final decision regarding delisting, he said.<\/p>\n
When it happens, it might be across the board, meaning all grizzlies everywhere in the Lower 48\u00a0would be delisted, he said.<\/p>\n
Or grizzlies might remain protected in some areas but delisted in others, he said. \u00a0<\/p>\n
As far as grizzly hunting seasons, Nesvik said that decision would probably be left up to the states, if and when grizzlies are delisted.<\/p>\n
Things Could Change For Wolves<\/strong><\/p>\nWhile the ultimate fate of grizzlies might not be known for a while, federal protections for wolves could soon be lifted across the Lower 48.<\/p>\n
Wolves were previously delisted in Wyoming, Montana and Idaho, and those states all allow wolf hunting and trapping.<\/p>\n
There is\u00a0a\u00a0significant population of wolves in the Great Lakes area. There are also wolves in Oregon, some of which moved south and established packs in California.<\/p>\n
There are efforts to recover the Mexican gray wolf population in southwestern states.<\/p>\n
And Colorado began reintroducing wolves in late 2023.<\/p>\n
On Thursday, the U.S. House passed H.R. 845, the Pet and Livestock Protection Act, which calls for a nationwide delisting of wolves.<\/p>\n
One of its sponsors is Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colorado, who has been a vocal opponent of her state\u2019s wolf reintroduction program.<\/p>\n
The last batch of wolves released in Colorado were flown in from British Columbia, Canada in January.<\/p>\n
Colorado was considering getting more wolves from British Columbia, but Nesvik intervened.<\/p>\n
In an Oct. 10 letter to Jeff Davis, then director of Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW), Nesvik stated that bringing wolves in from Canada violated an agreement between CPW and FWS.<\/p>\n
CPW has stated its intent to continue with reintroductions, either later this month or in early 2026, but it remains unclear where the next batch of wolves might come from.<\/p>\n
Nesvik on Thursday said he had no further comment on the situation, saying his letter \u201cspeaks for itself.\u201d<\/p>\n
As for possible delisting across the\u00a0Lower 48, he said the matter is currently in Congress’\u00a0wheelhouse, but \u201cwe\u2019re certainly interested to see\u201d what the outcome might be.<\/p>\n
He noted that regardless of whether H.R. 845 passes, the situation on the ground in Wyoming won\u2019t change, because wolves are already delisted\u00a0here and managed by Game and Fish.<\/p>\n
\u2018A Beautiful America\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\nThe interface of energy development and wildlife conservation is another ongoing hot topic.<\/p>\n
Nesvik said that in Wyoming, he saw the fossil fuel industry make great strides.<\/p>\n
Technology has developed that allows for multiple gas or oil wells to be drilled with only \u201cone surface disturbance.\u201d<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, there\u2019s been growing concern over how wind and solar power development in Wyoming might disturb wildlife habitat or block big game migration routes.<\/p>\n
Such concerns go beyond Wyoming, Nesvik said. There is worry over how wildlife might be affected as wind and solar projects continue to pop up across the country.<\/p>\n
So, wind and solar might have to develop technology to mitigate the effect on wildlife, similar to what fossil fuel companies did.<\/p>\n
Nesvik refuted criticism that he favored energy industry and ranching during his tenure at Game and Fish and might do the same at FWS.<\/p>\n
People in Wyoming\u2019s energy and agriculture industries would dispute claims that he was always on their side, he said.<\/p>\n
He added that there is broad support for wildlife across the country. As in Wyoming, people across the country love wildlife and want to see sound conservation, he said.<\/p>\n
He added that the Trump administration, including Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, is interested in a healthy balance between economic prosperity and \u201ca beautiful America.\u201d<\/p>\n
Mark Heinz can be reached at mark@cowboystatedaily.com<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A few months into his tenure as the nation\u2019s chief wildlife officer, Wyoming native Brian Nesvik has adjusted…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":458410,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[159,67,132,68,837],"class_list":{"0":"post-458409","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-wildlife","8":"tag-science","9":"tag-united-states","10":"tag-unitedstates","11":"tag-us","12":"tag-wildlife"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/115747919191781895","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/458409","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=458409"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/458409\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/458410"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=458409"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=458409"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=458409"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}