The USFWS should not permit ‘take’ from trapping for other species, which already threatens grizzly bear conservation. Lamb et al. (2022), McKim (2017).

Conflict with livestock is already a leading cause of grizzly bear death, and giving states authority over ‘management’ (i.e., conflict) take will further increase mortality. The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem has set mortality records in recent years even with current protections in place. USGS (2025).

Now is not the time to further reduce protections by increasing take. The Administration’s intent to rescind the Roadless Rule and the ESA ‘harm’ rule rescission both threaten to destroy grizzly habitat. Mattson (2024-1).

Giving management authority to hostile northern Rockies states like Montana will undermine grizzly bear recovery by decreasing connectivity between core populations. Mattson (2021). Montana’s own grizzly bear management plan states it would “not actively manage for grizzly bear presence between core areas”—precisely where management is needed for a connected metapopulation and ultimately recovery.

The proposal is too vague. The public cannot meaningfully weigh in because it leaves details about what grizzly bear ‘take’ will be allowed to future contracts between states and the USFWS.

Killing more grizzly bears will not increase social tolerance, and may actually decrease it. Mattson (2020). Further, studies on other predators also show poaching may increase after more killing is legalized. Chapron and Treves (2016).