Q&As: Grizzly bear lower 48 Proposed Revised 4(d) rule

These Questions and Answers are in reference to the July 2026 Proposed Updates to Grizzly Bear Endangered Species Act Management announcement. Additional details available on the project webpage.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What is the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposing? 

• The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is proposing a revised rule under section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act that would provide additional management flexibility for grizzly bears in specific areas, while maintaining existing protections and supporting long-term conservation.
• The proposal recognizes decades of successful conservation work by states, tribes, and federal partners and provides a more efficient, practical framework for managing grizzly bears where conservation goals have been met.

Does this proposal change the grizzly bear’s status under the Endangered Species Act?

• No. The grizzly bear remains listed as a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act in the lower 48 states. The proposal does not change the species’ legal status and does not initiate or constitute a delisting action.
• Protections under the Endangered Species Act remain in place. The revised proposed rule allows for tailored management flexibility only after specific conservation planning milestones and population objectives are achieved. These flexibilities are designed to support continued conservation while giving wildlife managers additional tools to address human safety concerns and conflicts where they occur.

What is a section 4(d) rule under the Endangered Species Act, and why is it being revised for grizzly bears?

• A Section 4(d) rule is a conservation tool under the Endangered Species Act that allows the Service to tailor protections for species listed as threatened. 
• The revised proposal, under Section 4(d) of the ESA, provides additional tools for key partners such as states and tribes who have played a critical role in grizzly bear recovery over the past 50 years.  

How is this proposed rule different from the January 2025 proposed 4(d) rule?

• Both proposals allow for nonlethal and lethal management actions to protect human safety and reduce conflicts, consistent with conservation objectives.
• Unlike the January 2025 proposal, this newly revised proposed 4(d) rule features a tiered structure allowing states additional flexibility when conservation strategies and management plans are in place to ensure grizzly bear conservation. As certain population objectives are achieved under these plans, even further management authority would be provided to states, tribes and national parks.

What is the history behind grizzly bear protection?

• Grizzly bears in the lower 48 states were first listed under the ESA in 1975, when only a small fraction of the historical population remained.
• Substantial recovery progress has been made in key geographic areas, including the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem.
• Grizzly bear populations have expanded largely due to commitments from private landowners, states, federal partners and tribes over the decades.
• Previous efforts to delist Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem populations were vacated by the courts due to issues related to distinct population segment definitions, regulatory mechanisms, and concerns over long-term genetic health of the species.
  

What prior actions has the Service taken regarding changes to grizzly bear status?

• Previously, the Service considered the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem population of grizzly bears to be recovered and attempted to delist this population in 2007 and again in 2017. Federal courts overturned both attempts. 
• This proposed revision to the 4(d) rule further expands management flexibility to prevent conflict and promote grizzly bear conservation.

How are the existing 10(j) population designations, such as in the North Cascades, impacted by this proposal?

• This proposal does not affect the designation of two nonessential experimental populations of grizzly bears in the North Cascades and Bitterroot Ecosystem. Any changes to those population-specific regulations would require separate rulemaking processes with opportunities for public review and comment. Information regarding the North Cascades and Bitterroot Environmental Impact Statement projects can be found on their respective web pages.

What are the next steps?

• The Service opened a 30-day public comment period that ends August 17, 2026. The public, stakeholders, and partners can provide feedback during this time. 

The Service will post updates, documentation, and details for public comment on the project webpage at: https://fws.gov/grizzlyrulemaking. To learn more about grizzly bears, visit https://www.fws.gov/species/grizzly-bear-ursus-arctos-horribilis.