Why Conservationists Capturing Grizzly Bears In Yellowstone Is Secretly A Hot-Button Issue

What emotions come to mind when you think of a grizzly bear out in the wilderness? For some people, it's fear, intimidation, or awe. For others, it's respect and a desire to preserve the species. Grizzly bears are listed as threatened in the U.S. under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which means they're protected federally. This level of protection makes it illegal to harm, capture, harass, or kill them without special permission. But just as there are mixed feelings about grizzlies in general, there's disagreement over whether the species should still be listed under the ESA.

Conservation teams in Yellowstone National Park started setting traps at the start of the month and will continue through October 2025 for these bears. These scientific capture operations, led by the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST), are a way of keeping tabs on how well grizzlies recover in the park.

Words like "conservation" and "recovery" typically evoke only positive emotions when spoken about an endangered species, since several amazing animals have survived near-extinction and made a comeback as a result of conservation efforts. This isn't the case with grizzly bears, though. Some people see more disadvantages to the species being listed under the ESA than advantages. Although no one's advocating for wiping out grizzlies, there's ongoing tension over who gets to call the shots on managing them.

The grizzly bear isn't just an iconic symbol on the California flag or a representation of wild beauty. It's also become a pawn in a political tug-of-war. The feds, through agencies like the U.S. Geological Survey and aforementioned IGBST, want to keep track of the grizzly bear populations using collars, traps, and data. They and other stakeholders believe this is the best way to protect the species from extinction and aid in its recovery.

Despite what may seem like a reasonable and beneficial plan, states like Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho aren't on board. Officials argue that grizzlies have bounced back enough from being endangered and should now be managed locally. After all, these individuals are the ones dealing with ranchers losing livestock to these furry predators or hikers running into them far from park borders. The shared thought is that there's too much government meddling with an animal that's roaming well beyond Yellowstone.

What started as a wildlife recovery plan in the 1990s has become a microcosm of a bigger debate: federal vs. local control. Who knew the conservation of grizzly bears could get so political? Interested in learning more about bears or other wildlife? Check out how to respond if you come across a bear while walking your dog or the disease-stricken animal the Oakland Zoo is helping repopulate in California parks.