```

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 9 (Wednesday, January 15, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3783-3786]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-00330]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2022-0150; FF09E21000-256-FXES11130900000]

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 12-Month Finding 
for the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem of the Grizzly Bear in 
the Lower-48 States

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notification of finding.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce a 
12-month finding on a petition to establish and delist a Northern 
Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) distinct population segment (DPS) 
of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) in the lower-48 States. 
After a thorough review of the best scientific and commercial data 
available, we find that grizzly bears in the petitioned DPS do not, on 
their own, represent a valid DPS. Thus, we find that the petitioned 
action

[[Page 3784]]

to establish and delist an NCDE DPS is not warranted at this time.

DATES: The finding in this document was made on January 15, 2025.

ADDRESSES: The finding and the supporting information that we developed 
for this finding, including the species status assessment report and 
species assessment form, are available on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2022-0150. Please submit 
any new information, materials, comments, or questions concerning this 
finding to the appropriate person, as specified under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hilary Cooley, Grizzly Bear Recovery 
Coordinator, Grizzly Bear Recovery Office, telephone: 406-243-4903, 
email: [email protected]. Individuals in the United States who are 
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 
711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay 
services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay 
services offered within their country to make international calls to 
the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Previous Federal Actions

    Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.; hereafter, ``Act''), the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos 
horribilis) is currently listed as a threatened species in the lower-48 
States (40 FR 31734, July 28, 1975). We detail the original rulemaking 
and our subsequent actions for the species in our species status 
assessment (SSA) report (Service 2024, pp. 74-76) and summarize the 
relevant actions for this finding below.
    On March 30, 2021, we completed a 5-year status review for the 
grizzly bear in the lower-48 States in which we concluded that the 
listed entity should retain its status as a threatened species under 
the Endangered Species Act (Act) (Service 2021, entire). On December 
17, 2021, we received a petition from the State of Montana (petitioner) 
to revise the listed entity of grizzly bear under the Act. The petition 
requested that we: (1) establish a NCDE DPS; and (2) remove it from the 
List (``delist''), asserting that the NCDE DPS did not meet the 
definition of an endangered or threatened species. On February 6, 2023, 
we published a 90-day finding (88 FR 7658) that the petition contained 
substantial information indicating that establishing and delisting a 
NCDE DPS may be warranted. This document and our supporting species 
assessment form constitutes our 12-month finding on the December 17, 
2021, petition to establish and delist a NCDE DPS of grizzly bear under 
the Act.

Background

    Under section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we 
are required to make a finding, within 12 months after receiving any 
petition that we have determined contains substantial scientific or 
commercial information indicating that the petitioned action may be 
warranted, as to whether the petitioned action is warranted, not 
warranted, or warranted but precluded by other pending proposals (known 
as a ``12-month finding''). We must publish a notification of this 12-
month finding in the Federal Register.
    This document announces the not-warranted finding on the petition 
for the NCDE grizzly bear population in accordance with the regulations 
at 50 CFR 424.14(h)(2)(i). In this document, we have also elected to 
include a summary of the analysis on which this finding is based. This 
supporting information can be found on the internet at https://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2022-0150 (see 
ADDRESSES, above). We provide the full analysis, including our 
rationale and the data on which the finding is based, in the decisional 
file for the petition and our subsequent finding. The species 
assessment form contains an explanation of why we determined that 
grizzly bears in the petitioned DPS do not, on their own, represent a 
valid listable entity such that the petitioned actions are not 
warranted at this time. The following is a summary of the documents 
containing this full analysis.

Listable Entity Requirements

    Under the Act, the term ``species'' includes any subspecies of fish 
or wildlife or plants, and any distinct population segment of any 
vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature (16 U.S.C. 
1532(16)). To interpret and implement the distinct population segment 
(DPS) provisions of the Act, the Service and the National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration published in the Federal Register the Policy 
Regarding the Recognition of Distinct Vertebrate Population Segments 
Under the Endangered Species Act on February 7, 1996 (61 FR 4722) (DPS 
Policy). Under the DPS Policy, we consider three elements to determine 
whether to classify a population of a vertebrate species as a DPS: (1) 
the discreteness of the population segment in relation to the remainder 
of the species to which it belongs; (2) the significance of the 
population segment to the species to which it belongs; and (3) the 
population segment's conservation status in relation to the Act's 
standard for listing, delisting, or reclassification. The Policy 
requires that a population segment meet both the discreteness and 
significance elements to be considered a valid DPS (i.e., a valid 
listable entity) and only then may we consider whether the DPS warrants 
listing under the Act.

Summary of Biological Information

    The grizzly bear is a large, long-lived mammal that occurs in a 
variety of habitat types in portions of Idaho, Montana, Washington, and 
Wyoming. Grizzly bears are light brown to nearly black and are so named 
for their ``grizzled'' coats with silver or golden tips. Grizzly bears 
in the NCDE population and the lower-48 States need access to large, 
intact blocks of land with limited human influence that provide cover, 
high-caloric foods, dens, and areas for dispersal. The specific quality 
and quantity of these resources influence the ability of individual 
grizzly bears to reproduce, grow, and survive at different life stages 
and for the NCDE population to be resilient or to withstand stochastic 
events (Service 2024, pp. 99-101). Our SSA report provides our full 
account of the life history, ecology, range, and historical and current 
distribution for the grizzly bear in the NCDE population and the lower-
48 States (Service 2024, pp. 39-73).

Summary of Information From the Petition

    The petitioner requests that we establish a DPS for the NCDE 
grizzly bear population (petitioned DPS) that occurs entirely within 
the State of Montana. In their arguments to support delisting, the 
petitioner indicates that the NCDE grizzly bear population's range has 
expanded, including a four-fold increase in the occupied range since 
the time of listing in 1975. The species assessment form provides 
additional summary of the information presented in the petition, 
including a map of the petitioned DPS.

Summary of Finding

    In determining whether to recognize the petitioned DPS as a valid 
DPS (e.g., a listable entity under the Act), we must base our decision 
on the best scientific and commercial data available. Since the time of 
the original listing in 1975, the abundance, distribution, and 
dispersal of grizzly bears within and surrounding the NCDE has 
increased.

[[Page 3785]]

New information supports the petitioner's claim that the NCDE 
population has increased in size and distribution, so much so that 
grizzly bears have dispersed and expanded their occupied range and 
verified outliers are occurring beyond the western and southern 
boundary of the petitioned DPS. From 2014 to 2022, estimated occupied 
range in the NCDE increased by 21 percent, averaging 5 percent every 2 
years. As a result, the distance between the occupied range in the NCDE 
and that of other ecosystems has decreased and continues to shrink. 
Models indicate that the NCDE estimated occupied range overlaps with 
the Cabinet-Yaak Ecosystem (CYE), although no genetic or demographic 
connectivity has been documented. In addition, models indicate that the 
estimated occupied ranges of the NCDE and Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem 
(GYE) populations are currently only 98 kilometers (61 miles) apart, 
within grizzly bear dispersal distance.
    The 2022 estimated occupied range of the NCDE population of grizzly 
bear extends beyond the western and southern boundaries of the 
petitioned DPS (Service 2024, figure 1). From 2020 to 2022, occupied 
range in the NCDE increased by 11 percent (Costello et al. 2023, p. 
13). We expect this trend to increase over time. Additionally, as the 
populations expand, individual grizzly bears are dispersing into new 
areas outside the estimated occupied range. Since 2014, there have been 
213 verified observations of grizzly bears outside of current estimated 
occupied range in the lower-48 States. Currently, genetic studies have 
confirmed that at least 14 grizzly bears originating from the NCDE 
population have dispersed beyond the boundary of the petitioned DPS. 
Seven of these individuals are known to have emigrated from the NCDE to 
the CYE, however, no gene flow is known to have occurred as of 2022 
(Kasworm et al. 2024, p. 34). These occurrences outside of areas 
considered occupied range are becoming increasingly common. While in 
most cases, the source population of such grizzly bears is unknown, a 
number of them likely originated from the NCDE population. The 
locations of these verified observations reveal the leading edges of 
grizzly bear range expansion within and between ecosystems (see Service 
2024, figure 1) (Costello et al. 2023, pp. 13-17; Dellinger et al. 
2023, pp. 22-23). With the increasing trend of population growth and 
expansion over the last several years, we anticipate range expansion 
and dispersal events to continue under current management, including 
the protections of the Act, such that natural connectivity between the 
NCDE population and other grizzly bear populations in the lower-48 
States will likely occur in the near future (Service 2024, p. 54).
    Additionally, we anticipate that dispersing bears from the NCDE 
will re-establish a population in the Bitterroot Ecosystem (BE) in the 
next 15 to 20 years. The estimated occupied range for the NCDE grizzly 
bear population is less than 5 kilometers (3 miles) from the Bitterroot 
recovery zone and a subadult female dispersed to within 5 kilometers (3 
miles) of the BE in 2022. This information indicates that the grizzly 
bear population has expanded beyond the boundary of the petitioned DPS 
and continues to expand.
    To summarize, information provided by the petitioner and the best 
scientific and commercial data available indicate that grizzly bear 
abundance, distribution, and dispersal have increased, and grizzly 
bears have expanded beyond the petitioned DPS boundary. As a result, 
the petitioned DPS is not based on the best scientific and commercial 
data available and is obsolete. As populations have grown and expanded, 
estimated occupied range has expanded beyond the petitioned DPS 
boundary. In addition, grizzly bears have dispersed beyond the 
petitioned DPS boundary, often into areas considered to be previously 
unoccupied.
    Under our DPS Policy, a population segment of a vertebrate species 
may be considered discrete if it satisfies either of the following two 
conditions: (1) it is markedly separated from other populations of the 
same taxon as a consequence of physical, physiological, ecological, or 
behavioral factors (quantitative measures of genetic or morphological 
discontinuity may provide evidence of this separation); or (2) it is 
delimited by international governmental boundaries within which 
significant differences in control of exploitation, management of 
habitat, conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist that are 
significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the Act. In determining 
whether the test for discreteness has been met under the DPS policy, we 
allow but do not require genetic evidence to be used.
    Although the DPS Policy does not require absolute separation of one 
population from another, (82 FR 30502, June 30, 2017, p. 30518), the 
standard for discreteness must allow us to distinguish between the DPS 
and other members of the species for purposes of administering and 
enforcing the Act (61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996, p. 4724). As 
summarized above, the best scientific and commercial data available 
indicate that the estimated occupied range of the grizzly bear 
population in the NCDE has expanded steadily in the past decade. The 
GYE and CYE populations have also expanded their range and these 
populations are increasingly closer in proximity to the NCDE 
population. Grizzly bears have dispersed beyond the boundaries of the 
petitioned DPS and the NCDE population has expanded to such an extent 
that it is not markedly separate from other populations of the taxon. 
Due to ongoing population growth and range expansion, which is expected 
to continue in the future under current management, including the 
protections of the Act, we do not consider the petitioned DPS to be 
discrete due to physical factors. Because grizzly bears within the 
boundaries of the petitioned DPS are not markedly separated from other 
populations of the taxon, the petitioned DPS does not meet the 
discreteness element in the DPS Policy. Therefore, we find that grizzly 
bears in the petitioned DPS do not, on their own, represent a valid DPS 
and we therefore do not consider the status of grizzly bears in this 
petitioned entity as a separately listable entity under the Act.
    We are in the process of fully evaluating the latest information 
regarding the status of the grizzly bear in the lower-48 States in a 
rulemaking expected by January 31, 2026. This rulemaking is pursuant to 
a settlement agreement associated with the State of Idaho's petition to 
delist the grizzly bear in the lower-48 States. That rulemaking, to 
either remove or revise the currently listed entity of the grizzly bear 
in the lower-48 States, will fully evaluate the best scientific and 
commercial data available, which could include potential DPSs, while 
considering potential population segment's conservation status and 
Congress's direction to exercise DPSs sparingly and only when the 
biological evidence indicates that such action is warranted. The trends 
of increasing distribution and dispersal point to the need for a 
broader, holistic evaluation at the rangewide level, which will be 
completed as part of the rulemaking already underway. Consistent with 
the DPS Policy, that analysis will require careful consideration of the 
extent to which formerly isolated populations are connected, or likely 
to be connected, and the need for connectivity to small or isolated 
populations and unoccupied recovery zones, given the best and most 
recent biological data available that

[[Page 3786]]

support a durable recovered grizzly bear in the lower-48 States.

Peer Review

    In accordance with our July 1, 1994, peer review policy (59 FR 
34270; July 1, 1994) and the Service's August 22, 2016, Director's Memo 
on the Peer Review Process, we solicited independent scientific reviews 
of the information contained in the SSA report for the grizzly bear in 
the lower-48 States. Results of this structured peer review process can 
be found at https://www.regulations.gov. We incorporated the results of 
these reviews, as appropriate, into the SSA report, which is the 
scientific foundation for this finding.

References Cited

    A list of the references cited in this petition finding is 
available in the species assessment form, which is available on the 
internet at http://www.regulations.gov under Docket No. FWS-R6-ES-2022-
0150 (see ADDRESSES, above).

Authors

    The primary authors of this document are staff members of the 
Grizzly Bear Recovery Office, Ecological Services Program.

Authority

    The authority for these actions is the Endangered Species Act of 
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2025-00330 Filed 1-14-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
```