Overview
Title
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Grizzly Bear Listing on the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife With a Revised Section 4(d) Rule; Extension of Comment Period
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The government is asking people to give their thoughts on new rules to help grizzly bears in the U.S. for a bit longer, so everyone has more time to speak up.
Summary AI
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is extending the comment period for a proposed rule regarding the grizzly bear, Ursus arctos horribilis, in the lower 48 states. This proposal, initially released on January 15, 2025, intends to revise the bear's status under the Endangered Species Act. By giving an additional 60 days for comments, the agency aims to allow more public input. Prior comments will still be considered, and new ones can be submitted online or by mail until May 16, 2025.
Abstract
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or FWS), announce that we are extending the comment period on our January 15, 2025, proposed rule to revise the listing of the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) in the lower-48 States under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act or ESA). We are extending the comment period for the proposed rule to give all interested parties adequate opportunity to comment. Comments previously submitted on the proposed rule need not be resubmitted as they are already incorporated into the public record for this rulemaking actions and will be fully considered in our development of the final rule.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has announced an extension to the comment period for a proposed rule concerning the grizzly bear, Ursus arctos horribilis, in the lower 48 states. Originally released on January 15, 2025, this proposal seeks to reassess the grizzly bear's position under the Endangered Species Act. To foster greater public participation, the agency has added an additional 60 days to the comment period, concluding on May 16, 2025. Submissions can be made online via the Federal eRulemaking Portal or by sending comments through U.S. Mail.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One prominent concern is the complexity of the language used in the document. The references to specific laws, such as the "Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended," and detailed legal citations like "16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq." may be challenging for a general audience to comprehend. Despite this being a legal document, a clearer explanation would facilitate broader understanding and participation.
Additionally, the document's procedural instructions for comment submission feature technical details that could be more clearly articulated. Specifically, the distinction between electronic submissions and hard copies is somewhat opaque and may be confusing for some. Furthermore, the stipulation that comments should include "scientific or commercial data" might inadvertently discourage input from community members who lack access to such resources but still have valuable perspectives or experiential insights to offer.
Public Impact
This document could have substantial implications for both the public and specific stakeholders. For the general public, extended comment periods provide more time to comprehend the rule changes and actively participate in environmental conservation processes. It also opens up room for more diverse viewpoints, ensuring that the decision-making process benefits from an array of perspectives, particularly concerning the grizzly bear's conservation status.
For specific stakeholders, such as environmental conservation organizations and local communities living near grizzly habitats, this proposal can bring both opportunities and challenges. Conservation groups may view this extension as a positive outcome, offering them additional time to gather supportive data and mobilize public awareness efforts. On the other hand, local communities who might feel impacted by grizzly populations may perceive this as prolonging uncertainty or as a delay in addressing their concerns.
Ultimately, while the extension of the comment period underscores a commitment to public engagement, it also highlights the need for documents to be accessible to all, ensuring every interested party has the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the conservation efforts for the grizzly bear.
Issues
• The document does not specify any particular spending or budgets related to the proposed rule, hence there is no indication of wasteful spending or spending that favors particular organizations or individuals.
• The complex legal references such as 'Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended', and the mention of specific U.S. Code sections ('16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.') may be difficult for the general public to understand without additional context or explanation.
• The document uses legal and regulatory language which may be complex for some readers, such as references to 'section 4(d) of the Act', and specific citation references like '90 FR 4234', which could be clarified for easier understanding by a broader audience.
• The process for submitting comments could be clearer, specifically how the public should differentiate between electronic submission and hard copy submissions to protect personal information.
• The instruction that comments should include scientific or commercial data could potentially be clarified to ensure that laypersons or individuals without access to such data are still able to meaningfully contribute to the comment process.