Idaho
An end to an Idaho lawsuit on grizzly bears raises questions about delisting
A lawsuit over the Idaho Department of Fish and Game’s killing of three grizzly bears in Eastern Idaho has been settled, with potential implications beyond the state’s borders.
A Montana-based nonprofit, Save the Yellowstone Grizzly, filed suit against Fish and Game and the federal government after the state killed a sow and two cubs near Tetonia in November 2021.
“They were not getting into the garbage. They were not threatening or harassing people,” said Graham Coppes, an attorney representing the advocacy group.
The lawsuit alleged violations of the Endangered Species Act, including claims that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) illegally authorized the killing of the sow and one cub and that Idaho killed the second cub without USFWS approval. The federal agency had a potential relocation site for the cub in mind.
In response, Idaho Fish and Game acknowledged that the federal agency had concerns about killing the bears and had urged the state to pursue non-lethal options. Idaho said it attempted to dart and trap the remaining cub as part of these efforts.
However, the state said that the USFWS “did not make it clear to Idaho that [it] would consider lethal removal of the second young bear to be unauthorized if non-lethal methods were unsuccessful.”
According to Fish and Game, the bears, which had recently been relocated from Gardiner, Mont., were wandering near a rural subdivision and posed a risk to public safety.
Additionally, Idaho filed a counterclaim against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, saying the state shouldn’t be subject to the Endangered Species Act for these bears, which it contends don’t qualify for protection.
“Because they have recovered,” said Kathleen Trever, a deputy attorney general. “And, the entity that is on the list does not meet the definition of a species that is [protected].”
Grizzly bears have been listed as “threatened” under the ESA since 1975. A year ago, the federal government rejected Idaho’s petition to delist grizzly bears across the contiguous U.S., saying it “failed to present any credible scientific” information. At the same time, it moved forward with other petitions to consider delisting in two specific recovery areas, including the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.
However, the settlement in this case could effectively open the door to delisting across the lower 48 once again. Under the agreement, the USFWS will revise or remove protections for the bears by Jan. 31, 2026.
“This action will allow the Service to evaluate the listed entity for grizzly bears in the lower 48 within a modern ESA framework,” USFWS spokesperson Joe Szuszwalak wrote in an email, “including consideration of updated science, additional information, and policies enacted since the entity was listed in 1975, including the Service’s 1996 policy for evaluating distinct population segments for listing, delisting, and reclassification under the ESA.”
The process will involve proposed rulemaking and a public comment period.
The fact that USFWS will now reconsider Idaho’s delisting request concerns some conservation advocates, including Kristine Akland, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, who was not involved with the case.
“It’s an incredibly unfortunate result of this lawsuit,” Akland said.
Still, Coppes, the attorney for Save the Yellowstone Grizzly, noted that the USFWS could end up making only a minimal change to the ESA listing. It’ll still need to follow the science, he said. Also, under the settlement, Idaho confirmed that it would seek an agreement with the USFWS before lethally removing any ESA-listed bear.
Meanwhile, federal officials announced plans last week to reintroduce grizzly bears to North Cascades National Park in Washington, and they are considering reintroduction efforts in the Bitterroot Recovery Area, which includes parts of Montana and Idaho.
Find reporter Rachel Cohen on Twitter @racheld_cohen
Copyright 2024 Boise State Public Radio
Idaho
Idaho is home to the nation's first DarkSky Reserve. Now it's home to the nations first DarkSky Certified Resort
Idaho
Idaho Falls City Council delays vote on proposed alcohol ordinance – Local News 8
IDAHO FALLS, Idaho (KIFI) – A controversy is brewing as the City of Idaho Falls reviews its alcohol ordinance.
The goal is to consolidate four existing ordinances for beer, wine and liquor into a single law and ensure compliance with state code.
However, at its meeting last Thursday, the Idaho Falls City Council unanimously voted to remove the proposed ordinance from its agenda, in order to receive and consider additional public comment.
The proposed ordinance would:
1. Require commercial establishments selling, dispensing or permitting consumption of alcohol – including beer, wine or liquor – to have an alcohol license, alcohol catering permit or a charitable event permit.
2. Business events with 20 or less employees consuming alcohol at the business would be allowed.
3. Require alcohol servers to complete training every three years.
4. Individuals who violate the law could be charged with a misdemeanor.
Idaho Falls City Council President Jim Francis said the changes were the culmination of months of collaboration between law enforcement, business owners and city attorneys.
“We wanted to provide a safe environment – the primary point here – for public gatherings,” Francis said. “We recognize that certain antiquated elements of the current code are overly restrictive and needed to be addressed. We wanted to make the code more accessible to the public. We needed to address over-pouring issues. We wanted to reduce penalties where possible for violations, particularly the first offenses, and yet make the code clear enough to be enforceable consistently by law enforcement.”
But City Council Member John Radford said the changes represent an overreach by city government.
“I believe it’s a bad policy. What problem are we solving in the name of trying to solve a non-problem?” Radford said. “We’re becoming big brother around alcohol in your private property. I’m concerned that landlords will be at risk of being charged with a misdemeanor if they knowingly, which I made sure that was in there, because that is what we’ve been talking about, allowed people to drink in our business. We will be outside the norm of Idaho cities. This is a big step, and I don’t think the public has weighed in on this.”
At a City Council Work Session on June 1, Idaho Falls Chief of Police Bryce Johnson cited an increase in alcohol-related crime – particularly downtown – as a reason for the changes.
“DUI is there, but this would include sexual assaults, assaults, batteries, disturbances, urination, public vandalism, shooting – all sorts of crimes,” Johnson said.
But business owners are concerned about the potential impact on commercial enterprises.
“The ordinance doesn’t address the real problem – which is people drinking … at one event and then showing up in a bar or restaurant already hammered and causing problems anyway,” ” said Terri Ireland, representing the Idaho Falls Downtown Merchants Association. “The industry is really well-regulated by state and local laws already.”
The City of Idaho Falls began the process of updating its alcohol ordinance in January 2026, seeking input from community stakeholders.
Multiple community members spoke out about the ordinance.
For more in-depth information, you can read the full 39-page proposed alcohol ordinance here.
Idaho
Idaho attorneys rebuff DOJ threat to prosecute Secretary of State in voter roll dispute
BOISE, Idaho (CBS2) — A simmering dispute between Idaho’s top elections official and the U.S. Department of Justice escalated this month after federal officials warned Secretary of State Phil McGrane about possible prosecution tied to non-citizens voting in Idaho.
The Justice Department sent a letter earlier this month threatening McGrane with prosecution. The warning came amid a broader conflict between the Trump administration and McGrane, whom the administration has sued over his refusal to provide unredacted voter rolls to the federal government.
Idaho’s chief of civil litigation, James Craig, responded on July 10. In a letter first reported by the Idaho Statesman, Craig pushed back on the federal warning, writing, “Insinuations of criminal violations of the federal election laws are not well taken,” and asking the department to “stop threatening your friends in Idaho.”
Craig also requested that the lawsuit against McGrane be dismissed and criticized the Justice Department for sending its letter directly to McGrane rather than to the Idaho attorney general’s office.
The attorney general’s office said the state has already referred 15 cases of possible non-citizen election violations to the Justice Department but is not aware of any of them being prosecuted. Craig’s letter ends by asking the department to do so.
-
Los Angeles, Ca1 hour agoStabbing at Chino Hills liquor store ends in attempted murder arrest
-
Detroit, MI2 hours agoA small group of citizens rally for mental health coverage in Detroit
-
San Francisco, CA2 hours ago1 dead, 2 missing after boat capsizes near Alcatraz in San Francisco Bay
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoDeath penalty off the table for man accused of beheading Dallas motel manager, prosecutors say
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoChickadee, the popular Mediterranean restaurant in Seaport, is shutting down – The Boston Globe
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoDenver Nuggets 7-Year NBA Veteran Gets Honest On Peyton Watson
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoTop 25 Seattle Seahawks Going into 2026 NFL Season: #17 Grey Zabel
-
San Diego, CA2 hours agoTijuana earns spot in Little League World Series, hoping third time’s a charm