PCEC's Public Comment on Blanket Rule
To: Director Brian Nesvik and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Attn: FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0029
Dear U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
I. Introduction– I am submitting this comment on behalf of Park County Environmental Council (PCEC), our 500+ members, and over 2,400 supporters. PCEC is a grassroots conservation group serving Park County, Montana. Our community's long-term environmental and economic stability depends directly on the health of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), which is upheld by strong protections under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
II. Background and Analysis– We oppose the proposed rule to rescind the general 4(d) Blanket Rule for threatened species. This proposal represents a failure to utilize one of the most effective and efficient mechanisms for species conservation and ecological integrity.
The Mandatory Protection Gap
Scientific research confirms that "wait times" for protection are a leading cause of species' failure to recover. Rescinding the Blanket Rule means newly listed species will be left defenseless for the 1 to 5 years it takes to finalize a specific rule. Research indicates species are already listed at dangerously low population levels—often as low as 1,000 individuals; adding years of delay during their most vulnerable phase is ecologically reckless.
Regulatory Chaos and Unfunded Mandates
This change shifts the burden of species protection and the massive cost of legal uncertainty onto private entities and state governments. The removal of the Blanket Rule eliminates the only immediate, clear legal signal for the regulated community. Private landowners and developers are left in a "legal vacuum," facing potential liability under other environmental laws and the constant threat of citizen lawsuits. This ambiguity creates an undefined financial burden on private operations in the form of litigation risk and project delays.
State and Administrative Burden
The State of Montana is not currently prepared to fill a federal regulatory void. This change diverts scarce state resources toward managing federal liability risk. Furthermore, requiring the USFWS to draft an individual 4(d) rule for every newly listed species creates an unsustainable administrative burden, diverting staff from vital recovery work and monitoring.
Economic Impacts
Habitat destruction during a protection gap is often irreversible. For example, the Western Bumble Bee's pollination services contribute significantly to the U.S. food system. Allowing its habitat to be legally harmed during a regulatory delay introduces an unacceptable and unnecessary economic risk to agriculture and food security.
III. Recommendations– We strongly urge the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to take the following actions:
Retain the general 4(d) Blanket Rule as the most effective, efficient, and science-based legal mechanism for species recovery.
Prioritize administrative efficiency by using the Blanket Rule as a baseline, allowing staff to focus on on-the-ground recovery rather than procedural rulemaking.
IV. Conclusion– The proposed rescission of the general 4(d) Blanket Rule is a regulatory retreat that guarantees unnecessary species loss. It contradicts the remedial and protective purpose of the Endangered Species Act. We urge you to retain this rule to safeguard the natural heritage of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem for all generations.
Sincerely,
Bethany Allen
Wild Habitat Director
Park County Environmental Council
Works Cited
Eberhard, E. K., et al. (2022). Too few, too late: U.S. Endangered Species Act undermined by inaction and inadequate funding.
Wilcove, D. S., et al. (1993/2022). What exactly is an endangered species? An analysis of the U.S. endangered species list.