Field Leaders Ep. 2 - Director Brian Nesvik || U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service

Summary

---

The Origins Foundation Podcast

Field Leaders Ep. 2 - Director Brian Nesvik || U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service

Date: February 24, 2026
Host: Ashley Smith (with The Origins Foundation)
Guest: Brian Nesvik, Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

---

Episode Overview

This episode of the Field Leaders series features Brian Nesvik, recently appointed Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Ashley Smith leads a candid conversation exploring Nesvik’s background, the intersection of state and federal wildlife management, hot-button issues such as the Endangered Species Act, predator management (with focus on wolves, grizzly bears, and barred owls), and the future direction of the FWS. The episode provides a rare, insider’s perspective on conservation leadership, dispels common misconceptions, and delves into both the policy and the human dimensions of fish and wildlife management.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Brian Nesvik’s Unique Career Path

• Background: Dual career in wildlife management and the military.
  • Started as a game warden in Wyoming, rose to Director of Game & Fish.
  • Served in the Wyoming Army National Guard, ultimately as Brigadier General.
• Work-Life Balance: Managed parallel leadership roles in state wildlife law enforcement and the military, all while raising a family.
  • "It wasn't all about what Brian Nesvik did. It's about what the whole team did." (Brian Nesvik, 11:21)

2. Exposure to Wildlife Careers

• Early Inspiration: Chose to be a game warden after a formative hunting trip at age 14.
  • "I want this to be my office. I want to be outside and interacting with the people ... never lost sight of that goal." (Brian Nesvik, 12:21)
• Importance of Outreach: Many kids lack awareness of wildlife career paths; field interactions can spark lifelong interests.

3. State vs. Federal Wildlife Management—Jurisdiction & Misconceptions

• Common Misunderstanding: Many believe the FWS manages all U.S. wildlife.
  • "The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service does not manage all our nation's wildlife—states have responsibility within their borders with a few exceptions." (Brian Nesvik, 15:10)
• Federal Exceptions: FWS is mandated by laws such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act.

4. Clarifying Interior Department Agencies

• FWS is separate from the National Park Service, focusing on refuges and endangered species rather than national parks and visitor management (17:50–18:49).

5. National Wildlife Refuge System—Priorities & Review

• Current Review: Nesvik ordered a comprehensive assessment of the refuge and hatchery systems due to chronic funding shortages and neglected maintenance.
  • "It's really to look at ... how can we use the National Wildlife Refuge System in a better way to serve the American people—superior service ..." (Brian Nesvik, 21:40)
• Goals: Address duplicity, gaps, deferred maintenance, and ensure alignment with statutory obligations.

6. Endangered Species Act (ESA)—Effectiveness & Reform

• Low Delisting Rates: Only 2–3% of listed species have been delisted.
  • Driven by litigation and administrative challenges rather than science alone.
• Intent vs. Reality: Intended as a tool for recovery and delisting, but now often inhibits return of management to states due to process and legal complications.
• Private Lands & Overreach: ESA's impact has spilled beyond its original intent, affecting private land use (26:20).
• Outlook: Nesvik is ready to support Congressional updates to the ESA, describing the act as “ripe ... for looking at some change.” (28:55)

7. Controversial Predator Management Issues

• Barred Owl Culling to Protect Spotted Owls:

  • Based on sound science, targeted removals are expected to benefit native spotted owls and facilitate timber industry objectives.
  • "Killing owls just doesn't seem right ... but this is truly wildlife management in action." (Brian Nesvik, 33:14)

• Grizzly Bear Recovery:

  • Nesvik unequivocally believes grizzlies are biologically recovered by all scientific criteria.
  • "It's not what I believe, it's what the science says." (Brian Nesvik, 35:55)
  • Delisting hampered by litigation—particularly for Greater Yellowstone populations overturned twice in court.

• Wolves and State-Federal Tensions (Colorado Case Study):

  • Colorado’s wolf reintroduction ignored some provisions of the MOU and involved known livestock depredators.
  • FWS is actively working with state officials to realign with federal agreements and address rancher concerns.

• Public Emotions Around Wolves:

  • Wolves evoke strong and diverse emotions; perspectives range from spiritual reverence to fear.
  • "Bottom line is ... they got big teeth and they eat things. They eat big things ... they need to be managed like other wildlife." (Brian Nesvik, 41:50)

• Hunting Bans & Conservation Model:

  • Discussion of a proposed Oregon ballot measure to ban all hunting, with Nesvik expressing belief such “extreme perspective” initiatives have little chance of success (44:27).

8. Director Nesvik’s Personal Motivations & Vision

• Commitment: Not a career bureaucrat; intends to make measurable impact in a short tenure.

  • "I came for a short period of time to take on a few of these challenges that I felt were really important ... and because I thought I could get something done that's good for the people of America." (Brian Nesvik, 46:44)

• Top Priorities for Tenure:

  • ESA Reform: Streamline delisting process, return management to states where scientifically justified.
  • Refuge System: Improve operations, maintenance, and public access for hunting and fishing.
  • Permitting: Increase efficiency and speed, especially on import/export and CITES-related permits.

• Personal Connection to Hunting:

  • Enjoys hunting a wide range of game, with particular passion for bighorn sheep, mule deer, and ducks.

9. Expanding Public Access to Refuges

• New Policy: Directive to open all compatible refuges to hunting and fishing within two years (except in special circumstances).
  • “If it’s compatible, we’re going to allow it ... that’s the charge from the Secretary and I fully support it.” (Brian Nesvik, 51:59)
• Community Impact: More youth and families will gain outdoor skills and connection to wildlife.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Career Balance:
  "I had to prioritize a lot of times in a way that made some people happy and some people not so happy ... it wasn’t all about what Brian Nesvik did. It’s about what the whole team did.”
  — Brian Nesvik (11:21)

• On FWS Jurisdiction:
  "States have the responsibility to manage wildlife within their borders, with very few exceptions ... the Fish and Wildlife Service needs to focus on their statutory mandates and get out of the way.”
  — Brian Nesvik (15:05)

• On Endangered Species Act Effectiveness:
  "We do not have a good, strong track record of recovering and delisting species ... There are Many species that are fully recovered by all biological metrics, but are still on the list because of administrative challenges in the courts."
  — Brian Nesvik (26:20)

• On Barred Owl Management:
  "Killing owls just doesn’t seem right ... but this is truly wildlife management in action.”
  — Brian Nesvik (33:14)

• On Grizzly Bear Recovery:
  "Absolutely, I believe the grizzly bear is recovered. And it’s not what I believe, it’s what the science says." — Brian Nesvik (35:55)

• On Wolves:
  "Bottom line is ... they got big teeth and they eat things. They eat big things ... they need to be managed like other wildlife." — Brian Nesvik (41:50)

• On Short Tenure and Intent:
  "I came for a short period of time to take on a few of these challenges ... not to stay forever in DC and get entrenched."
  — Brian Nesvik (46:44)

• On Refuges and Public Access:
  "We will have essentially every refuge open to hunting and fishing where that use is compatible ... I fully support it.”
  — Brian Nesvik (52:04)

---

Important Segment Timestamps

• Nesvik’s background & dual careers: 03:04 – 10:08
• Nature of state vs. federal wildlife management: 15:05 – 19:01
• National Wildlife Refuge System review: 19:01 – 23:50
• Endangered Species Act discussion: 24:50 – 29:57
• Barred owl & predator management: 31:28 – 35:30
• Grizzly bear recovery: 35:55 – 37:57
• Wolves, Colorado, and public controversy: 38:27 – 44:27
• Expanding refuge access to hunting/fishing: 51:29 – 52:21

---

Conclusion

The episode delivers a nuanced, transparent look at the complexity of U.S. wildlife management, guided by both scientific principles and the realities of law and public opinion. Director Brian Nesvik’s practical approach and willingness to tackle controversy head-on, paired with Origins Foundation’s focus on elevating truthful conservation storytelling, make this discussion essential listening for anyone invested in the future of America’s wildlife and wild spaces.

Transcript

[Hex Hunting Advertiser]

If you're a serious hunter and you haven't tried hex yet, this is the edge you're missing. Hunters have always talked about animals having a sixth sense, feeling you before they ever see you. Hex works by completely blocking your body's natural energy, helping you get closer without tipping them off. Most hunters don't believe it at first until they hunt in it. And once they do, it makes them believers fast. Go to hexhunting.com that's hecshunting.com and use code waypoint to save $20 on a full hex system.

[Ashley Smith]

Hi, this is Ashley Smith with the Origins Foundation. Thanks for joining us today. Our new Field Leaders series is designed to connect the audience directly with elected and appointed officials who make monumental decisions affecting the outdoors, hunting, fishing, and the sustainable use of wildlife. There is no better example of a field leader than Brian Nesvik, the recently appointed director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Brian joins us today to discuss a variety of topics spanning the interplay between state and federal wildlife management, the jurisdiction of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Endangered Species act, wolves, bears. He left no topic off the table, and I appreciate his candor. I think you will, too. Thanks for joining us.

[Podcast Host]

So five years ago, there was a reason why I started this movement. And the truth then is the truth now that we need to champion our narrative. We need to champion the truth around what we do and who we are. There's a sweet spot with a gun, you know, too heavy and it's a

[Brian Nesvik]

burden to walk with. Too light and you whipping it.

[Podcast Host]

Why is the project so important to the hunting community?

[Brian Nesvik]

It's.

[Hex Hunting Advertiser]

It's a. I think it's not only important. I think it's.

[Brian Nesvik]

I think it's vital.

[Hex Hunting Advertiser]

I think it's.

[Brian Nesvik]

It's just in time.

[Podcast Host]

It's like snakes and ladders. You guys climbing the ladder and then somebody does something stupid and you just slide down. That is such an amazing analogy. Snakes and ladders.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah.

[Podcast Host]

You know, ivory, in. In my opinion, was the plastic of its age. Okay.

[Ashley Smith]

The expenses were going up.

[Brian Nesvik]

It goes a long way with families.

[Ashley Smith]

We have families that do need it.

[Podcast Host]

Let me close this door because I have a little wiener dog. What? You. Are you laughing because I said wiener?

[Ashley Smith]

I'm really glad you finished this. And it's out. I'm sorry.

[Podcast Host]

The first.

[Ashley Smith]

What are we doing here today?

[Podcast Host]

You're telling the whole world.

[Ashley Smith]

I have the very great pleasure of sitting in the belly of the beast, this mammoth of a building. The Department of Interior. Yes. At the headquarters of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service with the chief himself, the man, the director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Brian Nesvik. And thank you so much.

[Brian Nesvik]

Absolutely. It's a pleasure to be here and I'm looking forward to this talk.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay, so as of tomorrow, it will have been six months to the day, not from your confirmation, but from the date you officially assumed the position.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah.

[Ashley Smith]

Well, you have been six months on the job.

[Brian Nesvik]

Six months, and it seems like one.

[Ashley Smith]

Did you ever imagine yourself in this position?

[Brian Nesvik]

No, I never had any. Any view or any kind of vision that I would ever be sitting in this chair. No aspirations. It just, it definitely happened by surprise. So.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay. And I looked you up quite extensively since the last time you and I met, which was a little bit by chance. We were seated next to each other at a dinner a few weeks ago at a Congressional Sportsman's foundation dinner and had never met before. And I knew that you had been the director of the Wyoming Game and Fish, because that's all you hear. Former Director of Game and Fish. Former Director of Game of Fish. I assumed that you were a wildlife biologist. And you. And you are by education. That's what you went to school for. But you're also not that much older than me. And so when I was reading your resume, the first thing I was like, how has he accomplished so much in your. Because you are really pretty young for this role.

[Brian Nesvik]

Thank you for saying that's great.

[Ashley Smith]

So I saw when you graduated college, and I was like, whoa, we are not that different now age. So I think that it would surprise people to know. Well, first of all, you were with Wyoming for several decades in law enforcement, right?

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah, I was actually at. I, I grew up and started in the agency as a game warden and then, you know, worked my way up through the the ranks and ended up as the chief game warden for the state, which in Wyoming also serves as the. The chief of the wildlife division. So it's kind of a dual role.

[Ashley Smith]

I saw that. So how. That's a lot at the same time. So a lot of not the case. There's a chief of law enforcement and a chief of wildlife. But you are both.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yes. And that's really reflects the game warden model in Wyoming. So in Wyoming, game wardens have responsibilities, obviously for law enforcement, but then they also have responsibilities for wildlife management and public contacts, public education, wildlife conflict. And so it's kind of a jack of all trades kind of job. And that's the way that the agency structured clear all the way up to the top.

[Ashley Smith]

So, okay. And at the same time, which is what I found even more impressive, you were, it's almost like you had two careers because you also served in the National Guard. You didn't just serve in the National Guard, you were leading forces in the National Guard. You had two tours to Iraq. Right. Commanding. And I'm going to get the terminology wrong, so I'm not even going to try to describe the, the different. I'm going to say battalion. That may have been the case in one of. One of the tours on up through the ranks, rising in leadership and ultimately ended up Brigadier General and assistant Adjutant General, which is like assistant to the entire state National Guard at the same time. And, and got your master's right at how. Okay. And you have four kids. Three kids.

[Brian Nesvik]

Three kids.

[Ashley Smith]

Three kids. Okay. I have two kids and I don't, I cannot even fathom how you were doing all of this at once. I mean one. Of course you probably have an amazing life. Have to. Right?

[Brian Nesvik]

Yes, absolutely.

[Ashley Smith]

Supporting all this. But. Okay, explain to me all of this and, and then I would just love to know how your military service impacted your. Let's call it your other career.

[Podcast Host]

Look guys, I'm a hunter, right? And when I go hunting, I like to figure out how to get my trophies back home as expeditiously as possible. Well, you don't have to look much further than Safari Specialty Importers. We know that trophy importation can be quite a headache. That's why Safari Specialty Importer strives to make it as easy and hassle free as possible. They have access to a bonded warehouse. You won't be charged storage fees and you get a dedicated team that's readily available and will update you at every step in the process. They'll even go one step further. Safari Specialty Importers is working with us and they are going to donate $100 from every shipment that they work with to conservation projects that include anti poaching, community development and wildlife conservation. At the end of the day, choose to spend your money with a team that's dedicated to you and is dedicated to helping show how hunting is a great conservation model. Hassle free logistics, fuel and conservation go with Safari Specialty importers. It is 2026 and my friends, big changes have happened in the world of firearm suppressors. The $200 tax stamp fee is now gone. Huge win for hunters, huge win for shooters, and a huge win for your wallets. If you're thinking about elevating your shooting experience and adding a suppressor. Silence essential is the best way to, to shop. And you don't even have to get off your couch to do it. Go to silenceessential.com, browse hundreds of suppressor options. They literally have all of the popular makes and models. Then their experts will walk you through setting up your account, creating a free NFA trust, and then submitting your application to the atf. Once approved, Silence Essential ships your new suppressor directly to your door. That's when you're going to have to essentially get off the couch. It's a game changer, guys. You haven't done it yet. Do it. The old days of waiting eight to 10 months on a suppressor are gone. It's more like two weeks. Some have even gotten their suppressors in shorter timeframes. It's never been easier to start shooting suppressed. Get started today by visiting silencer central.com it's really the simplest way to get your suppressors. Bushnell is eager to help you get set up for conservation success. That's right. They want to help you. The conservation and research community is dominated by good people doing good things and investing significant time and effort for the benefit of habitat and the species. So what do you need to do? Pretty simple. Send us your conservation story and. Or your conservation wish. Could be managing whitetails, could be understanding your environment or species or something else related to conservation. What would you be able to do if you had a great trail camera setup? We will select the best story every other month and send you a camera bundle. Cell camera, normal SD camera, SD cards, as well as optics, everything you need to get set up for success. I can't wait to see what you submit. You can email us, DM us, message us, whatever you want. We are not hard to find. Good luck.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah, and I, I really did look at it that way as two dual careers. I, when I was young I wanted to, you know, from the time I was 14 years old I wanted to be a game warden. But I also, my dad served, my grandpa, grandfather served in the military and I wanted to serve as well. And so the Guard was the perfect, that was the perfect way for me to serve in the military because I could do it. At the same time I had a civilian career and, and I, so I started in the Guard when I was 17 and as a private and went to, after a few years went to Officer Candidate School and got commissioned. And, and, and, and like you said, I did that with a very supportive employer, the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, a very supportive military organization, the Wyoming Army National Guard, and then a very supportive family because obviously there was a lot of priorities and a lot of different people pulling and tugging at me in different directions. And so I had to prioritize a lot of times in a way that made some people happy and some people not so happy. But at the end of the day, because of all those support systems, I was able to pull that off. And again, two deployments, both of them were over a year over to Iraq and just a stand up employer that really helped out my family and took care of them while I was gone, took care of the job while I was gone. And so, you know, there's some great opportunities, but it wasn't, it wasn't all about what Brian Nesvik did. It's about what the whole team did.

[Ashley Smith]

Well, I honestly think it's quite remarkable as a daughter of a veteran and two veteran grandfathers. Just thank you, thank you for doing that.

[Brian Nesvik]

Very proud to have done it.

[Ashley Smith]

I am super. Just thankful and impressed. So you said you wanted to be a game warden from the time you were 14, and what made you want to be a game warden?

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, I was out on my first big game hunt with my dad and one of his friends who had been gracious enough to give me a really cool outdoor experience. And while we were out deer hunting, we ran into this game warden and he was talking about, you know, we're out in the middle of nowhere, we're 50 miles from a town and the only, you know, there were no other people around and all, all there was in the, was a lot of sagebrush trees and wildlife. And, and as the game warden was talking about his day, just shooting the breeze with my, my dad and his friend, I, I, we drove away from that and I said, you know what, that's, that's what I want to do. I want this to be my office. I want to, want to be outside and interacting with the people, with hunters and fishermen and people who like the same things and being outside and, and, and I never lost, never lost sight of that goal after that.

[Ashley Smith]

So growing up I hunted and fished, but I never even knew that that was a career possibility. Do you think that's the case with a lot of kids?

[Brian Nesvik]

You know, I think that a lot of people's exposure, and I found this to be true, at least in the West, a lot of people's exposure to careers and wildlife really are from those interactions in the field. You know, it's not like if you remember when we were younger, you probably had, you know, the DARE program, that was a national level program where they took drugs into schools and Taught kids about drugs and. Well, you know what? There's typically not those kind of things, or there weren't then, where wildlife professionals come into a classroom and show off no cool stuff. And. And so I think really a lot of folks who become interested in this field, they have some kind of that personal experience out in the field a lot of times at a young age. And, and so I always really, I like to, when I, when I was leading that great team in Wyoming, I like to remind folks of that, that you really have an impact when you have an interaction, especially with youth, you have an impact for the rest of their life. And I think that's really important.

[Ashley Smith]

Right, right. So spread the word. Spread the word, guys. If you're in the wildlife industry, please tell kids that they have that option when they get older. I think that's so important. Okay, so let's talk about the service a little bit. One of the missions of the Origins foundation is to tell the truth about hunting, fishing, and the sustainable use of wildlife. There are so many misconceptions, and I, I would add there's so much misinformation and dissemination of misinformation out there about hunters and the government in general. And I've seen it over and over, just as I was watching you go through the confirmation process, just social media, like snippets and things like that. And people throw things out there based on, maybe it's where you came from, your state or your background or who nominated you without really knowing anything about you or your policies. Can you kind of just give a general overview of the jurisdiction of the Fish and Wildlife Service and what you think maybe one of the biggest misconceptions is.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah, absolutely. So I will tell you, first of all, the biggest misconception that I, That I encounter in this position is, and even, you know, before I was here was folks believe, you know, that there's all these state wildlife agencies, but then the next level up is the federal Fish and Wildlife Service. And at the end of the day, the. The U.S. fish and Wildlife Service has responsibility to manage all of our nation's wildlife. And that is a misconception that a lot of folks in this. In this country have. And, and as you are well aware, you know, the reality is, is that states have the responsibility to manage wildlife within their borders, with very few exceptions, and those being species that are otherwise dictated by law through the Endangered Species act to be managed by the Fish and Wildlife Service or, you know, under a separate law from DSA on the Migratory Bird Treaty act. There are certain birds that are managed at the federal level, either solely by the federal government or in cooperation and partnership with the states. But that, I will tell you, that misconception is. Is spread wide and far around this country, when in reality, the Fish and Wildlife Service needs to focus on their statutory mandates and get out of the way of letting the states do their thing and manage wildlife within their borders. Those states operate under the, you know, the public trust doctrine, where those state agencies have the privilege to manage those wildlife resources in trust for all of the people of the state who actually own those wildlife.

[Ashley Smith]

And it varies so drastically between states. I mean, what the states need out west and the species that they have on the landscape is so drastically different from the states in the south or from Florida and the Everglades. I mean, we're such a huge country. And so the biologists and the scientists on the ground are honestly the ones that do know. And there is an interplay because of, you know, federalism. But. But thank you for pointing that out, because I see it all the time. And I think there's another misconception because I actually got a question in my Instagram today from someone I know, and she said, hey, I. I trust you on all things nature, which is hilarious, because I do not know most things nature. But she said, is it true what they're saying, that many of our national parks are going to be closed? Well, I was like, no, I don't think that's true at all. Where are you seeing that? For one. But you guys don't have jurisdiction over national parks, right? Explain the difference between Interior, which. Which you fall under, and the Fish and Wildlife Service and National Parks. Can you just.

[Brian Nesvik]

Absolutely. So, yeah, within the Department of Interior, there are several bureaus or agencies that fall under the Department of Interior. So there's the Bureau of Land Management, there's the Bureau of Indian Affairs. There's the National Park Service, separate agency from the Fish and Wildlife Service. And so they have. The National Park Service has a whole different set of mandates and legally legal, you know, statutes to deal with their legal status than the Fish and Wildlife Service does. National Park Service, for the most part, has responsibility for managing their land managers. They're managing lands and visitor use and. And wildlife with. On those parks where it's not managed by another entity. Like, in some cases, the states actually have a management role. Fish Wildlife Service has a mandate to focus on the Endangered Species act, to focus on the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. And then our land management role is with the National Wildlife Refuge System.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay.

[Brian Nesvik]

And so we do have a land management role. It's. But it's not our entire focus. We've got other things that are statutorily charged for the service to. To be responsible for.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay, so I'm glad you brought up the national refuge system, which includes those national wildlife refuges across the country, as well as the National Hatchery. It's a huge chunk of your budget, right? Yes. A lot of your staff concentrates its efforts, and it's vitally important to wildlife habitat across the country, as well as our public use and people enjoying outdoor areas, I'll just call them areas. I love our refuge system. I mean, there are, I think, some of the crown jewels of the country. You have implemented and issued an order to just undertake a national review of the refuge system and the hatchery system. And it had some interesting language. And, I mean, people have just gone berserk. And look, I was initially alarmed when I saw this, and I think that you may be getting some of the baggage from Doge, and you're not Doge, and this came from you. And having talked with you privately, can you just talk about your goals for this and what you hope to accomplish and maybe alleviate some of the concern out there? Because I think people are like, oh, gosh, they're doing this, and so they can slash the refuge system. Well, look, it is no secret that our refuge system has needed some help for a long time. I mean, Congress has slashed funding and slash funding and slashed funding long before you ever got here. And so we have a backlog of maintenance. We have, you know, repairs that need all over the country, backlog of repairs, shortage of staffing, all sorts of things. And so you have an opportunity here to do some really good work. So can you just describe kind of what your goal is for this review?

[Brian Nesvik]

Oh, absolutely. And I'm glad you asked, because I think this is really important for people to understand. And first of all, let me start with. With Doge. So President Trump was elected on. On a whole lot of different campaign platforms and on an agenda that, as a part of it, was focused on eliminating government waste, at looking for places where the government was not efficient and was not serving the American people in the way that the government should be or was intended to. And so Doge had a charge, and Doge did great work. I mean, they, in a very short amount of time, took the President's charge and they moved out and they got. They got a lot of work done and did. And they worked very, very hard. And. And that was their intent. And so this effort, you're right, it's not Doge, but there's a lot of overlap. We know that there are places where we can serve in a better way in our refuge system. We know that we have places where we have duplicity of effort. We know that we also have gaps in certain places. We have places where some refuges need some more help. And so the intent of this review is really to look at the bottom line is how can we use the National Wildlife Refuge System in a better way to serve the American people, superior service to the American people. And, you know, we've got deferred maintenance backlogs. Well, we need to know what, we need to ground truth, those and make sure we have a good, accurate picture of what that is so we can properly prioritize. And I'm not in any way insinuating that they haven't, that the service hasn't prioritized those things in the past, but we need to. We need to take a fresh look at it. I hear every day from somebody in this country about problems at a wildlife refuge. A lot of times it's with crumbling infrastructure. A lot of times it's with staffing. And so there's this effort is really focused on doing a better job with our wildlife refuge system, because, as you said, it is. It's a Crown Jewel. It's 96% of the visitation on wildlife refuges is from people that are citizens of this country. And so I'm really looking forward to the results and what my team is learning about how we can do better. And I think we're going to be able to make some real improvements that are going to serve hunters and fishermen, folks that just like to go use wildlife refuges to view wildlife. We're going to improve habitat for wildlife, which many of these refuges were created for that purpose, to provide habitat. And we're also going to look and make sure that it makes sense for, you know, the original purpose and intent of the refuge and that we're still. We are still focused on that original intent and that what we're doing aligns with the current mission of the Fish and Wildlife Service and our statutory charge. This isn't about planning, picking and choosing what we like. It's about following the law and about serving the American people.

[Ashley Smith]

It's, I think, been years since Congress has fully funded your agency or the Interior's request for the refuge system. Would that make a substantial difference in the work that could be done on the refuges and for the hatchery system? If Congress Fully funded. Interior's request?

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, I. The, the answer to your question is I don't know. Because, you know, I don't know how the, the fully funded number was evaluated before I got here, but what I am seeking to do here is find out what is that number? What is the number that we need in order to. For operational costs to be able to do what we need to do on refuges, to be able to deal with deferred maintenance? And, and so I don't have anything to compare it to right now. I need to know what that is before I can make any kind of judgment on whether appropriate. And I'll tell you that I think there's a lot of folks that are going to be interested when we do figure this out.

[Ashley Smith]

Yeah. Yeah, I agree. Okay. Well, we are wishing you the best on this because we all live in the refuge system and we appreciate what you're trying to do. Okay. I'd like to talk a little bit. You've mentioned the Endangered Species act has been hugely controversial. And I mean, honestly, I think it's an act that shouldn't be so controversial because if it were doing what it was originally set up to do, species would go on the list, they would recover, and they would come off the list. Only, as you are probably very, very well aware, and especially coming from a state like Wyoming, species go on the list. And I think we've only had two or three that have ever come off the list.

[Brian Nesvik]

It's a little more than that.

[Ashley Smith]

2 or 3%.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah. 2 or 3%. Yeah.

[Ashley Smith]

Have ever come off the list. So. And some of those have, quantifiably, according to scientific data, have recovered. So why aren't they coming off a list? Do you think the Endangered Species act needs to be modified or tweaked to work together? Can you just kind of talk generally about your feelings about the esa?

[Brian Nesvik]

Absolutely. So, you know, the original intent and purpose when Congress passed the act back in the 70s, you know, was. Had really good, genuine intent, and there were certainly species that were in risk of extinction. And so when Congress enacted this law, I think their intentions were good. And I think initially the act provided focus, it provided some resources, and there were some real great success stories early on. But as, as time evolved and the Endangered Species act didn't, I think it's become less effective at, like you said, its original intent. In fact, I know it's become less effective. We are not. We do not have a good, strong track record of recovering and delisting species. As you pointed out, there are Many species that are fully recovered by all biological metrics, but are still on the list because of administrative challenges in the courts. A lot of litigation. I mean, litigation is driving a lot of our listings or delistings. And that's very frustrating because when you are using resources, investing resources into species that are recovered because they're still on the list, you're not using those resources on species that really do need the help and that need resources. So, you know, at the end of the day, I think there are some things. I know that there's been much discussion over two or three decades about what tweaks and changes might need to be taken with the Endangered Species Act. I think many of those ideas have some real merit. I think, you know, the other thing that's happened is that in some cases, the act and some of the provisions under the act, like critical habitat designations, have been. Have gone too far in controlling land. And the Endangered Species act was never intended to be a law to exercise control over private land. That was never the intent. However, because of some of its provisions and some of the designations that have followed, it's become that. And there are people that are, you know, severely impacted on what they can and can't do on private land because of the act. So, you know, end of the day, I think that the focus needs to be on using good quality science to recover species and return their management back where it belongs, which is to those states, states and tribes. And that's where our focus needs to be. I'm very supportive and have told Congress I'm ready to work with them on anything that they think is important and provide our advice and any kind of technical assistance that we can provide to help them. I've been in, you know, before this life, I was engaged in many efforts to try to come up with ideas for Congress. And so it's a lively discussion across our country. But it's ripe for. I think it's ripe right now for looking at some change.

[Ashley Smith]

Well, Congressman Westerman's Endangered Species Act Amendments act was a comprehensive. Is a comprehensive overview. And I know that there has been some hurdles over passing the entire act itself, but then there have been sort of piecemeal provisions coming out of that that may be. Do you think that. Do you see this Congress, any possibility of one or two major changes actually passing?

[Brian Nesvik]

You know, me predicting what Congress may or may not do is probably not. It shouldn't be worth very much because it's probably not very accurate. So I'm not going to try to predict what Congress may or may not do. But again, I do think it's important for him to look at it. And Congressman Westerman understands these issues. He and I have talked about them, and I have immense amount of respect for him.

[Ashley Smith]

He's working very hard on it, and

[Brian Nesvik]

his intentions here are great and he really gets it. He gets all sides of this. And there are many members of Congress that do that have helped him with this. So I'm supportive of their efforts for sure, and I'm ready to help them out any way that I can.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay. You have had some challenges since you came into office, some, I would say, that you possibly inherited. And you may not consider this a challenge. I think that this is. It's kind of a crazy issue to me, and I have very strong feelings. I'm kind of a black and white person, and this is one of those issues that I cannot like. I. I don't like. The science seems to be on both sides. It is. I can't even wrap my head around it, and I don't know how I feel about it. And you don't have to tell me what you think, but I would love to know how you deal with an issue like the barred owl management plan that was implemented under the last administration before you were confirmed. And it's so controversial. And to me, it is just so sad that we have to get to the point where we have to prioritize one species over another. And they're two. Like a subspecies. I mean, do we really have to, like, just. And for anybody that doesn't know what we're talking about, the targeted culling of the barred owls to save the. The spotted owl.

[Brian Nesvik]

Spotted.

[Ashley Smith]

L. Yes. And so, gosh. Can you talk about this?

[Brian Nesvik]

Absolutely. You know, I first of all tell you that this is truly a solution that was generated from pretty good science.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay.

[Brian Nesvik]

And these barred owls did not used to inhabit areas of the Northwest where northern spotted owls exist. Now, the science indicates they weren't. They were not there.

[Ashley Smith]

So they're invasive to that area, or

[Brian Nesvik]

I don't know if I would call them invasive. They got there on their own. We didn't, you know, humans didn't transplant them, but they have slowly moved from the east and it just colonized all the way to the west.

[Podcast Host]

Okay.

[Brian Nesvik]

And so they weren't there 20, 30 years ago. And the one. The other thing the science tells us is, is they. They compete with northern spotted algaes for space. And they're. They're aggressive little boogers, like the bar, huge. The barred owls are. They're aggressive and they will. They will push spotted owls out. The. The other thing that the science indicates is that at least for the short term, when you take aggressive action in a targeted area to remove that threat to spotted owls, it has a positive impact. Is the science and all of the predicted outcomes, you know, 100% accurate? No, but in science that you never, you never are going to have that. But the best science we have indicates that doing this targeted, very targeted in an area where you're trying to encourage northern spotted owls to be prevalent, that removal of a small number of owls can actually, of barred owls can actually have a positive impact. Nobody. It just seems. I mean, I'll tell you, the first time I got briefed on this, I'm like, killing owls just doesn't seem right. I mean, it just doesn't.

[Ashley Smith]

I know. And I am, like, okay with pretty much killing anything. Yeah, like, I mean, you know, management, species management, I get it. And especially things you eat.

[Brian Nesvik]

And that's what this is. This is truly wildlife management in action. It's just, it's a species that we typically would not think of as something that you want to go out and harvest in it, because it's really not. But this, again, it's, it's. It's wildlife management. I think that, you know, the other part of this that's really important is, is that our president has, you know, has provided very clear direction that we need to increase our timber production. Well, a huge part of timber production revolves around our abilities to mitigate threats to northern spotted owl. And so this plan helps to support our country and our timber industry and the direction from our president. So I think that's another part that might be lost on some of the folks that have looked at this thing on the cursory. And again, it's complex. There's a lot of details to it. It doesn't seem. It just seems counterintuitive to most people on its face. But at the end of the day, I think that this is, at least for today, until we have new science, this is probably a pretty good thing. The other. The numbers did get blown away out of proportion. I mean, any plan, you always put in there, the maximum potential over 30 years. Well, that maximum potential over 30 years got used as the number, okay. Of how many owls we were going to go out and kill.

[Ashley Smith]

What's the real number?

[Brian Nesvik]

You know, the real number is in the hundreds.

[Ashley Smith]

Oh, really?

[Brian Nesvik]

On a. On a.

[Ashley Smith]

It's not like 30,000.

[Brian Nesvik]

No. Maybe over 30 years. But it's targeted, specific, focused. I think that the local folks, I'm going to get the numbers messed up, but it was in the several hundred per year in order to get this done.

[Ashley Smith]

When are we going to know if it's working?

[Brian Nesvik]

Actually, some of the tests that have been done this has already been done in some places locally and some of those have indicated that there was positive benefits. And that's the only reason that we went down finalizing this plan. I think we'll know here within a couple, couple of years we're going to be able to measure the effect. The one fear I do have is that these effects will be short term and we're going to have to really keep on top of them.

[Ashley Smith]

You have to do that with so many species, though.

[Brian Nesvik]

It's a lot like it's got some similarities to some predator management plans that some states have.

[Ashley Smith]

Speaking of predators and predator management, I'm not going to ask you what the service is going to do or how it's going to handle this because this is an ongoing controversy between multiple states and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Do you personally believe the grizzly bear is recovered?

[Brian Nesvik]

Oh, absolutely, I believe the grizzly bear is recovered. And it's not what I believe, it's what the science says. I mean, the science clearly indicates by measures, by biological measures that were established by the Fish and Wildlife Service years ago, decades ago, the science clearly indicates that grizzly bears are recovered. And I mean, I've seen it on the ground, personally, I've seen the science. And so, you know, now we're in discussions about how do we use the Endangered Species act and what we're directed to do under the law to move this, this whole decision cycle forward and how to make a good decision on what the next best step is for this particular species in our country. And so we're ready to do it. I don't know what that looks like yet. I don't know what the decision is, but we are engaged right now in figuring out what that decision should be based on the best available science.

[Ashley Smith]

Has litigation been the primary force that has stopped it from being delisted so far?

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, certainly that's the case in the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem. So there's a group of bears there, you know, that has been delisted two different times under the, under the distinct population segment model, and both times overturned by the courts not on biological issues, but on technical issues. So, yeah, I think that at least for that group of grizzly bears around Yellowstone, they would be delisted today if it weren't for those two litigation efforts. That were undertaken over the last gosh, now it's been 15 years. So.

[Ashley Smith]

So do you think we will expect a decision during your tenure?

[Brian Nesvik]

Absolutely. I think that we can do that. I think we're fully capable of been able to figure this thing out. And it's certainly a priority. It's a priority for this administration to take species that are recovered and figure out the path forward to do the right thing under the law. Again, this isn't about what I feel. This is about what the law says you're supposed to do.

[Ashley Smith]

And science.

[Brian Nesvik]

Absolutely.

[Ashley Smith]

Speaking of doing the right thing under the law, there's a state and I just have to say I loved your letter that was publicly released. I don't know if it was supposed to be publicly released, but I'm going to talk about another predator species that is has different categorizations depending on the country and the state. But let's talk about the wolf for a second. And can we talk about Colorado?

[Brian Nesvik]

Sure.

[Ashley Smith]

Not doing the right thing under the law. And Colorado has an MOU with the Fish and Wildlife Service where the service allowed it after to, to reintroduce wolves into the state but put limits on where they could get them, what kind of wolves, et cetera. So on. Colorado did not follow what the service allowed them to do. And is Colorado going to get to keep their management or have they have is has there been a resolution to that situation because they have blatantly are disobeying the law?

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, there's, I won't say that there's any kind of resolution, but I will tell you that we've been in, I've had some productive discussions with their, the chief of their wildlife management agency who's

[Ashley Smith]

been put in kind of a bad position. I've kind of heard from.

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, she's, there's a new one now, not the same person I was dealing with originally. And so she's, she's new to the agency, but we've, we've had some good productive discussions about the path forward. And so I'm optimistic. But there's some things that are going to have to be done. Number one, they got to follow what the provisions are of the 10J rule. And we've got to make sure we follow the provisions of our memorandum of understanding. That's two different documents and agreements. And then, you know, they've got to be willing to deal with and talk with these cattle producers that have been so impacted by, by these reintroduced wolves

[Ashley Smith]

and because they brought in like known livestock depredators.

[Brian Nesvik]

Right and then my understanding is they did that was before my time. But the, but the indications I have are that some of, not all of them, but some of those wolves were, were known livestock depredators. And so, you know, that's a problem.

[Ashley Smith]

Right, right. Okay. People seem to lose their minds over wolves. I don't know what it is. I'm from the South. We don't have wolves down there. And so this is a whole new sort of phenomenon to me. What do you think it is? Being from Wyoming, you're used to it. It's been going on, I mean, for decades. But why are wolves this emotional hot button for people? Red Riding Hood, Is that what it is really? I mean we've got the teddy bear, you know, from Mississippi and bears.

[Brian Nesvik]

But you know, I think that if you, if you look at how different cultures look at wolves, it's amazing at the diversity. You know, Native Americans, you have some Native Americans who view wolves as their four legged brother and then you have other Native American tribes that don't view them that way. They view them completely different. And I think it's the same with other non Native American people too. Everybody's got an opinion on wolves. There's something about them. The bottom line is they got big teeth and they eat things. They eat big things. They eat a lot of red meat. And so I think you're right. It evokes an emotional response. They hunt in packs. I mean that for some folks is, is scary. They're the way that wolves can have a short term impact on either wildlife or domestic livestock I think evokes an emotional response. And then for folks on the other side.

[Ashley Smith]

Anti hunters.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah, that, you know, the, the other folks that are, that, that really believe, you know, they have spiritual connections to wolves and those kind of things. It's. So bottom line is, is no matter what side folks run on this thing, everybody's got strong kind of an opinion on, on wolves. At the end of the day, I look at them, you know, as a, as a, as a wildlife manager. Right. You know, where I came from, they're, they're a species of wildlife on the landscape. They're, they, you know what, they eat meat, fill their belly up and they need to be managed. That's the bottom line. They're just like other predator species. They need to be managed like other wildlife. They're, there's a balance and a predator prey relationship that has to be just like other wildlife management's got to be considered. There are other large carnivores like mountain lions. And black bears all have management plans where they are harvested, sustainably, used by hunters through regulated hunting. And it works very, very well. And I can tell you that in the handful of states where wolves are currently managed with the hunting season, it works very, very well and better than

[Ashley Smith]

in the states where there is no.

[Brian Nesvik]

Where there is no management. Yeah, certainly there's some states with, you know, low numbers and.

[Ashley Smith]

But.

[Brian Nesvik]

But now we have states that I never would have expected to have wolf numbers like they do, like California. And it's daily there with the. The challenges they have with wolf management and depredations on livestock and human safety concerns. You know, wolves traditionally aren't. You can look back in the literature all the way back. I mean, I've read the journals of. Journal of a Trapper, which was about a trapper that. That moved across the western Rockies. And, you know, wolves were never much of a threat towards human beings, but they've always been a threat to the things that human beings valued, like wildlife and livestock. And so. But with that said, now that wolves have become more habituated to humans, they're in a lot of these places where they're not managed. They are, you know, occupying areas very close to human beings, and it's making them darn nervous. I heard a. I got a report yesterday that there was a school in western Oregon, I believe it was, that they closed the school down because there was a wolf in the area. And so.

[Ashley Smith]

And Oregon, speaking of, is getting very, very close to having the number of signatures to put on the ballot, the referendum to ban all forms of hunting within the state. So what's that going to do?

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, I can tell you this, that I know a lot of people from Oregon and especially from the eastern part of the state and a lot of their rural parts of that state. And, you know, I don't think that thing surely that.

[Ashley Smith]

No way.

[Brian Nesvik]

I don't think that's got any chance. I mean, there's certainly, you know, extreme views that are driving that for sure. And, you know, I think that the sustainable use model that we all rely on has proven itself time and time again. And I just don't think that something that's coming from kind of an extreme perspective has got much chance.

[Ashley Smith]

Let's hope not. Oregonians, you need to unite on this, guys. It's coming down the pipeline, so please spread the word. That would not be good out there. Okay. You hunt. You love to hunt. What's your favorite thing to hunt?

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, I would have to say it's probably bighorn sheep, but but in Wyoming, you only get one license in your lifetime, so I've only been able to hunt my own sheep once, and I haven't gone to other states yet. But I have taken the opportunity to go with friends.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay.

[Brian Nesvik]

I love bighorn sheep, though. They're just an incredible animal. I love mule deer. I love.

[Ashley Smith]

Is that. Is mule deer your favorite? Like, let's call it regular honey pop, probably.

[Brian Nesvik]

I love. Yeah. Love mule deer, sheeps.

[Ashley Smith]

You're epic hunting.

[Brian Nesvik]

Epic. Yep. Love ducks. I just love ducks.

[Ashley Smith]

Do you?

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah.

[Ashley Smith]

You need to come down south, shoot some ducks with this.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah, I. I love to duck hunt, and I love big elk.

[Ashley Smith]

So you kind of like it all?

[Brian Nesvik]

I like it all.

[Ashley Smith]

So you have not really made it a huge secret that you don't intend to be a career politician here in D.C. i don't know if I'm letting it out of the bag, but you're here to do a job and like a good job because you want to effectuate some change and some good things for the service, which I truly appreciate. I just do not like people that come and stay forever in D.C. and get entrenched. What if you and I are sitting here in, let's say, four years, five years, what do you hope to have accomplished?

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, I will tell you that you and I will not be sitting here in four years.

[Ashley Smith]

Not even four? Not even four?

[Brian Nesvik]

No. I was appointed by President Trump.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay.

[Brian Nesvik]

And when President Trump's gone, or before, if he decides I won't be here anymore, I came for a short period of time to take on a few of these challenges that I felt like that were really important to our country and because I thought I could get something done that's good for. That's good for the people of America. And I strongly believe in this president's agenda and his focus on a lot of those things that are so important to our community. Hunters and fishermen and people that like to be outside.

[Ashley Smith]

Because he does care about that.

[Brian Nesvik]

He does care about that.

[Ashley Smith]

His family cares about that.

[Brian Nesvik]

Absolutely.

[Ashley Smith]

And that's not said enough. It's not said enough.

[Brian Nesvik]

I would agree. And his conservation ethic and his focus on making America beautiful again. You know, he just. Secretary Burgum just convened the Commission to Make America Beautiful Again commission here in D.C. last week, and some great outcomes from that. And this president doesn't get enough credit for his conservation ethic and the things that he is really led on, on conservation, but we're working on that. We're going to do better with that to make sure the American People know what, what a great conservation leader this president is.

[Ashley Smith]

Good, good. Okay, well, you didn't tell me what you. Okay, so if we're sitting here in two years, give me something that you really, really, really want to get done.

[Brian Nesvik]

I really want to one way or the other, get to a point on some of these big decisions on the Endangered Species act that we could move the ball, move the needle and get, get things right, I think. And generally a better. I want to be able to say we're doing a better job of applying the Endangered Species act directly in accordance with what the law tells us to do. I really want to improve the service we provide the American people through all that we do. But, but really this refuge thing is a big deal to me. I mean, these, there's 573 wildlife refuges in our country. And I really want to move the needle with wildlife refuges and do better for the American people. I want to do better with the way that we engage in our permitting functions. We have, we issue so many different permits that give American people the opportunity

[Ashley Smith]

to cite Goes through you guys.

[Brian Nesvik]

Oh yeah, CITES and all things related to endangered species permits and importation, exportation permits. Yeah, we've, we can do better there. We've, we've, we're already making some strides there, but we can do.

[Ashley Smith]

I don't hear a whole lot of complaints about that. So that like it, you know.

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, the hunting trophy imports thing is I certainly heard a lot of those before now, but we're, we've got a team that's been doing a good job with that and thank you. Made some really big improvements there and

[Ashley Smith]

that makes a, that is a huge benefit around the world to communities all over the world.

[Brian Nesvik]

It is. And so, but we issue a lot of permits a lot. We permit a lot of activity and we, we can do better with how we do that in, in all aspects of, of permitting. So, you know, those are some.

[Ashley Smith]

That's, that's that right there. I mean, if you get those done, that will be amazing. So, I mean, like, gosh, good luck and, and we'll be praying for you because that's a lot. So that, I mean, all those are the. You can, I mean, you're about to go on. But I was like, like, truly, if you get the ESA changes, the conservation community will thank you. And I know that you have said previously you don't, you know, believe in legacy mumbo jumbo, but that would be a tremendous legacy to the conservation community.

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, I, I don't focus on legacy. I Think people that do sometimes get lost in what their charge from the American people is. And so I don't focus on that, but people can define that how they want. I would say one other thing that's, that is really important and we've already taken steps forward on this is opening up are, are all the potential opportunities we have on lands we manage for the American people to use them. And so you know, we just. The secretary has rolled out this executive order on hunting, on opening up all of our refuges to hunting and fishing. I, I actually never realized how many we refuges were. We restricted so much hunting and fishing opportunity. And so we're within, you know, two years from now we will have essentially every refuge open to hunting and fishing where that use is compatible with the, the purposes of the refuge. There's a few exceptions where that doesn't work where you got it, you know, urban refuge where you got public safety concerns or you might have a sensitive species or habitat where it doesn't really, it's not compatible.

[Ashley Smith]

And, and just to clarify because I think there was some initial alarm because people were like, oh gosh, all the species and all. No, it's not every species on every refuge. You know, some species are more conducive to. You may have waterfowl hunting on this refuge and deer on that one. And you know, so you guys make the best informed decisions on which refuges have, have the best and highest use for which species and how well they can be managed and not interfere with, you know, because it is multi use, you know, built in. So that. Is that a fair.

[Brian Nesvik]

Well, I would say that for the most part, if it's compatible, we're going to, we're going to allow it.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay.

[Brian Nesvik]

To the ma just like a try to. We don't go out on BLM land and say, well, we're only going to allow certain types of hunting here. I mean that.

[Ashley Smith]

Right.

[Brian Nesvik]

We're going to open it up unless there's a good reason not to.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay.

[Brian Nesvik]

And that's, that's the charge from the Secretary and I fully support it.

[Ashley Smith]

Okay, that's great. Yeah. People are celebrating that.

[Podcast Host]

Yes.

[Ashley Smith]

When that is a win, that is a huge win. And all those. Think about all the kids that are going to have more opportunities to get out, get outside and learn those skills. Absolutely. Well, we're excited about you and thank you for allowing us the opportunity to talk with you today.

[Brian Nesvik]

Absolutely. And thank you for your time. It's been a, been a pleasure. Time went by quick.

[Ashley Smith]

I know we did this fast.

[Brian Nesvik]

Yeah.

[Ashley Smith]

Time for your. Time for your meeting now, I think get you to it. So.

[Brian Nesvik]

All right.

[Ashley Smith]

Thank you.

[Brian Nesvik]

You bet.

[Ashley Smith]

Bye.

[Podcast Host]

Well, that's it for today. I appreciate you listening, as always. Leave a review, share it with your friends, and most importantly, do what's right to convey the truth around hunting.