Brian Nesvik was confirmed as the new Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) at the beginning of this month, following his nomination by President Trump in February. The Senate passed the appointment by a vote of 54-43, with senators voting mostly on party lines but with a couple of Democrats voting in favour. Despite Republican Senator John Barrasso lauding his appointment as a move away from ‘politics-not science’ driving agency decisions, many see this decision as a move in the opposite direction: Bradley Williams of Sierra Club Wildlife and Lands Protection said that Nesvik ‘prioritized trophy hunts and weakened protections for imperiled species over scientifically sound wildlife management’ in his previous role in Wyoming.  125 separate organizations, including Wyoming Untrapped and Wyoming Wildlife Advocates, signed a letter opposing Mr. Nesvik’s nomination.

The Director of the USFWS is the most powerful government employee in the country when it comes to wildlife management and conservation. The responsibilities of the role include establishing agency policies, setting priorities, issuing directives, and overseeing all operations, including leadership of programs such as the National Wildlife Refuge System and Wildland Fire Management. As a result, Mr Nesvik will have a huge influence over the course of the future of birds and other wildlife in the U.S. for the duration of his tenure. Let’s take a look at what his supporters and detractors are saying about the man; we’ll have to wait and see who proves to be the better judge!

The positive reception

Supporters emphasize Nesvik’s extensive field experience and deep connection to conservation practice. With more than 30 years of experience working in the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, he rose from game warden to director (a position he held from 2019 until his retirement in 2024). Combined with his tenure as brigadier general in the Wyoming Army National Guard, the man clearly isn’t afraid of getting his hands dirty and understands wildlife management from the ground up, whilst simultaneously having extensive leadership experience in difficult circumstances. The National Audubon Society praised him as a leader who understands migratory bird habitat needs, pointing to his time as a board member of the Intermountain West Joint Venture, and brings practical, hands‑on expertise to the directorship: qualities viewed as vital in addressing challenges like habitat loss and human-wildlife conflict. The National Wildlife Refuge Association congratulated his confirmation, valuing his commitment to the National Wildlife Refuge System and expecting him to make it a bipartisan priority once again.

Nesvik in 2016, as Brigadier General in the Wyoming Army National Guard

Concerns and Criticism

Environmental groups and advocates have voiced strong criticism of Nesvik’s appointment. The Center for Biological Diversity has decried the move as ‘Trump declaring war on wolves, grizzly bears and imperiled wildlife’, arguing that Nesvik led one of the most anti‑conservation agencies in Wyoming and appears intent on undermining the Endangered Species Act. Similarly, the Western Watersheds Project warned that his confirmation ‘is a gift to extractive industries and a threat to imperiled species’, highlighting an apparent record of enabling wolf slaughters and promoting unsustainable livestock grazing on public lands. There was also his criticism of his apparent inaction on chronic wasting disease (CWD) at Wyoming elk feeding grounds, arguing he failed to act decisively despite mounting concerns, although those such as a retired federal game warden have defended him on this point, arguing that these systems existed long before Nesvik’s tenure and that responsibility for them is shared among multiple entities. Finally, his department’s response to an incident of unnecessary cruelty to a young wolf by a resident of the state in the spring of 2024 was considered to be lacklustre.