This week, the U.S. House approved what's been called the most significant investment in wildlife conservation in a generation, and supporters say if the Senate follows suit, South Dakota would get big help in protecting certain species.

The Recovering America's Wildlife Act sets aside nearly $1.4 billion dollars annually for preservation efforts. Tribal governments would also receive funding.

Collin O'Mara, president of the National Wildlife Federation, said one-third of all species are at heightened risk of extinction, and saving them helps humans, too.

"The food that we eat is healthier when we have healthy populations of pollinators," O'Mara pointed out. "Places with healthy wetland systems are more flood resilient."

At its core, the bill is geared to prevent vulnerable species from landing on the endangered species list. Supporters say South Dakota's annual share of $16 million would help more than 100 species around the state. The bill has bipartisan support in the Senate, but along the way, there have been some divisions over how to pay for it.

Chris Hesla, executive director of the South Dakota Wildlife Federation, said some area species on the decline include the swift fox and the greater prairie chicken. He added the state could really use the extra resources.

"In South Dakota, the only money that Game, Fish and Parks gets is from license sales of hunting, and then that money is put back into habitat, primarily for game animals," Hesla noted.

In the Senate, there are 16 GOP co-sponsors of the bill. Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., and Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., are not among them, and it is unclear if they would be "yes" votes. The state's lone congressman, Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., voted against the plan. The White House has signaled support for the proposal.

Two state agencies have teamed up to make safer wildlife migration a priority in Utah.

The Utah Wildlife Migration Initiative relies heavily on GPS tracking data received from mammals, birds and fish, which gives coordinators a good picture of where animals are spending time, the routes they take, and areas where safe migration routes are needed.

It is a joint project of the state's Division of Wildlife Resources and Department of Transportation.

Blair Stringham, wildlife migration initiative coordinator for the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, said they have now completed more than a hundred projects, and for them to be effective, they have to align with animals' tendencies and behaviors.

"Some of the really cool things we have done though, we've been able to install overpasses, which are essentially bridges going over roadways so animals can move back and forth," Stringham explained. "They've been really successful, with a lot of different animal species."

Stringham pointed out they have also been able to install underpasses, as well as fencing projects to keep wildlife off roads. They have even found ways to help fish move from one stretch of river to other tributaries if they were cut off by roadways.

Stringham emphasized helping animals migrate can save their lives in the process. Even so, about 4,900 deer were killed last year due to vehicle collisions. Stringham acknowledged many people do not realize the material damage which results from these accidents can add up quickly. He added keeping wildlife off the roads keeps people safer, too, and the evidence shows the projects are helping.

"We tend to see a huge improvement in the number of collisions with wildlife when we do these kinds of projects," Stringham observed. "We've seen anywhere from 75% to 90% success on most of these."

The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources recently released an app, called the "Utah Roadkill Reporter." It allows anyone to report animals killed on the road as they come across them. Stringham stated it helps contractors locate and remove carcasses, and the data is also used to plan future projects to help prevent wildlife-vehicle collisions.

Migrating wildlife can struggle with the extensive fencing throughout the West, and a new study is filling in the gaps on where these fences are in southwest Montana.

Simon Buzzard, senior coordinator of wildlife connectivity for the National Wildlife Federation and the report's lead author, said the variety of wildlife in the region is extensive, from large mammals such as pronghorn, mule deer and grizzly bears, to ground-nesting birds such as sage grouse.

"This host of species that migrate between public lands and private lands, across elevation changes and across state borders; we don't know how fences are impacting those movements," Buzzard pointed out. "That's why it's important to create this data."

Fences are designed to contain livestock movement on working lands but can entangle other species moving through the region. Buzzard noted more wildlife friendly fencing designs can help migrating animals better navigate fenced areas. He added hard-to-navigate fencing is an issue not just on private lands but public lands as well.

The preference is for fencing to be no higher than 40 inches, and for bottom wires to be at least 18 inches off the ground.

"To allow for sensitive species like pronghorn to go under but also for juveniles of other species," Buzzard emphasized. "Juvenile elk, juvenile moose, black bears. A lot of these large-bodied mammals still prefer to go under fences than to go over them."

Buzzard's study found only 3% of sampled fences in Beaverhead and Madison counties had bottom wires 18 inches or higher and only 6% had top wires of 40 inches or lower.

He noted financing is available for landowners to convert existing fencing into wildlife-friendly fencing, especially if a lot of big game species move across their lands.

A controversial proposal to let individual hunters kill two bears per season instead of one is on the agenda at a meeting of the California Fish and Game Commission's Wildlife Resources Committee tomorrow and Thursday. The state allows hunters as a group to kill 1,700 hundred black bears per year, and 1,300 were taken in 2022.

Judie Mancuso, founder and president of the group Social Compassion in Legislation, opposes hunting.

"From an ethical and moral standpoint, we absolutely shouldn't be hunting bears," Mancuso said. "This is purely a trophy sport. It's not about being overrun with bears."

Both conservationists and the pro-hunting advocacy group Howl for Wildlife are rallying members to weigh in at the meeting. Hunters have submitted a petition to authorize a second bear tag for the Fall hunt and to allow tags to be resold if they are not used within the season, which starts in August with two weeks of archery hunting and then transitions to rifle hunting through late December.

The Wildlife committee will also take comment on the development of a new bear management plan, which was last updated in 1998. Mancuso wants the hunt to be stopped until the new bear-management plan is approved.

"We don't want to be killing any bears because this management plan hasn't been completed," she said. "And the department has no idea how many bears we even have in the state. "

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife's 2020 bear take report estimated the population to be about 15,000 animals in the official hunting grounds. And bear tags are big business. In 2020, California sold 30,000 tags and raised more than $1.5-million for wildlife management and conservation.