A pair of U.S. lawmakers has introduced a bill that would reverse the federal government’s decision to roll back the definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to exclude habitat destruction.
“Congress enacted the Endangered Species Act to prevent extinction – not to document it after the damage has already been done,” U.S. Representative Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pennsylvania) said in a release. “For more than 50 years, our nation’s protections have reflected a basic legal, scientific, and commonsense truth: When habitat destruction actually kills or injures protected wildlife, that destruction is harm. The administration’s rule would erase that longstanding safeguard through regulatory action and leave vulnerable species exposed at the precise moment the law is intended to protect them.”
The U.S. government has long considered habitat when evaluating harm to an endangered species under the ESA and limiting human activities and development that could damage that habitat. In July, however, the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump decided to eliminate the consideration of habitat under the definition of harm, arguing that such a definition was far too broad and unnecessarily blocked economic development.
“For years, federal agencies abused the ESA to obstruct lawful land use and burden American families and businesses,” U.S. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum said in announcing the change. “That approach turned routine activity into a regulatory trap, drove up costs that impacted people’s lives, and expanded federal authority beyond what Congress intended. This action restores common sense, respects private property, provides much-needed certainty for landowners, and follows the statute Congress actually passed.”
Conservation groups and several lawmakers were highly critical of the move, arguing that failing to protect endangered species’ habitats only pushes them closer to extinction.
Now, Fitzpatrick and U.S. Representative Mike Quigley (D-Illinois) – who together co-chair the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus – have introduced the Safeguarding Endangered Species Act, which would nullify the recently changed definition of harm in the ESA.
“This essential legislation will reverse the Trump administration’s recent rule eliminating habitat protections outlined in the 1975 Endangered Species Act,” Quigley said. “As co-chair of the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus, I’m honored to continue fighting for our wildlife and the endangered species around us.”
The legislation has been backed by Humane World Action Fund, PennEnvironment, the Endangered Species Coalition, Defenders of Wildlife, Oceana, and Save the Manatee Club.
“To protect at-risk wildlife, you must protect their homes,” Oceana Campaign Manager Julia Singer said in a release. “Following the Trump administration’s attempt to fast-track extinctions by removing protections for habitat that endangered species need to survive, this bill would reverse this horrendous habitat decision. The Endangered Species Act is one of the nation's most effective conservation laws, saving 99 percent of species under its care.”
The Trump administration’s action has also been challenged in court, with conservation groups suing the government to undo the change. Represented by Earthjustice, the plaintiffs include the Center for Biological Diversity, Columbia Riverkeeper, the Conservation Law Foundation, Conservation Northwest, Friends of the Wild Swan, Oregon Wild, the Sierra Club, Swan View Coalition, and WildEarth Guardians.
“The rescission discards a longstanding and critical regulatory protection for imperiled wildlife based upon an irrational and unsupported interpretation of the ESA that would undermine the act’s extraordinary record of success in preventing the extinction of and recovering threatened and endangered species. The rescission violates the plain language and overarching purpose of the ESA; it also lacks any reasoned basis and is arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act,” the lawsuit states.
