Dismantling the Endangered Species Act will hurt a lot more than just wildlife

For more than 50 years, the Endangered Species Act has saved thousands of animals and plants from threats such as poaching, habitat loss, and pollution. He has brought bald eagles back from the brink of extinction, restored grizzly bear populations on public lands and protected redwood forests that are home to dozens of vulnerable animals. Overall this prevented the extinction 99 percent the species it protected.

Last week, President Donald Trump announced that his administration is weakening or eliminating key provisions of fundamental environmental laws that protect vulnerable species from extractive activities such as oil drilling.

This is not the first time Trump has repealed the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Back in 2019, his administration changed the law to make it easier to remove a species from the list and to allow economic factors to be taken into account when deciding whether to list a new species. Many of these changes were reversed during Joe Biden's presidency but could now be reversed again. Announced new rollbacks National Marine Fisheries Service and the Ministry of Internal Affairs US Fish and Wildlife Service.

The proposed changes would also limit the ability of federal agencies to consider potential future impacts on a species, such as the effects of climate change, when deciding which species to list. It would also eliminate the so-called “common rule,” which gives endangered species the same protections as endangered species. (“Endangered” means that a species is threatened with extinction, and “endangered” means that it is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future.)

“This is certainly consistent with the current administration's desire to undermine conservation, undermine protections for federal lands and wildlife, and benefit extractive industries and stakeholders who are certainly listening to this administration,” said Jane P. Davenport, senior attorney for the environmental nonprofit Defenders of Wildlife.

The ESA proposal comes days after two other major environmental concerns: The Environmental Protection Agency announced plans to remove federal protections from millions of acres of land. swamps and streamscurtailing the Clean Water Act and jeopardizing drinking water for millions of Americans. The administration also said it would open up nearly 1.3 billion acres of U.S. coastal waters to new oil and gas drilling.

What will a new ESA rollback mean?

The Endangered Species Act was originally a bipartisan piece of legislation signed by President Richard Nixon in 1973. At the time, many states had their own laws, but those laws tended to be weak, says Noah Greenwald of the Center for Biological Diversity. Regulations limited to state boundaries did not reflect the natural distribution or movement of species or the threats that affected them, and did not protect habitat. ESA has solved both of these problems.

In 1982, Congress passed a series of amendments to the law that made it easier for non-federal land users to develop habitats for endangered species—even in some cases where those species might have been “accidentally harmed.” Developers, loggers, and mining and drilling corporations have long sought to create more bypasses, but are often stymied by the idea of ​​“critical habitat”—land that is protected because it is essential to a particular species.

For example, the northern spotted owl requires the complex forests of the Pacific Northwest to thrive. The rusty bumblebee requires underground nesting sites in the Midwest and Northeast. “It’s not enough to just protect a species,” said Rebecca Riley, managing director of the Natural Resources Defense Council. “You also have to protect its habitat.”

Which species to protect and how, and when to delist, were previously decided using only the “best available scientific and commercial evidence.” The Trump administration's new policy will now allow economic factors to become part of the species listing and habitat designation process.

Climate impacts of proposed changes

The dismantling of ESA will have consequences for decades to come. This could significantly impact our ability to protect species from climate change, limit our ability to combat it and even fuel it further. Forests protected under this law absorb masses of carbon dioxide into their tissues and transfer much of this carbon to fungi. for storage in soil. Wetlands also not only provide a safe place for species, but they also sequester large amounts of carbon and, if they are on the coast, serve as a buffer against hurricane storm surges and rising sea levels. The loss of any of these habitats would mean a tougher fight against planetary warming. Weakening the ESA would also open the door to increased oil and gas drilling. greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. “It has a double effect,” Riley said. “You’re harming the species and the ecosystem, and you’re harming the climate.”

When President Donald Trump tried to weaken the Endangered Species Act during his first administration, he faced stiff opposition: environmental and climate groups. sued the presidentand Biden reversed many of Trump's changes in the first months of his presidency.

But 2025 is not 2019. In his second term, President Trump has pushed even harder to support expanded fossil fuel development, and the extraction of critical minerals is opening up new opportunities for mining, including on protected lands.

“The current administration is restoring the original purpose of the Endangered Species Act by protecting species with clear, consistent and legal standards that also respect the livelihoods of Americans who depend on our land and resources,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a statement. statement.

But four out of five Americans support current scope of the Endangered Species Act. “I think Americans understand that extinction is forever,” Riley said, “and they understand that we have a moral obligation to try to prevent species from becoming extinct.”

Currently the administration accepting public comment ESA's proposed changes for 30 days starting November 21.

Correction: This story originally misstated details about Rhyolite Ridge. lithium mine is in Nevada.