The Trump administration on Wednesday proposed rules redefine what it means to “harm” species protected under the Endangered Species Species Act, and the move’s guardians say they will strip the vulnerable plants and habitat animals needed to survive.
The proposal, advanced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, limits taking direct action to kill or harm endangered species or threatened wildlife, and removes bans against the destruction of habitat leading to those purposes. It fits the intentions of White House officials to promote economic growth by reducing regulations.
If adopted, the change could significantly reduce the scope of the Endangered Species Species Act, passed under former President Nixon in 1973. It also ruled that the US Supreme Court in 1995 upheld a definition of harm, including “important habitat modification or deterioration.”
“What they’re proposing fundamentally overturns how we’ve been conserving endangered species in this country,” said Noah Greenwald, co-director of endangered species at the Center for Biodiversity, a conservation group.
According to Greenwald, the previous definition prevented behavior such as cutting down strips of old, grown forests in Northern California and northwest. Or they fill the wetlands where red-footed frogs live, and state amphibians in California are also listed as being threatened by the federal government.
Under the proposed meaning, it would require something like the actual shooting of an owl to qualify, he said.
“I think there’s more room for Timber businesses to record their habitat without worrying,” he said. Given the sharp decline in owls over recent decades, “this could potentially be a nail in the co.”
The concept of harm in the Endangered Species Species Act is surrounded by the prohibition of “takes.” This means “harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, capturing, collecting” species protected by law.
“This makes sense in light of what FWS and NMFS understand for centuries that “take” is meant to kill or catch wild animals.
Publishing proposed rules in the federal register set on Thursday — triggers a 30-day public comment period. Once public comments are analyzed, the final rules could be published in a few months.
If changes were made, Greenwald said his group would challenge it in court.
The proposed change comes amidst a gust of winds that the Trump administration will take action to promote more development and resource extraction of public land. Parents believe it hurts wildlife, among other harmful effects.
Earlier this month, the Trump administration ordered an immediate expansion of timber production in the United States, and an emergency declaration by the U.S. Agriculture Secretary requires the U.S. Forest Service to cut down approximately 112.5 million acres of national forests.
A February order by Doug Burgum’s Interior Secretary, his staff directed that the national monument be reviewed and possibly changed as part of a push to expand U.S. energy production.
Source link
