NEWSNewsroom

Trump Administration Moves to Redefine ‘Harm’ Under Species Law

A proposed federal rule could change how the Endangered Species Act defines harm to threatened and endangered wildlife, prompting the Center for Biological Diversity to warn that habitat protections may be weakened. The proposal has been sent for review but was not publicly available in the government dashboard cited by the group.

Bio & NewsNovember 13, 2026122 reads0

The Department of the Interior submitted a proposal titled “Redefinition of ‘Harm’” to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs on Monday, the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) said Tuesday. A separate Tuesday submission from the Department of Commerce was titled “Defining ‘Harm’ Under the Endangered Species Act.” Interior is led by Doug Burgum, appointed by President Donald Trump.

The Endangered Species Act, signed by President Richard Nixon in 1973, prohibits the “take” of endangered fish and wildlife. The law defines take to include harassing, harming, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing or collecting. Its definition of harm includes significant habitat modification or degradation when it actually kills or injures wildlife by impairing essential behavior such as breeding, feeding or sheltering.

Noah Greenwald, CBD’s co-director of endangered species, said weakening that definition “would cut the heart out” of the law and be “a death sentence for plants and animals on the brink of extinction.” He cited spotted owls, sea turtles and salmon among species at risk if habitat destruction is not restricted.

The proposal comes amid other Republican efforts to change protections under the act. In late March, House Republicans were working to advance the ESA Amendments Act, which aims to streamline regulatory and permitting processes, and the Pet and Livestock Protection Act. The latter would remove federal protections for gray wolves within 60 days and bar judicial review of the action, according to Common Dreams.

Trump’s January declaration of a “national energy emergency” also raised concern among conservation groups. An executive order tied to the declaration effectively says the ESA cannot obstruct energy development, the article reports. Gib Brogan, a campaign director at Oceana, told The Associated Press that the order was “a gift to the oil and gas industry” and would accelerate the decline of endangered species. Greenwald said at the time that the extinction crisis and climate change, not energy supply, were the real national emergencies.

On Tuesday, Trump signed multiple orders aimed at boosting the coal industry. Jason Rylander of CBD’s Climate Law Institute criticized the actions, saying they would keep old coal plants operating and worsen pollution affecting air and water.

Comments (0)

Leave a comment

No comments yet. Be the first!