Wildlife agencies’ proposal would be a ‘death sentence’ for some imperiled species

WASHINGTON— Today the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service proposed a rule change that confirms the administration’s intent to dismantle the Endangered Species Act’s ability to protect imperiled species and the habitat they depend on.  

The agencies are proposing to eliminate the definition of “harm” under the ESA. For decades, FWS defined harm broadly, to include, “significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering.” This definition was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1995.  

Removing this definition would risk accelerating destruction of habitat, which is the leading cause of species decline. The stakes are higher for wildlife here in the South. We host a globally significant variety of plants and animals that are under mounting pressure because of human-made threats, including climate change and habitat loss. 

In response, SELC senior attorney and Wildlife Program leader Ramona McGee released the following statement:  

When Congress passed the Endangered Species Act, members recognized that conserving habitat is essential to protecting endangered and threatened species. Restoring ecosystems that species depend on is the difference between survival and extinction. Limiting the scope of the ESA’s protections to allow habitat destruction that kills and injures wildlife would be a death sentence to many endangered and threatened species.