If I were to come to your house and burn it down or bulldoze it to the ground, you might reasonably think that I had done you harm. Most people would apply a common sense standard that harm occurs when the place you live is destroyed. Until last week, that was the standard applied for 50 years under the Endangered Species Act—but no more.
Regulatory changes just adopted by the Administration limit the definition of harming endangered species to actions that directly result in their death. The wholesale destruction of habitat upon which endangered species rely is no longer considered a harm and therefore no longer subject to review under the Act. Because Congress allows the Executive Branch to interpret statutory language through regulation, this fundamental change—and effective gutting of the Endangered Species Act—was implemented with no meaningful public input or without any case being made to the American public that this serves their interests.
The Endangered Species Act was a tremendous success in bringing some species, including our national symbol back from the brink of extinction, including our national symbol, the bald eagle. An essential part of protecting species is maintaining their habitat. The Act, as interpreted for 50 years by administrations of both parties, applied the notion that the logical use of the prohibition of harm to habitat was a central tenant essential to the survival of an endangered species.
The Endangered Species Act is still on the books, but don’t expect it to do much to prevent the extinction of currently endangered species, as well as ones that face future extinction, like us….
