ESA Overhaul

 

Reactions

 

Democrats, Environmentalists Blast Trump Rollback Of Endangered Species Protections. According to The Hill, “ ‘I know this sounds like the plan of a cartoon villain and not the president of the United States, but that’s what we’re dealing with today,’ Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey (D) said in a call with reporters. Healey along with California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) said they expect several other states to join them in a lawsuit against the federal government. Many environmental groups have likewise said they will sue. Becerra said the power to change the Endangered Species Act lies squarely with Congress, not the administration, and violates the Administrative Procedure Act by not following the review process for creating new regulations. ‘This administration is trying to change the law by breaking the law and that’s not going to stand,’ Becerra said. … ‘For more than 40 years, the ESA has been a pillar of environmental protection in this nation,’ Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) said. ‘Its success — and its support among the American people — are undeniable. But this administration’s determination to dismantle bedrock environmental laws, turn a blind eye to science, and roll over for special interests apparently knows no bounds.’ … The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association referred to the decision as ‘long-awaited regulatory relief,’ while the American Petroleum Institute said it would lead to ‘the reduction of duplicative and unnecessary regulations that ultimately bog down conservation efforts.’ … ‘We’ve seen before how the act can be abused by environmental activist agendas, but by increasing transparency and ending the practice of one-size-fits-all reactions, we can end their sue and settle tactics while promoting responsible conservation without heavy-handed government intervention,’ Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said in a statement.” [The Hill, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Democrats Vow To Block New Rules. According to E&E News, “A senior Senate appropriator today floated the possibility of using an obscure 23-year-old law to fight the Trump administration’s revisions to the Endangered Species Act. ‘We need to consider stopping these regulations by any means, including the Congressional Review Act,’ New Mexico Democrat Tom Udall, ranking member of the Interior and Environment Appropriations Subcommittee, said during a call with reporters on the administration’s intended changes to the 1973 landmark law. The regulations, which the Interior Department unveiled this morning, would take ‘a wrecking ball’ to ‘one of our oldest and most effective environmental laws,’ Udall said. ‘There’s a coalition in Congress that agrees with me,’ he added. The CRA allows lawmakers 60 legislative days to review final rules that federal agencies issue. Within that time frame, congressional leaders can schedule a vote on whether to overturn the regulation. If the disapproval resolution passes and isn’t vetoed by the president, the CRA prohibits the issuing agency from promulgating a future ‘substantially similar’ rule.” [E&E News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

AGs, Greens Plan Legal Assault On Regulations. According to E&E News, “Blue states and environmental groups are plotting a major legal attack on the Trump administration’s new Endangered Species Act regulations. California Attorney General Xavier Becerra and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey today laid out a swift plan to challenge the rules, which the Interior and Commerce departments unveiled today (Greenwire, Aug. 12). Trump officials billed the updated rules as an attempt to ‘modernize’ implementation of the Endangered Species Act, but the Democrats and environmentalists say it will undercut enforcement and add red tape to species protections (see related story). In a press call today, Healey outlined the lawsuit she and other attorneys general expect to file after today’s changes are published in the Federal Register. She explained that the lawsuit will allege that the new regulations are illegal because they ignore scientific evidence, environmental impacts and public comments and that they violate the text of the Endangered Species Act. ‘We don’t take these challenges lightly,’ Becerra said during today’s call. ‘We don’t look to pick a fight every time this administration decides to take an action. But we challenge these actions by this administration because it is necessary.’ The Endangered Species Act regulation changes are expected to appear in the Federal Register in the coming weeks, and opponents will file lawsuits within 30 days of publication.” [E&E News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

CRA Crazy? According to Politico, “A Democratic senator floated the use of the Congressional Review Act in response to the Trump administration’s announcement that it would change how it implements the Endangered Species Act. The ESA revisions announced Monday and spearheaded by Interior Secretary David Bernhardt include preventing the Fish and Wildlife Service from automatically offering full endangered species protections to wildlife classified as ‘threatened’ and minimizing its consideration of climate change when analyzing a species, as Ben reports. While the Interior Department argues streamlining is necessary to update how it enforces the 1973 law, Democratic states and lawmakers were quick to say the revisions would benefit industry at the expense of the species the law is meant to protect. Democratic Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) raised the possibility of using the CRA, a 1996 law that allows lawmakers to block regulatory actions on an expedited basis, to halt the Interior revisions. On the House side, Rep. Ed Case (D-Hawaii) tweeted that as a Natural Resources Committee Democrat, he ‘will join my colleagues in seeking to reverse this rule.’ A Udall spokesman told ME the senator was serious about a possible CRA remanding the new ESA rule changes and would look into lobbying sympathetic Republicans when the Senate reconvenes next month, though he didn’t name potential targets.” [Politico, 8/13/19 (=)]

 

AP | The Latest: States Vow Suit Over Endangered Species Rollback. According to WSB-TV, “California and Massachusetts say they’ll go to court to fight the Trump administration’s overhaul of the Endangered Species Act. Content Continues Below Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey and California Attorney General Xavier Becerra (hahv-YEHR’ beh-SEH’-rah) said Monday that they planned to sue. It came hours after the administration announced broad changes to the way the government would enforce endangered species protections. Both Democratic state prosecutors pointed to a United Nations report earlier this year warning that more than 1 million species globally are in danger of extinction. Becerra told reporters that ‘this is not the time to go low, go slow or go backward.’ Several conservation groups also have promised court fights. The administration says the changes will reduce regulatory burdens while still protecting struggling species.” [WSB-TV, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Healey Plans To Sue Trump Administration Over Endangered Species Act Changes. According to WBUR, “As the Trump administration on Monday rolled out plans to change the implementation of the Endangered Species Act, Attorney General Maura Healey announced plans to sue over the move she said would dismantle important protections for at-risk wildlife and their habitats. ‘By gutting key components of the Endangered Species Act, one of our country’s most successful environmental laws, the Trump Administration is putting our most imperiled species and our vibrant local tourism and recreation industries at risk,’ Healey said in a statement. ‘We will be taking the Administration to court to defend federal law and protect our rare animals, plants, and the environment.’ Healey and California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said that the new rules would allow federal agencies to ignore ‘serious threats to endangered animals and plants,’ limit the circumstances when a species can be listed as threatened, and eliminate a requirement that agencies consider a species’ ability to recover before removing it from the endangered or threatened list. … Healey’s office said she believes the rules ‘would pave the way for approval of oil and gas and other development projects despite any species impacts.’ U.S. Sen. Ed Markey took a similar stance, saying the changes came ‘at the behest of the oil, gas, and mining industries’ and ‘will put countless species in the crosshairs of extinction.’” [WBUR, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

’We’re Ready To Fight’: Wildlife Activists Vow To Protect Endangered Species Act From Trump. According to Sacramento Bee, “Wildlife advocacy groups and two state attorneys general vowed to fight the Trump administration’s proposed regulatory change to the Endangered Species Act, arguing that it could threaten species ranging from the California condor to the monarch butterfly and the northern spotted owl. … ‘The best way to uphold the Endangered Species Act is to do everything we can to ensure it remains effective in achieving its ultimate goal—recovery of our rarest species. The Act’s effectiveness rests on clear, consistent and efficient implementation,’ said Interior Secretary David Bernhardt in a statement. … Groups including Defenders of Wildlife and the Center for Biological Diversity condemned the proposal, which would change how animals are added or removed from ‘endangered’ or ‘threatened’ status. ‘It’s probably the biggest attack on endangered species and the (Endangered Species Act) in history,’ said said Brett Hartl, government affairs director for the Center for Biological Diversity. ‘No species will get closer to recovery as a result of these changes.’ California Attorney General Xavier Becerra joined Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey in signaling they’d sue the Trump administration over the change. ‘We’re ready to fight to preserve this important law,’ Becerra said.” [Sacramento Bee, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Scientists Call Changes To Endangered Species Act 'Short-Sighted'. According to KGO-TV, “‘There are hundreds of thousands of species knitted together in a natural economy and if you take things out, they begin to crumble,’ said Dr. Roopnarine. We asked for an example. Dr. Roopnarine pulled out a drawer filled with the shells of freshwater clams. In North America, they’re 20 percent extinct now, because, in the 19th century, we used those shells to make buttons, but at a cost. ‘We lose clean water because that is how they feed-- by filtering the water. We have similar species on the bottom of San Francisco Bay. They filter all the water in that bay every 10 days.’ Supporters of the Endangered Species Act point to the American Alligator, which went off the Endangered Species list in 1987. In nature, it’s a high-level predator. If every species is, in fact, interconnected, the loss of these creatures could have impacted others. Bart Shepherd also studies at the Academy. ‘It matters because we couldn’t understand how they are all linked together in the material world.’ ‘What, in your opinion, is the administration not getting?’ we asked. ‘That humans are part of the natural world and tied to all of these things. Pull pieces and you risk the crumbling of all of them, like a house of cards.’” [KGO-TV, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

General Coverage

 

AP | Trump Overhauls Enforcement Of The Endangered Species Act, Putting An Economic Cost On Saving A Species. According to Chicago Tribune, “The Trump administration on Monday rolled out some of the broadest changes in decades to enforcement of the landmark Endangered Species Act, allowing the government to put an economic cost on saving a species and other changes critics contend could speed extinction for some struggling plants and animals. Interior Secretary David Bernhardt and other administration officials contend the changes improve efficiency of oversight, while protecting rare species. ‘The best way to uphold the Endangered Species Act is to do everything we can to ensure it remains effective in achieving its ultimate goal — recovery of our rarest species,’ he said. ‘An effectively administered Act ensures more resources can go where they will do the most good: on-the-ground conservation.’ Democratic lawmakers, several state attorneys generals and conservation groups said the overhaul would hamper protections for endangered and threatened species. The Endangered Species Act is credited with helping save the bald eagle, California condor and scores of other animals and plants from extinction since President Richard Nixon signed it into law in 1973. The Endangered Species Act currently protects more than 1,600 species in the United States and its territories.” [Chicago Tribune, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

AP | Trump Overhauling Enforcement Of Endangered Species Act. Critics Fear Animal Extinction. According to USA Today, “The Trump administration is finalizing major changes Monday to the way it enforces the landmark Endangered Species Act, in a move that it says will reduce regulatory burdens but critics charge will drive more creatures to extinction. The administration was making public a final version of a rule overhauling the way the federal government handles protections for plants and animals at risk of extinction. Information about the rule was obtained by The Associated Press beforehand. The Endangered Species Act is credited with helping save the bald eagle, California condor and scores of other animals and plants from extinction since President Richard Nixon signed it into law in 1973. At least 10 attorneys general joined conservation groups in protesting an early draft of the changes, saying they put more wildlife at greater risk of extinction. A draft version of the rule released last year would end blanket protections for animals newly deemed threatened, allow federal authorities for the first time to consider the economic cost of protecting a particular species, and could let authorities disregard impacts from climate change, one of the largest threats to habitat. The Endangered Species Act currently protects more than 1,600 species in the United States and its territories. A United Nations report warned in May that more than 1 million plants and animals globally face extinction, some within decades, owning to human development, climate change and other threats. The report called the rate of species loss a record.” [USA Today, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

U.S. Significantly Weakens Endangered Species Act. According to The New York Times, “The Trump administration on Monday announced that it would change the way the Endangered Species Act is applied, significantly weakening the nation’s bedrock conservation law credited with rescuing the bald eagle, the grizzly bear and the American alligator from extinction. The changes will make it harder to consider the effects of climate change on wildlife when deciding whether a given species warrants protection. They would most likely shrink critical habitats and, for the first time, would allow economic assessments to be conducted when making determinations. The rules also make it easier to remove a species from the endangered species list and weaken protections for threatened species, a designation that means they are at risk of becoming endangered. Overall, the new rules would very likely clear the way for new mining, oil and gas drilling, and development in areas where protected species live. Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said the changes would modernize the Endangered Species Act and increase transparency in its application. ‘The act’s effectiveness rests on clear, consistent and efficient implementation,’ he said in a statement Monday. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said in a statement the revisions ‘fit squarely within the president’s mandate of easing the regulatory burden on the American public, without sacrificing our species’ protection and recovery goals.’ The new rules are expected to appear in the Federal Register this week and will go into effect 30 days after that.” [The New York Times, 8/12/19 (+)]

 

New Trump rules weaken wildlife protections. “Three months after a U.N. report warned that 1 million species face extinction because of human activity, the Trump administration on Monday finalized rule changes to the Endangered Species Act that make it harder to protect plants and animals whose populations are in serious decline. The rules, jointly announced by the Interior and Commerce departments, were changed as part of President Trump’s mandate to scale back government regulations on behalf of businesses. In that vein, language in the act that required officials to rely heavily on science when considering whether to place a species on the threatened or endangered list, regardless of economic impact, was erased.” [Washington Post, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Administration Eases Endangered Species Act Protections. According to The Wall Street Journal, “The Trump administration is rolling back some protections aimed at keeping animals from becoming extinct, responding to complaints from energy companies, home builders and other businesses. The changes to the Endangered Species Act don’t affect animals that are now considered threatened or endangered, like polar bears or orcas. But the new guidance would change how animals can be protected when they are listed as threatened and restricts how their habitat can be protected. Under the new rules, species that get listed as threatened for the first time will no longer be immediately given the same protections as endangered species, which had become standard for some species overseen by the Interior Department, officials said. The Interior Department will also place more restrictions on which areas get designated as critical habitat, which sets the areas aside for threatened and endangered species to rebound. ‘The Endangered Species Act has led to important conservation efforts that have brought species back from the brink of extinction,’ said Margaret Everson, principal deputy director of the Fish and Wildlife Service. ‘However, there are improvements we can make.’” [The Wall Street Journal, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Administration Makes Major Changes To Protections For Endangered Species. According to NPR, “In a move that critics say will hurt plants, animals and other species as they face mounting threats, the Trump administration is making major changes to how the Endangered Species Act is implemented. The U.S. Department of Interior on Monday announced a suite of long-anticipated revisions to the nation’s premier wildlife conservation law, which is credited with bringing back the bald eagle and grizzly bears, among other species. Republican lawmakers and industry groups celebrated the revisions, some of the broadest changes in the way the act is applied in its nearly 50-year history. They come at a moment of crisis for many of the world’s plant and animal species. As many as 1 million species are at risk of extinction — many within decades — according to a recent U.N. report. Wildlife groups and Democratic lawmakers, pointing to that document, are promising to challenge the new rules in Congress and in court. ‘Now is the time to strengthen the ESA, not cripple it,’ said New Mexico Sen. Tom Udall on a press call.” [NPR, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Administration Announces Changes To Endangered Species Rules. According to ABC News, “The Trump administration announced changes to how the government handles endangered species on Monday, a move that advocates say could make it more difficult to protect species that are threatened by human activity and climate change. The newly finalized rules would change the requirements for how the government decides to add or remove species from the list of endangered animals that are regulated by the government, including limiting how much habitat can be protected to areas where the animals currently live. The changes would also require that each species listed as threatened in the future have its own plan for how it will be protected and if any hunting of that species is allowed, instead of issuing blanket policies that apply to every threatened species. The changes would not alter the protections for species currently listed as threatened or endangered, but would apply to future decisions about changing listings. Administration officials said the changes will still protect critical species and habitat but will also make the process more efficient and follow President Donald Trump’s mandate to eliminate regulations. One of the new rules announced on Monday also formally defines ‘endangered’ and ‘threatened,’ which will be used to decide if species should be protected or removed from the endangered species list. Under the rule ‘endangered’ means a species is in danger of extinction now, while ‘threatened’ means it is in danger of extinction in the foreseeable future.” [ABC News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Administration Overhauls Protections For Endangered Species. According to CBS News, “The Trump administration on Monday rolled out some of the broadest changes in decades to enforcement of the landmark Endangered Species Act, allowing the government to put an economic cost on saving a species and other changes critics contend could speed extinction for some struggling plants and animals. The changes included allowing economic cost to taken into account as the federal government weighs protecting a struggling species, although Congress has stipulated that economic costs not be a factor in deciding whether to protect an animal. That prohibition is meant to ensure that the logging industry, for example, would not be able to push to block protections on economic grounds for a forest-dwelling animal. Other changes include ending blanket protections for species newly listed as threatened and a revision that conservation groups say could block officials from considering the impact on wildlife from climate change, a major and growing threat to many species. Interior Secretary David Bernhardt and other administration officials contend the changes improve efficiency of oversight, while protecting rare species. ‘The best way to uphold the Endangered Species Act is to do everything we can to ensure it remains effective in achieving its ultimate goal — recovery of our rarest species,’ Bernhardt said. ‘An effectively administered Act ensures more resources can go where they will do the most good: on-the-ground conservation.’” [CBS News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Administration Overhauls Endangered Species Act In Bid To Reduce Red Tape. According to Fox News, “The Trump administration is finalizing major changes to the Endangered Species Act in a bid to reduce the system’s regulatory impact, though critics say the shift could accelerate the extinction of struggling creatures. In the face of such criticism, the administration argued the changes will make regulation more efficient and less burdensome while preserving protections for wildlife. ‘The best way to uphold the Endangered Species Act is to do everything we can to ensure it remains effective in achieving its ultimate goal—recovery of our rarest species. The Act’s effectiveness rests on clear, consistent and efficient implementation,’ U.S. Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt said in a statement. ‘An effectively administered Act ensures more resources can go where they will do the most good: on-the-ground conservation.’ … ‘This is a win for Montana and the West, and will help restore commonsense, science-based decision-making when it comes to the Endangered Species Act,’ Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., said in a statement. ‘These new rules will lead to more transparency, increased recovery of species greater conservation, and will help take the decision-making powers out of the hands of radical activists in the courtroom.’ … ‘This effort to gut protections for endangered and threatened species has the same two features of most Trump administration actions: it’s a gift to industry, and it’s illegal,’ Drew Caputo, a vice president of litigation for the conservation advocacy group Earthjustice, said in a statement. ‘We’ll see the Trump administration in court about it.’” [Fox News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Admin Rolls Out Rule Changes To Limit Law's Reach. According to E&E News, “The Trump administration announced changes to Endangered Species Act rules today that complicate efforts to protect at-risk animals and plants by requiring higher standards for government action. The new rules will apply only to future listing decisions. Plants and animals with existing protections won’t be affected unless their status changes. Administration officials hailed the reforms as balancing conservation with economic interests. ‘The best way to uphold the Endangered Species Act is to do everything we can to ensure it remains effective in achieving its ultimate goal — recovery of our rarest species. The Act’s effectiveness rests on clear, consistent and efficient implementation,’ Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said in a statement. ‘An effectively administered Act ensures more resources can go where they will do the most good: on-the-ground conservation,’ he said. Environmentalists promised to challenge the changes in court, and Democrats promise to attack them on Capitol Hill. The rules track with the administration’s draft regulations in making the biggest change in a generation to a broad swath of the federal conservation regime.” [E&E News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump's Assault On The Endangered Species Act Begins. According to Outside, “On Monday, the Trump administration announced the opening salvo in its long-feared attack on the Endangered Species Act. The three-pronged assault is designed to weaken protections for threatened and endangered species, while making it harder to add protections for other animals in the future. ‘These changes crash a bulldozer through the Endangered Species Act’s lifesaving protections for America’s most vulnerable wildlife,’ says Noah Greenwald, endangered species director for the wildlife advocacy nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity. Secretary of the Interior David Bernhardt, a former lobbyist for the oil and gas industries who last summer authored an op-ed in The Washington Post arguing against the ESA’s effectiveness, is behind the new regulations, which are intended to weaken the ESA in three ways: Make it harder to add to the list of species protected by the ESA, and harder to designate protected habitats for them; Eliminate protections for species designated as threatened; Add consideration of economic impacts to the listing process. These three changes will have wide-reaching impacts not only to how the ESA is implemented, but also on the protections it provides.” [Outside, 8/12/19 (+)]

 

Trump Administration Eases Endangered Species Rules. According to Politico, “The Trump administration announced on Monday it would change how it implements the Endangered Species Act, weakening protections that environmentalists say violate the law and make it easier for oil companies, real estate interests and the agriculture industry to develop land inhabited by vulnerable wildlife. The revisions announced in the new rule were a culmination of more than a year of efforts to loosen restrictions written to protect hundreds of species judged to be under pressure. The Interior Department has argued that a streamlining is necessary to update how it enforces the 1973 law, including allowing the federal government to begin to measure the economic costs of protecting some species. ‘The best way to uphold the Endangered Species Act is to do everything we can to ensure it remains effective in achieving its ultimate goal — recovery of our rarest species. The Act’s effectiveness rests on clear, consistent and efficient implementation,’ said Interior Secretary David Bernhardt said in statement. The revisions spearheaded by Bernhardt, who previous lobbied on behalf of oil and agriculture sectors, include preventing Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service from automatically offering full endangered species protections to wildlife classified as ‘threatened’ and minimizing its consideration of climate change when analyzing a species. The changes would also allow the department to publish economic impacts of whether to list a species as endangered or threatened, and it would loosen protections on habitats where a species does not currently live but could move into if its numbers rebound.” [Politico, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Rolls Back Endangered Species Protections. According to The Hill, “The Trump administration on Monday announced it has finalized a controversial rollback of protections for endangered species, including allowing economic factors to be weighed before adding an animal to the list. The Interior Department regulations would dramatically scale back America’s landmark conservation law, limiting protections for threatened species, how factors like climate change can be factored in listing decisions and the review process used before projects are approved on their habitat. ‘It means that in all likelihood that the federal government itself and individuals will be damaging the habitat and likely increase the timetable and likelihood of a species going extinct,’ David Hayes, executive director of the State Energy and Environmental Impact Center and a former deputy of Interior, said in a previous interview with The Hill. Going forward, the Endangered Species Act will no longer offer the same protections for threatened species — those at risk of becoming extinct in the foreseeable future — as those that are already endangered. ‘These changes crash a bulldozer through the Endangered Species Act’s lifesaving protections for America’s most vulnerable wildlife,’ Noah Greenwald, the Center for Biological Diversity’s endangered species director, said in a statement. Monday’s rule finalizes an earlier proposal from the Interior Department and prompted threats of lawsuits from many environmental groups who say the changes will gut the law. The Endangered Species Act, first passed in 1973, is considered a success globally, surpassing protections for flora and fauna in many other countries. Environmentalists see it as one of America’s premier environmental laws.” [The Hill, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

How Much Are Polar Bears Worth? Trump Admin Limits Endangered Species Act With Cost-Benefit Analysis. According to Newsweek, “The Trump administration, under the guidance of Department of Interior Secretary David Bernhardt, today finalized changes to the Endangered Species Act that will end key protections for animals and require a more stringent cost-benefit analysis before adding animals to the list of protected species. Under the new rule, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) will have to perform an analysis and weigh the costs based on already-available scientific and commercial data of protecting wildlife before adding an endangered species to their list. The rule would also require the FWS to write special regulations to protect each species on the endangered list from commercial exploitation, otherwise they won’t be considered protected. ‘Secretary Bernhardt has worked his entire career to weaken wildlife protections for the sake of more drilling and mining. As a lobbyist and lawyer, Bernhardt sued the Interior Department over Endangered Species Act implementation,’ wrote Center for Western Priorities Executive Director Jennifer Rokala in a statement. ‘Now he’s hand delivering another policy favor to his former clients in the oil and gas industry.’” [Newsweek, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

The Trump Administration Just Gutted The Endangered Species Act. According to Vice, “The Department of the Interior, currently headed by former fossil fuel lobbyist David Bernhardt, and the Department of Commerce made sweeping changes to the regulations required by the ESA just months after a United Nations report detailed an ‘unprecedented’ decline of biodiversity and accelerating extinction rates. The changes ‘clarify, interpret, and implement portions of the Act,’ according to the text of the final regulations. One function of the ESA is to protect the land that a threatened or endangered species needs to survive. The new regulations would limit the designation of this land, called critical habitat, stating that sometimes it ‘may not be prudent;’ for example, if the habitat threats lie outside the scope of the Act or if an area will provide ‘negligible’ conservation value for a chiefly non-US species. The new rules also require regulators to consider land where the species currently lives (rather than evaluate their ideal habitat) before expanding to unoccupied areas. Habitat loss is one of the greatest drivers of extinction, and so critical habitat designation is deemed a crucial part of the Act by conservationists. Many species are threatened or endangered because they’ve been pushed to a small fraction of their original range, and protecting more land can help them rebound.” [Vice, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Just Gutted The Law That Saved American Bald Eagles From Extinction. According to Fast Company, “President Trump came to power on a wave of red hats emblazoned with the phrase Make America Great Again (and with a little help from Russia), but making America great again apparently doesn’t include the symbol of America itself. The Trump administration today announced sweeping changes to the Endangered Species Act, rolling back protections for animals in favor of corporations that want to build luxury condos, mine, drill for oil, harvest timber, or otherwise develop the land that animals live on. Under the revisions to the act, regulators will now be allowed to weigh ‘economic factors’ when considering whether animals and their habitats deserve protection, the New York Times reports. Such considerations had been prohibited since the law was passed, in 1973; instead, determinations had to be made based solely on science. The changes essentially make it easier for corporations to argue that their economic interests are more important than animal habitats. The bill’s language has also been edited to allow regulators to disregard the impact of climate change. The move should not come as a surprise, since Interior Secretary David Bernhardt wrote in a Washington Post op-ed that the Endangered Species Act (which is credited with saving bald eagles, grizzly bears, wolves, California condors, and peregrine falcons) is nothing more than an ‘unnecessary regulatory burden’ on companies. The act currently protects more than 1,600 species in the United States and its territories.” [Fast Company, 8/12/19 (+)]

 

Trump Administration Guts Endangered Species Act. According to Earther, “At a time when species face an unprecedented threat from human activities, the Trump administration is rolling back key protections for those most at risk of extinction. On Monday, the administration made official a proposal to weaken the Endangered Species Act that’s been in the works for a year. The landmark conservation law is the reason bald eagles bounced back from the brink, and it continues to provide protections for more than 1,600 species of animals and plants. But the Trump administration changes will weaken those protections and make it harder to factor climate change into deciding whether to list species while allowing federal agencies to consider the potential economic impacts of listing species. The rule change fits with the Trump administration ethos of wringing the last few bucks out of a dying planet. Chief among the changes are removing the ‘blanket section 4(d) rule.’ There are two types of listing under the Endangered Species Act: endangered and threatened. The latter is a less acute designation than endangered, but the 4(d) rule allows Fish and Wildlife Service to extend some of the same protections to threatened species that it does to endangered ones since the whole point of the act is keep species from becoming endangered or even worse, going extinct.” [Earther, 8/12/19 (+)]

 

Endangered Species Act: How Trump Administration Changes Weaken Protections For Threatened Animals. According to Mic, “The biggest changes made by the Trump administration are as follows: Language that prohibited taking economic factors into consideration when deciding whether or not to protect a species has been removed. Blanket protections for animals placed on the threatened species list have been lifted and the requirements needed in order to remove a species from the endangered list have been loosened. Finally, text that asks authorities to consider the long-term concerns for a species has been tweaked. To hear the Trump administration tell it, these changes represent a modernization of a law passed in 1973. In a press release published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the agency referred to the changes as series of ‘improvements’ to the long-lasting law that would ‘bring the administration of the Act into the 21st century.’ In a statement, U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross said, ‘The revisions finalized with this rulemaking fit squarely within the President’s mandate of easing the regulatory burden on the American public, without sacrificing our species’ protection and recovery goals.’ In the public-facing comments made by the administration, these are presented as small changes that will simply help make applying the law easier.” [Mic, 8/12/19 (+)]

 

Claws Out After Trump Administration Overhauls 'Bureaucratic' Endangered Species Act. According to The Washington Times, “Rep. Don Young, Alaska Republican, supports the Endangered Species Act — he is the only sitting lawmaker left who voted for it in 1973 — but says the law aimed at saving wildlife and plants from extinction has since become a ‘bureaucratic nightmare.’ Only 3% of the 1,661 species listed as endangered or threatened since 1973 have been recovered. Meanwhile, critics say the act has been weaponized to block economic development, cordon off lands and halt forest management while cultivating a tangled thicket of federal regulations. On Monday, the Trump administration moved to ‘bring the Act into the 21st century’ by finalizing sweeping revisions that maintain the ‘best available science’ standard while placing limits on the designation of critical habitat, streamlining the listings process and making clear the costs of such designations.” [The Washington Times, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Trump Rule Aims To Streamline Protection Of Endangered Species. According to The Daily Signal, “The Trump administration is applying new regulations to protect endangered species, rolling back some requirements to ground the policy in scientific and economic factors, the Interior Department announced Monday. The regulations, based on the 1973 Endangered Species Act, will ‘increase transparency and effectiveness and bring the administration of the Act into the 21st century,’ the agency said. The rules won’t extend the same protections to threatened species as are applied to those already on the endangered list. Nor will they look as far into the future to project what species face extinction. The changes likely will draw litigation from liberal and environmental groups. … The Endangered Species Act directs that determinations to add or remove a species from the lists of threatened or endangered species be based ‘solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial information regarding a species’ status.’ Under the new regulations, these will remain the only criteria on which listing determinations are based, according to the Interior Department. However, the revisions clarify that standards for de-listing and reclassifying a species ought to consider the same five statutory factors used in listing the species in the first place.” [The Daily Signal, 8/12/19 (-)]

 

Opinion Pieces

 

Editorial: Trump Guts The Endangered Species Act. Polar Bears And Bald Eagles, Take Notice. According to Los Angeles Times, “The new rules come in the wake of a report from the United Nations earlier this year that more than 1 million plants and animals around the world face extinction, some within decades, owing to human development, climate change and other threats. Since it became law in 1973, the act has required that the decision to list an endangered or threatened species must be made on the basis of scientific criteria without reference to the decision’s possible economic effects. The administration’s new rule removes that language, clearing the way for cost-benefit analysis to be considered in the process. Although some officials suggested that economic impacts would be considered only for informational purposes, it is nevertheless a giant concession to industries that have long complained about having to make excessive accommodations because of the law. Also, the act has always protected species designated as endangered from being ‘taken,’ meaning that they can’t be killed or maimed or harassed. A threatened species got the same protection, except in the case of a special rule specifying otherwise. The new rules remove that automatic protection for threatened species, unless there is a specific rule written. (So the presumption has been reversed; the exception has become the rule.) But a key purpose of the law has been to keep threatened species from becoming endangered species . Wildlife advocates, rightly, fear that rolling back automatic protections and requiring special action from the Fish and Wildlife Service to protect an endangered species will be a time-consuming process and will leave the service vulnerable to political pressure from developers.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/13/19 (+)]

 

Editorial: Save Endangered Species Act From Extinction. According to The Post and Courier, “When a South Carolina Electric & Gas crew destroyed an active osprey nest atop a power pole in Mount Pleasant more than a year ago, federal wildlife officials sheepishly explained that the utility wouldn’t face punishment because rules under the Endangered Species Act were being rolled back. On Monday, the Trump administration finalized those rules, making it harder to protect endangered species and easier for businesses to get around wildlife regulations – the kind that helped save from extinction national icons such as the bald eagle, grizzly bear and alligator. That’s bad news for the Lowcountry as well as the rest of the country, especially in light of a recent U.N. report that said 1 million animal and plant species are facing extinction because of human activity. The new rules, which take effect in 30 days, change how federal agencies enforce parts of the 46-year-old Endangered Species Act, making it easier for some recovering species to be delisted and helping clear the way for mining, oil drilling or other activities. Scrapped is language that prohibits the consideration of economic factors when deciding if a species should be protected. Scrapped is the rule that extends to ‘threatened’ species such as sea turtles the same protections as ‘endangered’ species. The changes also will limit how federal regulators consider the effects of climate change on endangered species. Another revision will affect how federal agencies set aside habitat critical for the survival of certain species.” [The Post and Courier, 8/13/19 (+)]

 

Endangered Species

 

Sage Grouse Numbers Continue To Drop In Idaho. According to Associated Press, “Idaho’s sage grouse population has dropped 52% since the federal government decided not to list the birds as an endangered species in the fall of 2015. It’s not yet clear whether the three-year decline is part of a cyclical pattern or indicative of a more serious issue, but the Idaho Statesman reports the trend could force state and federal wildlife and land managers to take a closer look at how sage grouse are faring in Idaho and other states in the U.S. West. Idaho Gov. Brad Little said more information is needed before sounding any alarms, and that the Idaho Department of Fish and Game and the governor’s Office of Species Conservation are working to gather data. ‘I do know that sage grouse populations can fluctuate fairly significantly from year to year for a variety of reasons,’ Little said. ‘However, this scenario is exactly why we developed our Idaho sage-grouse plan back in 2012.’ Under Idaho’s sage grouse management plan, wildlife managers must work to determine the cause of population declines and come up with an appropriate response any time numbers drop below a certain level in any of the state’s eight sage grouse management zones. One hard trigger is if the population of male sage grouse declines by 20% in a three-year average, compared to a baseline set in 2011. Currently, Idaho’s three-year average is about 27% lower than the baseline.” [Associated Press, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Wildlife & Conservation

 

Giant Freshwater Species Vanishing Worldwide — Study. According to E&E News, “Freshwater behemoths are rapidly disappearing from river basins around the world, and scientists say habitat degradation, poaching and lagging conservation efforts are to blame. These megafauna species, which weigh more than 66 pounds, are key players in the planet’s most biodiverse environments, according to a new study that surveyed the 126 species around the world. The researchers found that in a little over four decades, megafauna populations plummeted by 88%, with giant fish and reptiles at the highest risk of extinction. That rate is double the decline in both terrestrial and marine vertebrate populations, says the report, published in the journal Global Change Biology. As it stands, there are 34 critically endangered megafauna species, with 51 more considered endangered or vulnerable. The report says this is caused in part by the fact that freshwater megafauna are more prone to poaching because their meat and eggs are highly sought after for luxury foods and medicine. The once-common European sturgeon, for example, has disappeared from all but one major European river — the Garonne River in France. And in the Great Lakes and the Missouri and middle Mississippi river basins, the alligator gar and paddlefish are increasingly hard to come by. In many regions, this is caused by the construction of large dams because they fragment the ecosystems in which megafauna species previously roamed freely.” [E&E News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Legal Deal Temporarily Blocks 'Cyanide Bombs' In Wyo. According to E&E News, “Government agents cannot use ‘cyanide bombs’ and other controversial devices to kill livestock predators on federal lands in Wyoming, according to a legal settlement approved last week. The U.S. District Court for the District of Wyoming on Thursday approved an agreement that requires the Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services to conduct an environmental analysis of its wildlife-killing program in the Cowboy State and barred the agency from using the cyanide traps, officially known as M-44s, in the meantime. Wildlife Services uses the spring-loaded devices to kill coyotes, wolves and other predators that can harm crops and livestock. The settlement temporarily barring M-44s on Wyoming federal lands comes as EPA greenlights their continued use across the West. The agency last week issued an interim decision that added new restrictions on the use of M-44s but rejected environmentalists’ calls to ban them altogether (Greenwire, Aug. 8). Critics say the devices are dangerous to humans and nontargeted animals, including grizzly bears. The Center for Biological Diversity, Western Watersheds Project and WildEarth Guardians filed suit in Wyoming earlier this year, arguing that Wildlife Services failed to consider impacts on animals and the environment.” [E&E News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

AP | Study: Asian Carp Could Find Plenty Of Food In Lake Michigan. According to E&E News, “Asian carp are likely to find enough food to spread farther if they establish breeding populations in Lake Michigan, reinforcing the importance of preventing the invasive fish from gaining a foothold, scientists said in a paper released today. A study led by University of Michigan researchers found that despite a drop-off in plankton, the tiny plants and animals on which bighead and silver carp typically feed, the lake has enough dietary options to sustain individual fish that venture away from nutrient-rich shoreline areas where most would congregate. That improves their prospects for colonizing large sections of Lake Michigan and eventually spreading to the other Great Lakes, said Peter Alsip, an ecological modeling data analyst and lead author of the paper, published in the journal Freshwater Biology. ‘Our study indicates that the carp can survive and grow in much larger areas of the lake than previous studies suggested,’ Alsip said. Asian carp were imported in the late 1960s to gobble up algae in Deep South sewage lagoons and fish farms. They escaped into the Mississippi River and have migrated northward, branching into dozens of tributaries.” [E&E News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

AP | State Sets First Sandhill Crane Hunt In A Century. According to E&E News, “Alabama has set its first hunting season for sandhill cranes in more than a century. The state wildlife agency says a limited number of hunters will be allowed to kill the migratory birds over two periods beginning Dec. 3. The state says it last allowed sandhill crane hunting in 1916. It says the species has made enough of a comeback in recent decades to allow hunters to go after them. Kentucky and Tennessee are the only other states east of the Mississippi River to allow hunting of the animals. More than a dozen Western states have crane seasons. The department says it will allow 400 permits for sandhill crane hunters over the season. Some people like eating the big birds.” [E&E News, 8/12/19 (=)]

 

Right-Wingers Again Demonize The Tiny Delta Smelt To Protect Big Agriculture. According to Los Angeles Times, “We’ve written before that among the most dangerous natural predators of the delta smelt are conservatives blaming the tiny freshwater fish for a host of ills befalling California’s agricultural Central Valley. They’ve blamed the unassuming fish for putting farmers out of business across California’s breadbasket, forcing the fallowing of vast acres of arable land, creating double-digit unemployment in agricultural counties, even clouding the judgment of scientists and judges. Now, with the state Legislature returning to Sacramento with an environmental protection bill tops on its agenda, they’re at it again. The right-wing National Review this weekend featured a screed by its vice president, one Jack Fowler, again pointing the finger at the delta smelt. ‘A tiny fish,’ Fowler writes, ‘trumps America’s food needs and the economy of the Central Valley.’ Kevin Drum, who pointed us to Fowler’s work, calls it ‘delta smelt demagoguery,’ and he’s right. Fowler’s piece is an outstanding example of the genre, in its way. For one thing, it’s rather more uninformed than the general run of delta smelt-bashing. Or perhaps it’s merely more cynical. We’ll let you be the judge as we walk you through its points.” [Los Angeles Times, 8/12/19 (+)]

 

Editorial: Cyanide Bombs Are ‘Like A Loaded Gun Ready To Go Off’ In Nevada Outdoors. According to Las Vegas Sun, “In March 2017, 14-year-old Canyon Mansfield was walking his dog, Kasey, when the unthinkable happened. It occurred when the teen from Pocatello, Idaho, poked at something he thought was a sprinkler head. But it actually was the trigger of an M-44 cyanide bomb, a predator control device that kills animals by spraying a cloud of sodium cyanide into the air. Canyon was able to escape the plume of poison he’d inadvertently set off. Kasey was not. The 3-year-old yellow Labrador retriever suffered an awful death before Canyon’s eyes. ‘I look over and see him having a seizure,’ Canyon told a news reporter afterward, holding back tears. ‘I ran over and he had these glassy eyes. He couldn’t see me, and he had this red stuff coming out of his mouth.’ Fast-forward two-plus years, and a different kind of unthinkable has occurred. Last week, the Trump administration reauthorized use of M-44 bombs by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife Services and state agencies in South Dakota, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico and Texas. It’s a sickening decision. Not only are these devices a barbaric way of killing coyotes, wolves and other predatory animals, they don’t discriminate between predators and other living things. Federal officials have acknowledged deaths of skunks, possums, bears and other animals to M-44s. Then there’s the danger to people and pets outdoors, as shown by the tragic incident in Idaho.” [Las Vegas Sun, 8/13/19 (+)]

 

 

Please do not respond to this email.

If you have questions or comments please contact mitch@beehivedc.com