MANY MINDEDUS drops habitat from the legal meaning of harming endangered species
The Trump administration finalized a rule on July 10 that removes the regulatory definition of 'harm' from the Endangered Species Act, with the change taking effect September 14. The discarded definition had treated destroying or degrading habitat as illegal harm when doing so killed or injured wildlife by disrupting feeding, breeding, or sheltering. Under the new policy, directly injuring or killing protected wildlife stays illegal, but habitat destruction on its own no longer counts as an illegal take.
The administration says the reinterpretation follows the 1973 statute more faithfully and will lower permitting costs for landowners, farmers, energy producers, and other businesses, making farming, drilling, mining, logging, and real-estate development easier where listed species live. Its legal footing leans on Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in the 1995 case Babbitt v. Sweet Home, in which the Supreme Court had upheld counting habitat destruction as harm, and on the 2024 Loper Bright ruling that ended judicial deference to agencies. Environmental groups and two Indigenous nations have filed suit.
This is a setback for the commons. The Endangered Species Act was signed by Nixon in 1973, the same year 80 countries met in Washington to negotiate CITES, and the leading global biodiversity assessment found land-use change has pressured terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems more than any other direct force. Narrowing habitat protection loosens the single lever that matters most, and the article argues the effect will be felt beyond US borders.
Watch the litigation, which may alter or delay the rule. Other safeguards remain: agencies must still consult wildlife officials before actions that may jeopardize a listed species and cannot destroy designated critical habitat, and states may go further. But much habitat lies outside designated areas, and many private projects need no federal permit at all.
Source: Mongabay