{"id":224593,"date":"2026-09-18T04:30:16","date_gmt":"2026-09-18T04:30:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/trump-officials-move-to-dismantle-key-protection-for-us-endangered-species-the-guardian\/"},"modified":"2026-09-18T04:30:16","modified_gmt":"2026-09-18T04:30:16","slug":"trump-officials-move-to-dismantle-key-protection-for-us-endangered-species-the-guardian","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/trump-officials-move-to-dismantle-key-protection-for-us-endangered-species-the-guardian\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump officials move to dismantle key protection for US endangered species – The Guardian"},"content":{"rendered":"

Fish and Wildlife Service memo calls for change in what it means to \u2018take\u2019 an endangered species
More than 1,600 critically imperiled species protected under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA) face losing further federal protections following a new reinterpretation of the 1973 law by the Donald Trump administration<\/a>.
A September 14 memo distributed to Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) field offices by FWS director Brian Nesvik calls for a reinterpretation of what it means to \u201ctake\u201d an endangered species. Under the ESA<\/a>, \u201ctake\u201d is defined as \u201cto harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct\u201d.
The memo<\/a>, obtained and shared by the Center for Biological Diversity, reinterprets the law to mean that harming or killing an endangered animal would no longer be considered illegal unless the action was specifically intended to cause harm or death.
\u201cA vessel that inadvertently strikes a whale has not taken it, because the vessel\u2019s course was not set against the whale,\u201d the memo said, adding: \u201cFelling a tree is not a take of the bats roosting in it unless the tree is felled for the purpose of killing or capturing them.\u201d
The reinterpretation effectively excludes economic activities such as logging, mining and industrial development from the ESA\u2019s prohibition on \u201ctake\u201d when those activities foreseeably kill or injure wildlife without intentionally targeting them.
The memo follows the Trump administration\u2019s repeal<\/a> in July of the ESA\u2019s definition of prohibited \u201charm,\u201d which was defined as \u201can act which actually kills or injures wildlife,\u201d including acts that \u201cmay include significant habitat modification or degradation\u201d.
Interior secretary Doug Burgum justified the repeal in July by saying<\/a>: \u201cFor years, federal agencies abused the ESA to obstruct lawful land use and burden American families and businesses.\u201d
Earlier this month, 20 states and Washington DC sued<\/a> the Trump administration over its decision<\/a> to redefine \u201charm,\u201d including removing \u201cmodification or degradation\u201d of habitat from conduct that can constitute a prohibited take.
In a statement on Thursday to the Guardian about the administration\u2019s reinterpretation of \u201ctake,\u201d the interior department, which oversees the FWS, said: \u201cAs outlined in the final rule, the department determined that the previous regulatory definition of \u2018harm\u2019 expanded the Endangered Species Act\u2019s prohibition on \u2018take\u2019 beyond the text Congress enacted. The final rule restores that interpretation while maintaining the ESA\u2019s core protections for listed species.\u201d
The memo has drawn swift backlash from environmental advocacy organizations. The Center for Biological Diversity pointed to the supreme court\u2019s 1995 6-3 decision<\/a> in Babbitt v Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon, in which the majority rejected the argument that \u201ctake\u201d is limited to actions deliberately directed against endangered species.
\u201cIf you chop down a tree full of endangered birds or race a huge ship through a pod of endangered whales, you should be held accountable for your destructive acts,\u201d Brett Hartl, the Center for Biological Diversity\u2019s government affairs director, said.<\/a>
\u201cBut this administration wants to give wildlife killers a get out of jail free card. Imposing new limitations on the entire definition of take is a flagrant and illegal attempt to rewrite the Endangered Species Act via unilateral fiat. This would drive imperiled species over the cliff to extinction,\u201d he added.
Similarly, the environmental law nonprofit Earthjustice told the Guardian: \u201cThe government\u2019s new legal position is a prescription for extinction. It says that as long as you claim you didn\u2019t mean to kill an endangered species, the law can\u2019t and won\u2019t stop you. That\u2019s ridiculous.
\u201cThe supreme court decided this issue in the Sweet Home case and its ruling still represents the best reading of the Endangered Species Act. We\u2019ll see the Trump administration in court about this.\u201d
The Trump administration\u2019s reinterpretation of the ESA is the latest in a series of environmental rollbacks. Since returning to office last January, Trump has moved to weaken federal protections<\/a> for old-growth forests, potentially jeopardizing habitat<\/a> for 400 endangered species across the US; scrapped drilling restrictions<\/a> near a world heritage site in New Mexico; and directed his administration to consider<\/a> the delisting of gray wolves from the ESA.
During the signing ceremony for the latter, Trump asked: \u201cYou can shoot them as of today?\u201d Agriculture secretary Brooke Rollins replied that Burgum \u201chas to do a little magic, but yes\u201d.<\/p>\n

source<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Fish and Wildlife Service memo calls for change in what it means to \u2018take\u2019 an endangered speciesMore than 1,600 critically imperiled species protected under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA) face losing further federal protections following a new reinterpretation of the 1973 law by the Donald Trump administration.A September 14 memo distributed to Fish and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":224594,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_genesis_hide_title":false,"_genesis_hide_breadcrumbs":false,"_genesis_hide_singular_image":false,"_genesis_hide_footer_widgets":false,"_genesis_custom_body_class":"","_genesis_custom_post_class":"","_genesis_layout":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-224593","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-us","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/224593","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=224593"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/224593\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/224594"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=224593"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=224593"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/quixnet.net\/wpinstance\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=224593"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}