The Endangered Species Act, also known as ESA, has saved an estimated 291 species from extinction. As the act continues to keep federal lands safe from industrialization, a new threat might hinder that. The government wants to revoke certain regulations that ESA enforces to help with “resource development and economic growth” according to the U.S. Department of the Interior’s website. The current threat these endangered species face is imminent, but will the benefits it supposedly brings to the government outweigh that?
What is the Endangered Species Act?
Passed on December 28, 1973, ESA has been around for over 50 years. The Nixon administration passed the act in the hopes of saving the 2300 animals on the endangered species list. The act proved itself efficient with a 99% success rate of saving animals and successfully taking 291 species off the endangered species list. But how does it work?
Deforestation is one of the main factors to the endangered species crisis. ESA was created to stop exactly that. The act reserves federal land to the animals and prohibits developmental actions in those areas. It also bans anyone from possessing or harming these animals in any way. This stops companies and other federal agencies from using the protected land for their own economic growth. Every federal agency is required to follow and enforce these regulations. But what if these laws change? What would change and what would that mean for the still hundreds of animals that are endangered?
What Will Change?
Many of the original Endangered Species Act’s regulations will stay in place, but some will be modified in order to provide more clarification and freedoms to any federal agencies affected by ESA. But some of these regulations allow agencies to not just think about the animals safety.
One of the main changes the revised version of ESA might include is allowing federal agencies to think about the economic challenges that might come with protecting a certain area. This allows them to oppose closing certain land for wildlife preservation to help with economic troubles. For example, if BLM, the Bureau of Land Management, wants to use a certain area of land for grazing, they can (if the area’s condition is not seen as critically endangered). However, that is not the only change.
The government’s next step to changing ESA is making it stricter. The new rule causes agencies to follow the rules by the letter. Any changes that need to be made will be made by the legislative branch and executive branch themselves. Essentially, the administration is getting rid of interpreting what the Endangered Species Act says and instead making it so every agency has to follow the rules exactly.
ESA is also saying goodbye to the “blanket rule.” The blanket rule is the idea that you can protect multiple different species from harm with only one regulation. With the new revisions, every species that goes onto the endangered list has to have a different rule to protect them. In the words of the U.S. Department of the Interior’s website, the rules are “tailored to each threatened species.”
The last change that will be happening for the time being is like an extension of the first modification. Although ESA will be able to take economic outlooks on how to protect a species the last rule assures everyone that FWS, the Fish and Wildlife Services, has the final say in what is best for the species. The Administration hopes this will provide clarity to landowners and businesses and not hurt them financially while ensuring, “exclusions will not result in species extinction.” Though these changes might seem small, they will make a difference in how the entirety of ESA operates.
The Lasting Impact
What seems like a few small changes now can make a huge impact on the future. For now, the new regulations haven’t been put into place, but that doesn’t mean they won’t be. The Trump administration promised the new changes will create many benefits to the economy, but at what cost? The animals will still be protected, maybe even better with the stricter rules, but what happens if the rules aren’t followed? It’s common for agencies to bend the rules a bit, but will that happen here too? All we can do is hope it can successfully save whatever animals we have left.
