@Nonilex
(1/2) My comment:

I urge you to reject the proposed rule change.

Clearly  "the definition of “harm,” like the other nine verbs in the definition, should be construed to require an “affirmative act[ ] . . . directed immediately and intentionally against a particular animal—not [an] act[ ] or omission[ ] that indirectly and accidentally cause[s] injury to a population of animals.” " is a misleading statment that fails to recognize the ability to predict cause and effect - something scientists, and wildlife biologists, have made great progress in doing with increasing accuracy.

It is clear that ANY act that changes the environment in a way that can reasonably be expected to reduce the "population" of specified animals causes harm.  The fact that such act is committed by entities that know, or should have known, that it "causes injury" of protected species is clear indication of intent.  

(Continued)

Boy they make those instructions seem tough, here I’ve simplified it by directly linking you to the correct proposed rule comment page.

Comment on the #Trump admin’s #EndangeredSpeciesAct proposed rule change redefining the word “#harm” here:

https://www.regulations.gov/commenton/FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0034-0001

"You're not actually harming any of them directly," he said, but the end result is essentially the same.

The public has 30 days to comment on the proposed rule change. The move will also likely be challenged in court.

#Law #Science #Wildlife #Habitat #EndangeredSpecies #Conservation #Climate

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/04/17/2025-06746/rescinding-the-definition-of-harm-under-the-endangered-species-act

The #Trump admin cites Scalia's argument in its proposal, saying it's "undertaking this change to adhere to the single, best meaning of the ESA."

#Conservation experts argue that it makes no sense to adopt such a narrow definition of harm. "If you're a prairie chicken in the Southwest, & there's an oil & gas developer & they want to destroy your prime breeding display grounds, the bird can't mate," said Hartl.

That interpretation has been a crucial part of how the #EndangeredSpecies Act has protected over 1,700 species since its passage in 1973, said Hartl. It's helped preserve spawning grounds for #AtlanticSturgeon, allowing them to mate & sustain the population. It has protected old-growth #forests in the Pacific Northwest that house northern #SpottedOwls, saving them from #extinction.

"Any conservation gains species were making will be reversed—we're going to see losses again," he said.
Under the #EndangeredSpecies Act, it's illegal to "take" an endangered species. By #law, "take" is defined to mean actions that harass, harm, or kill species. For decades, federal agencies have interpreted "harm" broadly, to include actions that modify or degrade #habitats in ways that impair endangered species' ability to feed, breed or find shelter.

The #Trump admin proposed a rule change that would prohibit only actions that directly hurt or kill actual animals, not the #habitats they rely on. If finalized, the change could make it easier to #log, #mine & build on #lands that #EndangeredSpecies need to thrive.

"#Habitat loss is the biggest single cause of #extinction & endangered species—it makes sense to address it,"Ctr for Biological Diversity govt affairs dir Brett Hartl said. He called efforts to deny that cause "callous & reckless."

“It’s time to fundamentally change how we think about species conservation,” Burgum wrote on social media. “Going forward, we must celebrate removals from the endangered list — not additions.”

#Trump #climate #EndangeredSpecies #Wildlife #conservation #law #science
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2025/04/10/trump-endangered-species-protections-dire-wolves/