Learn why urgent action is needed to protect the Endangered Species Act and defend the wildlife and habitats that depend on it.
On Endangered Species Day, Take a Stand for Habitat — and the Law That Protects It
This Endangered Species Day, we should be celebrating the incredible resilience of life—the wolves, whales, owls, orchids, frogs, and ferns that have survived against the odds thanks to people like you and one of the most powerful environmental laws in the world: the Endangered Species Act.
But instead, we’re fighting to stop the federal government from dismantling the very heart of that law. And we need your help to protect the Endangered Species Act.
Right now, the Trump administration is trying to gut the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by erasing the legal definition of “harm.” This might sound technical, but it’s not—it’s about whether we can stop the destruction of wildlife habitat before animals are injured or killed.
What is happening?
On April 17, the administration proposed to eliminate the ESA’s regulatory definition of “harm,” a move that would strip away essential habitat protections for some of the most imperiled species in the country. This flies in the face of decades of law, science, and precedent—and it would have devastating consequences by giving industry the green light to destroy vulnerable wildlife and the last places that should be their refuge.
We are in the middle of a biodiversity crisis. Habitat loss is the number one driver of extinction. If we don’t protect the places wildlife need to survive, we can’t protect wildlife. Period.
The ESA was created to prevent extinction, not rationalize it. There are no second chances when a species disappears forever.
Habitat destruction is the #1 reason species go extinct.
The ESA has long-recognized that “harm” to wildlife doesn’t just mean physically injuring an animal. It also means destroying the places they need to live—like their nesting sites, breeding grounds, or feeding habitats.
Take away an animal’s habitat, and you’re taking away its ability to survive. The current definition of harm—established by scientists, lawyers, and upheld by the Supreme Court—allows us to proactively protect species by preventing harmful development and habitat destruction before it’s too late.
Redefining “harm” is just another industry giveaway
One of the most powerful tools in the ESA has been its ability to protect animals as well as the places they live. That’s because the ESA defines “harm” to endangered species to include the destruction of their habitat—something industries like logging, oil and gas, and large-scale development have always resented.
They even tried to overturn this protection in the Supreme Court back in 1995. But the Court upheld it, affirming what biologists and common sense have long told us: if you destroy a species’ habitat, you’re harming the species.
If you recall anything about the infamous fight over spotted owls in the Northwest, it was the destructive logging industry that wanted to run over their ESA protections. Industry hasn’t changed in the time since that fight in the 1990s and now Trump is giving them carte blanche to destroy everything and everyone in their way.
This proposal is nothing short of a giveaway to industry at the expense of our most vulnerable species. It’s a deliberate attempt to weaken the ESA—one of the most effective conservation laws in the world—at a time when we should be strengthening it.
In short, it’s a gift to polluters and developers, and a death sentence for wildlife species already hanging by a thread.
The proposed rule change would:
- Strip away a vital legal tool in the ESA
- Make it harder to stop destructive activities like logging, mining, and drilling or even curtail their most destructive impacts
- Force agencies to wait until wildlife are already injured or dying to take action
- Undermine 30 years of legal precedent and scientific consensus
Let’s be clear: we can’t count on the federal government to protect wildlife anymore. This isn’t just about a rule change—it’s about whether our laws will continue to serve life and the public interest, or bend to the will of wealthy, extractive industries.
And this isn’t happening in a vacuum. The Trump administration has also floated reviving the so-called “God Squad,” a panel of officials with the power to waive species protections entirely. Even more disturbingly, Trump’s Interior Secretary has implied that we might not need endangered species protections at all, because science could one day recreate extinct animals in a lab, even though that has been thoroughly debunked.
This is reckless, unscientific, and morally bankrupt. The good news? We can still stop this and protect the Endangered Species Act. But we have to act now.
What You Can Do TODAY
Even though this is an uphill fight, this is our moment to push back. Public pressure works when we have enough of it—and we have until May 19 to make our voices heard.
1. Call & Email Your Members of Congress
Tell your Senators and Representatives: Defend the Endangered Species Act. Stop the rollback of the “harm” rule. Find yours here: (202) 224-3121
Suggested script:
Hi, my name is [Your Name] and I’m a constituent from [Your Town]. I’m calling to urge [Senator/Representative Name] to speak out against the proposed rollback of the “harm” definition in the Endangered Species Act.
Habitat destruction is the leading cause of extinction, and the current definition allows us to stop harm before it happens. This rule change would gut the ESA and put countless species at greater risk.
Please do everything you can to oppose this proposal and defend the full power of the Endangered Species Act. Thank you.
Ocelot photo courtesy of the Center for Biological Diversity
2. Submit a Public Comment
The Fish and Wildlife Service is accepting public input until May 19, 2025. Submit your comment here.
Please personalize this suggested comment:
I strongly oppose the proposed rescission of the regulatory definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act.
Habitat loss is the number one driver of extinction. The current definition of harm—upheld by the Supreme Court—is critical to ensuring that we can protect species before they are killed or injured by habitat destruction.
Stripping this language would delay interventions, increase legal ambiguity, and undermine the ESA’s science-based, preventative purpose. Please retain the current definition of harm and uphold the full protections of the Endangered Species Act.
Our wildlife—and our future—depend on it.
The Endangered Species Act can’t work if we dismantle its core protections. On this Endangered Species Day, let’s remember: extinction is a policy choice. So is protection.
Take action. Be bold. And let’s keep fighting for a future where all life has a place to thrive.
