Each of these species are here today because of the Endangered Species Act.
What is the current state of the Endangered Species Act?
On November 21st, the Trump Administration released proposed rules that would significantly weaken the Endangered Species Act – one of our nation’s (and the world’s) most critical tools for protecting vulnerable wildlife and the ecosystems they depend on. If finalized, these changes would strip automatic safeguards from threatened and newly listed species, reduce federal oversight of destructive projects, and make it easier to eliminate critical habitat necessary for recovery and conservation.
Why is the Endangered Species Act considered a foundational and impressive law as it stands without changes?
- The ESA is one of the most important laws in the world for protecting biodiversity. It’s our best tool to prevent extinctions, plus it’s popular, bipartisan and proven effective.
- Thanks to the ESA, species like bald eagles, gray whales and dozens of others are still with us today. In fact, 99% of all listed species have been saved from extinction.
- The proposed changes could put our most cherished species at risk. The Trump Administration is prioritizing resource extraction, business interests, and short-term energy grabs over the survival of wildlife and the ecosystems they depend on.
What is the call to action, how can I help defend the Endangered Species Act?
We are joined by environmental groups and wildlife advocates across the country in sounding the alarm – with a goal of submitting 1 million unique and specific comments. These rollbacks would have far-reaching, catastrophic consequences for endangered marine species, terrestrial wildlife, plants and entire ecosystems. Together, we are urging the public to speak out and submit comments to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service opposing these rules before the December 20th deadline.
To make it extremely simple to take action, we’ve created a toolkit with not only background and but also sample comments for all 4 action alerts. Remember these key points when submitting your comment:
- Include a heading that states the Name of the Project and the Docket Id Number.
- Use an opening sentence to establish your credibility. State who you are and summarize any of your experiences that are relevant to the topic of the proposed project.
- Use the next few sentences to succinctly summarize the data or information that you have provided.
- Address benefits of protecting species from extinction for the public and country
- Address potential negative or overlooked impacts
- Describe the personal impact
- Other tips:
- Be unique, fact-based, and brief. Formatted letters are not as effective!
- As a community member, your ability to share information that is unique to your area and your knowledge of your community’s interests is your greatest strength when writing a public comment. Your comment can report on local information or knowledge of potential impacts of the project, scientific evidence, or other data that opposes the purpose behind the proposed project.
- You do not have to come to a conclusion or judgment regarding the entirety of the proposed project, but you do have to clearly communicate the implications of the information that you present.
- If you are citing specific papers, newspaper articles, or online data or references in your comment, including your sources will help the agency staff find them later.
December 9th: Action 1 → Listing Endangered & Threatened Species and Designating Critical Habitat
- Background – The proposed rule would overturn the stronger 2024 updates, reinstate the weaker 2019 Trump-era regulations governing species listing and critical habitat under 50 CFR part 424. These changes would narrow how the agencies interpret the “foreseeable future” for threatened species, making it harder to protect wildlife vulnerable to climate change, drought, disease and other compounding threats. The rule would also revive restrictions that limit the designation of unoccupied critical habitat (areas that are essential for the recovery of wide-ranging species such as wolves, grizzlies, salmon and sage grouse) and restore regulatory language that courts have criticized as inconsistent with the ESA’s conservation mandate.
- Sample Comment – “I oppose the proposal to reinstate the weakened 2019 ESA listing and critical habitat regulations. Narrowing the definition of “foreseeable future” and restricting unoccupied critical habitat would make it harder to protect species threatened by climate change, disease and cumulative habitat loss. These rollbacks undermine the ESA’s requirement to use the best available science and would impede recovery for species that depend on future habitat conditions. The stronger 2024 protections should remain in place.”
December 10th: Action 2 → Section 7 Interagency Consultation Regulations
- Background – This is a direct attack on the backbone of the ESA, and dismantles Section 7 interagency consultation regulations — the process that requires federal agencies to ensure their actions do not jeopardize listed species or destroy critical habitat. The rule would roll back the stronger 2024 Section 7 regulations and re-adopt the weaker 2019 Trump-era framework. It also narrows how effects on species and habitat can be analyzed, prioritizing economics over science.
- Sample Comment – “Weakening Section 7 rules by narrowing baselines, raising thresholds for impacts and ignoring cumulative or climate effects – puts endangered and threatened species at serious risk. The Fish & Wildlife Service must retain the stronger 2024 protections to safeguard wildlife and their habitats, or federal projects will proceed without full scientific review. We strongly oppose the proposed changes to Section 7.”
December 11th: Action 3 → Threatened Species Protection
- Background – The Trump Admin wants to remove the long-standing blanket 4(d) rule, which automatically extends the same protections to newly listed Threatened species as those afforded to Endangered species, unless otherwise specified. Under this proposal, the USFWS would control and potentially reduce protections for specific species.
- Sample Comment – “The blanket 4(d) rule currently provides immediate, automatic protections for threatened species during their most vulnerable period. Without it, newly listed species may be unprotected from harm, killing or habitat destruction until slower, species-specific rules are created. Maintaining the rule is critical to prevent regulatory gaps and ensure the ESA continues to protect threatened species effectively.”
December 12th: Action 4 → Critical Habitat Exclusions
- Background – The proposed rule would reinstate the 2020 Trump-era Critical Habitat Exclusion framework under ESA Section 4(b)(2), making it significantly easier to exclude areas from critical habitat designations. This approach places a strong bias toward exclusions favored by industry, energy developers, ranching interests and private landowners, and requires the Fish & Wildlife Service to give outsized weight to economic impacts – even when the scientific benefits of habitat protection are clear.
- Sample Comment – “Critical habitat is essential for species recovery, and reverting to the 2020 rule would reduce the size and effectiveness of designated areas, increase habitat fragmentation, and shift decision-making away from science and toward political and economic pressure. Because habitat loss is the leading driver of extinction, weakening these protections directly undermines the ESA’s core mission. The Service should reject this rollback and instead restore the more balanced 2016 policy or adopt a stronger science-based framework.”
