Protect the ESA

Misguided efforts could harm endangered species

The Endangered Species Act is bedrock conservation law that has made a difference and must be rescued. Put into effect in 1973, the law was meant to ensure the survival of imperiled plants and animals. The legislation is credited with the rebound from near-extinction of the bald eagle and humpback whale.

The Trump administration has rolled back some of the ESA’s key protections, a strategy that Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has said is “squarely within the president’s mandate of easing the regulatory burden on the American public.”

The ESA revisions will make it easier to remove a species from the endangered list as well as weaken the protections for threatened species; reduce the habitat that threatened/endangered animals require to survive; allow federal regulators to consider potential negative economic impacts when deciding a species’ protection status; and place limitations on regulators’ ability to consider the effects of climate change when making assessments.

The zeal to reduce regulation has its merits, but putting the natural beauty of the United States and its wildlife at risk by weakening the ESA is misguided. A group of 17 attorneys general, including Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro, are taking the issue to court.

The group has sued the Trump administration over the ESA rule changes, arguing that they unlawfully undermine some of the act’s key requirements.

The Endangered Species Act is both noble in intent and effective in its application. Weakening its provisions cannot be justified on any grounds.