US memo narrows Endangered Species Act protection for accidental wildlife deaths

A Fish and Wildlife Service memo would limit the Endangered Species Act’s definition of unlawful “take” to intentional conduct directed at specific animals. The Interior Department confirmed the memo, while critics and Democratic-led states argue the broader changes weaken protections for endangered species.

The US government is preparing to narrow how the Endangered Species Act (ESA) is interpreted, according to The New York Times and officials who confirmed the policy to AFP. The change is set out in a memo signed by Brian Nesvik, director of the Interior Department’s Fish and Wildlife Service.

The memo would define “take”—a term covering actions such as pursuing, killing or capturing protected wildlife—as conduct intentionally directed at a particular animal or animals. As a result, deaths caused unintentionally by foreseeable risks from activities including commercial fishing or logging would no longer be treated as unlawful under the law, according to the supplied report.

The Interior Department confirmed the memo’s authenticity to AFP. It said the guidance followed a final rule rescinding the regulatory definition of “harm,” while maintaining that the ESA still prohibits conduct including harassing, pursuing, hunting, shooting, wounding, killing, trapping, capturing or collecting protected wildlife.

The policy is part of a wider effort by the Trump administration to change the application of the landmark 1973 law. The supplied material says the administration has also moved to redefine “harm,” potentially allowing oil drilling, mining and other activities in endangered habitats when they do not directly kill or injure animals. It has also ended the automatic application of endangered-species protections to animals classified as threatened.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has said the revisions are needed because the ESA has been “weaponized” to obstruct economic projects, reduce competitiveness and undermine national security. The administration has separately announced plans to shrink two large protected areas in Utah by more than 90 percent, opening millions of acres to fossil-fuel extraction and mining, according to the report.

The changes are facing legal challenges. Attorneys general from 20 Democratic-led states and Washington, DC, filed a lawsuit last week over the administration’s overhaul, including the redefinition of “harm,” protections for newly threatened species and business-related considerations in designating critical habitat. Washington Attorney General Nick Brown accused the administration of undermining the law and replacing stewardship with exploitation.