Biden aims to secure species protections revoked by Trump

The Biden administration is pushing to restore regulations protecting vulnerable species that the Trump administration previously scrapped. Many Republican lawmakers worry the protections are a hindrance to economic development. 

National Park Service/AP
A female gray wolf walks out of her cage at Isle Royale National Park in Michigan, Sept. 26, 2018 as part of a wildlife protection program. Scientists have urged the reinstatement of protections for gray wolves as their population has dwindled in some parts of the U.S.

The Biden administration says it is canceling or reviewing a host of actions by the Trump administration to roll back protections for endangered or threatened species, with a goal of strengthening a landmark law while addressing climate change.

The reviews by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service are aimed at five Endangered Species Act regulations finalized by the Trump administration, including critical habitat designations and rules defining the scope of federal actions on endangered species. The Fish and Wildlife Service also said Friday it will reinstate the so-called “blanket rule,” which mandates additional protections for species that are newly classified as threatened. Under former President Donald Trump, those protections were removed.

Habitat designations for threatened or endangered species can result in limitations on energy development such as mining or oil drilling that could disturb a vulnerable species, while the scoping rule helps determine how far the government may go to protect imperiled species.

Under Mr. Trump, officials rolled back protections for the northern spotted owl, gray wolves, and other species, actions that President Joe Biden has vowed to review. His administration already has moved to reverse Mr. Trump’s decision to weaken enforcement of the century-old Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which made it harder to prosecute bird deaths caused by the energy industry.

The decision on the bird law was among more than 100 business-friendly actions on the environment that Mr. Trump took and Mr. Biden wants reconsidered and possibly revised or scrapped. The reviews announced Friday follow through on that executive order.

“The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is committed to working with diverse federal, tribal, state, and industry partners to not only protect and recover America’s imperiled wildlife but to ensure cornerstone laws like the Endangered Species Act are helping us meet 21st century challenges,” said Martha Williams, principal deputy director of the Fish and Wildlife Service.

The agency looks forward to “continuing these conservation collaborations and to ensuring our efforts are fully transparent and inclusive,’’ Ms. Williams added.

The reviews announced Friday will take months or years to complete. Many rules targeted by Mr. Trump originated with former President Barack Obama and took him years to undo, continuing a decades-old, back-and-forth between Democratic and Republican administrations with starkly differing approaches to environmental regulation.

Industry groups and Republicans in Congress have long viewed the Endangered Species Act as an impediment to economic development, and under Mr. Trump, they successfully lobbied to weaken the law’s regulations. Environmental groups and Democratic-controlled states battled the moves in court, but those cases remained unresolved when Mr. Trump left office in January.

Noah Greenwald with the Center for Biological Diversity said the environmental group was grateful to see the Trump rules being canceled or changed, particularly a rule that would have denied blanket protections for threatened species.

“We hope they move quickly so more species aren’t harmed,” Mr. Greenwald said.

Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles, who was involved in legal challenges to the Trump rules, said Friday’s announcement covered major changes under the previous administration that needed to be addressed. But Ms. Boyles said questions remain about what will happen while the new proposals go through a lengthy rule-making process.

“These will take time, and in the interim we don’t want the harm to continue,” she said.

Jonathan Wood, a lawyer for the Pacific Legal Foundation, a conservative law firm that advocates for property rights, said the Biden proposals could backfire by removing incentives for landowners to cooperate in helping imperiled wildlife.

“There were some things in the Trump rules that were right,” Mr. Wood said, citing regulations that he said offered needed flexibility and better incentives to recover endangered species.

“This looks basically like a 180-degree reversal,’’ he said. “Once again we’re going to yo-yo back and forth on what the rules are.’’

The Biden administration said in January it was reconsidering a Trump rule that removed federal protections for wolves across most of the Lower 48 states, but officials so far have not backed away from the Trump rule and continue to defend it in court. Wildlife advocates have pressed to revive the federal protections for gray wolves across the Northern Rockies and Upper Midwest after Republicans in Idaho, Montana, and other states made it much easier to kill the predators.

In the final days of the Trump administration, the Fish and Wildlife Service cut by one-third the amount of protected federal old-growth forest used by the spotted owl, a move that was cheered by the timber industry and slammed by Democrats and environmental groups.

The Biden administration has temporarily delayed putting the Trump-era rules into effect in order to review the decision.

Last week, the Biden administration proposed federal protections for the lesser prairie chicken, saying its habitat across five states is in danger of becoming more fragmented, with a further toll expected from the effects of climate change and drought. The chicken’s habitat spans parts of New Mexico, Colorado, Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas – including a portion of the oil-rich Permian Basin.

The administration said this week that an extremely rare wildflower that grows only in Nevada’s high desert should be protected under the Endangered Species Act. The Tiehm’s buckwheat flower grows where an Australian mining company wants to dig for lithium.

This story was reported by The Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Give us your feedback

We want to hear, did we miss an angle we should have covered? Should we come back to this topic? Or just give us a rating for this story. We want to hear from you.

 

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.