Trump administration moves to roll back some protections for endangered and threatened species – CBS News

Report on Proposed Revisions to the U.S. Endangered Species Act and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction and Executive Summary

The United States government has proposed significant regulatory changes to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. These revisions aim to reduce regulatory burdens to facilitate economic activities, particularly in the energy, mining, and agriculture sectors. However, this policy shift presents a direct challenge to the nation’s progress toward several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), most notably SDG 15 (Life on Land), SDG 14 (Life Below Water), and SDG 13 (Climate Action). This report analyzes the proposed changes and evaluates their potential impact on biodiversity conservation and sustainable development frameworks.

Proposed Regulatory Changes and Stated Rationale

The administration’s proposal includes a suite of revisions that would fundamentally alter the implementation of the Endangered Species Act.

Key Proposed Revisions

• Elimination of the “Blanket Rule”: The proposal seeks to remove the automatic extension of protections to species listed as “threatened.” Instead, protections would be determined on a case-by-case basis, a process that could introduce significant delays.
• Introduction of Economic Analysis: A new provision would require officials to analyze the economic impacts of designating critical habitat for a species. This marks a departure from the practice of making such decisions based solely on scientific data.
• Redefinition of “Harm”: Other pending proposals aim to revise the legal definition of “harm” to a species, potentially narrowing the scope of activities considered detrimental to their survival.
• Exemptions for Development: The changes could allow certain projects, such as logging in national forests, to bypass species protection requirements.

Official Justification

According to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, the revisions are intended to restore the ESA to its original intent, provide “certainty to states, tribes, landowners and businesses,” and ground conservation efforts in “sound science and common sense.” The administration argues that existing environmental laws impede economic growth and that these changes are necessary to spur development.

Analysis of Impacts on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

The proposed rollback of ESA protections directly conflicts with the principles and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

SDG 15: Life on Land

This goal calls for urgent action to halt the loss of biodiversity and protect threatened species. The proposed changes undermine several of its core targets:

1. Target 15.5 (Protect biodiversity and natural habitats): By weakening protections for threatened species and their habitats, the revisions could accelerate the decline of at-risk populations, directly opposing the goal of halting biodiversity loss. Species such as the monarch butterfly, California spotted owl, and North American wolverine are cited as being at increased risk.
2. Target 15.9 (Integrate ecosystem and biodiversity values): Introducing economic considerations into habitat designation prioritizes short-term economic growth over the intrinsic and long-term value of ecosystems, contradicting the integration of these values into national planning.

SDG 14: Life Below Water

The ESA protects numerous marine and freshwater species. The proposed changes could negatively impact efforts to conserve aquatic ecosystems.

• Target 14.2 (Protect and restore ecosystems): Species like the Florida manatee, salmon, and steelhead trout, which depend on protected aquatic habitats, could face increased threats, hindering efforts to sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems.

SDG 13: Climate Action

The revisions fail to account for the increasing threat that climate change poses to species survival, thereby weakening climate resilience efforts.

• Target 13.1 (Strengthen resilience to climate-related hazards): The case of the Yarrow’s spiny lizard, whose population is collapsing due to rising temperatures, exemplifies how climate change is a primary driver of extinction. Weakening the ESA makes it more difficult to protect species vulnerable to climate impacts, thus undermining adaptation and resilience strategies.

Conflict Between Economic and Environmental Goals (SDG 8 vs. SDGs 13, 14, 15)

The administration’s rationale explicitly prioritizes SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) by seeking to remove barriers to development. However, this approach creates a direct conflict with environmental sustainability goals. Sustainable development requires a balanced integration of economic, social, and environmental dimensions, whereas the proposed ESA changes subordinate environmental protection to economic interests.

Stakeholder Perspectives and Historical Context

Support for Regulatory Reform

Proponents, including industry groups and organizations like the Property and Environment Research Center (PERC), argue that the revisions are a “necessary course correction.” They contend that the “blanket rule” was an unlawful regulatory overreach that discouraged private conservation efforts and that the changes will restore the focus of the ESA on species recovery.

Opposition from Environmental and Scientific Communities

Environmental law firms like Earthjustice and conservation scientists warn that the proposals will create yearslong delays in protection efforts and allow agencies to ignore harmful consequences to species. Critics argue that political appointees may use faulty science to justify decisions that favor development over conservation, as was alleged in previous rollbacks concerning the northern spotted owl and gray wolf.

Historical Success of the ESA

Since its enactment over 50 years ago, the Endangered Species Act has been a cornerstone of U.S. conservation policy. It is credited with preventing the extinction of 99% of the species listed under its protection, leading to the recovery of iconic species such as the bald eagle and the American alligator. This track record underscores its critical role in achieving the objectives outlined in SDG 15.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 15: Life on Land

  This is the most central SDG, as the article’s main topic is the rollback of protections for terrestrial species under the Endangered Species Act. It discusses threats to biodiversity, habitat loss, and the potential extinction of animals like the California spotted owl, North American wolverine, and Yarrow’s spiny lizard.

• SDG 14: Life Below Water

  The article mentions several aquatic and coastal species affected by the legislation, including the Florida manatee, salmon, steelhead trout, and green sea turtles. The discussion on protections and conservation efforts for these species directly connects to the goal of conserving marine and freshwater ecosystems.

• SDG 13: Climate Action

  The article explicitly links climate change to species endangerment. The case of the Yarrow’s spiny lizard is presented as a direct consequence of “rapidly warming temperatures,” highlighting how climate change is a primary threat pushing species toward extinction.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The entire article revolves around a piece of national legislation—the Endangered Species Act. The debate over its revision, the influence of industry and political groups, and the use of legal challenges (lawsuits) all relate to the strength, fairness, and effectiveness of institutions and laws designed to protect the environment.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. SDG 15: Life on Land

   • Target 15.5: Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species.

     The article is centered on this target. The proposed rollback of the “blanket rule” for threatened species is seen by environmentalists as a move that would undermine efforts to “prevent the extinction of threatened species.” The article mentions that the Act has been credited with saving 99% of listed species, directly speaking to the goal of preventing extinction.

   • Target 15.9: By 2020, integrate ecosystem and biodiversity values into national and local planning, development processes, poverty reduction strategies and accounts.

     This target is addressed through the conflict described between economic growth and environmental protection. The proposal to “analyz[e] economic impacts when deciding whether habitat is critical to a species’ survival” is a direct example of how biodiversity values are being weighed against economic factors in national planning and development processes promoted by industries like “oil and gas, mining and agriculture.”

2. SDG 14: Life Below Water

   • Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts…

     The article’s mention of protections for the Florida manatee (a coastal species), salmon and steelhead trout (which depend on both marine and freshwater ecosystems), and the recovery of green sea turtles due to conservation efforts directly relates to the management and protection of marine and coastal ecosystems.

3. SDG 13: Climate Action

   • Target 13.3: Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning.

     The article highlights the work of Professor John Wiens, whose research on the Yarrow’s spiny lizard demonstrates the impact of climate change on a species. The petition filed to protect the lizard, based on this scientific evidence, is an action aimed at raising awareness and prompting institutional response (adaptation) to the specific, localized impacts of climate change.

4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

     The focus on the Endangered Species Act, a national law, is central. The article details how the administration is attempting to change the regulations that implement this law. The mention of lawsuits, such as the one filed by the Property and Environment Research Center and the legal analysis by Earthjustice, demonstrates the process of using the legal system to challenge or defend the rule of law as it applies to environmental protection.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Red List Index (Indicator 15.5.1)

  The article explicitly mentions the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and its “Red List of Threatened Species.” It cites the Red List’s latest assessment that “arctic seals are being pushed closer to extinction” and “more than half of bird species around the world are declining.” This is a direct reference to the official indicator used to measure progress on Target 15.5.

• Species Population and Protection Status (Implied)

  The article provides several implied indicators. The statistic that the Endangered Species Act “has been credited with saving 99% of the listed species” is a direct measure of the effectiveness of protection policies. Furthermore, the status of individual species mentioned—such as the declining Yarrow’s spiny lizard, the recovering green sea turtle, and the previously delisted but now restored protections for the gray wolf—serve as qualitative indicators of biodiversity health and conservation success.

• Integration of Environmental Factors in Policy Making (Implied)

  An implied indicator for Target 15.9 is the outcome of the proposed policy change to “analyz[e] economic impacts when deciding whether habitat is critical to a species’ survival.” Whether this policy is enacted and how it is applied would serve as a measure of how biodiversity values are being integrated into, or subordinated to, economic considerations in national development planning.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: cbsnews.com