Defend the ESA — Keep Bulldozers Out of Critical Habitats

1,881 signatures toward our 30,000 goal

6.27% Complete

Sponsor: The Animal Rescue Site

Speak out now to stop a dangerous rollback that would erase habitat protections and leave endangered species unprotected against destruction.

Defend the ESA — Keep Bulldozers Out of Critical Habitats

For nearly 50 years, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has protected wildlife not just from hunters or poachers — but from bulldozers, chainsaws, and oil drills. It works because it recognizes that without habitat, animals cannot survive.

But a quiet move by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service could wipe that protection away.

These agencies have proposed a rule to erase habitat destruction from the legal definition of “harm.” If approved, the change would make it legal to pave over nesting grounds, reroute rivers, or tear down forests — as long as no one physically harms the animal1.

This Isn’t a Technicality — It’s an Extinction Risk

That may sound like a legal technicality. It’s not.

This change would gut the most powerful safeguard in the ESA — the ability to stop habitat destruction before it pushes a species to extinction. More than 80% of animals protected under the ESA were listed because their habitats were lost or degraded2. Without intact forests, rivers, wetlands, and coastlines, wildlife has nowhere left to go.

Northern spotted owls, red-cockaded woodpeckers, Florida panthers, grizzly bears, and hundreds of other species would be at risk. So would the rivers and wildlands that Americans rely on for clean water, flood control, and recreation3.

Driven by Politics, Not Science

This change is not driven by science. It’s driven by politics and pressure from industries that want fewer rules. It ignores the original purpose of the ESA: “to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved”4.

This rollback is happening fast. The comment period ends soon. If this rule goes through, it may take years — and a courtroom battle — to undo it. And by then, it may be too late for many species.

Add Your Name Before It’s Too Late

We still have a chance to stop it.

Now is the time to act. Now is the time to speak up — not just for wildlife, but for the wild places that make America whole. Protecting endangered animals means protecting the places they call home. It means standing up for a future where life can thrive.

Add your name today and tell the FWS and NMFS: Do not weaken the Endangered Species Act. Keep the full definition of harm — and protect our critical habitats.

More on this issue:

  1. Mariah Meek and Karrigan Börk, Earth Island Journal (21 May 2025), "How Redefining Just One Word Could Gut the Endangered Species Act."
  2. Kiley Price and Wyatt Myskow, Inside Climate News (17 Apr 2025), "Trump Administration’s Interpretation of One Word Could Gut Habitat Protections."
  3. Adam P. Kahn and Kevin Y. Chen, ACOEL (30 Apr 2025), "Major Shift Proposed for Endangered Species Act Interpretation."
  4. Federal Register (17 Apr 2025), "Rescinding the Definition of “Harm” Under the Endangered Species Act."

The Petition

To the Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the Administrator of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)

We, the undersigned, urgently call upon the FWS and NMFS to uphold the original intent of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by rejecting the proposed rescission of the regulatory definition of “harm.” This definition, which rightfully includes significant habitat modification and degradation, is essential to the ESA’s ability to protect imperiled wildlife.

For nearly five decades, the ESA has been a cornerstone of American conservation, shielding species not only from direct killing but from the destruction of the places they need to survive. More than 80 percent of species listed under the ESA face extinction primarily because of habitat loss. By redefining “harm” to exclude habitat destruction, the proposed change would strip the law of its most vital safeguard.

This shift would open the door to widespread deforestation, water diversion, and industrial development in areas previously protected as critical habitat — even if such actions ultimately drive species toward extinction.

Conservation is not just about protecting animals. It’s about maintaining the ecosystems that support clean air, fresh water, and a livable climate. When we protect endangered species and their habitats, we are protecting ourselves and future generations.

We urge the FWS and NMFS to withdraw this rule and retain the existing, scientifically and legally supported definition of harm. Doing so will honor the spirit of the ESA, safeguard America’s natural heritage, and ensure a healthier, more resilient future for all.

Sincerely,