By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block
A Trump administration memo obtained by The New York Times reveals an unprecedented attack on one of the most favored and effective wildlife protection laws in the U.S., the Endangered Species Act.
According to the story that broke last night, the administration is attempting to reinterpret the word “take” in the Endangered Species Act in a way that is not merely an insult to animals and the people who care about them. It is a full-scale assault on the meaning of the text of the Endangered Species Act.
Under this new interpretation, the incidental killing or injury of an endangered animal would no longer be considered illegal by the federal government. Instead, only the targeted, intentional killing of an endangered animal would be prohibited, according to the Times.
A pattern of attacks benefiting industry
There’s a pattern here, and it’s about who stands to benefit from these continued assaults on one of America’s most popular laws for animals.
It’s certainly not the average American. The Endangered Species Act consistently receives overwhelming public approval ratings of more than 80%.
Instead, the beneficiaries are the massive industries that profit from destroying vital habitat and the animals who depend on it for survival. Oil and gas companies and other developers that have to (horror of horrors!) apply for a permit when their activities posed a risk of killing animals with federal endangered species protections—such as North Atlantic right whales, gray wolves and black-footed ferrets to name just a few—could be handed a pass.
If this reinterpretation takes effect, more endangered animals will surely die. And we will all be worse off for it.
A broader effort to weaken wildlife protections
This latest move, which comes from within the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, is part of a coordinated effort to attack some of the country’s most vulnerable species.
In November 2025, the Trump administration effectively issued a declaration of war on the Endangered Species Act and other wildlife protection laws, outlining several lines of attack that could be expected in the months ahead.
Since then, there has been a chilling follow-through on those intentions.
Convening the "God Squad”
In late March, the Trump administration convened the federal Endangered Species Committee (known as the “God Squad”) for only the fourth time ever. The Committee has the power to grant case-by-case exemptions to the protections of the Endangered Species Act—in essence, the authority to decide that a project should be allowed to proceed despite jeopardizing the very existence of a threatened or endangered species.
When it convened, the committee took less than 15 minutes to grant sweeping exemptions relieving oil and gas companies operating in the Gulf of Mexico from any further burdens of worrying about the protection of whales, turtles or other wildlife.
Dismantling protections for threatened species
In July, the Trump administration eliminated the blanket 4(d) rule, a regulation instrumental in protecting threatened species before they slide further down the path toward extinction.
As a result, newly listed threatened species will no longer automatically receive protections from killing, harassment, or other harms under federal law. In response, we and a coalition of conservation organizations, represented by Earthjustice, put the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on notice that we will take the agency to court if it does not reverse the decision within 60 days.
Undermining habitat protections
That same month, the administration issued a rule eliminating a long-standing regulatory interpretation of the word “harm” in the Endangered Species Act, a definition that has been essential to the law’s effectiveness.
Claiming the Act’s protections remain intact while stripping away habitat protections under the “harm” rule is like saying a house is secure after its foundation has been removed. Habitat protection is species protection. That principle is why the Endangered Species Act has been responsible for some of America’s greatest conservation successes, helping save species from the brink of extinction, including the bald eagle.
Wolves in the crosshairs
Earlier this month, the Trump administration dealt another blow to wildlife protections through an executive order directing Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to determine whether gray wolves and Mexican wolves still meet the criteria for Endangered Species Act protections. During the press conference where Trump signed the order, the president joked (and received laughs) about killing wolves.
The move was clearly an attempt to scapegoat wolves to pander to American farmers and ranchers, who are dissatisfied with the president’s decision to ease tariffs on 300,000 metric tons of imported beef.
Removing protections for wolves will do nothing for ranchers and farmers, as fewer than 1% of cows and sheep who die before slaughter are killed by wild carnivores (e.g., wolves), according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s own data. Removing protections for wolves will only result in more wolves suffering cruelty and death.
Stand up for wolves >>
Weakening protections for grizzly bears
Even though three polls since 2020 confirm the American public’s broad support for the protection of grizzlies, in July, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to change Endangered Species Act protections for grizzly bears in the Lower 48 states. The change would establish a tiered system of state-run grizzly bear management, with seemingly little federal oversight or public participation, that puts grizzly bears into danger from traps, snares set for wolves and other species, bait stations, springtime black bear hunts and packs of hunting hounds used to hunt black bears and mountain lions.
But Americans want grizzly bears to retain protections: A January 2025 survey found that supermajorities of Americans—including rural residents of Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, and across the political spectrum, including conservatives, hunters, ranchers and farmers—support continued federal protections for grizzly bears. A 2022 poll showed that 76% of voters oppose trophy hunting, and 73% specifically oppose grizzly bear trophy hunting. A 2020 Montana survey found that 92% of residents believe grizzly bears have a right to exist.
An accelerating effort to gut a popular law
Taken together, these actions represent the latest hostile action in a staggering sequence of efforts to weaken the Endangered Species Act.
For more than half a century, the nation’s most important wildlife conservation law has enjoyed broad public support and helped bring countless species back from the brink. Yet despite its success and popularity, the administration continues to pursue measures that would hollow out the protections at its very heart.
We cannot let that happen.
Kitty Block is president and CEO of Humane World for Animals.
