Today, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed several burdensome rules related to the Endangered Species Act (ESA). House Committee on Natural Resources Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.) released the following statement in response:

"America is home to a rich diversity of species, and we have a responsibility to care for and conserve them well. Unfortunately, the ESA is not accomplishing this goal. Radical litigants have completely overtaken this law and weaponized it to line their own pockets, not protect our most sensitive habitats and wildlife. Now the Biden administration is rolling back commonsense reforms and further turning the ESA into a political battering ram rather than a conservation tool. These proposed rules take us in the wrong direction and are entirely unnecessary given the proven track record of success from private conservationists and state and local land managers. I look forward to working with my colleagues here in Congress to restore reason to this process and codify long-term, science-based methods to keep our wildlife secure for generations to come."

Background

The Endangered Species Act (P.L. 93-205 or Act) was enacted in 1973 and last amended by Congress in 1988. In 2019, the previous administration finalized several rules that address how the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) implements the ESA. The three rules at issue today address the implementation of sections 4 and 7 of the ESA.

Section 4, among other things, deals with adding species to or removing species from the ESA’s protections and designating critical habitat. In particular, one of the proposed rules would reinstate the so called “blanket 4(d) rule”. A "blanket 4(d) rule" under the ESA allows the FWS to extend most of the prohibitions for endangered species to threatened species. This was clearly not the intent of the ESA, or else Congress would not have created the two listing categories. A 2019 rule finalized under the Trump administration requires FWS to create species specific 4(d) rules to bolster protections. The FWS had admitted in the past that when they develop species-specific 4(d) rules, they have seen more benefits, including removing redundant permitting requirements and facilitating implementation of beneficial conservation actions.

Section 7 covers consultations with other federal agencies. The 2019 rule clarifies the interagency consultation process and makes it more efficient and consistent by codifying alternative consultation mechanisms that may provide greater efficiency for how ESA consultations are conducted. The 2019 rule also establishes a deadline for informal consultations to provide greater certainty for federal agencies and applicants of timely decisions, without compromising conservation of ESA-listed species.

Today, the Biden administration proposed rolling back crucial reforms implemented in the 2019 rulemaking and returning the ESA to its overly burdensome and archaic form.