A coalition of environmental groups is challenging the Trump administration’s repeal of its “blanket” rule under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
In August, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) removed the blanket rule option for newly listed threatened species under Section 4(d) of the ESA. The rule created a default that applied nearly all endangered species protections to threatened species unless an alternative rule was issued. By repealing the blanket rule option, USFWS could customize protections for each threatened species, the agency said.
In their lawsuit, the environmental groups contended that the repealed rule makes it less likely for species-specific rules to adequately protect species.
“This comes at a time when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service faces a backlog of 400 species awaiting consideration for ESA listing, has seen staff cuts affecting at least 500 biologists, and has lost more than a third of the budget allocated for this work,” the groups said. “With this perpetual backlog, reversing the blanket 4(d) rule undermines the ESA and strips vital conservation measures for hundreds of newly listed threatened species for the foreseeable future.”
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, seeks an order declaring the blanket repeal rule invalid, vacating the rule, enjoining the USFWS from applying it, and reinstating the prior regulation extending blanket protections to threatened species.
“This senseless rule will strain an already overburdened system, and newly listed threatened species will suffer for it,” said Joanna Zhang, endangered species advocate for WildEarth Guardians. “Proactive protections for threatened species under the Endangered Species Act have been effective at stopping extinctions, and we’re fighting to uphold the law.”
The groups in the lawsuit included Sierra Club, WildEarth Guardians, National Parks Conservation Association, Humane World for Animals, Conservation Council for Hawai‘i and Save the Manatee Club.
Background
USFWS said that removing the rule would reduce permitting burdens and would also bring the agency in line with the National Marine Fisheries Service’s practices of developing species-specific 4(d) rules rather than using a blanket rule option.
“Going forward, whenever we propose a species-specific 4(d) rule, we will ensure that each rule includes a necessary and advisable determination (including consideration of conservation and economic impacts) and we will seek public comment on that determination,” the agency said in its final rule.
The new rule applies only to species-specific 4(d) rules finalized after Aug. 20 and did not alter protections for any threatened species listed prior to the repeal. — Anna Miller Fortozo, WLJ managing editor
