On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NOAA proposed a major change to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by seeking to eliminate the regulatory definition of “harm.” Currently, “harm” includes habitat modifications that indirectly injure or kill protected species, a definition established in 1995. This has caused longstanding conflict with private landowners, especially in energy, agriculture, and forestry, whose land may qualify as habitat even if the species isn’t present.
One notable case involved the designation of 1,500 acres of a Louisiana tree farm as critical habitat for the Mississippi gopher frog, despite the species not being seen there in decades. Critics argue the existing definition overextends federal reach. The Services now claim the definition of “harm” is unnecessary, inconsistent with the statute, and that the term can be understood without elaboration.
If finalized, this rule would significantly narrow the ESA’s scope by removing habitat considerations from what constitutes “harm,” potentially benefiting landowners and developers but raising environmental concerns.
FFBF will continue to follow this issue and provide comments to the Services, in support of eliminating “harm” from the definition.
