Interior and Commerce Departments rescind Endangered Species Act definition of harm

The Interior and Commerce Departments announced Friday they are rescinding a regulatory definition of harm under the Endangered Species Act that treated habitat modification as potential injury to protected species. The agencies said the definition had expanded federal authority to restrict energy production, infrastructure projects, and private land use.

Officials cited the dunes sagebrush lizard and the lesser prairie-chicken as examples of species whose listings produced permitting and compliance costs for energy developers, farmers, and ranchers.

Background on the rule The definition of harm dates to the 1990s.

In 1995 the Supreme Court upheld a version that included significant habitat modification when it actually kills or injures protected wildlife. Timber interests challenged the rule after the 1990 listing of the northern spotted owl. A 2021 study in the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management estimated that listing reduced timber employment by 16,000 to 32,000 jobs in the Pacific Northwest and northern California.

Legal basis for the change The administration is relying on the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, which ended Chevron deference and requires courts to interpret statutes independently. Officials said the rescission aligns regulations with the statute’s original text rather than agency interpretations.

Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said federal agencies had abused the ESA to obstruct lawful land use. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Brian Nesvik said the administration remains committed to protecting wildlife using the law and tools Congress provided.