Uncertain future of ESA and global wildlife protection

The Endangered Species Act (ESA), enacted in 1973, has been a cornerstone of U.S. wildlife conservation, helping to save many iconic species, including the California condor, bald eagle, American alligator, grizzly bear, Kemp's ridley sea turtle and whooping crane.

In 2019, the Trump administration introduced significant revisions to the ESA, particularly concerning species listings and critical habitat designations. These changes permitted economic factors to influence decisions on listing species as endangered or threatened.

If protecting a species would cause substantial economic hardship, the species' listing status could be affected, shifting the focus away from extinction risk as the sole criterion.

Additionally, the revisions introduced greater flexibility in designating critical habitats, allowing exclusions if economic costs were deemed too high. This facilitated development projects such as energy exploration and infrastructure construction.

Interim protections for species under review were also reduced, and the delisting process was simplified by incorporating factors like population trends instead of relying solely on strict ecological criteria.

These amendments aimed to streamline the ESA by incorporating economic considerations and reducing restrictions on development. However, the changes sparked significant opposition.

Conservation groups argued that they weakened the law's ability to protect vulnerable species. The Center for Biological Diversity criticized the revisions, claiming that they would hinder the designation of critical habitats for species impacted by climate change.

"These changes crash a bulldozer through the Endangered Species Act's lifesaving protections for America's most vulnerable wildlife," said Noah Greenwald, the center's endangered species director.

The China Biodiversity Conservation and Green Development Foundation also expressed concerns about the potential global impacts of Trump's revisions. While not directly claiming that these changes would undermine global species protection, experts warned that weakening the ESA might erode trust in international environmental cooperation and affect global biodiversity conservation efforts.

The Biden administration restored ESA protections weakened during the Trump era. Species listing decisions are now based solely on scientific evidence, removing economic factors, while critical habitat designations focus on ecological importance.

However, recovery plans face challenges due to funding limitations, and some critical habitat designations are delayed or contested, especially in areas with conflicts between conservation and economic interests.

Despite ongoing challenges, the future of ESA and global wildlife protection remains uncertain, with significant obstacles yet to be addressed.

(Cover: A close-up shot of an American alligator in Florida, U.S. /CFP)