Environmental Groups Challenge Changes to Endangered Species Act Definition

Why it matters locally: Changes to the definition of 'harm' under the Endangered Species Act could affect how federal regulations impact West Virginia's coal mining, timber, and oil and gas industries, which frequently interact with federally protected habitats and species.

Washington D.C. — Several environmental organizations have filed lawsuits challenging a recent change to the definition of "harm" under the Endangered Species Act. The Trump administration implemented this alteration. The Endangered Species Act uses the term "harm" to define actions that negatively affect protected wildlife. Plaintiffs argue that the administrative reinterpretation of this term may reduce the scope of protections currently afforded to various species. The lawsuits specifically address how the federal government defines what constitutes damage to wildlife populations and their habitats. This definition influences regulatory enforcement and conservation efforts across the United States. Further details on the specific legal arguments presented by the environmental groups have not yet been released. Officials from the administration have not publicly commented on the reasons behind the redefinition.