The proposal advanced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service would limit the meaning to taking direct action to kill or injure endangered or threatened wildlife — removing the prohibition against habitat destruction that leads to those ends. It fits with White House officials’ intent to spur economic growth by slashing regulations. If adopted, the change could significantly curtail the reach of the Endangered Species Act, passed in 1973 under former President Nixon. It would also flout a 1995 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the definition of harm to encompass “significant habitat modification or degradation.” … (T)he previous definition prevented acts like cutting down swaths of old-growth forests in Northern California and the Pacific Northwest where federally threatened northern spotted owls nest and roost. Or filling in a wetland inhabited by red-legged frogs, California’s state amphibian also listed as federally threatened.

Related articles:

• Courthouse News Service: Interior department proposal could end habitat protections for endangered species
• The Independent: Trump administration is working to end habitat protections for endangered animals, environmental groups say 
• E&E News by Politico: Trump admin seeks to curtail reach of ESA protections
• The Washington Post: Trump officials say destroying endangered species’ habitats isn’t ‘harm’
• Associated Press: Proposed rule change on endangered species triggers alarm for environmentalists
• USA Today: US proposes looser interpretation of law that protects threatened species
• The Hill: Researchers point finger at politics for thwarting endangered species protections process
• The Colorado Sun (Denver): Trump move to redefine “harm” in Endangered Species Act may pose ecological risks for Colorado