Changes to how federal officials interpret just two words in the landmark Endangered Species Act could imperil numerous Michigan animals, plants and insects at risk of extinction, according to wildlife advocates.
Under the Nixon-era law, developers are required to consult with or obtain a permit from the US Fish and Wildlife Service if construction could harm a protected species or its habitat.
What other species around the country are at risk? Read about right whales, panthers and more from our editorial partner, Grist.
But in a reversal to the law’s longstanding protections, the Trump administration narrowed the definition of “harm” to no longer include degrading habitats of at-risk species. The administration also said last month it would reinterpret the meaning of “taking” an endangered species, which has historically criminalized attempts to kill, harass, injure or capture a species. Now, the “take” will be limited to intentional killing.
Those changes will impact the 26 federally protected species found in Michigan, which include iconic species like piping plovers, eastern massasauga rattlesnakes and the rare Michigan monkeyflower.
Wildlife advocates said stripping protections for habitats will weaken the law’s power and threaten at-risk species — habitat loss is the primary driver of extinction, according to researchers and federal agencies.
“I don’t think there’s any action that could have been taken that’s going to cause further harm to endangered species than removing habitat protections,” said Adam Austin, a wildlife biologist and co-executive director of Midwest Friends of Wildlife.
Trump officials said the changes restore the law’s original intent of protecting species. They’re part of the administration’s broader efforts to reform regulations that it says are an obstacle to energy development.
Some business advocacy groups in Michigan mostly agreed with the changes, calling them a step in the right direction toward better balancing development needs and protecting the environment.
“We do need reforms on the side of permitting,” said Mike Alaimo, vice president of legislative and external affairs for the Michigan Chamber of Commerce. “Deregulation for the sake of deregulation is not a good thing, but we can continue to be open for business while safeguarding our environment.”
In an email, spokesperson Ed Golder for the Michigan Department of Natural Resources said that agency hasn’t received any guidance from the US Fish and Wildlife Service yet on how the changes will be implemented in the state.
“As far as our state law on threatened and endangered species is concerned, it remains unchanged,” Golder said.
One animal Austin worries about is the eastern massasauga rattlesnake, Michigan’s only venomous snake species.
The Endangered Species Act has already helped conserve millions of acres of wetlands in Michigan, he said, where most eastern massasaugas are found — massasauga means “great river mouth” in Anishinaabemowin. Austin said the federal law has worked in tandem with Michigan’s strong wetlands protection laws, making the state a stronghold for the species.
But in recent years, shrinking wetland acreage across the Midwest from development, drainage and climate change has fragmented the rattlesnakes’ habitats.
That’s left the species unable to breed with other populations. More than a third of the roughly 260 sites where the snake has been surveyed across the Midwest are at risk of habitat loss, according to the US Fish and Wildlife Service.
Eastern massasaugas also get “a really bad reputation” as venomous snakes, Austin said. Often the subject of state advisories to stop harassing the animal, he said eastern massasaugas also face threats from people who vilify the “very shy, very calm” creature. With the reinterpretation of “take,” that threat could grow.
“My worry is there are many folks who will take advantage of this new rule to kill them and claim it was an accident to avoid responsibility under federal law,” he said.
Some experts said the changes in federal law will leave states increasingly responsible for regulatory gaps. Michigan’s endangered species law isn’t as comprehensive as the federal version. Habitat protections aren’t as explicit in Michigan law, which was written after the federal Endangered Species Act was passed in 1973.
State law does prohibit “take” of state-endangered and threatened species, which includes attempts to “harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, collect” any at-risk species.
But it means “Michigan’s law and the federal Endangered Species Act would suddenly be operating under the same words, but radically different legal meanings,” said Tara Zuardo, a senior advocate with the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity.
The federal Endangered Species Act has also helped at-risk species whose ranges cross multiple states. Michigan species like the eastern massasauga, Mitchell’s satyr butterfly or the migratory whooping crane aren’t just found in the Great Lakes State.
“Species don't know state boundaries, and their habitat lines are constantly changing because of climate change and storms, and so states are just not sufficiently able to protect species on their own,” Zuardo said.
Alaimo with the Michigan Chamber said the federal changes bode well for Michigan, which he said already has strong environmental laws, especially around wetland protections.
“We think it’s better for Michigan to have these protections in place,” he said.
Alaimo supports changes like removing the rule that automatically extended “take” protections for endangered species to newly listed threatened ones, instead requiring federal officials to create species-specific rules.
“Those designations exist for a reason. You blur those lines where they’re no longer meaningful. That has really gotten away from the Endangered Species Act,” Alaimo said.
Since it became law in 1973, the Endangered Species Act is credited with saving nearly 300 species. It has helped bird species in Michigan like Kirtland’s warbler and bald eagles recover — both were delisted in recent decades after populations rebounded. The law has also been a key factor in the growing numbers of Great Lakes piping plovers, providing a framework for local, state and federal conservation efforts around the shorebird.
Its successes have been cited in several legal challenges to the Trump administration’s rollbacks from environmental groups, tribes and state attorneys general across the country, including Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel.
“Michigan’s wildlife deserves to be protected,” Nessel said in a statement announcing the lawsuit last month. “That includes preserving the habitats it relies on for food and shelter.”
But while lawsuits work their way through the courts, the changes to “take” and habitat protections in the Endangered Species Act will be in effect.
“There is no protecting an animal while allowing its habitat to be destroyed,” Zuardo said. “It's not really possible.”
This story is made possible through a partnership between Interlochen Public Radio and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization.
This reporting is made possible by the Northern Michigan Journalism Collaborative, led by Bridge Michigan and Interlochen Public Radio, and funded by Press Forward Northern Michigan.
