Act Now: Tell your Senators to vote NO on five anti-wildlife resolutions!

Extremists in the Senate are putting animals in danger. Their new series of resolutions would gut vital wildlife protections reinstated by the Biden administration and effectively reinstate damaging Trump-era rules.

We cannot allow anti-wildlife Senators to roll back these protections, taking scientific decisions out of the experts’ hands and dooming species to extinction. The vote is expected to happen soon – we must work quickly to put a stop to these attacks!

Make sure your Senators hear from you today: Vote NO on five anti-wildlife resolutions!

Message

Dear Senator {contact_data~lastName}

As a constituent and a strong wildlife supporter, I am writing to urge you to vote NO on five resolutions expected to be considered soon on the Senate floor. These resolutions would leverage the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to disapprove the Biden administration’s Endangered Species Act (ESA) rules, published April 5, 2024, which restored several key regulatory provisions implementing the ESA rolled back by the Trump administration in 2019.

Please vote NO on S.J. Res 80, S.J. Res 81, S.J. Res 84, S.J. Res 85, and S.J. Res 86. These harmful resolutions would gut important aspects of successful ESA implementation restored by the Biden administration, including:

•	The blanket 4(d) rule, which automatically extends certain ESA protections for endangered species (including protections against “take” of a species like harassing, killing, or collecting) to threatened species under the management of the Fish and Wildlife Service. Without the restoration of the blanket rule, threatened species lack these protections unless the Fish and Wildlife Service publishes a species-specific rule. The blanket 4(d) rule has protected dozens of threatened species like the piping plover, Florida manatee, and Canada lynx for over four decades.

•	Clarification that listing, delisting, or reclassifying species as threatened or endangered should be made solely based on the best available scientific and commercial information, without reference to the economic impacts of such determination. Whether a species is threatened or endangered is a scientific question to be resolved solely based on the best available science. Economic impacts may be considered in other, later aspects of implementation — i.e. the designation of critical habitat — but have no place in the initial listing decision.

•	Incremental improvement in provisions on interagency consultation for listed species under ESA Section 7. Robust mechanisms guiding interagency consultation are important for improving ESA conservation outcomes, since Section 7 helps ensure that federal agency actions are not likely to adversely affect listed species and their critical habitats.

•	Improved language in particularly harmful areas of the Trump administration’s 2019 ESA regulations. For example, the Services are required to list species as threatened if they are likely to become endangered in the “foreseeable future”, which is particularly important when planning for the impacts of climate change. The Trump administration put in a definition of “foreseeable future” that made it more difficult to make that finding; the Biden administration replaced it with an improved definition.

At a time when our nation is faced with dual biodiversity and climate crises, Congress should be upholding – not undermining – the Endangered Species Act, our most effective tool for preventing extinction. Again, I urge you to fight for wildlife by voting NO on all 5 of these damaging resolutions: S.J. Res 80, S.J. Res 81, S.J. Res 84, S.J. Res 85, and S.J. Res 86.

Sincerely,
{user_data~First Name} {user_data~Last Name}

Contact Information

First Name

Last Name

Email Address

Please send me wildlife updates and calls to action from Defenders. Privacy Policy

Street

Address 2

Country

Postcode

City

State

Mobile Phone

Subscribe to SMS Alerts from Defenders. Message and data rates may apply.