Take action: Protect wildlife by protecting their homes

May 8, 2025, 11:05 a.m.

Federal agencies are proposing a change to the Endangered Species Act that would drastically weaken protections for wildlife. Specifically, they want to change the definition of what it means to “harm” an endangered species so that destroying habitat would no longer be prohibited.

But species need habitat to survive.

Why it’s important

No habitat, no wildlife. Habitat provides food, shelter, migration paths and breeding areas. It’s essential to survival.
This change is dangerous. Under the proposal, critical habitat could be destroyed without consequences.
The ESA prevents extinction. Iconic species like the California condor, polar bear, southern sea otter and Oregon silverspot butterfly, all supported by the Oregon Zoo, are still here today thanks to the ESA.
It would gut the ESA. Stripping habitat protections would drastically weaken the law and push vulnerable species even closer to extinction.

How you can help

Speak up to protect wildlife. Submit a public comment urging the government to keep the Endangered Species Act strong — including protections for habitat.

The deadline to submit public comment is Monday, May 19. Submit your comments here.

Use this sample message or write your own.

As a devoted supporter of wildlife and America’s natural heritage, I urge you to withdraw this proposal, which abandons decades of legal precedent and the original intent of Congress. The Endangered Species Act reflects our commitment to protecting not only imperiled species but the ecosystems that sustain them — an obligation we must not weaken.

By excluding habitat impacts from the definition of “harm,” this rule will accelerate species decline and undermine the ESA’s fundamental purpose. “Harm” has long been understood to include injury, whether direct or indirect, intentional or not, at both individual and population levels. Habitat destruction is the leading cause of extinction, and growing human pressures will only increase this threat.

I respectfully urge you to abandon this proposed rule and recommit to the ESA’s original purpose: conserving imperiled species and the ecosystems they depend on, as entrusted to you by Congress and the American people.

Submit your comments.