The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries announced their proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act, ostensibly "to ensure clarity and consistency." They are asking for comments from the public by September 24. Comments can be made by mail or over a JavaScript-based Web site. All comments will be published on the Web site.
Here are alternate pages where the proposed rules may be read. These do not require JavaScript.
Business Insider; the Roseburg, Oregon News-Review (archive link for EU readers); Mother Nature Network; and Idaho Stateman have articles on the topic.
In related news, CBS News notes that "while the White House can act on its own, those changes could always be undone by future administrations" while reporting that members of Congress have prepared several bills which would revise the Endangered Species Act.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday July 31 2018, @04:18PM (1 child)
In the context of this article you are correct. In the context of this thread you are not. "Threatened by this policy" and "Threatened" as a classification do not mean the same thing.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 3, Informative) by acid andy on Tuesday July 31 2018, @04:48PM
In the Business Insider article they give several examples of (profitable) human activity that was killing off some of these species until that activity was restricted via the introduction of the ESA protections. So yes, strictly speaking, the changes in policy are only "potentially" threatening to these species, but it's only potential insofar as there's a small but non-zero probability that all those profiteers might have a change of heart and voluntarily refrain from killing them!
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?