How will ESA rollback impact threatened species?

Federal wildlife agencies have rolled out a four-rule regulatory package that would revise species protections and habitat designations for endangered species.

The proposals stem from the “Unleashing American Energy” executive order and recent Supreme Court decisions, which collectively directed agencies to reassess rules that could hinder domestic energy development. If finalized, the rulemaking would reshape implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). 

In Part 1 of a three-part series, we outlined how two of the proposed rules would reinstate earlier frameworks for habitat definitions, consultation standards, and critical habitat designations. In an episode of the new podcast, “Our Wild Lives” published on Friday, The Wildlife Society’ policy experts discuss these rule changes. This follow-up dives into proposed changes in protections for threatened species.

Pulling back the protective blanket

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) proposes to eliminate the “blanket rule” (50 C.F.R. § 17.31), which automatically extends the same protections afforded to endangered species to all threatened species when listed.

Instead, the agency would issue species-specific rules tailored to the conservation needs of each species at the time of listing, mirroring the National Marine Fisheries Services’ (NMFS) long-standing approach. In the past, USFWS has said that either approach, using one blanket rule for all threatened species or creating species-specific rules are permissible under the ESA. This shift reflects the narrower interpretive standard created by the Supreme Court’s decision ending Chevron deference. Chevron deference historically has allowed agencies latitude to interpret ambiguous statutory provisions but was overturned by the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright Enterprises versus Raimondo decision.

Eliminating the “blanket rule” option would not immediately change protections for currently listed threatened species that already benefit from it. But for every species newly listed as a threatened species and those reclassified in the future, USFWS would develop individualized protective regulations. Each species-specific rule would evaluate conservation needs, consider economic impacts and be subject to public comment. While species-specific rules could better align regulations with conservation needs, the anticipated increase in workload combined with ongoing loss of agency capacity raises concerns about the feasibility of developing and implementing such rules effectively.

Calling on wildlife professionals to weigh in

The Wildlife Society (TWS) in its Issue Statement on the U.S. Endangered Species Act supports consistent interpretations that prevent extinctions and recover species.

Species-specific rules can allow for protective regulations that address unique biological needs and are necessary for the conservation of that species. However, moving exclusively to individualized rules will require significant staff capacity and funding. The work of USFWS has long been impacted by funding and personnel cuts that may limit its ability to develop timely and effective species-specific rules for every threatened species. TWS strongly supports adequate federal funding and agency staffing to ensure efficiency in ESA listing and recovery planning and implementation. 

The comment period for this proposed change opened November 21, 2025 and will close Dec 22, 2025.