Obama Administration Finalizes Policy Limiting Protection of Endangered Species; Conservation Group Will Challenge in Court

The Center for Biological Diversity will file a legal challenge to an Obama administration policy, finalized today, that severely limits when a species qualifies for protection under the Endangered Species Act — a change that ignores both broad legal precedent and congressional intent. Under the Act a species qualifies for protection when it is “in danger of extinction in all or a significant of portion of its range.” Both Congress and the courts have explained that the “significant portion of range” provision is vital for important conservation because it allows federal wildlife agencies to protect species before they are at risk of going extinct globally. But the newly finalized policy sharply restricts the use of this part of the Act, defining “significant” to mean that only when the loss of a part of a species’ range threatens the survival of the whole species would wildlife agencies protect that species under the Act. The policy also restricts “range” to mean “current range” — ignoring the reality that most endangered species in the United States have suffered massive losses over the past and now cling to survival in only a small remnant of their historical home. As such the final policy defines “significant portion of its range” to make it superfluous: Only species at risk of extinction everywhere will now be protected. “The policy finalized today eviscerates the key requirement that species need not be at risk of extinction everywhere before they can be protected,” said Brett Hartl, the Center’s endangered species policy director. “The policy absolutely undermines the spirit of the Endangered Species Act and will allow massive decline of our native wildlife along with the destruction of wildlife habitat.”...more

I'm getting the impression CBD doesn't care for this change.  Give them credit, though, for really slinging the lingo when something doesn't meet their approval.  The proposed change "severely limits", "sharply restricts", "eviscerates the key requirement", "absolutely undermines", "will allow massive decline of our native wildlife" and "the destruction of wildlife habitat.”

limits
restricts
eviscerates
undermines
decline
destruction

Almost makes me feel sorry for the wildlife! 

The only thing the proposal might limit is the ability of CBD and their ilk to use the ESA to control land use.  As of 2012 the feds have designated 315 million acres as Critical Habitat for various species and that only partially reflects the amount of control they are exercising over private, state and federal lands.