State bill would protect endangered species amid Trump's efforts to undermine the ESA
- Erik Meusborn
- 2 hours ago
- 3 min read
With the future of federal endangered species protection unclear, California may step up to fill in the gaps.
The Trump Administration’s plan for the Endangered Species Act centers on redefining ‘harm,’ one of the ESA’s prohibited acts under Section 9. Under the law, no one is allowed to ‘take’ an endangered species of fish or wildlife. To take is explicitly defined as ‘to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.’ But there are essentially two levels of definition at play here: the law as written and the law as regulated. It’s clear that to harm is to take, but then what does it mean to ‘harm’ a species? Since 1981, the Services have further provided that “significant habitat modification or degradation,” which amounts to a taking, constitutes unlawful harm under the law.
But on April 17, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA proposed rescinding their regulatory definition of ‘harm,’ opening the door to allow individuals to alter their property without violating the ESA—even if it means degrading critical habitat for endangered species. In their proposal, the Services argue that explicitly defining ‘harm’ is “unnecessary in light of the comprehensive statutory definition,” a claim that’s swiftly undercut by decades of court cases surrounding takings.
What would AB 1319 do to help?
The State of California has its own Endangered Species Act, CESA. Right now, 80 federally listed species under the ESA aren’t yet listed in CESA. Under proposed Assembly Bill 1319, the California Fish and Game Commission would consider listing California native species in CESA if their protection is weakened from any federal rollbacks to the ESA since Trump took office. This means that endangered species affected by the Trump administration’s redefinition of ‘harm’ could be taken under the wing of CESA for added protections until 2031, when the proposed law becomes inoperative.
How is CESA Different?
CESA has its differences from the federal ESA. Critically, the state law doesn’t designate critical habitat to listed species, and habitat modification is only prohibited if it results directly in the injury of a listed species. This is better than no habitat protections at all, but still relaxes protections from the ESA.
While the ESA covers endangered plants and animals, CESA applies more narrowly to animals and lets the state Native Plant Protection Act, the NPPA, handle plants. The process of listing species under CESA lacks a formal distinction between listing and managing subspecies, or populations of endangered species, and the rules for when to list a species are laid out in state regulations, not CESA itself. If these rules were codified into the statute, species that meet the criteria for protection could be protected more efficiently.
Will the governor sign off?
At first glance, it might seem inevitable that Governor Gavin Newsom would endorse legislation to expand protections under CESA. His “30 by 30” executive order promoted ambitious plans to conserve 30% of state land and waters by 2030 and established a state Biodiversity Collaborative between agencies and researchers. However, under the pressure to speed up housing and infrastructure development, the governor has also allowed for carve-outs in the state environmental protection law, CEQA, and has previously vetoed a bill that would have prevented Trump-admin environmental rollbacks on clean air and water from affecting the state.
With the future of federal protections for endangered species in question, AB 1319 offers California a chance to step in and safeguard vulnerable wildlife. While CESA has its limitations, the bill would extend protections at the state level where federal regulation would fall short. With public support, there’s hope to protect endangered species and preserve California’s biodiversity.
How Can You Help?
Contact your assemblymember and ask them to support AB 1319! The bill will be heard on May 23 in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Find your state assemblymember here, and let them know you support protecting imperiled species threatened by changes in federal law by requiring the Fish and Game Commission to consider acting through the emergency listing process if there are actions at the federal level to delist or change the legally protected status of a species, subspecies, or distinct population segment.