Bipartisan ESA reform evolves in Senate

Senators project optimism about changes to the Endangered Species Act, although staffing levels could be a point of contention.

March 19, 2026

Bipartisan opportunities exist for updating the Endangered Species Act, lawmakers and witnesses agreed at a notably even-keeled Senate panel hearing Wednesday.

Forgoing the rhetorical fireworks that sometimes light up ESA discussions, the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Fisheries, Water and Wildlife hearing suggested at least the possibility of legislative compromise.

That's a sharp contrast to developments in the House, where Republicans are moving forward with a proposed overhaul that many Democrats have blasted as little more than an industry wishlist.

"Contrary to popular belief, I think there are many bipartisan avenues to explore for improving the implementation of the Endangered Species Act," said subcommittee ranking member Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).

Schiff cited possibilities ranging from modernizing the Fish and Wildlife Service's work through use of AI technology to providing "greater flexibility" to conservation-minded private landowners and promoting "greater collaboration" with the states.

Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts of Nebraska, the subcommittee chair, likewise underscored the key role played by states as he shared at least some of Schiff's optimism.

"I agree; I think there are common-ground kinds of things we can do to improve and make sure we actually recover species," Ricketts said.

But while Schiff spoke of thinking "outside the box" to improve the workings of a law passed in 1973, he joined with former Fish and Wildlife Service official Jake Li in also stressing the paramount importance of providing agencies with sufficient resources to meet their ESA obligations.

"None of the recovery outcomes, that I think we all want to see, happen without the staff to do the hard work," Li said. "Unfortunately, the Service's capacity is more diminished than ever."

Li formerly served as assistant director of the Fish and Wildlife Service's Ecological Services division. He joined Defenders of Wildlife as the vice president of conservation policy last fall after he lost his federal job as part of the Trump administration's wholesale staffing cuts.

"When I worked there, I heard example after example of how staff were trying to juggle 20 balls at once, only to have more balls thrown at them," Li said, adding that "this was all before the agency lost a quarter of its staff within the last year, an incredible depletion of capacity, expertise and relationships with states, with private landowners and with businesses."

The Fish and Wildlife Service was not represented by a witness at the subcommittee hearing, which marked an early stage of any ESA bill moving through the Senate.

So far, the legislative action has occurred on the other side of the Capitol, where the House Natural Resources Committee passed a 58-page package of ESA revisions last December.

Two Democrats joined Republicans in approving the bill 25-16, after the committee rejected Democratic amendments including one by Rep. Jared Huffman of California, the panel's top Democrat, to establish a bipartisan blue-ribbon commission that would craft a compromise.

This Congress, the Senate's ESA-related bills have mostly picked away at small slivers of the law. A bill by Republican Sen. Roger Marshall of Kansas, S. 171, would remove the lesser prairie-chicken from the ESA list of threatened and endangered species, while S. 2579 by Republican Sen Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming would simply rename the law the "Endangered Species Recovery Act."

Brian Yablonski, chief executive officer of the Montana-based Property and Environment Research Center, told the Senate panel Wednesday that substantive ESA revisions should adopt a "new mindset" with an emphasis on incentives rather than regulatory mandates.

"As species improve, we should reward success gradually by giving agencies, states and landowners more flexibility," Yablonski said, adding that "instead of the current one-size fits all approach, regulations for threatened species should incorporate incremental recovery goals and automatically provide regulatory relief as they are met."

In a similar vein, the Trump administration has proposed a package of ESA regulatory changes that include the potential for easing some of the federal protections provided to threatened as opposed to endangered species.

Under a long-standing practice known as the "blanket 4(d) rule," threatened species are automatically given the same strict level of protection as species designated as endangered, unless the Fish and Wildlife Service says otherwise.

The Trump administration's proposal would have threatened species get a tailored protection plan that could allow for specified exceptions to the ESA's absolute ban on harming listed animals and plants. A 4(d) rule, for instance, might allow unintentional harm resulting to a protected species from flood control or timber management projects.

Li agreed that "as a general matter" he supports use of flexible 4(d) rules that might "loosen some of the ESA regulations as species demonstrate progress."


By:  Michael Doyle
Source: E&E Daily