New Federal Proposals Threaten to Gut the Endangered Species Act.
November 20, 2025
On November 19th the Trump Administration has published a proposal by US Fish and Wildlife to roll back Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections, specifically focusing on the removal of the “blanket rule” and its impact on threatened shark species.
The Department of the Interior, under the leadership of Secretary Doug Burgum, announced a sweeping set of proposals to roll back the core protections of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
For fifty years, the ESA has been the “emergency room” for America’s wildlife. It brought the California Gray Whale back from the brink of extinction. It allowed Southern Sea Otters to repopulate our kelp forests. It worked because it was fast, strict, and based on science.
Now, that safety net is being dismantled.
The Threat: Losing the “Blanket of Protection” The most dangerous change is the proposal to eliminate the “Blanket Rule” (Section 4(d)).
- How it used to work: If a species was listed as “Threatened,” it automatically received strict federal protection from killing and trade.
- The New Proposal: “Threatened” species will receive zero automatic protection. Instead, the agency must write a separate, custom rule for every single species. This creates a “pay-to-play” system where protections can be delayed for years, watered down by industry lobbyists, or simply never written.
What This Means for Our Sharks We fight to get sharks listed, but a listing without regulations is just a label.
- Tope Sharks: Currently under review for listing (due August 2025). If they are listed as “Threatened” under these new rules, they could legally be caught and sold indefinitely while bureaucrats debate the “economic impact” of saving them.
- Oceanic Whitetip Sharks: Already threatened, but their survival relies on strict enforcement. The new rules propose prioritizing “economic impact” over “critical habitat.” This gives commercial fisheries a legal argument to block protections in the very waters these sharks need to recover.
- Scalloped Hammerheads: The threatened populations of these sharks rely on the federal “stick” to force gear changes in fisheries. Without automatic protections, that pressure evaporates.
History Warns Us If these loopholes had existed in the 1970s, the economic value of whaling and fur trapping might have outweighed the survival of the Gray Whale and Sea Otter. We cannot let profit dictate the extinction of our sharks.
WE NEED YOU TO ACT BY DECEMBER 22 The USFWS has opened a strict 30-day public comment period. They need to hear that Americans will not stand for a watered-down Endangered Species Act.
Sign the petition or use the proposed text below. Send via regulation.gov using docket # FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0039
Action Item: Copy/Paste Public Comment
Instructions for your subscribers:
- Where to comment: Go to regulations.gov (or use the SharkStewards portal).
- Docket Number: FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0039
- Deadline: December 22, 2025
Draft Comment Text:
Subject: OPPOSITION to Proposed Revisions to ESA Regulations (Docket No. FWS-HQ-ES-2025-0039)
To the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service:
I am writing to strongly oppose the proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act regulations announced on November 19, 2025. Specifically, I object to the rescission of the “Blanket Rule” under Section 4(d) and the re-introduction of economic considerations into listing decisions.
1. Restore the Blanket Rule: Removing the automatic protections for “Threatened” species creates a dangerous gap in enforcement. For species like the Tope Shark, which is currently awaiting listing decisions, this change means they could be listed as threatened but remain legally unprotected from harvest for years while species-specific rules are drafted. This delay could lead to functionally extinct populations before a single protection is enforced.
2. Science Over Profit: The ESA was designed to base extinction decisions solely on science. Re-introducing economic impact assessments into the listing and critical habitat designation process inevitably prioritizes short-term industry profits over long-term biodiversity. For highly migratory species like the Oceanic Whitetip Shark and Scalloped Hammerhead, protecting critical habitat is often inconvenient for commercial fisheries. That inconvenience is not a valid reason to allow a species to go extinct.
3. Lessons from Success: The recovery of the Eastern North Pacific (California) Gray Whale and Southern Sea Otter proves that strict, automatic protections work. The ESA has saved 99% of species listed under fifty years since the ESA was enacted. The California Gray whale population numbered only a few thousand when it was listed in 1973. The rebuilding of the population- up to 27,000 in 2016 led to the delisting of the whale in a great success story. However, a lack of food and other threats have put this whale back into peril, underscoring the need for vigilance. Weakening the ESA would ensures that other threatened species will not share in the success story shared by plants and animals protected in the past.
I urge you to withdraw these proposals and maintain the automatic protections that have prevented the extinction of 99% of listed species.
Sincerely, [Your Name] [City, State]