The Trump administration recently finalized sweeping changes to the Endangered Species Act, shifting how the federal government protects at-risk wildlife and their habitats. Local conservation officials warn these rollbacks could have severe consequences for eastern North Carolina’s rivers and streams.
By leveraging the Supreme Court’s recent Loper Bright ruling, federal agencies have cut back on long-standing environmental protections under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) to make operations easier and less expensive for businesses.
The issue centers on a single word: "harm." The federal government has narrowed its legal definition under the Act. Now, Pamlico-Tar Riverkeeper Katey Zimmerman says the law only steps in if an action directly kills, injures, or captures a threatened animal.
“The definition no longer includes habitat modification or destruction, meaning that more habitat is able to be modified or destroyed,” Zimmerman said.
Local species left vulnerable
Zimmerman warns that this policy change leaves several species living in the waters of eastern North Carolina incredibly vulnerable to industrial impacts.
“We have endangered species in our watersheds—Carolina madtoms, Neuse River water dogs, Tar River spiny mussels,” Zimmerman noted. “So, these species, as well as other species in our watersheds, are going to be more threatened. Their survival is going to be more threatened as their habitat is being threatened.”
Sound Rivers Executive Director Heather Deck says North Carolina’s weak state-level laws cannot stop this impending habitat loss. State regulatory bodies, such as the North Carolina Division of Water Resources, face legal limits when reviewing permits for new pollution or construction.
“When they're looking to potentially permit a new discharge, whether it's wastewater, whether it's industrial discharge, they are somewhat limited at the scope of what they can look at and how they determine whether or not a new discharge would harm water quality,” Deck explained. “The difference with having the Endangered Species Act is that it's a more holistic approach and looks at what is surviving in the water body—not just the quality of the water, but what animals, what creatures, what plants are there and how might this discharge be harmed.”
A cascading impact on water quality
Zimmerman emphasizes that the rollbacks do not just impact small fish and rare mussels. Damaging these sensitive habitats triggers a dangerous domino effect that ultimately threatens commercial fisheries and human drinking water.
“The Tar River spiny mussel is an endangered species in the Upper Tar and Upper Neuse watershed, and these freshwater mussels and other species like it play a big role in filtering out and cleaning our water,” Zimmerman said. “If you remove these species from the rivers, then that's going to impact other species that live in the rivers, and we'll just have that cascading effect down the line of species in the river and their benefits to it.”
Under the relaxed federal rules, corporations, construction contractors, and other industries stand to benefit financially. Zimmerman points out that the rule changes are built directly around corporate profits.
“If they're claiming that lost revenue outweighs the conservation benefit of these critical habitat designations, then these areas can be excluded from protections as long as the activity doesn't cause immediate extinction of the species,” Zimmerman said.
The real cost of deregulation
Both Zimmerman and Deck noted that it is far easier for a company to put a precise dollar amount on an infrastructure or construction project than it is for scientists to calculate the true economic value of nature.
“Most ways to try to evaluate economically the benefit of a healthy environment is historically going to undervalue a healthy environment and the services it provides,” Deck said. “You think about clean air, clean drinking water that we don't have to pay to treat even more pollutants out of before we can send it to people's homes. Those types of studies always undervalue the services of a healthy environment.”
According to Deck, the administration's policy focus heavily favors deregulation, expanding domestic fossil fuel production, and rolling back climate oversight—a push that has already altered or repealed hundreds of environmental protections nationwide. She urges people to speak up.
“This is just yet another example of the administration's focus, which is not to protect the environment for the public good,” Deck stated. “And so, I think one thing that's important is for folks to reach out to their federal and state legislators and note that this is a special place. We rely on clean water. We want to have clean air. We want our children to grow up here and feel that they can be safe. We want these pollution issues that we have on the Cape Fear related to PFAS and forever chemicals to be solved. So, legislators need to hear from the public that this is a priority.”
To fight these rollbacks, national groups like Earthjustice and the Southern Environmental Law Center are taking the battle to federal court. Their lawsuits argue that stripping away habitat protections violates the very core of the Endangered Species Act. By pushing for emergency court orders, these organizations hope to freeze the new rules before developers can cause permanent damage to vital local waterways.
** Sound Rivers is a supporter of Public Radio East
