By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block
Since U.S. President Donald Trump returned to the White House last month for a second term, his administration has been issuing dozens of executive orders, some of which can have an impact on animals.
Executive orders are presidential instructions designed to direct federal government agencies and their staff members to take (or not take) certain actions, and it is customary for presidents to issue them early in their tenure to make good on campaign promises and/or pivot to agency agendas of their own. A permissible and legal executive order needs to be rooted in one of the president’s constitutionally outlined powers or in a law approved by the Congress.
The authority of a given executive order is not final. When called upon, a federal court may review the lawfulness and validity of an executive order and rule on whether it is a proper exercise of the president’s authority.
Here’s a look at how animals may be impacted by some of these new executive orders.
Bears, wolves and other wildlife in Alaska
One of the earliest orders the president signed was “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential,” which encompasses a long list of changes, that, unfortunately, take several steps backward for wildlife protection.
In the most notable regression, the order rescinds a rule forbidding the cruel practice of bear baiting in Alaska. When trophy hunters bait bears, they intentionally use food such as pastries or bacon grease to entice black and brown bears into range, making them easy to kill.
Any return to this abhorrent tactic would be a major step backward for the protection and survival of black and brown bears. Since the goal of baiting is to change bear behavior by drawing them to a certain place, it naturally increases run-ins with hikers, campers and others.
Bait sites attract other species, too, concentrating animals, which can lead to disease transmission such as rabies, mange or chronic wasting disease. Baits often contain theobromine and caffeine, which is toxic to many species, including bears, wolves and dogs.
In addition to its reauthorization of bear baiting, the Alaska order permits a litany of other cruel practices. Consistent with Biden-era policies, hunters in the state will still be allowed to kill mother wolves, coyotes and hibernating black bears while the animals shelter in their dens alongside their young. Hunters will also be permitted to shoot swimming caribou from motorboats and use dogs to hunt black bears.
Endangered species
Another early executive order declared a national energy emergency in the United States. Like the Alaska rule, the order contained many directives, but the most critical ones concerning animals relate to the Endangered Species Act.
The order directs federal agencies to maximize energy production and to use, “to the maximum extent permissible,” ESA emergency consultation regulations to achieve that goal. While agencies can still make recommendations for how to prevent harm to endangered or threatened species under these emergency provisions, those recommendations do not have to be followed. So, this eliminates standard protective procedures that consider how endangered species will be affected by new projects and leaves endangered animals with virtually no protection in the face of such projects.
At a time when American energy production is already at an all-time high (the U.S. is producing more oil and gas than any other country ever), it seems unnecessary to employ these emergency provisions, which could be potentially devastating to wildlife.
On top of everything else, the order urges the continuous action of a committee of agency heads—sometimes called “the God Squad”—a rarely-used group which can override endangered species protections so that development of projects can proceed even if they might result in an extinction. This has been used in the past to sidestep protections for the threatened northern spotted owl for dam construction and timber sales.
Animals vulnerable to climate change
Another executive order calls for a “temporary cessation” of all offshore leases and a review of federal leasing and permitting related to onshore and offshore wind energy projects. The review will include an assessment of how these projects will affect wildlife, including birds and marine mammals.
This order calls for a pause, not a final determination. While this language could be an early indication that the administration is interested in protecting birds and marine mammals (the president has previously claimed that wind energy may pose a threat to wildlife), some of the administration’s other executive orders reflect a pro-fossil fuels energy policy. Uninhibited use of fossil fuels will have adverse effects on critical habitat and expose animals to exacerbated impacts of climate change.
Frozen federal funds and animal protections
Multiple executive actions froze, however temporarily, large chunks of federal funding, and these orders have various potential consequences for animals, especially those who are targets of the illegal wildlife trade.
Federal funding plays a huge role in animal welfare, and while the domestic federal funding has been “unfrozen” for now, unfortunately, one order that freezes foreign aid to many organizations will likely impact programs that combat wildlife trafficking. While President Trump will have many chances to mitigate wildlife trafficking, a handful of his initial executive orders may—intentionally or not—have the effect of frustrating federal attempts to combat these crimes.
Moreover, by withdrawing the United States from the World Health Organization, the President has distanced the country from being a key international player in calling for an end to the wildlife trade and wildlife markets. Not only are these markets inhumane and deadly for animals, but they are serious vectors of disease for humans and animals alike. Live bird markets, like chicken production facilities, can be hotbeds of disease that ultimately lead to deadly strains of avian influenza and other acute illnesses.
The President also rescinded a Biden administration order establishing the United States Council on Transnational Organized Crime, which included wildlife trafficking in its scope.
Migratory species
A long-standing concern involves the impact on wildlife of a border wall between the United States and Mexico, and the president’s order calling for the construction of physical barriers at the southern border could be potentially devastating for migrating wildlife and animals living in wildlands along the U.S.-Mexico border.
Potential progress
Most of the wildlife-related executive orders issued by the White House during the first weeks of the Trump administration suggest a worrying pattern. But what we will say is that President Trump has the opportunity to do so much good for animals. During his first term, the Environmental Protection Agency embraced a vision of a future free of new animal testing, releasing a plan to promote the development and implementation of alternative testing methods to replace animals, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture took steps to strengthen some standards for USDA licensing of dog breeders.
We encourage this new administration to take meaningful steps to protect all animals. And we are prepared to defend animals against any regressive or negative consequences of executive action, and to contest them in court, in Congress and in the arena of public opinion. People of all political stripes can understand that animals deserve nothing less.
Kitty Block is CEO of the Humane Society of the United States.
