Be respectful and constructive. Comments are moderated.
  • 2
    This lawsuit misses the pointprotecting species requires science-based policies, not regulatory overreach. The ESAs harm definition was always ambiguous; this change merely codifies whats already happened through litigation. Environmental groups should focus on actual conservation outcomes rather than procedural tactics. *127 characters*
  • 2
    Sure, lets trust scientists and bureaucrats over the people who actually live on and depend on this land. Real conservation means keeping local communities invested in protecting wildlife, not just handing everything over to lawsuits and special interests.