The blue and green areas are now subject to
Fish & Wildlife regulation if you intend to cut
down any trees

Apparently in a bid to give itself more power over every proposed building project in the United States, the Fish & Wildlife Service in October 2024 (just before the election) wildly expanded its regulatory rules for protecting endangered bats.

According to the new rules, Fish & Wildlife now considers the removal of any trees at such projects to be a risk to the endangered species, because those trees “may” have been used as roosts and would therefore threaten the species ability to survive if removed.

No matter that there may be thousands of other trees nearby, including many acres of forest. If you are building anything that involves cutting down any trees, you will be subjected to Fish & Wildlife supervision that could block construction. And the area this new rule covers includes almost the entire eastern and northern parts of the United States, as shown on the maps to the right, taken from the new regulation guidelines [pdf].

Long time reader Jack O’Leary informed me of this new power grab. He also sent me information about one particular project in Massachusetts involving the installation of a well and pump station in a forested area southeast of Boston, far from any bat hibernacula. The only impact this project might have on any bats is the removal of some trees, though the project is located in a forested area with hundreds of acres of trees all around (as shown clearly on the satellite view on Google maps).

Yet Fish & Wildlife makes it clear in its letter [pdf] to the project that its “Endangered Species Act requirements are not complete.” Fish & Wildlife admits that the project will pose no direct threat to the endangered bats, but the very act of cutting down a few trees “may affect” the bats, so therefore government regulatory supervision is required.

The government paperwork repeatedly says its requirements from private owners is “voluntary”, but it also makes it clear if you don’t “volunteer” the government might come down on you like a ton of bricks.

“Nice project you got here. Shame
if something happened to it.”

Essentially what Fish & Wildlife is saying is simple: “That’s a nice project you got there. Sure would be a shame if something happened to it. Maybe you should do what we say to protect it from harm!”

This new regulatory framework is part of an overall pattern in the past decade by the federal government’s various environmental agencies to expand their power and control. Once environmental impact statements were only required once, at the start of any project, and only in certain situations where the project carried clear environmental risks. Now impact statements and reassessments are required for all work, no matter where or when, and are required again and again if projects are revised or changed slightly.

The space community has seen this power grab play out most starkly at the long established spaceports in Florida and Vandenberg, and at SpaceX’s new launch facility at Boca Chica. Even though we have empirical evidence over almost three-quarters of a century that rocket launches not only do no significant harm to the environment, they help wildlife thrive by creating large areas where development cannot occur. Yet, in the past decade the ability for new companies to launch at these facilities has been seriously hampered and delayed because of endless demands for new impact statements.

This new Fish & Wildlife rule will impact almost every construction project in the eastern half of the United States, as it apparently requires government review and approval (not guaranteed) for any work that removes or trims even one tree.

This is definitely an area that needs a quick review by the Trump administration.