The Relentless School Nurse: Redefining “Harm” – What the Trump Administration’s Rollback of the Endangered Species Act Means for Wildlife—and Us

The Trump administration is unleashing a torrent of executive orders and announcements, many of which roll back long-standing public health safeguards and pose serious risks to the health of our nation. It is hard to put them in rank order, but among the most concerning is a proposed redefinition of the term “harm” under the 1973 Endangered Species Act (ESA)—a subtle legal tweak with far-reaching implications. While it may be explained as a “technical change,” this shift would dramatically weaken protections for habitats essential to the survival of countless species. But this isn’t just about wildlife—it’s about us. The health of people is inseparable from the health of the planet.

Let’s understand how the proposed change to the ESA threatens not only endangered species and ecosystems but also public health, food systems, disaster preparedness, and community resilience. As a nurse and advocate for healthier futures, I believe it is urgent that we speak out. Environmental degradation is not an abstract threat—it is a direct assault on our collective well-being.

Destroying endangered species’ habitat wouldn’t count as ‘harm’ under proposed Trump rule

Why This Matters

Health is directly impacted by the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we grow, and the environments that surround us. That’s why the Trump administration’s attempt to narrow the definition of “harm” under the ESA must be seen not only as an environmental rollback, but as a public health crisis in the making.

At its core, this proposed policy shift endangers the integrity of entire ecosystems—and in doing so, it endangers the safety, stability, and well-being of communities across the country.

What Is the Endangered Species Act and Why Is “Harm” So Important?

The ESA has protected threatened plants, animals, and their habitats since 1973. One of its most powerful tools has been its broad definition of “harm,” which includes not only direct actions like killing or injuring a species, but also indirect actions, such as habitat destruction, that impair a species’ ability to survive and reproduce. To put it in perspective: under the proposed change, it would still be illegal to kill a Bald Eagle, but destroying the tree where its nest is built could be allowed.

This broader interpretation of “harm” has been upheld by the Supreme Court and forms the foundation of decades of successful conservation. After all, without protecting the places where endangered species live, we cannot protect the species themselves.

What’s Changing—and Why It’s a Problem

The Trump administration proposed redefining “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) on April 16, 2025. This change would limit “harm” to direct, intentional actions that injure or kill protected species, excluding habitat destruction from this definition. Consequently, activities like logging, mining, damming, or development would no longer be considered “harm,” even if they destroy critical habitats essential for the survival of endangered animals and plants.

This change would:

• Overturn longstanding legal precedent,

• Undermine decades of regulatory practice,

• Weaken protections for species like the red-cockaded woodpecker, Florida panther, and countless others,

• And accelerate habitat loss, the leading cause of extinction.

The rationale? Reducing regulatory burdens on industries like oil, gas, logging, and construction. But the long-term consequences go far beyond the balance sheets of a few sectors.

The Broader Impacts: Ecosystems, Health, and Humanity

Healthy ecosystems are not just beautiful—they’re essential. They purify water, clean the air, regulate the climate, pollinate crops, and prevent floods. When habitats are destroyed, these life-sustaining services break down.

Here’s what that means for our health:

Area of Impact	Consequences for Health and Well-being
Clean Air & Water	Higher rates of respiratory illness, waterborne disease
Food Security	Threats to pollinators and crop yields
Disaster Resilience	Increased flooding, soil erosion, and climate impacts
Mental Health	Loss of restorative access to nature
Disease Prevention	Greater risk of infectious disease outbreaks

When we dismantle the protections that preserve biodiversity, we invite consequences that affect every level of society. From a nurse’s perspective, this change puts the public at risk in ways that will outlast any short-term economic gain.

Communities Will Pay the Price

Industries may benefit initially from fewer restrictions, but the long-term costs will fall on the shoulders of communities. Water treatment costs will rise. Public health systems will be strained by new or worsening environmental illnesses. Natural disasters will do more damage, more often. And the mental and emotional toll of losing natural spaces—places of healing, reflection, and recreation—will ripple through our lives in ways that are harder to measure but just as real.

Our Natural and Cultural Heritage at Risk

Wildlife is a core part of our national identity and a source of joy, inspiration, and connection. Places like forests, wetlands, and prairies are not just ecosystems—they’re the backdrop of our collective story. To allow their destruction is to let go of something irreplaceable.

A Call to Protect What Protects Us

The Trump administration’s redefinition of “harm” under the ESA is a dangerous rollback that prioritizes short-term economic interests over long-term human and ecological health. As nurses, educators, and community members, we must speak out.

Protecting endangered species means protecting the environments we all depend on. And protecting those environments means protecting ourselves—our health, our safety, our future.

Because when we allow harm to nature, we are ultimately allowing harm to each other.

This blog post is dedicated to the memory of my father-in-law, lovingly known as Papi, a Cuban immigrant who had a reverence for Bald Eagles and the American flag. Papi was the most patriotic person I have ever known. The other handsome man in several of the pics is my best friend and husband of almost 41 years, Ed, also a Cuban immigrant, best dad and Papa. 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.