The Trump administration just proposed its first animal to be added to the endangered species list: a rare fish from Nevada that’s ‘barely clinging to existence’

LAS VEGAS (AP) — Federal protections could soon be extended to a rare Nevada fish that environmentalists say is “barely clinging to existence” because of rapid groundwater pumping in a remote region experiencing extreme drought conditions.

A proposal to list the tiny Fish Lake Valley tui chub as an endangered species was issued Wednesday by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, kicking off a 60-day public comment period.

It marks the Trump administration’s first consideration to list an endangered species during his second term. But it comes as a result of a yearslong legal fight: The Center for Biological Diversity, which sued in 2023, won a settlement last year that forced the government to decide by this month whether to list the fish.

In its proposal, the wildlife agency said the endangered species designation is warranted because of “the destruction and modification” of the tui chub’s habitat “caused by agricultural production or other land management practices,” as well as the effects of climate change and competition with invasive species.

Yet at the same time, the Trump administration has been trying to eliminate habitat protections for endangered and threatened species. Environmentalists say habitat destruction is the biggest cause of extinction.

Patrick Donnelly, director of the center’s work across the Great Basin where the tui chub is found, said Nevada can’t afford to lose any more of its native fish species, like the Ash Meadows killifish and Raycraft Ranch springfish that became extinct decades ago.

“The Fish Lake Valley tui chub is barely clinging to existence,” he said. “I’m thrilled these fish are poised to get the life-saving protections they urgently need.”

Under the Endangered Species Act, it is illegal to kill, import, export, possess or transport those species.

The olive-colored minnow, which is less than 5 inches (12.7 centimeters) long, used to live in a half dozen springs in Nevada’s Fish Lake Valley, near the California border. But they are now found in just one pond between Las Vegas and Reno that environmentalists say is threatened by groundwater pumping, mainly for the production of alfalfa. Other threats include looming lithium mining and geothermal energy projects.

The fish are widely considered a health indicator for Fish Lake Valley, Donnelly said. The valley’s wetlands, which support all kinds of desert wildlife, including the pronghorn antelope and bighorn sheep, are also dependent on the groundwater there.

“If the water level keeps going down and the Fish Lake Valley tui chub goes extinct, that whole ecosystem is going to crash, because it’s the same water that sustains both of them,” he said.

While the Trump administration’s proposal brings the tiny fish one step closer to federal protections, across the California line, a different tiny fish remains a Trump target.

As deadly wildfires raged across Los Angeles earlier this year, Trump falsely blamed efforts to protect California’s endangered delta smelt for fire hydrants running dry in urban areas. On social media, he called the slender fish found only in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta estuary a “worthless fish.”

And Trump has long criticized the way California manages its water. His prior administration allowed more water to be directed to the Central Valley and out of the delta. Environmental groups opposed that, saying it would harm endangered species, including the delta smelt.

The pace of listings under the Endangered Species Act dropped dramatically during Trump’s first term. Now, his administration wants to redefine what “harm” means under the act, which has long included altering or destroying the places those species live.

In a proposed rule last month, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service said habitat modification shouldn’t be considered harm because it isn’t the same as intentionally targeting a species, which is called “take.”

If adopted, environmentalists say, the proposal would lead to the extinction of endangered species because of logging, mining, development and other activities. They argue the definition of “take” has always included actions that harm species, and that the definition of “harm” has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com