Why It Matters

Federal agencies responsible for protecting endangered species are facing declining funding for some programs and significant workforce reductions, raising questions about whether they have enough resources to carry out their responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act.

A recent Congressional Research Service report examines whether funding and staffing levels at federal agencies are sufficient to carry out the Endangered Species Act (ESA). At issue is whether the agencies have enough resources to meet responsibilities that include listing species, designating critical habitat, developing recovery plans, and conducting consultations as they contend with existing workloads and backlogs.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) share responsibility for implementing the ESA. CRS identified staffing levels, funding for species conservation and recovery, and oversight of the economic costs associated with listed species as potential issues for Congress.

The Big Picture

Funding for some species protection programs has declined in real dollars over the past decade. FWS Ecological Services activity funding dropped from approximately $317.5 million in fiscal 2017 to approximately $277.5 million in fiscal 2026, adjusted for inflation. The Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund declined from approximately $87.5 million to $65 million over the same period.

Congress provided $511.2 million, or 45 percent, more than the administration's fiscal 2026 request for FWS overall and rejected proposals to eliminate funding for any FWS discretionary appropriations accounts. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act rescinded unobligated Inflation Reduction Act balances made available to FWS and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). CRS noted that the amount of funding rescinded was unclear.

Staffing cuts have accelerated. FWS experienced a net reduction of 1,538 employees from January 2025 to February, according to Office of Personnel Management data. NOAA experienced a net reduction of 2,473 employees across its line offices over the same period. A congressional hearing witness testified that the FWS Ecological Services program had lost 25 percent of its staff since January 2025.

The fiscal 2027 budget proposal would reduce FWS from 6,513 to 5,861 total employees, approximately a 10 percent reduction, and would reduce NOAA Operations, Research, and Facilities-funded personnel from 10,629 to 9,140, approximately a 14 percent reduction.

The Trump administration undertook initiatives in 2025 to reorganize federal agencies, including the Department of the Interior, and reduce the size of the federal workforce. NOAA also proposed consolidating ESA and Marine Mammal Protection Act activities administered by the NMFS Office of Protected Resources into FWS, with the proposal associated with the removal of more than 400 full-time equivalents from the office. Oceana argued that the proposed consolidation could result in a net elimination of over 200 positions.

Political Stakes

Some members of Congress and stakeholders have raised concerns that current staffing levels at FWS and NMFS are insufficient to perform activities required under the ESA. Stakeholders have argued that staff reductions could increase existing agency backlogs for listing findings and processing permits under Sections 7 and 10.

Funding for conservation and recovery has also emerged as an issue. Some stakeholders contend that FWS base funding barely covers salaries and operating costs and that nearly 30 percent of recovery actions are not being actively worked on because of inadequate funding.

Other stakeholders and lawmakers have questioned whether the ESA is effectively achieving species recovery and whether greater consideration should be given to its economic costs. Current law bases decisions to list or delist species on scientific factors, while economic considerations can factor into other ESA actions, including critical habitat designations.

The Bottom Line

The debate over ESA funding and staffing reflects a broader divide between the Trump administration's workforce reduction agenda and congressional decisions about the resources needed to implement the law. Congress directed FWS to maintain staffing levels to fulfill its statutory responsibilities and implement programs in a timely manner after the administration's workforce reductions.

House Republicans have also criticized what the House Appropriations Committee described as "Democrat-led weaponization of the Endangered Species Act" to prevent land use while supporting restrictions on certain FWS rules.

Congress could also consider broader changes to the ESA. H.R. 1897, the ESA Amendments Act of 2025, would make a series of changes to the law, including expanding state involvement in implementing the ESA, revising regulatory processes, and changing aspects of species recovery, permitting, and conservation.

The combination of declining real-dollar funding for some ESA programs, recent workforce reductions, proposed agency restructuring, and disagreements over the law's implementation leaves Congress with decisions over both how much money and staff the agencies need and how the ESA itself should operate.

***

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

---

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article