Republicans in Congress have long been gunning for the Endangered Species Act, but this time they may bring down the powerful, popular environmental law that saved the bald eagles.

And it's not just because the Trump administration is taking aim, too.

It's because President Donald Trump's parade of dysfunction has Americans' heads spinning. That gives the tree-haters an opportunity to gut this iconic law while people are distracted.

So don’t look away now.

Danger comes from conservatives in Congress and the White House.

Trump is proposing administrative changes in how the law is implemented — changes that could have devastating impacts.

Meanwhile, Republicans in the House have a package of nine bills euphemistically being called a “modernization” of the Endangered Species Act.

Grijalva says industry is driving changes

The bills were heard by the House Natural Resources Committee Wednesday.

Robert Dreyer of Defenders of Wildlife told the committee the bills “make it easier to develop land in ways that will hurt endangered species.”

Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva, ranking Democrat on the committee, said the proposals are a “wish list” for industries that see the Endangered Species Act at a barrier.

The nine House GOP bills have the support of business, agriculture and development interests.

Gosar says the act is 'hardly a success'

Arizona Republican Rep. Paul Gosar, a member of the committee and sponsor of one of the bills, said the Endangered Species Act was "hardly a success."

That's a common GOP refrain. But it does not reflect the continued popularity of this law among Americans who want their children to inherit a country that's enriched by creatures, such as eagles, grizzly bears and wolves.

More:Yellowstone grizzly bears are not an endangered species — but ranchers like me are

More:Let the FBI do its job. Don't make Kavanaugh investigation a fig leaf for Republicans.

Since Trump took office, more than 100 bills have been introduced into the GOP-controlled Congress that target the Endangered Species Act, says Jared Saylor of Defenders of Wildlife.

Meanwhile, Trump has launched his own administrative attack on the Endangered Species Act, with a list of proposed changes on how federal agencies implement the law.

What scientists say is wrong with this effort

In an open letter about the changes, three prestigious organizations representing more than 9,000 professional biologists explained why this is a bad idea.

The American Society of Mammalogists, the North American branch of the Society for Conservation Biology and the American Ornithological Society are mainstream organizations of scientists who understand the environment and what it takes to protect it.

Here’s their take on what Trump wants to do:

► Removal of the “blanket 4(d) rule,” as Trump proposes, would make the law more susceptible to political interference, lead to fewer endangered species designations and “facilitate industry and other development interests by removing requirements to minimize harm to threatened species.”

► Proposed changes to Section 7 regulations “will significantly limit the designation of critical habitat for threatened and endangered species” and expand the circumstances when designating critical habitat would be deemed “not prudent.”

► Another planned rule change would insert economic considerations into decisions that the Endangered Species Act says should be made “solely on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.” This would result in “limiting protection to numerous animals and plants because the short-term negative economic impacts are perceived to be too high.”

Changes would undermine biodiversity

Trump’s changes would “undermine the ability of science and scientists to help protect our nation’s biodiversity,” the scientists say.

They urge the administration to withdraw the planned attack on the ESA, which is highly unlikely.

Public comment on these rule changes ended Sept. 24. After assessing the comments, Trump can move ahead with changes that are “antithetical to what the Endangered Species Act it designed to do,” says Saylor.

We might not be able to sue to stop it

If implemented, environmental groups could sue to stop the rule.

But wait: One of the changes in the House package of bills would make it tougher for environmental groups to sue under the Endangered Species Act.

This law represents our national commitment to our shared natural heritage.

If the GOP has its way the law is doomed.

Linda Valdez is a columnist at The Arizona Republic, where this column first appeared. You can follow her on Twitter: @valdezlinda.