The Pros And Cons Of Reviving Endangered Species

Hank Greely, a Stanford professor who publicly supports de-extinction, acknowledges that there are important risks that should be taken into consideration before reviving lost species. Issues of animal welfare, health, environment, politics and morality should all be carefully deliberated on to determine that the good would outweigh the bad5. Many ethical drawbacks and arguments have been raised against the support of de-extinction alongside the arguments that many have against the process of cloning. A conservational issue that advocates have brought up is the idea that cloning extinct species will hinder other efforts to protect endangered animals from future extinction.XX According to this argument attention and funding for the protection

This number would be astronomically increased because cloning extinct species has no specific formula for success. This means that many attempts would have to be done in order to produce even one successful embryo. Each attempt would cost a large sum of money that to some would be better served elsewhere for instance: preserving the habitats of endangered species against deforestation, destruction, contributing to reversing climate change, enforcing hunting policies, reducing pollution, and many other activities that have can have a more substantial impact. An example of the damage that humans have had on the environment can be seen in the case of the Arctic polar bear. Scientists predict that by 2050 the polar bear, which uses ice as a platform to hunt seals, will become extinct as a result of not being able to obtain their source of nutrition due to human induced climate

On their webpage, an article titled “The Case for Reviving Extinct Species” likens the efforts of de-extinction to the efforts made to protect endangered species.12 Facts have shown that these projects are expensive and also have a chance of failure yet, biologists and conservationists still believe that making an attempt to protect endangered species is worth the effort. If this is the case for the protection of endangered then by their reasoning it should be the same for the efforts of de-extinction. If there is the chance of righting the wrong that has been done to these animals they believe that the moral course of action is to attempt