De-extinction; Ain't nobody got time for that!

      

      De-extinction in the process of "resurrecting" species that have previously died off through cloning, selective breeding, and DNA splicing. Scientists are working to rack in an immense amount of money to perform de-extinction on animals like the woolly mammoth and the passenger pigeon. The science behind de-extinction is groundbreaking, but with environmental conditions depleting we should focus that money towards preserving species that are still alive today.

     Scientists cannot perfectly predict how each and every animal that is resurrected will act. Species that are de-extinct have the complete possibility of being the top predator and wiping out other species, or they could overpopulate because other species don’t have the system to consume it. As well as that, if scientists can de-extinct species humans will care less and less about the environment and continue to destroy it because if an animal dies we can just bring it back. “If we develop a way to bring back extinct species, people may not be as worried because even if a species dies out, we could always bring them back. However, if a species that went extinct due to habitat destruction was revived, there wouldn’t be natural habitat in which they could live,” said SENCER in Should we bring back extinct species?(Para. 3) Either way all the time, energy and science that went into de-extincting these species would go to waste and tear apart the fragile food chains that are currently in place.

     Additionally, the process of de-extinction is set at a very high-price. “In New Zealand, the researchers calculated, the funds required to conserve 11 extinct species would protect three times as many living species," mentioned Steph Yin in We Might Soon Resurrect Extinct Species. Is It Worth the Cost? Currently, 20% of Earth's species face extinction, but if scientists go through with de-extinction that percentage could increase to 50 in less than 100 years. All the money that would save these 'once extinct' animals would be better spent saving our wildlife that is facing threats. They would greatly benefit from such large amounts of money and if the species roaming our planet today die, wouldn't we have to spend 3 times as much to get them back?

     De-extinction does do more harm than good, but the science that supports this could be the key to saving endangered species. “The same technology used for de-extinction could be used to help populate species that are currently endangered, or to diversify the gene pool of species with little genetic variation, leaving populations less susceptible to viruses, bacterial infections, and disease," said SENCER in Should we bring back extinct species?(Para. 2) The practice of DNA splicing, or inserting bits and pieces of on animals DNA into a close relative can be used to increase the population of endangered species. De-extinction has brought new knowledge to the table and this knowledge can be used to preserve animals facing harm, instead of being wasting on a project that may not even work.
     We all wish we can walk alongside dinosaurs, or play with a wooly mammoth, but in reality, bringing back extinct species just so we can sleep at night is moving the environment three steps back instead of one step forward. Resurrecting these species that once had a place on our planet would be causing more destruction than imaginable. These animals would tear up food chains and overpopulate areas. In fact, where would they even stay? Also, they would be using money that could have gone to animals that need it more. The science used to perform de-extinction is revolutionary and could be used to save endangered species whereas the act of de-extinction could ruin our home.