Should We Bring Back Extinct Species? What Science and Ethics Say

Home Biology Should We Bring Back Extinct Species? What Science and Ethics Say

Biology

By Joe Burgett - July 11, 2025

In recent years, biotechnology has made remarkable strides, sparking renewed interest in the concept of reviving extinct species. From the woolly mammoth to the passenger pigeon, scientists are exploring the potential to resurrect lost animals and plants using advanced genetic tools.

However, as these possibilities expand, so too do the ethical and ecological concerns. Is de-extinction a bold solution to biodiversity loss, or does it risk unforeseen consequences? The debate is as complex as the science itself, raising profound questions about our responsibilities—and the limits—of being stewards of life on Earth.

NEXT >>

The Science of De-Extinction

Should We Bring Back Extinct Species? What Science and Ethics Say — [Photo Credit: Daniel Eskridge/Shutterstock]

De-extinction relies on cutting-edge tools, such as cloning and gene editing, particularly the revolutionary CRISPR technology. These methods allow scientists to reconstruct the DNA of vanished species and, in some cases, insert key genes into living relatives. Projects such as the effort to revive the woolly mammoth utilize these techniques to blur the line between past and present. Such advances inspire hope—and caution—as the line between science fiction and reality becomes increasingly unclear.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Famous Candidates for Revival

Several extinct species have captured the imagination of both scientists and the public. These include the passenger pigeon, Tasmanian tiger (thylacine), and the dodo. Such species are often chosen because of their iconic status, the availability of genetic material, and their once-important roles in their ecosystems. Ongoing projects hope to reintroduce these lost creatures and, perhaps, restore lost ecological balance.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Ecological Role Restoration

Bringing back extinct species could help restore vital ecological roles they once played, such as seed dispersal, grazing, or top-level predation. This idea draws parallels with modern ecosystem engineering, where scientists reintroduce key species to revive natural processes. Some experts argue that de-extinction could repair damaged landscapes, but others warn that today’s ecosystems have changed, making outcomes unpredictable.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Risks of Invasive Species

Reintroducing extinct species poses significant risks. Ecological disruptions may occur if revived animals or plants become invasive in today’s altered environments. History offers cautionary tales, such as the introduction of rabbits to Australia, which devastated native habitats. Experts warn that de-extinct creatures could outcompete local species or spread disease, making careful risk assessment essential before any revival effort.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Habitat Loss Remains a Barrier

A significant obstacle to the successful de-extinction of species is the loss of suitable habitats. Many species disappeared because their environments were destroyed, and those habitats may no longer exist. Without safe and stable ecosystems, revived animals and plants could struggle to survive, raising questions about the practicality and long-term success of reintroduction.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Ethical Concerns: Animal Welfare

De-extinction raises pressing animal welfare concerns. Cloning and gene editing often involve high failure rates, with many embryos failing to survive or suffering from deformities. Even successful births may result in unnatural upbringings, as lab-born animals lack the social structures of their wild ancestors. Bioethicists question whether it is justifiable to expose revived species to potential pain and distress for the sake of scientific progress.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Genetic Diversity Limitations

Revived species often face a critical lack of genetic diversity, making them vulnerable to disease, inbreeding, and rapid extinction. With only a few DNA samples available, populations may struggle to adapt or survive in changing environments. Experts caution that without sufficient genetic variation, reintroduced species may not be viable in the long term.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Cost and Resource Allocation

The pursuit of de-extinction is costly, requiring substantial funding, advanced technology, and highly skilled personnel. Many conservationists argue that these resources could be better invested in protecting endangered species and preserving existing ecosystems. Tough choices must be made about where limited funds can have the most significant impact for biodiversity and planetary health.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Public Fascination and Support

The idea of resurrecting extinct animals has captured the public imagination, fueled by movies like Jurassic Park and widespread media coverage. This fascination can boost support and funding for de-extinction research, but it also risks oversimplifying the science and ethics involved. While public enthusiasm is powerful, it can sometimes lead to unrealistic expectations or misplaced conservation priorities.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Learning from Extinction

De-extinction research offers more than the hope of revival—it deepens our understanding of why species disappear and how ecosystems function. By studying ancient DNA and the mechanisms of extinction, scientists gain valuable insights that inform modern conservation strategies. These lessons can help protect today’s vulnerable species and prevent future losses, even if complete resurrection remains elusive.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Biodiversity Boost or Distraction?

A central question is whether de-extinction will genuinely enhance biodiversity or merely divert attention and resources from urgent conservation efforts. Some scientists argue that reviving species could help restore ecological complexity, while others believe it risks sidelining efforts to protect fragile habitats and living wildlife. The challenge is finding a balance that supports both innovation and effective stewardship.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Cultural and Spiritual Value

For many communities, extinct species hold deep cultural or spiritual significance. Reviving animals or plants that feature in folklore or indigenous traditions can foster healing and reconnect people with their heritage. Beyond science, de-extinction carries powerful symbolic meaning. Therefore, we must also consider the sensitivity to local values and histories. Especially when reintroducing a species to the wild.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Technological Spin-Offs

Pursuing de-extinction has led to remarkable breakthroughs in genetics, biotechnology, and medical research. Techniques developed for reviving extinct species often find applications in gene therapy, disease modeling, and biodiversity preservation. These innovations are reshaping what is possible in bioscience, benefiting not only endangered species but also human health and conservation efforts.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Legal and Regulatory Challenges

The prospect of resurrecting extinct species exposes a glaring gap in legal and regulatory frameworks. There are few, if any, established laws to govern the management, ownership, or protection of these animals and plants. Pressing questions about liability, conservation status, and international cooperation—issues that must be addressed before de-extinct species can safely rejoin the world.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Disease Transmission Risks

Reviving extinct species could inadvertently reintroduce ancient pathogens or zoonotic diseases into today’s ecosystems. These animals may carry bacteria or viruses long absent from the modern world, posing unpredictable threats to existing wildlife and humans. Careful screening and biosecurity measures are essential to minimize the risk of unintended outbreaks or cross-species disease transmission.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Climate Change Connections

Some scientists propose using de-extinct species as tools for climate engineering. For example, resurrected mammoths could help slow tundra thawing by compacting snow and maintaining grasslands, which could potentially reduce greenhouse gas emissions. These bold ideas, though critics question their feasibility and warn of unforeseen ecological consequences in already fragile environments.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Philosophical Questions of ‘Naturalness’

De-extinction stirs debate over what it means to be truly natural. Are revived species authentic parts of nature, or are they human-made constructs shaped by our technology and choices? Philosophers argue that these questions challenge our definitions of wildness, authenticity, and our role as creators or caretakers of life.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Impact on Endangered Species Protection

Some conservationists warn that de-extinction could diminish the urgency to protect species currently at risk. If people believe lost animals can be revived, the motivation to safeguard threatened wildlife and habitats may weaken. A focus on resurrection must not distract from the vital mission of preventing extinctions before they happen.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Community and Indigenous Engagement

Meaningful consultation with local and Indigenous communities is essential when considering species reintroduction. Their knowledge, cultural values, and lived experience provide crucial perspectives on ecological restoration and ethical responsibility. De-extinction projects should respect and involve these communities from the start, ensuring decisions are informed, just, and contextually appropriate.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Potential for Scientific Tourism

The revival of extinct species could open up unique opportunities for scientific tourism, drawing visitors eager to witness “living legends” firsthand. Wildlife tourism has already proven beneficial for conservation in regions with iconic animals, generating crucial funding and awareness. If managed responsibly, de-extinct species might become influential ambassadors for preservation and ecological education. However, we do not want a Jurassic Park type of issue…

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Unintended Consequences

Despite careful planning, reintroducing extinct species could trigger unforeseen ecological and social impacts. Newly revived animals might disrupt food webs, compete with existing species, or evolve in unexpected ways. The ripple effects of de-extinction could extend far beyond our predictions, underscoring the need for caution and humility in these ambitious endeavors.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Precedents in Plant De-Extinction

De-extinction isn’t limited to animals—plants have already been revived from ancient seeds and preserved tissues. A striking example is the Judean date palm, brought back from 2,000-year-old seeds. Such successes offer hope for restoring lost plant diversity and reconnecting with ecological history.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

The Role of Museums and Zoos

Museums and zoos play pivotal roles in de-extinction efforts, providing expertise, genetic resources, and platforms for public engagement. These institutions help care for revived species and foster discussions about conservation, ethics, and science. Museums and zoos are uniquely positioned to educate and inspire society about the promise and perils of bringing back extinct life.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Genetic Rescue vs. De-Extinction

There’s a key distinction between de-extinction and genetic rescue. While de-extinction seeks to revive extinct species, genetic rescue utilizes advanced techniques to introduce new genes into threatened populations, thereby enhancing their survival and adaptability. Genetic rescue may offer a more practical and immediate way to prevent extinctions and maintain biodiversity, without the risks of reintroducing long-lost species.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Rewilding and Reintroduction

De-extinct species could play a role in ambitious rewilding projects, aiming to restore natural processes and dynamic landscapes. By reintroducing lost animals or plants, conservationists hope to revitalize ecosystems and enhance their resilience. Such efforts might blend the old with the new, while cautioning that careful planning is vital to avoid unintended impacts.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Challenges in Behavior and Socialization

Revived animals may face unique behavioral and socialization challenges. Without parents or elders to teach them crucial survival skills, these creatures could struggle to find food, communicate, or form social bonds. The loss of intergenerational knowledge makes it difficult to recreate the full complexity of extinct species’ lives, potentially limiting their chances for thriving in the wild.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

The Limits of Fossil DNA

One major constraint on de-extinction is the degradation of DNA over time. Scientifically, it’s nearly impossible to recover usable genetic material from species extinct for millions of years—such as dinosaurs—because DNA breaks down and fragments. This reality sets clear boundaries on which lost species might ever be candidates for revival.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Commercialization and Patents

As de-extinction technologies advance, questions arise about patenting revived species or genetic methods. Companies may seek intellectual property rights over engineered organisms, raising concerns about access, control, and the commercialization of life. Debates over who profits from these innovations and how they might impact conservation, research, and equitable sharing of genetic resources.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Media Representations and Misconceptions

Popular media, from blockbuster films to viral social posts, often distort the realities of de-extinction. These portrayals can oversimplify the science, exaggerate risks, or fuel unrealistic hopes about bringing back dinosaurs and other ancient creatures. Public debate must be grounded in reality, not fantasy, to ensure informed policy and ethical decisions.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

The Future: Responsible Innovation

As de-extinction science accelerates, responsible innovation becomes crucial. Clear ethical frameworks, public transparency, and rigorous oversight must guide every step, from research to potential reintroductions. A collaborative approach—uniting scientists, policymakers, ethicists, and communities—is essential to strike a balance between technological potential and ecological integrity, as well as social responsibility.

<< Previous

NEXT >>

Should We Let The Dead Rest?

The dream of de-extinction embodies both scientific promise and deep ethical complexity. While breakthroughs in genetics could restore lost species and ecosystems, they also raise challenging questions about animal welfare, ecological risks, and our role as creators.

Actual progress demands cautious, collaborative decision-making—weighing ecological, cultural, and technological impacts with humility. Before we attempt to revive the past, let’s ensure we protect the living world and make choices that honor both nature’s legacy and future.

.article-content-img img { width: 100% }

<< Previous