Notes on Species Extinction:

http://www.ilo.org/oshenc/part-vii/environmental-health-hazards/item/505-species-extinction-
biodiversity-loss-and-human-health
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/05/140529-conservation-science-animals-species-
endangered-
extinction/?rptregcta=reg_free_np&rptregcampaign=20131016_rw_membership_n1p_intl_ot_w

The foremost ethical issue of species extinction is that we, as a species, have no right to kill off numerous
other organisms, when considering the wrongs in murdering within ones own species, this is essentially
the same act towards others.

Our actions upset the fragile ecological balance on which life depends through upsetting biological
diversity that makes soils fertile, creates the air we breathe, and provides food.

The growth in human population alongside an even greater rise in the consumption of resources and in the
production of wastes, are the main factors endangering the survival of species. This brings about acid
rain, global warming, and the discharge of toxics into the air, ultimately leading to a loss of biodiversity.

Habitat destruction, especially deforestation, is the greatest harm to biodiversity, specifically in the case
of rainforests. Less than 50% of the area originally covered by prehistoric tropical rainforests remains, yet
an unnecessary amount is still constantly being cut and burned.

Arguably, one could say that extinction is just a natural progress in life, as humans and technology
advance, naturally, impacts are going to be made which isnt necessarily unjust. To further that, looking at
a humanistic point of view, any advancements we make in the end benefit the human race, ergo no matter
what the cost to achieve them they are justified. That would have to be a very reaching argument
however, for when looked at in a world point of view, we are in actuality just slowly destroying the
biodiversity keeping us and all other species alive and in balance. Not to mention another
counterargument to this would be that it is through discovering new species, and preserving all species
that we can make advancements in medicine and other fields to help keep biodiversity and the human race
strong.

Applying a fairly accurate statistic approach to animal extinction data reveals a rate of 100 to 1,000
species lost per million per year, mainly due to human-caused actions. Modifying the calculation to apply
it to find the rate of extinction before modern humans evolved, about 200,000 years ago, scientists
reviewed data from fossil records and noted when species disappeared, then used statistical modeling to
fill holes in the record. This calculation revealed that before humans evolved, less than a single species
per million went extinct yearly.
Regardless of exact numbers, it cannot be denied that due to the human race there are higher extinction
rates and risks. This is exactly why it is up to humans to put more effort into fixing problems that lead to
higher extinction rates. One of the greatest tools is awareness, if an average person would be asked about
human impact on species extinction, they would respond with something along the lines of, It cant be
that bad, or, not much can be done, but there really are advancements we as a collection can make, and
it is mainly due to the lack of awareness that these critical issues are not addressed and dealt with. People
can vote for policies that lessen the impact of climate change, which is hitting the oceans particularly hard
by raising the water's pH and dissolving the shells of many marine animals. People can also encourage
their governments to connect one nature reserve to another. We truly do have a fair amount of power to
resolve issues if people can be made aware of their ethical duty to life on earth.

(The above focused mostly on the general ethics and impact of species extinction, the rest of this note will
focus more on the ethics of human action on animals in particular, so more animal extinction and harm.)

Due to human action, animal extinction is growing, this is obviously ethically unjust, for, as species of
animals, we are essentially obliterating other species. Arguably this can be blamed on a lack of
awareness, and the way corporations and initiatives cloud true intention, and the impact on various
habitats, which in its own is also ethically wrong. The counterargument to this is that through various
organizations a fairly large amount of awareness is brought to the general public, whats missing is the
action needed to actually change the state of current animal extinction.

Some examples of important animals that are at risk of extinction include dart-poison frogs, bears, and
sharks. Basically the frogs are super sensitive to deforestation, and are crucial to learning more about the
basic units of membrane function found throughout the animal kingdom. Bears in hibernation are cray-
cray, basically the do not urinate and stay at an almost standard temperature during hibernation, if studied
more some new advancements in human health can be developed. Immune systems of sharks are ridonk-
donk. (Didnt want to waste a bunch of typing, if you want more reading on these and more in more
specifics check out the first link at the top of the page).

In summary it is ethically wrong for animal life to be as damaged as it is by human action.