Human Intervention to Protect Endangered Species: Is It Necessary or Going Against the Flow of Nature?

Humans are implementing various restoration programs to protect endangered species, but human intervention can upset the balance between species and put other organisms at risk. Considering the natural changes in ecosystems from an evolutionary perspective, we need to rethink whether these interventions are necessary.

 

Today, with the advancement of science and technology, people’s quality of life has become increasingly comfortable. People are no longer concerned with survival, but with how they can live healthily, and to that end, they care a lot about the environment around them. However, the Earth’s ecosystems have already changed significantly due to the destruction of biological habitats due to various developments, the emission of pollutants due to industrialization, and the use of pesticides to increase agricultural production. Not only the environment, but also the organisms that make up ecosystems are undergoing many changes. In fact, the world is losing about 130 species every day. Because of these problems, many people advocate for environmental protection and are working to bring species back through endangered species recovery programs, such as the Wolf Recovery Program (Idaho, USA, 1987) or Fox Recovery (Canada).
However, while the wolf recovery program has been successful in restoring wolf populations, it has faced a number of challenges due to anthropogenic interference. For one thing, the ratio of wolf prey to wolf numbers has not been adjusted, which has driven existing deer populations to extinction and increased livestock depredation. This has led to discussions about how to reduce the number of wolves again. In the case of foxes, despite attempts to reintroduce them after increasing their numbers through restoration programs, they were not able to adapt to the predators (coyotes) that existed in their existing habitat and were driven to extinction again. These examples show that even when human interference increases the population, the interactions between organisms in an ecosystem can cause other species to become endangered. This raises the question of whether human intervention is necessary to save endangered species.
To answer this question, let’s first look at the theory of evolution. Darwin’s theory of evolution explains natural selection: as the environment changes, only those organisms that are adapted to it will survive, and even within the same species, only those traits that favor the survival of different individuals will remain. In addition, ecosystems naturally form food pyramids, which regulate proportions. Even without human intervention, certain factors can cause species to migrate to new areas, and even species that are doing well can suddenly become extinct due to factors such as volcanic eruptions. However, there has been a steady flow of life on Earth for thousands of years, which suggests that a great balance has been maintained. Of course, humans are a top predator, and their ever-expanding influence is different from other factors in that it affects the entire planet. Therefore, in order to determine whether endangered species should be protected, let’s look at the factors that humans affect ecosystems from an evolutionary perspective and consider their impact on ecosystems in terms of biomigration, pollution, and human settlement expansion.
First, bullfrogs and bluegills are examples of species that have been displaced and disrupted by anthropogenic intervention. When they were introduced, people were worried that they would destroy the ecosystem because they had no natural enemies in Korea, but people were mainly concerned about the extinction of native species, not the destruction of the entire ecosystem. In fact, the exotic species are now top predators and their numbers have been controlled and balanced to the point where they do not have a significant impact on the ecosystem.
Next, let’s look at the effects of global warming. Many species are said to be disappearing due to temperature changes. However, the Chinese cicada has been migrating to South Korea in response to these temperature changes. When the Chinese cicadas appeared in Korea, many people were worried about environmental pollution, but in fact, these cicadas have adapted to the changed environment and found a new habitat, and can be seen as an example of adaptation. Pollock and squid, which are specialties of the East Sea, are also gradually moving to Russia, which is unfortunate for Korea, but it is a natural reaction of creatures that have adapted to the changed environment. In addition, the fact that fish species that used to be caught in the East Sea are decreasing and new species that are caught near the equator are emerging shows that creatures are adapting to their environment. Considering biodiversity migration and global warming, it is likely that the species that are currently in danger of extinction are those that have not been able to adapt to the changed environment.
The destruction of ecosystems due to human settlement and pollution may be somewhat different from an evolutionary perspective. First, the nature of urban spaces can be inhospitable to animals, putting many species at risk. However, human settlements only cover a limited area of the planet, and natural disasters have threatened ecosystems in the past. Natural phenomena such as ice ages, volcanic eruptions, and tsunamis have changed ecosystems forever, but animals are still adapting to their changing environments.
Environmental pollution can stimulate genetic factors that make it impossible to reproduce, or even threaten the very survival of organisms. Therefore, environmental protection is essential because pollution must be improved, and the damage it causes can be difficult to repair. Fortunately, people now recognize the importance of environmental protection and are working to reduce human impact on ecosystems through the creation of green belts and the development of green energy and technology. This will lead to less drastic changes in ecosystems and easier adaptation for living things.
However, humans are still putting a lot of effort and money into saving animals that are unable to adapt to the changing environment. As we focus on fulfilling our role as top predators, we need to rethink whether human intervention is necessary to protect endangered species. It goes against the grain of evolution and may be an act of human arrogance.