In a landmark policy shift, the Trump administration is rethinking conservation law in light of a headline-making scientific development. After Colossal Biosciences announced it had successfully created three “de-extinct” dire wolf pups, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum swiftly questioned the relevance of the Endangered Species Act.
“The Endangered Species List has become like the Hotel California: once a species enters, they never leave,” Burgum said. This announcement signals the boldest challenge to the Act since it was established in 1973. Advocating for innovation over regulation, Burgum stated, “the only thing we’d like to see go extinct is the need for an endangered species list.”
The administration now claims that cutting-edge science—rather than federal oversight—should guide how America protects its wildlife in the modern era.
The “De-Extinction” Breakthrough That Changed Everything
On April 7, 2025, Colossal Biosciences revealed three wolf pups—Romulus, Remus, and Khaleesi—as evidence of successfully reviving the long-extinct dire wolf. Based in Dallas, the $10 billion biotech company used DNA extracted from ancient remains, including a 13,000-year-old tooth and a 72,000-year-old skull, to genetically alter gray wolf cells.
These cells were implanted into surrogate dogs, resulting in pups with large frames and thick, pale coats reminiscent of their Ice Age ancestors. Kept at a classified 2,000-acre compound in the northern U.S., the animals represent what Colossal CEO Ben Lamm describes as “the world’s first de-extinction.”
The White House quickly celebrated the accomplishment, framing it as a transformative moment for conservation, one that may reshape federal wildlife protection by emphasizing technological advancement over existing environmental laws.
Burgum’s Vision: Innovation Over Regulation
Interior Secretary Doug Burgum had already been in talks with Colossal Biosciences prior to the dire wolf announcement, exploring how the company’s de-extinction technology might influence federal conservation programs.
Once the pups were unveiled, Burgum wasted no time using the development to champion a policy overhaul. “The Department of the Interior is excited about the potential of ‘de-extinction’ technology… including strengthening biodiversity protection efforts,” he said.
Speaking at a streamed town hall, he added, “If we’re going to be in anguish about losing a species, now we have an opportunity to bring them back. Pick your favorite species and call up Colossal.” Burgum’s comments make clear the administration’s new strategy: shift the focus from protecting existing wildlife to potentially resurrecting what has already been lost.
The Scientific Community Pushes Back
Not everyone is convinced. Leading scientists have sharply contested Colossal’s claim of resurrecting the dire wolf. Julie Meachen, who helped sequence the species’ genome but didn’t assist in the pups’ creation, insisted these animals aren’t true dire wolves.
Zoologist Philip Seddon labeled them “genetically modified grey wolves.” Paleoecologist Jacquelyn Gill was more candid: “That is no more a dire wolf than I am Wonder Woman.” Paleogeneticist Dr. Nic Rawlence stressed that ancient DNA is far too degraded for cloning, saying it’s “like if you put fresh DNA in a 500-degree oven overnight.”
These criticisms cast doubt on the central rationale behind the administration’s policy shift: that de-extinction is reliable enough to replace existing conservation protections with cutting-edge biological engineering.
The Sweeping Regulatory Rollback Begins
The dire wolf debut accelerated the administration’s broader push to weaken endangered species protections. Under Secretary Burgum’s leadership, the Fish and Wildlife Service submitted a proposal to redefine “harm” under the Endangered Species Act—a move environmentalists say could encourage habitat destruction.
President Trump also revived the controversial “God Squad,” which can override species protections in favor of development. In February, the Interior Department withdrew safeguards for the Rice’s whale, a species with fewer than 100 individuals left. These rollbacks build on Trump’s Inauguration Day order to prioritize human interests over wildlife, such as diverting river water from protected habitats.
The administration’s actions underscore its shift toward prioritizing industry and development while sidelining decades of environmental safeguards and species recovery programs.
The Economic Argument: Unleashing American Innovation
Citing economic concerns, the administration argues that the Endangered Species Act now obstructs progress. House Natural Resources Committee Chair Bruce Westerman remarked, “The Endangered Species Act is a well-intentioned piece of legislation with admirable goals.
However, it has not been entirely successful.” Burgum echoed that sentiment, declaring that “it has been innovation—not regulation—that has spawned American greatness.” Officials claim burdensome federal rules inhibit economic growth, infringe on private property rights, and fail to deliver strong conservation outcomes.
Westerman highlighted that just 3 percent of listed species have fully recovered—a figure the administration uses to criticize the Act’s effectiveness. Their core message is clear: revitalizing American innovation means freeing businesses and communities from what they view as outdated and inefficient regulatory obstacles.
The Technological Reality Check
Despite government enthusiasm, researchers warn that de-extinction technology is far from ready to replace traditional conservation. Colossal’s project altered only 14 genes—barely scratching the surface of what made dire wolves genetically distinct.
Geneticist Adam Rutherford pointed out that dire wolves and gray wolves diverged around 6 million years ago—akin to the difference between humans and chimps. Even if scientists could recreate the animals, their original habitats are long gone. Dire wolves evolved to hunt massive Ice Age mammals like mastodons and bison, which are now extinct.
Without appropriate ecosystems, revived species would struggle to survive. The administration’s reliance on emerging biotech overlooks these realities, gambling on a solution that’s currently incapable of restoring the intricate balance of lost environments.
The Moral Hazard of Extinction-First Conservation
Experts warn that making resurrection a conservation strategy opens a dangerous door. Julie Meachen cautioned that de-extinction could be used “as a carte blanche to delist all the endangered species,” stressing it’s no substitute for actual protections.
Stanford’s Paul R. Ehrlich called the moral hazard “immense,” suggesting that resurrecting lost species distracts from solving real-world biodiversity threats. Environmental professor Adrian Treves added that lab-raised animals cannot take the place of wild populations in their ecosystems.
The fear is that governments might stop protecting at-risk species entirely, assuming future technology will fix the damage. This extinction-first mentality risks escalating biodiversity loss by replacing effective prevention efforts with speculative, unproven resurrection projects that may never deliver on their promises.
Species on the Legislative Chopping Block
With Republican majorities in Congress, lawmakers are pushing bills to remove protections from multiple species. Several GOP legislators back proposals to delist the dunes sagebrush lizard, which lives in West Texas oil fields; the northern long-eared bat, found in timber zones; and large predators like gray wolves and grizzlies, viewed by ranchers as threats.
Representative Bruce Westerman is also championing amendments to limit judicial oversight and give states more control over delisting decisions. Conservationists argue these efforts could doom species to extinction, particularly gray wolves.
One environmental group warned such legislation might “issue death sentences for thousands of wolves nationwide.” These policy moves suggest the administration’s stance on de-extinction is already influencing real-world decisions with potentially irreversible ecological consequences.
At What Cost? The Biodiversity Gamble
Replacing conservation with biotechnology represents a high-stakes gamble on America’s ecological future. More than 1,300 U.S. species are currently classified as endangered or at risk. Critics fear that prioritizing unproven technologies over habitat protection could speed biodiversity loss.
While Colossal’s pups are genetically engineered to resemble dire wolves, the company has not actually revived the species. Resurrection technology remains experimental and unproven at scale. Critics ask: Should we weaken conservation laws based on hypothetical future advances? The answer could determine the fate of species like the Rice’s whale, red wolves, and polar bears.
If protections disappear before alternatives are fully realized, the result may not be innovation, but extinction. For now, the promise of de-extinction remains a futuristic vision, not a conservation solution.
The Conservation Crossroads: Protection vs. Resurrection
The United States is facing a pivotal decision in environmental policy. Inspired by the dire wolf revival, the Trump administration is challenging 50 years of conservation strategy. Yet, the Endangered Species Act has prevented the extinction of 99 percent of protected species—a testament to its success.
Biologists argue that preserving species is far more effective than trying to revive them later. Some fear the administration’s new direction could trigger a feedback loop: weaker protections lead to more extinctions, which then justify more de-extinction projects.
Julie Meachen warned this could lead to a dangerous “carte blanche to delist all endangered species.” As America debates its future approach to wildlife, it must weigh the risks of replacing proven protections with speculative science.
Explore more of our trending stories and hit Follow to keep them coming to your feed!
Don’t miss out on more stories like this! Hit the Follow button at the top of this article to stay updated with the latest news. Share your thoughts in the comments—we’d love to hear from you!
