I am not interested in whether we should genetically modify species to exterminate them or not. I am rather interested in, as usual, the line of reasoning.
The writer argued that it can be justified with utilitarian approach, saying that
"its extermination would seem to be morally justified on the grounds that doing so would create more good than harm. Naturally, if a harmful species were also beneficial in other ways, then the matter would be rather more complicated and such extermination could be wrong on the grounds that it would do more harm than good."
