1.your spelling is horrible.
2.you keep saying "introduce" when you're keep referring to "reintroduce." there is a big difference. even if you think you're good at science, you really need to work on your english.
3. what is the point of your question? you seem to stand strongly by your stance and not accepting anyone elses. what are you trying to prove? or are you just trying to find someone to argue with because you don't have any friends?
4. we, humans, have changed this planet. let's take the tasmanian tiger, for example. even though the tasmanian tiger is declared "extinct" (but we'll never know for sure), and that we all dearly miss them, it doesnt mean it is right to somehow clone them and then release them back into the wild. humans have changed this planet. forcing things back into the way they were doesn't necessarily mean it is a good thing. afterall, reintroducing species could disrupt the ecosystem even more.
5. the everglades lost a lot of land than it once had before. even if u release jaguars there, it doesnt mean that they have enough room to survive. they might have enough food, but they need a lot of room.
6. "introducing" jaguars into the everglades is a really bad idea because jaguars were never native to the everglades. introducing a new species to take care of another invasive species is the worst idea ever. the problem just gets bigger. yea, jaguars are native to north america, but north america is a very big continent. you keep making it sound like jaguars live in every state.
7. you mention above that there "might have been" jaguars in the everglades, and then u continue with a jaguar being tagged in arizona. the everglades is nowhere near arizona. you didn't prove anything to anyone. stop trying to make yourself sound like a know-it-all. to be honest, i think the two girls above make 100x more sense than you do.