Should cloning be used to assist in management of species close to extinction?

As an opinion based question, the answer to this could go either way. It is a debated topic, so there is evidence that supports using clones to bolster dwindling populations, and it is equally supported that using clones should not be done. In my opinion, using cloning in species that are at risk of extinction is a bad idea. It sounds like a viable solution. A species that has dangerously low numbers of individuals could all of a sudden have population numbers that look sustainable. The problem is a genetic diversity one. Cloning does not increase genetic diversity. There is no shuffling of the gene pool. The population might be huge due to cloning; however, the gene pool for breeding is just as small as it always was. All that the cloning did was create a very large population of inbreeding. Inbreeding rarely works out, and a limited gene pool leads to inbreeding. The Florida panther is a good example of how low species numbers forced a species to begin inbreeding. Researchers discovered all kinds of genetic abnormalities such as kinked tails, undescended testicles, and structural heart problems as a result. Creating clones of those few individuals creates a larger population, but the available DNA to mix for future generations stays small, and that is why cloning as a form of species management should be avoided.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-kinked-tail-of-a-Florida-panther-on-the-left-and-an-x-ray-of-a-kinked-tail-on-the_fig4_273968104