Mammoth reconstitution

[Michael.Chamberland]

> From:         Dennis Paulson <dpaulson at MIRRORS.UPS.EDU>
>
> I guess I'm not turned off by the woolly mammoth attempt.  It seems a
> reasonable thing to attempt, if at all logistically possible, and I can't
> see that it does any harm to the elephant or anyone else (any objections I
> can think up border on the metaphysical or spiritual).  One might argue
> that we caused the demise of the species, so we have a certain right, or
> even prerogative, to try to bring it back if our science and technology
> allow it.  Would you have the same attitude if it were an extinct insect?

Several things really bother me about the plan to impregnate elephants with
mammoth sperm, in an attempt to "bring back the mammoths".

Suitable mammoth habitat is gone, or at least very limited.  Human
population growth has severely impacted the range of large mammals, and
mammoths are particularly large.  Where will the mammoth hybrids be
kept?  Can the hybrids be expected to live in the same kind of habitat
once inhabited by true mammoths?

The idea of impregnating extant animals with the sperm of extinct
related species is interesting, but mammoths are a very poor choice
of test subjects.  Mammoths are too large and bulky to be good research
subjects.  Why not try this instead with an extinct rodent species?
Fairly well-preserved mammoth remains are already available to science.
Would a researcher interested in mammoths prefer tissue of the hybrid
over that of the pure mammoth?

The choice of mammoths for this reconstitution project turns the effort into
a publicity stunt.  It reminds me of Jurassic Park.  It is intended to amaze
the public.  I worry that if such an experiment is successful, it will
convince the public that extinction is NOT forever.  Why protect rare
species in habitat if we need only a tissue sample to grow them up again
in the lab?   This overlooks the fact that a species is dependent and
interconnected with the ecology of its habitat.  Preservation of habitats,
rather than a few charismatic taxa, defines a working conservation effort.
Mammoths might be kept alive in a zoo, or on some island, but they will exist
as curiosities.  And these won't even be pure mammoths.  We could create
our own new genetic curiosities through the judicious application of
assorted mutagens, but I don't see (or want) that kind of project billed as
enhancing biodiversity.


Michael Chamberland