Cloning A Mammoth?

[BobC]

Sorry I haven't replied yet--i was having fun having a spinal tap done at North Austin Med Center! Yay! Don't you wish you were me?

I have read through the posts here in my still-somewhat-altered state, and I guess the main thing that leaps out to me is how there seems to be almost zero regret that our ancestors have wiped out so many species, but there seems to be lots of angst over possibly bringing a species back that might possibly interfere with critters that filled that niche. If I live to be 100, and I'm most of the way there, I will never get that.

Dingos vs. Thylacines, for example, is yet another example of people introducing a species (dingos) who may have helped spell the end of the Thylacine, which humans hunted into obscurity. Dingos came from domesticated dogs. I say reintroduce the Thylacine in Tasmania, and get rid of the dingo there, leaving the dingo on the Australian mainland. To my mind, a dog-like marsupial deserves some space if the dingo can have a whole continent.

I also don't get this talk about mammoths not having the same habitat anymore. Siberia has huge expanses that are uninhabited and have changed little from the Ice Age. I am not suggesting we try to return Colombian Mammoths to North America. I think trying to restore them is not necessarily a bad idea. Even if they don't "take," and eventually peter out due to new diseases and all that, at least we tried. Cost? Compared to invading certain Middle East Countries for over a decade? Minimal.

Maybe I'm still coming off my surgery meds, but it seems like almost nobody minds if we wipe out a species, but trying to bring one back causes panic.

I'm no liberal phony who walks around morally preening about "Saving the Whales"--I am a true lover of wildlife and am astounded at how many species humans have been eradicated in a geological eye-blink--the last two centuries (Moas, Dodos, Passenger Pigeons, Thylacines, etc.)

[Cris]

Why would having specimens in a zoo be disgusting or unethical? We keep all kind of organisms in a zoo that wouldn't normally be found in that area (or time in this case) for education and study. How would this be different? I am guardedly against reintroducing them as a population, but I need convincing that a zoo setting is unacceptable.

Brent Ashcraft

It's not the keeping them in a zoo I find so unethical, it's the breeding of a new species for the primary purpose of lining the pockets of some zoo owner with a sudden explosion of tourists that want to see the baby mammoth....IMHO, something as intelligent as a mammoth/elephant shouldn't be kept in captivity unless it couldn't be released back into the wild. Most zoos nowadays only keep animals that can't be released into the wild and try to reintroduce animals born in captivity to their natural habitat. That would probably never be the case with a cloned animal.

Don't get me wrong, as fascinated as I am with the Pleistocene, a sort of ice age "Jurassic Park" has a lot of appeal to me also. I would love to be able to do something other than just imagine what all these animals were like...But is it right to breed something with the only purpose of throwing it into a 100x100ft enclosure with a couple of fake trees for it to live out the remainder of its days?

[ashcraft]

Dingos vs. Thylacines, for example, is yet another example of people introducing a species (dingos) who may have helped spell the end of the Thylacine, which humans hunted into obscurity. Dingos came from domesticated dogs. I say reintroduce the Thylacine in Tasmania, and get rid of the dingo there, leaving the dingo on the Australian mainland. To my mind, a dog-like marsupial deserves some space if the dingo can have a whole continent.

I don't think we know if dingos came from dogs or not, there are wild dogs, such as the dohl, that humans did not "make". As I recall, genetic evidence is inconclusive.

You can't jump to conclusions when playing God, otherwise you end up with red fox introduced to eat the rabbits, and instead eating all the marupials.

Brent Ashcraft

PS- I hope your spinal tap went well, I understand they aren't very fun.

Edited March 15, 2012 by ashcraft

[ashcraft]

It's not the keeping them in a zoo I find so unethical, it's the breeding of a new species for the primary purpose of lining the pockets of some zoo owner with a sudden explosion of tourists that want to see the baby mammoth....IMHO, something as intelligent as a mammoth/elephant shouldn't be kept in captivity unless it couldn't be released back into the wild. Most zoos nowadays only keep animals that can't be released into the wild and try to reintroduce animals born in captivity to their natural habitat. That would probably never be the case with a cloned animal.

Don't get me wrong, as fascinated as I am with the Pleistocene, a sort of ice age "Jurassic Park" has a lot of appeal to me also. I would love to be able to do something other than just imagine what all these animals were like...But is it right to breed something with the only purpose of throwing it into a 100x100ft enclosure with a couple of fake trees for it to live out the remainder of its days?

Tough one, as I am for making money off of animals. Farmers do it all the time, and I don't see how cloning an animal to raise for a zoo in order to make money is any different then selectively breeding an animal (or plant for that matter) in order to make more money off of it.

Brent Ashcraft

[AgrilusHunter]

Everyone's comments here are thoughtful and informative, to me this thread is a credit to the forum and I'm really enjoying it.

For me, ashcraft already had the final say here by correctly pointing out that, even if cloning somehow succeeds, the pool of genetic material for mammoths is limited to a small number of spectacularly well preserved fossils. Even cloning tens of thousands of mammoths would fail to recreate the species because of the loss of 99.999% (probably a low estimate) of the genetic variation that originally defined the species, not to mention any learned behaviors lost to time. Undoubtedly, any attempt to recreate a species through cloning, mammoth or any other, would fail in its authenticity. Debating the ethics of where to keep these animals skirts the prime issue, that it would not even be the original extinct species. Really, what would be the point of it all.

BobC, I'm very sorry to hear about your surgery. I wish you a speedy recovery.

[Auspex]

I grieve the biological casualties of the ascendancy of mechanized modern man, and have personally contributed no small amount of time, effort, and money toward mitigating the continuing impact. Primitive, pre-mechanization humans, however, were part of their ecosystem, and if extinctions resulted from their activity (which is a controversial question), then I consider them to be part of the natural process.

[Tyrannoraptor]

As much as I'd like to see animals that have been long gone, I don't really support bringing them back by cloning. Human fault or not, there are now other animals filling the niches that the extinct species once filled. Sure, you could keep them in a controlled environment, separate from other animals, but is such a control even possible? And to bring them back to life only to be caged or fenced for the rest of their existance? Doesn't really sound right to me.

My heart says "hell yes, do it", but my mind says otherwise.

Edit: that only goes for the long extinct species. As for those who only recently became extinct... Well, I guess there's no harm in trying to reintroduce them to their habitats with help of cloning, I doubt they would have been replaced by other animals in such short time.

Edited March 15, 2012 by Tyrannoraptor

[BobC]

Thanks for the well wishes, guys. When I was under anesthesia--you know how most people see angels, or bright lights or Jesus? I saw my work team leader Susan K.--she was asking me for a breakfast taco!!! Now how random is that? So much for my spiritual ascendance!

Auspex--we part ways there regarding people being a natural part of the extinction process. I think we are an anomaly in the same sense that the Black Plague was, except that we humans are capable of having a conscience. When I go to Red Lobster and see all the photos of people posing with hundreds of bass, all strung up on fences, it just seems like people were catching as many as they could without a care about conserving them as a species (most of the pics look to be early 20th Century). I was that way as a kid--I had a BB gun and I was always shooting every frog I saw, every bird I saw, etc. I had no remorse or conscience about it, being a little boy. Today, I cannot believe I did that snarge.

Don't get me wrong here--I am no Injustice Collector like Janeane Garofalo. I can't stand that. What's done is done. But if we humans can undo a tiny portion of the damage we've done, I'm for it.

[AgrilusHunter]

Hi BobC, any chance your work team leader is an angel in disguise?

But if we humans can undo a tiny portion of the damage we've done, I'm for it.

The issue here is that we can't. Extinction is permanent, it is the death of a species and for many reasons cannot be undone. Even cloning a large number of animals will not repair the damage done.

Edited March 15, 2012 by AgrilusHunter

[Rodney]

I think the man made part of animal extinction will continue and get a lot worse because of habitat loss. I look at human over population and habitat destruction as a big concern over the next several hundred years.

So man has the power over the beast since they can not speak for them selves and they have never spoke a word.

I could be wrong but if someone could bring back T Rex they would find a large place for this very popular dinosaur to live.

Never happen..

Rodney, Ga. USA

[Tyrannoraptor]

I've watched the first Jurassic Park film again. I just had to play the scene when they first encounter the Brachiosaurus over and over again. And after watching that scene... Please, just do it. Find a place where you can isolate the animals so they wouldn't interfere with the modern day wildlife. I know it's probably a bad idea and part of my brain is still very much against this. But I'd give anything to see these creatures alive (that goes for the Mammoth, too).

Not the retro-engineered Horner's version of the dinos. Bring back the real thing.