I believe that the entire project is a public relations stunt and is ethically suspect.
- As Ed pointed out, these are hybrids, not dire wolves. Only a small fraction of the genes differentiating dire wolves from gray wolves were introduced. The company selected genes to create some of the dire wolf's appearance.
- These engineered animals will not live as dire wolves. They cannot. They have no parents to teach them, no pack to join. They are glorified niche pets.
- The company has no intention of re-introducing dire wolves. They said they will only create a small number of individuals - and that will be the end of that. A publicity stunt.
Any "de-extinction" project should first address these questions: (a) Is there a habitat and legislative/administrative framework ready to receive the species? (b) How will this species alter the habitat, and will the changes be beneficial to the ecosystem? (c) Is this a good use of resources, relative to the on-going habitat destruction and preventable species extinction?
It is possible that there are future valid projects. But conservation of the species and habitats we already have should come first.
Thank you, MM, I totally agree. Your emphasis on the ethical and ecological considerations of de-extinction aligns with the concerns raised by experts in the field. As noted, these animals are genetically modified gray wolves rather than true dire wolves. Your point about the absence of a suitable social structure and habitat for these animals is spot on, highlighting the challenges they may face in adapting to modern environments. Prioritizing the conservation of existing species and habitats must remain a primary focus in addressing current biodiversity challenges.
Thank you, Sharon. It's encouraging to hear that these questions are resonating in your conversations. The ethical considerations surrounding scientific advancements are indeed complex and merit thoughtful discussion. I appreciate you sharing your perspective.
I believe that the entire project is a public relations stunt and is ethically suspect.
- As Ed pointed out, these are hybrids, not dire wolves. Only a small fraction of the genes differentiating dire wolves from gray wolves were introduced. The company selected genes to create some of the dire wolf's appearance.
- These engineered animals will not live as dire wolves. They cannot. They have no parents to teach them, no pack to join. They are glorified niche pets.
- The company has no intention of re-introducing dire wolves. They said they will only create a small number of individuals - and that will be the end of that. A publicity stunt.
Any "de-extinction" project should first address these questions: (a) Is there a habitat and legislative/administrative framework ready to receive the species? (b) How will this species alter the habitat, and will the changes be beneficial to the ecosystem? (c) Is this a good use of resources, relative to the on-going habitat destruction and preventable species extinction?
It is possible that there are future valid projects. But conservation of the species and habitats we already have should come first.
Thank you, MM, I totally agree. Your emphasis on the ethical and ecological considerations of de-extinction aligns with the concerns raised by experts in the field. As noted, these animals are genetically modified gray wolves rather than true dire wolves. Your point about the absence of a suitable social structure and habitat for these animals is spot on, highlighting the challenges they may face in adapting to modern environments. Prioritizing the conservation of existing species and habitats must remain a primary focus in addressing current biodiversity challenges.
You bring up the exact questions a friend and I were discussing last night. Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
Thank you, Sharon. It's encouraging to hear that these questions are resonating in your conversations. The ethical considerations surrounding scientific advancements are indeed complex and merit thoughtful discussion. I appreciate you sharing your perspective.
Fascinating stuff.
Thank you, SFS! I'm delighted you found the article fascinating. Your engagement is truly appreciated, and I'm glad the content resonated with you.