A Hairy Problem: The Ethics of Woolly Mammoth De-Extinction

Case Study PDF / Additional Cases

Lauded geneticist Dr. George Church and his team of researchers at Harvard University are using cutting-edge genetic technology to resurrect the woolly mammoth. To do this, they are using CRISPR genome engineering to edit the DNA from the mammoth genome into the genome of the Asian elephant. The resulting embryo would be grown in an artificial womb created by the Church team. The organism would not be a perfect genetic copy of a mammoth, but rather a hybrid between the two species. Although the project represents an exciting scientific advancement, many scientists have pragmatic and ethical concerns. Dr. Beth Shapiro, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at UC Santa Cruz, suggests that our resources could be better spent preserving currently endangered species. She asks, “shouldn’t we be focusing on things that are still alive, instead of trying to bring things back that aren’t here anymore” (King, 2018)?

Church maintains that their ground-breaking research will naturally bring about advances in conservation. While working on the mammoth project, the Church team discovered a strain of the herpes virus contributing to the endangerment of the Asian elephant. Church explained, “it immediately struck me as an opportunity to make the virus [in the lab] and make a resistance to it. [...]it's also benefited our work on herpes viruses for humans. So there will be spinoffs” (“Don’t Bring Extinct Creatures Back To Life,” 2019).

De-extinction research could also lead to technological advancements that directly benefit endangered species. Gene-editing technologies can save species that would otherwise go extinct. Stewart Brand, founder of Whole Earth Catalog, explains that, “just 100 years ago, the chestnut blight came through, killed 4 billion trees, [and] made them functionally extinct. But thanks to genetic engineering by Bill Paulette, SUNY, they're now coming back” (“Don’t Bring Extinct Creatures Back To Life,” 2019). A cutting-edge project like mammoth de-extinction is likely to push the boundaries of such genetic technologies further, which may generate more innovative conservation techniques. 

While Church and Brand emphasize conservation benefits, Dr. Lynn J. Rothschild, an astrobiologist at NASA, worries that de-extinction projects are likely to encourage attitudes that undermine conservation efforts. She explains, “working at NASA, I often hear people say, ‘Well, if we screw up the Earth, we can always go to Mars as Plan B.’ And this, to me, is the same sort of argument. ‘Well, if we kill off the rest of them, we can always de-extinct them.’ What you should be doing is conserving the last of the ones that are there.” (“Don’t Bring Extinct Creatures Back To Life,” 2019).

Church and Brand contend that the new mammoth herd promises benefits for its future ecosystem. Church plans to place the mammoths in high latitude Siberia and believes their introduction could restore the tundra ecosystem while slowing climate change. Church explains, “They keep the tundra from thawing by punching through snow and allowing cold air to come in [...] In the summer they knock down trees and help the grass grow” (Devlin, 2019). Since grassland reflects more solar energy than forested areas—keeping the ecosystem colder—revived grassland would reduce the amount of methane and carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere.

Rothschild disagrees with their predictions. She points out, “when we have re-introduced endangered species back into the wild in the past, there have been all sorts of ripple effects and unintended consequences” (Rothschild, 2019). Introducing a resurrected species like the mammoth—thousands of years removed from presents ecosystems—could have disastrous results. Rothschild warns, “It’s impossible to know how a local ecology would change with a species brought back from the dead—we might bring the wooly mammoth back, yes, but [what] would that mean?”

 

Discussion Questions: 

• What values are in conflict over the de-extinction of the Woolly Mammoth and other extinct species?

• Is there a moral distinction between using gene-editing technology to prevent the extinction of living endangered species versus the resurrection of an extinct species? If so, what is it?

• If there’s a chance that a scientific research project could lead to advances in the field, but can’t predict whether negative outcomes may also result, should funding be allocated to such a project? Or, should funds be reserved for projects that will have clear positive outcomes? 

• Is gene-editing in general morally problematic? If so, why? 

 

Further Information:

Devlin, Hannah, “Woolly mammoth on verge of resurrection, scientists reveal.” The Guardian, February 16, 2017. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/feb/16/woolly-mammoth-resurrection-scientists

“Don’t Bring Extinct Creatures Back To Life.” Intelligence Squared U.S., January 31, 2019. Available at: https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/sites/default/files/013119_-_dont_bring_extinct_creatures_back_to_life_-_final_transcript.pdf

King, Anthony, “Should We Bring Back the Woolly Mammoth?” UC San Diego Institute for Practical Ethics, April 26, 2018. Available at: https://ucsdnews.ucsd.edu/feature/should-we-bring-back-the-woolly-mammoth

Rothschild, Lynn J, “Seven reasons we shouldn’t bring extinct animals back to life.” Quartz, March 15, 2019. Available at: https://qz.com/1566083/we-shouldnt-bring-back-extinct-animals-like-the-woolly-mammoth/

Sarchet, Penny, “Can we grow woolly mammoths in the lab? George Church hopes so.” NewScientist, February 16, 2017. Available at: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2121503-can-we-grow-woolly-mammoths-in-the-lab-george-church-hopes-so/

“Woolly Mammoth Revival.” Revive & Restore. Available at: https://reviverestore.org/projects/woolly-mammoth/

Authors:

Grace Leake & Alicia Armijo
The Ethics Project
University of Texas at Austin
November 6, 2019
 
https://liberalarts.utexas.edu/ethicsproject/

Image Credit: C.V. Vick / CC BY 2.0 

Cases produced by The Ethics Project remain the intellectual property of The Ethics Project. They can be used in unmodified PDF form without permission for classroom or educational uses. Please e-mail us and let us know if you found them useful! For use in publications such as textbooks, readers, and other works, please contact The Ethics Project.