With the breakthroughs in genome sequencing and gene-editing technology, bringing extinct species back into existence has become a possibility that George Church, a genetics professor at Harvard University and a pioneer in this space, is willing to explore, especially on mammoths. Should this scientific endeavor succeed, hybrid mammoths would be re-introduced to the planet through the use of CRISPR-Cas9 to splice and combine DNA from frozen mammoth specimens and the Asian elephant. The motive behind resurrecting mammoths are relevant to the ecosystem service mammoths provided and to combat climate change in the tundra. When mammoths traversed the tundra, they scraped away layers of snow, allowing the cold air to preserve the permafrost. Unfortunately, as mammoths died off, snow accumulated and their insulating properties thaw the permafrost thus releasing greenhouse gases trapped in the soil into the atmosphere. While the prospect of bringing back mammoths is exciting, proponents of mammoth de-extinction are underestimating the uncertainties that remain.
Mammoths may have thrived in the Pleistocene but that does not guarantee they will survive in the current tundra, after all the Earth has warmed significantly since they last walked this Earth. Not to mention, the scientists would have to find a womb to carry the hybrid mammoth from conception to birth. After it is born, who would be responsible for teaching it how to hunt, scavenge, build shelter, and socialize with other mammoths? There is further uncertainty regarding whether these mammoths would be able to breed and nurse healthy offspring. The risks behind bringing mammoths back from de-extinction are more profound and nuanced than scientists can calculate. Even if a hybrid mammoth DNA can be successfully coded, it is nonetheless necessary to take into consideration the timeline and resources–both the financial and human capital–invested into the whole project. In that respect, it is more practical to invest our limited resources into preventing further extinction rather than reversing it. This includes allocating our time to tackle habitat destruction, pollution, and overharvesting.
If we were to succeed in bringing back mammoths, it would de-incentivize the preservation of biodiversity, after all humans would be able to inflict harm on the environment knowing that they can just engineer it back. Furthermore, depending on who funds the de-extinction endeavor and which group of scientists succeed, they may legally “own” the species and be able to charge individuals a sum of money to see or use the animals.
Overall, it is difficult to predict whether mammoths would survive much less play a role in combating climate change should they be brought back. Instead, diverting expertise and funding to preserve endangered species now would be a much more viable and sensible decision. Scientists at least know that these endangered species have a natural habitat to return to, unlike mammoths who have been extinct for ten thousand years and might not adapt sufficiently to the Arctic tundra as we now know it.