4 ms·

Eh, it's hard for me to not be cynical about this given the number of times I've heard this exact headline throughout my life. When I was a little kid I saw on

Eh, it's hard for me to not be cynical about this given the number of times I've heard this exact headline throughout my life. When I was a little kid I saw on a TV program that "these scientists are working on bring back wooly mammoths and experts agree that we could see living wooly mammoths in the next 3 years". > Can mammoths really reverse climate change? > Colossal say that they want to 'rewild extinct species to their original habitats so they can revitalize lost ecosystems for a healthier planet'. > It is claimed that woolly mammoths will help to fight climate change by restoring the vast grassland steppes which once encircled the Arctic pole but which changed to forest when the mammoth went extinct. > 'One of the benefits of grasslands over tundra or forests in the high Arctic is they are really good carbon sinks,' explains Victoria. 'During the summer months the grasses grow high before dying back in the winter. But because of the cold temperature, they don't degrade. Every season's growth is stored in the ground. That is why the permafrost is a massive carbon sink.' > It is argued that the giant herbivores such as mammoths maintained these open grasslands by keeping encroaching forests at bay, and as a result helped cool the planet. That seems like pure nonsense and perhaps a way to market their goofy experiment to gullible journalists.

goldenkey 5y ago
It was literally the basis for Jurassic Park. It's kinda like the fusion meme. Except fusion seems a bit closer than it used to.
Ensorceled 5y ago
> > It is argued that the giant herbivores such as mammoths maintained these open grasslands by keeping encroaching forests at bay, and as a result helped cool the planet. > That seems like pure nonsense and perhaps a way to market their goofy experiment to gullible journalists. The effect of mammoths can be true AND it can be "a way to market their goofy experiment to gullible journalists". We've seen significant changes caused by the near extinction of the American Bison for instance.
- rozab 5y ago
  Individual statements here may be true on some level (e.g. 'large mammals maintain grassland', 'steppe climates sequester carbon'), but that doesn't make the broad conclusions true. We can't just rewild the Great Steppe, we grow our food there now! Anyways, ecosystems are complex. Here in Scotland we have a proliferation of deer, which no longer have any predators except cars and posh men with guns. No new trees with them around. They are also destroying peatlands, which I imagine are a much better carbon sink than grassland. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/29/huge-rise-in-scotlands-deer-cull-needed-to-protect-land-says-report https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/29/huge-ris...
inglor_cz 5y ago
Contemporary goats can keep a grassland from becoming forest all too well (by eating the seedlings) and overgrazing can have serious effects [0]. Maybe woolly mammoths played a similar role in Siberia, but being less numerous, did not desertify the region, only kept it open and treeless. Grass does not have much nutritional content. A beast of the size of a mammoth will have to eat a lot of it to sustain itself. [0] https://www.climatechangenews.com/2013/09/09/mongolian-steppe-munched-into-desert-by-goats-and-sheep/ https://www.climatechangenews.com/2013/09/09/mongolian-stepp...
throwaway894345 5y ago
> Can mammoths really reverse climate change? It’s so obvious: we should sequester carbon inside of wooly mammoths.
nicoffeine 5y ago
> That seems like pure nonsense and perhaps a way to market their goofy experiment to gullible journalists. Grasslands evolved in symbiotic relationships with the animals that tread on them, just as in any other part of the biosphere. As long as the wooly mammoth population is kept in check by humans, since they are not introducing mammoth predators, they will aerate the ground, eat and spread seeds, and provide essential elements and minerals to the soil as a natural part of their excretion processes. It will also have knock-on effects as insects regain access to dung, and that will feed the birds, and the birds and their eggs will become food for other animals, and so on. It's a lot easier to restore ecology that existed 10-20 thousand years ago than to wait millions of years for another set of species to maximize the biological output of a given area. Rewilding is based on solid science and is thankfully here to stay.
teshier-A 5y ago
Take a look at this experiment in Siberia : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleistocene_Park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleistocene_Park >The aim of the project is to research the climatic effects of the expected changes in the ecosystem. Here the hypothesis is that the change from tundra to grassland will result in a raised ratio of energy emission to energy absorption of the area, leading to less thawing of permafrost and thereby less emission of greenhouse gases.[8][9] It is also thought that removal of snow by large herbivores will further reduce the permafrost's insulation. >To study this, large herbivores have been released, and their effect on the local fauna is being monitored. Preliminary results point at the ecologically low-grade tundra biome being converted into a productive grassland biome and at the energy emission of the area being raised.[10]
garyfirestorm 5y ago
lol humans can keep forests at bay! why do we need mammoths for that?

goldenkey 5y ago

It was literally the basis for Jurassic Park. It's kinda like the fusion meme. Except fusion seems a bit closer than it used to.

Ensorceled 5y ago

> > It is argued that the giant herbivores such as mammoths maintained these open grasslands by keeping encroaching forests at bay, and as a result helped cool the planet. > That seems like pure nonsense and perhaps a way to market their goofy experiment to gullible journalists. The effect of mammoths can be true AND it can be "a way to market their goofy experiment to gullible journalists". We've seen significant changes caused by the near extinction of the American Bison for instance.

rozab 5y ago
Individual statements here may be true on some level (e.g. 'large mammals maintain grassland', 'steppe climates sequester carbon'), but that doesn't make the broad conclusions true. We can't just rewild the Great Steppe, we grow our food there now! Anyways, ecosystems are complex. Here in Scotland we have a proliferation of deer, which no longer have any predators except cars and posh men with guns. No new trees with them around. They are also destroying peatlands, which I imagine are a much better carbon sink than grassland. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/29/huge-rise-in-scotlands-deer-cull-needed-to-protect-land-says-report https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/29/huge-ris...

inglor_cz 5y ago

Contemporary goats can keep a grassland from becoming forest all too well (by eating the seedlings) and overgrazing can have serious effects [0]. Maybe woolly mammoths played a similar role in Siberia, but being less numerous, did not desertify the region, only kept it open and treeless. Grass does not have much nutritional content. A beast of the size of a mammoth will have to eat a lot of it to sustain itself. [0] https://www.climatechangenews.com/2013/09/09/mongolian-steppe-munched-into-desert-by-goats-and-sheep/ https://www.climatechangenews.com/2013/09/09/mongolian-stepp...

throwaway894345 5y ago

> Can mammoths really reverse climate change? It’s so obvious: we should sequester carbon inside of wooly mammoths.

nicoffeine 5y ago

> That seems like pure nonsense and perhaps a way to market their goofy experiment to gullible journalists. Grasslands evolved in symbiotic relationships with the animals that tread on them, just as in any other part of the biosphere. As long as the wooly mammoth population is kept in check by humans, since they are not introducing mammoth predators, they will aerate the ground, eat and spread seeds, and provide essential elements and minerals to the soil as a natural part of their excretion processes. It will also have knock-on effects as insects regain access to dung, and that will feed the birds, and the birds and their eggs will become food for other animals, and so on. It's a lot easier to restore ecology that existed 10-20 thousand years ago than to wait millions of years for another set of species to maximize the biological output of a given area. Rewilding is based on solid science and is thankfully here to stay.

teshier-A 5y ago

Take a look at this experiment in Siberia : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleistocene_Park https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleistocene_Park >The aim of the project is to research the climatic effects of the expected changes in the ecosystem. Here the hypothesis is that the change from tundra to grassland will result in a raised ratio of energy emission to energy absorption of the area, leading to less thawing of permafrost and thereby less emission of greenhouse gases.[8][9] It is also thought that removal of snow by large herbivores will further reduce the permafrost's insulation. >To study this, large herbivores have been released, and their effect on the local fauna is being monitored. Preliminary results point at the ecologically low-grade tundra biome being converted into a productive grassland biome and at the energy emission of the area being raised.[10]

garyfirestorm 5y ago

lol humans can keep forests at bay! why do we need mammoths for that?