"... For the most part, we assume that if de-extinction can feasibly be accomplished, someone will undertake the effort if for no other reason than because it would be irresistibly thrilling to do so. Jurassic Park itself may be unattainable, but a somewhat more plausible Pleistocene Park, populated with mammoths and aurochs, would generate nearly as much popular excitement. Other motivations for pursuing de-extinction might include the reintroduction of 'keystone' species for purposes of reviving whole ecosystems, with substantial environmental benefits.(via Nathaniel Rich in The New York Times)
Therefore, this Article explores the implications of de-extinction under existing law. ..."
Monday, March 3, 2014
How to Permit Your Mammoth: Some Legal Implications of "De-Extinction"
This article by Dr. Norman Carlin, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP; Ilan Wurman, J.D., Stanford Law School; and Tamara Zakim, Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP; was published in the Stanford Environmental Law Journal, January 2014.