Thylacine

Details

Created: 08 February 2006

09 Sep 1999 AUSTRALIA:

The Tasmanian backlash.

By Anne Barbeliuk.

THE Tasmanian tiger must be turning in its grave - or shivering in its formaldehyde. A preserved thylacine pup was the subject of heated debate around Tasmania yesterday after NSW revealed plans to clone it and resurrect the Tasmanian tiger from extinction. Thylacine experts and conservationists were united in slamming the project as an expensive exercise in science fiction. They argued that the many millions of dollars required to play God would be better spent trying to behave like responsible mortals. They said saving animals from extinction was more valuable than bringing them back from the dead. Along with the criticism came a Pandora's box of questions. How would a cloned thylacine be bred? Where would it live? Would it survive? What animal would be its surrogate mother? The debate follows the NSW Government's announcement of the formation of the Rheuben Griffiths Trust, which is dedicated to cloning the Tasmanian tiger.

The trust - set up by the Griffiths family and The Australian Museum - is pinning its hopes on extracting chromosomes from a Tasmanian tiger pup that was preserved in a bottle in 1866. The pup is kept in the Australian Museum in Sydney. The project would be loosely based on the DNA cloning method used to create Dolly the sheep. Critics yesterday variously labelled the plan as "harebrained", "deplorable" and "bizarre". In the words of wildlife manager Nick Mooney said: "In Tasmania we have hundreds of species currently on the threatened list. We have to choose between gimmicks and looking after the place." Mr Mooney, from the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service, slammed the plan as a gimmick. "There is no future in virtual wildlife," he said. My cautionary view may sound like I'm a wet blanket but I'm faced with the day-to-day realities of dwindling habitats." He was joined by the Tasmanian Conservation Trust. "This is a misdirection of resources," Conservation Trust director Michael Lynch said.Veteran Tasmanian tiger expert, and author of three books on the subject, Eric Guiler said he agreed with those views. "I agree that the money could be better spent protecting species that are teetering on the edge." Even Premier Jim Bacon was not rushing to congratulate his NSW Labor Party colleague Bob Carr. A spokesperson for Mr Bacon said: "This is a novel suggestion and we will be watching it with interest. "But we believe the best chance of seeing a Tasmanian tiger is still through the Tasmanian Museum and Art Gallery travelling exhibition, Tasmanian Tiger - The Mystery of the Thylacine." This was a view enthusiastically supported by the TMAG.

TMAG director Patricia Sabine also shared the view of conservationists. "We are more concerned with the threatened species that exist today," she said. Even those behind the project admitted the scheme had some science-fiction elements. But they believe there could be method in the madness. Randolph Griffiths, whose family has set up the trust which is funding the venture, said yesterday he hoped people would look at the bigger picture. "We believe it's a wonderful madcap venture," Mr Griffiths said. "And while it's a difficult task, it's not impossible." Mr Griffiths, a Sydney-based architect who has Tasmanian convict heritage, said the research was not just focussed on the end result but on uncovering all sorts of medical breakthroughs along the way. "The process can give us as many benefits as the outcome," he said. MR Griffiths, whose family is helping fund the research for its first three years, said he shared concerns about present-day threatened species. "I agree with all those views". But he said such criticisms always lurked near any large allocation of money. "People said the same thing about Sydney taking on the Olympics," he said. "As always, the issue of where to allocate funds is very difficult. But it should be viewed in a broader sense because you have to look at the benefits of the process. "You can always argue money would be better spent on education or on the terminally ill or something else. "And these concerns are valid - but we are talking about internationally cutting-edge research which is to be undertaken in this country." Scientific advances aside, Tasmanian critics are concerned about the ethics of the adventure. Dr Guiler, who has studied thylacines and their habitat since 1952, said questions needed to be raised about what would become of the end product. "Will they be able to look after themselves in the wild?" he said. "And if they intend to put it in a zoo I think that's deplorable."

There were also concerns about an Australian Museum suggestion that a Tasmanian devil would be the mostly likely candidate for the cloned cub's surrogate mother. Mr Lynch said the Conservation Trust would be totally opposed to such a plan. "The Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service should not be in the business of taking wild animals from Tasmania and sending them to Sydney to live in captivity to be surrogate mothers for an extinct species," he said. "Our native species should not be used at the whim of scientists." Mr Mooney said the plan sent entirely the wrong message to the community and industry in particular. "It gives people a great way out of conserving threatened species," he said. "Why worry about what we're doing to habitats when we can just clone species back into existence?" Mr Mooney shared the view of London-based thylacine expert Dr Jeremy Austin, who told The Mercury recently that any hope of resurrecting the species was "big-time dreamtime". Mr Mooney said the scientists may end up with an animal with stripes, or with fangs or with some other thylacine attribute. But he said it was unlikely they'd ever end up with the real thing. "The DNA of that preserved pup would have degraded," he said. "It would be like trying to find a phone number in a phone book that only has a couple of pages left. "It's bizarre. It's a red herring."