"Dire wolves" are now a real thing

[birdsandbats]

With impeccable timing, Trump just signed a new executive order paving the way for the destruction of the Endangered Species Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Coastal Barrier Resources Act, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (the irony!), and more.




Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting to Unleash American Energy

Reading through this order (and it's totally possible I'm not understanding something here), this order is not an attempt to dismantle these acts, but merely to evaluate what they are currently doing, and possibly dismantle only some of their applications? Not to say Trump couldn't make another order dismantling the acts in the future of course (and he very well may), but that doesn't look like what's happening here.

 

[SeaOtterHQ]

Reading through this order (and it's totally possible I'm not understanding something here), this order is not an attempt to dismantle these acts, but merely to evaluate what they are currently doing, and possibly dismantle only some of their applications? Not to say Trump couldn't make another order dismantling the acts in the future of course (and he very well may), but that doesn't look like what's happening here.

I tried to choose my words carefully, which is why I said "pave the way for the destruction of...". An executive order can't repeal a law passed by congress such as the Endangered Species Act, but what this administration can do - and has made clear it intends to do (see all the links I posted here as well as this new one) - is remove all possible enforcement mechanisms, which has the same practical effect as abolishing the law outright. This is why Trump and Elon were keen on firing so many federal employees, especially at agencies alleged to be promoting a "woke" agenda like the NOAA, which is involved with enforcing the Marine Mammal Protection Act and conducts essential research on many species:

"The OMB document — called a “passback” memorandum because it notifies agency officials of what to expect in the forthcoming fiscal year — also indicates NOAA’s operations, research and facilities (ORF) budget would be cut by 38 percent, from $4.8 billion in 2025 to $3.47 billion in 2026.

The 12-page memo calls for radical changes to NOAA’s marine resource protection responsibilities by shifting all enforcement of the Marine Mammal Protection Act and other NOAA-specific endangered species functions to the Fish and Wildlife Service, an Interior Department agency.

“I think it’s step one in the deconstruction of the agency,” former NOAA Administrator Rick Spinrad said in an interview Friday morning. “Any one of these [actions] are by themselves destructive enough. But taken together they foretell a much more calamitous outcome.”

The document reflects OMB Director Russ Vought’s proposal in Project 2025, the conservative policy handbook, to break up NOAA and dramatically shrink its mission while ending its work on climate."

These cuts can affect zoos and aquaria as well - for example, research conducted by the New England Aquarium on the critically endangered North Atlantic right whale and rescue programs for endangered sea turtles. This is at the same time the administration is touting a record trillion dollar defense budget, so don't believe the lies that this is about "cutting waste and fraud."

But returning to the new executive order: by requiring the regulations authorized under these acts to incorporate sunset provisions, not only does it place an onerous burden on the agencies tasked with reviewing and enforcing them, but the Trump administration can staff the regulatory bodies with cronies who agree with its agenda, as is already happening at the EPA and the Fish and Wildlife Service. These cronies will simply allow many regulations to expire, thus gutting the laws of any substantial content without "officially" repealing them.

Unless there's a fierce pushback - including but not limited to lawsuits against this administration - then yes, this executive order does place all of these laws and regulations in peril.

 

[Daktari JG]

I concur with Sea otter except one little detail

Unless there's a fierce pushback - including but not limited to lawsuits against this administration

lawsuits methinks will be useless, unless they can tie things up for the next four years.
The Supreme Court is corrupt beyond measure or hyperpartisan beyond belief. Either way it doesn't really matter as they are totally against any and all environmental protections, regardless of what the law clearly states. (the majority)

It seems almost impossible to understand their motives, but they do not think like any half way normal person. They see things only as a transaction and a desire to be better off than others.
They would rather live way better than most in a highly polluted , highly degraded world than
live better than most in a clean one. Endangered species? preserving diversity? That's for suckers and losers. I despair because I am afraid they have won completely. Even if we can displace these lunatics-they will eventually be back and gut the government (the parts that don't have to do with war and conflict) once again. Its up to us to circumvent the government if anything is going to be saved.

 

[JVM]

In the past, I have defended Colossal Biosciences on this and other websites. I believed that their true intent was to use the allure of de-extinction and the publicity around their bold promises to clone woolly mammoths and the like as a way to raise money from philanthropists and benefactors that were ignorant of the value of wildlife conservation towards genetic research that benefits wildlife conservation. I thought it was a "trojan horse" approach. I believed that the Woolly Mammoth cloning story was a way to fund research on elephants that might not otherwise get the funding they needed, and so on. Their involvement with the EEHV vaccine was key to me believing this.

I am disappointed to say the least. It would be unfair to say I have been deceived, but I was too willing to believe they had positive intentions. I was wrong and I want to admit it directly. The announcement in this thread deeply concerned me even before I read far enough to find out the animals were gray wolves modified to resemble a wildly overrated television program, and it was absolutely ridiculous that the initial announcement showboated the claim this was the "first de-extinction", disrespecting and erasing the research that produced a cloned Pyrenean ibex. The fact they pulled in George RR Martin and are now palling around with Joe Rogan have only compounded my concern and disappointment.

I applaud @SeaOtterHQ for compiling so much of this information in the thread about the political ramifications.

But returning to the new executive order: by requiring the regulations authorized under these acts to incorporate sunset provisions, not only does it place an onerous burden on the agencies tasked with reviewing and enforcing them, but the Trump administration can staff the regulatory bodies with cronies who agree with its agenda, as is already happening at the EPA and the Fish and Wildlife Service. These cronies will simply allow many regulations to expire, thus gutting the laws of any substantial content without "officially" repealing them.

Unless there's a fierce pushback - including but not limited to lawsuits against this administration - then yes, this executive order does place all of these laws and regulations in peril.

Very, very well-pointed out post overall but especially the summarizing here. The sunset provisions are very dangerous in exactly the way you're describing. I think this strategy also ensures that even if the incumbent is gone in four years, his successors can continue to carry on this path. I really have to hope the lawsuits bear some fruit.

lawsuits methinks will be useless, unless they can tie things up for the next four years.
The Supreme Court is corrupt beyond measure or hyperpartisan beyond belief. Either way it doesn't really matter as they are totally against any and all environmental protections, regardless of what the law clearly states. (the majority)

I will never, ever forget the people who said it was wrong to "threaten" them with the importance of the Supreme Court in an election that resulted in two vacancies being filled in a four-year term.

Too many people in this country decided ten plus years ago that they would rather say "both sides bad" and moan and complain than actually examine ideological positions on issues of concern and vote accordingly.

[QUOTE="Daktari JG, post: 1619662, member: 8994"It seems almost impossible to understand their motives, but they do not think like any half way normal person. They see things only as a transaction and a desire to be better off than others.
They would rather live way better than most in a highly polluted , highly degraded world than
live better than most in a clean one. Endangered species? preserving diversity? That's for suckers and losers. I despair because I am afraid they have won completely. Even if we can displace these lunatics-they will eventually be back and gut the government (the parts that don't have to do with war and conflict) once again. Its up to us to circumvent the government if anything is going to be saved.[/QUOTE]
The 'transaction' aspect is so important and very well spoken. You notice that a lot of the discussion of natural areas by certain figures in power is the idea these lands represent vast, untapped resources. As you say, it's transactional - everything has a value, this land has a value, and since nobody is profiting from it, that value is being hoarded and wasted.

 

[dillotest0]

One relatively simple analogy I have come up with for those less zoology-infused [if it's concise enough to understand, anyways...]...
The evolutionary tree with its lineage can be thought of similarly to a family tree with people. So say that you, the most recent member of your family tree represent the Canis, or wolf lineage. For the sake of this analogy, you are a 'wolf'!
Your father then represents the common ancestor between you and dholes. Imagine, if you may... in his youth, your father had a fling with a girl, who he impregnated and ran away from. The child borne from that represents the dhole.

Then there is your grandfather, who represents the common ancestor between you and your half-sibling; wolves and dholes; and the African wild dog. As it were, your grandfather, much like your father, too had a fling in his youth, and was infatuated with a girl. Same story - The girl ended up impregnated, and he escaped the scene. The child borne from that fling, or your half-uncle, represents the African wild dog. So you and your half-sibling share part of the family tree with your shared half-uncle, but needless to say you and your half uncle are not as close as are even you and your half sibling.

Then there is your great-grandfather, who represents the common ancestor between you, your half-sibling, your half uncle; the wolves, dholes, and African wild dog - and the jackals. by pure coincidence, your great-grandfather, just like your grandfather after him, too had a fling.... ...ran away, girl had the baby. That child, your half-grand-uncle, represents the jackals. So - you, your half-sibling, and your half-uncle share part of the family tree with your half-grand-uncle...grand-half-uncle... but even your half-uncle looks like close family at this point.

And then there is your greater-grandfather, who represents the common ancestor between you, your half-sibling, the half-uncle, and the grand half-uncle; the wolves, dholes, African wild dogs, jackals - and, at last, the dire-wolf! At this point it looks for all the world to see like a genetic disposition - but your greater grandfather too had a fling, and the rest is history. The child from that then represents the dire-wolf. So, you, your half-sibling, your half-uncle and your half-grand-uncle all share part of the family tree with your half-great-grand-uncle... but at this point your family tree looks like the Harem of the Court of King Caractacus... so whatever genetic similarity he has to you is a triviality if anything.

And then... one day some scientists knock on your door. They claim that they are from a company who likes cloning famous people - and as it were your half-great-grand-uncle was a famous, successful and intelligent person for his time. So one of your siblings agreed to having their genome sequenced, and they have your half-great-grand-uncle's genome too. They have found some physical traits of his that may or may not have made him as successful and intelligent as he was - and they have created an embryonic clone of your sibling with the genetic code altered so that these traits have been altered where deemed appropriate. Nine months later, the child is born.
Does the child have certain phenotypic similarities to that bodacious man? He probably does. But are the child and that man the same person? You would be hard-pressed to say so. And chances are that the man was successful in a time when time allowed, and his upbringing was much different from someone born in this century... that he wouldn't be accustomed to any of the same that the famous guy was. So chances are the child won't grow up to be him either.
And chances are the child won't even be on the cover of TIME.

And of course this is just an analogy and not really how evolution truly works.... in the dire wolf's case you are not working with five generations, but rather many thousands.... and where here you may be working with a quarter of a millennium... in the case of the dire wolf you are working with many tens of millennia!

 

[Pantheraman]

You know that paper they said they were publishing on dire wolf genetics? Well, here it is. Needless to say, I'm not impressed.

Here's the actual paper: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2025.04.09.647074v1.abstract

And here's the Science article for it: https://www.science.org/content/art...wCzuKhd9Lcec0miSy8_aem_X4A3xO-UWuthrT5dZb1SwA

And a quote from it : “Our results support the results of the 2021 paper,” says Greg Gedman, a computational biologist at Colossal and co-lead author of the new preprint, “with some important distinctions.” The original study found, for example, that dire wolves diverged from other wolflike canids nearly 6 million years ago. The new data place the split more recently, with dire wolves, gray wolves, jackals, and dogs sharing a common ancestor roughly 4.5 million years ago."

...Literally, their own paper supports the idea that dire wolves were a separate lineage from gray wolves and were distantly related to them.

In other words, dire wolves lived 13,000 years ago, what colossal biosciences created are genetically modified gray wolves, nothing more, nothing less. (And yes, I did that to sound like Alan Grant.)

 

[SeaOtterHQ]

And here's the Science article for it: https://www.science.org/content/art...wCzuKhd9Lcec0miSy8_aem_X4A3xO-UWuthrT5dZb1SwA

And a quote from it : “Our results support the results of the 2021 paper,” says Greg Gedman, a computational biologist at Colossal and co-lead author of the new preprint, “with some important distinctions.” The original study found, for example, that dire wolves diverged from other wolflike canids nearly 6 million years ago. The new data place the split more recently, with dire wolves, gray wolves, jackals, and dogs sharing a common ancestor roughly 4.5 million years ago."

...Literally, their own paper supports the idea that dire wolves were a separate lineage from gray wolves and were distantly related to them.

In that Science article, it's noteworthy that a few of the quotes from people involved in the dire wolf project walk back some of the earlier inflated and misleading pronouncements:

"Even the authors of the new preprint think media coverage of Colossal’s de-extinction project may have blown things out of proportion: “To me, obviously, these are not dire wolf puppies,” Perri says. “We’re not there yet.”

Shapiro contends that such distinctions are splitting hairs: “We at Colossal are happy for them to be called proxy dire wolves. You can call them Colossal’s dire wolves. You can call them gray wolves with 20 edits that make them look like dire wolves.”

The IUCN also released a statement criticizing Colossal:

"Gene editing technologies may offer specific benefits to species survival, such as removing harmful mutations or increasing genetic diversity in small, inbred populations, and even potentially reviving ancestral variation lost in living populations today. However, presenting this technology as a ready-to-use conservation solution is premature, and risks diverting attention from the more urgent needs of ensuring functioning and healthy ecosystems.

Creating three grey wolf pups with edited genomes in an attempt to resemble the extinct dire wolf may demonstrate technical capabilities, but it does not contribute to conservation. The dire wolf went extinct in the Americas some 12,000 years ago, and its ecological context—including prey species such as mammoths and giant ground sloths—is no longer present. Today, the grey wolf, which is adapted to current ecosystems, occupies that niche with a much-altered range of prey species. Editing the genome of a grey wolf to produce individuals that resemble an extinct species that has no ecological niche and that will not restore ecosystem function, does not follow the guiding principles on creating proxies of extinct species for conservation benefits put in place by the IUCN SSC. Indeed, creating phenotypic proxies of the dire wolf does not alter its conservation status, and may threaten the conservation status of extant species, like the grey wolf in the USA.

The three animals produced by Colossal are not dire wolves. Nor are they proxies of the dire wolf based on IUCN SSC guiding principles of extinct species for conservation benefit. First, there is no evidence that the genetically modified animals are phenotypically distinct from the grey wolf and phenotypically resemble the dire wolf. Second, our knowledge of the behaviour, phenotype, and ecology is inherently limited because the dire wolf is extinct."

Here is a good overview of the media fiasco which led to all kinds of false or exaggerated claims proliferating. I should add that quite a few prominent Youtube wildlife "influencers" were guilty of uncritically hyping up Colossal and contributing to the misinformation blitz, including but not limited to Forrest Galante, Brave Wilderness, Anneka Svenska, Lindsay Nikole, and Coyote Peterson. What's particularly galling is that Colossal even admits that they didn't bother researching the genes which influenced dire wolf behavior, but focused solely on its alleged appearance - probably so they could get some good photo ops with George R. R. Martin.

"“[If] it looks like a dire wolf and acts like a dire wolf, I’m going to call it a dire wolf,” Beth Shapiro, Colossal’s chief science officer, told Wired. “And my colleagues who are taxonomists will disagree with me,” she conceded. But also, the genetic changes they made all targeted how a dire wolf might look; the New Yorker reported that “no effort had been made to try to identify genes for behavior.”

 

[Pantheraman]

@SeaOtterHQ Thank you for the information. I very much appreciate it.

When I saw coyote peterson contribute to the misinformation, I immediately unsubscribed.

 

[Great Argus]

What's particularly galling is that Colossal even admits that they didn't bother researching the genes which influenced dire wolf behavior, but focused solely on its alleged appearance - probably so they could get some good photo ops with George R. R. Martin.

R. R. Martin is listed in the paper's credits, as he apparently is a significant investor in Colossal as well as a "cultural advisor." So yeah it's entirely possible the appearance was deliberate, with very little regard to the true phenotype (if that can even be deciphered). Regardless the whole thing is entirely disappointing and has been thrown around in all the wrong ways.

 

[Pantheraman]

I was thinking about this today, and it might just be the craziest thing I might post on this forum. But what if we could take them to court? Let's think about this for a moment, by law in the United States, when advertising products you have to be truthful. For example, when it comes to environmental benefits, the claims you make have to be backed by reliable and competent data.

Colossal Biosciences, at the end of the day, is a company, which, like other companies, makes products (genetically modified animals) that people want. This entire "dire wolf" stunt is technically a huge case of false advertising, with rather sketchy data backing up their claims. That and they claim to have cloned 4 red wolves, but in truth, these are Galveston Island coyotes, not red wolves.

So maybe we could take them to court over violating advertisement laws and winning.

Now, I'm not a law expert, but given that this current administration is set to butcher the Endangered Species Act because (at least in part) they were fooled by colossal into thinking we can resurrect extinct species, I'd like to get some justice for this nation's endangered wildlife.

Anyway, what do you guys think?

https://www.ftc.gov/business-guidance/advertising-marketing

 

[EliasNys]

I think the chances of winning against a large company that can afford very good lawyers are small. But if you have the money, time and you are a citizen of the united states, you can try.
I also don't know though if the claims Colossal makes, as untrue as they might be, really fall under advertising? They didn't really buy ads as far as I know, they just made social media posts and gave newspapers the info they wanted.

 

[Pantheraman]

So apparently, Colossal responded to the IUCN Canid Specialist Group's criticism.

Reading it, I'm convinced they don't understand the real point of a Species Survival Plan.

https://www.reddit.com/r/megafaunar...der the,to disrupt existing canid communities.

 

[Lafone]

So apparently, Colossal responded to the IUCN Canid Specialist Group's criticism.

Reading it, I'm convinced they don't understand the real point of a Species Survival Plan.

https://www.reddit.com/r/megafaunarewilding/comments/1k5j31x/colossals_response_to_the_iucn_ssc_canid/#:~:text=We are operating under the,to disrupt existing canid communities.

They do amuse me, well no they don't but they are really reaching.

We have elected to keep our de-extinct proxy dire wolves in a carefully controlled environment. This strategy follows the IUCN SSC guidelines’ emphasis on phased approaches and is an essential and ethical step in de-extinction research

Phased approach indeed...Phase 1 lie to everyone as part of a Jurassic Parkesque fantasy designed to gather gullible investors and fleece them of their cash and make up phrases like 'de extinct proxy' to amaze them. Phase 2 create a pointless hybrid ensuring exploitation of domestic dogs in the process because 'science'. Phase 3 pop the two resulting things that look a bit like stuff from a book (honest) and are from a time gone by (really) into a massive pen and 'research' them. Phase 4, profit.

 

[dillotest0]

So apparently, Colossal responded to the IUCN Canid Specialist Group's criticism.

Reading it, I'm convinced they don't understand the real point of a Species Survival Plan.

https://www.reddit.com/r/megafaunarewilding/comments/1k5j31x/colossals_response_to_the_iucn_ssc_canid/#:~:text=We are operating under the,to disrupt existing canid communities.

A species survival plan for a species which has not survived for the modern day... and even the proxy animals are not part of any breeding programme.
Logical !!

 

[Pantheraman]

You know how much our current interior secretary loves colossal? Well...apparently, he's had connections to the company for a while.

RECORDS: Trump's Interior Secretary Has Close Ties To The De-Extinction Company He Promotes

Not to sound dramatic, but I think it's safe to say there's a new type of poacher: The genetic poacher. Like those that sell animal parts in the black market, they lie to people to gain funds and harm wildlife conservation. Only genetic poachers incentivise governments to quit protecting habitat.

 

[Pantheraman]

I do apologize if my responding on this thread is tiresome at this point, since this thread has pretty much ran it's course. But there's something that really needs to be said.

Just now I saw this:

I'm posting this here for one reason: Funding.

You know all those billions of dollars rich people invested in colossal? And are still investing into the company? Let's think about what those same funds could've done to combat poaching on the ground, heck, with their funding, anti-poaching units would be a far better state than they are now!

But nope, they're more concerned about "resurrecting mammoths".

 

[dillotest0]

Moa - Colossal

Colossal has now announced pursuit of another 'de-extinction'... that of the moa.
I have yet to form my thoughts fully about this... though I do hope whatever technology Colossal uses will be used for endangered bird species alive today.
Feel free to read this and post your thoughts.

[hey, where's my woolly mammoth then?]
[the above is a joke]

 

[PossumRoach]

[hey, where's my woolly mammoth then?]

Please wait for five more years like how the media has been saying for the last thirty or more years. I promise you that this is not a Ponzi scheme or whatever

 

[Daktari JG]

Colossal has now announced pursuit of another 'de-extinction'... that of the moa.
I have yet to form my thoughts fully about this... though I do hope whatever technology Colossal uses will be used for endangered bird species alive today.
Feel free to read this and post your thoughts.

The planet haters of the trump administration have already used this as an (one of their many
lame) excuse to harm endangered species as they can just presto chango conjure one up if they do just happen to go extinct.

 

[Great Argus]

Colossal has now announced pursuit of another 'de-extinction'... that of the moa

For what?... New Zealand has changed a lot since the moa went extinct, what chance would there be of successfully reintroducing giant flightless birds? What's next, Haast's Eagle to prey on the moas and terrify NZ?

Focus on the Dodo and Thylacine, that actually have some chance to be reintegrated into today's ecosystems. At any rate, all they've made are woolly mice and some genetically modified gray wolves and we're already pitching more and more "return from the dead" projects. There is something to be gained from the genetic work I suppose, but personally I think this whole venture is a massive waste of money.