Cloned pet ban rejected

[Guest guest]

[From today's San Francisco Chronicle.]

 

Cloned pet ban rejected

Law would have been nation's first

John M. Hubbell, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau

 

Wednesday, May 4, 2005

 

 

 

 

Sacramento -- State lawmakers Tuesday turned away a bill that could have brought

a first-in-the-nation ban on pet cloning, moved less by a host of scientific and

ethical arguments than by photos of wide-eyed, copy-cat kittens.

 

The 4-2 vote against the bill with four abstentions by members of Assembly

Business and Professions Committee on AB1428 by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Van

Nuys, came after a brief discussion that touched on everything from free

enterprise to mad science -- all triggered largely by a pioneering Bay Area

firm's willingness to replicate pet owners' favorite cat or dog.

 

That firm, Genetic Savings & Clone, has created replicas of six cats,

representatives said Tuesday, and hopes to start work on dogs by December.

Pictures of two dark-haired, cloned felines were shown during testimony by Lou

Hawthorne, the firm's chief executive, prompting committee Chairwoman Gloria

Negrete McLeod, D-Chino, to inquire of him: " So you even do tabbies? "

 

" We do everything except calicoes, " Hawthorne said, citing their genetic

complexity.

 

It was not the type of inquiry hoped for by Levine, who framed pet cloning as a

needless scientific incursion in a world where millions of needy animals are

euthanized each year.

 

With the practice lacking federal or state regulation, he said, cloning could

not only lead to deformities in the laboratory, but to unintended consequences

in society.

 

" What happens when people decide they want to cross their boa constrictor with

their rattlesnake to get a really big poisonous snake? " he asked.

 

" Life is more than a commodity, " Levine said, " and this is where we draw the

line. Just because we can doesn't mean we should. "

 

Crystal Miller-Spiegel, policy analyst with the American Anti-Vivisection

Society, said pet owners should realize that " animals can't be replaced like a

printer. " She called Levine's legislation " not anti-science, not an animal-

rights bill, and not based on emotion. It's simply common sense. "

 

Assemblyman Paul Koretz, D-West Hollywood, queried Hawthorne on claims on a

recent Genetic Savings & Clone mailer touting it can clone an owner's " perfect "

pet. " I'm wondering whether consumers are being pulled into this, " Koretz said.

 

But Hawthorne said he was " perfectly comfortable " with the advertisement.

" Contractually, we guarantee only physical resemblance, " he said.

 

Hawthorne, who said his firm charged about $23,000 per cat, also touted the

promise of animal cloning one day addressing the repopulation of endangered

species. Christine Dillon, lobbyist for the California Veterinary Medical

Association, said generations of selective breeding meant that, in all

practicality, " vets have been working on genetically modified animals for

years. "

 

Democratic Assemblyman Joe Nation, whose district includes Sausalito, where

Hawthorne's firm is based, noted that a California ban on pet cloning would fail

to prevent the practice in neighboring states. Jokingly, he pondered the

scenario of a familiar state inspector intercepting cars inbound from Nevada to

ask, " Do you have any fresh fruits, vegetables or cloned kittens with you? "

 

Levine agreed cloning issues should be decided at the federal level, but likened

continued inaction in California to " trying to close the barn door after the

horses are already out. "

 

But the fears seemed unwarranted to Ken Press of Sacramento, who has stored the

DNA of his recently deceased cat, a 12-year-old Siamese mix named Kitamus he

called " an exceptional pet, " with Genetic Savings & Clone.

 

" I've considered his genetic lineage worthy of continuing, " Press told the

committee, adding that neutering the pet proved a mistake. " Sometimes you make a

decision and later regret it. "