When Dolly, the sheep that was the first cloned animal, was born in early 1997, some scientists and investors began to see dollar signs.
They imagined a rich market of show dog breeders and wealthy people with beloved pets clamoring for the services.
What they didn’t take into account was the human spirit and the relationship people have with their animals. Breeders of show dogs are generally not looking to duplicate a champion; they dream of breeding one even better.
Cloning pets presents other problems. Many owners are resistant to the idea of duplicating their pets. Then there is the problem of understanding what a clone is.
Only four dogs have been cloned, but cat cloning is becoming a business to produce a clone for only $50,000 (although I hear some labs are running 40% off sales).
But here’s the thing about cloning cats.

The first cat, CC (Carbon Copy) was cloned by transplanting DNA from Rainbow, a female calico cat, into an egg cell and implanting the embryo into a surrogate mother.
This picture was taken a year after the birth. Rainbow (left) is gold and black on white, but CC has a striped gray coat on white. Changes in coloration occur in the uterus.
Not only is their appearance different, but according to this msnbc story their cat behavior and personalities are also quite different. In other words when a cat is cloned, the DNA will be the same, but it won’t necessarily look or act like the original.

Rainbow looks and acts very much like my calico cat Taki, who wandered into our lives off the street as a teenage stray a few years ago. She is a great cat, affectionate and fearless.
If I were to pay to have her cloned, I’d want her same personality and behavior. I’d want her coloring and markings down to the tiny white patch on her back and the tan spot on her front leg. Or I’d want my money back.
There are a lot of great pets at animal shelters. All they need is a chance.
![Validate my Atom 1.0 feed [Valid Atom 1.0]](valid-atom.png)
That is a lot of money to spend on a cat that doesn't look much like my cat.
Posted by: Gina | January 16, 2007 at 02:51 PM
The last two sentences say it all.
Posted by: Denny | January 16, 2007 at 03:40 PM
I believe I've said this before: a pet or a person's personality is not made in the DNA. It's created through their experiences.
And like you said, Jan, why clone when there are so many great pets waiting for a family in animal shelters?
Posted by: Laura | January 16, 2007 at 07:30 PM
Agree with Denny -- why clone when so many already need loving homes? Makes no sense.
Posted by: I was Trailer Trash when Trailer Trash wasn't Cool | January 16, 2007 at 07:51 PM
im with you..too many cats already born that need homes..why make new ones...let me know when they start cloning people..i would like to see if my kids would come out any different if i raised them now...ha
Posted by: jackie | January 16, 2007 at 11:25 PM
So true...there are a lot of animals in need already. Do we really need to go and start custom building new animals?
Posted by: Tracey | January 17, 2007 at 04:57 AM
Thanks for that thought provoking article. I hadn't thought much about the issue of 'pet cloning' before. As Laura noted a pet or a person's personality is not made in the DNA. It's created through their experiences. What a terrible waste of money!
Posted by: Kelleigh | January 17, 2007 at 06:12 AM
The major pet cloning operation--Genetic Savings and Clone--has shut its doors. BUT the scientists that did its reported cloning now work for ViaGen one of the two companies cloning farm animals. I think that Genetic Savings and Clone was an effort to make money to support other cloning operations of ViaGen, an Exeter Life Sciences company and Geron, the California company that is trying to clone human embryos. They have not been able to make enough money from animal cloning or to suceed at cloning human embryos. So I think they saw Genetic Savings and Clone as a cash cow (or maybe in this case a cash cat!)
Remember too that these cat cloners usually rely on private contracts, not academic papers. I have not seen any published study showing that they did actually clone the cats. Ian Wilmut, who cloned Dolly, was careful to publish all the data so the world would see that he had in fact cloned Dolly.
Jaydee Hanson, Policy Analyst, Center for Food Safety-Washington DC
Posted by: Jaydee | January 17, 2007 at 04:38 PM
I agree, Jan! There are way too many loving cats (and other animals) in the shelters. Spending thousands of dollars to have a pet cloned when there are so many others to pick from...seems like a no brainer to me!
Posted by: Therese | January 18, 2007 at 06:40 AM
Trust cats not to clone identically, lol
Yeah, Pound Kitties are the best. How can you ever walk past the Petco cages and not long to rescue all of them at once? I plan to liberate about 30 of them at once when Shara goes. ;-)
Posted by: Chandira | January 18, 2007 at 04:23 PM
The concept of cloning rather leaves me cold. I tend to believe that the body may be copied.. but not the soul.
Posted by: Coll | January 19, 2007 at 07:44 PM
It's nature AND nurture after all, eh?
Posted by: Anvilcloud | January 20, 2007 at 05:10 AM
Here, here. Don't clone the cat, go to a shelter. After all I love both my cats but they are both fixed. This means their genes will not even be passed on the old fashioned way.
Posted by: sarala | January 26, 2007 at 07:52 PM
I love science, but we don't always need to mass produce it. Cloning is just a fancy (and costly) way of breeding. The concept of rescuing an animal should still prevail.
Posted by: Shaun | October 22, 2009 at 09:32 AM