12 CapitalPress.com August 26, 2016 Clone CONTINUED from Page A1 The team soon formed, found a steer carcass and a cow carcass with the requisite grading qualities, took tissue samples and turned them over to a private Texas company, ViaGen, which specializes in cloning cattle, horses, sheep, goats, pigs and even cats and dogs. ViaGen created a bull, named Al- pha, from the steer carcass, and three heifers — Gamma One, Gamma Two and Gamma Three — from the cow carcass. Artifi cial insemination of the Gammas with semen from Alpha has resulted in 13 calves, the fi rst bovine offspring of two cloned parents. Seven of the offspring, all steers, were raised in a conventional manner, including fi nishing time at a grain feed- lot, and slaughtered. Lawrence said the results are promising, especially given the small sample size. The offspring tended to produce better grade beef than average, and yield grades were ones and twos. The carcasses had 9 percent larger ribeye steaks than aver- age and 45 percent more marbling, the desirable white specks of intramuscu- lar fat. They had 16 percent less “trim” fat, the waste fat that doesn’t improve taste. The work is continuing. The idea, of course, is that higher grade beef — raised the same way as regular cattle — would bring a greater return to the rancher. Lawrence said beef quality is an afterthought in most cattle breeding operations, and West Texas A&M is turning that around. “It’s kind of a meat science per- spective on animal breeding, begin- ning with the end,” he said. Courtesy of Carman Ranch Cory Carman, who raises beef cattle in Northeastern Oregon, said her customers are more interested in livestock handling practices, nutritional profi le and fl avor than the fat marbling sought by cattle cloners. To attract consumers, beef producers should try a little grass-fed tenderness By ERIC MORTENSON The doubters Capital Press For critics and some in the indus- try, however, the West Texas work is a non-starter. “My fi rst take is that it’s a lot of work for little gain,” said Jaydee Hanson, senior policy analyst with the Center for Food Safety in Wash- ington, D.C. Hanson said traditional cattle breeders “keep a real close eye on the genetics of their herd” and produce good quality beef for lower cost than cloning. He said it’s unclear whether the West Texas A&M animals have en- countered problems reported in other clones, such as Large Offspring Syn- drome that can make birthing diffi - cult. Achieving the good marbling re- sults with grass fed cattle, without the expense of fi nishing them at a feedlot, might be of more benefi t to produc- ers, he said. “At the end of the day, it’s whether a farmer can produce a high-quality product that the customer wants, at a price that will keep them in business,” Hanson said. What are grocery shoppers looking for when they examine the offerings in the meat display? What they’re most likely to see is a USDA grade — prime, choice or select — that is based on the amount of intramuscular fat marbling. The more marbling, the higher the grade. But some producers and univer- sity researchers believe the USDA grading system is out of date, and that consumers are considering other factors. William F. “Frank” Hendrix, a meat scientist at Washington State University, said a grading standard for beef tenderness may come about in the next fi ve years. “As a customer, I want a tender piece of beef and I want it really fl avorful,” he said. “I don’t want very much fat.” Hendrix puts his taste buds where his mouth is. He’s part of a Washington State team that identi- fi ed DNA markers for beef tender- ness. By taking a hair, blood or tis- sue sample, researchers can predict tenderness, and breed for that trait. The research showed tenderness is an inherited trait. To clone cattle in an attempt to duplicate a prime, or fat-marbled, carcass — as West Texas A&M University is doing — doesn’t in- terest Hendrix. “I would scratch my head about it,” he said. “Not to criticize an- other scientist’s work, but it would not be a goal of mine. Beef quality work is turning a different direc- tion.” A 2009 taste test conducted by Oregon State University’s Food Innovation Center in Portland shed some light on consumers’ prefer- How to clone Cloning has been around since 1996, when Scottish researchers an- nounced the arrival of Dolly the sheep. The discovery touched off speculation about future uses of the technology, but since then cloning has primarily been confi ned to livestock breeding. It’s used, for example, to build dairy herds or to pass along the genetics of prized rodeo bucking bulls. A cloned animal is not genetically modifi ed. Rather, it is a duplicate of the donor animal. Advocates often re- fer to a clone as an identical twin born later. Lawrence, the West Texas A&M meat scientist, calls the result “a very fancy Xerox copy, if you will.” To achieve it, scientists take an egg from a female animal and replace its gene-containing nucleus with the nu- cleus of a cell from the animal they want to copy. The egg cell forms an embryo, which is implanted in the uterus of a host female. The surrogate carries the pregnancy to term and de- livers a calf. ViaGen, the Texas company, charges $21,000 to clone a female and $23,000 to clone a bull. After several years of study, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ruled in January 2008 that meat or milk from cloned animals or from their offspring is safe for human consump- tion and didn’t require special labeling. The approval applied to cattle, pigs and goats but not sheep, because there wasn’t enough information available about them, the FDA said. Since the FDA’s decision, however, cloning animals for food hasn’t taken hold. Wolf Area in WASH. detail CONTINUED from Page A1 FOR. 395 Republic Kettle 20 FERRY Approximate site of Profanity Peak wolfpack COLLVILLE CONFEDERATED 21 TRIBES um bia River 395 C ol “We won’t put anybody on the ground until we feel we absolutely have to,” Commis- sioner Mike Blankenship said. “We’ll see how it goes.” Wolves are a state-pro- tected species. If the county moves to shoot wolves, it will test the state’s jurisdiction over wildlife. “I would prefer to avoid that,” Blankenship said. He said WDFW’s offi cial count of cattle killed and in- jured by wolves understates the losses suffered by ranch- ers. “An operator has been losing an animal a day since 25 STEVENS 25 N Capital Press graphic their animals were put on the range,” he said. “Should Fish and Wildlife fail to, we’re pre- pared to step up and fi nish that job.” The state has never re- moved an entire pack. In 2012, ences. More than 100 panelists compared ham- burgers made from grass-fed cattle raised at Carman Ranch William “Frank” in Northeast Or- egon’s Wallowa Hendrix County to ham- burgers made from ground beef purchased at a Fred Meyer store. The test, run by OSU sensory specialist Ann Colonna, showed that 54 percent of participants pre- ferred the grass-fed patty, while 44 percent preferred the conventional hamburgers. Two percent saw no difference. A greater disparity revealed it- self in perceptions. Overwhelming majorities said grass-fed beef was more healthy, more humane, better for the environment, fl avorful and safe. Cory Carman, the ranch owner, said the defi nition of quality is one of the biggest issues in agriculture today. “If quality is defi ned by the processors or distributors, it’s of- ten uniformity, shelf life, and other attributes that make money for the middle people,” Carman said in an email. But consumers are looking at factors such as fl avor, nutrition and animal welfare practices, she said. “These things aren’t visual- ly apparent in the same way (fat) marbling is,” she wrote, “but mar- bling is only a relatively recent metric of quality and only delivers one attribute in what is a very com- plex product.” Carman said she will not invest in technology that isn’t directly responsive to her customers’ prior- ities and doesn’t contribute to the ecological health of her land. Will Homer, chief operations offi - cer for Painted Hills Natural Beef in Fossil, Ore., said his company decided several years ago not to get involved with cloned livestock. Even though cloned animals are not genetically modifi ed, “You’re some- what playing with Mother Nature,” he said. “There’s not going to be a very warm reception from the consumer for a cloned animal. WDFW announced plans to remove the Wedge Pack in Stevens County. Wildlife managers shot seven wolves, but two wolves survived. WDFW said in a press re- lease that removing the rest of the Profanity Peak pack will be hard because the wolves have retreated to rugged tim- berlands in the Kettle River Range. Amaroq Weiss of the Cen- ter for Biological Diversi- ty said the county shouldn’t shoot wolves. “Thumbing your nose at state law doesn’t engender a lot of respect from the rest of the public about your attitudes of living with wildlife,” she said. “This isn’t the 1850s.” Stevens County rancher Scott Nielsen, vice president Beef taste test results Oregon State University’s Food Innovation Center asked partici- pants to compare hamburgers made from grass-fed beef with those made from conventional beef. Taste test results show panelists believe grass-fed tastes better and is more healthy. Question: What are your perceptions of grass-fed beef? Perception Percent response 88 percent Healthy More humane Better for environment Flavorful 58 Safe 58 76 71 Expensive 49 Gamy 13 Tough 5 None 3 Imported 0 “That is the stone wall right there that they need to be aware of,” Homer said of the West Texas researchers. “The consumer would just blow their top.” Homer said the volatile economics of the cattle industry in recent years, with falling prices and rising costs, offset herd improvements that might come from cloning. Painted Hills, formed by seven ranching families, walks a tight mar- ket line. It delivers grain-fi nished cat- tle to a large-scale processor in Pasco, Wash., and takes grass-fed cattle to a specialty processor, Dayton Natural Meats in Dayton, Ore. In addition to processing Paint- ed Hills’ grass-fed beef, the Dayton facility processes hogs that are non- GMO verifi ed, and organic turkeys and chickens. The facility processes meat for New Seasons markets, a Port- land-based chain that caters to cus- tomers who prefer and are willing to pay more for locally grown, organic or sustainable food. “We would stay as far away from clones as possible,” said Reg Keddie, general manager of Dayton Natural Meats. Keddie said consumers already struggle to understand where their food comes from and would reject beef that had its “inception in a petri dish.” The Texas researchers, he said, are most likely aiming at the conven- tional meat companies that process thousands of cows a day. Cory Carman, a Northeast Ore- gon cattle rancher who has carved out a niche selling grass-fed beef to high-end markets in Portland, said her customers are primarily interested in Carman Ranch’s practices and the nu- of the Cattle Producers of Washington, said the county has a duty to respond if the state fails. “I’m sure they’ll get por- trayed as a bunch of rednecks on the westside (of Washing- ton) if they act, but they’ve been forced into it,” he said. According to WDFW pol- icy, the department considers culling a pack after four con- fi rmed depredations. Ranchers are obligated to take measures to prevent attacks. Four conservation groups that helped shape the policy issued a statement Wednesday calling the shooting of wolves “deeply regrettable,” but that WDFW was following a pro- tocol agreed to by the conser- vation groups and other orga- nizations. Survey size: 112 consumers Source: OSU, Food Innovation Center Alan Kenaga/Capital Press tritional profi le and fl avor of its meat. They don’t ask about yield and quality grade, she said. “If our primary request was for more marbling in our meat, we might look into the ethics behind cloning or research the technology, but no one asks for that,” Carman said in an email. “Marbling isn’t the primary driver of meat quality for us.” Jack Field, executive vice president of the Washington Cattlemen’s Asso- ciation, said cloning may not be worth the risk of consumer backlash. As with GMOs, he said, science says it’s safe and the benefi ts are apparent, but so- cial reaction is such that “all of a sud- den, the science goes out the window.” In addition, producers can improve their herds with technical tools already available, Field said. Genetic testing at $18 to $20 a head can help producers select bulls and heifers to breed for beef tenderness, yield and other traits, he said. “You can move your herd to what- ever your consumer is asking for,” Field said. Lawrence, the West Texas A&M meat scientist, nonetheless believes in the research and what it could mean for herd improvement. Among other things, he thinks the work may uncov- er another trait potential. “We may be selecting for better immune systems,” he said. “For an an- imal to be Prime and Yield Grade One simultaneously, it’s probably had no or very few bad days in its life. So are we selecting for (good health)? “We’re moving the curve to higher quality and higher yield at the same time,” he said. “I think it’s very viable for the beef industry to fi nd traits that are desirable and to propagate those.” Coba CONTINUED from Page A1 In a state with such a wide variety of crops and producers, that’s important, he said. He called on Gov. Kate Brown to consult with the people whose livelihoods depend on agriculture be- fore choosing the next ODA director. “To me it’s of vital importance to make sure producer voices are heard,” he said. Coba’s appointment is effective Oct. 1 but requires confi rmation by the Ore- gon Senate in September, according to a news release from the Governor’s Offi ce. Coba, who has been agri- culture director since 2003, started working in state gov- ernment in 1985. Kristin Grainger, a spokeswoman for the gover- nor, said Coba, a Pendleton native, is a “proven leader” and “committed to excel- lence” in state government. “Her roots in rural Or- egon and Eastern Oregon were infl uential as well,” Grainger said. Grainger said the state’s budget development process will likely be a focal point for Coba in her new posi- tion. The Department of Ag- riculture’s deputy director, Lisa Charpilloz Hanson, will serve as interim director starting Oct. 1, until a suc- cessor to Coba is appointed.