The Clone Controversy

Several years ago some folks in the bucking bull business decided to expand the breeding potential of some superstar bulls by having them cloned.  The question was how do you keep the breeding potential of the greatest bulls in history going?  The simple answer seemed to be that you make more of them.  More bulls, more semen, more calves from proven bloodlines.  But it wasn’t simple.  No one foresaw the firestorm of controversy it would create.

Most breeders in the bucking bull industry are against cloning. Some feel that it's cheating to take something someone else has bred and raised and make copies of it. Some object for religious reasons, feeling that it's wrong to take something God has made and make copies of it. 

Breeders work hard to advance their breeding programs and improve the quality of the industry's bucking stock through selective breeding.  To a certain extent, that process is a throw of the dice.  You can take two full brothers and one might buck and the other might not.  The idea of just reproducing previous champions somehow goes against the trial and error, science and art, of breeding bucking bulls.   

The dilution of the gene pool is another issue of contention.  There are going to be a lot more straws of "Bull X" semen on the market if there are a lot of Bull X clones, whose semen will be genetically indistinguishable from the original's.  This floods the market and decreases the value of existing straws from the original Bull X.  It also means that there's no dependable way to know which straws are from the original and which are from the clones. 

Further complicating the debate is the fact that neither clones nor their offspring can be registered with the ABBI, which is the largest bucking cattle registry.  Many believe that there are already clone offspring registered there anyway.  Some say that clones should be registered so that there is at least some way to track them.  Some say there should be a separate registry for them. 

Add to all of that the unknowns about how the clones will fare in terms of health and wellness and what odd genetic blips they might (or might not) pass on to their calves. 

Everyone has an opinion, usually a strong one, about what to do and how to do it.  The clones are there.  They might secretly be in the registry.  The semen is already devalued.  That's over and done.  The question is how to handle it going forward, and frankly, I don't have a clue.

__________________________________________

If you'd like to read more about clones, check out How to Make a Clone and Questions and Answers about Clones.

Greenville Controversy in a Nutshell

Here it is, the whole thing so far:

• Valdiron de Oliveira was disqualified for taking too long in the chute. Apparently this is not the first time he has been called for this.
  

• Silvano Alves got called for a slap no one saw. I have not been able to find video for this.
  

• Ryan McConnel clearly slapped his bull in the bonus round and was not called for it. Ty Murray put it something like this: The only people who didn't see that slap were the four people who should have seen it. (Watch for it in the first second of the video below.)
  

• In the heat of the moment, and in response to the Valdiron and Alves incidents, Renato Nunes pushed the replay button when Ryan McConnel received a score for the ride in question.
  

• Riders have the right to push this review button on their own or others' rides, but never has one called for a potentially negative review of someone else's ride.
  

• McConnel expressed his confusion and was mostly classy about it.

• Nunes stated that he just wanted to call attention to what he saw as judging inconsistencies.
  

• The following day he expressed his regret and said he would never do such a thing again. He was obviously extremely upset.

• People said they themselves would never do such a thing. Others said they would.
  

• Much talk was had about the "cowboy code" and how Renato had broken it.

• Subsequently the PBR has disqualified the four event judges for the remainder of the year and has said that it will institute judging reform. See press release.
  

• Renato was a villain. Renato is now a hero. Of course, Renato is actually neither.  He's just a guy who got upset and did something in the heat of the moment that was within the rules but had never been done before. 
  

Was this all a good thing or a bad thing? I'd say it was a good thing.  It called attention to what appeared to be some sloppy judging. It opened a door to riders using the review button in a new way, which could end up being useful to the sport.  It also called attention - maybe not in the way Renato wanted - to the fact that some riders do take an awful long time in the chutes. I'm not saying that judges don't pay attention, but it's never a bad thing to have a wake-up call in your profession. And I don't know if you noticed, but everyone got out of the chute pretty damn fast after that.