By Tim Welch
To scoop, or not to scoop? That is the question. Residents of two towns in Italy and Israel may be facing potential fines if they opt for the latter. City officials in Vercelli and Petah Tikva are taking advantage of genetic testing technology to promote cleanliness in their municipalities. They are creating DNA databases of all registered dogs and testing droppings left behind on the streets. Finally fed up with owners who carelessly leave behind their puppies’ poop in public areas, these two cities will hand out fines to any citizen whose dog is identified as a match in the database. The Israeli program also offers incentives to pet owners who place their dogs’ waste into special municipal bins. Incentives include dog toys and pet food coupons.
In Vercelli, a small northern Italian city of 45,000 residents, the lack of attention to current laws regarding cleaning up after pets prompted the idea for a doggy DNA database. “If signs and invitations aren’t enough, we’ll try genetics. I want a clean city,” said Antonio Prencipe, a city councilor.
In Petah Tikva, a suburb of Tel Aviv, the program is entirely optional. While some city councilors would like to require all owners to register their dogs at local veterinary clinics, mandatory registration is not yet in effect.
A clean city is a public good, aesthetically pleasing, and desirable to all. But should citizens be in violation of a law if they refuse to submit their pets to a DNA test in hopes it will clear up sidewalks, front yards, and pathways?
Genetic tests can reveal far more than the level of honesty of a suburban dog owner. Once a genetic database is created, the genes could be analyzed for further information. What if geneticists are able to identify a canine gene that is linked to elevated aggressiveness or violent attacks? Should owners of dogs with this gene be forbidden to bring their animals to parks and playgrounds? Such a question may seem unimportant, but the principle is not much different from a human employer rejecting a job candidate based on undesirable (however, uncontrolled) genetic information, obtained for some other reason.
Ethical questions aside, one must also look at these cities’ decisions from a logical standpoint. These programs will cost money—most likely taxpayer money. Italian reports say the fines doled out will more than cover the cost of testing. But for this to hold true, fines must actually be given out. How likely is it, under a volunteer registration program, that offenders will be punished? It is hard to imagine that someone who simply can not be hassled to clean up after their pet would make the effort to register by his or her own free will for a program which aims to punish specifically him or her. Why not simply hire more street cleaners?
To some people, this city ordinance stinks worse than the holding room at the testing facilities.
Comments