LOCAL ELECTIONS : Pound Animal Issue Stirs Passionate Debate : Proposition C: County advisory measure puts medical research establishment at odds with animal rights advocates.

The opposing arguments can get angrily passionate, uttered, as they are, in defense of humane treatment and prolonging life.

What makes the debate over Proposition C on the Nov. 6 countywide ballot both painful and compelling is that it seems to pit science against animals that were once pets.

And, although the measure is only advisory--asking voter opinion whether county Animal Control should continue selling some unidentified and unwanted pound animals for medical experiments--it has put the medical community at odds with animal rights groups and the San Diego Humane Society.

“It does seem to come down to emotion, it’s like the abortion issue,” said Dr. Laurence Favrot, president of the American Heart Assn. San Diego County Chapter and a leader in the “yes” on Proposition C campaign.

County supervisors put Prop. C on the ballot amid increasing distaste, especially among North County’s elected leaders, about using pound animals for medical work.

Although having no direct authority, Del Mar, Solana Beach, Encinitas, Carlsbad, Vista, San Marcos and Poway have told the county they want 60 days’ notice if pound animals from their communities are to be sold for that purpose.

Last year, UCSD paid $55 a dog and $25 a cat, obtaining 324 pound animals for laboratory use. But the seemingly modest number of pound animals ending up in medical experiments belies the intensity of the campaign over Proposition C.

Medical groups insist that animals are indispensable for seeking cures to both human and animal ailments.

“There is tremendous saving of life today and saving of suffering because of what has happened in the past in animal laboratories,” Favrot said.

Foes of Proposition C don’t necessarily oppose the use of all animals for medical research. But they claim that unwanted pound animals, even though they would be put to death anyway, have had human contact and would be inhumanely treated as lab animals.

That’s why researchers should use only animals specially bred in a clinical environment, according to Dr. Larry Boersma, director of community relations for the San Diego Humane Society.

“It’s simply cruel to subject an animal used to love and kindness from people to this terror of the unknown,” he said.

The campaign has taken on broader political implications as some medical leaders claim that Proposition C opponents are the vanguard of a radical animal rights effort to end all use of animals in medical research.

A recent letter from Dr. William Renert, president of the San Diego County Medical Society, seeking support from local physicians says the “animal rights groups have specifically targeted San Diego and UCSD School of Medicine as an important step in their long-term goal of stopping animal research completely, even if it means prolonging human suffering . . . “

Animal rights advocates accuse Proposition C backers of using scare tactics to win voters.

Mary Ann Melvin, director of Stop Taking Our Pets, said, “They’re talking about particular human ailments frightening to people.” They’re saying, she maintained, that, “if they don’t allow use of pets, medical research is going to come to a grinding halt. That’s patently untrue.”

However, her rival organization, the Coalition for Animals and Animal Research, maintains that genetic diversity makes pound animals well suited for advancing the understanding of heart disease, organ transplants, lung disease, diabetes and radiology.

“Animals have to be used in experimentation. There’s no way around this,” said Dr. Robert Reid, president-elect of the San Diego County Medical Society. Along with Reid, Dr. Jonas Salk is supporting Proposition C.

The medical community acknowledges that, in the past, animals were sometimes abused during experimentation, but contends that times have changed and animals don’t suffer in laboratories.

“The university has rigid controls, they don’t abuse animals,” Reid said. “They don’t torture them; I think they’re well-handled.”

Once again, there’s no common ground as organizations against Proposition C assert in their ballot argument that pound animals are desired because they’re “cheap” and that 20% die from “stressful laboratory conditions” before experimentation begins.

The Coalition for Animals and Animal Research does agree that pound animals are cheaper, roughly one-tenth of what a purpose-bred animal would cost, but contends that obtaining less-expensive animals helps control research costs.

Setting aside economic considerations, there is strong philosophical dispute--not that unwanted pound animals must die, but how and where they die.

Favrot’s attitude is that the animals might have been someone’s pet, but as long as they’re going to be euthanized, they might as well serve some higher purpose by furthering medicine. Proposition C supporters say last year, 25,000 unclaimed animals were destroyed in the county pound.

“These dogs will die anyway. Utilizing them in this way helps mankind,” he said. In fact, he claims, “putting them to sleep in a lab is done more expertly than at the pound.”

Favrot couldn’t hit a more sensitive nerve with opponents of Proposition C, who insist that former pets used to friendly human contact would face a more frightening struggle in the laboratory. They say it would be better if they were summarily put down at the pound.

Beyond emotional and scientific arguments, the two sides differ on less abstract matters.

For example, foes of Proposition C state that 54 of the 58 counties in California prohibit selling pound animals for research. Supporters say that four counties (Los Angeles, Mendocino, Sacramento and San Diego) provide research animals and that the practice is legal in six more counties (San Joaquin, El Dorado, Shasta, Mono, Plumas and Tuolumne), although no research animals are being purchased in those six.

The campaign against Proposition C has raised about $7,000 in contributions and been waged by volunteers handing out leaflets and manning information tables in shopping areas, and in appearances on television talk shows, Melvin says.

Supporters of the measure have hired a San Diego public relations firm to manage their campaign. Melvin said pro-Proposition C forces have $70,000 in contributions, but that figure couldn’t be independently confirmed Wednesday.