Animal Law
- 1. Carriage Horse Protection in New York City
- 2. New York Beats Animal Abuse
- 3. Beware of Breed Bans
- 4. Calgary's Animal Laws Win the Gold
- 5. Animal Welfare Law in New York
- 6. Lab Animal Protection Under Fire
- 7. Humane Law Enforcement in Illinois
- 8. Legal Rights for Animals
- 9. Dangerous Dog Legislation
Lab Animal Protection Under Fire
Nancy Blaney and Marianne Radziewicz
FEDERAL LAW -
Just as success in the long fight to improve treatment of laboratory animals seemed near, Congress stepped in and dealt the campaign a setback. The ASPCA is working to get the effort back on track.
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is supposed to ensure humane care for all warm-blooded animals used in research and for other purposes, but the regulations arbitrarily exclude birds, mice and rats. Thus, even though rodents and birds comprise 95 percent of the animals used in laboratories, researchers are under no legal requirement to provide humane care to these animals, nor must they consider nonanimal alternatives to tests using birds, mice and rats. The care and use of these animals are not subject to unannounced enforcement inspections by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) - which enforces the AWA.
In October 2000, the Alternatives Research and Development Foundation (ARDF) reached a settlement with the USDA in its lawsuit challenging the agency’s deliberate failure to protect these animals under the law. As a result of the settlement agreement, USDA agreed to begin a formal “rulemaking” to include birds, mice and rats under the AWA’s regulations and to complete that process in a reasonable length of time. The settlement did not establish either the content of the proposed rule or the final standards to adopt.
Creating a Panic
Certain biomedical groups, led by the National Association for Biomedical Research (NABR), objected, and set out to create a panic within the research community by raising false alarms over the agreement’s impact on research. Then-Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman told biomedical industry representatives that the settlement was preferable to court intervention and gave his assurance that any new rule “should in no way hamper” biomedical research. Unfortunately, at NABR’s eleventh-hour request, Sen. Thad Cochran (R-MS) included language in USDA’s budget prohibiting it from proceeding with the rulemaking.
The biomedical industry made the same dire predictions regarding the original Animal Welfare Act and subsequent amendments, trying to establish a conflict between the humane treatment of animals and lifesaving research. They were wrong then, and they are wrong now.
The question the industry cannot answer is this: How is science advanced by denying birds, mice and rats the minimal safeguards provided under the AWA? The truth is, good science depends on good animal care. Improvements that have occurred under the AWA in the care of other research animals have in fact benefited science. Recognizing this relationship, many researchers support extending to birds, mice and rats the coverage to which they are entitled. A survey of a sample of members of the committees in research facilities that oversee animal care and use showed that 70 percent of respondents agree that birds, mice and rats “should…receive AWA protection when used for research.” Even NABR’s previous public statements, while expressing concern about resources, had endorsed the inclusion of birds, mice and rats.
Support Needed
The biomedical industry has launched a media campaign aimed at discrediting the settlement agreement, and efforts are already underway to ensure that the rulemaking never goes forward. All other countries with biomedical research programs protect birds, mice and rats, and it is time for the United States to do likewise. Federal law already requires it; the regulations must be changed to reflect the law.
Please contact your representative and senators in Congress. Ask them to do everything they can to ensure that USDA can begin the rulemaking process that will finally bring birds, mice and rats under the protection of the Animal Welfare Act.
Skies Still Unsafe
The Clinton Administration failed to take the necessary action to implement the provisions of the Safe Air Travel for Animals Act that were included in last year’s bill reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration. Now we must convince the new Secretary of Transportation, Norm Mineta, to require airlines to begin reporting animal losses, injuries and deaths, and to improve training for airline personnel who handle animals. Visit our webpage at www.aspca.org, click on “Voice Your Opinion,” and send a letter to Secretary Mineta. It is very important that he hear from all of us who want air travel made safer for animals.
Nancy Blaney is the former director, and Marianne Radziewicz associate director, of ASPCA Federal Government Affairs and Public Policy in Washington, DC.
© 2001 ASPCA
ASPCA Animal Watch - Summer 2001
Courtesy of
ASPCA
424 East 92nd St.
New York, NY 10128-6804
(212) 876-7700
www.aspca.org
Next in
How You Can Help Pets: Animal Law:
Humane Law Enforcement in Illinois
EMAIL
SHARE
