---

BY ROSARIO PAZ

In print | Published April 3, 2008

A recent press release made available on the official Web site of the Humane Society of the United States concerning a lawsuit filed by the HSUS against the United States Department of Agriculture revealed that Swarthmore was one of 81 animal research institutions that had failed to file mandatory annual reports about research animals’ “pain and distress” at least one time between 1999 and 2004. The submission of these annual reports is mandated by the Animal Welfare Act. According to Associate Professor of Biology Sarah Hiebert Burch and Animal Facility Manager Tami Gura, co-chairs of the college’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), the failure to file this report was due to a “clerical mix-up” and the report was eventually turned in.

According to a listing released by the USDA of the 81 animal research institutions that had failed to file these mandatory reports, the college had failed to file a report in 2000-2001. During this time, Burch and Biology Department Business and Technology Manager Matt Powell were the appointed co-chairs of the IACUC at the college.

As it does every year, the USDA, which acts as an inspecting agency for all institutions involved in animal research, requested information from the college in order to assess its compliance with the various provisions of the Animal Welfare Act, according to Burch. This request is sent to a primary contact, the provost of the college, in charge of filing a response to the USDA.

At the time of the failure to file this report, Jennie Keith was in the process of ceding the position of provost to Connie Hungerford, according to Burch.

“The provost doesn’t have a direct hand in research at the institution, but she is, in effect, our boss. We have to file it through her,” Burch said.

Because of this change of provost, the request from the USDA was forwarded to Keith, who was no longer the acting provost of the college, and was never forwarded to Hungerford or either co-chair of the IACUC. Consequently, this clerical error created a delay in the submission of the college’s report.

According to Gura, although the IACUC had eventually sent a complete animal research report to the USDA, it was still classified as “a failure to send in the report.”

Failure to send in reports can result in warnings first, then fines, and ultimately, termination of animal research at the institution, according to Burch.

“Basically, all animal research at that institution would have to be shut down,” Burch said. “Even those that were not responsible for violating the [Animal Welfare] Act would be punished in that way.”

During his time as co-chair of the college’s IACUC, Powell had requested that the USDA annul the warning that had been issued to the college, which the USDA agreed to do.

The report itself contains the total number of animals used in experiments whether in a lab research project or in fieldwork. These animals are categorized in one of three ways: no “pain or distress,” alleviated “pain or distress” or unalleviated “pain or distress.” As of the present, the college has never had any animals that fell under the third category.

Additionally, a USDA inspector makes an annual visit to the college in order to ensure that all animal research being conducted meets all guidelines of the AWA.

“So [the USDA inspectors] show up whenever they want and they look over everything the IACUC has done since they last came to campus,” Burch said. “They read all the protocols that the IACUC has approved to make sure that they agree with the way we’re approving protocols, and sometimes they ask to see … our labs, … records, sometimes they even ask to see student lab notebooks, so they’re extremely thorough when they come.”Following the provisions of the AWA is only one aspect of ensuring that animal research is being conducted appropriately. The Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, provided by the National Research Council of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, is another standard through which the college’s IACUC ensures it is conducting animal research properly.

According to the guide, “the goal … is to promote the humane care of animals used in biomedical and behavioral research, teaching and testing.” Its definition of laboratory animals includes any vertebrate animal that is used in research, teaching or testing.

If animal research were to be conducted following only AWA guidelines, virtually all mice, rats and birds bred for the purpose of research, which account for almost 85% of all animals used in laboratories, would not be included under the provisions, according to the HSUS Web site.

Animal Rights Coalition Treasurer Brian Tomasik ’09 said that animal welfare advocates commonly believe that the Animal Welfare Act is not inclusive of enough of the wide variety of animals that are used in research laboratories.

“The main reason that animal welfare is important is that you’re providing that animals aren’t suffering,” he said. “You suffer just as much no matter what species you are. It would be important that this act extends to those species that people may not care as much about but still suffer the same amount.”

The complexities of maintaining compliance with the AWA and other provisions dictated by the USDA led the college to hire Gura, who works full time to ensure the college’s compliance with all animal welfare regulations.

“Two years ago, Connie Hungerford agreed that it was an important enough position that we couldn’t just have that job be a part of someone else’s job,” Burch said of the need for Gura’s position. “It makes it much easier for us to keep ahead of the game. The rules change in small ways all the time, but keeping with all that is a big job.”

---

« RETURN TO NEWS

« PREV ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE »