1

Report of the Secretary of Agriculture

to the President of the Senate and the

Speaker of the House of Representatives

Animal Welfare Report

Fiscal Year 2001

United States Department of Agriculture

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

APHIS 41–35–075
Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

The U.S. Department of Agriculture

(USDA) prohibits discrimination in

all its programs and activities on the

basis of race, color, national origin,

sex, religion, age, disability, political

beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital

or family status. (Not all prohibited

bases apply to all programs.) Persons

with disabilities who require

alternative means for communication

of program information (Braille, large

print, audiotape, etc.) should contact

USDA’s TARGET Center at (202)

720–2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination,

write USDA, Director, Office of Civil

Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten

Building, 1400 Independence Avenue,

SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410 or

call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD).

USDA is an equal opportunity

provider and employer.

Each year, the Secretary of

Agriculture reports on administration

and enforcement activities under the

Animal Welfare Act (AWA) (7 U.S.C.

2131 et seq.) as required by Section

25 of the AWA. The present report

covers fiscal year (FY) 2001, from

October 1, 2000, through September

30, 2001.
3

Report of Fiscal Year 2000 Activities 1

Performance-Based Management

The AWA: A Legislative and Regulatory History 2

The Law

The Regulations

How USDA Administers the Law 5

Animal Care

AC Appropriations for FY 2001

Investigative and Enforcement Services

Animal Welfare Information Center

Inspection Highlights 7

Risk-Based Inspection System

Class B Dealer Tracebacks Continue Sucess

Complaints and Searches

After the Inspection

Inspector Traininfg and Development

New Database Online

AC Inspectors Are Proactive, Dedicated, and Compassionate

Inspections by Business Type 12

Animal Dealers

Animal Exhibitors

Carriers and Intermediate Handlers

Research Facilities

Reports From Research Facilities

Enforcement Highlights 17

APHIS’ Enforcement Strategy Yields Results

Stronger Cases Through Digital Photography

Maximum Fines Raised Due to Inflation

The High-Priority Designation

The Results Are in the Numbers

Public Outreach 19

Doing More Business on the Web

Industry Report in Fifth Year of Updating Stakeholders

Safe Pet Travel Video Flies the Airways

Automated Telephone Service Assists Travelers

Answering Public Inquiries

Assisting the Media

Animal Welfare Inspection Available Through E-FOIA

Liaison With Other Federal Agencies

Cooperating and Communicating With Stakeholders

AWIC Focuses on Educational Efforts

Contents
4

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Regulatory and Policy Initiatives 24

Congress Does Not Allow Funds for Regulations on Rats, Mice, and

 Birds

Change Allows More Flexibility in Placing Confisicated Animals

Pain Categorization Change and Definition for “distress” Considered

Comments Sought on Proposed Licensing Changes

Comments Reviewed on Environmental Enrichment Policy

Perimeter Fencing Rule Completed

Work Progresses on Swim-With-the-Dolphins Rule

Policies Completed

Other Policy Initiatives

Other Initiatives

Glossary of Terms 28

Appendix 31

Table 1. Number of Licensees and Registrants by Facilities and

 Number of Sites (FY 2001)

Table 2. Animals Used in Research (FY 2001)

Table 3. Animals Used in Research, No Pain or Distress—

 No Drugs Needed for Relief (FY 2001)

Table 4. Animals Used in Research, With Pain or Distress—

 With Drugs Used for Relief (FY 2001)

Table 5. Animals Used in Research, With Pain or Distress—

 No Drugs Used for Relief (FY 2001)

Table 6. Animals Used by Research From the First Reporting

 Year (1973) to the Present

Attachments

Animal Welfare: List of Licensed and Registered Facilities
5

Each year, the Secretary of Agriculture reports on the

administration and enforcement of the Animal Welfare

Act (AWA) (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) as required by

Section 25 of the Act. This report covers such activities

for fiscal year (FY) 2001, October 1, 2000, through

September 30, 2001.

In addition to identifying facilities and reporting on

investigations and inspections as required by Section 25

of the Act, this report provides information on related

enforcement and regulatory initiatives. This report and

the data and findings in it are not released outside the

Federal Government until the report has been made

public by Congress.

Performance-Based Management

Under the mandate of the Government Performance

and Results Act, the Animal Care (AC) unit of the U.S.

Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has taken an active role in measuring its effectiveness in meeting the

provisions of the AWA. The primary measure used in

FY 2001 was the percentage of facilities in compliance with regulations. Based on data available as of October

2001, the overall level of facility compliance remained

the same, 58 percent in FY 2000 and 58 percent in FY

2001. The AC management team continued development of

several additional measures of program effectiveness.

A customer satisfaction survey was conducted for

regulated facilities in February 1997 and established a

baseline level of satisfaction. Before repeating the

facility survey, AC plans to survey animal protection

organizations.

Report of Fiscal Year 2001

Activities
2

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

The AWA: A Legislative and

Regulatory History

The Law

In 1966, Congress enacted Public Law (P.L.) 89–544,

known as the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act. This law

regulated dealers who handle dogs and cats, as well as

laboratories that use dogs, cats, hamsters, guinea pigs,

rabbits, or nonhuman primates in research.

The first amendment to the Laboratory Animal Welfare

Act was passed in 1970 (P.L. 91–579) and changed the

name of the law to the AWA. This amendment

authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to regulate

other warmblooded animals when used in research,

exhibition, or the wholesale pet trade.

An amendment in 1976 (P.L. 94–279) prohibited most

animal fighting ventures and regulated the commercial

transportation of animals. Another amendment was

added to the AWA in 1985 as the Improved Standards

for Laboratory Animals Act, which was part of the

Food Security Act. These amendments required the

Secretary to issue additional standards for the use of

animals in research.

In 1990, provisions concerning injunctive relief and pet

protection were added to the AWA. These two provisions were included in the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act of 1990. The injunctive relief

provision authorizes the Secretary to seek an injunction

to stop certain licensed entities from continuing to

violate the AWA while charges are pending. (Injunctions are used in cases of stolen animals and where an

animal's health is in serious danger or may become

endangered.)

The pet protection provision mandated that the

Secretary issue additional regulations pertaining to

random-source dogs and cats. (Random source means

“dogs and cats obtained from animal pounds or

shelters, auction sales, or from any person who did not

breed and raise them on his or her premises.”)

In April 2000, a Department of Transportation (DOT)

law was enacted requiring air carriers to report

incidents involving animals. The Wendell H. Ford

Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st

Century (P.L. 106–181, also known as the Federal

Aviation Administration [FAA] reauthorization bill)

requires carriers to submit monthly reports to the

Secretary of Transportation regarding any incidents

involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal (as

defined by the Secretary of Transportation). The

Transportation and Agriculture secretaries will enter

into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to share

this information. The law also calls for data based on

these incidents to be published as the FAA does for

other consumer complaints and incident data.

Provisions of the law also include improving training

for air carrier employees concerning the air transport

of animals and notifying passengers of the conditions

under which the animals are traveling. For example,

under the new law, airline personnel would explain the

difference in climate between the cargo hold, where the

animal is traveling, and the passenger cabin. USDA

expects to be working with DOT on developing the

MOU, related regulations, and educational materials.
3

USDA is charged with developing and implementing

regulations to support the AWA. These regulations,

which appear in Title 9, Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR), Chapter 1, Subchapter A, Parts 1–3, require the

licensing of animal dealers, exhibitors, and operators of

animal auction sales where animals regulated under the

AWA are sold.

Licenses are valid unless the licensee terminates the

license voluntarily or fails to renew it or an administrative law judge suspends or revokes the license in an

enforcement proceeding. Licensing fees for dealers and

exhibitors are determined by a graduated schedule

listed in the regulations [9 CFR 2.6(5)(c)]. Dealers pay

between $30 and $750, and exhibitors pay between $30

and $300 per year. These fees are deposited as miscellaneous receipts in the U.S. Treasury.

The regulations also require all carriers, intermediate

handlers, and exhibitors not subject to licensing and all

non-Federal research facilities using animals to register

with the Secretary of Agriculture. There is no charge to

register. Table 1 in the appendix provides a list of the

number of licensees and registrants for each State,

Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

All licensees and registrants must provide their animals

with care that meets or exceeds USDA's standards for

veterinary care and animal husbandry. These standards

include requirements for handling, housing, feeding,

sanitation, ventilation, shelter from extreme weather,

veterinary care, and separation of species when

necessary.

Over the years, USDA has made substantive changes to

the AWA regulations. In the late 1980s, USDA

amended the requirements pertaining to the use of

animals in research. In response to the Improved

Standards for Laboratory Animals Act, these amendments established standards for the exercise of dogs

and the psychological well-being of nonhuman

primates. The amendments also set standards to

minimize the pain and distress of animals; ensure the

The Regulations proper use of anesthetics, analgesics, and tranquilizers;

and require researchers to consider alternatives to

painful procedures.

To ensure that these standards are met, the amendments require each research facility to establish an

Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee to

approve and monitor all research conducted at the

institution. USDA published the final regulations for

Parts 1 and 2 of Title 9, CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter A,

on August 31, 1989; those for Part 3 were published on

February 15, 1991.

USDA published revised standards for guinea pigs,

hamsters, and rabbits in final form in the Federal

Register on July 15, 1990. These standards increased the

minimum space requirements for cages and provided

additional requirements to protect animals being

transported via common carrier.

In 1993, USDA established holding periods for animals

in pounds and shelters and certification requirements

to ensure that animals have been held for the duration

of these periods. The regulations were published as a

final rule on July 22, 1993, and became effective

August 23, 1993.

In February 2000, USDA adopted two guides that

facilities can use to clarify accepted standards of care

for agricultural animals used in nonagricultural

research or exhibition. In June 1990, USDA began

regulating horses used for biomedical or other nonagricultural research and other farm animals used for

biomedical or other nonagricultural research or for

nonagricultural exhibition. Previously, the standards in

Title 9, CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter A, Part 3, Subpart F, applied. In 1999, USDA requested and received

comments on adopting in the regulations two existing

guides on standards as they apply to the handling, care,

treatment, and transportation of these animals. The

guides are the “Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Agricultural Research and Teaching,”

published by the Federation of American Societies of

Food and Science, and the “Guide for the Care and Use

of Laboratory Animals,” published by the Institute of

Laboratory Animal Research. More information on the

The AWA: A Legislative and Regulatory History
4

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

guides can be found in AC Policy 29, posted on the

Web at www.aphis.usda.gov/ac/policy/policy29.pdf

During FY 2001, USDA developed and published

several more rules, policies, and other tools to provide

more consistent interpretation of the requirements

through clarifications and details:

• In January 2001, AC published a final rule allowing

confiscated animals to be placed with facilities or

persons not licensed under the AWA. The person

or facility must be able to offer a level of care equal

to or exceeding that required by the regulations.

The change in the regulations benefits confiscated

animals by giving AC more flexibility and options

in relocating them, resulting in quicker removal

from situations detrimental to their health and

well-being.

• In January 2001, USDA published a final rule

based on the consensus language regarding marine

mammal regulations (subpart E). This language

was derived from the negotiated rulemaking

committee of stakeholders established under the

Federal Advisory Committee Act. Major stakeholders were identified in 1995 and asked to

participate on the committee. The committee met

in 1995 and 1996 to develop regulatory language to

amend a large portion of the marine-mammalspecific regulations.

• In July 2000, AC requested comments on possible

changes to the pain and distress categorization

system and the creation of a definition for

“distress” in the AWA regulations. Comments were

accepted for 4 months and were reviewed. At the

end of FY 2001, AC was working on a report and

summary of options on how to proceed.

• In FY 2001, AC reviewed comments on a revised

draft policy regarding training and handling of

potentially dangerous wild and exotic animals. AC

received more than 250 comments during the

2 months they were accepted. A revised draft has

been submitted to the Department for final

approval and clearance.

• In July 1999, USDA published its final decision to

not change the definition of “retail pet store” but

did decide to license wholesale dealers of hunting,

security, and breeding dogs, based, in part, on a

petition and several thousand comments received

during the rulemaking process. In December

2000, AC published a proposed rule to change the

definition of “dealer” to require that only wholesale dealers of hunting, breeding, and security dogs

be licensed and inspected. AC received approximately 11,000 comments by April 3, 2001. In

July 2001, a Federal judge determined that a

decision could not be made about the regulation

because it is not a final rule, only a proposed rule.

The judge did rule that Congress’ intent with the law

was to exempt storefronts as retail pet stores, not

home breeders. That decision may be appealed.
How USDA Administers the Law 5

Within USDA, the APHIS AC program is responsible

for administering the AWA. AC's mission is to provide

leadership in establishing acceptable standards of care

and treatment and to monitor and achieve compliance

through educational and cooperative efforts.

The AC program is headquartered in Riverdale, MD,

and has regional offices in Raleigh, NC, Fort Collins,

CO, Fort Worth, TX, and Sacramento, CA. These

offices are charged with administering the AWA in each

of their respective areas.

In FY 2001, AC’s Western and Central Regions began

consolidation into one region with the new Western

Region office in Fort Collins. The current offices in

Fort Worth and Sacramento will remain open as

satellite offices until the physical office consolidation

can be completed in summer 2002.

The map on this page shows AC's regional structure

current to the end of this reporting period (September 30, 2001). The box provides the addresses, phone

numbers, and fax numbers for all AC offices, as well as

AC's home page on the World Wide Web and e-mail

address for incoming correspondence.

Each regional AC office employs a cadre of field

veterinary medical officers and animal care inspectors.

The number of field inspector positions at the end of

FY 2001 was 82. These employees are highly qualified

and have an excellent professional support system and

communication network. Many also have specialized

interest and expertise in such areas as the care of

laboratory animals, zoo animals, or marine mammals.

In enforcing the AWA, APHIS inspectors work closely

with other Federal agencies and frequently interact

with regulated professional groups, industry organizations, humane groups, the scientific community, and

other concerned associations or individuals. In

FY 2001, AC personnel attended about 150 training

sessions and meetings and gave 146 presentations at

104 of them. AC also exhibited and provided informational materials from a booth at 12 such events.

Animal Care

USDA–APHIS–Animal Care

Headquarters Office

4700 River Road, Unit 84

Riverdale, MD 20737–1234

Phone: (301) 734–7833

Fax: (301) 734–4978

Eastern Region

920 Main Campus Drive, Suite 200

Raleigh, NC 27606

Phone: (919) 716–5532

Fax: (919) 716–5696

Western Region—Fort Collins

2150 Centre Avenue, Building B

Fort Collins, CO 80526

Phone: (970) 494–7478

Fax: (970) 494–7460

Western Region—Sacramento

9580 Micron Ave., Suite J

Sacramento, CA 95827

Phone: (916) 857–6205

Fax: (916) 857–6212

Western Region—Fort Worth

P.O. Box 915004 (letters)

501 Felix Street, Building 11 (packages)

Fort Worth, TX 76115–9104

Phone: (817) 885–6923

Fax: (817) 885–6917

World Wide Web Home Page

www.aphis.usda.gov/ac

E-mail Address

ace@aphis.usda.gov

WA

OR ID

CA

NV UT

AZ NM

CO

WY

MT ND

MO

AR

TX LA

OK

KS

NE

SD

IA

MN

WI

IL IN

KY

TN

MS AL GA

SC

NC

MI

RI

MD

NJ

ME

MA

NH

VT

NY

PA

VA

OH

WV

FL

P.R.

DE

AK

HI

V.I.

Western Region

Eastern Region

CT

AK

Animal Care

How USDA Administers the Law
6

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

AC Appropriations for FY 2001

In FY 2001, the AC program received appropriations

totaling about $12 million for activities related to

animal welfare. The next tabulation shows APHIS'

animal-welfare-related appropriations for FY 1996–01

in unadjusted dollars. Supplemental funding is

explained in the following text.

In July 2001, Congress passed a $3 million supplemental appropriation that included $1 million for APHIS to

strengthen enforcement of the AWA. The Secretary

provided an additional $250,000 to further enhance the

AC program, for a total of $1.25 million. With the

supplemental appropriation came language from

Congress directing APHIS to hire more inspectors and

conduct more followup inspections on facilities not in

compliance with the AWA. By the end of FY 2001, AC

had gone from 75 to 82 inspector positions and plans

to create more in FY 2002.

The Secretary allowed APHIS to determine how best to

distribute these funds internally between inspections

and enforcement. Accordingly, an agreement was

reached whereby AC would receive $1 million for

increased inspections, and Investigative and Enforcement Services would receive $250,000 for activities to

support and follow up on the increased inspections.

Annual appropriation

FY for enforcement of the

Animal Welfare Act

2001 $12,140,000

2000 $10,167,000

1999 $9,175,000

1998 $9,175,000

1997 $9,182,000

1996 $9,185,000

Appropriations for Animal Welfare, FY 1996–2001

Congress also specified that no FY 2001 appropriations

could be used to promulgate any regulations regarding

the removal of the exemption of rats, mice, and birds

from the definition of “animal.”

Investigative and Enforcement

Services

Complementing AC's efforts is APHIS' Investigative

and Enforcement Services (IES) program. IES supports

all APHIS programs in the goal of enhancing compliance with agency regulations. Toward this end, IES

utilizes comprehensive investigations and sound

enforcement actions. IES also works closely with

USDA's Office of the General Counsel, other Federal

agencies, State and local governments, and industry

groups. IES is headquartered in Riverdale and has

regional offices in Raleigh and Fort Worth. IES has also

begun the process of moving its Western Region office

to Fort Collins, where all APHIS western regional

offices will be located, in summer 2002.

Animal Welfare Information Center

The National Agricultural Library's (NAL) Animal

Welfare Information Center (AWIC) also supports AC's

efforts. AWIC was established in December 1986 to

provide valuable information pertaining to possible

duplication of research involving animals, methods of

humane animal care and use, alternatives to the use of

live animals in research, and methods to minimize pain

and distress to animals. AWIC also provides materials

for the training of personnel and other products and

services that support the administration and regulatory

requirements of the AWA.

USDA–NAL–AWIC

AWIC Coordinator

National Agricultural Library

10301 Baltimore Blvd.

Beltsville, MD 20705

(301) 504–6212

E-mail Address

awic@nal.usda.gov
7 Inspection Highlights

AC personnel perform two major types of inspections:

prelicensing/preregistration inspections and unannounced compliance inspections.

To determine whether prospective licensees are in

compliance with the AWA, AC personnel perform

prelicensing inspections of dealers and exhibitors prior

to granting them licenses. Preregistration inspections

are not required under the Act, but many facilities

request AC's consultation. Whenever possible, the

program honors these requests to promote the highest

level of compliance.

Unannounced compliance inspections are performed

at the facilities of all licensees and registrants to

ascertain whether they are operating within the

regulations. The AWA requires that APHIS perform at

least one compliance inspection per year at each

research facility that uses animals in experimentation.

For nonresearch facilities, APHIS uses a risk-based

system to determine inspection frequency.

Risk-Based Inspection System

The risk-based inspection system was put into place in

February 1998 to support AC’s focused inspection

strategy, allowing more frequent and in-depth inspections at problem facilities and fewer at those consistently in compliance. The system uses several objective

criteria, including past compliance history, to determine the inspection frequency at each licensed and

registered facility. Facilities meeting the criteria for

low-frequency intervals are subject to inspection once

every 2–3 years. Facilities determined to require highfrequency inspections are subject to inspection at least

every 6 months. Those in the middle are inspected

about once per year. Registered research facilities are

inspected at least once per year, as required by the

AWA. With this system, AC has been able to provide

more in depth inspections and improve the agency’s

interactions with licensees and registrants—an

approach that APHIS firmly believes makes better use

of AC's inspection resources.

Since FY 1993, APHIS has conducted an intensive

traceback effort on dogs sold by random-source, class B

animal dealers. These dealers, who supply animals to

the research community, typically obtain them from

pounds and shelters, pet owners who wish to relinquish ownership, and other legitimate sources. However, there has always been concern that some of these

dealers may be trafficking in stolen animals.

Under the AWA, random-source dealers are required to

maintain accurate records of the acquisition and

disposition of their animals. APHIS' traceback effort

has focused on making sure these records are accurate

and complete. To optimize this effort, APHIS has

conducted quarterly inspections of all random-source

dealers since the traceback project went into effect in

1993. AC has also taken stringent enforcement action

when violations are found. Since 1993, this includes

issuing nearly $525,000 in fines, suspending 6 licenses,

and revoking 12 more. At the end of FY 2001, six cases

were under investigation.

The fruits of this effort have been tremendous. From

FY 1993 through 2001, the percentage of animals

traced back to their original source has increased from

a little more than 40 percent to 96 percent. (This figure

Class B Dealer Tracebacks Continue

Success

Inspection Highlights
8

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

does not include 23 tracebacks still being conducted at

the end of FY 2001.) At the same time, the number of

random-source dealers has decreased from more than

100 to 20. Moreover, the number of random-source

dealers under investigation has decreased from a high

of 260 in 1992 to only 6 in FY 2001.

Efforts have also been stepped up by regularly conducting tracebacks on dogs and cats originating with

owners, not just random sources such as shelters. At

least two to three tracebacks are conducted during

every inspection, whether the animals were obtained

from random sources or original owners or breeders.

The traceback process also includes asking the original

source of the animal what they were told about the

animal’s future disposition (e.g., were they told the

animal could be used in biomedical research?).

For FY 2001, 96 percent of all tracebacks were successful in reaching the original owners. The number of

class B dealers selling dogs and cats to research was 20

at the end of FY 2001.

Complaints and Searches

In addition to conducting routine inspections of

licensed and registered facilities, AC personnel also

follow up on public complaints to determine whether

regulated animals are receiving proper care and/or the

animal owner(s) should be licensed or registered.

APHIS regards these activities as critical to successful

enforcement of the AWA.

AC personnel also conduct periodic searches to

determine whether there are regulated facilities

operating without a license or registration. In FY 2001,

AC conducted 240 compliance inspections at unlicensed and unregistered facilities.

After the Inspection

If AC inspectors discover conditions and records that

are not in compliance with the regulations, AC typically

establishes a deadline for correcting these items and

provides it in the inspection report. In conjunction

with IES, AC immediately investigates any situations

that may have caused unnecessary animal suffering or

death. Inspectors are required to reinspect any facilities

where areas of noncompliance were found that have, or

are likely to have, an impact on the well-being of the

animals. If the conditions remain uncorrected, AC

documents them for possible legal action. In cases of

unrelieved suffering, AC may confiscate the animals or

arrange for their placement elsewhere. With the

assistance of IES, AC acted in one such situation in FY

2001.

Inspector Training and Development

In July 2001, AC sponsored a 4-day elephant management course in San Diego, CA. The course was held at

the San Diego Zoo, San Diego Wild Animal Park, and

Have Trunk Will Travel, a private elephant facility.

Twenty inspectors attended the course, which consisted

of classroom work and field work at the facilities,

including hand-on experience with the elephants.

Topics included protected and free contact, methods of

housing and training, diets, foot care, natural history,

breeding, conservation, and veterinary care. This was

the fifth elephant management course sponsored by AC

since 1998.

AC’s Internal Training Team has developed

preceptorship programs for transportation and

exhibitor specialties to be launched in FY 2002. A

second set of Field Specialty certification programs is

also in development. These programs will provide AC

with in-house expertise in various areas. AC also began

developing teams for specialized topics such as elephant oversight and large-cat issues.
9

New Database Online

Beginning in FY 2000, AC converted to its new Licensing and Registration Information System (LARIS) and

discontinued the old system January 1, 2000. This new

database provides a single storage center for licensing,

registration, and inspection data on regulated parties

throughout the United States. In FY 2001, all AC

inspectors and supervisors were trained on the database, allowing inspectors to enter inspection data

directly from remote locations using their laptop

computers.

A prototype Web-based application was posted online

to allow inspection reports for each facility to be

available through electronic Freedom of Information

Act (E-FOIA) access over the Internet. The new system

allows for an array of data to be collected, including a

complete compliance history, most common areas of

noncompliance, and number of animals involved in

those situations. Our risk-based inspection system has

been incorporated into the database, and inspectors

now get reports on their facilities based on risk-based

criteria. Additionally, at any given time, management

can track the status of compliance and prelicensing

inspections.

AC Inspectors Are Proactive,

Dedicated, and Compassionate

One of AC’s Indiana-based inspectors helped resolve a

situation in which one of his licensees developed

Alzheimer’s disease over a year, losing the ability to care

for his animals. The inspector met several times with

the licensee’s family and attorney and a licensee in

another State who agreed to take the animals. The

inspector ensured that the new owner knew when

animals were in need of care and followed up to ensure

they received the care.

A Pennsylvania AC inspector assisted local authorities

with a confiscation based on an animal cruelty complaint from the public. AC was already investigating

the facility for unlicensed exhibiting and dealing. The

animals at the facility were living in very poor conditions. When checking up on them, the inspector

noticed an elderly woman being cared for in the home.

She had recently been released from the hospital, and

her medications had gotten mixed up with the animals’.

The inspector notified the local social services agency

about the situation.

Two AC inspectors in Texas provided assistance to

licensed and registered facilities in Houston following

Tropical Storm Allison. Several facilities suffered a great

deal of damage and destruction that affected their

animals. One of the inspectors worked directly with

the Texas Gulf Coast Disaster Preparedness Committee

to assist with cleanup and repairs.

One Florida AC inspector helped find a home for

Jimmy, a capuchin monkey who spent many years in an

enclosure at an unlicensed pet dealer. The inspector

helped to relocate the animal as a condition for moving

forward on settlement of USDA charges against the

dealer. The owner took the inspector’s advice, despite

the pending investigation and inspection citations, and

moved Jimmy to a much better situation.

A Pennsylvania AC inspector worked with local officials

and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to

narrow down the source of Escherichia coli infections of

21 children. A petting zoo’s calf-petting exhibit turned

out to be the source and was closed.

Inspection Highlights
10

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

A New York AC inspector worked with State police and

a local humane group on an inspection of an unlicensed stable and petting zoo. Conditions were very

poor, including a lack of feed and dead animals left in

their cages. The inspector assisted with the care and

placement of the remaining animals and completed a

thorough photographic documentation of the area.

AC inspectors in Nebraska and Iowa found licensees in

each of those States with dogs exposed to extreme

winter elements. The Nebraska inspectors spent 2 days

at the kennel to ensure the dogs were provided adequate shelter to protect them from single-digit temperatures. The owner also provided needed veterinary

care to several dogs. A repeat visit by a South Dakota

inspector ensured that the owner followed up on

several other problems, avoiding confiscation.

The Iowa inspectors ensured that dogs in the facility

they inspected had bedding, food, and water before

leaving and convinced the owner to voluntarily

surrender the dogs to the Iowa Pet Breeders Association

the following day.

The next tabulation details the number of inspections

of licensees and registrants conducted during FY 2001.

Subsequent tabulations chronicle the number of

different types of inspections conducted from FY 1997

through FY 2001.

Total number Number of

of facilities inspections

(and sites)1 by category

Inspections for Compliance2

Dealers3 4,739

(5,792) 4,748

Research 1,216

facilities (1,868) 1,556

Exhibitors 2,549

(3,457) 2,753

Intransit 300

handlers (493) 103

Intransit 77

carriers4 (1,139) 277

Total 8,881 9,437

(12,749)

Other Inspections

Prelicensing and

preregistration inspections NA 1,623

Compliance inspections of

unlicensed, unregistered

facilities NA 240

Attempted inspections

of dealersand exhibitors NA 705

Total 2,568

Total of Inspections for Compliance

and Other Inspections in FY 2001 12,005

1

 See the glossary of terms for the definitions of “facility” and “site.”

2 Inspections for compliance are unannounced inspections and

reinspections. These do not include prelicensing or preregistration

inspections, auction market observations, or attempted inspections.

(Prelicensing/preregistration inspections are announced. Observations of

licensed and unlicensed auction markets are made to locate unlicensed

dealers. Attempted inspections could not be performed for certain

reasons—usually because there was no one available at the facility when

the inspector arrived unannounced.) 3 Dealer inspections for FY 2001 include auction market inspections, which

were counted under a separate category until FY 1999. 4 Intransit Carriers is a category representing commercial airlines. Each

airline may have two or more animal transportation sites at each airport it

serves. Due to frequent changes in airline activities and other factors, the

number of sites may vary.

FY 2001 AWA Inspections
11

Total Total

facilities compliance

 FY (sites) inspections

2001 8,881 9,437

(12,749)

2000 8,773 8,727

(10,207)

1999 7,958 9,096

(9,897)

Compliance Inspections, FY 1999–2001

Not yet

FY Total Dealers Exhibitors Research classified

2001 1,623 1,041 444 1 137

2000 1,651 938 369 7 337

1999 1,418 991 427

Prelicensing/Preregistration Inspections,

FY 1999–2001

Total

 inspections

 FY conducted

2001 12,005

2000 11,090

1999 11,263

1998 13,136

1997 15,898

Total Inspections Conducted per Year, FY 1996–2001

Inspection Highlights
12

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Inspections by Business Type

Animal Dealers

Total Class A Class B

dealers dealers dealers

FY (sites) (sites) (sites)

2001 4,739 3,573 1,166

(5,792) (4,180) (1,612)

2000 4,612 3,433 1,179

(4,618) (3,391) (1,227)

1999 4,071 2,986 1,085

(4,208) (3,039) (1,169)

Licensed Dealers, FY 1999–2001

Dealers are individuals who sell regulated animals for

research or teaching, wild or exotic animals for

exhibition or as pets, or domestic pet animals in

wholesale channels. Dealers can hold a USDA license

in one of two classes.

Class A licensees are those individuals who deal only in

animals that they breed and raise. Class B licensees

may breed and raise some of the animals they sell but

typically buy and resell animals from other sources.

Class B dealers include brokers, operators of auction

sales, and “bunchers.”

The numbers of class A and B licensed dealers and sites

for FY 1999 through 2001 are listed in the next tabulation. The number of inspections conducted during the

same period is shown on chart 1. It should be noted

that, of the 1,154 class B dealers, APHIS estimates that

20 supply dogs and cats to research. In FY 1993, there

were more than 100 such dealers.

A and B Dealers, FY 1999–2001

Chart 1

6,000

4,071

4,612 4,739

4,208

4,618 4,298

5,792

4,306

5,000 4,748

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

Numbers from Licensing and Registration Information System 

(LARIS) database.

Facilities

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Sites Inspections
13

Exhibitors

Total exhibitors Licensed Registered

FY (sites) (sites) (sites)

2001 2,549 2,531 18

(3,457) (3,437) (20)

2000 2,508 2,489 19

(2,822) (2,803) (19)

1999 2,293 2,276 17

(2,720) (2,701) (19)

Regulated Exhibitors, FY 1999–2001

Animal Exhibitors

Animal exhibitors may either be licensed or registered

under the AWA. Licensed exhibitors are those entities

that either obtain or dispose of animals in commerce

and exhibit them for compensation. Registered

exhibitors do not buy, sell, or transport animals and do

not accept compensation.

Licensed exhibitors typically operate animal acts,

carnivals, circuses, public zoos, “roadside zoos,” and

marine mammal displays. Many of the animals

exhibited are species not native to the United States

(e.g., nonhuman primates and exotic cats), but

exhibited species may also include domestic farm

animals and wild animals native to this country.

Listed next are the numbers of exhibitors and sites

regulated from FY 1999 through 2001. Chart 2 shows

the number of inspections for the same period.

Exhibitors, FY 1999–2001

Chart 2

6,000

2,293

2,508 2,549 2,720

2,822

3,457

2,591 2,463

2,753

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

0

Numbers from Licensing and Registration Information System 

(LARIS) database.

Facilities

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Sites Inspections

Inspections by Business Type
14

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Carriers and Intermediate Handlers

Carriers registered with USDA include airlines, motor

freight lines, railroads, and other shipping businesses.

Registered intermediate handlers are ground freight

handlers. Intermediate handlers usually (1) provide

services for animals between consignor and carrier and

from carrier to consignee, and (2) care for animals

delayed in transit.

The numbers of sites and registered carriers and

intermediate handlers for FY 1999 through 2001 are

listed next. Chart 3 shows the number of carrier

inspections, and chart 4 shows the number of intermediate handler inspections for the same period.

Registered Intermediate

carriers handlers

 FY (sites) (sites)

2001 77 300

(1,139) (493)

2000 86 302

(800) (422)

1999 86 276

(893) (432)

Sites and Registered Carriers and Intermediate

Handlers, FY 1999–2001

Carriers, FY 1999–2001

Chart 3

1,200

86 86 77

893 800

1,139

292 296 277

1,000

800

600

400

200

0

Numbers from Licensing and Registration Information System 

(LARIS) database.

Facilities

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Sites Inspections

Intermediate Handlers, FY 1999–2001

Chart 4

600

276

302 300

432 422

493

99 105 103

500

400

300

200

100

0

Numbers from Licensing and Registration Information System 

(LARIS) database.

Facilities

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Sites Inspections
15

Research Facilities

Research facilities that use animals include hospitals,

colleges and universities, diagnostic laboratories, and

many private firms in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries.

All research facilities are required to comply with the

AWA's regulations. Even though Federal facilities are

not registered or inspected under the AWA, they are

responsible for maintaining compliance with the

AWA's regulations and standards. The AWA requires

that non-Federal research facilities receive at least one

inspection per year to determine compliance.

Throughout 2001, AC worked on guidelines for its field

personnel to use when conducting AWA inspections of

research facilities. This guide, along with the dealer

inspection guide, will increase the quality and uniformity of reports, inspection, and enforcement in the AC

program. The guide covers such areas as how to

document inspection findings and how to conduct exit

interviews. The guide was distributed in FY 2001.

The next tabulation lists the numbers of research

facilities and sites for FY 1999 through 2001. Chart 5

shows the number of inspections of research facilities

conducted during this period.

Registered Research Facilities and Sites,

FY 1999–2001

Total Total

FY facilities sites

2001 1,216 1,868

2000 1,265 1,545

1999 1,232 1,644

Registered Research Facilities, Total Sites, and 

Inspections, FY 1999–2001

Chart 5

1,232 1,265

1,216

1,644 1,545

1,868 1,816

1,557 1,556

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

Numbers from Licensing and Registration Information System 

(LARIS) database.

Facilities

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001

Sites Inspections

Reports From Research Facilities

Each research facility registered under the AWA and

each Federal research facility is required to submit an

annual report, signed and certified by the Institutional

Official, covering the previous fiscal year. The report

lists the number and species of animals used in

research, testing, and experimentation and indicates

whether pain-relieving drugs were administered. If

such drugs were not administered for procedures that

cause pain or distress, the report must explain why

their use would have interfered with the research or

experiment.

Inspections by Business Type
16

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

The report must also assure that professionally

acceptable standards, including the appropriate use of

pain-relieving drugs, were followed and that each

principal investigator considered alternatives to painful

or distress-causing procedures.

Moreover, the report must demonstrate that the facility

adhered to the AWA regulations or that any exception

to such adherence was justified by the principal

investigator and approved by the Institutional Animal

Care and Use Committee prior to experimentation.

For FY 2001, research facilities had the option of

submitting these reports electronically over the AC

Web site. This option helped eliminate duplicate data

entry by AC, saving time and typing errors. It also

saved the facilities from duplicating paper reports and

postage expenses.

Chart 6 shows the number and species of animals used

in research during FY 2001. This number excludes

birds and laboratory rats and mice, as well as farm

animals used exclusively in agricultural research. Chart

7 shows the number of animals used in research that

involved no pain or distress, or that involved pain or

distress alleviated with drugs, or that involved pain or

distress without relief because use of pain-relieving

drugs would interfere with the results of the research or

testing.

Tables 1 through 5 of the appendix contain further

details. Table 6 reports the total of animals used by

research since this report was first published in 1973.

Data from 23 research facilities are not included in this

report because they either did not submit a report or

submitted it too late for tabulation. Of these facilities,

10 were Federal facilities and 13 were non-Federal. It is

a violation of the AWA for a facility, whether active or

inactive, not to submit a timely report. AC initiated the

appropriate corrective actions.

Dogs Cats Primates Guinea

pigs

Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs Other

farm

animals

Other

animals

Total

70,082

22,755 49,382

256,193

167,231

267,351

26,236

60,253

242,251

1,236,903

Millions

0.4

1.0

0

0.2 75,169

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

Animals Used in Research, Experiments, Testing, and

Teaching, FY 2001

Numbers from Licensing and Registration Information System

(LARIS) database

Chart 6

Millions

0.4

1.0

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

705,602

1,236,903

Pain/distress—

no drugs

Pain/distress

alleviated

No pain/

distress

Total animals

in research

Numbers from Licensing and Registration Information System

(LARIS) database

Animal Experiencing Pain/Distress, Pain/Distress Relief, or

No Pain/Distress During Experiments, FY 2001

425,786

Chart 7

0

0.2

105,515
Enforcement Highlights 17

APHIS' IES personnel investigate alleged violations

when corrective measures have not been taken by

licensees or registrants to come into compliance with

the AWA. Investigations disclosing violations are acted

on in a variety of ways depending on their severity.

Many infractions can be settled with an official notice

of warning or a stipulation offer. (Stipulations allow

alleged violators to pay a fine, have their license

suspended, or both, in lieu of formal administrative

proceedings.)

Cases warranting formal prosecution undergo Department-level review for legal sufficiency prior to issuance

of a formal administrative complaint. Formal cases

may be resolved by license suspensions, revocations,

cease-and-desist orders, civil penalties, or combinations

of these penalties through administrative procedures.

APHIS' Enforcement Strategy Yields

Results

In FY 2001, AC and IES continued to employ a twopronged enforcement strategy. For licensees and

registrants who show an interest in improving the

conditions for their animals, AC and IES actively

pursue innovative penalties that allow the individuals

to invest part or all of their monetary sanctions in

facility improvements, employee training, research on

animal health and welfare issues, or other initiatives to

improve animal well-being. In doing so, USDA enables

the individuals to immediately improve the conditions

for their animals while sending a clear message that

future violations will not be tolerated. Prior to 1997,

most fines were either suspended or paid directly to the

U.S. Treasury, but neither of those results directly

improved the care provided to the affected animals.

On the other hand, for licensees and registrants who do

not improve the conditions for their animals, AC and

IES pursue enforcement action. Such action typically

includes significant monetary penalties and/or license

suspensions or revocations. It may also include

confiscation of their animals and relocation of the

animals to another facility if they are found to be

suffering.

High-Priority Designation

An important component of AC and IES' enforcement

strategy is the high-priority designation for certain

cases. Cases are deemed high priority based on the

following criteria:

• Severity of animal suffering (death or severe

injury),

• Past compliance history of facility,

• Potential public or animal safety or health

concerns,

• Abusive or potentially violent nature of licensee or

registrant,

• Type of facility and species of animal involved, and

• Severity of the issue resulting in extensive public

interest.

When a case is given this designation, AC, IES, and

USDA's Office of the General Counsel put special

emphasis on the investigation and enforcement of a

case to expedite its resolution. This measure has been

successful in shortening the timeframes of significant

cases and providing quicker relief for animals protected

under the AWA.

Enforcement Highlights
18

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

The Results Are in the Numbers

Through this multifaceted enforcement strategy, the

AC and IES staffs and the Office of the General

Counsel have been able to virtually eliminate the

backlog of AWA cases awaiting resolution through the

formal administrative process. The results have been

shorter timeframes for resolving cases and the ability to

expedite high-priority cases. In addition, APHIS

imposed penalties totaling almost $510,000.

The next tabulation provides detailed information on

the number of enforcement actions conducted and

resolved during FY 2001. In the tabulation, it should

be noted that “Cases Submitted,” “Cases Resolved,” and

“Sanctions Imposed” are those actions that actually

occurred during the fiscal year even though many of

the settled cases were submitted in previous years. This

numerical disparity occurs because it takes a case

considerable time to work its way through the legal

system and appeals process.

Significant Cases in FY 2001

USDA resolved several cases or brought charges against

parties in FY 2001. The following are just a few

examples.

In November 2000, APHIS and a zoo in Oregon settled

charges that a handler severely beat an elephant. The

zoo agreed to a civil penalty of $10,000. Of that, $5,000

is to be used to hire outside experts, approved by

APHIS, on elephant care and to implement all reasonable recommendations. The other $5,000 was to be

paid to the U.S. Treasury. The zoo also agreed to not

rehire the handler who beat the elephant.

In January 2001, a USDA judicial officer upheld a

decision that found a Missouri dealer guilty of charges

that she was acting as a dog dealer without a license.

Her $5,000 fine was suspended as long as she does not

violate the AWA in the future. She is also permanently

disqualified from being licensed under the AWA.

In April 2001, a USDA administrative law judge found

a Nevada exhibitor guilty of charges that he harassed

APHIS officials and failed to maintain proper acquisition records, keep animal enclosures in good repair,

protect stored food from spoilage, provide enclosures

to protect animals from inclement weather and the

elements, provide sufficient and potable water, control

pests, properly clean enclosures, provide sufficient

perimeter fencing, and provide sufficient space for

animals to make normal postural and social adjustments. He was fined $27,500, and his license was

revoked. This decision was appealed and upheld.

Numbers of Enforcement Actions Conducted and

Resolved, FY 1999–2001

Cases Investigated and Reviewed

 Submitted

 Submitted to for formal

 FY Cases IES staff prosecution

2001 276 205 95

2000 329 184 101

1999 313 188 104

Case Resolved

 Administrative

 Official Stipulations law judges’

 FY warnings offered/settled1 decisions

 2001 178 130/97 83

 2000 125 75/100 70

 1999 143 87/79 28

Sanctions Imposed

 Revocations,

 Fines imposed by suspensions,

 administrative Fines imposed and disqualifi-

 FY law judges by stipulation cations

 2001 $365,875 $143,440 10

 2000 $343,301 $110,848 23

 1999 $585,162 $ 82,152 16

1

Some stipulations settled were orginally offered in the previous year.
Public Outreach 19

In FY 2001, AC carried out numerous outreach

activities, including moving forward with its multiyear

public affairs campaign to educate and inform all

program stakeholders about the AWA and AC's role in

enforcing the law. To support this effort, the program

is upgrading all of its existing public affairs materials

and creating new products where needed.

Doing More Business on the Web

AC continues to be one of the most frequently visited

Web sites in USDA. The Web address

(www.aphis.usda.gov/ac) is promoted on all AC

publications and listed on specific promotional items

such as luggage tags and stickers.

In addition to providing information such as that

contained in AC publications, the Web site also

provides more details for regulated parties. A license/

registration packet can now be requested through the

Web site. Research facilities were able to submit their

reports for FY 2001 animal use over the Web.

Industry Report in Fifth Year of

Updating Stakeholders

During FY 2001, AC continued distributing its Animal

Care Report to nearly 2,000 mail subscribers, double its

distribution in FY 1997. In addition to providing this

free mail subscription, AC publishes the report on the

Internet. AC also began taking steps toward publishing

and distributing the report exclusively in an electronic

format.

This report, which provides brief overviews on all key

issues affecting AC's administration of the AWA, is sent

to program stakeholders to keep them up to date on

current program initiatives. The Internet posting is on

the AC homepage (www.aphis.usda.gov/ac).

Safe Pet Travel Video Flies the

Airwaves

In FY 2001, AC continued to distribute its animated

television public service announcement (PSA) on safe

pet travel on airlines. It is estimated that by

November 26, 2000, the 30-second spot had aired in a

total of 43 States and garnered more than $1.2 million

worth of free airtime. Stations in Bermuda also

televised the PSA. Web users can watch the PSA on the

APHIS Web site at www.aphis.usda.gov/lpa/video/

index.html. Radio versions of the PSA also in production in FY 2001 were expected to be released before the

2002 travel season.

AC employees continued to distribute the “Traveling

With Your Pet” brochure at travel shows and referred

people to the Web posting (www.aphis.usda.gov/oa/

pubs/petravel.pdf or .html). The APHIS travel page

(www.aphis.usda.gov/travel/index.html) also provides a

link to the brochure and video.

In addition to brochures and kennel stickers with a tollfree information number, AC also distributed factsheets

on pet travel.

Automated Telephone Service Assists

Travelers

About 3,500 members of the general public used AC’s

toll-free, 24 hour, automated telephone voice response

service (800–545–USDA) during FY 2001. This service

provides information on the humane handling of cats

and dogs during transport, including the AWA requirements for temperature, shipping documents, food and

water, and cage sizes. Designed to be user friendly, the

service is recommended for inclusion in training

courses for airline cargo handlers, ticket agents, and

supervisors.

Public Outreach
20

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Answering Public Inquiries

APHIS received and responded to thousands of

inquiries about animal welfare from individual citizens,

concerned groups, and Members of Congress in FY

2001. Other Federal agencies and the Office of the

President also referred animal welfare concerns to

APHIS for response. AC responded to more than

10,000 pieces of written correspondence. This includes

regular mail, e-mail, faxes, and write-in campaigns. AC

is also the source for information needed to respond to

more than 1,600 pieces of executive correspondence.

Assisting the Media

AC assisted media officials in various ways during the

year. Altogether, APHIS fielded more than 1,100 calls

from members of the media and issued 37 press

releases related to animal welfare. Most of these

releases provided information concerning enforcement

actions taken against licensees and registrants (such as

settlements, fines, suspensions, and confiscations). The

other releases addressed matters such as possible

changes in regulations or policies, such as a proposal to

change the definition of “dealer” or new rules for

placement of confiscated animals.

AC personnel gave local and national television, radio,

newspaper, and magazine interviews on various issues

relating to the AWA. These included interviews with

CNN, NBC’s Dateline, The New York Times, USA

Today, and the Wall Street Journal.

Animal Welfare Inspections Available

Through E-FOIA

AC and APHIS’ FOIA office continued to work

throughout FY 2001 to make animal welfare inspection

reports available over the Internet through E-FOIA. All

inspection reports conducted after October 1, 2001,

became available through the system. A 21-day delay

of availability was instituted to allow for appropriate

reviews of the report, if needed. The first reports were

available on October 21, 2001.

Animal-Welfare-Related FOIA Requests Received by

APHIS, FY 1996–20011

1 These figures include both official FOIA requests processed through

APHIS’ FOIA office, with assistance from AC at headquarters, and requests

for inspection reports processed through AC’s regional offices. Before FY

1997, all such requests were processed through the FOIA office at

headquarters.

FOIA

 FY requests

2001 919

2000 734

1999 824

AC and APHIS also responded to numerous animalwelfare-related FOIA requests the old-fashioned way.

The next tabulation lists the number of FOIA requests

received for the past 3 fiscal years.
21

Liaison With Other Federal Agencies

AC serves on the Interagency Research Animal Committee, whose members come from Federal agencies

involved in the care and use of animals in biomedical

research. This committee is responsible for interagency

coordination of animal care-and-use concerns and for

making contributions to policy development. It also

acts as a forum for information exchange and regulation development.

AC also maintains close working relationships with

other Federal agencies that deal with animals on

regulation and enforcement of the AWA. APHIS

cooperated on numerous issues with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' National Institutes of Health, CDC, and Food and Drug Administration; the Department of Defense; the Marine Mammal

Commission; the U.S. Department of Commerce's

National Marine Fisheries Service; the U.S. Department

of the Interior's FWS; and the Environmental Protection Agency.

Cooperating and Communicating

With Stakeholders

For FY 2001, APHIS and the research community

cosponsored a research preceptorship program that

sent two AC veterinarians to 4 intensive weeks of

training at various research facilities and teaching

institutions, plus 1 week at the national meeting of the

American Association for Laboratory Animal Science.

AC personnel also attended and participated in

national meetings held by various organizations,

including the American Zoo and Aquarium Association, the American Association of Laboratory Animal

Science, the Applied Research Ethics National Association, and the Scientists Center for Animal Welfare.

AC personnel together attended about 150 industry

meetings and training sessions in FY 2001 and presented 146 papers or informal talks at 104 of them.

APHIS employees also staffed an exhibit booth at

several of these meetings to answer questions and

provide information on AC's enforcement of the AWA.

AC exhibited and provided informational materials

from a booth at 12 such events.

In addition, AC personnel actively interacted with

organizations such as the American Zoo and Aquarium

Association, the American Veterinary Medical Association, the National Association for Biomedical Research,

Americans for Medical Progress, the American Association of Zoo Veterinarians, the Alliance for Marine

Mammal Parks and Aquariums, the Association for the

Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal

Care International, the International Association of

Aquatic Animal Medicine, the Association of Aquatic

Life Support System Operators, and the Scientists

Center for Animal Welfare. Additional cooperators

include The Humane Society of the United States, the

Animal Welfare Institute, the American Humane

Association, the Animal Protection Institute, the

Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges,

and the Air Transport Association. AC is also represented in the United States Animal Health Association

and has members on both its animal welfare and

captive wildlife committees.

Public Outreach
22

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

AWIC Focuses on Educational Efforts

In FY 2001, staff from the Animal Welfare Information

Center (AWIC) responded to about 9,640 requests for

information and publications, including copies of the

AWIC Newsletter, and distributed more than 20,000

published documents to requesters. The AWIC

Bulletin was published once in FY 2001 and sent to its

7,500 subscribers in the United States and 48 foreign

countries.

AWIC's Web site (www.nal.usda.gov/awic) underwent

many changes during the year. The site and its subject

areas were restructured, and many documents and new

links were added. Press releases from USDA’s Agricultural Research Service and APHIS regarding research

relevant to animals were regularly updated. Other

news links were also posted when the information was

relevant and from reliable sources. The average

number of hits per month was more than 67,000. Hits

for the year totaled more than 808,000 with about 53

million kilobytes of information transferred.

AWIC trained 400 individuals in its workshop entitled

"Meeting the Information Requirements of the Animal

Welfare Act," which is held at the National Agricultural

Library in Beltsville, MD, three times a year and at

other locations throughout the country upon request.

In FY 2001, AWIC provided training to APHIS AC staff,

three universities, two pharmaceutical companies, and

a bird rescue organization.

AWIC has posted to their Web site the electronic slides

used for the workshop. Other institutions are using

them in their training materials. In addition, AWIC

continues to collaborate with the Veterans Administration and the National Institutes of Health’s Office of

Laboratory Animal Welfare to develop materials for an

online, interactive tutorial that will provide assistance

to researchers as they address the requirements to

search for alternatives to painful animal experiments

(AC Policy 12). These services are provided at no cost.

AWIC staff exhibited and disseminated materials at five

conferences and meetings during FY 2001. Roughly

1,200 pieces of information were distributed to around

1,000 attendees. (This is less than previous years due to

a lack of funding.)

AWIC continues to distribute original information

products directed to the regulated community. The

Center produced five new documents and either

printed or made them available through the AWIC Web

site. The following publications are available in both

print and electronic form:

• Crawford, R. L. October 2000. A reference source

for the recognition & alleviation of pain & distress

in animals. AWIC Series 2000–03.

• Crawford, R. L. December 2000. A reference source

for analgesia & analgesics in animals. AWIC Series

2000–02.

• Crawford, R. L. August 2001. Information

resources for amphibians, fish & reptiles used in

biomedical research. AWIC Resource Series No. 10.

• Crissey, S. D.; Slifka, K. A.; Shumway, P.; Spencer

S. B. May 2001. Handling frozen/thawed meat and

prey items fed to captive exotic animals: A manual

of standard operating procedures. [Place of

publication unknown]: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 26 p.

• Krause, W. J. September 2001. Information

resources on the North American opossum

(Didelphis virginiana): A bibliography on its

natural history and use in biomedical research.

AWIC Resource Series No. 9.

The following 695-page document was converted to

electronic format in 2001 and made available on the

AWIC Web site:

• Allen, T.; Kreger, M. September 2000. Information

resources for animal care and use committees

1988–1999. AWIC Resource Series No. 7.
23

AWIC prepared three other documents during FY

2001. Two were published in early FY 2002 and will be

made available in electronic format. The third is in

prepublication draft.

• Larson, J. November 2001. The South American

camelids: llamas, alpacas, guanacos, and vicunas

1962–2001. AWIC Resource Series No. 12.

• Larson, J. November 2001. Information resources

for Old World camels: Arabian and Bactrian 1962–

2001. AWIC Resource Series No. 13.

• Ho, J. (draft) A history of veterinary medicine: A

bibliography.

Public Outreach
24

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Regulatory and Policy Initiatives

Congress Does Not Allow Funds for

Regulations on Rats, Mice, and Birds

In March 1999, the Alternative Research and Development Foundation, a group affiliated with the American

Antivivisection Society—with In Vitro International

and Kristine Gausz, a college student—filed a lawsuit

against USDA seeking an order requiring USDA to

revise its regulations issued under the AWA to delete

the exclusion of rats, mice, and birds from the regulatory definition of “animal.” During FY 2000, the U.S.

District Court for the District of Columbia denied

USDA’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit. USDA and the

plaintiffs reached a settlement at the end of September

2000.

In the settlement, USDA agreed to initiate and complete the rulemaking process, though no outcome to

the process was predetermined. In early October, the

court ruled the settlement valid, but in subsequent

appropriation legislation, Congress prohibited USDA

from taking any rulemaking action during FY 2001.

For FY 2002, Congress prohibited USDA from issuing a

proposed rule for which the comment period would

close prior to September 30, 2002, or a final rule that

would change or modify the definition of “animal” in

the regulations.

Change Allows More Flexibility in

Placing Confiscated Animals

In January 2001, AC published a final rule allowing

confiscated animals to be placed with facilities or

persons not licensed under the AWA. The person or

facility must be able to offer a level of care equal to or

exceeding that required by the regulations. The change

in the regulations benefits confiscated animals by

giving AC more flexibility and options in relocating

them, resulting in quicker removal from situations

detrimental to their health and well-being. The

proposed rule was published in May 1999, and comments were accepted for 60 days. Responses to the

comments were published with the final rule, which

was unchanged from the proposed rule.

The issue started in spring 1998, when the Alternative

Research and Development Foundation filed a petition

that would have USDA exercise its authority under the

AWA to regulate rats, mice, and birds.

In January 1999, AC published the petition in the

Federal Register to solicit public input on whether rats,

mice, and birds should be regulated and, if so, how the

increased workload should be prioritized. In March

1999, the comment period was extended through

May 28, 1999. By the end of FY 1999, AC had received

more than 34,000 comments and was still reviewing

them throughout FY 2000. AC has also commissioned

a study by the Federal research division of the Library

of Congress to determine the potential number of

additional facilities that might need to be regulated.
25

Pain Categorization Change and

Definition for “Distress” Considered

On July 10, 2000, AC requested comments on possible

changes to the pain categorization system and creation

of a definition of “distress” in the AWA regulations.

Comments were due November 7, 2000. AC received,

reviewed, and considered nearly 3,000 comments,

including those received after the due date. At the end

of FY 2001, AC was working on a report and summary

of options on how to proceed. The July 10 Federal

Register notice is available on the Internet at

www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/webrepor.html under

docket 00–005–1.

Comments Sought on Proposed

Licensing Changes

On August 4, 2000, AC requested comments on several

proposed changes to and clarifications of AWA regulations, including licensing requirements, procedures,

and exemptions. The comment period was extended to

November 20, 2000. During FY 2001, AC received,

reviewed, and considered the comments before

developing the final rule. At the end of FY 2001,

APHIS was reviewing the final rule.

AC expects the changes will not only clarify certain

licensing regulations but also help AC to better enforce

the AWA. One change would allow AC to use an

applicant’s violation of other Federal, State, or local

laws or regulations pertaining to animal cruelty and

handling to keep the party from getting a USDA

license. Other proposed changes include

• Expanding requirements of licensees who

maintain potentially dangerous animals,

• Changing APHIS’ method for notification of

license expiration,

• Clarifying requirements regarding the number of

female breeding dogs and/or cats that may be

maintained on a single premises without a license,

and

• Clarifying requirements regarding the number of

dogs and/or cats that can be sold directly to

research from a single premises without a license.

The proposed rule is available in the August 4, 2000,

Federal Register or on the Internet at

www.aphis.usda.gov/ppd/rad/webrepor.html under

docket 97–121–1.

Comments Reviewed on

Environmental Enrichment Policy

In FY 2000, AC received and reviewed more than 230

comments on the policy regarding environmental

enrichment for nonhuman primates and drafted a final

policy. During FY 2001, the Department reviewed and

cleared the policy. At the beginning of FY 2002, the

Office of Management and Budget began its review.

The policy, which will serve as a resource for inspectors

and regulated parties, will complement the National

Research Council’s fall 1998 publication on this same

issue. The goal is to use both documents to best attain

enrichment for primates as mandated by the 1985

amendment to the AWA.

Regulatory and Policy Initiatives
26

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Comments Reviewed on Training and

Handling of Dangerous Animals

In FY 2001, AC reviewed comments on a revised draft

policy regarding best practices for the training and

handling of potentially dangerous wild and exotic

animals. Among other things, the notice sought input

on suggested experience requirements for animal

handlers and trainers, as well as on contingency plans

for the recapture of escaped or uncontrollable animals.

The revision was based on comments received in

FY 1998. The second comment period was open from

February 18 through April 18, 2000, and more than 250

comments were received. AC also held a public

meeting on the draft policy and other issues involving

exhibit animals. Comments made at the meeting or

submitted otherwise during the comment period were

considered and incorporated into the policy as appropriate. A revised draft has been submitted to the

Department for final approval and clearance.

Perimeter Fencing Rule Completed

On October 18, 2000, AC published its final rule on

perimeter fencing requirements for animals covered

under the AWA, with emphasis on wild and exotic

animals. It became effective November 17. The rule

does not apply to nonhuman primates, which are

already covered under subpart D of the AWA regulations. In general, the rule would require a perimeter

fence at least 6 feet high for most animals and 8 feet

high for dangerous animals, such as elephants, bears,

and large cats. All requirements are designed to

contain the animals and to keep out unwanted animals.

AC is pursuing a technical amendment to the rule to

correct the inadvertent inclusion of bobcats in a list of

large felines. Bobcats are wild felines that can range

from 12 to 60 or more pounds. The amendment would

require only a 6-foot perimeter fence for bobcats,

rather than an 8-foot fence. The amendment was

published November 28, 2000.

Work Progresses on Swim-With-theDolphins Rule

On September 4, 1998, APHIS published a final rule

that establishes new requirements for “swim-with-thedolphins” programs. The new rule includes requirements that facilities maintain three separate pool areas:

an interactive area, a buffer zone, and a sanctuary

where the dolphins can swim free of public contact. In

early FY 1999, based on the nature of shallow-water

interactive or wading programs, AC suspended the

attendant-to participant ratio requirements and the

interactive space requirements for wading programs.

In April 1999, because of other considerations, APHIS

suspended enforcement of the rule overall and solicited

additional comments to evaluate the appropriateness of

the rule given the extensive evolution of swim-with-the

dolphins programs in recent years. AC developed

proposed amendments to the current rule that are

more supportable based on existing scientific data and

more appropriate to the nature of existing programs,

including the wading programs. In FY 2001, APHIS

decided to move forward with an advance notice of

proposed rulemaking, including solicitation of comments and information, on the amendments. The

rulemaking would include swim and other interactive

programs. APHIS made this decision in order to

accommodate any recent changes in industry practices

and scientific knowledge before proceeding with a

proposed rule.
27

Other Policy Initiatives

During FY 2001, AC worked on an additional AWA

policy:

Space and exercise requirements for traveling exhibitors (policy 6, being revised)

Other Regulatory Initiatives

AC worked on other initiatives during FY 2001 and

published them in the Federal Register. These include

Notices:

Petition for regulation of rats, mice, and birds

Proposed Rules:

Acclimation certificates for dogs and cats (under

review)

Final Rules:

Standards for marine mammals: consensus language

(published 1/3/2001)

Policies Completed

At the end of FY 2001, the following policies had been

issued:

Guidelines for the confiscation of animals (policy 8,

revised)

Capture methods of prairie dogs (policy 27, revised)

Regulatory and Policy Initiatives
28

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Glossary of Terms

Airport inspection—Individual airline inspections of

terminal, cargo, and baggage areas made at airports for

compliance with the AWA regulations and standards.

Alleged violation—A violation of the AWA regulations

or standards that has been documented as existing but

has not been legally concluded.

Carrier—The operator of any airline, railroad, motor

carrier, shipping line, or other enterprise that is

engaged in the business of transporting any animals for

hire.

Commerce—Trade, traffic, or transportation that is

between a place in a State and any place outside of such

State (including foreign countries), or between points

within the same State but through any place outside of

the State.

Complaints—(1) A civil or administrative complaint

informs the alleged violator of the AWA about allegations charged against him/her. (2) A public complaint

is information received from citizens, humane groups,

or others concerning possible violations of the AWA,

regulations, or standards at animal facilities.

Compliance—The status of a facility that meets all of

the regulatory requirements set forth in the AWA

regulations and standards.

Dealer—Any person who, in commerce, for compensation or profit, delivers for transportation, or transports

(except as a carrier), buys, or sells, or negotiates the

purchase or sale of (1) any dog or other animal

whether alive or dead (including unborn animals,

organs, limbs, blood, serum, or other parts) for

research, teaching, testing, experimentation, exhibition,

or for use as a pet; or (2) any dog for hunting, security,

or breeding purposes. The term dealer does not

include a retail pet store unless such store sells any

animals to a research facility, an exhibitor, or to a dealer

(wholesale); or any person who does not sell, or

negotiate the purchase or sale, of any wild or exotic

animal, dog, or cat and who derives no more than $500

gross income from the sale of animals, dogs, or cats,

during any calendar year.

Enforcement—The activities undertaken by USDA and

APHIS AC and IES personnel to ensure that the AWA's

regulations and standards are met. Enforcement

includes developing alleged violation cases and taking

action in the form of Letters of Warning, warning

tickets, stipulations, administrative complaints,

hearings, trials, and other legal procedures and

methods to obtain compliance.

Exhibitor—Any person (public or private) exhibiting

any animals which were purchased in commerce or the

intended distribution of which affects commerce, or

will affect commerce, to the public for compensation.

Exhibitors include carnivals, circuses, animal acts, zoos,

and educational exhibits, whether exhibiting for profit

or not. The term exhibitor excludes most retail pet

stores, horse and dog races, organizations sponsoring,

and all persons participating in State and county fairs,

livestock shows, rodeos, field trials, coursing events,

purebred dog and cat shows, and any other fairs or

exhibitions intended to advance agricultural arts and

sciences.

Facility—A facility is the holder of the license or

registration. Each facility may have only one license or

registration number but may be physically divided into

two or more sites.

Inspections—

• Attempted inspection—An inspection that could

not be completed, including those where

representatives of the inspected entities were not

onsite or transportation facilities were found to

have no animals present.

• Compliance inspection—An unannounced

inspection completed, after licensing or

registration, to determine the facility's compliance

with the AWA regulations and standards.

Compliance inspections include reinspections.

• Prelicensing or Preregistration inspection—An

announced inspection made, after application for

licensure or registration has been submitted, to

ascertain compliance with the AWA regulations
29

and standards prior to licensing or registering the

facility. Prelicensing inspections are required.

Preregistration inspections, although not required,

are often performed upon request of the facility.

• Reinspection—An inspection made specifically to

follow up on one or more violations documented

during a compliance inspection.

Intermediate handler—Any person who is engaged in

any business receiving custody of animals in connection with their transportation in commerce. This

definition excludes dealers, research facilities, exhibitors, operators of auction sales, and carriers.

Investigation—Inquiries and examination of

allegation(s) that a person or facility is not complying

with the AWA or its regulations or standards.

License classes—

• A class A licensee is anyone meeting the definition

of "dealer" whose business consists only of animals

that are bred and raised on the premises in a closed

or stable colony and those animals acquired for the

sole purpose of maintaining or enhancing the

breeding colony.

• A class B licensee is anyone meeting the definition

of a "dealer" whose business includes the purchase

and/or resale of any animal. Class B licensees

include brokers and operators of auction sales, as

such individuals negotiate or arrange for the

purchase, sale, or transport of animals in

commerce.

• A class C licensee is anyone meeting the definition

of an "exhibitor" whose business involves the

showing or displaying of animals to the public.

Random-source dogs and cats—Animals acquired from

animal pounds and shelters, auction sales, or from any

person who did not breed and raise the animals on his

or her premises.

Registrant—Any research facility, carrier, intermediate

handler, or exhibitor whose primary business is not

required to be licensed by the AWA. If a registered

facility conducts an activity that requires a license,

then it will also be licensed for that activity. For

example, some research facilities have a dealer license

in addition to their registration because they occasionally sell surplus animals to other research facilities.

Research facility—Any school (other than elementary

or secondary), institution, organization, or person that

uses or intends to use live animals in research, tests, or

experiments, and that (1) purchases or transports live

animals in commerce or (2) receives funds under a

grant, award, loan, or contract from a department,

agency, or instrumentality of the United States for the

purpose of carrying out research, tests, or experiments.

• An active registered research facility is a USDAregistered research facility that currently utilizes

animals covered by the AWA for teaching, testing,

or experimentation.

• An inactive registered research facility is a USDAregistered research facility that currently does not

utilize animals covered by the AWA for teaching,

testing, or experimentation.

Retail pet store—Any outlet where only the following

animals are sold or offered for sale, at retail, for use as

pets: dogs, cats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, gerbils,

rats, mice, gophers, chinchillas, domestic ferrets,

domestic farm animals, birds, coldblooded species, and

other common small pets. Retail pet stores do not

include any establishment or persons who (1) deal in

dogs used for hunting, security, or breeding purposes;

(2) exhibit, sell, or offer to exhibit or sell, any wild or

exotic or other nonpet species of warmblooded animals

(except birds) such as skunks, raccoons, nonhuman

primates, squirrels, ocelots, foxes, coyotes, etc.; (3) sell

warmblooded animals (except birds and laboratory rats

and mice) for research or exhibition purposes;

(4) wholesale any animals (except birds and laboratory

rats and mice); or (5) exhibit pet animals in a room

Glossary of Terms
30

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

that is separate from or adjacent to the retail pet store,

or in an outside area, or anywhere off the retail pet

store premises.

Search—Activity associated with finding unlicensed or

unregistered entities.

Site—All regulated components of a licensed or

registered facility within the same geographical

location, typically within a 35-mile radius.

Stipulation—An agreement by a violator to accept

assessment of a civil penalty, license suspension, or

combination of both. The stipulation procedure is

used instead of formal administrative hearings. Alleged

violators are offered the opportunity to waive a hearing

by agreeing to enter into a stipulation, in which case

they will pay a specified civil penalty and/or have their

license suspended for a specified period.

Violation—An area or item, at a registered or licensed

facility, found to be out of compliance with the

regulations or standards of the AWA.
Appendix 31

Table 1. Number of Licensees and Registrants, By Facilities and Number of Sites (FY 2001)

Registered Licensed Licensed Active Inactive

intermediate Registered Class A Class B Licensed Registered research research

handlers carriers dealers dealers exhibitors exhibitors facilities facilities

Facilities Sites Facilities Sites Facilities Sites Facilities Sites Facilities Sites Facilities Sites Facilities Sites Facilities Sites

Total United States 300 493 77 1,139 3,573 4,180 1,166 1,612 2,531 3,437 18 20 1,216 1,868 35 32

Alabama 1 2 0 20 6 7 10 15 44 58 0 0 13 17 0 0

Alaska 3 5 3 19 2 2 0 0 9 9 0 0 3 4 0 0

Arizona 11 14 2 20 3 4 6 6 31 38 0 0 10 11 0 0

Arkansas 1 3 0 15 191 202 35 46 27 37 0 0 8 10 0 0

California 35 62 6 130 20 28 23 39 250 356 0 0 179 229 5 4

Colorado 5 12 1 22 6 6 9 9 34 39 0 0 25 26 0 0

Connecticut 7 13 0 11 0 0 9 12 41 53 0 0 17 30 1 1

Delaware 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 7 10 0 0 8 13 0 0

District of Columbia 0 2 0 13 0 0 0 0 00 00 58 11

Florida 25 49 4 63 40 48 95 123 264 431 1 1 21 40 5 4

Georgia 12 15 3 38 26 35 13 16 53 75 2 2 15 33 0 0

Guam 1 1 0 2 00 0 0 33 00 00 00

Hawaii 15 15 4 25 0 0 0 0 16 18 0 0 2 2 0 0

Idaho 0 1 0 6 4 4 3 3 18 23 0 0 4 6 0 0

Illinois 10 10 1 19 62 69 44 56 136 181 2 2 41 45 1 1

Indiana 2 6 1 15 42 48 37 47 71 90 0 0 21 29 0 0

Iowa 0 3 1 18 312 470 57 69 44 58 0 0 16 21 0 0

Kansas 0 0 1 11 406 451 67 84 27 39 0 0 18 21 1 1

Kentucky 4 11 0 18 9 9 5 6 18 26 1 1 7 13 1 1

Louisiana 0 3 0 4 14 16 10 12 20 26 0 0 14 28 0 0

Maine 3 3 0 7 1 2 2 9 8 17 0 0 10 23 0 0

Maryland 4 8 0 15 7 10 14 21 29 40 0 0 41 71 0 0

Massachusetts 5 9 1 14 7 14 9 20 40 56 0 0 83 189 1 1

Michigan 6 11 1 35 13 16 33 47 98 123 4 4 32 45 0 0

Minnesota 1 4 2 11 75 88 37 46 56 72 2 2 26 41 1 1

Mississippi 0 1 0 2 5 9 4 5 15 20 0 0 5 5 0 0

Missouri 9 13 3 30 1,181 1,340 153 217 68 101 0 0 37 38 0 0

Montana 0 0 1 27 13 14 0 0 17 18 0 0 9 11 0 0

Nebraska 0 0 0 8 153 186 15 18 15 18 0 0 14 16 0 0

Nevada 3 8 2 20 3 2 6 11 49 71 0 0 2 10 0 0

New Hampshire 1 1 1 5 0 0 1 4 19 24 0 0 4 12 0 0

New Jersey 8 17 2 10 9 8 17 35 48 58 0 0 45 86 2 2

New Mexico 2 3 1 10 4 4 3 3 13 15 0 0 10 10 0 0

New York 26 41 4 68 22 29 30 42 118 151 0 0 86 138 2 2

North Carolina 9 15 3 48 9 10 30 44 49 60 0 0 23 35 1 0

North Dakota 1 1 0 15 22 27 5 9 16 25 0 0 3 5 0 0

Ohio 4 7 1 29 26 28 31 36 68 103 4 4 44 68 3 3

Oklahoma 3 3 0 8 446 484 58 72 24 34 0 0 17 26 1 1

Oregon 14 15 1 16 35 37 35 39 48 55 0 0 10 10 0 0

Pennsylvania 13 20 2 52 128 151 49 78 112 144 0 0 71 114 2 2

Puerto Rico 2 2 2 8 0 0 1 1 6 6 0 0 7 14 0 0

Rhode Island 0 1 0 5 0 0 1 2 7 8 0 0 6 13 1 1

South Carolina 2 4 0 17 7 11 6 13 22 28 0 0 10 18 0 0

South Dakota 0 0 0 17 103 113 15 18 20 29 0 0 6 6 0 0

Tennessee 3 9 3 38 21 27 13 18 36 44 0 0 16 26 3 3

Texas 20 27 5 55 90 105 105 151 210 290 0 0 78 102 0 0

Utah 5 6 2 10 1 0 2 2 15 18 0 0 88 00

Vermont 1 3 0 5 00 3 4 46 00 44 00

Virgin Islands 2 2 0 3 00 0 0 00 00 00 00

Virginia 8 13 4 16 12 17 16 20 54 68 1 2 15 36 1 1

Washington 9 14 5 43 16 17 13 21 31 40 0 0 31 35 2 2

West Virginia 1 1 0 3 0 0 6 9 9 11 0 0 5 6 0 0

Wisconsin 3 4 4 20 20 31 27 49 93 113 1 2 28 58 0 0

Wyoming 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 11 00 33 00
32

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Appendix

Table 2. Animals Used in Research (FY 2001)

 Other

Number of Guinea farm Other

all animals Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs animals animals

Total United States 1,236,903 70,082 22,755 49,382 256,193 167,231 267,351 26,236 60,253 75,169 242,251

Total research 1,122,403 68,945 22,374 43,838 244,482 155,557 259,043 13,595 48,679 39,216 226,674

Federal agencies 114,500 1,137 381 5,544 11,711 11,674 8,308 12,641 11,574 35,953 15,577

Alabama 8,163 1,796 308 941 587 32 2,228 166 519 658 928

Alaska 26 8 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 10

Arizona 6,134 302 84 102 109 563 721 107 273 204 3,669

Arkansas 2,833 1,109 31 0 505 0 884 0 215 2 87

California 119,286 2,911 1,588 5,872 29,516 7,497 50,098 3,537 4,378 4,898 8,991

Colorado 8,368 859 291 18 2,794 1,553 784 633 515 62 859

Connecticut 7,103 728 90 485 1,383 1,037 1,783 6 559 8 1,024

Delaware 56,778 2,126 1,227 31 11,348 16,253 19,037 75 2,204 1,113 3,364

District of Columbia 1,867 168 35 22 64 281 460 56 741 0 40

Florida 7,094 360 347 402 1,012 206 1,126 186 1,007 213 2,235

Georgia 19,470 1,507 597 3,310 382 4,765 4,474 15 774 185 3,461

Guam 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0

Hawaii 113 0 1 5 0 80 16 0 0 0 11

Idaho 889 45 12 0 0 0 88 0 0 3 741

Illinois 39,128 2,532 727 683 10,861 1,778 14,912 560 3,843 592 2,640

Indiana 23,505 2,437 1,130 291 3,560 802 3,109 50 476 27 11,623

Iowa 58,612 1,708 1,468 19 5,712 38,650 3,697 164 332 869 5,993

Kansas 19,423 989 731 178 77 530 424 48 310 12,407 3,729

Kentucky 2,794 184 76 101 215 504 1,023 1 206 10 474

Louisiana 14,289 745 221 2,913 426 30 2,625 10 337 233 6,749

Maine 3,457 9 13 0 3 12 225 0 102 274 2,819

Maryland 26,679 852 358 2,503 8,742 2,195 6,911 332 489 184 4,113

Massachusetts 134,568 1,408 410 3,819 20,847 8,946 9,769 864 3,018 3,426 82,061

Michigan 39,023 5,236 808 1,305 13,293 1,622 5,316 314 558 447 10,124

Minnesota 16,365 1,858 589 311 4,794 853 3,697 632 2,633 605 393

Mississippi 1,502 341 36 134 0 332 224 25 199 14 197

Missouri 34,722 2,551 1,956 111 5,453 6,461 3,681 521 1,823 1,847 10,318

Montana 1,981 12 32 28 397 0 1,273 107 0 63 69

Nebraska 44,269 826 971 67 2,297 31,251 3,488 193 1,416 1,728 2,032

Nevada 1,979 100 0 0 460 0 128 253 0 0 1,038

New Hampshire 817 27 11 10 0 113 91 447 63 0 55

New Jersey 78,736 6,388 516 2,937 33,478 8,690 13,528 17 2,647 300 10,235

New Mexico 1,159 186 0 57 32 70 60 0 40 33 681

New York 50,888 5,636 2,023 1,947 9,665 6,116 8,198 445 1,927 256 14,675

North Carolina 21,289 1,501 587 1,298 7,416 688 5,289 131 2,474 141 1,764

North Dakota 309 19 29 0 0 0 0 221 20 20 0

Ohio 63,387 4,923 1,042 717 30,281 3,126 15,215 283 4,058 405 3,337

Oklahoma 4,586 698 134 63 483 132 793 48 43 134 2,058

Oregon 3,993 130 59 1,200 859 677 384 249 276 59 100

Pennsylvania 85,356 5,431 1,611 2,395 19,100 2,337 44,133 718 2,459 1,006 6,166

Puerto Rico 328 0 0 35 20 112 74 0 18 0 69

Rhode Island 1,491 56 46 1 45 169 192 108 247 47 580

South Carolina 3,146 241 98 200 251 8 742 0 342 8 1,256

South Dakota 5,135 62 31 8 0 6 360 388 1,259 2,850 171

Tennessee 7,103 941 194 298 1,226 501 979 115 1,491 69 1,289

Texas 37,176 2,079 603 2,897 5,745 3,158 13,216 954 1,681 3,186 3,657

Utah 4,686 215 106 35 1,292 247 1,258 176 86 60 1,211

Vermont 1,213 39 13 0 473 263 172 60 0 2 191

Virgin Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Virginia 15,129 1,761 186 1,676 220 854 4,548 32 1,118 158 4,576

Washington 13,380 1,209 320 1,815 3,718 323 2,245 159 477 148 2,966

West Virginia 722 19 50 0 111 53 214 89 22 0 164

Wisconsin 21,584 3,651 565 2,598 5,214 1,679 5,087 100 1,004 246 1,440

Wyoming 370 26 13 0 16 2 56 0 0 16 241
Appendix 33

Appendix

Table 3. Animals Used in Research, No Pain or Distress—No Drugs Needed for Relief (FY 2001)

 Other

Number of Guinea farm Other

all animals Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs animals animals

Total United States 705,602 34,533 13,008 22,069 150,677 79,056 156,364 16,585 22,140 59,900 151,270

Total research 637,466 34,327 12,828 19,260 146,239 74,530 155,160 4,823 14,003 31,030 145,266

Federal agencies 68,136 206 180 2,809 4,438 4,526 1,204 11,762 8,137 28,870 6,004

Alabama 2,644 657 186 88 160 2 639 20 8 473 411

Alaska 8 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0

Arizona 4,149 8 4 77 109 408 76 1 10 155 3,301

Arkansas 1,829 934 29 0 80 0 663 0 114 0 9

California 67,404 1,320 1,043 2,639 15,726 1,205 33,238 1,854 968 4,648 4,763

Colorado 2,494 392 128 0 1,028 89 410 12 11 40 384

Connecticut 2,045 150 21 107 532 2 693 3 153 8 376

Delaware 33,179 1,059 809 31 4,673 7,176 16,027 75 2,189 1,069 71

District of Columbia 120 12 0 0 64 15 29 0 0 0 0

Florida 2,764 208 115 174 392 143 283 16 40 165 1,228

Georgia 6,100 777 278 279 149 1,276 331 2 17 77 2,914

Guam 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0

Hawaii 86 0 1 5 0 62 7 0 0 0 11

Idaho 724 6 2 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 683

Illinois 27,246 1,143 515 283 8,064 833 11,068 509 2,696 490 1,645

Indiana 7,948 763 870 17 572 224 827 0 12 19 4,644

Iowa 38,136 626 805 0 4,824 24,727 990 46 104 788 5,226

Kansas 15,906 843 656 0 17 28 113 48 106 12,353 1,742

Kentucky 210 0 0 0 4 180 16 0 0 0 10

Louisiana 7,311 36 52 959 10 28 118 10 10 127 5,961

Maine 2,853 4 4 0 3 12 225 0 0 251 2,354

Maryland 10,670 393 86 944 2,797 582 3,497 0 47 24 2,300

Massachusetts 91,135 468 184 1,968 16,154 2,874 3,278 118 271 148 65,672

Michigan 20,894 2,823 382 853 6,266 372 2,028 55 22 411 7,682

Minnesota 7,778 163 46 82 4,459 189 1,403 74 699 513 150

Mississippi 376 4 19 55 0 0 83 0 47 8 160

Missouri 15,026 1,830 1,754 7 4,031 1,503 2,243 378 1,209 1,557 514

Montana 1,588 12 22 23 397 0 1,052 0 0 57 25

Nebraska 27,402 614 716 50 1,804 18,854 2,580 154 1,200 234 1,196

Nevada 1,679 100 0 0 428 0 113 0 0 0 1,038

New Hampshire 131 0 0 0 0 0 59 8 32 0 32

New Jersey 47,151 3,587 364 1,171 20,919 5,819 9,611 0 533 224 4,923

New Mexico 843 78 0 48 32 70 6 0 20 21 568

New York 21,619 3,278 874 1,191 4,295 1,573 2,165 108 214 170 7,751

North Carolina 11,782 783 253 267 5,458 11 3,521 6 451 106 926

North Dakota 66 5 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 20 0

Ohio 43,942 2,995 345 452 25,680 657 11,551 30 740 34 1,458

Oklahoma 2,774 300 89 16 314 4 119 39 4 106 1,783

Oregon 442 25 20 96 4 124 4 0 23 46 100

Pennsylvania 55,792 3,832 1,171 1,070 9,683 1,030 34,679 401 575 707 2,644

Puerto Rico 139 0 0 0 0 11 59 0 0 0 69

Rhode Island 725 6 0 0 0 119 29 28 0 21 522

South Carolina 1,091 33 45 200 1 0 216 0 0 4 592

South Dakota 4,296 18 28 0 0 6 322 352 674 2,800 96

Tennessee 1,241 29 21 13 131 412 156 5 23 25 426

Texas 20,580 932 343 2,049 3,690 2,243 6,179 291 189 2,729 1,935

Utah 1,334 40 31 0 0 113 152 6 0 2 990

Vermont 724 9 5 0 399 55 24 41 0 0 191

Virgin Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Virginia 7,970 658 34 1,098 75 473 1,030 2 198 126 4,276

Washington 3,841 554 197 969 75 135 1,045 40 152 112 562

West Virginia 181 0 0 0 23 13 10 0 0 0 135

Wisconsin 10,930 1,820 281 1,979 2,717 876 2,134 50 242 152 679

Wyoming 168 0 0 0 0 2 18 0 0 10 138
34

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Appendix

Table 4. Animals Used in Research, With Pain or Distress—Drugs Used for Relief (FY 2001)

 Other

Number of Guinea farm Other

all animals Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs animals animals

Total United States 425,786 33,878 9,339 26,460 69,371 43,254 105,951 9,154 36,883 13,471 78,025

Total research 385,930 32,951 9,138 23,859 65,411 37,438 99,256 8,275 33,721 6,420 69,461

Federal agencies 39,856 927 201 2,601 3,960 5,816 6,695 879 3,162 7,051 8,564

Alabama 5,180 1,088 122 853 427 30 1,541 146 511 185 277

Alaska 18 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

Arizona 1,926 294 80 25 0 108 645 106 251 49 368

Arkansas 812 0 2 0 424 0 205 0 101 2 78

California 45,488 1,432 545 3,219 8,107 6,292 16,483 1,683 3,399 150 4,178

Colorado 3,374 364 163 0 487 856 332 586 477 11 98

Connecticut 4,224 397 69 112 583 1,035 971 3 406 0 648

Delaware 14,240 1,014 396 0 5,986 1,309 2,978 0 15 44 2,498

District of Columbia 1,747 156 35 22 0 266 431 56 741 0 40

Florida 4,235 146 232 228 561 61 815 170 967 48 1,007

Georgia 11,836 722 303 3,020 233 3,120 3,013 13 757 108 547

Guam 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0

Hawaii 27 0 0 0 0 18 9 0 0 0 0

Idaho 140 39 10 0 0 0 30 0 0 3 58

Illinois 10,776 1,386 212 399 2,186 945 3,749 51 952 41 855

Indiana 8,577 1,537 203 272 2,988 578 2,205 50 464 8 272

Iowa 6,129 956 571 19 581 101 2,707 118 228 81 767

Kansas 3,517 146 75 178 60 502 311 0 204 54 1,987

Kentucky 2,584 184 76 101 211 324 1,007 1 206 10 464

Louisiana 6,978 709 169 1,954 416 2 2,507 0 327 106 788

Maine 186 5 9 0 0 0 0 0 102 23 47

Maryland 15,374 459 272 1,559 5,320 1,613 3,404 332 442 160 1,813

Massachusetts 40,879 935 226 1,842 4,132 5,872 6,489 745 2,597 1,695 16,346

Michigan 11,102 2,311 426 342 2,007 1,175 2,975 259 534 36 1,037

Minnesota 8,411 1,695 543 229 335 664 2,118 558 1,934 92 243

Mississippi 1,126 337 17 79 0 332 141 25 152 6 37

Missouri 14,076 721 202 104 503 286 1,409 143 614 290 9,804

Montana 393 0 10 5 0 0 221 107 0 6 44

Nebraska 5,555 192 239 17 378 1,278 908 39 216 1,494 794

Nevada 300 0 0 0 32 0 15 253 0 0 0

New Hampshire 683 27 11 10 0 113 29 439 31 0 23

New Jersey 26,840 2,595 143 1,701 11,336 492 3,118 17 2,114 76 5,248

New Mexico 314 106 0 9 0 0 54 0 20 12 113

New York 24,481 2,227 980 710 3,256 2,703 5,845 337 1,713 86 6,624

North Carolina 7,966 717 334 1,031 590 677 1,683 125 1,936 35 838

North Dakota 243 14 29 0 0 0 0 180 20 0 0

Ohio 16,104 1,920 697 244 1,478 2,469 3,492 253 3,318 371 1,862

Oklahoma 1,812 398 45 47 169 128 674 9 39 28 275

Oregon 3,551 105 39 1,104 855 553 380 249 253 13 0

Pennsylvania 24,993 1,504 421 1,246 5,759 1,063 9,012 317 1,850 299 3,522

Puerto Rico 169 0 0 35 0 101 15 0 18 0 0

Rhode Island 675 50 46 1 45 50 122 49 247 17 48

South Carolina 2,055 208 53 0 250 8 526 0 342 4 664

South Dakota 392 44 3 8 0 0 28 36 148 50 75

Tennessee 5,829 879 173 285 1,095 89 823 110 1,468 44 863

Texas 15,151 1,118 252 833 2,024 519 6,980 233 1,492 457 1,243

Utah 2,559 175 75 35 499 134 1,106 170 86 58 221

Vermont 441 30 8 0 74 160 148 19 0 2 0

Virgin Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Virginia 7,126 1,103 152 545 145 381 3,518 30 920 32 300

Washington 5,515 653 123 817 339 188 1,200 119 325 34 1,717"

West Virginia 541 19 50 0 88 40 204 89 22 0 29

Wisconsin 9,078 1,800 284 619 1,436 803 2,642 50 762 94 588

Wyoming 202 26 13 0 16 0 38 0 0 6 103
Appendix 35

Table 5. Animals Used in Research, With Pain or Distress—No Drugs Used for Relief (FY 2001)

 Other

Number of Guinea farm Other

all animals Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs animals animals

Total United States 105,515 1,671 408 853 36,145 44,921 5,036 497 1,230 1,798 12,956

Total research 99,007 1,667 408 719 32,832 43,589 4,627 497 955 1,766 11,947

Federal agencies 6,508 4 0 134 3,313 1,332 409 0 275 32 1,009

Alabama 339 51 0 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 240

Alaska 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Arizona 59 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 12 0 0

Arkansas 192 175 0 0 1 0 16 0 0 0 0

California 6,394 159 0 14 5,683 0 377 0 11 100 50

Colorado 2,500 103 0 18 1,279 608 42 35 27 11 377

Connecticut 834 181 0 266 268 0 119 0 0 0 0

Delaware 9,359 53 22 0 689 7,768 32 0 0 0 795

District of Columbia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Florida 95 6 0 0 59 2 28 0 0 0 0

Georgia 1,534 8 16 11 0 369 1,130 0 0 0 0

Guam 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0

Hawaii 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Idaho 25 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0

Illinois 1,106 3 0 1 611 0 95 0 195 61 140

Indiana 6,980 137 57 2 0 0 77 0 0 0 6,707

Iowa 14,347 126 92 0 307 13,822 0 0 0 0 0

Kansas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Kentucky 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0

Louisiana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Maine 418 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 418

Maryland 635 0 0 0 625 0 10 0 0 0 0

Massachusetts 2,554 5 0 9 561 200 2 1 150 1,583 43

Michigan 7,027 102 0 110 5,020 75 313 0 2 0 1,405

Minnesota 176 0 0 0 0 0 176 0 0 0 0

Mississippi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Missouri 5,620 0 0 0 919 4,672 29 0 0 0 0

Montana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Nebraska 11,312 20 16 0 115 11,119 0 0 0 0 42

Nevada 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0

New Hampshire 3 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0

New Jersey 4,745 206 9 65 1,223 2,379 799 0 0 0 64

New Mexico 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

New York 4,788 131 169 46 2,114 1,840 188 0 0 0 300

North Carolina 1,541 1 0 0 1,368 0 85 0 87 0 0

North Dakota 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ohio 3,341 8 0 21 3,123 0 172 0 0 0 17

Oklahoma 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Oregon 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0

Pennsylvania 4,571 95 19 79 3,658 244 442 0 34 0 0

Puerto Rico 20 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0

Rhode Island 91 0 0 0 0 0 41 31 0 9 10

South Carolina 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

South Dakota 447 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 437 0 0

Tennessee 33 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Texas 1,445 29 8 15 31 396 57 430 0 0 479

Utah 793 0 0 0 793 0 0 0 0 0 0

Vermont 48 0 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 0

Virgin Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Virginia 33 0 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Washington 4,024 2 0 29 3,304 0 0 0 0 2 687

West Virginia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Wisconsin 1,576 31 0 0 1,061 0 311 0 0 0 173

Wyoming 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
36

Animal Welfare Report • Fiscal Year 2001

Appendix

Table 6. Number of Animals Used by Research From the First Reporting Year (FY 1973) to the Present

Other

Guinea Farm covered

 FY1 Dogs Cats Primates Pigs Hamsters Rabbits animals animals Totals

1973 195,157 66,165 42,298 408,970 454,986 447,570 38,169 1,653,345

1974 199,204 74,259 51,253 430,439 430,766 425,585 81,021 1,692,527

1975 154,489 51,439 36,202 436,446 456,031 448,530 42,523 1,625,660

1976 210,330 70,468 50,115 486,310 503,590 527,551 73,736 1,922,100

1977 176,430 62,311 53,116 348,741 393,533 439,003 46,535 1,519,669

1978 197,010 65,929 57,009 419,341 414,394 475,162 58,356 1,687,201

1979 211,104 69,103 59,359 457,134 419,504 539,594 76,247 1,832,045

1980 188,783 68,482 56,024 422,390 405,826 471,297 49,102 1,661,904

1981 188,649 58,090 57,515 432,632 397,522 473,922 50,111 1,658,441

1982 161,396 49,923 46,388 459,246 337,790 453,506 69,043 1,577,292

1983 174,542 53,344 54,926 485,048 337,023 466,810 108,549 1,680,242

1984 201,936 56,910 55,338 561,184 437,123 529,101 232,541 2,074,133

1985 194,905 59,211 57,271 598,903 414,460 544,621 284,416 2,153,787

1986 176,141 54,125 48,540 462,699 370,655 521,773 144,470 1,778,403

1987 180,169 50,145 61,392 538,998 416,002 554,385 168,032 1,969,123

1988 140,471 42,271 51,641 431,457 331,945 459,254 178,249 1,635,288

1989 156,443 50,812 51,688 481,712 389,042 471,037 153,722 1,754,456

1990 109,992 33,700 47,177 352,627 311,068 399,264 66,702 257,569 1,578,099

1991 107,908 34,613 42,620 378,582 304,207 396,046 214,759 363,685 1,842,420

1992 124,161 38,592 55,105 375,063 396,585 431,432 210,936 529,308 2,134,182

1993 106,191 33,991 49,561 392,138 318,268 426,501 165,416 212,309 1,704,505

1994 101,090 32,610 55,113 360,184 298,934 393,751 180,667 202,300 1,624,649

1995 89,420 29,569 50,206 333,379 248,402 354,076 163,985 126,426 1,395,463

1996 82,420 26,035 52,327 299,011 246,415 338,574 154,344 146,579 1,345,739

1997 75,429 26,091 56,381 272,797 217,079 309,322 159,742 150,987 1,267,828

1998 76,071 24,712 57,377 261,305 206,243 287,523 157,620 142,963 1,213,814

1999 70,541 23,238 54,927 266,129 201,593 280,222 155,409 165,939 1,217,998

2000 69,516 25,560 57,518 1

266,873 174,146 258,754 159,711 166,429 11,286,412

2001 70,082 22,755 49,382 256,193 167,231 267,351 161,658 242,251 1,236,903

1

The number of guinea pigs used in research (no pain—no drugs needed for relief) was overreported in massacusetts for FY 2000. The affected totals are corrected here.