Table 7.--"Cther" animals used in experimentation (1975)--(con.)
(A tabulation of animals listed as "other" in Table 6)

state Rabbits Hamsters Guinea Pigs Wild Animals
Oklahoma 749 31 629 59
Oregon 1,715 395 1,339 1,781
Pennsylvania 26,896 32,625 34,746 281
Rhode Island 275 952 104 401
South Carolina 579 2,148 618 222
South Dakota 213 - 314 16
Tennessee 6,005 5,607 1,122 2
Texas 28,340 33,519 12,868 865
Utah 2,136 14 359 170
Vermont 802 112 182 60
Virginia 6,993 1,382 4,988 535
Washington 5,678 2,416 10,366 82
West Virginia 473 155 1,159 22
Wisconsin 2,052 8,760 1,038 12
Wyoming 93 119 44 201
Puerto Rico 124 138 35 -
Virgin Islands - - - -
Dist. of Columbia 814 342 358 -

33


Table 1.--Number of active licensees and registrants (1975)--(con.)

Animal exhibitors Registered

State Licensed research

dealers Licensed | Registered facilities
Oklahoma 128 8 2 7
Oregon 84 9 1 8
Pennsylvania 141 62 13 62
Rhode Island 6 1 4 10
South Carolina 18 2 10 3
South Dakota 41 6 - 2
Tennessee 11 5 9 10
Texas 119 23 33 22
Utah 11 2 - 7
Vermont 56 2 3 7
Virginia 51 3 13 14
Washington 22 7 6 17
West Virginia 20 1 3 1
Wisconsin 85 4 124 24
Wyoming 8 - 4 3
Puerto Rico 19 4 12 1
Virgin Islands - - - -
Dist. of Columbia - - - 6

21


PROTECTED ANIMALS

Currently, the Animal Welfare Act and its regulations cover hamsters,

sinea pigs, rabbits, dogs, cats, and monkeys and other nonhuman primates plus
ost other warmblooded species. The law and regulations currently exempt
certain farm animals, marine mammals, birds, rats, mice, and all coldblooded
animals such as reptiles and fish. However, the Secretary is consulting with
other Federal agencies to draft regulations and standards for the care and
treatment of marine mammals under discretionary authority conferred by the
Act.

LICENSEES AND REGISTRANTS

Lists of licensees and registrants under the Act are prepared periodically
and published in the Federal Register. On December 31, 1975, these lists
contained the names and addresses of 5,680 active licensed dealers, 535
licensed exhibitors, 657 registered exhibitors, and 985 registered research
facilities (see Appendix, table 1 and Separates).

The sharp increase in the number of licensees and registrants has over-
loaded the clerical staff, leading APHIS to computerize its records. Key
information on licensed dealers was stored in the computer during 1975. Now
the computer can answer questions such as "How many of the 1,600 animal dealers
licensed in Kansas should renew their license in March?" Getting this infor-
mation manually would have involved many hours of reviewing APHIS records. The

omputer does the job mechanically in seconds.

License Fees

As provided by law, licensed dealers and exhibitors must pay an annual fee.
The amount of the fee is determined by graduated schedules with separate rates
for dealers and exhibitors, which are published in the regulations. Dealer
fees range from $5 to $500; exhibitor fees range from $5 to $100. Altogether,
fees collected during 1975 amounted to $127,996. The increase in receipts
from newly licensed dealers was offset by a reduction in fees provided by
regulations that took effect in September 1974.

Fees collected under the Act must be deposited in the U.S. Treasury
as "miscellaneous receipts." No portion of income from fees is available
enforcement programs.

Registration of research facilities and certain exhibitors involves no
fees.


- - - 8 - -
- - - Sz L - Vi4
- OOT TSL‘T € - 6ee = S
- 2 - Sel - - -
9 OL - or - - -
€ ZLYS 88 678‘Z €L L YT
- 60T oT T0z‘Z Te - 8SZ
Ss - a4 - 61 - -
207 7276 9 8725 96T % Sle
- - - ot . -
9 S6L°9T =9TE €8t°7 SB ze 78s
- zy - - - - z

- - spueTS] UT8ITA
8 I oofty ojteng

- - SuTWwosm
- = uFSUOOSTM
- - ByUTZATA 3SeM
992 ” uo 3ZuTYysem
- - epTuTszatA

- - quowza,,
- yen

T sexo],

LST Zz aessouuel,
T B20¥eC YINos

- - BUTTOIeD YINoS
- pueTsT epouy

s3qd | s1oqsuey satqqey saqeutig sqe9 s3oq
PITA pourng

SyTeupue jo TSquny

9€9°8 L eTueaTAsuueg
- - u08e19
- - eWoye TIO
€19°Z 8 otyo
- - eI0%0 YIAON
96 T eUTTOIeD YIION
TEE eT 1z YzoR MON
9T T OoFXeW MON
160°2Z oT Aesier men
- - artysduey mon
- - epeaan
a T eyseiqen
- - euequoW
sTeuyue sjueijsy3er
go go . 3789S

zaquny zaquny

(7 u02)--(S/6T) s3nip gupAetTer-uped jo asn sayz Woy;FM sse1qstp 10

uyed Supouetiedxe sTewyuy-—-"g eTqPL

35


Table 5.--Number of alleged violations, (1975)=-(con.)

State

Investigated

Penalty

Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina

South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands

1
1

TwRwon

INL nwo aie
a '

imposed

_ Cases Closed | _

Insufficient ] Notices | Pending

evidence issued
- - 1
- 1 1
- - 1
- 1 2
2 - 2
1 3 2
- 2 6
2 1 2
2 - -

‘Includes 79 violations

pending from previous years.

29


Furthermore, the Interagency Committee on Live Animal Transportation,
formed at the recommendation of the House Committee on Government Operations--
hich has representation from the Civil Aeronautics Board, the Federal Aviation
.dministration, and APHIS--held an organizational meeting on October 20, 1974.
Rather than duplicate the efforts and information being assimilated by the
CAB's administrative hearing, the Committee decided to wait until information
from the hearing could be assembled and summarized before determining a proper
course of action. A meeting of the Committee will be held after CAB concludes
its proceedings. Then improvement in the humane care and treatment of animals
during, transportation will. be actively pursued.

HUMANE CARE IN LABORATORIES

As expressed by Congress, the Animal Welfare Act is not meant to interfere
with research in any way. Its purpose is to assure that research and experimen-
tation are conducted with proper care and treatment for laboratory animals and
with compassion for any unavoidable pain and distress caused by experimentation.
Thus, the Act includes provisions for requiring the use of appropriate
anesthetics, analgesics, and tranquilizers.

An institution's attending veterinarian, who is a member of its animal
care committee, must review the protocol for every experiment and certify
that no unnecessary pain or distress is involved, that pain or distress can
be relieved by the use of drugs, or that the use of pain-relieving drugs will
interfere with the objectives of the experiment.

The institution must submit to USDA an annual report, summarizing the use
of animals in biomedical research, tests, or experimentation. The report must
identify all animal experiments involving pain and justify all instances in
which pain or distress could not be relieved. An administrative official
legally responsible for the entire research institution must sign and attest
to the accuracy of the report. Each statement in the report to justify un-
relieved pain or distress is reviewed by the Animal Care Staff.

Appendix tables 6, 7, and 8 summarize the reports received from registered
research facilities for 1975. They indicate that almost all instances of un-
relieved pain occurred during research, development, or quality control of
health products. Tests with animals were required in some instances to obtain
data to keep such products safe, pure, and effective. Other occasions for
unrelieved pain were safety tests that provide data to protect users of chemical
products, or experiments involving electroanesthesia or mild electric shock.

Research facilities reported no instances of unrelieved pain without.a
documented reason. However, APHIS officials believe that attending veter~
inarians at some research institutions do not have sufficient resources or
authority to adequately monitor all of the research all of the time. Nor
does the Department have sufficient money or personnel to monitor all use of
pain-relieving drugs by research facilities. Still, APHIS believes that the

13


The Act provides for standards on handling, housing, feeding, watering,
sanitation, ventilation, shelter from extremes of weather and temperatures, and
‘dequate veterinary care--including the appropriate use of anesthetic, anal-
gesic, or tranquilizing drugs when such use would be proper in the opinion of
the attending veterinarian of the research facility.

During 1975, APHIS made special efforts to enforce the "veterinary care"
standard. This requirement includes having a doctor of veterinary medicine
to plan and supervise control of animal diseases and parasites.

Additional standards provide for separation of animals by species--when
necessary for the humane handling, care, or treatment of animals--and for
humane transportation. Transportation requirements cover vehicles and shipping
cages plus food, water, and care in transit.

Investigation of Complaints

Many letters and telephone inquiries from the public on animal welfare
consist of complaints against animal dealers.

The number of complaints investigated totaled 729 in 1975. The number
of complaints received was higher than in previous years because the public
responded to wide newspaper coverage of animal care and treatment. Therefore,
a separate entry is made in this Annual Report (see Appendix, table 3). In
previous annual reports to Congress, investigation of complaints was tabulated
with "routine inspections."

Prelicensing Inspections

Persons covered by the Animal Welfare Act have the responsibility to apply
for a license or registration; failure to do so is a violation of the Act and
its regulations. In most cases, a potential licensee or registrant gets a
reminder to apply for a license or registration before legal action is
initiated.

Dealers and exhibitors are licensed or registered promptly if their
facilities, housing, equipment, and records pass an inspection for compliance
with USDA regulations and standards. During 1975, APHIS conducted 1,912
prelicensing and preregistration inspections (see Appendix, table 3).

During 1975, APHIS used administrative proceedings to deny the license
application of a dealer who had violated the Animal Welfare Act within 2 years
of making his application. Under current regulations, the dealer could reapply
after 1 year.

Improvements at Zoos Through Prelicensing Inspections

Prelicensing inspections and the attendant changes made by prospective
licensees were particularly effective at zoos. A recent review, which went
back to the first inspections made in 1972, showed about 160 instances in


Research Facilities

Research facilities using animals regulated under the Act are registered
d pay no fees. They must comply with regulations and standards under the
act and undergo inspections. Types of institutions presently registered are
State-owned and privately owned laboratories, clinics, hospitals, colleges,
universities, drug firms, and large-scale diagnostic laboratories.

At the end of 1975, 985 research facilities were registered involving
inspections at 1,932 research sites (see Appendix, table 1). Registered
research facilities are required to submit annual reports on their use of
laboratory animals. About 1,378,000 such animals were used during 1975 (see
Appendix, table 6).

Exempt from registration as research facilities are schools below the
college level, institutions not using live animals in research, and Federal
agencies. However, Federal agencies using laboratory animals must comply
with APHIS standards for animal care and treatment.

Canceled Licenses and Inactive Registrations

Dealer and exhibitor licenses remain valid until terminated voluntarily
by the licensee or revoked or suspended by USDA. From 1967 through 1975,
there were altogether 2,340 dealer licenses and 63 exhibitor licenses canceled
(see Appendix, table 2).

Registration is permanent after issuance, both for exhibitors that qualify
ad for research institutions. Those who cease regulated activities are placed
1 an inactive list, but they can be reactivated on request. Since 1967, there

were 186 registrations inactivated for research facilities and 202 for
exhibitors (see Appendix, table 2).

The relatively large number of canceled licenses and inactive registra-
tions indicates that many formerly regulated parties voluntarily stopped
handling regulated animals. In most cases, the former licensees and
registrants would not maintain Federal standards of animal care and treatment.
If they had not stopped regulated activities voluntarily, APHIS would have
instituted court action or administrative proceedings.

INSPECTIONS

APHIS inspectors call at the business locations of persons subject to
the Act and check each site where they keep regulated animals. Inspections
cover regulations on licensing and registration, annual reports and fees,
animal identification, recordkeeping, inspection for missing animals, confis-
cation and destruction of animals, and--most importantly--compliance with
standards for animal care and treatment.


Table 6.--Animals used in experimentation (1975)--(con.)

3tate Number of
registrants
Oklahoma 7
Oregon 8
Pennsylvania 62
Rhode Island 10
South Carolina 3
South Dakota 2
Tennessee 10
Texas 22
Utah 7
Vermont 7
Virginia 14
Washington 17
West Virginia 1
Wisconsin 24
Wyoming 3
Puerto Rico 1

Virgin Islands -
ist. of Columbia 6

Number of

all animals

2,790
9,661
117,485
2,015
5,049

691
16,897
101,812
4,891
1,492

21,268
25,152
2,121
15,415
464

976

3,387

Number of animals by species

Dogs Cats Primates Other
917 311 94 1,468
795 1,074 2,562 5,230

14,040 7,056 1,841 94,548
126 62 95 1,732

1,202 251 29 3,567
125 23 - 543

3,150 246 765 12,736

18,687 4,365 3,168 75,592

1,321 853 38 2,679

254 82 - 1,156

3,127 985 3,258 13,898

3,147 1,363 2,100 18,542
199 63 50 1,809

2,740 481 332 11,862

1 6 - 457
669 2 - 8 297
1,115 689 69 1,514

31


Other than press releases, new or revised publications distributed during
1975 consisted of the following titles:

--Improvements at Zoos

~-Licensing and Registration Under the Animal Welfare Act (PA 1117)
--Regulating Animal Care in the Pet Industry (Rev.)

--The Problem of Unwanted Dogs and Cats

The feature story on "The Problem of Unwanted Dogs and Cats" was
particularly effective. It was reprinted in 70 newspapers, magazines, and
newsletters.

The Animal Care Staff gave four commercial television interviews one
radio interview, and many illustrated lectures. Illustrated narrations for
two basic lectures can be obtained from the staff, and the color slides for
the lectures are available for a fee from USDA's Office of Communication.

Public Correspondence

During 1975, APHIS received thousands of letters on animal care and treat~
ment, including about 273 addressed to members of Congress. Most of these
letters expressed an opinion on public policy, such as:

--Opposing the use of animals in research (14 letters) ;
--Proposing exercise for dogs caged in laboratories (221 letters);
--Opposing the overpopulation of dogs and cats (142 letters);
--Opposing inhumane killing of surplus animals (20 letters);

--Opposing a proposed "Handicapped Entrepreneur Lending Program" (119
(letters) 5

--Opposing instances of cruelty to animals (224 letters);
--Opposing inhumane practices at "puppy mills" (155 letters).

In addition, APHIS replied to many letters requesting information on topics
like: Operation of animal kennels and humane shelters; care and feeding of
pets; details of animal nutrition; and requirements for becoming licensed or
registered under the Animal Welfare Act. Furthermore, many educational, civic,
and humane associations requested illustrations, literature, and information
for educational programs.

Correspondence on animal welfare is so extensive because the persons that

write are varied, numerous, and frequently highly motivated. The composition
of groups that write is as follows:

11


a

>

Animal
Welfare
Enforcement

1975

REPORT OF THE

SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE
TO THE

: ’ PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE
“ AND THE
SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

United States Department of Agriculture e|ssued March 1976


ADDRESS LIST OF APHIS OFFICIALS

FFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR

Administrator's Office, APHIS
316-E USDA Administration Bldg.
Washington, DC 20250

Phone: (202) 447-5193

Dr. J. M. Hejl

Deputy Administrator, VS

Dr. Pierre Chaloux

Asst. Deputy Administrator, vs

NATIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING STAFFS

Director's Office
850 Federal Bldg.
Hyattsville, MD 20782
Phone: (301) 436-5721

Dr. G. V. Peacock, Director
Dr. R. P. Jones, Asst. Director

ANIMAL CARE STAFF

Senior Staff Veterinarian's Office
'70 Federal Building

Hyattsville, MD 20782

Phone: (301) 436-8271

Dr. Dale F. Schwindaman
Senior Staff Veterinarian
Dr. Lois E. Hinson, Chief
Horse Protection
Dr. Melvin R. Crane, Chief
Inspection and Humane Handling
Dr. Robert D. Whiting, Chief
Animal Medicine and Technology
Dr. Keith C. Sherman, Chief
Exhibition Animals
Mr. Francis W. Germaine
Program Specialist

NORTHERN REGION

Regional Director's Office
845 Federal Building
Hyattsville, MD 20782
Phone: (301) 436-8644

NORTHERN REGION con.

Dr. H. C. King, Regional Director

Dr. S. T. Wilson, Asst. Reg. Director

AREA 1 Veterinarian in Charge
424 Trapelo Rd.

Waltham, MA 02154

Phone: (617) 894-2400 ext. 761
Dr. A. E. Decoteau

DISTRICT 1 (MA, RI, CT)
Dr. A. Crawford
DISTRICT 2 (ME, NH, VT)
Dr. C. E. Watson

AREA 2 Veterinarian in Charge
80 Wolf Rd., Suite 503
Albany, NY 12225

Phone: (518) 472-4477

Dr. W. W. Thomas

DISTRICT 1 (NY)
Dr. W. Nape
DISTRICT 2 (PA, NJ)
Dr. R. Rissler

AREA 3 Veterinarian in Charge
601 Presidential Bldg.

6525 Belcrest Rd.
Hyattsville, MD 20782
Phone: (301) 436-8044.

Dr. Paul Kramer

DISTRICT 1 (MD, WV, DE)
Dr. J. Acree
DISTRICT 2 (VA)
Dr. W. Bechdolt

AREA 4 Veterinarian in Charge
P.O. Box 264

Pickerington, OH 43147
Phone: (614) 469-5602

Dr. D. R. Stauffer

DISTRICT 1 (OH)
Dr. R. W. Bowen

DISTRICT 2 (MI)
Dr. R. M. Scott

17


number of undocumented cases where animals experience pain during research,
testing, or experimentation is small.

As this report stated earlier, research facilities are subject to on-site
inspections by APHIS in addition to surveillance via the institutions’ annual
reports. Inspections cover animals held for research and those undergoing
studies and recovering from research to assure that all Federal standards of

animal care are observed.

In 1975, APHIS inspectors concentrated specifically on veterinary care
for laboratory animals. They looked for positive evidence that attending
veterinarians at registered research institutions had the authority and
responsibility to properly minister to the health and welfare of animals.
Where this authority and responsibility were incomplete, the full authority of
the Act was used to secure the needed change.

Besides direction and supervision from an attending veterinarian, APHIS
requires daily inspection of animals by their caretakers. Sick animals must
receive prompt and professional care. Thus, even in cases where pain-relieving
drugs can not be provided, animals still must receive all possible humane care
and treatment. APHIS inspectors report that at practically all inspection
sites, professional care was sound and high standards of humane treatment of
laboratory animals were observed. Discrepancies noted in a few cases were
correctéd.

REGULATORY AND LEGISLATIVE CHANGES

No proposed or final rulemaking under the Animal Welfare Act was published
in the Federal Register during 1975. APHIS is considering substantial changes
in the regulations which would permit certain acceptable practices requested
by the industry.

Other rule changes being considered are regulations and standards for the
care and treatment of marine mammals and licensing of marine mammal exhibitors.
APHIS officials are cooperating with the U.S. Department of the Interior's Fish
and Wildlife Service to develop a single set of standards under the authority of
the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Animal Welfare Act--both of which
authorize standards for the humane care and handling of captured marine mammals
used for exhibit purposes.

Although several petitioners have urged Congress to require health certi-
ficates for animals shipped in commerce, USDA officials believe they already
have this authority under existing legislation. Airport inspections confirmed
that an appreciable number of sick and weak animals are being shipped. There-
fore, APHIS is considering proposed requirements for a health certificate from
an accredited veterinarian before certain regulated parties can ship dogs and
cats in commerce.

15


peak hours. Spot inspections also are done at non-peak hours, there, and
at other airports handling fewer animal shipments.

Deficiencies noted at airports were reported in two categories: 263
violations attributed to licensed dealers and 30 deficiencies attributed to
freight handlers and airline personnel (see Appendix, table 4).

APHIS took steps to assure that violations by dealers were promptly
corrected and took legal action when necessary.

USDA does not have jurisdiction over common carriers, including animal
forwarders and airport authorities, but still deficiencies attributable to
them were recorded. Most of their deficiencies seem due to a heavy workload,
plane delays, and emergencies rather than deliberate mistreatment. APHIS has
urged the airline industry to identify and predict these stress times and to
train its personnel to cope with the attendant problems with animals. Airlines
generally have responded favorably to these suggestions, and the number of
deficiencies dropped significantly during 1975.

PROSECUTING APPARENT VIOLATIONS

Apparent violations of the regulations and standards under the Act do not
always result in legal action. Inspectors first attempt to guide licensees and
registrants toward voluntary compliance. In fact, for every hour spent in
investigating and documenting apparent violations, 24 hours were spent on
recurring compliance inspections, which serve to keep licensees and registrants
from violating the standards.

APHIS seeks legal action only when licensees and registrants commit serious
or repeated violations. The field force makes investigations that are used to
prepare court cases or administrative proceedings. Altogether, 301 such
investigations were completed during 1975 (see Appendix, table 5).

Notice of Apparent Violations

Some reports of alleged violations are closed by issuing warning notices
on alleged deficiencies. These warning notices advise the offending party
that USDA will not prosecute this specific violation and offer assistance in
avoiding further violations. The record of such warning strengthens a future

legal case. In 1975, 90 warning notices were issued (see Appendix, table 5).

Legal Action

As a result of administrative proceedings in 1975 for violation of
the Act, its regulations, and its standards, 10 cases were closed by
imposing cease-and-desist orders, license suspensions, and/or revocations;
39 cases were closed for insufficient evidence, which included one
case that was dismissed after charges had been issued (see Appendix, table
5). Failure to obey a cease-and-desist order is prosecuted as a civil


Animal Welfare Enforcement 1975

PORT OF THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE
TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE AND

THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

INTRODUCTION

Enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act by the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) is based on the approach that animal dealers, exhibitors, operators of
auction sales, research facilities, and other regulated parties perform use-
ful and necessary functions in society. Thus, USDA's Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) spends a lot of effort to aid these industries to
do a better job of caring for animals.

The work of enforcement is carried out by line and staff officers of
APHIS, Veterinary Services, responsible for the eradication and control of
animal diseases. Animal welfare constitutes an additional responsibility which
received about 6 percent of Veterinary Services time during 1975.

Field Force

Enforcement in the field is handled by about 370 APHIS veterinarians and
Sout 700 animal health technicians. Time and manpower spent on animal care
differs among the 18 area and 33 district offices throughout the U.S. (see
Appendix, address list). The differences are caused by variations in the
number of regulated parties in the area and local program priorities.

Staff Functions

Veterinary Services has an Animal Care Staff, located in Hyattsville, Md.,
near Washington, D.C., consisting of six members who evaluate programs and
procedures, conduct training courses, and administer the Act nationwide (see
Appendix, address list). They also evaluate cases of alleged violations of
laws, regulations, and standards and recommend appropriate legal action.

Training Courses

Line and staff officers cooperate in conducting animal care training
courses for the field force. In 1975, the emphasis of the course work was
on uniform interpretation of the Act, regulations, standards, and inspection
guidelines. APHIS wants to emphasize uniform interpretation to promote
effective.and fair enforcement nationwide.

The 1975 training-course work consisted of five 30-hour sessions involving
300 employees from 22 States. One day of each course involved practice inspec-
tions at the site of an exhibitor and a research facility in the area. APHIS
3 fortunate in securing the active cooperation from the exhibitors and
‘search facilities involved to make the practice inspections realistic and
informative. .


Table 2.--Number of canceled licenses and inactive registrations
(1967-1975)--(con.)

Animal exhibitors

$+

Registered

State Licensed a - research

dealers Licensed [ Registered facilities
Oklahoma 52 1 4 1
Oregon 34 - - 2
Pennsylvania 67 4 48 11
Rhode Island 6 1 - 1
South Carolina 6 - 9 -
South Dakota 16 - - -
Tennessee 7 - 1 -
Texas 53 7 2 1
Utah 10 - - 1
Vermont 21 - 3 -
Virginia 52 - - 2
Washington 7 1 - 5
West Virginia 20 - - -
Wisconsin 58 3 2 2
Wyoming 7 - - 1

Puerto Rico 7 -

Virgin Islands - - -
Dist. of Columbia 4 - - 2

23


BN-44399

APHIS continues to inspect 15 key airports for animal traffic. Unreinforced
vegetable crates are not acceptable and dealers who continue to use them are
subject to prosecution for violating the Animal Welfare Act.

27


CONTENTS

eublic Law 91-579 2 6 ee ee ee ee
Introduction . 6 ee ee ee ee te et
Field Force .- +++ eee etree
Staff Functions .- +. + + see eee
Training Courses... ++ +
Protected Animals -. +--+ + +s
Licensees and Registrants ....-
License Fees - 0 ee ee te te ee ee ee ee
Licensed Dealers . . «
Animal Exhibitors .
Research Facilities ...- + woe
Canceled Licenses and Inactive Registrations

Inspections

Investigation of Complaints car)
Prelicensing Inspections .. - Ps .
Improvements at Zoos Through Prelicensing “Inspections
Recurring Compliance Inspections

Searches

Inspections at Airports. ee eee
Prosecuting Apparent Violations

Notice of Apparent Violations .

Legal Action... es

Public Information Activities ec
Public Correspondence ..- ++ eee ee ee tt et

National Meetings ...- we w

Cooperation with Other Departments woe
Humane Care in Laboratories .
Regulatory and Legislative Changes.

Address list of APHIS officia

Appendix
Table
Table

Table
Table

Table
Table
Table

Table

Separate:
List
List
List’
List

1.
2.

3.
4.
5.
6.
7

8.

Ss

of
of
of
of

“Number of active licensees and registrants (975)
Number of canceled licenses and inactive
registrations (1967-1975) . +. +-+-++-s

Number of inspections (1975) .

Animal handling deficiencies at 15 iey airports.
(FY 1975) .- . ee ee ee
Number of alleged violations (1975) | see eee
Animals used in experimentation (1975)... -
"Other" animals used in experimentation (1975)

(A tabulation of animals listed as "other" in Table 6)
Animals experiencing pain or distress without the
use of pain-relieving drugs (1975)

licensed dealers

registered research facilities
licensed exhibitors

registered exhibitors

i}
S
pie

OVOCMMOYVVINUNONSSWWWRR EH

NNER ERP Ree
OOYHWNNHO

22
24

26
28
30
32

34




SOUTH CENTRAL REGION con. NOKTH CENTRAL REGION con.

[STRICT 1 (TX) Dr. S. J. Cougar Des Moines, IA 50309
wISTRICT 2 (TX) Dr. B. F. Lowry Phone: (515) 284-4140
DISTRICT 3 (TX) Dr. J. W. Upchurch Dr. G. W. Spangler
DISTRICT 4 (TX) Dr. H. W. Kinne
DISTRICT 5 (NM) Vacant DISTRICT 1 (IA)

Dr. C. V. Simmons
NORTH CENTRAL REGION DISTRICT 2 (MO)

Dr. R. Wagner
Regional Director's Office

838 Federal Bldg. WESTERN REGION
Hyattsville, MD 20782
Phone: (301) 436-8333 Regional Director's Office

Dr. John Jefferies, Regional Director 848 Federal Bldg.
Dr. Robert Morgan, Asst., Reg. Director Hyattsville, MD 20782
Phone: (301) 436-8700

AREA 14 Veterinarian in Charge Dr. G. E. Blake, Regional Director
P.O. Box 639 Dr. Milo Johnson, Asst. Reg. Director
Bismarck, ND 58501
Phone: (701) 224-2655 AREA 18 Veterinarian in Charge
Dr. M. B. Huffman 650 Capitol Mall, Rm. 8566
Sacramento, CA 95814
DISTRICT 1 (ND, SD) Phone: (916) 449-3217
Dr. D. Torkelson Dr. J. B. Healy
DISTRICT 2 (MT)
Dr. J. Kopec DISTRICT 1 (CA)
Dr. J. Anderson
AREA 15 Veterinarian in Charge DISTRICT 2 (AR, NV)
Rm. 237, 2490 W. 26th Avenue Dr. R. Mathis
Denver, CO 80211 DISTRICT 3 (HI)
Phone: (303) 837~3481 Dr. D. Gilhooly

Dr. D. A. Price
AREA 19 Veterinarian in Charge

DISTRICT 1 (CO) P.O. Box 2108
Dr. P. R. Henry Salem, OR 97308
DISTRICT 2 (WY, UT) Phone: (503) 339-5871
Dr. G. W. Klover Dr. R. L. Evinger
AREA 16 Veterinarian in Charge DISTRICT 1 (ID)
P.O. Box 81866 Dr. C. Watson
Lincoln, NE 68501 DISTRICT 2 (WA, AK, OR)
Phone: (402) 471-5441 Dr. R. Moody

Dr. R. W. Gerding

DISTRICT 1 (NE)

Dr. D. D. Philson
DISTRICT 2 (KS)

Dr. 0. F. Clabaugh

AREA 17 Veterinarian in Charge
877 Federal Bldg.
-O Walnut St.

19


Table 3.--Number of inspections (1975) --(con.)1

State Complaints Prelicensing Compliance Searches

Oklahoma - 38 209 14
Oregon 7 32 275 8
Pennsylvania 47 87 727 192
Rhode Island 1 1 82 45
South Carolina 2 8 106 2
South Dakota - 10 69 17
Tennessee 6 1 48 5
Texas 18 122 425 173
Utah 2 13 114 28
Vermont - - 150 18
Virginia 17 9 165 66
Washington 5 10 100 6
West Virginia 2 4 83 123
Wisconsin 99 22 355 151
Wyoming - 8 42 -
Puerto Rico 15 4 77 5

Virgin Islands - - - -

1 Excludes "airport inspections," which are not reported by State. A
typical airport inspection covers dealer shipments from a great variety of
States.

25