AC Public Meeting

Exceeds Expectations

On May 12, 1998, AC held its
first-ever public meeting at the
APHIS headquarters building in
Riverdale, MD. The meeting,
which was attended by approxi-
mately 250 members of the
general public, industry, and
animal welfare groups, focused on
the many regulatory and manage-
ment initiatives that the program is
undertaking.

The program included a morning
general session and afternoon
breakout sessions devoted to the
specific regulated business

types—researchers, dealers,
exhibitors, and animal trans-
porters. The agenda featured
speakers from USDA as well as
industry and animal welfare
organizations.

Overall, participants rated the
meeting a success and stated that
additional forums should be held
in the future. USDA officials were
also pleased with the meeting and
look forward to holding similar
ones in future years. A synopsis
of the meeting is posted on AC's
homepage on the World Wide
Web.

| AC National Work Conference
« Focuses on Uniformity

In March 1998, AC held its second
national work conference for its
field personnel. The weeklong
meeting was attended by AC
personnel from Hartford to
Honolulu and focused on ensuring
uniformity of inspections. Toward

this end, specific training sessions

included inspecting traveling
exhibitors and neonatal nutrition.
All attendees received valuable
instruction on animal care issues
that is now being applied
throughout the United States.

Elephant Training
Made a Priority

With increasing attention focused
on the care and handling of
elephants in recent years, AC has
made it a priority to provide
special training to its personnel on
these issues. In August 1998, AC
held its first elephant training
course at two zoos in the Seattle
area. The course provided
instruction on elephant care and

handling to about 15 inspectors
and veterinary medical officers.
Subsequent courses are scheduled
for exhibitor facilities in the San
Diego area in mid-November 1998
and the Tampa and Orlando areas
in April 1999. By FY 2000, about
45 members of AC's field force will
have completed the courses.

Risk-Based Inspection System

Takes Effect

In February 1998, AC’s new risk-
based inspection system went into
effect. This system, which utilizes
several criteria to determine the
inspection frequency for individual
licensees and registrants, is an

integral part of AC's efforts to
improve operations. The system
is described in detail in the "New
Inspection Strategy: Quality Over
Quantity” section earlier in this
report.

Dealer Inspection Guidelines

Move Forward

Throughout FY 1998, AC worked
diligently to prepare guidelines for
its field personnel to use when
conducting AWA inspections of
animal dealers. These guidelines
impose no new requirements on
dealers. The guidelines have been
prepared only to assist AC
personnel in their inspection
efforts and to improve the

uniformity of inspections
throughout the country. The
guidelines cover such areas as
how to document inspection
findings and how to conduct exit
interviews. A draft of the
Quidelines was near completion at
the end of FY 1998. When
finalized, the guidelines will be
made available to the public.


TABLE 5. ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH, WITH PAIN OR DISTRESS—
NO DRUGS USED FOR RELIEF (FY 1998)
Other

Number of Guinea farm Other

all animals Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits © Sheep Pigs animals animals
Total United States 2,065 363 ‘ 785 51,062 23 445
Total research 4,893 669. «649 49,244 at 366
Federal agencies 172 ae 136 2 79
Alabama 207 0 0 0
Alaska 0 0 0 0
Arizona 0 0 0 0
Arkansas 206 62 0 0
California 356 124 3 285
Colorado 0 12 18 0
Connecticut 106 21 0 0
Delaware 20 0 0 0
Dist. of Columbia 0 oO 0 0 0 0 |
Florida 0 0 0 0 0 0
Georgia 24 3 26 0 0 18
Guam 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hawaii 0 0. 0 0 0 07
Idaho 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minis 92 0 7 0 0 38
Indiana 66 105 2 0 0 1,884
lowa 128 350 0 2 79 0
Kansas 52 0 0 0 2 38
Kentucky 0 0 0 0 0 0
Louisiana 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maine 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maryland 131 0 37 1,440 379 397 0 0 316
Massachusetts 7 o- 0 305 703 20 0 32 306
Michigan 45 0 30 6,103 0 374 0 23 0
Minnesota 0 0 0 42 0 299 0 0 0 0
Mississippi 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Missouri 26 0 0 891 6,174 104 0 36 12 0
Montana 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nebraska 0 0 0 0 6,798 90 0 LN} 0 38
Nevada 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
New Hampshire 130 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 6 0 5
New Jersey 6,502 141 26 121 1,974 2,866 1,194 0 0 0 180
New Mexico 30 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0
New York 4,726 55 0 37 2,326 2,034 4 0 0 0 270
North Carolina 2,227 0 12 0 2,064 35 67 0 ca) 12 12
North Dakota 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ohio 1,931 68 0 56 1,284 4 363 0 4 0 152
Oklahoma a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oregon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Pennsylvania 8,115. 279 58 147 6,748 282 392 0 0 0 209
Puerto Rico 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Rhode Island 32 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 0
South Carolina 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
South Dakota 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 178 0 233
Tennessee 39 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Texas 1,352 7 0 74 263 363 378 0 29 0 238
Utah 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 O- 0 0
Vermont 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Virgin Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Virginia 29 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Washington 4,128 0 0 0 4128 0 0 0 0 0 0
West Virginia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Wisconsin 258 0 0 0 69 0 38 0 0 0 151
Wyoming 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


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 provide services
for animals between consignor
and carrier and from carrier to
consignee. They also care for
animals delayed in transit.

The numbers of sites and
registered carriers and
intermediate handlers for FY 1996
through 1998 are listed next.
Chart 3 shows the number of
carrier and intermediate handler
inspections for the same period.

SITES AND REGISTERED CARRIERS AND
INTERMEDIATE HANDLERS, FY 1996-98

Registered Intermediate
carrier handlers
FY (sites) (sites)
1998 90 292
(858) (465)
1997 96 309
(732) (465)
1996 98 302
(725) (417)

1,000

FY 1996
; FY 1997
FY 1998
800

600
400

200

Carrier facilities

Carrier sites

901 901

CARRIERS AND INTERMEDIATE HANDLERS, FY 1996-98

Carrier inspections Handler facilities Handler sites Handler inspections
Numbers from License and Registration Inspection System (LARIS) data base

Chart 3



PUBLIC OUTREACH

In FY 1998, 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 producing
New products where needed.

AC Expands
Distribution of
Quarterly Report

During FY 1998, AC continued to
expand the distribution of its
quarterly Animal Care Report,
increasing the number of
subscribers from about 1,000 to
1,700. This quarterly report,
which provides brief overviews on
all key issues affecting AC's
administration of the AWA, is
mailed at no charge to program
stakeholders to keep them up to
date on current program
initiatives. Editions of the report
were prepared in the winter/spring,
summer, and fall. The report is
also posted on the AC homepage.

| Safe Pet Travel Campaign
in Full Swing

AC's public affairs campaign on
safe pet travel, which was
launched in September 1997 to
educate the general public about
traveling with their pets, has
resulted in the dissemination of
thousands of pieces of
informational materials. By the
end of FY 1998, AC had distribu-
ted its entire press run of 20,000
full-color brochures. The program
had also disseminated thousands
of factsheets on safe pet travel and
stickers labeled “Live Animals”

that are designed to be to placed
on kennels to meet the AWA
tequirements. Recipients of these
materials have included members
of the general public, veterinary
Clinics, travel agents, and State
Veterinarians.

At the end of FY 1998, AC had an
additional 30,000 copies of the
brochure on order. AC had also
Posted the brochure to its Web
page so that anyone with
electronic access could view it.

AC Reaches Out
Through the
World Wide Web

AC is also improving communica-
tion with stakeholders via its site
on the World Wide Web. AC's site
(http:/Avww.aphis.usda.gov/ac)
provides information on the AWA
regulations, a list of available AC
publications, and much more. It is
also linked to numerous sites of
other organizations involved in
animal care and well-being. In

FY 1998, AC's site was
commended by Government
Executive magazine as providing a
valuable service to the general
public.


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 (PL. 91-579) and
changed the name of the law to the
Animal Welfare Act (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 (PL. 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.”)

The
Regulations

The U.S. Department of Agricul-
ture (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.
(Birds and laboratory rats and
mice are not currently included in
the regulations.)

Licenses are valid unless the
licensee terminates the license
voluntarily or fails to renew it or an
administrative law judge suspends
or revokes the ticense in an
enforcement proceeding.
Licensing fees for dealers and
exhibitors are determined by a

ed

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 al!
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 in the country and Guam,
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin
Islands.

All licensees and registrants must
provide their animals with care

that meets or exceeds USDAS
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 1980's,
USDA amended the requirements
pertaining to the use of animals in
Tesearch. In response to the
Improved Standards for Laboratory
Animals Act, these amendments
established standards for the
exercise of dogs and psycho-
logical well-being of nonhuman
primates. The amendments also
set standards to minimize the pain
and distress of animals; ensure the

|


TABLE 3. ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH, NO PAIN OR DISTRESS—
NO DRUGS NEEDED FOR RELIEF (FY 1998)

Other
Number of Guinea farm Other
all animals Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs animals. animals

Total United States 670,629 33,787 12,69 -31,377 107,644 37,879
Total research 585 ,1 33,705 12,276 = 28,195 18,835
Federal agencies 85,507 82 93. 3,182 11,825 19,044
Alabama 2,558 359 7 37 : 515
Alaska 106 0 0 : 0
Arizona 1,026 88 78 26
Arkansas 2,148 41,155 98 0
California 69,965 14311 3,163 3,113
Colorado 4180868 0 111
Connecticut 2,619 339 72 40
Delaware - 6661 961 26 0
Dist. of Columbia 5,927 10 158 0
Florida 9,460 137 4,222 57
Georgia 4448 352 157 227
Guam 0 0 0 0 0
Hawaii 67 0 2 5 0
Idaho 750 0 0 0 2
{llinois 24,025 1,641 313 449 988
indiana 11,417 1,727 242 210 110
lowa 45143 1,246 1,854 0 2,532
Kansas 11,382 1,214 667 0 1,634
Kentucky 584 12 0 0 2
Louisiana 8,268 186 273 6,258 128
Maine 434 0 0 0 250
Maryland 30,011 M1 94 3,112 122
Massachusetts 29,734 299 1m 564 202
Michigan 21,843 2,942 223 1417 196
Minnesota 8,472 283 18 a 761
Mississippi 542 135 4 0 49
Missouri 18,619 1,639 1,381 25 644
Montana 1772 0 14 13 6
Nebraska 64,637 227 92 47 18,560
Nevada 3545 95 0 1,562 0
New Hampshire 67 0 0 0 0
New Jersey 60,345. 3,846 334 1,179 15
New Mexico 991 48 0 V7 0
New York 24,355 1,650 865 1,086 286
North Carolina 15,802 874 232 384 650
North Dakota 301 24 6 0 0
Ohio 39,591 2,180 398 473 206
Oklahoma 1,022 241 A 0 122
Oregon 966 21 WH 434 108
Pennsylvania 57,694 4,070 4,231 81t 1,032
Puerto Rico 4,130 0 0 950 0
Rhode Island 1,025 230 195 28 20
South Carolina pit 02. 16 an 0 9
South Dakota 5,058 29 26 0 2,843
Tennessee 2,278 80 23 44 15
Texas 26,576 1,241 535 3,500 1,844
Utah 791 1 0 0 0
Vermont 551 7 5 0 4
Virgin Islands 0 0 0 0 0
Virginia 5,934 822 30 887 293
Washington 23,019 224 90 754 55
West Virginia 59 0 0 0 0
Wisconsin 12,550 834 142 2,066 73
Wyoming 329 12 0 0 29



| New Data Base
© on the Horizon

During FY 1998, AC moved closer
to finalizing its new LARIS data
base. When completed, this data
base will provide a single storage
center for licensing and inspection
data on regulated parties through-
out the United States. Eventually,

it will enable inspectors to enter
data from remote locations using
laptop computers. (Currently,
inspectors type up the data and
mail it to regional offices, where
support personnel reenter the
data.)

To support this effort, the data
base will utilize WindowsTM-based
screens that guide users in their
efforts to enter and retrieve
information. The data base will
also automate all of AC's forms.
The result will be an efficient,

easy-to-use system that should
significantly reduce the resources
needed to maintain records on
regulated parties.


AWIC Focuses
on Educational Efforts

In FY 1998, staff from the Animal
Welfare Information Center (AWIC)
fesponded to about 12,000
fequests for information and
publications, including copies of
the AWIC Newsletter, and
distributed more than 38,000
published documents to
requesters, AWIC’s Website
(http:/Awww.nal.usda.gov/awie)
has been visited more than
90,000 times since its inception.
The quarterly AWIC Newsletter
continues to be sent to about
7,000 requesters in the United
States and 40 foreign countries.

AWIC also trained more than
290 individuals in its workshop
entitled “Meeting the Information
Requirements of the Animal
Welfare Act,” which is held at the
National Agricultural Library (NAL)
in Beltsville, MD, and at other
locations throughout the country.
In addition, AWIC officials inter-
acted with more than 2,000 people
who visited their booth at various
conferences and witnessed more
than 1,500 people attend
presentations about AWIC’s
services and how to conduct
searches for alternatives to painful

fesearch procedures. AWIC also
participated in AC’s public meeting
in May.

AWIC staff also produced four new
publications on various aspects of
animals care. These publications
concern animal euthanasia;
alternatives to animal use in the
life sciences; how to handle fish
fed to fish-eating mammals; and
selected data bases for
biomedical, pharmaceutical,
veterinary, and animal science
resources.

In addition, AWIC continued to
distribute its computer CD ROM
disc that contains numerous
Official documents related to
animal welfare (such as the AWA
and the National institutes of

Health's Guide for the Care and
Use of Laboratory Animals). The
development of the CD ROM was
funded by APHIS, the U.S. Depart-
ment of Health and Human
Services’ National institutes of
Health, and NAL. Since December
1996, AWIC has distributed
roughly 1,300 copies of the disc.

Finally, AWIC officials continued to
participate in a broadly supported
effort to produce a searchable
information resource on alterna-
tives to animal experimentation.
The site, called ALTWEB, is
managed by the Johns Hopkins
Center for Alternatives to Animal
Testing and is supported by both
Procter and Gamble and the
Humane Society of the United
States.

Ea


& Primate Import
Workgroup
Established

During FY 1998, AC established
a workgroup that is seeking to
improve APHIS’ oversight of
shipments of imported primates.
This group worked with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
and the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) to
coordinate oversight activities,
improve information sharing
between agencies, and avoid
duplication of efforts. For
example, FWS and CDC officials
agreed to provide APHIS with
information on importers’
compliance histories and dates of
future shipments. In addition, AC

importers and transporters. Such

agreed to work with CDC and FWS — Measures will clearly help to

to address shipping and handling
concerns with unregulated

| Data Base of

improve oversight of shipments of
imported primates in the future.

Circus Elephants Developed

In January and February 1998, a
team of AC field members
inspected all circuses throughout
the United States that use
elephants. On these inspections,
the team completed formal
inspection reports, took photo-
graphs of the elephants, and filled
out evaluation forms containing
specific information on such

things as the condition of the
elephants’ feet. AC used this
information to develop a profile on
each circus elephant and has
compiled these profiles into a
single data base. We are confident
that this data base will serve as a
valuable resource to all AC field
personnel when inspecting
circuses.

| Class B Dealer Traceback
Continues Successes

Since FY 1993, APHIS has
conducted an intensive traceback
effort of 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, including
issuing more than $500,000 in
fines and suspending 5 licenses
and revoking 11 more

The fruits of this effort have been
tremendous. From FY 1993
through 1998, the percentage of
animals traced back to their
original source has increased
from a little more than 40 percent
to more than 90 percent. At the
same time, the number of
fandom-source dealers has
decreased from more than 100 to
fewer than 40. Moreover, the
number of class B dealers under
investigation has decreased from
ahigh of 260 in 1992 to less than
5 in FY 1998.

|


TABLE 4. ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH, WITH PAIN OR DISTRESS—
DRUGS USED FOR RELIEF (FY 1998)

Other

Number of Guinea farm Other
all animals Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs animals animals

Total United States 432,276 40,219 11,780 -25,215 62,119 47,537: 128,038 »~=—«9.904 15,347
Total research 388,160 38,335 11,197 22,204 59,048 42,081 117,890 9,253 8,974
Federal agencies 44.116 1,884 583 3,011 3,071 5,456 10,148 651 6,373
Alabama 4,967 1,498 198 708 54 5 1,549 84 176
Alaska 204 20 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0
Arizona 2,822 444 84 21 7 500 767 at 22
Arkansas 410 7 5 0 151 0 174 0 0
California 65,121 1,844 1,247 2,253 3,463. 11,688 31,055. 2,352 2,700
Colorado 3,190 207 288 19 713 425 680 405 247
Connecticut 6,173 852 103 97 474 971 2,051 12 23
Delaware 6,447 592 142 7 1,760 44 2,088 0 0
Dist. of Columbia 3,684 198 161 196 119 942 705 52 0
Florida 3,740 290 527 262 286 218 832 189 130
Georgia 22,220 826 292 2,825 199 3.771 3,656 2 4,993
Guam 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hawaii 169 0 0 12 32 4 4 0 a]
Idaho 250 28 3 0 0 0 0 30 0
Iinois 12,978 1,544 408 481 2215 . 1,428 3,927 118 97
Indiana §,253 1,556 113 146 467 275 4,494 103 72
lowa 8,155 1,308 291 10 1,837 509 2,824 224 195
Kansas 6711 275 207 158 2,592 958 2,077 0 128
Kentucky 3,616 340 102 102 113 472 1,746 0 21
Louisiana 6,042 751 238 1,677 366 5 2,136 0 53
Maine 193 0 0 0 0 0 62 0 32
Maryland 33,793 1,183 566 2,533 5,948 3,494 6,204 428 133
Massachusetts 22,880 1,095 213 1,792 3,038 2,993 6,267. 831 1,261
Michigan 12,871 2,139 760 410 2,300 868 4180 298 54
Minnesota 9,242 1,762 90 116 1,472 549 2,138 529 136
Mississippi 1,778 450 40 95 0 386 3 12
Missouri 7,871 1,122 295 47 362 92 225
Montana 719 0 0 0 100 116 0
Nebraska 5,546 661 130 1 553 119 1,148
Nevada 539 20 0 108 1 320 0
New Hampshire 459 20 57 2 0 0 0
New Jersey 26,827 2,248 601 1,550 13,371 63 26
New Mexico 573 150 0 269 23 10 0
New York 21,788 2,482 677 628 3,124 797 150
North Carolina 13,357 1,234 551 1,286 1,166 284 123
North Dakota 436 12 20 0 40 230 0
Ohio 21,875 2,746 560 a4 2,394 242 206
Oklahoma 2,066 794 79 86 93 7 69
Oregon 4,098 122 A 1,604 755 112 42
Pennsylvania 22,279 2,472 687 1,045 7,351 316 511
Puerto Rico 1,163 54 8 924 14 0 0
Rhode Island 1,639 14 113 a 87 235 329
South Carolina 1,850 244 160 120 24 0 48
South Dakota 495 25 9 6 a7 0 22
Tennessee 7,783 974 126 390 643 86 138
Texas 19,059 1,655 609 1,457 1,074 519 1,494
Utah 1,796 194 36 18 335 216 48
Vermont 212 8 6 0 0 0 0
Virgin Islands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Virginia 9,879 1,051 147 691 266 4 89
Washington 7,087 844 210 186 183 264 764 40
West Virginia 826 4 68 5 312 68 4 0
Wisconsin 8,966 1,797 497 440 2,069 86 501 89
Wyoming 179 26 15 0 12 0 0 54

Ed



Innovative
Penalties

© Ina March 1998 case with a
licensee whose circus
elephants contracted
tuberculosis, APHIS settled the
litigation for a $60,000 fine and
a 45-day license suspension.
Of the $60,000, $30,000 went
toward testing and treating the
infected elephants, and $30,000
was donated to a foundation to
conduct research in the
diagnosis and treatment of
elephant tuberculosis.

In April 1998, APHIS settled a
case for $50,000 against a
research facility charged with
violations pertaining to the
handling of animals and
protocol review procedures.
Of that amount, $20,000 must
be donated to an APHIS-
approved nonprofit organization
that promotes or develops
alternatives to animal testing;
$20,000 must be spent on
improving housing facilities;
and $10,000 is payable to the
Treasurer of the United States.

The 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,

The lab must also contract with
an outside consultant to review
its animal care program.

in April and September 1998,
APHIS settled cases with two
different airlines. In the settle-
ments, the airlines each agreed
to donate $25,000 to an APHIS-
approved organization to study
methods to promote the safe
and humane handling of
animals during transportation.
The results of this study will be
disseminated to all carriers
Tegistered under the AWA.

In July 1998, AC settled a case
against a circus pertaining to
the death of a baby elephant.
Under the settlement, the circus
agreed to donate $10,000 to a
nonprofit elephant sanctuary
and $10,000 to an outside
organization for research
relating to gastrointestinal or
infectious diseases of
elephants. Both the sanctuary
and the research organization
must be approved by APHIS.
The circus also agreed to
enhance its training programs
for animal handlers.

© Abusive or potentially violent
nature of licensee or registrant,

© Type of facility and species of
animal involved, and

© Media, public, or animal
protection group interest.

When a case is given this designa-
tion, 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.

NUMBERS OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
CONDUCTED AND RESOLVED, FY 1996-98

Cases Investigated and Reviewed

Submitted
Submitted to for formal
FY Cases IES staff prosecution
1998 456 416 60
1997 365 118 58
1996 370 126 78
Cases Resolved
Administrative
Official Stipulations law judges’
FY warnings offered/settled decisions
1998 219 100/66 82
1997 167 86/49 98
1996 182 85/45 84
Sanctions Imposed
Revocations,
Fines imposed by suspensions,
administrative Fines imposed and disqualifi-
FY law judges by stipulation cations
1998 $378,900 $89,763 34
1997 $822,200 $46,240 43
1996 $1,002,250 $48,340 29
The Results Are penalties into facility renovations,
. employee training, and other areas
in the Numbers to improve the conditions for their
animals.
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 prosecuting

cases and the ability to expedite
high-priority cases.

in addition, APHIS obtained more

than $465,000 in monetary
penalties. The agency required
licensees and registrants to put
more than $170,000 of these

The next tabulation provides
detailed information on the
number of enforcement actions
conducted and resolved during

FY 1998. 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.


AUCTION MARKET
OBSERVATIONS,
FY 1996-98

Total
auction market
FY observations

1998 57
1997 7
1996 59

Summary of
Complaints
and Searches

\n addition to inspections, AC
personnel routinely conduct
searches for unlicensed or
unregistered persons. They also
investigate all 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 and, each fiscal year,
conducts hundreds of such
inquiries.

FY 1998 AWA INSPECTIONS
Total number Number of Total number — Number of
of facilities inspections of facilities inspections
(and sites) by category (and sites)! by category
Inspections for Compliance” Other Types of Inspections
Dealers 3,926 Prelicensing and
(4,168) 4,922 preregistration
inspections NA 1,579
Research 1,267
facilities (2,206) 2,262 Auction market
observations NA 57
Exhibitors 2,198
(2,696) 2,803 Attempted inspec-
tions of dealers
Intransit 292 and exhibitors NA 791
handlers (465) 197
Total 2,427
Intransit 90 2
carriers? (858) 525 ‘Total of Inspections
for Compliance and
Total 7,773 10,709 Other Inspections 13,136
(10,393)
+ See the glossary of terms forthe definitions of “site” and “facility” reasons—usvally because there was no one available at the facility
‘wien the inspector arrived unannounced.)
° Inspections for compliance are unannounced inspections and
reinspections. These do not include prelicensing or preregistration 2 Intransit cartier is a category representing commercial arines. Each
inspections, auction market observations, or attempted inspections. airline may have two or more animal transportation sites at each airport
(Prelicensing/preregistration inspections are announced. Observations of it serves. Due to frequent changes in attne activities and othe factors,
licensed and unlicensed auction markets are made to locate unlicensed the number of sites may vary.
dealers. Attempted inspections could not be performed for certain

AC Inspectors Go Beyond

the Numbers
AC inspectors routinely do excep- conditions and animal
tional work that goes beyond the husbandry. Although the
call of duty and is not reflected in inspector and State officials
the numbers above. The vignettes worked to bring the 200 into
below describe three of these compliance, the facility
exceptional efforts. ultimately failed to operate

within the law.

© In the fall of 1997, an AC
inspector took an active role in
ensuring the health and welfare
of animals at a zoo in New
Jersey. Prior inspections over
several years disclosed
problems involving facility

Accordingly, officials from New
Jersey Fish, Game, and Wildlife
shut down the zoo and ordered
that all of the animals be
relocated. The State then called
‘on the AC inspector to help

with the relocation effort. The
inspector, in turn, worked with
AC inspectors throughout the
country to find suitable homes
for the animals. She also
assisted USDA officials in
successfully settling its case
against the zoo for a 20-year
license disqualification and a
$27,500 fine.

In March 1998, an AC inspector
noted numerous serious
deficiencies in meeting the AWA
standards at an animal dealer's
premises in Ardmore, OK.
These deficiencies included
inadequate sanitation, veterinary


APPENDIX

TABLE 1. NUMBER OF LICENSEES AND REGISTRANTS,
BY FACILITIES AND NUMBER OF SITES (FY 1998)

Registered Licensed Licensed Active inactive
intermediate Registered Class A Class B Licensed Registered research fesearch
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 292 465 90 858 2,892 3,024 1,084 1,144 2,178 2673 20 23 1,227 2,145 40. 61
Alabama 2 3 0. 2 5 6 aa} aa) 34 39 0 0 14 3t 0. 0
Alaska 3°05 4. 14 0 0 0 0 aa] 14 0 0 4 9 0 0
Arizona 9 14 2 8 7 7 7 10 32 43 0 0 10 22 Qo. 0
Arkansas 1 2 0 8 148 153 25 29 28 34 0 0 10 «17 0.0
California 3762 8 96 16 «20 20 23° 219-295 1 1 171278 12. 20
Colorado 7 M1 2.1 6 6 5 6 29 39 0 0 21 42 22
Connecticut 8 12 1 8 0 0 3 4 36 39 0 0 20 0 0
Delaware 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 7 7 0 0 8 9 0 0
Dist. of Columbia 0 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 ti 0. 0
Florida 2 44 4. 28 (39 58 65 = 239-339 1 1 23043 4.5
Georgia 12, 13 3 a4 2222 10 1 40 49 2 2 16 51 0. 0
Guam 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0. 0
Hawaii 22 22 5 30 0 0 0 0 14 18 0 0 2 8 0 0
Idaho 0 0 0 5 3 3 1 1 15 19 0 0 3 8 0.0
Illinois 9 9 1 12 420 43 35 36 132147 2 2 390 0 0
Indiana 3.5 1 13 32.34 34 37 64 65 0 0 2 25 0 0
lowa 0 3 1 25 65273 66 70 33 39 0 0 18 44 0 0
Kansas o 0 1 9 371 378 71 7 22 24 0 0 7 27 2 2
Kentucky 5 10 ton 7 8 10 10 14 15 1 1 9 ar 1341
Louisiana 1 3 0 8 15 14 9 9 18 22 0 0 1300417 0 0
Maine 3 8 0 5 1 1 2 5 10 10 0 0 g9 12 0 0
Maryland 7 16 0. 15 2 5 3 6 17 20 0 0 42 53 1641
Massachusetts 5 9 1 7 6 8 8 a 4 St 1 1 82 134 0 0
Michigan 4 9 3. 87 13. 16 33 41 79 85 5 6 33° «88 o 0
Minnesota 1.3 2 5 72 76 36 33 51 58 2 2 28 42 0 0
Mississippi 0 0 0 0 7 7 3 3 14 16 0 0 6 7 0. 60
Missouri 5 6 3 36 «949 974 182145 43 59 0 0 3973 0 0
Montana 0 0 1 18 Woot 2 2 19 23 0 0 6 10 1 1
Nebraska 1 1 0 6 129 129 15 16 12 12 0 0 13 (20 0 0
Nevada 3.8 1 7 3 3 8 7 50 63 0 0 2 1 0 0
New Hampshire 1 1 1 4 1 1 0 1 V7 19 0 0 3 4 0 0
New Jersey 6 8 2 6 5 W v7 39 48 0 0 4464 2 2
New Mexico 4 5 3 2 1 1 2 1 12 2 0 0 8 24 0 0
New York 2 30 6 39 26 28 30 33 108 128 0 0 95 142 3.3
North Carolina 5 12 2 2 8 10 ral 26 31 37 0 0 2457 1 2
North Dakota 1 1 0 23 24 5 2 3 u 15 0 0 3 3 o 0
Ohio 7 12 2.21 2732 37 40 64 75 3 4 46 93 1 4
Oklahoma 2 5 0 16 307 «321 47 50 24 28 0 0 15 28 1 2
Oregon 3 064 1 7 35 (39 31 34 42 46 0 0 8 18 1 2
Pennsylvania 15 18 1 32 101 109 aT 53 88 109 0 0 79 122 1 2
Puerto Rico 1 2 4 10 0 0 1 1 6 6 0 0 7 10 1 1
Rhode Island 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 9 "1 0 0 8 16 0 0
South Carolina 1 2 Q- 10 6 10 4 4 15 16 0 0 9 16 0 0
South Dakota o 0 0 22 78 = 80 14 16 19 22 0 0 6 9 0 0
Tennessee 4 9 1. 18 10 11 10 12 28 31 0 0 7 18 3. 4
Texas 22 39 6 67 72 80 = 101 116 = 156 = 200 0 0 84 134 0 0
Utah 2 2 210 2 1 3 3 a 12 0 0 7 30 0 0
Vermont 1 2 0 3 1 1 3 3 3 3 0 0 2 4 0 0
Virgin Islands 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60
Virginia 9 15 3 8 1 3 10 12 42 50 1 1 1531 0. 0
Washington 7 10 7 18 7 8 12 14 30 37 0 0 2753 2 6
West Virginia 1 1 0 1 1 1 10 10 W 13 0 0 5 8 0. 60
Wisconsin 3. 3 4 8 7 24 ai 23 87 94 1 2 28 7 1 1
Wyoming o.0 0 0 4 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 3 9 0 0



Additional
Policies
Near Completion

At the end of FY 1998, AC was
preparing to publish several
additional AWA policies:

© Space and Exercise Require-
ments for Traveling
Exhibitors. The policy spelis
out when licensees are required
to meet full primary enclosure
space requirements and/or
provide sufficient exercise
space and time for animals
during traveling exhibits.

.

Necropsy Requirements.
The policy clarifies when a
necropsy should be performed
on AWA-regulated animals and
details certain components that
are necessary for an appropriate
postmortem procedure. The
policy also states that necropsy
records must be maintained at a
facility for at least 1 year or as
specified in the AWA regula-
tions and standards.

.

Criteria for Licensing
Hoofstock Dealers. \n
general, the policy requires
hoofstock dealers to be licensed
if they sell more than 10 regu-
lated animals for regulated

.

} a

purposes during a 12-month
period. Regulated purposes
include using animals in
research, exhibiting them to the
public, transporting them in
commerce, or selling them at
the wholesale level. The policy
defines hoofstock as any
hoofed animal, such as deer,
pig, llama, or sheep, and the
Policy applies to all hoofstock.

Adequate Enclosures for
Flying and Aquatic Species.
For flying species, the policy
requires that sufficient space be
afforded for both roosting and
flying. For aquatic species, the
policy requires that primary
enclosures contain both dry
and aquatic portions that each
afford the animals sufficient
space to make normal postural
and social adjustments with
freedom of movement.

Proper Diets for Large
Felids. Among other things,
this policy notes that a number
of commercially prepared diets
are available for large felids,
such as lions and tigers, and
strongly recommends adherence
toa strict feeding schedule.
The policy also requires
attending veterinarian approval
of locally prepared diets to
ensure nutritional adequacy.

Regulatory

| Listing of
Initiatives

Several additional regulatory
initiatives were also under devel-
opment at the end of FY 1998.
Below is a listing of the initiatives
not discussed in detail earlier in
this section. The items are listed
as either under consideration and
not yet published in the Federal
Register, published in the Federal
Register and open for comment,
or previously open for comment
and now under review by the
Department.

Notices:

Guidelines for Farm Animals
(under consideration)

Swim-With-The-Dolphins:
Enforcement Notice (under
consideration)

Affirmation of Interim Rules:
Resting Surfaces for Dogs and
Cats (under consideration)

Proposed Rules:

Clarifying Meaning of “Field
Study” (under review)

Revisions to AWA Licensing
Requirements (under
consideration)

Identification of Unweaned
Puppies and Kittens (under
consideration)

Exotic Canids and Felids: Mini-
mum Age for Transport (under
consideration)

Standards for Marine Mammals:
Consensus Language (under
consideration)

Veterinary Medical Records (under
consideration)

Confiscation of Animals (under
consideration)

Horse Protection (under
consideration)

Final Rules
Nomenclature Changes (under
consideration)

Listing of
Other Policy
Initiatives

At the end of FY 1998, several
other new or revised policies were
under development. The list that
follows does not repeat those
discussed earlier in this section.

New Policies:

Medical Records

Prairie Dogs

Training/Handling of Dangerous
Animals

Licensing of Rehabilitation
Facilities and Education
Exhibitors

Regulation of Farm Animals
(adopting industry standards)

Regulation of Farm Animals Used
To Test and Manufacture
Biologics

Policies Being Revised:
Annual Report for Research
Facilities


HOW USDA ADMINISTERS THE LAW

Animal
Care

Within USDA, the AC program of
the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS) 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 three
fegional offices in Annapolis, MD,
Fort Worth, TX, and Sacramento,
CA. These offices are charged
with enforcing the AWA in each of
their respective areas. The map on
this page shows AC's regional
structure. The box provides the Each regional AC office employs a

addresses, phone numbers, and cadre of field veterinary medical USDA-APHIS-ANIMAL CARE
fax numbers for all AC offices, as * officers and animal care
well as AC's homepage on the inspectors. The number of field Headquarters Office | Western Region |
World Wide Web and e-mail inspectors at the end of FY 1998 .
address for incoming was 71. These employees are Aida Mo gov) 3a Sacre gautes
correspondence. highly qualified and have an Phone: (301) 734-4981 Phone: (916) 857-6205

Fax: (301) 734-4978 Fax: (916) 857-6212

ANIMAL CARE Eastern Region World Wide Web
. Homepage
2568-A Riva Road, #302

Annapolis, MD 21401 .
Phone: (410) 571-8692 www.aphis.usda.gov/ac

Fax: (410) 224-2854
E-mail Address
Central Region ace@usda.gov

P.O. Box 6258

Fort Worth Federal Center,
Building 11

Fort Worth, TX 76115

Phone: (817) 885-6910

Fax: (817) 885-6917



proper use of anesthetics,
analgesics, and tranquilizers; and
Tequire researchers to consider
alternatives to painful procedures.

To ensure that these standards are
met, the amendments require each
tesearch 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.

In June 1990, USDA began
regulating horses used for
biomedical or other nonagricul-
tural research and other farm
animals used for biomedical or
other nonagricultural research or
for nonagricultural exhibition.
Currently, the standards in Title 9,
CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter A,

Part 3, Subpart F, apply. USDA is
considering establishing specific
standards for these animals.

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 1997, USDA published a final
tule that removed the provisions
allowing the permanent tethering

of dogs as a means of primary
enclosure. The temporary
tethering of dogs for health or
other reasons is permitted if
licensees obtain approval from
their AC inspector or regional
Office. The final rule on this
matter went into effect September
12, 1997.

In FY 1998, APHIS published
three new rules that further
increase the protection for animals
covered under the AWA:

In January, AC amended the
AWA standards pertaining to
wire flooring. Under the new
Tules, AC now requires that
floors in primary enclosures for
dogs and cats be constructed of
coated wire if the wire is 1/8
inch in diameter or smaller. The
coating must be made of a
material such as plastic or
fiberglass. AC also requires
that any such wire floor, whether

coated or uncoated, be
constructed so that the floor
does not bend or sag between
the supports.

In March, AC revised the AWA
temperature requirements. The
amendments clarify the current
climatic conditions allowed for
dogs and cats in indoor,
sheltered, and mobile housing
facilities; in primary
conveyances used for
transportation; and in animal
holding areas of airport
terminal facilities. The rules
state that animals covered

_ under the AWA not be exposed

to combinations of time,
temperature, and humidity that
would adversely affect the
animal's health and well-being.
The responsible party must take
into account the animal's health
status, breed, age, and other
pertinent factors.

{n September, APHIS published
a final rule that establishes new
requirements for “swim-with-
the-dolphins” programs. These
interactive programs involve
direct human contact with the
dolphins and pose specific
risks that were not directly
addressed by the previous AWA
Tegulations. Among other
things, the new rules require
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. At the end of
FY 1998, APHIS was
considering temporarily
suspending certain aspects of
the new rule pertaining to
wading programs until
additional public comment
could be solicited.


CHARTING THE FUTURE:
AC’S STRATEGIC DIRECTION

In April 1996, AC launched its
strategic direction initiative to
examine all aspects of program
operations and identify areas for
improvement. Specifically, the
initiative focused on enhancing
statutory, regulatory, and
procedural authorities; providing
proactive leadership in establish-
ing acceptable practices of animal
care and treatment; maximizing
resources for enhanced program
delivery and efficiency; respond-
ing to external concerns and

expectations through objective
action; and empowering,
supporting, and developing
employees.

In April 1998, the strategic
direction initiative formally ended.
However, numerous projects
launched under the initiative
Moved toward completion
throughout FY 1998. The
remainder of this section
discusses these accomplishments.

Performance-Based

Management

Under the Government
Performance and Results Act, AG
has taken an active role in
measuring its effectiveness in
meeting the AWA's mandate.
Toward this end, AC has identified
seven specific performance
indicators: percentage of facilities
in compliance, percentage of
animals affected by noncompli-
ance, average number of days until
a case is resolved, percentage of
employee participation in the
inspection quality and uniformity
program, and average customer
satisfaction with the AWA regula-
tions, the program's informational
materials and electronic access,
and overall program delivery.

AC is also working to establish
baseline levels of performance for
each of these indicators and goals
for improving in the future. For
the first three indicators, AC is
using its Licensee Application and
Registrant Information System
(LARIS) data base, which provides
historical inspection data.
Through this system, AC has
already established a baseline for
the percentage of facilities in
compliance (55.7 percent) and a
goal (60 percent) for FY 1999. AC
is currently gathering baseline
data for the other two indicators.

For the fourth indicator, AC has
developed an Inspection Quality
and Uniformity Program. This
program will provide inspectors
from different regions of the
country the opportunity to work

together to exchange ideas,
identify any disparities in
inspection procedures, and
provide recommendations to
Management. AC's baseline level
of participation in this program is
4.2 percent of all field personnel.
It has set an ambitious goal of
increasing this to 50 percent of
field personnel by FY 1999.

For the final three indicators, AC
surveyed 3,700 randomly selected
AWA licensees and registrants in
February 1997. Based on the
survey responses, AC officials
established baseline performance
levels and goals. AC is seeking to

improve its rating on informational
materials and electronic access
from 3.24 to 4.0, its rating on the
effectiveness of its regulations
from 3.58 to 4.0, and its overall
customer satisfaction rating from
3.59 to 4.0. All of these goals are
set for FY 1999. AC plans to
survey the same licensees and
registrants at the end of FY 1999
to measure its progress.

In addition, AC intends to survey
the animal welfare community in
the future to obtain their ratings of
program operations. At the end of
FY 1998, this survey was still
being developed.


INSPECTION HIGHLIGHTS

AC personnel perform three major
types of inspections: prelicensing
and preregistration inspections,
unannounced compliance
inspections, and auction market
observations.

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. Preregis-
tration inspections are not
required under the Act, but many
facilities request AC's consulta-
tion. 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
the remainder of the facilities,

Auction market observations are
conducted to determine whether
animals covered under the AWA
are receiving care that meets the
standards and regulations. These
observations are also performed to
examine buyers’ and sellers’
acquisition and disposition
records for AWA-regulated
animals.

APHIS’ Inspection Strategy:
Quality Over Quantity

In 1997, AC modified its
inspection strategy. After 30 years
of focusing on conducting as
many inspections as possible, the
program began performing more
indepth inspections—particularly
of those licensees and registrants
who historically had compliance
problems.

The result has been a decrease in
overall number of inspections over
the past 2 FY’s but a significant
increase in the amount of time
spent inspecting individual
facilities. AC has used this time to

approach that APHIS firmly
believes makes better use of AC's
inspection resources.

To support this focused inspection
strategy, AC implemented a formal
risk-based inspection system in
February 1998. This system uses
several objective criteria, including
past compliance history, to
determine the inspection
frequency of each licensed and
fegistered facility.

Under the system, facilities that
meet all of the criteria qualify for

or none of the criteria qualify for
high inspection frequency and are *
subject to inspections at least
every 6 months. Those in the
middle qualify for medium
inspection frequency and are
inspected once a year. AC, of
course, remains committed to
inspecting research facilities once
a year, as required under the law.

The next tabulation details the
number of inspections of licensees
and registrants conducted during
FY 1998. Subsequent tabulations
chronicle the number of different
types of inspections conducted
from FY 1996 through FY 1998.

APHIS uses 2 repotton Fever more carefully inspect licensees’ low inspection frequency and are COMPLIANCE

This system is described in detail and registrants’ animals, subject to inspections once every INSPECTIONS.
structures, and records—an = . Faciliti ,

inthe next section ofthis report is—a 2-3 years. Facilities that meet few FY 1996-98

If AC inspectors discover Total Total

Conditions that are not in PRELICENSING/PREREGISTRATION facitiies compliance

compliance with the regulations, INSPECTIONS, FY 1996-98 FY (sites) inspections

AC either establishes a deadline ,

for correcting these items or, for

violations that cause unnecessary Preregistration 1998 (10393) 10,709

suffering or death, immediately brelcensing i ' inspections of . :

investigates the matter. Inspectors relicensing inspections of researc! 1997 7.819

are required to reinspect any FY Total Dealers Exhibitors facilities (10,534) 12,057

facilities where deadlines are

given. If the conditions remain 1998 1,579 1,074 505 0 1996 nl 12,635

uncorrected, AC documents them 1997 2150 11525 589 36 (10,366) s

for possible legal action 1996 1,932 1,355 533 44

,


Automated Telephone Service

Assists Travelers

In FY 1998, more than

2,500 members of the general
public used AC's toll-free,
24-hour, automated telephone
voice response service
(800-545-USDA). This service
provides information on the
humane handling of cats and dogs
during transport, including the

AWA requirements for tempera-
ture, 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.

E-FOIA Gives Public
Quick Access to Data

Throughout FY 1998, AC continued
to expand the amount of program
information available on APHIS’
Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) Website
(http://foia.aphis.usda.gov).

Under the project, AC has made
the names and locations ofall *
licensees and registrants available.
{thas also made recent inspection
findings for these individuals

available and will continue to add
additional information in the
future.

AC also responded to numerous
animal-welfare-related FOIA
requests the old-fashioned way.
The next tabulation lists the
number of FOIA requests received
for the past 3 fiscal years.

ANIMAL-WELFARE-RELATED FOIA

Assisting
the Media

In FY 1998, AC assisted media
Officials in various ways.
Altogether, the program fielded
about 1,500 calls from members of
the media and issued more than
100 press releases. Most of these
releases provided information
concerning enforcement actions
taken against licensees and
registrants (such as settlements,
fines, suspensions, and
confiscations). The other releases
concerned matters such as AC's
advance notice of proposed
Tulemaking pertaining to the Doris
Day Animal League petition and
publication of final rules on wire

Answering
Public Inquiries

During FY 1998, APHIS received
and responded to thousands of
inquiries about animal welfare
from individual citizens,
concerned groups, the Office of
the President, and Members of
Congress. Other Federal agencies

flooring and temperature
requirements.

AC personnel also gave numerous
local and national television,
radio, and newspaper/magazine
interviews on various issues
relating to the AWA. These
included interviews with CNN,
CBS, The New York Times, The
Wall Street Journal, and most
other national media outlets.
Outreach efforts also included
interviews with local media outlets
in all 50 States and several foreign
countries, including Japan,
England, and Australia.

also refer animal welfare concerns
to APHIS for response. The next
tabulation lists the numbers of
animal welfare inquiries received
by APHIS during FY 1996 through
1998.

REQUESTS RECEIVED BY APHIS,

FY 1996-1998
FOIA
FY requests
1998 657"
1997 824"
1996 403

* This figure includes both official FOIA requests processed through
APHIS’ FOIA office and requests for inspection reports processed
through AC's regional offices. In prior years, all such requests were
processed through the FOIA office at headquarter; field-processed
requests have been added to the number of headquarters-processed
requests to reach an accurate total

ANIMAL WELFARE CORRESPONDENCE
RECEIVED BY APHIS, FY 1996-98

Correspondence Correspondence
received/dispatched received/dispatched
FY by headquarters by regional offices
1998 2,495 22,280
1997 4,188 20,396
1996 6,155 37,736



United States
Department of
Agriculture

Animal and
Plant Health
Inspection
Service

APHIS 41-35-059

USDA
pes esas

Animal Welfare Report

Fiscal Year 1998

Report of the Secretary of Agriculture
to the President of the Senate and
the Speaker of the House of Representatives



INSPECTIONS BY BUSINESS TYPE

Animal
Dealers

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.

There are two classes of dealer
licensees. Class A licensees are

The numbers of Class A and B
licensed dealers and sites for

FY 1996 through 1998 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 1,034 Class B dealers, APHIS
estimates that fewer than

those individuals who deal only in 40 supply dogs and cats to
animals that they breed and raise. research.
Class B licensees include brokers,
operators of auction sales, and
“punchers.”
A AND B DEALERS, FY 1996-98

6,000,

FY 1996
3 FY 1997
FY 1998
4.075 4,043 3.996

5,000

4,000|

3,000|

‘Number of facilities

4265 4387 4168

Tota sites Inspections

‘Numbers from License and Registration inspection System (LARIS) data base

5,819

Chart 1

LICENSED DEALERS, FY 1996-98

Total Class A Class B

dealers dealers dealers

FY (sites) (sites) (sites)
1998 3,926 2,892 1,034
(4,168) (3,024) (1,144)

1997 4,043 2,996 1,047
(4,387) (3,151) (1,236)

1996 4,075 2,976 1,099
(4,265) (3,043) (1,222)



care, and shelter from the
elements. In short, the dogs
and cats at this facility were in
bad shape and suffering from
exposure to severe weather
conditions.

The inspector not only
documented these items for
future enforcement action
against the licensee, she also
went the extra mile to ensure
that the animals received
immediate care. In this effort,
she worked with other AC
Central Region personnel and

local humane officiais to
relocate nearly 100 dogs to a
shelter. Fortunately, the owner
of the facility recognized the
gravity of the situation and
voluntarily gave the animals to
the shelter before they had to be
formally confiscated. The
dealer also voluntarily gave up
his license to operate under the
AWA.

In June and July of 1998,
several AC officials, including
Western Region Director Robert
Gibbens, worked extensively to

find homes for three marine
mammals from the Depoe Bay
Aquarium in Oregon. Ina
settlement between APHIS and
the aquarium, Depoe Bay
Officials agreed to turn over two
sea lions and a harbor seal to
APHIS for relocation. The
Officials also agreed to a
permanent revocation of their
license and a $7,000 fine—
$6,000 of which is suspended
provided Depoe Bay officials do
Not conduct any AWA-regulated
activities.

In seeking new homes for the
animals, AC personnel
contacted aquariums
throughout the United States.
In the end, the animals were
temporarily relocated from
Depoe Bay to the Oregon Coast
Aquarium in early September.
Subsequently, the sea lions
were moved to permanent
quarters al the Indiana
Children’s Zoo, and the harbor
seal went to California's Sea
World.



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
ina 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. Ifa
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 schoo!
(other than elementary or
secondary), institution,
organization, or person that uses
or intends to use live animals in
Tesearch, 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.

* Anactive registered research
facility is a USDA-registered
research facility that currently
utilizes animals covered by the
AWA for teaching, testing, or
experimentation.

© An inactive registered research
facility is a USDA-registered
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 warm-
blooded animals (except birds and
laboratory rats and mice) for
Tesearch or exhibition purposes;
(4) wholesale any animals (except
birds and laboratory rats and
mice); or (5) exhibit pet animals in
a room 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—The physical location
where animals are used, housed,
or maintained by a licensed or
registered facility. A licensed or
registered facility may have one or
more animal sites. A site may be a
foom, building, outdoor run area,
or similar type of facility used to
hold or work on animals.

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.


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
tegulatory 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 AWAs 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
that 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,
z00s, 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 Preregistra-
tion inspection—An
announced inspection made,
after application for licensure or
registration has been submitted,
to ascertain compliance with the
AWA regulations 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,
tesearch facilities, exhibitors,
operators of auction sales, and
carriers.


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 profes-
sional groups, industry organiza-
tions, humane groups, the
scientific community, and other
concerned associations or individ-
uals. In FY 1998, AC personnel
attended about 288 industry training
sessions and meetings and gave
presentations at 137 of them.

AC's
Management
Team

AC is led by Deputy Administrator
-Ron DeHaven, D.V.M. DeHaven
was head of AC’s Western Sector
Office from 1988 until his move to
AC headquarters in November
1996. Supporting DeHaven

are three regional directors:

Dr. Elizabeth Goldentyer in the
Eastern Region, Dr. Walter
Christensen in the Central Region,
and Dr. Robert Gibbens in the
Western Region. All are
veterinarians with many years of
experience with AC and extensive
knowledge regarding the AWA.

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

Animal Welfare

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, MD, and has regional
offices in Annapolis and Fort
Worth.

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.

AC
Appropriations
for FY 1998

In FY 1998, the AC program
received appropriations totaling
about $9 million for activities
Telated to animal welfare. The next
tabulation shows APHIS’ animal-
welfare-related appropriations for
FY 1994 through FY 1998 in
unadjusted dollars.

APPROPRIATIONS
FOR ANIMAL
WELFARE,

FY 1994-98

Annual appropriation
for enforcement of the
FY Animal Welfare Act

1998 $9,175,000
1997 $9,182,000
1996 $9,185,000
1995 $9,262,000
1994 $9,262,000

USDA-NAL-AWIC

AWIC Coordinator

National Agricultural Library
10301 Baltimore Blvd.
Beltsville, MD 20705

(301) 504-6212

awic@nal.usda.gov



SPECIAL INITIATIVES

In FY 1998, AC pursued many
operational enhancements that did
not fall within the scope of its

strategic direction. These projects
all come under the broad rubric of
special initiatives.

| AC Helps Ensure Health and
4 Safety of “Free Willy” Star

During FY 1998, AC played an
active role in ensuring the health
and safety of Keiko, the killer
whale that starred in the movie
“Free Willie.” First, in November
1997, AC established and
coordinated an independent panel
of marine mammal experts from
around the country to obtain an
impartial and comprehensive
assessment of Keiko's health. (The
animal's health had been disputed
by the foundation that owned him,
which said he was healthy, and the
aquarium that housed him, which
said his health was in question.)

The study ultimately concluded
that Keiko was in good health but
could benefit from companionship
and increased exercise. The data
collected from the study have
since been used to advance the
knowledge of marine mammals
throughout the world.

Later in FY 1998, AC personnel
helped ensure Keiko's health
during his historic relocation from
an aquarium in Oregon toa sea
pen in Iceland. The move was the
second step in an effort to return
Keiko to his native waters in the
North Atlantic.

To assist with the move, AC
officials met directly with
government and veterinary
representatives from Iceland to
discuss the findings of the
independent panel's review and
the AWA requirements for Keiko’s
move. AC officials also
coordinated with the U.S. Air
Force to help arrange a nonstop
flight from Oregon to Iceland, and
they monitored Keiko’s transport
from the aquarium pool to the Air
Force jet.

We are pleased to report that all
went weil and that Keiko appears
healthy and happy in his sea pen
in Iceland. Keiko will continue to
be monitored to determine if an
eventual return to the wild is
possible.

| Class A Dealer
Workgroup Established

In December 1997, AC formed a
class A dealer workgroup to
examine enforcement of the AWA
at commercial breeding facilities
throughout the country and make
recommendations for improve-
ment. The group is modeled on
the highly successful approach
that was used to improve enforce-
ment of class B dealers over the
past several years. The group's
first meeting was in St. Louis in
early December. The team toured
breeding facilities in the area and
identified several possible ways to
improve enforcement.

One of these recommendations,
which entails training AC field
personnel on the inspection of

dealer facilities, has been
approved for FY 1999. The goal of
the training is to ensure uniformity
of inspection procedures through-
out the United States so that all
dealers are required to provide the
same level of care to their animals.

Another recommendation entails
the development of a policy that
spells out the minimum require-
ments for maintaining medical
records for all covered animals.
All AWA licensees, including
dealers, would be required to
follow the policy. At the end of
FY 1998, the policy was under
development. The team’s other
recommendations were also under
review.


INITIATIVES

REGULATORY AND POLICY

Tuberculosis (TB) Testing

Now Required

In January 1998, APHIS began
requiring that all captive elephants
in the United States be periodically
tested for TB. This requirement,
detailed in an APHIS policy, is
being enforced under the
adequate veterinary care
standard in the AWA regulations.
Around 515 regulated elephants
are affected by this new require-
ment. Any animals found positive
must undergo quarantine and/or
treatment

To support this policy, AC
developed a protocol called
“Guidelines for the Control of
Tuberculosis in Elephants,” dated
November 1997. This protocol
provides specific testing,
surveillance, and treatment
guidelines for meeting the new

fequirements. Licensees must
either follow the protocol or
provide a comparable testing and
Monitoring program that ensures
the welfare of captive elephants
and prevents the spread of the
disease to other animals. Copies
of the protocol were sent to all
licensees who own elephants. The
protocol is also posted on AC's
homepage.

By the end of FY 1998, results
from about 370 elephants had
been received; 10 tests were
positive for TB. Four of these
elephants had died from compli-
cations associated with the
disease, three were still under-
going treatment, and three had
been successfully treated and
released from quarantine.

| Petition on Regulating
Rats, Mice, and Birds

In the spring of 1998, the
Alternative Research and
Development Foundation, a group
affiliated with the American
Antivivisection Society, filed a
petition that would have USDA
exercise its authority under the
AWA to regulate rats, mice, and
birds. To do so, AC would have to
amend the AWA regulations to
include these species under the
regulatory definition of “animal.”

If adopted, the petition would
significantly increase AC's
regulatory responsibilities and
affect oversight of other program
activities (e.g. inspections of dog
dealers and animal exhibitors).
Accordingly, at the end of FY 1998,
AC was considering publishing 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.

“Doris Day”
Advance Notice

In late June 1998, AC published a
long-awaited advance notice of
proposed rulemaking on the
tegulation of dog and cat dealers.
This notice announced USDAs
formal consideration of amending
the AWA definition of “retail pet
store” and requiring that breeders
of hunting, security, and breeding
dogs be licensed. Both of these
changes were contained in the
Doris Day Animal League Petition
that AC published as a notice in
the Federal Register in FY 1997.

Recognizing that these rule
changes could severely strain
available AWA enforcement
resources by adding numerous.
new licensees, AC raised the
possibility of increasing the

number of breeding female dogs
and cats that may be owned
without obtaining an AWA license.
In doing so, AC requested input
on the number of these animals
that dealers should be allowed to
own without being licensed and
the impact that these rule changes
would have on currently licensed
and unlicensed dealers.

The extended comment period on
the advance notice closed in late
September 1998. During the
comment period, AC estimates
that more than 11,000 comments
were submitted. At end of

FY 1998, APHIS was reviewing
these comments to determine how
to proceed.


LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY: A

| am pleased to submit this report
on our administration of the
Animal Welfare Act (AWA) in fiscal
year (FY) 1998. The report not
only contains vital information on
our inspection and enforcement
activities, it also details our
Numerous managerial and
tegulatory initiatives during the
past year.

In terms of Animal Care (AC), one
of the most dramatic events that
occurred in 1998 was the physical
relocation of Keiko, the killer
whale that starred in the movie
“Free Willie.” Moving an animal
that weighs several tons halfway
around the globe from Oregon to
Iceland is no small feat. We were
pleased to play an active role in
this move, both making sure that
Keiko was fit for travel and that the
facility in Iceland was ready to
house him. We even coordinated
with the U.S. Air Force to transport
him via a cargo plane to prevent
any potential delays during the
journey.

But this effort, while dramatic, is
only one small example of our
many efforts to ensure the welfare
of animals during FY 1998. AWA
initiatives in five broad categories
are also worth noting.

First, we launched our formal risk-
based inspection system. This
system, which uses several
objective criteria to rate all AWA
licensees and registrants, enables
us to direct our limited resources
toward those facilities most in
need of oversight. The system
also complements our new focus
on conducting less frequent but
more indepth inspections. The
result is fewer inspections overall
but more thorough inspections of
high-risk facilities.

Second, we placed increased
emphasis on our new enforcement
strategy, which entails using
innovative settlements rather than
pursuing formal litigation in many
cases. Through these settlements,
we were able to direct money to be
spent on facility improvements,
employee training and education,

and even research on anima!
diseases and the safe transport of
pets on commercial airlines. We
also were able to continue to
reduce our backlog of AWA cases,
thus lessening the time it takes to
Tesolve cases that do require
formal litigation.

Third, we advanced our AC
program's strategic direction
initiative. This initiative entails
Managerial projects aimed at
preparing AC for the 21 century.
Besides the risk-based inspection
system mentioned above, other
efforts include a national training
conference for all AC field
personnel, a public meeting for
AC stakeholders, and a new data
base that, when complete, will
significantly improve our ability to
Manage information on licensees
and registrants.

Fourth, in addition to our work
with Keiko, we carried out several
special projects beyond the scope
of our strategic direction initiative.
They included establishing a team
to improve our oversight of

commercial dog dealers, devel-
oping a data base containing
information on all circus elephants
in the United States for reference
purposes, and distributing
approximately 20,000 brochures
on safe pet travel to the public.

Fifth, we pursued several regula-
tory and policy initiatives to
strengthen the protection afforded
animals covered under the AWA.”
For the first time ever, we required
that all captive elephants in the
United States be tested for
tuberculosis and that all elephants
found infected must receive
appropriate treatment. We also
published new requirements for
both “swim-with-the dolphins”
programs and primary enclosures
for dogs and cats.

We firmly believe that these efforts
and many more made FY 1998 a
“whale” of year for animals
covered under the AWA. We hope
you find this report helpful in
providing a comprehensive
perspective on our initiatives.

Sincerely,

DAN GLICKMAN
Secretary of Agriculture
Washington, DC


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
Tesponsible for maintaining

compliance with the AWAS
regulations and standards. The
AWA requires that non-Federal
research facilities receive at least
one unannounced inspection per
year to determine compliance.

The next tabulation lists the
numbers of research facilities and
sites for FY 1996 through 1998.
Chart 4 shows the number of
inspections of research facilities
conducted during this period.

3,000

1,264 1,243 1,267

Number of facilities

Tolal sites
Numbers from License and Registration Inspection System (LARIS) data base

REGISTERED RESEARCH FACILITIES,
TOTAL SITES AND INSPECTIONS, FY 1996-98

Inspections

REGISTERED RESEARCH FACILITIES

AND SITES, FY 1996-98
Total Total
FY facilities sites
1998 1,267 2,206
1997 1,243 2.410
1996 1,264 2,506

Chart 4



ENFORCEMENT HIGHLIGHTS

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 forma!
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

FY 1998 was another extremely
successful year from an AWA
enforcement perspective. The
major reason for this success was

AC and IES’ two-pronged enforce-

ment 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. In doing so, USDA
enables the individuals to
immediately improve the condi-
tions for their animals while
sending a clear message that
future violations will not be
tolerated. In the past, most such
fines were either suspended or
paid directly to the U.S. Treasury
but neither of those results directly

improved the plight of the
violators’ animals.

On the other hand, for licensees
and registrants who do not
improve the conditions for their
animals, AC and IES move swiftly
and pursue stringent enforcement
action. Such action typically
includes significant monetary
penalties and/or license suspen-
sions or revocations. It may also
include confiscation of their
animals and relocation to another
facility if the animals are found to
be suffering.

AC's strategy focuses on making
the welfare of the animals the top
priority in all enforcement actions.
The examples that follow highlight
cases from the past year that
illustrate both components of AC
and IES’ enforcement strategy.

Stringent
Enforcement

© In December 1997, APHIS
obtained a $200,000 monetary
penalty and permanent
revocation of an exhibitor's
license for AWA violations
pertaining to the movement of
elephants and llamas across the
Southwestern United States in
the summer of 1997. The
movement of the animals
resulted in the death of one of
the elephants.

The case is significant not only
in terms of penalties sought but
also in the manner in which it
was handled. By making this
case a top priority, APHIS was
able to complete its investiga-
tion and file formal charges
within 3 weeks, This process
typically takes several months.
APHIS was also able to obtain a

decision from an administrative
law judge within 4 months, a
process that normally takes
More than a year. The judge's
decision has since been upheld
by both the USDA judicial
officer and the U.S. Court of
Appeals. At the end of FY 1998,
the case was still open pending
further appeals.

In September 1998, APHIS
obtained a $20,000 fine and a
permanent revocation of a
dealer's license for numerous
AWA violations. In the case,
APHIS proved that the dealer
sold more than 30 dogs without
a valid USDA license. Through
the decision, APHIS not only
imposed significant monetary
sanctions but also ensured that
the dealer will never again be
able to operate under the AWA.
This case was still open
pending a possible appeal at
the end of FY 1998.

|


Public Outreach 22
AC Expands Distribution of Quarterly Report
Safe Pet Travel Campaign in Full Swing
AC Reaches Out Through The World Wide Web
Automated Telephone Service Assists Travelers
E-FOIA Gives Public Quick Access to Data
Assisting the Media
Answering Public Inquiries
Liaison With Other Federal Agencies
APHIS, Other Federal Agencies Formalize Agreement

To Protect Marine Mammals

Cooperating and Communicating With Stakeholders
AWIC Focuses on Educational Efforts

Regulatory and Policy Initiatives 26
Tuberculosis (TB) Testing Now Required
Petition on Regulating Rats, Mice, and Birds
“Doris Day” Advance Notice
Training and Handling of Dangerous Animals
Environmental Enrichment Policy Nears Completion
Perimeter Fencing Examined
Additional Policies Near Completion
Listing of Regulatory Initiatives
Listing of Other Policy Initiatives

Glossary of Terms 29

Appendix 31

Table 1. Number of Licensees and Registrants by Facilities
and Number of Sites (FY 1998)

Table 2. Animals Used in Research (FY 1998)

Table 3. Animals Used in Research, No Pain or Distress—
No Drugs Needed for Relief (FY 1998)

Table 4. Animals Used in Research, With Pain or Distress—
With Drugs Used for Relief (FY 1998)

Table 5. Animals Used in Research, With Pain or Distress—
No Drugs Used for Relief (FY 1998)

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

Attachments
Animal Welfare: List of Licensed Dealers
Animal Welfare: List of Registered Research Facilities
Animal Welfare: List of Licensed Exhibitors and
Registered Exhibitors
Animal Welfare: List of Registered Carriers and
Intermediate Handlers


Totals

TABLE 6. NUMBER OF ANIMALS USED BY RESEARCH FROM
THE FIRST REPORTING YEAR (1973) TO THE PRESENT
Other

. Guinea Farm covered
FY Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits animals animals
1973 66,195 408,970 447,570 * 38,169
1974 74,259 430,439 425,585 81,021
1975 51,439 436,446 448,530 42,523
1976 70,468 486,310 527,551 73,736
1977 62,311 348,741 439,003 46,535
1978 65,929 419,341 475,162 58,356
1979 69,103 457,134 539,594 76,247
1980 68,482 422,390 4T1,297 49,102
1981 58,090 432,632 473,922 50,111
1982 49,923 459,246 453,506 69,043
1983 53,344 485,048 466,810 108,549
1984 56,910 561,184 529,101 232,541
1985 59,211 598,903 544,621 284,416
1986 54,125 462,699 521,773 144,470
1987 50,145 538,998 554,385 168,032
1988 42,271 431,457 459,254 178,249
1989 50,812 481,712 471,037 153,722
1990 33,700 352,627 399,264 257,569
1991 34,613 378,582 396,046 363,685
1992 38,592 375,063 431,432 529,308
1993 33,991 392,138 426,501 212,309
1994 32,610 360,184 393,751 202,300
1995 29,569 333,379 354,076 126,426
1996 26,035 299,011 338,574 146,579
1997 26,091 272,797 309,322 150,987
1998 24,712 261,305 287,523 142,963



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
Tegulation 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 Department of
Veterans Affairs; the Marine
Mammat 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.

APHIS, Other Federal Agencies
Formalize Agreement To Protect

Marine Mammals

In July 1998, APHIS, FWS, and
the National Marine Fisheries
Service signed a formal
memorandum of agreement (MOA)
regarding the enforcement of the
Marine Mammal Protection Act
(MMPA). The agreement codifies
the roles and responsibilities of
each agency in enforcing the

MMPA and clarifies areas where
there are questions of jurisdiction.
The MOA replaces the original
agreement, which was signed
nearly 20 years ago, and is aimed
at improving protection for captive
marine mammals throughout the
United States through cooperative
efforts of the three agencies.

Cooperating and Communicating

With Stakeholders

In FY 1998, APHIS and the
Tesearch community cosponsored
a research preceptorship program
that sent two AC veterinarians to
6 intensive weeks of training at
various research facilities and
teaching institutions.

AC personnel also attended and
participated in national meetings
held by various organizations,
including the International
Association of Aquatic Animal
Medicine, the American Zoo and
Aquarium Association, the Society
of Marine Mammalogy, the
Association of Aquatic Life
Support System Operators, the
North American Veterinary
Conference, the American
Association of Laboratory Animal
Science, the Applied Research
Ethics National Association, and
Public Responsibility in Medicine
and Research.

In total, AC personnel attended
More than 300 industry meetings
and training sessions in FY 1998
and presented papers or informal
talks at more than 140 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.

in addition, AC personnel actively
interacted with organizations
concerned about the humane care
of animals. These organizations
include the American Zoo and
Aquarium 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, and the Scientist's
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 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 zoological
committees.


Letter From the Secretary: A Whale of a Year
for Animal Care 1

The AWA: A Legislative and Regulatory History 3
The Law
The Regulations

How USDA Administers the Law 5
Animal Care
AC's Management Team
Investigative and Enforcement Services
Animal Welfare Information Center
AC Appropriations for FY 1998

Inspection Highlights 7
APHIS’ Inspection Strategy: Quality Over Quantity
Summary of Complaints and Searches
AC Inspectors Go Beyond the Numbers

Inspections by Business Type 10
Animal Dealers
Animal Exhibitors
Carriers and Intermediate Handlers
Research Facilities
Reports From Research Facilities

Enforcement Highlights  * 15
APHIS’ Enforcement Strategy Yields Results
Innovative Penalties
Stringent Enforcement
The High-Priority Designation
The Results Are in the Numbers

Charting the Future: AC’s Strategic Direction 7
Performance-Based Management
AC Public Meeting Exceeds Expectations
AC National Work Conference Focuses on Uniformity
Elephant Training Made A Priority
Risk-Based Inspection System Takes Effect
Dealer Inspection Guidelines Move Forward
New Data Base on the Horizon

Special Initiatives 20
AC Helps Ensure Health and Safety of “Free Willie” Star
Class A Dealer Workgroup Established
Primate Import Workgroup Established
Data Base on Circus Elephants Developed
Class B Dealer Traceback Continues Successes


TABLE 2. ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH (FY 1998)

Other
Number of Guinea farm Other
all animals Dogs Cats Primates pigs Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs animals animals }
Total United States 1,213,814 76,071 24,742 57,377 261,305 206,243 «287,523 27,381 76,568 53,671 442,963 |
: ‘
Total research 4,079,097 73,933 24,082 -51,048 187,144 274,486. 14,069 64,124 28,175
Federal agencies B47 2,138 680. 6,329 19,099 13,087 13,312 12,444 25,496
Alabama 2,064 715 42 2,076 ot 499 691
Alaska 20 0 0 0 0 :
Arizona 532 99 702 1,174 2t
Arkansas 1,368 160 140 1,002" 0
California 3,511 5,540 24,585 57,960 2,987
Colorado 1075 6 31 1,020 4375 446
Connecticut 1297 190 1,186 2,786 13
Delaware 1,573 33 4.527 3,507 0
Dist. of Columbia 208 354 1,625 1,106 56
Florida 427 1,484 891 1886-278
Georgia 1,202 3,008 5,074 6,242 8
Guam 0 0 0 Bee 0
Hawaii o- v7 4 42 0
Idaho 28 0 3 84 32
Illinois 3,277 937 4,861 10,006 681
Indiana 3,349 358 602 5,945 115
lowa 2,682 10 43,666 6,191 641
Kansas 1,541 158 9,700 3,460 25
Kentucky 352 102 552 41,859 0
Louisiana 937 7,935 192 2,586 14
Maine 0 0 18 ~ 200 0
Maryland 1,425 5,682 13,751 12,806 530
Massachusetts 1,411 ,
Michigan 5,126
Minnesota 2,045
Mississippi 585
Missouri 2,787
Montana 0 :
Nebraska 888 2
Nevada 115 0
New Hampshire 20 57
New Jersey ¥ 961
New Mexico aA
New York 1,642
North Carolina - 195
North Dakota 46
Ohio 958
Oklahoma 120
Oregon §2
Pennsylvania 1,976
Puerto Rico 8
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin ’
Wyoming 508°

E]


Training and Handling
of Dangerous Animals

On December 12, 1997, AC closed
the extended comment period on
its request for information
concerning current “best”
practices for the training and
handling of potentially dangerous
wild and exotic animals. Among
other things, the notice sought
input on suggested experience
Tequirements for animal handlers
and trainers, as well as on
contingency plans for the
recapture of escaped or

uncontrollable animals. During
the comment period, more than
400 comments were submitted.

At the end of FY 1998, AC person-
nel had evaluated the comments
and were near completing a draft
policy on this issue. When
completed, a notice of the draft
policy will be published in the
Federal Register to allow for
public comment prior to the
policy's issuance in final form.

Environmental Enrichment Policy

Nears Completion

During FY 1998, AC worked to
finalize its long-awaited policy on
environmental enrichment for
Nonhuman primates. 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.

Atthe end of FY 1998, a draft of
the policy was still under internal
review. When completed, the draft
will be made available through a
notice in the Federal Register,
allowing for public comment prior
to the policy's issuance in final
form.

Perimeter
Fencing
Under Review

In FY 1997, APHIS published a
proposed rule on perimeter fencing
requirements for animals covered
under the AWA, with emphasis on
wild and exotic animals. The
proposal does not apply to
nonhuman primates, which are
already covered under subpart D of
the AWA regulations. In general,
the proposed 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
better contain the animals and to
keep out unwanted animals. At the
end of FY 1998, APHIS had
evaluated the comments on the
proposal and was moving forward
with rulemaking on this issue.


Animal
Exhibitors

Animal exhibitors may either be displays. Many of the animals
licensed or registered under the exhibited are species not native to
AWA. Licensed exhibitors are the United States (e.g., nonhuman
those entities that either obtain or + primates and exotic cats), but
dispose of animals in commerce exhibited species may also include
or exhibit them tor compensation. domestic farm animals and wild
Registered exhibitors do not buy, animals native to this country.

sell, or transport animals and do

not accept compensation. Listed next are the numbers of
exhibitors and sites regulated from

Licensed exhibitors typically FY 1996 through 1998. Chart 2

operate animal acts, carnivals, shows the number of inspections

circuses, public zoos, “roadside for the same period.
zo08,” and marine mammal

EXHIBITORS, FY 1996-98
FY 1996
3,000 Bite:
FY 1998
2,999 2198. 2,198

Number offalities Inspections
Numbers from License and Registration Inspection System (LARIS) data base REGULATED EXHIBITORS, FY 1996-98
Chart 2
Exhibitors
Total
exhibitors Licensed Registered
FY (sites) (sites) (sites)
1998 2,198 2,178 20
(2,696) (2,673) (23)
1997 2,098 2,105 23
(2,540) (2,510) (30)
1996 2,098 2,073 25
(2.453) (2,422) (31)



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, the report must
explain why their use would have
interfered with the research or
experiment.

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.

Chart 5 shows the number and
species of animals used in
research during FY 1998. This
number excludes birds and
laboratory rats and mice, as well
as farm animals used exclusively
in agricultural research. Chart 6
shows the number of animals used
in research that involved no pain

Millions
15

09 |
06 |

03

57,377

24,712
Dogs Cals

Primates

ANIMALS USED IN RESEARCH, EXPERIMENTS, TESTING,
AND TEACHING, FY 1998 ,

1,213,814

orge1 75588 53.671

Other farm Other Total
animals

Guinea Hamsters Rabbits Sheep Pigs
igs animals

Numbers from License and Registration Inspection System (LARIS) data base

Chart 5

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
Teports the total number of animals
used by research since this report
was first published in 1973.

In FY 1998, there were 89 research
facilities whose data are not
included in this report because
they either did not submit a report
or submitted it too late for
tabulation. Of these facilities,

71 were Federal facilities, and

18 were non-Federal.

tis a violation of the AWA for a
facility, whether active or inactive,
Not to submit a timely report. AC
initiated the appropriate corrective
actions.

ANIMALS EXPERIENCING PAIN/DISTRESS,
PAIN/DISTRESS RELIEF, OR NO PAIN/
DISTRESS DURING EXPERIMENTS, FY 1998

Millions
15

1,213,814
12

432,276

Pain-distress/
‘no drugs

Pain-distress
alleviated

No pain-distess

Total animals
in research

‘Numbers from License and Registration inspection System (LARIS) dala base

Chart 6