Information Resources for Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees 1985-1999 *************************

International Perspectives on the Animal Care Committee



Regulation of Animal Research in Selected European Countries


The following information is generously provided by the European Biomedical Research Association. Their website may be accessed at http://www.ebra.org


Animal Experimentation Legislation in The Netherlands



Under the Dutch Animal Experimentation Act (1977) the heads of research establishments can apply to the Ministry of Welfare, Public Health and Cultural Affairs to be issued with a licence to perform animal experiments. When applying for such a licence, they must specify what type of animal research will be conducted in the institution, but there is no specific control of individual research projects involving animals. The Ministry must normally give a decision on the application within two months and a notice about the licence, the purposes of the experiments and the conditions applied to them is published in the Netherlands Government Gazette. There is no specific limit to the duration of a licence.


Each institution is required to appoint a veterinary surgeon or other qualified expert in animal welfare who is responsible for supervising the welfare of the laboratory animals. In addition this person has wide powers to check that the provisions of this Act are being correctly observed. They make an annual report to the licence holder and to the Chief Veterinary Inspector.

The person responsible for determining the way that an animal experiment is performed must hold a doctoral degree in biology, medicine, veterinary medicine or dentistry and to have completed a specified course on laboratory animal science. There are specific requirements for the expertise and training of persons conducting animal experiments or looking after the animals, the size and construction of cages, the cleaning and heating of animal houses and the feeding of the animals.

Laboratory animals have to be obtained from a licensed animal breeder or animal research institution. They must be housed and cared for and handled so as to satisfy, as far as possible, their physiological and ethological needs. No animal experiment can be conducted for a purpose which, according to a consensus of expert opinion, could be achieved without using animals. No experiment can be conducted on a monkey, dog, cat or horse if another species would suffice. Anesthetics are required where the animals might otherwise suffer appreciable pain, unless these would defeat the object of the experiment. Detailed records must be kept of all the animal experiments conducted.

The legislation instituted an Animal Experiments Advisory Committee, composed of experts on animal research and animal welfare, which is consulted about any general administrative orders concerning animal husbandry, record- keeping, training, etc. In addition, the committee may offer advice of its own volition.

The enforcement of the Act is the responsibility of the Veterinary Public Health Inspectorate, which has an Animal Experimentation Department of six staff. They can enter any animal research premises, take samples, examine animals and require researchers to provide information or copies of records. Any misdemeanors have to be reported to the public prosecutor. This legislation is currently being amended. The main change which the amendments will introduce will be a requirement for local anima l ethics committees, including external lay representatives, at each animal research institution. The exact role and powers of these committees is not yet known.

New Legislation in The Netherlands

On 5 February 1997, a revised Experiments on Animals Act came into force in the Netherlands. The original Act, dating from 1977, was reviewed in the EBRA Bulletin in July 1995 (see above).

Under that legislation, the Ministry of Welfare, Public Health and Cultural Affairs could grant a licence to the head of a scientific institution on the basis of an application describing the type of animal experimentation to be performed. However, there was no external control of individual research projects. Each institution had to appoint an animal welfare officer to supervise the well-being of the animals. In addition, the person responsible for determining the way in which an animal experiment was performed had to hold a doctoral degree in a relevant subject. The law also contained other provisions based on the EU Directive 86/609.

The main change introduced by the revised Act is to require that research plans must be approved by an ethical review committee, which has to consider the benefit to come from the experiments and whether this justifies the distress caused to the animals to be used. No maximum duration for a research plan is stipulated. Committees are required to give a decision on an application within three months and, if they do not approve the research plan, the applicant can appeal to the central animal review committee established under the previous legislation.

Although it is not stipulated in the revised Act, it appears likely these would be local ethical review committees, specific to larger establishments. Smaller research establishments might need to use the committees set up at larger establishments. The structure of these committees is defined in the new Act which requires that they have at least seven members made up from equal numbers of experts in i) animal experiments, ii) alternative methods, iii) animal welfare, and iv) ethical assessment. At least two members must not be conducting animal experiments and at least three members, including the chairperson, must not be employed by a scientific institution applying to the committee.

The ethical review committees must be recognized by the Minister, who will be advised by the central animal review committee. This mechanism is to ensure they operate properly and, for the same purpose, all committees are required to submit an annual report to the Minister. An obligation of confidentiality is placed upon members of these committees with respect to information provided to them.

One addition to the legislation which has been discussed by many observers is the requirement to recognize the intrinsic value of animal life. However, the Act only states that "Any right accorded by or pursuant to this Act shall be exercised in recognition of the intrinsic value of animal life." It is noticeable that the ethical review committees are not required to take this point into account when assessing research plans.

Additional provisions introduced by the revised Act ban the LD50 and LC50 tests, but permit an exemption to be granted if it can be shown that the experiment cannot be performed by any other method. The testing of cosmetics and cosmetic ingredients is completely banned. Licensing for animal breeders and suppliers is required, applying similar provisions to those for animal use establishments.

The fact that the previous Act did not require the licensing of breeders and suppliers would mean that the Netherlands was not properly implementing the Directive 86/609 which requires such registration. It was obviously important for this to be corrected. The introduction of a system of research plan review based on the cost-benefit principle was also a positive move, bringing the Dutch system closer to that operating in the UK and Germany. However, with the introduction of a ban on the LD50 and an absolute ban on cosmetic testing, the Netherlands system has now gone significantly further than any other EU country. Naturally, much will depend on how the new Act is implemented but, on the basis of the written legislation, this appears to introduce a significantly tighter system of regulation in the Netherlands.

The Regulation of Animal Research and Testing in the United Kingdom

The British system for regulating the use of animals in experiments is defined by a law passed in 1986 called the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act. The main principle of this law is the requirement for researchers to obtain personal and project licences and a certificate for the establishment where the animal experimentation is conducted. [Ed. Note: A revision to the text of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, which came into effect in September 1998, makes clear the requirement that a project licence applicant must be aware of the possibilities of implementing any of the Three Rs (refinement, reduction and replacement of animal use) within the proposed study. One of the ways in which this awareness may be demonstrated is by documenting the literature searches which have been conducted in the course of planning the study.]

The legislation covers all vertebrate animals and has recently been extended to include the octopus. Anyone wanting to use any of these animals for a scientific purpose that might cause it distress, suffering or permanent harm must seek the necessary licences before commencing any animal work. There is a general exemption for animals which are humanely killed (using a method specified by the legislation) before being used in any experimentation or other procedure. Most of the normal laboratory species are required to be obtained from breeding or supplying establishments holding a certificate under this Act. Cats and dogs are required to be obtained directly from a certified breeder.

The personal licence lists the techniques the person is permitted to use on animals. Every time the researcher needs to use a new technique, the licence must be amended. The certificate for the establishment is given to a named person who is legally responsible for ensuring that the Act is properly enforced in the establishment. This person is normally the most senior person in charge or their deputy. They are required to have one named person (usually the chief animal technician) responsible for the care and welfare of the animals on a day-to-day basis. They are also required to have a named veterinary surgeon permanently on call.

A similar certificate is required by any premises breeding or supplying animals for scientific procedures. The standards of animal care and husbandry required in research, breeding and supplying establishments are defined in Codes of Practice publishe d by the Home Office.

The project licence is held by the senior investigator in charge of a particular project or programme of testing. To apply for this licence they have to describe the scientific purpose behind the research project or testing scheme, the numbers and types of animals to be used, the procedures which the animals will go through and what steps have been taken to reduce the number of animals and any distress, suffering or harm involved. Project licences are valid for up to five years. All procedures within a project licences are assigned a severity limit - either mild, moderate or substantial. No animal procedure used under a project licence should exceed the severity limit unless an alteration to the licence has been agreed by the Inspector.

Applications for project licences are submitted to the Home Office which has a team of approximately 20 Inspectors (who must hold medical or veterinary qualifications and have relevant experience or training). These Inspectors will assess the application and may require it to be modified before granting the project licence. Home Office Inspectors pay unannounced visits to research establishments to ensure that researchers comply with their licences. They have the power to modify or suspend licences including, if necessary, the power to immediately suspend the certificate for an entire research establishment, halting all animal work.

Before a person is granted a personal licence, they are required to complete a specified training course normally lasting two or three days. A similar training requirement for all first-time applicants for project licences started in April 1995.

Project licence holders are required to keep detailed records of all animals used which are then reported annually to the Home Office. These annual statistics are published showing the numbers and types of animals used as well as the purposes for whic h they were used and the type of establishment using them.

A national committee (the Animal Procedures Committee), made up of researchers, veterinarians, doctors, lawyers, philosophers and animal welfarists advises the government about matters concerning the Act. This committee can decide which subjects it will study. It reviews all project licence applications in certain categories (cosmetic testing, tobacco research, etc) and has the power to see any other project licence application.

Although the UK system is complex and considered by some to be too bureaucratic, it is generally accepted by UK researchers as a fair and sensible system. There are some concerns that the Home Office requires too much detail in the project licence application. Since it is very difficult to predict the way that a fundamental research project will develop, researchers may need to submit several requests to vary the project licence to the Home Office which can delay the progress of the research.

Laboratory Animal Research Legislation in Sweden

The Swedish system of regulating animal research comes under a general law controlling animal welfare, the Animal Protection Act and the Animal Protection Ordinance, both of 1988. To appreciate the way in which these regulate animal research, it is necessary to explain the way in which much of the legislation in Sweden operates.

Each Ministry in the Government has a number of National Boards operating under it. The legislation passed by the Parliament deals with the general principles and then delegates the power to create specific regulations to certain National Boards.

Under the Swedish Ministry for Agriculture, there is a National Board for Laboratory Animals which is responsible for setting up seven regional ethical committees. Scientific and medical experts make up half of the membership of each committee with the other half being lay members. Animal welfare representatives can only make up one third of the committee. The Chairman of each committee is a senior lawyer, usually a judge. Detailed rules for the operation of the committees are provided by the National Board for Laboratory Animals. All animal research and testing proposals are considered by these committees which are required to weigh up the importance of the experiments against the animal suffering involved. Projects can be approved for a maximum of three years. Although these committees only have advisory power, their recommendations are always followed. Animal experimentation conducted without ethical committee approval is illegal under the basic animal welfare provisions of the Animal Protection Act. There is no appeal against the decision of an ethical committee.

All animal research projects require ethical committee approval, including feeding studies, experiments under terminal anaesthesia and the killing of animals to remove tissues for use in vitro biomedical research.


It is worth noting that the Swedish legislation covers all animals, not just vertebrates. There is a general requirement that laboratory animals must be specially bred, but exceptions are granted for most types of animals apart from the normal laboratory species. Wild mammals are included in the exceptions. The re-use of animals in not banned under the Swedish system, but it is taken into account by the ethics committee when they assess the project proposal.

Veterinary inspectors from the local or regional authorities check research establishments to ensure compliance with the committee decisions. Where problems are found, they have the power to force researchers to comply with the committee recommendations or to impose a fine. However, the experimenter can appeal against this to the regional authorities of higher if necessary. In 1990, the law was amended to ensure that the ethical committee decision took precedence over the opinion of the inspector. The amendment ensured that when an animal research project was approved by an ethical committee and performed in accordance with the protocol approved by that committee, the inspector had no legal power to halt the project.

The Laboratory Animal Board is also responsible for the keeping of records and collection of statistical data about the numbers and type of animals used. They are also responsible for the regulation of education and training requirements for experimenters and technicians and funding the development of alternatives methods to the use of laboratory animals.

In the National Board for Agriculture, there is a Department of Veterinary Affairs which has to approve the design of animal research facilities before they are built or before any significant modifications to the buildings are made. It licences the facility when it meets the guidelines for temperature control, humidity, cage sizes, etc. Each facility is required to appoint a supervisor, a person in charge of animal research for the facility who must be approved by the National Board of Agriculture. This Board also registers and approves laboratory animal breeders and suppliers.

All animal researchers, technicians and animal care[givers] are required to undergo training within two years of starting working with animals. Until they have completed this training and passed a test on it, they are required to work under supervision. The National Board for Laboratory Animals has set out a number of subjects which must be covered by the training, although no formal curriculum or duration of training is stipulated.

The National Board for Laboratory Animals also creates regulations about the recording of animal experiments and the reporting of statistical data. Regulations also cover the way that certain procedures must be conducted. These include immunizations, the production of monoclonal antibodies and acute toxicity testing.


Bibliography


Allen, M. (1998). US and UK control of animal experimentation. Lab Animal 27(5): 34-36.
NAL call number: QL55.A1L33
Abstract: The author examines the strengths and weaknesses of the US and UK Systems of regulating animal care and use.

Anderson, W.P. and M.A. Perry (1999). Australian animal ethics committees: we have come a long way. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 8(1): 80-6.
Descriptors: animal welfare; research review, guidelines.

Anderson, W.P. (1987). Animal ethics committees. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Medicine 17(1): 157.
Descriptors: animal welfare, policy.

Baker, R.M. (1994). Animal experimentation ethics committees in Australia and New Zealand. In Welfare and Science: Proceedings of the Fifth Symposium of the Federation of European Laboratory Animal Science Associations, 8-11 June 1993, Brighton, UK. London : Royal Society of Medicine Press, pp. 283-285.
NAL call number: QL55.F43 1993
Descriptors: animal welfare, committees, animal experiments, regulations, communication.

Balls, M. (1986). Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986: The Animal Procedures Committee. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals - ATLA 14(1): 6-13.
NAL call number: Z7994.L3A5
Descriptors: animal research, advisory committees, legislation, law, animal welfare.

Bowd, A.D. (1997). The educative role of an Animal Care Committee in Canada: A case study. Animal Welfare 6(4): 309-315.
NAL call number: HV4701.A557
Descriptors: Ethics, humane use of animals, training, training strategies, alternatives to animal testing, animal care.

Britt, D.P. (1983). The potential role of local ethical committees in the moderation of experiments on animals in Britain (includes Swedish view). International Journal for the Study of Animal Problems 4(4): 290-294.
NAL call number: HV4701.I49
Descriptors: ethical code, animal use, research, ACUC.

Britt, D. (1994). Animal ethical committees. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals: ATLA 22 (3):141-142.
NAL call number: Z7994.L3A5
Descriptors: bioethics, committees, animal welfare, legislation.

Canadian Council on Animal Care (1994). CCAC 1994 Ontario Regional Workshop, Animal Care Committees: Role and responsibilities. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Council on Animal Care, 50 p.
NAL call number: HV4704.C32 1994
Descriptors: Animal welfare, Laboratory animals.

Canadian Council on Animal Care (1994). CCAC 1994 Western Regional Workshop, Animal Care Committees : Role and Responsibilities. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Council on Animal Care, 38 p.
NAL call number: HV4704.C34 1994.
Descriptors: Animal welfare, Laboratory animals.

Canadian Federation of Humane Societies (1986).Guidelines for Lay Members of Animal Care Committees. Experimental Animals Committee. Nepean, Ontario: Canadian Federation of Humane Societies.
NAL call number: HV4735.G8
Descriptors: protocol review, animal welfare, recommendations, public concern.

Canadian Council on Animal Care (1994). CCAC 1994 National Workshop, Animal Care Committees: Role and Responsibilities. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Council on Animal Care, 146 p.
NAL call number: HV4704.C33 1994.
Descriptors: Animal welfare, Laboratory animals.

Combes, R.D. (1999). New measures on animal experimentation in the UK will improve animal welfare and scientific research. ATLA-Alternatives to Laboratory Animals 27(3): 309-316.
NAL call number: Z7994.L3A5
Descriptors: regulations, ethical use of animals, alternatives, ascites production of antibodies, consumer product testing, ethical review process, local review of proposals, cost-benefit analysis, United Kingdom.

Davis, H. (1986). Animal welfare in Canada: A contrasting view. PsyETA - Psychologists for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Bulletin 8(2):9-10.
NAL call number: HV4701.B85
Descriptors: animal experiments, facilities, university research.

Einstein, R. (1994). Animal care and ethics committees: Their role in Australia. In Vitro Toxicology 7(2):137.
NAL call number: RM300.I55
Descriptors: committees, responsibilities.

Fekete, S. (1992). An ethical committee for the control of animal experiments was founded in Hungary: A model protocol. Magyar Allatorvosok Lapja 47(6): 303-304.
NAL call number: 41.8 V644
Descriptors: animal care, committees.

Griffin, G. (1995). Alternatives in Canada. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals: ATLA 23 (6): 824-826.
NAL call number: Z7994.L3A5
Abstract: In Canada, promotion of the Three Rs concept of alternatives occurs largely through the Canadian Council on Animal Care. Institution-based animal care committees are required to conduct an ethical renew of all protocols which use animals in research, teaching or testing. Investigators are expected to use animals only when their best efforts to find an alternative have failed. Those using animals are required to employ the most humane methods on the smallest number of animals possible. The Joseph F. Morgan Research Foundation was established to promote the development and use of alternative methods in Canada. The focus of the Foundation has been on the use of alternative methods for testing purposes. However, the Foundation also encourages the acceptance of each of the Three Rs throughout Canadian science. The Foundation is therefore in the process of developing a refinement alternatives program.
Descriptors: animal experiments, animal welfare, animal testing alternatives.

Johnston, N.E. (1994). How important is a central animal experimentation ethics committee (AEEC) compared with a local AEEC? In Vitro Toxicology 7(2): 137.
NAL call number: RM300.I55
Descriptors: toxicology, committees, Australia.

Legge, D. and S. Brooman (1999). Animal experimentation ethics committees in the United Kingdom. ANZCCART News 12(2): 1-3.
NAL call number: SF405.5.A3
Descriptors: ethical review process, regulations, functions of an AEEC, lay members, scientific review, advantages and disadvantages, consistency of review, Animal Procedures Committee, Home Office, Boyd Report.

Michener, G.R. (1989). Surveillance of animal care and use in Canada. In Animal Care and Use in Behavioral Research: Regulations, Issues, and Applications J.D. Driscoll (ed.), United States Department of Agriculture/National Agricultural Library, Beltsville, MD, pp. 9-14.
NAL call number: AHV4762.A3A64
Descriptors: Canadian Council on Animal Care, experimental animals, guidelines, ACUC.

New Zealand Institute of Public Administration, New Zealand, National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee, New Zealand, Animal Welfare Advisory Committee, New Zealand, Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (1995). Animals and the Law--Protection, Welfare or Rights: Proceedings of an IPA Seminar Held at Turnbull House, Wellington, 14th February 1995. Wellington: New Zealand Institute of Public Administration
NAL call number: KUQ1533.A55 1995
Descriptors: animal welfare.

Noach, E.L. (1995). Ethical assessment of biomedical experiments in The Netherlands (Ethische beoordeling van biomedische experimenten in Nederland). Verhandelingen-Koninklijke Academie voor Geneeskunde van Belgie. 57 (3): 158-182.
Abstract: The ethical evaluation of biomedical experiments is loyally accepted in the Netherlands. It was introduced everywhere during the last 15 years. Among the targets we find not only the protection of the experimental objects--animals and humans-- but also the protection of researchers who may find moral support in the approval of their projects by a Committee of Ethical Evaluation. Concerning experiments in animals, the legal framework is provided by the Law on Animal Experiments. This law was drawn up in accordance with the directive of the E.U. To be allowed to practice experiments in animals, an institute must possess a licence; the researchers are moreover obliged to be appropriately trained with regard to experiments in animals. To that end an adequately functioning organization has been set up. The intensive supervision is widely decentralized and effected for the greater part by experts working within the institutes. The "intra muros" Committees supervising the experiments in animals play an important part in the ethical evaluation. More than 50 of those Committees are active at this time. Setting the ethical standards is done in close collaboration between the Authorities and the researchers. Researchers and animal protection associations have established a "Platform for the Replacement of Experiments in Animals", in which they support development of alternative methods for research. The legislation concerning medical experiments in humans is not yet completely enforced, but in practice the ethical evaluation has been effected for many years in every hospital of the Netherlands. At present about 150 "Committees for medico-ethical evaluation" are at work. Their task may be very heavy, especially in the academic hospitals, where, mostly, over 150 projects are advised on every year. Adequate training facilities are provided for the members of the committees. The passing of the bill on experiments in humans is stagnating owing to political reasons. Besides the approval of the present practice, the bill-draft contains some elements that are difficult to accept by researchers; among other things, the researchers refuse a possible political influence on the ethical advice. Moreover, there exists a menace to see the insurers changing their rules: the legislation on privacy might also hamper the development of a research seeming too closely patient-linked. Sufficient attention is not given to the financial aspects of the evaluation-process. The real cost of the evaluation should be incorporated into the budget of research projects.
Descriptors: animal testing alternatives, legislation and jurisprudence, ethics committees, human experimentation, Netherlands.

Nomura, T. (1995). Laboratory animal care policies and regulations: Japan. ILAR Journal 37 (2): 60-61.
NAL call number: QL55.A1I43
Descriptors: animal welfare, laboratory animals, regulations, law enforcement.

Obrink, K.J. and L. Wass (1985). Compulsory ethical examination of animal experiments. Experiences with the Swedish system. In: Proceedings of the 8th ICLAS/CALAS Symposium Vancouver, 1983 New York: Gustav Fischer Verlag, pp. 151-156.
NAL call number: QL55.I55 1983
Descriptors: animal experiments, ethics, ethical committees, compulsory preexamination, Swedish legislation, ACUC.

Perry, M. (1998). Revised Australian Code of Practice for the care and use of animals for scientific purposes. Australian Veterinary Journal 76 (4): 286.
NAL call number: 41.8 Au72
Descriptors: animal welfare, education, animal ethics committee, scientific animal use, Australian Code of Practice.

Poon, P. (1999) The use of laboratory animals in Taiwan. ANZCCART News 12(2): 10.
NAL call number: SF405.5.A3
Descriptors: training, animal care and use, laboratory animal production, Laboratory Animal Ethics Committees, Animal Protection Act, public opinion, advocacy for research.

Reid, C.S.W. (1995). Laboratory animal care policies and regulations: New Zealand. ILAR Journal 37 (2): 62-68.
NAL call number: QL55.A1I43
Descriptors: animal welfare, laboratory animals, regulations, law enforcement.

Rodgers, L. and R. Tremont (1992). Australian researchers take on animal rights. New Scientist May 16, 1992 134 (1821): 37.
NAL call number: 472 N42
Descriptors: animal welfare, animal experiments, ethics.

Rose, M. (1996). Striking the balance: the practitioner and the animal ethics committee. ANZCCART (Australia and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Testing) News 9(3): 1-3.
NAL call number: SF405.5.A3
Descriptors: legislation, veterinary profession, laboratory animals, animal welfare.

Rowsell, H.C. (1986). Regulation of animal experimentation: Canada's program of voluntary control. Acta Physiologica Scandinavica 554: 95-105.
NAL call number: QP1.A2
Descriptors: animal welfare, animal testing alternatives, animal welfare history, history of medicine, pain, peer review.

Rowsell, H.C. (1987). Program and objectives of the Canadian Council on Animal Care. Laboratory Animal Science 37(special issue): 24-25.
NAL call number: 410.9 P94
Descriptors: animal welfare, pain, prevention, legislation, protection, animal testing alternatives.

Rowsell, H.C. (1980). The voluntary control program of the Canadian Council on Animal Care. Journal of Medical Primatology 9(1-2): 5-8.
NAL call number: QL737.P9J66
Descriptors: laboratory animals, ethics, research, ACUC.

Scharmann, W. (1994). Housing of laboratory animals and animal welfare legislation: a critical evaluation of current guidelines. [Tiergerechte Haltung von Versuchstieren: Kritische Bewertung der geltenden Richtlinien.] Tierarztliche Umschau 49(9): 552, 555-560.
NAL call number: 41.8 T445
Descriptors: rats, mice, rabbits, guinea pigs, caging, housing, European Union, experiments, animal welfare, guidelines, legislation and regulations.

Swiss Academy of Medical Sciences and Swiss Academy of Sciences (1992). Ethical principles and guidelines for scientific experiments on animals. Experientia 48(1):1-3.
NAL call number: 475 EX7
Descriptors: animal welfare, animal experiments, guidelines, professional ethics.

Townsend, P. and D.B. Morton (1995). Laboratory animal care policies and regulations: United Kingdom. ILAR Journal 37 (2): 68-74.
NAL call number: QL55.A1I43
Descriptors: animal welfare, regulations, law enforcement, laboratory animals.

Wong, J. (1995). Laboratory animal care policies and regulations: Canada. ILAR Journal 37 (2): 57-59.
NAL call number: QL55.A1I43
Descriptors: animal welfare, laboratory animals, regulations, law enforcement, organizations.


Useful World Wide Web Sites



Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act - 1986
http://www.archive.official-documents.co.uk/document/hoc/321/321-xa.htm
From the United Kingdom Home Office--full text, plus amendments and guidance notes.

The Animal Welfare Act and the Animal Welfare Ordinance (Sweden)
http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/10158/a/90310
Made available by the Swedish Fund for Research Without Animal Experiments.

The Dutch Experiments on Animals Act
http://www.nca-nl.org/
Provided by the Netherlands Center for Alternatives-in English.

European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes ETS no.: 123
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexapi!prod!CELEXnumdoc&numdoc=21999A0824(01)&model=guichett&lg=en
The Convention is designed primarily to reduce both the number of experiments and the number of animals used for such purposes. It encourages Parties not to experiment on animals except where there is no alternative. All research into alternative methods should be encouraged. Animals to be experimented on should be selected on the basis of clearly established quantitative criteria and must be well cared for and spared avoidable suffering whenever possible. To this end, the Convention lays down a number of principles which are to be considered only as a starting point. The Parties meet regularly to examine the application of the Convention and, if appropriate, to extend or strengthen its provisions.

Laboratory Animals--Articles to Download
http://www.lal.org.uk/onlinerep.html
This site provides access to many Working Party Reports, FELASA reports, and scientific papers from European scientists.

Legislation Worldwide
http://www.frame.org.uk/page.php?pg_id=65
From FRAME in the United Kingdom.

Norwegian Regulation of Animal Experimentation (Forskrift om forsøk med dyr)
http://oslovet.veths.no/statute.html
Pronounced by the Ministry of Agriculture, January 15, 1996, in accordance with the Animal Welfare Act of December 12, 1974, nr 73, §§ 22 and 30, after royal proclamation of 19.11.76, amended November 17, 1998.

University of Melbourne
http://www.research.unimelb.edu.au/animalethics/home
The homepage of the Animal Experimentation Ethics Committee containing guidelines, policies and recommendations.




Top | Articles and Bibliographies


Return to: Title Page | Main Contents | Using this Resource

Last updated July 26, 2001