Ch. 1 —Summary, Policy Issues, and Options for Congressional Action • 15 
FDA and EPA both established rules on good lab- 
oratory practices to ensure the quality of toxicity 
data submitted by industry in compliance with the 
agencies' regulations. Because proper animal care 
is essential to good animal tests, these rules in- 
directly benefit animals. 
The NIH Guide for the Care and Use of Labora- 
tory Animals prescribes detailed standards for ani- 
mal care, maintenance, and housing. It applies to 
all research supported by NIH and is in fact used 
by most animal facilities throughout the public and 
private sector. 
The Department of Defense (DOD) has been crit- 
icized for its use of animals in weapons research 
and in training for treatment of wounds. In 1973, 
Congress prohibited DOD from using dogs for re- 
search and development of chemical or biological 
weapons. In 1983, publicity caused an uproar 
about the use of dogs, pigs, and goats to train mili- 
tary surgeons in the treatment of gunshot wounds . 
The furor led to congressional action that pro- 
hibited DOD from using dogs and cats in such train- 
ing during fiscal years 1984 and 1985. 
State Regulation 
Most State anticruelty statutes forbid both ac- 
tive cruelty and neglect (see ch. 14). Many of these 
laws incorporate vague terms, and alleged offend- 
ers offer a variety of defenses. Enforcement may 
be delegated to humane societies, whose members 
are not well trained to build criminal cases skill- 
fully and are underfunded for the task. 
Twenty States and the District of Columbia reg- 
ulate the use of animals in research to some ex- 
tent. As in the case of the Federal Animal Welfare 
Act, most State laws address such matters as 
procurement rather than the actual conduct of 
experiments. 
All 50 States and the District of Columbia allow 
some form of pound animal use for research and 
training. In some States, laws permitting or requir- 
ing research and teaching facilities to purchase 
stray dogs and cats from pounds and shelters have 
been the targets of repeal efforts. To date, 9 States 
prohibit in-State procurement (although not im- 
portation from out-of-State) of pound animals for 
research and training. Of these, Massachusetts will 
in October 1986 prohibit the use of any animal 
obtained from a pound. 
Institutional and Self-Regulation 
Opponents of increased government regulation 
of research assert that investigators and their in- 
stitutions are best suited to determine what con- 
stitutes appropriate care and use of animals. To 
regulate animal use at this level, the scientific com- 
munity relies on a variety of policies and adminis- 
trative structures (see ch. 15). 
Taken together, the requirements for institu- 
tional animal committees contained in the Ani- 
mal Welfare Act (as amended), the Health Re- 
search Extension Act of 1985, and the PHS 
Policy bring the overwhelming majority of 
experimental-animal users in the United States 
under the oversight of a structured, local re- 
view committee. 
Institutions that receive funds from PHS for re- 
search on warm-blooded laboratory animals must 
have committees that oversee the housing and rou- 
tine care of animals. NIH reports that about a quar- 
ter of these animal care and use committees cur- 
rently review research proposals to determine 
whether experimental procedures satisfy concerns 
about animal welfare. Committees with such re- 
sponsibility are not unique to research with ani- 
mals : For 1 5 years , similar groups have been weigh- 
ing ethical issues raised by the use of human 
research subjects, and these committees have 
served as models in the development of animal care 
and use committees. 
Committees usually have included the institu- 
tion’s attending veterinarian, a representative of 
the institution’s administration, and several users 
of research animals. Some committees also have 
nonscientist members, or lay members not affil- 
iated with the institution. Nonscientist and lay seats 
have been filled by clergy, ethicists, lawyers, hu- 
mane society officials, and animal rights advocates. 
Animal care and use committees at PHS-sup- 
ported facilities are today required to consist 
of not less than five members, and must include 
at least: 
• one Doctor of Veterinary Medicine with 
training or experience in laboratory ani- 
