Ch. 16— Regulation of Animal Use in Selected Foreign Countries • 363 
suffer the minimum pain possible within the 
limits imposed by these purposes. 
• If an animal will not recover from a scientific 
procedure, the person who used the animal 
must immediately dispose of the animal by a 
method that causes it the minimum pain 
possible. 
These responsibilities do not apply to education 
and research in livestock husbandry or breeding 
or to experiments for the purpose of observing 
animal’s roles in an ecosystem (3 7). 
The Prime Minister has issued three standards 
in implementing this law: Standards for the Keep- 
ing and Custody of Dogs and Cats (1975); Stand- 
ards Relating to the Keeping and Custody of Ani- 
mals for Exhibition, etc. (1976); and Standards 
Concerning the Raising, Custody, etc. of Animals 
in Experimental Use (1980) (37). The first two estab- 
lish general requirements for adequate food, 
water, shelter, exercise, care, safety, and disease 
control for animal owners, custodians, and exhib- 
itors. As the title indicates, the first standard ap- 
plies to dogs and cats; the most recent standard 
covers other mammals, birds, and reptiles. En- 
forcement guidance for local authorities was also 
provided in 1980 (37), and a licensing system was 
established for facilities conducting experiments 
(35). 
The law establishes a decentralized system for 
general administration and enforcement. Local 
authorities at various levels— prefectures, cities, 
towns, villages, and wards— pass ordinances and 
establish custody and disposition programs. Prefec- 
tures, the largest units, can levy fees for custodial 
programs and can enlist the aid of animal protec- 
tion societies. Such programs can also be granted 
subsidies by Cabinet Order (38). 
An Animal Protection Council created by the Cab- 
inet in 1974 (36) aids the Prime Minister at his re- 
quest. Though the 15-member Council is advisory, 
the Prime Minister must consult with it before 
establishing, enlarging, or abolishing standards. 
The Council, together with the Government and 
the Japanese Science Council, recommended in 
1980 that the Government establish guidelines for 
animal experimentation (39). The guidelines de- 
veloped are quite like the NIH ’s Guide for the Care 
and Use of Laboratory Animals; they cover stand- 
ards for housing, husbandry, veterinary care, han- 
dling during and after experimental procedures, 
anesthetics, euthanasia, and disposal (63). 
In addition to these several publications on how 
to use animals, the Government has also published 
detailed information on licensed and regulated fa- 
cilities, including statistics on experimental -animal 
use (75). According to this publication, mice ac- 
counted for 78 percent of total animal usage in 
1980, while rats accounted for a little less than 
1 7 percent. The total number of animals used has 
been declining from a peak in 1970 (13.6 million), 
though the use of hamsters, dogs, cats, and pri- 
mates has increased (30). 
WESTERN EUROPE 
Throughout Western Europe, animals have legis- 
lative protections. The first such protections were 
anticruelty laws, many of which were passed in 
the late 19th century. Most anticruelty laws had 
only limited application to experiments, but in the 
last several decades, additional laws were passed 
to protect experimental animals, primarily from 
pain. This section describes the laws of seven of 
the more active countries. Table 16-1 compares 
the major provisions of these laws. 
Denmark 
The philosophy in Denmark, as in other Scan- 
dinavian countries, is that animal experiments are 
prohibited unless specifically allowed. This belief 
was first expressed by statute in 1953 (19). With 
amendments in 1977 (18), Denmark gave author- 
ity for all experiments involving animals to an Ani- 
mal Experiment Board at the Ministry of Justice. 
This board has seven members who are doctors 
