C/7. 16— Regulation of Animal Use in Selected Foreign Countries • 373 
United Kingdom 
The United Kingdom has been a pioneer in the 
protection of experimental animals. The Cruelty 
to Animals Act, passed in 1876 (68), was the most 
protective statute of its kind for many decades. 
Although the act has not been amended, the pro- 
tections afforded animals have continued to ex- 
pand through administrative actions of the Home 
Office and by voluntary actions by institutions and 
individuals (69). 
As in other parts of Western Europe, animal wel- 
fare advocates have been actively campaigning for 
more protective laws. Unlike many other coun- 
tries, some of these groups have also made major 
scientific contributions to the development of alter- 
natives. The most active of these scientifically, the 
Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical 
Experiments, was recently given over $200,000 
by the Government to fund research on alter- 
natives. 
Contributing to the debate over how the act 
should be changed, the British Veterinary Asso- 
ciation, the Committee for the Reform of Animal 
Experimentation, and the Fund for the Replace- 
ment of Animals in Medical Experiments made rec- 
ommendations that became the basis for a 1983 
White Paper by the Home Office. Several items 
in that paper provoked considerable debate, lead- 
ing to the 1985 White Paper Scientific Procedures 
on Living Animals (70). This was presented by the 
Home Office to the Parliament in May 1985 and 
recommends substantial amendments to the 1876 
Act, some of which would codify current prac- 
tice. The 1876 act (as it is currently practiced) and 
the proposed legislation are summarized and com- 
pared in table 16-2. 
Other acts that bear on these activities include 
the Dogs Act of 1906 and the Theft Act of 1968 
(as amended by the Criminal Theft Act of 1977), 
which address the problem of stolen pets. Experi- 
ments regulated by the Cruelty to Animals Act are 
excluded specifically from the reaches of the Pro- 
tection of Animals Act of 1911, the Protection of 
Animals (Scotland) Act of 1912, the Protection of 
Animals (Anaesthetics) Act of 1954 (65), and the 
Protection of Animals (Anaesthetics) Act of 1964 
I (66). 
A basic philosophy of the act is that experiments 
should be permitted if they lead to new knowl- 
edge, but the use of animals to develop manual 
skills is not permitted. (Demonstrations— another 
educational use— are permitted, however, if the 
animal is anesthetized and does not recover.) In 
permitting the development of new knowledge, 
the authorities, as in many other countries, will 
not try to predict which experiments will result 
in useful knowledge or practical applications. 
Control over experiments occurs in three ways : 
through the granting of licenses to experimenters, 
through the registration of facilities where exper- 
iments take place, and through the appointment 
of government inspectors. Although responsibil- 
ity rests with the Home Office, assistance is pro- 
vided by an Advisory Committee with represen- 
tation by animal welfare organizations . In addition, 
many institutions have established their own in- 
formal review procedures (3). 
The Secretary of State approves and registers 
every place for the performance of experiments 
or for the purpose of instruction, imposes condi- 
tions on licenses, and revokes licenses for cause. 
The Secretary may require reports, appoint inspec- 
tors, and require inspections. Most licenses are 
issued with one or more certificates. Certificates 
may be given for the period and series of experi- 
ments the persons signing the certificate may think 
expedient. There are six kinds of certificates, based 
on species use, pain, and the use of anesthetic. 
A practical approach to the assessment of pain, 
suggested by a Royal Commission appointed in 
1906, is that it would be unreasonable to impose 
greater restrictions on the infliction of pain for 
the advancement of knowledge than those imposed 
by public opinion in the pursuit of sport, in carry- 
ing out such operations as castration and spaying, 
or in the destruction of rabbits, rats, and other 
vermin (41). 
The United Kingdom is able to compile detailed, 
accurate statistics on animal use through its report- 
ing requirements as well as the through the issu- 
ance of licenses and certificates. Each licensee (ex- 
cept those who have no experiments to report for 
a given year) must submit an annual report for 
as many of each of the following reporting cate- 
