374 • Alternatives to Animal Use in Research, Testing, and Education 
Table 16-2.— Comparison of the United Kingdom’s Cruelty to Animals Act of 1876 and Proposed Amendments 
Provision 
Current law 
Animals 
protected 
All living vertebrates; additional 
protection for nonhuman primates, 
dogs, cats, and equidae 
Permissable 
purposes 
Advance new discovery of 
knowledge or lead to longer life, 
less suffering 
Licensing 
system 
Any person Home Secretary allows: 
difficult to alter issued license; 
restrictions must be specified 
Severity No statutory limit on pain, but may 
be limited in certificates; pain may 
be severe or enduring, not both 
Assessors 
Registering 
facilities 
No mechanism to assess integrity or 
competence for personal license 
Most facilities for experiments are 
registered; most breeders and 
suppliers are not 
Fees 
Source of 
animals 
None 
Only stray dogs protected 
(Dog Act) 
Reuse of 
animals 
Killing of 
animals when 
procedure 
ends 
Use of animals 
to attain 
manual skill 
Use of 
alternatives 
Only anesthetized animals must be 
killed 
Only if animal is in severe pain or 
was anesthetized 
Not permitted unless decerebrated 
Encouraged but not required 
Use for Only anesthetized animals that are 
education killed before recovery for 
and training university lectures 
Advisory 
Committee 
Not required, but has existed since 
1912, with lay members since 1979 
Codes of Voluntary codes are often used 
practice 
Offenses and Experimenting without a license; 6 
penalties months and $3,000 
Records All licensees keep records of 
experiments 
Proposed amendments 
All living vertebrates, fetuses of mammals, embryonic or larval 
young of other species at specified stages, (would also add 
authority over breeding of animals with potentially disabling 
genetic defects; would allow the Home Secretary to protect 
invertebrates; would require justification of all species choices) 
Adopts permissible purposes of European Convention (Article 
2) (see app. E), encompassing many procedures rather than 
experiments (e.g., production of serums, maintaining tumors 
or pathogens); Secretary must balance the severity (pain) 
against the purpose 
Personal license would only allow specified techniques and 
species; project license for each experiment, specifying 
purpose of work, species, number of animals, techniques; 
Secretary must answer to Parliament for balance of severity 
and purpose (Secretary must publish guidelines for the 
decision criteria) 
An animal in severe pain or distress would have to be killed 
immediately and painlessly; severity would encompass pain, 
distress, suffering, morbidity, and mortality and would be 
tailored to each project license; would require licensees to 
minimize severity wherever possible; would broaden 
inspector’s power to kill humanely 
Senior licensee with personal knowledge of applicant and 
applicant’s abilities would certify applicant’s competence; 
Home Office would continue to issue license 
All facilities would be registered; Secretary would have power 
to set standards for staffing, care, and accommodation; 
facilities would name person responsible for day-to-day care 
and outside veterinarian must be called for problems; 
breeders and suppliers would register 
Registered facilities, based on number of procedures 
All animals purpose-bred in registered establishments (except 
for farm animals and animals taken from the wild); 
recordkeeping on source and disposal 
Reuse would require Secretary’s permission, and only if the 
animal has returned to normal 
Not required to kill animals at the end of a procedure; if 
certified fit, surviving wild animals may be returned to the 
wild, farm animals to a farm, and certain domestic animals 
may be offered to private homes 
Secretary would authorize for special, specific skills such as 
microsurgery on anesthetized animals 
License would not be issued until Secretary was convinced 
that alternatives were not suitable and that no further 
refinements or reductions could be made 
Would be extended to allow other nonrecovery training for 
approved professional courses; would permit recovery if 
animal suffers only trivial pain or distress under exceptional 
circumstances, decerebration would become a licensed 
procedure and no longer permitted in schools 
Would require Animal Procedures Committee, with lay members 
(including animal welfare advocates), doctors, veterinarians, 
and biologists; no more than half of the Committee would be 
licensees; would advise Secretary on procedures, standards, 
trends, licensing, and revisions of the law 
Secretary would issue guidelines and codes of practice on 
animal husbandry and would give guidance on recognizing 
and alleviating stress and pain 
Performing, aiding, or abetting performance of a procedure without 
authority; providing false information; disclosing information 
obtained in confidence; 2 years and an unlimited fine 
Same 
SOURCE: Office of Technology Assessment. 
