Source: Tom Johnston, MEATINGPLACE, 4/1/15

USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service said it is seeking public comment on a petition to amend federal animal welfare law as it pertains to research facilities. 

The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) filed a petition in October 2013 to define the term “alternatives,” clarify the definition of “painful procedure,” and set standards governing the consideration of such alternatives at research facilities. 

PCRM contends the intent of the Animal Welfare Act is to authorize research facilities to undertake procedures likely to produce pain or distress in animals only if there are no alternatives to these procedures, but ambiguities in the law have allowed research facilities to take only “cursory deliberation regarding alternatives” in order to comply with the law. 

PCRM wants APHIS to add a definition of “alternatives” to delineate what a primary investigator must consider in lieu of a procedure that may cause more than momentary or slight pain or distress to animals.

The petition also seeks a definition of “painful procedure” to codify APHIS policy that a procedure should be considered painful if it may cause more than momentary or slight pain to the animals, even if the pain is subsequently relieved through anesthesia. 
Lastly, the petition wants APHIS to specify what must occur as part of a consideration of alternatives.

APHIS is taking comments for 60 days from March 27, the date it published the notice in the federal register.

For more stories, go to www.meatingplace.com.