ACTION ALERT:
Contact USDA to DEMAND MAX FINE against Brown University
Dr. Elizabeth Goldentyer
Director, USDA, Eastern Region
919-855-7100
Betty.J.Goldentyer@usda.gov
aceast@aphis.usda.gov
SAMPLE MESSAGE:
Please levy the MAXIMUM FINE against Brown University for their blatant disregard of the Animal Welfare Act when their negligence caused traumatic injuries to a monkey and also performed unapproved surgical procedures. Their behavior should NOT be tolerated and MUST be punished to the fullest extent of the law. The time is NOW to send a clear message with stiff penalties to these negligent facilities that these behaviors will NOT be tolerated!
Brown accused of violating Animal
Welfare Act
By Hattie Xu, BrownDailyHerald.com, October 7, 2016
Animal rights organization Stop Animal Exploitation NOW! filed an
official complaint against the University with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture Oct. 2.
SAEN reviewed internal records sent from a University administrator to the
National Institutes of Health after submitting a public request for
information under the Freedom of Information Act, said Michael Budkie,
executive director of SAEN. The records documented two incidents that SAEN
identifies as violations of the Animal Welfare Act, according to the
official complaint.
In an incident reported June 23 to the NIH’s Office of Laboratory Animal
Welfare — a division that reviews protocol violations by NIH-funded
institutions — a titanium mesh implant was placed in a rhesus macaque even
though an amendment to the procedure was “still under review and not yet
approved by the (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee),” according to
the submitted document. During the procedure, anesthesia was administered,
and the animal recovered well.
A corrective action plan was later developed in which the “(principal
investigator) agreed to not conduct (any procedures) without prior IACUC
approval,” according to the document.
The University’s Animal Care Facility is required to record surgery statuses
as “tentative” until receiving IACUC approval. The procedure used in the
incident was later approved by the IACUC, wrote Brian Clark, director of
news and editorial development, in an email to The Herald.
A second incident was reported to OLAW Aug. 9. This case involved “traumatic
injuries” to the right pinky finger of a rhesus macaque that eventually
necessitated amputation of the finger, as well as a small tongue injury,
according to the incident report. The injuries were caused by the improper
latching of a cage door by an animal care technician, which allowed the
primate to escape. The rhesus macaque was injured during its “interactions
with other monkeys housed in the room,” wrote Director of Animal Care Lara
Helwig in an email to The Herald.
Corrective actions included disciplinary actions against the technician
involved and additional cage-changing training for animal care staff,
according to the document.
OLAW investigations into the two incidents have been closed, a
representative of the Office wrote in an email to The Herald, adding that
the University is “in compliance with the (Public Health Service) Policy on
Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals.”
Both incidents were also reported to the Association for Assessment and
Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International, the University’s
accreditation agency, Clark wrote.
While OLAW investigations have ceased, SAEN has requested a USDA
investigation into the University’s research procedures in addition to a
mandate that the University pay the maximum penalty of $10,000 per incident
per animal, according to the complaint.
“The University staff has demonstrated that they are sufficiently
incompetent (and) should not be trusted to use non-human primates,” Budkie
said. “If we’re talking about University staff that are not even capable of
making sure the enclosures are locked down properly to prevent a monkey from
escaping, why should we believe they can do science?”
SAEN ultimately hopes to see the University terminate both research
projects, Budkie said. The organization filed an official complaint against
the University in 2014, as well.
In general, SAEN advocates the permanent discontinuation of using animals in
all laboratories, according to its website. It monitors over 1,100 research
facilities and has helped launch 14 active USDA investigations into other
laboratories, Budkie said.
The University is reasserting its commitment to animal welfare through
putting a “thorough system in place to guide and monitor animal care and use
in research,” Vice President for Research David Savitz, who originally
reported the incidents to OLAW, wrote in an email to The Herald. Procedures
are often reviewed by veterinary staff before they are submitted to the
IACUC, which is a team of scientists and non-scientists both affiliated and
not affiliated with the University that evaluates procedures and
qualifications of the personnel involved in given cases, he added.
All staff members employed by the animal care department are trained in
“animal health, animal husbandry and other relevant topics throughout the
year,” Savitz wrote. He added that many are also certified technicians by
the American Association of Laboratory Animal Science and that there are
three full-time veterinarians on the staff.
The University plans to cooperate with any possible investigations, as well
as to “be responsive to the agencies that oversee animal care and use and
implement any corrective actions necessary to prevent future occurrence,”
Savitz wrote.
“As the institutional official responsible for overseeing these activities,
I can assure you that I take that duty very seriously,” Savitz wrote, “and
(I) am quite confident that staff at Brown are doing all they possibly can
to ensure we adhere to the high standards we are obligated to uphold.”
See also:
Return to Media Coverage