The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) was the first federal law in the United States regulating the use of animals in research. In addition to research laboratories, the AWA now also applies to animal carriers, handlers, dealers, breeders, and exhibitors. The law establishes minimum standards of care that must be provided for animals with respect to, among other things, housing, handling, sanitation, food, water, veterinary care, and protection from weather extremes. Over the years, the AWA has been amended numerous times. It covers warm-blooded species but (as amended) expressly excludes birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research.
The following is a chronological account of the legislative and administrative actions pertaining to the AWA’s key provisions:
August 24, 1966: The Laboratory Animal Welfare Act (P.L. 89-544) is signed into law. Its stated purpose is “to protect the owners of dogs and cats from theft of such pets, to prevent the sale or use of dogs and cats which have been stolen, and to insure that certain animals intended for use in research facilities are provided humane care and treatment.” The law sets minimum housing and handling standards for dogs, cats, primates, rabbits, hamsters, and guinea pigs on the premises of animal dealers and laboratories. To prevent theft, all dogs and cats handled in commerce by any dealer must be identified. Dealers must be licensed and laboratories must be registered.
December 24, 1970: The Laboratory Animal Welfare Act is amended and renamed the Animal Welfare Act (P.L. 91-579), extending protection to “such other warm-blooded animal, as the Secretary [of Agriculture] may determine is being used, or is intended for use, for research, testing, experimentation, or exhibition purposes, or as a pet,” except “horses not used for research purposes and other farm animals.”
December 24, 1971: Contrary to the language of the statute, AWA regulations published by the USDA one year later add birds, rats, and mice—animals who, along with fish, constitute 80%–92% of all animals used in research—to the list of animals excluded from coverage under the AWA.
April 22, 1976: The Animal Welfare Act Amendments of 1976 (P.L. 94-279) are signed into law. Among other things, the amendments:
- Extend coverage to animals held by carriers, intermediate handlers, and animal brokers
- Specify that, with respect to dogs protected under the law, the term “dog” refers to “all dogs including those used for hunting, security, or breeding purposes”
- Require a veterinarian’s certificate for animals in interstate transport
- Require all federal agencies using laboratory animals—including the Army, the Air Force, and the National Institutes of Health—to show they fully comply with the AWA
- Prohibit commerce in animals for use in animal fighting
December 23, 1985: The Improved Standards for Laboratory Animals Act (ISLAA) is signed into law as a component of the Food Security Act (P.L. 99-198), an omnibus farm bill. ISLAA adds provisions to the AWA designed to minimize the pain and distress of animals in research. Among other things, registered research facilities must provide exercise opportunities for dogs and psychological enrichment for primates. Researchers must consider alternatives and consult with a veterinarian before beginning any experiment on an animal that could cause pain. To facilitate this, the law establishes an information service in the National Agricultural Library, in cooperation with the National Library of Medicine, to provide data on alternatives to animals in research, help prevent unintended duplication of experiments and tests, and supply information to institutions for training scientists and other personnel in the humane practices required under the law.
Researchers must adhere to standards set by the Secretary of Agriculture for pre- and post-surgical care, pain relief, euthanasia, and the unnecessary use of the same animal for more than one major operation. Fines rise from $1,000 to $2,500 for an AWA violation and from $500 to $1,500 for failure to obey a cease-and-desist order, per violation, per day.
Under ISLAA, every registered research facility must also appoint an institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC), which must include a veterinarian, a scientist, a nonscientist, and a person unaffiliated with the institution to represent the community’s interest in the welfare of the animals. The IACUC must inspect the animal laboratories twice a year and report deficiencies to the institution for correction. If these are not corrected promptly, the USDA must be notified for enforcement action, and any funding agency involved must be informed so it can decide whether the grant should be suspended or revoked.
November 28, 1990: The Pet Theft Prevention Act is signed into law as a component of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act (P.L. 101-624), an omnibus farm bill. The Pet Theft Prevention Act amends the AWA (1) to require pounds to hold dogs and cats for five days before releasing them to dealers and (2) to require Class B dealers (those who acquire “random source” animals and sell them for use in research, teaching, and testing) to provide statements describing the animals they are selling and their source. The amendment also authorizes the USDA to seek injunctions against any licensed facility found dealing in stolen animals or placing the health of any animal in serious danger in violation of the AWA.
1992–2000: In 1991, animal welfare organizations sued the USDA after it denied their petition urging the department to revise the AWA regulations in order to extend the law’s protections to birds, rats, and mice. Although a federal district court initially ruled that the USDA’s exclusion of birds, rats, and mice (as well as its denial of the petition) was “arbitrary and capricious and violates the law,” a panel of the appellate court ruled in 1997 that the plaintiffs lacked standing and dismissed the case.
In 1998, however, in an unrelated case, the full appeals court expanded the grounds for standing to include “injuries to one’s ‘aesthetic interest in observing animals living under humane conditions.’” Armed with this ruling, the Alternatives Research and Development Foundation sued the USDA in 1999 and was granted standing the following year by the appellate court, which found that one of the plaintiffs suffered “aesthetic and emotional injury resulting from her observation of these mistreated animals.” The USDA settled this case in October 2000 by agreeing to amend the regulations to extend coverage to birds, rats, and mice. The effort stalled, however, when later that month, a rider was inserted into USDA appropriations legislation that prohibited fiscal year 2001 funds from being used to “modify the definition of ‘animal’ in existing regulations pursuant to the Animal Welfare Act.” A similar prohibition was included in appropriations legislation the following year.
May 13, 2002: The Farm Security and Rural Investment Act (P.L. 107-171), an omnibus farm bill, is enacted with a provision changing the definition of “animal” under the statutory language of the AWA itself (not merely in the implementing regulations) to expressly exclude birds, rats of the genus Rattus and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research. This ends the discrepancy between the statute and its regulations and thus effectively nullifies the October 2000 court settlement.
May 3, 2007: The Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act (P.L. 110-22) is enacted, providing increased fines and/or prison terms for violations of the AWA’s animal fighting provisions. The law also amends the AWA to prohibit the buying, selling, and use of knives, gaffes, or other sharp instruments meant to be attached to a bird’s legs for fighting.
June 18, 2008: The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act (P.L. 110-246), an omnibus farm bill, is enacted with an amendment to the AWA strengthening the law’s animal fighting provisions and increasing fines for violations of the law from $2,500 to $10,000 per violation, per animal, per day. It also requires that dogs imported into the United States must be at least 6 months old and in good health.
Prior to the bill’s passage, a provision to phase out the purchase and use of random source dogs and cats from Class B dealers was dropped, even though it had been adopted by both the House and Senate. It was replaced with language calling for a study of Class B dealers by the NIH and instructing the USDA to respond to the House and Senate Agriculture Committees on the study. Subsequently, the NIH requested that the National Academy of Sciences appoint a committee to assess the need for Class B dealers as a supplier of dogs and cats for use in research.
May 29, 2009: The NAS committee’s report on Class B dealers is released. It cites a “tangle of trade” that could still result in the theft of pets for sale to laboratories, as well as serious compliance problems and humane concerns, and concludes that there is no scientific need or justification for the purchasing of animals for research from Class B dealers.
Read more about the NAS committee’s report on Class B dealers.
January 10, 2013: P.L. 112–261 is enacted, amending the AWA to exclude from its licensing requirements anyone owning “a common, domesticated household pet who derives less than a substantial portion of income … for exhibiting an animal that exclusively resides at the residence of the pet owner.” This is known as the “de minimis” rule.
December 20, 2018: The Parity in Animal Cruelty Enforcement (PACE) Act is signed into law as a component of the Agriculture Improvement Act (P.L. 115-334), an omnibus farm bill. The PACE Act extends the AWA’s animal fighting prohibitions to US territories, including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands, where local law had allowed animal fighting.
May 13, 2020: The USDA publishes amended licensing regulations that require covered entities to apply for a new license every three years rather than have their licenses renewed annually. The USDA states that this is meant to “promote compliance” and “reduce the regulatory burden.” The new regulations require licensees that handle dogs to establish programs of veterinary care that include scheduled veterinary visits.
February 21, 2023: The USDA publishes a final rule extending AWA protections to birds not bred for use in research—thus, primarily covering those used in exhibitions and the commercial pet trade. Certain breeders and exhibitors must now be licensed and inspected and must meet care standards that include providing psychological enrichment for their birds. The standards, however, are not as rigorous as called for by animal welfare organizations, and a large number of breeders are exempt from the license requirement.
Read more about this rule extending AWA protections to birds not bred for use in research.