Pound Seizure Frequently Asked Questionsby Humane Society of the United StatesWhy ban pound seizure?Animals that have been socialized have formed a loving, trusting bond with humans and most people who have pets come to regard them as a member of their family. While all animals are capable of suffering, pets are particularly vulnerable. Accustomed, in most instances, to personal care and relative freedom, these animals suffer psychologically a great deal under the harsh demands and confines of a laboratory environment.Will an end to pound seizure hinder medical science?Far from it. Massachusetts, which has the most comprehensive state law banning pound seizure, is proof that research is not hindered. Three years after the ban was enacted, medical research remained at the same level as before, in terms of the number of cats and dogs used. Biomedical research continues in Sweden, Denmark, and Holland, where the use of pound-source animals has been banned. The World Health Organization publicly advises against the use of pound-source animals in research, as does the Council of Europe.Aren't pound source animals sometimes necessary for an experiment?No. Researchers will claim that some experiments call for a mongrel rather than a purebred dog. However, mongrel simply means mixed-breed and these dogs can be, and are, bred, for research purposes under controlled conditions. While many shelter animals are mixed-breed, many are not; and nothing is known about their genetic backgrounds or medical histories, making them poor subjects.In what kind of experiments are pound-seized animals used?Animals are used for practice surgery by medical and veterinary students and then euthanized. Thousands are used in long-term and/or painful experiments or programs by researchers studying everything from the effects of radiation to behavioural abnormalities.Won't just as many animals suffer if only purpose-bred animals are used?No. Studies by researchers have shown that it takes more random-source than purpose-bred animals to produce the same results in an experiment. Purpose-bred animals provide more precise data; therefore, fewer are needed.What about using shelter animals in university teaching situations?The answer for education should clearly be no! In Great Britain, where practice surgery on live animals for medical students has not been allowed for over a century (with one minor exception), the psychians and veternarians are as competent as those educated elsewhere. Faculty at several universities oppose many of the teaching methods that use randon-source animals and have developed perfectly adequate alternative models. For example, to study the symptoms of death by poisoning, Instructors at Michigan State University used to give massive doses of poison to dogs in front of their students. In 1979, these live classroom demonstrations were replaced by the use of videotapes.Do all scientists support the practice of pound seizure?Absolutely not! More and more scientists are stepping forward to decry the use of random-source animals as effective research models and are aiding to end the release of shelter animals for research.How does the release of animals for research undermine effective animal control?If an animal shelter is to operate effectively, it must be seen by the public as a safe haven for the animals taken there. Shelters should strive to return animals to their rightful owners, provide them with adoption to a suitable home, or euthanize them humanely. Releasing animals to facilities where they may undergo painful experimentation or suffer from induced diseases is not a humane alternative. Rather than risk their being seized for research, individuals who have animals they can no longer keep may abandon them, and people who find lost animals may be reluctant to turn them in.Aren't only stray animals used in research?Researchers don't want the sick, injured, aggressive, maladjusted stray dogs and cats. They want the friendly, healthy, socialized, trusting animals - those that are sure to have been pets. For example, when a research institution from Cincinatti requisitioned poodles from the local public shelter in 1994, these dogs were undoubtedly former pets, not feral animals caught roaming the city streets.Aren't poorly run shelters and irresponsible pet ownership the real problems that need to be addressed?All animal protection and contro organizations should combat irresponsible pet ownership through differential licensing, subsidized spay/neuter clinics, public education, etc.. While shelter personnel attempt to find homes for the animals that are adoptable, researchers compete for the use of those same animals, directly interfering with the animal protection movement and its work. And researchers fail to implement alternatives to using animals that are scientifically proven, cost-effective, and readily available. It is time to return all shelters to their proper status as the last humane refuge for animals separated from or without owners, and to eliminate, once and for all, the release of shelter animals for research.Posted to talk.politics.animals by Debbie Ann Brett, dbrett@nlnet.nf.ca. |