Judge Orders Closer Review of Animals Used for Research

Agreeing with two animal rights groups that contended “the county doesn’t have any idea what our pets are being used for,” a Superior Court judge has ordered Los Angeles County to change its review process for hospitals that buy stray animals for medical research.

Judge Loren Miller Jr. said that Ollie Haggans, chief veterinarian for the county Department of Public Health, “has abdicated his responsibility” to make sure research institutions follow the rules when they purchase stray animals from the pound and use them for research.

The judge, in a three-page ruling Wednesday, sided with animal rights activists who claimed that Haggans must do more than take the word of medical institutions when they say they do not subject animals to unnecessary cruelty.

Scolded on Records

Miller also criticized the county for keeping no records of violations. The county veterinarian ought to conduct a more complete review, he said.

Haggans testified that each hospital signed a checklist indicating that its treatment of research animals followed county guidelines. He said he took the word of hospital officials, whom he called qualified, conscientious professionals. He also said he inspected each facility “three or four” times a year. County lawyers contended that no ordinances stated how the county must carry out its inspection and certification.

In their court brief, the Fund for Animals Inc. and Actors and Others for Animals, maintained: “Dr. Haggans knows nothing of the experiments, rarely if ever observes an experiment, knows nothing about whether animals are experiencing postoperative pain, knows nothing about whether pain-relieving drugs are being administered and even admits in his deposition that he leaves this to the discretion of the institution.”

Miller did not give the plaintiffs a complete victory, saying there was no evidence of widespread animal abuse. He did not rule on their contention that county procedures violated animal protection guidelines established in a 1984 court order.

That order requires that each institution approved to buy dogs and cats from county pounds be certified as conducting “research under humane conditions.”

In the fiscal year ending last June, research institutions purchased 493 dogs and 170 cats from county pounds, less than 1% of the more than 90,000 animals brought to the pounds annually.

The brief trial, which concluded in September, centered on how the county certifies “humane treatment.” The two animal rights groups, which also were parties to the 1984 case, contended that the county had shirked its responsibility to certify that hospitals do not intentionally hurt animals. They must administer pain-relieving drugs unless they interfere with experiments.

Six hospitals are approved to buy dogs and cats from county shelters, most of them purchased by UCLA. The number of animals sold has decreased steadily over the last few years, from a peak of 2,883 animals in 1981, after the city of Los Angeles banned such sales.

Supervisors have defeated several motions for the county to follow suit, despite heavy lobbying by animal rights groups.

County guidelines prohibit the selling of purebred animals or animals with collars because they might be pets. Also, anyone turning an animal over to a shelter must sign a statement authorizing its sale for research. More than 90% refuse to grant such permission, said George Baca, deputy director of the Department of Animal Care and Control.