Commenting Guidelines

    • The HSLF invites comments—pro and con. Keep them clean. Keep them lively. Adhere to our guiding philosophy of non-violence. And please understand, this is not an open post. We publish samplers of comments to keep the conversation going. We correct misspellings and typos when we find them.

Animals in Research

Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Bunnies take over Capitol Hill to find Some Bunny to Love

Rabbits are docile, loveable animals who we view as companions. Unfortunately, they, along with guinea pigs, mice, and rats, are still used for cosmetics testing for products like lipstick, toothpaste, lotion, and shampoo. In fact, approximately 500,000 animals suffer and die worldwide every year due to cosmetic testing where substances are forced down animals’ throats, dripped into their eyes, or smeared onto their skin, and they are left to suffer for days or weeks without pain relief.

Bunny-event
Photo by Paul Morigi/AP Images for the HSUS
HSLF President Sara Amundson, left, and
Rep. Tony Cárdenas, right, with bunnies
Paxton and Andre

That is why the Humane Society Legislative Fund, along with Congressman Tony Cárdenas  (D-Calif), hosted a bunny awareness event on Capitol Hill yesterday where we provided educational tools on how consumers can become more aware of cruelty free cosmetics while also interacting with some adorable rabbits available for adoption at local rescue groups. Staff and volunteers from Friends of Rabbits, a Baltimore/Washington D.C.-based rescue group, and Last Chance Animal Rescue, based in Waldorf, MD, brought about a dozen adoptable rabbits to the event. Hundreds of Congressional staffers came by to meet the rabbits and learn more about humane cosmetics.

Over the last 20 years, cosmetics companies have significantly reduced their use of animal testing in favor of alternative test methods and strategies, which are generally more cost-effective and predictive of human health and safety. Because species respond differently when exposed to the same chemicals, results from animal tests may not be indicative of how they will affect humans. In addition, results from animal tests can be variable and difficult to interpret. Unreliable and ineffective animal tests mean consumer safety cannot be guaranteed.

“It’s well past time we begin moving away from cruel and inhumane animal testing, and move towards alternative, sound scientific methods that do not involve harming animals like dogs, cats, and rabbits. I will continue working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to push federal agencies to move away from unnecessary painful testing and adopt more humane methods that result in beneficial outcomes.” -Congressman Tony Cárdenas

In order to remain competitive in a changing global market, the American cosmetics industry will need to adopt humane testing methods as many other countries have banned the sale of cosmetics that have been newly tested on animals.

In 2012, HSLF, the Humane Society of the United States, and Humane Society International launched the global #BeCrueltyFree campaign with the goal of extending the EU ban to cosmetics animal testing and trade around the world.

In 2013, the European Union (EU) became the world’s largest cruelty-free cosmetics marketplace when it finalized a ban on using animal tests to determine the safety of cosmetics and the sale of cosmetics tested on animals. This ban compelled cosmetics companies around the world to end animal testing and invest in the development of alternatives in order to sell in the EU. 

As a result, similar bans were enacted in Israel, Norway, India, and Switzerland. More than 1.8 billion people can now buy cosmetics that will never be tested on animals again.

Significant support for more accurate and humane testing for cosmetics is also found here in the United States. State legislatures are hopping on board to end animal testing for cosmetics. California, Nevada, and Illinois  became the first states to pass laws  to prohibit the sale of animal-tested cosmetics. As California is the fifth largest economy in the world, it only follows that we should have a federal law. 

It is time for Congress to take action to ensure that all cosmetics produced and sold in the United States are free from new animal testing. The Humane Cosmetics Act, which would prohibit the production and sale of animal-tested cosmetics, had strong bipartisan support in the last Congress, including from Congressman Cardenas and 186 other House members. In addition, close to 300 stakeholders in the cosmetics industry, including Paul Mitchell, Coty, Lush, and The Body Shop, have endorsed the legislation.

We are nearing reintroduction of the bill with leaders from the 115th Congress. Please contact your members of Congress (you can find their contact information here) and tell them to become original cosponsors of the Humane Cosmetics Act when it’s reintroduced in the House and introduced in the Senate. Let’s make the United States the next country to #BeCrueltyFree.

Tuesday, September 10, 2019

Breaking news: EPA moves to end animal testing

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

In a landmark announcement, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today announced plans to end all animal testing on dogs, mice, rabbits, and other mammals for chemicals and pesticides in coming years. Instead, the agency will focus on investing in non-animal alternative technologies that are more reliable and do not cause animal suffering.

Bunny_istock_270x240
Photo courtesy of iStock Photo

The agency plans to substantially reduce animal tests, including those it commissions in-house as well as those that it requires businesses to conduct, by 2025, and to end them altogether by 2035. The agency will also devote $4.25 million to the development of non-animal technologies (also known as new approach methodologies, or NAMs) at five universities. These approaches could include organ-on-a-chip technologies, cell cultures, computer modeling and other methods that are faster, cheaper and more predictive than time-consuming animal tests.

The agency’s decision to stop using results from mammal studies for approval of new chemicals will further spare even more animal lives. Companies seeking approval for a new chemical will be required to seek the consent of the EPA in order to carry out animal tests.

Today’s announcement follows the 2016 revision by Congress of the Toxic Substances Control Act—a law that regulates chemical safety in the United States. At that time, the Humane Society Legislative Fund and the Humane Society of the United States successfully advocated for key provisions which mandated that animal testing should be minimized and non-animal methods and strategies developed and prioritized. The likely outcome will be to spare hundreds of thousands of animals from having chemicals rubbed onto their skin, dropped in their eyes, or forced down their throats.  

We have also lobbied the U.S. Congress to support increased appropriations for the EPA’s Office of Research and Development and its Computational Toxicology Program, to explore the use of mathematical and computer models to help assess chemical hazards and risks to human health and the environment. In a bipartisan approach, members of Congress have consistently prioritized key funding for these non-animal technologies.

In recent years, the EPA has taken decisive steps to reduce the use of animal testing for both chemicals and pesticides, and we are grateful to EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler for his continued commitment in this regard. In 2016, the agency released a guidance document allowing pesticide manufacturers to waive the need for skin toxicity tests by accepting information already obtained through other tests, and published a letter to stakeholders expressing its goal of significantly reducing the use of animals in acute toxicity tests for pesticides. In 2018, the EPA released a policy encouraging the use of non-animal test methods for determining whether pesticides and chemicals cause skin allergies. As part of the updated TSCA, the EPA, in 2018, published a strategic plan to promote the development and implementation of alternative test methods. The overall effect has been one of steady, sweeping progress toward a long-cherished goal for animal protection advocates—the end of experiments that cause pain and misery to animals.

We are excited to see the EPA reinforce its commitment with today’s pathbreaking announcement, which heralds a new era for animals in laboratories. We urge other government agencies, industries, and stakeholders to join with the agency to end animal testing by investing in development and implementation of non-animal methods. The results will be improved human safety, more accurate and timely results, a better environment, and an end to animal suffering.

Kitty Block is President and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States.

Friday, August 23, 2019

Washington Post reveals White House may have meddled to stop USDA inspectors from helping suffering animals

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

There are new and explosive revelations about the lengths the Trump administration may be going to in order to prevent U.S. Department of Agriculture inspectors from documenting and reporting violations of the Animal Welfare Act and the Horse Protection Act.

NCPUPPYMILL_0740_359091
Photo by Meredith Lee/The HSUS

Washington Post story details a disturbing case at an Iowa facility in 2017 where nearly 300 raccoons, bred and sold as pets and for research, lay suffering and without relief in their stacked cages in 100-degree temperatures. But when a USDA team of veterinarians and specialists confiscated some of the animals and made plans to come back for the others, an industry group appealed to a Trump White House adviser. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue and senior USDA officials then intervened to block the inspectors and veterinarians from taking the remaining raccoons, and they were ordered to return the ones they had already seized.

“In the months that followed, the Iowa incident was described by USDA officials at internal meetings as an example of the new philosophy of animal welfare protection under the Trump administration and Perdue,” reporters Karin Brulliard and William Wan write. “Leaders of the agency’s Animal Care division told inspectors to treat those regulated by the agency—breeders, zoos, circuses, horse shows and research labs—more as partners than as potential offenders.”

William Stokes, a veterinarian who oversaw inspectors in 27 states for USDA, told the Post that the weakened enforcement had caused an “untold numbers of animals” to experience unnecessary suffering.

These are shocking revelations, but they are not surprising to us. The Post article further cements concerns that we’ve had—and voiced—on this blog before: that in the past two-and-a-half years, the USDA—the agency with a mandate to protect animals used by businesses, including pet breeders, zoos, research labs and other institutions—has been failing miserably to do its job because it is busy pandering to those who run these businesses. The result has been immense suffering for the animals, even as the USDA itself has been hemorrhaging experienced staff and taxpayer dollars.

The Post article also discusses a shift in the enforcement of the Horse Protection Act with regards to the soring of Tennessee walking horses and other related breeds—a shift that began in 2016, after the appointment by the Obama administration of Bernadette Juarez, the first non-veterinarian to lead the Animal Care division. Among other changes, a new rule required a second USDA veterinarian to independently perform a second inspection on a sored horse, and unless both came up with the same results, the horse could not be disqualified and the owner could not be cited. As a result, the number of horses that inspectors determined had been sored dropped from 30 percent in 2016 to only two percent in 2018.

The weakening of enforcement is not the only bad change made by the Trump administration: in early 2017, it abruptly removed from the USDA website all public inspection reports on regulated facilities. The same year, it introduced an incentive program that allows licensees to avoid penalties for violations by self-reporting them, even if the violations resulted in animal deaths. It has also removed a chapter in the inspectors’ guide that explained how to identify and confiscate suffering animals, and began training for inspectors that instructs them to “educate” licensees rather than documenting violations.

As a result, since the current administration took office, citations by USDA have plummeted 65%, according to the Post’s research, and enforcement cases declined 92% between 2016 and 2018.

Former Animal Care division head Ron DeHaven called the decrease in citations for the most serious violations concerning. “If there are things that are directly impacting the health and well-being of animals, I don’t care who the administration is,” he told the Post. “Those are the kinds of things that need to be documented.”

The Humane Society of the United States own research for our Horrible Hundred report shows a similar drop. They found that many puppy mills that have been cited by state officials for serious issues, such as emaciated dogs and dying puppies, received completely clean inspection reports from their USDA inspectors.

With our government turning its back on the animals, it has been left to animal protection groups like us—and the media—to shine a light on the cruelty when possible. We are intensifying our fight against puppy mills by working with states and localities to stop the sale of puppies in pet stores altogether, and we’ve been successful in more than 312 localities and two states. Earlier this year, 39 Senators and 188 Representatives wrote a letter urging the USDA to stop treating regulated industries as their clients, tighten up enforcement, require documentation of every noncompliance, and restore the public inspections records and enforcement documents to the USDA’s website.

We, along with the HSUS, have also filed a lawsuit against the USDA for withdrawing, in 2017, a rule finalized by the Obama administration that would have closed loopholes in Horse Protection Act regulations. And we’ll be watching to see how USDA inspectors are allowed to perform their duties at the Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration that starts this week in Shelbyville. This week, five of the lead House sponsors of the Prevent All Soring Tactics (PAST) Act, which the House approved in July, sent a letter to Secretary Perdue urging the Department to “do everything possible to vigorously enforce” the HPA, and for field employees at the Celebration to “perform their inspection duties with diligence.” A parallel letter was also sent to the secretary by the lead sponsors of the Senate PAST Act.

The administration should take heed that we will not sit by and allow it to continue choosing the interests of businesses over the animals they use. The media spotlight is already turned on them, Congress is watching, and rest assured we will not miss a single opportunity to protect the animals with all means at our disposal.

Kitty Block is President and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States.

Tuesday, August 20, 2019

Where do the Democratic presidential candidates stand on animal protection issues?

By Brad Pyle

With the Democratic election field for 2020 in play, we thought it timely to examine the animal protection records of candidates for president. This two-part series will highlight the pro-animal commitments of the candidates. Following the order of the Democratic Party’s second presidential debate, here’s what we know:   

ISTOCK-479747398_476683Bernie Sanders

Bernie Sanders has been a steady and consistent supporter of animal protection during his time in Congress.

In the current session, Sanders is cosponsoring legislation to create a felony penalty for malicious animal cruelty and crack down on horse soring abuses.

In previous sessions, Sanders cosponsored bills to curtail abusive puppy mills and animal fighting, to restrict the private trade in big cats and primates as exotic pets, and to ban barren battery cages for egg-laying hens. He supported strong enforcement of federal animal welfare laws, and opposed the weakening of the Endangered Species Act.

He helped to lead the effort in the 111th and 112th Congresses to end the use of chimpanzees in invasive research and retire them to sanctuaries.

Elizabeth Warren

Elizabeth Warren has continually supported animal protection legislation while in the U.S. Senate.

Currently, Warren is cosponsoring legislation to create a felony penalty for malicious animal cruelty and crack down on horse soring abuses.

In previous sessions, Warren has introduced legislation to strengthen oversight of antibiotic use in animals. She also co-filed an amendment to the Farm Bill to correct abuses by commodity checkoff programs such as those for beef, pork, and eggs.

Pete Buttigieg

Pete Buttigieg’s accelerated rise to the forefront of American politics has presented him with little opportunity to affect animal protection policy.

During his 2018 State of the City address, Buttigieg highlighted South Bend’s Animal Care & Control successes in doubling the number of pet adoptions and reducing the euthanasia rate for cats and dogs.

Pete has two rescue dogs, Truman and Buddy, who appear frequently on social media.

Beto O’Rourke

Beto O’Rourke supported critical animal protection legislation while in Congress, and was a member of the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus.

O’Rourke supported the full range of animal protection legislation through his votes and cosponsorships. This includes voting to protect wildlife in Alaska, crack down on animal fighting, and against stripping ESA protections from gray wolves in the Lower 48 states.

Amy Klobuchar

In the current session, Senator Amy Klobuchar is cosponsoring legislation to crack down on horse soring abuses.

In the past, she cosponsored legislation which would require furs to be labeled, enabling consumers to make informed decisions. She also voted against legislation which allowed egregiously cruel and unsporting hunting methods on more than 76 million acres of National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska.  

Tim Ryan

Congressman Tim Ryan has received scores ranging from 25 to 100 on the Humane Scorecard.

In the current session, Ryan is cosponsoring legislation to crack down on malicious animal cruelty, eliminate the shark fin trade, and prevent the export of American horses for slaughter overseas. This year he voted for the PAST Act, which would end horse soring abuses.

Previously, he voted to establish a recovery program for the Southern sea otter and to expand funding for marine turtle conservation.

John Delaney

Former Congressman John Delaney consistently received top marks on the Humane Scorecard, receiving an impressive score of “100” over each of his last 5 years in office.

While in the U.S. House, Delaney voted to crack down on animal fighting in the U.S. territories, and against stripping ESA protections from gray wolves in the Lower 48 states. During his last term in office, he cosponsored legislation to end horse soring abuses, crack down on malicious animal cruelty, and end the domestic shark fin trade.

Delaney was a member of the Congressional Animal Protection Caucus.

Marianne Williamson

Marianne Williamson is a member of the Humane Society of the United States’ Faith Advisory Council. In this capacity, she plays a leading role in reminding people to be responsible stewards and caretakers of God’s creation. She also serves as an ambassador for the HSUS in her community.

Williamson’s presidential platform contains promising animal protection language, stating, “As custodians of this planet, we are intended to care for the animals that share the land with us.”

Steve Bullock

Few animal protection bills make it to the desk of Steve Bullock, Montana’s governor since 2013.  Montana currently ranks 42nd in the Humane Society of the United States’ Humane State ranking.

 In 2015, Bullock vetoed a bill which would have restricted Montana’s ability to relocate bison within the state.

During a campaign stop in Iowa, Bullock said large animal confinements known as CAFOs are a state issue, not a federal one, not a promising animal welfare position for someone seeking the presidency.

Closing Remarks

Please remember to update your voter registration, and take other steps to ensure that  your voice is heard in our democracy. Tomorrow’s blog will cover the candidates featured in night two of the second presidential debate.

Brad Pyle is political director of the Humane Society Legislative Fund.

Tuesday, August 13, 2019

Cruel cosmetics banned in Illinois; third U.S. state to do so after California, Nevada

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

The United States has moved one step closer to ending unnecessary cosmetics testing on animals, as Illinois becomes the third U.S. state to enact a marketing ban preventing companies from selling cosmetics that have newly been tested on animals. On August 9, Governor J.B. Pritzker signed into law a bill that prohibits the sale of cosmetics like shampoos, lipsticks and deodorants in Illinois, unless they are cruelty free.

Bunny_istock_270x240
Photo courtesy of iStock Photo

Illinois joins California and Nevada, which have passed similar laws. Starting January 1, 2020, all cosmetics products on store shelves in these three states will be free of new animal testing. We applaud the work of Sen. Linda Holmes, Rep. Jonathan Carroll, and the Animal Welfare Institute in helping to secure the passage of the Illinois bill.

As we continue to expand our global #BeCrueltyFree campaign, we are thrilled to see the momentum building in the United States. This is one of the world’s largest cosmetics markets and reforms here have the potential to spare the lives of tens of thousands of animals used in these tests worldwide each year, including mice, rabbits, rats and guinea pigs. In traditional tests, substances are forced down the animals’ throats, dripped into their eyes, or smeared onto their skin, and they are left to suffer for days or weeks without pain relief. There is no need for this.

Consumer demand for cruelty-free products has led to more than 1,000 cosmetic brands in North America committing to develop and offer products based on the thousands of safe ingredients already available, or by using non-animal test methods that are often more reliable predictors of human safety at a great savings in time and cost when compared to animal tests.

For these and other reasons, we need Congress to step up now and pass legislation to end cosmetics testing on animals in our country altogether. There is strong support for such a law: in the last Congress, the Humane Cosmetics Act received the support of more than 180 cosponsors. This legislation was also endorsed by nearly 300 companies in the cosmetics industry. We expect the bill to be reintroduced when Congress reconvenes in September.

Worldwide, nearly 40 countries, including the member countries of the European Union, Australia, Guatemala, India, Israel, New Zealand, Norway, South Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan and Turkey, have already banned or limited the use of animals for cosmetics testing through the efforts of Humane Society International and others. HSI and its partners are on the front lines in countries including Brazil, Canada, Chile, Mexico, South Africa, Sri Lanka and the ASEAN region of south-east Asia, working hard to help pass additional legislation on these lines.

HSI’s #BeCrueltyFree campaign also has the support of global beauty giants like Unilever, Procter & Gamble, Avon and the Estée Lauder Companies, in addition to our longstanding partners at Lush and H&M.

There is a beauty revolution underway, and it is one that rejects outmoded cruelty and embraces compassion and modern scientific alternatives to animal testing. There is no excuse for our country to remain on the sidelines even as the rest of the world commits to this new, forward-thinking protocol. With the momentum for ending cosmetics testing building up day by day, now is the perfect time to recommit to ending these tests here in the United States. Please call your members of Congress (you can find their contact information here) and let them know you support reintroduction of the Humane Cosmetics Act. With a few more victories, we can push cosmetics testing with animals off the map for good.

Kitty Block is President and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States.

Tuesday, June 11, 2019

New USDA animal care fact sheets focus more on gloss than truly improving animal care

The Animal Welfare Act is supposed to ensure the humane treatment of animals—from dogs to elephants—at zoos, commercial breeders, research labs, and other regulated facilities. For years, the Humane Society Legislative Fund and the Humane Society of the United States have pressed the U.S. Department of Agriculture to improve its enforcement of this critical law by updating its regulations to account for scientific developments, explicitly prohibiting certain practices known to cause animal suffering, and providing appropriate guidance to its inspectors, as well as by working with Congress to significantly boost the agency’s enforcement budget.

NCPUPPYMILL_0740_359091
Photo by Meredith Lee/The HSUS

Over the last few years, however, the USDA’s enforcement of the AWA has moved almost entirely in the wrong direction. That’s why we were hopeful when we saw that USDA had recently updated its website with “easy-to-understand informational guidance” on a range of animal care issues.

Unfortunately, these fact sheets are woefully insufficient to address the numerous problems associated with the agency’s implementation of the AWA.

For example:

  • Eight new fact sheets on Primate Care Topics illustrate the social needs of primates, including the importance of mother-infant relationships and problems with social isolation for monkeys and apes. This is critical information for regulated facilities to incorporate into their practices, but these infographics are not a real substitute for formal guidance on how to meet the AWA’s primate psychological well-being requirements, as we requested in a legal petition in 2015.

  • Three new fact sheets on Nondomestic Cat Care Topics highlight the fact that captive big cats develop metabolic bone disease when fed improper diets. But USDA has failed to amend its regulations, as we requested in a 2012 petition, to address the primary cause of big cat suffering: the endless cycle of cats bred only to be torn away from their mothers as infants to be used for photo ops and bottle feeding. Qualified facilities housing big cats should already be well versed in carnivore dietary needs, and the real issue is that the agency needs to take action to prevent public contact with these animals to prevent a lifetime of medical and behavioral problems.

  • Four new fact sheets on Bear Care Topics—from nutrition to habitat design—are useful but insufficient. We have long advocated that the agency adopt formal standards for humane bear treatment, as the animals are currently only protected by generic catchall regulations that do not apply to bear-specific behavior.

  • Four new fact sheets on Canine Care Topics include basic information about dental and coat care. For our part, we continue to await the implementation of necessary regulations related to dental care and grooming as requested in our 2015 petition for rulemaking .

The posting of such rudimentary information in the form of fact sheets leaves us with troubling implications concerning the regulated businesses of the entities involved. Rather than putting glossy infographics online, the USDA should be taking stronger action on enforcement and reform across the range of the enterprises it regulates.

Thursday, March 21, 2019

Breaking news: USDA proposes rule to crack down on worst puppy mills and roadside zoos; require strengthened veterinary care for dogs

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

The U.S. Department of Agriculture today proposed a new rule to close a loophole in the law that allows puppy breeders and roadside zoo exhibitors, whose licenses have been revoked for severe and multiple Animal Welfare Act violations, to continue doing business as usual by relicensing under a family member’s name. The rule also proposes enhanced veterinary care for animals held by dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities, including annual hands-on veterinary exams and vaccinations for all dogs, and other commonsense measures like requiring that all dogs and cats have regular access to fresh, clean water.

Hslf-dog-cage-inset-240x190
Photo by Shutterstock

The rule will also require businesses to disclose any animal cruelty convictions before they can obtain a license, and it will prevent those which keep exotic animals as pets from obtaining an exhibitor license to skirt local laws that restrict the private ownership of dangerous wild animals.

We’re pleased to see that the rule mirrors several (though not all) of the improvements we requested in a 2015 petition to the agency to improve standards of care for dogs, and in legal comments we submitted in 2018 regarding the licensing scheme. Under the new rule, licensees will also be required to renew their licenses every three years instead of every year. While we prefer annual renewal, the current process does not require licensees to show compliance with AWA rules before renewal. If the new rule goes into effect, breeders and other licensees will now have to pass an inspection before they can obtain a new license.

The Humane Society Legislative Fund and the Humane Society of the United States have long pressed for such reforms because of concerns about the manner in which the USDA has been regulating puppy mills and other AWA licensees. For instance, USDA citations, warnings and fines have plummeted dramatically over the last two years. We strongly urge that the USDA accurately and diligently document violations; otherwise, a rule change that prevents noncompliant dealers from renewing their licenses will be pointless.

Our review of the USDA’s recent inspection reports also shows that inspectors rarely ever cite dealers for “critical” or “direct” violations anymore—even when they find bleeding, injured or emaciated animals on the property. When violations are not correctly cited, there is no follow-up. USDA must provide follow-up to address suffering animals.

The proposed rule is similar to the bipartisan Welfare of Our Friends (WOOF) Act, H.R. 1002, introduced in the House earlier this year by U.S. Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., Charlie Crist, D-Fla., Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., and Jim McGovern, D-Mass.

Let the USDA know you support measures that will require professional, hands-on veterinary care for dogs, that you support preventing problem pet breeders and other kinds of animal dealers and exhibitors with poor animal care histories from getting a new license, and that you support firm and diligent enforcement of the AWA.

This rule has the potential to improve the lives of tens of thousands of animals now languishing in the squalor of puppy mills and roadside zoos. We can do great good for them by seeing this rule over the finish line together.

Kitty Block is President and CEO of the Humane Society of the United States and President of Humane Society International, the international affiliate of the HSUS.

Thursday, February 21, 2019

Procter & Gamble, maker of Pantene and Herbal Essences, joins fight to end animal testing for cosmetics

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

Procter & Gamble, maker of popular household brands like Herbal Essences, Pantene, and Head & Shoulders, today announced it will join with our #BeCrueltyFree campaign to ban all animal testing for its cosmetics products in major global markets by 2023. This decision by one of America’s—and the world‘s—largest personal products manufacturers is an important victory for animals, and it further strengthens the case for banning animal testing for cosmetics in the United States and worldwide.

Bunny_istock_270x240
Photo courtesy of iStock Photo

Today‘s announcement builds upon a long history of cooperation between the multinational corporation and Humane Society International, the Humane Society of the United States, and the Humane Society Legislative Fund. For two decades, we have worked together to develop animal-free tests, pass legislation to require alternatives to animal tests, and fund government research and development, while also pressing for regulations to end animal testing around the globe. 

More than 10 years ago, Procter & Gamble and the HSUS founded AltTox.org, a global resource on advancing alternatives to animal testing for manufacturers, governments, and others seeking such options. P&G is also a founding member of the Human Toxicology Project, a coalition committed to replacing the use of animals in chemical testing with faster, better, more humane science based on current understanding of human biology.

Overall, P&G has invested more than $420 million over 40  years in developing non-animal test methods and its researchers have led or co-designed at least 25 cruelty-free methods for testing cosmetic products. Manufacturers are making the investment in this arena because they recognize that consumers continue to demand products free of the cruelty of new animal testing. 

In tandem with our campaign to convince the European Union to enact its long-promised ban on the marketing of cosmetics that have been newly tested on animals, HSI launched the #BeCrueltyFree initiative with the goal of extending the EU ban to countries where the practice is still allowed or even required under law. To date 38 countries have enacted legislation to fully or partially ban animal testing for cosmetics, including all countries in the EU, India, Taiwan, New Zealand, South Korea, Guatemala, and just last week, Australia. HSI and its partners played a major role in each of these victories, and we are also driving similar efforts in Brazil, Canada, Chile, Mexico, the Philippines, South Africa, Sri Lanka, and Vietnam.

More than 200 manufacturers worldwide have joined the #BeCrueltyFree initiative, including Lush Cosmetics, H&M, and Unilever.

Here in the United States, more than 1,000 personal care brands have committed to no new cosmetics testing on animals. Our HSLF staff has also been working with members of Congress to enact the Humane Cosmetics Act, introduced in the last Congress with bipartisan support and with the endorsement of more than 275 stakeholders in the personal care products industry. We expect it will once again be introduced in this Congress, and having a major manufacturer like Procter & Gamble on board will further strengthen our case.

Last year, the HSUS, HSLF, and others worked with lawmakers in California to make the Golden State—the most populated state in the country and the world’s fifth largest economy—the first in the United States to ban the sale of animal-tested cosmetics. 

Testing cosmetics on animals is not only cruel, but it is absolutely unnecessary. In traditional tests, rabbits, mice, rats, and guinea pigs have substances forced down their throat, dripped into their eyes, or smeared onto their skin, and are left to suffer for days or weeks without pain relief. Fortunately, cosmetic companies can create new and innovative products the cruelty-free way by choosing from thousands of ingredients that have a history of safe use. For new ingredients, animal tests are increasingly being replaced with non-animal methods that are often quicker, cheaper, and more reliable as predictors of toxicity in humans.

Today’s announcement from Procter & Gamble is a key milestone. HSI, the HSUS, and HSLF applaud the company for its smart thinking and compassion, and we are proud for the role we have played in making this change happen.

Kitty Block is President and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States and President of Humane Society International, the international affiliate of The HSUS.

Thursday, February 14, 2019

A budget deal has been reached, and it's good news for animals

After months of negotiations, and the longest shutdown in United States history, a deal has emerged for funding to cover all the remaining federal agencies whose Fiscal Year 2019 budgets have been in limbo. While the package has been agreed to by key House and Senate negotiators, it still has to clear some hurdles. We are hopeful that this turning point shows that Congress stands united, and that President Trump will sign the bill into law. Although earlier appropriations bills in the House and Senate contained worrisome provisions and excluded important protections for animals, we are happy to report that the final version has resolved many of those problems.

Duchess_horses_jkunz
Jennifer Kunz/Duchess Sanctuary

The Humane Society Legislative Fund worked with animal protection champions in both chambers and with other stakeholders to secure these key outcomes:

Maintaining the ban on horse slaughter: The bill prohibits government spending on horse slaughter inspections, which effectively bans horse slaughter in the United States for human consumption. This language has been in place in almost every year’s budget since 2005, and was initially secured in the FY19 Senate version of the bill.

Protecting wild horses and burros: The bill prevents the Bureau of Land Management and its contractors from sending wild horses and burros to slaughter, and from killing excess healthy horses and burros. In addition, the bill leaves out harmful language contained in the House version of the bill to launch a program of mass surgical sterilization—a procedure which research has yet to prove can be conducted humanely. The conferees have requested that the BLM provide them with an updated humane management plan within 180 days, and that the agency include in its fiscal year 2020 budget request an outline of its proposed strategy and the funding necessary for implementation.

Preserving ESA protections for gray wolves: The bill omits an assault on gray wolves contained in the original House version of the bill. If enacted, it would have directed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to remove Endangered Species Act protections from wolves in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin, remove Endangered Species Act (ESA) protections from wolves in the entire contiguous 48 states, and barred judicial review of those actions and of the 2012 removal from the ESA of gray wolves in Wyoming.

Allowing grizzly bear recovery: The bill excludes a provision contained in the House version which strove to block funding for the reintroduction of grizzly bears to the North Cascades Ecosystem in Washington State. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service released an environmental impact statement in 2015 to launch the reintroduction process, which former U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke endorsed in March 2018. Instead, the conferees have directed FWS and NPS to re-open the public comment period regarding the draft environmental impact statement with proposed alternatives for the restoration of grizzly bears to the North Cascades Ecosystem—and to work with ranchers, conservation groups, local governments, and other local partners to reduce conflicts between grizzly bears and livestock, drawing upon lessons learned with the Wolf Livestock Loss Demonstration Program to improve conservation outcomes while limiting effects to agricultural producers.

Oversight of farm animals used in research: In 2015, the New York Times brought to light terrible abuses of farm animals at a USDA Agricultural Research Service facility in Nebraska, the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center. Congress responded forcefully with directives to USDA to begin inspecting these facilities for animal welfare compliance and providing quarterly reports to the Appropriations Committees.This bill includes harsh criticism of USDA’s progress reports, noting that “ARS did not report a single specific negative finding by APHIS inspectors, despite the fact that numerous violations have been found involving the death of numerous animals and serious health issues of many more. The failure to report these problems to the Committees is unacceptable. The conferees direct ARS to submit a single report covering all violations found by APHIS to date and the specific actions taken to prevent them from recurring within 60 days of enactment.”

Animal testing alternatives: The omnibus sustains level funding of $21.41 million (rejecting a $4.2 million cut proposed by the President) for the Environmental Protection Agency’s Computational Toxicology program to develop replacements for traditional animal tests, as required in the 2016 reauthorization of the Toxic Substances Control Act.

Class B random source dealers: The bill contains the same language as in the past few years prohibiting the USDA from licensing Class B random source dealers, who are notorious for keeping dogs and cats in awful conditions and obtaining them through fraudulent means such as pet theft to sell them to research facilities. Our colleagues at the Animal Welfare Institute have led this fight.

USDA data purge: Following bipartisan expressions of outrage, the House Committee Report (in a provision deemed adopted in the final package) directed the U.S. Department of Agriculture to restore inspection reports and enforcement records for horse shows, puppy mills, roadside zoos, laboratories, and other facilities which were purged from the agency’s website in February 2017.

Providing needed funding: The bill provides a $500,000 increase for the U.S. Department of Agriculture to enforce the Animal Welfare Act and a $500,000 boost in a veterinary services grant program. It sustains funding for other key accounts including enforcement of the Horse Protection Act, Humane Methods of Slaughter Act, and federal animal fighting law, as well as for programs to address the needs of animals in disasters, encourage veterinarians to locate in underserved areas, support the Marine Mammal Commission’s crucial work, and crack down on international wildlife trafficking.

The omnibus package is not perfect. For example, it renews a harmful provision that blocks the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating toxic lead content in ammunition and fishing tackle, which poisons and kills wildlife. But overall, the Humane Society Legislative Fund is very happy that Congress has taken a stand on so many important animal protection issues. We look forward to working with the 116th Congress to ensure these protections are maintained and to build on them with additional vital measures.

Thursday, February 07, 2019

Bill in Congress will require puppy mills, roadside zoos, and other businesses to have emergency plans to protect animals during disasters

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

Weather-related disasters such as floods and wildfires are occurring more frequently and with increasing intensity across the United States. While there is a federal law that requires state and local authorities to consider household pets and service animals in their disaster contingency plans, it doesn’t address hundreds of thousands of animals held in American businesses, institutions and enterprises, specifically those in puppy mills, research facilities, zoos, circuses and aquariums regulated under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). A bipartisan bill introduced in Congress today will remedy that by requiring all such enterprises to create emergency response plans for the animals in their care, so that they are not simply abandoned when disaster strikes.

Alex_tiger_JP-Bonnelly_270x240
JP Bonnelly/The HSUS

The Providing Emergency Plans for Animals at Risk of Emerging Disasters (PREPARED) Act, H.R. 1042, is championed by Reps. Dina Titus, D-Nev., and Peter King, R-N.Y. It would require facilities that are regulated under the AWA to submit annual plans to the U.S. Department of Agriculture that identify emergency situations, including natural disasters, power outages and animal escapes, and outline specific tasks to respond to these emergencies. Plans need to include instructions for evacuating the animals, shelter-in-place, provision of backup food and water, sanitation, ventilation, bedding and veterinary care.

In 2001, more than 34,400 animals, including 78 monkeys, 35 dogs and 300 rabbits, died when Tropical Storm Allison flooded the University of Texas Medical Center. That facility, located along one of Houston’s largest bayous, housed more than half of its research animals underground. Sadly, the same mistake was repeated when New York University began construction on a research building one year later and located the animals in the basement; thousands of mice drowned there from Hurricane Sandy’s storm surge in 2012.

In 2006, with our urging, Congress enacted the Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards (PETS) Act, after an estimated 600,000 animals were abandoned during Hurricane Katrina. Some people refused to evacuate and lost their lives because they couldn’t bear to abandon their pets. The PETS Act required state and local authorities to take into account—and to plan for—the needs of individuals with household pets and service animals before, during and after a disaster, but it did not cover commercially owned animals.

The PREPARED Act would do more than simply benefit animals. It would also reduce the burden on first responders, the local community and nongovernmental entities involved with rescue efforts after a disaster. For example, in 2008, the Culpepper & Merriweather Circus in Kansas ignored four days of severe tornado warnings by the National Weather Service to keep two elephants outside, giving rides to the public. When a tornado hit, equipment fell on one of the animals. A handler was thrown from an elephant and injured, and the traumatized animals bolted and were loose for hours.

The 2014 Farm Bill directed the USDA to create an exemption from the AWA for people with only a few non-dangerous animals, noting that this would enable the agency to swiftly adopt a requirement for emergency contingency plans by AWA-regulated facilities. That exemption was finalized in June last year, so there is no reason for further delay on requiring the emergency plans.

We know firsthand the difficulties of providing care for thousands of animals after a significant disaster. Each year, the HSUS Animal Rescue Team spends hundreds of hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars to assist with rescuing and caring for animals during hurricane season and in the aftermath of other catastrophes, natural and manmade. The four animal care centers, operated by our affiliates the Fund for Animals and the South Florida Wildlife Center, all have disaster plans in place. The PREPARED Act is a win-win for everyone: by creating contingency plans for the animals in their care, businesses can safeguard their investments, reassure the public and other stakeholders that they are protecting the animals in their care, and prevent catastrophic outcomes for dependent animals. Congress should enact this commonsense reform quickly.

Kitty Block is President and CEO of The Humane Society of the United States and President of Humane Society International, the international affiliate of The HSUS.

Get Political
for Animals




Powered by TypePad