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

Monday, November 18, 2019

Bill to end animal testing for cosmetics introduced in Congress with support from industry leaders

The movement to end the testing of personal care and beauty products on animals has gained unprecedented momentum in recent years, with three U.S. states, 39 countries, and more than a thousand manufacturers abandoning this outdated and unnecessary practice. Today, Congress took an important step toward ending cosmetics animal testing in all of the United States, with the introduction of the Humane Cosmetics Act.

Bunny_istock_270x240
Photo courtesy of iStock Photo

The bill would, with certain exceptions, end all animal testing for cosmetic products and ingredients in the United States and prohibit the import of cosmetics that have been tested on animals anywhere else in the world. The United States is one of the world’s largest cosmetics markets and this bill has the potential to spare the lives of thousands of mice, rabbits, rats and guinea pigs.

Although versions of the Humane Cosmetics Act have been introduced in past Congresses, we are especially optimistic it will succeed this time because there is unprecedented support for passing it from the cosmetics industry itself. In an exciting development, our Humane Society Legislative Fund and Humane Society of the United States teams worked with the Personal Care Products Council, the leading national trade association representing cosmetic and personal care products companies, to propose language for the bill in both its House and Senate versions.

Passing a law banning cosmetics testing would put us on par with many other nations globally who have, working in cooperation with Humane Society International, already passed laws banning or limiting the use of animal tests for cosmetics, including India, New Zealand, South Korea, Guatemala, Australia and all countries in the European Union. Multinational cosmetics companies must already comply with the laws in these countries to sell products there, and, starting January 2020, they must also comply with laws banning the sales of cosmetics newly tested on animals in California, Nevada and Illinois.

This cruelty-free surge is driven by consumers who are increasingly scanning store shelves for products not tested on animals. Cosmetics producers have been only too happy to comply, and already more than 1,000 brands in North America have committed to producing cosmetics that are free of new animal testing.

When creating their products, these brands can choose from the thousands of safe ingredients already available, or use advanced scientific alternative test methods and new technologies that are often more reliable, efficient and cost-effective than animal tests. And as the global market for non-animal tests expands, new and improved methods will continue to be developed, leading to safer cosmetics without harming animals.

In recent years, our #BeCrueltyFree campaign has partnered with global beauty giants, including Unilever, Procter & Gamble, Avon and the Estée Lauder Companies, to ban animal testing for cosmetics in all major global beauty markets by 2023. We’ve worked together to standardize legislation to end cosmetics animal testing, share information on alternative testing methods, and invest in education and training for scientists.

For many of us here at the HSUS and HSLF, getting the Humane Cosmetics Act across the finish line has been a long-cherished personal and career goal. My own journey with ending cosmetics animal testing began as far back as 1988, when I worked at the Doris Day Animal League to secure the passage of state bills to require the use of alternatives to animal tests for industrial chemicals, cosmetics and other ingredients in California, New Jersey and New York as well as lobbying on important federal bills on the issue. These included measures to end to the cruel lethal dose 50 tests, where animals were forced to ingest a chemical until 50 percent of them died, and a state bill in California to ban the Draize rabbit eye test for cosmetics. In 1990, I helped draft the Corporate Standard of Compassion for Animals. This standard for “cruelty free” cosmetics was subsequently adopted by the Leaping Bunny Program rolled out in 1996 by DDAL, the HSUS, and six other animal protection organizations, working with key members of the cosmetics industry, including Paul Mitchell and The Body Shop. In 2000, I was pleased to help win enactment of the Interagency Coordinating Committee for the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), and in 2016, to secure provisions in the reauthorization of the Toxic Substances Control Act that set the stage for replacing the use of live animals in chemical testing, as well as appropriations over the past many years to provide increased resources to make this research possible.

Cosmetics tests on animals are not only unnecessary, and ineffective; they involve serious animal suffering. Animals used in these tests have substances forced down their throats, dripped into their eyes, or smeared onto their skin, and they are left to suffer for days or weeks without pain relief. Our thanks to Sens. Martha McSally, R-Ariz., Cory Booker, D-N.J., Rob Portman, R-Ohio, and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., and Reps. Don Beyer, D-Va., Vern Buchanan, R-Fla.,  Tony  Cárdenas, D-Calif., Paul Tonko, D-N.Y., and Ken Calvert, R-Calif., for introducing this important bill designed to bring our nation’s laws into alignment with the wishes of the majority of American consumers. For our part, we promise to push with all our might and passion to make this the Congress that ends the ugliness of cosmetics animal testing.

Please take a moment to reach out to your legislators and ask them to support this important bill!

Friday, November 15, 2019

USDA moves to permanently hide animal welfare records on puppy mills, walking horse shows and other regulated businesses

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

The U.S. Department of Agriculture plans to permanently conceal crucial animal welfare records, including inspection reports and enforcement records of puppy mills and horse shows where Tennessee walking horses and other related breeds are vulnerable to the heinous practice of soring.

NCPUPPYMILL_0740_359091
Photo by Meredith Lee/The HSUS

Last month, the agency posted a notice in the Federal Register announcing a regulatory change and cited privacy as the reason for concealing the records. But that excuse doesn’t hold water, since the records pertain to commercial businesses that sell or use animals, not to individuals who keep animals for their own private use.

The proposal would further solidify the obfuscation that began when the administration purged all Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and Horse Protection Act (HPA) records from the USDA website, just a few weeks after President Trump took office in 2017. This is a change we’ve been fighting in the courts and in Congress, with some success, because it is a blatant attempt to keep Americans in the dark about how a taxpayer-funded agency is enforcing animal welfare laws. Worse, the absence of public scrutiny could provide AWA and HPA violators with a cover to continue with their substandard and frequently abusive animal welfare practices, even after they have been cited for such mistreatment.

USDA oversight of businesses that use animals is already at a record low. We have been reporting on a disturbing drop in enforcement of the AWA and HPA, and in August, the Washington Post revealed the lengths the administration is going to in order to prevent USDA inspectors from documenting and reporting violations of these important animal welfare laws.

Now, with this attempt to permanently black out certain records from public access, the administration is showing us just how far it will go to put industry interests over the most basic animal welfare needs and transparency. The regulation change, if finalized, would also make it impossible for the public to learn, for example, about puppy mills where there are recent serious disease outbreaks that can affect animal and human health. These puppies are often transported across the country, bringing with them very contagious illnesses.

This is a very real concern—just yesterday, HSUS released their eighth investigation into a Petland store, this one in Florence, Kentucky. Their investigations into this chain, notorious for sourcing animals from puppy mills, have repeatedly revealed that the animals at its stores suffer from untreated contagious health problems, such as campylobacter, which can be—and often is—passed on to humans.

In the past, whenever there’s been a proposal like this, we’ve called on you to submit your comments on the regulations.gov website, and you’ve always responded by the tens of thousands to help animals. We need your help this time too: public comment on the proposal closes soon, on Nov. 25, and we need you to speak up immediately and let the USDA know that you do not approve of this regulatory change that blocks public access to key animal welfare records. Please also share this blog with your friends and encourage them to comment as well.

Your help could make all the difference in stopping our government from moving forward with this dangerous regulation. Let’s work together to make sure that the agency charged with the mandate of protecting our most vulnerable animals does not provide a cover to some of the very businesses that mistreat them.

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

Thursday, October 24, 2019

BREAKING NEWS: NIH reneges on promise, will not send 44 research chimpanzees to sanctuary

By Sara Amundson and Kitty Block

In a stunning about-face on its own promise, the National Institutes of Health today announced it will not send 44 chimpanzees, now held by the Alamogordo primate laboratory in New Mexico, to sanctuary.

Hslf-chimp-300x200
Photo by Crystal Alba/Project Chimps

Just last October, National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins reiterated the agency’s full commitment to retire all chimpanzees it owns or supports to the federal sanctuary Chimp Haven, saying that there would be very limited exceptions. These are animals who have spent their lifetimes in metal cages and they deserve to enjoy the rest of their days in an environment that simulates, to the best extent possible, the natural surroundings of a chimpanzee in the wild.

Dr. Collins had clearly stated that the only exception to retiring the chimpanzees would be in cases where relocation would severely or irreversibly accelerate deterioration of the chimpanzee’s physical or behavioral health. Today’s agency announcement contradicts that promise.

The NIH claimed that "it would be a serious risk to the chimpanzees’ health to move them." There were many flaws with the process that the NIH followed in deciding the chimpanzees’ fate: the panel was certainly not “independent” as it was made up of NIH’s own veterinarians and it did not include a veterinarian with sanctuary experience nor a primate behaviorist nor an ethicist. We expressed these concerns when the panel was created and had hoped they wouldn’t simply rubber-stamp the laboratory’s request to keep the chimpanzees confined at their facility for the rest of the animals’ lives while the laboratory continues to receive taxpayer dollars. Unfortunately, that is exactly what happened. There is no clear evidence that the long-term welfare of the chimpanzees was actually considered in making this decision.

We know that chimpanzees who are sent to sanctuary see an immense improvement in the quality of their lives. Since the inception of Chimp Haven, hundreds of chimpanzees, of all ages and health conditions, have moved there. There has not been a single death during transport and there are incredible stories of chimpanzees who have thrived at the sanctuary, including a chimpanzee named Grandma who was deemed as fragile when retired to Chimp Haven in 2005, yet lived happily there for another 10 years, reaching the age of 62.

We are putting NIH on notice that this fight is not over. Chimpanzees are our closest relatives in the animal kingdom, and we share 99 percent of our DNA with these sentient and intelligent animals. HSLF and the HSUS have been working for a long time to end the use of chimpanzees in experiments and to get them to retirement in sanctuary and we will not let the NIH blindside the American public and let the chimpanzees suffer through the rest of their lives in the confines of a laboratory. We’re now evaluating our options for judicial review to compel the NIH to honor its obligation under the Chimpanzee Health Improvement and Maintenance Protection (CHIMP) Act, which requires that all government-owned chimpanzees deemed no longer necessary for research be retired to the national sanctuary. The NIH has a responsibility to all Americans to ensure that these animals, who have suffered their whole lives, finally get the quality of life—and a retirement—they deserve, at Chimp Haven.

Please take a moment to send a message to the NIH and urge them to reassess their decision to not retire these chimps.

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

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.

Get Political
for Animals




Powered by TypePad