Internal report shows U. obeys animal regulations

The investigation, led by a subcommittee of the University’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, was initiated in response to allegations brought against the University in an anonymous letter published online in September written by a former University employee. Animal rights groups have protested the University’s record on the issue since 2010, scrutiny that only increased when the University tied with Yale for the second-worst record on animal abuse in a report released in September.

The subcommittee was appointed in response to the allegations, University Spokesperson Martin Mbugua said in an email. The inquiry was launched immediately after the allegations were made in late September and was active until the report was completed.

The subcommittee examined the allegations by inspecting research and medical records, interviewing research and animal care staff and communicating with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, which is part of the National Institutes of Health.

Chaired by Joan Girgus, professor of psychology and special assistant to the dean of the faculty, the subcommittee reported that some of the allegations were factually unsound, while the rest were “either descriptions of events that made no reference to any noncompliant condition or presented distorted or incomplete information,” according to the University statement. On Feb. 17, the subcommittee’s report was adopted by the full IACUC, which determined that there was no clear and convincing evidence of inhumane or noncompliant behavior.

Veterinarian Laura Conour was a member of the subcommittee. Conour was appointed director of laboratory animal research by the University last summer and also serves as a member of several interdisciplinary committees involved with animal care and use. She works closely with the new Office for Research Integrity and Assurance, which grew from within the Office of the Dean of Research last spring. The RIA will be headed by its own director, and “is responsible for formulating and implementing research compliance programs in accordance with international, federal, state and local rules and regulations and Princeton University’s policies,” Mbugua said.

Michael Budkie, the co-founder and executive director of Stop Animal Exploitation Now!, the group that published the anonymous letter online on Sept. 29, said the internal investigation had no credibility. He added that the staff involved, aside from being employed by the University, were involved in the animal research with which to begin.

“What it really comes down to is they were trying to self-investigate,” Budkie said. “Of course they’re going to come up with the conclusion that nothing was wrong, because otherwise they would be self-incriminating. Nixon said he wasn’t a crook too — why would anyone have expected them to come up with any other conclusion?”

Budkie also dismissed the instances when the University was found to have met regulations. The University’s program has been accredited by the Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International since 2002, and its accreditation was most recently affirmed in an AAALAC review conducted in January.

“It’s very easy to make things look good for one day when the inspector is there,” he said. “It’s kind of like your first date — anyone can behave normally for a couple of hours. It’s the same thing.”

Budkie disputed the report by citing the photographs published online in a September letter from SAEN, depicting cases of animal abuse such as beheaded primates and dead rats.

“If people want to know the reality of what’s happening, the photos we provided don’t lie,” he explained. “In fact, they’ve not questioned the accuracy of any of these photographs, because they can’t.”

Budkie noted that in many cases, such treatment is not technically illegal. The acts, conducted in a laboratory, are not in violation of the Animal Welfare Act, he said, but outside a laboratory would cause someone to be charged with animal cruelty.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

He added that SAEN will continue to protest and campaign against the University.

“If they really believe everything is fine within their laboratories, then I would like to publicly challenge them to provide access to their labs for a tour as well as the opportunity to look at their veterinary records,” he said. “If they can’t do basic things like making sure the animals have adequate water, why should we believe they’re capable of doing anything that’s even roughly reminiscent of science?”