104 / Chapter 4
become alternatives to animal research will fi rst be conducted on
thousands or even millions of animals.^63 Heightened concern for
bioterrorism since September 11, 2001, means that countless ani-
mals, especially nonhuman primates, will continue to be used in
experiments involving anthrax, and other pathogens. As Carbone
puts it, “animals are in laboratories, and they are going to be there
for many years to come.”^64 In the context of this book, the question
thus becomes one of how to reduce their vulnerability when disas-
ters strike.
I would like to propose three related steps. The fi rst involves
extending federal protection to all animals, including those bred
for research. For the most part, rats, mice, and birds do not have
the political capital to arouse public outrage over their treatment. If
the defi nition of animal in the Animal Welfare Act were extended
to include these animals, they would have at least some protection
because of their position on the phylogenetic and not the socio-
zoologic scale. Although there has been signifi cant resistance to
this move from the scientifi c community as an institution, surveys
indicate that most individual animal researchers support regulating
rats, mice, and birds under the Animal Welfare Act.^65 Indeed, they
support the change even though it would have signifi cant poten-
tial impact on their research. In short, the opponents of animal
research and its defenders agree that if research is to be conducted
on animals, all species used should have at least the minimal legal
protections provided by the Animal Welfare Act. In terms of disas-
ter planning and response, this wider scope of protection would
entail planning for the welfare of all animals in research facilities.
Offi cials will claim that they already do this planning, but events
such as Tropical Storm Allison and Hurricane Katrina reveal a “we
never imagined” mentality that shortchanges animals in disaster
planning. Including rats, mice, and birds in the Animal Welfare Act
would provide a means to sanction facilities that fail to provide for
the welfare of the animals under their care. For covered species, vio-
lations of the act could impose criminal and civil penalties on the
research and the institution.