The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

'Bred, but not used': understandings of avoidable and unavoidable waste in animal research.

'Bred, but not used': understandings of avoidable and unavoidable waste in animal research.
'Bred, but not used': understandings of avoidable and unavoidable waste in animal research.
Since 2018, the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 has mandated the reporting of research animals that fall into the category ‘bred, but not used’. These are by-products from breeding specific genetically altered animals, bred to maintain a live ‘tick-over’ research animal colony or research-ready but not used in experiments. The qualitative research in this chapter found that within the animal facility these animals were described as surplus or waste. This terminology demonstrates the variable feelings and meanings circulating around these animals. The animal care technicians, facility managers, Named Veterinary Surgeons, and scientific researchers, however, differentiated between ‘avoidable waste’ and ‘unavoidable waste’, aiming to minimise avoidable waste and drive changes in practice. To meet this goal, there is a growing interest in outsourcing breeding, which avoids localised killing of waste animals and is perceived to reduce costs for research facilities. However, this practice can be in conflict with an industry culture that expects research animals to be available on demand. Furthermore, outsourcing can result in these surplus animals, and the emotional burdens on staff responsible for culling them, becoming less visible to end-users, thereby perpetuating the problem. The chapter concludes by recommending more regulatory attention to practices leading to avoidable ‘bred, but not used’, and further transparency around where and how these animals are created. Making these changes would align with the guiding principle of the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, refinement), and help to extend ‘cultures of care’ beyond individual institutions to encompass entire supply chains.
290-311
Manchester University Press
Peres, Sara
d6b4ed3e-254d-4ff8-943b-4cc518caa20d
Roe, Emma
f7579e4e-3721-4046-a2d4-d6395f61c675
Davies, Gail
Greenhough, Beth
Hobson-West, Pru
Kirk, Robert G.W.
Palmer, Alexandra
Roe, Emma
Peres, Sara
d6b4ed3e-254d-4ff8-943b-4cc518caa20d
Roe, Emma
f7579e4e-3721-4046-a2d4-d6395f61c675
Davies, Gail
Greenhough, Beth
Hobson-West, Pru
Kirk, Robert G.W.
Palmer, Alexandra
Roe, Emma

Peres, Sara and Roe, Emma (2024) 'Bred, but not used': understandings of avoidable and unavoidable waste in animal research. In, Davies, Gail, Greenhough, Beth, Hobson-West, Pru, Kirk, Robert G.W., Palmer, Alexandra and Roe, Emma (eds.) Researching animal research: What the humanities and social sciences can contribute to laboratory animal science and welfare. (Inscriptions) Manchester University Press, pp. 290-311. (doi:10.7765/9781526165770.00021).

Record type: Book Section

Abstract

Since 2018, the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 has mandated the reporting of research animals that fall into the category ‘bred, but not used’. These are by-products from breeding specific genetically altered animals, bred to maintain a live ‘tick-over’ research animal colony or research-ready but not used in experiments. The qualitative research in this chapter found that within the animal facility these animals were described as surplus or waste. This terminology demonstrates the variable feelings and meanings circulating around these animals. The animal care technicians, facility managers, Named Veterinary Surgeons, and scientific researchers, however, differentiated between ‘avoidable waste’ and ‘unavoidable waste’, aiming to minimise avoidable waste and drive changes in practice. To meet this goal, there is a growing interest in outsourcing breeding, which avoids localised killing of waste animals and is perceived to reduce costs for research facilities. However, this practice can be in conflict with an industry culture that expects research animals to be available on demand. Furthermore, outsourcing can result in these surplus animals, and the emotional burdens on staff responsible for culling them, becoming less visible to end-users, thereby perpetuating the problem. The chapter concludes by recommending more regulatory attention to practices leading to avoidable ‘bred, but not used’, and further transparency around where and how these animals are created. Making these changes would align with the guiding principle of the 3Rs (replacement, reduction, refinement), and help to extend ‘cultures of care’ beyond individual institutions to encompass entire supply chains.

Text
9781526165770-9781526165770.00021 - Version of Record
Download (661kB)

More information

Published date: 9 January 2024

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 487687
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/487687
PURE UUID: bb248966-3d47-49c6-beae-1ec077b491bb
ORCID for Sara Peres: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-9537-144X
ORCID for Emma Roe: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-4674-2133

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 01 Mar 2024 17:32
Last modified: 15 Jun 2024 01:41

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Sara Peres ORCID iD
Author: Emma Roe ORCID iD
Editor: Gail Davies
Editor: Beth Greenhough
Editor: Pru Hobson-West
Editor: Robert G.W. Kirk
Editor: Alexandra Palmer
Editor: Emma Roe

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×