An animal welfare organization has filed a federal complaint against the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, claiming that the fatal asphyxiation of a pig at the Arkansas Children’s Research Institute violated federal law.
A UAMS spokesperson said the university already reported the incident and took actions deemed appropriate by a federal official.
Michael A. Budkie, executive director of Stop Animal Exploitation NOW!, submitted a letter Wednesday to a U.S. Department of Agriculture official accusing the university of possibly violating multiple parts of the federal Animal Welfare Act and requesting the agency’s Investigative and Enforcement Services Division open a case, according to a news release.
The group included the UAMS report in its federal complaint, according to the release.
“I insist that you immediately launch a full investigation of the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences because their carelessness, negligence, and potentially faulty enclosures are directly responsible for the unnecessary death of at least one animal,” Budkie wrote in the letter.
In response to an inquiry from the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, UAMS spokesperson Leslie Taylor said the report had already been submitted to the Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare at the National Institutes of Health.
Taylor forwarded a communication from Neera V. Gopee, the office’s associate director, acknowledging a March 2 letter and Feb. 17 phone notification of a pig’s death during a study at the research institute.
According to Gopee’s letter, the office had been informed that the pig attempted to manipulate the door of its cage to open it and became entrapped between the door and floor due to “mechanical failure.”
After that, the letter continued, they took several actions — temporarily reinforcing the cages with zip ties and a rod, adding a stainless-steel cable with a locking carabiner as a secondary restraint system and added signage to remind personnel to confirm “appropriate gate closure and secure engagement of both the primary latch and secondary restraint.”
All of the modified enclosures were inspected after the implementation of the new security measures, according to the letter, which noted that routine supervisory checks would follow.
“Based on the information provided, OLAW is satisfied that appropriate actions have been taken to investigate, correct and prevent recurrence of the adverse event,” Gopee said. “Your prompt and thorough resolution of this matter is commendable and consistent with the (Public Health Service) Policy philosophy of monitored self-regulation. We appreciate having been informed of this matter and find no cause for further action by this Office.”
The UAMS report, Budkie said, described separate possible infractions of the federal law related to general facilities, personnel qualifications and handling.
In his letter, Budkie requested the maximum penalty against UAMS of $12,722 per infraction. He said the incident violated the policy calling for animal housing facilities to “protect the animals from injury,” arguing that the cage’s construction may have been “involved in causing the injury/fatality.”
Budkie noted the situation could have arisen from a staff member not closing the cage properly, which could violate the law’s provision to “ensure that all … personnel involved in animal care, treatment, and use are qualified to perform their duties.”
He also said the report’s description of events might go against a subsection of the law calling for animal handling to be “done as expeditiously and carefully as possible in a manner that does not cause trauma, overheating, excessive cooling, behavioral stress, physical harm, or unnecessary discomfort.”
“Since the violation led to the death of this animal it should be considered CRITICAL because it directly impacted the animal’s health and well-being,” Budkie said, adding that it was “quite clear” that the enclosure did not safeguard the pig from injury and referring to the death as “entirely preventable.”
