Search Results

Conversations to Improve Animal Welfare in Research and Teaching (by Katherine Reid) Society is composed of individuals and personal ethics are a choice made on an individual basis. These individual choices coalesce to form the societal ethic. The societal ethic becomes the basis of the acceptance or rejection by society of a practice such as the use of animals in research and teaching. It is by influence on the individual that science gains its approval. These opinions of the individual are formed from numerous and nebulous factors. Because the knowledge and experience of the individual is the basis for their decisions, the influence of science must be to affect that knowledge and experience. That influence is exerted in conversation. Through literal and figurative conversations ideas are exchanged and the reasons for decisions are considered. These conversations take place among the members of society, some of whom are themselves scientists. Many of the most important conversations are commonplace and mundane. Other conversations are dramatic taking place in print and media. Conferences, seminars and meetings are the venues for more conversations. But always conversations occur between individuals who are members of society. In some conversations the individuals are scientists. Sometimes scientists talk to non-scientists. And non-scientists will converse among themselves. All of these conversations form the basis for the personal decisions on ethics which provide continued acceptance of the use of animals in research and teaching. From individual knowledge and personal experience conclusions are drawn and this is the basis for personal ethics. The knowledge and experience of individuals is extraordinarily diverse. For scientists, the training and experience of the discipline is a strong influence on their personal decisions about animal use. Part of scientific training regarding the basis for animal use includes the principle wherein cost to animal health and welfare is squared against the benefit derived from the use. Reduction, refinement and replacement are equally important principles which seek to maximise this equation and gain the greatest benefit for animal cost. These are good principles and their application is an important ethical justification for continued use of animals in research and teaching. But these principles must not be employed without careful consideration and understanding of the meaning behind them. Unconsidered reliance upon conventional principles is not sufficient to ensure continued acceptance by society. In application such principles must be vibrant and living practices and not be allowed to stagnate and harden into unconsidered dogma. Scientists are also individuals within society and not a separate or opposed entity. Scientists embrace scientific values and these values become part of the basis for societal acceptance. But not all scientists share identical background and variance occurs among the opinions of scientists as to the ethics and acceptance of animal use. Acceptance of animal use by scientists is a part of societal acceptance and a significant influence but not the entirety. By thought and discussion, these concepts will be kept alive in the minds of scientists. These principles will serve as some of the topics for conversation. As with scientists, acceptance by non-scientists within society is based on the particular knowledge and experience of the person. There is also a factor of visceral reaction and emotional perception of the question. The particular acceptance or rejection by an individual is generally not based on direct experience of the realities of animal use and welfare of animals. It is also highly unlikely that the individual decision about acceptability of animal use is based on understanding of the benefits gained. Essentially, non-scientists do not apply the same principles that scientists are trained to use. So upon what does the average individual base their decision? The cynic will say that non-scientific opinions are based on emotional and irrational reactions. They will contend that the emotional reaction is due to lack of scientific education or direct experience. They will further put forth that the average member of society is unwilling and uninterested in education or a greater appreciation of the realities of animal use. This same cynic will likely conclude that the acceptance or rejection of animal use by society should be based on strict application of scientific rationale and valueless science. This, in their opinion, is the only way to derive the single correct conclusion in a given situation. The fallacy of this argument is that even scientists cannot agree on correct application of the scientific method and rational evaluation by multiple parties does not always reach the same conclusion in any given case. Furthermore, science is not without emotion. Scientists too have an emotional response but training reduces the influence of this. The response is reduced but not eliminated. Scientists are human and, however logical and calculating, they still feel emotions about the work in which they engage and the animals which are used in that work. Misuse of animals in any context will affect scientists as human beings. That reason alone is sufficient to motivate scientists to carefully consider the welfare of animals used in their work. An emotional reaction is also not entirely irrational. Human emotions have evolved for survival. Emotions in favor of improving animal welfare can be argued to be self-protective. Humanity existed as an agrarian society for millennia and depended upon hunting since before the advent of agriculture. Before humans ate animals and kept warm in their skins they depended upon an ecosystem which relied upon healthy and vibrant animal populations. The inherent desire to protect animal species is not entirely irrational and can be thought to be based upon the human symbiosis with the other animal species. Conversation is the tool by which each party comes to appreciate the emotional reaction of the others. The pragmatist will say that animal use is a strictly mathematical cost versus benefit equation where the pain or damage inflicted on animals must be weighed strictly and mathematically against the benefit derived. The evidence of benefits to society gained by the use of animals in research and teaching is undeniable and exhaustive. The average individual, a critical decision maker about the acceptance of animal use is largely unaware of the extent to which animal use has benefited them. Even scientists are not completely informed about the extent to which their lives have benefited from animal based research. Scientists are also insufficiently informed of the negative aspects of animal use. The apparent equation becomes imbalanced and does not reflect the reality which it attempts to judge. The ability to solve the equation accurately is further impaired by the lack of understanding on both sides of the equation; cost and benefit. The effects on society for good or ill will not be determined except in the context of history. It is impossible to know how the benefit from animal use will weigh ultimately. In practicality, lack of understanding of animal physiology and management makes accurate evaluation of animal welfare precarious. Knowledge of animal pain and the experience of suffering is changing and improving continually. Judgment can only be based on the most recent understanding and the future will undoubtedly show that understanding to be deficient. Conversations among individuals will weigh this balance in a way that accounts for, evaluates and incorporates the grey areas. One current conversation puts forth that greater transparency in animal based research would benefit public understanding and thus promote acceptance. The thought is that if society were more clearly aware of the realities of animal use then they would be able to make informed decisions. Decisions would be based on logical evaluation and understanding of animal welfare. It is unlikely that greater awareness by non-scientists of the realities of research for animals will improve the welfare of animals. Society is generally not prepared to learn how the sausage is made. There are harsh techniques and uncomfortable realities of animal use of which non-scientists are not aware. Showing society the harm that is done without sufficient realization of the benefit derived is likely to create a strong and justified negative reaction to the techniques employed in research. This negative reaction by some members of society would not support the continued use of animals, even research for the benefit of animals. Lack of continued veterinary research would impact animal welfare negatively. Veterinary research is absolutely necessary for better understanding of the needs and physiology of animals. If improvements in the welfare of animals used in research and teaching are to be made, veterinary research is a necessity. By the fact that the superficial appearance of animal use would likely be uncomfortable to the uninitiated it can be concluded that there are important improvements which must be made in animal welfare. This reinforces the importance of societal acceptance of animal use and motivates the need to engage in conversations. To reprise the three R’s principles of animal use, conversation represents an important tool in refinement of animal use in teaching and research. The purist will put forth that the acceptance of society is based upon the quality of research and that only from high quality research can relevant results be obtained. They will further add that any benefit to society is only derived from research that is applicable and relevant to society. These individuals will contend that both sides of the cost-benefit equation are dependent on quality of work done and analysis performed. The purist forgets that conclusions derived from data are subject to interpretation. These conclusions are in turn based on analysis of raw data and that analysis is subject to the style and influence of the primary investigator. It can be startling to realize how science is not, in actuality, fact. Society believes that an observed phenomena, measurable and recordable, must be real. Society and science both accept that once something is published in peer reviewed literature, it becomes practical fact. Better scientists see the influence of analysis and interpretation and understand the process of scientific investigation in elucidation but not proof. Science contends that this method is the best available representation of reality. This is a leap of faith, though oddly logical. By faith, science becomes religion and subject to dogma. But any observation, measurement and recording is still only subjective. Scientific investigation into cognitive neurosciences and the mechanisms of consciousness reveal that reality is perception. An observed phenomena is subject to perception and is an individual experience. Observation therefore is a personal experience, different for every individual. Measurement and recording equally are interpretations which require analysis. Science itself undermines its own essential tenants and the dogmatic are forced to resolve the discrepancy. As science develops and progresses human knowledge of consciousness, the faith in science as fact will be challenged. Acceptance by society will change to accommodate. Conversation will benefit all parties as understanding of the mechanisms of human cognition change. There are direct implications to the ethics of animal use for human purposes. These will come forward as science reveals more about the nature of human and animal consciousness. New understanding will change how all view animal welfare and the relationship between humans and animals. It will be a radical change in thought for all parties and continued conversation will be essential for all to resolve the issues that will surround the new understanding. Understanding of the subjectivity of perception promotes humility. The intent here is to demonstrate the variety of perspectives and opinions in order to appreciate the reasoning behind individual decisions. It is also to show that no single perspective is the correct approach. The acceptance of society is a synthesis of varied perspectives with the advantages and disadvantages of all. The function of conversation is to express, develop and share positions, examine fallacies and failures as well as the strengths and to organically create a community and society opinion from the mosaic of individual perspectives. Engaging in conversation has several important functions. It is necessary to learn and experience the opinions and perspectives of others as well as learn important knowledge from the experiences of others. It is also necessary to debate and be coerced into articulation of logical arguments. Arguments require support with reasons and rationale and communication of these forces their examination. By explaining opinions to others, insight is gained on both sides as to the reasons for decisions. This practice moves decisions away from dogmatic authoritarianism to insightful, and carefully considered choices based in reason with due respect given to emotion. Conversation also induces self-analysis and promotes a critical evaluation of personal practices and beliefs. Most will have to examine their own practices if they are to confidently argue for those practices to others. As an example, a scientist who cannot comfortably discuss the animal techniques used in their lab with others including non-scientists will be forced to begin to examine those techniques. They will have to critically evaluate if they are in fact based on ethical decisions about animal use. The mutual exchange aspect of conversation also serves to communicate ideas between parties with different experience. Participants in the conversations gain empathy for others’ point of view and in return allow empathy from others. These benefits will ultimately be crucial to ensure the continued use of animals in research and teaching. Conversation and debate with non-scientists is important for the scientist as a member of both society and of the scientific community to which they belong. It is all too easy for any person to only engage with those who share their ideas and values, such as scientists discussing animal use only among other scientists. Such conversations in isolation are unlikely to produce fruitful progress and will not serve to improve the acceptance of animal use by society. Because science is an integral part of society and functions within society, scientists cannot remain isolated and removed from that society. Conversations with the broader group will promote a greater understanding of society’s values by members of the scientific cohort. If science is to continue to function as a valued part of society, scientific values will need to incorporate societal values. This conversation will also work for promoting understanding of scientific values by non-scientific portions of society. It is the propagation of this greater mutual understanding which is one of the key functions of conversation and critical to the continued use of animals in research and teaching. Conversation must also take place within the scientific community. There is no doubt that for the greatest benefit to be derived with the least cost to animal welfare, science must be of the highest quality. The debate must continue as to what constitutes high quality, relevant research. Individual scientists will need to embrace the importance of research quality and move beyond mere acquiescence to authority. Individual scientists need to determine for themselves what constitutes quality research and implement this because it provides the greatest benefit, not because they suffer penalties otherwise. Conversation within scientific society will be necessary for individuals to understand what is quality science, how to implement good practice and the importance of this. Exchange of ideas, as occurs in conversation also serves to improve education of all participants. The cynic was convinced that society was unwilling to self-educate and keep themselves informed. By conversation, the uninformed gain valuable insight and improve the breadth of their experience. In turn, through conversation, the cynic will hopefully come to understand that scientists are humans with emotions and subject to emotional reaction. The pragmatist will see that the mathematical equation is not so easily weighed but will learn from conversation that cost versus benefit is highly complex. The purist will come to understand that while high quality science is in fact essential, defining what constitutes high quality is difficult and will require continued evaluation through debate and conversation. The actual conversations do not need to be elaborate or formal. They will take place naturally and develop organically. People will congregate and talk at school or on the bus. The issues discussed will be the topic of conversations at scientific meetings and committee hearings as well as at conferences and in classrooms. Conversations will take place in the elevator and in lecture halls. The quiet will listen patiently while the talkative ramble on. The erudite will relish the opportunity to debate and all interested parties will finish with a slightly different perspective than they started. What is important for the purpose is that no one shrink from the conversation. The topic can be difficult and emotional at times. Many will not have thought about the topic and others will be excessively enthusiastic. But all must consciously engage and participate. There is no excuse for not participating. Every member of society has a responsibility to converse. This is because all of society will derive benefit from the good usage of animals in research and teaching. For the same reasons, all will be impacted if society withdraws its acceptance of animal use or if that animal use is poor. Acceptance of animal use in research and teaching is based on the decisions and opinions of the individual. Many and varied factors influence those decisions and opinions. The breadth and depth of experience and knowledge which underpins the perspectives of individuals is vast and only continues to grow, expanded by continued scientific research and investigation. There is no single act or policy that can guarantee that society will continue to accept the use of animals. There are in place many sound principles as well as irrational dogmatic beliefs. It is an overwhelming task to try and resolve the varied experiences and opinions of a society composed of such varied individuals. Free societies do not dictate morals but rather allow free and open debate to determine ethics. The mechanism of this debate is the simple conversation. By conversation, progress will continue and the opinion of society will adapt to meet the needs of that society. The place of scientific research and the use of animals in science will continue to develop organically with that society as it progresses. The simple conversation will serve to bind science within society and determine the future of animal use in research and teaching.

2026 ANZCCART Conference Date: Wed, 21, 12:00 am - Fri, 23 Oct 2026, 5:00 pm Location: Sydney, New South Wales Email: anzccart@adelaide.edu.au CALL FOR ABSTRACTS for non-invited speakers ANZCCART is now inviting abstracts from anyone interested in speaking or presenting a poster at the ANZCCART Conference 2026, which will be held in Sydney from 21st to 23rd October. Consideration will be given to presentations on any topic relevant to ethical, social or scientific issues relating to the use and well-being of animals in research and teaching. Current suggestions for topics include (but are not limited to): New technologies in animal-based research Non-animal methods Managing high animal welfare impact models AEC operations – administrative challenges AEC operations – ethical and welfare issues Openness in animal research Animal sentience Education and training Research culture and high-quality research Presentations must be suitable for a lay audience. SUBMISSION OF ABSTRACTS FOR CONSIDERATION: If you are interested in delivering an oral presentation or poster, please email ANZCCART Aus with an abstract of up to 300 words and, in the case of oral presentations, the preferred duration (15, 30 or 45 minutes including 5 minutes for questions) no later than Friday 17th April 2026. Email: anzccart@adelaide.edu.au Abstracts must be submitted as a separate Word document with title, names of all contributors, presenter’s name and institution name and location (city, country). Please note that all abstracts will be carefully considered but inclusion in the Conference Program is at the discretion of the Board and Conference Organising Committee . In the case of oral presentations, a different duration to that proposed by the speaker may be requested due to programing constraints or other reasons. You will be notified by Tuesday 28th April whether your abstract has been accepted. Accepted abstracts will be included in the conference program. Presenters may, if they wish, expand their abstract to a summary of up to 1,000 words for the proceedings (but not the program). The closing date for the expanded summary for the proceedings is to be advised. We strongly encourage oral presentations to be delivered in person, but video presentation may be considered if necessary. Cam Reid Oration The Cam Reid Oration is an initiative introduced by the ANZCCART New Zealand Board in 1995 in recognition of the late Dr Cam Reid's pioneering role in the evaluation and adoption of standards of ethical conduct for animal experimentation in New Zealand. It is awarded at the ANZCCART (NZ) Conference every three years. Previous Cam Reid Orators: 1995: Mr Chris Puplick, former Senator, Australian Parliament 1997: Mr Andrew McCaw, Office of Ombudsmen, Wellington 1999: Dr Jean Fleming, University of Otago 2001: Mr Gary Reese, former Director of Save Animals from Exploitation, Auckland 2003: Professor Jane Harding, Liggins Institute in Auckland 2005: Professor Don Evans, University of Otago 2008: Dr Mark Fisher, Kotare Bioethics Ltd, Hastings 2011: Professor Laura Bennet, University of Auckland 2014: Dr Siouxsie Wiles, University of Auckland 2017: Dr Helena Hogberg, Johns Hopkins University 2021: Professor Craig Johnson, Massey University 2024: Professor Natalie Waran, Companion Animals New Zealand Archive of ANZCCART Conference proceedings: 2025 ANZCCART Conference - Brisbane Australia (PDF 11MB, 70 pages) 2024 ANZCCART Conference - Christchurch, New Zealand ANZCCART Conference proceedings 2024 .pdf Download PDF • 708KB The conference served this purpose with emphasis on educating those who use animals in R&T, those who regulate such use under the New Zealand Animal Welfare Act or the eight equivalents in Australian states/territories, and the need for openness with the public. The conference delivered on its theme of use of animals in education, teaching and training in New Zealand and Australia in a neutral forum, where a diversity of ethical opinions were recognised and respected, and promoted openness and transparency with the public by those using animals in R&T. 2023 ANZCCART Conference - Adelaide, South Australia (PDF 3.4MB, 54 pages) 2022 ANZCCART Conference - Melbourne 26-28 July (PDF 3.4MB, 99 pages) 2021 ANZCCART Conference – Openness in Animal Research (PDF 7.2MB, 160 pages) Exploring the benefits and risks of openness in regards to the use of animals in Australian and New Zealand research. View the conference proceedings View the conference presentations The 2021 conference (delayed from 2020) looked at ‘openness’ in animal research and teaching. Public confidence in animal research hinges on the scientific community engaging in the evolving conversation about how and why animals are used. Being open about these matters is a worthwhile endeavour, and to be encouraged. To gain a broader perspective on how openness looks in practise, the conference examined overseas examples, both success stories and failures, and learn from different cultural viewpoints. 2019 ANZCCART Conference – Breaking Down Laboratory Walls (PDF 4.1MB, 138 pages) 2018 ANZCCART Conference – Keeping it Relevant (PDF, 198 pages) 2017 ANZCCART Conference – Maintaining social license in a changing world (PDF) Part 1 , Part 2 The theme of the conference was maintaining social licence in a changing world. The conference covered a wide range of topics from addressing social license in different contexts, to advances in replacement, reduction and refinement technologies, lessons from animal ethics committee front lines, and animal handling. https://vimeo.com/240602922 https://vimeo.com/240606138 https://vimeo.com/240729080 2016 ANZCCART Conference – Man or Mouse (PDF, 3.5 MB, 109 pages) 2015 ANZCCART Conference – Animal ethics – the gold standard 2014 ANZCCART Conference – Mixing it up – ethics, science, and adventure tourism (PDF 1.7MB, 106 pages) The use of animals for research and teaching can be awkward. Necessary, justifiable, ethical, well managed, well regulated without doubt. But still it can be awkward. It raises awkward questions. The conference sought to provide good answers to those questions. 2013 ANZCCART Conference – Can we do better? (PDF, 3.96 MB, 162 pages) 2012 ANZCCART Conference – Thinking Outside the Cage: A different point of view (PDF, 2 MB, 128 pages) 2011 ANZCCART Conference – Science with feeling: animals and people (ANZCCART website) The eclectic mix of contributions in these proceedings recognise the complex interdependence between animals and people, an inextricable connection woven with feelings. 2010 ANNZART Conference – Ethics in a changing environment (PDF) 2009 ANZCCART Conference – AEC best practice (PDF, 3.2 MB, 126 pages) 2008 ANZCCART Conference – Blue Sky to deep water: the reality and the promise (ANZCCART website) The contributions to the 2008 conference "Blue sky to deep water: the reality and the promise" held in Auckland, New Zealand, reflect the conference presentations dealing with science, values and the reality of understanding “backward running rats” and “cunning fighting fish”. 2007 ANZCCART Conference – Getting it Right (PDF, 1 MB, 120 pages) 2006 ANZCCART Conference – Responsibilities – The 4th R (PDF, 2.9 MB, 175 pages) 2005 ANZCCART Conference – Animal Ethics Committees and animal use in a monitored environment: is the ethics real, imagined or necessary? (PDF, 2.6 MB, 98 pages) The conference focused on what Animal Ethics Committees do in regulating and monitoring the use of animals in research and teaching, and the public’s and scientists’ expectations of the process. 2004 ANZCCART Conference – Animal Ethics: New Frontiers, New Opportunities (PDF, 1 MB, 44 pages) 2003 ANZCCART Conference - Lifting the veil: finding common ground 2003 - ANZCCART .pdf Download PDF • 12.55MB The theme of this ANZCCART Conference is "Lifting the veil: finding common ground". This theme was borne out of a perceived need to respond in a positive way to concerns that have been expressed in New Zealand regarding secrecy in the regulatory processes governing animal research. 2003 ANZCCART Workshop - Monitoring Animal Welfare and Promoting Refinement (PDF) 2002 ANZCCART Conference – Animal welfare and Ethics Committees. Where are the goalposts now? (PDF, 2.2 MB, 94 pages) 2001 ANZCCART Conference – Learning, animals and the environment: Changing the face of the future (ANZCCART website) 2001 ANZCCART .pdf Download PDF • 8.97MB Exploring the relationships between ourselves, animals, and the environment was the theme of the conference jointly organised by ANZCCART and the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC). Issues to be addressed included the interdependence and interconnectedness of all life, the images of science and scientists, relevant legislation, dealing with new technology, fish research, and what could and should statistics or the popular media tell us. 1999 AWAC/ANZCCART Conference - Innovation, ethics, and animal welfare: public confidence in science and agriculture 1999_ANZCCART .pdf Download PDF • 11.50MB The conference placed the welfare of animals squarely in the context of the challenges posed by changing patterns ofinternational trade, scientific and technological innovation, and societal attitudes. A central issue was that of the relationship between the wider community-including producers and consumers of livestock products-and scientists. 1997 ANZCCART/NAEAC Conference - Ethical approaches to animal-based sceince 1997_ANZCCART .pdf Download PDF • 16.20MB Ethical approaches to animal-based science emphasises value systems. Value systems are of importance to all of those concerned with animalbased science, whether as proponents or opponents of it. 1995 ANZCCART Conference - Farm animals in Biomedical and Agricultural Research 1995_ANZCCART .pdf Download PDF • 8.98MB This was the sixth conference held by ANZCCART and the second in New Zealand. Its theme moved from the narrower area of traditional laboratory animals to encompass the much wider field of farm animals in biomedical and agricultural research. 1994 ANZCCART Conference - Animal welfare in the twenty-first century: ethical, educational and scientific challenges 1994_ANZCCART .pdf Download PDF • 10.91MB The conference considered what directions animal welfare thinking might take in the future, the implications of those directions for human uses of animals in education and science, and the initiatives we would like to see taken to safeguard the welfare of the animals used in the educational and scientific arenas.

Our People New Zealand Board Members: Emeritus Professor Pat Cragg (Chair), retired, formerly University of Otago (Joined 2020) Chair of the ANZCCART New Zealand Board since April 2020. Pat is a physiologist, and from undergraduate training, a zoologist; her research area covered cardiorespiratory function and control in health and disease; her breadth of teaching is typified as a co-editor of a long-standing physiology textbook. Prior to retirement in May 2018, she held appointments at the University of Otago, for instance as Head of Department of Physiology, Associate Dean Academic Health Sciences and Acting Dean of School of Biomedical Sciences. Pat was on the University's Animal Ethics Committee for 27 years and on the ANZCCART New Zealand Board for 18 years, with four years as Deputy Chair, as well as seven years as the NZ representative on the ANZCCART Australian Board. For many years Pat was Secretary of the Physiological Society of NZ and Chair of the Scientific Committee of the Otago Medical Research Foundation (OMRF). she now Chairs the OMRF Council. From mid-April 2019 to the end of January 2022, she returned from retirement to be the Acting Deputy Vice-Chancellor Academic at the University of Otago. Ian Saldanha (Deputy Chair), Biosecurity & Animal Welfare Advisor, Cawthron Institute (Joined 2021) I have been involved in the lab animal industry for over 10 years. Before taking up a position at the Cawthron Institute in Nelson, I was the Head of the Animal facility at the Malaghan Institute in Wellington. This is where my passion for working with animals grew. During this time, I served on the executive committee for Australia New Zealand Laboratory Animal Association (ANZLAA) for a few years where I used this opportunity to support those that work in the animal science field and meet others from the industry. One of the highlights in my career was getting the opportunity to travel the world, visit other animal facilities, and gain an understanding about how they operate. Outside my profession I have a love for the outdoors in particular running. I enjoy travelling, meeting new people, and of course spending time with my family. Dr Arnja Dale, Chief Scientific Officer, Royal New Zealand SPCA (Joined 2016) Arnja has over 20 years working in the field of animal welfare science in New Zealand and overseas. Arnja is the Chief Scientific Officer at SPCA New Zealand. Prior to joining SPCA, Arnja was a Senior Lecturer in Animal Welfare Science, Ethics and Law, leading numerous research projects, and also led the animal welfare investigations training programme at Unitec. She is a current member of the ANZCCART NZ, the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC) and the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC). Arnja is passionate about animal welfare science and changing the hearts and minds of the next generation through evidence-based education initiatives. Arnja lives in Auckland with her husband, 3 children, and her dog and cat.. Susan Doohan, Animal Welfare Officer, AgResearch (Joined 2024) Susan Doohan is a Massey trained veterinarian working as an Animal Welfare Officer based at AgResearch Grasslands Campus for the last 7 years. From an initial background in mixed practice, with a later focus on dairy cattle production, she enjoys getting to interact with inspiring research on a daily basis. Further education has included Massey postgraduate courses, and gaining Australian and New Zealand College of Veterinary Scientists membership in Animal Welfare in 2021. Working with technicians, farm staff, and scientists from varied backgrounds and skill levels, to train them to perform research and husbandry manipulations on production species, is a strong area of interest, alongside implementation of the 3R’s. Dr Nadia Mitchell, Senior Lecturer, Department of Agricultural Sciences, Lincoln University (Joined 2025) I am a neuroscientist at Lincoln University, where I lead the ovine Batten disease research programme. My research explores translational brain- and eye-directed gene therapies in sheep, and preclinical data from my laboratory has led to the FDA clearance of two gene therapy products and supported human clinical trials for CLN5 Batten disease and Frontotemporal Dementia in collaboration with industry partners. I am a passionate advocate for sustainable and ethical animal research and as an educator, my role is to instil a deep understanding of, and commitment to, animal welfare practices in research and applied farming settings. Outside of work, I love to run, walk and explore Aotearoa New Zealand with my friends and family. Dr Mike Pankhurst, Senior Lecturer, Department of Anatomy, University of Otago (Joined 2024) Mike is reproductive biologist who specialises in the biology of the ovary and female infertility. Mike began research with animals nearly 20 years ago at the University of Tasmania during his PhD studies examining tissue repair following brain injury. Since 2011, Dr Pankhurst has been investigating female reproduction and fertility at the University of Otago, initially as a postdoctoral fellow and now as Senior Lecturer in the Department of Anatomy. Mike’s research team conducts experiments with mouse models but also makes use of alternative techniques such as human (blood) samples, tissue discarded from abattoirs, mathematical models, cell culture, protein-based research and re-analysis of historic archived tissues (microscope slides) using new technologies. Mike is passionate about using a broad range of techniques because this helps to reduce the number of experiments involving animals but also increases the breadth of knowledge gained by research. Mike is the former chair of the Animal Users Group, and a current member of the Animal Practices and Compliances Steering Group, at the University of Otago. Stacey Parbhu, Animal Welfare Science Manager, Ministry for Primary Industries (Joined 2023) Stacey is currently leading the Animal Welfare systems team at MPI. As part of this role, she works alongside the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC) and a team of technical and science advisors to ensure good governance to support RTT activities across New Zealand. She has been active in the care of companion animals, research animal husbandry, animal project management and animal facility management in a variety of positions since 2007, including AgResearch and Massey University. In 2017, Stacey moved to Te Herenga Waka | Victoria University in Wellington, to operate their brand-new small animal facility, eventually becoming the facility manager. In 2024 Stacey finalised her master’s thesis which utilised a mouse IVF model, providing her a greater understanding of the challenges and complexities many organisations will encounter with animal replacement techniques ANZCCART Fellow (observer) - vacant The ANZCCART Fellow is an ANZCCART board observer position for early stage researchers, to both give early stage researchers an opportunity for ANZCCART board experience, but also to inform the Board with their perspectives. Previous ANZCCART Fellows were: 2023-2025: Morgan Heslop, doctoral student, Massey University 2021-2023: Essie Van Zuylen, Postdoctoral Researcher, University of Canterbury ANZCCART NZ EXECUTIVE OFFICER Dr Marc Rands I was born in Lower Hutt and my father was a pākehā and my mother Canadian. My family moved to the UK when I was eight, and I was schooled in London, before completing a degree in Marine and Environmental Biology at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland, and a doctorate from the University of Oxford (Linacre College) studying sea anemones with symbiotic algae. I met my wife at university in Scotland, and we lived in Perth (Scotland) with our two sons while undertaking work at the Institute of Aquaculture at the University of Stirling, then working at the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council in Edinburgh, before moving to the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1998. In 2010, I took up a position at the Royal Society of New Zealand, where I worked on supporting the Society’s expert advice, and then supporting the Society's Academy. As the ANZCCART NZ Executive Officer, I work with the Board supporting the responsible use of animals in research and teaching.

ANZCCART is the Australian & New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching located in both New Zealand and Australia. Promoting the responsible use of animals in research and teaching, and informed discussion and debate within the community regarding these matters. Openness Agreement on Animal Research and Teaching in New Zealand 2025 Annual Report The fourth report on progress since the Agreement’s launch in 2021 Learn More Caring for the Animals We Use in Research and Teaching ANZCCART is the Australian & New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching. We are located in both New Zealand and Australia as two independent organisations working collaboratively with a shared vision, mission and role in society . Our websites contain information for animal carers, animal ethics committee members, scientists, schools as well as other interested parties. Through these websites, we hope to further the primary goals of ANZCCART which include promoting the responsible use of animals in research and teaching, and informed discussion and debate within the community regarding these matters. When viewing our websites please be mindful that legislation and some animal welfare information will differ between our countries. Learn More Featured Initiatives To play, press and hold the enter key. To stop, release the enter key.

Information for New Zealand Teachers, Science Technicians and Students All animals need to be cared for and treated with respect at all times as they are sentient living things. Everyone has a legal obligation to provide animals in their care with all of their needs – food and water, shelter, the opportunity to behave normally, to be handled carefully by people, and to ensure/maintain their good health. These legal requirements exist to protect the animals with whom we interact. This includes making sure that our pets are treated well, that farm animals are taken care of and that our native species are not exploited. In New Zealand the use of animals in research, testing and teaching is controlled by the Animal Welfare Act 1999. This legislation is designed to protect animals in New Zealand from harmful or inhumane treatment. It covers our obligations to care for animals, the people who can conduct surgical procedures on animals, animal exports, humane treatment of wild animals, and codes of welfare. The Three Rs The Three Rs are important animal welfare principles that guide the way we interact with animals. ANZCCART promotes and encourages the implementation of these principles when interacting with animals. These three principles are: Replacement Avoiding or replacing the use of animals in areas where they otherwise would have been used. Reduction Minimising the number of animals used, consistent with scientific aims. Refinement Minimising the pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm that research animals might experience.

Information on animal ethics and legislation in New Zealand In New Zealand the use of animals in research, testing and teaching is controlled by the Animal Welfare Act 1999 . This legislation is designed to protect animals in New Zealand from harmful or inhumane treatment. It covers our obligation to care for animals; who can conduct surgical procedures on animals; animal exports; humane treatment of wild animals; and codes of welfare. For information on the control of animal use in research, testing and teaching under the Animal Welfare Act 1999, see the Ministry for Primary Industries website . Before institutions in New Zealand are permitted to use animals for research, testing or teaching, they must apply for a licence from the government. The licence is called a ‘Code of Ethical Conduct’, and the institution is called a 'code holder'. See here for more information. Anyone wishing to carry out any form of research, testing or teaching on an animal must first apply for approval from an Animal Ethics Committee. To gain ethical approval to work with animals (research, testing or teaching) you must submit an application to an Animal Ethics Committee (AEC). Most research institutions (e.g. university) have their own Animal Ethics Committees. Approval is normally sought by a lead investigator or teaching team leader. Once approval is given it will allow the named students and employees to carry out the animal work provided they are adequately trained and are fully aware of the protocols, including those around animal care. To find out how to apply you should contact your Head of Department or the research office of your institution. If you work in an institution or company that does not have an Animal Ethics Committee please contact the Ministry for Primary Industries ( animalwelfare@mpi.govt.nz ) for advice on how to proceed. Information for Researchers on Applications to Animal Ethics Committees If you are working with animals in New Zealand for research, testing or teaching then it is likely that you will need to apply for Animal Ethics Committee (AEC) approval. Ten top tips for animal ethics application success Preparing ethical approval applications can be a challenging exercise for many researchers. Many proposals are sent back to applicants for modification before approval can be granted. To assist researchers in the preparation of animal ethics applications the University of Melbourne has produced a brochure, based on an analysis of past AEC decisions, to provide some helpful advice. ANZCCART (NZ) has reviewed this document and strongly endorses its use by the New Zealand research community. The document covers the following 10 topics: Writing with purpose in mind Writing for a non-scientific audience Providing a clear narrative and chronology Including and reconciling scientific information Justifying and minimising animal numbers Assembling the right team Piloting and/or staging the project Monitoring and documenting the animals Getting surgery and pain management right Making the endpoint clear Download the brochure for more information. When you are preparing your animal ethics application you need to consider each of the points listed above. In addition to demonstrating good experimental design and sound reasoning for conducting your work, you will also need to demonstrate that you can meet the normal husbandry requirements for the animals including providing for their nutrition, environment, health, behaviour and mental state. The right team is a team that has been trained in all aspects of their proposed role or arrangements have been made for training to be provided. Lastly, you need to show that you have considered the Three Rs animal welfare principles in your experimental design.

FAQs Frequently asked questions: 1. What regulations exist for animal research in New Zealand? New Zealand law mandates that researchers must apply to an Animal Ethics Committee (AEC) to gain approval for using animals in research, testing, and teaching. These AECs are also tasked with monitoring approved research activities. The composition of AECs includes a veterinarian, a scientist, a nomination of an approved organization (e.g., SPCA), and a layperson with no involvement in animal research. This diverse membership provides a broad perspective on animal welfare. The government, while not directly involved in AEC decision-making, regulates animal research by reviewing the codes of ethical conduct that AECs and researchers operate under, oversees these AECs and requires annual reporting from the organisations that have them. 2. Is cosmetic testing on animals allowed in New Zealand? Testing on animals for developing, making, or testing a cosmetic or an ingredient that is intended exclusively for use in a cosmetic is explicitly banned in New Zealand under the Animal Welfare Act 1999, 2015 amendment. 3. How are animals chosen for research? Animals are selected for research based on the specific needs of the study and the suitability of different species to provide relevant data. The selection process is governed by ethical considerations, aiming to use non-sentient, or non-living organisms where possible and to minimize the number of animals used. Researchers must demonstrate that no viable alternatives exist and that the potential benefits of the research justify the use of animals. 4. Are there alternatives to using animals in research? Yes, researchers actively seek alternatives to animal testing, such as cell-based models, computer modelling, and other technologies that can reduce or eliminate the need for animal use. This effort aligns with the Three Rs: Replacement of animals with non-animal methods, Reduction in the number of animals used, and Refinement of techniques to reduce impacts. 5. How can the public learn more about animal research? The public can learn more about animal research through various trusted sources, including animal welfare organizations, regulatory bodies, and research institutions. Many of these organisations support openness about use of animals in research and teaching as signatories to the Openness Agreement on Animal use in Research and Teaching in New Zealand. They provide educational resources online, offering insights into how animal research is conducted, regulated, and how it contributes to scientific and medical advancements. Engaging with these sources can provide a balanced view of the ethical considerations and the importance of animal research in certain contexts.

Use of Animals in New Zealand Records of the annual numbers of animals used in research, testing and teaching have been collected since 1987, and record animals that have had manipulations involving the normal physiological, behavioural, or anatomical integrity of the animal by deliberately subjecting it to a procedure which is unusual or abnormal when compared with that to which animals of that type would be subjected under normal management or practice. This can involve exposing the animal to any parasite, micro-organism, drug, chemical, biological product, radiation, electrical stimulation, or environmental condition; or enforced activity, restraint, nutrition, or surgical intervention; or depriving the animal of usual care. Proportion of animals (per type) used in research, testing and teaching in 2024 From 1 January 2018, the definition of ‘manipulation’ was expanded to include the killing of an animal for research, testing or teaching on its body or tissues, and the breeding or producing offspring that have potentially compromised welfare due to breeding (for example, to research some hereditary medical conditions). All animals reported in this new category are required to be treated with the same duty of care as animals used for research and teaching. Reasons for animals being bred but not used might include: Wrong sex for the specific research project (this is because the sex ratio of offspring can often not be controlled prior to birth). Creating or maintaining genetically altered lines (not all offspring have the required genetic alteration). Number bred was over and above what was needed (exact size of litters or number of offspring born are usually unpredictable). Sufficient numbers are needed to sustain animal colonies, as well as ensure adequate diversity and sufficient timely supply for research and teaching purposes. ‘Sentinel animals’ used for health screening of other animals in the laboratory, whose condition hints towards any subtle health issues in the lab that could widely impact other animals’ welfare. The animals can also be useful after death in teaching and training, or by storing tissues from the animals which can be used in future research. This may reduce the number of animals that need to be bred and used in future. Statistics on New Zealand’s use of animals in research can be found here: 2024 , 2023 , 2022 , 2021 , 2020 , 2019 , 2018 , 2017 , 2016 , 2015 , 2014 , 2013 , 2012 , 2011 , 2010 Infographics on this data can be found here: 2020 , 2019 , 2018 , 2017 The definition of animal, however, varies from country to country: In New Zealand it includes any mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, fish, octopus, squid, crab, lobster, or crayfish, including any mammalian foetus, or any avian or reptilian pre-hatched young, that is in the last half of its period of gestation or development, but excludes any animal in the pre-natal, pre-hatched, larval, or other such developmental stage (other than those indicated previously). Marsupial pouch young are also considered animals. In Australia it includes any fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals and cephalopods, but with some variation by state. In some States it also extends to lobsters, crabs or crayfish. In South Australia, a license is not required to use fish for research purposes. In the US , it includes warm-blooded animals, but excludes birds, rats and mice bred for use in research. In the EU , it includes live vertebrate animals and cephalopods, including independently feeding larval forms and foetal forms of mammals.

ANZCCART Conference 2001 Joint ANZCCART/NAEAC Conference on 28-29 June 2001 Held at the Novotel Tainui Hotel, Hamilton, New Zealand NB: this page was written in advance of the conference Exploring the relationships between ourselves, animals, and the environment is the theme of the conference jointly organised by the Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching (ANZCCART) and the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC). Issues to be addressed include the interdependence and interconnectedness of all life, the images of science and scientists, relevant legislation, dealing with new technology, fish research, and what could and should statistics or the popular media tell us. In understanding these relationships and challenging our beliefs, this conference will help to map the intricate connections between humans, animals, and the environment. It will therefore be valuable to anyone interested in how we learn, communicate, and evolve the relationships between ourselves and the natural world. This conference will be of special interest to those involved in education, in science in both the public and private sectors, and to those interested in teaching, animal welfare, the environment, ethics, and the communication and regulation of community expectations. The programme will provide both local, Australian, and international perspectives. ANZCCART aims to provide leadership in developing community consensus on ethical, social, and scientific issues relating to the use of animals in research and teaching. NAEAC provides independent advice to the Minister of Agriculture on policy and practices relating to the use of animals in research, testing and teaching. Programme Thursday, 28 June 8.15 am Registration 8.45 am Opening Session 1 Primary and secondary education Focus: To consider how our interaction with animals and the environment has changed and how we might develop better interactions through education 9.00 am Cam Reid Oration: Learning, animals and the environment — an animal rights perspective Mr Gary Reese, Compassion in World Farming, London; former member of SAFE, Auckland (by videoconference) 9.40 amInfluences on learning Mrs Barbara Benson, Dunedin College of Education 10.20 am Morning tea 10.50 am Consequences of the continuity between the human and biological worlds Professor David Penny, Massey University 11.30 am Science in the classroom Mr Peter Trim, Independent consultant 12 noon Lunch Session 2 Tertiary education and research and teaching Focus: To consider the influences which impinge on the acceptability of animal-based research, testing and teaching and how we might acknowledge and incorporate them 1.00 pm Public perception of scientists: Frankenstein and Einstein Professor Frank Griffin, University of Otago 1.40 pm The next generation of scientist Dr Catherine Morrow, AgResearch Ruakura 2.20 pm Alternatives and the future Professor Bruce Baguley, Auckland Cancer Society Research Institute 3.00 pm Afternoon tea 3.30 pm The Animal Welfare Act 1999 – impacts and issues Professor John Marbrook, Deputy Chair NAEAC 4.10 pm Skeletons and sovereigns in the cupboard — learning from history Dr Mark Fisher, AgResearch Poukawa Friday, 29 June Session 3 Future challenges Focus: To consider the challenges that we could use to build an appropriate learning environment for our interaction with animals and nature 8.30 am Moving forward with the media Dr Mark Matfield, Research Defense Society, UK (by videoconference); Dr Kay Weavers, University of Waikato 9.25 am Democratically modified science Ms Ronda Cooper, Office of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment 10.05 am Morning tea 10.25 am The next Animal Welfare Act Hon Pete Hodgson, Minister of Research, Science and Technology 11.10 am Fish as experimental animals Good for science and fish? Dr John Baldwin, Monash University, Melbourne 11.40 am “Back off man, I’m a scientist” Dr David Scobie, AgResearch Lincoln 12.20 pm Lunch Session 4 Care and regulation Focus: To consider how society should move forward in dealing with the regulatory aspects of animals and the environment. 1.00 pm Dealing with the emerged technologies Dr Judy McArthur-Clark, Biozone, UK 1.40 pm Living with the legislation Dr Donald Hannah, ERMA NZ 2.20 pm Care beyond regulation Dr Barbara Nicholas, Christchurch 3.00 pm Close of conference Conference details Venue The 2001 ANZCCART conference was held jointly with the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee (NAEAC). The venue is the Novotel Tainui Hotel, Alma Street, Hamilton — located on the banks of the Waikato River in the Central Business District of Hamilton.

Information about animal research in New Zealand The use of animals in research, testing and teaching in New Zealand Animal use in research, testing and teaching in New Zealand is strictly controlled under the Animal Welfare Act 1999 . Any person or organisation using animals must follow an approved code of ethical conduct, which sets out the policies and procedures that must be followed by the organisation and its animal ethics committee. Further information about the regulation of animal research is available from the Ministry for Primary Industries. It is the responsibility of everyone who uses animals to ensure that they are only used when absolutely necessary and that when they are used they are treated with care and respect. If an animal is used for research, testing or teaching the work must be conducted in line with the Three Rs (from the ideas of Russell and Burch in their 1959 book The principles of humane experimental technique available through the Johns Hopkins Alt Web website). Replacement Accelerating the development and use of predictive and robust models and tools, based on the latest science and technologies, to replace the use of animals in addressing important research questions where they would have otherwise been used. Reduction Appropriately designed and analysed animal experiments that are robust and reproducible, and add to the knowledge base. Refinement Advancing laboratory animal welfare by exploiting the latest in vivo technologies to minimise pain, suffering and distress and improve understanding of the impact of welfare on scientific outcomes. Animal use statistics Annual records of the annual numbers of animals used in research, testing and teaching have been collected and published by the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) since 1987 ( MPI animal use statistics ). What is recorded are animals that have had their normal physiological, behavioural, or anatomical integrity altered by a procedure (called a 'manipulation'). This can involve exposing the animal to any parasite, micro-organism, drug, chemical, biological product, radiation, electrical stimulation, or environmental condition; or enforced activity, restraint, nutrition, or surgical intervention; or depriving the animal of usual care. Further details of ‘manipulations’, annual statistics and the definition of an ‘animal’ according to the NZ Animal Welfare Act can be found below . Records of the annual numbers of animals used in research, testing and teaching have been collected since 1987, and record animals that have had manipulations involving the normal physiological, behavioural, or anatomical integrity of the animal by deliberately subjecting it to a procedure which is unusual or abnormal when compared with that to which animals of that type would be subjected under normal management or practice. This can involve exposing the animal to any parasite, micro-organism, drug, chemical, biological product, radiation, electrical stimulation, or environmental condition; or enforced activity, restraint, nutrition, or surgical intervention; or depriving the animal of usual care. Proportion of animals (per type) used in research, testing and teaching in 2024 From 1 January 2018, the definition of ‘manipulation’ was expanded to include the killing of an animal for research, testing or teaching on its body or tissues, and the breeding or producing offspring that have potentially compromised welfare due to breeding (for example, to research some hereditary medical conditions). All animals reported in these new categories are required to be treated with the same duty of care as animals used for research and teaching. From 1 January 2019 the number of animals bred but not used also had to be reported in another new category. Reasons for animals being bred but not used might include: Wrong sex for the specific research project (this is because the sex ratio of offspring can often not be controlled prior to birth). Creating or maintaining genetically altered lines (not all offspring have the required genetic alteration). Number bred was over and above what was needed (exact size of litters or number of offspring born are usually unpredictable). Sufficient numbers are needed to sustain animal colonies, as well as ensure adequate diversity and sufficient timely supply for research and teaching purposes. ‘Sentinel animals’ used for health screening of other animals in the laboratory, whose condition hints towards any subtle health issues in the lab that could widely impact other animals’ welfare. The animals can also be useful after death in teaching and training, or by storing tissues from the animals which can be used in future research. This may reduce the number of animals that need to be bred and used in future. Statistics on New Zealand’s use of animals in research: 2024 , 2023 , 2022 , 2021 , 2020 , 2019 , 2018 , 2017 , 2016 , 2015 , 2014 , 2013 , 2012 , 2011 , 2010 Infographics on this data (incorporated into reports from 2021): 2020 , 2019 , 2018 , 2017 ANZCCART NZ press releases relating to MPI statistics: 2024 , 2023 , 2022 , 2021 , 2020 The definition of animal, however, varies from country to country: In New Zealand it includes any mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian, fish, octopus, squid, crab, lobster, or crayfish, including any mammalian foetus, or any avian or reptilian pre-hatched young, that is in the last half of its period of gestation or development, but excludes any animal in the pre-natal, pre-hatched, larval, or other such developmental stage (other than those indicated previously). Marsupial pouch young are also considered animals. In Australia it includes any fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, mammals and cephalopods, but with some variation by state. In some States it also extends to lobsters, crabs or crayfish. In South Australia, a license is not required to use fish for research purposes. In the US , it includes warm-blooded animals, but excludes birds, rats and mice bred for use in research. In the EU , it includes live vertebrate animals and cephalopods, including independently feeding larval forms and foetal forms of mammals. Institutional Codes of Ethical Conduct under animal welfare legislation Before institutions in New Zealand are permitted to use animals for research, testing or teaching, they must apply for a licence from the government. The licence is called a ‘Code of Ethical Conduct’. This system is unique to New Zealand. Each institutional Code sets out the conditions and rules for animal use and the approving procedures of its Animal Ethics Committee. Codes vary between organisations, depending upon the nature of the scientific activity. These Codes offer insights into how organisations value animals used for scientific or teaching purposes. A list of Code Holders can be found at the end of each MPI annual statistics report, including a list of organisations who have an approved arrangement to use the Code of another organisation. Since 2021 the ANZCCART New Zealand Openness Agreement has encouraged all research and teaching signatories to make the code they use publicly available on their institution’s website. New Zealanders' Attitudes to Animal Research in 2023 A recently conducted study reveals New Zealanders’ perspectives and knowledge on the use of animals in scientific research, testing, and teaching. The study was conducted on behalf of the New Zealand board of the Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching (ANZCCART NZ). You can read the report here: ANZCCART_Animal research report Final .pdf Download PDF • 3.37MB ANZCCART Press release: New Study Reveals New Zealanders' Views on Animal Use in Scientific Research and Teaching Science Media Centre expert reaction to the study can be read here . Research animal re-homing ANZCCART supports and encourages the re-homing of research animals as an alternative to euthanasia, wherever possible.

Information for New Zealand Researchers and Tertiary Education Researchers, technicians or tertiary teachers are often directly responsible for animal welfare. The following information has been designed by ANZCCART to assist these groups when they are conducting research, testing and/or undertaking teaching involving animals. Animal ethics and legislation in New Zealand Please click to follow link for information on ethics and legislation in New Zealand. Understanding Animal Ethics Committees Please click to follow link for information on Animal Ethics Committees and the criteria for assessing applications . Assistance with statistics in designing studies with animals Appropriate research study design is an important part of reducing the numbers of animals used in research and testing. We strongly recommend the free interactive course on designing animal experiments provided by Michael Festing. Designing and reporting animal experiments ANZCCART (NZ) endorses the PREPARE and ARRIVE guidelines for the designing and reporting of animal experiments involving the use of animals. The guidelines are intended to improve the planning and reporting of research using animals – maximising information published and minimising unnecessary studies. PREPARE guidelines for planning animal experiments can be found here . ARRIVE guidelines for reporting animal experiments can be found here . The ARRIVE reporting guidelines have been endorsed by over 1,000 scientific journals including nature, and the journals of the Royal Society Te Apārangi. A 3-minute video about the PREPARE guidelines can be found here . Animal welfare Please click to follow link for information on managing pain and anaesthesia in research animals. Alternatives to using animals in research, testing, or teaching Please click to follow link for information on alternatives to using animals in research, testing, or teaching. ComPass Animal Welfare Training This free online course covers the Australian Code and NZ Guide and welfare issues relating to animal use in research and teaching. Successful completion of Phase one of the course and its quiz fulfills the mandated basic training needs of researchers and teachers using animals as well as members of Animal Ethics Committees (AEC) in Australia and NZ (except AEC members in Victoria who are required to complete the Animal Welfare Victoria training). The aim is to standardize and augment the training offered for animal users in research and teaching throughout Australasia by offering this free online interactive and resource-rich course to all who need this training. For the course link and more information . Resource bank and recommendations on best practice There are ANZCCART resources and Links to r esources from other organisations that contain information and resources about animal welfare and alternatives to using animals. If you would like to add information or resources to this database please contact us . Information updates Our regular newsletter ANZCCART News contains updates on animal welfare, legislation and alternatives to using animals. If you are doing work that has animal ethics approval you should receive this newsletter (via email). If you have not been receiving a copy of ANZCCART News please contact us . Archived editions are available here . ANZCCART Conferences ANZCCART holds an annual conference which discusses animal welfare in the context of research, testing and teaching. The conference location varies and usually is held two successive years in Australia followed by one year in New Zealand. For more details please see our conference page . ANZCCART Contacts for questions If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to contact us .

ANZCCART Conference 2008 Blue Sky to deep water: the reality and the promise Proceedings of the 2008 ANZCCART Conference Auckland, New Zealand Preliminary pages Introduction Mark Fisher Welcome John Martin SESSION 1: Sharing experiences (dilemmas and compliance) Doing animal experimentation in a national organisation with regional responsibilities under state legislation Dr Chris Prideaux ( See PowerPoint presentation – PDF, 629 kb, 18 pages) Meeting animal welfare needs in a biotherapies environment- challenges for the CSL/Pfizer Animal Ethics Committee Dr John Phelps Assessing a research project with reference to the big picture Grant Shackell International benchmarking: AAALAC International Accreditation Dr Kathryn Bayne SESSION 2: Transgenics and modelling Modelling human muscle activity Professor Andrew Pullan Using zebrafish in human disease research: some advantages, disadvantages and ethical considerations Dr Michael Lardelli (See PowerPoint presentation – PDF, 5.6 MB, 26 pages) The benefits of using sheep to model human brain disease Jessie Jacobsen et al. SESSION 3: Great idea but not necessarily what I expected Great idea but not necessarily what I expected (Sometimes the techniques worked; sometimes they didn’t) Dr Allan Goldenthal, Dr Glen Harrison (See Powerpoint presentation – PDF, 1MB, 10 pages) Julie Hitchens ( PowerPoint presentation) Dr Jacqueline Keenan (PowerPoint presentation) Associate Professor Donald Love SESSION 4: Challenging ethics A brief but practical summary of ethics James Battye The Cam Reid Oration: Should we be giving attention to justifying animals in science? Dr Mark Fisher Infrared thermography and heart rate variability for non-invasive assessment of animal welfare Dr Mairi Stewart et al. (ANZCCART Student Award winner) ( PowerPoint presentation) SESSION 5: Death as an event, death as a challenge Euthanasing animals-the human experience Dr Erich von Dietz ( PowerPoint presentation) Managing grief associated with euthanasia Dr Dianne Gardner ( PowerPoint presentation) Recruiting Rats to the Research Resort: the importance of well trained resort personnel Dr John Schofield SESSION 6: Wildlife and conservation The artificial incubation of kiwi eggs: a conservation tool Suzanne Bassett and Claire Travers ( PowerPoint presentation) Researching wildlife in New Zealand: conservation opportunities are both constraints and opportunities Dr Mark Hauber Animal welfare issues in vertebrate pest management and research in New Zealand Dr Penny Fisher et al. SESSION 7: Fish welfare Working towards the development of best practices in fish and fisheries research or The troubles with fish and fish biologists! Howard Gill, Carolyn Ashton and Andrew Rowland The fish: What potential for awareness? Dr Colin Johnston ( PowerPoint presentation) “Pain” and analgesia in fish: What we know, what we don’t know, and what we need to know before using analgesics in fish Dr Don Stevens