ȱ
‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱ
Ž•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
Ž˜›Ž¢ȱǯȱŽŒ”Ž›ȱ
™ŽŒ’Š•’œȱ’—ȱ›’Œž•ž›Š•ȱ˜•’Œ¢ȱ
ŽŒŽ–‹Ž›ȱśǰȱŘŖŖŞȱ
˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ
ŝȬśŝŖŖȱ
   ǯŒ›œǯ˜Ÿȱ
ŘŘŚşřȱ
ȱŽ™˜›ȱ˜›ȱ˜—›Žœœ
Pr
epared for Members and Committees of Congress

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
ž––Š›¢ȱ
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) was first passed in 1966 to prevent pets from being stolen for
sale to research laboratories, and to improve the treatment and well-being of animals intended for
research. Congress periodically has amended the act to strengthen enforcement, expand coverage
to more animals and activities, or curtail practices viewed as cruel, among other things. Farm
animals are not covered by the AWA, which is administered by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
In the 110th Congress, 2007 legislation (H.R. 137; P.L. 110-22) was aimed at strengthening
provisions against animal fighting, the sixth time that Congress has amended the act. It was
amended again in 2008 when AWA provisions were included in the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246).
These provisions ban the importation of puppies under six months of age for resale, tighten
prohibitions on dog and other animal fighting activities, and increase penalties for violation of the
act.
Other AWA bills that were pending at the close of the 110th Congress included H.R. 1280/S. 714,
to restrict where research facilities could obtain their dogs and cats; H.R. 1947, to make it
unlawful for animal exhibitors and dealers (but not accredited zoos) to allow direct contact
between the public and big cats such as lions and tigers; H.R. 2193, to prohibit the use of animals
in marketing medical devices and products; and H.R. 6949/S. 3519, to require an AWA license
from USDA of those who raise more than 50 dogs in a 12-month period and sell directly to the
public.
These or similar bills could be reintroduced and debated when the 111th Congress meets in 2009.

˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
˜—Ž—œȱ
Key Provisions ................................................................................................................................ 1
Animals Covered....................................................................................................................... 1
Businesses and Activities Covered............................................................................................ 1
Standards ................................................................................................................................... 2
Oversight and Enforcement............................................................................................................. 2
Legislative History .......................................................................................................................... 3
Original Law ............................................................................................................................. 3
Animal Welfare Act of 1970 ..................................................................................................... 3
Animal Welfare Act Amendments of 1976 ............................................................................... 3
Improved Standards for Laboratory Animals Act ..................................................................... 3
Protection of Pets ...................................................................................................................... 4
2002 Amendments..................................................................................................................... 4
Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007............................................................ 4
2007-2008 Farm Bill ....................................................................................................................... 5
Animal Fighting ........................................................................................................................ 5
Puppy Imports; Penalties for AWA Violations .......................................................................... 5
Dogs and Cats in Research........................................................................................................ 5
Other Selected Bills......................................................................................................................... 6
Animal Protection Accountability Improvement Act................................................................ 6
Haley’s Act ................................................................................................................................ 6
Puppy Mills ............................................................................................................................... 6

˜—ŠŒœȱ
Author Contact Information ............................................................................................................ 7

˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
he Animal Welfare Act (AWA; 7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.) is intended to ensure the humane
treatment of animals that are intended for research, bred for commercial sale, exhibited to
T the public, or commercially transported. Under the AWA, businesses and others with
animals covered by the law must be licensed or registered, and they must adhere to minimum
standards of care. Farm animals are among those not covered by the act, which nonetheless
provides a broad set of statutory protections for animals.1
The law was first passed in 1966 following several years of lobbying by animal welfare
organizations and growing public outcry over allegations that large numbers of pets were being
“dognapped” for sale to medical research laboratories. Congress amended the original law in
1970, 1976, 1985, 1990, and 2002. These amendments generally were intended to expand the
scope of the AWA or to clarify various provisions. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s
(USDA’s) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) administers the AWA. The House
and Senate Agriculture Committees have exercised primary legislative jurisdiction over the act
and its amendments.
Ž¢ȱ›˜Ÿ’œ’˜—œŘȱ
—’–Š•œȱ˜ŸŽ›Žȱ
The act applies to any live or dead dog, cat, nonhuman primate, guinea pig, hamster, rabbit, or
other warm-blooded animal determined by the Secretary of Agriculture to be for research or
exhibition, or used as a pet. The AWA explicitly excludes birds, rats, and mice bred for research;
horses not used for research; and other farm animals used in the production of food and fiber.3
Animals sold in retail facilities are not covered, unless they are wild or exotic animals. Cold-
blooded animals like fish and reptiles also are excluded from coverage.
žœ’—ŽœœŽœȱŠ—ȱŒ’Ÿ’’Žœȱ˜ŸŽ›Žȱ
Generally, animal dealers and exhibitors must obtain a license, for which an annual fee is
charged. APHIS does not issue a license until it inspects the facility and finds it to be in full
compliance with its regulations. If a facility loses its license, it cannot continue its regulated
activity. Those who conduct research, and general carriers that transport regulated animals, do not
need a license but must still register with APHIS and undergo periodic inspections. Specific
details follow.
Dealers, including pet and laboratory animal breeders and brokers, auction operators, and anyone
who sells exotic or wild animals, or dead animals or their parts, must have an APHIS license for
that activity. So-called Class A licensees are breeders who deal only in animals they breed and
raise; all others are called Class B licensees. Exempt from the law and regulations are retail pet

1 Numerous other federal laws seek to protect other classes of animals, often those from the wild. Examples include the
Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Lacey Act as amended, and the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act. These
and the others are described, with legal citations, in CRS Report 94-731, Brief Summaries of Federal Animal Protection
Statutes
, by Henry Cohen.
2 Unless noted, sources on the AWA are various materials provided by APHIS.
3 For example, rabbits raised for food are exempt from AWA coverage; those for pets are not.
˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ
ŗȱ

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
stores, those who sell pets directly to pet owners, hobby breeders, animal shelters, and boarding
kennels.
Exhibitors must be licensed by APHIS as such. These so-called Class C licensees include zoos,
marine mammal shows, circuses, carnivals, and promotional and educational exhibits. The law
and regulations exempt agricultural shows and fairs, horse shows, rodeos, pet shows, game
preserves, hunting events, and private collectors who do not exhibit, among others.
Animal transporters must be registered, including general carriers (e.g., airlines, railroads, and
truckers). Businesses that contract to transport animals for compensation are considered dealers
and must have licenses.
Research facilities must be registered. They include state and local government-run research
institutions, drug firms, universities, diagnostic laboratories, and facilities that study marine
mammals. Federal facilities, elementary and secondary schools, and agricultural research
institutions are among those exempt from registration.
Animal fighting generally is prohibited by the AWA. The ban includes dogfights and bear and
raccoon baiting; sponsors and exhibitors are subject to penalties. The AWA also has banned bird
fights, except in the states where they are not prohibited by state law (namely Louisiana and New
Mexico), and the sponsor or exhibitor was unaware that the transaction had occurred in interstate
commerce.
Š—Š›œȱ
All licensed and registered entities must comply with USDA-APHIS regulations, including
recordkeeping and published standards of care. These standards deal with humane handling,
shelter, space requirements, feeding, watering, sanitation, ventilation, veterinary care, and
transport. (AWA regulations are at 9 C.F.R. §1.1 et seq.)
ŸŽ›œ’‘ȱŠ—ȱ—˜›ŒŽ–Ž—ȱ
APHIS’s Animal Care (AC) program oversees the AWA, under which approximately 10,300
facilities were licensed or registered in FY2008. That year, AC had total staff of approximately
200 and an annual budget of nearly $21 million.4
AC officials make unannounced inspections of registered and licensed facilities to ensure
compliance with all rules. Under the AWA, research facilities are to be inspected at least annually.
Inspection frequency for other AWA-regulated facilities is based on risk; for example, moderate-
risk facilities are to be visited about once yearly. APHIS inspectors also conduct searches to
identify unlicensed or unregistered facilities. Failure to correct deficiencies can result in
confiscation of animals, fines, cease-and-desist orders, or license suspensions. AC inspectors
conducted 18,343 inspections during FY2007, which included pre-licensing as well as
compliance inspections, according to APHIS.

4 A portion of this amount, nearly $500,000, was used to administer the Horse Protection Act (15 U.S.C. §§1821-1831),
which makes it a crime to exhibit or transport any “sore” horse, i.e., one whose feet have been injured to alter its gait.
˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ
Řȱ

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
Ž’œ•Š’ŸŽȱ ’œ˜›¢ȱ
›’’—Š•ȱŠ ȱ
Although long known as the Animal Welfare Act, the original law was passed simply as P.L. 89-
544, the Act of August 24, 1966. The law requires dealers in dogs and cats for research purposes
to obtain a USDA license and to abide by USDA-set humane treatment requirements. It also
requires a research facility to register with USDA only if it uses dogs or cats and either (1)
purchases them in interstate commerce or (2) receives federal research money. The law authorizes
the Secretary of Agriculture to set humane handling standards for guinea pigs, nonhuman
primates, rabbits, and hamsters as well as dogs and cats—but only dealers and research facilities
with dogs and cats are subject to these standards. Farmers and pet owners are among those
exempted from the law. Other provisions spell out recordkeeping requirements, enforcement
authorities and penalties for noncompliance.
—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒȱ˜ȱŗşŝŖȱ
P.L. 91-579 expands animal coverage to include all warm-blooded animals determined by the
Secretary to be used for experimentation or exhibition, except horses not used in research and
farm animals used in food and fiber research. The 1970 law also incorporates exhibitors; defines
research facilities; and exempts from coverage retail pet stores, agricultural fairs, rodeos, dog and
cat shows.
—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒȱ–Ž—–Ž—œȱ˜ȱŗşŝŜȱ
P.L. 94-279 was passed mainly to clarify and expand previous regulations covering animal
transport and commerce. This act for the first time addresses animal fighting, making it illegal to
exhibit or transport interstate animals used in fighting ventures, such as dogs and roosters.
Hunting animals are generally exempt, as are live fighting birds for states where such fighting is
legal.
–™›˜ŸŽȱŠ—Š›œȱ˜›ȱŠ‹˜›Š˜›¢ȱ—’–Š•œȱŒȱ
These amendments were passed as Title XVII, Subtitle F, of the Food Security Act of 1985 (P.L.
99-198, the omnibus 1985 farm bill). The law directs the Secretary to set new minimum standards
of care for handling, housing, feeding, water, sanitation, ventilation, and so forth. One new
provision that was highly contentious at the time singles out two species by requiring standards
for the exercise of dogs and the psychological well-being of primates. The law provides that
research facilities must have procedures that minimize pain and stress to the animals, and
describes practices considered to be painful. Each research facility must establish an Institutional
Animal Care and Use Committee to review research proposals that involve animal
experimentation and to provide oversight of laboratories. The amendments also increase civil and
criminal penalties for AWA violations, and establish an animal welfare information center at
USDA’s National Agricultural Library.
˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ
řȱ

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
›˜ŽŒ’˜—ȱ˜ȱŽœȱ
Section 2503 of the Food Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-624, the
1990 farm bill) extends pet protections. It requires public and private animal shelters and research
facilities that acquire dogs and cats to hold them for at least five days to allow time for either
adoption or recovery by the original owner before they can be sold to a dealer. Dealers are
prohibited from selling dogs and cats they did not breed unless they provide certified records on,
among other things, the animals’ origin. Other new recordkeeping requirements also are
specified.
ŘŖŖŘȱ–Ž—–Ž—œȱ
Title X, Subtitle D, of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-171, the
omnibus 2002 farm bill) makes it a misdemeanor to ship a bird in interstate commerce for
fighting purposes, or to sponsor or exhibit any bird in a fight with knowledge that any of the birds
were so shipped (even fights within a state where the practice is permitted). The law also
increases the maximum financial penalty for a violation (a misdemeanor) of the anti-fighting
provisions of the AWA, to $15,000 from $5,000. The 2002 law also explicitly excludes from AWA
coverage birds, rats, and mice bred for research purposes. The Secretary of Agriculture had
previously published regulations excluding these animals from coverage, which the Animal Legal
Defense Fund challenged in federal court. When USDA agreed to settle the case by essentially
reversing its regulations, Congress (in P.L. 106-387, the FY2001 agriculture appropriation)
blocked the action by prohibiting funds for such a rule change. The 2002 law made the exclusion
a permanent part of the AWA.5
—’–Š•ȱ’‘’—ȱ›˜‘’‹’’˜—ȱ—˜›ŒŽ–Ž—ȱŒȱ˜ȱŘŖŖŝȱ
P.L. 110-22, signed into law May 3, 2007, makes a violation of the animal fighting provisions of
the AWA a felony punishable by up to three years in prison, under Title 18 of the U.S. Code
(Crimes and Criminal Procedure). The law, based on companion bills introduced by
Representative Gallegly (H.R. 137) and Senator Cantwell (S. 261), also makes it a felony to trade,
in interstate and foreign commerce, knives, gaffs, or other sharp objects designed for use in
animal fighting, or to use the Postal Service or other “interstate instrumentality to trade in such
devices, or to promote an animal fighting venture.”
Proponents of various animal fighting bills had observed that in 2001, the House and Senate had
approved strong animal fighting sanctions in their respective farm bills, but that conferees on the
final 2002 farm bill (P.L. 107-171) removed the felony language. Stronger deterrents are needed
because animal fighting is a brutal, inhumane practice that is closely associated with criminal
activity, endangers children where aggressive dogs are being reared, and may contribute to the
spread of avian influenza in the case of live birds, they argued. Opponents have countered that
such measures would violate provisions in the U.S. Constitution that protect states’ rights,
including the Commerce Clause, and that recognize private citizens’ right to travel for economic
reasons. Completely banning and/or stiffening penalties for all animal fighting activities would

5 CRS Report 94-731, Brief Summaries of Federal Animal Protection Statutes, by Henry Cohen.
˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ
Śȱ

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
drive them further underground, undermining efforts to protect animals and the public from any
disease problems created by such activities, other opponents have argued.
ŘŖŖŝȬŘŖŖŞȱŠ›–ȱ’••ȱ
—’–Š•ȱ’‘’—ȱ
A new omnibus farm bill (P.L. 110-246, first passed as H.R. 2419) contains a number of
amendments to the AWA. One section (§14207) strengthens further the definitions of, and
penalties for, activities related to animal fighting. For example, maximum imprisonment rises to
five years from the current three years. The animal fighting provision is based on language in S.
1880 and H.R. 3219—bills introduced shortly after the July 17, 2007, indictment of NFL
quarterback Michael Vick on charges related to dog fighting—to more explicitly ban various dog
fighting activities, and to define the term.6
ž™™¢ȱ –™˜›œDzȱŽ—Š•’Žœȱ˜›ȱȱ’˜•Š’˜—œȱ
The 2008 farm bill requires regulations to prohibit imports for resale of dogs unless they are at
least six months of age, in good health, and have all necessary vaccinations, with exemptions for
research, veterinary treatment, or imports into Hawaii from certain countries. Another section
(Section 14214) increases the maximum penalty for a general violation of the act from the current
$2,500 to $10,000 for each violation.
˜œȱŠ—ȱŠœȱ’—ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱ
Both the House- and Senate-passed versions of the omnibus farm bill had contained the language
of two other pending bills (H.R. 1280; S. 714) to restrict where research facilities could obtain
their dogs and cats. Such animals were to be obtained only from licensed breeders, publicly
operated shelters, other licensed research facilities, or donors that had bred and raised the animal
or that had owned it for at least the previous year. Additional language in the Senate but not the
House bill directed USDA to phase out the use of random source dogs and cats from “Class B”
dealers within five years. However, all of these provisions were deleted by farm bill conferees.
The final version instead directs USDA to review “any independent reviews by a nationally
recognized panel of experts” on Class B use by researchers.
Conferees said in accompanying report language that they were aware of concerns regarding use
of random source animals from Class B dealers. However, they observed that USDA’s FY2008
appropriation (part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008, P.L. 110-161) had requested
such an independent review, which is being undertaken by the National Academies of Science.
The results, expected in spring 2009, “will help provide Congress information regarding the value
of Class B dogs and cats in medical research.”

6 Another bill, H.R. 3327, included the provisions of H.R. 3219 and S. 1880, as well as language to enable animal
humane agencies to initiate civil actions where violations are alleged.
˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ
śȱ

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
Critics have asserted that the 15 Class B dealers who still collect dogs and cats from random
sources, including “free to a good home” classified ads, auctions, and flea markets, are more
concerned about profit than animal welfare. Others contend that passage would leave no viable
sources of random source dogs and cats, which are needed by medical and veterinary researchers
because of their genetic and age diversity; and that the majority of Class B dealers are in
compliance with the AWA.
‘Ž›ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱ’••œȱ
—’–Š•ȱ›˜ŽŒ’˜—ȱŒŒ˜ž—Š‹’•’¢ȱ –™›˜ŸŽ–Ž—ȱŒȱ
H.R. 2193 would have amended the AWA to prohibit the use of animals in marketing medical
devices and products, and increase the penalties for animal research facilities that violate this part
of the act. This language was the House farm bill (H.R. 2419) but was deleted by conferees.
Interest in the proposal was stimulated at least in part by a sales demonstration in an Ohio
medical facility, where a dog reportedly was given a brain aneurysm, repeatedly subjected to the
medical device, and later put down. Proponents believe the incident highlighted an inhumane
practice done for profit, not science or medicine. Opponents argue that the facility had not
approved the demonstration and acted swiftly to address it, and that most research facilities even
go beyond federal welfare requirements to ensure that research animals do not experience pain
and suffering.
Š•Ž¢ȂœȱŒȱ
This bill (H.R. 1947) would have amended the AWA to make it unlawful for animal exhibitors
and dealers (but not accredited zoos) to allow direct contact between the public and big cats such
as lions and tigers. The bill, which also would have increased penalties for AWA violations, was
named for a teenager killed by a grown Siberian tiger in 2005 while having her picture taken with
it at an APHIS-licensed facility. Opponents argue that the measure is unnecessary because federal
regulations already ban such contacts with older cats (the facility presumably was out of
compliance) and because zoos will gain a monopoly in exhibiting younger cats.
ž™™¢ȱ’••œȱ
The proposed Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety (PUPS) Act (H.R. 6949/S. 3519) would have
required those who breed dogs to obtain an AWA license from USDA if they raised more than 50
dogs in a 12-month period and sold directly to the public. The bills also would have set some
minimum daily exercise requirements for dogs held by the dealers. Supporters of the bills
contended that the Internet and other relatively recent marketing techniques have enabled
importers and large commercial breeders, whom they call “puppy mills,” to sell their animals
directly to the public while evading the AWA licensing and humane handling requirements, even
though they are selling large numbers of animals. (Wholesale breeders are already covered by the
AWA.) Opponents countered that the measures would strain USDA resources and newly subject
thousands of relatively small in-home and hobby breeders, as well as rescue organizations, to
burdensome licensing and regulatory requirements that were designed for large commercial
businesses.
˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ
Ŝȱ

‘Žȱ—’–Š•ȱŽ•Š›ŽȱŒDZȱŠŒ”›˜ž—ȱŠ—ȱŽ•ŽŒŽȱŽ’œ•Š’˜—ȱ
ȱ
The bills were similar in intent to measures offered in the 109th Congress, the Pet Animal Welfare
Statute (“PAWS”; H.R. 2669; S. 1139). These bills would have required commercial dog and cat
breeders to obtain AWA licenses if they sold more than six litters or more than 25 dogs or cats
directly to the public each year, among other things.

ž‘˜›ȱ˜—ŠŒȱ —˜›–Š’˜—ȱ

Geoffrey S. Becker

Specialist in Agricultural Policy
gbecker@crs.loc.gov, 7-7287




˜—›Žœœ’˜—Š•ȱŽœŽŠ›Œ‘ȱŽ›Ÿ’ŒŽȱ
ŝȱ