av magazine issue 1-2 2015

A PUBLICATION OF THE AMERICAN ANTI-VIVISECTION SOCIETYAV 2015 | Number 1-2

magazine

PLUSUNDERSTANDING CHIMPANZEES pg 4

THE PATH TO PROGRESS pg 12

SAVING CHIMPANZEES UNITED FOR CHANGE

AV

DEPARTMENTS

1 First Word Something to smile about.

2 Briefly Speaking The Latest on Chimps; Humane Cosmetics Bill in the U.S.; Are You AWARE?; USDA Matters.

26 GivingHonoring Tina Nelson by supporting sanctuaries.

26 TributesSpecial friends honored and remembered.

28 Members’ CornerLearning kinder lessons from the primate in the mirror.

Saving Chimpanzees:United for Change

7 Conversations About ChimpanzeesA national discussion, “In Their Own Words,” brought lab stories to the public. By Theodora Capaldo

8 Interview: Eric Kleiman Research Consultant, Animal Welfare Institute The tragic history of The Coulston Foundation, and what went on at the world’s largest chimp lab.

11 Chimps in Labs and U.S. LawTracing the laws and regulations that do and don’t protect primates.

12 The Path to Progress What led to the stunning successes for chimpanzees. By Sue A. Leary

14 Inside SanctuariesWhat it takes to provide lifelong care for rescued chimpanzees. By Jen Feuerstein

16 From Trauma to RecoveryHow former research subjects suffer from post-traumatic stress, and what can be done to help them. By G.A. Bradshaw

17 New Homes, New HappinessDespite their painful pasts, chimpanzees find joy in the present.

18 What Now for Chimpanzees in Labs?Successful efforts to free chimpanzees in New Mexico provide a blueprint for helping hundreds more. By Laura Bonar

20 Interview: Paul Waldau Director of Anthrozoology, Canisius College Changes in society and ethics take hold.

22 Seeking Legal Rights for ChimpanzeesWill courts ever grant chimpanzees “personhood” status? By Natalie Prosin

24 AAVS Provides for Their CareSanctuaries supported by AAVS go the extra mile to ensure happy endings.

FEATURES

Founded in 1883, the American Anti-Vivisection Society’s (AAVS) mission is to unequivocally oppose and work to end experimentation on animals and to oppose all other forms of cruelty to animals. AAVS is a nonprofit education organization using legal, effective advocacy to achieve meaningful, lasting change.

2015 Issue 1-2

4 UNDERSTANDING CHIMPANZEES The world’s foremost chimpanzee expert shares what her experiences in Africa taught her about their uniqueness. By Jane Goodall

18

24

CO

VE

R P

HO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F TH

E J

AN

E G

OO

DA

LL IN

STI

TUTE

/ F

ER

NA

ND

O T

UR

MO

AV MAGAZINE 1

SPECIAL REPORT

p 22

HERE’S HOW TO LAUGH LIKE A CHIMP: top teeth covered, lower teeth exposed, and breathy sounds. (You might not want to try this when other people are around.) That’s according to the smart, courageous, com-passionate Roger Fouts, the psychology professor who famously taught sign language to the smart, courageous, compassionate chimpanzee named Washoe. What makes chimps laugh, and the larger story of Roger, Washoe, and their extended family, is shared in Roger’s book, Next of Kin (1997). Reading that was an eye-opener for me and many others, and it’s hard to think of another book that does such a remarkable job of making the case for how humans and chimpanzees are cousins to the core.

And of course, it’s hard to think of another subject so gut-wrenching as how chimpanzees have been treated in scientific experimentation. The language studies that Roger conducted were nothing like the violent, cruel horrors inflicted on hundreds of chimpanzees over the years. There is little doubt in my mind that the worst thing to happen to chimpanzees has been humans.

But now, humans are reversing that trend. Indeed, chimpanzees and the people like you and me who care about them have plenty to smile about today. The National Institutes of Health, America’s largest funder of scientific research, has finally agreed to effectively halt funding in-vasive research on chimpanzees and designate nearly all of the hundreds of individuals it owns as retired. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has finally categorized all chimpanzees—captive or wild—as Endangered, triggering key protections under the Endangered Species Act. And dedicated, competent sanctuaries have demonstrated that they can provide excellent care for chimpanzees who are released from research and other onerous captive situations.

One such sanctuary is Chimp Haven, where seven little chimpanzees under the age of six are supported by AAVS—and will be for the rest of their lives. I am so proud of the AAVS Board, which established the Total Lifetime Care fund for them, and of all the TLC Founders who have contributed. Special thanks are due to the late Deloris Ahrens, whose generous be-quest got our fund off to a solid start.

Hats off as well to the inspiring Jane Goodall; other outspoken, enlightened scientists; and the dedicated leaders, staff, and members of all the animal protection organizations that have been involved over the years in making gains for chimpanzees. There’s more to do, but we have made great progress working together.

Thank you for caring.

First WordAVExecutive Editor

Sue A. Leary

Managing Editor and Copy Editor

Jill Howard Church

Staff ContributorsJill Howard ChurchChristopher DererCrystal Schaeffer

Art Direction Brubaker Design

AV Magazine (USPS 002-660) is published by the

American Anti-Vivisection Society for the benefit of its members, and has been in continuous publication since 1892. Annual membership

dues: $25.00.

Office of Publication:801 Old York Road, Suite 204Jenkintown, PA 19046-1611

phone: 215-887-0816e-mail: [email protected]

www.aavs.org

AAVS welcomes requests to reproduce articles that appear in

AV Magazine. In all cases, we will require that credit be given to the

author and to AAVS.

The individual views and claims expressed in AV Magazine are

not necessarily those of the organization.

AV Magazine is printed on recycled paper.

magazine

VOLUME CXXIII Number 1-2 ISSN 0274-7774

Sue A. Leary, President, American Anti-Vivisection Society

Sue, at home with Sasha.

FPOFSC LOGO

Learn about the baby chimps supported by AAVS.AAVS.org/TLC

2 2015 SAVING CHIMPANZEES

For decades, animals including rabbits, guinea pigs, and mice have been used to test cosmetics and their ingredients. Even with the greater acceptance of alternative methods in recent years, some animal testing is still done on cosmetic ingredients in the U.S. However, this could change with the passage of the Hu-mane Cosmetics Act (HCA). This bipartisan bill would ban the use of animals for testing cosmetics and their ingredients, as well as the sale of animal-tested cosmetics.

Animals used in testing suffer immensely. Chemicals are placed in their eyes or on their skin to assess corrosivity, and toxicity is measured by forcing animals to ingest or inhale a chemical. In many cases, the animals’ pain is relieved only when they are killed at the end of the experiment.

Although some companies con-tinue to conduct animal testing, it is unnecessary. The U.S. does not require companies to use animal tests to assess the safety of their cosmet-ics, and alternatives to replace cruel testing methods have been proven

effective. Conveniently, companies can formulate products using the thousands of ingredients already determined to be safe.

More than a decade ago, the Eu-ropean Union began phasing out the use of animals for testing cosmetic products and ingredients. Israel and India followed with similar laws in 2007 and 2013, respectively. The American public also wants cruelty-free cosmetics. In fact, a 2011 survey found that 67 percent of Americans believe that companies should not test products such as cosmetics and dish soap on animals.

If passed, the HCA would put the U.S. in line with other countries that are taking action to ban using animals in cruel and unnecessary cosmetics testing. AAVS urges mem-bers to contact their U.S. Represen-tative and ask him/her to support the Humane Cosmetics Act (H.R. 2858), and to note that using animals to test items such as shampoo and lipstick is outdated and unacceptable. Take ac-tion at aavs.org/HumaneCosmetics or call the Congressional switch-board at 202-224-3121.

BrieflyNEWS YOU NEED TO KNOW

SpeakingTHE LATEST ON CHIMPSOn June 12, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) announced that it will classify captive chimpanzees as Endangered, just as their wild cousins have been since 1990. Previously, FWS categorized captive chimps as only Threatened, a distinction that allowed for their use in research and entertainment. At the time, the FWS hoped the split listing would help reduce the number of chimpanzees taken from the wild, while also appeasing the biomedical research community, which claimed that chimps were needed to study diseases such as HIV.

“That was a well-intentioned decision, but now we realize it was a mistake,” said FWS Director Dan Ashe. “What we actually did was encourage a culture that treats these animals as a commodity.”

There are an estimated 1,750 chimpanzees in captivity in the U.S., more than 700 of whom are in research labs. Anyone owning chimpanzees must acquire a permit from the FWS in order to import, trade, or use them in ways that may cause harm, such as in research. Technically, permitted activities must benefit species conservation, but in past cases with other species, the FWS accepted questionable activities in exchange for monetary contributions to conservation efforts. However, the permitting process requires public disclosure, and with the vigilance of chimp advocates, it’s unclear how exceptions will be handled if invasive research is proposed.

In other chimp news, there is growing sup-port for 66 former lab chimpanzees who were abandoned by the New York Blood Center (NYBC) in Liberia. In the 1970s, NYBC set up a lab in Liberia, where it would have easy access to chimpanzees, and then used the animals in experi-ments to study hepatitis and HIV. After decades of use, NYBC closed the lab and the surviving chimps were moved to several nearby mangrove islands. Although able to move about freely, the chimps are still completely dependent on humans for their care, especially for food and fresh water. NYBC, a corporation with assets of up to $450 million, stated previously that it would continue to provide for their lifetime care. However, on March 6, NYBC completely stopped all funding for the care of these animals, leaving the chimpanzees at risk of dying from dehydration and starvation.

A coalition of more than 30 organizations, including AAVS, are working together to help these animals. Although the chimps’ immediate needs are currently being met, their future is not secure. At press time, over 200,000 people have signed a petition urging the NYBC to rein-state its funding for the care of these chimpan-zees; a second petition is asking Met Life, one of NYBC’s largest sponsors, to withdraw their support of the corporation.

Humane Cosmetics Bill in the U.S.

PH

OTO

(LE

FT):

BIG

STO

CK

PH

OTO

.CO

M/N

IKO

DIM

AV MAGAZINE 3

USDA MATTERSThe U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) released an internal audit at the end of 2014, outlining the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service’s (APHIS) serious failure to adequately uphold the integrity of the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and its corresponding regulations. The report details problems with inspections and enforcement, and also criticizes APHIS for failing to resolve similar problems noted in previous audits conducted in 1995, 2005, and 2010. There were three items of particular concern:

•The method used to reduce a backlog of more than 2,000 open investigations. Although APHIS agreed to “close old or unviable cases,” it also closed cases involving “grave or repeat welfare violations.”

• Settlement agreements with discounts as high as 75 percent, despite Congress increasing maximum penalties to $10,000 per violation. The audit concluded that “reductions to this degree are too lenient and may not serve as an adequate deterrent for violators.”

• Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs) failing to properly monitor experimental procedures on animals. From 2009 to 2011, 288 laboratories were cited for IACUC violations, including incomplete descriptions of the protocols, inadequate searches for alternatives, and no descriptions of euthanasia methods or procedures designed to minimize pain and distress.

In response to the audit, APHIS made some promises to change, but many animal advocates believe it will remain soft on enforcement.

Some good news related to the USDA is the closure of another random source Class B dealer. Located in Ohio, Robert Perry was the largest of the remaining random source dealers selling animals to research facilities. His license was cancelled on January 9.

According to information received by AAVS in July, there are three random source Class B dealers still operating: D&M Resources, Hodgins Kennels, and R&R Research, the latter of which is under investigation by the USDA. All are located in Michigan.

Random source Class B dealers obtain animals from pounds, shelters, and individuals and then sell them to laboratories. They have a sordid history of illegal acquisition and improper treatment of dogs and cats housed at their facilities. Additionally, as of October 2014, any research studies using dogs and cats acquired from random source dealers are no longer eligible for funding from the National Institutes of Health.

Continuing to spend valuable resources regulating the few remaining random source dealers is a waste of taxpayer money and has not helped to protect the dogs and cats who continue to suffer in their facilities. However, the Pet Safety and Protection Act (H.R. 2849) would ban random source Class B dealers, putting these unscrupulous operators out of business for good. AAVS is supporting the legislation.

Animals used in agriculture research, such as pigs, cows, and sheep, are not considered

“animals,” as defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). In fact, they are spe-cifically excluded from the min-imal protections afforded by the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), the only federal law meant to protect animals in laboratories. Concern over this issue was raised following a January 20 New York Times article that al-leged extensive animal cruelty

and questionable oversight at the USDA’s Meat Animal Re-search Center (MARC).

An example of the docu-mented cruelty at MARC is

“easy care” sheep who give birth “unaided in open fields where newborns are killed by preda-tors, harsh weather, and starva-tion.” Also, it was reported that since 1985, “at least 6,500 animals have starved” to death and 870 died from such ail-ments as abscesses and mastitis, which are generally treatable. Another area of great concern is MARC’s dysfunctional Insti-tutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC), which

is supposed to help ensure that animal welfare is protected. However, it apparently failed to even formally review re-search protocols at the facility.

Although the USDA com-piled preliminary reports responding to the Times allega-tions, officials accepted little responsibility for the alarming animal suffering documented in the article. At a March 24 House Agriculture Appropria-tions Budget Hearing, outraged members of Congress demand-ed answers from USDA officials for the agency’s repeated failure to protect the welfare of animals at its labs.

“We’ve got some serious issues here,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT). “That was a devastating article, and to not have any real responses and action plans and the determination of where we’re going from here and to…stonewall staff in terms of getting responses, I think is pretty irresponsible.”

To address future situations like the abuses at MARC, members of Congress intro-duced the Animal Welfare in Agricultural Research Endeav-ors (AWARE) Act. This bipar-tisan bill would amend the AWA to include protection for animals used in agriculture research at federal labs. Legis-lators should be encouraged to co-sponsor the AWARE Act (H.R. 746 / S. 388). See aavs.org/AWARE for up-dates and to take action.

Are You AWARE?


chimpanzeesBY JANE GOODALL

understanding Jane giving a banana to David Greybeard outside her tent in her early days at Gombe.

AV MAGAZINE 5

W

chimpanzees

Jane Goodall’s vast and intimate knowledge of chimpanzee behavior has changed the way humankind views its closest evolutionary kin. Here, she describes her early years studying chimpanzees where they naturally exist, where they truly belong.

When I began my study in Gombe in 1960 it was not permissible—at least not in ethological circles—to talk about an animal’s mind. Only hu-mans had minds. Nor was it quite proper to talk about animal personality. Of course everyone knew that they did have their own unique characters—everyone who had ever owned a dog or other pet was aware of that. But ethologists, striving to make theirs a “hard” science, shied away from the task of trying to explain such things objectively. One respected ethologist, while acknowledging that there was “variability between individual animals,” wrote that it was best that this fact be “swept under the carpet.” At that time ethological carpets fairly bulged with all that was hidden beneath them.

How naïve I was. As I had not had an under-graduate science education, I didn’t realize that animals were not supposed to have personalities, or to think or to feel emotions or pain. I had no idea that it would have been more appropriate to assign each of the chimpanzees a number rather than a name when I got to know him or her. I didn’t real-ize that it was not scientific to discuss behavior in terms of motivation or purpose. And no one had told me that terms such as childhood and adolescence were uniquely human phases of the life cycle, cul-turally determined, not to be used when referring to young chimpanzees. Not knowing, I freely made use of all those forbidden terms and concepts in my initial attempt to describe, to the best of my ability, the amazing things I had observed at Gombe.

I shall never forget the response of a group of ethologists to some remarks I made at an erudite seminar. I described how Figan, as an adolescent, had learned to stay behind in camp after senior males had left, so that we could give him a few bananas for himself. On the first occasion he had, upon seeing the fruits, uttered loud, delighted food calls: whereupon a couple of the older males had charged back, chased after Figan, and taken his bananas…. I explained how, on the next occasion, Figan had actually suppressed his calls. We could

hear little sounds, in his throat, but so quiet that none of the others could have heard them. Other young chimps, to whom we tried to smuggle fruit without the knowledge of their elders, never learned such self-control. With shrieks of glee they would fall to, only to be robbed of their booty when the big males charged back.

I had expected my audience to be as fascinated and impressed as I was. I had hoped for an ex-change of views about the chimpanzee’s undoubted intelligence. Instead there was a chill silence, after which the chairman hastily changed the subject….[A]fter being thus snubbed, I was very reluctant to contribute any comments, at any scientific gather-ing, for a very long time…. I suspect that everyone was interested, but it was, of course, not permis-sible to present a mere “anecdote” as evidence for anything.

The editorial comments on the first paper I wrote for publication demanded that every he or she be replaced with it, and every who be replaced with which. Incensed, I…crossed out the its and whiches and scrawled back the original pronouns. As I had no desire to carve a niche for myself in the world of science, but simply wanted to go on living among and learning about chimpanzees, the pos-sible reaction of the editor of the learned journal did not trouble me…. I won that round: the paper, when finally published, did confer upon the chim-panzees the dignity of their appropriate genders and properly upgraded them from the status of mere “things” to essential Being-ness….

It is not easy to study emotions even when the subjects are human…. As we try to come to grips with the emotions of beings progressively more dif-ferent from ourselves, the task, obviously, becomes increasingly difficult. If we ascribe human emo-tions to non-human animals we are accused of be-ing anthropomorphic—a cardinal sin in ethology. But is it so terrible? If we test the effect of drugs on chimpanzees because they are biologically so simi-lar to ourselves, if we accept that there are dramatic


similarities in chimpanzee and human brain and nervous system[s], is it not logical to assume that there will be similarities also in at least the more basic feelings, emotions and moods of the two species?

In fact, all those who have worked long and closely with chimpanzees have no hesitation in as-serting that chimps experience emotions similar to those which in ourselves we label pleasure, joy, sor-row, anger, bore-dom and so on. Some of the emo-tional states of the chimpanzee are so obviously similar to ours that even an inexperienced ob-server can under-stand what is going on. An infant who hurls himself at any nearby object, banging his head, is clearly having a tantrum. Another youngster, who gambols around his mother, turn-ing somersaults, pirouetting and…rushing up to her and tumbling into her lap, patting her or pull-ing her hand towards him in a request for tickling, is obviously filled with joie de vivre.… And one cannot watch chimpanzee infants for long without realizing that they have the same emotional need for affection and reassurance as human children. An adult male, reclining in the shade after a good meal, reaching benignly to play with an infant or

idly groom an adult female, is clearly in a good mood. When he sits with bristling hair, glaring at his subordinates and threatening them, with irritat-ed gestures, if they come too close, he is clearly feel-ing cross and grumpy. We make these judgments because the similarity of so much of a chimpanzee’s behavior to our own permits us to empathize.

It is hard to empathize with emotions we have not experienced…. I have spent countless hours

watching mother chimpanzees interacting with their infants. But not until I had an infant of my own did I begin to un-derstand the basic, powerful instinct of mother-love. If someone acciden-tally did something to frighten [my son] Grub, or threaten his well-being in any way,

I felt a surge of quite irrational anger. How much more easily could I then understand the feelings of the chimpanzee mother who furiously waves her arms and barks in threat at an individual who approaches her infant too closely, or at a playmate who inadvertently hurts her child. And it was not until I knew the numbing grief that gripped me after the death of my second husband that I could even begin to appreciate the despair and sense of loss that can cause young chimps to pine away and die when they lose their mothers.

Empathy and intuition can be of tremendous value as we attempt to understand certain complex behavioral interactions, provided that the behavior, as it occurs, is recorded precisely and objectively…. And “knowing” intuitively how a chimpanzee is feeling–after an attack, for example–may help one to understand what happens next. We should not be afraid at least to try to make use of our close evolutionary relationship with the chimpanzees in our attempts to interpret complex behavior. AV

Excerpted (and edited for length) from Through a Window: My Thirty Years with the Chimpanzees of Gombe (Houghton Mifflin Company, 1990), which was revised and republished in 2010. More information about Dr. Goodall’s biography, honors, studies, and programs on behalf of people, chimpanzees, and the environment can be found at www.janegoodall.org and www.rootsandshoots.org.

Some of the emotional states of the chimpanzee are so obviously similar to ours

that even an inexperienced observer can understand

what is going on.

Jane in Gombe National Park.

PH

OTO

S C

OU

RTE

SY O

F TH

E J

AN

E G

OO

DA

LL IN

STI

TUTE

/ H

UG

O V

AN

LA

WIC

K A

ND

CH

AS

E P

ICK

ER

ING

AV MAGAZINE 7

In 2005, the New England Anti-Vivisection Society launched Project R&R: Release and Restitution for Chimpanzees in U.S. Labs, because as I came to know many of the chim-panzees rescued from research, getting them all out became

urgent. The campaign focused on gathering scientific evidence of why chimpanzees were unnecessary and never made essential contributions to human health despite their genetic similarity to us, and on bringing the chimpanzees’ stories to the public.

Our scientific evidence proved salient to the Institute of Medicine’s 2011 findings about the use of chimpanzees, which concluded that, “Most current use of chimpanzees for biomedi-cal research is unnecessary.” In 2006, Project R&R Co-Chair Gloria Grow of Fauna Sanctuary, NEAVS’ Science Advisor, geneticist Dr. Jarrod Bailey, program specialist/former lab care-giver Nancy Megna, and I went on the road to present “In Their Own Words” in major U.S. cities. The talks featured Dr. Bailey discussing the science; me, the strategies and goals; Gloria and Nancy, the voice of the chimpanzees.

Although various opinion surveys have concluded that the public accepts animal research only if they feel it is “necessary” and “the animals do not suffer,” our Project R&R audiences learned that chimpanzees were not only unnecessary in research, but also that using them wasted time and money finding preven-tions, treatments, and cures. As we shared lab records, autopsy results, and the chimpanzees’ traumas, audiences learned how these chimps suffered. Images and stories, accompanied by fac-tual assurances that ending chimpanzee research wouldn’t deter advances in human health, left the attendees hopeful for better science without animal suffering.

People fell in love with Tom, who had been battered by de-cades of use yet remained strong and noble. Before his rescue, Tom spent 30 years in “hard” research, including 25 years alone in a 5x5x7-foot cage. After 15 safe and happy years at Fauna Sanctuary, Tom collapsed one day and died. His autopsy re-vealed more of the hardships he endured, which explained some of his behavior.

Every day upon awakening, Tom had spent several minutes gag-ging and clearing his throat. He preferred high water-content foods, like lettuce. His autopsy revealed massive adhesions throughout his body, with sections of organs fused together. His trachea was hard and scarred. At one lab, records indicated Tom endured 369 “knockdowns”—anesthesia by dart gun—and intubation. Although the autopsy couldn’t directly point to research as the cause of his ail-ments, common sense and empathy could.

Tom was acutely aware of his injuries inside and out. At

Conversations About Chimpanzees

Fauna Sanctuary the chimps are offered an array of enrichment, including water paints. Tom had great interest in this for awhile. One day he chose only black paint. His caregiver watched as Tom painted the pink scar tissue on his foot black to match the rest of his foot. He did this for several days and then stopped.

We appointed Tom as Ambassador of Project R&R because he had the dignity and senior status deserving of the title. After seeing his photo someone wrote, “How could anyone turn away from that guy?” People were in awe of all the chimpanzees they met through us. The chimps themselves propelled our campaign. We heard heartfelt responses during the tour, such as, “It’s their time. How could we have done this to them…and for so long?” Others asked, “If chimps are so like us and using them for research doesn’t help us, how can any other species give us info about our health?”

Those who attended “In Their Own Words” came to under-stand the bad science and the alternatives. They came to feel the suffering and celebrate the recoveries. They connected to chim-panzees and to all animals sacrificed by science. NEAVS/Project R&R is honored to be working not only on behalf of but with the chimpanzees, ambassadors for all animals in labs. AV

Theodora Capaldo, Ed.D., is a licensed psychologist and President of the New England Anti-Vivisection Society (www.neavs.org). She also leads NEAVS’ educational affiliate, the Ethical Science Education Coalition, and is trustee of the American Fund for Alternatives to Animal Research.

By Theodora Capaldo

Tom’s rescue from research made him an ambassador

for other chimpanzees.

PH

OTO

CO

UR

TESY

OF

M. S

ER

ES

/FA

UN

A S

AN

CTU

AR

Y


AAVS: How did TCF initially acquire chimpanzees?ERIC: In 1970, the Air Force deter-mined that chimpanzees were no longer needed for spaceflight research, so it made them available for another lab’s biomedical research. Dr. Frederick Coulston ran the Air Force lab from 1972 to 1980 and then founded the White Sands toxicology lab in Alamogor-do, New Mexico, which advertised the availability of chimpanzees and monkeys to develop cosmetics and insecticides.

How many chimpanzees did Coulston’s foundation ultimately acquire?In 1993, TCF was given control of 200 chimpanzees owned by New Mexico State University, plus 150 Air Force chimps and another 125 from White Sands. It obtained 100 more chimpan-zees from a New York lab in 1996. That eventually made Coulston head of the largest chimpanzee lab in the world.

Why did so many chimpanzees end up in the same place?TCF was a willing dumping ground. The National Institutes of Health [NIH] had started a large-scale breeding program in 1986 thinking that chimpanzees would be a valid model for HIV. But as early as 1990, NIH discussed the glut of chim-panzees it had created, and that the chim-panzee model turned out to be a failure. Other labs began to realize that, too, and with the long-term cost of maintaining hundreds of chimpanzees running into the tens of millions of dollars, they started looking for a way out.

How did the Air Force add to this?Beginning in 1994, for one dollar a year, TCF could use the Air Force chimpan-zees, as well as the $10 million buildings housing them, in any type of research. In 1995, the Air Force tried to give away

Eric Kleiman has been deeply involved with efforts to protect chimpanzees used in research.

He currently serves as a Research Consultant for the Animal Welfare Institute, and before

that was the Research Director for In Defense of Animals. Eric provided evidence to federal regulatory agencies in formal complaints and

research reports relating to violations of animal welfare and data integrity laws, and used the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to peel

back the veil of secrecy regarding animal use at federally funded facilities.

Here he shares with AAVS the history of The Coulston Foundation (TCF) in New

Mexico, where hundreds of former Air Force chimpanzees and other chimpanzees from

various origins suffered for many years before the lab was eventually shut down.

INTERVIEW

Eric Kleiman

Hundreds of chimpanzees languished for years in The Coulston Foundation’s barren laboratories in Alamogordo, New Mexico.

Research Consultant, Animal Welfare Institute

AV MAGAZINE 9

all 150 of its chimpanzees and the facility to TCF. A lobbying effort led by Dr. Jane Goodall stopped it, and Congress man-dated what was supposed to be a fair and open bidding process.

It seems as though the Air Force didn’t consider TCF’s bad reputa-tion and repeated animal welfare violations. Just how bad was it?Extremely bad. Over a period of just six years, the U.S. Department of Agriculture [USDA] filed four complaints alleg-ing countless animal welfare violations, including negligent veterinary care that resulted in multiple chimpanzee and monkey deaths. TCF was cited and fined for violating the Animal Welfare Act [AWA], but the Air Force gave them more chimpanzees anyway.

Can you tell us about a few of the chimps? Jello was a healthy 11-year-old chimpan-zee who choked to death on his vomit after an inexperienced veterinarian didn’t fast him properly before negligently anesthetizing him in a group. A USDA investigation said TCF tried to withhold an internal memo that was highly critical of the way Jello had been treated.

Echo, who was two years old, died after being attacked by a stronger, older chimpanzee in an adjacent cage. Her arm was badly mangled, but instead of waiting until she stabilized, she was rushed into surgery by vets so inexperienced that they had to consult a surgical manual while she was on the operating table. She was left unmonitored, and by the time she was discovered in distress, it was too late. No wonder the USDA considered the veterinary care substandard. Can you give an example of what kind of testing was done at TCF?There was toxicology and efficacy test-ing for an anti-HIV drug with a well-documented side effect called capillary leak syndrome, which killed three of eight chimpanzees–Terrance, Muffin, and Holly–used in two separate studies. The USDA called these deaths “unnecessary”

WITH THE LONG-TERM COST OF MAINTAINING HUNDREDS OF

CHIMPANZEES RUNNING INTO THE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, THEY

STARTED LOOKING FOR A WAY OUT.

because of this “known side-effect.” The capillary leak syndrome was not only treatable, it caused enormous suffering for Terrance, Muffin, and Holly. Yet a paper and patent written by this pharmaceuti-cal company director did not mention a single death, and claimed the drug was safe and effective.

And a test for a spinal implant led to the negligent death of a chimp named Eason. USDA investigators found that chimpanzees who had never been ap-proved to be in the study were put on it, and that tests required by the protocol were never performed. The implant devel-oper wrote in published papers that the tests were a resounding success, without mentioning Eason’s death or other prob-lems uncovered by the USDA and Food and Drug Administration [FDA].

Was the FDA monitoring the Coulston lab too?Yes. The FDA issued a rare Warning Letter in December 1999 after Terrance, Muffin, Holly, and Eason died, citing more than 270 violations of the Good Laboratory Practice regulations. The FDA also audited a third study, uncovering the death of a chimpanzee who died because he lost 29 percent of his body weight in a period of weeks.

It’s hard to believe that TCF was still operating at this point.The FDA findings helped to peel away the lab’s private client base. And the FDA’s Warning Letter was covered in industry publications such as Science magazine.

So industry started to take notice.Yes, but the lab didn’t close until Septem-ber 2002, and the AWA violations contin-

ued. The USDA filed its fourth complaint in July 2001, for the negligent deaths of a chimpanzee named Donna and an NIH-owned chimp named Ray. Donna’s story is particularly tragic and gruesome.

Tell us about her.Donna was a former Air Force chimpan-zee who suffered from severe infection after carrying a large dead fetus in her womb for at least two weeks, and possibly as long as two months. When the veteri-narians belatedly performed a C-section, they removed one liter of pus from her abdomen and observed the partially decomposed fetus’s skull through the rup-tured wall of her uterus. The USDA com-plaint stated that she endured “extreme pain” before and after the delayed surgery. Donna had also been used as a breeder by the FDA, and had 14 babies in just 26 years. In the wild, chimpanzees usually give birth at most only every six years.

Donna’s story is so unbelievably sad. But were some chimps finally relinquished to a sanctuary?Yes. The Air Force awarded TCF 111 chimpanzees in 1998, but Dr. Carole Noon, who was a primatologist, filed a lawsuit citing TCF’s record of failing to meet any of the criteria mandated by the Air Force. A year later she won, and the Air Force, through TCF, agreed to transfer 21 chimpanzees to her sanctuary, Save the Chimps.

What happened to the other chimps?TCF was faced with the mounting evi-dence of violations and loss of funding, so in 1999, the lab signed a settlement with the USDA to cut its chimpanzee popula-tion by 300.


We haven’t talked much about NIH. Do you think that NIH facilitated the problems at the Coulston lab?Yes. After a 1999 audit found that TCF was near bankruptcy, NIH began to ille-gally provide “supplemental” grant awards, eventually totaling millions of dollars, in an effort to bail the lab out. Then in 2000, Congress requested testimony regarding the TCF situation and NIH’s actions.

What resulted from that?Congress launched an investigation of NIH’s management and oversight of bil-lions of dollars in taxpayer-funded grants, and found that NIH had continued to fund TCF despite the lab’s violations of federal regulations.

What finally shut down the Coulston lab?Its death spiral was cemented by two things. First of all, in 2001, Congress forced NIH to stop funding TCF. That was two-thirds of the lab’s revenue, and within six months, its largest creditor filed a foreclosure lawsuit for more than $1.1 million in unpaid loans. Then that same year the FDA issued a second Warning Letter noting that violations of the Good Laboratory Practice regulations were so severe and conditions were so bad, the lab’s study data was too compromised to be considered reliable. Eventually, the FDA disqualified the lab—for the first time in history—and all data generated there is now considered suspect in the eyes of the agency.

“The Great Chimpanzee Migration:” A custom trailer was used to transport chimpanzees from the defunct Coulston Foundation laboratory in New Mexico to the Save the Chimps sanctuary in Florida.

Essentially, no researchers could work with TCF anymore. Yes, and being unable to recover from its loss of federal funding and private client base, TCF folded in September 2002. Save the Chimps, with incredibly gener-ous funding from Jon Stryker’s Arcus Foundation, took over the facility and retired 266 chimpanzees and 61 monkeys.

This story should end there, but it doesn’t.No. NIH then took ownership of the lab and contracted with Charles River Labo-ratories to operate what it renamed the Alamogordo Primate Facility [APF]. In 2004, District Attorney Scot Key in New Mexico filed multiple counts of criminal animal cruelty against Charles River for the deaths of two chimpanzees, Rex and Ashley, and the near-death of another, Topsy. Charles River refused to supply these chimpanzees’ medical records but NIH refused to intervene and continued to fund the lab. The case was dismissed on an egregious legal technicality, but the lab’s refusal to provide those records prompted a five-year federal FOIA lawsuit against NIH, which resulted in the even-tual release of the records of all chimpan-zees at the APF. So for the first time in history, a chimpanzee lab was completely subject to FOIA, and the magnitude of the suffering the chimps had endured for decades was exposed.

Yes, obtaining those records was so important because they

provided evidence that no one could deny. And you were able to interest the media?The records were provided to McClatchy Newspapers, which published an in-depth report called “Chimps: Life in the Lab.” The groundbreaking 2011 Institute of Medicine [IOM] report largely echoed this series, which was cited by Scientific American when that magazine called for a ban on chimpanzee research. Although it was not possible for McClatchy to include the suffering of all the chimpanzees, specific case studies showed the physical and psychological damage not only of the research itself, but also the conditions of confinement. This was far larger than TCF; much of the suffering occurred at government labs too, and many of those stories can be found online (www.mc-clatchydc.com/chimps/). What went on in those labs became impossible to ignore, and that eventually led to further action by Congress and the IOM.

Last question: How did everything that was going on at TCF come to light?A brave and remarkable network of whistleblowers had emerged at TCF. They demonstrate how integral whistleblow-ers—and protecting them from retali-ation—are to uncovering what is truly happening to animals, day in and day out, behind the locked doors of laboratories. I want to give special thanks to those brave people, who for years stood up to do the right thing. AV P

HO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F S

AV

E T

HE

CH

IMP

S, I

NC

.

AV MAGAZINE 11

Chimps in Labs and U.S. LawFederal laws regulating chimpanzees in the United States have been inadequate and, at times, contradictory. Here is a timeline of laws affecting chimpanzees in laboratories:

1966The [Laboratory] Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is passed by the U.S. Congress as the first and only federal law to regulate the acquisition and use of various species used in research. Amended several times in later years, it sets minimal standards for housing, feeding, and transportation of animals at research facilities.

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) identifies plants and animals around the world whose risk of extinction is designated

as either Threatened or Endangered, with the different designations resulting in different treatment. Captive-bred

chimpanzees (the children of chimps imported to or born in captivity in the U.S.) are not covered by the ESA, which allows

further breeding of chimps for research and entertainment.

The U.S. joins 20 other countries as the first to sign the United Nations’ Convention on International Trade in Endangered

Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which regulates the commercial trade of imperiled animals and plants.

CITES goes into effect with chimpanzees listed under Appendix II, indicating that their wild populations could become threatened with extinction without trade controls.

CITES up-lists chimpanzees to its Appendix I of endangered species, restricting international trade.

1973

1975

1977

The AWA is amended to cover “humane handling” and provide for the “psychological well-being” of nonhuman

primates, which includes unspecified enrichment.

1985

Wild chimpanzees are listed as Endangered under the ESA but domestic captive chimpanzees are listed as Threatened, with a Special Rule allowing their use in laboratories.

1990

Congress passes the CHIMP (Chimpanzee Health Improvement, Maintenance, and Protection) Act, to establish

a sanctuary system to retire “surplus” chimpanzees owned by the federal government. It includes criteria for retirement,

requirements for composition of a governing board, and a funding formula. A controversial last-minute provision allows

chimpanzees to be returned to laboratories for research under certain “special circumstances”, although it was never invoked.

2000

The Chimp Haven is Home Act is passed by Congress to amend the provisions of the CHIMP Act, ending the government’s authority to return chimpanzees in sanctuary back to research. Chimp Haven, the sanctuary that receives the government chimpanzees, reassures funders that retirement is permanent.

2007

The Great Ape Protection Act (GAPA) is introduced in Congress, and again in 2009, to prohibit invasive research on, or the breeding or transport of, chimps and other great

apes in federal laboratories, and requires them to be retired to sanctuaries. The measure expired without passage.

2008

The Great Ape Protection and Cost Savings Act is introduced in Congress, with many of the same provisions as GAPA. Supported by a broad coalition, it gains support for federally owned chimps to be retired to sanctuaries. However, a final version included numerous exceptions, and the bill expired at the end of the 112th Congress in 2012 without a full vote.

2011

The CHIMP Act is amended again, to address a $30 million federal funding limit in the original

bill that did not anticipate the numbers of animals requiring retirement. Specific dollar amounts are

authorized through fiscal year 2018.

2013

2014The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service seeks public comments on a legal petition filed by humane and conservation groups, based on provisions of the Endangered Species Act. The petition cites the continuing, radical decline in wild populations of chimpanzees, and asks that all captive chimpanzees be listed as Endangered.

2015In June, the USFWS announced that captive chimpanzees

will now be classified as Endangered under the same provisions that wild chimpanzees are. The ruling, which went into

effect September 14, requires permits for the import, export, or interstate transfer of chimpanzees, and limits scientific

use to purposes that enhance their survival in the wild. Legally acquired chimpanzees may still be kept by zoos and sanctuaries,

and as “pets” by individuals. The status of those used for entertainment will be decided after further review.


returned from a lunch break, I was surprised! They must have come from all over the National Academies’ modern headquar-ters in Washington, DC, where the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee on the Use of Chimpanzees in Biomedical and Be-havioral Research was conducting its second public meeting. All that morning in August 2011, the room was only half full, and those in attendance, like me, had come to present information and prepared remarks to urge the committee members to adopt one position or another. Everyone knew that their findings and recommendations could change national policy on government funding of research on chimpanzees.

What changed after the recess was that famed primatologist Jane Goodall was scheduled to give a special presentation via a live video feed from her home in England. It’s not clear how all these people knew, but that’s what drew the crowd. Dr. Goodall began with an account of her own scientific interests and the needs of chimpanzees in Africa, whose survival is in imminent danger. She shared a moving story about Old Man, a chimpan-zee who, even though he had plenty of reason to mistrust hu-mans, made friends with a caregiver and defended him when the man was attacked by other chimps, saving his life. Her soft voice had the effect of making everyone listen quietly as she made the connection between the human and nonhuman apes. Someone asked whether she considered experiments on chimpanzees tor-ture. She replied, “To them, it is.”

A few months later the IOM Committee published its report,“Chimpanzees in Biomedical and Behavioral Research: Assessing the Necessity,” which concluded that nearly all research using chimpanzees is not ethically or scientifically justified. The “necessity” question was answered; it was a turning point. With-in minutes, in a stunning response, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Dr. Francis Collins said that the agency would accept all of the report’s recommendations, including phasing out or terminating current research that did not meet the strict new criteria.

NIH agreed to retire hundreds of chimpanzees but said it would still keep 50, reserving the right to use them in case of a medical research emergency in the future. NIH agreed that the 50 chimps would live in vastly improved “ethologically appropri-ate physical and social environments.” An expert Working Group laid out the practical details, and by June 2013, the agency made P

HO

TO C

OU

RTE

SY O

F C

HIM

P H

AV

EN

THE PATHTO PROGRESS

BY SUE A. LEARY

SUDDENLY, THE MEETING ROOM WAS FULL OF PEOPLE—STANDING ROOM ONLY. Having just

some modifications but did not renege on its fundamental com-mitments to end its funding of virtually all invasive chimpanzee research and to provide retirement and appropriate care for the chimps it owned. It may have seemed as if this change came out of nowhere, but it didn’t. Experience tells us that progress is built on some past pain or gain, and related to a current con-text. There are lessons to be learned from tracing the path that brought us to this moment, when chimpanzees are within reach of being treated with the respect that they deserve.

THE EARLY YEARSSome of the past images are familiar: Newspaper photos of young chimpanzees strapped into a space capsule, their bravery hailed, as if they volunteered. National Geographic TV specials show-ing a young British woman in the forests of Africa, living among chimpanzees and explaining their daily lives, which seemed full of familiar relationships and feelings. News of a chimpanzee named Washoe, who learned sign language and was loved and protected by the scientists who raised her. These stories helped form a cultural fascination and affection for the species we un-derstood were our closest relatives on the evolutionary tree.

Unfortunately, chimpanzee babies are desirable to those who would exploit them because they are so appealing, innocent, and impressionable. In science, young animals not yet used in experi-ments are referred to as “naïve,” and it is apt. We now realize that obtaining a baby chimpanzee from the wild means the mother and other adults in the group were probably killed. Breeding pro-grams in the U.S. continued the practice of separating chimpan-zee babies from their mothers—usually within hours after birth.

After government-funded researchers bred chimps to train for possible space flight and endurance tests, they sought to populate labs with chimpanzee test subjects for AIDS, hepatitis, and other research and testing, ranging from the mild to the severe. Then in the 1990s funding priorities shifted, in part because chimpanzees turned out to be a useless model for studying AIDS, and sud-denly there was a surplus of chimpanzees.

PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICEA 1997 National Academies committee report concluded that a breeding moratorium was a good idea and that surplus chimpan-zees should not be euthanized. Meanwhile, shocking experiments and treatment continued. Revelations emerged from eyewitnesses and shook up the public, whose values during the 1980s and

AV MAGAZINE 13

SCIENTISTS BECAMEACTIVISTS AND ACTIVISTSSTUDIED THE SCIENCE.

1990s were gradually lining up in opposition to painful, cruel research on animals. Scientists became activists and activists studied the science. Animal protection organizations, includ-ing the National Anti-Vivisection Society and the Doris Day Animal League, worked to advance the powerful idea that chimpanzees who were no longer needed in research could be retired to live the rest of their lives in peace. AAVS’s Tina Nel-son worked closely with her U.S. Representative, James Greenwood, who introduced and helped gain passage of The Chimpanzee Health Improve-ment, Maintenance, and Protection Act. It set in place the principles and standards of a sanctuary that would receive chimpanzees that the government agreed to retire. Chimp Haven became the National Chimpanzee Sanctuary “system,” and the first two residents, Rita and Teresa, arrived on April 4, 2005.

Meanwhile, the innovative sanctuary Save the Chimps was breaking ground, with generous support of the Arcus Founda-tion that allowed them to receive hundreds of chimpanzees from the defunct Coulston Foundation laboratory. In fact, all sanctuaries with chimps were learning and growing in sophisti-cation, implementing higher standards of care.

RESEARCH FALTERSAs some labs closed and divested themselves of active research on chimpanzees, other chimpanzees continued to be used in experiments. In 2009, The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) announced results of a nine-month undercover investigation at the New Iberia Research Center in Louisiana. The result was alarming documentation of severely distressed chimpanzees and monkeys who were treated very badly, and blatant violations of the NIH breeding moratorium.

It was against this backdrop that the public was informed in early 2010 that 202 chimpanzees, who had not been actively used in research for 10 years at the Alamagordo facility in New Mexico, were about to be transferred to a Texas facility where they could be used in experiments once again. AAVS and our members were among the many who saw this as a betrayal, be-cause so many of the chimps were elderly and had already suf-

fered in invasive research. New Mexico politicians made formal inquiries. NIH responded that the chimpanzees would not be moved until a study about the “necessity” of using chimpanzees

in research was complete.Which leads us back to the IOM committee,

and how it could have gone wrong. The original composition of the committee, including the chair, appeared to be leaning decidedly toward continuing the status quo, which seemed to be the intention of NIH. At the first committee meeting in May 2011, an NIH representative confirmed that the only reason NIH requested the IOM study was because of the congressional

inquiry, and that the agency was confident that chimpanzee use was necessary because the review system was robust. Although NIH wanted to limit the committee to addressing “scientific” questions, a few committee members objected, saying that any analysis must take ethical issues into account. A letter from Dr. Andrew Rowan of HSUS to the National Academies’ president objected to apparent conflicts of interest of three IOM com-mittee members, who resigned a short time later. Bioethics professor Jeffrey Kahn was appointed as the chair, and is cred-ited with negotiating the different perspectives.

WHAT DOES IT TAKE?In the last 20 years that I’ve been president of AAVS, here’s what I’ve learned: perseverance and persistence are key, because success rarely comes on the first try. Knowing and monitoring the issue is also vital, as is the ability to engage and work with others, although strategies can and should vary. It also takes financial resources, because full-time staff are critical to advanc-ing complicated programs.

Finally, there’s no doubt that we owe a debt to the scientists who apply their expertise and have the courage to speak out, providing an objective framework for compassionate change.

In the end, the main ingredient for success is people— people with varied skills, resources, experience, and knowledge. People who care and are undaunted. AV

Sue A. Leary, MS, is the President of AAVS.

In 2005, Rita and Teresa became the first NIH-owned chimpanzees to be retired to the Chimp Haven sanctuary in Louisiana.


A door opened. Moesha, a chimpanzee, peered out, squinting in the sunlight. After a moment’s hesitation,

she climbed through the doorway onto a concrete patio. Beyond the patio lay an unfamiliar swath of green that stretched into the distance. Moesha nervously pressed her foot into the grass, unsure about this ticklish material. Moesha took one step, then another. For the first time in her life, no cage barred her way. She found herself out in the open, climbing a large wooden platform. She gazed upon blue sky, trees, and her fel-low chimpanzees. Moesha was home.

Moesha is a resident of Save the Chimps (STC), the world’s largest sanctuary for chimpanzees rescued from laboratories, entertainment, and the pet trade. Cur-rently home to 256 chimpanzees, STC is perhaps best known for rescuing 266 chimpanzees from The Coulston Foun-dation (TCF), a defunct laboratory in Alamogordo, New Mexico. Over a period of nine years, scenes like Moesha’s played out over and over as the chimpanzees were relocated from their laboratory cages to new island homes in Fort Pierce, Florida.

TRANSFORMATIONMoesha’s story illustrates the amazing transformation that can be achieved by former laboratory chimpanzees, and the care and expertise required to help get them there.

Moesha was born August 14, 1997 at TCF, and was taken from her mother, Stella. When Moesha was a year old, TCF shipped her to a laboratory in Maryland where she was used in invasive research. Moesha lived indoors, isolated from other chimpanzees, for eight years. When she was four years old, she began screaming, pulling out her hair, and violently rub-bing the side of her head with her thumb. Moesha’s laboratory caretakers felt that she had screaming fits more often with the introduction of new objects or new people. Her behavioral profile stated, “She does not care for ‘change.’”

However, dramatic changes ultimately gave Moesha hope. When she arrived at STC’s New Mexico location in 2006, she was pale, thin, balding, and suffering from extreme anxiety. The laboratory had prescribed antidepressants for her, and we continued that treatment. Chimpanzees in biomedical research often suffer from psychological trauma that is exhibited in a

multitude of ways, ranging from unusual screaming to self-injurious behavior.

STC veterinarian Dr. Jocelyn Bezner consults with psychiatrists and other spe-cialists to provide each chimpanzee who exhibits signs of psychological trauma with individualized treatment. Psychi-atric issues are among a host of medical problems that can be faced by captive chimpanzees. Chimps may suffer from cardiac disease, kidney failure, and conta-gious illnesses such as colds and flu. Since chimpanzee medicine is so similar to hu-man medicine, our in-house pharmacy rivals that of any drugstore chain, and we use the same medical equipment found in hospitals and doctors’ offices.

Moesha received a robust diet of fresh produce, and she began to put on weight. She had an outdoor area for the first time in her life, and although it was not the island paradise she would eventually call home, it allowed her to enjoy sunshine and fresh air. Her skin darkened and her hair grew. She also enjoyed toys, blankets, and enrichment.

“Enrichment” refers to objects and tasks provided to captive beings to pro-vide mental stimulation and promote physical activity. One example at STC is

By Jen FeuersteinInside Sanctuaries

PH

OTO

S C

OU

RTE

SY O

F S

AV

E T

HE

CH

IMP

S, I

NC

.

Rescued chimpanzees at Save the Chimps enjoy life on

open-air islands.

AV MAGAZINE 15

ABOUT SANCTUARIES

Moesha has come a long way since she first arrived at Save the Chimps (left), and today (right) is

“healthy and confident.”

a “foraging board,” a piece of synthetic grass with peanut butter or oatmeal mashed into the turf. The chimps use their fingers to dig out the goodies—a task that can occupy them for hours.

FINDING FAMILYWhat Moesha needed most, however, was a chimpanzee family. We intro-duced her to another female, Alari, who became her best friend. Over time, Moe-sha found herself with 23 new friends. It didn’t happen overnight; chimps with no social experience often find chimpanzee society overwhelming. In Moesha’s case, it took nearly four years to integrate her into a family.

The caregivers get to know the chimps, and suggest who might get along with whom. We also want each family to have a balance of males and females across a wide range of ages. But once we open the door between the chimpanzees, it’s up to them. We typically introduce chimps one-on-one, rather than in a group. More of-ten than not, they make friends. Chimps who are incompatible are separated, and

other groups found for them. After all the chimps have met each other, we merge them into a single group.

Once Moesha’s family formed, they traveled in a custom trailer from New Mexico to Florida. The drive took about 40 hours, and each chimpanzee had a window seat. Once they arrived, they relaxed in their indoor housing for a day. Then came their big moment: the doors opened, and a three-acre island with hills, trees, and green grass lay before them on the other side.

Save the Chimps has 12 such islands on 150 acres. Each island is connected to secure indoor housing built to withstand hurricanes. Construction required three years and more than $14 million.

Like other chimps born at TCF, Moe-sha had never set foot on grass or soil. Many chimps with this background are apprehensive when they first go out onto the island. They stick to the patio (which is familiar concrete) and hang onto the mesh walls adjacent to the building. They may dip their toes in the grass or push on it to see if it gives way. Some chimps may

take weeks, months, or even years before summoning up the courage to walk into this foreign environment. But once they do, they relish their newly found freedom.

Because Moesha was a cautious chimp, we expected she would be one of the last out the door and onto her island. Imagine our tears of joy when she was the first. The chimp who didn’t “care for change” had surprised us all. She had shown re-markable courage, and paved the way for Alari and the rest of her chimpanzee fam-ily who soon followed in her footsteps. We could not have been prouder of her.

Today, Moesha is unrecognizable as the thin, pale, anxious chimp we met nine years ago. Thanks to the profes-sional, loving care she has received, she is healthy and confident. She loves her island home and her chimpanzee family. Moesha’s recovery is a testament to the power of sanctuary, the importance of friendship, and the incredible bravery of chimpanzees. AV

Jen Feuerstein is the Sanctuary Director at Save the Chimps.

Operating a chimpanzee sanctuary requires a serious commitment and a broad range of expertise in nonprofit management, chimpanzee care, veterinary medicine, and facilities maintenance. For example, Save the Chimps employs 60 people (and has more than 80 volunteers) and has an annual budget of $5.5 million to provide a secure, sustainable environment for the chimps. Chimpanzees have long lives—sometimes living to be 50 or older—so long-term planning for sustainability is critical.

In contrast, many facilities that claim to rescue and protect exotic animals do not live up to the ideals and practices followed by professional sanctuaries. These “pseudo-sanctuaries” are often open to the public, and may

breed, buy and sell animals, or train their residents for use in entertainment. Professional sanctuaries are nonprofit organizations that provide high-quality care in secure and enriched environments. True sanctuaries do not buy and sell animals or deliberately breed, are not open to the public for unescorted tours, and do not allow the public to have direct contact with the animals.

A true sanctuary will be accredited by the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries. Professional primate sanctuaries in the U.S. and Canada may also be members of the North American Primate Sanctuary Alliance. These organizations set high standards of excellence and provide independent oversight.


Chimps and PTSD:From Trauma to Recovery

Jeannie’s experience depicts what animals used in biomedical research and clinical trials experience. Her suite of wracking symptoms is

called complex post-traumatic stress disorder (C-PTSD). Psychiatrist Judith Herman created this diagnosis to describe the searing anguish of political prisoners and other human captives. The same sensibilities of brain and mind that we use to appreciate and experience the beauty of the world are shared by chimpanzees, monkeys, and other animals. These gifts are also what create vulnerability to stress and trauma.

In its most general definition, stress is the difference between the environment and our psychological and physiological expectations. For example, we experience stress when we step outside into the cold or have to take a driver’s test. Most of the time, stress can be mitigated. We

counter the stress by putting on a jacket or enjoying a warm cup of tea, and all is well. But when stress gets too intense or lasts too long, the effects become detrimental. This is what captive animals experience in the extreme.

The pacing tiger at the zoo, the feather-plucking caged parrot, Jeannie’s head-banging—all are efforts to deal with the unbearable. Trauma symptoms are the voice of a soul in despair. Eventually, the trauma overwhelms. The prisoner withers and dies, or like Jeannie, finds temporary escape in the safety of inner sanctuary inside her mind.

Traumatized individuals who make it to an actual sanctuary have a chance to live in dignity and regain a sense of self. Sanctuary is still captivity, but it offers key elements that bring survivors onto a path of health. Foundational to the “10 Principles of Being Sanctuary”

(aavs.org/10principles), concepts and methods grounded in the trauma recovery, is safety.

Above all, after years of constant threat and fear of death, a trauma survivor needs to feel physically and psychologically secure. An appropriate environment that is devoid of danger but which offers fresh food, safe and comfortable quarters, and an endless source of care and love provides the basis for transitioning from the terror of the past to a future of hope and well-being. This future includes the diligent dedication by sanctuary caregivers and the ability to exercise self-determination—the freedom of choice and to live life on one’s own terms. Recovery is not a goal, but a process. AV

G. A. Bradshaw, Ph.D., Ph.D., is the Founder and Director of The Kerulos Center in Jacksonville, Oregon, and author of Elephants on the Edge (Yale 2009).

At age three, a chimpanzee later named Jeannie was taken from her mother in Africa and shipped to a U.S. research institution where she lived in a 5x7x5-foot steel suspended cage, alone. She was subjected to scores of liver biopsies and was infected with HIV, hepatitis NANB and C, and rhinoviruses. She experienced more than 200 “knockdowns” (anesthesia via dart gun). After nine years, she suffered what the staff called “a nervous breakdown.” Psychotropic drugs were administered to stop her screaming, rocking, self-mutilation, head banging, seizures, and trance-like states. Euthanasia was proposed, but a sanctuary intervened and Jeannie was retired. There, the terror was gone, but the physical and mental scars

haunted her. She would often stare off into space with her hand floating in front of her face. She still performed a ritual she had created in the lab: When food arrived, she would take each piece of fruit and arrange it with the others in a circle around her, then sit back with a shadow of a smile.

By G.A. Bradshaw

PH

OTO

S C

OU

RTE

SY O

F TH

E S

AN

CTU

AR

IES

Jeannie endured both physical and psychological damage from

her time in research.

AV MAGAZINE 17

New Homes, New HappinessEach chimpanzee fortunate enough to find sanctuary has a special story to tell. Many are heartbreaking, but they illustrate how the love and dedication of caregivers help these smart, sensitive primates respond to kindness and live the remainder of their lives with greater peace and dignity—and often outright fun. Meet some special chimpanzees who have managed to survive and thrive:

BOBBY (Save the Chimps)Bobby was taken from his mother soon after his birth at the Coulston Foundation laboratory in 1983. His life in the lab included being anesthetized more than 250 times for liver and muscle biopsies, and he began a habit of biting his own arm. But after being sent to Save the Chimps in 2002, he made chimp friends, stopped injuring himself, and developed a love of shiny jewelry. Bobby’s favorite event at STC is Bananaversary, marking the date when he and 265 other chimps were rescued from Coulston. “Bananas are one of Bobby’s favorite foods, and he will grab as many as he can—one in each hand, one in each foot, and maybe even a banana or two stuffed in his mouth,” says STC. And “Bobby is beside himself anytime he gets fresh pineapple. He chomps away at the juicy fruit, food-grunting in excitement as he chews. It puts a big smile on all of our faces to see Bobby so happy.”

BINKY (Fauna Foundation)Binky was born in 1989 and used in experiments at the

Laboratory for Experimental Medicine and Surgery for Primates (LEMSIP) in New York from the age of three months to seven years. When the lab closed in 1997, Binky and other LEMSIP

chimps began new lives at the Fauna Foundation sanctuary in Canada. He found an adoptive mother in Annie, another

LEMSIP survivor. After she passed away in 2002, Binky formed loving bonds with both male and female chimps who served as both friends and role models. Fauna director Gloria Grow says

Binky “is even more fun-loving and rambunctious than ever.” His favorite pastimes are getting his feet tickled, playing chase, and watching sitcoms, cartoons, and (understandably) National

Geographic specials on TV.

FOXIE (Chimpanzee Sanctuary Northwest)Foxie started life in 1976 at the Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research (now called the Texas Biomedical Research Institute), but she was sold and shuffled around to a variety of laboratories for use in hepatitis vaccine trials. She was used for breeding until the 1990s, but all four of her babies (including twins) were taken away and used for experiments also. When Foxie first arrived at the sanctuary, she refused to touch the toys and objects given to the chimpanzees, but soon developed a love for troll and Dora the Explorer dolls, and still carries them around with her wherever she goes. “She’s put her fearful days behind her,” says the sanctuary, “and she is now playful and energetic, often spinning around and pirouetting like a much younger chimpanzee.”


Even after the U.S. moved toward a ban on breeding chim-panzees for testing in the 1990s, after the creation of chimp sanctuaries with highly professional standards, and even in light of growing public concern for the plight of chimps, many incen-tives remained to keep chimps locked in labs.

An August 2010 meeting in New Mexico illustrates this prob-lem, when an official from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) rationalized plans to move 202 chimpanzees from the Al-amogordo Primate Facility on Holloman Air Force Base—where no invasive research had occurred on the population of mostly elderly and chronically ill chimps in nearly a decade—to the Texas Biomedi-cal Research Institute for use in further potentially invasive testing.

Workers in Alamogordo were told by NIH Program Director Harold Watson that the chimps had to be moved be-cause, he said, “The NIH mission is to use animal resources to advance human health. We need to use the chimpan-zee resource in the best way possible and that requires that the animal be moved...The main issue here is that NIH has a research reserve colony of chimpanzees that we cannot use effectively.”

Today it is more broadly understood that there is no way for chimpanzees to be “used effectively.” But it took organized public outcry and considerable political will, combined with undeniable facts and leadership within NIH, to begin to break down the stubborn systems that prop up the callous business of keeping chimps in labs.

Intense pressure, including that from former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and U.S. Senators Tom Udall (D-NM), Tom Harkin (D-IA), and Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), led NIH to request an Institute of Medicine (IOM) study on

Great apes were brought to a U.S. lab in 1923 in the name of progress. Years later, entrenched federal policies were combined with the drive by private labs to sustain and grow their revenue so that approximately 1,500 chimpanzees were bred, warehoused, and tested on in laboratories across the country, supported with taxpayer dollars.

What Now forChimpanzees in Labs?By Laura Bonar

ALREADY THE RETIREMENT OF MORE THAN 110 CHIMPS

FROM THE NEW IBERIA RESEARCH CENTER TO CHIMP HAVEN HAS BEEN EVIDENCE OF MEANINGFUL CHANGE.

PH

OTO

S C

OU

RTE

SY O

F C

HIM

P H

AV

EN

(LE

FT)

AN

D T

HE

RIC

HA

RD

SO

N C

EN

TER

FO

R G

LOB

AL

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

(RIG

HT)

whether invasive testing on chimpanzees is necessary for research to advance human health. The compelling IOM finding in 2011 that most research on chimps is unnecessary helped create a cascade of changes. Most notably, the federal government has not funded any new invasive testing protocols using chimpan-zees, and has formally ended the breeding of chimps for use in research. Also, NIH has pledged to retire hundreds more chim-panzees to sanctuaries.

Already the retirement of more than 110 chimps from the New Iberia Research Center to Chimp Haven has been evidence

of meaningful change. Yet advocates must remain vigilant by monitoring NIH’s actions and keeping pressure on Congress to demand more. Congress can and should be persuaded to help NIH retire all chimps to sanctuary, thereby realizing cost savings and re-sponding to public support for doing the right thing.

This, especially when combined with the recent decision by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to protect captive

chimpanzees under the Endangered Species Act, will help end the cruel and insidious trade for chimpanzees in the U.S.

Finally, federal policies are catching up with the understand-ing that chimpanzees must be protected, not exploited. The arc of justice is starting to bend in the chimps’ favor.

What chimpanzees in labs most need and deserve now is life-long sanctuary care–a home where their needs are considered first, and where survivors can have a chance to heal.

THE PATH AHEADNIH Director Dr. Francis Collins has pledged to retire another approximately 300 chimps considered owned by the federal

AV MAGAZINE 19

ABOVE: Chimp Haven is currently home to Mason

and his mother, Tosha. The sanctuary is expanding to be able to take in more rescued

chimpanzees. RIGHT: Former New Mexico Governor Bill

Richardson played an important role in retiring chimpanzees.

government. Currently, accredited U.S. chimpanzee sanctuaries provide compassionate, comprehensive care to approximately 500 chimpanzees. The logistical challenges of moving hundreds more chimps to sanctuary as quickly and responsibly as possible will take time. How much time de-pends in part on the resources (especially funding) available for this historic opportunity to realize wholesale change.

Yet there’s another barrier keeping chimps in labs.In the wake of the IOM study, the NIH adopted arduous cri-

teria for researchers wanting to use chimps in the future and has been quoted as saying it can’t retire more chimps to sanctuary until it understands more about which chimps might be needed for future research that fits the new criteria. This is the “group of 50” that NIH has planned to hold back from sanctuary and re-evaluate every three to five years.

But why should chimps, especially those whom we know have been used extensively in research and who bear significant physi-cal and psychological scars, have to wait and even die in labs when there is space for them in sanctuary?

This question is painfully relevant for Rosie and Fred, two of approximately 20 chimps considered owned by NIH and cur-rently held at the Texas Biomedical Research Institute. Rosie and Fred were part of the group moved by NIH in 2010 when the agency first announced plans to ship all New Mexico chimps to Texas for further research. Rosie and Fred’s group was quietly

moved as the announcement was made, before public outcry and political will changed so much for chimps. Today, there’s still no justification for keeping these indi-viduals in the lab, preventing their chance at peace and dignity in sanctuary. Rosie, Fred, and their colleagues should be retired, as soon as possible (please visit www.RetireTheChimps.org to send a message today to support their retirement).

FAITH AND MEANINGFUL ACTIONAlready, the dedication and hard work of so many in-dividuals and organizations has resulted in tremendous change for hundreds of chimpanzees in sanctuaries today. Building further political momentum to continue do-ing the right thing for chimps, evaluating facilities to determine their suitability as sanctuaries, raising dollars to expand and sustain sanctuaries–these actions and more are needed to unlock the doors for all chimps to find safe havens.

High-quality accredited sanctuaries–especially organi-zations like Chimp Haven, Inc., which is currently com-pleting another phase of construction–deserve ongoing support. Further, the effective work of many organiza-tions already helping to sustain sanctuaries–such as the American Anti-Vivisection Society, whose TLC Fund is

helping to pay for the sanctuary care of a group of seven young chimps for the rest of their lives—deserve recognition for identifying and working to implement a tan-gible path forward.

Animal Protection of New Mex-ico and The Humane Society of the United States have also created a fund to help more chimpanzees attain sanctuary. The Chimpanzee Sanctuary Fund, housed at the

New Mexico Community Foundation, was established to benefit accredited U.S. chimpanzee sanctuaries. More money raised will help more chimps have a chance for a sanctuary home.

Too much is at stake to spend time in cynicism or despair about the challenges ahead. Let compassion and optimism lead to effective actions. It’s worth repeating that we are witnessing the beginning of the end when chimps in labs need sanctuary—a milestone that thousands of individuals achieved by working together.

Celebrate these changes with thoughtful persistence to help fix what’s been broken for generations. Every chimp who sees sanc-tuary, and every dollar not wasted on cruel, ineffective breeding and testing of chimps in the lab, is a sweet success and propels us to more victories that will benefit all species. AV

Laura Bonar is Program Director for Animal Protection of New Mexico. Contributions to its sanctuary fund can be made at www.chimpstosanctuary.org.


AAVS: How did you arrive at your current work on behalf of animals?PAUL: I started out with a deep fascination with animals, both human and nonhuman. When I went to study this, I had several degrees in the study of religion. The religious traditions were talked about as if some were considered overall harmful, and others considered overall positive. The conclusion I drew was that each tradition has a very heavy mix of both good and bad. I’m currently working in Animal Studies, which is a much more integrated approach, trying to get all of these different academic fields to talk to each other because I think that’s where a lot of the advancement can happen.

How did you get involved with the Great Ape Project?I was at Oxford studying and happened to have some extra time. The great love of my life has been cetaceans, and I thought if animals who are closer to us–the chimpanzees, and gorillas and orangutans and bonobos–can get protection, it’s surely going to help create a bridge and open a door for some other animals.

Do you recall specifics of how chimpanzees were used back then? There were many chimps still used in biomedical research in some of the vicious, tough, domination ways. It was to me so lamentable that we would do that sort of thing. I consider experimenting on chimps to be experimenting in immoral ways in the same way it would be to use humans without their consent.

How does concern for animals translate into establishing moral and legal rights for them? There’s this wonderfully alive debate in the United States over what is the leading edge of creating better, deeper, and more morally inspired protections for these rich individuals outside of our own species. In other parts of the world, legal systems are a kind of secondary aspect of society. It’s true we can have laws on the books that seem to protect, but political realities can override them.

My personal sense is that the real traction is in social ethics, the ability of a whole people to begin to migrate its understanding toward more morally based protections. It is an interesting thing to use the law and the social consensus change hand in hand. Trying to get all of that stuff to work together has ever been the challenge.

What would you say is the role of ethics in science? I think science is powerful, but it’s only one of the literacies or competencies someone needs when they’re studying our relationship with other living beings. There are plenty of times science has been used to buttress prejudice and privilege over other humans, and so the common refrain that science is value-free is a beautiful thing to work toward, but in practice, many values are evident. And science’s failure to identify those and to remedy that is really a serious one.

How do you counter the pushback that you get from those in the scientific community who say utilitarianism trumps ethics? Utilitarianism is a really important concept in ethics that all of us use every day—

Paul Waldau’s background in law, religion, and

public policy, along with his experience as Vice President of the Great

Ape Project, bring a multidisciplinary approach to bioethics. We asked him

about his perspective on human relationships with

chimpanzees and what the future might hold.

INTERVIEW

Director of Anthrozoology, Canisius CollegePaul Waldau

PH

OTO

S (

LEFT

) C

OU

RTE

SY O

F PA

UL

WA

LDA

U, (

RIG

HT)

ISTO

CK

.CO

M/M

ICR

OG

EN

AV MAGAZINE 21

I CONSIDER EXPERIMENTING ON CHIMPS TO BE EXPERIMENTING IN IMMORAL WAYS

IN THE SAME WAY IT WOULD BE TO USE HUMANS WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT.

try to do the most good for the most people. But humans continue to do utilitarian calculus from a human point of view, and lo and behold, human interests are more important! There’s plenty of the sort of standard thinking in public policy circles, cost-benefit analysis, that is so morally one-dimensional as to be bankrupt.

What do you think of the changes in attitudes and practices involving chimpanzees over the years?Chimpanzees are important because they open a door. You just have to be around them to find that these are complex individuals [with] unbelievably individual personalities, but also capable of suffering.

They are also representative of the fact that we slipped into a kind of speciesist mentality I call human exceptionalism: [The idea that] humans alone matter, we get the privileges, and the fact that we harm other complicated beings is not important because we run a cost-benefit analysis, and we’re so important and they don’t count.

All these groups working together [to help] chimpanzees has opened us up greatly, to see that there are other animals out there that we should protect even if it doesn’t give us a cost-benefit advantage.

Would you say that human beings have a moral imperative to protect chimpanzees?I’d say yes. C. S. Lewis, the evangelical icon, said [in effect], “We’re going to be in a tough place if some angels come down to earth and they’re more powerful than we are, because we’re not going to be able to say to the angels, ‘You’re more powerful than we are, but we count’ because we never use that reasoning toward the nonhuman animals.”

It’s a fairly simple straightforward proposition that merely because you’re stronger doesn’t mean you get privilege over other people.

When society fears crises like Ebola, there is hesitation to say we won’t ever use chimpanzees again. But do you think the ethical concern is more prominent now?Absolutely, yes, it’s spreading in that

complex way that social consensus morphs. I don’t think there’s any question but that there have been major changes. It turns out that chimpanzees, because they’re whole and complex and evolutionarily distant, don’t make good models. I have the sense that politically what will happen is that it will just become unacceptable for us to do that.

Do you foresee the same understanding of chimpanzees “trickling down” to other primates who are still used?I actually think what trickles down is the questioning of using whole animals as the model instead of in vitro work or certain kinds of heavy data crunching over lots of studies. We still use so many mice in such harsh ways, who just get killed because they’re sentinels. My hope is that we are past a certain tipping point on [chimpanzees] being brought back in as a primary research animal, and hopefully we get to the point where they can never be brought back.

How can the public’s concern translate into action?I have a deep hope in the value of well-run education, which is one of the reasons that at Canisius, I insist on

critical thinking skills, interdisciplinary approaches, and cross-cultural analyses, and insist on the place of ethics in our lives and in the classroom, and the fact that you’ve got to be scientifically literate if you want to talk about this stuff.

I still think living beings matter. And I want the education to get open and frank about that. I just think that’s the most important thing. AV

The most recent book by Paul Waldau, Ph.D., is Animal Studies: An Introduction (Oxford University Press, 2013). For more information and resources related to anthrozoology, visit www.paulwaldau.com.


By Natalie Prosin

Seeking Legal Rights for ChimpanzeesThe Nonhuman Rights Project [NhRP] goes to court to challenge the legal wall that separates all humans from all nonhuman animals. This strategy was born out of years of theorizing how to change the way that nonhuman animals are viewed under our legal system. Attorney Steven M. Wise, Founder and President of the NhRP, outlined the legal arguments and strategies in his groundbreaking book, Rattling the Cage: Towards Legal Rights for Animals (1999), followed by Drawing the Line: Science and the Case for Animal Rights (2002). The issue of “legal personhood” has been featured in such diverse media as The New York Times Magazine and “The Colbert Report.”

PH

OTO

S C

OU

RTE

SY O

F A

DA

M N

AD

EL/

PO

LAR

IS (

LEFT

), A

ND

PE

NN

EB

AK

ER

HE

GE

DU

S F

ILM

S, I

NC

., 2

01

5 (

RIG

HT)

Like every other nonhuman animal on earth, chimpanzees are considered merely property, subject to being owned and exploited by humans. They have no legal rights and are therefore invisible to the civil law system. The Nonhuman Rights Project is working to change this unjust situation through a long-term strategic

litigation campaign to achieve actual legal rights for some of the most cognitively com-plex animals on earth: great apes, elephants, and cetaceans.

LEGAL PERSONHOODWe argue that certain nonhuman animals should no longer be classified as property, but instead be designated as legal persons. Legal personhood means having the capacity to possess at least one legal right; being human isn’t a requirement. There are already different types of nonhuman entities who have been granted legal personhood status around the world. In the U.S., corporations are considered legal persons with certain rights, such as the right to sue or be sued. In India, the sacred text of Sikhism was granted legal personhood, which permits it to own and possess property. Also in India, a Hindu Idol was given the right to sue by way of a third party. And in 2012 in New Zealand, a river was designated a legal person that owns its riverbed.

THE FIRST LAWSUITS After five years of rigorous research and analysis of more than 60 different legal issues across all 50 states, the NhRP chose to begin our campaign in New York because, from a legal perspective, it is among the best states in the country for the kind of lawsuit we filed. We began our pursuit of personhood for certain nonhuman animals by selecting chimpanzees as our first plaintiffs. We canvassed the state to find as many captive chimpanzees as we could; as of 2013, we had found seven.

Our first petitioner is Tommy, who lives caged in solitary confinement in a warehouse on a used trailer lot. Our second petitioner is Kiko, who is being kept as a pet in a private

AV MAGAZINE 23

home. Our final two petitioners are Hercules and Leo, both of whom are being used in locomotion research at the State University of New York at Stony Brook. The other three chimpanzees died before we had a chance to file our lawsuits.

In December 2013, we filed lawsuits on behalf of Tommy, Kiko, Hercules, and Leo. Instead of relying on statutory or federal law to make our legal arguments, we are using the common law, which is made by judges and developed over time and judicial precedent. It is deliberately flexible in order to adapt as morality changes and new scientific facts are discovered. We are petitioning the courts using the writ of habeas corpus (Latin for “produce the body”). It remedies illegal restraints, public or private, wherever and however they may occur. A third party may file this petition on behalf of an individual who is being held captive in order to challenge the legality of the detention.

We are using these writs to argue that our chimpanzee petitioners are being detained illegally because, as we assert, they are not property but rather legal persons who have the right to bodily liberty. We aren’t arguing that the chimps’

“owners” are violating animal welfare laws. Instead, we argue that “owners” are depriving these self-aware animals of their ability to exercise their autonomy, and that the court must recognize this right and transfer the chimps to a sanctuary where their autonomy will be respected.

With the support of some of the world’s most well-respected primatologists, we submitted more than 100 pages of affidavits demonstrating that chimpanzees possess the complex cognitive abilities sufficient for common-law personhood and the

In New York, attorney Steven Wise argued in court (left) on behalf of a chimpanzee named Tommy (right), asking a judge to grant him legal personhood status and free him from solitary confinement.

common-law right to bodily liberty, as a matter of liberty, equality, or both.

PROGRESS OF CASESAt the lower court level, the judges denied our petitions in each of the three cases. Since ours are novel claims, this wasn’t unexpected; there is no precedent on which a lower court can rely, and expanding the common law is typically left up to the higher courts. However, we received encouragement and support from two of the three judges, acknowledging the strength of our arguments. We immediately filed appeals to the intermediate appellate courts.

In Tommy’s case, an intermediate appellate court granted us an oral hearing where five judges were actively engaged, asking questions that went to the heart of the case. Eight weeks later, the Court concluded that Tommy was not a “person” entitled to the rights afforded by habeas corpus. The Court reasoned that since a chimpanzee had never sought a writ of habeas corpus before, Tommy was not entitled to it now. But just because habeas corpus has never been demanded on behalf of a chimpanzee is not a reason for denying it now. Additionally, the Court erroneously claimed that in order for Tommy to have a legal right, he must be able to bear duties and responsibilities. This contradicts numerous previous decisions by New York’s highest court. We are currently pursuing an appeal to the Court of Appeals.

In Kiko’s case, an intermediate appellate court granted us an oral hearing. That Court concluded that a petitioner was not allowed to use

habeas corpus to change “the conditions of confinement rather than the confinement itself.” However, this contradicts many decisions by New York courts over the last 200 years, which is why we are pursuing an appeal.

Finally, in Hercules and Leo’s case, on April 20, New York County Supreme Court Justice Barbara Jaffe issued an order to show cause under New York’s habeas corpus statute on their behalf. On July 30, she issued a decision to deny habeus corpus relief to Hercules and Leo because “for now” she feels bound by the intermediate appellate court’s decision in Tommy’s case. The NhRP is currently appealing the decision.

WHAT’S NEXTThe Nonhuman Rights Project will continue litigating these three cases. Meanwhile, we are preparing another lawsuit that we will file by the end of the year on behalf of one or more captive elephants.

The classification of nonhuman animals as property is steeped in legal history and tradition, and changing how these individuals are viewed under the law is going to take time. But we believe our chimpanzee petitioners will one day no longer have to rely on the balancing of human interests in order not to be experimented on, kept as pets, or used for human entertainment. AV

Natalie Prosin is the Executive Director of the Nonhuman Rights Project. She holds a master’s degree in Public Policy from Brown University and a J.D. from Boston College Law School. For more information, please visit www.nonhumanrights.org.


AAVS Provides for Their CareAn important part of AAVS’s work is supporting sanctuaries that care for animals retired from research and testing. Meeting the special needs of these animals is no easy task, particularly for retired chimpanzees who may have serious medical and/or psychological issues. Creating living spaces suitable for such long-lived, intelligent animals takes resources, time, dedication, ingenuity, and teamwork. AAVS is proud to support the following sanctuaries through our Sanctuary Fund, and we greatly appreciate their important work!

CHIMP HAVENChimp Haven lies on 200 acres of pristine forest donated by the citizens of Caddo Parish, Louisiana. The chimpanzees’ environments include five-acre wooded habitats that accommodate large social groups, and the surrounding natural groundcover, trees, and other climbing structures help stimulate natural chimpanzee behavior such as nesting and foraging. In September 2002, Chimp Haven was selected to operate the National Chimpanzee Sanctuary System, which was established by the CHIMP Act. The law assures sanctuary and lifetime care for chimpanzees retired from government-supported research, and is partially funded by the National Institutes of Health as well as private donations.

Enrichment at Chimp Haven includes manmade termite mounds that stimulate natural behaviors, such as using sticks as tools to fish out treats like applesauce or honey.

Onyx and Riley, two of the AAVS-supported chimps, at Chimp Haven.

TOTAL LIFETIME CARE (TLC) FOR CHIMPS

In 2013, AAVS launched Total Lifetime Care (TLC) for Chimps, pledging to fund the lifetime care of seven baby chimpanzees who, along with their mothers, were released from a lab. The seed money for TLC for Chimps was a generous estate gift from loyal AAVS Life Member Deloris Ahrens. Unlike generations of babies born in research labs, little girls Arden, Diane, Onyx, and Quilla and boys Jimmy, Mason, and Riley have the opportunity to grow up under the care of their mothers in the natu-ralistic setting of Chimp Haven.

PH

OTO

S C

OU

RTE

SY O

F TH

E S

AN

CTU

AR

IES

AV MAGAZINE 25

CENTER FOR GREAT APESLocated in central Florida, the Center for Great Apes is home for 30 chimpanzees and 15 orangutans. The 100-acre sanctuary is set in a tropical wooded habitat and has 12 domed enclosures, each three stories high and filled with swinging vines, climbing structures, toys, and tubs. Although most of the apes are either former pets or were used in the entertainment industry, several have ties to research.

A mile-long elevated chute system that weaves through the treetops connects the outdoor enclosures and night houses, giving animals a chance to check out other areas of the sanctuary.

CHIMPANZEE SANCTUARY NORTHWESTIn June 2008, seven chimpanzees traveled from a Pennsylvania lab to

Cle Elum, Washington, and settled into their new home at Chimpanzee Sanctuary Northwest, 90 miles east of Seattle. Surrounded by the Cascade

Mountains, six female chimps—Annie, Foxie, Jamie, Jody, Missy, and Negra—and Burrito, the only male, have access to a two-acre outdoor

habitat called Young’s Hill. In addition to a greenhouse play area, indoor accommodations include a two-story, 18,000-cubic-foot chimphouse that

has climbing structures, platforms, and several window seats.A new 16-foot-high climbing structure, complete with covered platforms, ladders,

fire hose tight walks, and shaky bridges, gives the chimps more opportunity to engage in natural chimp behavior.

SAVE THE CHIMPSLocated in Fort Pierce, Florida, Save the Chimps is made up of 12 separate,

three-acre islands where the chimpanzees live in groups of up to 26 members. Its first residents arrived in 1999 after the sanctuary sued the U.S. Air Force to gain

permanent custody of 21 chimps, many of whom were once part of the space program and otherwise destined to be relocated to another lab. A few years later, the

owner of a notorious New Mexico lab contacted Save the Chimps and offered to sell the laboratory land and buildings and donate its 266 chimpanzees. Knowing the

years of suffering these animals had already endured, and the possibility that if the sanctuary didn’t act, another lab might, Save the Chimps (with the help of a number of generous grants) purchased the facility. In a matter of months, the sanctuary grew

from 21 animals to more than 280 chimpanzees!It’s important to provide chimpanzees a variety of enrichment activities, and painting is just one way.

Many chimps love it, including Connor, who painted this piece.

PRIMARILY PRIMATESEstablished in 1978, Primarily Primates is a 78-acre sanctuary near San Antonio, Texas, and is home to nearly 500 animals, including 43 chimpanzees. Several of the chimps residing there came from biomedical research facilities and some were used by the Air Force in space flight training and research. In 1996, the Buckshire Corporation, a facility located just miles from the AAVS office, released 12 chimpanzees to Primarily Primates, marking one of the first times chimps were permanently retired from research and placed in a sanctuary environment. Primarily Primates launched a pilot program to socialize the Buckshire 12, who had each lived in isolation for 10-20 years. Although many believed that it would be impossible to establish social groups with solitary animals (particularly those born in captivity), Primarily Primates was able to help them form two families.Wanda, one of the Buckshire 12, expressing excitement using a vocalization called a “pant-hoot.” AAVS provided funding for the construction of two large enclosures for the Buckshire chimpanzees.


FOR SOME FORTUNATE CHIMPANZEES, monkeys, and other animals who are allowed to “retire” from their dire existence as test subjects, there are animal sanctuaries throughout the U.S. that provide shelter, food, medical care—and love. Caring for multiple animals—often for decades—represents an enormous investment. AAVS created the Tina Nelson Sanctuary Fund to provide our members with a means to directly support carefully screened sanctuaries that conduct exceptional work. By making a contribution to the Sanctuary Fund, you can give a second chance to animals who have suffered, and help them recover and live in peace.

Who was Tina Nelson? Tina was AAVS’s Executive Director for 10 years before her untimely death from cancer in 2005. Tina was very passionate about rescuing chimpanzees and other primates from grave situations and was a tireless advocate for the CHIMP Act of 2000. Tina was a constituent of Jim Greenwood, the highly regarded member of Congress who sponsored and worked hard to achieve passage of the Act. After Tina died, Representative Greenwood visited her young children and told them that he credited Tina with making it happen. Even opponents of AAVS’s philosophy had fondness for Tina, who had a friendly way of connecting with people and persuading them to do the right thing. With your generosity, it is our hope that her legacy of caring will continue to benefit animals.

You may designate a gift to the Sanctuary Fund using the enclosed envelope, or learn more and donate online at www.aavs.org/SanctuaryFund. AAVS operates the fund at no cost; 100 percent of your gift will go directly to the sanctuaries.

For information on planned giving, leadership gifts, recurring gifts, or other support, contact Chris Derer, Director of Development & Member Services, at 800-SAY-AAVS or [email protected]. When including AAVS in your estate plans or sending a donation, please use our legal title and office address: American Anti-Vivisection Society, 801 Old York Road, Suite 204, Jenkintown, PA 19046-1611. EIN: 23-0341990. AAVS is a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) organization to which contributions are 100 percent tax-deductible under federal and state law.

GivingSUPPORT THE AAVS MISSION

TRIBUTESHONORING LOVED ONES

In loving memory of my MyMissKitty#1. When life became a burden here, your love meant everything. I’m sorry you became ill and I had to let you go. And now, without your love, what do I do with the burden of your loss? I’ll remember you fondly, ’til I draw my last breath.Raymond NashWestminster, MD

In memory of William Cerny, Jr., who died from bladder cancer on February 27, 2014. I love you.Katherine CernyDeer Park, NY

In memory of Susan Thrope. To a dear and beloved friend. You are sadly missed.

Jane MullenArlington, VA

In memory of Ian Dylan Williams.Judi WilliamsBailey, CO

In memory of Jim Clark.Peggy EldonElverson, PA

In memory of John Cowie and Thelma King. They taught me about compassion for animals before I could read the words. I am forever grateful.Denise CowiePhiladelphia, PA

In memory of Scout and Sir Edmund. I miss you every day. See you at the Rainbow Bridge, my loves!Michelle AlvarezNew York, NY

In loving memory of my very special friend, Pat Berge, for her lifelong commitment, compassion, and amazing love for all animals. I miss you!Sally McCarthySt. Louis, MO

In memory of Java.Matthew MoultonWaukesha, WITina Nelson

The Tina Nelson Sanctuary Fund

Negra resides at Chimpanzee Sanctuary Northwest, a beneficiary of the Tina Nelson Sanctuary Fund.

PH

OTO

, AB

OV

E L

EFT

, C

OU

RTE

SY O

F C

SN

W

AV MAGAZINE 27

In memory of all my loved pets. You have taught me the true meaning of companionship, and for that, I am most grateful.Randi HildenWichita Falls, TX

In memory of Daniel and Evelyn Sherman.Renee Sherman StraussWest Chester, PA

In memory of Hana Proska (mutti). You loved your human and animal children, and we love you!Ilona ProskaBerwyn, IL

In memory of my beagles, Spirky and Lil’ Sis.Marcia BennettFletcher, NC

In memory of Monica Meyer.Frederick MeyerRemsenburg, NY

In memory of Princess, Frisky, Daisy, Buddy, and Lucky. You were my best friends and I love and miss all of you.Sandy KnudsenSunrise, FL

In memory of Lillian Stevens. Love, Abby and Molly.Paula StevensMerrillville, IN

In memory of our beloved kids, Sparky, Sissy, and Scout.Rose and Fred KellerHouston, TX

In memory of all the innocent victims of “medical science.”Mary RayesLa Jolla, CA

In memory of my mother, Mercedes M. Chop.Carole ChopPalmdale, CA

In memory of Charcoal, who graced our lives for 23 years. A cat who taught us that love is patient. We miss him.Katherine TaylorOrono, ME

In memory of Susan, Romona, and Jeanie. I still miss you my sweet girls, which is to your credit. Love, Mommy.Meredith RooneyRiverside, RI

In memory of our wonderful orange cat, Gus. We surely do miss him.Nina and Steven WaiteIsland Park, ID

In memory of Silki and Siegfried, two loved Dachshunds who both knew suffering.Jacqueline DunnVista, CA

In memory of our beloved long-lived terrier, Miss Mu’u, and the extraordinary 12-year-old parakeet, Mr. Blue, who kept each other company and died seven weeks apart. It was a very sad time for us.Virginia DominguezChampaign, IL

In memory of Annabel and Oliver, our cat companions for many years until cancer took Annabel and old age (19 years) took Oliver.Mary FenskeColumbus, IN

In memory of Roswell.Phran GinsbergLloyd Harbor, NY

In memory of Katrina Louise, a little gift from the hurricane, who was the light of my life.Sandra BossEncinitas, CA

In memory of Guy. I’ll meet you over the Rainbow Bridge. I miss you. Love, Mom.Nancy ZadekGlencoe, IL

In memory of Duffy.Aime ChapdelaineSilver Spring, MD

In memory of Milton Tavlin.Steven TavlinNew York, NY

In memory of Satie Boo, my baby. Missed more than anyone knows.Ruth McNeillPlymouth, MA

In memory of Lucky LuLu Belle.James SpatesAustin, TX

In memory of Kiera—I love you and miss you. You were only one year old when you were taken from me. I pray you did not suffer.Raylene SwinockCalument City, IL

In memory of Corrie. A more loyal and beautiful corgi I have yet to meet.Nancy Gail MarquezMillbrae, CA

In memory of Blaze and Kitty, my very best friends. No pain anymore. I love you forever. Mama Phyllis. Phyllis HydeEagle, AK

In memory of Bernie cats: one, two, and three. Remembering you all with love—seems like only yesterday. Richard ZapadkaHoliday, FL

In memory of Grawlee. He knew how to love.Maria Teresa MeyerPotomac, MD

In memory of my German Shepherd, Honey, who was the light of my life for 12 years.Dan ShawHollywood, FL

In memory of my beloved mom, Martha R. Leckar, who passed away on January 1, 2015. I miss you very much and love you with my heart forever. You were very devoted to me all my life.Jenece LeckarCasselberry, FL

In memory of Robert C. Scott.Maria ScottNew Iberia, LA

In memory of Kay Warren.Kathryn BarringhamNorth Haven, CT

In memory of my mother, Ruth Hodkinson. She showed me how to love all animals.Dorothy HoltzmanExton, PA

You can honor or memorialize a companion animal or animal lover by making a donation in his or her name. Gifts of any amount are greatly appreciated. A tribute accompanied by a gift of $50 or more will be published in the AV Magazine. At your request, we will also notify the family of the individual you have remembered.


WATCHING CHIMPANZEES AND OTHER PRIMATES IS much like looking in a mirror. We humans are fascinated by their appearance and behavior because it is so much like our own, yet still exotic and mysterious.

Unfortunately, this fascination with our primate cousins has resulted in their being used for entertainment since ancient times, when they were captured for exotic menageries or taught to perform tricks for paying patrons. Watching primates in zoos, circuses,

movies, or shows can be momentarily appealing, but it becomes readily apparent that the same qualities we share with them—intelligence, emotions, social bonds—also should preclude their exploitation.

Many of us grew up watching TV shows and movies featuring animal “actors.” There was Tarzan’s chimp, Cheeta, Ronald Reagan’s chimp, Bonzo, Clint Eastwood’s orangutan, Clyde, the chimpanzees of Lancelot Link, Secret Chimp and Project X, and the capuchin monkeys on Friends and in The Hangover. Trained chimpanzees have been used in Las Vegas shows and traveling acts for decades.

But what we audiences didn’t know was that all of those monkeys and apes were taken from their natural families and were raised by humans in conditions that were neither appropriate nor humane. And when those usually young apes got just a few years older, they became useless as performers and were either dumped in bad zoos or sold to research labs; the luckier ones made it to a sanctuary but often with physical and emotional scars.

And yet, we might be at a turning point. Remember a few years ago when CareerBuilder got a lot of grief for using chimpanzees in its Super Bowl ads? It put a fresh spotlight on the use of primates in entertainment. And just recently the world marveled at the technology used to make the last two Planet of the Apes movies, with human actors’ movements transformed into sophisticated CGI apes.

It came as a momentous surprise earlier this year when Feld Entertainment announced that it will retire elephants

from its Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus by 2018. The company acknowledged the public’s “mood shift” regarding elephants being forced to perform.

Likewise, more people are becoming aware of how primates are trained and exploited, and are finding animal “performers” increasingly unacceptable. Perhaps with enough concerted effort, the use of monkeys and apes in entertainment will itself become extinct, so we may look at our fellow primates not as caricatured imitations of ourselves, but as the dignified, unique individuals they have always been.

Members’ Corner

PH

OTO

S C

OU

RTE

SY O

F A

LBE

RT

D. C

OC

HR

AN

, TH

E S

UN

PA

PE

RS

- U

SE

D W

ITH

PE

RM

ISS

ION

(LE

FT)

AN

D C

HIM

P H

AV

EN

(R

IGH

T A

ND

BA

CK

CO

VE

R)

A chimpanzee named Bonzo appeared with Ronald Reagan in a movie called Bedtime for Bonzo in 1951. He was later sold to a circus and died in Pennsylvania in 1969.

Chris DererDirector of Development & Member Services

Arden, Diane, Jimmy, Mason, Onyx, Quilla, and Riley were born in a research lab. But today their futures are bright because AAVS is committed to provide for their Total Lifetime Care. Thanks to our members who have generously supported our TLC for Chimps campaign, these babies are safe, living with their moms at Chimp Haven, the National Chimpanzee Sanctuary.

Join our efforts to secure their future.www.aavs.org/supportTLC

For seven chimps born in captivity,there’s life after the lab.

To send a donation via mail, please use the enclosed self-addressed envelope and write TLC on the form. Thank you!

The American Anti-Vivisection Society801 Old York Road, Suite 204Jenkintown, PA 19046-1611 U.S.A.

Non-Profit Org.U.S. PostagePAIDHamburg, PAPermit No. 102

Carole Noon, PhDFounder of Save the Chimps

“Chimpanzees: They are amazing people.”

Candy and her son, Jimmy, at Chimp Haven in Shreveport, LA

av magazine issue 1-2 2015

Documents