Lab rats and mice make great pets according to Dr Jodi Salinsky, Animal Welfare Officer and Head Veterinarian at the University of Auckland. She lists off their perks: “hilarious”, “easy to train”, “social”, “snuggle bunnies” and “not prone to biting”.
The rats in question are not standard pets, but rather animals bred for research, and either alive and healthy after experiments or surplus to requirements.
As part of a new rat rehoming initiative, the University of Auckland is teaming up with the New Zealand Anti-Vivisection Society (NZAVS) to find homes for 50 animals every month.
It’s a surprising collaboration, given the NZAVS is dedicated to ending animal experimentation, and the university engages in such research.
Tara Jackson, Executive Director of NZAVS, sees the widespread failure to take responsibility for rehoming as symbolic of government and research sector attitudes towards the animals in research.
“Rats are one of the main animals that get killed every year for science, and a lot of them are bred, never used and killed…healthy, happy rats that are just discarded,” she says.
The rehoming program vets adoptees, provides welcome packs and ferries the animals to their new homes, leveraging the networks and expertise of the two organisations.
“We couldn’t do any of that if the university didn’t open their doors,” Jackson says.
Globally, at least 120 million mice and rats are routinely bred for research, most of which are humanely killed. Initiatives to rehome smaller research animals are rare: it’s more costly than humane killing, lacks government funding and achieves a minute share of overall numbers.
Across the globe, unlikely alliances are forming in efforts to rehome these animals. Those involved say institutions bear an ethical responsibility for all the animals involved in research, even the small ones.
In Australia, the Code governing animal research says “opportunities to rehome animals should be considered wherever possible”. Yet financial support is limited. The notable exception being NSW, which announced $2.5 million in rehoming grants in 2023.
It’s challenging to gain an overall picture of the number of animals bred, used, killed or rehomed in any given year, given the lack of national data. In NSW, data on the fate of laboratory animals suggests 97% are euthanised, 2.7% reused and 0.005% rehomed.
In New Zealand, Carolyn Guy, Director Animal Health and Welfare at the Ministry for Primary Industries says: “In its Good Practice Guide for the use of animals in research, testing and teaching, the National Animal Ethics Advisory Committee recommends rehoming as the preferred outcome for animals used for these purposes, when appropriate”.
The rat rehoming initiative is a significant step up in ambition for Jackson and Salinsky, who have previously collaborated on rehoming rabbits, sheep and even pigeons.
Salinksy says the university is a willing partner, even though it bears some additional costs – cleaning, feeding, enrichment and desexing – while the animals wait for adoption.
Animal technicians are also happy to support rehoming efforts, given the alternative (euthanising animals) takes such an emotional toll, she says. There’s one proviso: “We do want to make sure that on balance, the life of the animal is going to be improved, and better for them than being euthanised”.
The behaviour of lab rats and mice
Not all animals are eligible, there are usually restrictions on rehoming genetically modified animals, for example.
Yet even if the program achieves its target, 600 rats annually pales in comparison to the 58,000 mice, rats, guinea pigs and rabbits used for research in New Zealand, and an additional 116,000 bred for research but not used.
On the other side of the world, a rehoming initiative which began as a pilot in 2019 has since become standard practice.
In the Netherlands, the Animal Welfare Body of Utrecht University and the University Medical Centre, Utrecht, strive to rehome smaller laboratory animals, finding new homes for about 2.5% of all animals used or surplus.
Independent ethics consultant, Dr Monique Janssens was involved in developing the program.
Janssens argues the ethical imperative to rehome smaller mammals like mice and rats is the same as for larger animals like horses, sheep, dogs or cats.
“They are small but the richness of their lives is equal,” she says.
“And as long as we can – with a little effort – help them stay alive and have a good life in their new homes, I think we are obliged to do that.”
When a research project is ending, the institution first looks at whether the animals can be reused, then assesses them for rehoming.
As Janssens explains, the initiative has brought together unlikely bedfellows – animal rights advocates, the welfare body, and science and medical research organisations – all motivated to do their best for the animals, and each bearing their part of the costs.
Researchers keep the animals for a couple of additional weeks. The Dutch SPCA posts them on its rehoming platform. The animal rights group transports them to new homes or the shelter. The shelter cares for the animals until a home is found.
Like Salinsky, Janssens says the initiative has been important for the morale of animal welfare staff. “We’ve made so many staff happy, asking them to work with us to organise this rehoming program,” she says.
Rehoming is an important step forward in recognising the value of the animals’ lives, Janssens says. Although it’s not a panacea, and work on replacing and reducing animals in science remains crucial.
The benefits are significant enough to bring seemingly opposing sides together.
Jackson says collaborating with the ‘other side’ has involved plenty of potentially “risky moments”, especially early on. Yet she describes the unusual pairing as a “powerful” catalyst for social change”.
Salinsky agrees. “We’ve just found this beautiful way to understand each other, not worrying about where those edges are, but working in the middle”.
Discussion about this post