Humane Society Should Stop Criticizing, Start Funding

The letter by Randall Lockwood and Martin L. Stephens (The Scientist, December 15, 1986, p. 10) implies that behavioral researchers, who have not welcomed the recent mandate to provide for the psychological well-being of captive primates, are simply ignorant of the set of prescriptions that the authors provide. These include a varied environment over which the animals can exert some control, the opportunity to perform all possible species-specific behaviors, and provision of compassionate careta

Susan Suarez
Feb 8, 1987
The letter by Randall Lockwood and Martin L. Stephens (The Scientist, December 15, 1986, p. 10) implies that behavioral researchers, who have not welcomed the recent mandate to provide for the psychological well-being of captive primates, are simply ignorant of the set of prescriptions that the authors provide. These include a varied environment over which the animals can exert some control, the opportunity to perform all possible species-specific behaviors, and provision of compassionate caretakers. The authors also claim that objective attempts to study environmental variables as they relate to quality of life would be fruitless and unnecessary since they "already have a good sense of what constitutes quality of life for many captive primates."

It is refreshing to note that these views apparently are not shared by their coworker, Michael W. Fox, the ScientifIc Director of the Humane Society of the United States. In his recent book Laboratory Animal...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?