Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Protocol Review
  • Published:

Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Consider the circumstances

Lab Animal volume 45, pages 95–96 (2016)Cite this article

This question involves assessing the training and expertise of the principal investigator (PI) with regard to the use of firearms. The qualifier 'highly skilled' is not precisely defined, so its interpretation is appropriately left to the IACUC. As described, this practice has been continuing for a number of years, so the simplest and most straightforward solution is to ask the investigator about his or her proficiency and experience with firearms: how often has the technique been used over the past years and with what results? It might seem counterintuitive to seek consultation from the individual under review; however by doing so the IACUC can gain clear, tangible and perhaps even quantifiable insight into the PI's experience with this technique. The IACUC is also well within its purview to request documentation of the PI's proficiency. Documentation can include data from previous years or targets showing shot placement. It is also worth noting for this scenario that, while a .22-caliber rifle, presumably in Long Rifle (LR), might be used in training, proficiency with such a weapon translates well to proficiency with any firearm suitable for the species listed.

A question of more importance for IACUC deliberations is whether gunshot is being used for “euthanasia” or “humane killing”? The AVMA guidelines state that “gunshot is acceptable with conditions for euthanasia of free-ranging, captured, or confined wildlife, provided that bullet placement is to the head (targeted to destroy the brain)”1. If the use described in the protocol meets the AVMA restriction of destroying the brain, then the animals listed are almost certainly trapped, because suitable shots on free-ranging animals the size of a skunk, raccoon or fox would be uncommon without baiting. If, instead, the investigator is using gunshot as a means of “humane killing” (anything other than a shot through the brain as described in the AVMA guidelines), the AVMA guidelines for euthanasia do not apply, as noted on page 68 (ref. 1), and an IACUC-approved departure is warranted.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. American Veterinary Medical Association. AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2013 Edition. (American Veterinary Medical Association, Schaumburg, IL, 2013).

  2. Sikes, R.S., Gannon, W.L. & the Animal Care and Use Committee of the American Society of Mammalogists. Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research. J. Mamm. 92, 235–253 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fair, J., Paul, E. & Jones, J. (eds.) Guidelines to the use of Wild Birds in Research 3rd edn. (The Ornithological Council, Washington, DC, 2010).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sikes is Director of the Basic Animal Services Unit and Professor of Biology at University of Arkansas at Little Rock and Chair of the Animal Care Committee of the American Society of Mammalogists.,

    Robert Sikes

  2. Bryan is Public Service Assistant and Wildlife Veterinarian at Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study (SCWDS) at University of Georgia, Athens, GA.,

    John A Bryan II

Authors
  1. Robert Sikes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John A Bryan II
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sikes, R., Bryan, J. Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Consider the circumstances. Lab Anim 45, 95–96 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.950

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.950

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing