Chimpanzees
in Research:
Past, Present,
and Future
Kathleen M. Conlee and Sarah T. Boysen
9
CHAPTER
C
himpanzees have been used
in research in the United
States since the 1920s
(Brent 2004), with their breeding
and use highlighted in the 1980s as
a model for acquired immune defi-
ciency syndrome (AIDS) research.
However, the use of chimpanzees in
harmful research has come to be
questioned throughout the world,
based on both ethical and scientific
concerns. Public support for chim-
panzee research has been declining
over time (National Science Board
2002), costs of using chimpanzees
in research have been rising, the
number of chimpanzees in laborato-
ries (including in the United
States) has been declining, and leg-
islation and policies prohibiting the
use of great apes in research have
been on the rise internationally.
These trends may indicate an end to
the use of chimpanzees in research
in the United States and abroad in
the near future. Other than
increased attention to the use of
chimpanzees in research, animal
protection groups, conservationists,
lawyers, and others are focusing on
issues related to chimpanzees as
well, including their use in enter-
tainment, hunting of them in the
wild for food (known as âbush-
meatâ) and the pet trade, general
conservation issues, and pursuit of
their legal rights (Cavalieri and
Singer 1993; Wise 2000, 2002).
Why is there particular interest
in the use of chimpanzees in
research? They are the only apes
(of both great and small) used in
biomedical research and testing in
the United States, and much has
been learned about their emotion-
al lives and intelligence over the
last several decades.
1
Although the welfare of chim-
panzees encompasses many issues,
this chapter addresses their use in
research, including their historical
and current use in the United
States, ethical and scientific con-
cerns, public opinion, international
legislation, and future directions.
The Species
Chimpanzee
(Pan troglodytes)
Chimpanzees are members of the
taxonomic order primates and the
great ape family
(Pongidae)
, which
also includes gorillas (both lowland
and mountain subspecies), orang-
utans, and bonobos (formerly
referred to as pygmy chimpanzees).
The natural habitat of the chim-
panzee is a range of countries
across equatorial Africa, from Sene-
gal, Mali, Sierra Leone, CĂ´te
dâIvoire, Ghana, Nigeria, Cameroon,
and Gabon in West Africa; the cen-
tral African countries of Congo,
Equatorial Guinea, the Central
African Republic, the Democratic
Republic of Congo, Uganda, and
Burundi; and Tanzania in east
Africa. Chimpanzee social structure
has been observed to include nearly
every type of relationship seen
among different primate species,
including multimale or multifemale
groups, bachelor groups, male/
female breeding pairs, a mother
and her infant, or a female and her
offspring of various ages.
In general, chimpanzee social
organization is described as a fis-
sion-fusion society, with individuals
or small groups leaving and then
periodically rejoining the group.
Like many primate species, chim-
panzees give birth to a single
infant, who may nurse for four to
five years, so the offspring have an
extended period of maturation and
learning. Males remain in their
natal group for their entire life,
while females of reproductive age
emigrate and take up residence in
neighboring communities. These
sex-related behavioral strategies
thus serve as a natural incest taboo
Introduction
119
120
The State of the Animals III: 2005
and help maintain genetic diversity
within and among different chim-
panzee groups in a given area. Male
chimpanzees maintain order and
position in their groups through a
dominance hierarchy and often
form coalitions of two to three
males who co-rule the group.
Females, however, are not as social
with other females as males are
with males, although a dominance
structure does exist among them.
Exceptions have been observed,
even to the point of a female who
participated in cooperative hunt-
ing with the males of her group,
although most of such opportunis-
tic predation on small mammals
(including monkeys such as the
red colobus) has typically occurred
among all-male groups.
Like many nonhuman primates
whose habitats are being en-
croached upon, the chimpanzee is
listed as âendangeredâ in the wild
under the U.S. Endangered Species
Act. Some estimates are that only
110,000 animals remain across
Africa. However, unlike any other
species on the list, the chimpanzee
is the only species that is cross-list-
ed as âthreatenedâ in captivity,
thereby given less protection from
certain types of biomedical and
invasive research. Consequently,
the âthreatenedâ status of the cap-
tive population permits procedures
and other activities that are not
legally permitted with wild chim-
panzees. If chimpanzees were list-
ed solely as endangered, the types
of research that are currently
allowable could simply not be
done. Currently, only a few coun-
tries other than the United States,
including Gabon, Liberia, and
Japan (although a ban is in prepa-
ration there), permit biomedical
research on chimpanzees. Chim-
panzee research is not permitted
in the United Kingdom, Sweden,
Australia, New Zealand, or the
Netherlands (although not formal-
ly declared by each country, no
European Union countries conduct
research on chimpanzees).
Chimpanzee
Intelligence
Cognitive and behavioral research
with chimpanzees, including both
field studies and captive work over
the past forty years in particular,
have taught us much about the
remarkable capabilities chim-
panzees share with humans. These
include:
⢠An extensive list of some thir-
ty-nine-plus types of tool use
in the wild (e.g., Goodall
1968; McGrew 1992; Whiten
et al. 1999)
⢠Complex processing capacities
for acquiring concepts such as
âsame vs. differentâ (e.g.,
Premack and Premack 1983)
⢠Numerical skills, including
counting abilities, that are
comparable in chimpanzeesâ
development as they are in
young children (e.g., Boysen
and Berntson 1989; Matsuza-
wa 1985a)
⢠Productive use and compre-
hension of symbolic language-
like systems of several types,
including signed English based
on American Sign Language,
visual symbol systems such as
plastic shapes that stand for
words, or graphic symbols that
are computer-interfaced to dis-
play the word-like symbols cho-
sen and the order in which
they have been selected (e.g.,
Matsuzawa 1985b; Premack
1986; Savage-Rumbaugh 1986;
Gardner, Gardner, and van
Cantfort 1989)
⢠Extensive skills with problem
solving of all kinds observed in
both the wild and under exper-
imental conditions in captivity
(e.g., Matsuzawa 1985b;
Limongelli, Boysen, and Visal-
berghi 1995; Kuhlmeier and
Boysen 2002)
⢠Recognition of kin relation-
ships based on comparing
photographs alone of chim-
panzees and their offspring
(Parr and de Waal 1999a)
⢠Studies that suggest chim-
panzees, like humans, under-
stand that other chimpanzees
may have the same or differ-
ent set of beliefs, desires, and
knowledge from their own, a
capacity formerly believed to
be unique to humans (e.g.,
Hare, Call, and Tomasello
2001; Tomasello and Call
1997).
Clearly, the evidence demon-
strates that the chimpanzee is a
species whose genetic, morphologi-
cal, anatomical, neurological, bio-
chemical, behavioral, and cognitive
similarity to humans is unique
among all other species living today.
Chimpanzee
Emotions and
Motivation
During the past several decades,
much has been learned about the
chimpanzeeâs motivation and capac-
ity for emotional expression. Empir-
ical studies under controlled condi-
tions in captivity have documented
that the emotional range of chim-
panzees is quite comparable to that
observed in humans, with consider-
able overlap in facial expressions
(Parr, Dove, and Hopkins 1998; Parr
2001, 2003). These include expres-
sions exhibited during laughter;
under conditions of fear, anger, or
sadness; and a range of grimaces
observed in human neonates, such
as disgust or pleasure in response to
odors and/or taste.
Observations in both wild and
captive settings suggest that chim-
panzees are subject to some of the
same types of behavioral and emo-
tional pathologies as have been
observed in humans, including
depression, various neuroses, anxi-
ety, and even grief to the point of
death (Goodall 1986). It is typical-
ly easy, especially for young chil-
dren, to watch chimpanzees in a
zoo or sanctuary and recognize
that the animals are playing tag or
play-fighting or that a disagree-
121
Chimpanzees in Research: Past, Present, and Future
ment has occurred between ani-
mals, with resultant real fighting.
The overlap among behavioral and
emotional expressions between
humans and chimpanzees is quite
dramatic, such that even very
young children are able to interpret
often complex social interactions
among chimpanzees quite accu-
rately. (There are notable excep-
tions, however, such as differences
in the two speciesâ respective
âsmilesââa chimpanzee âsmilingâ
with upper and lower teeth showing
is expressing fear, for example.)
The History of
U.S. Chimpanzee
Research:
1920â1979
Chimpanzee research began with
the work of Robert M. Yerkes of Yale
University, who established a labo-
ratory at his rural home in the early
1920s with two purchased chim-
panzees (Yerkes and Learned
1925). His early writing about
these animals, a male and a female,
explored a wide range of behavioral
and intellectual capacities ob-
served both directly and indirectly
as the young chimpanzees devel-
oped. He was particularly interest-
ed in and wrote fairly extensively
about the differences he noted
between the two animals and, at
the time, attributed such to sex dif-
ferences. However, it was later con-
firmed that Yerkes actually had one
chimpanzee
(Pan troglodytes)
and
one bonobo
(Pan paniscus)
, so
many of the differences he attrib-
uted to sex may actually have been
species differences. This was partic-
ularly notable with respect to dif-
ferences in vocalizations, although
many other behavioral traits were
also confounded by reporting them
as sex rather than species differ-
ences (Yerkes and Learned 1925).
Despite this misguided start, Yerkes
and his wife contributed several of
the first descriptions of chim-
panzee behavior, including a range
of observations that included social
interaction, play, sexual activity,
diet, morphology, anatomy, emo-
tional states, facial expressions,
vocalizations, and intelligence.
Yerkesâs work was critical to the
emergence of primate studies in the
United States. His burgeoning labo-
ratory moved first to Orange Park,
Florida, in 1930 and then to Emory
University in Atlanta, Georgia, in
1965 where, as the Yerkes National
Primate Research Center, it remains
today (Yerkes National Primate
Research Center n.d.). In addition
to his numerous books on apes,
including chimpanzees, Yerkes con-
tributed a wealth of scientific papers
to the emerging literature. Yerkesâs
books and journal articles remain an
important source for researchers,
particularly for those whose inter-
ests are in chimpanzee cognition
and behavior. He was the first to
study many phenomena in chim-
panzees of great importance to the
field of primatology and is consid-
ered to be one of the fathers of pri-
matology in the United States.
In the 1940s the focus at Yerkes
National Primate Research Center
shifted from the study of behavior
to the study of infectious disease
(Committee on Animal Models in
Biomedical Research 1995). The
use of chimpanzees for the study of
infectious disease has increased
ever since, particularly in hepatitis
and human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV), and continues at a
number of facilities (Table 1)
.
In the 1950s the U.S. Air Force
created a research and breeding
program with sixty-five wild-caught
chimpanzees to determine the
effects of space flight on humans
(Brent 2004; Save the Chimps
n.d.). The aeronautics research
involved subjecting chimpanzees to
a number of stressors during train-
ing as well as the obvious stressors
associated with being launched
into space. These stressors includ-
ed exposure to G forces, loss of con-
sciousness in decompression cham-
bers, spinning in giant centrifuges,
and use of shock as punishment
while training (Save the Chimps
n.d.). In January 1961 a chim-
panzee named Ham was placed on a
ballistic trajectory flight and forced
to perform a motor task through-
out the flight for which he had been
trained. In November 1961 a sec-
ond chimpanzee, Enos, orbited the
earth twice and was forced to per-
form a more complex task (NASA
2004). Unfortunately, through a
malfunction in equipment, Enos
received a shock for every correct
maneuver he made, which contra-
dicted the 1,263 hours of training
he had undergone (NASA 2004;
Save the Chimps n.d.); despite the
shocks, Enos continued to com-
plete the task correctly.
After some Air Force chimpan-
zees were sent into space, they were
reassigned to other projects, such
as testing seat belts. In the 1970s
the Air Force no longer used chim-
panzees but did lease them out for
biomedical research studies (Save
the Chimps n.d.). In 1975 the Con-
vention on International Trade in
Endangered Species (CITES) was
adopted, which greatly restricted
importation of chimpanzees from
the wild. This prompted a captive-
breeding effort within the United
States, which has been federally
funded since 1986 (Brent 2004).
Chimpanzee
Research: 1980
to the Present
AIDS Research
in the 1980s
During the 1980s there was a dras-
tic increase in chimpanzee re-
search, primarily prompted by the
human AIDS epidemic. A massive
breeding effort was launched in
1986 (National Research Council
1997), and in 1992 scientists repre-
senting animal welfare and AIDS
research interests met to discuss
122
The State of the Animals III: 2005
Table 1
U.S. Facilities Housing Chimpanzees:
Types of Research and Numbers of Animals
Facility*
Location
Type
Total Number
Number of
of Research
of Chimpanzees
NCRR-Supported
Chimpanzees
3
New Iberia
New Iberia, La.
Breeding, vaccine research, drug
Research Center
efficacy
350
1
130
Alamogordo
Alamogordo, N.M. Behavioral
275
1
270
Primate Facility
Southwest
San Antonio, Tex. Vaccine and drug testing, hepatitis,
250
1
15
National Primate
Alzheimerâs, HIV
Research Center
Yerkes National
Atlanta, Ga.
HIV, behavioral, neuroscience,
197
1
75
Primate Research
reproduction
Center
M.D. Anderson
Bastrop, Tex.
Breeding colony, hepatitis,
154
1
105
Cancer Center
infectious disease
Primate
Mesa, Ariz.
Behavioral, reproductive, research
75
1
74
Foundation
supply
of Arizona
Bioqual
Rockville, Md.
Hepatitis, respiratory viruses
63
2
Not mentioned
Centers for
Atlanta, Ga.
Hepatitis
14
2
Not mentioned
Disease Control
and Prevention
Food and Drug
Rockville, Md.
11
2
Not mentioned
Administration
Ohio State
Columbus, Ohio
Behavioral, cognitive (noninvasive)
11
1
0
University
Language Decatur,
Ga.
Behavioral
(noninvasive)
4
2
Not mentioned
Research Center,
Georgia State
University
Chimpanzee and
Ellensburg, Wash. Behavioral (noninvasive)
4
2
Not mentioned
Human Commu-
nication Institute,
Central Washing-
ton University
*This is not meant to be an exhaustive list of the types of research being conducted at each facility.
1
According to the
International Directory of Primatology
.
2
According to Goodall et al. 2003.
3
According to a presentation given by J. Strandberg at the American Association of Laboratory Animal
Science (AALAS) conference in 2003. The remaining chimpanzees are not federally owned,
but the facilities may still receive federal funding for research.
the use of chimpanzees in human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
research (van Akker et al. 1993). At
that time, the group acknowledged
there were some areas of HIV re-
search for which chimpanzees were
not necessary, such as prevention of
maternal-infant transmission and
physiological safety tests for vac-
cine development. The group advo-
cated for alternatives, such as using
monkeys, but it emphasized that
some of the suggested approaches
engendered animal welfare con-
cerns as well. The group considered
other factors related to HIV re-
search on chimpanzees, such as
housing conditions, and concluded
that not allowing chimpanzees in
HIV research to interact socially
with other chimpanzees or humans
âis both unnecessary and unethi-
calâ (van Akker et al. 1993). The
group advocated the use of environ-
mental enrichment (innovative
ways to enrich the lives of chim-
panzees that promote natural be-
havior) and housing that allows the
chimpanzees to express natural
locomotor behaviors.
It is not known whether HIV sur-
vives in chimpanzees, but we do
know that the animals do not devel-
op the AIDS-related complex seen
in humans (Balls 1995; Nath, Schu-
mann, and Boyer 2000). There is,
however, a specific strain that is
pathogenic in chimpanzees and
typically takes up to ten years to
progress to AIDS-like symptoms.
Great controversy has arisen over
whether chimpanzees should, in
fact, be challenged with that partic-
ular strain (Nath Schumann, and
Boyer 2000). Some members of the
research community have strongly
opposed the idea, some publicly
(Prince et al. 1999). Over time,
however, it has been determined
that the chimpanzee is a poor
model for HIV research, and some
researchers argue that the use of
chimpanzees is not likely to lead to
a cure for AIDS (Reynolds 1995).
Despite this, HIV-related research
in chimpanzees continues.
The Humane Society of the Unit-
ed States (HSUS) examined U.S.
Public Health Service (PHS)-fund-
ed grants that involved captive
chimpanzees in HIV research in
some way (including breeding for
HIV research), beginning in 1980.
Some grants extended over as
many as twenty-five years; there-
fore, data for each year reflect both
ongoing research and newly funded
projects. In 1980 three PHS-fund-
ed studies involved the use of chim-
panzees in HIV-related research.
Table 2
Public Health Service-Funded Grants:
HIV Research Involving Captive
Chimpanzees
Year
Number
Types of HIV Research
of Grants
1980
3
Receptors
Vaccine safety
Chimpanzee housing
1984
5
Receptors
Vaccine safety
Chimpanzee housing
Transmission of HIV
1988
17
Receptors
Vaccine safety
Chimpanzee housing
Transmission of HIV
Vaccine efficacy
Chimpanzee breeding/management
1992
18
Receptors
Vaccine safety
Chimpanzee housing
Transmission of HIV
Vaccine efficacy
Chimpanzee breeding/management
Immune response
1996
20
Receptors
Vaccine safety
Chimpanzee housing
Transmission of HIV
Vaccine efficacy
Chimpanzee breeding/management
Immune response
HIV progression and pathogenesis
Genetic inoculation
2000
23
Receptors
Vaccine safety
Chimpanzee housing
Transmission of HIV
Vaccine efficacy
Chimpanzee breeding/management
HIV progression in young chimpanzees
Infection with strain most virulent in chimpanzees
Cell-based immunotherapy
2004
7
Chimpanzee breeding/management
Gene expression in infected chimpanzees
Vaccine development
Chimpanzees in Research: Past, Present, and Future
123
124
The State of the Animals III: 2005
This number increased to five
grants in 1984 and jumped to sev-
enteen in 1988. The next few years
resulted in an increase in these
grants, to twenty-three in 2000,
but this number fell to seven
grants in 2004 (Table 2). As of
2001 150 chimpanzees had been
infected with various strains of HIV,
but only four had had evidence of
âprogressive HIV infection,â and
one of the four had progressed to
AIDS (Muchmore 2001). AIDS
research on chimpanzees (includ-
ing colony maintenance) has been
conducted primarily at Yerkes
National Primate Research Center
(Atlanta, Georgia), Southwest
National Primate Research Center
(San Antonio, Texas), New Iberia
Primate Research Center (New
Iberia, Louisiana), and the M.D.
Anderson Cancer Center Science
Park (Bastrop, Texas) (Table 2).
Chimpanzees and
Research Facilities
in the United States
According to Stephens (1995), there
were approximately 1,800 chimp-
anzees in fourteen biomedical and
behavioral research facilities in the
United States in 1993. In 2001 a
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
report to Congress identified 1,584
chimpanzees, including 614 who
were government owned, who may
have been used in federally support-
ed or conducted research and were
housed in thirteen biomedical and
behavioral research facilities in the
United States (National Center for
Research Resources 2001). Since
that time approximately 266 chim-
panzees formerly owned by a bio-
medical research facility in Alam-
ogordo, New Mexico, were
transferred and are now being cared
for by a sanctuary organization
based in Florida. It was estimated
that there were approximately
1,300 chimpanzees in twelve facili-
ties in the United States as of
2005. Table 1 provides a list of re-
search facilities that as of 2005
housed chimpanzees, some areas
of research conducted at each
facility, and the number of chim-
panzees (if known) at each facility.
The majority of captive research
chimpanzees are housed at six bio-
medical facilities. Information re-
garding the number of chim-
panzees and chimpanzee research
facilities in the United States was
also supported by a census con-
ducted and reported by the Great
Ape Project (Goodall et al. 2003).
A review of the literature pub-
lished during 2001 and included in
the National Library of Medicine
and PrimateLit databases revealed
that of the 4,411 studies worldwide
involving nonhuman primate re-
search, nine involved the use of apes
(Carlsson et al. 2004). Overall, it
was estimated that 41,000 primates
were used, although the specific
number of great apes represented
Figure 1
Chimpanzee Research Grants, 2000âSeptember 2004
by these studies is unknown, partic-
ularly because not all publications
specify the number of animals used
(Carlsson et al. 2004). Some stud-
ies, particularly those from private-
sector organizations such as phar-
maceutical companies, are not
published (Carlsson et al. 2004) at
all. These data suggest that a review
of the published literature may not
produce reliable information about
the actual number of chimpanzees
used in research, consequently
requiring reliance on other sources
of information.
Research in Which
Chimpanzees Are Used
Chimpanzees are most commonly
used for hepatitis (particularly hep-
atitis C) and HIV/AIDS research. A
total of 334 federally funded grants
between 2000 and 2004 involved
the use of live chimpanzees, with
approximately 29 percent related
to hepatitis research and 16 per-
cent related to HIV/AIDS research.
Stephens (1995) reported that
approximately 80 percent of
research conducted on chim-
panzees in the early â90s was relat-
ed to hepatitis and HIV/AIDS.
Therefore, these types of biomed-
ical research with chimpanzees are
not as prevalent as they are in the
recent past, although such invasive
studies continue.
Other areas of research for which
chimpanzees are currently used
include cognitive and behavioral
studies, as models for human repro-
duction, malaria, gene therapy, res-
piratory viruses, Crohnâs disease,
drug and vaccine testing, and a vari-
ety of other infectious diseases (Fig-
ure 1). Experiments in some of
these areas, such as studies of cer-
tain strains of HIV, can lead to
severe appetite and weight loss,
lethargy, diarrhea, severe illness,
infections, and/or eventual death.
Procedures such as major surgery,
liver biopsies (required for some
protocols in hepatitis research and
involving multiple biopsies), fre-
quent blood sampling, and restraint
can also cause pain and distress.
Invasive research, in general, raises
particular concerns regarding
chimpanzee welfare in captivity.
Chimpanzee Housing
and Care
Individuals who have worked closely
with chimpanzees in research
report that those used in many inva-
sive protocols are typically housed
alone in cages required by USDA
standards to be only five feet by five
feet by seven feet, with twenty-five
square feet of floor space. This can
be compared to the interior of an
elevator (Figure 2). Cages are typi-
cally constructed from steel and, in
some cases, include a perch for rest-
ing or sleeping. Many cages also
have a âsqueeze back,â a moveable
interior wall that can be pulled from
the back of the cage toward the
front and can press or hold a chim-
panzee closer to the front of the
cage so that a technician, veterinar-
ian, or researcher can administer
injections or perform other proce-
dures without anesthetizing the
chimp. Under some conditions,
housing areas do not have any natu-
ral light, and the animals live under
artificial lighting (light/dark) cyc-
les at all times.
In the wild, chimpanzees are very
social and live in complex groups of
varying sizes. Therefore, social
housing is almost certainly the sin-
gle most important factor for chim-
panzee psychological well-being
(National Research Council 1997).
Individual housing can lead to pro-
found depression, increased aggres-
sion, psychological withdrawal,
extreme frustration, and self-muti-
lation, such as physical wounding,
hair plucking, rocking, and other
psychotic-like behaviors. Chim-
panzees who are not being used in
active research protocols typically
are housed in pairs or social groups.
The physical environment for social
housing can range from a cage that
is slightly larger than the individual
cage depicted in Figure 2 to large
outdoor enclosures where the ani-
mals live in large social groups of
eight to 20 individuals. The type of
housing used depends on the partic-
ular institution and the type of
research being conducted. Chim-
panzees who live in groups also can
be separated for a period and placed
on research protocols that involve
single housing. The likelihood of
this depends on several factors, in-
cluding the specific institution, the
type of research conducted there
(whether study animals could infect
others if they were housed togeth-
er), and precedents within the insti-
tution that may not be necessary
for the specific study but instead
reflect the culture of the institution.
An analysis of chimpanzee re-
search for the years 2000 to mid-
2002 conducted by The HSUS
revealed that information about the
types of housing provided in publi-
cations or in federal grant abstracts
was lacking (Conlee, Hoffeld, and
Stephens 2004). Among 189 publi-
cations 24 percent mentioned so-
cial housing and 76 percent did not
mention any specific housing type.
Overall, information regarding the
specific number of chimpanzees
maintained in each type of housing
(individual vs. social) was not readi-
ly available. Housing and environ-
mental conditions, however, can
have significant effects on research
Chimpanzees in Research: Past, Present, and Future
Figure 2.
A typical laboratory cage for individually
housed chimpanzees.
FAUNA FOUNDAITON
125
126
The State of the Animals III: 2005
results, so such information should
be included in all publications.
Regardless of whether housing
information is available, Balls
(1995) raises an important point: it
may be impossible to provide hous-
ing in laboratories that truly meets
the physiological and behavioral
needs of chimpanzees under captive
conditions.
Funding for Research
The HSUS analysis of federally fund-
ed great ape research found that
$20 million to $25 million dollars of
federal funding per year is devoted
to chimpanzee research and care
(Conlee, Hoffeld, and Stephens
2004) (Figure 3). Hepatitis re-
search accounts for $4.2 million of
this funding each year, and HIV
research accounts for approximate-
ly $500,000. The amount of private-
sector funding for chimpanzee
research is not available to the pub-
lic; however, the use of chimpanzees
by the private sector may be on the
rise. A chimpanzee researcher sit-
ting on a panel at the 2003 Ameri-
can Association of Laboratory Ani-
mal Science conference indicated
that 75 percent of private-sector
growth (particularly pharmaceuti-
cal companies) at the New Iberia
Research Center was due to re-
quests for chimpanzee use.
It is estimated that it costs
$20â$30 a day to care for a chim-
panzee in the laboratory and $15 a
day to care for oneâbetterâin a
sanctuary. Compare the $9.5â$14.2
million a year to care for the United
Statesâ 1,300 chimpanzees in a lab-
oratory to the $7.1-million-a-year
cost of sanctuary care. It is impor-
tant to emphasize that the sanctu-
ary setting not only costs less per
chimpanzee per day, but also can
provide a much more naturalistic
and stimulating environment.
Ethical
Questions and
Responsibilities
The United States currently uses
more chimpanzees in biomedical
research than any other country in
the world. The U.S. government pro-
vides more funding for the study of
chimpanzee cognition and behavior
than does any other country. Results
from studies over the past four
decades in particular have provided
a wealth of scientific evidence show-
ing that chimpanzees and humans
bear striking similarities. While we
have known for up to two hundred
years that the anatomy, physiology,
morphology, biochemistry, and gen-
etic overlap between chimpanzees
and humans is overwhelming, it has
only been within the last forty years
that demonstrations of chimpanzee
cognitive abilities and behavior,
including a wide range of emotions
evoked by chimpanzees and human
beings in similar situations, have
been reported from field studies
(e.g., Goodall 1968) and captive
work (e.g., Washburn and Rum-
baugh 1992; Brown and Boysen
2000). Recent technological ad-
vances have allowed direct compar-
isons at the neuroanatomical level
between the two species, with
notable correspondence between a
significant number of neuroanatom-
ical structures that likely support
the same functions (e.g., Cantalupo,
Pilcher, and Hopkins 2003; Hopkins
and Cantalupo 2004).
With more than thirty years of
direct interactions with chim-
panzees as part of a comparative
cognition project, one author
(S.B.) (2000) reports that her
chimps have shown a number of
behaviors suggesting that they
were responding to natural events
such as wind or thunderstorms
with great fear. A similar response
was likely felt by early humans, who
subsequently created myths and
legends to explain these phenome-
na. When a chimpanzee lost a
tooth and the chimpâs loud alarm
calls drew the other chimps to the
scene, the groupâs responseârau-
cous calls and all members peering
at the tiny white tooth on the
groundâclearly suggested that
the group interpreted the pain and
blood loss as caused by the tooth
itself as an animate object.
One author (S.B.) and her stu-
dents have observed their subjects
readily sharing food with younger
chimps, assisting older animals
having difficulty moving from place
to place in the facility, and re-
sponding with âreverenceâ to the
body of a group member who had
died of natural causes. In the last
instance, the dead chimpâs cage
mate picked up a blanket, covered
the dead chimpâs head, and then
placed a second blanket over her
body. A videotaped record of these
events leads an observer to the
conclusion that the âfriendâsâ
response was intentional and
empathetic (S.B., personal obser-
vation 2003). Goodall (1968)
reports similar behaviors to those
described above among wild
chimps, suggesting that captive
chimpanzees are not acquiring
behaviors unseen in the wild. Long-
term observations of chimps in the
field and captivity have increasing-
ly complemented and confirmed a
range of comparable behaviors
that are seen in humans as well as
in the chimpanzee. Observations
of behaviors of this level of sophis-
tication and complexity raise diffi-
cult ethical and moral questions
about the types of research on
chimpanzees that are permitted in
the United States.
More detailed studies of the sim-
ilarities between human and chim-
panzee behavioral and emotional
responses are even more telling.
Parr and de Waal (1999b) provided
captive chimpanzees with photo-
graphs of chimpanzees they didnât
know and found that the chim-
panzees were not only able to
match two different photographs
of the same individual, but also to
127
Chimpanzees in Research: Past, Present, and Future
match mothers and sons. This
demonstrates that chimpanzees
are capable of identifying similari-
ties in the faces of related individu-
als who were unfamiliar to them.
In another test by Parr and De
Waal, chimpanzees were presented
with sample head-shot photo-
graphs of chimpanzees. The sub-
jects recognized the emotional
expressions of the chimpanzees in
the sample photographs and
matched them to photographs of
novel chimpanzees showing facial
expressions that depicted the same
emotional state. The subjects
chose the photograph that best
matched the sample chimpanzeeâs
picture, based on the underlying
meaning of the facial features and
configuration, since the perceptual
and physical features were not pre-
cisely the same.
Such trials underscore chim-
panzeesâ capacity for empathetic
responses. Such responses, coupled
with the cognitive capacities hu-
mans demonstrably share with
chimps, indicate that, under cir-
cumstances in which a human
being might experience emotional
distress or trauma, chimpanzees
respond similarly under comparable
conditions. One example would be
for a chimpanzee to be housed in
isolation, with no physical or social
contact with other chimpanzees, as
well as with only minimal daily con-
tact with caregivers. There is a rea-
son that similar housing conditions
in our nationâs prisons, that is, soli-
tary confinement, are considered to
be the worst conditions for inmates
to endure. (Indeed, solitary confine-
ment of human prisoners is consid-
ered by some to be âcruel and
unusual punishment.â)
These findings suggest that the
range and nature of invasive
research in the United States repre-
sents unethical and, indeed, im-
moral actions. In its 1997 report,
the National Research Council that
examined the status of chim-
panzees in research facilities in the
United States noted the ethical and
moral responsibilities to chimps
(National Research Council 1997).
Unlike humans who participate in
biomedical research, chimpanzees
are incapable of giving informed
consent. Therefore, it is clearly
time for society to reappraise the
status of humankindâs closest pri-
mate relative.
Public Opinion:
Driving Change
Increasing public concern has large-
ly driven international efforts to end
the use of chimpanzees in research.
According to a recent opinion poll
conducted by Zogby International
for the Doris Day Animal League in
2001 (in Conlee 2003), 90 percent
of Americans believe it is unaccept-
able to confine chimpanzees in gov-
ernment-approved cages (Figure 2),
54 percent believe it is unaccept-
able for chimpanzees to âundergo
research which causes them to suf-
fer for human benefit,â and 65 per-
cent say it is unacceptable to kill
them for research.
A 2002 opinion poll by Penn,
Schoen, and Berland Associates for
The Humane Society of the United
States (HSUS n.d.) found that 79
percent of the U.S. public supports
creation of a government-sponsored
sanctuary system to provide life-
time care to chimpanzees no longer
used in research. This and other
survey findings indicate that not
only does the public oppose the suf-
fering of chimpanzees in research,
but it also is willing to financially
support a significant commitment
to chimpanzees, who can live to be
sixty years old in captivity.
The National Science Board,
which conducts surveys of public
attitudes toward scientific re-
search every three years, included
the following statement in its 1985
survey: âScientists should be al-
lowed to do research that causes
pain and injury to animals like
dogs and chimpanzees if it pro-
duces new information about hu-
man health problems.â In 2002
(the most recent survey results
available as of 2005), 52 percent of
adults opposed or strongly op-
posed this statement. When the
same statement was used in a 1985
survey, only 30 percent of adults
voiced opposition (National Sci-
ence Board 2002) (Table 3).
U.S. Overview
Recent Issues
Over the last twenty years, major
changes in the use of chimpanzees
in research have taken place. The
rush to increase breeding for HIV
research in the 1980s was followed
by a significant decrease in the num-
ber of facilities housing chim-
panzees as well as in the number of
chimpanzees at each facility in sub-
sequent years. Three large chimp-
anzee research laboratories have
closed since 1995, and many of their
chimpanzees are now permanently
retired at sanctuaries throughout
the United States. In 1995 New York
University decided to close its Labo-
ratory of Experimental Medicine
and Surgery in Primates (LEMSIP).
Approximately half of the LEMSIP
chimpanzees were sent to various
retirement facilities, but the other
half were sent to the Coulston Foun-
dation, Alamagordo, New Mexico,
the largest chimpanzee colony in
the world at that time, which had a
poor record of compliance with the
Animal Welfare Act (AWA).
The second large closure was that
of the chimpanzee colony at the
Holloman Air Force base, also in
New Mexico, in 1997. This colony of
141 chimpanzees who were used by
the space program was released
from the Air Force. In a controver-
sial decision, all but thirty chim-
panzees were sent to the Coulston
Foundation instead of to sanctuar-
ies that had volunteered to take in a
number of them. (Those requests
had been denied by the Air Force.)
One of those sanctuaries was the
Center for Captive Chimpanzee
128
The State of the Animals III: 2005
Care (the CCCCânow known as
Save the Chimps), an organization
that ultimately sued to obtain cus-
tody of twenty-one of the chim-
panzees. The CCCC entered into an
agreement with the Coulston Foun-
dation in October 1999 that
brought those chimpanzees to live
at the Save the Chimpsâ sanctuary
in Florida.
The most recent laboratory clos-
ing was that of the Coulston Foun-
dation in 2002. Approximately one
year before closing, Coulston trans-
ferred three hundred chimpanzees
to the Alamogordo Primate Facility,
currently run under contract by
Charles River Laboratories, to set-
tle violations of the AWA. The chim-
panzees at the Alamogordo Primate
Facility were not being used for
research at that facility as of mid-
2005, but they could be transferred
elsewhere for research (Brent
2004). In 2001 the National Insti-
tutes of Health stopped funding the
Coulston Foundation (Brent 2004).
By 2002 the company had col-
lapsed financially and divested
itself of 266 chimpanzees, selling
them to Save the Chimps, which
purchased the land and facilities
from the company.
Despite the decrease in the num-
ber of chimpanzee laboratories and
the retirement of a significant
number of chimpanzees, there are
signs that some aspects of chim-
panzee research have been grow-
ing. In addition to 75 percent of
private-sector growth at the New
Iberia Research Center coming
from requests for use of chim-
panzees in research, New Iberia and
the Southwest National Primate
Research Center have each re-
ceived funds from the National
Institutes of Health to expand their
chimpanzee-holding facilities. The
abstract of the grant for New Iberia
specifies that such a facility will
allow other laboratories to hold
their chimpanzees within the bio-
medical research community with-
out retiring them under the
CHIMP Act (see below). This is an
unfortunate development.
U.S. CHIMP Act
The large chimpanzee breeding
effort launched in the United
States in 1986 exceeded expecta-
tions at the same time it was
determined that the chimpanzee
was not a critical model for HIV
research after all. This created a
âsurplusâ of chimpanzees for
research. As a result, the National
Institutes of Health called on the
National Research Council (NRC)
to provide input on key issues,
including the number of chim-
panzees required to support
research needs and how to address
the long-term needs of the animals
who had been produced. The NRC
found (l) that euthanasia is not
considered by the public to be an
acceptable means of addressing
the surplus issue (as previously
noted); (2) a five-year breeding
moratorium should be adopted;
and (3) sanctuaries should be
established for the long-term care
of retired chimpanzees (National
Research Council 1997).
Following the NRC report, lobby-
ing efforts began for the creation
of a national chimpanzee sanctu-
ary system through what became
known as the Chimpanzee Health
Improvement, Maintenance and
Protection Act (CHIMP Act). The
animal protection coalition devot-
ed to passage of the CHIMP Act
was known as the National Chim-
panzee Research Retirement Task
Force (NCRRTF). It consisted of
The HSUS, the American Anti-Vivi-
section Society, the American Soci-
ety for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals, the Society for Animal
Protective Legislation, and the
National Anti-Vivisection Society,
with the support of an advisory
board of numerous primatologists.
The CHIMP Act was sponsored and
introduced in the House of Repre-
sentatives (H.R. 3514) by Rep.
James Greenwood (R-PA) on
Table 3
Public Opinion on Using Chimpanzees
and Dogs in Painful and Injurious
Research
Survey Statement: Scientists should be allowed to do research that causes
pain and injury to animals like dogs and chimpanzees if it produces new
information.
Year
Supporting/Strongly Opposing/Strongly
Supporting Animal Research
Opposing Animal Research
1985
63
30
1988
53
42
1990
50
44
1992
53
42
1995
50
46
1997
46
51
1999
50
47
2001
44
52
Source: National Science Board 1985â2001.
Number of adults surveyed varied per year and ranged from 904 to 2,041.
129
November 22, 1999; a companion
bill, sponsored by Sens. Richard
Durbin (D-IL) and Bob Smith (R-
NH), was introduced in the Senate
(S. 2725) on June 13, 2000. A leg-
islative hearing was held on May
18, 2000, with key individuals tes-
tifying, including Jane Goodall of
the Jane Goodall Institute. (John
Strandberg of the National Center
for Research Resources, National
Institutes of Health [NIH], provid-
ed the only oral testimony against
the bill).
The CHIMP Act incited a fair
amount of controversy when then-
House Commerce Committee
Chairman Thomas Bliley (R-VA) pro-
posed amendments that would have
provided the research community
with limited access to chimpanzees
after they were sent into the sanctu-
ary system. When this amendment
was proposed, the animal protection
community, including NCRRTF,
became divided, and its support for
the legislation declined. Some
groups decided to continue work on
the legislation to ensure that any
opportunity to remove chimpanzees
from the sanctuary system was as
narrow and difficult as possible, fear-
ing that the bill ultimately would
allow the research community to
have easy access to chimpanzees
while holding them in less expensive
housing in the interim.
The final legislative language
specified that various requirements
be met before any individual chim-
panzee could be removed from the
system, thereby greatly reducing
the chances that animals would be
moved back into the laboratory.
These requirements included:
⢠Researchers could subject the
chimpanzee and his or her
social group to only minimal
pain, distress, and disturbance
(as determined by the board of
directors of the sanctuary).
⢠Special circumstances related
to the particular chimpanzeeâs
medical history might make
him or her uniquely needed for
research.
⢠The technology to be used was
not available when the chim-
panzee entered the sanctuary
system.
⢠The research is essential to
address an important public
health need, and that the appli-
cant has not violated the AWA.
⢠The proposal is subject to
public scrutiny through a
sixty-day formal notice and
comment process.
The CHIMP Act (P.L. 106â551)
was signed into law on December
20, 2000, by President Bill Clinton.
Some pro-animal groups pursued a
repeal of the CHIMP Act, but they
were unsuccessful. One important
and positive result of the CHIMP
Act was a shift in thinking and pol-
icy related to the use of chim-
panzees in research.
Since passage of the legislation,
various efforts have been underway
to create the national sanctuary
system. The NIH published a
âsources soughtâ notice in 2001
(
Federal Register,
April 19, 2001)
and, on September 30, 2002, grant-
ed the nonprofit Chimp Haven, in
Shreveport, Louisiana, the contract
to run the entire system. Chimp
Havenâs mission is to provide life-
time care to chimpanzees previous-
ly used in research, as pets, or for
entertainment (Brent 2004).
The sanctuary contract stipulates
that the federal government will
provide $19 million for the care of
an initial two hundred chimpanzees
for ten years, with Chimp Haven pro-
viding matching funds of $4 million
(Brent 2004). The government will
also provide $10 million in construc-
tion costs, and Chimp Haven is
expected to match 10 percent of
those funds (Brent 2004).
The Chimp Haven facility in
Shreveport will house two hundred
chimpanzees at the outset and
eventually expand to house a total
of three hundred. At least two
other sites will hold groups of sev-
enty-five or more. Chimp Haven
can also contract care out to other
facilities, but it will ultimately be
responsible for all of the chim-
panzees in the systemâa maxi-
mum of nine hundred individuals
(Brent 2004). The first phase of
construction at Chimp Haven has
been completed, and chimpanzees
began to arrive on April 1, 2005
(personal communication, Chimp
Haven representative, with S.B.,
April 22, 2005).
The U.S. government has asked
laboratories and government enti-
ties holding chimpanzees to pre-
pare lists of animals no longer
Figure 3
Public Health Service Funding
for Chimpanzee Research,
2000â2002
Chimpanzees in Research: Past, Present, and Future
needed for research. These lists
will be shared among the facilities
so that laboratories can share and
undertake research on chim-
panzees if desired, but the lists
had not been made available to
the public as of mid-2005. Table 4
provides a timeline of events relat-
ed to the creation of the national
sanctuary system.
International
Activities
Some countries already prohibit or
strongly restrict the use of chim-
panzees in research. In 1997 the
United Kingdom announced that
licenses to conduct research on
great apes would no longer be
granted, although great apes have
not been used in research in the
United Kingdom since 1986 (U.K.
Animal Procedures Committee
1998, 2001).
In 2000 New Zealand placed strin-
gent restrictions on the use of non-
human hominids (nonhuman great
apesâwhich include chimpanzees,
bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans)
within its Animal Welfare Act
(www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/
legislation/animal-welfare-act/
130
The State of the Animals III: 2005
Table 4
National Chimpanzee Sanctuary System:
Timeline of Events
Date
Action
April 15, 1999
A coalition that includes representatives from the research, animal-protection, zoo, and sanctuary
communities writes a letter regarding the issue of chimpanzee âretirementâ and submits it to U.S.
Rep. J.E. Porter (R-IL) and U.S. Sen. A. Specter (R-PA).
November 22, 1999
H.R. 3514, the Chimpanzee Health Improvement, Maintenance, and Protection (CHIMP) Act, is
introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. J. Greenwood (R-PA). This bill will require
the federal government to provide for permanent âretirementâ of chimpanzees who are identified
as no longer needed for research.
May 18, 2000
The House Committee on Commerce holds a hearing on H.R. 3514. Those presenting testimony
include J. Goodall (Jane Goodall Institute), J. Strandberg (NIH), T. Nelson (National Chimpanzee
Research Retirement Task Force), and A. Prince (New York Blood Center).
June 14, 2000
S. 2725, the Chimpanzee Health Improvement Maintenance and Protection (CHIMP) Act,
is introduced in the U.S. Senate by Sens. R. Smith (R-NH) and R. Durbin (D-IL).
September 20, 2000
S. 2725 gains approval by the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.
October 24, 2000
The House passes H.R. 3514 with the Bliley amendments (see section, entitled
Legislation:
United States and International).
December 6, 2000
The Senate passes S. 2725 unanimously.
December 20, 2000
President Clinton signs the CHIMP Act into public law (P.L. 106â551).
April 16, 2001
The National Center for Research Resources (NCRR), part of NIH, publishes a âsources soughtâ
notice to determine whether there is an existing nonprofit that fulfills the requirements of the
CHIMP Act and is interested in serving as the âcontractorâ of the sanctuary system.
September 28, 2001
NIH publishes a Request for Proposal for an entity to operate and maintain a sanctuary system via
the CHIMP Act.
December 20, 2001
The departments of Labor, Education, Health and Human Services and related agenciesâ 2002
Appropriations Act (H.R. 3061) allocates $5 million to begin construction of the national
chimpanzee sanctuary facilities.
January 10, 2002
President G.W. Bush signs H.R. 3061 into public law, including $5 million toward construction
of the national sanctuary system.
September 30, 2002
NIH announces the award of a contract to Chimp Haven to establish and operate a chimpanzee
sanctuary, pursuant to the CHIMP Act.
May 1, 2003
Chimp Haven, the contractor of the national chimpanzee sanctuary system, breaks ground
on its Shreveport, La., facility.
January 11, 2005
NIH publishes a notice of proposed rule making regarding standards of care for chimpanzees
held in the national chimpanzee sanctuary system.
guide/awguide.pdf, 24).
The coun-
tryâs director-general can approve
the use of nonhuman hominids, but
he or she must first consult the
National Animal Ethics Advisory
Committee; the use of these
species must be in the best interest
of the individual animal or the
species; and the benefit must out-
weigh the harm. At the time this
ban was implemented, no great
apes were being used in research,
but the action sent a strong mes-
sage about the ethics of such use.
When the Netherlands finalized
an amendment to the Dutch Law
on Animal Experiments in 2002
that prohibits the use of great apes
in biomedical experiments (Con-
lee, Hoffeld, and Stephens 2004),
six chimpanzees being used in hep-
atitis research already underway
were exempted from the ban. At
the time of the amendment, the
only chimpanzees in the European
Union were located at the Biomed-
ical Primate Research Centre
(BPRC) in the Netherlands. In
October 2002 the Dutch minister
of education and the director of
the BPRC signed an agreement for
the transfer of ownership of fifty-
nine chimpanzees to the AAP
Sanctuary for Primates and other
Exotic Animals (Anonymous 2003).
AAP suffered various delays but
had secured a site for the sanctu-
ary and expected construction to
begin in mid-2005 (AAP Sanctuary
for Exotic Animals 2005).
In June 2003 Swedenâs National
Board for Laboratory Animals
established new regulations that
ban the use of apes (great apes and
gibbons) in research (Anonymous
2003). The only exception is for
the conduct of noninvasive behav-
ioral studies. As was the case in
New Zealand, great apes were not
being used in research in Sweden
when these regulations were being
implemented, but the rules would
prohibit any such use in the future.
Japan has also taken steps by
banning invasive research on
great apes (Goodman and Check
2002), but it appears that nonin-
vasive research is still allowed.
Table 5 provides a summary of
international legislation, regula-
tions, and policies.
The Future of
Chimpanzee
Research
Trends in international legislation
strongly suggest that additional
countries will adopt legislation to
restrict or end the use of chim-
panzees (and other apes) in bio-
medical research and testing. The
U.S. CHIMP Act of 2000 acknowl-
edged the special status of chim-
panzees and human responsibility
for their lifetime care. There are
current efforts, including by The
HSUS, to end invasive research on
chimpanzees in the United States
in the coming years.
Regardless of legislative efforts,
the drastic decline in chimpanzee
research in the United States over
the past twenty years is the result
of various factors, including the
high cost of keeping chimpanzees
in laboratories, public pressure,
and evidence of the physical and
psychological similarities between
chimpanzees and humans. Trends
suggest that the use of chim-
panzees in research in the United
States will continue to decline.
Additional efforts to protect chim-
panzees, such as legislation to pre-
vent private ownership of chim-
panzees, legal work to gain
personhood for chimpanzees, and
inclusion of chimpanzees and
Table 5
International Legislation, Policies,
and Regulations Related to
Chimpanzees in Research
Country
Type Year
Comments
of Action
Enacted
United
Policy
1997*
Licenses to conduct research
Kingdom
on nonhuman great apes will
no longer be granted
New Zealand
Legislation
2000
Stringent restrictions on the
use of nonhuman great apes
in research
United States
Legislation
2000
Chimpanzees determined no
(P.L. 106-551)
longer needed in research are
transferred to a national
sanctuary system
Netherlands
Legislation:
2002
The use of great apes in
an amendment
biomedical experiments
to the Dutch
is prohibited
Law on Animal
Experiments
Sweden
Regulations
2003
The use of apes in research is
prohibited
Japan
Unknown
Unknown
Invasive research on great
apes is prohibited (Goodman
and Check 2002)
*Although the United Kingdom has had its policy in place since 1997, great apes
have not been used in research in that country since 1986.
Chimpanzees in Research: Past, Present, and Future
131
humans in the same genus, are
likely continue or expand. In the
meantime, the likelihood of prima-
tologists providing even more evi-
dence of the intelligence and emo-
tional capabilities of chimpanzees
will further support the argument
that their use in biomedical
research and testing should come
to an end.
The authors thank Jennifer Ball,
Leah Nickle, and Stephany Harris for
research assistance for this chapter.
Note
1 Other apes, including gorillas, orangutans,
and gibbons, were used in the research labora-
tory at one time, but chimps successfully
breed in captivity and as adults are smaller
and easier to handle than either gorillas or
orangutans.
Literature Cited
AAP Sanctuary for Exotic Animals.
2005. Breakthrough in Spain:
Villena Town Council says yes to
establishment of Primadomus.
Electronic newsletter of AAP
Sanctuary for Exotic Animals.
March 9.
Anonymous. 2003. Last European
research chimps to retire.
Labo-
ratory Primate Newsletter
42(1):
26. January.
Balls, M. 1995. Chimpanzee med-
ical experiments: Moral, legal,
and scientific concerns.
Alterna-
tives to Laboratory Animals
23:
607â614.
Boysen, S.T. 2000. The tooth mon-
ster. In
The smile of the dolphin,
ed. M. Bekoff, 82â83. New York:
Discovery Books.
Boysen, S.T., and G.G. Berntson.
1989. Numerical competence in
a chimpanzee
(Pan troglodytes).
Journal of Comparative Psychol-
ogy
103: 23â31.
Brent, L. 2004. Solutions for
research chimpanzees.
Lab Ani-
mal
33(1): 37â43.
Brown, D.A., and S.T. Boysen.
2000. Spontaneous discrimina-
tion of natural stimuli by chim-
panzees
(Pan troglodytes). Jour-
nal of Comparative Psychology
114: 392â400.
Cantalupo, C., D. Pilcher, and W.D.
Hopkins. 2003. Are asymmetries
in sylvian fissure length associat-
ed with the planum temporale?
Neuropsychologia
41: 1975â1981.
Carlsson, H., S.J. Schapiro, I.
Farah, and J. Hau. 2004. Use of
primates: A global overview.
American Journal of Primatology
63: 225â237.
Cavalieri, P., and P. Singer, eds.
1993.
The Great Ape Project:
Equality beyond humanity.
Lon-
don: Fourth Estate Limited.
Committee on Animal Models in
Biomedical Research. 1995.
Aping science: A critical analysis
of research at the Yerkes Regional
Primate Research Center.
New
York: Medical Research Modern-
ization Committee.
Conlee, K.M. 2003. Great ape
research: Exposing the hard
facts and pursuing a ban.
AV
Magazine
111: 12â14.
Conlee, K.M., E.H. Hoffeld, and
M.L. Stephens. 2004. A demo-
graphic analysis of primate
research in the United States.
Alternatives to Laboratory Ani-
mals
32
(Supplement 1)
:
315â322.
Gardner, R.A., B.T. Gardner, and
T.E. van Cantfort. 1989.
Teaching
sign language to chimpanzees.
Albany: State University of New
York Press.
Goodall, J. 1968. The behaviour of
free-living chimpanzees in the
Gombe Stream Reserve.
Animal
Behaviour Monographs 1
:
161â311.
ââââ. 1986.
The chimpanzees
of Gombe: Patterns of behavior.
Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap, Har-
vard University Press.
Goodall, J., R. Fouts, F. Patterson,
E. Katz, M. Bekoff, and B.
Galdikas. 2003.
The Great Ape
Project census.
Portland, Ore.:
Great Ape Project Books.
Goodman, S., and E. Check. 2002.
The great primate debate.
Nature
417: 684â687.
Hare, B., J. Call, and M. Tomasello.
2001. Do chimpanzees know
what conspecifics know?
Animal
Behaviour
61: 139â151.
Hopkins, W.D., and C. Cantalupo.
2004. Handedness in chim-
panzees is associated with asym-
metries in the primary motor
but not with homologous lan-
guage areas.
Behavioral Neuro-
science
118: 1176â1183.
Kuhlmeier, V.A., and S.T. Boysen.
2002. Chimpanzees
(Pan
troglodytes)
recognize spatial
and object correspondences
between a scale model and its
referent.
Psychological Science,
January: 60â63.
Limongelli, L., S.T. Boysen, and E.
Visalberghi. 1995. Comprehen-
sion of cause-effect relations in a
tool-using task by chimpanzees
(Pan troglodytes). Journal of
Comparative Psychology
109:
18â26.
Matsuzawa, T. 1985a. Use of num-
bers by a chimpanzee.
Nature
315: 57â59.
ââââ. 1985b. Color naming
and classification in a chim-
panzee
(Pan troglodytes)
.
Jour-
nal of Human Evolution
14:
283â291.
McGrew, W.C. 1992.
Material cul-
ture in chimpanzees.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Muchmore, E. 2001. Chimpanzee
models for human disease and
immunobiology.
Immunological
Reviews
183: 86â93.
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA). 2004.
Project Mercury Ballistic and
Orbital Chimpanzee Flights
(CHIMP).
http://lsda.jsc.nasa.
gov/scripts/cf/exper.cfm?exp_
index=907.
Nath, B.M., K.E. Schumann, and
J.D. Boyer. 2000. The chim-
panzee and other non-human
primate models in HIV-1 vaccine
research.
Trends in Microbiology
8(9): 426â431.
National Center for Research Re-
sources (NCRR). 2001. Report to
Congress regarding number of
chimpanzees and funding for care
132
The State of the Animals III: 2005
of chimpanzees, Public Law 106-
551, Chimpanzees Health Im-
provement, Maintenance, and
Protection Act. Bethesda, Md.:
NCRR.
National Research Council. 1997.
Chimpanzees in research: Strate-
gies for their ethical care, man-
agement, and use.
Washington,
D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Science Board 2002.
Sci-
ence and engineering indicators
2002: Appendix table 7â27.
Parr, L.A. 2001. Cognitive and
physiological markers of emo-
tional awareness in chimpanzees
(Pan troglodytes). Animal Cogni-
tion
4: 223â229.
ââââ. 2003. The discrimina-
tion of faces and their emotional
content by chimpanzees
(Pan
troglodytes). Annals of the New
York Academy of Sciences
1000:
56â78.
Parr, L.A., and F.B.M. de Waal.
1999a. Like motherâlike son:
Visual kin recognition in chim-
panzees.
American Journal of
Primatology
49: 84â85.
ââââ. 1999b. Visual kin recog-
nition in chimpanzees.
Nature
399: 647â648.
Parr, L.A., T. Dove, and W.D. Hop-
kins. 1998. Why faces may be
special: Evidence of the inver-
sion effect in chimpanzees.
Jour-
nal of Cognitive Neuroscience
10:
615â622.
Premack, D. 1986.
Gavagai! or the
future history of the animal lan-
guage controversy.
Cambridge,
Mass.: MIT Press.
Premack, D., and A. Premack.
1983.
The mind of an ape.
New
York: Norton.
Prince, A.M., J. Allan, L. Andrus, B.
Brotman, J. Eichber, R. Fouts, J.
Goodall, P. Marx, K.K. Murthy, S.
McGreal, C. Noon. 1999. Viru-
lent HIV strains, chimpanzees,
and trial vaccines.
Science
283
(5405): 1117â1118.
Reynolds, V. 1995. Moral issues in
relation to chimpanzee field
studies and experiments.
Alter-
natives to Laboratory Animals
23: 621â625.
Savage-Rumbaugh, E.S. 1986.
Ape
language: From conditioned
response to symbol.
New York:
Columbia University Press.
Save the Chimps n.d. History: Sav-
ing space chimps.
http://
www.savethechimps.org/about_
history.asp.
Stephens, M. 1995. Chimpanzees
in laboratories: Distribution and
types of research.
Alternatives to
Laboratory Animals
23: 579â
583.
The Humane Society of the United
States (HSUS). n.d. Statement
of The HSUS on ending biomed-
ical research on nonhuman apes.
http://www.hsus.org/animals_in
_research/monkeys_and_apes_in
_research/ending_biomedical_
research_on_nonhuman_apes/
statement_of_the_hsus_on_
ending_biomedical_research_on_
nonhuman_apes.html.
Tomasello, M., and J. Call. 1997.
Primate cognition.
New York:
Oxford University Press.
United Kingdom Animal Proce-
dures Committee. 1998. Govern-
ment announces end to cosmetic
testing on animals. Press release
http://www.apc.gov.uk/press_
releases/981126b.htm.
ââââ. 2001.
Report of the Ani-
mal Procedures Committee for
2001.
London: The Stationary
Office.
http://www.apc.gov.uk/
reference/annrep2001.pdf.
van Akker, R., M. Balls, J.W. Eich-
berg, J. Goodall, J.L. Heeney,
A.D.M.E. Osterhaus, A.M. Prince,
and I. Spruit. 1993. Chim-
panzees in AIDS research: A bio-
medical and bioethical perspec-
tive.
Journal of Medical
Primatology
22: 330â392.
Washburn, D.A., and D.M. Rum-
baugh. 1992. Comparative
assessment of psychomotor per-
formance: Target prediction by
humans and macaques
(Macaca
mulatta)
.
Journal of Experimen-
tal Psychology: General
121:
305â312.
Whiten, A., J. Goodall, W.C.
McGrew, T. Nishida, V. Reynolds,
Sugiyama, Y., Tutin, C.E.G.,
Wrangham, R.W., and Boesch, C.
1999. Culture in chimpanzees.
Nature
399: 682â685.
Wise, S. 2000.
Rattling the cage.
Cambridge, Mass.: Perseus
Books Group.
ââââ. 2002.
Drawing the line:
Science and the case for animal
r i g h t s .
C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . :
Perseus Books Group.
Yerkes, R.M., and B.W. Learned.
1925.
Chimpanzee intelligence
and its vocal expressions.
Balti-
more: Williams and Wilkins Co.
Yerkes National Primate Research
Center. n.d. Innovation and sci-
ence: The history of Yerkes.
http://www.yerkes.emory.edu/
about_history.html.
133
Chimpanzees in Research: Past, Present, and Future
135
Sarah Boysen
received her Ph.D. in
1984 from The Ohio State Universi-
ty. Her current research interests
are animal cognition, particularly
the acquisition of counting abilities
and numerical competence in non-
human primates; cognitive develop-
ment in the great apes, including
attribution, self-recognition, and
intentional behavior; and social
behavior and tool use in captive
lowland gorillas. She is currently
consulting editor for the
Journal of
Comparative Psychology
.
Kathleen Conlee
is director of pro-
gram management, Animal Re-
search Issues, at The HSUS and is
responsible for the organizationâs
work related to nonhuman primates
in research, the use of animals in
education, and the HSUS Pain and
Distress campaign. She previously
worked for seven years at a large
nonhuman primate breeding facili-
ty and a year and a half at a chim-
panzee and orangutan sanctuary.
Jennifer M. Felt
graduated from
the University of Vermont in 1999
and served for two and a half years
in the Peace Corps in Honduras.
She was program manager for
Latin America and the Caribbean
for Humane Society International
(HSI), the international arm of The
HSUS, until June 2004, when she
became deputy director for trade
capacity building at The HSUS.
Stephanie Edwards
is a 2003 grad-
uate of the University of Maryland
and program assistant and Web
content manager for HSI.
Katherine C. (Kasey) Grier
is asso-
ciate professor in the Department
of History, University of South Car-
olina. She is the author of
Culture
and Comfort: Parlor Making and
Middle Class Identity
and the forth-
coming
Pets in America: A History
.
Her current research focuses on
the history of animal-human inter-
action. She serves as guest curator
for an exhibition on the history of
pet keeping in the United States
originating at McKissick Museum,
the University of South Carolina, in
2005 and traveling for three years
thereafter.
Kristin Kaschner
received her
M.Sc. from Albert-Ludwigs-Univer-
sität of Freiburg, Germany, in 1997.
Based at the Underwater Acoustics
Group at Loughborough University,
Leicestershire, England, she devel-
oped an acoustic analysis tech-
nique to study the behavior of small
cetaceans around midwater trawl
nets. She joined the Marine Mam-
mal Research Unit at the Fisheries
Centre at the University of British
Columbia (UBC) in 1998 and has
been a member of the Sea Around
Us Project, based at UBC and
devoted to studying the impact of
fisheries on the worldâs marine
ecosystems, since 1999. Ms.
Kaschner was an invited participant
at the International Whaling Com-
mission Scientific Committee
workshop on bycatch mitigation
and acoustic deterrents in 1999
and is a member of the Cetacean
Bycatch Task Force. She has been a
FishBase collaborator since 2000,
compiling information about the
acoustical behavior of fish.
About the Contributors
136
The State of the Animals III: 2005
Randall Lockwood
received his
Ph.D. from Washington University
in St. Louis. He is senior vice pres-
ident for anti-cruelty initiatives
and training for the American
Society for the Prevention of Cruel-
ty to Animals and former vice pres-
ident/Research and Educational
Outreach for The HSUS. He is the
co-editor of
Cruelty to Animals and
Interpersonal Violence
and co-
author (with Frank Ascione) of
âCruelty to Animals: Changing Psy-
chological, Social, and Legislative
Perspectives,â which appeared in
The State of the Animals: 2001
.
Kelly OâMeara
is program manager,
Africa and Asia, for HSI. She has
promoted humane slaughter prac-
tices to government representatives
in Indonesia and Vietnam; initiated
and organized first-of-their-kind
workshops on stray dog/street ani-
mal control in Moscow and St.
Petersburg; and managed a two-year
street dog control program on the
island of Abaco in the Bahamas. A
graduate of the University of Massa-
chusetts, she holds certificates from
the Royal Society for the Prevention
of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) in
large-animal euthanasia and from
Bristol University, England, for ani-
mal welfare officer training. She is
co-author of the HSI report
Dogs on
Abaco Island, the Bahamas: A Case
Study.
Daniel Pauly
acquired his doctorate
in fisheries biology in 1979 from the
University of Kiel in Germany. He is
a former division director of the
International Center for Living
Aquatic Resources Management
(ICLARM) in Manila and taught
fisheries sciences at the University
of the Philippines. In 1994 he joined
the Fisheries Centre, University of
British Columbia, while remaining
ICLARMâs principal science advisor
until 1997 and the science advisor
of its FishBase project until 2000.
Since 1999 he has been principal
investigator for the Sea Around Us
Project. In 2001 he received the
Murray Newman Award for Excel-
lence in Marine Conservation
Research and the Oscar E. Sette
Award of the Marine Fisheries Sec-
tion, American Fisheries Society. He
was named an honorary professor at
Kiel University in 2002 and elected
a Fellow of the Royal Society of
Canada (Academy of Science) in
2003.
Nancy Peterson,
a registered vet-
erinary technician, is an issues spe-
cialist in the Companion Animals
section of The HSUS and coordina-
tor of the Pets for Life Training
Centers. Before joining The HSUS,
Ms. Peterson worked in small-ani-
mal veterinary hospitals and as a
trainer of dogs for people with dis-
abilities. Her articles promoting
pet-friendly rental housing have
been published in numerous hous-
ing magazines. She was a member
of the HSUS staff who collaborated
on
The Humane Society of the Unit-
ed States Complete Guide to Cat
Care
(co-authored with Wendy
Christensen).
J.F. Reece
received his B.Sc.(Hons.)
in biology from University of York
and was qualified (B.V.Sc.) from Liv-
erpool University Veterinary School
in 1994. He worked for more than
three years in rural, large-animal
veterinary practice in Devon, Eng-
land. Since 1998 he has been asso-
ciated with the work of Help in Suf-
fering, an animal welfare charity in
Jaipur, India, as a volunteer veteri-
nary surgeon. Since 2002 he has
been in charge of the ongoing ABC
Extension Project, sponsored by
HSI, at Help in Suffering Jaipur.
Beth Rosen
has worked in the
HSUS Government Affairs and Eval-
uation and Planning departments
since 2001. She received her mas-
terâs degree in public administra-
tion from New York University.
Andrew N. Rowan
is executive vice
president, operations, for The
HSUS. He is the author of
Of Mice,
Models, and Men
; co-author of
The
Animal Research Controversy:
Protest, Process, and Public Policy
;
and coeditor of Humane Society
Pressâs State of the Animals series.
Stephanie Shain
is director of
companion animal outreach for
The HSUS and one of the organiza-
tionâs leading spokespeople on
pet-related topics. From 1995 to
2000 she worked as assistant
director of programs for the Amer-
ican Anti-Vivisection Society.
137
Margaret R. Slater
is a veterinarian
and associate professor of epidemi-
ology in the departments of Veteri-
nary Anatomy and Public Health
and Small Animal Medicine and
Surgery in the College of Veteri-
nary Medicine at Texas A&M Uni-
versity in College Station, Texas.
The author of
Community Ap-
proaches to Feral Cats: Problems,
Alternatives, and Recommenda-
tions
, she is frequently invited to
speak on feral cat issues at profes-
sional conferences nationwide.
Neil Trent
is executive director of
HSI. A graduate of the law enforce-
ment division of the RSPCA, he
worked in a number of capacities
for the RSPCA in England, the
Bahamas, and Australia. He is a for-
mer field officer and field services
director for the World Society for
the Protection of Animals. He is co-
author of âThe State of Meat Pro-
duction in Developing Countries:
2002,â which appeared in
The
State of the Animals II: 2003
.